Capitalism & Socialism

[Naurgalen]

 

1) The Nazi party was called what? NSDAP - National SOZIALISTISCHE Deutsche ARBEITPARTEI, which translates to National Socialist German Workers' Party.

 

Do you want to tell me that socialistic workers party was capitalistic? Really?

 

 

2) There is no such thing as "capitalistic" genocides. Capitalism is only an economical system, while socialism is not only an economic but also political system and that the root of the problem with this abomination.

The communist hunt was present in many countries and by good riddance! This radical socialistic movement cost lives of about 85 to 100 millions people! Most countries have it banned right along with Nazism in their law or even right in the constitutions.

Not to mention that in 1976 Argentina was under military junta reign if memory serves.

 

3) Again you are confusing capitalism with feudalism. In capitalism aristocracy don't mean crap. It doesn't matter who you are or where were you born you could be Kings son and end up in a dumpster and you could start in a dumpster and end up as a King. Capitalism promotes smarts and talent, it awards the best people, socialism awards laziness, dumbness and ineptness.

 

4) Anders Breivik - good parents, good public education, great social status - killed 69 people

Chris Garder - bad parents, second rate education, badly social status - was homeless but managed to rise a kid and become successful - never resorted to crime.

 

Yes, I really think that people choose who they are and how they live their life unless they are in extreme situations like war etc.

 

5) So either you are for "everybody is responsible for himself" capitalist or you are "we need to help everybody to live their life" socialist. Make up your mind.

 

 

1)  Hitler never cared about capitalism or socialism, he started in that political place, and then when he gained power totally changed all the rules.Im not telling you bull****,  if you were jew in those days, your political ideas wont mean a thing to him, you will die all the same. That is why he is just a nationalist extremist.

 

2) Answering this point is very complicated to me, because you are telling me that killing innocent people is right and we cant think more different than that. But still, I need to inform you that the military junta was just that: rich generals trained in US to kill communists before they spread. Not only that, those are the same that attacked the Islas Malvinas making a ****ing war to stay in power. Finally, we both know that in capitalist world money IS power, so don't tell me that its not a social system at the same time.

 

3) Illusions... how many scientists that make contributions to the whole race are millionaires? how many doctors? what is the % of millionaires that have really transformed the world with their inventions? How many people work 14+hs and are paid inhuman salary's? How many people in dumpsters became kings? You cant tell a system by its variations, systems are defined why their patrons, the things that happen the most.

 

4) How we are is made 70%(more or less) in the first 7 years of life. (+ reading Freud would help you understand how limited we are to choose in reality) Ethical and moral things are learned from our parents, friends etc... not from the money they had. As I said before: educated criminals are far worse and dangerous, always

 

5) None. As social animals we need to help others because we are always being helped out. But the way (and not the fact/amount) we help others is something that we should select. That is what being responsible and free means.

[JadedWolf]

The very broad definition of socialism used in this thread is making the discussion rather silly.

 

Nazi Germany and modern day Sweden have very, very little in common.

 

But suddenly we have to condemn Sweden for being "socialist" because the nazi's once called themselves national socialists.

 

It just makes any meaningful conversation impossible.

[Zoraptor]

Oh yippee, someone who thinks the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic, has to be they called it democratic NSDAP was socialist because they call themselves that, it's been at least six weeks since the last one. What next, using Vladimir Zhirinovsky's/ Russia's 'Liberal' Party as the case study in liberalism, or RSA's Conservative Party as the study in conservatism?

 

Anyone with a skerrick, a smidge, an iota of actual knowledge not mired in deliberate ideological head-in-sand obtuseness knows that the first thing Hitler did once power was secure was liquidate the socialist arm of the NSDAP (SA/ SturmArbeitlung, Ernst Rohm et alia) in the Night of the Long Knives.  Hitler hated socialists, much as with Stalin he was willing to tolerate them short term to achieve his goals but then, as with Stalin, he stuck the knife in as soon as he could.

 

There is no such thing as "capitalistic" genocides.

 

Board veterans know what is coming next: Famines perpetrated by Britain in India while pushing massive amounts of drugs to China, in the name of 'free trade'. I await with anticipation the long list of justifications for why They Just Don't Count (but inevitably things like holodomor do, because teh socilaism!!!!).

[Gorgon]

I don't think anyone is really in doubt that the Nazis were, well, Nazis, rather than socialists. Socialistst don't have a monopoly on goverment spending and populist policies you know. The end goal was rearmament and conquest not making everyone happy. 

[Namutree]

I don't think anyone is really in doubt that the Nazis were, well, Nazis, rather than socialists. Socialistst don't have a monopoly on goverment spending and populist policies you know. The end goal was rearmament and conquest not making everyone happy. 

Nor is that the goal of the socialists. The Nazis did implement socialistic policies, had no respect for property, and called themselves socialists. If they aren't socialists; no one is.

 

I'm perfectly happy with my land; socialists want to take it away. Why? Because it allows me to be in control of my own life. As Naurgalen has said, people should rely on each other.

Edited September 20, 2014 by Namutree

[leninghola]

Fascist ideologies often have (somewhat) equal parts socialism and capitalism. That was the point. The problem was that they never seem to take the most beneficial aspects of either/both. It's further made inoperable when a strong sense of nationalism is thrown into the mix.

 

It's not a terribly interesting line of debate in current day geopolitics, imo.

[Namutree]

Fascist ideologies often have (somewhat) equal parts socialism and capitalism. That was the point. The problem was that they never seem to take the most beneficial aspects of either/both. It's further made inoperable when a strong sense of nationalism is thrown into the mix.

