The Far-Left Anti-Capitalism of the Nazi Program

[buffysummersfanboy]

This is by far one of the best videos I've seen which uses primary sources to link the national socialists in Germany to socialism. It is one of the crimes of academia that our intellectuals have largely gotten away with claiming that the National Socialists were pro capitalist. What a lie. The more I research this topic, the more I find that the older works confirm that the Nazi Party was anti Marxist, but definitely pro socialist.

[buffysummersfanboy]

@buffysummersfanboy The mistake some honest but uneducated people make in conflating Marxism with socialism as such is a reason for the confusion. But it still must be remembered that a propoganda campaign by professors was launched to distance international socialists from national socialists to avoid an inconvenient but historical, political, and economic association with the Nazis in terms of a collectivist vision.

[buffysummersfanboy]

@buffysummersfanboy Too much information has been devoted to the Holucaust. While it is good to remember those who were slaughtered at the hands of the Nazis, we dishonor their very memories by failing to understand the socialist and nationalist forces which allowed that tragedy to happen in the first place.

[buffysummersfanboy]

@buffysummersfanboy One minor point I have with the video is that the Nazis are portrayed as far left. This is just as innacurate as the progressive/social democratic claim that the Nazis were on the right. In my honest study of the primary sources and the economic and political policies, I believe that the National Socialist German Worker's Party was a party of the center. As such it contained people of the right and left wings, and gave them a forum of discussion and policy implementation.

[buffysummersfanboy]

We have to purge our minds of this idiotic conception of politics wherein far left, far right are bad, and center is good. That's not the case as a rule, and in the case of Nazi Germany, the Nazi Party emerged as an ideological amalgamation of and alternative to, the other socialist parties and nationalist parties in Germany. It was a combination of the two. This was something of the center, but it wasn't good, and it certainly wasn't something promoting a democratic republic.

[buffysummersfanboy]

We must accept that center, left, and right are means of explaining politics in a rough sketch, not terms which mean that any one of them is particularly good. The ultimate question is whether you are for or against liberty.

[buffysummersfanboy]

But returning to the topic at hand, it will be evident to anyone who reads the diaries, speeches, and other writings of the Nazis that some were more nationalistic and others were more socialistic, but that the two were not (in the mind of the national socialists or even among moderns ones today,) mutually exclusive terms. The idea that they are is nothing but a warmed over lie from Marx, Lenin, and Stalin.

[buffysummersfanboy]

Read Hitler and Goering and you will find that these men were nationalists who used socialism, but who were more committed to nationalism. In this sense they were right wing. Read Goebbels and Himmler and you will see that they were socialists who used nationalism, but who were more committed to socialism. In this sense they were left wing. It must not be forgotten that Hitler was influenced by strongly anti Jewish writings.

[buffysummersfanboy]

@buffysummersfanboy He (Hitler) had a mild interest in socialism, but his main concern was nationalism. He was from a rural background and grew up as a racist. Gobbels, as the video shows, was an academic and an intellectual. After reading Marx, he realized stupidity of the idea that revolution must be a worker's revolution and must be international. But he retained socialist talking points carried over from his early days in the German Worker's Party working under Strausser.

[TheBuzzo01]

IBM . coca .cola . ford ,adidas ,Socialist? DE Commissioner is supported Hitler because Commie. cattle

[TheBuzzo01]

fascism = capitalism droktrína.As much as some people want hazudni the past, the great industrialist and the Nazis supporters bankers.

[rjpcambridge]

Sorry not speaking with someone who posted the offensive lies contained in this video -and thinks the end of Social Programs would be a Utopia - yeah for you, you get to pay less tax.

To hell with the poor. Let them eat cake.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

Figured, you're not only dishonest but a coward as well. To hell with you, if you are poor. You deserve it.

[2011rosarot]

The Nazis believed in Social Darwinism. They believed that only the strong, intelligent and talented had a reason or right to live. THAT belief was the core of Nazism. Is it also the core of Ayn Rand's teachings? (I don't know, I am just asking.)

