Were the Nazis Socialist?

[Oddball]

ONCE AGAIN.... why does it matter?
The important mark in history about Nazism is that it was fascism.
And who is being fascist today??

 

[Theowl32]

Are leftists really trying to convince us there is nothing similar between...

The Bolshevik thugs
The Brown Shirt thugs
The red guard thugs
Khmer rouge
Bill Ayers call for mass violence
BLM violent tactics
Antifa violent tactics
Che and castro tactics
Kkk tactics

I guess the left need the colors to be separate. Cause trust me that is all they will see. The violent tactics by the thugs is lost on them. It is about colors of skin and race.

They see no other simlarities. You see, to the left in this country, all they do is see things in color.

They, are the racists.

 

[2aguy]

This has never been an interesting question to me because, it didn't have a great bearing on their Antisemitism.

The Nazis obviously weren't Soviet-style Socialists, they hated the Bolsheviks and were highly critical of them. Private enterprise flourished under the Nazis, more than in the previous German governments. In fact, many businesses nationalized during the Great German Depression, were privatized under the Nazis.

But, as you can imagine, the topic of Antisemitism is very much in my (our) minds this week and because of that, I decided to re-watch the 1940 Nazi propaganda film, 'The Eternal Jew' by Franz Hippler.

Something I had never really focused on before is the the emphasis they put on 'decent' labor and 'evil' capitalism. German workers are good, Jewish businessmen are bad (they neglect to point out there were many more non-Jewish businessmen than Jewish ones in Germany). The Nazis were, at least according to their own propaganda, firm believers in the 'Labor Theory of Value' straight our of Marx. That theory holds that the the amount of socially valuable labor that goes into a good is what determines its value, not its value in the market.

For example, a farm, a coal mine, a tractor factory ... all are valuable, because they produce goods that use lots of (cheap and semi-skilled) labor.

A bank, an investment firm, merchants and wholesalers, are bad ... they make a profit without providing labor for the masses.

In this film, they chastise the French banking family, The Rothschilds, because they sought to avoid the punitive taxes placed on all Jewish businesses in the 18th Century. They denounce banking and mercantile trade as 'evil' and 'Jewish'.

This, however, wasn't unique to the Nazis. Coming out of the Great Depression, most Western countries were experiencing a wave of populist Socialism because of the perceived failure of Market Capitalism, which they had just gone through. Jews in many countries took a lot of abuse, even in America, for their historical connection to finance and markets as opposed to large scale, labor intensive production.

This was counter-balanced in America and other countries because Jews were very influential in the ever-growing labor movement while other Jews had strong ties to banking and finance, and others in science and education. Obviously, this wasn't the case in Nazi Germany, where Jews, quite apart from not being leader in the labor movement, they weren't allowed to be members of labor organizations.

While the Nazis did privatize many businesses when they took power. It was a special type of privatization unique to the Nazis. One that made the Nazi Party a (not so silent) partner in each of the businesses they privatized. So, that while the company itself was run as a private company. The production goals, and economic decisions were made by the Nazi Party, not the company owners. Likewise, much of the profits went to the party as well.

The Nazis had other cultural similarities with the Soviets. They were both very adamant in their rejection of 'decadence' in music, art, and cinema. They believed Jazz, modern forms of art, and absurdly comedic films to be degrading to the morals of the people. Because of this, both the Nazis and the Soviets controlled their films, art, and music with strict censorship.

My conclusion to all this. I don't believe the Nazis were ideological Socialist the way the Soviets were. I don't believe they held strongly to any any dogmatic economic theory. Instead, I believe they were economic opportunists. They portrayed themselves as friends of the working man and used the words and symbols of the populist Socialism movement. But, at the same time, used government control of private investment to take advantage of Capitalism to enrich the party and its leaders.

Nazism is socialism..... the national socialists controlled every aspect of the economy, which is what socialism is, the government controls the means of production, that they used private owners to run the companies, they did not have any control over their prices, or their policies, and would be removed if the government wanted them removed......

Check out Friedrich Von Hayek and Ludwig von Mises...two economists who had to flee nazi Germany who explain in their work exactly how the nazis were socialists...keep in mind, the national socialists had their crimes exposed to the public while the international socialists committed their crimes where people never saw them.....so the left uses the national socialists to protect the even worse mass murderers, the international socialists.....since if was truly grasped that the worst mass murderers in history were all left wing socialists...socialism would lose a lot of support...

