If you like what you see and want to stay up to date with Dad Saves America, please subscribe here on UA-cam or over on Substack, where you can find weekly articles and the audio version of the podcast, with more to come in the near future! www.dadsavesamerica.com
Fascism was first implemented in the Soviet Union, under the name of "New Economic Policy", on the 1920's. Hitler, Mussolini, Franco and Peron just copied it, and the longest surviving fascism is the peronist party.
The bad guys are those who initiated the destruction of Germany from London and New York before WWI. Chief H was just a reaction of self-preservation to this destruction. No one thinks it controversial that Germany is a united country today. In 1939, the British made a world war out of it. In 1914, they made a world war out of German market share on the so-called free market. Even if Germans play by British-American rules, they are demonized. This is the real basis for accusing American to be a racist country.
Stalin had horrific policies. He convinced poor Ukrainians that the relatively well to do farmers, the productive farmers had stolen wealth from the poor. "Look, the farmers have a tractor and 6 cows. They are too wealthy, they must givecthat wealth back!" The kulack farmers were killed and their farms seized. These farms were turned over to cooperative non-farmers. Who had no clue how to run a farm. Production fell like a stone. There was no grain, no bread, no meat. Millions starved. Stalin was so cruel, he sent troops to collect ALL the grain from the farmers. He left nothing to re-plant with, nothing to eat. One farm wife went through the field after soldiers left and picked up individual grains of wheat, gathering a few handfuls... enogh for a tiny loaf of bread. She was working to kerp her kids from starving. Her "Theft" was discovered and she was sent to the gulag. Thats socialism at work.
Correct! Stalin was an evil man and he did all that because most who supported him politically were urban-dwellers and he had little support in rural areas! When the inevitable famine arrived as a result of the latest 5-year plan, food became very scarce in cities and towns where his supporters were, and most importantly he had to feed the army as they could threaten his removal.
Depopulation of the undesirable/lesser peoples. The Kulacs were just a means to an end. That's what our American communists are doing to us right now. I don't believe the end will look the same, so that remains yo be seen, not even to its authors. That's why socialism never works... unexpected human behavior. Plus it's a crappy business model.
Stalin faced a communist opposition organized around Trotsky. He lead a counter revolution that murdered most of the old Bolsheviks who had joined the Party before the revolution. .
The "Ukraine" was also the home to many "Germans from Russia" which was my family. These farmers with ethnic ("Swiss, German, Alsatian," ) low German speakers. They were very good farmers and many who managed to flee before the executions and Gulags ended up in Saskatchewan Canada as well as Pennsylvania and the Dakotas. They were promised land and no military service under Catherine the Great who was German herself. These brutal and divisive acts under Stalin were not only based on class/wealth, but also based on race. Looking at Canada right now really scares me, all this talk of race, hating religion, giving the government crazy amounts of power…. Its almost like we’ve done this before.
It goes deeper than that within the EU, when countries join the EU, the centralized Brussels government tells farmers what they grow, they tell dairy farmers that you can no longer have cows and you must grow crops we tell you to grow just look at Finland and Ireland for the evidence of that, you coal miners are now unemployed look at the UK and Germany for that, you gas workers are now unemployed, you oil workers are now unemployed, you nuclear workers are now unemployed, you car workers are unemployed, you ship builder's are unemployed, you steel workers are now unemployedyou fisherman are now unemployed. And all the towns and cities that had those industries become ghost towns, and the inhabitants rely completely on government handouts, countries within the EU no longer have sovriegnty and will obey the dictates, rules and regulations of the EU council which no citizen within the EU gets to vote on. You will have a single currency a single flag, and now a single military. Not bad for an organization that started off as a trading block. Slow rolling continental socialism.
WEhy not mention all the huamn rights worker reneter womens gay rights etc? Seemsn to me all the issues with cloised factories cound be fixed by not allowing companies to be all over pacpitalisitic and see cheap labour but force them to stay and employ peoepl at decent wage levels of the excitivies and shareholders have very painful and quite fatal accidents of imprisionment. the issue is not the eue tryignt o protecvt peoepl its those who want to use filk as cheap labour
Thats not socialism! Socialism is an economic and political philosophy encompassing diverse economic and social systems[1] characterised by social ownership of the means of production,[2] as opposed to private ownership. If the government runs things on behalf of people thats not socialism!
@@albal156 Communism is a movement of the working class on its way to state power. Socialism is the first stage of a Communist revolution that will replace the world capitalist system of production and trade.
@@albal156 What liberals an left want for socialsim or just liberla and left etc is not the government controls all production and doens not allow anyone to make money in business. It meens everyoens needs are met ie univerdal heralth care, educaion, fire, medical, rescue services water supplies etc. anyone wantignt o run nightclubs, make businecuits surf boards etc can go ahead and if somone makes good products and services that benefit peoepl and can make lots of money from many sales then good on them, as long as its not by cuttign safety corners, exploitign workers, pollutiing or sellign dangerous goods. ie be nice do good then hopefully do well and get well off but nobody is too bad off and all; have a good basic stand of living theat they casn improve with effort
After WW2, my Hungarian grandparents were put into a Soviet run gulag for three years. My grandmother died and my grandfather was broken physically and psychologically. They endured back breaking labour and communist indoctrination for three years telling them they were the worst people in society. Their crimes were that they were farmers.
Viewer from Germany here. I'm a long time follower of Dr. Zitlemann and read most of his books. Great to see him on your podcast and congrats for recognizing his important work on history and the economy.
A lot of people love the Germans in LA .It was the German's who were brought over for the NASA program .Their kids started surfing and developed the modern surfing industry ,designs and composites we use today .
Hitler was not socialist at all, it is extrem right propaganda and lies. Hitler was funded by Henry Ford and American industrial & bankers who were surely not socialist friends. This has nothing to with being german or not. If you think Hitler is part of german culture that tells a lot about what you are.
@@effexonI've heard of him through TIK History, here on YT. My WW2 vet Grandfather used to comment that the Nazis were considered left-wing in the 1930s, even by Marxists. "Orwell was right that history would be changed," are words of his that echo in my memory. When a modern leftist claims Fascism and NatSoc were pro-capitalist, it's fun to watch them twist themselves into pretzels trying to explain away the abjectly anti-capitalist economic policies these ideologies had. 😂
Yeah we know Democrat states love Nazis. Amazing that you say Germans brought over to work on the nasa program but in reality it was Nazi higher ups that were brought here. Glad we are ok with war criminals and their children just because one of them like surfing 😂😂@@lalaboards
25:18 My great great grandfather was a father of confederation here in Canada and he advocated for this on PEI/Canada. That people be able to own their own land and that it will make them invest more into developing it. Unfortunately the government wanted to collect land taxes and many disagree with me that you can own land here but its a perspective issue. If you pay off your house right.... you should be set for life but you don't you will forever pay land taxes. So I ask people if you can never pay off the debt how can you own something? If the government forces you to pay for something indefinity you don't really own it, you are renting it. It is a service. I really wish his ideas were taken more seriously at the time.
I agree. We have the same issue here in the US. After two missed property tax payments the government can take your home and land. When I point this out to people they appear to be horrified as if they never considered this! At least in the past having a mortgage “fixed” your housing costs vs. rent payments that increase frequently. Property taxes take away this security and can make home ownership more expensive than renting. Given the fact that younger generations now have no kids or just 1-2 kids, there won’t be children able to help save the family home (their inheritance) from the tax man. The only strategy for many retirees is selling their home at a profit & moving to a foreign country like Costa Rica so that they can retire.
American here from CA. I ask home “owners” all the time do you ever own your home. They answer yes. Then I say stop paying your property taxes. It’s like oh dang you’re right.
There are reasons you aren't taught this by teachers who have a MAJOR soft spot for socialism.... The same thing as why you aren't taught anything about personal finances or how to raise money for starting a business. This is done intentionally by the old Trillion dollar wealth families of America (Rockefeller, Carnegie, Dupont's, Dow, Fords) They wanted workers, not creators/builders. Now the weird question is what does that mean for all of us when they get Optimus like humanoid robots....? I think this is why they are flooding the country to rob the middle class faster.
Except this is a dishonest take, comparing socialist countries like Denmark or Norway to Nazi Germany is a straight lie. Don't think this is "educational". It's more like right wing propaganda, which is actually akin to Hitler.
Some libertarians want to do away with county health departments. Do you want that? There are various government functions which have never (to my knowlege) been successfully done by purely private sector means.
Doing away with governments would result in us being ruled by bankers, CEOs, large landlords and their private police forces and armies. What is the advantage of that?
@@bdnevins Healthcare used to be much much cheaper in the US, to the point that physicians lobbied government to restrict competition cause they wanted to be paid more, they lobbied government to cartelize who could and could not become a doctor through state-certified medical licenses, a monopoly of who can become a doctor was decreed by law in the name of "protecting" physicians. I'd link it but youtube would hide my comment, search "How government regulations made healthcare so expensive mises" and you'll find an excellent article you can criticize and scrutinize yourself.
F.A. Hayek "The Road to Serfdom", Ludwig Von Mises "Omnipotent Government" (both published in 1944 if my old brain is correct). And on the cultural side - the works of Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddinhn - which show as well as being economically socialist, the National Socialists (Nazis) were also radical culturally - socially.
Which is why the Nazis turned Germany back into the militaristic top down government state, like it was during the second Reich, the Kaiserreich, yes? Calling it the third Reich should be a clear indicator that they see themselves as continuing a lineage.
@@Arnaere Wow, with argument like that, how can I disagree? Do tell, who is better at explaining prices in the free market. Or why socialism fail, because it ruin the market and prevents people from trading legally.
Just like the current Democrat party in the US. This is why it’s so important we educate our children on the dangers of this ideology and the disease of chronic victimhood!
@@tombrunila2695 no. Marx hated Germany, which can clearly be seen in his book ”the German ideology”. Therefore his socialism is not at all like German socialism/national socialism.
I mean, I'll wait to listen to the whole thing, but he has stated his thesis, and this is not some new revelation to anyone who has read about this subject. I could have given the first five minutes of his talk.
@@iluvyunie the whole thing seems kinda meandering and lacking a genuine humanity; 20:30 I checked out after this comment about Africa, which in my opinion is simply intellectually dishonest ie - saying that they were provided development aide yet failed to “capitalize” is just an absurdly disingenuous over-simplification that completely OMITS the well-documented [open-secret] of 1st worlders systematically undermining and subverting places to exploit resources period. end of story. all the rest of the annoying blahblahblah is just smug nonsense when people arrogantly refuse to have conversations based on the objective geopolitical monopoly game that has been had specifically throughout the last few decades… whatever… who cares
The level of gaslighting on the part of those who claim Hitler was not a socialist is truly astounding, though perhaps understandable because to admit the truth is to admit that Hitler was a "fellow traveler". "Oh...but National Socialism isn't >real< socialism." Again, that is nothing more than a dodge of the truth. There was absolutely no room for conservative or libertarian thought in the National Socialist movement, and those ideologies are correctly placed on the Right side of the ideological spectrum. Perhaps national socialism was slightly to the right of communism, but that still places it firmly on the Left side of the ideological spectrum.
It's the same with COVID-19 vaccinated people, they prefer to die over admitting that they made a mistake and followed blindly their leaders and the herd. The same with socialist after the war they prefer to blame the conservative right. They simply can't see themselves in the eyes and now they do it again.
Hitler threw Marxists in jail. Hitler did not privatize industry. When Hitler took power, he privatized governmental services. He did not take any property away from any of the large industrialists. He supported a private banking system and turn previously nationalized Deutsche Bank back to private control. So tell me again how was Hitler a socialist? Just because some Nazi with a German accent gets on UA-cam and talks a lot of s*** don't go believing him. I noticed a lot of people that think like this also are very swayed by UA-cam experts with Russian accents . . .
Excellent guest. All his descriptions of fascism fit with the research I've done in recent years, and confirms that 99.9999% of people don't know what fascism is. This guest got me to finally subscribe to your channel.
I've seen quite a lot of circular logic with the definition of fascism. They'll say, for a recent example, "Trump is a fascist." And when you ask what fascism means, they'll say "Trump."
Yeah Hitler socialist 😂 He was funded by Henry Ford and so many USA industrial & bankers. Your research proved totally ineffective. By the way fascism started when local industrials hiring veterans from WWI to go beat strikers and communist. Those groups were named fasci. Yeah i've read 500 page book about fascism contrary to 99% peoples here.
