Fascists Targetting America's Youth

[Saras]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
edit: Wouldn't have noticed it weren't for Saras. Thanks.

Anytime man

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious



-Labor Front

Kid. So? What does that prove? That was 1933. What happened to wages in subsequent years? Also you seem to ignore universal health care, autobahns, cheap resorts, and economic prosperity. Hitler did a lot for the common German it seems. The only people who had it bad were Communists (and, of course, Jews). I have a hard time believing that the average worker did not like the Nazi's after a time.

(But, yes, I do understand the harshness of the Nazi's in forcing the workers to pay their income taxes through withholding. That was the singlemost vile deed ever done by any government, at any time and at any place in the whole history of tryanny.)

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
Kid. So? What does that prove? That was 1933. What happened to wages in subsequent years? Also you seem to ignore universal health care, autobahns, cheap resorts, and economic prosperity.

All of those things benefited the state though. For example, when your employees have health care they stay healthy and work better. He exploited the workers though. How can you justify setting their wages fixed when the capitalists are making profit? They only justification was that it was for the good of the German race. Unless you believe in that crap you can't say that he didn't oppress them.

Hitler did a lot for the common German it seems. The only people who had it bad were Communists (and, of course, Jews).

I see. It's ok because only the commies and Jews had it bad?

I have a hard time believing that the average worker did not like the Nazi's after a time.

Yeah, probably because they were glad to have a means to survival, and some of them kind of hated the commies and Jews anyway.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious

All of those things benefited the state though. For example, when your employees have health care they stay healthy and work better. He exploited the workers though. How can you justify setting their wages fixed when the capitalists are making profit? They only justification was that it was for the good of the German race. Unless you believe in that crap you can't say that he didn't oppress them.

Kid, the Nazi's took control of industry as well. They regulated profits as well as wages. Their control of industry was as complete as it can be without ending private ownership altogether.

But that said, what happened to wages after 1933? I suggest that they went up in real terms because the Nazi economy took off.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Kid, the Nazi's took control of industry as well. They regulated profits as well as wages. Their control of industry was as complete as it can be without ending private ownership altogether.

BS. The capitalists controled the Nazis. The Nazis didn't do squat without running it past their industrial backers first. I suggest you watch Schindler's List and pay special attention to how the commander of a Nazi death camp fawned at Schindler, a factory owner and war profiteer. The fact that he was a capitalist is what allowed him to save those people, because no matter how bad things got, the Nazis held private property inviolate (with the exception of the private property of Jews and conquered nations). Then knew the smell of their masters hand.

Even Ford's company in Germany made a profit, at a time when Germany and the U.S. were at war! Obviously, Ford couldn't run the plant, and the Nazis had to set up a trustee to run it during the war, but rather than nationalizing the plant of an enemy nation, they not only left it owned by Ford, but even ran it profitably and put the profits in a special escrow for Ford.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
But that said, what happened to wages after 1933? I suggest that they went up in real terms because the Nazi economy took off.

No. In real terms wages went down. They remained frozed, but inflation started to reduce them in real terms.

[Kidlicious]

Hitler's economic policies worked well for everyone (except the commies, Jews, trade unionists etc) until about 1936. That's when the economy started experiencing shortages and inflation, but Hitler kept wages frozen. That's when he started worrying about social upheaval and planning war.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


BS. The capitalists controled the Nazis. The Nazis didn't do squat without running it past their industrial backers first. I suggest you watch Schindler's List and pay special attention to how the commander of a Nazi death camp fawned at Schindler, a factory owner and war profiteer. The fact that he was a capitalist is what allowed him to save those people, because no matter how bad things got, the Nazis held private property inviolate (with the exception of the private property of Jews and conquered nations). Then knew the smell of their masters hand.

Even Ford's company in Germany made a profit, at a time when Germany and the U.S. were at war! Obviously, Ford couldn't run the plant, and the Nazis had to set up a trustee to run it during the war, but rather than nationalizing the plant of an enemy nation, they not only left it owned by Ford, but even ran it profitably and put the profits in a special escrow for Ford.

