Judging from their flags, adolf was more a wind power type of guy whereas benito believed in the tried and true wood as fuel method, oswald seemingly adhered to the general concept of electricity.
The reason why TIK has to have a disclaimer is because commies (and useful idiots) talk a lot of sh1t. It is apparent that the leftist gaslighters seek power over others more than they value understanding.
It’s disturbing because that means the people doing the censoring believe these ideas are so potent that the mention of them is enough to convince people of them, unless you explicitly disapprove the Holocaust
You don’t need to put a disclaimer like that in videos about Mao, Lenin, Stalin, war criminal dictator George Bush and tony Blair etc Shows you who the system fears and what they are trying to hide and who they don’t fear and don’t try to censor.
Most of the way through Peaky Blinders, currently on chapter 5 with Mosley as the antagonist. He's made a couple comments about fascism and national socialism which came off as modern misunderstandings of the eras ideologies. So, glad you are commenting on this. Perfect timing really 🤣
Yeah I watched peaky blinders and they basically just say fascist are all the same even if they come from completely different countries with opposing views. Like Moseley is working with the IRA who want to break away from Union which he wants to protect.
The excuse is that modern audiences cannot understand the realities of the past. Well, they would if they were taught about them properly - but that might cause the audience to doubt certain modern ideologies. Can't have that.
Thumbs up from Germany. Love your analyses. You make compelling arguments and show facts to support them. Lots of infos the average person doesn't get to hear in school. We definitely need more objectivity and less ideological subjectivity in our infos.
I think that "Ethno-nationalism" would be the best word to describe Hitler's politics, because he wanted all of the Germans, no matter what 'nationality', under one nation
That is what "Völkisch" means. The policy of the NSDAP under Hitler was a policy of "German people in the german nation". Hitler was against christianity, where else Mussolini cooperated and supported the catholic church.
Not even ethno-nationalism, more like racial nationalism. He wanted to assimilate memebers of other ethnic groups considered "Aryan" like the Nordic peoples and the dutch into the Greater German Reich.
ethnonationalism would imply that hitler would respect austrian independence from germany, which was in reality the first thing militarily the NSADP did when in power - morph austria into the reich, without firing a shot.
@@AleXoEx0 It doesn't. Nationalism in its most refined definition means that a group of people (nation) should be organized politically under a common authority and jurisdiction, aka a state. Such a country is called a nation state. Whether nation equals or should equal ethnicity is unresolved really.
The biggest issue isn't UA-cam's guidelines, it's the people enforcing it. Some of them are sensible, and some of them are not. It just seems luck of the draw whether you get a free pass or are purged from existence.
@@TheImperatorKnight why do you use the awd as a modern example from what I researched about them and what people like them have said before they are just satanist wannabes of course I do not support any of these believes but still whats up with that
Post uploading, I think a good alternative word to “Volkisch” is “Racialism”, which I’ve heard one Third Positionist use. And due to the nature of this video, I wasn’t able to fit the Patreon and SubscribeStar lists into it. So I apologise about that. I’m hopefully going to make another video this week, and if I manage to do so I’ll make sure the names are in there.
It'd be interesting to compare also Franco (who, I believe, is very different from the others) and Primo de Rivera's Falange (which is much closer with their national-syndicalism). I'm not sure if you've done a video on this already
I just pointed out national syndicalism as another example of syndicalism, but yeah, he was his own thing, more willing to take allies and related to catholithism and tho authoritarian he wasn't as radical as the others
José Antonio wanted an agrarian syndicalist Spain, where as Ramiro Ledesma Ramos wanted something more similar to what Stalin was doing with mass industrialisation and central planning
Yes that would be nice. However contrary to popular belief the Showa state was not fascism, even with Hideki Tojo as the prime minister. While I admire the nationalistic goals of that state, it did not meet basic core tenants necessary to be considered fascist. As someone who has spent years reading fascist literature, and a supporter of it, I hope people are not still confused about where the Japanese system in WWII lies.
@@shelbyspeaks3287 Nationalism or honoring past warriors is not something special to fascism, and can manifest in any ideology. No need to bring a word thats irrelevant to Japan. In an ideal world people would stop using words they don't know the meaning of.
@@handroids1981 it kind of just took elements from other types of fascism, it made the state really religious unlike other forms of fascism, and although still opressive it was usually preatty mild when it came to opressing the people
I'm glad you are keeping up the "fight" against suppressing human history. If we dont know how these things happen then we could not prevent them from being repeated. Thank you !
@@gigachad6885 Any Western leader would have thought similar, indeed even before #WW2 Churchill and others thought so. Not forgetting the Russian civil War up to 1923 which saw UK, USA, German and 6 other nations fighting on Russian soil. 🇬🇧 #ourhistory
It's really sad that we as people can't learn about or talk about our history without disclosing that we are not racists fascists or nazis in today's day and age
It is handy that the 'Woke' postmodernists put so much effort into screaming at us about their monopoly on tolerance, and supressing any questioning or disagreement. Otherwise, we might have mistaken them for just another mob of murderous irrational totalitarian ideologues.
@@TheImperatorKnight Hello. I really like your Videos. Could you make a video about variantes of marxian socialism like stalinism, maoism or trotskyism? Would be great! Keep up the good work.
Apparently by the mid-20th century the Mosley name was tainted by mustache man’s trip to Paris (WW2), so Max abandoned politics and went to a field (motorsport) where his dad’s name didn’t have baggage
It's fun when I've been called a fascist, and then I simply ask what a fascist is and am met with corn syrup stares. ( I went to a candice owens event ).
I love that you put your references at the bottom of the screen, ive never seen anyone else do that but it should definitely be standard practice. Very transparent.
"Democracy is another word for Totalitarianism." Good for you for putting these challenging ideas out there. I have been slowly gravitating toward the Mises view (or at least learning more about it) and you make me all the more interested.
Yeah, I'm not against the idea of freedom etc, I just don't think "democracy" is what people think it is. The American Founders created a Republic for a reason, not a democracy. And interestingly, Mises was pro-democracy (at least in his early books). People accuse me of "just believing Mises", but this is one element of Mises that I do disagree with.
@@TheImperatorKnight So many things that we're taught to feel a certain way about from a young age are not what they seem, democracy isn't necessarily synonymous with freedom, feminism was never about equality, fascism though always terrible isn't necessarily synonymous with racism , communism was not always necessarily synonymous with being "woke" or socially liberal (for example, homophobia in the Soviet Union and Castro's Cuba, racism in the 20th century Australian communist party).
@@TheImperatorKnight A Republic and a democracy are not mutually exclusive subjects. Also it seems like you're presupposing that the original ideology of the American Founding fathers was correct when back then Senators weren't even elected and you could only vote if you were a white landowner. Conflating the idea of Totalitarianism with Democracy is just dangerous and misinformed. Don't get me wrong, Authoritarian Democracies do exist but thats not the same as Democracies just plainly being Totalitarian.
@@johnnyjohn-johnson7738 Social issues like lgbt rights weren't really what made someone "woke" back in the day. It was mainly anti-colonialism and feminism. Not defending the Soviet Union or Castro's political treatment of LGBT people but historical context matters.
@@jamesmcpherson8599 I can see where you're coming from, I am not arguing whether the fact that Communists were progressive for their time, I'm wrestling with the general assumption that being homophobic or racist makes you a fascist, because both the fascist and communist movements were extremely big tent in the beginning when it comes to social views, we had extremely conservative (and often racist) Australian and Chinese communists and extremely progressive British fascists. For example one fascist group in the UK was lead by Rotha Lintorn-Orman, who was a woman with an emo haircut who was involved in the early 20th century equivalent to the "swingers" movement (sex parties) and wanted to get more women into politics (she was also rumored to be bisexual), she also started a female version of Mosely's fascist defense force (honestly she was so progressive that I can't help but wonder if she was a 2000s hipster who ended up in the past somehow.) On the other hand, John Curtain was an Australian Prime Minister was involved in the Communist movement before joining the Labor Party, he was a devout and proud white nationalist and did not see it as conflicting with his socialism, in fact he blamed capitalism for non white people moving to Australia and believed that they could peacefully go back to where they came from once worldwide socialism becomes a thing. in Spain there were some trade unions in the Republic who did not women to get involved in the work force. Point is, being a fascist or communist does not automatically mean you have a particular set of social views.
Excellent breakdown. Unfortunately the meaning behind fascism/ nazism is being obscured and diluted today. Clear definitions like this are absolutely vital to understanding history and ideologies.
problem is many people aren’t going to take the time to learn politics or sociology as they aren’t compulsory subjects (in the uk). i think it leaves people unaware of how politicians deliberately polarise their society by stirring up things like nationalism. so many ideologies intersect as well so people are mislabelling a lot.
All of them were anti-wars and against bolshevism and for national sovereignty. Pretty simple. Fascism and NS was a defence against bolshevism so it had to be an authoritarian state. Europe saw what revolution jews did in Russia and knew that that same bloody genocidal revolution was about to be imposed on Europe by USSR
This is interesting. I didn't know about the distinctions between their ideologies and what makes them different from each other. Can we have a part two to this, but with Falangism, Rexism, and the Iron Guard of Romania?
Definitely should, also to know more about the American “democratic socialism” and the rise of socialism in the post world war 1 era and pre world war 1 era
@@magdalenusrex346 the ustase were like national socialism bumped up to the max they basically just killed whoever they felt like its like if the dirlewanger brigade was a whole army
@@ancapgrandscribe9546 pre-WW2 there was also William Pelley and his “Christian Commonwealth” here in the States. A mix Socialism and a ethno-religious ideology. The guy even ran for president back in the day.
Back in 1983 as a college student I had the greatest "a ha" moment in my life when I realized that Italian, British, and American "fascism" was in fact, an expression of an older syndicalism and that the bedrock of this would be the "trade unions" or syndicates. This can still be seen in the US economy and political system in many ways, except that the "syndicates" are now deep pocketed hedge and venture corporations.
@bustercrabbe8447 The United States is not a mixed economy. The US has a long history of government and big public corporations working in tandem to ensure that the means of production remain in the hands of large monopolistic corporations that are subsidized with public funds to ensure that no meaningful competition can spring forth. It's socialism mired under the guise of capitalism and well meaning government
Would you be interested in making a video on the differences between syndicalism and socialism? I've never heard the term syndicalism before and I am a bit fuzzy on the distinctions between the economic systems
Yeah, thinking about it, this might be necessary. I mean, they're close enough where I would say that syndicalism is just another variant of socialism, but I know that explanation won't be good enough for some people.
my understanding of the nuances is rather limited since i never really went down the Marxist theoretical rabbit hole and have only superficial knowledge but as far as i do understand them socialism is more or less the umbrella term/political family of . Syndicalism is one branch of that which focuses on the trade unions as the leading and organizing forms for ushering in the workers revolution. This form mostly comes from states where the industrial revolution already entrenched itself and thus workers movmements were entrenched as well. By contrast, Lenin's variant of socialism focused on the enlightened role of the avant-garde political party as the nexus for generating the revolution since Tsarist Russia had a mostly peasant population, not a lot of industrial workers, and thus they needed to be "showed the way" into class consciousness. Mao's socialism would be Lenin's flipped upside down as Mao thought that peasants were the leading class to communism, not industrial workers. TLDR version: It's all kind of the same. They just have constant schisms on the subjects of who's in charge, how best to do the revolution and govern after to usher in utopian communism and who the true "socialist" class is. TIK will probably do a much better job going over the details if he makes the video P.S. for those that know the memes: Juan Posada's socialism is nuclear alien space dolphin comrades :)a
@@Skelli2 Syndicalism is much more anarchist than socialism (not the umbrella term), the worker still owns the means of production but instead of owning all the means of production by proxy of the state they own their immediate means of production through their union and mutually assist other unions, they can all be part of bigger unions or even just one really big union but everything is supposed to be very direct-democratic and "stateless". But again it's an idea born from anarchism so there will be 20 people giving you 26 different definitions.
@@mnk9073 The closest forms Syndicalism I can think of would be the stock market the other would be a Partnership, or a Sole Trader(defined under UK business law, basically what type of legal entity a business is). Those are really the closest you can get to in terms of practical and functional forms Syndicalism.
9:50 This is an extremely good point. When I was younger I personally went through a period where I became much more radical in my beliefs precisely because I had felt betrayed and lied to. It adds an emotional catalyst to whatever you're discovering, basically amplifying the effect. When someone comes along and gives you the answer you're looking for, you're far more likely to buy into other things because he too, in your view, has seen the truth and suddenly the crazy stuff doesn't seem so crazy anymore. If you lie to people, even if your intentions are good, you are setting them up for failure.
This hits close to home. I'd grown up in a very multicultural environment in school + other places, and it caused deep insecurity within me during quite a bit of it. I was the white kid with no culture to show, or wear. I can't remember what set it off, but I 'discovered' my British heritage and became wildly nationalistic for Britain as a young teen - I seemed to focus on the 18th century and British Empire a lot. I'm not racist at all, and was aware of the faults of the British Empire... but it just made me so inexplicably happy to have a feeling of belonging and pride, knowing that my ancestors were a part of a 'great' nation. I'm not nationalistic towards Britain very much anymore, but it's always going to be a small part of my past I won't forget. You're right when you say it's emotional. My personal experience was mostly harmless, but definitely a bit of an obsession for a while.
@@Arvga8662 I'm not entirely sure. You see, I feel nationalistic for what _was_ , but when it comes to what Britain is now... I just can't bring myself to the same feeling. I was like that for a bit about Germany too (which have roots in as well) - until I realised that this image I had of Germany in my head wasn't real, and that Germany's also 'westernised' and 'modernised' just as much as the United States. It kind of crushed me, and so the nationalism I once felt dimmed down a lot. Hope that helps, some.
@@laurac.405 It does, thank you very much. I know how you're feeling and I can't blame you, it's tough. But I don't think we should give up hope. What once was, has been written down numerous times, so it can be again (, it's not lost forever). And even though everything seems lost right now...I'd like to think that we can become 'great' once again. I think of it in a spiritual way: 'become who you are' (who you once were). I don't think we should forget our great potential. On the other hand, maybe I am enthusiastic because I'm still young (not a teen anymore though). We'll see how things get. All the best to you and your future plans.
This is by far one of the best videos on this site. I've tried to explain this exact thing, that fascism and nazism are different things. But people still belive that they are the same. And that fascism isn't inherently racist.
This video is fantastic. It should be shown in all schools tbh. But having said that, still your last sentence is technically wrong. You meant "(originally) racist." From 1938 onwards, you see openly racists laws and discourse in Italy.
