Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The "uber" capitalists were happy with Hitler, as were numerous people opposed to the growing threat of Marxism, until they understood more about his regime. Hitler was a mad man Jake- He murdered people for the color of their skin or the ancestry of their birth. AGAIN, your point?
I refuse to believe Jake is as clueless as his posts. I still believe he plays devil's advocate here, but damn that must get really tedious after awhile.
Pure socialism takes complete control of the economy, generally through totalitarian means.
Facism, of which Hitler's Third Reich embraced, controlled the corporations by installing or controlling the CEO's/owners of those businesses. While the owners could still profit fro their businesses, they were required to use their property and production in the 'national interest' as dictated by the government authorities. Those who resisted were appropriated and run by the State. Pure socialism replaces the free market with a governent run economy. Facism gives the illusion of a free market capitalistic system but is setting and enforcing all prices and wages behind the scenes.
You describe yourself perfectly, foxfyre. You are not clueless but playing a game. Hitler was not a socialist. He killed them. He played up to capitalists until he controlled them. Fascism, as practiced by Mussolini, for that matter, abhorred socialism.
We are now living in an economy that is fascistic, interaction of government and business. Both parties are fascist in that matter. Both parties are statist. The difference for me is that Romney will not playing hardcore leftist statist but will try to work as a right wing statist with businesses. That is one of the reasons I am voting for him.
But to the real point: we are not going back to small time government, we are not going to allow libertarian nonsense to run our government and society, and we are not going to allow the very far right militia to run anything.
You guys are clueless if you think any of that will ever happen.
You are out of the mainstream, and you have to come back to it, not it come to you.
I refuse to believe Jake is as clueless as his posts. I still believe he plays devil's advocate here, but damn that must get really tedious after awhile.
Pure socialism takes complete control of the economy, generally through totalitarian means.
Facism, of which Hitler's Third Reich embraced, controlled the corporations by installing or controlling the CEO's/owners of those businesses. While the owners could still profit fro their businesses, they were required to use their property and production in the 'national interest' as dictated by the government authorities. Those who resisted were appropriated and run by the State. Pure socialism replaces the free market with a governent run economy. Facism gives the illusion of a free market capitalistic system but is setting and enforcing all prices and wages behind the scenes.
You describe yourself perfectly, foxfyre. You are not clueless but playing a game. Hitler was not a socialist. He killed them. He played up to capitalists until he controlled them. Fascism, as practiced by Mussolini, for that matter, abhorred socialism.
We are now living in an economy that is fascistic, interaction of government and business. Both parties are fascist in that matter. Both parties are statist. The difference for me is that Romney will not playing hardcore leftist statist but will try to work as a right wing statist with businesses. That is one of the reasons I am voting for him.
But to the real point: we are not going back to small time government, we are not going to allow libertarian nonsense to run our government and society, and we are not going to allow the very far right militia to run anything.
You guys are clueless if you think any of that will ever happen.
You are out of the mainstream, and you have to come back to it, not it come to you.
Shall we add reading dysfunction to your other charming attributes, Jake? Perhaps you overlooked where I drew a sharp distinction between socialism and fascism? And I suggest you re-read Mein Kampf and restudy what facism is before you declare Hitler to be the savior of capitalism.
The dysfunctionalism is not mine. I understand fully the differences between the two. What I don't like is redefinition of terms politically and historically that have already been defined.
And I suggest very gently but firmly you carefully reread what I wrote. I wrote that others considered Hitler the savior of capitalism. That came from a source of clevergirl.
The dysfunctionalism is not mine. I understand fully the differences between the two. What I don't like is redefinition of terms politically and historically that have already been defined.
And I suggest very gently but firmly you carefully reread what I wrote. I wrote that others considered Hitler the savior of capitalism. That came from a source of clevergirl.
They don't care about truth and facts. They just wish to cling to their ridiculous dogma.Yes, Hitler and Mussolini despised Socialism.There is no difference between those three Gods of CON$ervoFascism. They were all united by their hatred of Marxism.
"In the years 1913 and 1914, I expressed the conviction that the question of the future of the German nation was the question of destroying Marxism."
- Adolf Hitler
"The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle of Nature and replaces the eternal privilege of power and strength by the mass of numbers and their dead weight."
