• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Latest tripe from Republicans for their idiot base. Socialists are Nazis

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
s0me0nesmind1 said:
It's a pretty well know fact that as people become older (Translation: More intelligent. Paying taxes. Etc.) that they turn more right as they age. That will happen with millennials just like any other generation.

Anyone with half a brain knows that government spending is basically tossing cash into a burning inferno.
Click to expand...

Did you already forget how we spent our way out of a recession in 2009-2010???
 
Amused said:
Crony capitalism.

"To help Hitler keep his promise to have every German capable of owning an affordable car (Volkswagen—the People’s Car) the DAF subsidized the construction of an automobile factory."
Click to expand...

It wasn't crony capitalism as the DAF was the Nazi party's labor organization. Subsidize means own and operate. The states labor party owned the factory. The Nazis owned the means of production. Hey, did you know DAF also owned and operated one of the largest financial institutions in Germany during Hitlers reign?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_German_Labor,_Inc.

Yes, the National Socialists owned the means of production in many industry. Like their socialist relatives in other parts of the world. It was not a private economy like you claim. Even what was left of the private economy was under the boot of the Nazis. What people conflate are the industrialists that joined the Nazi party and made a lot of money and think it was crony capitalism. I view that differently. They joined the party or they lost their wealth. The state would had confiscated it if they didn't play ball. Or some of them legitimately were Nazi a-holes. Either way they may had owned industry. But they lacked any real control over it.

I suspect if Hitler had achieved his war goals. These industrialists would had gone the way of everybody else. Into a camp or working for the state. They were a necessary evil in his eyes until the goals of the state could be achieved. Luckily we never found out if my opinion would hold true.
 
Genx87 said:
It wasn't crony capitalism as the DAF was the Nazi party's labor organization. Subsidize means own and operate. The states labor party owned the factory. The Nazis owned the means of production. Hey, did you know DAF also owned and operated one of the largest financial institutions in Germany during Hitlers reign?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_German_Labor,_Inc.

Yes, the National Socialists owned the means of production in many industry. Like their socialist relatives in other parts of the world. It was not a private economy like you claim. Even what was left of the private economy was under the boot of the Nazis. What people conflate are the industrialists that joined the Nazi party and made a lot of money and think it was crony capitalism. I view that differently. They joined the party or they lost their wealth. The state would had confiscated it if they didn't play ball. Or some of them legitimately were Nazi a-holes. Either way they may had owned industry. But they lacked any real control over it.

I suspect if Hitler had achieved his war goals. These industrialists would had gone the way of everybody else. Into a camp or working for the state. They were a necessary evil in his eyes until the goals of the state could be achieved. Luckily we never found out if my opinion would hold true.
Click to expand...

Two businesses. So Nazi Germany was just two businesses? That was it? A car maker and a bank?

Wow.

Dude, just because they created a bank (not took one over) and a car company (not took one over) to fulfill a campaign promise does not mean they were nationalizing all means of production. Quite the opposite, actually.

They nationalized no means of production. They kept it capitalist and slid it into the hands of party loyalists. Fascism. That's what it is.

This is called cherry picking. The United States has the Federal Reserve banks. Does that make us socialist?
 
UNCjigga said:
I thought Newt Gingrich got credit for the surplus in conservative circles? Or do you think the surplus didn’t happen??
Click to expand...
It didn't happen. The US got very close to breaking even but didn't quite reach that point. The argument stems from whether one should count SS inflows and outflows in the determination. The Clinton deficits were a drastic improvement over the Reagan-Bush deficits but still a deficit.
 
IronWing said:
It didn't happen. The US got very close to breaking even but didn't quite reach that point. The argument stems from whether one should count SS inflows and outflows in the determination. The Clinton deficits were a drastic improvement over the Reagan-Bush deficits but still a deficit.
Click to expand...

Clinton's deficits weren't caused by tax giveaways to the Rich & blown out Military spending. Remember when GHWB raised taxes & the faithful turned on him like rabid dogs?
 
Amused said:
Two businesses. So Nazi Germany was just two businesses? That was it? A car maker and a bank?

Wow.

Dude, just because they created a bank (not took one over) and a car company (not took one over) to fulfill a campaign promise does not mean they were nationalizing all means of production. Quite the opposite, actually.

They nationalized no means of production. They kept it capitalist and slid it into the hands of party loyalists. Fascism. That's what it is.

This is called cherry picking. The United States has the Federal Reserve banks. Does that make us socialist?
Click to expand...


/facepalm
 
Genx87 said:
/facepalm
Click to expand...

Do that all you want. They did not nationalize the means of production. They created a car company and a bank.

The rest of the means of production, including all food production AND war production were never nationalized.

This is the weak "nazis were socialist" argument. It's a lot like anti-vaxxer's arguments. You cherry pick a couple of things and say "SEE! SOCIALIST!" when in reality, the Nazi's were stauncly capitalistic and anti-communist.
 
IronWing said:
It didn't happen. The US got very close to breaking even but didn't quite reach that point. The argument stems from whether one should count SS inflows and outflows in the determination. The Clinton deficits were a drastic improvement over the Reagan-Bush deficits but still a deficit.
Click to expand...