@@LizRealGirlBeautyYou're speaking to some particularly dumb leftists then. 😂 Well read ones will at least say that a businessman running the country is like a marriage between the state and big business (a very loose way of defining Fascism). For the well read ones, I ask them to point to any economic policy of his that mirrors than of Syndicalism (the branch of Marxist theory which Mussolini and Gentile got most of their ideas from). That normally shuts them up 😁
@@SEKreiverOttoman and earlier Arab caliphates empires eg multiethnic monarchy with most power centralized with the state dominated by one ethnic group, though very often local elites do get co-opted into the project. As for the Interesting question though you’ve posed - probably has been answered more eloquently but colonialism is set apart by less of the above, globalized/industrializing setting, social attitudes towards land vs overseas expansion, and racial component. Are the Romans colonizing the rest of Latium in 5th century bc?
It was complex. There were many Princely states that had considerable autonomy… The Indian Civil Service was tiny, never more than 1200 people responsible for 300 million…(nowadays there are probably 1200 civil servants in one suburb of London). The British Indian Army was far more Indian than British.
Definitely not if you see how most Indians live and behave. The 3rd world needed to be quelled and wrangled by superior people for its own good. The transplanting has occurred in Britain and Ireland though, vast numbers of Indians plague us and demand we pay attention to their cultural holidays etc
@chari---zard when you ideologize and condemn schools of thought you are cutting yourself from a branch of intelligence, one it seems you could sorely use
@@chari---zard understanding there are other kinds of socialism that aren't rooted in Marxism doesn't make someone a Nazi apologist, it makes them educated.
@@sigurdholbarki8268 Not really. German Nazi apologists do criticize the way the Nazi era is taught in school (Nazis very, very bad), by comparing it to the Nazi school system. "If you make me feel bad about Nazis in a public school, the public school is as bad as the Nazis." That argument OF COURSE minimizes how bad the Nazis actually have been, and it slanders the public school system.
@@darthcalanil5333 Yeah I for one being a Swede grew up fully on the "Fascism was capitalists last effort defence against the working man's demands" narrative. Never heard a word about Hitler or Mussolini having socialist policies or even genuinely being inclined that way ideologically at any point.
I think what you are saying makes sense but a lot of people will struggle with it because of what they use to define left versus right. I find what often makes sense to people is to ask them to view these ideologies along a spectrum of individualist versus collectivist. It then becomes very easy to see that there was a battle between left collectivist and right collectivist ideologies. The principles around which they were organized were different, but they were collectivist ideologies.
It's not a coincidence. This is a strategic manipulation tactic to try and forget it. I think people underestimate the evil intentions and tactics of the left
@DadSavesAmerica Lol. That's why you never trust your education to the system. I don't know if you can still find his work online (it's mostly been scrubbed after his death) but he's got a bunch of books on the subject, Jim Marrs. Thanks for this podcast, I will re enjoy while at work, hopefully someone else learns something too.
Ah yes, but the retort from the other side when this is pointed out is usually something along the lines of: “Oh but often names are used that don’t actually mean what they say. For example the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is not democratic or a republic.”
@@DadSavesAmerica Come on, mate. You, of all people, should know that the education establishment is well aware of this misguided view of history. Unlike you, they are more responsible and teach people the truth about Nazism instead of entertaining crackpots like Zitelmann.
In the 80ies it was Ethiopia (when the country had 25 million inhabitants and was rules by Soviet-style socialists and couldn't feed itself. Today the country has more than 100 million inhabitants)
My grandparents were stating "African children were starving" , now the tables have turned China (in the 90s) and many African nations (recently) have adopted freemarket capitalism with 0-5% taxation which has allowed more saving potential when PPP is considered.
Trumps’s success is because he has been able to tap into the emotions. Capitalists need to do this. Tell the people what socialism steals from them! The best thing of all is that it’s TRUE!! I’m a self educated Austrian Economist, and know the truth. We have to think of how to simplify our message for the masses, so they can understand without reading dozens of books and listening to 100s of lectures. I believe the message should start in schools, and be constantly reinforced, because socialism is so alluring to non- thinking people due to its simple, emotional lies.
I rather Take Trump's success is the growing pragmatism and the rationalization of Americans in Opposition of Kamala Harris growinf raficalization to far left liberals From what I see. It is Kamala Harris instead Who tapped the emotion spectrum
I totally agree with you. There needs to be some form of educational basis that explains the brilliance of the free market and that why economic freedom is the most fundamental of all our rights. The socialists go for the emotional play of how tough life it is for some. Where as the those that follow and live by free markets can simply say well look at the evidence of what has actually occurred when people get to deal with other.
@@arielquelme "What can be, unburdened by the past" is an advertising slogan and utopian "I am a god" magical thinking. I can't think of any working invention in human history that was "unburdened" by the past. That said, an "appeal to emotion" is an effective way to make an argument, humans are not what I would call a purely "logical" species. All politicians seem to know this.
That will only work on SOME of them. The root of the problem is most of them FEEL afraid of making choices in their lives where they may fail. They don't admit it to themselves, sometimes, but it's there. Those people would prefer guaranteed equal misery than the chance they fail while others succeed.
After WW1 Hitler became an important member of Kurt Eisner's revolutionary Socialist Bavarian Republic which brought down the Bavarian monarchy. After the assassination of Eisner he joint the short-lived Bavarian Soviet Party (yeah, "Soviet" as in Socialist/Communist). He subsequently joined the Socialist DAP (Deutsche Arbeiter Party/German Workers Party). That party was later renamed to NSDAP (National Sozialist Deutsche Arbeiterpartei / National Socialist German Workers Party = Nazis). He told the Germans: "I bring you a Socialism for the Germans; a National Socialism". I'm pretty sure Hitler was a Socialist, even leaning to Communism. Mussolini was an activist Communist in his younger years. Later - when he was chief-editor of the Socialist daily newspaper - he was very critical of the Communist Party based on its policies, not the ideology. Influenced by Giovanni Gentile he joined the Fascists supporting that ideology based in the French revolutionary movement of Syndicalism (Literally "trade-unionism") aimed at controlling industry through militant trade-unions. His Fascist ideology was aimed to benefit all Italian nationals, independent of race. Oswald Mosley from the UK was a member of the British Socialist Labour party, until being expelled for being too radical. He subsequently became the leader of the British Fascists. Jacques Doriot of France was a Communist before he became the leader of the French Fascist party. It's pretty unlikely that such dedicated far-left sympathisers like Hitler, Mussolini, Mosley, and Doriot will become the absolute leaders of a far-right ideology. It only makes sense when National Socialism and Fascism are considered far-left ideologies.
It should be pointed out that, though it's true Moseley was a Labour MP before starting the BUF, it's also true that he had been a paid in member (but not a parliamentary member) of both the Liberal and the Tory (Conservative) parties prior to joining Labour. Moseley was a bit of political grifter, more than an ideologue.
When i was a kid in communist Czechoslovakia, our house was "rundown grey" and there was a weird stump on the house next to my window. Now the house is restored to how it really should look like. It is white with a cherub statue next to the window!
I think what people don't realize is that socialism is really the economic system by which much wealth is centralized in the hands of a few. Capitalism only works when there's the free flow of money and ideas. Capitalism by definition requires the investment of capital in new ideas. You are not capitalizing on your money unless you do this. This means money naturally has to flow from those who have it to those who do not. It's only through the growth of wealth of those who do not have wealth that those who do have wealth are able to capitalize.
@@kimobrien. Yes, this is why 'capitalists' have always been the biggest proponents of socialism. Since the 'capitalists' control the government, socialist control means 'capitalist' control.
@@kimobrien. Versus the economy being controlled by the centralized few in socialism. Exactly why successful economies are some hybrid of both capitalism and socialism. No perfect answer.
The small number of people controlling the economic system under socialism claim they are doing the working for the benefits of all the people. However, it’s impossible to keep them accountable to that promise, and anyone who dare to challenge the top becomes the “enemy of the people”.
Dr. Peterson argued this too, and it made sense to me, but people look at you like you're crazy for suggesting a Nationalist Socialist might be....... ......Socialist 😂
I do like some things JBP says, but he didn't give a good argument on Hitler's socialism. I think TIKHistory on youtube and Zitelmann's books give much better arguments and evidence of why National Socialism is REAL socialism.
That was one of the most coherent interviews. And, Dad, you always impress me by allowing your guest to be front stage. What a joy it must be to sit across from you.
my favorite thing in college was getting people to agree with hitler quotes on socialism without telling them the source of the quote. This was pre-web and pre-search engines
@@Si_Mondo "One may regret living at a period when it's impossible to form an idea of the shape the world of the future will assume. But there's one thing I can predict to eaters of meat: the world of the future will be vegetarian." I never tell them
Both fascisme and nazism were interwar ideologies trying to contain communism with social policies. Roosevelts "New deal" had many elements taken from the social polices of fascisme. Both in Denmark and Sweden you saw social democrats adopt polices with a corporative state from fascisme. It's the interwar and there was a fear of communisme.
You may be overlooking the fact that all those groups split from Social Democratic Parties and that Fascists actually split from the French Communist Party (where the fascists were called Syndicalists). Marxist Communists held that the Proletariat would inevitably rise up against the Bourgeoisie, but by the end of the 19th Century this was looking increasingly unlikely, which posed a problem with a number of solutions. The Bolsheviks decided they would rise up in violent revolution on the Proletariat's behalf. The Syndicalists, after WWI, abandoned the International Class based Socialism of Marx in favour of National Socialism. In Germany this took the form of Ethno Socialism mixed with 19th German Nationalism and weird occult shit that was rife among the chattering classes. In the less homogenous Italy, their National Socialism had less of an emphasis on ethnicity and more of an emphasis on the State. The Communists weren't a massive threat in Europe, they succeeded in taking Russia and China by force because both countries were practically feudal kingdoms so they could take over relatively few cities and tyranise the largely rural population.
Fascism was implemented first in the soviet union by lenin. He called it "new economic policy", and fascists just copied it. So there was no difference. The difference is that the soviet union was a violent imperialist project, that invaded all neighbor nations, so the europeans came with their own imperialist fascist projects, to be the rulers of global socialism instead of being ruled from Moscow. That's' why the USSR was "international socialism", or "communists", and the others were "national socialisms". It was a clash of power between the same ideologies with capital in different nations. But modern socialism is controlled by London, so it wants to rewrite the history, in orwellian fashion, to build his own imperialist socialism, this time disguised as wokism, feminism, climate changeism...
any time a state, tells a company what to do, what to make, what to not make etc. through coercion or however incentives even. that is socialism. if they do it on a national basis, tampering with free market dynamics, that is national socialism, if they do it on a global or international basis, then that is international socialism, or global communism.
Mussolini was the most honest politician of his day. He wrote a Treatise on Fascism and it was in his mind a natural progression from Communisms. State run companies... no, but private companies that do the state's bidding. USA is too close to this. A marriage of convivence has become a corrupted Bureaucracy. The EV mandate is the dumbest. Hybrid is the best tech we have right now. It solves several problems at once while greatly recusing CO2 output if that is your biggest concern. But that option has been mandated out too.
It is more important what modern socialists don't want you to know about socialism! Read "The Socialist Phenomenon" by Igor Shafarevich. You can find in online as a PDF. And by the way, the Nordic countries are not and have never been socialist!
I recently had a conversation with a person who is quite the proud Kiwi. But he was upset a Jacinda Ardern had gone and she was one of the main reasons he was proud. So I asked him with his national pride and heavy leaning towards socialism then what party should he vote for. He said Labour…
Dr. Rainer Zitelmann is a brilliant mind that needs more exposure. Thanks for having him on your show and having a long enough conversation for him to get some of his main points accross.
I always laugh when I see people only finding out that Nazis were called National Socialists for the first time, thinking they've discovered some giant historical cover-up. The name of the National Socialist German Workers Party is common knowledge. Maybe look into what really happened during Hitler's rise to power instead of listening to crackpots like Dr. Rainer Zitelmann. Perhaps you could start with Hitler's murdering of prominent socialists within the Party on the "Night of the Long Knives." Or maybe his outlawing of the Communist Party after the Reichstag fire. Or the fact that he had to keep imprisoning or killing members of the Democratic Socialist Party in the Reichstag to finally get the numbers he needed to pass the Enabling Act, after which he imprisoned all communists and socialists by decree. They were among the first to go into the camps, and none of them made it out. He sided with big business and abolished Unions, crushing any resistance from the socialist working class. His focus was on ethnic purity and National pride. Hitler was not a socialist; he was a far-right authoritarian fascist. First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me. -Martin Niemöller, 1946.
Thank you to both of you, Dr. Rainer Zitelmann really makes things completely clear, so it in a very understandable way makes sense, in this never ending battle between kapitalisme and socialism. I really hopes it will change somebody’s mind for the better. Once again: A very big THANK YOU.
