Jordan Peterson interview on C4

pumpkin4life

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

A Liberal who murdered Jews, homosexual people, disabled people, Roma and various other Untermenschen. I don't think you actually understand what you write.

Marxists are really good at killing people though, even better at it than fascists.

Brian?

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Marxists are really good at killing people though, even better at it than fascists.

What has that got to do with the point at hand?

Nazis were not socialists. It's propaganda being spread by the alt-right, it should be derided every time it comes up. Agreed?

RDM_83 again

I thought the Hitler being a socialist thing is an argument more based on misinterpretation.

Hitler wasn't a socialist, the NAZI's however could be argued had some socialist aspects initially , but that wing got killed of in the night of the long knives (by Hitler and co).

That's my understanding of it but not super familiar with that period.

Havockk

Have I seen this wall of text twice before, or is that my imagination?

Wibbs

Nope, not your imagination H.

Pa ElGrande

Brian? wrote: »

What has that got to do with the point at hand?

Nazis were not socialists. It's propaganda being spread by the alt-right, it should be derided every time it comes up. Agreed?

Both the communist and fascist systems were based in collectivism and state-planned economies. Both also proposed systems wherein the individual was heavily controlled by a powerful state, and both were responsible for large-scale atrocities and genocide.

The German economy under the Nazi rule was socialist and while industry had nominal private owners they were de facto controlled by the government. The primary reason the difference with the Soviet Socialist model (central committee seized ownership of property) came about was due to the hyper-inflation of the Weimar republic years earlier as capital fled in expectation that the Communists (KPD) with the help of the Russians would seize power. The outcome of the Polish-Soviet war (February 1919 – March 1921) effectively put a barrier between Russian and German communists (KPD). In Germany, Adolf Hitler became head of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazi Party) in 1921 and mounted a coup attempt in 1923. The German Communist party was allied with the Bolshevics and had their own failed Spartacist uprising in 1919.

Benito Mussolini, a Marxist and socialist who had been expelled from Italy’s Socialist Party in 1914 for his support for World War I, later founded the fascist movement as his own political party. He took power through his “March on Rome” in October 1922.

Weimar came about because the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) leadership refused to work with the Communists (KPD) and opted for a middle ground which did not plan to completely strip the old imperial elites of their power and assets. The SPD sought a compromise whereby they were integrated into the new social democratic system. The left wing fell into political fragmentation that prevented Germany from turning communist at the time. The Weimar Constitution was adopted in1919.


Consequently, this was a revolutionary government. All economic activity stopped. The wealthy were scared since they saw the bloodshed in Russia in 1917. Capital hoarded and the velocity of money imploded. There were no lenders to the government. There were no bond markets. There was absolutely nothing. Nobody would dare lend anything for the fear was Germany would go the way of Russia and that is how the hyper-inflation came about. Later when the NAZIs took power in 1933 they mostly left the private owners in place rather than trigger a mass capital flight and gradually took control of the means of production, you can read The Vampire economy to learn how this worked.

The allies intended to impose a socialist model on post war Germany, however Konrad Adenauer took control and returned West Germany to a market economy.

Another interesting development from this period is the emergence of Antifa sometime after the third world congress of the communist international organised by the KPD (the largest Communist party outside Russia). For the communists in Germany, “anti-fascism” merely meant “anti-capitalism.”. A description of Antifa on the German federal office for the protection of the Constitution (Intelligence services) website notes that the organization still holds this same basic definition of capitalism as being “fascism.”

via google translate

"Anti-fascism" as a term is also used by Democrats to express their rejection of right-wing extremism. However, most of the left-wing extremists claim this term. They claim that the capitalist state produces fascism, or at least tolerates it. Therefore, anti-fascism is directed not only against actual or supposed right-wing extremists, but always against the state and its representatives, especially members of the security authorities.

Brian?

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Both the communist and fascist systems were based in collectivism and state-planned economies. Both also proposed systems wherein the individual was heavily controlled by a powerful state, and both were responsible for large-scale atrocities and genocide.