Friedrich Hayek: Nobel Prize winning economist....

Nazism is Socialism -- F A Hayek, et al

One of the main reasons why the socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great industries and the great landowners. But this merely proves that these groups too -as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment -have, at least partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement. But only partly because -and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany – many capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience. But, in spite of this, the German entrepreneur class have manifested almost incredible short-sightedness in allying themselves with a move movement of whose strong anti-capitalistic tendencies there should never have been any doubt.

A careful observer must always have been aware that the opposition of the Nazis to the established socialist parties, which gained them the sympathy of the entrepreneur, was only to a very small extend directed against their economic policy. What the Nazis mainly objected to was their internationalism and all the aspects of their cultural programme which were still influenced by liberal ideas. But the accusations against the social-democrats and the communists which were most effective in their propaganda were not so much directed against their programme as against their supposed practice -their corruption and nepotism, and even their alleged alliance with “the golden International of Jewish Capitalism.”

It would, indeed, hardly have been possible for the Nationalists to advance fundamental objections to the economic policy of the other socialist parties when their own published programme differed from these only in that its socialism was much cruder and less rational. The famous 25 points drawn up by Herr Feder,[2] one of Hitler’s early allies, repeatedly endorsed by Hitler and recognized by the by-laws of the National-Socialist party as the immutable basis of all its actions, which together with an extensive commentary is circulating throughout Germany in many hundreds of thousands of copies, is full of ideas resembling those of the early socialists. But the dominant feature is a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic -individualistic profit seeking, large scale enterprise, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, “international finance and loan capital,” the system of “interest slavery” in general; the abolition of these is described as the “[indecipherable] of the programme, around which everything else turns.” It was to this programme that the masses of the German people, who were already completely under the influence of collectivist ideas, responded so enthusiastically.

That this violent anti-capitalistic attack is genuine – and not a mere piece of propaganda – becomes as clear from the personal history of the intellectual leaders of the movement as from the general milieu from which it springs. It is not even denied that man of the young men who today play a prominent part in it have previously been communists or socialists. And to any observer of the literary tendencies which made the Germans intelligentsia ready to join the ranks of the new party, it must be clear that the common characteristic of all the politically influential writers – in many cases free from definite party affiliations – was their anti-liberal and anti-capitalist trend. Groups like that formed around the review “Die Tat” have made the phrase “the end of capitalism” an accepted dogma to most young Germans.[3]

And more...

The Myth of "Nazi Capitalism" | Chris Calton

German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

“In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living. The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”

 

[2aguy]

Essentially, Nazism is rather like a cult. Their belief in an unfounded theory of genetics, superiority and destiny led them to do whatever was necessary to achieve power. Political ideology, diplomacy and military power were all subservient to this. They said, did, committed whatever they thought would work. It was very similar to religion.
So, of course they were not committed 'socialists'.

The belief in eugenics and racial purity weren't unique to the Nazis (although they did take it to grotesque extremes). In the post-war trials of Nazi Leaders in Nuremberg after WWII, the defense lawyers of the Nazis were quick to point out that the sterilization of low-IQ and mentally ill patients was performed in pre-War America just as it was in Nazi Germany.

I'm not sure I would classify Nazism as a 'cult' -- although among it's leadership it was very much a cult. It had much too much popular appeal in Germany for it to be considered a cult.

Marx also believed that certain peoples....too far behind the historical curve to ever catch up before the creation of the pure communist state would have to be killed.....

 

[yiostheoy]

This has never been an interesting question to me because, it didn't have a great bearing on their Antisemitism.

The Nazis obviously weren't Soviet-style Socialists, they hated the Bolsheviks and were highly critical of them. Private enterprise flourished under the Nazis, more than in the previous German governments. In fact, many businesses nationalized during the Great German Depression, were privatized under the Nazis.

But, as you can imagine, the topic of Antisemitism is very much in my (our) minds this week and because of that, I decided to re-watch the 1940 Nazi propaganda film, 'The Eternal Jew' by Franz Hippler.