01:08:00 without having read your book, Poland's growth could also be attributed to the huge financial support from the US as the last frontier between NATO and Russia. We should put nation within their global context and not judge them individually. "No country is an island".
My college thesis in 1975 was about the lack of difference between National Socialism and Global Socialism outside of geographic ambitions. I received a high grade according to our teacher because I explained it fully and factually !
There's Brown national socialism in Germany and Red national socialism in Stalin's USSR. Big regret that they fought each other, but not Liberals together. Mussolini corporate state was the only time when trains arrived on time in Italy 😂
My father was a Theologian, & Historian. He and Dr. Zitellman would’ve talked for hours! There is always more to learn about history & getting the truth not just the propaganda story told by those in power. ❤
For me as a german I do agree with Rainer Zittelmann. A free america which stands for liberty, free speach etc etc is absolutly vital for us here in Europa esp. Germany. I do 💙 capitalism ✊🏼
Excellent conversation! The one thing I do wish they touched on was how Germany was so held down, and used, after WWI. The debt was unbearable. Children were prostitutes, especially in Berlin, which became the famous city of sin. One reason Jews were hated was because they owned not only the banks, but the Cabarets where sex and drugs were plentiful. When the Brown Shirts began growing, they focused on these establishments, and conservative Germans supported this because their poor were being abused by these businesses that drew in international clients. It really was not about religion. History will repeat if we do not understand it.
@danielpye7738 Man's inhumanity to man crosses all ages and borders. Just 2 years ago, countrymen denied healthcare and even locked up neighbors for not complying to experimental drugs. We are not so different.
Most peoples arguments opposed to calling Nazis "Socialist" point to North Korea or the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea." It's an idiotic assertion and argument.
Not so fast. The Nazi’s implemented every single thing that would be on anyones who called themselves a socialist wish list. You have to remember that at the time of the rise of the Nazi’s that Germany was THE most educated country in the world. And yet many of them let it fall into the mess it did by actually supporting Nazi policies because it benefited them. Which is why conservatives (used to be a liberal value) value individual freedom so much. Far less chance of falling into an induced mass psychosis that Germany did.
Because they think Democracy and Universal Suffrage are the same things. Democracy just means "people rule", and historically the Demos didn't include everyone
Yeah, but I would differ slightly in that the building block of society, the base unit, is the family. Like an atom, if you break it down to it's constituent parts, it won't end well
He nailed it in the end. Socialist talk with the emotions and conservatives by the head. I came to the same conclusion years ago. So we conservatives / capitalists need to develop the skill of story telling but not based on fantasies and utopias but based on what there is to win.
@@gThomasHaggyou're making a massive category error and your logic is way off. Firstly, conservative is a relative term dependent on the culture and time they exist. These days Classical Liberals are often thought of as conservatives, but in 17th and 18th century Britain they were not. Capitalism and Conservatism describe different, but sometimes overlapping, things. A Conservative can be Capitalist, but not all Capitalists are Conservatives (and vice versa). The same goes for Nationalists, who can be very different beasts depending on whether they are religious or secular - for one it's merely a tool of governance, for the other it runs the risk of replacing religion. Furthermore, in Scotland the Nationalist Party used to be split between Capitalists (often called Tartan Tories) and Socialists, although now the party is exclusively socialist.
@@gThomasHagg It depends on where you live. In the New World conservatism is more individualistic, while in Europe conservatism is more royal central planning. Mises called himself a liberal, in America Ocasio-Cortez also calls herself a liberal. But their ideas are opposites.
I always refer to Germany during WWII as it’s official name on its constitution and coinage- “Deutschland Reich”, as that is the ONLY correct answer. Whenever someone begins screaming about the NEON YAHTZEES (who are surprisingly Hispanic), and YAHTZEE GERMANY I cringe inside.
From the Warring States and the Hundred Schools of Thought, ancient China settled on two main ideas, Confucianism ( orderly compliance ) and Taoism ( natural value ). With the base idea of Yin Yang, both Confucian compliance and Taoist naturality are sides to each other... too much of one leads to imbalance with the other. So when one side says " Conform! " a reply can be " But it is not in my nature! ".
Capitalism will exist where the authority in a community recognises and defends the people's ability to own private property. Owning private property, and having a state governed by laws that protect your ability to do what you will with private property means people will be able to profit from trading in that private property. Even the ideas in your head are your private property. This is why Orwell uses the cypher 2+ 2 = 5 to illustrate the depths of control and the jealousy totalitarianism feels towards the private sector. It's not "left right" it's "public private". Corporations are publically listed companies that are owned by share holders. Corporations have a fiduciary duty to the share holders to seek profit for those share holders. So publically listed companies are public bodies owned by a government within the state government.
So I just watched this whole video. I just want to preface with that I have studied this topic and WW2 altogether for almost 25 years. I have come across “Were the Nazis socialist?” More and more in recent years. I always find it odd because ultimately…who cares? However, experts want to categorize them as either yes or no regarding socialism. After many years studying them, as well as adjacent ideologies, I’ll brake it down in the least biased way possible. First of all, I am not promoting capitalism vs socialism. My own personal philosophy is that a nation should embrace capitalism over socialism but I also realize both are neither good or bad in and of themselves. It’s how you implement them. Second, this video takes many unnecessary tangents but primarily because of the interviewer. Although interesting to a degree, this interview trails off into the weeds a lot. This is UA-cam though so I guess that’s the reality of today. Without further ado, were the Nazis socialist? The short answer is “No, but” the long answer is “Yes, If” The problem I see with the doctor’s view, as well as many people that argue for or against the socialism topic, is that they almost always misrepresent and/or omit the facts that contradict their position. This pertains to what the Nazis said (specifically Hitler’s speeches vs the Fuhrerprinzip), how they acted and behaved, and even when. A woefully brief history of the Nazi Party: when Hitler joined and was a rising star speaker, the party only had one truly binding platform; nationalism. There were many other people within the party, namely Gregor Strasser , who were clearly more socialist ideologically. The party was full of people who were very far left to very far right but they mostly banded together on German nationalism and antisemitism. The SA (sturmabteilung) was full of all walks, left and right. Hitler saw this as a growing problem and eventually eliminated the Socialist leadership element of the Nazi Party in the Night of the Long Knives. The entire threat of the (big S) Socialists was murdered in a few days. The result being the conservative section (Hitler) gained full control, the SA’s power was effectively destroyed, the SS was victorious. Now. You must also understand Hitler’s worldview. It’s not easy. Hitler viewed National Socialism as one word. He viewed the that solely in terms of the Aryan race and not necessarily in terms of economics. The Nazis were not afraid to use socialist methods as a tool. I e the employees of the autobahn for example. Just as they were not afraid of using capitalism as a tool. Germany could not have escaped the depression without capitalism, obviously. The point is that neither were really the central point of their ideology. The core tenants of Nazism were centered around the nationale or Volksgemeinshaft and the struggle against Communism/Jewry (which they viewed as one and the same). Anyway, there are also other reasons that the “Socialist” argument doesn’t pass the test. There was no real transfer of wealth in Nazi Germany, collectivization wasn’t ever implemented before war (specifically late 1941), private property was never really eliminated unless you didn’t play ball or if you were Jewish. In Mein Kampf, Hitler specifically refers to “The Left” as his enemy. Hitler also contradicted himself in speeches all the time depending on the crowd he was speaking to. When you take away the rose colored glasses, the Nazis were 100% authoritarian, 110% nationalist, but socialist? Maybe kinda? They were inarguably more capitalist in the grand scheme and I wouldn’t call them capitalist per se. They even took the time to murder the socialist wing of their party in 1934. So were The Nazis Socialist? “No, BUT. Yes, IF.” …Ultimately…no. Too many disqualifying factors would suggest not and even by their own definition they would have said no.
I've pretty much landed where you are. He had two goals: to have a uni-racial country, and to go to war to conquer land and create an empire. His economy was simply oriented toward that goal. Their entire economy was underpinned by massive deficit spending. The only reason they allowed themselves to do this was because they assumed they could recover the deficit by conquering foreign lands and riches. So, in essence, nazism was this freakish and unique thing, perhaps more aligned with warring societies thousands of years earlier.
@@sdrc92126 Well, he clearly *was* as Marxists are *pragmatists* if nothing else; they really do believe in winning at all cost, and in modifying the claims if needed to obtain their goals- they do NOT believe in objective moral standards, really at all.
National Socialism was not the same as marxist / leninist / bolshevist socialism. They were ideologically opposed. The latter was internationalist, and always transhumanist in intention. So few are qualified to talk about this topic because so few are willing to read the source material, or an honest telling of history.
Marxist socialism was a complex philosophical ideology, whereas National Socialism was the equivalent of an antagonistic bumper sticker. Even mentioning them in the same breath is absurd.
well duh, nazi litterally stands for national socialist workers party. which makes it all that much more hilarious when young liberals call anyone conservative a nazi.
I bought a copy of Samuelson's book from the early 1960's. It might have even been late 1950's. The footnotes are SO intelligent compared to the garbage in standard college level econ books these days. Don't get me wrong - Samuelson interpreted Böhm-Bawerk 180° backwards, but atleast his name was in Samuelson's book. I feel like Alfred Marshall was the original Paul Samuelson. I'm sure he meant well, but he forced economic reasoning into mathematical exercises. And in my humble opinion, that was more important to him than truth and realism. 80 years later, the dichotomy was between the followers of Keynes vs Friedman. And they ALL repeated the methodological sloppiness of Marshall. I love the Supply & Demand curves, though. I don't want to come off as his biggest critic. That *was* Marshall, wasn't it? Oh well. I guess the demand for mathematical economics will always be around. Rightly or wrongly.
Dr. Zitelmann is right about lack of marketing (or education) on behalf of conservatism. Than the new generation learns the hard way about pitfalls of left ideologies.
Yeah, well, that's public education for you. I grew up in the 90s and as a conservative I thought I should give mein kampf a read so I didn't end up becoming a Nazi. My conclusion? What a load of socialist gobbledegook!
I'd add that free markets are not what define capitalism. Capitalism is the only system in which people can buy, own and sell capital without having to come into direct possession or management of that capital. It remains the case in China today, that one cannot buy, own or sell capital without coming directly into its management, so China is not capitalist in any way, shape or form.
The best way to define Capitalism is against it's opposite: The Private Ownership of the Means of Production (i.e. the Private Capital). The opposite would be Public (i.e. State) Ownership (or Control) of the Means of Production. This is the historic definition of Socialism and was before Marx started using the term.
@@sigurdholbarki8268 socialism is against private property. "means of production" gives an impression of factories etc, but it is not. You just cannot own anything.
Great interview but he gets quite a bit wrong. 1) People do get rich by unethical means: junk food, tobacco, monopolistic behavior, medical price gouging, advertising, much of the financial and legal complex (this might be less obvious in Germany). 2) 1990's + has been very bad for the american middle class. People in the middle are not better off--they are worse off. Savings rate lower and lower, debt levels higher, house cost vs income getting worse, need for costly college degree to get a good paying job, etc.
@@danielpye7738 Socialism is the opiate for the masses that Marx talked about. He was a theologian/philosopher (not an economist) who wrote the CM on commission for a millenarian religious group (really). The masses can't learn its true purpose.
I would say "influence" rather than origin. The origin lies with the rise of Enlightenment Liberalism, specifically the Liberalism of Rousseau which differs wildly from that of Locke or Hobbes. But you can't deny its influence, especially when you see how many members of the intelligentsia were into spiritualism and far more weird ideas than that
I think he is oversimplifying the effects of inequality and defending the rich. We‘ll see if current events in the US and the outcomes will change his perspective.
I agree - he is keeping his argument simple. I see corporate capitalism without political constraint as a major threat to living standards and flourishing
@@johnkrstyen Perhaps you're right. Maybe he hasn't seen my comments, although channel owners do receive a notification every time someone comments on their videos. Just to clarify, that's not why I'm calling him an idiot. He's an idiot because of his blatant revisionist history and refusal to acknowledge well-documented facts and historical events that completely dismantle his entire stance on fascism.
Companies that succeed also need morals, and it doesn't come automatically. So we also need ethics, basically carried by religion, and a government to implement those ethics. Otherwise, true.
