Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speleo)
    Redistribution of wealth doesn't mean socialism unless the redistribution aims for further equality.
    And please address the three points that I made.
    There is a massive argument about this at a much higher academic level than this. There are many tracts on the web discussing the socialist parts of nazism in much better detail than I could manage, have a look at them.

    Nazism was an attempt at marrying the concepts of nationalism and socialism, so clearly from a socialist (or more correctly international socialist) view point there are going to be many things that don't look like socialism. Just like for a nationalist there are many things that don't look like nationlism. Of course we all know that the experiment didn't work, but that doesn't make the ideology suddenly change.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Who did Thatcher kill then?
    She sold arms to both sides in the Iran Iraq war. Other elected people also have killed such as Sharon.

    They nationalised big businesses for the mutual good of the workers.
    Which major corporations did they take companies away from? The nazis were supported by the elite all the way through.

    Lets see.. would this be the first time leftists fought and banned other leftists?
    It would be the first time monarchists, conservatives and 'leftists/socialists' joined together to defeat socialists/social democrats and communists.

    Right, so you ARE comparing the massive majorities Thatcher managed to pull on multiple occasions to Germans electing a dictator one rainy day under threat of death from the roaming gangs of SA, great stuff . Oh, and assuming you're staying consistent and using the Marxist definition of "worker" and not shorthand for "manual worker", then most workers did vote Thatcher.
    Then qhy did the Nazi vote drop at the last election if they were under so much of a threat? This also doesn't tally with the lack of resistance during the Nazi reign.

    Ahh, clause #1! I'm a socialist, but I only care when it's not me who's richer than everyone else.
    Not at all. I just think small businesses are vital to our economy. It's when multi national corporations control government policy that I object. I'm not a Communist you know.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Nazism was an attempt at marrying the concepts of nationalism and socialism, so clearly from a socialist (or more correctly international socialist) view point there are going to be many things that don't look like socialism. Just like for a nationalist there are many things that don't look like nationlism. Of course we all know that the experiment didn't work, but that doesn't make the ideology suddenly change.
    Socialism is inherently internationalist. Workers of the all the world Unite etc. I have never met anyone with any proof that that they were socialists, and I'e had enough arguments about it!
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    There is a massive argument about this at a much higher academic level than this. There are many tracts on the web discussing the socialist parts of nazism in much better detail than I could manage, have a look at them.

    Nazism was an attempt at marrying the concepts of nationalism and socialism, so clearly from a socialist (or more correctly international socialist) view point there are going to be many things that don't look like socialism. Just like for a nationalist there are many things that don't look like nationlism. Of course we all know that the experiment didn't work, but that doesn't make the ideology suddenly change.
    So:
    I don't have a counter argument but there are other people on the web who might?
    :rolleyes:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    Socialism is inherently internationalist. Workers of the all the world Unite etc. I have never met anyone with any proof that that they were socialists, and I'e had enough arguments about it!
    Well there is a book out by a guy called Gotz Aly, a professor at Fritz-Bauer in Frankfurt-am-Mein called 'Hilters Volkstaat'. It's quite a good analysis of how closely related national socialism is to other types of socialism on economic grounds. Maybe you should read it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speleo)
    So:
    I don't have a counter argument but there are other people on the web who might?
    :rolleyes:
    No it's more the: I have had this argument before and can't be bothered.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Well there is a book out by a guy called Gotz Aly, a professor at Fritz-Bauer in Frankfurt-am-Mein called 'Hilters Volkstaat'. It's quite a good analysis of how closely related national socialism is to other types of socialism on economic grounds. Maybe you should read it.
    If you're not going to make your own arguments, you can at least quote other people's.

