For starters, allow me to be blunt. If you're incapable of watching the film or reading the transcript, you're speaking from ignorance. Your arguments have already been refuted in the film, so I'm not going to bother. If you're not going to listen to TIK, you're not going to bother to seriously read what I have to say. Well, if you quoted someone on the forums like you quoted Engels you'd be breaking forum rules. In addition, you're a little off topic. Engel was writing about how the Catholics were getting upset with what he was doing and they might excommunicate him. Hitler replied that the Pope didn't have the balls and he was right. He was always going to be Catholic. Hitler rarely attacked churches publicly but definitely did so privately. He liked Islam a lot more. Uncle Joe said something similar. This is your right and left. Left <-------------------------------------------------------------------------> Right Authoritarian Authoritarian government control of economy government control of economy no individual freedom no individual freedom Your left and right is nonsensical. They are the same. VIK's arguments are not popular. They are almost unknown. In fact, you haven't even bothered to watch or read them. nope, but off-topic. Already refuted in the film/transcript. Stalin killed Trotsky. Does that make Trotsky or Stalin right-wing? Nope. I'm not a fan of the Catholic Church or as I would say the Roman Imperial Church, but they did not embrace Hitler. Hitler didn't embrace the Catholic or Protestant Churches, he simply used them. He had plans to get rid of both. Once again, off-topic. Henry Ford built the industry of Soviet Russia. He must have been one of those Communist Capitalists or is that Capitalist Communist? Silly stupid argument. Nonsensical lists without a purpose or a context. Once again this is the economics section of the forum. This is about Capitalist vs. Socialist. Any Left-wing or Right-wing stuff no matter how you define them is tertiary to the subject of the thread. This is for everyone, If you're not going to discuss the topic of the film as well as not bothering to watch or read it, start your own thread please.
But I just refuted your film. Hilter was not a socialist anymore than he was a Catholic. I supplied numerous counter examples and you still ignore the evidence.
Yeah it's bullshit. Fascism was commonly known and DEFINED as right wing belligerent nationalism up to about 1980 when the right including publishing companies decided to force a bait-and-switch to redefine it as "socialism" just because Hitler feigned some meager "socialist" ties and "sympathies" to win over the people. And this revisionism is exactly why it is necessary to clarify that socialism is a system in which THE WORKING CLASS owns and controls the MoP. It is and has always been held up as the liberation of the working class. Hitler's fascism DID NOT liberate the working class. So it was not "socialism".
Hilter fits the definition of a fascist much better, and not a socialist as your film claims. The most common criteria for determining Hitler as a fascist is known as the “fascist minimum model" used by Dr. Lawrence Britt, a political scientist, who listed 14 characteristics common to fascist regimes. Another expert on fascism is Dr. Robert O. Paxton who rejects this method as too static. Paxton also rejects an “intentionalist” interpretation of fascist dictatorship that focuses on the dictator’s will and personality and instead accepts the "structuralist" view that focuses on historic, economic and culture forces that forms a fascist movement . Paxton does not even consider Imperial Japan as fascist and instead calls it “an expansionist military dictatorship” (Robert O. Paxton, Anatomy of Fascism, 2005, Vintage Books, p. 200). Paxton rejects Spain’s General Francisco Franco as fascist and calls it a traditional form of dictatorship lacking the emotional commitment to fascism (Ibid., p. 157). I would say these past examples are “close enough” because Paxton is too strict applying his criteria in my opinion. Paxton puts forward the following formal definition of fascism: "Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion (Ibid., p. 218 ). "
Fascism is a rightwing reaction to socialism, in particular confiscatory revolutionary socialism. It was in Germany, Italy, Spain, Chile, and so on.
Here is a excellent historical lecture about how American Corporations loved Hitler, and Mussolini even more! IBM was particularly bad. IBM used it's computers that ran patented Hollerith numbered punch cards that only IBM could use and be programmed on their machines. This computer system kept tract of the Jewish population in death camps or work camps, and all the German people. Daily, camp prisoners had to stand for hours during roll calls to verify prisoner records. Prisoner deaths were recorded as "natural," "disease," and "special treatment" (gas chambers) so the American IBM programmers knew how their computers were being used.. Also, the famous Nazi "Blitzkrieg" method of military combat was only possible by getting the Nazi military off horses and into a fully mechanized army--General Motors provided the Nazi army with vehicles. Edwin Black, "The Nazi Nexus" America's Corporate Connections to Hitler: IBM, General Motors, Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie (2009)
"Computers" back then were enormous electromechanical calculators, and used mechanical linkages and electrical relays rather than vacuum tubes like ENIAC and the even earlier electronic computers at Bletchley Park. But they did have to be programmed with punch cards.
OK so you proved you can dream up endless dumb questions to stop any possibility of rational discussion. I can prove that I can ignore nonsense.
If the Nazi's were pretty much self sustained while having to do very little trade with other countries where all German Life was run by a Socialist Dominated government, then I would have to say that government was complete socialist. Heck, the current Left wing leaders apply many of their socialist ideals are from the Nazi's version of Socialism.
The error made by many is that of taking specific policies or even just words from well-known Marxist socialists and then finding similar policies and words in other non-socialist economies and calling then “socialist”. Just as capitalism is not identified by markets (since they’ve existed in every kind of economy) or by court systems, so too socialism is not identified by socially-beneficial programs. And just as North Korea’s claim that they are “democratic” does not indicate that they are, in fact, democratic. Socialism is more than programs and words. It is relationships. It is the end of the employer-employee relationship and the beginning of the worker as their own collective employer and boss. This is accomplished by ending private ownership of the MoP for private profit. If you don’t have actual worker ownership and worker collective, democratic management of a business as a dominant feature and trend in a country, you don’t have socialism. Hitler’s Germany was not socialist. His first act upon taking office was to ban labor unions and workers’ organizations, arrest their members, and execute their leaders. No pro-worker effort or intention there.