Huh. I could’ve sworn it was real—and I’m not the only one.
https://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/

“Clinton’s large budget surpluses also owe much to the Social Security tax on payrolls. Social Security taxes now bring in more than the cost of current benefits, and the "Social Security surplus" makes the total deficit or surplus figures look better than they would if Social Security wasn’t counted. But even if we remove Social Security from the equation, there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000. So any way you count it, the federal budget was balanced and the deficit was erased, if only for a while.”
 
UNCjigga said:
Huh. I could’ve sworn it was real—and I’m not the only one.
https://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/

“Clinton’s large budget surpluses also owe much to the Social Security tax on payrolls. Social Security taxes now bring in more than the cost of current benefits, and the "Social Security surplus" makes the total deficit or surplus figures look better than they would if Social Security wasn’t counted. But even if we remove Social Security from the equation, there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000. So any way you count it, the federal budget was balanced and the deficit was erased, if only for a while.”
Click to expand...
I stand corrected.
 
Amused said:
Wow, even after he was owned, you still ran with this.

Really? Fascism has nothing to do with socialism. It is 100% corrupt crony capitalism under authoritarian rule with nationalism as the rallying cry.

That is 100% what our current right-wing calls for here in the US... along with every alt-right and white nationalist group.
Click to expand...


And so the right wing shtick of "what you call us we'll call you the same right back" gets slammed back in their faces once again. Never worked before but they keep on trying it. Must work well on right wing websites though.
 
Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum are over in Russia right now. Republicans have been making regular trips to Russia for years, as have conservative organizations like the NRA. Republicans welcomed Russian interference and assistance in our 2016 Presidential election and are signaling that they want it again in 2020, and so on and so on. Remember this truth: If Republicans accuse Democrats of doing or being something, that's what they themselves are doing. They accuse their enemy of doing what they are actually doing to sow confusion and deflect. Now this doesn't work well on smart people, but for some reason their base isn't that smart.

Lemmings are a fairly good description of the Republican base... scared, easily panicked and distracted lemmings.
 
whm1974 said:
As someone who read the history of Nazi Germany, the answer is yes of course
Click to expand...

The Nazis were socialists in the same way the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is democratic. Nazism also wasn’t a workers’ party in case you were wondering. After all, they banned unions and strikes. Not super worker friendly!

The Nazis were not socialists in any way that would be understood by modern people as socialism. In fact, the party explicitly rejected socialism in the way it is understood today and Hitler murdered the people in the Nazi party who pushed for it. (Not to mention he murdered and imprisoned the actual socialists of the time) Hitler’s idea of what ‘socialism’ was is what we think of today as fascism.
 
fskimospy said:
The Nazis were socialists in the same way the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is democratic. Nazism also wasn’t a workers’ party in case you were wondering. After all, they banned unions and strikes. Not super worker friendly!

The Nazis were not socialists in any way that would be understood by modern people as socialism. In fact, the party explicitly rejected socialism in the way it is understood today and Hitler murdered the people in the Nazi party who pushed for it. (Not to mention he murdered and imprisoned the actual socialists of the time) Hitler’s idea of what ‘socialism’ was is what we think of today as fascism.
Click to expand...
Well there is more then one type of Socialism. And Nazis did opposed Free Market Capitalism and had a great deal of control over Germany's Economy.
 
whm1974 said:
Well there is more then one type of Socialism. And Nazis did opposed Free Market Capitalism and had a great deal of control over Germany's Economy.
Click to expand...

because they were fascists, not socialists. Both oppose free market capitalism. This is an important nuance that seems to fail those that stop reading beyond middle school.

If you want to compare the Nazis to anyone else, it's Mussolini that you need to look to. Were the actual fascists, socialists?

The anwser is no, of course they weren't. Unless you agree with that illiterate quisling, slow.
 
SlowSpyder said:
Nazis were socialists. Not all flavors of socialists are Nazis.
Click to expand...

Nazis were socialists in the same way the DPRK is democratic - not at all. Nazism was an ultra-right ideology and this is completely uncontroversial everywhere except in the extreme right itself, which understandably wants to distance itself from the whole 'Holocaust' thing.

https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/09/05/were-nazis-socialists/

However, the assumption that because the word “socialist” appeared in the party’s name and socialist words and ideas popped up in the writings and speeches of top Nazis then the Nazis must have been actual socialists is naive and ahistorical. What the evidence shows, on the contrary, is that Nazi Party leaders paid mere lip service to socialist ideals on the way to achieving their one true goal: raw, totalitarian power.
Click to expand...

Let me guess though, despite recently citing Snopes as a source you're now going to just declare them wrong or biased or whatever.

Being an actual socialist in Nazi Germany was a great way to get yourself imprisoned or killed.
 
whm1974 said:
Well there is more then one type of Socialism. And Nazis did opposed Free Market Capitalism and had a great deal of control over Germany's Economy.
Click to expand...

The Nazis were/are not a socialist party. Full stop. When it was conveniant for them they 'borrowed' some small bits of socialism when it was helpful for them to gain power and that's it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top