All modern govts require central control. That's the nature of the beast.You devolved into current politics, which are you are not supposed to do. Your posts are their own calling card. I didn't "call" you anything.
Had you read the thread, you would be familiar with what I did write.
1. All these terms (socialism, communism, fascism and capitalism) are vague, almost to the point of meaningless. Right and Left don't coney a lot of meaning for me either.
2. All regimes employ ideas and practices that could be associated with any of the four above labels, or that could be called bastardizations of the label. (And WW2 is not a clash of these isms, just look at who is in bed with whom).
3. Nobody wants to be linked with Nazi's, so people who like ideas that they associate with "socialism," are not going to want to admit that National Socialism is socialism.
OK, let's Are you included in #3?
The post that put you on the warpath said that one of the four isms I mentioned requires central control. I'd argue they all entail central control. If they were never enforced, we wouldn't have labels for them. They wouldn't be four "isms."
The Scandinavian countries all practice demosocialism, as does every nation in the EU and nearly every other developed nation on the planet.
There are legal monopolies possible under a free enterprise system. For example, many years ago, communities and cities would settle on, for example, a single telephone company to provide telephone services in a given city. This was intended to do away with destructive and chaotic competition to provide an ‘essential public service’. What this meant back then was the telephone service provider pretty much made a guaranteed profit in exchange for an orderly market in providing an essential public service.@Peaceful about communists fighting for 'world brotherhood' it was in the way as old Babeuf explained about Robespierre: He wantde to feed the French yes...but with killing half of them. Plus as should I add also Hitler's racial doctrine was not without socialist elements. Jews being enemies of German people because they are selfish by nature, Aryan Germans are by nature inclined to work for the good of Aryan society etc.
@Sam Nary that i agree. I said it in this way that you can not have free market with monopolies. You can have only monopoly controled market.
Well if Britannia is the authoritiave source of definitions then the quetsion of the thread is decided and you are 100% wrong.
They did not. Otherwise Britian, the USA war eequally socialist during the war. Government control does not equal socialism.@Pugsvile this i explained before already. Hitler pushed from power not just left wing Nazis but also conservatives which wanted or hoped to control him and not long ago after Strasser. Marxists and specially communists were also persecuting other socialists so this is not an argument too. And the third here we are talking about the economy of Third Reich not in general about Nazis. In economy of the Third Reich they were soon, before the war applied socialistic model.
|Similar History Discussions||History Forum||Date|
|Why is Argentina's economy always such a basket case?||South American History|
|WAS the Soviet economy a modernized version of ancient AMP ???||European History|
|Economy of the Third Reich||European History|
|Could the U.K. economy be third world by 2014?||Current Events|