I know it's incredibly niche and there might not be a lot about it, but, being Romanian, I think I'd love to see another video comparing Codreanu or Antonescu's ideas on fascism with these three. Awesome video, love to see someone finally actually defining fascism as something other than "it's racist don't ask more questions!"
Marcus Garvey himself wasn’t a fascist, but held sympathy towards Mussolini and spoke fondly of fascism, even comparing the Italian movement to his own.
Excellent video. It's weird, on the surface, to say we need more education in areas like this because of an assumed danger of people then adopting the ideology, but as you said one needs to know what one is debating to refute it.
Yeah, I've given up trying to persuade them. I'll still fire off the odd broadside, but the videos are now made for those who wish to listen, not those who cannot.
19:19 "Real socialism" should not be to describe economy of the Third Reich. That term is already taken (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_socialism). The Real socialism is an official term coined by Brezhnev USSR to describe "comunism in real life". The Real socialism was the final state on a way to implement comunist regime. It was "as close to communism as we can get", nothing could be improved and it was the reason why the whole east block froze in late 60s till it fell down in 89... Some of us experienced the Real socialism (or ream communism?) first hand...
@@jkotekvolnycz - Oh, jeez, of COURSE there's going to be at least one - and no doubt multiple - socialist philosophies that officially call themselves "Real Socialism", but are only "Real Socialism" for as long as they are being tried, and once they go completely defunct, then "Real Socialism isn't REAL socialism - real socialism STILL hasn't been tried, which is why we need to try Real Socialism again, but really try harder!"
@@jkotekvolnycz There's at least six (possibly 7 but not sure, Globalism has elements of Socialism) different variations of Socialism who claim to be the real Socialism mate. Marxism, Maoism, National Socialism, British Socialism, Cultural Marxism ( race/ gender/ identity based socialism currently called 'woke' in west) in current day west, Democratic Socialism and Globalism. I'm definitely missing a few variations from Cold War era.
Oh, he abandoned *that* a while ago, in favour of telling lies that made Nazis look better. Remember, if you keep private profits from keeping a war running, Luddendorf goes 'Good for you' and Marx goes 'That's not socialism !'
Hey Tik, I'm really glad you're going to do videos on Mosley and especially look forward to seeing the reactions that "certain" persons may have on them. Keep the work, you're doing great as always.
It's unfortunate that you have to leave a disclaimer like that, I thought it was obvious you were simply educated people on it and not supporting it. I wish I could say people just say you are those things to try and justify their own beliefs but something tells me people REALLY think you're those things. Sad times we live in. Keep up the good work TIK, you're amazing and the quality of your videos is amazing, great research and factual. Thanks for all you do and all you deal with
Post ww2 we live under strong political repression. No more free speech than Nazi germany or USSR, the only difference is different speech is censored/allowed and the regime doesn’t have to be as brutal since it has basically consolidated power in the entire western world besides 3rd world countries and I guess Russia and China too.
It sucks that you have to start with a disclaimer, all the more so because the radical left will just ignore it anyway. It is still smart to do so, just for legal reasons or the Mighty Google Algorithm.
The critics have been accusing me of holding all sorts of views, and they're just pulling it out of thin air. It's sad that they're so intellectually dishonest.
@TIKhistory I remember awhile back I had a lengthy debate with someone who was a stalinist in Australia (little bit weird). He was terrible, supported things like the holodomor and stalins purges but I digress. I remember debating with him about hitler and national socialism, I argued it was a more left wing ideology and he disagreed (obviously). I eventually referred him to your video "Hitlers socialism" and before even looking he said "he's just a racist trying to get away from his inherent nazism" I mean....wow, all that from just the thumbnail lol.
If possible at all TIK could you do a video on Germany's relationship with middle eastern nations during WW2? love your content and wanted to ask this for awhile.
@@PyatPree88 Goofy comment. They support an Iraqi revolt, had a Free Arabian Legion and had support from the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. They met with Pan-Turkic leaders and created Turkish military divisions. Egyptians are just arabs. Hitler liked them all like he liked all races
Tik, thanks to you I am now more knowledgeable about the subject of early to mid 20th century history than I have ever been before. You've also helped imform and shape my current position as a free market libertarian, exposing me to the likes of Milton Friedman, Ludwig von Mises and Ayn Rand and now I can't stop reading about them and their work, you have my thanks. please don't stop making these videos and keep telling the truth! 👍
I'm almost curious enough to hope there IS a future video on that gobbledygook, but I have a feeling it's a "be careful what you wish for" kind of topic that I wouldn't wish on anyone, least of all myself!
Why do all of the worst regimes in the 20th century tend to link back to Hegel? Yet neo-Hegelians out here today ready to do it all again with no real pushback.
Tik, I feel humbled after watching your political and economic videos. You absolutely blew my mind by just going back to the simple objective truth of public vs private. Keep it up.
I dont know anything abt this channel i didnt even finish the video but as a historian i love how you provide sources for everything you say. Just because of that you just received another sub good job 👍
I would love a video going over the various kinds of communism and comparing them. Trosky vs Stalin, or other Communist/leftist movements during WW2, POUM , CNT, or other different ideologies under the same "umbrella"
@@unclesamowitz9922this comment tells all you need to know about what this guys garbage takes attracts. Well I guess someone’s gotta scrape the bottom of the intellectual barrel.
Hi Tik, you commented on the fact that it was not real 'Nationalism' for Hitler to have incorporated the Austrian Germans into the Reich, and if this was the case, he would have maintained the Austrian nation; could one not argue that the origination of the word 'Nation' is from the Roman 'Natal' - to be born in Latin or 'Ethnos' in ancient greek, meaning ethnicity. I believe that it would logically follow that seeing as Hitler believed the Austrians to be Racially and thus Ethnically (by birth) German, the Austrian state was simply a guise to divide the German brotherhood, like wise with his views on the Nordic nations and England; as well as combining the German minorities in the other nations of Europe to create the German ethno state (the Nation of Germany in its entirety) and expand its borders by conquest and enslavement of the 'other'. I would argue that in this context, there is no difference between the term of 'Racialism' or 'Nationalism' as both are determined by one's birth 'Ethnic group' and 'Race' to Hitler or any other person on Earth for most of history would be synonymous; hence I state my claim that Hitler was indeed a German Nationalist.
@@BigHenFor In which capacity? A race is a group of people with shared characteristics (e.g. facial features or skin tone) which are highly prevalent within the group, passed down via genetic legacy; ethnicity is very much the same, as I explain, it depends of the circumstance of your birth to which ethnicity you belong (ethnos and natal) and thus it follows that you must share blood and a genetic lineage with a specific ethnic group to be considered a part of it; this is how nations have been determined for centuries; they are an extended kinship if you will, for instance even in England, People would refer to themselves as 'of the Anglo-Saxon race', which is synonymous with English ethnicity, in the context of Hitler's views concerning ethnic Germans, i think my point stands rather robust against your statement and no counter arguement is given, please elaborate...
@@MartinMartinm I agree, having been to Austria and Germany many times, the only noticeable difference between the two is a dialect and, otherwise the people look the same it may aswell be another Lände.
Videos about tanks and frontlines with divisional emblems are cool. And probably bring in the bacon for TIK. But the social economic vids, and especially Hitler being a socialist, are his greatest contribution to history. If it manages to become mainstream it will do far more for his reputation then endless hours of Battlestorm Stalingrad.
Ive never seen Tiks tank videos, love his political and molitary videos though. Tik covers so many things that we can all find something to disagree with him on but Im 95% in agreement. And Im probably wrong on some of the things I disgree on😬
Mosley used the rising tide of fascism to propel himself into the public eye but his core policies definitely differed a lot. He cared about political corruption and where national spending went.
Yeah, he definitely used "facism" to gain popularity in the public eyes and also bc facism was becoming a thing for other countries. That why he went there.
These are GREAT ! You're an absolute legend and have the best history lessons for teaching actually history and sense about political ideologies. Just amazing stuff .
>also [...] less known parties >the Falange This video is on mosley... Is the most notable wing of the only fascist regime to survive ww2 really generally less known than a party that never gained power?
@@theultimatefreak666 Well neither did the Falange really. Before the Civil War they received 0,6% of the votes which was pathetic even for fringe facist parties. And during/after the civil war they fused with the Karlists and became nothing more than a rubber stamp for Francos military dictatorship. Spain was a Military Dictatorship with certain facist attributes but not actual facist regime. And Franco def wasnt one.
Fascist has definitely become a throw around term and seems to have lost all meaning, similar to the use of the word communist and its use in America during the Cold War era
I would disagree with you the Soviets literally funded coups and ideological warfare all across the globe what do you think the far left of current America is a product of? The kgb use to pay off and sometimes themselves would become college professors to spread communist ideas in america the hippie movement all that was a project of social subversion from the kgb all those who “fear mongered” about communism were completely correct communism of the tyrannical kind almost took over the entire globe it’s just that a lot of people who sympathize with the communist utopian vision are desperate to cling to the idea that you can tip toe on the edge and adopt the good parts while avoiding the negative so if someone generalizes communism they get angry about it
Well yea in German “Kampf” translates to fight/struggle/battle it depends on context like for “mien kampf” I would say it would translate to struggle but in something like “panzerkampfwagen” it wouldn’t translate too “armored struggle vehicle” it would be “armored fighting/battle vehicle”
We are living in the most boastfully ignorant times I am aware of. People are peppered with labels, insults, and slurs on a daily basis. Yet often the person who is doing the insulting has no idea what the words mean, and the object of the insult is often unaware of the reason he is being insulted. If you attempt to remedy the situation by educating the ignorant party you are almost invariably shouted down by a gaggle of the ignorant yet arrogant.
Oh i don't think we do. There is probably as much ignorats today as there was at any point in history. I don't see a reason why there should be more ignorants today than in the past. What is more likely is that ignorants of the past are forgoten by history as they are not worth mentioning.
I can say little but, alas. The sad part is that those who are well versed in this are usually surrounded by those who aren't. Those knowledgeable are then forced to either remain silent forever, or try argue with those who refuse to learn and get back lashed, even called the labels they were explicitly teaching against.
@@Alaryk111hat’s the problem! Stop looking back! And don’t use that line we must so we won’t forget! Yes people are more ignorant today than ever before.
Could you maybe do a video on the different kinds of National Socialism throughout Europe? For example in the Netherlands, there was the “National Socialist Movement in the Netherlands (NSB)” which was wildly different from Hitler’s NSDAP. Although information on this can be a bit scarce, it’s incredibly interesting.
If you're interested in the Dutch situation in the interbellum, if it comes to Fascist and National Socialist parties, you might want to read the first volume of "Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog" by Loe de Jong, named 'Voorspel". It gives a good overview of the numerous parties including the NSB ofcourse. I didnt really dive into the NSB history because its frontman Mussert lacked all charisma and was married to his aunt. (!)
Even in the NSDAP there were different factions, the main being the more pro-Russian National 'Socialists' led by the Strasser brothers, they all got purged in the Night of the Long Knives.
It's incredible how scarce information on this subject and only this subject is in the information age. All of the world's collective knowledge at our fingertips and we're not allowed to learn and understand our own history. China censors the [redacted] Square Massacre and it's an afront to freedom. We do the same with our history and it's totally fine.
@@punishedgloyperstormtroope8098 Mainly because Socialism is more of a general goal than a nerdy ass "erm we need these policies 🤓". In the sense of liberating the people from unjust hierarchy, Fascism was just an evolution of what that truly means, Marxism did the same they just made it gay
@@friedrichbaeker I feel fascist and national socialist socialism was more philosophical not just about money whereas Marxist socialism is more materialistic
@@punishedgloyperstormtroope8098 Pretty much. Socialism is just an essence of "right, theres a bunch of greedy cnuts that oppress us. lets rise up" from the general people. Marx, decided to make that about gay sex and how the west is evil for not being gay enough and not nice enough to minorities or some random jibber jabber
It's insane how fast people are nowadays with political labeling especially when they know next to nothing about the said ideologies and when corrected that's somehow proof of your guilt nevertheless. This is a fine sample of how nuanced they actually are and how one variable will have insanely huge impact on how the said ideology works when put in place.
If u get called a fascist just laugh it off the people who usually throw that word around are a lot closer to being a fascist then the person they trying to call one
Well, political name-calling is pretty insane today. In my country (Hungary) politicans do nothing but that: call the opposition, their "rivals" (literally anybody who can be used for propaganda, but they go chicken when they actually face with them... orban in the eu. Lol) or people who spoken up against the government "leftists" "liberals" "dollarleft" "pro-war" "anti-hungarian" "traitor" and so on. The future of dictatorships is not in violence, unless they prohibit the use of media. The internet makes people aware of reality... if they get access to the right information. If you own most media (Hungary: fidesz owns 90%, and makes it impossible for any other parties to get access to people trough media. Even irl, people are scared to even get contact with other parties out of fear. We have a few excellent independent newspapers, but they get heavily demonized, and even people who "hate fidesz" believe almost everything they say without noticing and attack this sources. The stupidity and ignorance is astonishing here), you rule the country, because you rule peoples' opinion. And this is where identity politics and "ruling by ideology" comes in. Fidesz doesnt even have a political program, they just say which people believe the easiest, and win. And they will make this easier by ruining education. I was actually tossed against a police car in an education protest. Some where beaten or tear gassed so bad they couldnt stop vomiting (like my ex's 15 yo 45 kg sister...) or threatened with 2 years in prison for throwing an empty water bottle at a policeman's helmet because that 16 yo girl was allegedly "violent" and "dangerous". Hell, young students who protest against the government are called "violent" "dangerous" "brainwashed" "traitors"... even if they are around 14. Im pretty sure they know my name already lol. There are obvious red-flags in rulers, and this is one them. If they say more subjactive things than facts and say that everybody who thinks otherwise is an enemy, they use peoples' natural instinct to be dominant, and who doesnt like to be called smart, right, the best, etc? People will feel enamoured with themselves and adopt rulers' vocabulary which is highly simple, and doesnt even make the slightest sense. Thus they can be manipulated very easily. Fun fact: a fidesz newspaper announced WW3. There are articles. Not even kidding. And yes, it would be the same with a liberal ideology, its just wouldnt be that easy today. If the opposition is weak, like in Hungary, they tend to do the same things as a right-populist to win over dumb liberals.
Japan's a completely different kettle of fish. I don't know much about Spanish Fascism, but the runaway militarism in Japan really defies definition, it's NOTHING like European fascism.