The German economy under the Nazi rule was socialist and while industry had nominal private owners they were de facto controlled by the government. The primary reason the difference with the Soviet Socialist model (central committee seized ownership of property) came about was due to the hyper-inflation of the Weimar republic years earlier as capital fled in expectation that the Communists (KPD) with the help of the Russians would seize power. The outcome of the Polish-Soviet war (February 1919 – March 1921) effectively put a barrier between Russian and German communists (KPD). In Germany, Adolf Hitler became head of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazi Party) in 1921 and mounted a coup attempt in 1923. The German Communist party was allied with the Bolshevics and had their own failed Spartacist uprising in 1919.

Benito Mussolini, a Marxist and socialist who had been expelled from Italy’s Socialist Party in 1914 for his support for World War I, later founded the fascist movement as his own political party. He took power through his “March on Rome” in October 1922.

Weimar came about because the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) leadership refused to work with the Communists (KPD) and opted for a middle ground which did not plan to completely strip the old imperial elites of their power and assets. The SPD sought a compromise whereby they were integrated into the new social democratic system. The left wing fell into political fragmentation that prevented Germany from turning communist at the time. The Weimar Constitution was adopted in1919.


Consequently, this was a revolutionary government. All economic activity stopped. The wealthy were scared since they saw the bloodshed in Russia in 1917. Capital hoarded and the velocity of money imploded. There were no lenders to the government. There were no bond markets. There was absolutely nothing. Nobody would dare lend anything for the fear was Germany would go the way of Russia and that is how the hyper-inflation came about. Later when the NAZIs took power in 1933 they mostly left the private owners in place rather than trigger a mass capital flight and gradually took control of the means of production, you can read The Vampire economy to learn how this worked.

The allies intended to impose a socialist model on post war Germany, however Konrad Adenauer took control and returned West Germany to a market economy.

Another interesting development from this period is the emergence of Antifa sometime after the third world congress of the communist international organised by the KPD (the largest Communist party outside Russia). For the communists in Germany, “anti-fascism” merely meant “anti-capitalism.”. A description of Antifa on the German federal office for the protection of the Constitution (Intelligence services) website notes that the organization still holds this same basic definition of capitalism as being “fascism.”

via google translate

I don't really need the history lesson. But thanks anyway.

kumate_champ07

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope, not your imagination H.

is there a known explanation?

Ulysses Gaze

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

is there a known explanation?

A re-reg.

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

Absolute and complete codswallop. Revisionist nonsense. Complete and total BS.

Didn't even watch the video but it is an interesting question. Were the Nazi's Socialists. Well in many ways, yes they were.

They believed in a society where the individual would be subordinate to society.
They believed in a large interventionist state into the economic affairs.
They hated Capitalists, much like Communists and Socialists of the time.

In other words, its complicated.

Brian?

markodaly wrote: »

Didn't even watch the video but it is an interesting question. Were the Nazi's Socialists. Well in many ways, yes they were.

They believed in a society where the individual would be subordinate to society.
They believed in a large interventionist state into the economic affairs.
They hated Capitalists, much like Communists and Socialists of the time.

In other words, its complicated.

Actually it isn’t complicated at all. The Nazis were fascists, not socialists. It really is that simple.

It’s a premise so ridiculous that I’m not going to argue the individual points you’re making.

Pepefrogok

Brian? wrote: »

Actually it isn’t complicated at all. The Nazis were fascists, not socialists. It really is that simple.

It’s a premise so ridiculous that I’m not going to argue the individual points you’re making.

Would you agree that some of their economic policies were socialist?

Havockk

markodaly wrote: »

Didn't even watch the video but it is an interesting question. Were the Nazi's Socialists. Well in many ways, yes they were.

They believed in a society where the individual would be subordinate to society.
They believed in a large interventionist state into the economic affairs.
They hated Capitalists, much like Communists and Socialists of the time.

In other words, its complicated.

Pepefrogok wrote: »

Would you agree that some of their economic policies were socialist?

So they were socialists who did not behave like socialists, violently oppressed all socialist groups like trade unionists. Were not liberal in any shape or fashion, were racist, were uber-nationalist, literally went to war with communism.... but we are to believe they were socialists?

Some folk aren't too bright.

professore

Havockk wrote: »

The greatest antifa coalition of all time, the Allies killed a great many Fascists between the years 1939 - 1945.

They didn't label themselves anti fascists. They were a disparate group of countries that bonded together to fight a common enemy that threatened to defeat and enslave them. None except the Soviet Union and China were Marxist. No comparison whatsoever.

