Your Culture is Moldy. Kekistani Exclusive!

Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
They didn't "nationalize" anything that had previously been privately owned. They created military material construction projects under national ownership, where there had previously been no such industry due to the Treaty of Marseilles. The German economy had been nationalized under the Weimar Republic.

Hitler privatized the economy in order to pay for national military projects and industry. Here's a peer reviewed study about it that was authored by a German scholar, funded by Harvard and researched at a university in Spain.

http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf
Click to expand...
Versailles?
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
You have literally ignored the entire argument and focused on a misspelled word in a minor premise. You have NOTHING. You should stop trying to defend Hitler.

Just face it, Hitler privatized the german economy, which was previously nationalized. What he nationalized had not previously existed (military, due to treaty) and wasn't even economic infrastructure.
Click to expand...
Again, I've even given you the things to search. They started out with iron works and expanded into nearly every strategic industry, merging them into the Reichswerke Hermann Göring.

This corporation was directly controlled by the Reich Economics Minister...

And that to you isn't nationalization?

Defend Hitler? You're a retard posing as an intellectual.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Yes I already did, actually you're the one who has failed to respond to most of my arguments. You have also failed to cite anything useful.

The fact is, Hitler privatized the German economy. You should stop defending him.
Click to expand...
Except Iv repeatedly named the vehicle they used to nationalize over 500 private German companies in strategic industries which you won't even address let alone refute.

And then you fall back to "defending Hitler"...clear sign of a weak point and an even weaker mind.

Sad!!
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
Except Iv repeatedly named the vehicle they used to nationalize over 500 private German companies in strategic industries which you won't even address let alone refute.

And then you fall back to "defending Hitler"...clear sign of a weak point and an even weaker mind.

Sad!!
Click to expand...
You have cited nothing but "everyone knows" while insisting that the peer reviewed paper (researched in Spain, funded by Harvard and cited thousands of times by scholars) I cited was either unpublished or written by an undergrad. I mean if you're going to try so hard to defend Hitler, you should at least cite something.

The fact is, the German economy had been nationalized under the Weimar Republic and Hitler privatized it to pay for his national armament. The embellished claim you made about 500 private companies notwithstanding, there was no such expropriation from private hands to gov't hands of economic infrastructure and resources in order to maintain economic endeavors, it wasn't used as economic infrastructure so it was neither socialist or capitalist infrastructure because socialist and capitalist things are economic things.

Quite the opposite is true. What was previously nationalized was sold off by the nazi regime (privatized) in order to fund the national armament. Everything literally went from being nationalized under the previous gov't, to privatized under the nazi regime. Also, your endless and mindless drivel has taken this whole thing out of focus, since you are terrible at arguing your point. The fact is, the nazi regime was not socialist at all, but capitalist. They privatized the economy as I have clearly argued and cited my premises. The only thing that came to be owned by the nazi regime had not been previously privately owned because it did not exist. There were no such military industries because the Treaty of Versailles prevented Germany from building them.

In short, there was absolutely no nationalization of economic infrastructure in the nazi regime. There was however a massive privatization of economic infrastructure which had been previously nationalized by the Weimar Republic. That's another point you have utterly failed to address, the very well known fact that the entire economy had been nationalized under the previous gov't. That makes it kinda fucking hard to nationalize it again and say Hitler nationalized it, ya dingus. Add to that the fact that Hitler was hellbent on killing communists.

Getting the last word and adding an insult and declaring victory really won't change the facts and you are defending Hitler. You are insisting he was not lying when he called himself a socialist. You are insisting he did not privatize the German economy. You are doing so by repeating yourself with fallacies and insisting that solid sources are something they're not, while citing absolutely nothing yourself. In other words, you are in fact defending him, you're just doing it poorly.
 
Last edited:
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
You have cited nothing but "everyone knows" while insisting that the peer reviewed paper (researched in Spain, funded by Harvard and cited thousands of times by scholars) I cited was either unpublished or written by an undergrad. I mean if you're going to try so hard to defend Hitler, you should at least cite something.

