Starker on 12/6/2017 at 15:52
Ah, a half-Nazi, then.
N'Al on 12/6/2017 at 17:03
Quote Posted by Krush
Nazism means National
Socialism. I am against socialism, therefore not a Nazi.
There wasn't anything remotely socialist about National Socialism either, despite what it may have been called.
Krush on 12/6/2017 at 18:11
You're incorrect. I suspect that's because you've been taught from birth that socialism is “nice” and just means the same thing as sharing. You probably just believe that socialism is automatically good while capitalism is automatically bad. The Nazis were bad, thus they can't be socialists!
BUT...from the 25-point program of the NSDAP, here are a few policies that I would consider Socialist in nature:
Point 12: In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
Point 13: We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
Point 14: We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
Point 15: We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.
From point 17: We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility...
From point 20: We demand the education at the expense of the State of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession.
Renzatic on 12/6/2017 at 18:15
Nazism did have a socialist aspect during its nascent days, though it was quickly abandoned as the ideology started to solidify, and when things started getting nasty between the Nazis and the Communists.
N'Al on 12/6/2017 at 18:21
Once again you're confusing what the Nazis wrote on a piece of paper to the way they actually acted in real life. There was nothing socialist about the National Socialists, and to pretend otherwise is just your attempt to deflect from the fact that - for all intents and purposes - you act in the same exact way.
Also, your quip about my stances on socialism and capitalism: you're incorrect.
Krush on 12/6/2017 at 18:32
The way the Nazi government "acted in real life" was to institute wage controls, price controls, and seize private businesses for state use. Sounds socialist to me.
I agree there is a discrepancy between what was written down and what the people got. Yes, the people of Germany voted for the "nice, sharing" socialism and got the totalitarian socialism. That always happens, and that's how it's supposed to work - just look at Venezuela.
N'Al on 12/6/2017 at 18:37
The way the Nazi government acted in real life was to discriminate against others based solely on their religious affiliation, skin colour or ancestry*. Sounds like Krush to me.
* To put it mildly.
Renzatic on 12/6/2017 at 18:38
Quote Posted by Krush
You're incorrect. I suspect that's because you've been taught from birth that socialism is “nice” and just means the same thing as sharing. You probably just believe that socialism is automatically good while capitalism is automatically bad. The Nazis were bad, thus they can't be socialists!
Jesus, no wonder you're scared of everything. You've built this strawman monster in your head you're now railing against.
First off, the Nazis were pretty much straight Fascists with a heavy racial bent thrown in for good measure.
When you're talking about Socialism, keep in mind that there are two definitions of Socialism that currently floating about these days: Marxist Socialism, and Welfare State Capitalism.
No one thinks the former is a good idea, despite what all the people on Reddit and 4Chan claim. You won't see anyone advocating for the collectivization of all property and industry these days. A private and public sector is pretty much the default standard for anything and everything in the Western world.
The latter is, well, it's what we are. What we have been since the mid 30's to varying degrees. It started off with the New Deal, and has fluctuated since. The American economy in the 50's and 60's is probably the gold standard for this particular form of government, which was a public sector that helped subsidize a healthy, decentralized private sector, providing base needs for its people, giving them the tools to excel on their own. I doubt anyone would call Eisenhower or 50's Americana Communists.
Secondly, since the argument over how much and how far the government should provide its citizenry has been around since time immemorial, you're gonna find some overlap throughout the various implementations of Classical Liberalism, Welfare Statism, Fascism, and Communism. Just because one group advocates, say, a large scale old age welfare system doesn't make it, by itself, Marxist of Fascist. Everything's on a multi-axis gradient, and there are about 50,000 other points that make something what it is, and to say that "Oh, well this ethos has 5 points I disagree with, therefore..." is overly simplistic thinking.
Krush on 12/6/2017 at 18:39
Quote:
Sounds like Krush to me.
Oh yeah I forgot about all the dead Jewish people in my basement. YOU GOT ME THERE!
Renzatic on 12/6/2017 at 18:40
MISREAD! DERP ON ME!
