@WAFFEN COLLIDER National Socialism is not identical or a part of fascism as fascism is not a political spectrum. Aside from nationalist aspects the ideologies share no common ground when it comes to economics and race.
@WAFFEN COLLIDER How does it share common ground when fascism applied a corporate government which is relatively close to the USSR's economic policies, it's evident that the fundamental nature of fascism was generally closer to communism than National Socialism in any way.
@@SCHMALLZZZ Communism in practice has produced very little international socialism. It has created Nationalist States with one party authoritarian systems. AKA NK, China, Cuba, Venezuela etc. Textbook is very different from reality. Personally I make very little distinction from Nazis and Communists. They are cousins, they are family. They come from the same origin and should be viewed the same.
To be honest, I would be angry and probably even shout at someone who makes such a stupid connection. Just like someone calling a Jew a Nazi, or equating Nazism with Socialism.
@@Rustycaddy17 Communism and Nazism where both funded by the same elite bankers , do your research and see that the EU is a vehicle controlled by those who are against free individual people, The EU is making more and more fascist laws, or do you think the GDR was not as bad as rule under the Nazis, if you deny the incredible suffering socialism has brought to this planet and blame others and call them Nazis for the darkside of socialist ideology , personally i think its even worse than Nazism itself, if someone is a Nazi openly and honestly is a Nazi at least you know who you deal with, socialism is bringing you all kinds of goodies while taking control of everything in your life ... Fuck these internationalist globalist fascists , this makes so clear how low iq, emotional and psychopathic ther EU bureaucrats are , and they are so afraid we discover the truth hence al the censorship of "fake news" 1984 is at our doorstep ... On coin one state one people ...Hail psycho Verhofstadt , why do you praise the psychopathic control freaks ??? explain WHY , why do you get angry if someone has a different opinion than you, whya re you so immature and support the same leadership wich is totally destructive why? why cant you accept Marxism has led to so much more suffering and killing than Nazism why? You are the one with blood on your hands, and the free people who want nothing to do with big state ideologies are prevailing so fuck you emotional triggers, its a total disrespect to those who suffered and died cause of all large state ideologies SHAME SHAME SHAME on you !
Kamall could have avoided making a fool of himself before everyone had he opened a book, for ex. the Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica - Were the Nazis Socialists? By Michael Ray No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934. ... Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements, and in January 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character. Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month. That July Hitler banned all political parties other than his own, and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps. Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished.
It is fascist. Communists of ALL colors are just like that. NAZI is National Socialist Workers Party. Socialism is disguised communism. Please read Atlas Shrugged for details.
Socialism is a less developed and controlled communism. And an even worse communism is marxism which he himself called socialism (this was changed obviously)
@@commoncriminal923 ummm lol? I don’t think you know what you’re talking about. Marxism is theory, while communism and socialism are forms of practice. Therefore you can have socialism and communism and have Marxist socialism and communism. Marxism doesn’t come after communism lol
@@anonymousalias.5059 Do some research, I mean true historical research and it will become painfully obvious that Fascism is on the left and it's always been on the left.
@@ludvighauger5044 Fascism and communism are both sides of the socialist coin. Both are collectivist ideologies that put the state before the people, that places them on the left. Fascism = Socialism is for us only but not YOU. Communism = Socialism is for everyone but not YOU. BOTH come with a gun pointed at your head.
Guy Verhofstaed destroyed him and the german parliamentary shamed him with his shameful, pathetic guilt by assocation lie. Not surprising you see it repeated in the CZcams comments, but in the EU parliament, it's only worthy of mockery and apologies. Kamall was caught red handed like a deer in a headlight and his ignorance of the most basic european History was showing.
@@lolilollolilol7773 Yes it was stupid and we see it all the time. Like blaming white people for slavery. Or phases like ‘white people did the holocaust’ etc. Dirty smear tricks. All of this must stop.
@@michaelfern4079 There is no doubt that the Aryan germans are responsible for the Holocaust. Not all white people are aryan germans so the generalization is of course abusive, but the fact that the people responsible for the Holocaust were white is also technically true.
Indeed socialist? Depends on your definition of socialism they were the antithesis of Marxism socialism you could make a case they were a form of non marx socialism but it wouldn’t make sense and you can’t argue solely based on the fact socialism was in the name
Allow me to hurst yours by saying that nazi were pro capitalist demagogic pig dogs.... Fascism and nazism is basicly liberalism freed from enlightment ideals.... They even had a freedom of circulation of capital and labour project with no silly national borders within teh reich.. Basicly reich was a proto EU dear to our current day liberals !
@LimeWire2000 "They were also opposed to capitalism in the modern sense". Are you sure? I mean, they even had a liberal as Minister of Economics from 1938 to 1945 (Walther Funk). Funk himself admitted that he was seen as a "liberal Nazi". And it's well known that the Nazis did big business with Henry Ford, IBM, Texaco, Krupp, Nestlé, Coca-Cola, Thyssen, Volkswagen, Hugo Boss, Porsche, Kodak, Bayer, General Motors, etc... So I wouldn't say they were anti-capitalist lol.
Calling the EU "Parliament" a Parliament is an offense to the English. Nobody knows who any of these clowns are, let alone why they are imposing policy on Nations with elected rulers.
I agree. TIK did a great video on “was Hitler left wing?”. The entire concept is absolutely ludicrous. Hitler and left wing fly in the face of all reason. People have no idea what the hell theyre on about. It’s the whole “this is exactly how naxi Germany started!” Anger mongering.
Nazis were so socialist that they formed a coalition with the socialist German National People’s Party, Zentrum, and others against the Right-Wing Social Democratic Party and Communist Party
“National Socialism derives from each of the two camps the pure idea that characterizes it, national resolution from bourgeois tradition; vital, creative socialism from the teaching of Marxism.” - Adolf Hitler, January 27, 1934, interview with Hanns Johst in Frankforter Volksblatt
"The experience of the last fourteen years had shown that ‘private enterprise cannot be maintained in the age of democracy’. Business was founded above all on the principles of personality and individual leadership. Democracy and liberalism led inevitably to Social Democracy and Communism. After fourteen years of degeneration, the moment had now come to resolve the fatal divisions within the German body politic. Hitler would show no mercy towards his enemies on the left. It was time ‘to crush the other side completely’. The next phase in the struggle would begin after the elections of 5 March. If the Nazis were able to gain another 33 seats in the Reichstag, then the actions against the Communists would be covered by ‘constitutional means’. But, ‘regardless of the outcome there will be no retreat . . . if the election does not decide . . . the decision must be brought about even by other means’." - Adolf Hitler By other means, such as storming the Capitol, err, I mean, Reichstag.
"Spengler's Prussian socialism was popular amongst the German political right, especially the revolutionary right who had distanced themselves from traditional conservatism. His notions of Prussian socialism influenced Nazism and the Conservative Revolutionary movement." "Historian Ishay Landa has described the nature of 'Prussian socialism' as decidedly capitalist. For Landa, Spengler strongly opposed labor strikes, trade unions, progressive taxation or any imposition of taxes on the rich, any shortening of the working day, as well as any form of government insurance for sickness, old age, accidents, or unemployment. At the same time as he rejected any social democratic provisions, Spengler celebrated private property, competition, imperialism, capital accumulation, and 'wealth, collected in few hands and among the ruling classes'. Landa describes Spengler's 'Prussian Socialism' as 'working a whole lot, for the absolute minimum, but - and this is a vital aspect - being happy about it.'"
"Strasser said that he did deny it: National Socialism was an idea which was still in evolution, and in that evolutionary process Hitler certainly played a specially important role. The 'idea' itself was Socialism. Here Hitler interrupted Strasser by declaring that this so-called Socialism was nothing but pure Marxism. There was no such thing as a capitalist system. A factory-owner was depended upon his workmen. If they went on strike, then his so-called property became utterly worthless."
"At this point Hitler turned to his neighbour Amann and said: 'What right have these people to demand a share in property or even in the administration? Herr Amann, would you permit your typist to have any voice in your affairs? The employer who accepts the responsibility for production also gives the workpeople their means of livelihood. Our greatest industrialists are not concerned with the acquisition of wealth or with good living, but, above all else, with responsibility and power. They have worked their way to the top by their own abilities, and this proof of their capacity -- a capacity only displayed by a higher race--gives them the right to lead."
"For at that date Hitler was still respectable. He had crushed the German labour movement, and for that the property-owning classes were willing to forgive him almost anything. Both Left and Right concurred in the very shallow notion that National Socialism was merely a version of Conservatism." - George Orwell
The whole left-wing and right-wing argument of fascism being right wing. communism being left wing. The wings of what, of what exactly is socialism. They are on the same Spectrum one is collectivistic globalist and the other one is National but they're both socialist. They both seek an authoritarian government. I'm a capitalist so if anybody ever calls me a fascist a socialist or communist is absurd.
"Incidentally, this also shows that the instruments used to induce private industry to undertake war-related productions and investments could be very similar on both sides of the front. That in turn can be viewed as a piece of indirect evidence for the fact that the economies Germany and the Western Allies still were quite similar, as they all were basically capitalist. The foregoing analysis again proves that in the Nazi period enterprises continued to shape their actions according to their expectations and that the state authorities not only tolerated this behavior, but bowed to it by adapting their contract offers to the wishes of industry. That is also confirmed by Tooze, who argues that there was no 'Stalinist option' available to the Nazi regime and consequently 'a mixture of incentives provided by the state with private economic motives' was decisive for the development of certain sectors of production."
"The experience of the last fourteen years had shown that ‘private enterprise cannot be maintained in the age of democracy’. Business was founded above all on the principles of personality and individual leadership. Democracy and liberalism led inevitably to Social Democracy and Communism. After fourteen years of degeneration, the moment had now come to resolve the fatal divisions within the German body politic. Hitler would show no mercy towards his enemies on the left. It was time ‘to crush the other side completely’. The next phase in the struggle would begin after the elections of 5 March. If the Nazis were able to gain another 33 seats in the Reichstag, then the actions against the Communists would be covered by ‘constitutional means’. But, ‘regardless of the outcome there will be no retreat . . . if the election does not decide . . . the decision must be brought about even by other means’." - Adolf Hitler
Socialism: The State owns the means of production. Fascism: You can own the means of production so long as you do as you're told. Both: Centralized power and socially collectivist.
Earthworm James N64 no they weren’t they were ethno nationalist who embraced capitalism just because they had a strong state doesn’t mean they were left
He demanded him to take back his words and shut up about it until he was properly educated. Spewing out incorrect facts as a mere opinion is not something that should be done in a parliament.
On the face of it, the argument may seem ridiculous. … After all, the name of the party was National Socialist German Workers' Party. For some, it should be as simple as that. Yes, Hitler and the Nazis were socialists, for the simple reasons that they were staunchly anti-capitalist and believed that the means of production in their society should be controlled by a centralized state power. That is very clear from their writings, their words and their actions. Done and done.
good point... the power of words... or the power of action.... China, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Former USSR, former DDR (east Germany), Communist Poland and Hungary, etc. were all titled "democratic republics"... none of them were democratic, none of them were republics.... I so amazed at how uneducated so many people are trying to revision history.... Nazis were highly ANTI COMMUNIST/ANTI SOCIALIST... they were extreme right wing (Fascism)
@@SaraSwank how did Hitler take power through free market capitalisation, ooh wait no Hitler was the leader of the national socialist workers party. Please educate yourself you ignorant fool.
@@sonsofmatriarchy5552 Lol EVERYBODY except you fools knows that Hitler was empowered by the capitalists, who saw him as the leader who came to save them from communism. How do you explain him doing business with Henry Ford, IBM, Texaco, Krupp, Nestlé, Coca-Cola, Thyssen, Volkswagen, Hugo Boss, Porsche, Kodak, Bayer, General Motors, etc etc? If you really think that Nazi regime was a socialist regime you are just an ignorant, sorry to say. I said this to another person but I'm going to say it here again: Hitler himself described his movement as right-wing, for example, in a speech on April 21, 1929, Hitler declares that if a left-wing party took power, that would lead to the complete destruction of Germany, to Bolshevism, while if a right-wing party took power it would be the beginning of great resistance that would lead to the victory of the Aryan. The fact that Fascism and Nazism were to the right of the political spectrum was generally accepted by conservatives, communists, members of the clergy and the fascists themselves. National-Socialism and Fascism were seen as right-wing in all areas, in fact, as George Orwell said in his review of "Main kampf", Hitler crushed the labor movement and that's why the great capitalists were willing to forgive him almost everything. Both the left and the right agreed on the notion that National-Socialism was simply a version of conservatism, the right saw Hitler and Mussolini as leaders protecting capitalism and civilization of Eastern Bolshevism. Fascism saw an ally in the political right of the United States, for example Franco was praised by Republican Richard Nixon as a loyal friend of the United States. In fact, the American right admired fascism so much that President Raegan declared that most Americans believed that Abraham Lincoln's anti-fascist brigades fought on the wrong side of the Spanish civil war, which reveals much about Raegan's sympathy for fascism As Orwell pointed out in 1940, the National-Socialist regime was largely accepted as pro-capitalist and anti-labor both by the left and by the right, while the working class was repressed in the Third Reich, the capitalists enjoyed record profits, in fact , as William Shirer, author of "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," the proportion of national income enjoyed by the capitalists, increased massively under Hitler, while that of the workers declined despite more employment. It is also worth knowing that Hitler and Mussolini privatized state industries when they came to power, the first leaders of the 21st century to do so. So almost all, if not all, the fascists were pro-capitalists, and that is a historical fact that cannot be denied.
@@SaraSwank do you always copy and paste replies, authoritarian leftist regimes are all the same, wasn't Hitler and Stalin Allies before WW2. National socialist workers party isn't real socialism argument. You disgusting vile excuse of a human being all leftists are good for is mass murder through social engineering while blaming capitalism for being about freedom and liberty.
Imagine having to apologize for offending someone because of something you said without any intention of offending someone. I would have just said “I will not apologize, if you got offended it’s not my responsibility since what I said was not with that intention, since now I have cleared that my intention was not to be offensive you got to understand that I have the right to have my personal opinion and you got to respect mine just like I respect yours, so you’re the one who needs to apologize from trying to deprive me from my freedom of speech”. Political correctness is just a way to censor what the majority of the people see as being “bad”, well guess what if my liberty doesn’t affect yours then I can say whatever I want
@saya yowakage Yes, Socialists kill Socialists. Stalin killed Trotsky. Socialists propagandists like you spout this crap as if it's a point. Were there free-markets or private property in Nazi Germany? Nope, that was done away with right after the Reichstag Fire; that's totalitarian Socialism. It's true the SPD (the actual fascist party in Germany according to the KPD) were on the opposite side of the Nazis but they were even more opposed to the KPD because they were the most Liberal (least Socialist). Claiming the "Nazis aren't Socialist" is blatant horseshit. But like all Socialist Parties you're not allowed to say facts that they don't like even in Europe in the 21st Century.
@Krisbugajew11-11 Socialism is public control of the means of production. So... Ehm.. Yeah it can be pretty totalitarian like the soviet union or China.
@saya yowakage after hitler purged socialist leaders from the party in 1934, they privatized for SOME, not all. between the time that hitler joined the party and then (1919-1934) the party was socialist and hitler rose to prominence in the party by espousing socialist ideology. just because "govmnt didnt do as they said" doesnt mean the party wasnt founded, based, and thrived to power on socialist ideas and people.
just putting it out there that the other name of North Korea is - The Democratic People's Republic of Korea. So i guess North Korea is democratic now right i mean it's in the name
There’s actually an explanation for this. These communists believe that totalitarianism and a completely collectivised state (basically a hive mind) is the highest form of democracy. That’s what they believe
North Korea is marxist democracy. Karl Marx envisaged a system where people can vote for the leadership of their worker's councils and a central government which would be charged with dictating economic allocation without any elected officials.
@The Outlaw Torn If anything its an oportunistic ideology, promoting themselves to this day as the third position. Doing what suits its needs. Far from socialists but I guess economically left wing. Since they dont want to move twoards communism. Also who was a rabid leftist giovani or musolini? I guess both.
@The Outlaw Torn Collectivism is not necessarily leftist. Actually there is nothing socialist in corporatism. According to Murray Rothbard: "Fascism and Nazism were the logical culmination in domestic affairs of the modern drift toward right-wing collectivism. It has become customary among libertarians, as indeed among the Establishment of the West, to regard Fascism and Communism as fundamentally identical. But while both systems were indubitably collectivist, they differed greatly in their socio-economic content. For Communism was a genuine revolutionary movement that ruthlessly displaced and overthrew the old ruling élites; while Fascism, on the contrary, cemented into power the old ruling classes. Hence, Fascism was a counter-revolutionary movement that froze a set of monopoly privileges upon society; in short, Fascism was the apotheosis of modern State monopoly capitalism." In addition, Mussolini during a speech on October 28, 1933, said: "All the socialist parties in Europe are on the ground. And I don't mean only Italy and Germany, but also other countries." So it seems that not even Mussolini considered the Nazi party a socialist party. No one really at that time considered the Nazi party a socialist party lol.
@@klemenator NAzis remind me of left wing universities with their propaganda and suppression of free speech. Antifa reminds me of Nazi tactics more than wall street.
He should have apologized by saying he was sorry that telling the truth about their authoritarian ideology, ILL-liberal leftism, socialism is so offensive.
@@dscoleri Are you all fucking disabled, socialists were being killed in camps you dipshit !!! Greetings from Germany you are all are spitting on the grave of every man opposing the 3rd Reich !!!
@MajorLeague Then take any other socialist writer, socialism is the opposite of what you are trying to compare it too. Once the Nazis took power Writers like: Rocker, Luxembourg and also Marx were banned in Gemany. And all trade unions were dissolved by the Nazis. You would have to not understand socialism at all to make this quite revisionist argument!
Same with capitalism. Which one does more damage in the "wrong hands"? Which one does more damage when people are slightly/moderately/terribly uninformed? Which one encourages sharing of important information to others more? I don't know the answer to any of these questions (though I can make an educated guess in some cases). But I'd say they are question you'll need to answer if you bring up "can do damage when uninformed or in wrong hands" if you want to use that to argue for one or the other.
@@jayman6151 Are you sure you're talking about socialism _being the actual cause/ideology/..._ that led to that? Or could it simply be that the idea of socialism was used by tyrants to get enough people behind them to establish a system - and some other ideology of those tyrants then led to the atrocities? Can you _show_ that it was indeed the socialism that caused it? And no, I won't even try to show you that it wasn't. You're the one making the claim, the burden of proof is on you. Deal with it.
nope. He is an arrogant englishmen and shall be removed as soon as possible from that honorable parliament. I am so happy when these arrogant grap is leaving... my god. LEAVE! Join the Dollar Zone and fine.
@@m.c9146 Are you really that ignorant? We have no need to join the dollar we have our own currency. As for Kamall he isn't a member of this polit bureau any more, how stupid are you?
@@Zlonk7 Yeah I'm German and I've never seen this man. He's some politican from the Social Democratic Party who was angry because the Nazis were called socialists. What "socialist dictator" haha
It can't be when globalist fascists use fraud, lies and collusion to undermine every single freedom you have, then call you a conspiracy theorist and election denier for seeing it. At a certain point, people are going to lose their patience under that abuse and speak harsh truths about those who intend to enslave humanity.
@@LautaroJaguar Marxists and Social Democrats are variants bud. By ur logic, if I am an American and kill another American does that mean I am no longer an American?
@@LautaroJaguar So did the communists. Flimsy anecdote. Do all Socialists agree with all the policies of every other Socialist? Do you believe that socialists are a hivemind?
@@josephhenley6926 this man is very stupid or deliberately lying.Nazis haéaé hate socialists it is as if to say that the Social Democrats are Social Darwinists who is not stupid knows that social democrats represent the poor sick fall people. Méf socialdawinism is clearly Nazi the right wing .
@@TheBuzzo01 You are wrong,... once again. Nazi's LOVE Socialism and are anti-capitalist. They are totalitarian, racist Neo-Marxists. Socialist Democrats are Bolsheviks. Same thing....different name. Remember the Left will always fight with the left before the Right gets involved because it it is about complete and utter power. Different factions of Leftism... all crazy.
