DinkinFlicka
Erect Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 31,932
- Likes
- 28,491
I always understood the non-aggression pact to have been agreed for military purposes. Hitler didn't want to fight Russia and on the Western Front concurrently and Stalin wanted time to strengthen the Soviet military.that was after they were anti capitalist. The Nazis and the communists had a non-aggression pact so that the Nazis could go after the capitalists first. it wasn't accidental that the Nazis only went after the communists after clearing the continent of capitalism. Capitalism was seen as the common, and bigger enemy because it was politically more removed from either. both were seen as replacements of capitalism, not extensions or corrections.
none of the changes in fascism/nazism made it more "right" than capitalism. fascism/nazism was slightly right of communism, but not farther right than capitalism.
it got changed to far right because because people can't understand that slight political differences still make a big impact. heck we had monarchs fighting each other, so two branches of socialism fighting doesn't mean they were all that different. calling the nazis far right is an oversimplification that hides the truth, and largely done for political (local us) purposes.
I always understood the non-aggression pact to have been agreed for military purposes. Hitler didn't want to fight Russia and on the Western Front concurrently and Stalin wanted time to strengthen the Soviet military.
The Nazis didn't go after the capitalists other than some who couldn't compete under wartime production rules. They and the major capitalists were tight. That bailout in the early 30's kept them going and they returned the favor with labor and other laws which were very beneficial to industrialists. Krupp, Siemens, IG Farben, etc. all thrived during the Reich.
The Nazis, ironically, called this reorganization “privatization,” although the owners of these corporations were either removed from board positions and replaced by Nazi Party members or sold out and became Nazi Party members. They included IG Farben and the Junkers airplane factory. IG Farben was a chemical company founded in 1925 by Carl Bosch and Carl Duisberg, who were both Jewish, and had a capitalization of around a billion marks by 1926. By 1938, all of the company’s Jewish workers had been purged and the supervisory board replaced by Nazis (see Joseph Borkin’s book The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben).
IG Farben was a clear example of the reorganization of industry the Nazis undertook for their benefit. Sybille Steinbacher, a professor of Holocaust studies, wrote about the public-private partnership in her book Auschwitz, stating:
Otto Ambros and IG Farben director Fritz ter Meer held a board meeting in Berlin with Carl Krauch who was not only a member of the board of directors of IG Farben, but also a member of the circle of industrialists around Reichsfurhrer-SS known as Himmler’s “Circle of Friends.”
After the Nazis took power, this kind of cooperation was common. Private businesses became merely public entities, and industrialists who resisted the Nazi commissars and their policies were removed from their positions and their businesses seized.
Junkers airplane factory did not fare much better, according to Temin, who wrote:
Prof. Junkers of the Junkers airplane factory refused to follow the government’s bidding in 1934. The Nazis thereupon took over the plant, compensating Junkers for his loss. This was the context in which other contracts were negotiated.
This Nazi war on business left industrialists and other businessmen worried that they would have their livelihoods stolen from them, as Günter Reimann explains in The Vampire Economy.
Reimann quotes a letter from a German businessman to an American businessman:
The difference between this and the Russian system is much less than you think, despite the fact that officially we are still independent businessmen.
The letter continues:
Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.
It's legit. She's not poor.hilarious. So she pays herself $200k a year to run an "anti-poverty" non-profit. Did I read that right? These people are complete frauds
![]()
Far-left agitator who organized MN church storming raked in over $1 million from anti-poverty nonprofit
Far-left agitator Nekima Levy Armstrong, who was one of the organizers of the storming of a Minnesota church to protest ICE, raked in over $1 million leading a civil rights nonprofit.www.foxnews.com
Ah, the Mises Institute, that explains quite a bit. Messrs. Mises, Rothbard and Rockwell weren't afraid to go against the grain were they? Do you think maybe the Austrian School folks call the Nazis Leftists to put some distance between the two philosophies?There seems to be a reason why some thrived (and some didn't).
![]()
Yes, They Were Socialists: How the Nazis Waged War on Private Property | Mises Institute
The myth that won't die is that Nazi Germany was a fully functioning free-market economy. In truth, it was effectively as socialist as its supposed rival, themises.org
nazigermany2019.eadrummondhistory.lmu.build
Google doesn't give any results on that.Check out VA House Bill #1369 that the Dems just passed:
"No state agency responsible for the administration of federal funds shall impose a requirement on a nonprofit charitable organization providing a federal public benefit to determine, verify, or otherwise require proof of eligibility of any applicant for such benefits"
Ah, the Mises Institute, that explains quite a bit. Messrs. Mises, Rothbard and Rockwell weren't afraid to go against the grain were they? Do you think maybe the Austrian School folks call the Nazis Leftists to put some distance between the two philosophies?
Here's a different take on the dynamic between industrialists and the Party in Nazi Germany:
Relations Between the Nazi State and Industry/Big Business – Grappling with the Nazi Past
nazigermany2019.eadrummondhistory.lmu.build
Fascism as you noted started as a sect of Socialism. I think you're ignoring that the ideological changes it underwent took it from leftist to rightist.
It's not my personal definition, it's general consensus, yesterday and today. In my UT days it was dogma in the Economics Department that Fascism was and is rightist.
In the 40's Fascists including Nazis were strongly anti-Bolshevik / Communist and that's still the case. Do you think Reds are right wing?
Some turns to all. If not all, how do you choose who gets it after the criminals are eliminated? Once the ones who aren’t given amnesty what do you do with the rest? Round them up with Ice?
