Economy of Third Reich was a socialist economy

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,830
Europix
Well for Soviets there was apparently no problem to use slave labour for socialist totalitarian state.
Err .... no. Tthey weren't slaves.

A slave is the property of someone (which prisoners in Gulags weren't) and doesn't have a wage (which prisoners in Gulags had).

They were persons convicted to forced labour. Something that Bolsheviks didn't invented, it existed long before them, still exists nowadays.

Let's not just throw words around just like that.
 
Sep 2019
486
Slovenia
Well it can really be that slaves were in better position sometimes yes, because sometimes they were able to buy freedom. Gulag prisoners could work up to 14 hours per day. They were ''paid'' 15% of payment of a worker in comparable job ( from after the time of WW2, like to increase productivity ). Typical Gulag labor was exhausting physical work many times in very bad weather conditions. Prisoners were also not fed enough to sustain such difficult labor. So that's why milions died.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macon

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,830
Europix
Well it can really be that slaves were in better position sometimes yes, because sometimes they were able to buy freedom. Gulag prisoners could work up to 14 hours per day. They were ''paid'' 15% of payment of a worker in comparable job ( from after the time of WW2, like to increase productivity ). Typical Gulag labor was exhausting physical work many times in very bad weather conditions. Prisoners were also not fed enough to sustain such difficult labor. So that's why milions died.
That is something else.

It's factual, thus useful, unlike the previous post that, with all do respect, sounds as simplistic anti-communist propaganda.
 
Dec 2017
360
Florida
That is something else.

It's factual, thus useful, unlike the previous post that, with all do respect, sounds as simplistic anti-communist propaganda.

A gulag is a forced-labor camp, a condition of slavery is forced labor. What you have been talking about before (seeing a slave as property) is called chattel slavery where the slave is designated as property. Slavery does not necessarily have to have a property basis. You can have forced labor which is a form of slavery and is used to define such conditions as serfdom, child labor, and penial labor.
 
Last edited:

Linschoten

Ad Honoris
Aug 2010
16,417
Welsh Marches
Indeed, forced labour of that kind is in effect a form of slavery, perhaps temporary, perhaps until death; it is not exactly the same as traditional slavery (one is using a comparison), it could be seen as better in certain respects, worse in others (both the Nazis and the Soviets worked people to death, which would usually - though not always - have been uneconomic for slave-owners). I have no qualms about saying that the Nazi and Soviets used slave-labour, it was no more different from normal slavery than one kind of normal slavery differed from another. Forced labour under totalitarian systems differed from forced labour, moreover, under other systems (even authoritarian ones). To accuse people of peddling anti-Communist propaganda if they talk of slavery in this context seems to me to be as ridiculous as making that accusation if they talk of Stalinist mass-murder. After all, how is any form of 'propaganda' needed in reference to self-evident evils, any more than with evils committed by the Nazis. It is telling the people only need to throw such accusations around with regard to communists and not to Nazis!
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,830
Europix
A gulag is a forced-labor camp, a condition of slavery is forced labor. What you have been talking about before (seeing a slave as property) is called chattel slavery where the slave is designated as property. Slavery does not necessarily have to have a property basis. You can have forced labor which is a form of slavery and is used to define such conditions as serfdom, child labor, and penial labor.
Indeed, forced labour of that kind is in effect a form of slavery, perhaps temporary, perhaps until death; it is not exactly the same as traditional slavery (one is using a comparison), it could be seen as better in certain respects, worse in others (both the Nazis and the Soviets worked people to death, which would usually - though not always - have been uneconomic for slave-owners). I have no qualms about saying that the Nazi and Soviets used slave-labour, it was no more different from normal slavery than one kind of normal slavery differed from another. Forced labour under totalitarian systems differed from forced labour, moreover, under other systems (even authoritarian ones). To accuse people of peddling anti-Communist propaganda if they talk of slavery in this context seems to me to be as ridiculous as making that accusation if they talk of Stalinist mass-murder. After all, how is any form of 'propaganda' needed in reference to self-evident evils, any more than with evils committed by the Nazis. It is telling the people only need to throw such accusations around with regard to communists and not to Nazis!
Errata :

I directly translated the locution "forced labour" into English, without checking a dictionary. It's always a bad idea and I acknowledge, coming from me, it's unforgivable. But I did it, I can't undo it.

It seems that in English "forced labour" covers something else.