@Krisbugajew11-11 National Socialists are Nazis by it's very name. But instead of getting into semantics, it is important to understand how they are the very opposite of Conservative Nationalists. Conservatives believe in God, Family and Country. These three things make up a Nationalist. Since Nazi's are also Nationalists but my argument to you is that they are Left wing Nationalists, let me set the table here. The opposite of celebrating God family and country would be: * Anti-diety, put your faith in a Statist power instead. * Do not believe or promote traditional family values. Instead promote sexual cults and perversions. * Destroy Anthems, Laws and Nation's Constitutions * Property should not be owned by private citizens In otherwords, the opposite of Conservative Nationalism is Left wing Nationalism...or four stalwarts of Cultural Marxism. You ask how Marxism can be racist? It is thru the set up division by people like Kimberlé Crenshaw, Robin DeAngelo, Ibram X.Kendi, Saul Alinsky, Sam Harris, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault and Herbert Marcuse. They all set up division through deceit using inverse reality. Saul Alinsky would be so proud. As for Utilitarianism. Sure..,Let's make a move for the majority or what's good for the majority. Who make's that decision? Where does objectivity cross subjectivity when it comes to the good of the majority? How many people are involved in the making of rightful laws? Can they be influenced? True Socialism is literally the same as Communism,... it is merely the intermediary step between dragging a society from a Capitalist Christian society to a Communist Statist society. Marxism is the medium used. Call it Neo-Marxism, Cultural Marxism, Maoism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, Che Guevara Radicalism, Leninism or plain old Luciferian Sabbateanism for all I care... they love word games and I would rather not play those games. (Deconstructionism by Derrida and Word manipulation by Chomsky). As we see today, leftist ideology has indeed become the religion of all who lean left, for they dare not go against the fascist overlords and their army of indoctrinated Marxists. BLM is a Maoist paid, Marxist trained leftist activist group. LGBTQ is a catastrophic messianistic ideology (Erich Fromm's definition... not mine...as he tried to pull people away from the word Sabbateanism), and activist organization that pushes anti-Nationalism regularly. Leftists who may despise each other will work hand in hand to defeat the good of God before they tear eachother to shreds. After reading your retort, I chose to speak to you as an intellect rather than the 99% who troll social media. I hope you enjoyed this 5 year study molded into a 3 minute dialogue. (whether you agree or not😎) -Peace Doc-G
If the comment held no truth the man would not have been so offended by the statement. One doesn't concern themselves with "lies" they address them and move on.
Your comment is highly imbecilic. He was offended because that's a LIE, a HUGE LIE. In fact, - and ALL HISTORIANS AGREE -, Leftists were the first ENEMIES and VICTIMS of Nazism, something he recalled. Socialists were the FIRST to be sent to concentration camps, even before the Jews, but this fact that everyone agrees upon except RW imbeciles like Kamall (who had to immediately apologize after being mocked by the whole assembly) and of course ignorant CZcams commentators. This fact is recalled in pretty much every history book (that you've never opened) and every WW2 history museum (that you've never visited). So yes, being equated to your own executioner IS offending and totally unbecoming of such an assembly. You see, it's not surprising to see uneducated comments like yours in CZcams comments, but in the EU Parliament, we expect a higher standard from members, and it's abundantly clear that a guy who repeats Qanon level fabrications that fly in the face of all historians has no place in such an arena. That's why this dude Kamall was chastised publicly and had to apologize without reservation, because LIES like this have to stop.
The na zees were socialists. Not only was Ad Hit a former communist who the joined a workers movement but even the antisemitism is anticapitalist by nature. After all many antisemitic quotes and ideas Hit parrots comes from one Karl Heinrich Marx himself
@@eoin4172 Elitism talk, school at how to be authoritarian? Just wondering? Socialism originates it which also created Fascism and Nazism. Since Benito Mussolini was a Revolutionary Marxist
In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living. The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”
Socialism is the rejection of capitalism and individualism. The term Socialism is older than Marx. Hitler hatted capitalism and Marxist socialism. Be he agreed with the central planing and the rejection of the individual over the collective. It is laid out in his 25 tenets.
Hugh Ganis Well Capitalism is simply a system of production, where the means of production are owned by private sectors. A market is merely where products are exchanged. You can have a market socialist economy, as formerly seen in the Nordic countries, and you can have a planned Capitalist economy, as seen in former Nazi Germany.
The funny thing is that fascism derives many of its tenets from socialism. So even if not socialist, it does have a lot of socialist tendencies. The main difference is that fascists believe that the in group is some race, ethnic group, or nationality. While socialists want to export their socialism to the entire world and doesn’t necessarily hold any in group. But both systems require expansion(militarily) to stave off collapse. We tend to forget that the Soviets waged war on the entirety of Eastern Europe. That they, had the exact same economic mindset when they expanded their borders. They were exporting their inflation and inner problems. Nazism just had the “benefit” of being able to witness Lenin’s reforms, and the utter collapse that happened
@@TheWizardGamez Rubbish. Fascism takes nothing from socialism. It's nation-centric rather than human-centric. It preaches strong man dictatorship, rather than communal control. It preaches violence as admirable, rather than sometimes necessary.
@@whereschavo3953 i hope you arent about to show me how much of a moron you are but then again im not lucky enough for that not to be the case so dont even bother replying
@@mcsmash4905 when someone says "the private sector allows you to do your own shit" then writes (evil capitalism) in brackets it makes me think you are aware of the benefits of capitalism but call it evil?. makes me think you are being sarcastic by calling capitalism evil. so again, i dont understand if thats sarcasm orrrrrr.
@@whereschavo3953 guess im the moron now actually i thought you were one of the regular smartasses but anyway i put it in brackets because thats what people like to call it for some reason
@@liam3814 Economics of Fascism. - Universal Healthcare - Price controls - Wage controls - Guaranteed work programs - Gun control - Using censorship and violence as political weapons - Nationalizing industries and 500 companies. - Controlling who a business can hire and fire. They shared about 90% of economic policies with socialism. They were by no means right wing. This is because the father of Fascism Benito Mussolini and his philosopher of Fascism Giovanni Gentile were both lifelong socialist. Mussolini literally wrote in socialist publications from the age of 18. He was only kicked out of the party due to disagreements on the war. They wanted to improve socialism. They saw the shortages created under socialism. They decided they didn't want to fire or kill the entrepreneur in an attempt to solve the shortage problem. It also allowed them to partner with big business who saw being able to keep their business and not die as an improvement to the Socialist and Communist. All of these groups had inner turmoils despite having very similar beliefs from an American perspective. They regularly fought for the recruitment of the same pools of men to join their ranks which caused bloody rivalries. Price controls are by definition an anti market aka socialist policy. They are essential to all forms of socialism as they can't find prices. (See "Calculation problem with Socialism") They also create shortages in any area they are used, which has lead to the death of millions thru starvation. So Fascist effectively turned entrepreneurs into defacto government employees... Telling them what to do, how much to charge, who to hire and fire... Not allowing the market to decide anything. Many of these businesses became dependent on government subsidies. This was clearly central planning with a veneer of ownership aka not capitalism or right wing. NATIONALIZED ECONOMIES: Nationalization is a huge part of Fascism aka the government taking ownership, while claiming "the people" now have ownership. Like all socialist.... Hitler nationalized over 500 companies including banks, iron, manufacturing, etc.. Mussolini did as well I'm sure you remember Alfa Romeo, state oil and gas... Mussolini nationalized 3/4 of the economy. TRADE UNIONS: Hitler wanted to centralize the trade unions as well... Many small trade unions were too difficult to control. In 1933, he formed two national unions to replace the dozens of poorly organized, badly run organizations. Then he outlawed any new unions, forcing all workers to join. So again... Far from being right wing/ free market. It was central planning, central control. From Mein Kampf: The racial Weltanschauung (world view) is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung. - Hitler, Mein Kampf Aka the single biggest difference between Nazism and Socialism was that Race is what defined their class struggle... not wealth. All forms of Socialism require someone to be greedy aka a class divide. You need the poor to be greedy and want what they wealthy have created in society or you'll never have the vanguard for your revolution. Marx divided between the haves and have nots, Hitler Divided via race, Gramci and the Frankfurt school came to America and saw that class divide wouldn't work because even the poor could afford similar amenities as the wealthy cars, air conditioning, etc... so they focused on group division and group identity aka shared consciousness. Many Marxist saw the flaws in socialism. They then moved to support the third way... After seeing the failures of fascism they became disillusioned with Marxism. Socialism has three meanings so sadly it confuses most people. 1. Any anti market policy that goes beyond the liberal idea that the government should address "public goods" this is an economic term for goods that are non excludable and non rival. So Medicare for all... Would be a socialist policy. 2. Any anti market system. These would be communism, socialism, and fascism. All of these are types of socialist aka anti market ideologies. 3. Socialism as an ideology/ economy. Which would describe the subset at the level of communism and fascism. This would be what Marx was describing. Fascism is and has always been a far left wing ideology staunchly opposed to free markets
@@marcusdavenport9847 Too bad Mussolini and Gentile wrote The Doctrine of Fascism, which shatts your entire comment. They literally say that fascism is a right-wing anti-socialist ideology: "Fascism is opposed to socialism, which reduces and immobilizes the historical movement in the class struggle and ignores the unity of the State that can bring the classes together in a single economic and moral reality. Fascism is likewise opposed to trade unionism." "After fighting socialism, fascism attacks the whole set of democratic ideologies." "The fascist denials of socialism, of democracy, of liberalism, should not lead us to believe, however, that fascism understands to make the world return to what it was before 1789." "Granted that the XIXth century was the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy, this does not mean that the XXth century must also be the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy. Political doctrines pass; nations remain. We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century of "right", a Fascist century." And here are some quotes from Hitler in which it's quite clear that he was NOT anti-capitalist: This is what Hitler responded (in a letter) to Otto Strasser after he spoke to him about the importance of nationalizing the industry: "Democracy has left the world in ruins, and yet now you intend to extend that to the economic sphere. It would be the end of the German economy. The capitalists have made their way to the top thanks to their ability, and on the basis of that selection, which is further proof that they are a superior race, they have the right to command and direct." This is a quote from Mein Kampf: "The National Socialist State has to ensure the well-being of its citizens, recognizing, in all aspects, the significance that personality embodies and thus fostering in each domain of human activity that maximum degree of productive capacity that, in turn, allows the individual a maximum degree of benefit." And this is what Hitler said when he still didn't have in mind to enter the country into a war: "It is too easy for these economic advice, this multiplicity of opinions, this chaos of interests, to inhibit, perhaps even stifle, the development of personality and initiative. First of all, this structure is necessary as long as the economy is slow, while millions of people are out of work, as long as the state has to manage the economy according to plan to get it back on track in the first place. But the closer we get to normal times, the more the shackles and inhibitions that hinder the free play of natural wrestling must loosen. The State should not be a babysitter, but the form of the ethical conscience of a people and of each individual. [...] Personal effort advances if personal profit is the agent that animates the world and the economy and produces great inventions and discoveries. If we get rid of that, instinct fades and development stagnates. But staying still is going backwards. That is why we have to preserve, maintain and even reward this agent!" Oh, and in Mein Kampf he tells how they were attacked by leftists during their rallies, who accused the Nazis of being the "representatives of the monarchical and reactionary agitation". He also says that they chose the color red for their proclamations and their flag just to provoke the ire of the leftists... And by the way, Hitler and Mussolini PRIVATIZED lots of companies when they came to power. This is a very well documented fact. The word "privatization" in english was used for the first time in history in The Economist magazine to describe the economic policies of the Nazis... P.S. Here in Spain we have a right-wing party called VOX that has created its own workers' union... Yeah, right-wing unions exist, as much as Americans may be surprised...
@@marcusdavenport9847 Here are two liberal economists who contradict you: These are some quotes from Ludwig von Mises, from his 1927 book _Liberalismus_ : “Fascism can triumph today because the general indignation at the infamies committed by the socialists and communists has made it win the sympathy of broad social strata. [...] The exploits of the fascists and other similar parties were an emotional reaction sparked by outrage at the exploits of the Bolsheviks and Communists. After the first wave of rage, his policy entered the lane of greater restraint and it is possible that it will be even more so with the passage of time. This moderation is due to the fact that the traditional liberal conception continues to exert an unconscious influence on the fascists. But whatever the extent of this restraint, it cannot be ignored that the shift from the right-wing parties to the tactic of fascism shows that the fight against liberalism has had unimaginable successes until recently. Not a few people accept the fascist methods, because the fascist parties, despite having a totally anti-liberal economic policy program and a fully interventionist policy, take great care to not practice that senseless policy of extreme destruction that it imprints on the communists the seal of absolute enemies of civilization. [...] It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has for the moment, saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history." Mises himself ended up joining a fascist party (the austrian Fatherland Front). And this is a quote from Murray Rothbard, from his 1965 book _Left, Right, and the Prospects for Liberty_ : "Fascism and Nazism were the logical culmination in domestic affairs of the modern drift toward right-wing collectivism. It has become customary among libertarians, as indeed among the Establishment of the West, to regard Fascism and Communism as fundamentally identical. But while both systems were indubitably collectivist, they differed greatly in their socio-economic content. For Communism was a genuine revolutionary movement that ruthlessly displaced and overthrew the old ruling élites; while Fascism, on the contrary, cemented into power the old ruling classes. Hence, Fascism was a counter-revolutionary movement that froze a set of monopoly privileges upon society; in short, Fascism was the apotheosis of modern State monopoly capitalism. Here was the reason that Fascism provided so attractive (which Communism, of course, never did) to big business interests in the West, openly and unabashedly so in the 1920s and 1930s."
Nazis were just more openly racist and honest about wanting to eliminate certain groups of people that they viewed as inferior or a burden. Socialists tend to hide behind labels to seem more fair and tolerant.
@will walker But was he a socialist when he became a ruthless dictator?... No! And if you really think that fascism is socialist, then i would dare you to find a fascist and call him a socialist right into his face.
Economics of Fascism. - Universal Healthcare - Price controls - Wage controls - Guaranteed work programs - Gun control - Using censorship and violence as political weapons - Nationalizing industries and 500 companies. - Controlling who a business can hire and fire. They shared about 90% of economic policies with socialism. They were by no means right wing. This is because the father of Fascism Benito Mussolini and his philosopher of Fascism Giovanni Gentile were both lifelong socialist. Mussolini literally wrote in socialist publications from the age of 18. He was only kicked out of the party due to disagreements on the war. They wanted to improve socialism. They saw the shortages created under socialism. They decided they didn't want to fire or kill the entrepreneur in an attempt to solve the shortage problem. It also allowed them to partner with big business who saw being able to keep their business and not die as an improvement to the Socialist and Communist. All of these groups had inner turmoils despite having very similar beliefs from an American perspective. They regularly fought for the recruitment of the same pools of men to join their ranks which caused bloody rivalries. Price controls are by definition an anti market aka socialist policy. They are essential to all forms of socialism as they can't find prices. (See "Calculation problem with Socialism") They also create shortages in any area they are used, which has lead to the death of millions thru starvation. So Fascist effectively turned entrepreneurs into defacto government employees... Telling them what to do, how much to charge, who to hire and fire... Not allowing the market to decide anything. Many of these businesses became dependent on government subsidies. This was clearly central planning with a veneer of ownership aka not capitalism or right wing. NATIONALIZED ECONOMIES: Nationalization is a huge part of Fascism aka the government taking ownership, while claiming "the people" now have ownership. Like all socialist.... Hitler nationalized over 500 companies including banks, iron, manufacturing, etc.. Mussolini did as well I'm sure you remember Alfa Romeo, state oil and gas... Mussolini nationalized 3/4 of the economy. TRADE UNIONS: Hitler wanted to centralize the trade unions as well... Many small trade unions were too difficult to control. In 1933, he formed two national unions to replace the dozens of poorly organized, badly run organizations. Then he outlawed any new unions, forcing all workers to join. So again... Far from being right wing/ free market. It was central planning, central control. From Mein Kampf: The racial Weltanschauung (world view) is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung. - Hitler, Mein Kampf Aka the single biggest difference between Nazism and Socialism was that Race is what defined their class struggle... not wealth. All forms of Socialism require someone to be greedy aka a class divide. You need the poor to be greedy and want what they wealthy have created in society or you'll never have the vanguard for your revolution. Marx divided between the haves and have nots, Hitler Divided via race, Gramci and the Frankfurt school came to America and saw that class divide wouldn't work because even the poor could afford similar amenities as the wealthy cars, air conditioning, etc... so they focused on group division and group identity aka shared consciousness. Many Marxist saw the flaws in socialism. They then moved to support the third way... After seeing the failures of fascism they became disillusioned with Marxism. Socialism has three meanings so sadly it confuses most people. 1. Any anti market policy that goes beyond the liberal idea that the government should address "public goods" this is an economic term for goods that are non excludable and non rival. So Medicare for all... Would be a socialist policy. 2. Any anti market system. These would be communism, socialism, and fascism. All of these are types of socialist aka anti market ideologies. 3. Socialism as an ideology/ economy. Which would describe the subset at the level of communism and fascism. This would be what Marx was describing. Fascism is and has always been a far left wing ideology staunchly opposed to free markets
They are democractic in their view of what a Democrat is. There is a representative for each industry. And there is a dictatorship of people's democracy. But Hitler was a socialist. The clue is in the title. National socialist workers party. Aka nazi
It's not just the party name, every speech by Hitler explained his socialist ideals, every government action showed them to be real. It's only the socialists so have tried to posthumously rewrite history to call a left wing socialist government "right wing" calling it so, does not make it the case.
But it isnt the truth. What the f'ck . Did they drop out of school or did they just skive their history lessons. Bruh I'm glad that we still teach this things in germany .
@@thenarkknight278 Yes of course you are right, there is no way the Nazis IE the National Socialists could have been socialists, what were we thinking?
@@whoseeyesareflowers639 ah, kinda like how a dude who claims he is a woman is not actually a woman? So tell me how the Nazis were not "socialists" then?
@@MBOgonnaPWNu Typical libt@rcl thinking. Hitler was inspired by a socialist economist Gottfried Feder, who defined “finance capitalism” as the result of the Jews’ moral depravity . Socialism was the root of modern anti-semitism.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu It's the truth. Only leftists want to twist it and shift the blame onto the right. Feder was giving a speech on how to eliminate Capitalism and one of his audiences was Adolf Hitler.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu Examples are A LOT 😂 Food stamps, public parks, car subsidies, writing off the poorest’s debts, even free money. The most important of all: hatred on capitalism.
Quote"In statement after statement, Hitler could not be clearer about his socialist commitments. He said, for example, in a 1927 speech, “We are socialists. We are the enemies of today’s capitalist system of exploitation … and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”
You are ignoring the fact that this quote is from Strasser right? Even for the benefit of a doubt, Hitler stated advocates privatization in 1938, dec 28?
You do understand that Hitler hi-jacked the party to get the following for total power. He was not a socialist, and the party before he arrived was good.
The argument is bogus, ignorant, and obscures history. Hitler increased privatization. And corporatism. So your statement is false. But there is another issue people ignore when it comes to German politics and most European states which US citizens are very far removed and don’t get. To be for monarchism meant being definitively right wing. This was the case since the French Revolution. In fact in a technical sense if we use the early definition all people who believe in democracy or representative Republicanism are LEFT. Hitler intended to disband democracy and the Republic. The left position was always to expand democracy by including worker democracy. Even in the so-called “dictatorship” communism workers had guaranteed union voter rights in there work place and could vote for local Soviets. Hitler like Bismarck before him promised to restore the titles and wealth of the former German aristocracy. Hitler was a type of monarchist. Bismarck was right wing and hated socialism in a similar way that Hitler hated Bolshevism Marxism and both wrote about it. But Bismarck also innovated types of social democracy, social guarantees like universal health insurance as a way to prevent socialism “worker ownership of the means of production and cooperativism”. But these “social democratic” policies came directly from older ideas of the monarchy aristocracy to protect the welfare of their subjects not as a democratic or economic rights.
The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was a non-aggression pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union that enabled those two powers to partition Poland between them. The pact was signed in Moscow on 23 August 1939 by German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov and was officially known as the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Unofficially, it has also been referred to as the Hitler-Stalin Pact, Nazi-Soviet Pact or Nazi-Soviet Alliance. Hey! How about you ALL watch the historical documentary entitled: THE SOVIET STORY (EDVĪNS SNORE, 2008). ▶️🔍⌨️🎞️📕🗂️📑
What's your point? The first people purged from the Nazi party were the socialists. The first political enemies sent to the camps: communists. Hitler would betray the pact with Russia, which he'd always planned to attack.
"The conservatives and reactionaries had their greatest triumph when the common worker gave up and sank to the level of a slave. The A to Z of this “socialist” creation was to craftily draw the “Old Fighters” away from the capitalistic class. The Nazis offered unimagined possibilities, with Hitler impressing the upper classes with fairy tales about world domination: a vision to which the German has absolutely no resistance. So the largest military buildup of all times came about and, of course, the desired war. The German people will someday sleep off this intoxication, but the hangover will not go away as easily. When the curtain finally opens and the theater is visible to the audience without impostors and stage directors, there will be a frightful awakening. Never in the history of a nation have the guilty ones been more evident than now. It may be that one or the other bandit will have a higher degree of blame, but in general it is the entire bunch that is guilty. In my view the people of industry and the military officers will be at the head of the line. With few exceptions, they went through thick and thin with Hitler and gave him counsel." - Friedrich Kellner, "My Opposition" (presented in the US by the H.W. Bush Presidential Library) July 27, 1941
I'd rather deal with Christian pearl clutchers than the socialist E.U.. We've seen what these socialist do once in power throughout the 20th century and recently around the world. At worse some Christians are annoying, but still created the freest societies in the world. While socialist bring tyranny, mass slavery, mass theft, mass death & even mass starvation at times.
