Economy of Third Reich was a socialist economy

May 2017
193
Monterrey
I wonder where this really stems from. Mostly I hear this from Americans. Is it because they don't want things like universal healthcare? Naturally, it's complete hogwash.
 
Last edited:

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,961
Sydney
Just right now in Australia the airlines companies are running a campaign against the privatized airports
they are a natural monopoly and practice a broad spectrum gouging of their customers and the public
the Airlines want government control on those blood suckers

Is it socialism and when is "free market" a free for all
 
Oct 2011
421
Croatia
socialism does not require state control.

constructing grossly inaccurate strawman?
Actually, it does. It is defined by it. The only question is of the extent (social democracy vs state socialism).

Mind you, even free market requires a degree of state intervention, unless you want to let major companies take control of it (and thus destroy free market in the process). So, again, it is a question of extent. But overall, anything large, any major concentration of power - big government, big corporations etc. - is danger to democracy.

Socialism is not the only ideology that requires state control....
No, it is not.
 
Sep 2019
182
Slovenia
Concerning the question about social democrats. Mitterand, German social-democrats, Prieto in Spain or Pertini in Italy etc. called themselves socialists true but they were considered traitors by marxists and communists. In some phases Stalin saw even bigger problem in them than in national socialists of Hitler. And indeed if we look from the point of economics they did not destroy the free market and capitalism in their states. Capitalism in Scandinavia is really more regulated that capitalism in USA but that is all. It is not destroyed.
 
Sep 2019
182
Slovenia
About rearmanent and military industry that is a conscious toll in fascism or national socialism of governament spending and of course is leading to imperialism to.

Some basic characteristics of fascism:

It is a form of social organization

  1. In which the government acknowledges no restraint upon its powers — totalitarianism
  2. In which this unrestrained government is managed by a dictator — the leadership principle
  3. In which the government is organized to operate the capitalist system and enable it to function — under an immense bureaucracy
  4. In which the economic society is organized on the syndicalist model, that is by producing groups formed into craft and professional categories under supervision of the state
  5. In which the government and the syndicalist organizations operate the capitalist society on the planned, autarchical principle
  6. In which the government holds itself responsible to provide the nation with adequate purchasing power by public spending and borrowing
  7. In which militarism is used as a conscious mechanism of government spending, and
  8. In which imperialism is included as a policy inevitably flowing from militarism as well as other elements of fascism.


What Is Fascism? | John T. Flynn

We should keep in mind that fascism in Italy was hindered by monarchy. As i was said correctly by Alpine Luke fascists could not take power without its support. So they made more compromise with old elites, than national socialists in Germany. But when fascists felt liberated of monarchy in autumn of 1943 they returned to their earlier and original even more left wing and socialist policy.
 
Last edited:

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
9,476
About rearmanent and military industry that is a conscious toll in fascism or national socialism of governament spending and of course is leading to imperialism to.

Some basic characteristics of fascism:

It is a form of social organization

  1. In which the government acknowledges no restraint upon its powers — totalitarianism
  2. In which this unrestrained government is managed by a dictator — the leadership principle
  3. In which the government is organized to operate the capitalist system and enable it to function — under an immense bureaucracy
  4. In which the economic society is organized on the syndicalist model, that is by producing groups formed into craft and professional categories under supervision of the state
  5. In which the government and the syndicalist organizations operate the capitalist society on the planned, autarchical principle
  6. In which the government holds itself responsible to provide the nation with adequate purchasing power by public spending and borrowing
  7. In which militarism is used as a conscious mechanism of government spending, and
  8. In which imperialism is included as a policy inevitably flowing from militarism as well as other elements of fascism.


What Is Fascism? | John T. Flynn

We should keep in mind that fascism in Italy was hindered by monarchy. As i was said correctly by Alpine Luke fascists could not take power without its support. So they made more compromise with old elites, than national socialists in Germany. But when fascists felt liberated of monarchy in autumn of 1943 they returned to their earlier and original even more left wing and socialist policy.
And there fore totally and utterly opposed to political equality a core tenats of socialism without which you simply cannot have socialism

they are fundamentally opposed.. Antithetical political positions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukeofjive

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
9,476
Actually, it does. It is defined by it. The only question is of the extent (social democracy vs state socialism).

Mind you, even free market requires a degree of state intervention, unless you want to let major companies take control of it (and thus destroy free market in the process). So, again, it is a question of extent. But overall, anything large, any major concentration of power - big government, big corporations etc. - is danger to democracy.



No, it is not.
No government control of the economy is not a core tent of socilaism. Some sort econimic equality, is. Goevrnement control is just how some socialists see as a way of doing so. It's not a core , central tenet of socialism or required in any way,
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukeofjive
Sep 2019
182
Slovenia
Political equality was most hated by Marxists. Just their political view was allowed others were all suppresed by force. Also if you were against state control of economy you were of course traitor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macon

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,014
Italy, Lago Maggiore
When I studied political economics Socialism was still a licit alternative in Italy, so that I studied it [The Italian Communist Party was still there and quite strong].

Anyway, real Socialism in its factual application has become a dictatorship based on a single strong party. This is the real similarity with Nazism and Fascism: the dictatorial system based on one party ... and we can add the existence of a "Maximum Leader".

What I mean is that when an exclusive ideology [in the etimological sense of the term: which excludes], regardless its political orientation, gets the power it tends just to generate dictatorial systems. I put exclusive ideologies with exclusive religions, in fact an exclusive ideology is based on a system of untouchable these and an exclusive religion is based on a system of untouchable beliefs. From a functional perspective they are identical. But if the theses [beliefs] of an exclusive ideology are sustained by an exclusive party which is able to get the power ... you will have an authoritative regime which will exclude any possibility of differentiation, freedom ... to be "free" you will have to follow that ideology.

But this doesn't mean that all exclusive ideologies are the same thing ...
 
Sep 2019
182
Slovenia
Because we are talking here also about economy i would like to say that capitalism is like a hen which is laying golden eggs. It reduces poverty and because is very supportive of inovations it is making life in general better. You can feed the hen with a little different food that is still ok, but if you kill it than you will have problems. That is a warning to politicians and to all of us in fact from history.