Japan was utterly different and poorly researched due to a predominance of worse historians than elsewhere (they have fixed on fascism as an aesthetic as they very quickly ran into the problem that the Japanese were very blatantly not fascist and showed every sign of not even understanding the ideology). Spain had fascists but they were as different as Mosley is from Mussolini and were largely intentionally disempowered by Franco who was probably less fascist than Churchill and FDR (he was an authoritarian, a rabid Catholic and a monarchist, one also gets the impression that he was a political realist and largely non-ideological but rather very religious (if the two can even be said to be different things), in short he was an actual reactionary who hated all forms of revolutionary thought).
@@moritamikamikara3879from my Understanding of Spanish fascism you may be talking about 'Falangism" it basically is the ideology of National Syndicalism, which was the official ideology of the party. If your speaking of Francisco Franco he is not much of a fascist but he used the popularity of the falange party to maintain power, at best Franco could be considered a Paternal autocrat or maybe a Conservative nationalist.
Keep up the great work TIK. Been watching your videos for years, love your stuff. More informative, fun, with sounder historiography than what I got in my MA - History.
Actually, I would more argue that Mussolini and Mosley's economics revolved around Corporatism, which has inspirations from National Syndicalism. They both called their system "Corporatism" and there is actually a difference between the two from my research: Corporatism is the control of markets by large interest groups that are national to the country, meaning that it advocates for corporate groups to run the economy on the basis of their common interest. These corporate groups that are established by the government, are divided into different industries and afterwards the corporations gets to decide how to run their industry's economy, based on what is their interest of them and what the people want. Corporatism also involves employers and employees syndicates being linked together in cooperative associations to collectively represent the nation's economic producers and work alongside the state to set national economic policy; collectivism plays a part in making this happen. Corporatism is a egalitarian and traditional way in running the economy. So to sum it up, corporations runs the economy based on their industry the government gives them, so in some way its centralized to the government, but then the corporations have the real control over the economy, only that the government makes what the corporations is. National syndicalism is the transferring of the ownership and control over the means of production and distribution to worker's unions. It's similar to socialism ,however, fascism had syndicalism to be nationalized which is completely different from the normal syndicalism. That means that workers do get their rights to their own production and ownership of the industry, but it's all given by the government and in the end workers are working for the government, only with more power on what they do in their industry's economy. This is also something Alexander Raven Thomson, chief ideologue of the British Union of Fascists, clarifies in his book "The Coming Corporate State" which is all about the economics of the BUF. In his book he describes that the difference between National Syndicalism and Corporatism is that in Syndicalism the Syndicates must completely rely on each other's cooperation and that they all have equal governing powers, while in Corporatism the Syndicates are obedient to the State and the "National Corporation", as the state watches over them and can act as a third party when disputes arise...And this is why Thomson says that the BUF prefers Corporatism over Syndicalism. Both economic systems are closely related, as they both are nationalized and are working for their own interest of the industry. They are working for the government and it is in the end a freer market than that of any left-wing economy system, since the government allows them to do whatever they want and it's run by the interest of the people. The difference between the two I say is that national syndicalism is more about worker's unions and the workers' ability to control over their industry while corporatism is mainly the elites of the company that decides how the industry will be controlled. So corporatism is more for the company and corporates while syndicalism is more for the individual and worker. So I would say it is far more accurate to call Mussolini and Mosley Corporatists, and even Thomson himself differentiates between the two and argues that Corporatism is more ideal for a Fascist Britain than National Syndicalism.
Thanks for a clarification!!!! However, can u pls explain what powers unions inside of a corporation supposed to have? I mean u have a group of employers and a group of workers. First one cant fire them all, the second go on strike. Because it would hardly hurt the national economy. In that sense I do not really get how the fair salary, working conditions e.t.c. are being established. It seems like they are called syndicates because fascists loved this word. I mean I know its fascist bullshit. But it just does not seem as a system that has a theoretical way of working. For example syndicalism have one. It is simply a corporation where every worker is an owner. They just vote and select the management.
@@KunstPicker So let me give an example, a list of corporations which would be required to control the economic system: A - Primary Products 1. Agricultural 2. Fishing 3. Mining and Fuel 4. Iron and Steel 5. Metal Trade B - Industrial 1. Engineering 2. Printing and Paper Trade 3. Shipbuilding 4. Textiles And so on, you get the idea. These Corporations would, in their turn, be split up into smaller groups functioning in single industries within the main category, but would represent the whole industrial section in relation to the central government. We now turn to the typical Corporation/Syndicate, and see in what manner it is organised and how it will function. There will be represented on the Corporation enployers, workers and consumers. Each group will be given equal representation and equal power, and may not be outvoted by the other two. The employers' representatives will be elected by the owners, partners and directors in the business enterprises of the industry, and by those engaged in a managerial capacity or in executive office. They will represent the organising side and will form an employers' federation. Association to this employers' federation will be compulsory upon every business enterprise, which will contribute a yearly subscription proportional to the number of its employees, and submit itself to the disciplined control of the federation. The workers' representatives will be elected by all employees, whatever their function, including clerical staff. They will form a trade union embracing every worker, but confined entirely to these. The principle of Trade Unionism is entirely retained, and advanced to 100%. Stripped of their obnoxious and irrelevant political activites the Unions will play an essential part in the organisation of the Corporate State. The consumers' representatives cannot be elected like the others, as consumers may very well be a scattered broadcast. Instead the nation itself is the ultimate consumer in the case of most products and, therefore, the Government, as representatives of the nation, is best fitted to nominate the consumers' representatives. Reputable persons will be chosen to represent he interests of the ultimate consumer, and thes ewill hear the grievances and suggestions of anyone who is affected by the working of the industry in question. In many cases other industries are big consumers, then the Government will appoint representatives to be nominated by the Corporations controlling these industries to watch over their interests. It is through these corporate institutions that a rationalised expression of opinion will be realised in keeping with the modern age. For the first time all members of every industry will have their share in the control of the great economic factors of their daily life. The consumers' representatives are in a certain sense, the delegates of central authority, to give warning of any unjustifiable raising of prices or restricting of output. They are, however, backed up by a central economic council which crowns the industrial structure of the Corporate state. The "National Corporation" which comprises representatives from every corporation, and centralises the administration of the whole system. It will be the duty of the National Corporation to co-ordinate activities in the interests of national welfare, and will be elected as other Corporations, each will nominate equal numbers of employers and workers. The number of members from each Corporation will not be equal, but will be weighted in accordance with the importance of the industry to the national welfare. Its function will be executive and administrative, as distinct from the occupationally elected parliament, which will be legislative. All controversies within the individual Corporations, which cannot be settled by compromise, will be referred to the National Corporation for settlement and according to public interest. Disputes between Individual corporations will also come before the National corporation, which will exercise a judicial capacity. Hope this answers your question!
@@nolancer5974 dude, it's hard to express, I really thank u. Best answer I have ever received. Suddenly, it makes a lot of sense. The system is pretty bizarre, nevertheless creative and smart. I think it can even be upgraded to a degree that would make it actually work for the people. I mean basically in this version government decides all the disputes , because consumer can side with either workers or employers. So government each time decides arbitrary whom to make richer - workers or the employers. Like... in a socialist state with the exception that in socialist state employers are just directors appointed by party. However the thing I like is that this framework gives employers and workers ability to ban the government(consumers) intervention in the economy. I mean if taxation would have been considered subject to the jurisdiction of national corporation it would make sense.
@@KunstPicker While I myself am not a Corporatist, it is still extremelt fascinating to look into, and I think we can both agree that even Corporatism is a better alternative to Communism. Again, I highly recommend you acquire the book "The Coming Corporate State" by Alexander Raven Thomson if you truly wanna look into Corporatism straight from the words of a Fascist. What I truly admire about the book is that Thomson literally addresses every single issue in the book and how the Corporate State would handle it: Unemployment, Role of the Government, How Investments would Work...Basically every single part of the economy he addresses in complete detail and how Corporatism would handle it, and easy to understand. Funnily enough I have never seen a Communist ever writing a book like this actually explaining how Communism would work in an economy.
@@nolancer5974 I will give it a try when I will have enough time, thank you for recommendation!!! English is not my first language, so I read complex texts really slow:( . From my point of view, the thing is that communism does not really exist as a model of economy. It never existed actually as a one, it is just an umbrella term to define any society without private property. So there are different communisms. For example, I think some communists in the west believe that we should nationalise all the companies and make them act as if they were controlled by private owners. Or just make an income tax 80-90%. So basically communism=Scandinavian model maximized. And u can not actually right a book describing this communism from economical point of view, because the answers would always refer to how things work in a market economy. A lot of political questions arise too and they are just being thrown away with "if we have democracy, it will make our socialism great". Kinda bad argument, but that s how the things are. Mostly discussions stop here and becomeore historical than political, that there were no democratic communisms. In Russia))) I am from Russia we have a lot of books about communism))) Russian communists believe in so called "plan" historically it was nothing more than the aim established by the party, but somehow they see it as something essential. So we get nationalised companies here too, but(!) there is one entity that defines their purposes , and can destroy some of them and transfer resources to another company or industry. This sounds worse than the previous plan, much worse. So what these books about? How we fix plan? The answer is shizoprenical. A.I. . Yeah the whole idea is there gonna be a supercomputer that will save our communism and would not make any mistakes. Also because it is a computer it will act in a good faith , being the least corrupted economical actor ever. The funniest thing is that some o them(ru communists) believe that one model was even close to being created , but enemies destroyed USSR from inside and so it never was finished.
I'm a bit late but I would like to point out that another evidence that syndicalism/unionism is key in fascism is that the spanish fascism (falangism) is also known as national syndicalism
In Italy during the fascist era the fascist party wasn't even the largest organisation, but the syndicalists of Edmondo Rossoni which had 3 times as many members
Yeah also the revolutionary republicans of Catalonia during the revolution and civil war against the falangistas, but let’s just conveniently ignore the difference between actual syndicalism (anarcho-syndicalism) and the populist facade of fascism, which one was just a perversion of the other, and the fact that real syndicalists, like socialists in general, was the first ones to be targeted as soon as fascists had the power to do so. It was a counter-revolution against the very movement you’re trying to claim they were a part of. It’s just silly.
@@Vamashara socialist fighting other socialist? Yeah, that never happend before (sarcasm). If you said so I'll asume you are also spanish and know a bare minimun about the civil war, so I don't think it's going to be a surprise mentioning that the republicans in the war started fighting each other in the popular front too, the same way bochevicks and menchevicks were also againts each other in Russia and lots of examples more could be made. Also, ERC (a catalonian pro republic party as you know) was also linked to fascism at the time, in fact their anthem was a fascist one
@@Dario-uj6qo no, fascists aren’t socialists, no matter how much you knights in shining armor rides out to whitewash it. Whatever your motivations may be..
“Ok fine I’m a fascist if you insist whatever” OMG THIS DUDE LITERALLY ADMITTED TO BEING A SELF ADMITTED FASCIST NAZI RACIST GENOCIDAL MANIAC WHO WANTS TO KILL ANYONE WHO DOESNT LOOK EXACTLY LIKE HIM!!!!!!”
I've been saying for a while that bigotry isn't technically a component of fascism but a lot of fascists tend to have bigoted views so I'm glad this was pointed out.
Lol, what? Give an example of fascism without an outgroup? Are you fucking stupid? Or just a lowly hate monger trying out a new phrase. Your kind will be eliminated
literally nothing wrong with that... its also not a Fascist concept... thank god. England for the English = Naturalisation and Assimilation in to the English. Which is fundamental to any successful immigration system.
This is a great tabling and guide to what each of the three ideologies are, really Tik, it's appreciate and I'll add this to my list of Tikhistory (and sources included) ideological guides. Also, love that rubbing it in where you call it 'real Socialism'.
Great analysis. I've always wondered why they were so different yet lumped into the same title, as if I lumped American senator Bernie Sanders and Stalin together (or myriad other odd combinations)
Thanks for this TIK. I'm really looking forward to a series on Moseley. My grandfather was a hard line member of the communist party back in the early 30's (he even supported Stalin!), and he literally had running battles with the Blackshirts. Moseley was a fascinating character though, and very few people realise that he was a successful and popular politician before he swung toward fascism. When I was younger, inexperienced, less knowledgeable, and had fire in my veins, I saw myself as a 'Third Positionalist', but not a racist (rest assured that over the years I have moderated my views - a lot!), and thus saw myself as 'enlightened'. This is why your videos are so important and educational. There are very clear distinctions within these movements, and it's important to point this out and understand them rather than lump them all together. In order to truly beat the enemy, we have to understand him. As you rightly said, criticising fascists without prior knowledge can leave us open to correction, and if the person concerned is naive enough, even conversion. As someone who several decades ago was headed down a very radical and dangerous, I can say with assurance, "Trust me, I know".
Communism won 100 million + dead And a trail of Communist inspired groups like the Frankfurt school, "equal rights " feminism Homophobia Xenophobia LGBTQ pedo-ism Abortion in the U S alone accounts for 60 million +
@@mgd8867 Yea like being anti-Semitic, denying the Holocaust. Oh and the segregation of all of Africa, illegalization of interracial marriages... all very popular opinions today... Mosely was a grifter and a racist stop giving this man more credit than he deserves.
Syndicalism to me seems to be an ideology that American leftists seem to push without knowing what it is and thinking is a liberal or Diet Communist ideology which they are completely wrong.
@@TheImperatorKnight Please do a video tackling the "Fascism is Capitalism in decay" argument where they make this claim and then claim that Vladimir Lenin said it was when he never did.
I've learned more about totalitarian ideologies in 2 days of watching these videos than 2 years of world war 2 history at my highschool, thanks TIK, you're a great educator
I can in a modern university, in fact I've heard similar along the lines of "I'm not a right winger but as an academic I must urge you to be more sceptical of social constructivism, it really doesn't hold much water among professional philosophers". The fact is that there are plenty of people who just resort to name calling when ideas they are invested in are refuted.
I quite enjoy watching your videos and hearing your opinions TIK. To be entirely upfront, I normally disagree with significant aspects of the arguments you put forward but I find your approach to argumentation interesting due to your seemingly genuine approach to legitimate historical analysis. It really is refreshing, after consuming much historical brainrot from all kinds of people to see someone actually taking in an opposing view and evaluating it in a calm manner without some kind of shouting match (leave that stuff to the commenters!)
Hey TIK, been curious about this one political movement that I'm not 100% knowledgeable about. If you know anything about the "Iron Guard" in Romania, and what are its differences between mussolini's and hitler's ideologies if any?
Hey TIK, there is actually an American interpretation of syndicalism referred to as industrial unionism. The general idea is instead of multiple different syndicates or corporations you instead have one giant single trade union. Evidently some of the Nazi economists like Feder were influenced by its theorists like Daniel DeLeon. Would be interested to hear what you say. Also, on Mosley’s philosophy I also think that is distinct. Because he has an essay called “the ideology of fascism.” Inside that, he essentially affirms Oswald Spangler’s philosophic doctrine, which is more similar to the traditional school of philosophy than Gentile’s actualism.
