The News Thread

[rms]

I mean Nazi Germany was fascist...not sure this is up for historical debate

 

[Mort Divine]

I mean Nazi Germany was fascist...not sure this is up for historical debate

yeah, this is the first time i've ever heard anyone suggest otherwise.

 

[Dak]

I mean Nazi Germany was fascist...not sure this is up for historical debate

yeah, this is the first time i've ever heard anyone suggest otherwise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Influenced by national syndicalism

This was the name given to political organizations in Italy known as fasci, groups similar to guilds or syndicates and at first applied mainly to organisations on the Left.

Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who combined left-wing and right-wing political views.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syndicalism

Syndicalism is a type of proposed economic system, a form of socialism, considered a replacement for capitalism. It suggests that industries be organized into confederations or syndicates. It is "a system of economic organization in which industries are owned and managed by the workers".

You haven't heard anyone suggest otherwise because no one does any personal research nor do they connect one dot to another.

 

[rms]

Not going to lie man, I have little interest in talking WW2 with you again. Last time was all over the fucking place with little to no evidence on your part.

Your wiki article cites Nazi Germany as fascist...I mean come on man.

 

[Dak]

Yeah. It was Fascist (although historians/political theorists can't even agree on a definition of fascism).....Fascism (whatever it is)was founded by socialists. It employs socialist economics. Socialism. Do I really have to spell it out?

This must be why the reader on my thesis committee said my ability to synthesize material exceeded the majority of grad students he has worked with (as an undergrad). Not trying to be a dick but goddamn.

I'm sorry I don't have the thousands of tomes on WW2 to recite to you chapter and verse.

 

[rms]

There's a reason why historians separate Fascism and Socialism. Can't just say Nazi's were fascist because they had state controlled economy. The fact that you even attribute Nazi's as socialist makes me think you have no understanding of Hitler's deep hatred of socialism..which he saw personified by the Jews. You already admitted to using a strange definition of socialism that Mort busted you on and now with your definition of nationalism. Fascism aka Nazi is ultra-nationalist, not nationalist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality

There's a debate to whether Japan was fascist in WW2 but you're willing to claim Sanders is. Just admit you got excited with your whacky choice of language.

 

[Dak]

No. Mort didn't bust me on anything. He didn't even really say anything. "State controlled economy" could be anything, and it's not what I said. I specifically quoted the linkage - Left/syndicalism. I didn't use a "strange definition", I quoted from a fucking crowdsourced source. Communism is not socialism (although there is significant relation). Jews epitomized both communism and usury, not national socialism (at the time). Japan was very classically imperialist/monarchist.

Ok now it's "ultra" nationalism, not nationalism. So what creates the difference? Sounds like bullshit.

You guys are both very confused. I don't blame [you] though, it is a fault of [your] education. You were given the interpretations, not the tools.

Edit: this is why history repeats itself - because people don't understand history:

 

[Matt]

I mean in terms of rhetoric, Trump is much more like Hitler than Sanders is. Preaching hatred, discrimination, etc.

 

[arg]

but it's hate against illegals, muslims and terrorists so it's ok and not nazi

 

[Dak]

I mean in terms of rhetoric, Trump is much more like Hitler than Sanders is. Preaching hatred, discrimination, etc.

Only because we have it pounded into our heads that Naziism = xenophobia, and Trump isn't anywhere near Hitler on xenophobia. Trump is just trying to maintain poll positions, Hitler really believed Jews (not a religious group) were to blame for German problems. Hitler had his beliefs, but mainly he wanted a pre WWI bordered economically prosperous Germany. It's not up for debate that even today Jews dominate control positions in international finance. Whether or not that is a bad thing is matter of perspective. Either way, Hitler was an idiot for blaming the average Jew for the goings on of a few, no different than the modern Mortician blaming the lay white for any random "white privilege" instance.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

The fact that you even attribute Nazi's as socialist makes me think you have no understanding of Hitler's deep hatred of socialism..which he saw personified by the Jews.

Citation needed pls. Most of what I've seen shows Hitler putting Jews and international banking together, not Jews and socialism. Obviously there was a significant Jewish element to be found in many Communist philosophies and movements, as well as the whole of "cultural Marxism", but that was social policy, not economic.

