Message from @DrYuriMom
Discord ID: 523919442657280000
^^
His business sense is very autocratic.
how were the NSDAP socialist in anything other than name?
They were anti-capitalist, got a lot of support from working class Germans, and considered free trade to be disadvantageous to Germany.
and those are defining characteristics of socialism?
The NSDAP also did support nationalizing all industries.
National socialism wasn’t socialism in the traditional sense, but it did incorporate many of socialism’s ideas, with the notable exceptions of class conflict and internationalism.
so, NSDAP argued against private ownership of property?
So at the very least, they were opposed to non-Germans owning private property.
hence the nationalist part but that doesn't prove they were socialist
Did you read the points?
The NSADP redirected capital with state power in the name and for the (purported) benefit of the people, in their case as defined by the state. In the end it was more kleptocracy than anything else, but they knew they had to provide at least enough social benefit to maintain the support of the masses. This was the mid-30's. By the late 30's they could dispense with that since they could drive public opinion through the war. Good thing, too, since the capital derived from nationalizing Jewish wealth was drying up.
But again, I differentiate the Nazi's from the initial theory of national socialism.
National Socialism was always Ethnic Socialism, mobilizing socialist revolution by mobilizing people on Nationalities (Ethnicity) lines
I am trying to separate out the basic philosophy from the German application
The original Italian put it that 'mobilizing on class lines doesn't work, but you can much more readily mobilize along ethnic lines.'
I suppose even the Chinese application has a strong ethnic component, but their goal is more to mobilize by creed than race as I view it from afar.
By having an etho-state supporting one race over others you have the foundations of Ethnic Socialism. In fact you can argue that the ANC is a National Socialist group.
So you believe you cannot frame the "nationalism" for national socialism around a national identity but that it *must* be framed as race?
But technically Judaism is not a race but a creed/religion.
Correct.
It strikes me that it can be framed around any "us" verses a "them"
As long as it is popularly accepted
In the old days of the Age of Empires when Marx and Socialist theory was propogated Nationality was the term for race.
I'm listening
EG "He is a Hungarian in service of the Austrian Empire"
Every creed/religion that specifies birthright membership is technically an ethnoreligion.
So the US is an ethnoreligion
The US is a nation.
People can argue that White American is an "Artificial Ethnicity" like Hispanic
With birthright membership
And fealty to a Constitution
Traditionally nationality is intertwined with ethnicity.
In Canada they have "English" And "French" whites
Modern Europe after the first World War was recarved more or less along Ethnic Lines to form new Enthostates. This was cited by Wilson in his peace plan "That all nationalities may have be able to determine Sovereignty."
no, they redirected capital for the benefit of the state, the people were considered an entity that was part of the state, if they served the state then they were would be rewarded and fed by the state, but the goal was to build up the state.
Are you familiar with the four stage economic plan of the NDSAP Brant?
no ?
Stage 1: Get Germany out of the Depression (Autoban, Infostructure works) Stage 2: Pre-War Economy build up (Assign contracts to 'Preffered firms' to build up the war capacity of the state) Stage 3: War Economy (Yeah) Stage 3: Post War Cartel Economic Reconstruction (all economic activities are controled by state run cartels based on type EG- Arts Cartel runs movie studios and painters, Machining Cartel runs manufaturing of industrial made good) The Cartels are Guilds / Unions / corporations all at the same time.