Economics of Fascism. - Universal Healthcare - Price controls - Wage controls - Guaranteed work programs - Gun control - Using censorship and violence as political weapons - Nationalizing industries and 500 companies. - Controlling who a business can hire and fire. They shared about 90% of economic policies with socialism. They were by no means right wing. This is because the father of Fascism Benito Mussolini and his philosopher of Fascism Giovanni Gentile were both lifelong socialist. Mussolini literally wrote in socialist publications from the age of 18. He was only kicked out of the party due to disagreements on the war. They wanted to improve socialism. They saw the shortages created under socialism. They decided they didn't want to fire or kill the entrepreneur in an attempt to solve the shortage problem. It also allowed them to partner with big business who saw being able to keep their business and not die as an improvement to the Socialist and Communist. All of these groups had inner turmoils despite having very similar beliefs from an American perspective. They regularly fought for the recruitment of the same pools of men to join their ranks which caused bloody rivalries. Price controls are by definition an anti market aka socialist policy. They are essential to all forms of socialism as they can't find prices. (See "Calculation problem with Socialism") They also create shortages in any area they are used, which has lead to the death of millions thru starvation. So Fascist effectively turned entrepreneurs into defacto government employees... Telling them what to do, how much to charge, who to hire and fire... Not allowing the market to decide anything. Many of these businesses became dependent on government subsidies. This was clearly central planning with a veneer of ownership aka not capitalism or right wing. NATIONALIZED ECONOMIES: Nationalization is a huge part of Fascism aka the government taking ownership, while claiming "the people" now have ownership. Like all socialist.... Hitler nationalized over 500 companies including banks, iron, manufacturing, etc.. Mussolini did as well I'm sure you remember Alfa Romeo, state oil and gas... Mussolini nationalized 3/4 of the economy. TRADE UNIONS: Hitler wanted to centralize the trade unions as well... Many small trade unions were too difficult to control. In 1933, he formed two national unions to replace the dozens of poorly organized, badly run organizations. Then he outlawed any new unions, forcing all workers to join. So again... Far from being right wing/ free market. It was central planning, central control. From Mein Kampf: The racial Weltanschauung (world view) is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung. - Hitler, Mein Kampf Aka the single biggest difference between Nazism and Socialism was that Race is what defined their class struggle... not wealth. All forms of Socialism require someone to be greedy aka a class divide. You need the poor to be greedy and want what they wealthy have created in society or you'll never have the vanguard for your revolution. Marx divided between the haves and have nots, Hitler Divided via race, Gramci and the Frankfurt school came to America and saw that class divide wouldn't work because even the poor could afford similar amenities as the wealthy cars, air conditioning, etc... so they focused on group division and group identity aka shared consciousness. Many Marxist saw the flaws in socialism. They then moved to support the third way... After seeing the failures of fascism they became disillusioned with Marxism. Socialism has three meanings so sadly it confuses most people. 1. Any anti market policy that goes beyond the liberal idea that the government should address "public goods" this is an economic term for goods that are non excludable and non rival. So Medicare for all... Would be a socialist policy. 2. Any anti market system. These would be communism, socialism, and fascism. All of these are types of socialist aka anti market ideologies. 3. Socialism as an ideology/ economy. Which would describe the subset at the level of communism and fascism. This would be what Marx was describing. Fascism is and has always been a far left wing ideology staunchly opposed to free markets
@@MBOgonnaPWNu the founder of the EU is Richard Von Kalergi, he was an open socialist. Read his book Practical Idealism, the EU is founded on this book and is following what Kalergi planned by the book, literally. Ignorance is not an argument, kid.
It was just denial. Then came anger and bargaining. 3 out of 5 stages of grief. He probably also went through depression off camera. And when he cuts his moustache on the sides he will also have gone through acceptance.
No, it's just super offensive to say that Nazi's were socialist, when the socialists were among the first groups exterminated by the Nazi's when they took power. It's an absolute disgrace and sad to see people in the comments working against their interest. Keep kissing the boots of your fascist-minded republican leaders, I'm sure they have your best interest in mind.
Your inability to understand (or your wilful misunderstanding) does not change facts. Intelligent people change the theory when the reality is not sufficiently well explained by their theory --- stupid people try to change facts. PS: See "titmouse", which is not a mouse either. PPS: Do not look at Nordic countries. You'd die of apoplexy.
It is democracy with hints of socialism. Social democracy is politics where everyone has an equal right for wellbeing, even the poor, the sick and the other weak parts of our society. Years of rough capitalist politics always lead up to a point where the politics start harming the weakest parts of our society and people start protesting against capitalism and then the social democracy gains power and starts fixing the problems, capitalism has caused. but by the next elections, people find faults in the things social democracy has done and capitalists enter to fix the problems caused by social democracy. Both are needed at the end of the day.
@@ristuksenvittu Capitalism is good for those who have money. And with strong checks and balances for everyone else and the environment --- and everyone paying their fair share of taxes, even the rich and the big multinationals --- then it can work. Usually, the rich people and corporations lobby (using their vast amount of money) to erode the checks and balances and reduce their tax levels to zero. And too often they succeed.
actually Democratic Socialism or a Socialist Democracy is the idea that you reform from within the democratic system, society from one of Capitalism to one of Socialism, but the important aspect is within democracy, because as we see in the past whenever someone violently overthrows a system it ends up in democracy being abandoned, therefor Democratic Socialists wish for reform instead of Communist who are socialists who think Capitalist society can only become socialist through violent protest / revolution (which to their credit it has some merit, social systems usually have to be overthrown by a violent uprissing from below, change rarely if ever comes from above, the female rights movement, the black rights movement, the gay rights movement, workers rights too, the free india movement, the american revolution, the french revolution, the russian revolution, all these have in common that the people who were opressed rose up in violent protest against their opressors and overthrew the previous social structures or powers. Then with varying succesrates.
You are literally repeating Nazi propaganda. "A good many paragraphs of the party program were obviously merely a demagogic appeal to the mood of the lower classes at a time when they were in bad straits and were sympathetic to radical and even socialist slogans. Point 11, for example, demanded abolition of incomes unearned by work; Point 12, the nationalization of trusts; Point 13, the sharing with the state of profits from large industry; Point 14, the abolishing of land rents and speculation in land. Point 18 demanded the death penalty for traitors, usurers and profiteers, and Point 16, calling for the maintenance of “a sound middle class,” insisted on the communalization of department stores and their lease at cheap rates to small traders. These demands had been put in at the insistence of Drexler and Feder, who apparently really believed in the 'socialism' of National Socialism. They were the ideas which Hitler was to find embarrassing when the big industrialists and landlords began to pour money into the party coffers, and of course nothing was ever done about them." - William L. Shirer, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich"
If they were socialist why were there financial backers aristocrats and industrialists? Why did they support Franco in his fight against, anarchists, communists and socialists? Why did the Nazis privatise nationalised industries and share the spoils with their financers? Why did the contemporary right wing press support them and see both Mussolini and Hitler as a defence against socialism and communism? Why are the right trying to rewrite history? Because they want us to believe that all totalitarian governments were left wing. What a load of bollocks! Margaret Thatcher supported Pinochet, do you think she would have helped a socialist dictator?
@@gastrickbunsen1957 who said above that the only totalitarian regimes were leftwing? Kapitalism can be totalitarian too. But national socialism (read nacism) is more on the left side.
@@daweplachy5281 For the past several years right wing politicians have been trying to move the goalposts. Fascism and Nazism have always been regarded as far right. The Daily Mail, still a far right rag to this day, wrote lyrically about both Mussolini and Hitler. Churchill was a big fan of Mussolini, and good ol' Winston was the person who wondered why people were squeamish about marsh Arabs being mustard gassed, and also wanted to set the army on striking miners.
@@gastrickbunsen1957 who cares about daily mail. National socialist are still socialist. Comunist steal from rich, nacist steal from jews. But I admit that nacist were less on left
"First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist Then 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 out for me" -- Martin Niemöller
Economics of Fascism. - Universal Healthcare - Price controls - Wage controls - Guaranteed work programs - Gun control - Using censorship and violence as political weapons - Nationalizing industries and 500 companies. - Controlling who a business can hire and fire. They shared about 90% of economic policies with socialism. They were by no means right wing. This is because the father of Fascism Benito Mussolini and his philosopher of Fascism Giovanni Gentile were both lifelong socialist. Mussolini literally wrote in socialist publications from the age of 18. He was only kicked out of the party due to disagreements on the war. They wanted to improve socialism. They saw the shortages created under socialism. They decided they didn't want to fire or kill the entrepreneur in an attempt to solve the shortage problem. It also allowed them to partner with big business who saw being able to keep their business and not die as an improvement to the Socialist and Communist. All of these groups had inner turmoils despite having very similar beliefs from an American perspective. They regularly fought for the recruitment of the same pools of men to join their ranks which caused bloody rivalries. Price controls are by definition an anti market aka socialist policy. They are essential to all forms of socialism as they can't find prices. (See "Calculation problem with Socialism") They also create shortages in any area they are used, which has lead to the death of millions thru starvation. So Fascist effectively turned entrepreneurs into defacto government employees... Telling them what to do, how much to charge, who to hire and fire... Not allowing the market to decide anything. Many of these businesses became dependent on government subsidies. This was clearly central planning with a veneer of ownership aka not capitalism or right wing. NATIONALIZED ECONOMIES: Nationalization is a huge part of Fascism aka the government taking ownership, while claiming "the people" now have ownership. Like all socialist.... Hitler nationalized over 500 companies including banks, iron, manufacturing, etc.. Mussolini did as well I'm sure you remember Alfa Romeo, state oil and gas... Mussolini nationalized 3/4 of the economy. TRADE UNIONS: Hitler wanted to centralize the trade unions as well... Many small trade unions were too difficult to control. In 1933, he formed two national unions to replace the dozens of poorly organized, badly run organizations. Then he outlawed any new unions, forcing all workers to join. So again... Far from being right wing/ free market. It was central planning, central control. From Mein Kampf: The racial Weltanschauung (world view) is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung. - Hitler, Mein Kampf Aka the single biggest difference between Nazism and Socialism was that Race is what defined their class struggle... not wealth. All forms of Socialism require someone to be greedy aka a class divide. You need the poor to be greedy and want what they wealthy have created in society or you'll never have the vanguard for your revolution. Marx divided between the haves and have nots, Hitler Divided via race, Gramci and the Frankfurt school came to America and saw that class divide wouldn't work because even the poor could afford similar amenities as the wealthy cars, air conditioning, etc... so they focused on group division and group identity aka shared consciousness. Many Marxist saw the flaws in socialism. They then moved to support the third way... After seeing the failures of fascism they became disillusioned with Marxism. Socialism has three meanings so sadly it confuses most people. 1. Any anti market policy that goes beyond the liberal idea that the government should address "public goods" this is an economic term for goods that are non excludable and non rival. So Medicare for all... Would be a socialist policy. 2. Any anti market system. These would be communism, socialism, and fascism. All of these are types of socialist aka anti market ideologies. 3. Socialism as an ideology/ economy. Which would describe the subset at the level of communism and fascism. This would be what Marx was describing. Fascism is and has always been a far left wing ideology staunchly opposed to free markets
He is just wrong. The Nazis called them socialist, precisely to appeal to the people who would benefit under socialism, without bringing any of the actual changes. Socialism is defined by the worker control of production and of the abolition of markets, neither of which happened in Nazi germany, nor was there ever any plan to. Hitler, as an authoritarian, controlled the countries production, without any input from the people, and markets were able to continue en masse. In fact, Hitler blamed the communists/socialists for the burning of the Reichstag and banned them from parliament, as well as sending many to concentration and extermination camps. Not something you'd do to your political allies. Frankly, this is blatantly wrong, and an insult to the socialists who died under the Nazi regime and to those who continue to fight for social change. And, to all of the people who are claiming that this is an insult to free speech: freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. If he is wrong (and clearly so), they can correct him, especially when it is a matter of fact.
Actually it’s state/public control of the means of production. The workers only fell under Marxism. Marxism was only one form of socialism, as was National Socialism. Socialism as a concept existed before Marx
@@kingorange7739 Socialism is a theory, where for example Industries and the government was controlled by the community. Hitler did the exact opposite.
@@user-dk9dx3xb2t I already debunked this in another thread so I won't even bother here. These businesses were all under the control of the state. A state is an organized community representing the entire nation.
@@mpetkovic26 except that 99% of the people blamed for being nazis are not nazis at all or anywhere close to being one , rather its just normal people that have some common sense in their head
@@mcsmash4905 Yeah, but this guy is comparing German socialist party with the Nazi party, im just pointing out that in many countries in Europe you can go to jail for being a nazi. So ofcourse elder gentleman is gonna be offended. Cause freedom of speech is not same in Europe as it is in USA.
@@mcsmash4905 The Nazi's were about as socialist as the pope being a protestant, maybe do some reading about the foundations of the DAP and then the NSDAP maybe? That'd be the thing us with at least one working braincell would do instead of babbling delusional bs 🤣🤣🤣 Or as socialist the CCP are currently, you two idiots are hilarious
@@theronbassett5505 oh, also Angela Merkel was a Strasser-socialist. Then she (like many others of the S.A. & Strasser wings/factions of Nazism) converted to join the Stasi after the Marxists began to dominate (in East Germany) again.
@@theronbassett5505 oh, also Angela Merkel was a Strasser-socialist. Then she (like many others of the S.A. & Strasser wings/factions of Nazism) converted to join the Stasi after the Marxists began to dominate (in East Germany) again.
@@theronbassett5505 oh, also Angela Merkel was a Strasser-socialist. Then she (like many others of the S.A. & Strasser wings/factions of Nazism) converted to join the Stasi after the Marxists began to dominate (in East Germany) again.
Kamall is Correct... Socialism was Created by the Leftist Italian Socialist Philosopher Giovanni Gentile... Who was himself a Disciple of Carl Marx... And he called it the "Only workable Socialism, because it combined Socialist Philosophy with Nationalism." He named it for the Italian word "Fascia," which means "To bundle together"... Because a bundle of sticks is Stronger than any one stick... And THAT is Straight out of Socialism 101... Making Fascism nothing more than a Branch of Socialism. Moreover, Right Wing Philosophy is Individualistic... And Left Wing Philosophy is Collectivist... AND Fascism is a Collectivist Ideology... That said... When it comes to mass murder, the Fascists in Germany and Italy were Rank Armatures... When compared to the likes of the Soviet Union and China... All told, Nazi Germany, for instance, murdered some 13 Million people... Half of which were Jews with the rest being Christians, Gypsies and others... Meanwhile, the Soviet Union Murdered north of 25 Million people in Ukraine Alone... And China Murdered a Minimum of 75 Million people in their own country... And I've seen estimates that more than Double that. So as Evil as Fascism is... Other Branches of Socialism are Far Worse.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu WOW? A Leftist with at least a Modicum of an Argument! That's Refreshing! Usually All Leftists do is engage in Ad Hominem Attacks. That said, you should go back and review your history. And I mean Actual History... And NOT that Revisionist History the Left is Passing Off as Real... Giovanni DID Invent Fascism and Everything I said was 100% True. Socialism, Communism and Fascism; EVERY SINGLE One of these Toxic Ideologies is Collectivist... You Know this, if for No Other Reason, than the Names they were given... I'll even take it a step further... Left Wing Ideologies are Not Only Collectivist... They are Evil! How can I say that? Because Good is Life Affirming... And Evil is Life Destroying... So ALL you need to do is look at the History of the Left... And the 100s of Millions of People they have Murdered.. And then take note of the Fact that they are STILL engaging in the EXACT same Behavior and Rhetoric... To Recognize that Evil. BTW... The Slogan "The Ends Justifies the Means"... Is NOT the Moto of a Righteous Man... It is the Moto of a Self-Righteous Man... And the Battle Cry of an Evil Heart. ANYONE who says it is telling you that You Cannot Trust Them... Because the day WILL Come when Your End will be Their Means... And the Left LOVES to scream that slogan at the top of their lungs.
John Ken he wasn’t exposing them, socialism is about the workers owning the means of production - them owning the products that their labour produces, and being able to do what they want with it. Typically socialists are also egalitarian, though don’t have to be I suppose, but they definitely believe that that means of production should be socially owned. And well Hitler was against this, he advocated for privatisation of industries and celebrated capitalism - what socialists are opposed to. He only called it National Socialism because it would get them votes
@@tomio8072 Yes right, because under Stalin people could keep the products their labour produced... Guess the millions of Ukranians starving to death would disagree with you!
TK-315 CloneM as I said socialism is the workers having the means of production, the USSR failed as it only changed the person gaining the surplus value from people’s labour, they thought it would mean that that surplus value could then be reinvested into services again, however it didn’t work for them. That’s why Socialists have moved beyond their mistakes and now advocate for different things. If it isn’t workers owning their means of production, it’s not Socialism.
@@shawnv123 Ever heard of "cultural bolshevism"? This is the term Adolf Hitler and the Nazis used to describe and demonize Marxism and any other socialist-aligned ideology that focused on economic and political egalitarianism. As it turns out, Nazis were quite fond of hierarchies of racial and economic castes and so anything that didn't support the state in this manner was decried as degeneracy from the depths of "Jewish Intelligentsia".
The left/right spectrum from what I understand comes from France where supporters of the King (conservatives who want no change) sat on the right and revolutionaries sat on the left (those who sought reform). I would say the transition from Weimar Republic to Third Reich was an act of reform not conservatism. The conservatives were the Weimar republicans.
@Nícolas Rabelo Socialism is public (government) ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private (citizen) ownership of the means of production, which is Capitalism. The farther Left, the more regulation of the economy by the government, and the farther Right, the less regulation of the economy. It has nothing to do with the civil or social policy (Authoritarian vs. Libertarian) of the system, nor anything to do with the ideology (end goal) of the system. National Socialism is a Left-of-Center (moderately Left-wing), Totalitarian (radically Authoritarian) system. The government owned the means of production but had a relatively open market. It was ideologically Ethnonationalist (racial Nationalism) and opposed to both Marxist Socialism (Communism) and Capitalism.
National socialism was socialism and any person who has read about Hitler's ideas would know it. Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc were all socialist. Socialism is a failed idea which never dies because it is so attractive but is not possible.
In a 1923 interview, George Sylvester and Hitler exchanged this dialogie: "Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?" "Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists. "Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic."
Theres a book called Hitler's Table Talk which is comprised of first hand accounts of private conversations between Hitler and the people who were closest to him. Hitler admitted that he stole his entire political philosophy from Karl Marx and that he Hitler enacted true socialism while the Bolsheviks were mere pamphleteers hiding behind pen and paper. *Nazi's are in fact Socialists* People say "But Hitler killed Communists" Yes because Hitler killed anyone who stood is his way of total power and anyone who may have threatened his power. The only difference between Communist/Soviets and Nazi Socialism was that the Soviets said they renounced Nationalism in favor of Internationalism however the policies the Soviets enacted were the complete opposite of internationalism and these policies included but were not limited to; the systematic large-scale cleansing of ethnic minorities, political repression and various forms of ethnic and social discrimination, including state-enforced antisemitism, Tatarophobia, and Polonophobia
So he wasn't a Marxist then. Marx invented Socialism and Hitler read about it and thought, Germanic tribes used to do this, so it's a German invention that I will follow.
Kaiser Willy He was a socialist but comparing political parties that advocate capitalism with social policies to hitler just makes him look like an idiot.
No offense, but if the video starts with ad hominems and "look, they are sitting on the right, therefore they are right wing", it's hard to take it seriously. The fact is that period texts before 1939 from tourists and local often note that Hitler's reign looked a LOT LIKE the rule of the Bolsheviks, even though Hitler's main claim to fame abroad was being the guy who will stand up to socialism and Bolshevism. This is the good old switcheroo - claim to be the opposite of the thing you are, and you will be hiding in plain sight. That's not to imply that nazis were 100% like modern, or indeed period socialists. There's a reason "national" is in their name. "But how could someone be left and right wing at the same time!?" Well, that's your issue. You think socialism is left wing. It isn't. Socialism is just a form of collectivism. Just because typically it is the political left calling for socialism doesn't mean that right wing ideas can't breed a form of socialism/collectivism. One that seeks to control the economy and the culture of a people completely and unquestionably. That's socialism. Isn't that what Marx said too? "State ownership of the means of production"? Isn't that EXACTLY what happened in the societ union? If nazis weren't socialists, why do socialist countries bear so close a resemblance to Mussolini's fascism and Hitler's nazism? How come Mussolini and Hitler were both lifelong socialists before turning to their respective ideologies? Socialism is neither left, nor right wing. It's a neutral tool. Just like the left or the right doesn't have a monopoly over liberalism (yes, there are many many right wing liberals), the left doesn't have a monopoly over socialism.