Something I had never really focused on before is the the emphasis they put on 'decent' labor and 'evil' capitalism. German workers are good, Jewish businessmen are bad (they neglect to point out there were many more non-Jewish businessmen than Jewish ones in Germany). The Nazis were, at least according to their own propaganda, firm believers in the 'Labor Theory of Value' straight our of Marx. That theory holds that the the amount of socially valuable labor that goes into a good is what determines its value, not its value in the market.

For example, a farm, a coal mine, a tractor factory ... all are valuable, because they produce goods that use lots of (cheap and semi-skilled) labor.

A bank, an investment firm, merchants and wholesalers, are bad ... they make a profit without providing labor for the masses.

In this film, they chastise the French banking family, The Rothschilds, because they sought to avoid the punitive taxes placed on all Jewish businesses in the 18th Century. They denounce banking and mercantile trade as 'evil' and 'Jewish'.

This, however, wasn't unique to the Nazis. Coming out of the Great Depression, most Western countries were experiencing a wave of populist Socialism because of the perceived failure of Market Capitalism, which they had just gone through. Jews in many countries took a lot of abuse, even in America, for their historical connection to finance and markets as opposed to large scale, labor intensive production.

This was counter-balanced in America and other countries because Jews were very influential in the ever-growing labor movement while other Jews had strong ties to banking and finance, and others in science and education. Obviously, this wasn't the case in Nazi Germany, where Jews, quite apart from not being leader in the labor movement, they weren't allowed to be members of labor organizations.

While the Nazis did privatize many businesses when they took power. It was a special type of privatization unique to the Nazis. One that made the Nazi Party a (not so silent) partner in each of the businesses they privatized. So, that while the company itself was run as a private company. The production goals, and economic decisions were made by the Nazi Party, not the company owners. Likewise, much of the profits went to the party as well.

The Nazis had other cultural similarities with the Soviets. They were both very adamant in their rejection of 'decadence' in music, art, and cinema. They believed Jazz, modern forms of art, and absurdly comedic films to be degrading to the morals of the people. Because of this, both the Nazis and the Soviets controlled their films, art, and music with strict censorship.

My conclusion to all this. I don't believe the Nazis were ideological Socialist the way the Soviets were. I don't believe they held strongly to any any dogmatic economic theory. Instead, I believe they were economic opportunists. They portrayed themselves as friends of the working man and used the words and symbols of the populist Socialism movement. But, at the same time, used government control of private investment to take advantage of Capitalism to enrich the party and its leaders.

The German NAZI Party of the 1930's was not socialist.

They just put that into their name to attract socialists.

It was a big lie. The first of many big lies.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

This has never been an interesting question to me because, it didn't have a great bearing on their Antisemitism.

The Nazis obviously weren't Soviet-style Socialists, they hated the Bolsheviks and were highly critical of them. Private enterprise flourished under the Nazis, more than in the previous German governments. In fact, many businesses nationalized during the Great German Depression, were privatized under the Nazis.

But, as you can imagine, the topic of Antisemitism is very much in my (our) minds this week and because of that, I decided to re-watch the 1940 Nazi propaganda film, 'The Eternal Jew' by Franz Hippler.

Something I had never really focused on before is the the emphasis they put on 'decent' labor and 'evil' capitalism. German workers are good, Jewish businessmen are bad (they neglect to point out there were many more non-Jewish businessmen than Jewish ones in Germany). The Nazis were, at least according to their own propaganda, firm believers in the 'Labor Theory of Value' straight our of Marx. That theory holds that the the amount of socially valuable labor that goes into a good is what determines its value, not its value in the market.

For example, a farm, a coal mine, a tractor factory ... all are valuable, because they produce goods that use lots of (cheap and semi-skilled) labor.

A bank, an investment firm, merchants and wholesalers, are bad ... they make a profit without providing labor for the masses.

In this film, they chastise the French banking family, The Rothschilds, because they sought to avoid the punitive taxes placed on all Jewish businesses in the 18th Century. They denounce banking and mercantile trade as 'evil' and 'Jewish'.

This, however, wasn't unique to the Nazis. Coming out of the Great Depression, most Western countries were experiencing a wave of populist Socialism because of the perceived failure of Market Capitalism, which they had just gone through. Jews in many countries took a lot of abuse, even in America, for their historical connection to finance and markets as opposed to large scale, labor intensive production.

