Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian.

[Mindful]

My purpose today is to make just two main points: (1) To show why Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And (2) to show why socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.

The identification of Nazi Germany as a socialist state was one of the many great contributions of Ludwig von Mises.

When one remembers that the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der NationalsozialistischeDeutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National Socialist German Workers' Party — Mises's identification might not appear all that noteworthy. For what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?

Nevertheless, apart from Mises and his readers, practically no one thinks of Nazi Germany as a socialist state. It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed.

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman

 

[TNHarley]

Capitalism, by definition, is lack of govt.
People are completely ignorant if they try to claim tyranny or authoritarianism is capitalism.

 

[Mindful]

^ The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.

What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.

 

[bodecea]

My purpose today is to make just two main points: (1) To show why Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And (2) to show why socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.

The identification of Nazi Germany as a socialist state was one of the many great contributions of Ludwig von Mises.

When one remembers that the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der NationalsozialistischeDeutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National Socialist German Workers' Party — Mises's identification might not appear all that noteworthy. For what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?

Nevertheless, apart from Mises and his readers, practically no one thinks of Nazi Germany as a socialist state. It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed.

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman

Just like the People's Republic of China is a Republic?

 

[Mindful]

My purpose today is to make just two main points: (1) To show why Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And (2) to show why socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.

The identification of Nazi Germany as a socialist state was one of the many great contributions of Ludwig von Mises.

When one remembers that the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der NationalsozialistischeDeutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National Socialist German Workers' Party — Mises's identification might not appear all that noteworthy. For what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?

Nevertheless, apart from Mises and his readers, practically no one thinks of Nazi Germany as a socialist state. It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed.

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian | George Reisman

Just like the People's Republic of China is a Republic?

I was going to bring that up.

Those companies, like Huawei for instance, are not privately run, but are state owned.

 

[whitehall]

The acronym "nazi" stood for the "nationalist socialist workers party". Communist propagandists have tamed down the rhetoric since WW2 but it's the same.

 

[TNHarley]

^ The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.

What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.

And the govt heavily regulated businesses and such. That isn't capitalism

 

[Oddball]

The acronym "nazi" stood for the "nationalist socialist workers party". Communist propagandists have tamed down the rhetoric since WW2 but it's the same.

 

[whitehall]

The acronym "nazi" stood for the "nationalist socialist workers party". Communist propagandists have tamed down the rhetoric since WW2 but it's the same.

View attachment 310535

What's the point? Did FDR's buddy "Uncle Joe" Stalin's socialist republik out socialist Hitler's socialist democrats?

 

[007]

Hitler would have loved the new radical commie democrat party, and his minister of propaganda Heir Goebbels would have just been in awe of the democrat propaganda wing.

 

[Mindful]

It seems to me that government intrusion and interference are anathema to Americans.


^ In the United States at the present time, we do not have socialism in any form. And we do not have a dictatorship, let alone a totalitarian dictatorship.

We also do not yet have Fascism, though we are moving towards it. Among the essential elements that are still lacking are one-party rule and censorship. We still have freedom of speech and press and free elections, though both have been undermined and their continued existence cannot be guaranteed.

What we have is a hampered market economy that is growing ever more hampered by ever more government intervention, and that is characterized by a growing loss of individual freedom. The growth of the government's economic intervention is synonymous with a loss of individual freedom because it means increasingly initiating the use of physical force to make people do what they do not voluntarily choose to do or prevent them from doing what they do voluntarily choose to do.

Since the individual is the best judge of his own interests, and at least as a rule seeks to do what it is in his interest to do and to avoid doing what harms his interest, it follows that the greater the extent of government intervention, the greater the extent to which individuals are prevented from doing what benefits them and are instead compelled to do what causes them loss.

Today, in the United States, government spending, federal, state, and local, amounts to almost half of the monetary incomes of the portion of the citizenry that does not work for the government. Fifteen federal cabinet departments, and a much larger number of federal regulatory agencies, together, in most instances with counterparts at the state and local level, routinely intrude into virtually every area of the individual citizen's life. In countless ways he is taxed, compelled, and prohibited.

The effect of such massive government interference is unemployment, rising prices, falling real wages, a need to work longer and harder, and growing economic insecurity. The further effect is growing anger and resentment.

Though the government's policy of interventionism is their logical target, the anger and resentment people feel are typically directed at businessmen and the rich instead. This is a mistake which is fueled for the most part by an ignorant and envious intellectual establishment and media.

