Message from @Pelagius
Discord ID: 400557294649081857
because its guiding philosophy from which the politics came was underdeveloped
That is not an achievement to scoff at however
He did not intend NS as an eternal thing, but only a thing to turn the tide.
Again, very clearly stated in *Mein Kampf*.
The race must survive
He said that his successors MUST CHANGE AND READAPT.
If what you are saying is true, then it could have been a good first step had he not been such a fool
to not wait for atomic bombs when he had the greatest and most scientists, to attack east and west simultaneously, etc
He was "such a fool", but probably not in the way you think.
to not listen to his generals
But it's still a first step that's irrelevant to me now
and not a doctrine that I will follow, as all we know of is the first step
I think arrogance got the best of him.
He literally scoffed at his generals, at least from Speer's perspective.
With respect to your conclusions, I basically agree with them.
It is the departure points which are think are a misunderstanding. (socialism, aryanism, etc.)
And these may be crucial to understand that many positions did not dictate the defeat, so they cannot be judged as wrong.
E.g. Germany's socio-economic model was miraculous, and not at all a "failure". Despite what @diversity_is_racism , its "socialist" component was not a detriment, nor did it have anything to do with losing the war.
Do not throw the baby with the water, or something like that.
NS as it became, not as it was conceived, wasn't socialism, it was welfare capitalism
And some of the welfare was not toward money pits, but toward cultivating potential
and that's good
It may have been part of why they had so many chemists, engineers, etc
If you were smart, you got free stuff, and a spot at university
you got promoted based on talent
proven talent
So instead of the strong carrying the weak, the weak carried the strong
and i think this is one of the positive traits
no reason to throw that away
I'm not against all welfare
I can see that, I am saying, in general terms.
But I recognize that if you must force people to do it against their will, then it isn't sustainable
In regards to our conversation about throwing out NS or not.
Did he force people, actually? Does a miraculous success in 6 years show an oppressed and miserable people?
I think people were accepting of the idea
there will always be people against whatever you do, however
and that's why it happened so smoothly
These things don't emerge out of nowhere
Mohammedan countries kill gays for a reason
it's popular
For sure. So the working plan was an attempting tailoring to these people.
People with a "work" culture, but also an "idealistic" culture.