I didn't know that. Thank you for the information. Sounds like the Americans want a modern version of the DAF. By the way, someone recommended your content to me as a way to understand Third Positionism more. I'm currently watching another creator on this topic first, but I intend to watch some of your videos in the near future.
If I’m not mistaken Leon was a guy who combined Marxism with Syndicalism, and was of Jewish Descent. Also I would like you to cover Japan’s economic stuff. I know for a fact that Ikki Kita was an awoved agrarian Socialist, and I would like more details on them.
Informative comparison amongst three political movements...accurate evaluating and explaining..yes we live in times where a disclaimers is necessary... good doing ( TIK) channel, and thank you
Probably because they were really successful everywhere they went, and people wanted them dead for it. Can't believe you would agree with the Nazis, when so many great inventions were made by jewish intellectuals while being oppressed.
More people need to understand that politics, and especially the history of such, are nowhere near as cut and dry as tv, movies, and video games portray them as. Those who see those, don't know. And most, haven't seen anything. Almost all are led by the word and ideas of another, then we get the blind leading the blind, or the blind led by the malicious. Those are some of the reasons as to why such revolutions occured, and why we are where we are now. Amazing videos, keep up the good work!
That might explain why there's different takes on this. Reading online, Gentile calls his philosophy both "Actual Idealism" and "Actualism" at different times.
1.I dont think that its unfair to call the british the british. The identity between northern irish, welsh, scot and english is (and has been for some time) disapearing. 2. Hitlers german movement was 100% nationalist if the movement of 1848 with the frankfurt assembely is nationalistic. Hitlers Nation wasnt just a race. It was more a nation WITH a race
Why not do a video on the little-known fascist movement that was *militantly anti-racist* , which is, of course, the Brazilian Integralists. They were also the largest fascist movement outside of Europe.
I highly recommend the art-deco "Richard III" with Sir Ian McKellan: it's basically done as an alternate-history film where Mosley stages a coup and becomes King of England.
I found this video interesting. It answered some technical questions that I had on these matters. I knew practically nothing of Mosley, but this info is very helpful. LOL at 19:15!
Oh no I got to 10 minutes in and you said Democracy is just a word for totalitarianism.....fringe ideological view inserted! And I've not started the economics section yet 🤦♂️ wish me luck!
@@jrton1366 Know any channels covering topics like these, but less well... Fringe? I do enjoy his military his stuff still but it's just a bore when he starts talking economics or politics.
(Does a video about history in YT and has to preface it with the following;) "No, i'm not a vassal of Charlemagne and i don't hate saxons nor i support the genocide of saxons, i just want to talk about his campaigns on the 8th century saxon wars."
I already knew this, people just don't know what fascism is. People always put Mosley, Franco and Mussolini in the same camp as Hitler even though the former three were more moderate compared the extremism of the Nazis. Franco is a prime example of that, he never lost power and generally wasn't even close to being the worst dictator... Non of them are good of course but Hitler has really skewed the view of what fascism actually is, Mussolini even today is admired by a lot of Italians
@@foodchewer People just don't know the meaning. Antifa are closer to fascism than literally anyone they protest against but they're so clueless that they have no idea what they're doing is what they claim to be against.
I wouldn't even classify Franco as fascist, he was nationalist and anti-marxist primarily and while he did ally with fascists in the civil war, he also allied with monarchists and the church, against a similarly politically diverse alliance. He mostly just wanted to ensure that Spain did not fall into the hands of communists, he was surprisingly hands-off with the governing of Spain.
I've really been looking forward to you talking about Mosley. I know very little about him. Living in Canada, the history about him feels a little more close to home.
Another fantastic vid as usual. Tell me TIK, have you ever considered covering the 2nd Sino-Japanese War? Its a front in WW2 that is almost completely forgotten in the west, and the Japanese were just as brutal towards civilians as the Germans were.
15:58 Hey TIKhistory! Im from germany and i wanted to mention that its really important to write the Ö Ä Ü like in ,,Völkisch". A word can change its meaning for example: Kuchen = Cake Küchen = plural of kitchen the correct way to write it if ur unable to get the letter u can also go: oe (ö), ue (ü), ae (ä) btw loved the video !
Very helpful video, loved it a lot! Semitism is just for people in the Middle East. Hitler was not just against Jews, but also anyone from that general area. 👍
It seems TIK is confusing "nation" with "state". Hitler viewed his "nation" as the German speaking peoples, therefore he was a nationalist. For someone who goes back to etymology and 18th century usage to confirm that Hitler was a "socialist" it is odd that TIK would use the 21st century common usage for "nation".
Nation come from the latin word Natio meaning birth into or race. Nationalism has an ethnic/tribal dimension. I don’t mean that as a pejorative its just is what it means.
I've watched your all videos about national socialism and fascism. After comparison with other videos about this, I must admit that: - Your videos are of the highest quality and are objectively the closest to the "core" of these ideologies. You are basing DIRECTLY on nazi/fascist books, not some Umberto Ecco and other speculative theories. - Your videos at first were hard to accept because I was taught that these ideologies are totally different in school and later it was enforced while discussing with other people. Yet, after giving it some thought, your perspective is more explainable from either historical, personal, or just rational levels (as Mussolini was definitely not far-right before becoming Duce and A.H. was leading the national SOCIALIST party). I just want to thank you for your work. I also recommended these videos to my friends and random people, Let's hope this will give them a different perspective, at least. Sadly, a lot of people just don't want to watch "political stuff", as they call it. But ignorance is bliss I guess.
@@friedrichbaeker Indeed, I am also ignorant in this matter. I only tried to read "Mein kampf" but it was very unwelcoming lecture (just bad writing) + the best way to read it was to do it in the original german language which I sadly do not (yet) operate fluently. Knowing as much as TIK about it would be just too much time, so let's call it "rational ignorance" from my part to compare different thinkers who already worked over this topic. TIK gives us references, I checked some and they were legit, which proves he at least is not making up his theories.
thats just the sad truth, we do not have that much time to read "original books" ourselves. And with my knowledge, I admit I will not be able to understand too much.
@@globaldemand3100 I mean it does require a neutral attitude to comprehend because of all the brainwashing, that is fair. It requires a whole picture to appreciate it tbh. But I mean books dont take months to read it you actively read books
@@friedrichbaeker I completely agree with you both about problems with being objective and the fact that books are not THAT time-consuming. Of course, specialist, scientifical books are much more demanding, especially at first. I will explain why I decided to compare different youtube experts rather than read books: 1) They already have vast knowledge. I can compare their views on the topics much more quickly. 2) I am aware of my lack of knowledge which is why I first want to know what wiser people have to say. Thank you for your well-deserved criticism. At the same time I consider my decision to first watch an expert's podcast about a topic justified: it is a time-efficient method to get myself introduced to the topic. I am only starting my journey but both the TIK videos and Your comment did motivate me to also do my own research.
You should do a short video comparing Dolfuss, Franco and Salazar, the Catholic advocates of Corporativism. I believe that despite their statism, were not totalitarian such as Hitler and Mussolini, who were athiestic. I haven't seen the full video yet but Mosley prior to founding the BUF, was a member of the Labour Party, the same one that elected the notorious anti-semite Corbyn as leader in 2015. Coincidence? I think not!
"Mosley... was a member of the Labour Party" Mosley was in the Conservatives for a couple years, then went Liberal, then went Labour for about 8 years, before founding the New Party, and then the BUF. So the counter will be that Mosley wasn't a real socialist, he was just an opportunist, and his moving across party lines "proves" that he didn't have a solid position. The problem with that narrative is that the Conservatives were the old Left-wing party in the mid 1800s. Because the Liberals embraced socialism ("New Liberalism"), they went from the Right to the Left. So all the Parties that Mosley was in were Left-wing, and Mosley was disappointed that they weren't radical enough to actually implement the socialist policies that they were preaching about. This is why I said in the video that he was probably an Actualist - he didn't care about the Real, he wanted to implement the Actual.
@@arcadeoutpost a) the majority of billionaires are white non-jewish b) the latter is a strawman, i have not seen any actual examples of such a thing happening
Judging from their flags, adolf was more a wind power type of guy whereas benito believed in the tried and true wood as fuel method, oswald seemingly adhered to the general concept of electricity.
ahahahah🤣
Alex with the actual _observation_ !!! XD nice !
Oh, so thats what he was doin with all them people, makin windmills.
makes sense why Germany took the Netherlands
based comment
Not a Fascist, not a Nazi, not a Racist........sad that we live in times where a disclaimer is necessary.
What he said.
The reason why TIK has to have a disclaimer is because commies (and useful idiots) talk a lot of sh1t. It is apparent that the leftist gaslighters seek power over others more than they value understanding.
It’s disturbing because that means the people doing the censoring believe these ideas are so potent that the mention of them is enough to convince people of them, unless you explicitly disapprove the Holocaust
You don’t need to put a disclaimer like that in videos about Mao, Lenin, Stalin, war criminal dictator George Bush and tony Blair etc
Shows you who the system fears and what they are trying to hide and who they don’t fear and don’t try to censor.
This disclaimer wont convince socialists
Most of the way through Peaky Blinders, currently on chapter 5 with Mosley as the antagonist. He's made a couple comments about fascism and national socialism which came off as modern misunderstandings of the eras ideologies. So, glad you are commenting on this. Perfect timing really 🤣
Yeah I watched peaky blinders and they basically just say fascist are all the same even if they come from completely different countries with opposing views. Like Moseley is working with the IRA who want to break away from Union which he wants to protect.
No way really? Well that's just embarrassing. Yea I can imagine it now being about skin colour probably too which is American racism.
That's the BBC for you.
@@liammiskell3522 it's not a bbc show...
The excuse is that modern audiences cannot understand the realities of the past. Well, they would if they were taught about them properly - but that might cause the audience to doubt certain modern ideologies. Can't have that.
Thumbs up from Germany. Love your analyses. You make compelling arguments and show facts to support them. Lots of infos the average person doesn't get to hear in school. We definitely need more objectivity and less ideological subjectivity in our infos.
I think that "Ethno-nationalism" would be the best word to describe Hitler's politics, because he wanted all of the Germans, no matter what 'nationality', under one nation
That is what "Völkisch" means. The policy of the NSDAP under Hitler was a policy of "German people in the german nation". Hitler was against christianity, where else Mussolini cooperated and supported the catholic church.
Not even ethno-nationalism, more like racial nationalism. He wanted to assimilate memebers of other ethnic groups considered "Aryan" like the Nordic peoples and the dutch into the Greater German Reich.
ethnonationalism would imply that hitler would respect austrian independence from germany, which was in reality the first thing militarily the NSADP did when in power - morph austria into the reich, without firing a shot.
"Ethno-Imperialism" would fit better I think.
@@AleXoEx0 It doesn't. Nationalism in its most refined definition means that a group of people (nation) should be organized politically under a common authority and jurisdiction, aka a state. Such a country is called a nation state. Whether nation equals or should equal ethnicity is unresolved really.
We need more people's like this that explain things without being afraid of UA-cam TOS.
The biggest issue isn't UA-cam's guidelines, it's the people enforcing it. Some of them are sensible, and some of them are not. It just seems luck of the draw whether you get a free pass or are purged from existence.
@@TheImperatorKnight The problem is the folks doing the enforcement are third-party non-native speakers sitting in some sweatshop far away from Soy HQ
Turtle on that Tik, DPA, History Legends grind
@@TheImperatorKnight why do you use the awd as a modern example from what I researched about them and what people like them have said before they are just satanist wannabes of course I do not support any of these believes but still whats up with that
@@TheImperatorKnight the worst part of it is, at least a third of them are AI's. I've had 24 hour shadowbans a lot recently.
Post uploading, I think a good alternative word to “Volkisch” is “Racialism”, which I’ve heard one Third Positionist use.
And due to the nature of this video, I wasn’t able to fit the Patreon and SubscribeStar lists into it. So I apologise about that. I’m hopefully going to make another video this week, and if I manage to do so I’ll make sure the names are in there.
I was kind of surprised you didn't use that term since it popped into my head and fit. Possibly "Ethnocentrism" could have also fit.
Yes, I think racialism works better.
Yes "völkisch" comes from Volk which means the people. And the people and the race aren't necessarily the same so racialism is the better term.
Perhaps it could be described as "International-Nationalism".
Issue is racialism is often just used to mean racism when its not that so Volkisch works better even if it of an older time
It'd be interesting to compare also Franco (who, I believe, is very different from the others) and Primo de Rivera's Falange (which is much closer with their national-syndicalism). I'm not sure if you've done a video on this already
I just pointed out national syndicalism as another example of syndicalism, but yeah, he was his own thing, more willing to take allies and related to catholithism and tho authoritarian he wasn't as radical as the others
José Antonio wanted an agrarian syndicalist Spain, where as Ramiro Ledesma Ramos wanted something more similar to what Stalin was doing with mass industrialisation and central planning
Antonio de Oliveira Salazar and the Estado Novo in Portugal would be interesting too
He should do one comparing fascism, national socialism, falangism, British unionism, and Soviet VFP/VSN industrial falangism
Corneliu Codreanu is another one for the list
I'd love to see an analysis of the Japanese military regime from WWII next.
i second this
Yes that would be nice. However contrary to popular belief the Showa state was not fascism, even with Hideki Tojo as the prime minister.
While I admire the nationalistic goals of that state, it did not meet basic core tenants necessary to be considered fascist. As someone who has spent years reading fascist literature, and a supporter of it, I hope people are not still confused about where the Japanese system in WWII lies.
This is not what you're looking for per se but it is an interesting watch nonetheless.
ua-cam.com/video/voo0CpPcE0c/v-deo.html
@@user-pn3im5sm7k Japan was just bringing back samuraism and war fetishesism under the guise of something "fascist".
@@shelbyspeaks3287 Nationalism or honoring past warriors is not something special to fascism, and can manifest in any ideology.
No need to bring a word thats irrelevant to Japan. In an ideal world people would stop using words they don't know the meaning of.
You should review portuguese fascism during the "estado novo" regime" because its often overlooked by people, and actually had some unique things
Sounds interesting. Can you tell what makes it unique?
Brasil Getúlio Vargas first.
@@handroids1981 it kind of just took elements from other types of fascism, it made the state really religious unlike other forms of fascism, and although still opressive it was usually preatty mild when it came to opressing the people
salazar wasnt a fascist
@@enzathecomedian6759 OP should`ve been more precise: he/she was referring to Brazilian fascism.