Havockk

professore wrote: »

They didn't label themselves anti fascists. They were a disparate group of countries that bonded together to fight a common enemy that threatened to defeat and enslave them. None except the Soviet Union and China were Marxist. No comparison whatsoever.

Indeed, I was making a point.

professore

Havockk wrote: »

So they were socialists who did not behave like socialists, violently oppressed all socialist groups like trade unionists. Were not liberal in any shape or fashion, were racist, were uber-nationalist, literally went to war with communism.... but we are to believe they were socialists?

Some folk aren't too bright.

We can already see that from comments like the above.

professore

For some reason communism and Marxism is held up as the ideal system still while it is at least as bad as fascism. I can only imagine that it's because everyone knows who Hitler was and what he did but far fewer know who Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and a whole slew of evil across the world were. Castro is held up as a hero FFS.

Pa ElGrande

Brian? wrote: »

Actually it isn’t complicated at all. The Nazis were fascists, not socialists. It really is that simple.

This is just another variant of the tired that was not my socialism argument. The outcome of socialist economic system in Germany and Russia was so bad that most socialists changed the narrative and re-packaged themselves as social democrats.


If you were to look at the history of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries socialism was seen as the way of the future even the writings of the classical liberals at the time begin to reflect that it was inevitable and some of them became very disillusioned by this. In the German speaking world the Austrian school of economics under Carl Menger, Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek analysed the socialist system and correctly diagnosed it's outcome. Von Böhm-Bawerk wrote a devastating critique on the failures on Marxism in "Karl Marx and the Close of His System" which still stands today. In 1920 von Mises wrote an essay "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth" that is very readable and outlines why a socialist economic system ALWAYS fails. Defenders of socialism have never yet been able to refute the criticisms contained in these and its not from want of trying so thy ignore the lessons of history.


In 1936 the Nazi regime imposed price and wage controls in response to the rise in prices that began to result from the inflation caused by their expansion of the money supply to fund various public works, subsidies and re-armament programs. This led to shortages, that is, a situation in which the quantities of goods people attempt to buy exceed the quantities available for sale. This caused widespread chaos and behaviours like hoarding, the black market and the search for scapegoats to blame for this and even greater control of production and citizens lives by the government. There is a obvious present day example of the outcome of such socialist economics in Venezuela.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNjtpksJD4s

silverharp

professore wrote: »

For some reason communism and Marxism is held up as the ideal system still while it is at least as bad as fascism. I can only imagine that it's because everyone knows who Hitler was and what he did but far fewer know who Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and a whole slew of evil across the world were. Castro is held up as a hero FFS.

they shouldn't be seen as opposites either , they are kissing cousins at a minimum . Both are authoritarian, identitarian , both undermine the rights of individuals in favour of what is convenient to the state and both aim to control and direct the economy.

Franz Von Peppercorn

professore wrote: »

We can already see that from comments like the above.

You probably need a different argument. There are plenty of populist, right wing and fascist parties who have supported or introduced welfare policies. This doesn’t make them socialist.

dav3

I was wondering why this shambles of a thread kept getting bumped. Good to see the re-regs have found a new home. Like flies around sh*t when one of them takes a massive dump.

I thought the whole 'nazis were socialists' meme died out long ago? It had it's time in the sun. We laughed, we cried, but never did any sane person take it seriously. Or am I wrong, are there idiots out there who took it seriously?

Franz Von Peppercorn

19C liberals would have seen the Keynesian post war states of Europe and even America as socialist (hence neo liberals dismantling it eventually). Unfortunately for the theory those countries were extremely successful.

Brian?

Pepefrogok wrote: »

Would you agree that some of their economic policies were socialist?

No. I wouldn't. The Nazis economic policies were a mix of extreme protectionism, crony capitalism and random nationalisation.

Brian?

Progenitor wrote: »

Is fascism mutually exclusive with socialism?

Yes

Brian?

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

This is just another variant of the tired that was not my socialism argument. The outcome of socialist economic system in Germany and Russia was so bad that most socialists changed the narrative and re-packaged themselves as social democrats.


If you were to look at the history of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries socialism was seen as the way of the future even the writings of the classical liberals at the time begin to reflect that it was inevitable and some of them became very disillusioned by this. In the German speaking world the Austrian school of economics under Carl Menger, Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek analysed the socialist system and correctly diagnosed it's outcome. Von Böhm-Bawerk wrote a devastating critique on the failures on Marxism in "Karl Marx and the Close of His System" which still stands today. In 1920 von Mises wrote an essay "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth" that is very readable and outlines why a socialist economic system ALWAYS fails. Defenders of socialism have never yet been able to refute the criticisms contained in these and its not from want of trying so thy ignore the lessons of history.