@@horvathbenedek3596 Hitler was opposed to *Marxism* because he believed it to be a Jewish subversion of socialism. Socialism predated Marxism. He was very much a socialist through and through. He was standing up to "internationalist socialism" with "national socialism".
@@MalleusImperiorum yes I can. It would have been easier for me if you actually gave a counter argument so I could tear it apart but I'll give you some basics. Socialism predates Marx. Marxism is a class socialism for the workers while national socialism is a racial socialism for the German RACE. Mussolini was a former Marxist but started his national movement for Italian nationals because he opposed the internationalism of Marxism. "You cannot get rid of me because I am and always will be a socialist. You hate me because you still love me." -Mussolini "What a waste that we lost Mussolini. He is a first-rate man who would have led our party to power in Italy" -Lenin "I have not set myself on the road of politics in order to pave the way for an international socialism... I bring the German people a national socialism, the political theory of the national community, the feeling of unity of all who belong to the German nation and who are prepared and wiling to feel themselves as being an inseparable but also co responsible particle of the totality of the nation" - Austrian painter I suggest you read Gunter Reimann's 'Vampire economy'. It's a primary source document written from the perspective of a Marxist business man during Nazi Germany and it gives you insights into how the economy was run. Please give me your best counter arguments and i will destroy them with actual sources and references
@@MalleusImperiorumwhat was nazi Germany’s economic policies if not socialist? Cause they most certainly weren’t free market. Massive hike in taxes. Regulation beyond the extreme. If there was any deviation from the party line you’d end up in the concentration. Your company had a ton of wage and price controls. There were was a gutting of private sector(forcefully) to remilitarize Germany. All things the Soviets did. All things China has done. If nazi germany wasn’t socialist then what economic system were they planning for after the war?
There is no such thing as a conservative. Just a FASCIST. "The domestic agenda [in Nazi Germany] was one of authoritarian conservatism, with a pronounced distaste for parliamentary politics, high taxes, welfare spending and trade unions." -- Adam Tooze, "The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy"
@@nicknolte8671 LOL. Wow, no wonder you lie and call just about everyone you dislike a Fascist. Calling everyone a conservative a Fascist is a new low even for you.
If you allow someone with his influence to say something fundamentally & historically incorrect, which is bad for democracy, especially if more than 50% of people in a YT comment section start believing the non-truth, then that is also extremely dangerous. The same dangers existed when the National Socialist Party was hi-jacked by Hitler, and it was the mistruth that enabled him to total power.
@@mogu8026 The means of production were owned by the government (publicly), rather than by citizens (privately), therefore it was definitionally socialist.
@@plasmazulu6643 That's factually wrong tho, the Nazis privatized lots of sectors and companies had great influence on the state. Saying the Nazis were socialist just shows having 0 understanding of how economies work and is historical revisionism.
Have you ever seen leftist waving the nazi flag at a left-wing rally. And please mention an outspoken neo-nazi who openly supported Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton. And please go find nazi in public and call him a social democrat right into his face. I am sure that would change your mind(don't actually do that).
Matt Clayer The nazis we’re objectively socially right wing and economically left wing. They had nationalized trade unions and government control over industrial production. The economy was even on the brink of collapse like all socialist regimes, until of course they went around looting half of Europe
@@general7733 "The nazis we’re objectively socially right wing and economically left wing" You could say that. But their economy was actually doing better than in the U.S under Franklin D. Roosewelt. And the reason why they invaded most of europe was because of "Lebensraum" a geopolitical goal, that was supposed to expand the german territory and the living space of the german people and remove indigenous people.
@@general7733 "socially right wing" is a lie. They just used race as a sheild for their class war. They prosecuted socialists since they wanted their version to thrive, not traditional socialism. The nazis added nationalist elements into socialism and sprinkled in different definitions of "class war" based on race and religion. So it's modified socialism, but shares the same evil as socialism.
@@mattclayer6541 Authoritarian belief system originated from marxism, Benito Mussolini was a revolutionary marxist before making fascist party. So they share that goal of Authoritarian rulings. So Marxists are same as fascists and nazis
it is a fact that the Fascists philosophers were inspired by Marx, Gentile draws from Marx's works and National Socialism is a form of State ownership a socialist concept
Yes but you need to understand, both socialism and fascism are collectivist ideologies as opposed to individualist ideologies but fascism is not socialism Yes Hitler had massive state industry. But he also suppressed Union, some of the first people interned and imprisoned without trial were socialists and leftists in Germany after the reichstag fire. Just because the state has a massive role in a society doesn’t make it socialism. China today is a great example.
I'm Canadian and as far as I see it the fascists are still the same they may have changed their ideology a little bit but they're playing at the end of the day still continues
@@gameoforbits3783 when wikipedia describes fascism as far right, then uses mussolini as an example of a fascist, you know the left wing have utterly changed the definition of it. Mussolini was far left. Fascism is simply an authoritarianism form of implementing your ideaology. Hither was through and through left wing, but in order to fund the war, he needed to control the capitalists to raise the tax funds. That's why the lefties call him far right. Since mussolini was in actual fact a far left fascist, and Hitler followed him, the claims of Hitler being fascist and him controlling capitalism like a right winger came about. Is all got twisted for the sake of lefties saving face.
@@dsswooshy "Mussolini, a leading member of the Italian Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Italiano) before World War I, became a fierce antisocialist after the war. After coming to power, he banned all Marxist organizations and replaced their trade unions with government-controlled corporatist unions. Until he instituted a war economy in the mid-1930s, Mussolini allowed industrialists to run their companies with a minimum of government interference. Despite his former anticapitalist rhetoric, he cut taxes on business, permitted cartel growth, decreed wage reduction, and rescinded the eight-hour-workday law. Between 1928 and 1932 real wages in Italy dropped by almost half. Mussolini admitted that the standard of living had fallen but stated that “fortunately the Italian people were not accustomed to eating much and therefore feel the privation less acutely than others."
@@nicknolte8671 but, Mussolini and Adolf reacted on marxist communism and marxist social democrats and they provided alternative left movements with patriotic mindset vs internationalism. Both fascism and nat.soc were left (social policy, family policy, favouring workers and raising the living standards of the lover class and lower middle class, had good family support policy BUT denied the marxism cos they did not want a soviet type terror state with mass murdering their own citizens!). These ideologies were left (commies, social democrats, nat.soc and fascist). The difference is the marxism. Nat.soc and fascist refused marxism as political ideology and refused it including its internationalism and revolutionary approach to change the society. Nat.soc and fascist prefered peacefull transformation vs commies who preferred mass killing and revolutinary implementation of cimmunism. Nat.soc refused capitalism too. Lefties today in europe are still marxists and try to get rid off nat.soc and fascism as an alternative for left and they pushing those 2 ideologies to conservatives who actually refused all lefty ideologies (royalists, monarchs and high nobility refused all political ideologies especially those who had connection with the former emperors in germany and austria-hungary (these group called as legitimists)
The socialists act like Nazis by shouting him down and refusing to examine his claims fairly. I thought politicians had the sense to realise that parties can be socialist but still bitterly opposed to each other.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu There are some arguments for this. I'd refer you to TIK's channel on WW2. He looks at the way the Nazis took power and wealth away from the individual in favour of the state. Also he was influenced by the 'disappearing markets' theory, believing he could solve Germany's capitalist crisis by conquering territory.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu It's down to where one stands politically. Stalin put loyal bolsheviks in labour camps and there weren't free trade unions in the soviet union. There was the holodomor where millions died in forced collectivisation. But I suppose it follows that if Hitler thought he could solve the shrinking markets problem by capturing more territory then he was preserving the capitalist system not destroying it. The discussion in the EU parliament shows that they haven't progressed much over freedom and tolerance. At one time everybody had to be a Nazi. Now they all have to be virulently anti-Nazi (as defined by them).
@@robert-_-636 yes, he is. Literally all their policies were socialist, they called themselves socialists. They spouted socialist propaganda, Hitler said his ONLY disagreement with Marx was that Marxism wasn't racist enough, and included ethnic jews... even though Marx was explicitly antisemitic (Marx said capitalism IS judaism and so did Hitler) Marx thought that they could convert while Hitler thought judaism was in the blood. That's the only difference, nazism is LITERALLY JUST racist socialism.
They were socialists and like most socialists they didn't get to implement full socialism, if anything I think national socialism is the worst kind of socialism thst exists.
@@henriqueb287 Ofc not because they see it as a failed previous batch of mistake of an ideology, remember the fascist ideology was started by a socialist aka Mussolini.
@@henriqueb287 I dont know to be honest.. communists and nationalsocialists ruined their relationship permanently when Hitler invaded Russia I think.. their political hatred is beyond any level other than that I think that their policies regarding economy had socialistic characteristics and a lot of commons..
national socialism is collectivism with national & racial purity ideas while communism is international with worker control and collectivism communism and marxism focuses on the class struggle while the national socialists believed in class struggle but strongly believed in racial purity. im a communist and anti-nazism
So the People’s Party in Canada is a Communist party despite being right-winged because “People’s”. I wonder if Original Poster is really just a 43 year old libertarian who lives in their mother’s basement and spends all day eating social security check and posts on the internet.
No he didn't. Fascists are more logical. He's the standard retard democratic dumbass who think democracy will haul their asses through. Democracy won't, because it entirely relies on the people within the country to function. Sure it's made by the people for the people but the people have no leader, don't know what they want and can't see into the future to plan ahead.
Don't be obtuse. National Socialism had more in common with other brands of Socialism than just the name. NS Germany policies were socialist in nature.
willisshooting he should have upset you as well spouting lies about Hitler being a leftist that’s like me going “oh all conservatives are socialist because they agree on some points”
In an argument, one has to raise one's voice and act in a threatening manner in order to enforce a position that is unattainable, because that person knows they are wrong! Welcome to the European parliament.
Really ? Verhofstadt was VERY calm, when he told him he made a mistake and had to apologize. Kamall LIED and insulted the memory of the hundreds of thousands of ACTUAL socialists that Hitler rounded up and killed even before he killed the Jews. THAT is the historical truth that you refuse to admit, despite the fact that you SAW an entire supranational assembly being offended by his lie.
How many people have actually watched and payed attention to any of Hitler's speeches? He was a text book national socialist.
@WAFFEN COLLIDER It refers to the transitionaty stage between Capitalism and Communism, and Communism is International Socialism...
@WAFFEN COLLIDER National Socialism is not identical or a part of fascism as fascism is not a political spectrum. Aside from nationalist aspects the ideologies share no common ground when it comes to economics and race.
@WAFFEN COLLIDER How does it share common ground when fascism applied a corporate government which is relatively close to the USSR's economic policies, it's evident that the fundamental nature of fascism was generally closer to communism than National Socialism in any way.
@@SCHMALLZZZ Communism in practice has produced very little international socialism. It has created Nationalist States with one party authoritarian systems. AKA NK, China, Cuba, Venezuela etc. Textbook is very different from reality. Personally I make very little distinction from Nazis and Communists. They are cousins, they are family. They come from the same origin and should be viewed the same.
@WAFFEN COLLIDER Socialism predates Marx.
Notice how they didn’t let him speak. They shouted and tried to drown out his argument. That is an incredibly facist thing to do.
To be honest, I would be angry and probably even shout at someone who makes such a stupid connection. Just like someone calling a Jew a Nazi, or equating Nazism with Socialism.
@@Rustycaddy17 Communism and Nazism where both funded by the same elite bankers , do your research and see that the EU is a vehicle controlled by those who are against free individual people, The EU is making more and more fascist laws, or do you think the GDR was not as bad as rule under the Nazis, if you deny the incredible suffering socialism has brought to this planet and blame others and call them Nazis for the darkside of socialist ideology , personally i think its even worse than Nazism itself, if someone is a Nazi openly and honestly is a Nazi at least you know who you deal with, socialism is bringing you all kinds of goodies while taking control of everything in your life ... Fuck these internationalist globalist fascists , this makes so clear how low iq, emotional and psychopathic ther EU bureaucrats are , and they are so afraid we discover the truth hence al the censorship of "fake news" 1984 is at our doorstep ... On coin one state one people ...Hail psycho Verhofstadt , why do you praise the psychopathic control freaks ??? explain WHY , why do you get angry if someone has a different opinion than you, whya re you so immature and support the same leadership wich is totally destructive why? why cant you accept Marxism has led to so much more suffering and killing than Nazism why? You are the one with blood on your hands, and the free people who want nothing to do with big state ideologies are prevailing so fuck you emotional triggers, its a total disrespect to those who suffered and died cause of all large state ideologies SHAME SHAME SHAME on you !
He didn't have an argument
Irony lol
He should not have apologized. It's okay to offend, sometimes people need offended when told the truth.
So he should apologize for telling the truth? What???
@@colincambell8025 when Hitler abolished private property I bet you laughed too
Just because you are offended, doesn't mean you are right...
Kamall could have avoided making a fool of himself before everyone had he opened a book, for ex. the Encyclopedia Britannica.
Encyclopedia Britannica - Were the Nazis Socialists?
By Michael Ray
No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934.
...
Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements, and in January 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character. Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month. That July Hitler banned all political parties other than his own, and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps. Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished.
And just because you're offensive, doesn't mean you're not wrong.
@@markussf5702 Far right
Im offended to share a species with anyone who thinks nazis were socalists.
I guess North Korea is a republic too..
Nazi behavior
The truth is only offensive to those with a guilty conscience.
👏👏👏👏
It's bloody nonsense that's what it is.
Holy shit you people are so uneducated, National Socialism is an oxymoron, and it literally has nothing to do with Socialism.
@@Rustycaddy17 no it is not an oxymoron. IT has everything to do with socialism. just like progessive christianity. DOes not exist.
@@rajmathai7699 "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea" is the official name of North Korea. Which as you know, is far from being Democratic.
forcing him to apologize for telling the truth...how undemocratic....almost fascist like
How the fuck is telling someone they're wrong undemocratic.
@Magnificent Bastard Please explain why you think the "left" is pure scum? As an avid leftists I'm curious
@@jaylenmedina2689 the forcible suppression of the opposition is fascist! You don't need to like what someone said but you must accept it.
@@jaylenmedina2689 so yeah most certainly undemocratic. And extremely bigoted!!!
It is fascist. Communists of ALL colors are just like that.
NAZI is National Socialist Workers Party. Socialism is disguised communism. Please read Atlas Shrugged for details.
If anyone remembered that Hitler himself stated that his "socialism" had nothing to do with Marxist socialism.
I think you forgot the point
Socialism is a less developed and controlled communism. And an even worse communism is marxism which he himself called socialism (this was changed obviously)
@@commoncriminal923 ummm lol? I don’t think you know what you’re talking about. Marxism is theory, while communism and socialism are forms of practice. Therefore you can have socialism and communism and have Marxist socialism and communism. Marxism doesn’t come after communism lol
stalin saw hitler and mussolini as fellow revolutionairies
they had a treaty before hitler invaded poland in 1941
@@xgl0983 the goal of socialism is communism.
Do we have an uncut version to see what was debated prior to Mr. Kamall's arguments?
FREE -Speech-NO apology needed!!!! he shouldn't have!
And he is correct 👍
Then I am allowed to insult you by calling you a lazy good for nothing waste of space and human trash.
Free speech riff?
@@epicvikingforce843 explain why nazism is left wing because "da guverment duz stufff" is not inhernitely leftist
Bruh, I just thought that!!! Honest people that still think this isn't truth need to do their own research...
@@anonymousalias.5059
Do some research, I mean true historical research and it will become painfully obvious that Fascism is on the left and it's always been on the left.
The german guy is only upset because khamal is right
william nicholson Nazism is far right with slightly socialist policies in certain things, outside of that the are far right
Also, search up fascism on Wikipedia and read the first line
@@ludvighauger5044 Fascism and communism are both sides of the socialist coin. Both are collectivist ideologies that put the state before the people, that places them on the left. Fascism = Socialism is for us only but not YOU. Communism = Socialism is for everyone but not YOU. BOTH come with a gun pointed at your head.
Matt Forde Congrats on defending Hitler and Mussolini, I reccomend you return to your ol' southern home in the US and read up on history you racist.
Fuzzy Karma nazism was not collectivist you brainlet.
At 0:42 someone calls him an ‘idiot’ to which he returned the ‘idiot’ back.
He may also just repeat it as a quote: »You idiot ?«
Guy Verhofstaed destroyed him and the german parliamentary shamed him with his shameful, pathetic guilt by assocation lie. Not surprising you see it repeated in the CZcams comments, but in the EU parliament, it's only worthy of mockery and apologies. Kamall was caught red handed like a deer in a headlight and his ignorance of the most basic european History was showing.
@@lolilollolilol7773 Yes it was stupid and we see it all the time. Like blaming white people for slavery. Or phases like ‘white people did the holocaust’ etc. Dirty smear tricks. All of this must stop.
@@michaelfern4079 There is no doubt that the Aryan germans are responsible for the Holocaust. Not all white people are aryan germans so the generalization is of course abusive, but the fact that the people responsible for the Holocaust were white is also technically true.
That someone was the arrogant Frans Timmermans of the Netherlands, maybe our future Prime Minister, God forbid.
No matter what you call them, Nazis were indeed socialist.
Excellent observation my friend.
Indeed socialist? Depends on your definition of socialism they were the antithesis of Marxism socialism you could make a case they were a form of non marx socialism but it wouldn’t make sense and you can’t argue solely based on the fact socialism was in the name
'Socialists' that privatised everything? You fucking idiot.
@Frederick Bailey you're*
@@shibainu6087 you’re a nazi lover, idiot
Germany still wants Europe has always wanted Europe they are just doing it another way and played the long game to achieve it.
Exactly. People are starting to see this for what it is, a German power grab, with France sucking German dick as per the last time.
they are trying to resurrect the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation since it fell in 1806
Correct what they couldn't get done through war they are trying through politics and trade agreements
The 1000 year Reich
@ProjectsBlack absolutely!
facts don't care about your feelings!!!
Allow me to hurst yours by saying that nazi were pro capitalist demagogic pig dogs.... Fascism and nazism is basicly liberalism freed from enlightment ideals.... They even had a freedom of circulation of capital and labour project with no silly national borders within teh reich.. Basicly reich was a proto EU dear to our current day liberals !
@LimeWire2000 "They were also opposed to capitalism in the modern sense". Are you sure? I mean, they even had a liberal as Minister of Economics from 1938 to 1945 (Walther Funk). Funk himself admitted that he was seen as a "liberal Nazi". And it's well known that the Nazis did big business with Henry Ford, IBM, Texaco, Krupp, Nestlé, Coca-Cola, Thyssen, Volkswagen, Hugo Boss, Porsche, Kodak, Bayer, General Motors, etc... So I wouldn't say they were anti-capitalist lol.
Yhea when lime wire talk nazim he think old liberalism the liberalism of Rousseau and robesspierre and the liar imeprsonnating them...
Alt-right people are all about "this feels true"
They are all about bowing down to authority, and embracing their own educational deficiency as being virtuous!
Saying 'national socialism is socialism' in the EU parliament is like saying 'men and women are biologically different' at a feminist convention.
Calling the EU "Parliament" a Parliament is an offense to the English. Nobody knows who any of these clowns are, let alone why they are imposing policy on Nations with elected rulers.
I agree. TIK did a great video on “was Hitler left wing?”. The entire concept is absolutely ludicrous. Hitler and left wing fly in the face of all reason. People have no idea what the hell theyre on about. It’s the whole “this is exactly how naxi Germany started!” Anger mongering.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu thank you for your opinion
Nazis were so socialist that they formed a coalition with the socialist German National People’s Party, Zentrum, and others against the Right-Wing Social Democratic Party and Communist Party
@@MBOgonnaPWNu Typical braindead NPC comment
“National Socialism derives from each of the two camps the pure idea that characterizes it, national resolution from bourgeois tradition; vital, creative socialism from the teaching of Marxism.” - Adolf Hitler, January 27, 1934, interview with Hanns Johst in Frankforter Volksblatt
"The experience of the last fourteen years had shown that ‘private enterprise cannot be maintained in the age of democracy’. Business was founded above all on the principles of personality and individual leadership. Democracy and liberalism led inevitably to Social Democracy and Communism. After fourteen years of degeneration, the moment had now come to resolve the fatal divisions within the German body politic. Hitler would show no mercy towards his enemies on the left. It was time ‘to crush the other side completely’.