Marxist propaganda. The Nazi's controlled everything. While they may have done deals with the industrialists and the Catholics and in 1933 in order to gain their support for Hitler becoming chancellor, they soon broke their promises began to dominate. Here's a passage from book written prior to the introduction Marxist revisionism into Western textbooks:

"The tenets of fascism in a realm of economic affairs furnish an interesting example of contrast between theory and practice. The statement of the fascist leaders, both written and oral, have repeatedly preached respect for private property rights and private initiative and ownership in business. It is that it was this aspect of fascist doctrine which appeal to German and Italian industrialists and financiers and led them to come contribute their support to the movement in its early stages. Yet, in both Italy and Germany today the state has come to exercise far-reaching control over economic activities. Although lip service is still paid to the principles of private ownership and private initiative, nevertheless they are held to be subordinated to the exigencies of national interest. Both labor and capital have been brought under the regimentation of the state. Private property rights have been extensively curtailed, especially in Germany, through such measures as governmental fixing of prices, wages, interest and profits, control over raw materials and types of production, regulation of exchange and foreign commerce, et cetera. In Italy, also, the government has assumed a decisive role in guiding and controlling the economic life of the nation. Capital and labor are organized in syndicates, dominated by the Italian government. In both countries trade unions have been abolished and strikes declared illegal. The extension of government controlled over German business was described as early as 1934 in the following statement by an English observer:

Most businessmen find it advisable to keep on the right side of the local party authorities. By no stretch of the imagination can their property be called their own. The State suggests war limits extension of plant or new construction; it fixes most prices as well as wages, endeavoring to prevent price increases; it compels companies increasing evidence to invest an equal amount in government securities; it organizes compulsory cartels; it dictates the use of domestic instead of foreign raw materials.... No directors of important, or even unimportant, private concerns are appointed without the tacit assent of the State and the Nazi party.

One of the most prominent theories of communism, the class struggle and the inherent hostility between the proletariat and the capitalist, is repudiated in fascist philosophy. With its emphasis upon national unity and the supremacy of the state fascism has no place for the class struggle, the latter would threaten the authority of the state and disrupt national unity. As capital and labor are not to oppose each other for their own selfish ends, rather both are to be subordinated to a higher entity, the state in the nation. In place of the class struggle the Fascists have tended to substitute the concept of evolution through struggle between nations or between racial groups."

Mosher, William E., "An Introduction to Responsible Citizenship," Henry Holt & Co., New York 1941, at page 813.

[Kidlicious]

Hitler's talent was political. He did what he could to make an alliance with the capitalists, and he was successfull. The capitalists were gratefull for the Nazi controls on the economy because they profited from it. There was no option for them to profit in the failed free market.

[Ned]

No doubt, Kid, that Hitler used the industrialists and they used him -- initially. But, fascism does not admit of control by the industrialists. The party controls the State and State controls everything.

The fact that industry still made profits is beside the point, unless one is into class warfare for its own sake. Fascism is not free enterprise as the State ultimately dictates what business can do and how much profit it can make.

In a way, Nixon was a fascist as he declared wage and price controls by edict. If you have followed my posts, you know what I think of wage/price controls and how much I despised Nixon for imposing them.

It would be beneficial to a discussion of fascism to actually discuss it as it was, not some propagandistic version of what it was. It was (and is) a totalitarian philosophy where the party ruled all. There is very little difference between fascism and communism on this point. Where it departs from communism is on the issue of class warfare.

[Frozzy]

Even Ford's company in Germany made a profit, at a time when Germany and the U.S. were at war! Obviously, Ford couldn't run the plant, and the Nazis had to set up a trustee to run it during the war, but rather than nationalizing the plant of an enemy nation, they not only left it owned by Ford, but even ran it profitably and put the profits in a special escrow for Ford.

That wouldn't have anything to do with Ford's anti-semitist beliefs would it?

And, re: Labour one-party state, it is possible as Laz said, mainly because of pro-Parliament legislation and ideals introduced post-Civil War.

[Shi Huangdi]

Constitutionally, is it still in the Monarch's purview to Disband Parliament?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
It would be beneficial to a discussion of fascism to actually discuss it as it was, not some propagandistic version of what it was. It was (and is) a totalitarian philosophy where the party ruled all. There is very little difference between fascism and communism on this point. Where it departs from communism is on the issue of class warfare.

We are discussing it as it was. True, that the proclaimed goal of fascism was national unity, but in reality they did nothing to end class warfare. It doesn't matter how many communists they killed or how much control over the capitalists that they had, fascism can never end class warfare.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Marxist propaganda.

Historical fact. It's just that reality tends to support our propaganda.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
It would be beneficial to a discussion of fascism to actually discuss it as it was, not some propagandistic version of what it was.

That's what I'm doing. It just doesn't fit into your mindset, so it must obviously be false. I recomend to you, Fascism and Big Business, by Daniel Guerin. Read the facts, not the propaganda that agrees with you.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0873488784/ref=lpr_g_2/002-7467267-1048859?v=glance&s=books

A comprehensive study of fascism as it evolved in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and 1930s.

Daniel Guerin's classic work, first published in French in 1936, shows how fascism, far from being an aberration of mass psychology, arose from the specific conditions of a social system in crisis. At first covertly, then increasingly openly, layers of big business financed and promoted the fascist movements in Italy and Germany.

Guerin contrasts the fascists' initially radical anticapitalist demagogy with their moves to shore up the capitalist profit system once they form the government.