This was counter-balanced in America and other countries because Jews were very influential in the ever-growing labor movement while other Jews had strong ties to banking and finance, and others in science and education. Obviously, this wasn't the case in Nazi Germany, where Jews, quite apart from not being leader in the labor movement, they weren't allowed to be members of labor organizations.

While the Nazis did privatize many businesses when they took power. It was a special type of privatization unique to the Nazis. One that made the Nazi Party a (not so silent) partner in each of the businesses they privatized. So, that while the company itself was run as a private company. The production goals, and economic decisions were made by the Nazi Party, not the company owners. Likewise, much of the profits went to the party as well.

The Nazis had other cultural similarities with the Soviets. They were both very adamant in their rejection of 'decadence' in music, art, and cinema. They believed Jazz, modern forms of art, and absurdly comedic films to be degrading to the morals of the people. Because of this, both the Nazis and the Soviets controlled their films, art, and music with strict censorship.

My conclusion to all this. I don't believe the Nazis were ideological Socialist the way the Soviets were. I don't believe they held strongly to any any dogmatic economic theory. Instead, I believe they were economic opportunists. They portrayed themselves as friends of the working man and used the words and symbols of the populist Socialism movement. But, at the same time, used government control of private investment to take advantage of Capitalism to enrich the party and its leaders.

The German NAZI Party of the 1930's was not socialist.

They just put that into their name to attract socialists.

It was a big lie. The first of many big lies.

Indeed...Nazi's were obviously raging capitalist.

 

[Moonglow]

This has never been an interesting question to me because, it didn't have a great bearing on their Antisemitism.

The Nazis obviously weren't Soviet-style Socialists, they hated the Bolsheviks and were highly critical of them. Private enterprise flourished under the Nazis, more than in the previous German governments. In fact, many businesses nationalized during the Great German Depression, were privatized under the Nazis.

But, as you can imagine, the topic of Antisemitism is very much in my (our) minds this week and because of that, I decided to re-watch the 1940 Nazi propaganda film, 'The Eternal Jew' by Franz Hippler.

Something I had never really focused on before is the the emphasis they put on 'decent' labor and 'evil' capitalism. German workers are good, Jewish businessmen are bad (they neglect to point out there were many more non-Jewish businessmen than Jewish ones in Germany). The Nazis were, at least according to their own propaganda, firm believers in the 'Labor Theory of Value' straight our of Marx. That theory holds that the the amount of socially valuable labor that goes into a good is what determines its value, not its value in the market.

For example, a farm, a coal mine, a tractor factory ... all are valuable, because they produce goods that use lots of (cheap and semi-skilled) labor.

A bank, an investment firm, merchants and wholesalers, are bad ... they make a profit without providing labor for the masses.

In this film, they chastise the French banking family, The Rothschilds, because they sought to avoid the punitive taxes placed on all Jewish businesses in the 18th Century. They denounce banking and mercantile trade as 'evil' and 'Jewish'.

This, however, wasn't unique to the Nazis. Coming out of the Great Depression, most Western countries were experiencing a wave of populist Socialism because of the perceived failure of Market Capitalism, which they had just gone through. Jews in many countries took a lot of abuse, even in America, for their historical connection to finance and markets as opposed to large scale, labor intensive production.

This was counter-balanced in America and other countries because Jews were very influential in the ever-growing labor movement while other Jews had strong ties to banking and finance, and others in science and education. Obviously, this wasn't the case in Nazi Germany, where Jews, quite apart from not being leader in the labor movement, they weren't allowed to be members of labor organizations.

While the Nazis did privatize many businesses when they took power. It was a special type of privatization unique to the Nazis. One that made the Nazi Party a (not so silent) partner in each of the businesses they privatized. So, that while the company itself was run as a private company. The production goals, and economic decisions were made by the Nazi Party, not the company owners. Likewise, much of the profits went to the party as well.

The Nazis had other cultural similarities with the Soviets. They were both very adamant in their rejection of 'decadence' in music, art, and cinema. They believed Jazz, modern forms of art, and absurdly comedic films to be degrading to the morals of the people. Because of this, both the Nazis and the Soviets controlled their films, art, and music with strict censorship.