 

[Picaro]

Nazism was a personality cult, not a political ideology, despite all the rhetoric put out by Goebbels. The fact is without Goering and the aristocrats and the industrialists like Kruppe Hitler could never have risen on his own to run Germany, and the Nazis never had an actual absolute majority in any of their votes before the dictatorship. It was not the same as Marxism or Communism, no matter how much the right wingers try and spin it. We also know his polices were half-assed and chaotic. While the Soviets had their 'Uncle Joe' propaganda, few Party members considered him as anything else but temporary and their 'scientific' system was historically inevitable no matter what. Nazism wasn't remotely similar to that; Hitler was Germany.

Right wingers wouldn't be so desperate with peddling 'the Nazis Were Leftists!!!' rubbish if they really believed their own bullshit re economics and their Social Darwinism cults was real life.

 

[Mindful]

Nazism was a personality cult, not a political ideology, despite all the rhetoric put out by Goebbels. The fact is without Goering and the aristocrats and the industrialists like Kruppe Hitler could never have risen on his own to run Germany, and the Nazis never had an actual absolute majority in any of their votes before the dictatorship. It was not the same as Marxism or Communism, no matter how much the right wingers try and spin it. We also know his polices were half-assed and chaotic. While the Soviets had their 'Uncle Joe' propaganda, few Party members considered him as anything else but temporary and their 'scientific' system was historically inevitable no matter what. Nazism wasn't remotely similar to that; Hitler was Germany.

Right wingers wouldn't be so desperate with peddling 'the Nazis Were Leftists!!!' rubbish if they really believed their own bullshit re economics and their Social Darwinism cults was real life.

That's correct. Hitler was Germany. And Nazism was peculiar to the Germany of that time. Other versions of it don't compare. Don't come close.

 

[Picaro]

Capitalism, by definition, is lack of govt.
People are completely ignorant if they try to claim tyranny or authoritarianism is capitalism.

The Soviet Union was a capitalist country; state capitalism is capitalism, industrial capitalism is capitalism, and financial capitalism is capitalism. The word 'capitalism' is a general term, not a specific one; there are several categories, and few of the are 'laissez faire' types, in fact almost none of them are. Industrial capitalism has been the more successful historically; it has produced the logistical networks and administrative and accounting methods necessary for large economies to grow and produce. Financial capitalism is parasitic and eventually destroys productivity and generates the most corruption and kills itself off. State capitalism is just a more efficient parasitism created by instability inherent in it's mother, financial capitalism.

 

[Mindful]

Capitalism, by definition, is lack of govt.
People are completely ignorant if they try to claim tyranny or authoritarianism is capitalism.

The Soviet Union was a capitalist country; state capitalism is capitalism, industrial capitalism is capitalism, and financial capitalism is capitalism. The word 'capitalism' is a general term, not a specific one; there are several categories, and few of the are 'laissez faire' types, in fact almost none of them are. Industrial capitalism has been the more successful historically; it has produced the logistical networks and administrative and accounting methods necessary for large economies to grow and produce. Financial capitalism is parasitic and eventually destroys productivity and generates the most corruption and kills itself off. State capitalism is just a more efficient parasitism created by instability inherent in it's mother, financial capitalism.

The Germans are state capitalists. Masters at it. A money making machine. They charge you just for putting a stamp on a paper/document.

 

[Picaro]

Capitalism, by definition, is lack of govt.
People are completely ignorant if they try to claim tyranny or authoritarianism is capitalism.

The Soviet Union was a capitalist country; state capitalism is capitalism, industrial capitalism is capitalism, and financial capitalism is capitalism. The word 'capitalism' is a general term, not a specific one; there are several categories, and few of the are 'laissez faire' types, in fact almost none of them are. Industrial capitalism has been the more successful historically; it has produced the logistical networks and administrative and accounting methods necessary for large economies to grow and produce. Financial capitalism is parasitic and eventually destroys productivity and generates the most corruption and kills itself off. State capitalism is just a more efficient parasitism created by instability inherent in it's mother, financial capitalism.

The Germans are state capitalists. Masters at it. A money making machine. They charge you just for putting a stamp on a paper/document.

