The National Socialists were actually socialist though. Yes they were fascists also. But why pretend like socialism and fascism are exclusive? They were both.
>>17092629They were socialists, but not Marxists. Hitler despised Marx and believe he stole the term 'socialism', his 'national socialism' was an attempt to take back that term.
>>17092629There are three main reasons for that:1. Marxists kidnapped the term “Socialist” and refuse to accept you can be a Socialist without following Marx’s ideas (like many did before and after Marx up to around WW2).2. Social Democrats stopped calling themselves Socialists in order to distance themselves from the soviets during the Cold War.3. The greatest menace to the “current thing” (aka ultra progressive ultra liberal ultra capitalism) would be a socially conservative, nationalist form of socialism (aka national socialist aka fascism)
National socialism was burzhui-fascisti ideology ultimately serving the industrialist class
The Bolshevist Soviets infiltrated and took over the European communist and socialist movements in the 1920's and 1930's. By the time the Nazi government was elected, the Bolshevists had gained the interpretive authority on the term "socialism". They did what they could to paint their Lenin- and Stalin-dictated "Internationale" socialism as the diametral opposite of German socialism, mostly because they could not infiltrate the German socialists of the NSDAP and were purged by them.But there were roughly two years of peace and cooperation on the propaganda front. 1939 to 1941. Best friends forever. In Winter 1940/1941 the Soviets even offered a strategic alliance to Germany. After the German invasion in 1941 it all fell apart and the Soviet propaganda drew a thick line between their "Socialism" and the so-called "Hitler fascism" again.
The history of the world may have been completely different if only Röhm had been straight
>>17093290>what we got nowNational ”Socialism”>what we would gave got with straight RöhmNational SOCIALISM>what we could have got if Röhm win despite being homosexualPEAK HOMOFASCISM
Can't have socialism If you still have private ownership of the means of production.
It was state directed economy. But not socialist per se. The free market capitalism that Marx studied no longer exists. Most capitalist countries have some form of statist elements
>>17093434which they didn't as private property rights were abolished after the reichstag fire
>>17093467>as private property rights were abolished*for jewsIG Farben and other companies (Krupp) were still privately owned
>>17092646>Marxists kidnapped the term “Socialist” and refuse to accept you can be a Socialist without following Marx’s ideas (like many did before and after Marx up to around WW2).But he is right.What is even socialism meaning of socialism without Marksist foundation?Gibs? Gibs can be within market economy and so called capitalism. Market economy is neutral to gibs. So what even non Marxist "socialism" means?
>>17093485for everyonethe article of the constitution guaranteeing property rights, article 153 was abolished by the Reichstag fire degree. You could have private property, but you had no rights to it, so the state could take it from you whenever they pleased.>Die Artikel 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 und 153 der Verfassung des Deutschen Reichs werden bis auf weiteres außer Kraft gesetzt. Es sind daher Beschränkungen der persönlichen Freiheit, des Rechts der freien Meinungsäußerung, einschließlich der Pressefreiheit, des Vereins- und Versammlungsrechts, Eingriffe in das Brief-, Post-, Telegraphen- und Fernsprechgeheimnis, Anordnungen von Haussuchungen und von Beschlagnahmen sowie Beschränkungen des Eigentums auch außerhalb der sonst hierfür bestimmten gesetzlichen Grenzen zulässig.
>>17093518People like to say fascism is a meaningless term but socialism is the true meaningless term. It’s very broad and can encompass many things, from Western European market gibs economy to trade-union based anarchism to a completely state-planned economy. I think one of the only possible definitions of socialism that doesn’t piss anyone off is an “economic system in which the wellbeing of the community is prioritized”. But after WW2, the term was kidnapped by Marxists and even SocDems who traditionally named themselves socialists stopped being socialists. You can definetly have socialism with a market economy (even Lenin “agrees”!)
>>17093581>, so the state could take it from you whenever they pleased>Implying it's different today How's hoarding gold in 1933 America? Does this mean USA was socialist, too?