 

[rms]

Yes, he hated Jews because he saw them personifying the cultural/social side of socialism. Should have added that one word to save you a response

 

[tagradh]

Donald Trump called Katie Hopkins as 'respected columnist'.

lel.

 

[rms]

No. Mort didn't bust me on anything. He didn't even really say anything. "State controlled economy" could be anything, and it's not what I said. I specifically quoted the linkage - Left/syndicalism. I didn't use a "strange definition", I quoted from a fucking crowdsourced source. Communism is not socialism (although there is significant relation). Jews epitomized both communism and usury, not national socialism (at the time). Japan was very classically imperialist/monarchist.

Ok now it's "ultra" nationalism, not nationalism. So what creates the difference? Sounds like bullshit.

You guys are both very confused. I don't blame [you] though, it is a fault of [your] education. You were given the interpretations, not the tools.

Didn't even catch this on the first go around, but you cited a sentence from Hitler's Mein Kampf which was written before he was even in power and have no analysis of the system in place even during the pre-war period Jesus Christ Dak, what's up with you and citing Hitler directly?

Before I go into this response, instead of thinking that myself or Orifice are correct on some point (as we are both students of history, and you are not) you instead go into full-blown i'm a genius because my professors said so. Don't think i've seen you like this, weird mannnnnn

Nazis were socialist

This is what you said and are completely wrong.

I think we all agree that the Nazi's were not a socialist party/regime. Did they have socialist tendencies? Yes, the party controlled the economy.

Nationalism is a shared group feeling in the significance of a geographical and sometimes demographic region seeking independence for its culture and/or ethnicity that holds that group together. This can be expressed as a belief or political ideology that involves an individual identifying with or becoming attached to one's nation. Nationalism involves national identity, by contrast with the related concept of patriotism, which involves thesocial conditioning and personal behaviors that support a state's decisions and actions.[1]

So we can just add 'ultra' here and apply that to the Nazis and the Japanese. Is it clear cut and objective? No, but that's academia. Everything can be and basically is argued, because that's academia. This seems like a really silly point to make here.

Is Bernie Sanders an economic nationalist? I don't know his policies entirely and I haven't seen you cite anything, but I know he is against the TPP because he fears for the jobs of the lower educated workforce. Does that mean he is a protectionist? Ok, maybe. So he is, it doesn't make him a nationalist because he overlaps in certain aspects, because that is ridiculous. I know you're trying to be controversial here or something, but you aren't being clear enough to persuade anyone.

 

[Baroque]

Donald Trump is delusional, and I mean that in the psychiatric, probably a mental illness sort of way.

 

[Dak]

Didn't even catch this on the first go around, but you cited a sentence from Hitler's Mein Kampf which was written before he was even in power and have no analysis of the system in place even during the pre-war period Jesus Christ Dak, what's up with you and citing Hitler directly?

Before I go into this response, instead of thinking that myself or Orifice are correct on some point (as we are both students of history, and you are not) you instead go into full-blown i'm a genius because my professors said so. Don't think i've seen you like this, weird mannnnnn

This is what you said and are completely wrong.

I am irritated when I run into typical talking point regurgitation which can be debunked with next to no time required. You're going to rip my anecdote on the heels of an appeal to authority due to difference in degree field. I'm not a history major, but WWII is the one area of history I've done the most reading on, and far more than a BA in history would have to do just within the requirements of the sum of his or her course load.

I think this board is the only place I've ever seen people complain about primary sources, and it's happened more than once.

I think we all agree that the Nazi's were not a socialist party/regime. Did they have socialist tendencies? Yes, the party controlled the economy.

I guess I don't even know what definition of socialism you are using. My link/quote stated "Syndicalism is a form of socialism", but I imagine you'd disagree. What definition are you using? What countries qualify as having been socialist?

So we can just add 'ultra' here and apply that to the Nazis and the Japanese. Is it clear cut and objective? No, but that's academia. Everything can be and basically is argued, because that's academia. This seems like a really silly point to make here.

Is Bernie Sanders an economic nationalist? I don't know his policies entirely and I haven't seen you cite anything, but I know he is against the TPP because he fears for the jobs of the lower educated workforce. Does that mean he is a protectionist? Ok, maybe. So he is, it doesn't make him a nationalist because he overlaps in certain aspects, because that is ridiculous. I know you're trying to be controversial here or something, but you aren't being clear enough to persuade anyone.