I'm glad you are keeping up the "fight" against suppressing human history. If we dont know how these things happen then we could not prevent them from being repeated. Thank you !
Suppressed how exactly?
@@TheMrFu Tearing down statues would be one of the most visible. Erasing names off of buildings.
@@greyone40 not relevant to the video subject matter
"We defeated the wrong enemy"
-General Patton
@@gigachad6885 Any Western leader would have thought similar, indeed even before #WW2 Churchill and others thought so. Not forgetting the Russian civil War up to 1923 which saw UK, USA, German and 6 other nations fighting on Russian soil. 🇬🇧 #ourhistory
It's really sad that we as people can't learn about or talk about our history without disclosing that we are not racists fascists or nazis in today's day and age
That’s because of woke
NA/EU moment
@@TexWashingtonwhy unfortunately
@@whatda7705 because nobody likes Nazis
It is handy that the 'Woke' postmodernists put so much effort into screaming at us about their monopoly on tolerance, and supressing any questioning or disagreement. Otherwise, we might have mistaken them for just another mob of murderous irrational totalitarian ideologues.
You already deserve a like just for that thumbnail. Well made, brother.
Thank you! Terri does a good job with the thumbnails :)
@@TheImperatorKnight Hello. I really like your Videos. Could you make a video about variantes of marxian socialism like stalinism, maoism or trotskyism? Would be great! Keep up the good work.
Fun fact: Oswald Mosley's son Max Mosley was the president of the FIA (highest governing body for motorsports) from 1993 to 2009
Apparently by the mid-20th century the Mosley name was tainted by mustache man’s trip to Paris (WW2), so Max abandoned politics and went to a field (motorsport) where his dad’s name didn’t have baggage
So?
@@the1knifepro169I don't think he was making a statement about that mate get off the defensive hahahaha
It's fun when I've been called a fascist, and then I simply ask what a fascist is and am met with corn syrup stares. ( I went to a candice owens event ).
They wouldnt recognize one if he explained his ideology
And remember, all through the summer of 2020 "antifa" was trying to convince us that the fascists must be the good guys.
@@mark12strang58 They might even agree with him.
My favourite answer is it doesn't matter what fascism was when it was created it matters only that it means racist today
I tend to say, "Sorry, I'm pro-Capitalism, not Syndicalism."
I love that you put your references at the bottom of the screen, ive never seen anyone else do that but it should definitely be standard practice. Very transparent.
"Democracy is another word for Totalitarianism." Good for you for putting these challenging ideas out there. I have been slowly gravitating toward the Mises view (or at least learning more about it) and you make me all the more interested.
Yeah, I'm not against the idea of freedom etc, I just don't think "democracy" is what people think it is. The American Founders created a Republic for a reason, not a democracy.
And interestingly, Mises was pro-democracy (at least in his early books). People accuse me of "just believing Mises", but this is one element of Mises that I do disagree with.
@@TheImperatorKnight So many things that we're taught to feel a certain way about from a young age are not what they seem, democracy isn't necessarily synonymous with freedom, feminism was never about equality, fascism though always terrible isn't necessarily synonymous with racism , communism was not always necessarily synonymous with being "woke" or socially liberal (for example, homophobia in the Soviet Union and Castro's Cuba, racism in the 20th century Australian communist party).
@@TheImperatorKnight A Republic and a democracy are not mutually exclusive subjects. Also it seems like you're presupposing that the original ideology of the American Founding fathers was correct when back then Senators weren't even elected and you could only vote if you were a white landowner. Conflating the idea of Totalitarianism with Democracy is just dangerous and misinformed. Don't get me wrong, Authoritarian Democracies do exist but thats not the same as Democracies just plainly being Totalitarian.
@@johnnyjohn-johnson7738 Social issues like lgbt rights weren't really what made someone "woke" back in the day. It was mainly anti-colonialism and feminism. Not defending the Soviet Union or Castro's political treatment of LGBT people but historical context matters.
@@jamesmcpherson8599 I can see where you're coming from, I am not arguing whether the fact that Communists were progressive for their time, I'm wrestling with the general assumption that being homophobic or racist makes you a fascist, because both the fascist and communist movements were extremely big tent in the beginning when it comes to social views, we had extremely conservative (and often racist) Australian and Chinese communists and extremely progressive British fascists.
For example one fascist group in the UK was lead by Rotha Lintorn-Orman, who was a woman with an emo haircut who was involved in the early 20th century equivalent to the "swingers" movement (sex parties) and wanted to get more women into politics (she was also rumored to be bisexual), she also started a female version of Mosely's fascist defense force (honestly she was so progressive that I can't help but wonder if she was a 2000s hipster who ended up in the past somehow.)
On the other hand, John Curtain was an Australian Prime Minister was involved in the Communist movement before joining the Labor Party, he was a devout and proud white nationalist and did not see it as conflicting with his socialism, in fact he blamed capitalism for non white people moving to Australia and believed that they could peacefully go back to where they came from once worldwide socialism becomes a thing. in Spain there were some trade unions in the Republic who did not women to get involved in the work force.
Point is, being a fascist or communist does not automatically mean you have a particular set of social views.
Excellent breakdown. Unfortunately the meaning behind fascism/ nazism is being obscured and diluted today. Clear definitions like this are absolutely vital to understanding history and ideologies.
problem is many people aren’t going to take the time to learn politics or sociology as they aren’t compulsory subjects (in the uk). i think it leaves people unaware of how politicians deliberately polarise their society by stirring up things like nationalism. so many ideologies intersect as well so people are mislabelling a lot.
Why are these criticized as bad ideologies when Democracy is perfectly ok with race replacement and sterilizing children to be another gender?
All of them were anti-wars and against bolshevism and for national sovereignty. Pretty simple. Fascism and NS was a defence against bolshevism so it had to be an authoritarian state. Europe saw what revolution jews did in Russia and knew that that same bloody genocidal revolution was about to be imposed on Europe by USSR
it's about saving your people
They have been for a very long time. They mean nothing now
What’s interesting is I am doing this exact kind of research, compare, and contrast for the civil war 👏🏻
Keep up what you’re doing brother!
Therapist: Mosely without a mustache can't hurt you.
Mosely without a mustache: 10:53
💀💀
This is interesting. I didn't know about the distinctions between their ideologies and what makes them different from each other. Can we have a part two to this, but with Falangism, Rexism, and the Iron Guard of Romania?
One on the Ustase could be good too. Apparently they were so bad they freaked out the Nazis.
Definitely should, also to know more about the American “democratic socialism” and the rise of socialism in the post world war 1 era and pre world war 1 era
@@magdalenusrex346 the ustase were like national socialism bumped up to the max they basically just killed whoever they felt like its like if the dirlewanger brigade was a whole army
Maybe add the Action Française and Vichy Govt too!
@@ancapgrandscribe9546 pre-WW2 there was also William Pelley and his “Christian Commonwealth” here in the States. A mix Socialism and a ethno-religious ideology. The guy even ran for president back in the day.
Back in 1983 as a college student I had the greatest "a ha" moment in my life when I realized that Italian, British, and American "fascism" was in fact, an expression of an older syndicalism and that the bedrock of this would be the "trade unions" or syndicates. This can still be seen in the US economy and political system in many ways, except that the "syndicates" are now deep pocketed hedge and venture corporations.
In that vein, modern China is nothing but a huge syndicate with a communist leadership structure. It’s not a Leninist system.
Hitler's campaign speech in Eberswalde is interesting. He definitely spoke out against Syndicalism explicitly there.
@bustercrabbe8447 The United States is not a mixed economy. The US has a long history of government and big public corporations working in tandem to ensure that the means of production remain in the hands of large monopolistic corporations that are subsidized with public funds to ensure that no meaningful competition can spring forth. It's socialism mired under the guise of capitalism and well meaning government
The Fourth Industrial Revolution is nothing more than the Fourth Reich.
The old term for now known as "political capitalism" was "mercantilism" which existed since the late-18th and early-19th century
Would you be interested in making a video on the differences between syndicalism and socialism? I've never heard the term syndicalism before and I am a bit fuzzy on the distinctions between the economic systems
Yeah, thinking about it, this might be necessary. I mean, they're close enough where I would say that syndicalism is just another variant of socialism, but I know that explanation won't be good enough for some people.
my understanding of the nuances is rather limited since i never really went down the Marxist theoretical rabbit hole and have only superficial knowledge but as far as i do understand them socialism is more or less the umbrella term/political family of . Syndicalism is one branch of that which focuses on the trade unions as the leading and organizing forms for ushering in the workers revolution. This form mostly comes from states where the industrial revolution already entrenched itself and thus workers movmements were entrenched as well. By contrast, Lenin's variant of socialism focused on the enlightened role of the avant-garde political party as the nexus for generating the revolution since Tsarist Russia had a mostly peasant population, not a lot of industrial workers, and thus they needed to be "showed the way" into class consciousness. Mao's socialism would be Lenin's flipped upside down as Mao thought that peasants were the leading class to communism, not industrial workers.
TLDR version: It's all kind of the same. They just have constant schisms on the subjects of who's in charge, how best to do the revolution and govern after to usher in utopian communism and who the true "socialist" class is. TIK will probably do a much better job going over the details if he makes the video
P.S. for those that know the memes: Juan Posada's socialism is nuclear alien space dolphin comrades :)a
@@Skelli2 Syndicalism is much more anarchist than socialism (not the umbrella term), the worker still owns the means of production but instead of owning all the means of production by proxy of the state they own their immediate means of production through their union and mutually assist other unions, they can all be part of bigger unions or even just one really big union but everything is supposed to be very direct-democratic and "stateless". But again it's an idea born from anarchism so there will be 20 people giving you 26 different definitions.
@@mnk9073 thanks for the answer and adding more knowledge
@@mnk9073 The closest forms Syndicalism I can think of would be the stock market the other would be a Partnership, or a Sole Trader(defined under UK business law, basically what type of legal entity a business is). Those are really the closest you can get to in terms of practical and functional forms Syndicalism.
Great series. I no longer think I am alone as I have come to understand these movements.
9:50 This is an extremely good point. When I was younger I personally went through a period where I became much more radical in my beliefs precisely because I had felt betrayed and lied to. It adds an emotional catalyst to whatever you're discovering, basically amplifying the effect. When someone comes along and gives you the answer you're looking for, you're far more likely to buy into other things because he too, in your view, has seen the truth and suddenly the crazy stuff doesn't seem so crazy anymore. If you lie to people, even if your intentions are good, you are setting them up for failure.
This hits close to home. I'd grown up in a very multicultural environment in school + other places, and it caused deep insecurity within me during quite a bit of it. I was the white kid with no culture to show, or wear. I can't remember what set it off, but I 'discovered' my British heritage and became wildly nationalistic for Britain as a young teen - I seemed to focus on the 18th century and British Empire a lot. I'm not racist at all, and was aware of the faults of the British Empire... but it just made me so inexplicably happy to have a feeling of belonging and pride, knowing that my ancestors were a part of a 'great' nation. I'm not nationalistic towards Britain very much anymore, but it's always going to be a small part of my past I won't forget. You're right when you say it's emotional. My personal experience was mostly harmless, but definitely a bit of an obsession for a while.
@@laurac.405Just out of interest, why aren‘t you a „nationalist“ as you described anymore? It would genuinely interst me.
@@Arvga8662 I'm not entirely sure. You see, I feel nationalistic for what _was_ , but when it comes to what Britain is now... I just can't bring myself to the same feeling. I was like that for a bit about Germany too (which have roots in as well) - until I realised that this image I had of Germany in my head wasn't real, and that Germany's also 'westernised' and 'modernised' just as much as the United States. It kind of crushed me, and so the nationalism I once felt dimmed down a lot. Hope that helps, some.
@@laurac.405 It does, thank you very much. I know how you're feeling and I can't blame you, it's tough.
But I don't think we should give up hope. What once was, has been written down numerous times, so it can be again (, it's not lost forever). And even though everything seems lost right now...I'd like to think that we can become 'great' once again. I think of it in a spiritual way: 'become who you are' (who you once were). I don't think we should forget our great potential.
On the other hand, maybe I am enthusiastic because I'm still young (not a teen anymore though). We'll see how things get.
All the best to you and your future plans.
quit yappin
This is by far one of the best videos on this site. I've tried to explain this exact thing, that fascism and nazism are different things. But people still belive that they are the same. And that fascism isn't inherently racist.
This video is fantastic. It should be shown in all schools tbh. But having said that, still your last sentence is technically wrong. You meant "(originally) racist." From 1938 onwards, you see openly racists laws and discourse in Italy.
@@ramirosotto yeah. I completely agree. But fascism as an ideology is not a racist ideology to begin with.
National socialism isn't racist either
@@Swedishoutlaw nazis flocking HARD to some of these comments
@@friendlywobbly9903 We do 😎
I know it's incredibly niche and there might not be a lot about it, but, being Romanian, I think I'd love to see another video comparing Codreanu or Antonescu's ideas on fascism with these three. Awesome video, love to see someone finally actually defining fascism as something other than "it's racist don't ask more questions!"
Yeah I'd like to see that too. The Romanian Fascists tended to be more religious right? As in Catholic? They were clericals?
Marcus Garvey himself wasn’t a fascist, but held sympathy towards Mussolini and spoke fondly of fascism, even comparing the Italian movement to his own.
Excellent video. It's weird, on the surface, to say we need more education in areas like this because of an assumed danger of people then adopting the ideology, but as you said one needs to know what one is debating to refute it.
Yet communism that killed way more people, is never talked about, amazing right?
Education and empathy are the best weapons against fascism 💪🏽
"Know thy enemy"
A Smart Ancient Fellow
Good to see you having fun with the "Real socialism" part. It's relieving to see you relaxed about it after years of fuming.
Yeah, I've given up trying to persuade them. I'll still fire off the odd broadside, but the videos are now made for those who wish to listen, not those who cannot.
19:19 "Real socialism" should not be to describe economy of the Third Reich. That term is already taken (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_socialism). The Real socialism is an official term coined by Brezhnev USSR to describe "comunism in real life". The Real socialism was the final state on a way to implement comunist regime. It was "as close to communism as we can get", nothing could be improved and it was the reason why the whole east block froze in late 60s till it fell down in 89...
Some of us experienced the Real socialism (or ream communism?) first hand...
@@jkotekvolnycz you do realise this is supposed to be done for comedic purposes, right?
@@jkotekvolnycz - Oh, jeez, of COURSE there's going to be at least one - and no doubt multiple - socialist philosophies that officially call themselves "Real Socialism", but are only "Real Socialism" for as long as they are being tried, and once they go completely defunct, then "Real Socialism isn't REAL socialism - real socialism STILL hasn't been tried, which is why we need to try Real Socialism again, but really try harder!"