-Adolf Hitler
Socialism is a fraud, a comedy, a phantom, a blackmail.
*Benito Mussolini
Really?
Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Hitler was the head of a political party. In English, it was called the National Socialist German Workers Party, or "Nazi Party" for short.
.
Yes, Hitler and Mussolini despised Socialism. Conservatives, of course, have attempted to rewrite history of late. After all, who'd want to be associated with those two?There is no difference between those three Gods of CON$ervoFascism. They were all united by their hatred of Marxism.Sorry, but you're wrong. Tell me the difference between Hitler, Musulini and Stalin. hint: NOTHING (and dont answer something gay like date of birth)
"In the years 1913 and 1914, I expressed the conviction that the question of the future of the German nation was the question of destroying Marxism."
- Adolf Hitler
"The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle of Nature and replaces the eternal privilege of power and strength by the mass of numbers and their dead weight."
-Adolf Hitler
Socialism is a fraud, a comedy, a phantom, a blackmail.
*Benito Mussolini
Hitler was considered the savior of Western civilization and capitalism. No nationalization of industry happened. The uber capitalists were very happy with Herr Hitler.
And he had his SS murder the homosexual leadership of the SA, where the seeds of socialism had existed. Not only did Hitler have SA socialists murdered, he had them and communists and all opponents murdered.
11. Nationalization of industry
Internet History Sourcebooks
My point was to look carefully at the sources.
Hitler was considered the savior of Western civilization and capitalism. No nationalization of industry happened. The uber capitalists were very happy with Herr Hitler.
And he had his SS murdered the homosexual leadership of the SA, where the seeds of socialism had existed. Not only did Hitler have SA socialists murdered, he had them and communists and all opponents murdered.
The "uber" capitalists were happy with Hitler, as were numerous people opposed to the growing threat of Marxism, until they understood more about his regime. Hitler was a mad man Jake- He murdered people for the color of their skin or the ancestry of their birth. AGAIN, your point?
Really?Hitler was considered the savior of Western civilization and capitalism. No nationalization of industry happened. The uber capitalists were very happy with Herr Hitler.
And he had his SS murder the homosexual leadership of the SA, where the seeds of socialism had existed. Not only did Hitler have SA socialists murdered, he had them and communists and all opponents murdered.
11. Nationalization of industry
Internet History Sourcebooks
Calling for something to occur doesn't not equal it actually occurring. Also, there were so many changes in the movement from 1920 to the 1930s that referring to manifestos from 1920 paints a pretty inaccurate picture.
Really?11. Nationalization of industry
Internet History Sourcebooks
Calling for something to occur doesn't not equal it actually occurring. Also, there were so many changes in the movement from 1920 to the 1930s that referring to manifestos from 1920 paints a pretty inaccurate picture.
Nazi Economic Policy
Nazi regimentation extended to the economic sphere, although the property and profits of the capitalists were protected. In practical terms, the word "socialist" in the name of the Nazi Party did not refer to the nationalization of the means of production but rather to requiring the economy to serve the interests of the state.
Hitler succeeded in reducing unemployment by initiating public works projects, including the construction of superhighways (autobahns), and establishing the Labor Service to provide jobs for young workers who could not find employment in the private sector. In 1936, the Four Year Plan was launched with the purpose of promoting economic self-sufficiency and of mobilizing the economy for war.
Hitler's Rise to Power
Isn't that part in bold socialism?
Page three second paragraph
Hitler and Nationalism
You didn't notice this part? and notice thew word requireReally?Calling for something to occur doesn't not equal it actually occurring. Also, there were so many changes in the movement from 1920 to the 1930s that referring to manifestos from 1920 paints a pretty inaccurate picture.
Nazi Economic Policy
Nazi regimentation extended to the economic sphere, although the property and profits of the capitalists were protected. In practical terms, the word "socialist" in the name of the Nazi Party did not refer to the nationalization of the means of production but rather to requiring the economy to serve the interests of the state.
Hitler succeeded in reducing unemployment by initiating public works projects, including the construction of superhighways (autobahns), and establishing the Labor Service to provide jobs for young workers who could not find employment in the private sector. In 1936, the Four Year Plan was launched with the purpose of promoting economic self-sufficiency and of mobilizing the economy for war.
