Communism/Nazism

[Theige]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2818615.stm

The report's chapter on agriculture says about 25,000 people die daily from hunger, with an estimated 815 million people suffering from malnutrition.

25,000*365 = ~9 million or so. I've seen figures which state 30,000 per day, but we'll lowball it here for your convenience.

Oh yea you're right, there it is 9 million dead a year.

Attributing every death in the world to Capitalism makes perfect sense.

Even if the person dies in a non-capitalist country.

Perfect sense.

I could poke more holes in your argument, but that one is big enough.

 

[LesCanadiens]

Oh yea you're right, there it is 9 million dead a day.

I said per year. Are you not literate?

Attributing every death in the world to Capitalism makes perfect sense.

Even if the person dies in a non-capitalist country.

Perfect sense.

I could poke more holes in your argument, but that one is big enough.

I'm just using the exact same arguments that anti-communists use against communism. Nice to see that flew right over your head.

So now you see how amusing it is when anti-communists blame every single death that occurs due to famine in communist countries to how evil communism is?

 

[Dachs]

So now you see how amusing it is when anti-communists blame every single death that occurs due to famine in communist countries to how evil communism is?

It's more believable - although still of course not entirely correct - for the Soviet Union at least because of active policies like this one.

 

[REDY]

The goal of Nacism - Aryan race above the europe is clear evil, the goal of communism - classless society, should be considered as good thing. And communists were not doing soap from their opponents.

 

[Leifmk]

Nazi -> Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei -> National Socialist German Workers’ Party



Nazism was pretty socialist.

No. A name does not a fact make.

In actual economic policy (as far as they even had a coherent economic policy, if you study the matter a bit you will find it was a mess of Biblical proportions and it's kind of hard to understand how they even managed to keep the country running for as long as they did without collapsing on themselves) they were just about as socialist as the later German Democratic Republic was democratic. I.e. not very much at all.

Collectivist, after a fashion, yes. But very much in favour of Big Business.

 

[Richard Cribb]

Yeah, since capitalism isn't perfect, let's all switch to socialism.

I fixed it for you.

Ten million people a year isn't just imperfect, it's stupefyingly flawed.

Indeed.

The usual underwhelming drivel.

Exactly which word in the sentence in my sig is it you don't understand?
Moderator Action: This is flame bait. Also don't change someone's quote as you did to Lightfang.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Nazism was pretty socialist.

It was neither pretty nor socialist.
Let me guess; you have no idea what socialism is, do you?

There was definitely a distrust of the free market.

As it was and is among big capitalists. And capitalism is not the same as free market, whatever that may mean.But you don't know so much about capitalism either, do you?
Try at least to pick up a history book and check who supported and financed Hitler and who raked in the huge profits.Then you can return all tall and handsome.

They banned unions and formed worker's councils IIRC...

Worker councils?? Son, you are killing me. Be a good boy now and go reading that history book.

The goal of Nacism - Aryan race above the europe is clear evil, the goal of communism - classless society, should be considered as good thing. And communists were not doing soap from their opponents.

Exactly.

 

[Dachs]

The goal of Nacism - Aryan race above the europe is clear evil, the goal of communism - classless society, should be considered as good thing.

Is there a corollary here of "the ends justify the means"?

 

[RedRalph]

The goal of Nacism - Aryan race above the europe is clear evil, the goal of communism - classless society, should be considered as good thing. And communists were not doing soap from their opponents.

Yes. The difference is that regardless of past mistakes (and crimes) made in attaining the goal, the ideal of communism is a classless state where all mechanisms for creating production are shared equally, no one is poor, the weak are protected by the strong and there is no social or economic contradictions.

The ideal Nazi state is one where people born into an imaginary social construct category called race are gassed to death or used in medical experiments until there are none left, and then where the ruling class will lord it over all inferior races for all eternity.

The difference in the ideological goals seems pretty obvious to me.

 

[RedRalph]

Is there a corollary here of "the ends justify the means"?

when discussing ideological ideals, the means arent relevant at all, we are merely talking about the ends.

 

[aelf]

Nazism is an extension of social Darwinism. Capitalism is social Darwinism at work. Hmm...