@@jkotekvolnycz There's at least six (possibly 7 but not sure, Globalism has elements of Socialism) different variations of Socialism who claim to be the real Socialism mate. Marxism, Maoism, National Socialism, British Socialism, Cultural Marxism ( race/ gender/ identity based socialism currently called 'woke' in west) in current day west, Democratic Socialism and Globalism.
I'm definitely missing a few variations from Cold War era.
Tanks for sticking to historical analysis!
I support this comment with the ferocity of a Tiger.
I get it !
Oh, he abandoned *that* a while ago, in favour of telling lies that made Nazis look better.
Remember, if you keep private profits from keeping a war running, Luddendorf goes 'Good for you' and Marx goes 'That's not socialism !'
Love the video mate! Very concise and watchable but can tell you’ve done your due diligence research-wise. subbed 😎
Hey Tik, I'm really glad you're going to do videos on Mosley and especially look forward to seeing the reactions that "certain" persons may have on them.
Keep the work, you're doing great as always.
It's unfortunate that you have to leave a disclaimer like that, I thought it was obvious you were simply educated people on it and not supporting it. I wish I could say people just say you are those things to try and justify their own beliefs but something tells me people REALLY think you're those things. Sad times we live in.
Keep up the good work TIK, you're amazing and the quality of your videos is amazing, great research and factual. Thanks for all you do and all you deal with
Post ww2 we live under strong political repression.
No more free speech than Nazi germany or USSR, the only difference is different speech is censored/allowed and the regime doesn’t have to be as brutal since it has basically consolidated power in the entire western world besides 3rd world countries and I guess Russia and China too.
It sucks that you have to start with a disclaimer, all the more so because the radical left will just ignore it anyway. It is still smart to do so, just for legal reasons or the Mighty Google Algorithm.
The critics have been accusing me of holding all sorts of views, and they're just pulling it out of thin air. It's sad that they're so intellectually dishonest.
@TIKhistory I remember awhile back I had a lengthy debate with someone who was a stalinist in Australia (little bit weird). He was terrible, supported things like the holodomor and stalins purges but I digress. I remember debating with him about hitler and national socialism, I argued it was a more left wing ideology and he disagreed (obviously). I eventually referred him to your video "Hitlers socialism" and before even looking he said "he's just a racist trying to get away from his inherent nazism" I mean....wow, all that from just the thumbnail lol.
@@TheImperatorKnight Might some critics be so intellectually vacuous that they have nothing to which to be honest?
If possible at all TIK could you do a video on Germany's relationship with middle eastern nations during WW2? love your content and wanted to ask this for awhile.
They liked iranians. Somewhat arabs. Not so much turks. And not sure about egypt
@@PyatPree88 Goofy comment. They support an Iraqi revolt, had a Free Arabian Legion and had support from the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. They met with Pan-Turkic leaders and created Turkish military divisions. Egyptians are just arabs. Hitler liked them all like he liked all races
@@PyatPree88 They had good relationships with turks, a lot of them volunteered to enter the german army and the SS
I'd love to see a video on this topic. Very interesting.
🇸🇾 Especially
Tik, thanks to you I am now more knowledgeable about the subject of early to mid 20th century history than I have ever been before. You've also helped imform and shape my current position as a free market libertarian, exposing me to the likes of Milton Friedman, Ludwig von Mises and Ayn Rand and now I can't stop reading about them and their work, you have my thanks. please don't stop making these videos and keep telling the truth! 👍
Thank you for dismissing actualism and other Hegelian nonsense out of hand. Just thank you. Oh my God
I'm almost curious enough to hope there IS a future video on that gobbledygook, but I have a feeling it's a "be careful what you wish for" kind of topic that I wouldn't wish on anyone, least of all myself!
Imagine being so bad, someone being a more coherent version of you is marx.
Why do all of the worst regimes in the 20th century tend to link back to Hegel? Yet neo-Hegelians out here today ready to do it all again with no real pushback.
actualism is an analytic philosophy hegel was continental philosopher stop talking about shit you know nothing about
@@janehrahan5116 marx was critic of hegel his philosphy was way different stop talking about philosophies you know nothing about
Tik, I feel humbled after watching your political and economic videos. You absolutely blew my mind by just going back to the simple objective truth of public vs private. Keep it up.
I dont know anything abt this channel i didnt even finish the video but as a historian i love how you provide sources for everything you say. Just because of that you just received another sub good job 👍
This video is so informative, I have learnt a lot! Thank you very much
I would love a video going over the various kinds of communism and comparing them. Trosky vs Stalin, or other Communist/leftist movements during WW2, POUM , CNT, or other different ideologies under the same "umbrella"
If by "leftist" you mean jew, then yes.
@@unclesamowitz9922this comment tells all you need to know about what this guys garbage takes attracts. Well I guess someone’s gotta scrape the bottom of the intellectual barrel.
@@Vamashara You say while completely failing to refute that the "leftists" are almost exclusively jews.
@@VamasharaLow IQ comment can't deal with facts
@@AverageAlien Deal with what facts
Hi Tik, you commented on the fact that it was not real 'Nationalism' for Hitler to have incorporated the Austrian Germans into the Reich, and if this was the case, he would have maintained the Austrian nation; could one not argue that the origination of the word 'Nation' is from the Roman 'Natal' - to be born in Latin or 'Ethnos' in ancient greek, meaning ethnicity. I believe that it would logically follow that seeing as Hitler believed the Austrians to be Racially and thus Ethnically (by birth) German, the Austrian state was simply a guise to divide the German brotherhood, like wise with his views on the Nordic nations and England; as well as combining the German minorities in the other nations of Europe to create the German ethno state (the Nation of Germany in its entirety) and expand its borders by conquest and enslavement of the 'other'. I would argue that in this context, there is no difference between the term of 'Racialism' or 'Nationalism' as both are determined by one's birth 'Ethnic group' and 'Race' to Hitler or any other person on Earth for most of history would be synonymous; hence I state my claim that Hitler was indeed a German Nationalist.
I was thinking the same thing. "Nation" at the very least connotes "Race" as opposed to simply "state" which does not.
Race and Ethnicity are not one and the same.
Austrians are ethnically germans in every way. Genetics, culture, linguistics, history etc.
@@BigHenFor In which capacity? A race is a group of people with shared characteristics (e.g. facial features or skin tone) which are highly prevalent within the group, passed down via genetic legacy; ethnicity is very much the same, as I explain, it depends of the circumstance of your birth to which ethnicity you belong (ethnos and natal) and thus it follows that you must share blood and a genetic lineage with a specific ethnic group to be considered a part of it; this is how nations have been determined for centuries; they are an extended kinship if you will, for instance even in England, People would refer to themselves as 'of the Anglo-Saxon race', which is synonymous with English ethnicity, in the context of Hitler's views concerning ethnic Germans, i think my point stands rather robust against your statement and no counter arguement is given, please elaborate...
@@MartinMartinm I agree, having been to Austria and Germany many times, the only noticeable difference between the two is a dialect and, otherwise the people look the same it may aswell be another Lände.
Am I the only one who loves the social political videos Tik does rather than the tanks? Keep up the great work and I agree 💯 👍
I mean I love both, also the economic side to WW2 made me a lot more interested in the naval aspect
Videos about tanks and frontlines with divisional emblems are cool. And probably bring in the bacon for TIK. But the social economic vids, and especially Hitler being a socialist, are his greatest contribution to history. If it manages to become mainstream it will do far more for his reputation then endless hours of Battlestorm Stalingrad.
Nope, you're definitely not the only one
I see the merit of both, and I don't see why I should be restricted to doing one or another. I do think I have to strike a balance though.
Ive never seen Tiks tank videos, love his political and molitary videos though. Tik covers so many things that we can all find something to disagree with him on but Im 95% in agreement. And Im probably wrong on some of the things I disgree on😬
Mosley used the rising tide of fascism to propel himself into the public eye but his core policies definitely differed a lot. He cared about political corruption and where national spending went.
Yeah, he definitely used "facism" to gain popularity in the public eyes and also bc facism was becoming a thing for other countries. That why he went there.
These are GREAT ! You're an absolute legend and have the best history lessons for teaching actually history and sense about political ideologies. Just amazing stuff .
TIK is the gift sent to help the entire humanity. I'm not sarcastic, he did more than thousands of intellectuals.
Would be interesting if you also reviewed the fascist ideologies of less known parties, such as the Falange or the Iron Legion.
>also [...] less known parties
>the Falange
This video is on mosley... Is the most notable wing of the only fascist regime to survive ww2 really generally less known than a party that never gained power?
Or the Mexican syndicalists or Brazilian integralists. Ba'athism in the Arab world took a lot from fascism too
@@theultimatefreak666 Well neither did the Falange really. Before the Civil War they received 0,6% of the votes which was pathetic even for fringe facist parties. And during/after the civil war they fused with the Karlists and became nothing more than a rubber stamp for Francos military dictatorship.
Spain was a Military Dictatorship with certain facist attributes but not actual facist regime. And Franco def wasnt one.
@@theultimatefreak666 It honestly is in the Anglosphere.
@@theultimatefreak666 Mosley is far more popular in the Anglosphere than the falangists (btw the falangists were never really a big political party )
Fascist has definitely become a throw around term and seems to have lost all meaning, similar to the use of the word communist and its use in America during the Cold War era
I would disagree with you the Soviets literally funded coups and ideological warfare all across the globe what do you think the far left of current America is a product of? The kgb use to pay off and sometimes themselves would become college professors to spread communist ideas in america the hippie movement all that was a project of social subversion from the kgb all those who “fear mongered” about communism were completely correct communism of the tyrannical kind almost took over the entire globe it’s just that a lot of people who sympathize with the communist utopian vision are desperate to cling to the idea that you can tip toe on the edge and adopt the good parts while avoiding the negative so if someone generalizes communism they get angry about it
Yea with all the media propaganda there truly is a modern day "fascist scare" going around. Everyone who disagrees must be a fascist.
I've always found that "My struggle" is a weak translation. It's stronger than that. A kampf is literally a battle.
Well yea in German “Kampf” translates to fight/struggle/battle it depends on context like for “mien kampf” I would say it would translate to struggle but in something like “panzerkampfwagen” it wouldn’t translate too “armored struggle vehicle” it would be “armored fighting/battle vehicle”
@@-Benito_Swagolini- In Dutch it is translated to “Mijn strijd”: “My Fight”. I think struggle is a bit underwhelming.
@@robindemeyer8960 I agree a fight is a struggle both work
TIK, I have a lot of respect for you and you’ve opened my eyes on many things. Thanks you.
Sorry I said thanks instead of thank. Thanks for the heart though.
There was similar movements in France during the interwar period, i should try to take a deeper look at that.
Great work as always !
We are living in the most boastfully ignorant times I am aware of. People are peppered with labels, insults, and slurs on a daily basis. Yet often the person who is doing the insulting has no idea what the words mean, and the object of the insult is often unaware of the reason he is being insulted. If you attempt to remedy the situation by educating the ignorant party you are almost invariably shouted down by a gaggle of the ignorant yet arrogant.
Oh i don't think we do. There is probably as much ignorats today as there was at any point in history. I don't see a reason why there should be more ignorants today than in the past. What is more likely is that ignorants of the past are forgoten by history as they are not worth mentioning.
@@Alaryk111 They were also a lot less visible. There was no internet permanently and widely disseminating their ignorance.
I can say little but, alas. The sad part is that those who are well versed in this are usually surrounded by those who aren't. Those knowledgeable are then forced to either remain silent forever, or try argue with those who refuse to learn and get back lashed, even called the labels they were explicitly teaching against.
oh no, kids are so dumb these days!!11
@@Alaryk111hat’s the problem! Stop looking back! And don’t use that line we must so we won’t forget! Yes people are more ignorant today than ever before.
Literally yesterday I thought, "I sure hope TIK comes out with the video on Mosley soon" and you delivered, awesome.
Could you maybe do a video on the different kinds of National Socialism throughout Europe? For example in the Netherlands, there was the “National Socialist Movement in the Netherlands (NSB)” which was wildly different from Hitler’s NSDAP. Although information on this can be a bit scarce, it’s incredibly interesting.
If you're interested in the Dutch situation in the interbellum, if it comes to Fascist and National Socialist parties, you might want to read the first volume of "Het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden in de Tweede Wereldoorlog" by Loe de Jong, named 'Voorspel". It gives a good overview of the numerous parties including the NSB ofcourse. I didnt really dive into the NSB history because its frontman Mussert lacked all charisma and was married to his aunt. (!)
Even in the NSDAP there were different factions, the main being the more pro-Russian National 'Socialists' led by the Strasser brothers, they all got purged in the Night of the Long Knives.
Theres also the legionaries in romania
@@schizoid7734 Basic they are all thugs organized to defend capitalism.
It's incredible how scarce information on this subject and only this subject is in the information age.
All of the world's collective knowledge at our fingertips and we're not allowed to learn and understand our own history. China censors the [redacted] Square Massacre and it's an afront to freedom. We do the same with our history and it's totally fine.
"REAL Socialism. I think this looks better." Love it!
It’s also actually true. National socialism is far closer to true socialism than Marxism.
Hitler actually achieved a lot of his socialist goals.
@@punishedgloyperstormtroope8098 Mainly because Socialism is more of a general goal than a nerdy ass "erm we need these policies 🤓". In the sense of liberating the people from unjust hierarchy, Fascism was just an evolution of what that truly means, Marxism did the same they just made it gay
@@friedrichbaeker I feel fascist and national socialist socialism was more philosophical not just about money whereas Marxist socialism is more materialistic
@@punishedgloyperstormtroope8098 Pretty much. Socialism is just an essence of "right, theres a bunch of greedy cnuts that oppress us. lets rise up" from the general people. Marx, decided to make that about gay sex and how the west is evil for not being gay enough and not nice enough to minorities or some random jibber jabber
@@endloesung_der_braunen_frage Oh man I'm sure the user with the name Totalitarian Sexual Socialist knows exactly what he is talking about!
It's insane how fast people are nowadays with political labeling especially when they know next to nothing about the said ideologies and when corrected that's somehow proof of your guilt nevertheless. This is a fine sample of how nuanced they actually are and how one variable will have insanely huge impact on how the said ideology works when put in place.
