Self proclaimed "Fascist Major" proves the Third Reich was Capitalist

[NatSoc420]

This leftist who is a self proclaimed "Fascist Major" who claims he has master degrees on "Fascism" made a 3 part mini video series on proving the Third Reich was Capitalist by "debunking" the Socialist aspects of the Third Reich. He brings up interesting claims that I've never seen other leftists bring up before and cites academic books and articles along with using quotes by Hitler.

The points made are:

1. The 25 Points Manifesto was propaganda to appeal to Socialists and Workers and everything promised was on paper.

2. All trade unions were abolished and replaced with the Labor Front which wasn't a union and employers controlled labor relations.

3. They privatized, set welfare, and improved their economy for war.

4. Consumer goods vanished and the standard of living dropped for weapons production.

5. Wages fell and the rich got richer.

6. The National Socialists gave full worker control to the employers

7. The National Socialists targeted the Traditional Targets of the far right, disabled, unemployed, ethnic minorities (jews) and socialists.

The historians he uses are Richard Evans and Ian Kershaw

Is there any way to rebuttal all of this and is all or most of it fabricated lies?

Original Videos:

1. https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMRFeYELq/

2. https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMRFejoUW/

3. https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMRFehYUL/

[Moderator]

For more see:
The Economy of Nazi Germany
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=12567
Thanks, M1

[fireofice]

This video debunks many claims against Hitler being a socialist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCkyWBPaTC8

This article as well:

https://national-justice.com/op-ed-ther ... -socialist

Lenin and Stalin also banned labor unions. This is in fact expected under socialism, since the workers don't need them any more.

Privatization claims debunked in the video I linked. Nothing was privatized.

The economy definitely improved.

On worker's wages:

In comparison to hourly real earnings, weekly real earnings showed a considerably steeper rise during the period of National Socialism. Between their low point in 1932 and their peak in 1941 they increased 30 percent. Like hourly earnings, they show a small decline from 1941 to the end of the war. Their standing in 1944, the last year for which information is available, was 5 percent above 1929, 15 percent above 1913, and 56 percent above 1871 levels.

https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapt ... /c2506.pdf page 77

Don't see the issue with rich getting richer. It's inevitable when the economy improves.

On worker control:

A system of social honor courts (fifteen courts plus a supreme court in Berlin) was established for the resolution of labor-disputes. Heneman says that nine-tenths of cases brought before the social honor courts were complaints brought against management, and that convicted managers faced fines in 48% of cases and removal from their positions in 31% of cases. "It is not correct to say … that labor has been treated unfairly in these courts."

https://national-socialist-worldview.co ... licy-1938/

Targeting certain groups has nothing to do with whether there is socialism or not.

[Otium]

This video debunks many claims against Hitler being a socialist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCkyWBPaTC8

No, Tik in this video tries very hard, and does a poor job, trying to prove to Marxists in his own lolbertarian way that "Hitler's Socialism" was much more akin to Communism than the Marxists would like to accept. The irony is that the Libertarianism Tik defends was actually defined by him in the same way as he defined Communism, although he totally embarrassed himself by failing to notice it.

Hitler's Socialism didn't operate in the realm of economics, but in the realm of social policy, biology, and nature. That people like Tik, a materialist, who is thus a bedfellow with the Marxists he rightfully derides, is completely unequipped to deal with this question in a way that is devoid from his preconceptions about economics.

[fireofice]

I agree with you that TIK says many dumb things. Nevertheless, I do think Hitler was an economic socialist. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

[Otium]

I agree with you that TIK says many dumb things. Nevertheless, I do think Hitler was an economic socialist. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

This really depends on what exactly you understand by the term "socialist". If you're only thinking in terms of Marxist socialism, then you couldn't be more wrong. Hitler did embrace his own kind of "economic socialism", which took the form of generous social benefits afforded to the German Volksgemeinschaft. Social welfare policies were important to the Socialist conception of practical National Socialism. Yet, National Socialism absolutely repudiated class conflict and even the concept of class distinction in any capacity. This alone disputes any claims that Hitler's "Socialism" in an economic sense was anything akin to that of Marxism.

The other issue with Tik, is that rather than quote from Hitler what he said on the topic of his conception of Socialism, Tik instead equates Hitler's discussion of foreign policy in his second book and Mein Kampf with his ideals on Socialism. This is a very misleading, and yet cunning, way to redefine your opponents position on a topic they weren't even necessarily discussing.

What really disputes the libertarian economic, and Marxist economic attempt at redefining Hitler's Socialism in economic terms, is that if you were to believe Ian Kershaw, Hitler was "wholly ignorant of any formal understanding of the principles of economics. For him, as he stated to the industrialists, economics was of secondary importance, entirely subordinated to politics." (Kershaw, Hubris, p. 448.) This statement is only half true. Hitler didn't need to be ignorant of economics in order not to prescribe much importance to it. His conception of life wasn't dictated by an obsession with commodifying material objects, but ensuring the survival and continued existence of the German ethnic group, and Aryan race as a whole. That Hitler wasn't concerned with economics, as Hitler himself stated "we have one single doctrine, which is that in economic life there is no place for doctrine." (Baynes, Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 1261.) is an important aspect of the National Socialist worldview, and certainly not borne out of ignorance, but a deliberate decision to place the emphasis on the kinship of blood rather than the accumulation of money.

The idea of ​​the Volksgemeinschaft, for which the term National Socialism was chosen, was intended to overcome special class struggle and economic interests as well as denominational political aspirations and thereby make Germany so strong that it could emphatically assert its vital interests abroad.

Social equilibrium and equal treatment of all Germans as national comrades were seen as the basis of national unity. The performance principle was considered a prerequisite for social advancement as opposed to professional status.

Adolf von Thadden, Adolf Hitler: Verwandler der Welt (Rosenheim: Deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft (DVG), 1991), passim. See here. See too: Max Klüver, Vom Klassenkampf zur Volksgemeinschaft: Sozialpolitik im Dritten Reich (Leoni: Druffel-Verlag, 1988), passim., p. 23ff.

I am thinking of a specific quote from Hitler on the topic of shedding class distinctions, but it escapes me at the moment.

---

FYI: If I recall correctly Tik termed "true" Communism as "anarcho-Capitalism", which he rightfully derided as utopian and unrealistic. Yet this conception of "anarcho-Capitalism" is exactly what he believes in, a Capitalistic society devoid of as many restrictions of state as possible.

[Tiepolo]

Master's degree on fascism? In other words, he knows hilariously false Jewish comintern lines from the 1930's. National Socialism did a whole lot more for its workers than the U.S.S.R, it wasn't the Third Reich that sided with the U.S it was the Soviet Union.