I remember as kid 70s early 80s was similar in europe , also nordics, I bet for same reason: people had jobs and knew where those jobs came from. So outtake was positive on average. (And 1950s rough rural life was still very close in memory and childhood)
Don't the old definitions still work-- 1. Economics is the study of how best to meet infinite need with finite resources. Need is infinite. Resources are finite. The world has created two economic options. 2. Marxism (The foundation of communism and socialism) says you meet that need by giving to each person according to what he needs. It sounds reasonable and virtuous but it means incentivizing need. You will get more if you need more. Need is infinite so it exhausts your resources. And who decides what need is and whose is greatest? It is not easu to measure need objectively: the system is susceptible to corruption and oppression. That has always been its outcome In the real world. Human suffering and genocide. 3. Capitalism says you meet that need by giving to each according to what he produces. Production is incentivized so everybody wants to produce more. Production is easier to measure and not as susceptible to corruption. Everyone works more and harder and innovates ways to boost resources. You end up with surplus production that can raise the less fortunate and bring them out of poverty. That has been its outcome in the real world, lifting millions and millions of people out of poverty. 2
That is not really the definitions. Part of the problem is that Marxists made the original definitions and they invented the word capitalism. And their definition is Marxism: A fair system where everybody get what they deserve Capitalism: A unfair system where the owner steal the surplus from the workers. What I would say the true definitions is rather Socialism (including Marxism): When government control the trade between two other parties Capitalism: When government do not control the trade between two other parties,,, also known as free market, but the Marxist changed that because it sounded to posetive.
Marx was inventing a new spiritual socialist religion. Mankind, the Collective, being and becoming God. But only when the disbelievers are weeded out and ended. Private property was blamed for alienating Man from himself and from Mankind.
No, Prussian/ German socialist as described by the national system of economics talked about by Sombart. After the Anschluss Austrian economy merged with the German one. Not the other way around.
You in Germany have an economic model that depends on cheap Russian resources. You could prevent the war by refusing Russian resources after the war in Georgia in 2008. But you didn't.
"The whole idea [NATO expansion eastwards] is wrong . . . a bad mistake." -- Mikhail Gorbachev, addressing the US Congress in 1997 "Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down." -- Lord Ismay, first Secretary General of NATO "Never underestimate Joe Biden‘s ability to fuck things up." -- Obama "To be an enemy of the US is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal." -- Kissinger "Cry Ukraine, cry! You are your own traitor and executioner. You crushed reason and peace with your own hand." -- Oles Alekseevich Buzina. Buzina was a Ukrainian journalist and writer known for his criticism of Ukrainian politics and for his support of closer ties to Belarus and Russia. He was found killed by a gunshot on 16 April 2015, near his residence in Kiev.
@@SEKreiver How many Germany officers ran NATO? Hi ter's Chief of Staff was Chairman of the NATO Military Committee. I have a list of dozens of these types of positions
If you don't know the difference between national socialism (nazi) and socialism you're a lost cause. National socialism has aspects of socialism but it's definitely not the same. The first people Hitler was fighting were the socialists, even before the jews. In my (nazi-occupied) Western-European country, the socialists and communists formed the most important resistance groups. Many socialists had to go in hiding, even if they weren't doing any resistance work. Also, the Russians (communists) liberated a great part of Europe just as well. It was only after WWII when the divide in Europe was established and America told us to hate all communists and socialists. If you want to learn more about the socialists against the nazis, read about the history of Willy Brandt. I know more Americans who say that Hitler was a socialist. I blame the American education system and probably the post-war American propaganda agaist the Russians, because nobody in Europe thinks that way. And it's about us. Sorry @DadSavesAmerica, I expected more of you.
Hitler was fighting socialists to start with because they wanted to be THE socialist party of Germany. If you made a modern socialist wish list right now of what they want from government, well the Nazi Party met them for the German people. Don’t also forget at the time Germany was regarded the most educated country in the world. And this mess still happened.
Anyone who's spent even five minutes reading any history since the French Revolution knows that socialists of different flavours fight each other constantly. It is such a well known fact that it's one of the most memorable memes in Monty Python's Life of Brian (Judean People's Front Vs People's Front of Judea, etc). Your problem is that you don't seem aware that Marx's Class Socialism was not the first type of Socialism, nor the only type of Socialism proposed in his lifetime. Socialism was one of the main aspects of French Liberal Thought (Voltaire, Rousseau, Murat, Ropespierre, etc) before the French Revolution, and spread across Europe in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars - notably in Trier where Karl Marx was born. Marx added the Class element to his socialism, and he wasn't the first either, but Socialism does not require it as a defining feature because it pre-existed the Communist Manifesto by over 50 years. Furthermore Socialism is only a component of Communism, an intermediate phase before Communism can be achieved. But as communism can never be achieved, Marx was deluded when it came to human nature, so all communists end up being Socialists.
@@sigurdholbarki8268 I have been intrigued by every single on of your comments on this video. And I want to ask some book recommendations, podcast recommendations or any reading/listening.
Mussolini's rule and fascist ideology crafted by him and Giovanni Gentile predate FDR by a decade. The Party was founded in November 1921, Mussolini came to power in '22, and dictator in January '25. 'The Doctrine of Fascism', co-written by both, was translated into English in 1933. Until Mussolini's invasion of Abyssinia in October '35, Italy was allied with France and Britain with the goal to check Germany's rise (first with the Franco-Italian Agreement and then the Stressa Front). Mussolini feared Germany would take over Austria. Germany provided weapons to Haile Selassie to fight Italy with the goal to keep Italy bogged down and create conflict within and collapse of the Stresa Front.
He was a national socialist…socialism to benefit the Volk, the German nation and identity. All the benefits were to be for the Nation…not individuals. The nation was more important than any person or the sentimental feeling towards any person.
Well you can always look at their socialist policies, like centrally planned economies, rent control, prices control, minimum wage, adherence to the shrinking markets fallacy and the Labour Theory of Value. These are all Socialist Economic Policies. You can also look at their evolution, where they split from the Social Democratic Party, existed as the DAP (German Workers' Party) before becoming the NSDAP. If you've not looked into their economic policies, or even read Mein Kampf, I would humbly suggest you're just parroting that line from someone else - so it must be true. And FYI, there are a number of historical Democracies that did not have universal suffrage - the Greeks, Romans and even the USA at its founding. The term democracy means everything and nothing because it's not a form of government, and it's meaning is so ambiguous it can describe everything from mob rule to an oligarchy.
@@sigurdholbarki8268 It was not a command economy, it was state capitalism, and also Facism can be associated with any economic system, its not inherently capitalist or socialist
Socialism doesn't need defending but it's an economic model. Hitler was an authoritarian and an ethno-nationilist. I'm tired of people conflating the two.
@@richardavery4692 Why do you need to follow an economic model? Capitalism isn't an economic model, it's how humans naturally trade with each other free of constraints. Adam Smith wrote a description, not prescription. The only real rule is private property, concept that most animals seem to grasp in nature. It's probably an evolutionary advantageous idea
They have Hitlers speeches translated to English now on UA-cam. It's quite interesting...not supporting its message but it's much easier to understand why he was popular when you can actually understand the words...
If you like what you see and want to stay up to date with Dad Saves America, please subscribe here on UA-cam or over on Substack, where you can find weekly articles and the audio version of the podcast, with more to come in the near future!
www.dadsavesamerica.com
Softball interview.
nope hitler was buisness freindly and pro corporation
Fascism was first implemented in the Soviet Union, under the name of "New Economic Policy", on the 1920's. Hitler, Mussolini, Franco and Peron just copied it, and the longest surviving fascism is the peronist party.
The bad guys are those who initiated the destruction of Germany from London and New York before WWI. Chief H was just a reaction of self-preservation to this destruction. No one thinks it controversial that Germany is a united country today. In 1939, the British made a world war out of it. In 1914, they made a world war out of German market share on the so-called free market. Even if Germans play by British-American rules, they are demonized. This is the real basis for accusing American to be a racist country.
when where and why did you pick it up?
Stalin had horrific policies. He convinced poor Ukrainians that the relatively well to do farmers, the productive farmers had stolen wealth from the poor. "Look, the farmers have a tractor and 6 cows. They are too wealthy, they must givecthat wealth back!" The kulack farmers were killed and their farms seized. These farms were turned over to cooperative non-farmers. Who had no clue how to run a farm. Production fell like a stone. There was no grain, no bread, no meat. Millions starved. Stalin was so cruel, he sent troops to collect ALL the grain from the farmers. He left nothing to re-plant with, nothing to eat. One farm wife went through the field after soldiers left and picked up individual grains of wheat, gathering a few handfuls... enogh for a tiny loaf of bread. She was working to kerp her kids from starving. Her "Theft" was discovered and she was sent to the gulag. Thats socialism at work.
Correct! Stalin was an evil man and he did all that because most who supported him politically were urban-dwellers and he had little support in rural areas! When the inevitable famine arrived as a result of the latest 5-year plan, food became very scarce in cities and towns where his supporters were, and most importantly he had to feed the army as they could threaten his removal.
Depopulation of the undesirable/lesser peoples. The Kulacs were just a means to an end. That's what our American communists are doing to us right now. I don't believe the end will look the same, so that remains yo be seen, not even to its authors. That's why socialism never works... unexpected human behavior. Plus it's a crappy business model.
and even the children of farmers were murdered
Stalin faced a communist opposition organized around Trotsky. He lead a counter revolution that murdered most of the old Bolsheviks who had joined the Party before the revolution. .
The "Ukraine" was also the home to many "Germans from Russia" which was my family. These farmers with ethnic ("Swiss, German, Alsatian," ) low German speakers. They were very good farmers and many who managed to flee before the executions and Gulags ended up in Saskatchewan Canada as well as Pennsylvania and the Dakotas. They were promised land and no military service under Catherine the Great who was German herself. These brutal and divisive acts under Stalin were not only based on class/wealth, but also based on race. Looking at Canada right now really scares me, all this talk of race, hating religion, giving the government crazy amounts of power…. Its almost like we’ve done this before.
It goes deeper than that within the EU, when countries join the EU, the centralized Brussels government tells farmers what they grow, they tell dairy farmers that you can no longer have cows and you must grow crops we tell you to grow just look at Finland and Ireland for the evidence of that, you coal miners are now unemployed look at the UK and Germany for that, you gas workers are now unemployed, you oil workers are now unemployed, you nuclear workers are now unemployed, you car workers are unemployed, you ship builder's are unemployed, you steel workers are now unemployedyou fisherman are now unemployed. And all the towns and cities that had those industries become ghost towns, and the inhabitants rely completely on government handouts, countries within the EU no longer have sovriegnty and will obey the dictates, rules and regulations of the EU council which no citizen within the EU gets to vote on. You will have a single currency a single flag, and now a single military. Not bad for an organization that started off as a trading block. Slow rolling continental socialism.
WEhy not mention all the huamn rights worker reneter womens gay rights etc? Seemsn to me all the issues with cloised factories cound be fixed by not allowing companies to be all over pacpitalisitic and see cheap labour but force them to stay and employ peoepl at decent wage levels of the excitivies and shareholders have very painful and quite fatal accidents of imprisionment. the issue is not the eue tryignt o protecvt peoepl its those who want to use filk as cheap labour
Thats not socialism!
Socialism is an economic and political philosophy encompassing diverse economic and social systems[1] characterised by social ownership of the means of production,[2] as opposed to private ownership.
If the government runs things on behalf of people thats not socialism!
@@albal156 Communism is a movement of the working class on its way to state power. Socialism is the first stage of a Communist revolution that will replace the world capitalist system of production and trade.
Europe needs a single military, and the people voted for a single currency on most countries. Why are you so against the people?
@@albal156 What liberals an left want for socialsim or just liberla and left etc is not the government controls all production and doens not allow anyone to make money in business.
It meens everyoens needs are met ie univerdal heralth care, educaion, fire, medical, rescue services water supplies etc.
anyone wantignt o run nightclubs, make businecuits surf boards etc can go ahead and if somone makes good products and services that benefit peoepl and can make lots of money from many sales then good on them, as long as its not by cuttign safety corners, exploitign workers, pollutiing or sellign dangerous goods.
ie be nice do good then hopefully do well and get well off
but nobody is too bad off and all; have a good basic stand of living theat they casn improve with effort
After WW2, my Hungarian grandparents were put into a Soviet run gulag for three years. My grandmother died and my grandfather was broken physically and psychologically. They endured back breaking labour and communist indoctrination for three years telling them they were the worst people in society. Their crimes were that they were farmers.
Hungarians in the Wehrmacht committed the most terrible war crimes during World War II, perhaps your ancestors were one of these criminals
Viewer from Germany here. I'm a long time follower of Dr. Zitlemann and read most of his books. Great to see him on your podcast and congrats for recognizing his important work on history and the economy.
A lot of people love the Germans in LA .It was the German's who were brought over for the NASA program .Their kids started surfing and developed the modern surfing industry ,designs and composites we use today .
never seen him before, very sharp person with objective look to see history.
Hitler was not socialist at all, it is extrem right propaganda and lies. Hitler was funded by Henry Ford and American industrial & bankers who were surely not socialist friends. This has nothing to with being german or not. If you think Hitler is part of german culture that tells a lot about what you are.