If u get called a fascist just laugh it off the people who usually throw that word around are a lot closer to being a fascist then the person they trying to call one
Well, political name-calling is pretty insane today. In my country (Hungary) politicans do nothing but that: call the opposition, their "rivals" (literally anybody who can be used for propaganda, but they go chicken when they actually face with them... orban in the eu. Lol) or people who spoken up against the government "leftists" "liberals" "dollarleft" "pro-war" "anti-hungarian" "traitor" and so on. The future of dictatorships is not in violence, unless they prohibit the use of media. The internet makes people aware of reality... if they get access to the right information. If you own most media (Hungary: fidesz owns 90%, and makes it impossible for any other parties to get access to people trough media. Even irl, people are scared to even get contact with other parties out of fear. We have a few excellent independent newspapers, but they get heavily demonized, and even people who "hate fidesz" believe almost everything they say without noticing and attack this sources. The stupidity and ignorance is astonishing here), you rule the country, because you rule peoples' opinion. And this is where identity politics and "ruling by ideology" comes in. Fidesz doesnt even have a political program, they just say which people believe the easiest, and win. And they will make this easier by ruining education. I was actually tossed against a police car in an education protest. Some where beaten or tear gassed so bad they couldnt stop vomiting (like my ex's 15 yo 45 kg sister...) or threatened with 2 years in prison for throwing an empty water bottle at a policeman's helmet because that 16 yo girl was allegedly "violent" and "dangerous". Hell, young students who protest against the government are called "violent" "dangerous" "brainwashed" "traitors"... even if they are around 14. Im pretty sure they know my name already lol.
There are obvious red-flags in rulers, and this is one them. If they say more subjactive things than facts and say that everybody who thinks otherwise is an enemy, they use peoples' natural instinct to be dominant, and who doesnt like to be called smart, right, the best, etc? People will feel enamoured with themselves and adopt rulers' vocabulary which is highly simple, and doesnt even make the slightest sense. Thus they can be manipulated very easily. Fun fact: a fidesz newspaper announced WW3. There are articles. Not even kidding.
And yes, it would be the same with a liberal ideology, its just wouldnt be that easy today. If the opposition is weak, like in Hungary, they tend to do the same things as a right-populist to win over dumb liberals.
Exactly.
Brilliant as always. But you know I really feel like comparisons with Spain and maybe even Japan are necessary.
Japan's a completely different kettle of fish.
I don't know much about Spanish Fascism, but the runaway militarism in Japan really defies definition, it's NOTHING like European fascism.
Excellent point. That would require another library of books!
Japan was utterly different and poorly researched due to a predominance of worse historians than elsewhere (they have fixed on fascism as an aesthetic as they very quickly ran into the problem that the Japanese were very blatantly not fascist and showed every sign of not even understanding the ideology). Spain had fascists but they were as different as Mosley is from Mussolini and were largely intentionally disempowered by Franco who was probably less fascist than Churchill and FDR (he was an authoritarian, a rabid Catholic and a monarchist, one also gets the impression that he was a political realist and largely non-ideological but rather very religious (if the two can even be said to be different things), in short he was an actual reactionary who hated all forms of revolutionary thought).
Japan is not fascist they were Imperialist
@@moritamikamikara3879from my Understanding of Spanish fascism you may be talking about 'Falangism" it basically is the ideology of National Syndicalism, which was the official ideology of the party. If your speaking of Francisco Franco he is not much of a fascist but he used the popularity of the falange party to maintain power, at best Franco could be considered a Paternal autocrat or maybe a Conservative nationalist.
Keep up the great work TIK. Been watching your videos for years, love your stuff. More informative, fun, with sounder historiography than what I got in my MA - History.
Actually, I would more argue that Mussolini and Mosley's economics revolved around Corporatism, which has inspirations from National Syndicalism. They both called their system "Corporatism" and there is actually a difference between the two from my research:
Corporatism is the control of markets by large interest groups that are national to the country, meaning that it advocates for corporate groups to run the economy on the basis of their common interest. These corporate groups that are established by the government, are divided into different industries and afterwards the corporations gets to decide how to run their industry's economy, based on what is their interest of them and what the people want. Corporatism also involves employers and employees syndicates being linked together in cooperative associations to collectively represent the nation's economic producers and work alongside the state to set national economic policy; collectivism plays a part in making this happen. Corporatism is a egalitarian and traditional way in running the economy. So to sum it up, corporations runs the economy based on their industry the government gives them, so in some way its centralized to the government, but then the corporations have the real control over the economy, only that the government makes what the corporations is.
National syndicalism is the transferring of the ownership and control over the means of production and distribution to worker's unions. It's similar to socialism ,however, fascism had syndicalism to be nationalized which is completely different from the normal syndicalism. That means that workers do get their rights to their own production and ownership of the industry, but it's all given by the government and in the end workers are working for the government, only with more power on what they do in their industry's economy.
This is also something Alexander Raven Thomson, chief ideologue of the British Union of Fascists, clarifies in his book "The Coming Corporate State" which is all about the economics of the BUF. In his book he describes that the difference between National Syndicalism and Corporatism is that in Syndicalism the Syndicates must completely rely on each other's cooperation and that they all have equal governing powers, while in Corporatism the Syndicates are obedient to the State and the "National Corporation", as the state watches over them and can act as a third party when disputes arise...And this is why Thomson says that the BUF prefers Corporatism over Syndicalism.
Both economic systems are closely related, as they both are nationalized and are working for their own interest of the industry. They are working for the government and it is in the end a freer market than that of any left-wing economy system, since the government allows them to do whatever they want and it's run by the interest of the people. The difference between the two I say is that national syndicalism is more about worker's unions and the workers' ability to control over their industry while corporatism is mainly the elites of the company that decides how the industry will be controlled. So corporatism is more for the company and corporates while syndicalism is more for the individual and worker.
So I would say it is far more accurate to call Mussolini and Mosley Corporatists, and even Thomson himself differentiates between the two and argues that Corporatism is more ideal for a Fascist Britain than National Syndicalism.
Thanks for a clarification!!!!
However, can u pls explain what powers unions inside of a corporation supposed to have?
I mean u have a group of employers and a group of workers. First one cant fire them all, the second go on strike. Because it would hardly hurt the national economy. In that sense I do not really get how the fair salary, working conditions e.t.c. are being established. It seems like they are called syndicates because fascists loved this word.
I mean I know its fascist bullshit. But it just does not seem as a system that has a theoretical way of working. For example syndicalism have one. It is simply a corporation where every worker is an owner. They just vote and select the management.
@@KunstPicker So let me give an example, a list of corporations which would be required to control the economic system:
A - Primary Products
1. Agricultural
2. Fishing
3. Mining and Fuel
4. Iron and Steel
5. Metal Trade
B - Industrial
1. Engineering
2. Printing and Paper Trade
3. Shipbuilding
4. Textiles
And so on, you get the idea. These Corporations would, in their turn, be split up into smaller groups functioning in single industries within the main category, but would represent the whole industrial section in relation to the central government. We now turn to the typical Corporation/Syndicate, and see in what manner it is organised and how it will function. There will be represented on the Corporation enployers, workers and consumers. Each group will be given equal representation and equal power, and may not be outvoted by the other two.
The employers' representatives will be elected by the owners, partners and directors in the business enterprises of the industry, and by those engaged in a managerial capacity or in executive office. They will represent the organising side and will form an employers' federation. Association to this employers' federation will be compulsory upon every business enterprise, which will contribute a yearly subscription proportional to the number of its employees, and submit itself to the disciplined control of the federation.
The workers' representatives will be elected by all employees, whatever their function, including clerical staff. They will form a trade union embracing every worker, but confined entirely to these. The principle of Trade Unionism is entirely retained, and advanced to 100%. Stripped of their obnoxious and irrelevant political activites the Unions will play an essential part in the organisation of the Corporate State.
The consumers' representatives cannot be elected like the others, as consumers may very well be a scattered broadcast. Instead the nation itself is the ultimate consumer in the case of most products and, therefore, the Government, as representatives of the nation, is best fitted to nominate the consumers' representatives. Reputable persons will be chosen to represent he interests of the ultimate consumer, and thes ewill hear the grievances and suggestions of anyone who is affected by the working of the industry in question. In many cases other industries are big consumers, then the Government will appoint representatives to be nominated by the Corporations controlling these industries to watch over their interests.
It is through these corporate institutions that a rationalised expression of opinion will be realised in keeping with the modern age. For the first time all members of every industry will have their share in the control of the great economic factors of their daily life.
The consumers' representatives are in a certain sense, the delegates of central authority, to give warning of any unjustifiable raising of prices or restricting of output. They are, however, backed up by a central economic council which crowns the industrial structure of the Corporate state. The "National Corporation" which comprises representatives from every corporation, and centralises the administration of the whole system.
It will be the duty of the National Corporation to co-ordinate activities in the interests of national welfare, and will be elected as other Corporations, each will nominate equal numbers of employers and workers. The number of members from each Corporation will not be equal, but will be weighted in accordance with the importance of the industry to the national welfare.
Its function will be executive and administrative, as distinct from the occupationally elected parliament, which will be legislative. All controversies within the individual Corporations, which cannot be settled by compromise, will be referred to the National Corporation for settlement and according to public interest. Disputes between Individual corporations will also come before the National corporation, which will exercise a judicial capacity.
Hope this answers your question!
@@nolancer5974 dude, it's hard to express, I really thank u. Best answer I have ever received. Suddenly, it makes a lot of sense.
The system is pretty bizarre, nevertheless creative and smart.
I think it can even be upgraded to a degree that would make it actually work for the people. I mean basically in this version government decides all the disputes , because consumer can side with either workers or employers. So government each time decides arbitrary whom to make richer - workers or the employers. Like... in a socialist state with the exception that in socialist state employers are just directors appointed by party.
However the thing I like is that this framework gives employers and workers ability to ban the government(consumers) intervention in the economy. I mean if taxation would have been considered subject to the jurisdiction of national corporation it would make sense.
@@KunstPicker While I myself am not a Corporatist, it is still extremelt fascinating to look into, and I think we can both agree that even Corporatism is a better alternative to Communism.
Again, I highly recommend you acquire the book "The Coming Corporate State" by Alexander Raven Thomson if you truly wanna look into Corporatism straight from the words of a Fascist. What I truly admire about the book is that Thomson literally addresses every single issue in the book and how the Corporate State would handle it: Unemployment, Role of the Government, How Investments would Work...Basically every single part of the economy he addresses in complete detail and how Corporatism would handle it, and easy to understand.
Funnily enough I have never seen a Communist ever writing a book like this actually explaining how Communism would work in an economy.
@@nolancer5974 I will give it a try when I will have enough time, thank you for recommendation!!! English is not my first language, so I read complex texts really slow:( .
From my point of view, the thing is that communism does not really exist as a model of economy. It never existed actually as a one, it is just an umbrella term to define any society without private property.
So there are different communisms.
For example, I think some communists in the west believe that we should nationalise all the companies and make them act as if they were controlled by private owners. Or just make an income tax 80-90%. So basically communism=Scandinavian model maximized. And u can not actually right a book describing this communism from economical point of view, because the answers would always refer to how things work in a market economy. A lot of political questions arise too and they are just being thrown away with "if we have democracy, it will make our socialism great". Kinda bad argument, but that s how the things are. Mostly discussions stop here and becomeore historical than political, that there were no democratic communisms.
In Russia))) I am from Russia we have a lot of books about communism))) Russian communists believe in so called "plan" historically it was nothing more than the aim established by the party, but somehow they see it as something essential. So we get nationalised companies here too, but(!) there is one entity that defines their purposes , and can destroy some of them and transfer resources to another company or industry. This sounds worse than the previous plan, much worse. So what these books about? How we fix plan? The answer is shizoprenical. A.I. . Yeah the whole idea is there gonna be a supercomputer that will save our communism and would not make any mistakes. Also because it is a computer it will act in a good faith , being the least corrupted economical actor ever. The funniest thing is that some o them(ru communists) believe that one model was even close to being created , but enemies destroyed USSR from inside and so it never was finished.
I'm a bit late but I would like to point out that another evidence that syndicalism/unionism is key in fascism is that the spanish fascism (falangism) is also known as national syndicalism
In Italy during the fascist era the fascist party wasn't even the largest organisation, but the syndicalists of Edmondo Rossoni which had 3 times as many members
Yeah also the revolutionary republicans of Catalonia during the revolution and civil war against the falangistas, but let’s just conveniently ignore the difference between actual syndicalism (anarcho-syndicalism) and the populist facade of fascism, which one was just a perversion of the other, and the fact that real syndicalists, like socialists in general, was the first ones to be targeted as soon as fascists had the power to do so. It was a counter-revolution against the very movement you’re trying to claim they were a part of. It’s just silly.
@@Vamashara socialist fighting other socialist? Yeah, that never happend before (sarcasm). If you said so I'll asume you are also spanish and know a bare minimun about the civil war, so I don't think it's going to be a surprise mentioning that the republicans in the war started fighting each other in the popular front too, the same way bochevicks and menchevicks were also againts each other in Russia and lots of examples more could be made. Also, ERC (a catalonian pro republic party as you know) was also linked to fascism at the time, in fact their anthem was a fascist one
@@Dario-uj6qo no, fascists aren’t socialists, no matter how much you knights in shining armor rides out to whitewash it. Whatever your motivations may be..
@@Vamashara what are my motivations if I may know? Also, I guess you can prove that they arent, right?
Ok - so a very well put together video on political ideologies rather unexpectedly had me laughing out loud 😂 thank you!
Tik: "I'm not a Fascist, nor a National Socialist"
American Leftist/Liberal: AHA! That's exactly what a Nazi or Fascist would say!
"This disclaimer won't stop me, because I can't read!"
to which an American constitutionalist would say: "typical BS". The American left is now so unmoored from reality that it is really just a game show.
“Ok fine I’m a fascist if you insist whatever”
OMG THIS DUDE LITERALLY ADMITTED TO BEING A SELF ADMITTED FASCIST NAZI RACIST GENOCIDAL MANIAC WHO WANTS TO KILL ANYONE WHO DOESNT LOOK EXACTLY LIKE HIM!!!!!!”
American illiberal, reactionary, authoritarian.
@championszz political creed of soldiers don't matter, state politics does.
Let’s gooo! Been waiting on this topic for a while now, thanks for all your work TIK.
I've been saying for a while that bigotry isn't technically a component of fascism but a lot of fascists tend to have bigoted views so I'm glad this was pointed out.
Lol, what? Give an example of fascism without an outgroup? Are you fucking stupid? Or just a lowly hate monger trying out a new phrase. Your kind will be eliminated
Example?
@@mrsleep237well socialists sure are bigots.
"Bigot" is such a gay word
@@Dryhten1801that in itself is bigoted
England for the English, England for the English! 🎵🎤
literally nothing wrong with that... its also not a Fascist concept... thank god.