The fact is, the German economy had been nationalized under the Weimar Republic and Hitler privatized it to pay for his national armament. The embellished claim you made about 500 private companies notwithstanding, there was no such expropriation from private hands to gov't hands of economic infrastructure and resources in order to maintain economic endeavors, it wasn't used as economic infrastructure so it was neither socialist or capitalist infrastructure because socialist and capitalist things are economic things.

Quite the opposite is true. What was previously nationalized was sold off by the nazi regime (privatized) in order to fund the national armament. Everything literally went from being nationalized under the previous gov't, to privatized under the nazi regime. Also, your endless and mindless drivel has taken this whole thing out of focus, since you are terrible at arguing your point. The fact is, the nazi regime was not socialist at all, but capitalist. They privatized the economy as I have clearly argued and cited my premises. The only thing that came to be owned by the nazi regime had not been previously privately owned because it did not exist. There were no such military industries because the Treaty of Versailles prevented Germany from building them.

In short, there was absolutely no nationalization of economic infrastructure in the nazi regime. There was however a massive privatization of economic infrastructure which had been previously nationalized by the Weimar Republic. That's another point you have utterly failed to address, the very well known fact that the entire economy had been nationalized under the previous gov't. That makes it kinda fucking hard to nationalize it again and say Hitler nationalized it, ya dingus. Add to that the fact that Hitler was hellbent on killing communists.

Getting the last word and adding an insult and declaring victory really won't change the facts and you are defending Hitler. You are insisting he was not lying when he called himself a socialist. You are insisting he did not privatize the German economy. You are doing so by repeating yourself with fallacies and insisting that solid sources are something they're not, while citing absolutely nothing yourself. In other words, you are in fact defending him, you're just doing it poorly.
Click to expand...
Lol, and he cites the same paper again...
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
didn't hitler funnel all the money from his amped-up war machine industry to his close buddies in order to wage a fascist campaign against not only the world, but also his own duped citizenry?

sounds way more like fascism to me than socialism. it would take intellectual laziness to a massive degree to fall on the sneekyninja side of the argument rather than on abandon's side.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
and didn't hitler mainly use slave labor from conquered territories and 'untermenschen' to run his war machine, rather than using his own nation's supply of workers?

nationalization would seem to imply using his own nation's workers, rather than his conquered foes. again, more like fascism and slavery and totalitarianism and authoritarianism than anything else.

sneeky, feel free to tell me where i am going wrong with any of this.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
and didn't hitler mainly use slave labor from conquered territories and 'untermenschen' to run his war machine, rather than using his own nation's supply of workers?

nationalization would seem to imply using his own nation's workers, rather than his conquered foes. again, more like fascism and slavery and totalitarianism and authoritarianism than anything else.

sneeky, feel free to tell me where i am going wrong with any of this.
Click to expand...
Nationalization doesn't necessarily fit directly in with any political sphere of thought, ie. Fascism and nationalization aren't mutually exclusive.

Nationalization is simply the state taking control of private business for whatever reason.

Hitler's Germany did this under Hermann Goering (later head of the Luftwaffe).

They started with iron (for steel) and expanded into petro-chemicals (including rubber and synthetic oil) and eventually into straight weapon production and nearly any other industry them deemed "essential to the Reich".
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
Nationalization doesn't necessarily fit directly in with any political sphere of thought, ie. Fascism and nationalization aren't mutually exclusive.

Nationalization is simply the state taking control of private business for whatever reason.

Hitler's Germany did this under Hermann Goering (later head of the Luftwaffe).

They started with iron (for steel) and expanded into petro-chemicals (including rubber and synthetic oil) and eventually into straight weapon production and nearly any other industry them deemed "essential to the Reich".
Click to expand...
Citations required*

Also, it is a well known fact that the regime sought oil on the private market. Besides, fascism is a form of capitalism, hence the privatization.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Citations required*

Also, it is a well known fact that the regime sought oil on the private market. Besides, fascism is a form of capitalism, hence the privatization.
Click to expand...
You're literally trying to disprove a point with an appeal to semantics rather than fact.

Citation?

Just Google "Third Reich Economy" and pick any of the hundreds of thousands of verifiably published studies, statistics and facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top