Some functions are going to be natural monopolies; whether they are state-owned or not will make no difference to the average citizen. The Postal Service is one, so is the military, and some utilities. The only way private enterprises can be truly efficient is for its owners to be held liable for the consequences of failures as well as successes; our current farce of allowing any idiot who can afford to incorporate as a limited liability company, for instance, immediately derails the whole system, and is a form of socialist protectionism by putting a floor on shareholder losses. But, the same proponents of corporate welfare will oppose a similar floor on wages to protect workers from being forced to work for less than the value of their work. Giving one part of the economy protection from its corruption and failures makes it necessary to also provide protections for the other parts of the equations; to not do so leads to political instability for all. The state capitalists of your own country or a foreign state capitalist country will soon own you.

 

[rylah]

Capitalism, by definition, is lack of govt.
People are completely ignorant if they try to claim tyranny or authoritarianism is capitalism.

The Soviet Union was a capitalist country; state capitalism is capitalism, industrial capitalism is capitalism, and financial capitalism is capitalism. The word 'capitalism' is a general term, not a specific one; there are several categories, and few of the are 'laissez faire' types, in fact almost none of them are. Industrial capitalism has been the more successful historically; it has produced the logistical networks and administrative and accounting methods necessary for large economies to grow and produce. Financial capitalism is parasitic and eventually destroys productivity and generates the most corruption and kills itself off. State capitalism is just a more efficient parasitism created by instability inherent in it's mother, financial capitalism.

The Germans are state capitalists. Masters at it. A money making machine. They charge you just for putting a stamp on a paper/document.

Interesting, first time I hear of such distinction, 'state capitalism' vs 'financial capitalism'.

Might be a bit offtopic, maybe wrong impression, or just a symptom of the above distinction -
but why do Germans get so insulted at the mere suggestion of bargaining?

 

[Mindful]

Capitalism, by definition, is lack of govt.
People are completely ignorant if they try to claim tyranny or authoritarianism is capitalism.

The Soviet Union was a capitalist country; state capitalism is capitalism, industrial capitalism is capitalism, and financial capitalism is capitalism. The word 'capitalism' is a general term, not a specific one; there are several categories, and few of the are 'laissez faire' types, in fact almost none of them are. Industrial capitalism has been the more successful historically; it has produced the logistical networks and administrative and accounting methods necessary for large economies to grow and produce. Financial capitalism is parasitic and eventually destroys productivity and generates the most corruption and kills itself off. State capitalism is just a more efficient parasitism created by instability inherent in it's mother, financial capitalism.

The Germans are state capitalists. Masters at it. A money making machine. They charge you just for putting a stamp on a paper/document.

Interesting, first time I hear of such distinction, 'state capitalism' vs 'financial capitalism'.

Might be a bit offtopic, maybe wrong impression, or just a symptom of the above distinction -
but why do Germans get so insulted at the mere suggestion of bargaining?

I don't know. But they are masters of it when they are on holiday elsewhere.

 

[Picaro]

Capitalism, by definition, is lack of govt.
People are completely ignorant if they try to claim tyranny or authoritarianism is capitalism.

The Soviet Union was a capitalist country; state capitalism is capitalism, industrial capitalism is capitalism, and financial capitalism is capitalism. The word 'capitalism' is a general term, not a specific one; there are several categories, and few of the are 'laissez faire' types, in fact almost none of them are. Industrial capitalism has been the more successful historically; it has produced the logistical networks and administrative and accounting methods necessary for large economies to grow and produce. Financial capitalism is parasitic and eventually destroys productivity and generates the most corruption and kills itself off. State capitalism is just a more efficient parasitism created by instability inherent in it's mother, financial capitalism.

The Germans are state capitalists. Masters at it. A money making machine. They charge you just for putting a stamp on a paper/document.

Interesting, first time I hear of such distinction, 'state capitalism' vs 'financial capitalism'.

Might be a bit offtopic, maybe wrong impression, or just a symptom of the above distinction -
but why do Germans get so insulted at the mere suggestion of bargaining?

The art of haggling is not widely practiced in the U.S., either.Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean by 'bargaining'? I haggle with small storekeepers everywhere I go when I'm in Europe; the more 'insulted' they pretend to be the longer they will haggle, in my experience. Not a possibility in a big store, too many people in line and are there precisely because they want to get in and get out.

 

[edthecynic]

socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production

The pure STUPIDITY of the Right on display!
Socialism is SOCIETY controlling the means of production,
Marxism is the WORKERS controlling the means of production.
Capitalism is the WEALTHY controlling the means of production.
The objective of Capitalism is MONOPOLY control of the means of production.