Has there ever been a successful socialist state besides Nazi Germany?
Reminder that nordic countries are welfare capitalist.
Nice b8
Ah yes, I remember the socialist state of Germany
The one where the means of production were owned by such socialist governments as IG Farben, Krupp, Porsche, Mauserwerke, Siemens, Opel, Volkswagen, Rheinmetall, Focke-Wolfe, Messerschmidt, Junkers and Zeppelin.
And of course one can't forget the lack of aristocrats in leading position: Generalfeldmarschallen Von Manstein, Von Below and Colonel Von Stauffenberg were all just happy coincidences
And really can one forget their universal employment scheme?
Of course their victory over the USSR solidified their position as successful socialists
2/10 made me reply
>>529304
Strasser and Röhm got rekt before any of the "socialist" parts out of national socialist could be applied...
Does Canada count ? :(
None including Nazi Germany which was just another socialist failure only more aggressive than some (but not all) others.
>>529304
How could a socialist state be succesful if americans bombed or boycotted anyone who tried in the past century?
>>529327
>The one where the means of production were owned by such socialist governments as IG Farben, Krupp, Porsche, Mauserwerke, Siemens, Opel, Volkswagen, Rheinmetall, Focke-Wolfe, Messerschmidt, Junkers and Zeppelin.
You realize that the government seized the majority of shares for these companies right? You realize that the nationalization of industry is literally public ownership of the means of production... right?
>>529423
>state had majority share
Not in any of these companies but VW
And even then public ownership of the means of production=/=state ownership of private company run by profit motive
>>529503
The owners could still make money if they were loyal to the government and did shit for them when they were asked to.
>>529304
> Nordic states
> Welfare capitalists
Actually, Sweden had what they called "Funktionssocialism" or "Functional socialism" for the majority of the 19th century, where the main focus wasn't about controlling the ownership of capital but the function of said capital.
>>529304
Nazi Germany relied on foreign debt it knew it wouldn't have to pay back after it declared war on the entire world.
Its economic system was based on putting short term gain before long term gain and making excuses for it which is greece tier economics.
>>529568
>relied on forigen debt
Proofs?
>>529568
>Germany declared war on the whole world
No.
>>529402
How could a capitalist state be succesful if Russians bombed or boycotted anyone who tried in the past century?
Britain 1945-1951
Highest levels of economic growth
Highest value of the Pound
Highest employment level
Nationalisation of key industries
Creation of a universal health service
>>529592
Failure to come through on commodities for the working class.
No industrial democracy.
Didn't put down the tories for good.
Failed to decolonise in the interests of working people.
Didn't repudiate war debt.
>>529304
Could argue modern-day China.
Foreign influence however has really impacted them.
>>529304
>Nazi Germany
>Socialist
>Successful
I wonder who could be behind this post? Pic very much related.
>>529582
Oh come on. He's oversimplifying, but Germany unequivocally was the country solely responsible for starting WW2 on the European continent. All arguments to the contrary are retarded.
>>529374
Does it ever?
>>529540
By function you mean giving it all to useless people who dosn't even make part of said country?
>>530849
Yes, Stalin dindu nuffin.
>>529304
National Socialism was not socialist.
It was state capitalist.
Hitler was a buttbuddy with a bunch of wealthy German industrialists.
>>532252
>It was state capitalist.
..and capitalists like pay less, so xenos-workers with small wage more profitable so capitalism is enemy of nazi
>>532285
Am I supposed to understand your 3rd grade English?
>>529304
>Nazi Germany
>Succesfull
>>532239
Stalin was multi-nazi. Personal areas for ethnics, line of habitancy
>>532252
>National Socialism was not socialist.
>Hitler outwardly said he was socialist
>his supporters were socialists
>Socialism in the name
>Socialist policies
>>532310
No, having the state own most industries is not socialistic.
The definition of socialism is to find and alternate economic system to capitalism.
Having the state own shit is not an alternate economic system to capitalism, if it still trades and operates like capitalism.
Besides, Hitler had the guy who pushed to emphasize the socialist part of National Socialism murdered, i.e Strasser.
>>532288
As the minimum I know into one language more than you
>>532310
>state-capitalist policies
>socialist
Just because you call yourself something doesn't make it true. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is not democratic or a republic, for example. Just as National Socialism is a highly conservative and market based ideology. It has some similarities with communism, but that's because when you go far enough around the political horseshoe, you meet up in the back.
>>532323
>having the state own most industries is not socialistic.
Thats entirely socialistic.