My conclusion to all this. I don't believe the Nazis were ideological Socialist the way the Soviets were. I don't believe they held strongly to any any dogmatic economic theory. Instead, I believe they were economic opportunists. They portrayed themselves as friends of the working man and used the words and symbols of the populist Socialism movement. But, at the same time, used government control of private investment to take advantage of Capitalism to enrich the party and its leaders.

The German NAZI Party of the 1930's was not socialist.

They just put that into their name to attract socialists.

It was a big lie. The first of many big lies.

Indeed...Nazi's were obviously raging capitalist.

Just the wealthy ones like Krupp..

 

[Preacher]

Absolutely....It's even in the name....National Socialist German Workers' Party.

View attachment 226237

Everything I believe in,IN a white ethnostate absolutely!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Duhahhhhh_yeah! It's right dare in dare damn name.

Now excuse me while I head off to explore the Republic in North Korea.

It was also in most, if not all, of their symbology.

For example, the big red field for their flag, like both the Soviets and Red Chinese.....Then there's this little gem...

View attachment 226245

LOL & AMSMCOTCS (almost spit my coffee on the computer screen).

Fabian socialism is the promise of socialism sans revolution. It was also demagoguery when used by Hitler in his rise to power. Give a little, promise a lot and take away freedom described Nazi Germany.

Lenin and the Bolsheviks murdered the power elite, Hitler and Mussolini co opted them. Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini ruled by fiat and murder. The British form of Fabian Socalism is quite different.

Benito Mussolini, took the name of his party from the Latin word fasces, which referred to a bundle of elm or birch rods (usually containing an ax) used as a symbol of penal authority in ancient Rome. Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation.

Source: fascism | Definition, Characteristics, & History

 

[Lesh]

Oh Christ.

This stupid shit again?

 

[Lesh]

This has never been an interesting question to me because, it didn't have a great bearing on their Antisemitism.

The Nazis obviously weren't Soviet-style Socialists, they hated the Bolsheviks and were highly critical of them. Private enterprise flourished under the Nazis, more than in the previous German governments. In fact, many businesses nationalized during the Great German Depression, were privatized under the Nazis.

But, as you can imagine, the topic of Antisemitism is very much in my (our) minds this week and because of that, I decided to re-watch the 1940 Nazi propaganda film, 'The Eternal Jew' by Franz Hippler.

Something I had never really focused on before is the the emphasis they put on 'decent' labor and 'evil' capitalism. German workers are good, Jewish businessmen are bad (they neglect to point out there were many more non-Jewish businessmen than Jewish ones in Germany). The Nazis were, at least according to their own propaganda, firm believers in the 'Labor Theory of Value' straight our of Marx. That theory holds that the the amount of socially valuable labor that goes into a good is what determines its value, not its value in the market.

For example, a farm, a coal mine, a tractor factory ... all are valuable, because they produce goods that use lots of (cheap and semi-skilled) labor.

A bank, an investment firm, merchants and wholesalers, are bad ... they make a profit without providing labor for the masses.

In this film, they chastise the French banking family, The Rothschilds, because they sought to avoid the punitive taxes placed on all Jewish businesses in the 18th Century. They denounce banking and mercantile trade as 'evil' and 'Jewish'.

This, however, wasn't unique to the Nazis. Coming out of the Great Depression, most Western countries were experiencing a wave of populist Socialism because of the perceived failure of Market Capitalism, which they had just gone through. Jews in many countries took a lot of abuse, even in America, for their historical connection to finance and markets as opposed to large scale, labor intensive production.

This was counter-balanced in America and other countries because Jews were very influential in the ever-growing labor movement while other Jews had strong ties to banking and finance, and others in science and education. Obviously, this wasn't the case in Nazi Germany, where Jews, quite apart from not being leader in the labor movement, they weren't allowed to be members of labor organizations.

While the Nazis did privatize many businesses when they took power. It was a special type of privatization unique to the Nazis. One that made the Nazi Party a (not so silent) partner in each of the businesses they privatized. So, that while the company itself was run as a private company. The production goals, and economic decisions were made by the Nazi Party, not the company owners. Likewise, much of the profits went to the party as well.

The Nazis had other cultural similarities with the Soviets. They were both very adamant in their rejection of 'decadence' in music, art, and cinema. They believed Jazz, modern forms of art, and absurdly comedic films to be degrading to the morals of the people. Because of this, both the Nazis and the Soviets controlled their films, art, and music with strict censorship.