England for the English = Naturalisation and Assimilation in to the English.
Which is fundamental to any successful immigration system.
The celts of the north and west will descend and retake what is rightfully theirs 😈
This is a great tabling and guide to what each of the three ideologies are, really Tik, it's appreciate and I'll add this to my list of Tikhistory (and sources included) ideological guides.
Also, love that rubbing it in where you call it 'real Socialism'.
Great analysis. I've always wondered why they were so different yet lumped into the same title, as if I lumped American senator Bernie Sanders and Stalin together (or myriad other odd combinations)
Thanks for this TIK. I'm really looking forward to a series on Moseley. My grandfather was a hard line member of the communist party back in the early 30's (he even supported Stalin!), and he literally had running battles with the Blackshirts.
Moseley was a fascinating character though, and very few people realise that he was a successful and popular politician before he swung toward fascism.
When I was younger, inexperienced, less knowledgeable, and had fire in my veins, I saw myself as a 'Third Positionalist', but not a racist (rest assured that over the years I have moderated my views - a lot!), and thus saw myself as 'enlightened'.
This is why your videos are so important and educational. There are very clear distinctions within these movements, and it's important to point this out and understand them rather than lump them all together. In order to truly beat the enemy, we have to understand him.
As you rightly said, criticising fascists without prior knowledge can leave us open to correction, and if the person concerned is naive enough, even conversion. As someone who several decades ago was headed down a very radical and dangerous, I can say with assurance, "Trust me, I know".
Communism won
100 million + dead
And a trail of Communist inspired groups like the Frankfurt school, "equal rights " feminism Homophobia Xenophobia LGBTQ pedo-ism
Abortion in the U S alone accounts for 60 million +
You should listen to your grandfather more! Sounds like a good and kind man
your grandfather was a respectable man who stood for something. you are a pseud
Mosley held a lot of beliefs which are very common today. He was ahead of his time on a lot of issues.
@@mgd8867 Yea like being anti-Semitic, denying the Holocaust. Oh and the segregation of all of Africa, illegalization of interracial marriages... all very popular opinions today... Mosely was a grifter and a racist stop giving this man more credit than he deserves.
Have you ever considered tackling Syndicalism Tik?
I talk about it in this video. It is something that needs to be tackled at some point, although I think others have already done so
@@TheImperatorKnight Go full MacArthur on them
Syndicalism to me seems to be an ideology that American leftists seem to push without knowing what it is and thinking is a liberal or Diet Communist ideology which they are completely wrong.
@@TheImperatorKnight Please do a video tackling the "Fascism is Capitalism in decay" argument where they make this claim and then claim that Vladimir Lenin said it was when he never did.
19:11 - Socialism = the workers control the means of production. National Socialism = the state controls the workers and the means of production.
What does "the workers control the means of production" even mean?
It's such a nothing statement. It's always the state.
I've learned more about totalitarian ideologies in 2 days of watching these videos than 2 years of world war 2 history at my highschool, thanks TIK, you're a great educator
these type of videos about economics are my favorite! more of them please
Economics?
Can you imagine your history teacher giving the classroom a disclaimer that he's not a Nazi or a Fascist. Okay class turn to page.....
I can in a modern university, in fact I've heard similar along the lines of "I'm not a right winger but as an academic I must urge you to be more sceptical of social constructivism, it really doesn't hold much water among professional philosophers". The fact is that there are plenty of people who just resort to name calling when ideas they are invested in are refuted.
I could these days. Students with already firm views before entering the school seem to be running the classrooms
I quite enjoy watching your videos and hearing your opinions TIK. To be entirely upfront, I normally disagree with significant aspects of the arguments you put forward but I find your approach to argumentation interesting due to your seemingly genuine approach to legitimate historical analysis. It really is refreshing, after consuming much historical brainrot from all kinds of people to see someone actually taking in an opposing view and evaluating it in a calm manner without some kind of shouting match (leave that stuff to the commenters!)
legit
Hey TIK, been curious about this one political movement that I'm not 100% knowledgeable about. If you know anything about the "Iron Guard" in Romania, and what are its differences between mussolini's and hitler's ideologies if any?
Hey TIK, there is actually an American interpretation of syndicalism referred to as industrial unionism. The general idea is instead of multiple different syndicates or corporations you instead have one giant single trade union. Evidently some of the Nazi economists like Feder were influenced by its theorists like Daniel DeLeon. Would be interested to hear what you say. Also, on Mosley’s philosophy I also think that is distinct. Because he has an essay called “the ideology of fascism.” Inside that, he essentially affirms Oswald Spangler’s philosophic doctrine, which is more similar to the traditional school of philosophy than Gentile’s actualism.
I didn't know that. Thank you for the information. Sounds like the Americans want a modern version of the DAF. By the way, someone recommended your content to me as a way to understand Third Positionism more. I'm currently watching another creator on this topic first, but I intend to watch some of your videos in the near future.
If I’m not mistaken Leon was a guy who combined Marxism with Syndicalism, and was of Jewish Descent. Also I would like you to cover Japan’s economic stuff. I know for a fact that Ikki Kita was an awoved agrarian Socialist, and I would like more details on them.
@@lugiasimply6054 I will eventually
Oswald Mosley, literally me
Informative comparison amongst three political movements...accurate evaluating and explaining..yes we live in times where a disclaimers is necessary... good doing ( TIK) channel, and thank you
Mosley was a man of great mind. It's curious how jews had problems in so many nations throughout history, just saying.
Tends to happen when you are a traveller society moving from one foreign land to another without any real homeland.
@@AverageAlien and now that they do, _some_ have never lost the mindset.
Probably because they were really successful everywhere they went, and people wanted them dead for it. Can't believe you would agree with the Nazis, when so many great inventions were made by jewish intellectuals while being oppressed.
See Thomas Sowell’s essay on middle men minorities in Black Rednecks and White Liberals
More people need to understand that politics, and especially the history of such, are nowhere near as cut and dry as tv, movies, and video games portray them as. Those who see those, don't know. And most, haven't seen anything. Almost all are led by the word and ideas of another, then we get the blind leading the blind, or the blind led by the malicious. Those are some of the reasons as to why such revolutions occured, and why we are where we are now.
Amazing videos, keep up the good work!
I think you misunderstand what a Nation is.
Just so you know, in fascism, "actualism" refers to Actual Idealism not Actualism.
That might explain why there's different takes on this. Reading online, Gentile calls his philosophy both "Actual Idealism" and "Actualism" at different times.
1.I dont think that its unfair to call the british the british. The identity between northern irish, welsh, scot and english is (and has been for some time) disapearing.
2. Hitlers german movement was 100% nationalist if the movement of 1848 with the frankfurt assembely is nationalistic. Hitlers Nation wasnt just a race. It was more a nation WITH a race
You’re an idiot
hitler was an ethno-nationalist, this guy just apparently forgot that term
Why not do a video on the little-known fascist movement that was *militantly anti-racist* , which is, of course, the Brazilian Integralists. They were also the largest fascist movement outside of Europe.
Great video TIK, as always!
Could you also make a video on Falangism in the future? I'd love to hear your take on it.
Keep it up!
"We live in a period"
I highly recommend the art-deco "Richard III" with Sir Ian McKellan: it's basically done as an alternate-history film where Mosley stages a coup and becomes King of England.
I found this video interesting. It answered some technical questions that I had on these matters. I knew practically nothing of Mosley, but this info is very helpful. LOL at 19:15!
TIK I am 5 minutes in and you haven't gone off on an Ancap rant. Thank you very much sir very enjoyable.
Oh no I got to 10 minutes in and you said Democracy is just a word for totalitarianism.....fringe ideological view inserted! And I've not started the economics section yet 🤦♂️ wish me luck!
@@jrton1366 How was it?
@@zexal4217 Not his worst. Watchable!
@@jrton1366 Know any channels covering topics like these, but less well... Fringe? I do enjoy his military his stuff still but it's just a bore when he starts talking economics or politics.
(Does a video about history in YT and has to preface it with the following;)
"No, i'm not a vassal of Charlemagne and i don't hate saxons nor i support the genocide of saxons, i just want to talk about his campaigns on the 8th century saxon wars."
I have come to bury Caesar, not to praise him!
@@TheImperatorKnight You can keep the ears. 😊
I already knew this, people just don't know what fascism is. People always put Mosley, Franco and Mussolini in the same camp as Hitler even though the former three were more moderate compared the extremism of the Nazis. Franco is a prime example of that, he never lost power and generally wasn't even close to being the worst dictator... Non of them are good of course but Hitler has really skewed the view of what fascism actually is, Mussolini even today is admired by a lot of Italians
Yes, in my mind "Nazi" is always a far uglier and scathing insult or accusation than just "Fascist".
@@foodchewer People just don't know the meaning. Antifa are closer to fascism than literally anyone they protest against but they're so clueless that they have no idea what they're doing is what they claim to be against.
@@foodchewerNothing is more vile and evil than a Marxist though
@@AverageAlienyes there is, a nazi.
I wouldn't even classify Franco as fascist, he was nationalist and anti-marxist primarily and while he did ally with fascists in the civil war, he also allied with monarchists and the church, against a similarly politically diverse alliance. He mostly just wanted to ensure that Spain did not fall into the hands of communists, he was surprisingly hands-off with the governing of Spain.
I've really been looking forward to you talking about Mosley. I know very little about him. Living in Canada, the history about him feels a little more close to home.
Another fantastic vid as usual. Tell me TIK, have you ever considered covering the 2nd Sino-Japanese War? Its a front in WW2 that is almost completely forgotten in the west, and the Japanese were just as brutal towards civilians as the Germans were.
15:58
Hey TIKhistory! Im from germany and i wanted to mention that its really important to write the Ö Ä Ü like in ,,Völkisch".
A word can change its meaning for example:
Kuchen = Cake
Küchen = plural of kitchen
the correct way to write it if ur unable to get the letter u can also go: oe (ö), ue (ü), ae (ä)
btw loved the video !
Very helpful video, loved it a lot! Semitism is just for people in the Middle East. Hitler was not just against Jews, but also anyone from that general area. 👍
It seems TIK is confusing "nation" with "state". Hitler viewed his "nation" as the German speaking peoples, therefore he was a nationalist.
For someone who goes back to etymology and 18th century usage to confirm that Hitler was a "socialist" it is odd that TIK would use the 21st century common usage for "nation".
Found the communist
Nation come from the latin word Natio meaning birth into or race. Nationalism has an ethnic/tribal dimension. I don’t mean that as a pejorative its just is what it means.
@@bobfred159 Exactly.
@@rustybayonette6641 Found the idiot.
6:24 "Aryan Super Sayian blood" Teh heh heh. TIK, I love your humor.
I can only hope for a BattleStorm Namek or an analysis of Freeza's ideology someday.
@@Mitchell_Gant Well, Frieza is pretty much space Hitler...
This is fantastic! Thank you so much. Educational, understandable, insightful, and not boring. This is one of the best ones so far!
I've watched your all videos about national socialism and fascism. After comparison with other videos about this, I must admit that:
- Your videos are of the highest quality and are objectively the closest to the "core" of these ideologies. You are basing DIRECTLY on nazi/fascist books, not some Umberto Ecco and other speculative theories.
- Your videos at first were hard to accept because I was taught that these ideologies are totally different in school and later it was enforced while discussing with other people. Yet, after giving it some thought, your perspective is more explainable from either historical, personal, or just rational levels (as Mussolini was definitely not far-right before becoming Duce and A.H. was leading the national SOCIALIST party).
I just want to thank you for your work. I also recommended these videos to my friends and random people, Let's hope this will give them a different perspective, at least. Sadly, a lot of people just don't want to watch "political stuff", as they call it. But ignorance is bliss I guess.
And yet you don't read the original books themselves
@@friedrichbaeker Indeed, I am also ignorant in this matter. I only tried to read "Mein kampf" but it was very unwelcoming lecture (just bad writing) + the best way to read it was to do it in the original german language which I sadly do not (yet) operate fluently.
Knowing as much as TIK about it would be just too much time, so let's call it "rational ignorance" from my part to compare different thinkers who already worked over this topic. TIK gives us references, I checked some and they were legit, which proves he at least is not making up his theories.
thats just the sad truth, we do not have that much time to read "original books" ourselves. And with my knowledge, I admit I will not be able to understand too much.
@@globaldemand3100 I mean it does require a neutral attitude to comprehend because of all the brainwashing, that is fair. It requires a whole picture to appreciate it tbh. But I mean books dont take months to read it you actively read books
@@friedrichbaeker I completely agree with you both about problems with being objective and the fact that books are not THAT time-consuming. Of course, specialist, scientifical books are much more demanding, especially at first.
I will explain why I decided to compare different youtube experts rather than read books:
1) They already have vast knowledge. I can compare their views on the topics much more quickly.
2) I am aware of my lack of knowledge which is why I first want to know what wiser people have to say.
Thank you for your well-deserved criticism. At the same time I consider my decision to first watch an expert's podcast about a topic justified: it is a time-efficient method to get myself introduced to the topic.
I am only starting my journey but both the TIK videos and Your comment did motivate me to also do my own research.
You should do a short video comparing Dolfuss, Franco and Salazar, the Catholic advocates of Corporativism. I believe that despite their statism, were not totalitarian such as Hitler and Mussolini, who were athiestic.
I haven't seen the full video yet but Mosley prior to founding the BUF, was a member of the Labour Party, the same one that elected the notorious anti-semite Corbyn as leader in 2015. Coincidence? I think not!
Wasn't A.H more of a pantheist/ deist?
"Mosley... was a member of the Labour Party"
Mosley was in the Conservatives for a couple years, then went Liberal, then went Labour for about 8 years, before founding the New Party, and then the BUF. So the counter will be that Mosley wasn't a real socialist, he was just an opportunist, and his moving across party lines "proves" that he didn't have a solid position.
The problem with that narrative is that the Conservatives were the old Left-wing party in the mid 1800s. Because the Liberals embraced socialism ("New Liberalism"), they went from the Right to the Left. So all the Parties that Mosley was in were Left-wing, and Mosley was disappointed that they weren't radical enough to actually implement the socialist policies that they were preaching about. This is why I said in the video that he was probably an Actualist - he didn't care about the Real, he wanted to implement the Actual.
@@TheImperatorKnight difference between real and actual?
Fascism is based af
@@ivanf.482 pure cringe ivan
>I'm NOT a nazi, NOT a fascist
then you aren't paying attention
The entire basis of Nazi ideology, that there exists superior and inferior races, was scientifically refuted years ago
@@arcadeoutpost a) the majority of billionaires are white non-jewish
b) the latter is a strawman, i have not seen any actual examples of such a thing happening