Hitler's Rise to Power
Isn't that part in bold socialism?
Page three second paragraph
Hitler and Nationalism
No, it's not. Nationalization of industry, by definition, requires government ownership of the means of production. Government placing large orders with private sector firms isn't nationalization.
requiring the economy to serve the interests of the state
Obama likes to censor via the internet.
Google reports 'alarming' rise in government censorship requests - CNN.com
Then they realized their mistake. Just like Churchill warned. Appeasement is just the hope the Crocadile eats you last. Hitler followed a pattern.My point was to look carefully at the sources.
Hitler was considered the savior of Western civilization and capitalism. No nationalization of industry happened. The uber capitalists were very happy with Herr Hitler.
And he had his SS murdered the homosexual leadership of the SA, where the seeds of socialism had existed. Not only did Hitler have SA socialists murdered, he had them and communists and all opponents murdered.
The "uber" capitalists were happy with Hitler, as were numerous people opposed to the growing threat of Marxism, until they understood more about his regime. Hitler was a mad man Jake- He murdered people for the color of their skin or the ancestry of their birth. AGAIN, your point?
Oh please. They weren't just happen with Hitler in the early days, they were happy with Hitler all along. They were happy that he killed the commies, and they were happy to use the slave labor he supplied.
Then they realized their mistake. Just like Churchill warned. Appeasement is just the hope the Crocadile eats you last.The "uber" capitalists were happy with Hitler, as were numerous people opposed to the growing threat of Marxism, until they understood more about his regime. Hitler was a mad man Jake- He murdered people for the color of their skin or the ancestry of their birth. AGAIN, your point?
Oh please. They weren't just happen with Hitler in the early days, they were happy with Hitler all along. They were happy that he killed the commies, and they were happy to use the slave labor he supplied.
I will link the rest of the article in a while, but I'd like to see discussion on this much of it, before I attribute it.
Politically, it is heads-I-win when things go right, and tails-you-lose when things go wrong. This is far preferable, from Obama's point of view, since it gives him a variety of scapegoats for all his failed policies, without having to use President Bush as a scapegoat all the time.
Government ownership of the means of production means that politicians also own the consequences of their policies, and have to face responsibility when those consequences are disastrous -- something that Barack Obama avoids like the plague.
Thus the Obama administration can arbitrarily force insurance companies to cover the children of their customers until the children are 26 years old. Obviously, this creates favorable publicity for President Obama. But if this and other government edicts cause insurance premiums to rise, then that is something that can be blamed on the "greed" of the insurance companies.
The same principle, or lack of principle, applies to many other privately owned businesses. It is a very successful political ploy that can be adapted to all sorts of situations.
One of the reasons why both pro-Obama and anti-Obama observers may be reluctant to see him as fascist is that both tend to accept the prevailing notion that fascism is on the political right, while it is obvious that Obama is on the political left.
Back in the 1920s, however, when fascism was a new political development, it was widely -- and correctly -- regarded as being on the political left. Jonah Goldberg's great book "Liberal Fascism" cites overwhelming evidence of the fascists' consistent pursuit of the goals of the left, and of the left's embrace of the fascists as one of their own during the 1920s.
Mussolini, the originator of fascism, was lionized by the left, both in Europe and in America, during the 1920s. Even Hitler, who adopted fascist ideas in the 1920s, was seen by some, including W.E.B. Du Bois, as a man of the left.
You didn't notice this part? and notice thew word requireReally?
Nazi Economic Policy
Nazi regimentation extended to the economic sphere, although the property and profits of the capitalists were protected. In practical terms, the word "socialist" in the name of the Nazi Party did not refer to the nationalization of the means of production but rather to requiring the economy to serve the interests of the state.
Hitler succeeded in reducing unemployment by initiating public works projects, including the construction of superhighways (autobahns), and establishing the Labor Service to provide jobs for young workers who could not find employment in the private sector. In 1936, the Four Year Plan was launched with the purpose of promoting economic self-sufficiency and of mobilizing the economy for war.
Hitler's Rise to Power
Isn't that part in bold socialism?
Page three second paragraph
Hitler and Nationalism
No, it's not. Nationalization of industry, by definition, requires government ownership of the means of production. Government placing large orders with private sector firms isn't nationalization.
requiring the economy to serve the interests of the state