 

[Leifmk]

Nazism is an extension of social Darwinism.

Not really; it was too much of an incoherent, confused mess to be described as concisely as that.

Communism and socialism, in all its varieties and for all its flaws, has been founded upon and has generated shelves upon shelves of books on economic and historical theories, works that remain influential even today, even as part of an academic toolkit used by people who do not advocate communism.

Nazism had... well, basically it had Mein Kampf. Which is hard as hell to read, not because it's dry and academic, but because it's a stream-of-consciousness rant by someone who was already not entirely well.

 

[aelf]

Not really; it was too much of an incoherent, confused mess to be described as concisely as that.

Communism and socialism, in all its varieties and for all its flaws, has been founded upon and has generated shelves upon shelves of books on economic and historical theories, works that remain influential even today, even as part of an academic toolkit used by people who do not advocate communism.

Nazism had... well, basically it had Mein Kampf. Which is hard as hell to read, not because it's dry and academic, but because it's a stream-of-consciousness rant by someone who was already not entirely well.

Yeah, but at least in principle it was supposed to be an extension of that.

 

[Princeps]

Nazism was a haphazard mixture of all sorts of radical political ideologies, but predominantly right-wing.

The nazis were not left-wing or socialist economically: in fact, they didn't really have an economic plan. All they cared about was the rearmament, it was absolutely essential, and they were willing to sacrifice almost everything else to arm their military, even the welfare of the population, even the housing markets (which might've otherwise lead the recovery from the great depression in the private sector) and even public infrastructure like railways. The disrepair of the railways, which Germans were once proud of, evoked international commentary. Almost all railway cargos ran late (so much for fascists making things run on time!).

Politically, the nazis were extremely authoritarian conservatives. They explicitly promised the corporate sector that they would crush labor unions and leave private companies fairly free to deal with their internal issues. THe nazis carried through a program of forced business cartelization, which the big business welcomed warmly. Through these cartels the government worked with the companies. The resulting bureocracy was of course annoying to the business people, but they received very lucrative contracts from the government, so they didn't whine that much. In fact, Hitler consistently received his most fanatical support from the business sector. So, Nazi Germany was no a socialist country at all, it was more like a regime of the bosses.

Also, the nazis were not Darwinian. You don't need Darwinism to think in racialist terms. The nazis had a lot influence from agrarian romanticists. Now, any agriculturalist roughly knows how to refine races of different animals to suit some needed purpose.

 

[Stapel]

Nazism was a haphazard mixture of all sorts of radical political ideologies, but predominantly right-wing.

The nazis were not left-wing or socialist economically: in fact, they didn't really have an economic plan. All they cared about was the rearmament, it was absolutely essential, and they were willing to sacrifice almost everything else to arm their military, even the welfare of the population, even the housing markets (which might've otherwise lead the recovery from the great depression in the private sector) and even public infrastructure like railways. The disrepair of the railways, which Germans were once proud of, evoked international commentary. Almost all railway cargos ran late (so much for fascists making things run on time!).

Politically, the nazis were extremely authoritarian conservatives. They explicitly promised the corporate sector that they would crush labor unions and leave private companies fairly free to deal with their internal issues. THe nazis carried through a program of forced business cartelization, which the big business welcomed warmly. Through these cartels the government worked with the companies. The resulting bureocracy was of course annoying to the business people, but they received very lucrative contracts from the government, so they didn't whine that much. In fact, Hitler consistently received his most fanatical support from the business sector. So, Nazi Germany was no a socialist country at all, it was more like a regime of the bosses.

Also, the nazis were not Darwinian. You don't need Darwinism to think in racialist terms. The nazis had a lot influence from agrarian romanticists. Now, any agriculturalist roughly knows how to refine races of different animals to suit some needed purpose.

Hmm, I've read a thing or two on German economy politics in the 1930s. to me they appeared rather left-wing. I find your statement "All they cared about was the rearmament" pretty ill-informed. There most certainly were massive ideas about every German owning a car (that was absolutely a far-off left wing revolutionary idea in 1935) and every German family being able to go on a summer holiday.