[qtutoringhelps]

@2011rosarot

"THAT belief was the core of Nazism. Is it also the core of Ayn Rand's teachings? (I don't know, I am just asking.)"

No, it was not the core of Ayn Rand's teaching. Ayn Rand was not a social Darwinist or a racist.

[2011rosarot]

@qtutoringhelps, okay, thanks for the reply. :) I think it is important to know that the Nazis called people who were weak, lazy or uncapable to keep a job (for whatever reason) parasites or leeches and "useless eaters". Therefore, when I read Atlas Shrugged many years ago, I got a very weird feeling that the book had a strong sense of fascism to it. But I have never read any other book by Ayn Rand and I don't want judge her work just on that novel.

[qtutoringhelps]

@2011rosarot

Well, it depends on the reason for the person being weak or incapable to work. Laziness is a different category.

[2011rosarot]

@qtutoringhelps, No human being should EVER be called a "useless eater".... for no reason....EVER. To think that someone's behavior is wrong (for instance, that he should try harder to be good at his job) is different from saying that someone is "useless" and should perish. Also, so-called "laziness" can have all kinds of roots, for instance, depression. Apart from that, everybody can change. So the person who is "lazy" now, could come hyper-productive next week or year or so.

[rjpcambridge]

anyone posting video's on youtube trying to spread the lie that Nazism was a Far Left movement (which is obviously a lie given the right wing racist propoganda that was at the core of Nazism) is a TRAITOR to America - and is spitting on the graves of the service men who fought and died for America. Yes Mr. Poster that means you. A disgrace.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

"... is a TRAITOR to America ... is spitting on the graves of the service men who fought and died for America."

Only if you consider a large social welfare state essential to the identity of America--which it is patently not. It is disgraceful for you to impute to servicemen the motive--YOUR motive--that the mixed economy welfare state is the basis on which they fought Nazism.

[rjpcambridge]

@qtutoringhelps so smarty pants --- what happens to all the poor people if people like you actually got your dark dreams accomplished and ended social programs ? Are you expecting the wealthy to voluntarity come to their aid creating jobs -maybe your hope is that they will be so desperate they will work for pennies again like during the 19th Century .... twisted

most of the front line grunts of WW2 came from families that survied the depression due to The New Deal -

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

"what happens to all the poor people if people like you actually got your dark dreams accomplished and ended social programs ? "

We'd be living in a paradise utopia.

[rjpcambridge]

@qtutoringhelps And with that answer you FULLY discredit yourself - you obviously have no sense of history or reality or the SUFFERING in America before the New Deal, Business; Employment Regulation and Civil Rights legislation ... Laws and Regulations exist for a reason. To protect people from people like you.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

I'd be happy to debate the New Deal laws and regulations that you think appropriate in an economy via Skype. I will record the debate and post it in full on my channel. I'm afraid my patience is limited for these little comments.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

I have a hard time debating someone so insecure in his views that he throws around "TRAITOR to AMERICA" and "YOU ARE DISCREDITED" at the slightest provocation or divergence of opinion on the matter. You just have to hear out the position before you characterize it, and as I said, I am willing to spend time debating you real time via Skype.

[2011rosarot]

@rjpcambridge, yes, the idea that Nazism was a far left movement is indeed ridiculous. Before Hitler became a dictator, there were frequent street fights in Germany between groups of social democrats and/or communists and right wing fanatics (Nazis). Later, when Hitler had become a dictator, he put the social democrats and the communists into concentration camps or killed them immediatley, By the way, I am German and live in Germany.

[rjpcambridge]

They did not control everything because they were Liberal - they did because they were TOTALITARIAN MONSTERS.... you are describing COMMUNISM and they hated and KILLED Communists.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

1. Communists, in Russia, China, Cambodia, etc., on the whole killed far more people than Nazis.

2. Communists were also totalitarian monsters.

[rjpcambridge]

@qtutoringhelps bravo for sharing the obvious..... the fact is Nazi's are far Right Wing .... and Communists are far Left Wing. Socialism is in most cases as in American Democracy is very moderate on the political spectrum.