The next phase in the struggle would begin after the elections of 5 March. If the Nazis were able to gain another 33 seats in the Reichstag, then the actions against the Communists would be covered by ‘constitutional means’.
But, ‘regardless of the outcome there will be no retreat . . . if the election does not decide . . . the decision must be brought about even by other means’." - Adolf Hitler
By other means, such as storming the Capitol, err, I mean, Reichstag.
"Spengler's Prussian socialism was popular amongst the German political right, especially the revolutionary right who had distanced themselves from traditional conservatism. His notions of Prussian socialism influenced Nazism and the Conservative Revolutionary movement."
"Historian Ishay Landa has described the nature of 'Prussian socialism' as decidedly capitalist. For Landa, Spengler strongly opposed labor strikes, trade unions, progressive taxation or any imposition of taxes on the rich, any shortening of the working day, as well as any form of government insurance for sickness, old age, accidents, or unemployment. At the same time as he rejected any social democratic provisions, Spengler celebrated private property, competition, imperialism, capital accumulation, and 'wealth, collected in few hands and among the ruling classes'. Landa describes Spengler's 'Prussian Socialism' as 'working a whole lot, for the absolute minimum, but - and this is a vital aspect - being happy about it.'"
"Strasser said that he did deny it: National Socialism was an idea which was still in evolution, and in that evolutionary process Hitler certainly played a specially important role. The 'idea' itself was Socialism. Here Hitler interrupted Strasser by declaring that this so-called Socialism was nothing but pure Marxism. There was no such thing as a capitalist system. A factory-owner was depended upon his workmen. If they went on strike, then his so-called property became utterly worthless."
"At this point Hitler turned to his neighbour Amann and said: 'What right have these people to demand a share in property or even in the administration? Herr Amann, would you permit your typist to have any voice in your affairs? The employer who accepts the responsibility for production also gives the workpeople their means of livelihood. Our greatest industrialists are not concerned with the acquisition of wealth or with good living, but, above all else, with responsibility and power. They have worked their way to the top by their own abilities, and this proof of their capacity -- a capacity only displayed by a higher race--gives them the right to lead."
"For at that date Hitler was still respectable. He had crushed the German labour movement, and for that the property-owning classes were willing to forgive him almost anything. Both Left and Right concurred in the very shallow notion that National Socialism was merely a version of Conservatism." - George Orwell
Look how they jump when you get close to the truth.
So funny and true.
It deeply embarrassed socialists that their ideology is the most murderous one invented and they have only existed a century.
Im sick of Nazi democrats and their fascism
Yeah people all jump like that when I say China is the most free country. Some people can't handle the truth!
@@siruranos9172 😂😂😂
Worst theater ever en the human history is EU.
Worse than all the war torn countries?
@@rupertsmith5815 European theatre is by far the worst theatre in history... Worse than every present day war torn country in present combined!
Political actors
The whole left-wing and right-wing argument of fascism being right wing. communism being left wing. The wings of what, of what exactly is socialism. They are on the same Spectrum one is collectivistic globalist and the other one is National but they're both socialist. They both seek an authoritarian government. I'm a capitalist so if anybody ever calls me a fascist a socialist or communist is absurd.
Nice position to take here.
I prefer Conservative..
"Incidentally, this also shows that the instruments used to induce private industry to undertake war-related productions and investments could be very similar on both sides of the front. That in turn can be viewed as a piece of indirect evidence for the fact that the economies Germany and the Western Allies still were quite similar, as they all were basically capitalist.
The foregoing analysis again proves that in the Nazi period enterprises continued to shape their actions according to their expectations and that the state authorities not only tolerated this behavior, but bowed to it by adapting their contract offers to the wishes of industry. That is also confirmed by Tooze, who argues that there was no 'Stalinist option' available to the Nazi regime and consequently 'a mixture of incentives provided by the state with private economic motives' was decisive for the development of certain sectors of production."
This is factually wrong
"The experience of the last fourteen years had shown that ‘private enterprise cannot be maintained in the age of democracy’. Business was founded above all on the principles of personality and individual leadership. Democracy and liberalism led inevitably to Social Democracy and Communism. After fourteen years of degeneration, the moment had now come to resolve the fatal divisions within the German body politic. Hitler would show no mercy towards his enemies on the left. It was time ‘to crush the other side completely’.
The next phase in the struggle would begin after the elections of 5 March. If the Nazis were able to gain another 33 seats in the Reichstag, then the actions against the Communists would be covered by ‘constitutional means’.
But, ‘regardless of the outcome there will be no retreat . . . if the election does not decide . . . the decision must be brought about even by other means’." - Adolf Hitler
Socialism: The State owns the means of production.
Fascism: You can own the means of production so long as you do as you're told.
Both: Centralized power and socially collectivist.
Actually socialism is when the workers own the means of production
@@zorro_lorenor6717 no
@@tiboga6135 yes.
@@zorro_lorenor6717 No it isn't
The Nazis ran all German enterprises.
Party members controlling the economy, where have I seen that one before?
Truth hurts he should except it and
Move on freedom of speech
Accept it* just letting you know, not being rude
spouting stupidity and lies to intentionally mislead people is not freedom of speech, the same applies to incitement.
@@themoon4040 Nazis were socialist though. In words and policy. A race based socialism. Fact. Use the google.
Yeah, truth hurts sometimes.
Do you know what else hurts? Being called a NAZI.
Earthworm James N64 no they weren’t they were ethno nationalist who embraced capitalism just because they had a strong state doesn’t mean they were left
'that guy called me a fascist, so i demand he change his opinion!'
@@wandaperi great argument
Says the old, balding, grey haired Hitler lookalike.
@@wandaperi You sound super intelligent
He demanded him to take back his words and shut up about it until he was properly educated. Spewing out incorrect facts as a mere opinion is not something that should be done in a parliament.
My reply literally keeps getting removed
On the face of it, the argument may seem ridiculous. … After all, the name of the party was National Socialist German Workers' Party. For some, it should be as simple as that. Yes, Hitler and the Nazis were socialists, for the simple reasons that they were staunchly anti-capitalist and believed that the means of production in their society should be controlled by a centralized state power. That is very clear from their writings, their words and their actions. Done and done.
Wrong. Free market capitalism operated within the Nazi government. Hitler hated socialism so much he invaded the USSR
thank you
They don’t like the truth do they
The Peoples' Democratic Republic of Korea must be more democratic and peoples' than the regular Republic of Korea.
good point... the power of words... or the power of action....
China, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Former USSR, former DDR (east Germany), Communist Poland and Hungary, etc. were all titled "democratic republics"... none of them were democratic, none of them were republics....
I so amazed at how uneducated so many people are trying to revision history.... Nazis were highly ANTI COMMUNIST/ANTI SOCIALIST... they were extreme right wing (Fascism)
If they call themselves socialist… or democratic… they certainly must be right? 😂
Exactly 😂
@@moonfrog9878 In the case of the Nazi party, yes. They were socialist. Just not Marxist socialists.
@@moonfrog9878DPRK most notably now lol (mind you they do show actual election ballot forms lol, just they all point to the same party lol).
Facts don't care about your feelings.
I hope you know every time you call a fascist socialist a political scientist blows his brains out
Levi Smith jreg is happy with you
They were kinda were socialist but they redefined what the society is.
And the fact is that nazism is a far-right ideology, and that most american neo-nazis supported Donald Trump.
@@donaldtrumplover2254 Good
Hitler was an absolute dictator and socialism gave him that position.
Roynek Robbertse
I don’t think it was socialism that gave Hitler power
@@MichaelJ44 In fact, it was capitalism. The people in this comment section are just ignorants...
@@SaraSwank how did Hitler take power through free market capitalisation, ooh wait no Hitler was the leader of the national socialist workers party.
Please educate yourself you ignorant fool.
@@sonsofmatriarchy5552 Lol EVERYBODY except you fools knows that Hitler was empowered by the capitalists, who saw him as the leader who came to save them from communism. How do you explain him doing business with Henry Ford, IBM, Texaco, Krupp, Nestlé, Coca-Cola, Thyssen, Volkswagen, Hugo Boss, Porsche, Kodak, Bayer, General Motors, etc etc? If you really think that Nazi regime was a socialist regime you are just an ignorant, sorry to say. I said this to another person but I'm going to say it here again:
Hitler himself described his movement as right-wing, for example, in a speech on April 21, 1929, Hitler declares that if a left-wing party took power, that would lead to the complete destruction of Germany, to Bolshevism, while if a right-wing party took power it would be the beginning of great resistance that would lead to the victory of the Aryan.
The fact that Fascism and Nazism were to the right of the political spectrum was generally accepted by conservatives, communists, members of the clergy and the fascists themselves. National-Socialism and Fascism were seen as right-wing in all areas, in fact, as George Orwell said in his review of "Main kampf", Hitler crushed the labor movement and that's why the great capitalists were willing to forgive him almost everything. Both the left and the right agreed on the notion that National-Socialism was simply a version of conservatism, the right saw Hitler and Mussolini as leaders protecting capitalism and civilization of Eastern Bolshevism.
Fascism saw an ally in the political right of the United States, for example Franco was praised by Republican Richard Nixon as a loyal friend of the United States. In fact, the American right admired fascism so much that President Raegan declared that most Americans believed that Abraham Lincoln's anti-fascist brigades fought on the wrong side of the Spanish civil war, which reveals much about Raegan's sympathy for fascism
As Orwell pointed out in 1940, the National-Socialist regime was largely accepted as pro-capitalist and anti-labor both by the left and by the right, while the working class was repressed in the Third Reich, the capitalists enjoyed record profits, in fact , as William Shirer, author of "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," the proportion of national income enjoyed by the capitalists, increased massively under Hitler, while that of the workers declined despite more employment. It is also worth knowing that Hitler and Mussolini privatized state industries when they came to power, the first leaders of the 21st century to do so. So almost all, if not all, the fascists were pro-capitalists, and that is a historical fact that cannot be denied.
@@SaraSwank do you always copy and paste replies, authoritarian leftist regimes are all the same, wasn't Hitler and Stalin Allies before WW2.
National socialist workers party isn't real socialism argument.
You disgusting vile excuse of a human being all leftists are good for is mass murder through social engineering while blaming capitalism for being about freedom and liberty.
Imagine having to apologize for offending someone because of something you said without any intention of offending someone. I would have just said “I will not apologize, if you got offended it’s not my responsibility since what I said was not with that intention, since now I have cleared that my intention was not to be offensive you got to understand that I have the right to have my personal opinion and you got to respect mine just like I respect yours, so you’re the one who needs to apologize from trying to deprive me from my freedom of speech”. Political correctness is just a way to censor what the majority of the people see as being “bad”, well guess what if my liberty doesn’t affect yours then I can say whatever I want
@saya yowakage Yes, Socialists kill Socialists. Stalin killed Trotsky. Socialists propagandists like you spout this crap as if it's a point. Were there free-markets or private property in Nazi Germany? Nope, that was done away with right after the Reichstag Fire; that's totalitarian Socialism. It's true the SPD (the actual fascist party in Germany according to the KPD) were on the opposite side of the Nazis but they were even more opposed to the KPD because they were the most Liberal (least Socialist). Claiming the "Nazis aren't Socialist" is blatant horseshit. But like all Socialist Parties you're not allowed to say facts that they don't like even in Europe in the 21st Century.
@Krisbugajew11-11 Socialism is public control of the means of production. So... Ehm.. Yeah it can be pretty totalitarian like the soviet union or China.
@saya yowakage they killed everybody... capitalists too
@saya yowakage after hitler purged socialist leaders from the party in 1934, they privatized for SOME, not all. between the time that hitler joined the party and then (1919-1934) the party was socialist and hitler rose to prominence in the party by espousing socialist ideology. just because "govmnt didnt do as they said" doesnt mean the party wasnt founded, based, and thrived to power on socialist ideas and people.
Yes, but there is also this thing called Manners, Politeness, and Professional Courtesy
just putting it out there that the other name of North Korea is - The Democratic People's Republic of Korea. So i guess North Korea is democratic now right i mean it's in the name
There’s actually an explanation for this. These communists believe that totalitarianism and a completely collectivised state (basically a hive mind) is the highest form of democracy. That’s what they believe
North Korea is marxist democracy. Karl Marx envisaged a system where people can vote for the leadership of their worker's councils and a central government which would be charged with dictating economic allocation without any elected officials.
YES THEY WERE !
The word Nazi is a short to “National Socialist”
Yes and the democratic peoples republic of north korea is democratic.
Nazis were facists, right wing.
@@klemenator Number 1 rule in running a scam! STICK TO THE LIE! So are you a liar. Or just one of the obscenely gullible morons?
@The Outlaw Torn If anything its an oportunistic ideology, promoting themselves to this day as the third position. Doing what suits its needs.
Far from socialists but I guess economically left wing. Since they dont want to move twoards communism.
Also who was a rabid leftist giovani or musolini? I guess both.
@The Outlaw Torn Collectivism is not necessarily leftist. Actually there is nothing socialist in corporatism. According to Murray Rothbard: "Fascism and Nazism were the logical culmination in domestic affairs of the modern drift toward right-wing collectivism. It has become customary among libertarians, as indeed among the Establishment of the West, to regard Fascism and Communism as fundamentally identical. But while both systems were indubitably collectivist, they differed greatly in their socio-economic content. For Communism was a genuine revolutionary movement that ruthlessly displaced and overthrew the old ruling élites; while Fascism, on the contrary, cemented into power the old ruling classes. Hence, Fascism was a counter-revolutionary movement that froze a set of monopoly privileges upon society; in short, Fascism was the apotheosis of modern State monopoly capitalism."
In addition, Mussolini during a speech on October 28, 1933, said:
"All the socialist parties in Europe are on the ground. And I don't mean only Italy and Germany, but also other countries."
So it seems that not even Mussolini considered the Nazi party a socialist party. No one really at that time considered the Nazi party a socialist party lol.
@@klemenator NAzis remind me of left wing universities with their propaganda and suppression of free speech. Antifa reminds me of Nazi tactics more than wall street.
Why did he apologize?
That's his mistake.
He should have apologized by saying he was sorry that telling the truth about their authoritarian ideology, ILL-liberal leftism, socialism is so offensive.
Absolutely! You should never apologize for being truthful. Socialism is a disgusting philosophy and Naziism was just another iteration.
@@dscoleri Are you all fucking disabled, socialists were being killed in camps you dipshit !!! Greetings from Germany you are all are spitting on the grave of every man opposing the 3rd Reich !!!
@MajorLeague You actually believe the 3rd Reich had anything to do with Marxism?
@MajorLeague Then take any other socialist writer, socialism is the opposite of what you are trying to compare it too. Once the Nazis took power Writers like: Rocker, Luxembourg and also Marx were banned in Gemany. And all trade unions were dissolved by the Nazis.
You would have to not understand socialism at all to make this quite revisionist argument!
Doesn't change the fact that when socialism is uninformed or in wrong hands it can do irreparable damage.
Same with capitalism. Which one does more damage in the "wrong hands"? Which one does more damage when people are slightly/moderately/terribly uninformed? Which one encourages sharing of important information to others more?
I don't know the answer to any of these questions (though I can make an educated guess in some cases). But I'd say they are question you'll need to answer if you bring up "can do damage when uninformed or in wrong hands" if you want to use that to argue for one or the other.
@@mcwolf1096 socialism is way easier to fuck up since it has and always will lead to genocide or massive famine
@@jayman6151 Are you sure you're talking about socialism _being the actual cause/ideology/..._ that led to that? Or could it simply be that the idea of socialism was used by tyrants to get enough people behind them to establish a system - and some other ideology of those tyrants then led to the atrocities? Can you _show_ that it was indeed the socialism that caused it?
And no, I won't even try to show you that it wasn't. You're the one making the claim, the burden of proof is on you. Deal with it.
In the wrong hands lol.
Doesn’t anything do wrong and irreparable damage if it’s in wrong and irreparable hands?
Many EU politicians aren't acting very professional.🤣 They acted very childish when the truth came out
Kamall was right and shouldn't have apologised.
He didn't apologise for what he said. He only apologised for causing hurt feelings. He worded his "apology" quite carefully.
nope. He is an arrogant englishmen and shall be removed as soon as possible from that honorable parliament. I am so happy when these arrogant grap is leaving... my god. LEAVE! Join the Dollar Zone and fine.
@@m.c9146
Are you really that ignorant? We have no need to join the dollar we have our own currency. As for Kamall he isn't a member of this polit bureau any more, how stupid are you?
@@hughfranklin4002 Exactly, I didn't support Brexit to transfer our independence from the EU to the U.S.
Oscar i dontmind they got legal weed.. Everyone needs to chill the fuck out lol
4:56 - The socialist dictator from Germany really isn't giving any justic to his cause here.
lol what socialist dictator of Germany
@@oliver9815 he's some bitchy conservative
@@Zlonk7 Yeah I'm German and I've never seen this man. He's some politican from the Social Democratic Party who was angry because the Nazis were called socialists. What "socialist dictator" haha
If only politics were like apologetics debates, peaceful, constructive, and well organized
Good point
It can't be when globalist fascists use fraud, lies and collusion to undermine every single freedom you have, then call you a conspiracy theorist and election denier for seeing it. At a certain point, people are going to lose their patience under that abuse and speak harsh truths about those who intend to enslave humanity.
….try arguing premillennialism in a dispositionalist church :)
There was a time when they were, my friend...
Shoutin him down, just like nazis.
you know who the nazis banned and killed? actual socialists
@@LautaroJaguar Marxists and Social Democrats are variants bud. By ur logic, if I am an American and kill another American does that mean I am no longer an American?
@@LautaroJaguar does not matter that often rivals are mostly samiliar
@@LautaroJaguar So did the communists. Flimsy anecdote. Do all Socialists agree with all the policies of every other Socialist? Do you believe that socialists are a hivemind?
The Nazis did a fair bit more than "shouting people down" .....
Rule number one
Never
Ever
Apologise to a socialist.
You guys are adorable😄
😂😂😂😭😭😭😭😂😂
@Kenneth Jr. St. Brice North Korea is called The Democratic People's Republic of Korea
FuCk YoU! (not sorry!)
The little man with the moustache sounds familiar, has he made a speech before at the EU before?
Wrong guy this one’s mustache is a little grayer
@@KuuchWizard he's Hitler just older.
@@josephhenley6926 this man is very stupid or deliberately lying.Nazis haéaé hate socialists it is as if to say that the Social Democrats are Social Darwinists who is not stupid knows that social democrats represent the poor sick fall people. Méf socialdawinism is clearly Nazi the right wing .
@@TheBuzzo01 You are wrong,... once again. Nazi's LOVE Socialism and are anti-capitalist. They are totalitarian, racist Neo-Marxists.
Socialist Democrats are Bolsheviks.
Same thing....different name.
Remember the Left will always fight with the left before the Right gets involved because it it is about complete and utter power. Different factions of Leftism... all crazy.
@Krisbugajew11-11 National Socialists are Nazis by it's very name. But instead of getting into semantics, it is important to understand how they are the very opposite of Conservative Nationalists. Conservatives believe in God, Family and Country. These three things make up a Nationalist. Since Nazi's are also Nationalists but my argument to you is that they are Left wing Nationalists, let me set the table here.
The opposite of celebrating God family and country would be:
* Anti-diety, put your faith in a Statist power instead.
* Do not believe or promote traditional family values. Instead promote sexual cults and perversions.
* Destroy Anthems, Laws and Nation's Constitutions
* Property should not be owned by private citizens
In otherwords, the opposite of Conservative Nationalism is Left wing Nationalism...or four stalwarts of Cultural Marxism. You ask how Marxism can be racist? It is thru the set up division by people like Kimberlé Crenshaw, Robin DeAngelo, Ibram X.Kendi, Saul Alinsky, Sam Harris, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault and Herbert Marcuse.
They all set up division through deceit using inverse reality. Saul Alinsky would be so proud.
As for Utilitarianism. Sure..,Let's make a move for the majority or what's good for the majority. Who make's that decision? Where does objectivity cross subjectivity when it comes to the good of the majority? How many people are involved in the making of rightful laws? Can they be influenced?
True Socialism is literally the same as Communism,... it is merely the intermediary step between dragging a society from a Capitalist Christian society to a Communist Statist society. Marxism is the medium used. Call it Neo-Marxism, Cultural Marxism, Maoism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, Che Guevara Radicalism, Leninism or plain old Luciferian Sabbateanism for all I care... they love word games and I would rather not play those games.