@@effexonI've heard of him through TIK History, here on YT.
My WW2 vet Grandfather used to comment that the Nazis were considered left-wing in the 1930s, even by Marxists.
"Orwell was right that history would be changed," are words of his that echo in my memory.
When a modern leftist claims Fascism and NatSoc were pro-capitalist, it's fun to watch them twist themselves into pretzels trying to explain away the abjectly anti-capitalist economic policies these ideologies had. 😂
Yeah we know Democrat states love Nazis. Amazing that you say Germans brought over to work on the nasa program but in reality it was Nazi higher ups that were brought here. Glad we are ok with war criminals and their children just because one of them like surfing 😂😂@@lalaboards
25:18 My great great grandfather was a father of confederation here in Canada and he advocated for this on PEI/Canada. That people be able to own their own land and that it will make them invest more into developing it. Unfortunately the government wanted to collect land taxes and many disagree with me that you can own land here but its a perspective issue.
If you pay off your house right.... you should be set for life but you don't you will forever pay land taxes. So I ask people if you can never pay off the debt how can you own something?
If the government forces you to pay for something indefinity you don't really own it, you are renting it. It is a service. I really wish his ideas were taken more seriously at the time.
I agree. We have the same issue here in the US. After two missed property tax payments the government can take your home and land.
When I point this out to people they appear to be horrified as if they never considered this! At least in the past having a mortgage “fixed” your housing costs vs. rent payments that increase frequently. Property taxes take away this security and can make home ownership more expensive than renting.
Given the fact that younger generations now have no kids or just 1-2 kids, there won’t be children able to help save the family home (their inheritance) from the tax man.
The only strategy for many retirees is selling their home at a profit & moving to a foreign country like Costa Rica so that they can retire.
People need to act and vote these government tax grabs out. The government can’t improve a dam thing in society.
That’s a great point. Never thought about it that way. Thank you.
American here from CA. I ask home “owners” all the time do you ever own your home. They answer yes. Then I say stop paying your property taxes. It’s like oh dang you’re right.
You are merely renting the like bottom half of society.
Whats the problem? Don't like renting?
I'll take "Things I never learned in school but wish I did" for $1,000, Alex. This interview is amazing. Thank you to you both!! 🙏🔥
here is a link to the joint nazi david star coin they had in '33. img.ma-shops.de/monetarium/pic/5338_img_9723.jpg
Try _Science, Politics and Gnosticism_ by Eric Voegelin for things I really wish I had known in high school. It's a very short and easy read.
There are reasons you aren't taught this by teachers who have a MAJOR soft spot for socialism....
The same thing as why you aren't taught anything about personal finances or how to raise money for starting a business. This is done intentionally by the old Trillion dollar wealth families of America (Rockefeller, Carnegie, Dupont's, Dow, Fords) They wanted workers, not creators/builders.
Now the weird question is what does that mean for all of us when they get Optimus like humanoid robots....? I think this is why they are flooding the country to rob the middle class faster.
Except this is a dishonest take, comparing socialist countries like Denmark or Norway to Nazi Germany is a straight lie. Don't think this is "educational". It's more like right wing propaganda, which is actually akin to Hitler.
I'm a libertarian, but I'm not deluded enough to think that libertarianism leads to a utopia, I just like freedom.
Some libertarians want to do away with county health departments. Do you want that? There are various government functions which have never (to my knowlege) been successfully done by purely private sector means.
If you like freedom you should not vote democrats. It is not logic rational.
I like your position on that!
Doing away with governments would result in us being ruled by bankers, CEOs, large landlords and their private police forces and armies. What is the advantage of that?
@@bdnevins Healthcare used to be much much cheaper in the US, to the point that physicians lobbied government to restrict competition cause they wanted to be paid more, they lobbied government to cartelize who could and could not become a doctor through state-certified medical licenses, a monopoly of who can become a doctor was decreed by law in the name of "protecting" physicians. I'd link it but youtube would hide my comment, search "How government regulations made healthcare so expensive mises" and you'll find an excellent article you can criticize and scrutinize yourself.
F.A. Hayek "The Road to Serfdom", Ludwig Von Mises "Omnipotent Government" (both published in 1944 if my old brain is correct). And on the cultural side - the works of Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddinhn - which show as well as being economically socialist, the National Socialists (Nazis) were also radical culturally - socially.
Which is why the Nazis turned Germany back into the militaristic top down government state, like it was during the second Reich, the Kaiserreich, yes?
Calling it the third Reich should be a clear indicator that they see themselves as continuing a lineage.
I found Mises book "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis" also very good.
@@haraldbredsdorff2699 Mises is trash
@@Arnaere Wow, with argument like that, how can I disagree? Do tell, who is better at explaining prices in the free market.
Or why socialism fail, because it ruin the market and prevents people from trading legally.
Just like the current Democrat party in the US. This is why it’s so important we educate our children on the dangers of this ideology and the disease of chronic victimhood!
When he talks about "traditionalist communism" he means Marxism. Marxism is one form of Socialism.
Communism is a Utopia. Socialism is the engineering of the human species to normalize it.
The word "communism" was used by Richard Wagner as well, who lived under the same time as Marx
Socialism, communism and Marxism are the same thing, the only difference is in the spelling.
@@tombrunila2695 Throw monarchy in there also. Kim Jong Il is the king of North Korea, change my mind
@@tombrunila2695 no. Marx hated Germany, which can clearly be seen in his book ”the German ideology”. Therefore his socialism is not at all like German socialism/national socialism.
Try having this conversation with a socialist.
😂
I mean, I'll wait to listen to the whole thing, but he has stated his thesis, and this is not some new revelation to anyone who has read about this subject. I could have given the first five minutes of his talk.
Try this conversation with a right winger
@@donjuanmckenzie4897what do you even mean
@@iluvyunie the whole thing seems kinda meandering and lacking a genuine humanity;
20:30 I checked out after this comment about Africa, which in my opinion is simply intellectually dishonest
ie - saying that they were provided development aide yet failed to “capitalize” is just an absurdly disingenuous over-simplification that completely OMITS the well-documented [open-secret] of 1st worlders systematically undermining and subverting places to exploit resources
period. end of story.
all the rest of the annoying blahblahblah is just smug nonsense when people arrogantly refuse to have conversations based on the objective geopolitical monopoly game that has been had specifically throughout the last few decades…
whatever… who cares
The level of gaslighting on the part of those who claim Hitler was not a socialist is truly astounding, though perhaps understandable because to admit the truth is to admit that Hitler was a "fellow traveler". "Oh...but National Socialism isn't >real< socialism." Again, that is nothing more than a dodge of the truth. There was absolutely no room for conservative or libertarian thought in the National Socialist movement, and those ideologies are correctly placed on the Right side of the ideological spectrum. Perhaps national socialism was slightly to the right of communism, but that still places it firmly on the Left side of the ideological spectrum.
" no room for conservative thought" except for the rampant racism
It's the same with COVID-19 vaccinated people, they prefer to die over admitting that they made a mistake and followed blindly their leaders and the herd. The same with socialist after the war they prefer to blame the conservative right. They simply can't see themselves in the eyes and now they do it again.
Hitler's mass support came from the pauperized small businessman and the educated professional.
Hitler threw Marxists in jail. Hitler did not privatize industry. When Hitler took power, he privatized governmental services. He did not take any property away from any of the large industrialists. He supported a private banking system and turn previously nationalized Deutsche Bank back to private control. So tell me again how was Hitler a socialist? Just because some Nazi with a German accent gets on UA-cam and talks a lot of s*** don't go believing him. I noticed a lot of people that think like this also are very swayed by UA-cam experts with Russian accents . . .
And killing bad races instead of killing bad classes, but there was a lot of crossover on that.
Excellent guest. All his descriptions of fascism fit with the research I've done in recent years, and confirms that 99.9999% of people don't know what fascism is. This guest got me to finally subscribe to your channel.
tikhistory has excellent videos on fascism
@@sdrc92126 At this point I think I've got an accurate definition pretty well resolved, but if I get time I'll check the channel out
I've seen quite a lot of circular logic with the definition of fascism.
They'll say, for a recent example, "Trump is a fascist."
And when you ask what fascism means, they'll say "Trump."
Yeah Hitler socialist 😂 He was funded by Henry Ford and so many USA industrial & bankers. Your research proved totally ineffective. By the way fascism started when local industrials hiring veterans from WWI to go beat strikers and communist. Those groups were named fasci. Yeah i've read 500 page book about fascism contrary to 99% peoples here.
@@LizRealGirlBeautyYou're speaking to some particularly dumb leftists then. 😂
Well read ones will at least say that a businessman running the country is like a marriage between the state and big business (a very loose way of defining Fascism).
For the well read ones, I ask them to point to any economic policy of his that mirrors than of Syndicalism (the branch of Marxist theory which Mussolini and Gentile got most of their ideas from).
That normally shuts them up 😁
I would have to question whether Britain colonised India. Britain certainly controlled India, but did Britain transplant its culture? I think not.
It "imperialized" India. Muslims always argue with me regarding the Spanish and Ottoman caliphates. Somehow, neither were "colonialist".
@@SEKreiverOttoman and earlier Arab caliphates empires eg multiethnic monarchy with most power centralized with the state dominated by one ethnic group, though very often local elites do get co-opted into the project. As for the Interesting question though you’ve posed - probably has been answered more eloquently but colonialism is set apart by less of the above, globalized/industrializing setting, social attitudes towards land vs overseas expansion, and racial component. Are the Romans colonizing the rest of Latium in 5th century bc?
It was complex.
There were many Princely states that had considerable autonomy…
The Indian Civil Service was tiny, never more than 1200 people responsible for 300 million…(nowadays there are probably 1200 civil servants in one suburb of London).
The British Indian Army was far more Indian than British.
Definitely not if you see how most Indians live and behave.
The 3rd world needed to be quelled and wrangled by superior people for its own good.
The transplanting has occurred in Britain and Ireland though, vast numbers of Indians plague us and demand we pay attention to their cultural holidays etc
I think that might depend on the size of the enclave.
This guy further supports the argument for closing government schools. We aren't taught any of this in fact quite the opposite.
This is bs and you're taking sucky sucks from a Nazi apologist
@chari---zard when you ideologize and condemn schools of thought you are cutting yourself from a branch of intelligence, one it seems you could sorely use
@@chari---zard he's literally slagging the National Socialists off and all you're doing is engaging in logical fallacy (i.e. ad hominem)
@@chari---zard understanding there are other kinds of socialism that aren't rooted in Marxism doesn't make someone a Nazi apologist, it makes them educated.
@@sigurdholbarki8268 Not really. German Nazi apologists do criticize the way the Nazi era is taught in school (Nazis very, very bad), by comparing it to the Nazi school system. "If you make me feel bad about Nazis in a public school, the public school is as bad as the Nazis."
That argument OF COURSE minimizes how bad the Nazis actually have been, and it slanders the public school system.
im from germany the sad part is on one hand we learned all of this in school but due to propaganda mostly from documentarys we " forget" this.
Very interesting point
UA-cam Chanel Sean Hross Giureh-G.I.U.R.E.H:" The Swiss Beast. The Home of the Devil " bringt Licht in Ihr Dunkel !!!
NICHTS IST WIE ES SCHEINT !!!
And er learn it more focused on how "Nationalism" is bad, and often minimalising the "socialism" part
@@darthcalanil5333 Yeah I for one being a Swede grew up fully on the "Fascism was capitalists last effort defence against the working man's demands" narrative. Never heard a word about Hitler or Mussolini having socialist policies or even genuinely being inclined that way ideologically at any point.
@@gThomasHagg Probably because they weren't socialists. Especially Hitler, who killed socialists.
My thing is capitalism is voluntary. Socialism is forced.
Fascism does not engage in a fight between left and right, but between different leftists ideologies.
Fascism is a counter revolutionary movement of thugs organized to defeat the Socialist Revolution.
Fascism is the vomit expelled by a dying capitalism. .
BINGO!
I think what you are saying makes sense but a lot of people will struggle with it because of what they use to define left versus right. I find what often makes sense to people is to ask them to view these ideologies along a spectrum of individualist versus collectivist. It then becomes very easy to see that there was a battle between left collectivist and right collectivist ideologies. The principles around which they were organized were different, but they were collectivist ideologies.
Fascism hates communism because they are fighting over the same political ground
I mean....the word Nazi means National Socialist....hows nobody remembered this?
Because they've been taught by lefties
It's just new to you. I learned it like...... a year ago.
@@jeffkay1977 Somehow the left hasn't heard yet.