All nations had to have socialist programs during the Depression.

Social Programs are still needed.

Social Programs are not what made the Nazis bad.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

The right/left division is false. The issue is the role of government. The government CAUSED the depression, so the socialist programs governments brought about were not needed.

[rjpcambridge]

@qtutoringhelps you are delusional if you think working against the Far Right and Far Left for Moderate Democratic Government is not a reality.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

No, I'm not delusion. The issue is not "moderation" because "one extreme is bad" and "the other extreme is also bad". That kind of thinking is idiotic. If you think like that, it means you have the wrong principle.

[rjpcambridge]

@qtutoringhelps so bingo ---- so where on the political spectrum do you propose we live ... and if you fully reject the left / right concept -- what are you proposing to replace political science? A group of people have to work for balance.... how do you propse that without moderation?

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

Have you read the novelist-philosopher Ayn Rand? If not, I would start with her book: *Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal*.

[rjpcambridge]

@qtutoringhelps Studied Ayn Rand --- not interested in selfish elites who love Anarchy (Libertarianism) and speak out against social cooperation and want people to be free to discriminate against minorities. I listen to Rand and Ron Paul enough on Alex Jones to know how dangerous they are ... Paul Ryan - another Ayn Rand elitist nutjob.

[SuperFinGuy]

@rjpcambridge "speak out against social cooperation and want people to be free to discriminate against minorities. "

lol and i thought that collectivism and democracy was the rule of the majority over the minorities, and also that cooperation was not equal to coercion. The Ayn Rand's philosophy is about people respecting each other.

[rjpcambridge]

@SuperFinGuy Ayn Randians want to be free to do whatever they want and speak out the collectivism that is required to be a good citizen in a modern society ---- there is nothing respectable about wanting to hoard your gains from being in a society and leave every live for themself alone - and by the law of the jungle. There is something very wrong with people drawn to the darkness she promoted in life.... and the corporate elitie in the GOP promote today.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

You are utterly dishonest. Please go away.

[rjpcambridge]

@qtutoringhelps no I am utterly honest speaking to radical selfish individuals who do not care about their fellow citizens -

United We Stand Divided We Fall

It is not an accident that the BILLIONAIRES are spreading and financing the Ayn Rand garbage.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

You clearly have no idea what Ayn Rand's philosophy is. She NEVER advocated "the law of the jungle". You are an idiotic scumbag.

[rjpcambridge]

@qtutoringhelps you just said below ---- she advocated voluntary cooperation - that in reality is law of the jungle

Before regulation the elite volunaritly paid inhuman wages in inhuman condition - even putting small children to work and in danger. Luckily we live in a Representative Democracy --- where we as a community get to vote on what OUR society looks like.

Your side hate what Democracy results in - legistlation and regulation - you hate American Democracy it seems.

[SuperFinGuy]

@rjpcambridge No, supporting a coercive government is not being civilized, obviously much for the contrary.. It is theft and slavery. Ayn Rand didn't advocate for violence. You are. She talked about *actual* voluntary cooperation and trade. That is civilization. On the other hand the law of the jungle is about who has the bigger guns or the biggest gang. Rings a bell?!

[rjpcambridge]

@SuperFinGuy The Government is The Will of The People --- you just do not like the outcome because you are selfish

[rjpcambridge]

@SuperFinGuy The Government is The Will of The People --- you just do not like the outcome because you are selfish and resent having to be part of a community that voted in collective responsibility

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

What you're saying is: a huge amount of poison is bad, but a moderate amount of poison is what we should aim for. No, the problem is that you've chosen the wrong premise: what degree of poison (a lot or a little) should I swallow?

