"National Socialist"
Was he really a socialist or is it just a misuse of the word that no one really questioned.
>>69630620
more like selective communism
>>69630620
NatSoc is economically centrist
>>69630978
Communism is a type of socialism
>>69631048
No it's not
You guys are fucking retards
depends on what you would class a command economy with some free-ish market elements
>>69630978
What exactly was selected and discarded?
>>69631048
Meaning what?
If he was running for POTUS today with that same ideology, who would be the closest to his economical position?
What are the big lines of his view anyway?
>>69631138
wow you sure showed me
*le tip du fedora*
>>69631182
What was the command part and what was the free-ish market part?
>>69630620
No the "socialism" in "National socialism" was just a to attract working class. Actual socialism is more than just welfare state.
>>69631260
hitler took control of jewish businesses and snatched the central bank out of their grubby hands
Communism is the abolishment of a natural system of exchange.
National Socialism encouraged a folkish free market that emanating from a truly nationalised, usury free, central bank, whilst co-opting the largest and most important industries, that the regular man could never hope to compete with, under the same control as the national bank.
It's the only form of Socialism that has objectively prospered.
>>69630620
He created the only sensible version of socialism.
NATIONAL socialism without marxism.
>>69631766
I really fucked up that paragraph.
But you get my gist?
>>69630620
yes, Nazism is socialism, hence "national socialist."
the state did things like implement price controls and the state delegated production quotas, etc.
>>69632032
OH, SO I'M A JEW NOW?!?!
>>69631766
>>69631887
First british poster to make me not hate the brits
>>69631766
I wish I knew more about economics to understand.
What I got from that is..
Communism regulates everything within the market.
National Socialism doesn't, so I assume it's capitalistic in that sense?
I lose you after that.
Usury free..meaning reasonable interest rates?
Central bank..I have no idea what that implies.
Co-opting largest/important industries..meaning that the government helps it get bigger by pushing in the workforce and developing its infrastructure? (doesn't that destroy free market though? you're essentially forcing a monopoly)
>>69632134
The first?
Wow.
I feel honoured.
>>69632273
>Communism regulates everything within the market.
Communism is a stateless, classless, moneyless society where workers own the means of production.
>>69630620
i'm just gonna leave this here
http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/haken32.htm
http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/pre1933.htm
NatSoc was all over the place.
a weird amalgamation of state capitalism, an extensive welfare state, a partially nationalized economy and widespread cooperation between the state and major industrialists.
it was staunchly anti-capitalist in that it rejected international finance and investment. it also did a LOT of interventionalism.
but it was also staunchly anti-communist in that it cooperated with major industrialists and landowners, and promoted the preservation of traditional societal structures.
national socialism certainly was very nationalist, no doubt about that. whether it was socialist remains dubious (partly because even socialists themselves still cant give a proper definition on what socialism actually means)
/pol/ is so fucking retarded on this subject it's embarrassing.
The S in NSDAP stands for the Spenglerian definition of socialism, not the Marxist one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preussentum_und_Sozialismus
It was a deliberate attempt to steal the word Socialism from the Marxists and redefine it as something closer to the ideal Prussian character, a sense of national comradery and common goal, rather than anything based on Marx's class struggle.
However, was Hitler a socialist in the modern buzzword sense that he advocated fairly extensive government economic intervention? Yes.
>>69632790
>(partly because even socialists themselves still cant give a proper definition on what socialism actually means)
It's the ideology for people who didn't buy the communist narrative but are still pretty retarded
>>69632466
>Communism is a stateless, classless, moneyless society where workers own the means of production.
I get the stateless and classes part but the Idea of workers owning the means of production simply means that hieracical political and bureaucratic systems govern business which is inherently inefficient.
In NS the free market still exists to act as stabiliser to bureaucratic power.
>>69630620
They were the Third Way, fascism. They just called it National Socialism, just like the Romanian fascists did. But they were fascists make no mistake, and they absolutely hated Marxists and Communists.
>>69632890
Did NS abolish privately owned property and currency?
Did hitler not publicly declare equality for all Germans and an end to the concept of class?
Marx's class struggle was an ideological struggle, not a pragmatic one. His disgusting legacy can be seen today, as well after women have secured equal rights, feminists still fight straw men in the spirit of their ideological struggle.
Marx was destroyer not a builder.
not really
their economic policies were a command economy with protectionism
socialism was just super popular at the same (the SPD and the KPD were often the top 2 most popular parties in germany) and hitler the co. used it as a marketing gimmick
goebells might have been an actual socialist tho
>>69630620
Natsoc is left wing means to right wing ends.
>>69633629
its a full circle
>>69633529
What does this have to do with my post
>>69633629
>Left wing
>Right wing
you're using these terms without knowing what they mean
>>69633717
You imply that NS was a dishonest parody of Communism.
It was not.
The Idea of collective identity and necessity is a concept that is inherent to us as human beings.
Marx did not invent collectivism.
>>69633008
in my experience socialism is just a buzzword that commies use instead of communism because the latter has more of a negative stigma
>>69630620
Nazis actually privatized a couple of stuff
Mixed market more than anything
A socialist in terms of economics, yes, but in terms of social structure and the role of government, no. He advocated a kind of hybrid socialism, taking the best parts of it and replacing the shit parts with nationalism and traditional Prussian social code.
Using Left/Right Wing in traditional terms;
He was 1/3 Left Wing, 2/3 Right Wing
>>69630620
In capitalism you have private property and the market dictates the lives of the people and trespasses national sovereignity.
In socialism, workers control the means of production (although in reality, it's the state controlling them, but private property is frowned upon either way).
In National Socialism, there is private property like in Capitalism, but unlike in the latter, the private property is used in the interests of the nation (promotion of national industry, no usury, etc.).
The thing is, for communists, the fact that there is private property is a sign of capitalism, so to them, National Socialism is a reformed version of capitalism to avoid the spread of socialism.
This is my understanding of those terms, it's a brief review and it might be wrong, so correct me if I am.
>>69630620
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GWuoud11Fg
>>69630620
Interesting thread, have a bump.
>>69634624
And I forgot to say, if you believe that government intervention in the economy while still allowing private property and initiative is Socialism, then you might say National Socialism is socialist.