>>17093636america theoretically has the law protecting your private property rights, germany abolished it completely (even roosevelt allowed people to hold 5 oz of gold)
>>17093518>What is even socialism meaning of socialism without Marksist foundation?You can find a list of names here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Marx_socialists
>>17093424RYPPED CHVD GACHY MVCHY PARTYVGH
>>17093644>Companies privatized by the Nazis included the four major commercial banks in Germany, which had all come under public ownership during the prior years: Commerz– und Privatbank, Deutsche Bank und Disconto-Gesellschaft, Golddiskontbank and Dresdner Bank.[52][48] Also privatized were the Vereinigte Stahlwerke A.G. (United Steelworks), the second largest joint-stock company in Germany (the largest was IG Farben) and Vereinigte Oberschlesische Hüttenwerke AG, a company controlling all of the metal production in the Upper Silesian coal and steel industry. Shares in the Deutsche Reichsbahn (German Railways), at the time the largest single public enterprise in the world, were slated to be sold in the fiscal year 1934-1935. The government also sold a number of shipbuilding companies, and enhanced private utilities at the expense of municipally owned utilities companies.Tell me how this is socialism
>>17093699They could take the stock from you whenever they pleased. There were also companies in the USSR, was this also not socialism because of it?
>>17093727The USSR had state-owned companies, they didn't even have privately-owned *restaurants* let alone private banks.
>>17093740Yes in the end, how many years took it for them to get there? The nazis nationalized the reichsbahn in 1937, they nationalized the steel production, they were only in power for six years when the war started, how far was the soviet union in 1923?
>>17092629To a certain extent but the Nazis didn't believe in class struggle as that was Marxism. The issue of the term "socialism" is vague as it can basically mean you're trying to address social problems and harness socio-economic forces to do it. The Nazis had very different views from left-wing socialists, but they weren't like Margaret Thatcher either, she didn't believe in the concept of "society" at all. For her, there were "just individuals and their families."But the Nazis had predecessors in 19th-century antisemitic socialists like Adolf Stoecker and Eugen Dühring (who believed racial conflicts go deeper than class conflicts and is most well known for getting BTFO'd by Engels in his famous text). There was a combination of antisemitism, German nationalism, biological racism, a belief the nation is facing an existential crisis and being pro-productivism by stressing the need for cooperation among all "productive" strata of the nation while eliding (as Marxists would see it) the class-based exploitation that is characteristic of industrial capitalism.So you can say the fascists were opposed to the Marxist class-conflict view of the world and liberalism with its individualistic worldview.
Socialism is not handouts
>>17093743I don't think the Soviet Union ever privatized banks. Actually one of the strange things about the country is that a lot of things were state-owned by the Tsarist Empire and the communists took them over. But then in the 1930s the state seized and collectivized all land in the country and turned them into massive, state-owned collective farms:https://youtu.be/UE-jGjCEzH4which is something the Nazis did NOT believe in and had no intention of doing. The Nazis made inroads into private property and undertook socialistic measures but it was nothing like the Soviet Union. The Third Reich didn't even switch to a total war economy until the battle of Stalingrad.
Nazism is socialism in decline desuBolshevism only ever succeeded in producing state monopoly capitalism and you’ll notice that every attempt at producing full socialism (war communism, collectivization) were the periods in which millions starved. Parliamentary socialism in germany and west europe had demonstrated its weakness and opportunism through the experience of ww1 and weimar. The natural conclusion was to substitute mysticism of the blood for the kind of egghead ‘scientific materialism’ in vogue among marxists, as a more firm and enduring metaphysical foundation for their socialism. Private property was still allowed, yet only on a conditional basis, in practice it resulted in a kind of state monopoly capitalism not unlike that that existed in Russia, something totally antithetical to the kind of anglo-liberalism usually implied by the term capitalism.
>>17092629They were socialists, being that they wanted to gear their nation towards a common social good, yes. Rather than they capitalist systems which don't even believe in a common society and think the state should just be a means for individuals to enrich themselves.The Nazis big break with the other socialists was their intense racism and nationalism. The Bolsheviks advocated pride in one's nation, but we're against any nation declaring itself supreme over another.
>>17093771Socialism =/= communismAnd which banks were privatized by the nazis?Selling stock in a government owned bank that can be taken from you at any time at the government's wish is not privatization.