 

It's not a terribly interesting line of debate in current day geopolitics, imo.

I don't think that was the point. The fascists never respected property rights at all. They were just socialists; which is what they claimed to be. Sure, some of them had corporations, but they were ultimately government managed. I think western Europe would be a better example of a combination of capitalism & socialism.

 

Western Europe has many of the goals and some of the policies of socialism, but a certain amount of respect for property rights. 

Edited September 20, 2014 by Namutree

[Orogun01]

 I think people are making the wrong distinction the reason why most extremist offshoots of socialism were able to take place in the first place was because of the economic situation in those countries. Hasn't anyone read Das Kapital?

Capitalist countries with a equitable distribution of wealth are more prone to charity, whereas those with great gaps often descent into the far right. Is not a coincidence that there was a rise of communism that took place in the Third world.

[leninghola]

Fascist ideology is supported by a mixed economy. The evil comes not from their economic policies, but from their warlike, nationalistic, hypercollectivist vitriol. They are Romulans who think they are Vulcan.

 

It's not useful in the debate of socialism vs. capitalism, as it doesn't fall in line with either school of thought.

[Orogun01]

I'm not discussing their economic situation but the economics that allow for fascism to rise and be accepted by the populace.

[Namutree]

 I think people are making the wrong distinction the reason why most extremist offshoots of socialism were able to take place in the first place was because of the economic situation in those countries. Hasn't anyone read Das Kapital?

 

It's not just the poor economics of those regions; it's ideology. Countries that are not sympathetic to the concept of property rights are easily taken over by dangerous socialists.

[Namutree]

Fascist ideology is supported by a mixed economy.

Fascists do not support property rights at all. That's not a mixed system. It's just a socialist one. It's a different approach than most socialists, but the core idea of socialism, the opposition to private property (Or all property for some variants); is 100% untouched. The core idea of capitalism, the respect for property; is 100% gone. 

[leninghola]

 

Fascist ideology is supported by a mixed economy.

Fascists do not support property rights at all. That's not a mixed system. It's just a socialist one. It's a different approach than most socialists, but the core idea of socialism, the opposition to private property (Or all property for some variants); is 100% untouched. The core idea of capitalism, the respect for property; is 100% gone. 

 

Both Mussolini and Hitler had mixed economies. They were fiercely anti-communist. They were both fiercely anti-liberal, too. That's true.

 

Both disregarded property rights when it suited them, since they were autocratic opportunists who had essentially declared martial law, at all times. 

 

Fascism does not equal socialism, not in any peer reviewed political spectrum. I have a bad taste in my mouth for either system, but I cannot equate true fascism with socialism. Doesn't compute.

[Wrath of Dagon]

nazis were definitely socialist : http://www.nationalreview.com/article/372197/nazis-still-socialists-jonah-goldberg

[leninghola]

nazis were definitely socialist : http://www.nationalreview.com/article/372197/nazis-still-socialists-jonah-goldberg

Of course they were. You know what else? They were fascist. Which one had more influence on their society and economy?

[Namutree]

I would argue that Fascism is just as much a socialist ideology as communism is. When talking about Nazis I would say they were socialists. If asked what kind of socialist; I would say fascist. 

[Wrath of Dagon]

And in any case totalitarian regimes are similar, whatever they profess. nazis were worse because they were also extreme racists. I don't think the fascist Mussolini was worse than Stalin, not by a long stretch.

[leninghola]

I would argue that Fascism is just as much a socialist ideology as communism is. When talking about Nazis I would say they were socialists. If asked what kind of socialist; I would say fascist. 

And I would say they were extreme right wing populists, with socialist organizational structures.

[Namutree]

And in any case totalitarian regimes are similar, whatever they profess. nazis were worse because they were also extreme racists. I don't think the fascist Mussolini was worse than Stalin, not by a long stretch.

Italy was much better than the USSR, but Mussolini was just as bad as Stalin. All these socialists are the same. The difference is how cooperative a country is with the insanity of socialism.

Edited September 20, 2014 by Namutree

[leninghola]

Mussolini didn't have enough time to prove he was as bad as Stalin. Stalin was responsible for far more misery, being in control for much longer.

Edited September 20, 2014 by leninghola

[Walsingham]

Communism is a mechanism for clinical sociopaths to pretend that they care about other people, while murdering them.

[Meshugger]

Socialism is everything bad int the world, and stuff you do not like.

[Namutree]

Socialism is everything bad int the world, and stuff you do not like.

Dang. I've never heard that definition for it before.

[Zoraptor]

Meh, that's exactly right when you have people insisting that nazis were socialists because their world view demands everything evil must be socialist and everything good must be capitalist. Extremists going to extreme, and will always insist that they're not. You'd think that the nazis were redistributing wealth from Jews to poor people rather than just seizing it for themselves or selling it off to cronies and that Ferdinand Porsche et alia were just code names for collectivist communes given the way some go on.

 

Watching dedicated -ists pat each other on the back and agree that they see things clearly is always amusing though.

 

(Still waiting for someone to spin selling dope to China while the people growing it starve as being all due to socialism. I'll give you a hand guys- if only those Indians had worked harder and educated themselves, put themselves through college and established their own businesses they'd all have been fine...)

[Namutree]

Meh, that's exactly right when you have people insisting that nazis were socialists because their world view demands everything evil must be socialist and everything good must be capitalist. 

No one I have ever seen says that the Nazi's are socialists just cuz' they don't like them. I call them socialist because:

 

A) They called themselves socialists.

 

B) They opposed the concept of private property rights.

 

C) They heavily regulated industry's output and prices.

 

There are more reasons, but then the list would go on forever.