(Deconstructionism by Derrida and Word manipulation by Chomsky).
As we see today, leftist ideology has indeed become the religion of all who lean left, for they dare not go against the fascist overlords and their army of indoctrinated Marxists.
BLM is a Maoist paid, Marxist trained leftist activist group.
LGBTQ is a catastrophic messianistic ideology (Erich Fromm's definition... not mine...as he tried to pull people away from the word Sabbateanism), and activist organization that pushes anti-Nationalism regularly.
Leftists who may despise each other will work hand in hand to defeat the good of God before they tear eachother to shreds.
After reading your retort, I chose to speak to you as an intellect rather than the 99% who troll social media. I hope you enjoyed this 5 year study molded into a 3 minute dialogue. (whether you agree or not😎)
-Peace
Doc-G
This comment section is full of people who don't seem to know what nazism, socialism, liberalism and even the EU are.
How so?
If the comment held no truth the man would not have been so offended by the statement. One doesn't concern themselves with "lies" they address them and move on.
You are wrong. Repeated lies that go unopposed gain strength
@@brianpottorff9779 well I've just become aware of the eugenics program in Iceland so who knows
Your comment is highly imbecilic. He was offended because that's a LIE, a HUGE LIE. In fact, - and ALL HISTORIANS AGREE -, Leftists were the first ENEMIES and VICTIMS of Nazism, something he recalled. Socialists were the FIRST to be sent to concentration camps, even before the Jews, but this fact that everyone agrees upon except RW imbeciles like Kamall (who had to immediately apologize after being mocked by the whole assembly) and of course ignorant CZcams commentators. This fact is recalled in pretty much every history book (that you've never opened) and every WW2 history museum (that you've never visited). So yes, being equated to your own executioner IS offending and totally unbecoming of such an assembly.
You see, it's not surprising to see uneducated comments like yours in CZcams comments, but in the EU Parliament, we expect a higher standard from members, and it's abundantly clear that a guy who repeats Qanon level fabrications that fly in the face of all historians has no place in such an arena. That's why this dude Kamall was chastised publicly and had to apologize without reservation, because LIES like this have to stop.
@@robert48044 ok schizo
The na zees were socialists. Not only was Ad Hit a former communist who the joined a workers movement but even the antisemitism is anticapitalist by nature. After all many antisemitic quotes and ideas Hit parrots comes from one Karl Heinrich Marx himself
Nazis had a national socialism and in EU we have international socialism with the same centralist tendencies
Nononono, the 4th reich is not socialist, it is ultra-liberal !
Yet again IIIrd Reich had no border project sooooooooooo..............
I don't think you know what socialism means my dude
Don't The EU to Nazi Germany, there are plenty of differences.
@@eoin4172 Elitism talk, school at how to be authoritarian? Just wondering? Socialism originates it which also created Fascism and Nazism. Since Benito Mussolini was a Revolutionary Marxist
As yes, my favourite democracy, the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea.
In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living. The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants. This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism. Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”
@@hughganis9015 Capitalism and a Market Economy are two different things.
Socialism is the rejection of capitalism and individualism. The term Socialism is older than Marx. Hitler hatted capitalism and Marxist socialism. Be he agreed with the central planing and the rejection of the individual over the collective. It is laid out in his 25 tenets.
Comrade muffin what’s the difference I’m not being snarky I’d really like to know thanks.
Hugh Ganis Well Capitalism is simply a system of production, where the means of production are owned by private sectors. A market is merely where products are exchanged. You can have a market socialist economy, as formerly seen in the Nordic countries, and you can have a planned Capitalist economy, as seen in former Nazi Germany.
I love how they said nazism is not socialism and then called nazism fascist
The funny thing is that fascism derives many of its tenets from socialism. So even if not socialist, it does have a lot of socialist tendencies. The main difference is that fascists believe that the in group is some race, ethnic group, or nationality. While socialists want to export their socialism to the entire world and doesn’t necessarily hold any in group. But both systems require expansion(militarily) to stave off collapse. We tend to forget that the Soviets waged war on the entirety of Eastern Europe. That they, had the exact same economic mindset when they expanded their borders. They were exporting their inflation and inner problems. Nazism just had the “benefit” of being able to witness Lenin’s reforms, and the utter collapse that happened
Both statements are true.
@@TheWizardGamez Rubbish. Fascism takes nothing from socialism. It's nation-centric rather than human-centric. It preaches strong man dictatorship, rather than communal control. It preaches violence as admirable, rather than sometimes necessary.
@@VolrinSeth No, Nazism isn’t fascist. It has similarities, but they are not the same thing.
@@capncake8837 Incorrect. Nazism is a form of fascism. Just like communism is a form of socialism.
If I was a business owner, I wouldnt want the government determining how I price my goods and how I should use my wealth.
welcome to the public sector (communism/socialism) , while the private sector allows you to do your own shit (evil capitalism)
@@mcsmash4905 i hope your being sarcastic
@@whereschavo3953 i hope you arent about to show me how much of a moron you are but then again im not lucky enough for that not to be the case so dont even bother replying
@@mcsmash4905 when someone says "the private sector allows you to do your own shit" then writes (evil capitalism) in brackets it makes me think you are aware of the benefits of capitalism but call it evil?. makes me think you are being sarcastic by calling capitalism evil. so again, i dont understand if thats sarcasm orrrrrr.
@@whereschavo3953 guess im the moron now actually i thought you were one of the regular smartasses but anyway i put it in brackets because thats what people like to call it for some reason
"My feelings are hurt. you have to apologize!" lol wimp
It's important to differentiate between smt being emotional damaging and being bluntly offensive
@@liam3814 Economics of Fascism.
- Universal Healthcare
- Price controls
- Wage controls
- Guaranteed work programs
- Gun control
- Using censorship and violence as political weapons
- Nationalizing industries and 500 companies.
- Controlling who a business can hire and fire.
They shared about 90% of economic policies with socialism. They were by no means right wing.
This is because the father of Fascism Benito Mussolini and his philosopher of Fascism Giovanni Gentile were both lifelong socialist. Mussolini literally wrote in socialist publications from the age of 18. He was only kicked out of the party due to disagreements on the war.
They wanted to improve socialism. They saw the shortages created under socialism. They decided they didn't want to fire or kill the entrepreneur in an attempt to solve the shortage problem. It also allowed them to partner with big business who saw being able to keep their business and not die as an improvement to the Socialist and Communist. All of these groups had inner turmoils despite having very similar beliefs from an American perspective. They regularly fought for the recruitment of the same pools of men to join their ranks which caused bloody rivalries.
Price controls are by definition an anti market aka socialist policy. They are essential to all forms of socialism as they can't find prices. (See "Calculation problem with Socialism")
They also create shortages in any area they are used, which has lead to the death of millions thru starvation.
So Fascist effectively turned entrepreneurs into defacto government employees... Telling them what to do, how much to charge, who to hire and fire... Not allowing the market to decide anything. Many of these businesses became dependent on government subsidies. This was clearly central planning with a veneer of ownership aka not capitalism or right wing.
NATIONALIZED ECONOMIES:
Nationalization is a huge part of Fascism aka the government taking ownership, while claiming "the people" now have ownership. Like all socialist....
Hitler nationalized over 500 companies including banks, iron, manufacturing, etc..
Mussolini did as well I'm sure you remember Alfa Romeo, state oil and gas...
Mussolini nationalized 3/4 of the economy.
TRADE UNIONS:
Hitler wanted to centralize the trade unions as well... Many small trade unions were too difficult to control. In 1933, he formed two national unions to replace the dozens of poorly organized, badly run organizations. Then he outlawed any new unions, forcing all workers to join.
So again... Far from being right wing/ free market. It was central planning, central control.
From Mein Kampf:
The racial Weltanschauung (world view) is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung. - Hitler, Mein Kampf
Aka the single biggest difference between Nazism and Socialism was that Race is what defined their class struggle... not wealth. All forms of Socialism require someone to be greedy aka a class divide. You need the poor to be greedy and want what they wealthy have created in society or you'll never have the vanguard for your revolution.
Marx divided between the haves and have nots, Hitler Divided via race, Gramci and the Frankfurt school came to America and saw that class divide wouldn't work because even the poor could afford similar amenities as the wealthy cars, air conditioning, etc... so they focused on group division and group identity aka shared consciousness.
Many Marxist saw the flaws in socialism. They then moved to support the third way... After seeing the failures of fascism they became disillusioned with Marxism.
Socialism has three meanings so sadly it confuses most people.
1. Any anti market policy that goes beyond the liberal idea that the government should address "public goods" this is an economic term for goods that are non excludable and non rival.
So Medicare for all... Would be a socialist policy.
2. Any anti market system.
These would be communism, socialism, and fascism. All of these are types of socialist aka anti market ideologies.
3. Socialism as an ideology/ economy.
Which would describe the subset at the level of communism and fascism.
This would be what Marx was describing.
Fascism is and has always been a far left wing ideology staunchly opposed to free markets
@@marcusdavenport9847 dude could you send this to me hahah also do you have references?
@@marcusdavenport9847 Too bad Mussolini and Gentile wrote The Doctrine of Fascism, which shatts your entire comment. They literally say that fascism is a right-wing anti-socialist ideology:
"Fascism is opposed to socialism, which reduces and immobilizes the historical movement in the class struggle and ignores the unity of the State that can bring the classes together in a single economic and moral reality. Fascism is likewise opposed to trade unionism."
"After fighting socialism, fascism attacks the whole set of democratic ideologies."
"The fascist denials of socialism, of democracy, of liberalism, should not lead us to believe, however, that fascism understands to make the world return to what it was before 1789."
"Granted that the XIXth century was the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy, this does not mean that the XXth century must also be the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy. Political doctrines pass; nations remain. We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century of "right", a Fascist century."
And here are some quotes from Hitler in which it's quite clear that he was NOT anti-capitalist:
This is what Hitler responded (in a letter) to Otto Strasser after he spoke to him about the importance of nationalizing the industry:
"Democracy has left the world in ruins, and yet now you intend to extend that to the economic sphere. It would be the end of the German economy. The capitalists have made their way to the top thanks to their ability, and on the basis of that selection, which is further proof that they are a superior race, they have the right to command and direct."
This is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"The National Socialist State has to ensure the well-being of its citizens, recognizing, in all aspects, the significance that personality embodies and thus fostering in each domain of human activity that maximum degree of productive capacity that, in turn, allows the individual a maximum degree of benefit."
And this is what Hitler said when he still didn't have in mind to enter the country into a war:
"It is too easy for these economic advice, this multiplicity of opinions, this chaos of interests, to inhibit, perhaps even stifle, the development of personality and initiative. First of all, this structure is necessary as long as the economy is slow, while millions of people are out of work, as long as the state has to manage the economy according to plan to get it back on track in the first place. But the closer we get to normal times, the more the shackles and inhibitions that hinder the free play of natural wrestling must loosen. The State should not be a babysitter, but the form of the ethical conscience of a people and of each individual. [...] Personal effort advances if personal profit is the agent that animates the world and the economy and produces great inventions and discoveries. If we get rid of that, instinct fades and development stagnates. But staying still is going backwards. That is why we have to preserve, maintain and even reward this agent!"
Oh, and in Mein Kampf he tells how they were attacked by leftists during their rallies, who accused the Nazis of being the "representatives of the monarchical and reactionary agitation". He also says that they chose the color red for their proclamations and their flag just to provoke the ire of the leftists...
And by the way, Hitler and Mussolini PRIVATIZED lots of companies when they came to power. This is a very well documented fact. The word "privatization" in english was used for the first time in history in The Economist magazine to describe the economic policies of the Nazis...
P.S. Here in Spain we have a right-wing party called VOX that has created its own workers' union... Yeah, right-wing unions exist, as much as Americans may be surprised...
@@marcusdavenport9847 Here are two liberal economists who contradict you:
These are some quotes from Ludwig von Mises, from his 1927 book _Liberalismus_ :
“Fascism can triumph today because the general indignation at the infamies committed by the socialists and communists has made it win the sympathy of broad social strata. [...] The exploits of the fascists and other similar parties were an emotional reaction sparked by outrage at the exploits of the Bolsheviks and Communists. After the first wave of rage, his policy entered the lane of greater restraint and it is possible that it will be even more so with the passage of time. This moderation is due to the fact that the traditional liberal conception continues to exert an unconscious influence on the fascists. But whatever the extent of this restraint, it cannot be ignored that the shift from the right-wing parties to the tactic of fascism shows that the fight against liberalism has had unimaginable successes until recently. Not a few people accept the fascist methods, because the fascist parties, despite having a totally anti-liberal economic policy program and a fully interventionist policy, take great care to not practice that senseless policy of extreme destruction that it imprints on the communists the seal of absolute enemies of civilization. [...] It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has for the moment, saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history."
Mises himself ended up joining a fascist party (the austrian Fatherland Front).
And this is a quote from Murray Rothbard, from his 1965 book _Left, Right, and the Prospects for Liberty_ :
"Fascism and Nazism were the logical culmination in domestic affairs of the modern drift toward right-wing collectivism. It has become customary among libertarians, as indeed among the Establishment of the West, to regard Fascism and Communism as fundamentally identical. But while both systems were indubitably collectivist, they differed greatly in their socio-economic content. For Communism was a genuine revolutionary movement that ruthlessly displaced and overthrew the old ruling élites; while Fascism, on the contrary, cemented into power the old ruling classes. Hence, Fascism was a counter-revolutionary movement that froze a set of monopoly privileges upon society; in short, Fascism was the apotheosis of modern State monopoly capitalism. Here was the reason that Fascism provided so attractive (which Communism, of course, never did) to big business interests in the West, openly and unabashedly so in the 1920s and 1930s."
German only needs to trim his moustache a little at the sides...
paint it a little dark too maybe?
@@Yetipfote nah his red face and screaming outrage are more than enough 😂
As someone who speaks German, the subtitles aren't accurate to be quite honest
Hitler technically was a Socialist
@@Dino23968 yes by far
the problem was he went to the EU clown parliament and acted like it was a real parliament
You don't understand how the EU functions.
Yep. Clown 🤡 Show!
EU=✡️
@@rick7424 It should stop functioning for the betterment of Europe! Greetings from India. 🙏🗽🐍
@@Josh.Stovalllets look at the UK and than you will see a Clown Show
well nazis and socialist were almost the same in practise i dont understand why he should apologize
Nazis were just more openly racist and honest about wanting to eliminate certain groups of people that they viewed as inferior or a burden. Socialists tend to hide behind labels to seem more fair and tolerant.
Tell the truth and get shouted down. I guess that the Italian would deny that Mussolini invented fascism.
Mussolini didn't create fascism, it was created like 100 years before him
@will walker But was he a socialist when he became a ruthless dictator?... No! And if you really think that fascism is socialist, then i would dare you to find a fascist and call him a socialist right into his face.
@will walker Thank you for the argument😂
Economics of Fascism.
- Universal Healthcare
- Price controls
- Wage controls
- Guaranteed work programs
- Gun control
- Using censorship and violence as political weapons
- Nationalizing industries and 500 companies.
- Controlling who a business can hire and fire.
They shared about 90% of economic policies with socialism. They were by no means right wing.
This is because the father of Fascism Benito Mussolini and his philosopher of Fascism Giovanni Gentile were both lifelong socialist. Mussolini literally wrote in socialist publications from the age of 18. He was only kicked out of the party due to disagreements on the war.
They wanted to improve socialism. They saw the shortages created under socialism. They decided they didn't want to fire or kill the entrepreneur in an attempt to solve the shortage problem. It also allowed them to partner with big business who saw being able to keep their business and not die as an improvement to the Socialist and Communist. All of these groups had inner turmoils despite having very similar beliefs from an American perspective. They regularly fought for the recruitment of the same pools of men to join their ranks which caused bloody rivalries.
Price controls are by definition an anti market aka socialist policy. They are essential to all forms of socialism as they can't find prices. (See "Calculation problem with Socialism")
They also create shortages in any area they are used, which has lead to the death of millions thru starvation.
So Fascist effectively turned entrepreneurs into defacto government employees... Telling them what to do, how much to charge, who to hire and fire... Not allowing the market to decide anything. Many of these businesses became dependent on government subsidies. This was clearly central planning with a veneer of ownership aka not capitalism or right wing.
NATIONALIZED ECONOMIES:
Nationalization is a huge part of Fascism aka the government taking ownership, while claiming "the people" now have ownership. Like all socialist....
Hitler nationalized over 500 companies including banks, iron, manufacturing, etc..
Mussolini did as well I'm sure you remember Alfa Romeo, state oil and gas...
Mussolini nationalized 3/4 of the economy.
TRADE UNIONS:
Hitler wanted to centralize the trade unions as well... Many small trade unions were too difficult to control. In 1933, he formed two national unions to replace the dozens of poorly organized, badly run organizations. Then he outlawed any new unions, forcing all workers to join.
So again... Far from being right wing/ free market. It was central planning, central control.
From Mein Kampf:
The racial Weltanschauung (world view) is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung. - Hitler, Mein Kampf
Aka the single biggest difference between Nazism and Socialism was that Race is what defined their class struggle... not wealth. All forms of Socialism require someone to be greedy aka a class divide. You need the poor to be greedy and want what they wealthy have created in society or you'll never have the vanguard for your revolution.
Marx divided between the haves and have nots, Hitler Divided via race, Gramci and the Frankfurt school came to America and saw that class divide wouldn't work because even the poor could afford similar amenities as the wealthy cars, air conditioning, etc... so they focused on group division and group identity aka shared consciousness.
Many Marxist saw the flaws in socialism. They then moved to support the third way... After seeing the failures of fascism they became disillusioned with Marxism.
Socialism has three meanings so sadly it confuses most people.
1. Any anti market policy that goes beyond the liberal idea that the government should address "public goods" this is an economic term for goods that are non excludable and non rival.
So Medicare for all... Would be a socialist policy.
2. Any anti market system.
These would be communism, socialism, and fascism. All of these are types of socialist aka anti market ideologies.
3. Socialism as an ideology/ economy.
Which would describe the subset at the level of communism and fascism.
This would be what Marx was describing.
Fascism is and has always been a far left wing ideology staunchly opposed to free markets
EU...look who’s there to represent the European people, hope this “institutional” biggest joke will soon disappear!
I see potential and trust in the European Union's President.
Who? Verhoffstat? The alcoholic?
By this logic the Democratic Peoples Republic Of Korea is a democracy
They are democractic in their view of what a Democrat is. There is a representative for each industry. And there is a dictatorship of people's democracy.
But Hitler was a socialist.
The clue is in the title.
National socialist workers party. Aka nazi
well, people are saying in some forums that china is a democracy 🙄
It's not just the party name, every speech by Hitler explained his socialist ideals, every government action showed them to be real. It's only the socialists so have tried to posthumously rewrite history to call a left wing socialist government "right wing" calling it so, does not make it the case.
@@badda_boom8017 badda bing
@Wick that's actually the real world definition of socialist, rather than the textbook definition. It happens every time.
Never apologize for telling the truth no matter how offensive it may be.
It’s not the truth though. It’s only offensive to people who don’t have half a brain.
But it isnt the truth. What the f'ck . Did they drop out of school or did they just skive their history lessons. Bruh I'm glad that we still teach this things in germany .
@@thenarkknight278 Yes of course you are right, there is no way the Nazis IE the National Socialists could have been socialists, what were we thinking?
@@thesultanofsaltines921 Just because they called themselves socialists doesn’t mean that’s what they actually were.
@@whoseeyesareflowers639 ah, kinda like how a dude who claims he is a woman is not actually a woman? So tell me how the Nazis were not "socialists" then?
Kamall (as well as conservatives and libertarians), stop letting "these" people calibrate you to their standards.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu Typical libt@rcl thinking. Hitler was inspired by a socialist economist Gottfried Feder, who defined “finance capitalism” as the result of the Jews’ moral depravity . Socialism was the root of modern anti-semitism.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu Pathetic are you people who don’t read half a page of history.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu It's the truth. Only leftists want to twist it and shift the blame onto the right. Feder was giving a speech on how to eliminate Capitalism and one of his audiences was Adolf Hitler.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu Hitler implemented A LOT of socialist policies.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu Examples are A LOT 😂 Food stamps, public parks, car subsidies, writing off the poorest’s debts, even free money. The most important of all: hatred on capitalism.
Quote"In statement after statement, Hitler could not be clearer about his socialist commitments. He said, for example, in a 1927 speech, “We are socialists. We are the enemies of today’s capitalist system of exploitation … and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”
You are ignoring the fact that this quote is from Strasser right? Even for the benefit of a doubt, Hitler stated advocates privatization in 1938, dec 28?
You do understand that Hitler hi-jacked the party to get the following for total power. He was not a socialist, and the party before he arrived was good.