[rjpcambridge]

@qtutoringhelps No - what I am saying is that Democratic Socialism when managed correctly is beautiful - not poison. And Anarchy kills.

[qtutoringhelps]

@rjpcambridge

"And Anarchy kills."

Ayn Rand did not advocate anarchy (no government), she advocated a government that prevents people like you from violating the rights of others because they want others to sacrifice themselves and their property for the collective or those who don't earn or deserve anything.

[rjpcambridge]

@rjpcambridge Really ? again delusional --- Government in America is the will of the people. Government is the people. Anti-Government People hate the will of the people.

[MrReco12]

This person is not very bright. Hitler never "nationalized industries", he privatized industries.

[qtutoringhelps]

@MrReco12

It's never a good sign when you begin your argument with a personal attack on the speaker. Let's stick to the facts.

Can you explain what you mean by "privatize" here. Under Nazism, there was no private property. The Nazi government held total power over the use and disposal of property. If Hitler wanted you to convert your furniture factory into armory, you had no right to say, "No, Hitler, this is my private property."

[MrReco12]

@qtutoringhelps Sweezy states that industrialists supported Hitler's accession to power and his economic policies: "In return for business assistance, the Nazis hastened to give evidence of their good will by restoring to private capitalism a number of monopolies held or controlled by the state." This policy implied a large-scale program by which "the government transferred ownership to private hands."

[qtutoringhelps]

@MrReco12

The issue of legal ownership, under Nazism, is secondary. What matters is who actually controls the property. Which monopolies is Sweezy referring to? If you investigate it further, you'll see that the Nazi state reserved to itself the unqualified right to regulate the use of their property. That's not capitalism; it's fascism.

[TheRivetthead]

@MrReco12 bull

[MrReco12]

@TheRivetthead

Dimwit. 

[qtutoringhelps]

@MrReco12

Under Nazi fascism, people may have held "titles" to property but these titles were only a pretense, because the government's decree reigned supreme.

[WarVideo]

@qtutoringhelps Im talking to this other guy on another video, who says that third world countries like somalia and sudan are capitalist because they have property. Now how do you deal with a mentality like that? You cant. You're not going to change this guys mind.

[fountainherz]

@MrReco12

Right, so the Reichswirtschaftsministerium, which basically told businesses what to produce and how much, to sell at what prices, dictated what wages were received, that is totally privatization and not state intervention in business, is it? Nope, that's totally free market.

[MrReco12]

@fountainherz

Name me one country that DID NOT use state intervention during World war II.

Capitalist America and Capitalist Britain(introduced rationing before Germany) both implemented price controls.

[fountainherz]

@MrReco12

You seemed to have missed my point and yet simultaneously validated it without even providing refutation.

Price controls (amongst the other things I mentioned which you never even addressed) are necessarily not "privatization" (at least in the sense you're insinuating) as that constitutes state control. Though I'm not making the claim that he "nationalized" either.

[shlockofgod]

Very good.

[WarVideo]

I heard a leftists tv actor defend socialism by saying that the reason Hitler said he was a socialist was because socialism is good so he wanted it as cover.

[StudentOfObjectivism]

It always amazes me when socialists claim that the Nazis were capitalists. I still struggle to understand how someone can be so totally dishonest.

[Hiro139]

@StudentOfObjectivism It reminds me of the old East German song "Die Partei hat Immer rechts" (The party is always right). It's a mentality that they have that discourages individual thinking, its Orwellian groupthink at its best.

[t3hsauce]

@StudentOfObjectivism It's not necessarily dishonesty, just stupidity/ignorance. The socialism of the Nazi's was cosmetically different than say the Soviet or Chinese schemes in that the legal title of ownership of business was left in private hands, leaving the appearance of a market economy. The actual control (the defining characteristic of ownership) of the property was exercised by the state through price controls and other totalitarian schemes.

[StudentOfObjectivism]

@t3hsauce true enough, but the effort required to maintain that level of ignorance and stupidity ultimately becomes dishonesty.