My conclusion to all this. I don't believe the Nazis were ideological Socialist the way the Soviets were. I don't believe they held strongly to any any dogmatic economic theory. Instead, I believe they were economic opportunists. They portrayed themselves as friends of the working man and used the words and symbols of the populist Socialism movement. But, at the same time, used government control of private investment to take advantage of Capitalism to enrich the party and its leaders.

The German NAZI Party of the 1930's was not socialist.

They just put that into their name to attract socialists.

It was a big lie. The first of many big lies.

Indeed...Nazi's were obviously raging capitalist.

In almost the exact same way that Putin is.

It wasn't state control. It was Kleptocatic control.

 

[Oddball]

Duhahhhhh_yeah! It's right dare in dare damn name.

Now excuse me while I head off to explore the Republic in North Korea.

It was also in most, if not all, of their symbology.

For example, the big red field for their flag, like both the Soviets and Red Chinese.....Then there's this little gem...

View attachment 226245

LOL & AMSMCOTCS (almost spit my coffee on the computer screen).

Fabian socialism is the promise of socialism sans revolution. It was also demagoguery when used by Hitler in his rise to power. Give a little, promise a lot and take away freedom described Nazi Germany.

Lenin and the Bolsheviks murdered the power elite, Hitler and Mussolini co opted them. Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini ruled by fiat and murder. The British form of Fabian Socalism is quite different.

Benito Mussolini, took the name of his party from the Latin word fasces, which referred to a bundle of elm or birch rods (usually containing an ax) used as a symbol of penal authority in ancient Rome. Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation.

Source: fascism | Definition, Characteristics, & History

The ends are the same, fool.

 

[Oddball]

Oh Christ.

This stupid shit again?

Then step the fuck off.

 

[Oddball]

No from what I've read they hated socialists.

Not sure how true that is.

Socialists hate competition as a matter of course...Marx's socialism was not only a competitor to nationalist socialism (which is redundant, BTW), he was also a Jew and a member of a race that Hitler deemed to be mongrel.

 

[Oddball]

The German NAZI Party of the 1930's was not socialist.

They just put that into their name to attract socialists.

It was a big lie. The first of many big lies.

Socialist lie as a matter of course.

 

[Lesh]

The German NAZI Party of the 1930's was not socialist.

They just put that into their name to attract socialists.

It was a big lie. The first of many big lies.

Socialist lie as a matter of course.

Trolling and tourettes seems to be all you have.

Carry on with your mythical battle against socialism.

People should remember that Social Security, Medicare. and Medicaid are "socialist" programs...

NO one is proposing a state takeover of private industry

 

[Coyote]

The acronym says it all. Hitler was chancellor for life and Nazis claimed to be "nationalist socialist". Were they lying?

And NK claims to be Democratic. What is your point?

 

[boedicca]

Neither Hitler nor Stalin were dictators. They got in power using populism. They kept power by being dictators that used fear to control their populations.

How delusional. Seriously.

 

[Oddball]

And NK claims to be Democratic. What is your point?

One-party democracy and rigged elections are features of socialism...What's your point?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Duhahhhhh_yeah! It's right dare in dare damn name.

Now excuse me while I head off to explore the Republic in North Korea.

It was also in most, if not all, of their symbology.

For example, the big red field for their flag, like both the Soviets and Red Chinese.....Then there's this little gem...

View attachment 226245

LOL & AMSMCOTCS (almost spit my coffee on the computer screen).

Fabian socialism is the promise of socialism sans revolution. It was also demagoguery when used by Hitler in his rise to power. Give a little, promise a lot and take away freedom described Nazi Germany.

Lenin and the Bolsheviks murdered the power elite, Hitler and Mussolini co opted them. Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini ruled by fiat and murder. The British form of Fabian Socalism is quite different.

Benito Mussolini, took the name of his party from the Latin word fasces, which referred to a bundle of elm or birch rods (usually containing an ax) used as a symbol of penal authority in ancient Rome. Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation.

Source: fascism | Definition, Characteristics, & History

The ends are the same, fool.

Really? How many death camps are being built in France, GB and Germany vis a vis N. Korea, Russia & China?

Do you not understand the difference between despotism and democracy? When in the latter the leadership can change in a moments notice, or in every even year?