It's an understandable yet false assumption that I go "out of my way to be controversial". I simply read (and not just theoretical pieces) and think. A lot. That this leads me to take a different perspective on a lot of issues than most people is a matter of efforts at education and reflection, not an attempt to find a unique spot on the intellectual floorspace of a metal forum, or whereever.

https://reason.com/blog/2015/09/15/bernie-sanders-protectionism-nativist-ec

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/26/politics/donald-trump-bernie-sanders-free-trade-2016/

He is pretty clearly protectionist, even CNN can acknowledge it. So what counts as being a nationalist?

@Baroque : Yeah, Trump is something else. He makes Obama's narcissism look mild.

 

[rms]

There's nothing wrong with primary sources, but using a source that was written when the person wasn't in power has no weight on a discussion about the function of the Nazi State under Hitler. How is this complex? Your last use of a primary source was analyzed without discussing the bias and failed interpretations. You are still saying it, I just didn't bother to bring the argument back up again

but mainly he wanted a pre WWI bordered economically prosperous Germany.

Quite honestly, I haven't seen much about this whole spectrum of knowledge you're referring to when talking about WWII. The last discussion you just kept trying to segway to WWI which meant nothing.

I guess I don't even know what definition of socialism you are using. My link/quote stated "Syndicalism is a form of socialism", but I imagine you'd disagree. What definition are you using? What countries qualify as having been socialist?

Syndicalism is a form of a socialism, I don't think I disagreed anywhere on that. Maybe you should define socialism since you keep saying "overlap" and "form of x."

It's an understandable yet false assumption that I go "out of my way to be controversial". I simply read (and not just theoretical pieces) and think. A lot. That this leads me to take a different perspective on a lot of issues than most people is a matter of efforts at education and reflection, not an attempt to find a unique spot on the intellectual floorspace of a metal forum, or whereever.

I just cited a definition that talks about a cultural identity..why are you only looking at one aspect towards nationalism?

 

[Dak]

There's nothing wrong with primary sources, but using a source that was written when the person wasn't in power has no weight on a discussion about the function of the Nazi State under Hitler. How is this complex? Your last use of a primary source was analyzed without discussing the bias and failed interpretations. You are still saying it, I just didn't bother to bring the argument back up again

Fascism was started by socialists, Hitler said he used socialist economics.BTW, that wasn't a quote from Mein Kampf.

Adolf Hitler, Max Domarus. The Essential Hitler: Speeches and Commentary. pp. 171, 172-173.

Even if it was from Mein Kampf though, it would still stand as evidence. If he had written "Gee I sure do love capitalism" you'd be all over that.

Quite honestly, I haven't seen much about this whole spectrum of knowledge you're referring to when talking about WWII. The last discussion you just kept trying to segway to WWI which meant nothing.

Apparently I can't help you there. Not going to go all back into that now. I'm not even talking about WWII specifically here. We are talking about economic and political policy/theory.

Syndicalism is a form of a socialism, I don't think I disagreed anywhere on that. Maybe you should define socialism since you keep saying "overlap" and "form of x."

Maybe that's because:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them

I'm not going to quote the entire economics section of the wiki, but Nazi Germany had a significantly centrally planned economy (nearly a necessity for a wartime economy at that level), provided universal healthcare, had a nationalized labor group, etc. Germany still holds to a lot of those socialist concepts. "Free" this, "free" that (with high taxation of course). Mort wants to hold that the workers must directly own the means of production, but that's rather vulgar. Instead, via taxation and redistribution, generally the same effect if not better is achieved than a 1/50th claim to my automobile assembly line machinery or something of that nature.

I just cited a definition that talks about a cultural identity..why are you only looking at one aspect towards nationalism?

So nationalism is a system of feels? Sounds like one aspect and a pretty weak one. I'm interested in rubber meets road practical application. I should be clear that "nationalism" isn't even a negative word to me in general, but instead how is it applied. Going "I love Murka!" is an empty platitude, but by that definition we just need a whole lot of that for "Nationalism".

 

[rms]

I don't think there's anything left to say unless socialism is defined sooooo i'll just say this is done

 

[Dak]

I don't think there's anything left to say unless socialism is defined sooooo i'll just say this is done