It seems the closest term in English to what I was referring to would be "penal labour".

Example:

French: travaux forcés (=> forced labour)

" La peine de travaux forcés est une peine de détention assortie de travail obligatoire qui peut être infligée aux individus condamnés à l'emprisonnement pour des crimes ou des délits. La peine de travaux forcés est encore en vigueur dans certains pays."*

(trad: The sentence of forced labor is a punishment of detention subject to work mandatory that can be imposed on individuals sentenced to imprisonment for crimes or offenses . Forced labor is still in force in some countries.
N.B. not mine)

Russian: Принудительные работы (=>forced labour)

"Принудительные работы — вид уголовного наказания, связанный с привлечением осуждённого к оплачиваемому труду в местах, определяемых органами уголовно-исполнительной системы, с вычетом из его заработной платы определённой денежной суммы. "*

(trad : " Forced labor is a type of criminal punishment related to the conviction of a convicted person in paid labor in places determined by the penitentiary system, with deduction of a certain amount of money from his salary. " N.B. not mine)

Lost in translation, one might say ...

That being clarified (my apologies for the confusion, again) I remain on the position I expressed in the two posts.

Of course, I will not start to point out my disagreement with Your posts, as You were mislead by the inappropriate use of the verbal locution in question.

________
* both definitions are from the inevitable Wiki.
 

Lee-Sensei

Ad Honorem
Aug 2012
2,151
This binary has always bugged me. The Third Reichs economy w@s neither socialist or capitalist. They had a mixed economy with socialist and capitalist elements.
 
Dec 2011
1,386
Belgium
# 519

Larrey, I thank you for your to the point summary of the comparison of Nazism and USSR Communism

Kind regards, Paul.
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,830
Europix
This time, I did checked the dictionary, for not making the same stupid mistake (errare humanum est sed perseverare diabolicum ... ).

After all, how is any form of 'propaganda' needed in reference to self-evident evils, any more than with evils committed by the Nazis.
IDK. I don't understand either. But it seems that self-evident evils is not a thing that can stop it, so Communism or Nazism are still object of propaganda. I mean Anticommunist and Antinazist propaganda.

I think I will be always against any form of propaganda, even propaganda against self-evident evils, because of (I underlined wherefrom my issues with propaganda come from):

"Propaganda is information that is used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be presenting facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information ... " *

"Propaganda is the more or less systematic effort to manipulate other people's beliefs, attitudes, or actions by means of symbols ..." **

" the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person" ***



And I'm sorry, I don't think that a discourse that is selective, leading, is more acceptable just because is targeting a self-evident evil.

One doesn't fight evil through partial views and emotional analysis but trough in-depth knowledge based on a rational analysis. If one does not keep a cool head, the rationality, it might very well end in finding "arguments" to apologise right-wing dictatures as they're fighting Communism or vice-versa, apologising left-wing dictatures as they're fighting Nazism. We're seeing plenty of that around us on "social media".

It is telling the people only need to throw such accusations around with regard to communists and not to Nazis!

1. It wasn't an accusation, rather a remarq, a "friendly warning" if You want, and I have the impression our fellow historumite anonymousprofesor/ understood me, in regard to the reformulation he proposed right afterwards.

2. The post I was referring to was dealing to exclusively one thing: communist gulags. It didn't mentioned anything Nazi. So I didn't mentioned Nazis either. Seemed logical to me at the time.

_______
the definitions are from: * Wikipedia, **Britannica, *** Merriam-webster

_____
PS: if You don't mind, I will PM You a couple of things: I do not want to further derail the thread as I might already done it a bit.
 

Linschoten

Ad Honoris
Aug 2010
16,417
Welsh Marches
"Well for Soviets there was apparently no problem to use slave labour for socialist totalitarian state." With regard to the Soviet state in its Stalinist phase, I see nothing objectionable in that remark (although as I have already said, this involves a comparison rather than an identification). Such a remark could be used as propaganda to put forward a misleading argument about the nature of Communism in general, but one could hardly say in my view that it is inherently propagandistic. And the poster didn't withdraw his point in response to your post, he formulated more clearly what he meant by it, arguing (reasonably in my view) that the forced labour in the Gulag can be meaninfully compared to forms of slavery. The thousands of prisoners who died as as result of being forced to build the White Sea-Baltic Canal suffered a very similar fate to those who were forced to labour in the silver-mines at Laurium in antiquity.