Anyway, in many senses, it can be considered a great succes of the left-wingers to label nazism as right-wing. That however, doesn't answer the question why nazisim is considered as the absolutel evil, whereas communsim and its equal or worse atrocities is regarded as a "good theory that doesn't work in practice".

The same difference between Germans and Russians. Only recently (thus after 60 years), Germans have started losing their collective shame. Russians hardly ever seem to feel ashamed of their incredibly rotten past. No sense of guilt at all........... As if forcing a dozen countries into vassality for 40 years is just a minor issue....

 

[Princeps]

I find your statement "All they cared about was the rearmament" pretty ill-informed. There most certainly were massive ideas about every German owning a car (that was absolutely a far-off left wing revolutionary idea in 1935) and every German family being able to go on a summer holiday.

It was propaganda. Cars were very rare in Germany for workers, and the so-called volkswagen and other "volks" products sold very badly, because of diminishing consumption and wages caused by, for example, the brutal nazi anti-labour policies. (not very left-wing)

Once the labour unions were crushed, the nazis nationalized all the assets of these unions and formed the "labour front" organization, a sort of universal German worker's union. The labour front was in reality a puppet organization of the nazi regime, and not really concerned about the interests of the labour.

The volkswagen program, which was supposed to make Germany a modern automobile society, was a total failure and probably never pursued with any actual intention to give any cars to the workers. IIRC, The volkswagen program was funded through the Labour Front organization, so therefore the workers bore the cost of this program. In reality, they never received any cars and the program was carried out to feed the military-industrial complex. It was a racket.

The same is true for the wonderful National Socialist job creation programs. These programs created very little jobs and mainly very easily established employment like road construction, swamp draining and other such public works. But the Nazi propaganda advertised these programs loudly.

The military build up was always the top priority.

Anyway, in many senses, it can be considered a great succes of the left-wingers to label nazism as right-wing.

Not really. It's obvious who the nazis were.

 

[Winner]

I'm just using the exact same arguments that anti-communists use against communism. Nice to see that flew right over your head.

No, you're not, you're simply being silly

Communist regimes engineered famines or caused them by their inefficient method of distributing wealth.

The dozens of millions who died in China as the result of Mao's Great Leap did not die because the land couldn't produce enough food to feed them, they died because the state took the food from them or prevented them from producing enough of it by other means (like forcing the farmers into inefficient collective farms - the main reason why the Soviet Union couldn't produce enough food for its own citizens, despite having enough arable land to feed like 10x as many people).

So now you see how amusing it is when anti-communists blame every single death that occurs due to famine in communist countries to how evil communism is?

Uh, when the same thing happens (death from starvation), it does not mean that the cause is the same -> wrong logic.

Plus, as the other poster here said, most of these deaths happen in countries which are everything except being capitalist. They are in most cases third world kleptocracies which certainly can't represent capitalism as a system. Again, how many people per year starve in the US, Germany or Japan?

 

[Winner]

The goal of Nacism - Aryan race above the europe is clear evil, the goal of communism - classless society, should be considered as good thing. And communists were not doing soap from their opponents.

Classless society should be considered as a good thing? Since when?

Yes, communists did not make soap of Jews, they just locked millions of people in forced labour concentration camps where they died of starvation, diseases, beating, shooting, torture, freezing etc. That's sooo different from the Nazi crimes!

 

[Winner]

Yes. The difference is that regardless of past mistakes (and crimes) made in attaining the goal, the ideal of communism is a classless state where all mechanisms for creating production are shared equally, no one is poor, the weak are protected by the strong and there is no social or economic contradictions.

The ideal of Communism is to eradicate whole classes of the society.

Nazis - creating a Jewless society
Commies - creating a classless society

Huge difference!

The idea of Communism is evil, since it plans to force people to live as the commie elites want, it's totally not different from any other totalitarian ideology.

 

[holy king]

Nazi -> Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei -> National Socialist German Workers’ Party



Nazism was pretty socialist. There was definitely a distrust of the free market. They banned unions and formed worker's councils IIRC...

go learn history. real history, not what they seemingly tell you in american highschools.

 

[holy king]

Nazis - creating a Jewless society
Commies - creating a classless society

Huge difference!

you are studying political science?

this is probably the most stupid historical-political analysis i've ever seen in my life....