Hitler was a socialist!

[k-onmmunist]

Political correctness is a threat to free speech, one of our most sacred rights. That is why I resent PC so much. And no, it is not demagogy. It's saying what you think rather than what the state wants you to think.

[k-onmmunist]

If you want an account of the absorbtion of small businesses into conglomerates such as IG Farben

Arguing that such things were Socialist is... laughable. Utterly laughable.

Read the rest of the post instead of picking parts out of context.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Political correctness is a threat to free speech, one of our most sacred rights. That is why I resent PC so much. And no, it is not demagogy. It's saying what you think rather than what the state wants you to think.

Freedom to speach is fully (except in particular cases that are really complicated and concern conflicts between two liberties) guaranteed in most of Europeans countries. Thinking it's not so and claiming to everyone "OMG THE EVIL STATE WANTS TO CENSOR ME OMG" is just paranoia.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I didn't say ALL government intervention in the economy is socialist, otherwise that would make me one. However, intervention on the Nazi scale was.

And I didn't write "all government intevention". I had in mind large-scale government intevention in the economy - in many cases on a larger scale than the Nazis-in-peacetime. Was Charles de Gaulle a Socialist?
You should note that no one who calls themselves a Socialist thinks that Socialism can be defined as "large scale state intervention in the economy". Regardless, the state intervention of the Nazis was not exactly motivated by Socialist principles...

Myth. The entire economy was rigged up (oh, that's rigged in both possible senses of the word in this context, actually...) to enable a quick rearmament programme. The economy was boiling over by the late '30's and would have likely collapsed in some way had it not been for the war. But as there was no chance of there not being a war with that lot in charge, that's an entirely academic point.

Studies have also shown that ordinary people didn't actually benefit much from the economic "boom" (especially in terms of wages and so on... IIRC one showed that working class wages fell, in real terms, during that period), though how much stock you want to put into them is up to you, of course.

And, once again, a reminder about bad taste.

[k-onmmunist]

Political correctness is a threat to free speech, one of our most sacred rights. That is why I resent PC so much. And no, it is not demagogy. It's saying what you think rather than what the state wants you to think.

Freedom to speach is fully (except in particular cases that are really complicated and concern conflicts between two liberties) guaranteed in most of Europeans countries. Thinking it's not so and claiming to everyone "OMG THE EVIL STATES WANTS TO CENSOR ME OMG" is just paranoia.

No it isnt. If I were to go out tomorrow, and say to a crowd 'All Muslims/Jews/Sikhs/Hindus/Whatevers are evil scum', I'd be thrown in jail for inciting hatred (Not that I'd want to). As far as I'm concerned, the only thing that should not be allowed under free speech is libel.

[Alexander Hamilton]

cut this out.


NOW

[k-onmmunist]

cut this out.


NOW

Cut what out?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If you want an account of the absorbtion of small businesses into conglomerates such as IG Farben

Arguing that such things were Socialist is... laughable. Utterly laughable.

Read the rest of the post instead of picking parts out of context.

I don't think that I'm picking anything out of context. IG Farben as a Socialist corporation, hmm...

[k-onmmunist]

If you want an account of the absorbtion of small businesses into conglomerates such as IG Farben

Arguing that such things were Socialist is... laughable. Utterly laughable.

Read the rest of the post instead of picking parts out of context.

I don't think that I'm picking anything out of context. IG Farben as a Socialist corporation, hmm...

I said it was under close state supervision. It's crypto-interventionism, basically.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Political correctness is a threat to free speech, one of our most sacred rights. That is why I resent PC so much. And no, it is not demagogy. It's saying what you think rather than what the state wants you to think.

Freedom to speach is fully (except in particular cases that are really complicated and concern conflicts between two liberties) guaranteed in most of Europeans countries. Thinking it's not so and claiming to everyone "OMG THE EVIL STATES WANTS TO CENSOR ME OMG" is just paranoia.

No it isnt. If I were to go out tomorrow, and say to a crowd 'All Muslims/Jews/Sikhs/Hindus/Whatevers are evil scum', I'd be thrown in jail for inciting hatred (Not that I'd want to). As far as I'm concerned, the only thing that should not be allowed under free speech is libel.

This is precisely the case when we have a conflict within two freedom : freedom of speech and freedom against hatred. My principle is simple : attack anyone on whatever you want for what he does, but not for what he is. I said it better twice in other occasions but once again I'm too lazy to search the quotes. Anyways, the point is that your liberty stops when the others' one begins.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If you want an account of the absorbtion of small businesses into conglomerates such as IG Farben

Arguing that such things were Socialist is... laughable. Utterly laughable.

Read the rest of the post instead of picking parts out of context.

I don't think that I'm picking anything out of context. IG Farben as a Socialist corporation, hmm...

I said it was under close state supervision. It's crypto-interventionism, basically.

I think you're missing the point of Nazi economic policy. It's true that everything was geared towards serving the regime (saying "serving the state" isn't exactly right, because the government structure of Nazi Germany was... odd) and to its goals, but there is nothingly remotely Socialist about that (note again how well IG Farben, Krupp and so on did out of the regime). Means and ends should not be confused - the point of Nazi economic policy was to prepare for war. Nothing else really mattered. And that is not Socialism.

[ChrisJG777]

It can't just have been to attract voters, if they actually carried it out, which they did. Your reply is weak at best.

Whereas you replies have been weak no matter what.  It was solely to attract voters.  I know for one those two items you listed were never carried out.  You'll find that most (and certainly enough to count) businesses and factories remained under private ownership both before and during the war.  Hitler was not a socialist, get that into your head and stop acting like you've just been on the receiving end of a botched lobotomy.

Hitler was socialist ECONOMICALLY. They may have remained under private ownership, but Hitler came them in line and the slightest dissent would have led to nationalisation. They were bullied and cajoled into doing as he said.

Also, many industries were nationalised, including the railways.

*Head-desk*

There is absolutely no doubt that Hitler was an absolute control freak, but his actions did not make him a socialist, just an ultra-authoritarian.  The act of simply nationalising businesses does not necessarily make one a socialist, it just means that you've nationalised a lot of businesses.  There's more to socialism than simply having the state run a lot of businesses you'll find, much more.

I was just trying to point out some similarities. I think politicaladdict is a nutcase personally, and his Nazi obsession is annoying (I went through that phase when I was 11). Ultimately, it's all down to the definition of 'socialism'.

Indeed, state control of businesses is a feature of socialism, but it's not the sole component.  With socialism there's also more a focus on workers' rights and some hints of egalitarianism (it may vary); these features never came about in Nazi Germany as Hitler ordered the dissolution of all trade unions and over saw the erosion of the rights of industrial workers, which of course is very un-socialist.  Also, with certain variants of socialism there's an element of wealth redistribution (methods may vary), and none of that happened under Hitler either.  So, whilst he may have done some things that are synonymous with socialism, in the end he wasn't truly a socialist, just an epic control freak and hyper authoritarian, anti-Semite militarist.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Strictly speaking, the Nazis didn't believe in state control of the economy. Actually, they didn't believe in the state.

They believed in "the movement" and  that this movement should infiltrate, subjugate, and control all aspects of society, including the state. After this was accomplished, the state was to be used as one of many tools to achieve the movement's ultimate goals: enforcing the dominance of the master race.

So, the Nazis didn't exactly believe in the state controlling the economy. If anything, they believed that the movement should control both the state and the economy. And there were many ways to secure the movement's control over the economy. "State intervention" was one possible method, again using the state as a tool. Another (and more direct) approach was to make sure that most businessmen are either party members or at least loyal to the party. If all businessmen are party members then the moverment controls the economy.