The argument is bogus, ignorant, and obscures history.
Hitler increased privatization. And corporatism. So your statement is false.
But there is another issue people ignore when it comes to German politics and most European states which US citizens are very far removed and don’t get.
To be for monarchism meant being definitively right wing. This was the case since the French Revolution. In fact in a technical sense if we use the early definition all people who believe in democracy or representative Republicanism are LEFT.
Hitler intended to disband democracy and the Republic.
The left position was always to expand democracy by including worker democracy. Even in the so-called “dictatorship” communism workers had guaranteed union voter rights in there work place and could vote for local Soviets.
Hitler like Bismarck before him promised to restore the titles and wealth of the former German aristocracy. Hitler was a type of monarchist.
Bismarck was right wing and hated socialism in a similar way that Hitler hated Bolshevism Marxism and both wrote about it.
But Bismarck also innovated types of social democracy, social guarantees like universal health insurance as a way to prevent socialism “worker ownership of the means of production and cooperativism”.
But these “social democratic” policies came directly from older ideas of the monarchy aristocracy to protect the welfare of their subjects not as a democratic or economic rights.
@@recusantcatholicgroyper101 that wasnt privatization, that was a state control economy
Yes Hitler did say those words, Strasser made a similar statement about a year before.
The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was a non-aggression pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union that enabled those two powers to partition Poland between them. The pact was signed in Moscow on 23 August 1939 by German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov and was officially known as the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Unofficially, it has also been referred to as the Hitler-Stalin Pact, Nazi-Soviet Pact or Nazi-Soviet Alliance.
Hey! How about you ALL watch the historical documentary entitled: THE SOVIET STORY (EDVĪNS SNORE, 2008).
▶️🔍⌨️🎞️📕🗂️📑
okay? and Barbarossa was the invasion by Nazi Germany into the Soviet Union, the nazis weren’t socialist
Pact of two imperialist countries, that's nothing to do with the idiotic statement in video
What's your point? The first people purged from the Nazi party were the socialists. The first political enemies sent to the camps: communists. Hitler would betray the pact with Russia, which he'd always planned to attack.
@@JeremySmith-fk4yf Lenin died on January 21, 1924 at the age of 53 years.
Why would he need to correct something about which he is factually and demonstrably correct?
"The conservatives and reactionaries had their greatest triumph when the common worker gave up and sank to the level of a slave. The A to Z of this “socialist” creation was to craftily draw the “Old Fighters” away from the capitalistic class.
The Nazis offered unimagined possibilities, with Hitler impressing the upper classes with fairy tales about world domination: a vision to which the German has absolutely no resistance. So the largest military buildup of all times came about and, of course, the desired war. The German people will someday sleep off this intoxication, but the hangover will not go away as easily. When the curtain finally opens and the theater is visible to the audience without impostors and stage directors, there will be a frightful awakening.
Never in the history of a nation have the guilty ones been more evident than now. It may be that one or the other bandit will have a higher degree of blame, but in general it is the entire bunch that is guilty.
In my view the people of industry and the military officers will be at the head of the line. With few exceptions, they went through thick and thin with Hitler and gave him counsel."
- Friedrich Kellner, "My Opposition" (presented in the US by the H.W. Bush Presidential Library) July 27, 1941
I love all your films Nick Nolte now your great at copying and pasting.well done
Somebody hit a nerve...
If i heard a person say that Nazis were leftists i would be triggered by the stupidity too
@@hueyfreeman1983 really. On what spectrum are socialist are on?
@@sillymesilly far left unlike nazis who are far right
@@sillymesilly The left!
@Jessica A fantastic lie. The State in this case N--- Germany told all the factories what to make. If that is privatization then I am a toad.
So much pearl clutching I thought this was recorded in a Baptist Church in Georgia, not the European Parliament.
I'd rather deal with Christian pearl clutchers than the socialist E.U.. We've seen what these socialist do once in power throughout the 20th century and recently around the world. At worse some Christians are annoying, but still created the freest societies in the world. While socialist bring tyranny, mass slavery, mass theft, mass death & even mass starvation at times.
Yeah i know... those darn Christians and their pearl clinching! Amiright!? . . .
Economics of Fascism.
- Universal Healthcare
- Price controls
- Wage controls
- Guaranteed work programs
- Gun control
- Using censorship and violence as political weapons
- Nationalizing industries and 500 companies.
- Controlling who a business can hire and fire.
They shared about 90% of economic policies with socialism. They were by no means right wing.
This is because the father of Fascism Benito Mussolini and his philosopher of Fascism Giovanni Gentile were both lifelong socialist. Mussolini literally wrote in socialist publications from the age of 18. He was only kicked out of the party due to disagreements on the war.
They wanted to improve socialism. They saw the shortages created under socialism. They decided they didn't want to fire or kill the entrepreneur in an attempt to solve the shortage problem. It also allowed them to partner with big business who saw being able to keep their business and not die as an improvement to the Socialist and Communist. All of these groups had inner turmoils despite having very similar beliefs from an American perspective. They regularly fought for the recruitment of the same pools of men to join their ranks which caused bloody rivalries.
Price controls are by definition an anti market aka socialist policy. They are essential to all forms of socialism as they can't find prices. (See "Calculation problem with Socialism")
They also create shortages in any area they are used, which has lead to the death of millions thru starvation.
So Fascist effectively turned entrepreneurs into defacto government employees... Telling them what to do, how much to charge, who to hire and fire... Not allowing the market to decide anything. Many of these businesses became dependent on government subsidies. This was clearly central planning with a veneer of ownership aka not capitalism or right wing.
NATIONALIZED ECONOMIES:
Nationalization is a huge part of Fascism aka the government taking ownership, while claiming "the people" now have ownership. Like all socialist....
Hitler nationalized over 500 companies including banks, iron, manufacturing, etc..
Mussolini did as well I'm sure you remember Alfa Romeo, state oil and gas...
Mussolini nationalized 3/4 of the economy.
TRADE UNIONS:
Hitler wanted to centralize the trade unions as well... Many small trade unions were too difficult to control. In 1933, he formed two national unions to replace the dozens of poorly organized, badly run organizations. Then he outlawed any new unions, forcing all workers to join.
So again... Far from being right wing/ free market. It was central planning, central control.
From Mein Kampf:
The racial Weltanschauung (world view) is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung. - Hitler, Mein Kampf
Aka the single biggest difference between Nazism and Socialism was that Race is what defined their class struggle... not wealth. All forms of Socialism require someone to be greedy aka a class divide. You need the poor to be greedy and want what they wealthy have created in society or you'll never have the vanguard for your revolution.
Marx divided between the haves and have nots, Hitler Divided via race, Gramci and the Frankfurt school came to America and saw that class divide wouldn't work because even the poor could afford similar amenities as the wealthy cars, air conditioning, etc... so they focused on group division and group identity aka shared consciousness.
Many Marxist saw the flaws in socialism. They then moved to support the third way... After seeing the failures of fascism they became disillusioned with Marxism.
Socialism has three meanings so sadly it confuses most people.
1. Any anti market policy that goes beyond the liberal idea that the government should address "public goods" this is an economic term for goods that are non excludable and non rival.
So Medicare for all... Would be a socialist policy.
2. Any anti market system.
These would be communism, socialism, and fascism. All of these are types of socialist aka anti market ideologies.
3. Socialism as an ideology/ economy.
Which would describe the subset at the level of communism and fascism.
This would be what Marx was describing.
Fascism is and has always been a far left wing ideology staunchly opposed to free markets
@@marcusdavenport9847 absolutely correct
@@MBOgonnaPWNu the founder of the EU is Richard Von Kalergi, he was an open socialist. Read his book Practical Idealism, the EU is founded on this book and is following what Kalergi planned by the book, literally. Ignorance is not an argument, kid.
Nazis were conservative and right wing extremists.
I ask you to look past your Google and Wikipedia searches
Im surprised we didnt see a grown man cry by the end.
He was laughing at first, then thought, it makes better political capital to get offended.
It was just denial. Then came anger and bargaining. 3 out of 5 stages of grief. He probably also went through depression off camera. And when he cuts his moustache on the sides he will also have gone through acceptance.
@@Valchee9192631770 Lol! Fantastic reply, and so true!
@@Valchee9192631770 Agreed. Should have gone to Art School.
No, it's just super offensive to say that Nazi's were socialist, when the socialists were among the first groups exterminated by the Nazi's when they took power. It's an absolute disgrace and sad to see people in the comments working against their interest. Keep kissing the boots of your fascist-minded republican leaders, I'm sure they have your best interest in mind.
@@WishfulCreation socialism, state control of the means of production... Checks out. Boot licking in Venezuela, Chin
a, Cuba, No None Here
Socialist Democracy is an oxymoron. It is either a democratic state or a socialist state it can't be both.
Your inability to understand (or your wilful misunderstanding) does not change facts.
Intelligent people change the theory when the reality is not sufficiently well explained by their theory --- stupid people try to change facts.
PS: See "titmouse", which is not a mouse either.
PPS: Do not look at Nordic countries. You'd die of apoplexy.
It's called Social Democracy not Socialist democracy
It is democracy with hints of socialism. Social democracy is politics where everyone has an equal right for wellbeing, even the poor, the sick and the other weak parts of our society. Years of rough capitalist politics always lead up to a point where the politics start harming the weakest parts of our society and people start protesting against capitalism and then the social democracy gains power and starts fixing the problems, capitalism has caused. but by the next elections, people find faults in the things social democracy has done and capitalists enter to fix the problems caused by social democracy. Both are needed at the end of the day.
@@ristuksenvittu Capitalism is good for those who have money. And with strong checks and balances for everyone else and the environment --- and everyone paying their fair share of taxes, even the rich and the big multinationals --- then it can work.
Usually, the rich people and corporations lobby (using their vast amount of money) to erode the checks and balances and reduce their tax levels to zero. And too often they succeed.
actually Democratic Socialism or a Socialist Democracy is the idea that you reform from within the democratic system, society from one of Capitalism to one of Socialism, but the important aspect is within democracy, because as we see in the past whenever someone violently overthrows a system it ends up in democracy being abandoned, therefor Democratic Socialists wish for reform instead of Communist who are socialists who think Capitalist society can only become socialist through violent protest / revolution (which to their credit it has some merit, social systems usually have to be overthrown by a violent uprissing from below, change rarely if ever comes from above, the female rights movement, the black rights movement, the gay rights movement, workers rights too, the free india movement, the american revolution, the french revolution, the russian revolution, all these have in common that the people who were opressed rose up in violent protest against their opressors and overthrew the previous social structures or powers. Then with varying succesrates.
ROFL, Finally telling Socialists that they are Socialists, like Hitlers Socialist Party. Loved it
You are literally repeating Nazi propaganda.
"A good many paragraphs of the party program were obviously merely a demagogic appeal to the mood of the lower classes at a time when they were in bad straits and were sympathetic to radical and even socialist slogans. Point 11, for example, demanded abolition of incomes unearned by work; Point 12, the nationalization of trusts; Point 13, the sharing with the state of profits from large industry; Point 14, the abolishing of land rents and speculation in land. Point 18 demanded the death penalty for traitors, usurers and profiteers, and Point 16, calling for the maintenance of “a sound middle class,” insisted on the communalization of department stores and their lease at cheap rates to small traders. These demands had been put in at the insistence of Drexler and Feder, who apparently really believed in the 'socialism' of National Socialism. They were the ideas which Hitler was to find embarrassing when the big industrialists and landlords began to pour money into the party coffers, and of course nothing was ever done about them."
- William L. Shirer, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich"
If they were socialist why were there financial backers aristocrats and industrialists?
Why did they support Franco in his fight against, anarchists, communists and socialists?
Why did the Nazis privatise nationalised industries and share the spoils with their financers?
Why did the contemporary right wing press support them and see both Mussolini and Hitler as a defence against socialism and communism?
Why are the right trying to rewrite history?
Because they want us to believe that all totalitarian governments were left wing.
What a load of bollocks!
Margaret Thatcher supported Pinochet, do you think she would have helped a socialist dictator?
@@gastrickbunsen1957 who said above that the only totalitarian regimes were leftwing? Kapitalism can be totalitarian too. But national socialism (read nacism) is more on the left side.
@@daweplachy5281 For the past several years right wing politicians have been trying to move the goalposts.
Fascism and Nazism have always been regarded as far right.
The Daily Mail, still a far right rag to this day, wrote lyrically about both Mussolini and Hitler.
Churchill was a big fan of Mussolini, and good ol' Winston was the person who wondered why people were squeamish about marsh Arabs being mustard gassed, and also wanted to set the army on striking miners.
@@gastrickbunsen1957 who cares about daily mail. National socialist are still socialist. Comunist steal from rich, nacist steal from jews. But I admit that nacist were less on left
Seems convenient they want to forget the national socialist workers party.
" The Truth Will Set You Free "
"First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then 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 out for me"
-- Martin Niemöller
in north korea, there are right-wing republican powers because it is a republican of North Korea about so real you weak-minded ignorant
@Krisbugajew11-11 the nazis were socialists
@Krisbugajew11-11 Hitler said he was a socialist
@@frfrchopin He was more of a pseudo-socialist.
Wow that pissed off dude sounds like Hitler, socialist lol
It may have to due with the fact that he is yelling in German. It does sound somewhat close though.
Economics of Fascism.
- Universal Healthcare
- Price controls
- Wage controls
- Guaranteed work programs
- Gun control
- Using censorship and violence as political weapons
- Nationalizing industries and 500 companies.
- Controlling who a business can hire and fire.
They shared about 90% of economic policies with socialism. They were by no means right wing.
This is because the father of Fascism Benito Mussolini and his philosopher of Fascism Giovanni Gentile were both lifelong socialist. Mussolini literally wrote in socialist publications from the age of 18. He was only kicked out of the party due to disagreements on the war.
They wanted to improve socialism. They saw the shortages created under socialism. They decided they didn't want to fire or kill the entrepreneur in an attempt to solve the shortage problem. It also allowed them to partner with big business who saw being able to keep their business and not die as an improvement to the Socialist and Communist. All of these groups had inner turmoils despite having very similar beliefs from an American perspective. They regularly fought for the recruitment of the same pools of men to join their ranks which caused bloody rivalries.
Price controls are by definition an anti market aka socialist policy. They are essential to all forms of socialism as they can't find prices. (See "Calculation problem with Socialism")
They also create shortages in any area they are used, which has lead to the death of millions thru starvation.
So Fascist effectively turned entrepreneurs into defacto government employees... Telling them what to do, how much to charge, who to hire and fire... Not allowing the market to decide anything. Many of these businesses became dependent on government subsidies. This was clearly central planning with a veneer of ownership aka not capitalism or right wing.
NATIONALIZED ECONOMIES:
Nationalization is a huge part of Fascism aka the government taking ownership, while claiming "the people" now have ownership. Like all socialist....
Hitler nationalized over 500 companies including banks, iron, manufacturing, etc..
Mussolini did as well I'm sure you remember Alfa Romeo, state oil and gas...
Mussolini nationalized 3/4 of the economy.
TRADE UNIONS:
Hitler wanted to centralize the trade unions as well... Many small trade unions were too difficult to control. In 1933, he formed two national unions to replace the dozens of poorly organized, badly run organizations. Then he outlawed any new unions, forcing all workers to join.
So again... Far from being right wing/ free market. It was central planning, central control.
From Mein Kampf:
The racial Weltanschauung (world view) is fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason of the fact that the former recognizes the significance of race and therefore also personal worth and has made these the pillars of its structure. These are the most important factors of its Weltanschauung. - Hitler, Mein Kampf
Aka the single biggest difference between Nazism and Socialism was that Race is what defined their class struggle... not wealth. All forms of Socialism require someone to be greedy aka a class divide. You need the poor to be greedy and want what they wealthy have created in society or you'll never have the vanguard for your revolution.
Marx divided between the haves and have nots, Hitler Divided via race, Gramci and the Frankfurt school came to America and saw that class divide wouldn't work because even the poor could afford similar amenities as the wealthy cars, air conditioning, etc... so they focused on group division and group identity aka shared consciousness.
Many Marxist saw the flaws in socialism. They then moved to support the third way... After seeing the failures of fascism they became disillusioned with Marxism.
Socialism has three meanings so sadly it confuses most people.
1. Any anti market policy that goes beyond the liberal idea that the government should address "public goods" this is an economic term for goods that are non excludable and non rival.
So Medicare for all... Would be a socialist policy.
2. Any anti market system.
These would be communism, socialism, and fascism. All of these are types of socialist aka anti market ideologies.
3. Socialism as an ideology/ economy.
Which would describe the subset at the level of communism and fascism.
This would be what Marx was describing.
Fascism is and has always been a far left wing ideology staunchly opposed to free markets
so mad
He is just wrong. The Nazis called them socialist, precisely to appeal to the people who would benefit under socialism, without bringing any of the actual changes. Socialism is defined by the worker control of production and of the abolition of markets, neither of which happened in Nazi germany, nor was there ever any plan to. Hitler, as an authoritarian, controlled the countries production, without any input from the people, and markets were able to continue en masse.
In fact, Hitler blamed the communists/socialists for the burning of the Reichstag and banned them from parliament, as well as sending many to concentration and extermination camps. Not something you'd do to your political allies.
Frankly, this is blatantly wrong, and an insult to the socialists who died under the Nazi regime and to those who continue to fight for social change.
And, to all of the people who are claiming that this is an insult to free speech: freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. If he is wrong (and clearly so), they can correct him, especially when it is a matter of fact.
Actually it’s state/public control of the means of production. The workers only fell under Marxism. Marxism was only one form of socialism, as was National Socialism. Socialism as a concept existed before Marx
@@kingorange7739 Socialism is a theory, where for example Industries and the government was controlled by the community.
Hitler did the exact opposite.
@@user-dk9dx3xb2t I already debunked this in another thread so I won't even bother here. These businesses were all under the control of the state. A state is an organized community representing the entire nation.
You're wrong. Socialism is not defined by the worker control of production... That's just pathetic.
Socialism never changes
So called "champions of freedom of speech" is angry with speech itself, the irony.
Freedom of speech in Europe is restricted, in many countries it is illegal to spread false panic or to be a nazi.
@@mpetkovic26 except that 99% of the people blamed for being nazis are not nazis at all or anywhere close to being one , rather its just normal people that have some common sense in their head
@@mcsmash4905 Yeah, but this guy is comparing German socialist party with the Nazi party, im just pointing out that in many countries in Europe you can go to jail for being a nazi. So ofcourse elder gentleman is gonna be offended. Cause freedom of speech is not same in Europe as it is in USA.
@@mcsmash4905 The Nazi's were about as socialist as the pope being a protestant, maybe do some reading about the foundations of the DAP and then the NSDAP maybe? That'd be the thing us with at least one working braincell would do instead of babbling delusional bs 🤣🤣🤣
Or as socialist the CCP are currently, you two idiots are hilarious
@@mpetkovic26 Is exactly the same lol the 1st Amendment is only to allow those to talk freely about government you imbecile
also Mussolini came from a socialist ideology..
Mussolini was viscously anti socialist.
He was an anti communist fascist with some socialist and marxist ideas.
@@theronbassett5505 oh, also Angela Merkel was a Strasser-socialist. Then she (like many others of the S.A. & Strasser wings/factions of Nazism) converted to join the Stasi after the Marxists began to dominate (in East Germany) again.
@@theronbassett5505 oh, also Angela Merkel was a Strasser-socialist. Then she (like many others of the S.A. & Strasser wings/factions of Nazism) converted to join the Stasi after the Marxists began to dominate (in East Germany) again.
@@theronbassett5505 oh, also Angela Merkel was a Strasser-socialist. Then she (like many others of the S.A. & Strasser wings/factions of Nazism) converted to join the Stasi after the Marxists began to dominate (in East Germany) again.
obviously the truth sure hurts. funny how that works
Kamall is Correct...
Socialism was Created by the Leftist Italian Socialist Philosopher Giovanni Gentile...
Who was himself a Disciple of Carl Marx...
And he called it the "Only workable Socialism, because it combined Socialist Philosophy with Nationalism."
He named it for the Italian word "Fascia," which means "To bundle together"...
Because a bundle of sticks is Stronger than any one stick...
And THAT is Straight out of Socialism 101...
Making Fascism nothing more than a Branch of Socialism.
Moreover, Right Wing Philosophy is Individualistic...
And Left Wing Philosophy is Collectivist...
AND Fascism is a Collectivist Ideology...
That said...
When it comes to mass murder, the Fascists in Germany and Italy were Rank Armatures...
When compared to the likes of the Soviet Union and China...
All told, Nazi Germany, for instance, murdered some 13 Million people...
Half of which were Jews with the rest being Christians, Gypsies and others...