>The definition of socialism is to find and alternate economic system to capitalism.
Merriam Webster:
>any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
Oxford
>A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
The alternative to capitalism is purely Marxist, and then it's only a endgame to bring about communism.
>Having the state own shit is not an alternate economic system to capitalism, if it still trades and operates like capitalism.
That's precisely what socialism is, instead of private ownership trading/operating like capitalism, you have public/state ownership.
>Hitler had the guy who pushed to emphasize the socialist part of National Socialism murdered, i.e Strasser.
Hitler had numerous people murdered, including the fucking SA. He was a lunatic and people high up in his 'clique' regularly manipulated him for their own gain.
Hitler also had Rommel kill himself, it doesn't mean he was opposed to using tanks in warfare.
>>532334
>It has some similarities with communism, but that's because when you go far enough around the political horseshoe, you meet up in the back.
Exactly, which would mean that in the endgame there's little difference, and playing with labels is an utterly pointless exercise and a futile attempt to label Nazism as a right wing conservative ideology. Hell, in the context of Germany at the time, it could be argued that Nazi's were the 'liberals' fighting to upset the status quo, and were fighting 'conservative' German thought.
At the end of the day, Hitler went out of his way to state he was socialist, and an enemy of capitalism. As was naziism.
>>532353
Yes, but the point is that the different between "government ownership" and "private ownership" is entirely spurious if it operates in the exact same way as a capitalist economy.
Do you really think that Hjalmar Schacht and the rest of the economists that Hitler employed to fix the German economy would be insane enough to advocate 100% government ownership of German industries and market?
No. Because that would mean zero profitability.
Hence, state capitalism is the better alternative, because it meant that they could have their totalitarian fingers into whatever was going on, while at the same time earning profit.
>>532393
>Hence, state capitalism is the better alternative, because it meant that they could have their totalitarian fingers into whatever was going on, while at the same time earning profit.
Yes, that is generally how socialist countries work. But I'm arguing that they were not acting as state capitalists, that they were acting as socialists, that they stated they were socialists acting as socialists, and that playing label games comes off as an attempt at historical revisionism by people looking to support similar socialist policies while at the same time trying to label their opponents as the "real nazis"
Again, with the horseshoe theory, there's very little difference between the two in how they operate.
>>529423
That was ostensibly the plan, but Hitler realized, after coming to power, that he needed the rich families' money and loyalty. So he allowed them to exist and in fact funneled very lucrative deals their way. slave labour, opening up markets in france etc, etc. The reichsmark was set at a fixed rate very favourable toward the franc.
>>529590
They didn't tho.
>>532414
>Yes, that is generally how socialist countries work.
Yes, because most claimed "socialist" countries aren't socialist.
Please pay attention.
>>532252
It was neither state capitalist nor socialist. Pretty much all industry was private-owned. For state capitalism, look at the Soviet Union.
Mein Kampf Chapter 2: Hitler shits on socialists and social democrats.
>>532329
Polandball is that you?
>>529304
Spotted a contradiction:
>socialist state
>Nazi Germany
>socialist
m9 the Third Reich was when Germany transited from a protectionist and monopolistic capitalist system to a liberal one
What's socialist about that?
Daily reminder
>>532577
>literally using leftypol macro images
No.
>>532353
Dictionaries are not good places to find political nuance and you know it.
>>532586
who gives a shit, look at the sources used in it, they're right
>>529304
Except they were going bankrupt by 1st January 1940 and had to steal gold from Poles, Danes and Norwegians to avoid it.
Very obvious proof - their armoured equipment.
They've had tons of stop-gap mark 1 and 2, designed for training if anything(especialy mk. 1) instead of 3 and 4 which were supposed to be the core of German panzer divisions.
>>529590
They didn't.
>>532239
Stalin wanted war in Europe but he didn't want to start it.
His entire plan was to make Germans and French fight WW1 v2 and then conquer what's left from it.
Britain was to be put down by invasion of India through Afghanistan which can be deducted from #1 archives, #2 enormous amount of aerial photos made in the region by Soviet airforce, likely for the purpose of cartography and planning.
>>530853
>in the 19th century
>>532623
could've been worse
>>532329
What's the point if you cannot efficiently communicate in it?
>>529304
The first few countries to introduce comprehensive welfare states, like Prussia, Britain, and Austria, while not socialist, had marked improvements in some economic realms.
>>532611
Except it leaves out the entire premises of policy.
>>532694
In case of Prussia it was kinda ponzi scheme that worked because majority of people couldn't access the benefits they were paying for their entire life.