@@jeffkay1977 lol. It was one of most memorable lines from _The Big Lebowski_
It's not a coincidence. This is a strategic manipulation tactic to try and forget it. I think people underestimate the evil intentions and tactics of the left
This was one of the best discussions you've had. Please have Dr. Zitelmann on again soon.
Thank you. Somebody is reminding the right Hitler was a socialist!
So who didnt know Na zi was short for national socialist? Wtf.
The entire education establishment.
@DadSavesAmerica Lol.
That's why you never trust your education to the system.
I don't know if you can still find his work online (it's mostly been scrubbed after his death) but he's got a bunch of books on the subject, Jim Marrs.
Thanks for this podcast, I will re enjoy while at work, hopefully someone else learns something too.
The fact that people do not know this is insane.
Ah yes, but the retort from the other side when this is pointed out is usually something along the lines of: “Oh but often names are used that don’t actually mean what they say. For example the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is not democratic or a republic.”
@@DadSavesAmerica Come on, mate. You, of all people, should know that the education establishment is well aware of this misguided view of history. Unlike you, they are more responsible and teach people the truth about Nazism instead of entertaining crackpots like Zitelmann.
Anyone else growing up in the late 60's, early 70's remember your parents admonishing, "Eat your dinner! Chinese kids are STARVING.." 😒
At home they were black children...
My Mom used that on me and my brothers once and we told her that they are communists, of course they are starving. I had a wonderful loving mother.
Was Africans in my day.
In the 80ies it was Ethiopia (when the country had 25 million inhabitants and was rules by Soviet-style socialists and couldn't feed itself. Today the country has more than 100 million inhabitants)
My grandparents were stating "African children were starving" , now the tables have turned China (in the 90s) and many African nations (recently) have adopted freemarket capitalism with 0-5% taxation which has allowed more saving potential when PPP is considered.
Trumps’s success is because he has been able to tap into the emotions. Capitalists need to do this. Tell the people what socialism steals from them! The best thing of all is that it’s TRUE!! I’m a self educated Austrian Economist, and know the truth. We have to think of how to simplify our message for the masses, so they can understand without reading dozens of books and listening to 100s of lectures. I believe the message should start in schools, and be constantly reinforced, because socialism is so alluring to non- thinking people due to its simple, emotional lies.
Do you have any papers or lectures that you did that I could look at?
I rather Take Trump's success is the growing pragmatism and the rationalization of Americans in Opposition of Kamala Harris growinf raficalization to far left liberals
From what I see. It is Kamala Harris instead Who tapped the emotion spectrum
I totally agree with you. There needs to be some form of educational basis that explains the brilliance of the free market and that why economic freedom is the most fundamental of all our rights.
The socialists go for the emotional play of how tough life it is for some. Where as the those that follow and live by free markets can simply say well look at the evidence of what has actually occurred when people get to deal with other.
@@arielquelme "What can be, unburdened by the past" is an advertising slogan and utopian "I am a god" magical thinking. I can't think of any working invention in human history that was "unburdened" by the past. That said, an "appeal to emotion" is an effective way to make an argument, humans are not what I would call a purely "logical" species. All politicians seem to know this.
That will only work on SOME of them.
The root of the problem is most of them FEEL afraid of making choices in their lives where they may fail. They don't admit it to themselves, sometimes, but it's there.
Those people would prefer guaranteed equal misery than the chance they fail while others succeed.
After WW1 Hitler became an important member of Kurt Eisner's revolutionary Socialist Bavarian Republic which brought down the Bavarian monarchy. After the assassination of Eisner he joint the short-lived Bavarian Soviet Party (yeah, "Soviet" as in Socialist/Communist). He subsequently joined the Socialist DAP (Deutsche Arbeiter Party/German Workers Party). That party was later renamed to NSDAP (National Sozialist Deutsche Arbeiterpartei / National Socialist German Workers Party = Nazis). He told the Germans: "I bring you a Socialism for the Germans; a National Socialism". I'm pretty sure Hitler was a Socialist, even leaning to Communism.
Mussolini was an activist Communist in his younger years. Later - when he was chief-editor of the Socialist daily newspaper - he was very critical of the Communist Party based on its policies, not the ideology. Influenced by Giovanni Gentile he joined the Fascists supporting that ideology based in the French revolutionary movement of Syndicalism (Literally "trade-unionism") aimed at controlling industry through militant trade-unions. His Fascist ideology was aimed to benefit all Italian nationals, independent of race.
Oswald Mosley from the UK was a member of the British Socialist Labour party, until being expelled for being too radical. He subsequently became the leader of the British Fascists. Jacques Doriot of France was a Communist before he became the leader of the French Fascist party.
It's pretty unlikely that such dedicated far-left sympathisers like Hitler, Mussolini, Mosley, and Doriot will become the absolute leaders of a far-right ideology. It only makes sense when National Socialism and Fascism are considered far-left ideologies.
It should be pointed out that, though it's true Moseley was a Labour MP before starting the BUF, it's also true that he had been a paid in member (but not a parliamentary member) of both the Liberal and the Tory (Conservative) parties prior to joining Labour.
Moseley was a bit of political grifter, more than an ideologue.
When i was a kid in communist Czechoslovakia, our house was "rundown grey" and there was a weird stump on the house next to my window. Now the house is restored to how it really should look like. It is white with a cherub statue next to the window!
I think what people don't realize is that socialism is really the economic system by which much wealth is centralized in the hands of a few. Capitalism only works when there's the free flow of money and ideas. Capitalism by definition requires the investment of capital in new ideas. You are not capitalizing on your money unless you do this. This means money naturally has to flow from those who have it to those who do not. It's only through the growth of wealth of those who do not have wealth that those who do have wealth are able to capitalize.
💯
@@sdrc92126 Small capitalist production combines into larger firms who then control the whole economy.
@@kimobrien. Yes, this is why 'capitalists' have always been the biggest proponents of socialism. Since the 'capitalists' control the government, socialist control means 'capitalist' control.
@@kimobrien. Versus the economy being controlled by the centralized few in socialism. Exactly why successful economies are some hybrid of both capitalism and socialism. No perfect answer.
The small number of people controlling the economic system under socialism claim they are doing the working for the benefits of all the people. However, it’s impossible to keep them accountable to that promise, and anyone who dare to challenge the top becomes the “enemy of the people”.
Dr. Peterson argued this too, and it made sense to me, but people look at you like you're crazy for suggesting a Nationalist Socialist might be.......
......Socialist
😂
Does Burger King sell burgers? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Just make people who do not believe it read their funding principles in their own words. It my help to not tell them who wrote them
I do like some things JBP says, but he didn't give a good argument on Hitler's socialism. I think TIKHistory on youtube and Zitelmann's books give much better arguments and evidence of why National Socialism is REAL socialism.
@@sdrc92126Yes.
And the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea is a democracy?
This IS your best video so far, Dad.
Thank you both.
This is awesome!
That was one of the most coherent interviews. And, Dad, you always impress me by allowing your guest to be front stage. What a joy it must be to sit across from you.
my favorite time waster arguing with socialist about hitler being a socialist
my favorite thing in college was getting people to agree with hitler quotes on socialism without telling them the source of the quote. This was pre-web and pre-search engines
@@sdrc92126Please tell me you at least have Polaroids of their faces just after you inform them that they agree with the Austrian Painter 🙏
@@Si_Mondo "One may regret living at a period when it's impossible to form an idea of the shape the world of the future will assume. But there's one thing I can predict to eaters of meat: the world of the future will be vegetarian."
I never tell them
@@sdrc92126 I always do! Their faces are pictures! 😂
Both fascisme and nazism were interwar ideologies trying to contain communism with social policies. Roosevelts "New deal" had many elements taken from the social polices of fascisme. Both in Denmark and Sweden you saw social democrats adopt polices with a corporative state from fascisme. It's the interwar and there was a fear of communisme.
You may be overlooking the fact that all those groups split from Social Democratic Parties and that Fascists actually split from the French Communist Party (where the fascists were called Syndicalists).
Marxist Communists held that the Proletariat would inevitably rise up against the Bourgeoisie, but by the end of the 19th Century this was looking increasingly unlikely, which posed a problem with a number of solutions.
The Bolsheviks decided they would rise up in violent revolution on the Proletariat's behalf.
The Syndicalists, after WWI, abandoned the International Class based Socialism of Marx in favour of National Socialism.
In Germany this took the form of Ethno Socialism mixed with 19th German Nationalism and weird occult shit that was rife among the chattering classes.
In the less homogenous Italy, their National Socialism had less of an emphasis on ethnicity and more of an emphasis on the State.
The Communists weren't a massive threat in Europe, they succeeded in taking Russia and China by force because both countries were practically feudal kingdoms so they could take over relatively few cities and tyranise the largely rural population.
Fascism was implemented first in the soviet union by lenin. He called it "new economic policy", and fascists just copied it. So there was no difference.
The difference is that the soviet union was a violent imperialist project, that invaded all neighbor nations, so the europeans came with their own imperialist fascist projects, to be the rulers of global socialism instead of being ruled from Moscow.
That's' why the USSR was "international socialism", or "communists", and the others were "national socialisms". It was a clash of power between the same ideologies with capital in different nations.
But modern socialism is controlled by London, so it wants to rewrite the history, in orwellian fashion, to build his own imperialist socialism, this time disguised as wokism, feminism, climate changeism...
@@sigurdholbarki8268 Nonsense.
@@Cirwlos Even more nonsense.
@@brett22bt Just google "new economic policy", and marxists themselves will explain it to you.
This was an excellent discussion. Thank you to you both!
any time a state, tells a company what to do, what to make, what to not make etc. through coercion or however incentives even.
that is socialism.
if they do it on a national basis, tampering with free market dynamics, that is national socialism,
if they do it on a global or international basis, then that is international socialism, or global communism.
See net zero, EVs, renewables etc etc. no one asked for any of it
Mussolini was the most honest politician of his day. He wrote a Treatise on Fascism and it was in his mind a natural progression from Communisms. State run companies... no, but private companies that do the state's bidding. USA is too close to this. A marriage of convivence has become a corrupted Bureaucracy. The EV mandate is the dumbest. Hybrid is the best tech we have right now. It solves several problems at once while greatly recusing CO2 output if that is your biggest concern. But that option has been mandated out too.
Neville Chamberlain was the honest one...and knew war was planned by the British deep State or the Rhodes - Milner
roundtable..
Mussolini also once quipped that 'Fascism' should actually be called 'Corporatism', because of the way it works (described above).
It is more important what modern socialists don't want you to know about socialism! Read "The Socialist Phenomenon" by Igor Shafarevich. You can find in online as a PDF.
And by the way, the Nordic countries are not and have never been socialist!
I recently had a conversation with a person who is quite the proud Kiwi. But he was upset a Jacinda Ardern had gone and she was one of the main reasons he was proud. So I asked him with his national pride and heavy leaning towards socialism then what party should he vote for.
He said Labour…
It was the same with the National Socialists of Scotland, oh sorry, Scottish National Party. Oops 😂
Lol
Dr. Rainer Zitelmann is a brilliant mind that needs more exposure. Thanks for having him on your show and having a long enough conversation for him to get some of his main points accross.
@@KevinFitzMauriceEverett ZERO intellectual integrity. A propagandist of the worst garbage sort. D E M O C R A C Y.
If you liked this, try TIK History in depth explanations of the origins, ideology and policies of Fascism and Nazism.
@@gThomasHagg Thanks. It looks good.
But but nazi were fascism and Donald Trump is fascism 😂
That would be even funnier if you said "Donald Trump is a fascism" 😂
🤣🤣🤣
Aside from the poor sentence structure, I agree. The Nazis were fascists, and Trump is also a fascist.
The liberals are not gunna like this one lol
*The Left stopped being Liberal decades ago.*
They're already reeeing in the comments
Conservatives are liberals in slow motion.
As John Rambo said
“Fuck em”
I always laugh when I see people only finding out that Nazis were called National Socialists for the first time, thinking they've discovered some giant historical cover-up. The name of the National Socialist German Workers Party is common knowledge. Maybe look into what really happened during Hitler's rise to power instead of listening to crackpots like Dr. Rainer Zitelmann. Perhaps you could start with Hitler's murdering of prominent socialists within the Party on the "Night of the Long Knives." Or maybe his outlawing of the Communist Party after the Reichstag fire. Or the fact that he had to keep imprisoning or killing members of the Democratic Socialist Party in the Reichstag to finally get the numbers he needed to pass the Enabling Act, after which he imprisoned all communists and socialists by decree. They were among the first to go into the camps, and none of them made it out. He sided with big business and abolished Unions, crushing any resistance from the socialist working class. His focus was on ethnic purity and National pride. Hitler was not a socialist; he was a far-right authoritarian fascist.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out-because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me.