    No it's more the: I have had this argument before and can't be bothered.
    Quote, link, or pretend that this thread doesn't exist then, I guess.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speleo)
    If you're not going to make your own arguments, you can at least quote other people's.
    I don't have the book with me at the moment. It's also in german.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Read Road to Serfdom and than you'll see there just different sides of the same coin
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    Read Road to Serfdom and than you'll see there just different sides of the same coin
    Yeah, much better than my suggestion, thanks!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://mises.org/story/47

    Read this as well
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/chpt1.htm

    A refutation of the Road to Serfdom, among other things.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speleo)
    http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/chpt1.htm

    A refutation of the Road to Serfdom, among other things.
    That link basically agrees that Nazis was a *******isation of socialism. I don't really care for the class-based argument to prove that Nazis is not socialism, when many other socialist movements were not lead or formed from the working class either.

    I'm afraid that quoted work is incredibly defensive, which indicates a signifcant bias. Personally I am trying to approach this from a neutral point of view (i am neither right or left wing really) and I do see signficant similarities between nazi economics and social systems in the pre-war period and socialism, but similarly I see the same links with facism. It was certainly a bizzare experiment.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    There shared ideas in nazism and socialism. But there are shared ideas between communism and mainstream fascism. This is authoritarian, a wish by the state to control. In socialism, the industries should be accountable to the people. Nazis wouldn't even let independent unions.

    It's like saying libertarianism is a *******isation of socialism because most socialists happen to be Liberal. The actual fundamentals ideologies share little in common, and the ultimate goals are vastly different.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    It's like saying libertarianism is a *******isation of socialism because most socialists happen to be Liberal.
    But not libertarian.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    Which major corporations did they take companies away from? The nazis were supported by the elite all the way through.
    They nationalised several large steel corporations, who would not cooperate. Also the DAF (German Labour Front) insisted that companies provided job security and improvement of conditions. Effectively the DAF did teh job of trade unions without them being peskily independent.
    Then qhy did the Nazi vote drop at the last election if they were under so much of a threat? This also doesn't tally with the lack of resistance during the Nazi reign.
    The fact that the majority of the population supported the regime does not mean that suppression of opposition was not tyranny. The majority of the population in Zimbabwe support his anti-white policies, does that mean he isn't a tyrant?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Effectively the DAF did teh job of trade unions without them being peskily independent.
    Then why was there more non conformism among workers than anyone else? As the historian Mason (forgotten his 1st name points out?)

    The fact that the majority of the population supported the regime does not mean that suppression of opposition was not tyranny. The majority of the population in Zimbabwe support his anti-white policies, does that mean he isn't a tyrant?
    They supported the regime after it was installed, but at the time of the elections the majority voted for someone else.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    Then why was there more non conformism among workers than anyone else? As the historian Mason (forgotten his 1st name points out?)
    Timothy Wright Mason? He was an openly Marxist historian, one of the most extreme ones. Marxist historians have tended to overestimate the role of the working class in resisting the Nazis, for obvious reasons.
    They supported the regime after it was installed, but at the time of the elections the majority voted for someone else.
    That is usually the case in elections that include more than 2 candidates.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    If the USA is no using other peoples resources then how come they produce 25% of the worlds pollution?
    Well, 40% of our energy does come from coal, which we have enough of to last us a very long time.

    Your 25% figure is a bit misleading. The US is a very big country with a very large population. Of course we are going produce a lot of carbon dioxide. If you divide our greenhouse gas output by our GDP (obviously countries that don't produce anything will produce less C02) we are the 3rd most efficent country on earth, right behind Germany and Japan, which both rely heavily on nuclear power.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Your 25% figure is a bit misleading. The US is a very big country with a very large population. Of course we are going produce a lot of carbon dioxide. If you divide our greenhouse gas output by our GDP (obviously countries that don't produce anything will produce less C02) we are the 3rd most efficent country on earth, right behind Germany and Japan, which both rely heavily on nuclear power.
    And how much of the population do you have? About 5%. Per head, you use the most energy than anyone anywhere? Just because the lifestyle this leads to is one of luxury, doesn't excuse it.

    Timothy Wright Mason? He was an openly Marxist historian, one of the most extreme ones. Marxist historians have tended to overestimate the role of the working class in resisting the Nazis, for obvious reasons.
    I think he did exaggerate. Or rather he exaggerating the significance of the resistance. But the biggest reistance in and out of Germany still came from the left.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 7, 2005
The home of Results and Clearing

1,016

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.