Meanwhile, the Soviet Union Murdered north of 25 Million people in Ukraine Alone...
And China Murdered a Minimum of 75 Million people in their own country...
And I've seen estimates that more than Double that.
So as Evil as Fascism is...
Other Branches of Socialism are Far Worse.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu WOW? A Leftist with at least a Modicum of an Argument! That's Refreshing!
Usually All Leftists do is engage in Ad Hominem Attacks.
That said, you should go back and review your history.
And I mean Actual History...
And NOT that Revisionist History the Left is Passing Off as Real...
Giovanni DID Invent Fascism and Everything I said was 100% True.
Socialism, Communism and Fascism; EVERY SINGLE One of these Toxic Ideologies is Collectivist...
You Know this, if for No Other Reason, than the Names they were given...
I'll even take it a step further...
Left Wing Ideologies are Not Only Collectivist...
They are Evil!
How can I say that?
Because Good is Life Affirming...
And Evil is Life Destroying...
So ALL you need to do is look at the History of the Left...
And the 100s of Millions of People they have Murdered..
And then take note of the Fact that they are STILL engaging in the EXACT same Behavior and Rhetoric...
To Recognize that Evil.
BTW...
The Slogan "The Ends Justifies the Means"...
Is NOT the Moto of a Righteous Man...
It is the Moto of a Self-Righteous Man...
And the Battle Cry of an Evil Heart.
ANYONE who says it is telling you that You Cannot Trust Them...
Because the day WILL Come when Your End will be Their Means...
And the Left LOVES to scream that slogan at the top of their lungs.
People hate being Exposed.!
John Ken he wasn’t exposing them, socialism is about the workers owning the means of production - them owning the products that their labour produces, and being able to do what they want with it. Typically socialists are also egalitarian, though don’t have to be I suppose, but they definitely believe that that means of production should be socially owned. And well Hitler was against this, he advocated for privatisation of industries and celebrated capitalism - what socialists are opposed to. He only called it National Socialism because it would get them votes
@@tomio8072 Yes right, because under Stalin people could keep the products their labour produced... Guess the millions of Ukranians starving to death would disagree with you!
TK-315 CloneM as I said socialism is the workers having the means of production, the USSR failed as it only changed the person gaining the surplus value from people’s labour, they thought it would mean that that surplus value could then be reinvested into services again, however it didn’t work for them. That’s why Socialists have moved beyond their mistakes and now advocate for different things. If it isn’t workers owning their means of production, it’s not Socialism.
will we ever be able to talk about th national socialist party without out screaming and shouting ?
They wont allow it. Mentioning anything good about what the naught zees did will get your comment autodeleted
When the left wing socialists admit that the NAZI were socialists, then we can progress towards a more peaceful world
@@funkymunky7935 they never will there dumb marxist scums
@@shawnv123 Ever heard of "cultural bolshevism"? This is the term Adolf Hitler and the Nazis used to describe and demonize Marxism and any other socialist-aligned ideology that focused on economic and political egalitarianism. As it turns out, Nazis were quite fond of hierarchies of racial and economic castes and so anything that didn't support the state in this manner was decried as degeneracy from the depths of "Jewish Intelligentsia".
@@VerniasAugoeides Sounds like Marxist revisionism to me. They're so very fond of rewriting history to benefit their cults beliefs
The left/right spectrum from what I understand comes from France where supporters of the King (conservatives who want no change) sat on the right and revolutionaries sat on the left (those who sought reform).
I would say the transition from Weimar Republic to Third Reich was an act of reform not conservatism. The conservatives were the Weimar republicans.
Your whole argument falls apart on you stupid and false premise
@@prod9k explain
I agree, the Nazis are most certainly Leftist despite clearly not being Marxist.
Not all Socialism is Marxist.
@Nícolas Rabelo Socialism is public (government) ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private (citizen) ownership of the means of production, which is Capitalism. The farther Left, the more regulation of the economy by the government, and the farther Right, the less regulation of the economy. It has nothing to do with the civil or social policy (Authoritarian vs. Libertarian) of the system, nor anything to do with the ideology (end goal) of the system.
National Socialism is a Left-of-Center (moderately Left-wing), Totalitarian (radically Authoritarian) system. The government owned the means of production but had a relatively open market. It was ideologically Ethnonationalist (racial Nationalism) and opposed to both Marxist Socialism (Communism) and Capitalism.
National socialism was socialism and any person who has read about Hitler's ideas would know it. Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc were all socialist.
Socialism is a failed idea which never dies because it is so attractive but is not possible.
Hitler was national socialist where as Stalin and mao had Marxism. Grow up.
@@scottishbananaclan Bro isn't marxism a type of socialism? If I am wrong,please enlighten me.
Socialism = government controls all business. The "national" part of Hitler was the main difference.
@@scottishbananaclan Marxism has nothing to do with this conversation. You grow up!
@@blackroute1527 perfectly summed up
In a 1923 interview, George Sylvester and Hitler exchanged this dialogie:
"Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"
"Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.
"Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic."
Basically Hitler wanted to twist the ideaology of marxist-socialism into his own meaning of National Socialism
@@vincentwitt1810 No? Twist?... He made the very antithesis.
Theres a book called Hitler's Table Talk which is comprised of first hand accounts of private conversations between Hitler and the people who were closest to him. Hitler admitted that he stole his entire political philosophy from Karl Marx and that he Hitler enacted true socialism while the Bolsheviks were mere pamphleteers hiding behind pen and paper. *Nazi's are in fact Socialists* People say "But Hitler killed Communists" Yes because Hitler killed anyone who stood is his way of total power and anyone who may have threatened his power.
The only difference between Communist/Soviets and Nazi Socialism was that the Soviets said they renounced Nationalism in favor of Internationalism however the policies the Soviets enacted were the complete opposite of internationalism and these policies included but were not limited to; the systematic large-scale cleansing of ethnic minorities, political repression and various forms of ethnic and social discrimination, including state-enforced antisemitism, Tatarophobia, and Polonophobia
@@wewuzkangz4723 Still pretty consistent with his public accounts.
So he wasn't a Marxist then. Marx invented Socialism and Hitler read about it and thought, Germanic tribes used to do this, so it's a German invention that I will follow.
People should watch "Was Hitler a Socialist? - A Response to Steven Crowder and Others" on CZcams
Kaiser Willy He was a socialist but comparing political parties that advocate capitalism with social policies to hitler just makes him look like an idiot.
No offense, but if the video starts with ad hominems and "look, they are sitting on the right, therefore they are right wing", it's hard to take it seriously.
The fact is that period texts before 1939 from tourists and local often note that Hitler's reign looked a LOT LIKE the rule of the Bolsheviks, even though Hitler's main claim to fame abroad was being the guy who will stand up to socialism and Bolshevism. This is the good old switcheroo - claim to be the opposite of the thing you are, and you will be hiding in plain sight.
That's not to imply that nazis were 100% like modern, or indeed period socialists. There's a reason "national" is in their name.
"But how could someone be left and right wing at the same time!?"
Well, that's your issue. You think socialism is left wing. It isn't. Socialism is just a form of collectivism. Just because typically it is the political left calling for socialism doesn't mean that right wing ideas can't breed a form of socialism/collectivism. One that seeks to control the economy and the culture of a people completely and unquestionably. That's socialism. Isn't that what Marx said too? "State ownership of the means of production"? Isn't that EXACTLY what happened in the societ union? If nazis weren't socialists, why do socialist countries bear so close a resemblance to Mussolini's fascism and Hitler's nazism? How come Mussolini and Hitler were both lifelong socialists before turning to their respective ideologies?
Socialism is neither left, nor right wing. It's a neutral tool. Just like the left or the right doesn't have a monopoly over liberalism (yes, there are many many right wing liberals), the left doesn't have a monopoly over socialism.
@@horvathbenedek3596 Bravo Sir 👌
@@horvathbenedek3596 Hitler was opposed to *Marxism* because he believed it to be a Jewish subversion of socialism. Socialism predated Marxism. He was very much a socialist through and through. He was standing up to "internationalist socialism" with "national socialism".
@@NYsummertimeCHI True.
If we are dealing in party names, Lenin and Stalin were social democrats. End of story.
Sorry to break it to you but Marxism and national socialism are two sides of the same coin. Same with the fascist movement in Italy.
@@mrsentencename7334 You have no idea what you are talking about, nor can you prove it.
@@MalleusImperiorum yes I can. It would have been easier for me if you actually gave a counter argument so I could tear it apart but I'll give you some basics.
Socialism predates Marx. Marxism is a class socialism for the workers while national socialism is a racial socialism for the German RACE. Mussolini was a former Marxist but started his national movement for Italian nationals because he opposed the internationalism of Marxism.
"You cannot get rid of me because I am and always will be a socialist. You hate me because you still love me." -Mussolini
"What a waste that we lost Mussolini. He is a first-rate man who would have led our party to power in Italy" -Lenin
"I have not set myself on the road of politics in order to pave the way for an international socialism... I bring the German people a national socialism, the political theory of the national community, the feeling of unity of all who belong to the German nation and who are prepared and wiling to feel themselves as being an inseparable but also co responsible particle of the totality of the nation" - Austrian painter
I suggest you read Gunter Reimann's 'Vampire economy'. It's a primary source document written from the perspective of a Marxist business man during Nazi Germany and it gives you insights into how the economy was run.
Please give me your best counter arguments and i will destroy them with actual sources and references
@@MalleusImperiorumwhat was nazi Germany’s economic policies if not socialist? Cause they most certainly weren’t free market. Massive hike in taxes. Regulation beyond the extreme. If there was any deviation from the party line you’d end up in the concentration. Your company had a ton of wage and price controls. There were was a gutting of private sector(forcefully) to remilitarize Germany. All things the Soviets did. All things China has done. If nazi germany wasn’t socialist then what economic system were they planning for after the war?
There is no such thing as a DEMOCRAT SOCIALIST. Just a SOCIALIST.
There is no such thing as a conservative. Just a FASCIST.
"The domestic agenda [in Nazi Germany] was one of authoritarian conservatism, with a pronounced distaste for parliamentary politics, high taxes, welfare spending and trade unions." -- Adam Tooze, "The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy"
@@nicknolte8671 LOL. Wow, no wonder you lie and call just about everyone you dislike a Fascist.
Calling everyone a conservative a Fascist is a new low even for you.
1 minute to have your say....that is democracy, EU style (unless that is, what you say is not liked, then you are prevented from speaking at all).
If you allow someone with his influence to say something fundamentally & historically incorrect, which is bad for democracy, especially if more than 50% of people in a YT comment section start believing the non-truth, then that is also extremely dangerous. The same dangers existed when the National Socialist Party was hi-jacked by Hitler, and it was the mistruth that enabled him to total power.
@@_-BikerBoi69_- It isn’t accurate.
@@plasmazulu6643 it is, everytime someone says that the Nazis were socialist, a political scientist shoots a bullter through his brain
@@mogu8026 The means of production were owned by the government (publicly), rather than by citizens (privately), therefore it was definitionally socialist.
@@plasmazulu6643 That's factually wrong tho, the Nazis privatized lots of sectors and companies had great influence on the state. Saying the Nazis were socialist just shows having 0 understanding of how economies work and is historical revisionism.
he tells the truth they freak out ,they cant handle the truth
Have you ever seen leftist waving the nazi flag at a left-wing rally. And please mention an outspoken neo-nazi who openly supported Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton. And please go find nazi in public and call him a social democrat right into his face. I am sure that would change your mind(don't actually do that).
Matt Clayer The nazis we’re objectively socially right wing and economically left wing. They had nationalized trade unions and government control over industrial production. The economy was even on the brink of collapse like all socialist regimes, until of course they went around looting half of Europe
@@general7733 "The nazis we’re objectively socially right wing and economically left wing" You could say that. But their economy was actually doing better than in the U.S under Franklin D. Roosewelt. And the reason why they invaded most of europe was because of "Lebensraum" a geopolitical goal, that was supposed to expand the german territory and the living space of the german people and remove indigenous people.
@@general7733 "socially right wing" is a lie. They just used race as a sheild for their class war. They prosecuted socialists since they wanted their version to thrive, not traditional socialism.
The nazis added nationalist elements into socialism and sprinkled in different definitions of "class war" based on race and religion. So it's modified socialism, but shares the same evil as socialism.
@@mattclayer6541 Authoritarian belief system originated from marxism, Benito Mussolini was a revolutionary marxist before making fascist party. So they share that goal of Authoritarian rulings. So Marxists are same as fascists and nazis
it is a fact that the Fascists philosophers were inspired by Marx, Gentile draws from Marx's works and National Socialism is a form of State ownership a socialist concept
Yes but you need to understand, both socialism and fascism are collectivist ideologies as opposed to individualist ideologies but fascism is not socialism
Yes Hitler had massive state industry. But he also suppressed Union, some of the first people interned and imprisoned without trial were socialists and leftists in Germany after the reichstag fire.
Just because the state has a massive role in a society doesn’t make it socialism. China today is a great example.
Oopsie, I think you hit bulls eye there Mr.
I'm Canadian and as far as I see it the fascists are still the same they may have changed their ideology a little bit but they're playing at the end of the day still continues
Yup marxists on the rise, ideology taught in schools. We are headed for dark times
@@aztharz5637 you don't have to like marxism but it's a totally different thing from fascism
@@gameoforbits3783 when wikipedia describes fascism as far right, then uses mussolini as an example of a fascist, you know the left wing have utterly changed the definition of it.
Mussolini was far left.
Fascism is simply an authoritarianism form of implementing your ideaology.
Hither was through and through left wing, but in order to fund the war, he needed to control the capitalists to raise the tax funds.
That's why the lefties call him far right.
Since mussolini was in actual fact a far left fascist, and Hitler followed him, the claims of Hitler being fascist and him controlling capitalism like a right winger came about.
Is all got twisted for the sake of lefties saving face.
@@dsswooshy "Mussolini, a leading member of the Italian Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Italiano) before World War I, became a fierce antisocialist after the war. After coming to power, he banned all Marxist organizations and replaced their trade unions with government-controlled corporatist unions. Until he instituted a war economy in the mid-1930s, Mussolini allowed industrialists to run their companies with a minimum of government interference. Despite his former anticapitalist rhetoric, he cut taxes on business, permitted cartel growth, decreed wage reduction, and rescinded the eight-hour-workday law. Between 1928 and 1932 real wages in Italy dropped by almost half. Mussolini admitted that the standard of living had fallen but stated that “fortunately the Italian people were not accustomed to eating much and therefore feel the privation less acutely than others."
@@nicknolte8671 but, Mussolini and Adolf reacted on marxist communism and marxist social democrats and they provided alternative left movements with patriotic mindset vs internationalism. Both fascism and nat.soc were left (social policy, family policy, favouring workers and raising the living standards of the lover class and lower middle class, had good family support policy BUT denied the marxism cos they did not want a soviet type terror state with mass murdering their own citizens!). These ideologies were left (commies, social democrats, nat.soc and fascist). The difference is the marxism. Nat.soc and fascist refused marxism as political ideology and refused it including its internationalism and revolutionary approach to change the society. Nat.soc and fascist prefered peacefull transformation vs commies who preferred mass killing and revolutinary implementation of cimmunism. Nat.soc refused capitalism too. Lefties today in europe are still marxists and try to get rid off nat.soc and fascism as an alternative for left and they pushing those 2 ideologies to conservatives who actually refused all lefty ideologies (royalists, monarchs and high nobility refused all political ideologies especially those who had connection with the former emperors in germany and austria-hungary (these group called as legitimists)
The socialists act like Nazis by shouting him down and refusing to examine his claims fairly. I thought politicians had the sense to realise that parties can be socialist but still bitterly opposed to each other.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu There are some arguments for this. I'd refer you to TIK's channel on WW2. He looks at the way the Nazis took power and wealth away from the individual in favour of the state. Also he was influenced by the 'disappearing markets' theory, believing he could solve Germany's capitalist crisis by conquering territory.
@@MBOgonnaPWNu It's down to where one stands politically. Stalin put loyal bolsheviks in labour camps and there weren't free trade unions in the soviet union. There was the holodomor where millions died in forced collectivisation. But I suppose it follows that if Hitler thought he could solve the shrinking markets problem by capturing more territory then he was preserving the capitalist system not destroying it. The discussion in the EU parliament shows that they haven't progressed much over freedom and tolerance. At one time everybody had to be a Nazi. Now they all have to be virulently anti-Nazi (as defined by them).
Nazism is when you talk but loud
He's right, you know
no he’s not
@@robert-_-636 yes, he is. Literally all their policies were socialist, they called themselves socialists. They spouted socialist propaganda, Hitler said his ONLY disagreement with Marx was that Marxism wasn't racist enough, and included ethnic jews... even though Marx was explicitly antisemitic (Marx said capitalism IS judaism and so did Hitler) Marx thought that they could convert while Hitler thought judaism was in the blood. That's the only difference, nazism is LITERALLY JUST racist socialism.
They were socialists and like most socialists they didn't get to implement full socialism, if anything I think national socialism is the worst kind of socialism thst exists.
I'm not sure if you're a troll or not
@@user-dk9dx3xb2t You're an idiot
Kamal was upsolutely right
so tell me, if I go to a neo-nazi party and greet them as comrades/marxists, they will greet me right?
@@henriqueb287 Ofc not because they see it as a failed previous batch of mistake of an ideology, remember the fascist ideology was started by a socialist aka Mussolini.
@@henriqueb287 I dont know to be honest..
communists and nationalsocialists ruined their relationship permanently when Hitler invaded Russia I think.. their political hatred is beyond any level
other than that I think that their policies regarding economy had socialistic characteristics and a lot of commons..
@@henriqueb287 it's like Shia and sunni,both are Muslim but neither like each other much. None of the left wing ideologies like each other either.
He was not, and he knew it.
look at the nazis getting mad
How come so many people in the comments have less than 5 IQ?
national socialism is collectivism with national & racial purity ideas while communism is international
with worker control and collectivism communism and marxism focuses on the class struggle while the national socialists believed in class struggle but strongly believed in racial purity.
im a communist and anti-nazism
Actually he's right and the left tends to forget that!
He's not right though, he most likely never even studied political philosophies throughout his lifetime.
Nazi is a socialist workers party.
Why does no single serious Historian or political scientist disagree then, if he is right?
So the People’s Party in Canada is a Communist party despite being right-winged because “People’s”.
I wonder if Original Poster is really just a 43 year old libertarian who lives in their mother’s basement and spends all day eating social security check and posts on the internet.
@@Marvin-fw2bn that's kinda the point. The people who have looked into the policies of the NS-state agree with him.
He said the truth about fascism the socialist acted like a fascist himself.
No he didn't. Fascists are more logical. He's the standard retard democratic dumbass who think democracy will haul their asses through. Democracy won't, because it entirely relies on the people within the country to function. Sure it's made by the people for the people but the people have no leader, don't know what they want and can't see into the future to plan ahead.
And right there kids is the forbidden knowledge, no one shall dare to utter.
"muh it had suciliszm in its name"
Don't be obtuse. National Socialism had more in common with other brands of Socialism than just the name. NS Germany policies were socialist in nature.
@@fightinandirish Examples please?
@@fightinandirish They litterally killed their anti-capitalist wing...
If nazis were socialists then why did Hitler kill Communists,socialists,and liberals.
I'll wait for a counter point
@@tarikrandom7535 Because they signed treaty of Versailles. Hitler mentioned many time in speech. Hitler view them anti German.
Oh dear he upset them didn't he how sad never mind lol
willisshooting he should have upset you as well spouting lies about Hitler being a leftist that’s like me going “oh all conservatives are socialist because they agree on some points”
@@donaldtrumplover2254 Hitler was exactly what I said anyone who upsets lefty snowflakes get upset about anything well tough
willisshooting you didn’t even say your thoughts on the topic nor did you explain why hitler was a leftist if that’s the point you were trying to make
You shouldn't appologise for speaking the truth, truth sometimes hurts and offends. Tufff
North Korea is democracy, it's called *Democratic* People's Republic of Korea. If it wasn't democracy it wouldn't be called that way
@@realdragon Nazis had socialism in their name so they must be socialist 5head
@@morgan.freemen307 So you're saying North Korea is a democratic country?
@@realdragon I agreed with you?
In an argument, one has to raise one's voice and act in a threatening manner in order to enforce a position that is unattainable, because that person knows they are wrong! Welcome to the European parliament.
Really ? Verhofstadt was VERY calm, when he told him he made a mistake and had to apologize. Kamall LIED and insulted the memory of the hundreds of thousands of ACTUAL socialists that Hitler rounded up and killed even before he killed the Jews. THAT is the historical truth that you refuse to admit, despite the fact that you SAW an entire supranational assembly being offended by his lie.
That german just said social democracy is socialism. That's nonsense.