-Martin Niemöller, 1946.
Thank you to both of you, Dr. Rainer Zitelmann really makes things completely clear, so it in a very understandable way makes sense, in this never ending battle between kapitalisme and socialism. I really hopes it will change somebody’s mind for the better. Once again: A very big THANK YOU.
Evem wikipedia states that hler hated capitalism
Sounds like how the EU is now
You can't talk about that here
01:08:00 without having read your book, Poland's growth could also be attributed to the huge financial support from the US as the last frontier between NATO and Russia. We should put nation within their global context and not judge them individually. "No country is an island".
Hitler was not a socialist.
My college thesis in 1975 was about the lack of difference between National Socialism and Global Socialism outside of geographic ambitions. I received a high grade according to our teacher because I explained it fully and factually !
Global socialism is pro-labor and antiwar. That's the exact opposite of Hitler's National Socialism, which was socialist in name only.
There's Brown national socialism in Germany and Red national socialism in Stalin's USSR. Big regret that they fought each other, but not Liberals together. Mussolini corporate state was the only time when trains arrived on time in Italy 😂
My father was a Theologian, & Historian. He and Dr. Zitellman would’ve talked for hours!
There is always more to learn about history & getting the truth not just the propaganda story told by those in power.
❤
For me as a german I do agree with Rainer Zittelmann. A free america which stands for liberty, free speach etc etc is absolutly vital for us here in Europa esp. Germany. I do 💙 capitalism ✊🏼
Excellent conversation! The one thing I do wish they touched on was how Germany was so held down, and used, after WWI. The debt was unbearable. Children were prostitutes, especially in Berlin, which became the famous city of sin. One reason Jews were hated was because they owned not only the banks, but the Cabarets where sex and drugs were plentiful. When the Brown Shirts began growing, they focused on these establishments, and conservative Germans supported this because their poor were being abused by these businesses that drew in international clients. It really was not about religion. History will repeat if we do not understand it.
That may well be true. But to say the vengeance sought by the Nazi Party on Jews was extreme is an understatement.
@danielpye7738 Man's inhumanity to man crosses all ages and borders. Just 2 years ago, countrymen denied healthcare and even locked up neighbors for not complying to experimental drugs. We are not so different.
As I've said before; Yakov the bagel baker did fuck all wrong.
Onlyfans ring a bell?
Most peoples arguments opposed to calling Nazis "Socialist" point to North Korea or the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea."
It's an idiotic assertion and argument.
hitler was buisness freindly and pro corporation
Not so fast.
The Nazi’s implemented every single thing that would be on anyones who called themselves a socialist wish list.
You have to remember that at the time of the rise of the Nazi’s that Germany was THE most educated country in the world. And yet many of them let it fall into the mess it did by actually supporting Nazi policies because it benefited them.
Which is why conservatives (used to be a liberal value) value individual freedom so much. Far less chance of falling into an induced mass psychosis that Germany did.
Because they think Democracy and Universal Suffrage are the same things.
Democracy just means "people rule", and historically the Demos didn't include everyone
Clue in party name
min 59.CO2 is not a pollutant,,,the guest is wrong about that.
isn't what Margaret Thatcher said 'There are no societies but individuals'.
Yeah, but I would differ slightly in that the building block of society, the base unit, is the family.
Like an atom, if you break it down to it's constituent parts, it won't end well
@@sigurdholbarki8268 Ancient Rome was based on those three principles... Family, God, and Nation. Mussolini even adapted this dictum in the 1930s.
He nailed it in the end. Socialist talk with the emotions and conservatives by the head. I came to the same conclusion years ago. So we conservatives / capitalists need to develop the skill of story telling but not based on fantasies and utopias but based on what there is to win.
Conservatives are not capitalists, nor are nationalists. Not consistently, which means they are not.
What else are they then? You could argure that fascism is a progressive ideology.
yes, conservatives go to church on Sundays , cause they use their heads there
@@gThomasHaggyou're making a massive category error and your logic is way off.
Firstly, conservative is a relative term dependent on the culture and time they exist. These days Classical Liberals are often thought of as conservatives, but in 17th and 18th century Britain they were not.
Capitalism and Conservatism describe different, but sometimes overlapping, things. A Conservative can be Capitalist, but not all Capitalists are Conservatives (and vice versa).
The same goes for Nationalists, who can be very different beasts depending on whether they are religious or secular - for one it's merely a tool of governance, for the other it runs the risk of replacing religion.
Furthermore, in Scotland the Nationalist Party used to be split between Capitalists (often called Tartan Tories) and Socialists, although now the party is exclusively socialist.
@@gThomasHagg It depends on where you live. In the New World conservatism is more individualistic, while in Europe conservatism is more royal central planning.
Mises called himself a liberal, in America Ocasio-Cortez also calls herself a liberal. But their ideas are opposites.
I always refer to Germany during WWII as it’s official name on its constitution and coinage- “Deutschland Reich”, as that is the ONLY correct answer.
Whenever someone begins screaming about the NEON YAHTZEES (who are surprisingly Hispanic), and YAHTZEE GERMANY I cringe inside.
Reich is the unstated (secret, hidden, true, real) goal of socialism.)
People have also been told that the current leaders of China and North Korea are "smart men" with "good intentions."
Mao was a total national socialist .
So is xi
@@sdrc92126 Only difference is that XI makes a way better orange chicken .
@@lalaboards 🐻🟧🐔
@ 🐈⬛😹😹
Tikhistory has more content like this on youtube.
Not always accurate, like the mumbojumbo about Hitler being inspired by Hegel. He wants to have viewers and money too.
@@wiardinterested in argument that Hitler was not inspired by Hegel or from others that got their ideas from Hegel.
From the Warring States and the Hundred Schools of Thought, ancient China settled on two main ideas, Confucianism ( orderly compliance ) and Taoism ( natural value ). With the base idea of Yin Yang, both Confucian compliance and Taoist naturality are sides to each other... too much of one leads to imbalance with the other. So when one side says " Conform! " a reply can be " But it is not in my nature! ".
You forgot Chinese Legalism (Chinese machiavellian version)
Oh man I’m super excited. I’m gonna start this tomorrow at work. I have Hitler’s National Socialism.
Absolutely loved this interview! Thank you. He’s wonderful.
Capitalism will exist where the authority in a community recognises and defends the people's ability to own private property.
Owning private property, and having a state governed by laws that protect your ability to do what you will with private property means people will be able to profit from trading in that private property.
Even the ideas in your head are your private property.
This is why Orwell uses the cypher 2+ 2 = 5 to illustrate the depths of control and the jealousy totalitarianism feels towards the private sector.
It's not "left right" it's "public private".
Corporations are publically listed companies that are owned by share holders.
Corporations have a fiduciary duty to the share holders to seek profit for those share holders.
So publically listed companies are public bodies owned by a government within the state government.
Spot on
Most animals recognize property (think bird nests). It's enshrined in the 10 commandments..
So I just watched this whole video. I just want to preface with that I have studied this topic and WW2 altogether for almost 25 years. I have come across “Were the Nazis socialist?” More and more in recent years. I always find it odd because ultimately…who cares? However, experts want to categorize them as either yes or no regarding socialism. After many years studying them, as well as adjacent ideologies, I’ll brake it down in the least biased way possible.
First of all, I am not promoting capitalism vs socialism. My own personal philosophy is that a nation should embrace capitalism over socialism but I also realize both are neither good or bad in and of themselves. It’s how you implement them.
Second, this video takes many unnecessary tangents but primarily because of the interviewer. Although interesting to a degree, this interview trails off into the weeds a lot. This is UA-cam though so I guess that’s the reality of today.
Without further ado, were the Nazis socialist? The short answer is “No, but” the long answer is “Yes, If” The problem I see with the doctor’s view, as well as many people that argue for or against the socialism topic, is that they almost always misrepresent and/or omit the facts that contradict their position. This pertains to what the Nazis said (specifically Hitler’s speeches vs the Fuhrerprinzip), how they acted and behaved, and even when.
A woefully brief history of the Nazi Party: when Hitler joined and was a rising star speaker, the party only had one truly binding platform; nationalism. There were many other people within the party, namely Gregor Strasser , who were clearly more socialist ideologically. The party was full of people who were very far left to very far right but they mostly banded together on German nationalism and antisemitism. The SA (sturmabteilung) was full of all walks, left and right. Hitler saw this as a growing problem and eventually eliminated the Socialist leadership element of the Nazi Party in the Night of the Long Knives. The entire threat of the (big S) Socialists was murdered in a few days. The result being the conservative section (Hitler) gained full control, the SA’s power was effectively destroyed, the SS was victorious.
Now. You must also understand Hitler’s worldview. It’s not easy. Hitler viewed National Socialism as one word. He viewed the that solely in terms of the Aryan race and not necessarily in terms of economics. The Nazis were not afraid to use socialist methods as a tool. I e the employees of the autobahn for example. Just as they were not afraid of using capitalism as a tool. Germany could not have escaped the depression without capitalism, obviously. The point is that neither were really the central point of their ideology. The core tenants of Nazism were centered around the nationale or Volksgemeinshaft and the struggle against Communism/Jewry (which they viewed as one and the same).
Anyway, there are also other reasons that the “Socialist” argument doesn’t pass the test. There was no real transfer of wealth in Nazi Germany, collectivization wasn’t ever implemented before war (specifically late 1941), private property was never really eliminated unless you didn’t play ball or if you were Jewish. In Mein Kampf, Hitler specifically refers to “The Left” as his enemy. Hitler also contradicted himself in speeches all the time depending on the crowd he was speaking to.
When you take away the rose colored glasses, the Nazis were 100% authoritarian, 110% nationalist, but socialist? Maybe kinda? They were inarguably more capitalist in the grand scheme and I wouldn’t call them capitalist per se. They even took the time to murder the socialist wing of their party in 1934.
So were The Nazis Socialist? “No, BUT. Yes, IF.” …Ultimately…no. Too many disqualifying factors would suggest not and even by their own definition they would have said no.
I've pretty much landed where you are. He had two goals: to have a uni-racial country, and to go to war to conquer land and create an empire. His economy was simply oriented toward that goal. Their entire economy was underpinned by massive deficit spending. The only reason they allowed themselves to do this was because they assumed they could recover the deficit by conquering foreign lands and riches.
So, in essence, nazism was this freakish and unique thing, perhaps more aligned with warring societies thousands of years earlier.
I first heard of Zitelmann from Tom Woods.
You are well informed 👍
Yeah, he really was; as is any fascist or nazi also by default a devout follower of Marx's socialism.
Even Lenin was not a devout follower of Marx's socialism.
@@sdrc92126 Well, he clearly *was* as Marxists are *pragmatists* if nothing else; they really do believe in winning at all cost, and in modifying the claims if needed to obtain their goals- they do NOT believe in objective moral standards, really at all.
National Socialism was not the same as marxist / leninist / bolshevist socialism. They were ideologically opposed. The latter was internationalist, and always transhumanist in intention. So few are qualified to talk about this topic because so few are willing to read the source material, or an honest telling of history.
Marxist socialism was a complex philosophical ideology, whereas National Socialism was the equivalent of an antagonistic bumper sticker. Even mentioning them in the same breath is absurd.
well duh, nazi litterally stands for national socialist workers party. which makes it all that much more hilarious when young liberals call anyone conservative a nazi.
I bought a copy of Samuelson's book from the early 1960's. It might have even been late 1950's. The footnotes are SO intelligent compared to the garbage in standard college level econ books these days.
Don't get me wrong - Samuelson interpreted Böhm-Bawerk 180° backwards, but atleast his name was in Samuelson's book.
I feel like Alfred Marshall was the original Paul Samuelson. I'm sure he meant well, but he forced economic reasoning into mathematical exercises. And in my humble opinion, that was more important to him than truth and realism. 80 years later, the dichotomy was between the followers of Keynes vs Friedman. And they ALL repeated the methodological sloppiness of Marshall. I love the Supply & Demand curves, though. I don't want to come off as his biggest critic. That *was* Marshall, wasn't it?
Oh well. I guess the demand for mathematical economics will always be around. Rightly or wrongly.
You’re my kinda guy.
@DadSavesAmerica
Ha ha ha! Thanks. This channel always gives me a good excuse to vent about stuff I never had a chance to say 15 years ago. 😄
Samuelson was a keynesian, and keynesianism is nazism.
Dr. Zitelmann is right about lack of marketing (or education) on behalf of conservatism.
Than the new generation learns the hard way about pitfalls of left ideologies.
Partly - the American ‘rugged individualist’ trope is a powerful emotional conservative argument - and it works on me!
