@Doctor Anon No he wasn't

Obviously.

and let me adress the privitisation

"What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.
"

"Privatisation" was only in name

I mean, almost no nations have been completely communist.

It can't work.

Well also most fascists say they are third position, opposing both communism and capitalism

And if socialism causes all this genocide disease etc imagine going to the full step communism. Itd be worse.

Yeah docile they can say that

Economically they're a form of socialism

Hitler was designated to serve as a catalyst to ramp up capitalist production. All of the German industrial tycoons of the time supported him, including many in the U.S. like Henry Ford.

Now tell me, why would Henry Ford give $20 million to a ‘socialist’. That’s the equivalent of Rupert Murdoch today donating $1 billion to a communist party.

I mean it's hard to imagine a third system, since we're used to our 1d axis in economics

Yes and they were over regulated

look what Mises said

"What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.
"

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Hitler was designated to serve as a catalyst to ramp up capitalist production. All of the German industrial tycoons of the time supported him, including many in the U.S. like Henry Ford.

Now tell me, why would Henry Ford give $20 million to a ‘socialist’. That’s the equivalent of Rupert Murdoch today donating $1 billion to a communist party.

All of Germany’s rich industrialists stood firmly behind Hitler and his attempts to revive stagnating capitalism through a war economy. Socialists are anti-war because socialists do not believe in borders

Read what I said

idk why they supported him, that was their policies

doesn't matter

you need to see the policies

in no way was it capitalist

"doesn't matter"

yes

"""""doesn't matter""'" yes let's ignore the capitalist riches earned when the Nazis were in power, let's ignore the rampant support of capitalists to a supposed socialist party

National Socialism is only socialist in name

By this logic, the DPRK is fully democratic

Welfare is a capitalist invention

i just trolled someone sos hard

@Doctor Anon

lol

@Doctor Anon 1sec

Ill reply in a sec

Controlled forest fires are helpful I hear

At least from my science teacher last year

""""""doesn't matter""'" yes let's ignore the capitalist riches earned when the Nazis were in power, let's ignore the rampant support of capitalists to a supposed socialist party
National Socialism is only socialist in name
By this logic, the DPRK is fully democratic
Welfare is a capitalist invention
"

So first of all