In 1936 the Nazi regime imposed price and wage controls in response to the rise in prices that began to result from the inflation caused by their expansion of the money supply to fund various public works, subsidies and re-armament programs. This led to shortages, that is, a situation in which the quantities of goods people attempt to buy exceed the quantities available for sale. This caused widespread chaos and behaviours like hoarding, the black market and the search for scapegoats to blame for this and even greater control of production and citizens lives by the government. There is a obvious present day example of the outcome of such socialist economics in Venezuela.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNjtpksJD4s

The Nazis were not socialists. Agree or disagree?

I'm happy to debate the merits of socialism once we move past that.

Brian?

dav3 wrote: »

I was wondering why this shambles of a thread kept getting bumped. Good to see the re-regs have found a new home. Like flies around sh*t when one of them takes a massive dump.

I thought the whole 'nazis were socialists' meme died out long ago? It had it's time in the sun. We laughed, we cried, but never did any sane person take it seriously. Or am I wrong, are there idiots out there who took it seriously?

There are a plethora of idiots who take it seriously. Some of them make YouTube videos apparently.

Pepefrogok

Hey your arguments are sound lads! Just because they were called socialists and had socialist policies just shout anyone who mentions it down, don't even argue the points! Just shout them down!

Pa ElGrande

Brian? wrote: »

The Nazis were not socialists. Agree or disagree?

I'm happy to debate the merits of socialism once we move past that.

Unlike the Soviets, the Nazis generally did not have to kill in order to seize the property of Germans other than Jews. They established socialism by stealth, mainly through price controls, which served to maintain the outward guise and appearance of private ownership. The difference between the Soviet and Nazi regimes was one of semantics, in the USSR ownership of the means of production resided with the state and they directed the production targets though economic planning. In Nazi Germany ownership of the means of production was nominally in the hands of private citizens while the state directed the production targets. The book the vampire economy is available for free to you to read.

There is no debate, history shows socialism to be a failure by every conceivable aggregate metric that measures human well-being. Whether you establish socialism directly as happened in Venezuela, Russia, China, or Cuba or by stealth as happened in Germany, the outcome is a much lower standard of living for the majority of the population, limits on freedom of speech and movement with the imposition of long prison sentences, forced labour and death for those that hold dissenting opinions and ultimately the economic implosion of such regimes once the capital reserve has been used up.

The outcomes of the Russian, German and Chinese patterns of socialism were so horrific that todays Social Democrat parties do not establish socialism when they come to power, realising the massive act of theft and violence required they are unwilling to do what would be required to establish a socialist regime is beyond them. So while they may talk socialism as their core philosophy and their ultimate goal they are content to work with a hampered market economy and let private individuals pursue profit as long as they get their cut that they can then use to buy votes.

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

Actually it isn’t complicated at all. The Nazis were fascists, not socialists. It really is that simple.

It’s a premise so ridiculous that I’m not going to argue the individual points you’re making.

Well, it is easy of course to live in a monochrome world, yet you do not address any of the points I made.

Take the Nazi view on Capitalists. They hated them, thought they were part of the Jewish conspiracy as a way to weaken the states resolve and morality by seducing the population with materialism.

Take the Nazi view on public works. The Reichsautobahn is a prime example of what economic policy they were in favour off.

Let us not kid ourselves that the Nazi's were interested in free markets, liberal economic policy and a non interventionist state.

Economically, the Nazi's had huge parallels with Socialites. Again, I am not directly calling them socialists but the monochrome view point that they were chalk and cheese is neither not historically accurate or factually true.

markodaly

Havockk wrote: »

So they were socialists who did not behave like socialists, violently oppressed all socialist groups like trade unionists. Were not liberal in any shape or fashion, were racist, were uber-nationalist, literally went to war with communism.... but we are to believe they were socialists?

Some folk aren't too bright.

I do not think people are directly calling them socialists but drawing parallels with some socialist thinking.

Nazi's hated communism because communists didn't really believe in a nation state. I supposed you could call them the first globalists.