Hm didn't hear anything I didn't know.. blows my mind that people don't know this..
Yeah, well, that's public education for you. I grew up in the 90s and as a conservative I thought I should give mein kampf a read so I didn't end up becoming a Nazi. My conclusion? What a load of socialist gobbledegook!
@@sigurdholbarki8268 As others have said, you have to approach it as a religious document. My high school made us read it.
It blows my mind that people believe this.
@@brett22bt Believe what?
@@KelliAnnWinkler Dr. Rainer Zitelmann's nonsense.
Read Liberal Fascism from Goldberg. It's all in there.
I'd add that free markets are not what define capitalism. Capitalism is the only system in which people can buy, own and sell capital without having to come into direct possession or management of that capital. It remains the case in China today, that one cannot buy, own or sell capital without coming directly into its management, so China is not capitalist in any way, shape or form.
People haven't read _The Communist Manifesto._ Just look up the 10 planks of.
The best way to define Capitalism is against it's opposite:
The Private Ownership of the Means of Production (i.e. the Private Capital).
The opposite would be Public (i.e. State) Ownership (or Control) of the Means of Production.
This is the historic definition of Socialism and was before Marx started using the term.
@@sigurdholbarki8268 socialism is against private property. "means of production" gives an impression of factories etc, but it is not. You just cannot own anything.
@@aaakin they make a distinction between personal property and private property. But its arbitrary and never explained where the line is drawn.
Absolutely enlightening discussion, mind blown, a must listen if you want to understand the state of the world now
This was super interesting
Great interview but he gets quite a bit wrong. 1) People do get rich by unethical means: junk food, tobacco, monopolistic behavior, medical price gouging, advertising, much of the financial and legal complex (this might be less obvious in Germany).
2) 1990's + has been very bad for the american middle class. People in the middle are not better off--they are worse off. Savings rate lower and lower, debt levels higher, house cost vs income getting worse, need for costly college degree to get a good paying job, etc.
You might also be interested to look into the occultism origins of the N party and their H leader.
That is a big rabbit hole: 🤐
That would describe a lot of socialist “thinking” today. A cult level of pseudo virtue signalling to various agendas.
@@danielpye7738 Socialism is the opiate for the masses that Marx talked about. He was a theologian/philosopher (not an economist) who wrote the CM on commission for a millenarian religious group (really). The masses can't learn its true purpose.
@@danielpye7738 _Secret Practices of the Sufi Freemasons_ was written by the guy who founded the dap before h added the ns
I would say "influence" rather than origin. The origin lies with the rise of Enlightenment Liberalism, specifically the Liberalism of Rousseau which differs wildly from that of Locke or Hobbes.
But you can't deny its influence, especially when you see how many members of the intelligentsia were into spiritualism and far more weird ideas than that
It was an extremely illuminating discussion .
I think he is oversimplifying the effects of inequality and defending the rich. We‘ll see if current events in the US and the outcomes will change his perspective.
I agree - he is keeping his argument simple. I see corporate capitalism without political constraint as a major threat to living standards and flourishing
Informative conversation. Zitlemann is jacked.
Tikhistory has been saying this.
Tiks video Hitlers Socialism references the Doctors book. This is where Tik got it from.
Tikhistory is an idiot. I've challenged him many times in the comments, but he doesn't have the guts to reply.
@brett22bt alright what is he an idiot about? Witb thousands of comments you sure he has even seen one of yours?
@@johnkrstyen Perhaps you're right. Maybe he hasn't seen my comments, although channel owners do receive a notification every time someone comments on their videos.
Just to clarify, that's not why I'm calling him an idiot. He's an idiot because of his blatant revisionist history and refusal to acknowledge well-documented facts and historical events that completely dismantle his entire stance on fascism.
@brett22bt curious to elaborate on his historical revisionism and his flaws on fascism?
Companies that succeed also need morals, and it doesn't come automatically. So we also need ethics, basically carried by religion, and a government to implement those ethics. Otherwise, true.
Boom. Totally agree
Listen to Mussolini and Hitler's AI translated speeches, and you will be surprised
Fun fact. In Vietnam, for wedding photos, many couples take photos with fancy brand advertising in the background.
I remember as kid 70s early 80s was similar in europe , also nordics, I bet for same reason: people had jobs and knew where those jobs came from. So outtake was positive on average. (And 1950s rough rural life was still very close in memory and childhood)
Don't the old definitions still work--
1. Economics is the study of how best to meet infinite need with finite resources. Need is infinite. Resources are finite.
The world has created two economic options.
2. Marxism (The foundation of communism and socialism) says you meet that need by giving to each person according to what he needs. It sounds reasonable and virtuous but it means incentivizing need. You will get more if you need more. Need is infinite so it exhausts your resources. And who decides what need is and whose is greatest? It is not easu to measure need objectively: the system is susceptible to corruption and oppression. That has always been its outcome In the real world. Human suffering and genocide.
3. Capitalism says you meet that need by giving to each according to what he produces.
Production is incentivized so everybody wants to produce more. Production is easier to measure and not as susceptible to corruption. Everyone works more and harder and innovates ways to boost resources. You end up with surplus production that can raise the less fortunate and bring them out of poverty.
That has been its outcome in the real world, lifting millions and millions of people out of poverty.
2
That is not really the definitions.
Part of the problem is that Marxists made the original definitions and they invented the word capitalism.
And their definition is
Marxism: A fair system where everybody get what they deserve
Capitalism: A unfair system where the owner steal the surplus from the workers.
What I would say the true definitions is rather
Socialism (including Marxism): When government control the trade between two other parties
Capitalism: When government do not control the trade between two other parties,,, also known as free market, but the Marxist changed that because it sounded to posetive.
Marxism isn’t an economic theory.
It’s fiction, a fantasy.
As millions have found out unfortunately.for them.
Marx was inventing a new spiritual socialist religion. Mankind, the Collective, being and becoming God. But only when the disbelievers are weeded out and ended.
Private property was blamed for alienating Man from himself and from Mankind.
He was a Prussian or German socialist which was different than a Marxian socialist. Literally saved Germany with it.
Austrian you mean
No, Prussian/ German socialist as described by the national system of economics talked about by Sombart. After the Anschluss Austrian economy merged with the German one. Not the other way around.
Born in Austria though
You in Germany have an economic model that depends on cheap Russian resources. You could prevent the war by refusing Russian resources after the war in Georgia in 2008. But you didn't.
You taking to the German oligarchs?
Aside from Atlanta, the rest of Georgia seems fine to me
@@Hypnotically_Caucasian troll :)))
"The whole idea [NATO expansion eastwards] is wrong . . . a bad mistake." -- Mikhail Gorbachev, addressing the US Congress in 1997
"Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down." -- Lord Ismay, first Secretary General of NATO
"Never underestimate Joe Biden‘s ability to fuck things up." -- Obama
"To be an enemy of the US is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal." -- Kissinger
"Cry Ukraine, cry! You are your own traitor and executioner. You crushed reason and peace with your own hand." -- Oles Alekseevich Buzina. Buzina was a Ukrainian journalist and writer known for his criticism of Ukrainian politics and for his support of closer ties to Belarus and Russia. He was found killed by a gunshot on 16 April 2015, near his residence in Kiev.
@@SEKreiver How many Germany officers ran NATO? Hi ter's Chief of Staff was Chairman of the NATO Military Committee. I have a list of dozens of these types of positions
Thank you! This one of the best videos on these topics, and such important points made for this age of global confusion 🙏!
If you don't know the difference between national socialism (nazi) and socialism you're a lost cause. National socialism has aspects of socialism but it's definitely not the same.
The first people Hitler was fighting were the socialists, even before the jews. In my (nazi-occupied) Western-European country, the socialists and communists formed the most important resistance groups. Many socialists had to go in hiding, even if they weren't doing any resistance work. Also, the Russians (communists) liberated a great part of Europe just as well. It was only after WWII when the divide in Europe was established and America told us to hate all communists and socialists.
If you want to learn more about the socialists against the nazis, read about the history of Willy Brandt.
I know more Americans who say that Hitler was a socialist. I blame the American education system and probably the post-war American propaganda agaist the Russians, because nobody in Europe thinks that way. And it's about us.
Sorry @DadSavesAmerica, I expected more of you.
Read any books lately?
Hitler was fighting socialists to start with because they wanted to be THE socialist party of Germany.
If you made a modern socialist wish list right now of what they want from government, well the Nazi Party met them for the German people.
Don’t also forget at the time Germany was regarded the most educated country in the world. And this mess still happened.
Anyone who's spent even five minutes reading any history since the French Revolution knows that socialists of different flavours fight each other constantly.
It is such a well known fact that it's one of the most memorable memes in Monty Python's Life of Brian (Judean People's Front Vs People's Front of Judea, etc).
Your problem is that you don't seem aware that Marx's Class Socialism was not the first type of Socialism, nor the only type of Socialism proposed in his lifetime.
Socialism was one of the main aspects of French Liberal Thought (Voltaire, Rousseau, Murat, Ropespierre, etc) before the French Revolution, and spread across Europe in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars - notably in Trier where Karl Marx was born.
Marx added the Class element to his socialism, and he wasn't the first either, but Socialism does not require it as a defining feature because it pre-existed the Communist Manifesto by over 50 years.
Furthermore Socialism is only a component of Communism, an intermediate phase before Communism can be achieved. But as communism can never be achieved, Marx was deluded when it came to human nature, so all communists end up being Socialists.
@@sigurdholbarki8268 I have been intrigued by every single on of your comments on this video. And I want to ask some book recommendations, podcast recommendations or any reading/listening.
@@sigurdholbarki8268I'd love some recommendations too
Best episode yet
Mussolini based his policies on FDRs policies.
Mussolini's rule and fascist ideology crafted by him and Giovanni Gentile predate FDR by a decade. The Party was founded in November 1921, Mussolini came to power in '22, and dictator in January '25. 'The Doctrine of Fascism', co-written by both, was translated into English in 1933.
Until Mussolini's invasion of Abyssinia in October '35, Italy was allied with France and Britain with the goal to check Germany's rise (first with the Franco-Italian Agreement and then the Stressa Front). Mussolini feared Germany would take over Austria. Germany provided weapons to Haile Selassie to fight Italy with the goal to keep Italy bogged down and create conflict within and collapse of the Stresa Front.
He was a national socialist…socialism to benefit the Volk, the German nation and identity.
All the benefits were to be for the Nation…not individuals. The nation was more important than any person or the sentimental feeling towards any person.
Completely ridiculous.
why? Have you read much of the actual ideology that they published themselves?
It is important to debate, examine, critically evaluate EVERYTHING.
Oh yeah, they called themselves socialist so it must be true
just like how Democratic peoples Republic of North Korea is Democratic and a Republic
Well you can always look at their socialist policies, like centrally planned economies, rent control, prices control, minimum wage, adherence to the shrinking markets fallacy and the Labour Theory of Value. These are all Socialist Economic Policies.
You can also look at their evolution, where they split from the Social Democratic Party, existed as the DAP (German Workers' Party) before becoming the NSDAP.
If you've not looked into their economic policies, or even read Mein Kampf, I would humbly suggest you're just parroting that line from someone else - so it must be true.
And FYI, there are a number of historical Democracies that did not have universal suffrage - the Greeks, Romans and even the USA at its founding.
The term democracy means everything and nothing because it's not a form of government, and it's meaning is so ambiguous it can describe everything from mob rule to an oligarchy.
They had centralized health insurance, national control of the means of production and the first green new deal
@@sigurdholbarki8268 It was not a command economy, it was state capitalism, and also Facism can be associated with any economic system, its not inherently capitalist or socialist
And water is wet. Any other shocking revelations?
Socialism doesn't need defending but it's an economic model. Hitler was an authoritarian and an ethno-nationilist. I'm tired of people conflating the two.
Socialism ENABLES authoritarianism.
It's not an economic model, it's a system to destroy economies and to re-engineer humans to accept a monarchy. Ordo Ab Chao
How do you implement an economic model without an authoritarian State enforcing it?
@@richardavery4692 Why do you need to follow an economic model? Capitalism isn't an economic model, it's how humans naturally trade with each other free of constraints. Adam Smith wrote a description, not prescription. The only real rule is private property, concept that most animals seem to grasp in nature. It's probably an evolutionary advantageous idea
@@sdrc92126 humans are heavily biased and tribal.
It would be nice if host learned the guest's name before he appears on the programme...basic decency
They have Hitlers speeches translated to English now on UA-cam.
It's quite interesting...not supporting its message but it's much easier to understand why he was popular when you can actually understand the words...
Not exactly, Hitler was a blood socialist, not international, but German blood only.