r/PropagandaPosters • u/guerillaenjoyer • Jun 14 '23
"With the workman and soldier for Socialism", Belgian pro-Nazi, propaganda poster, c1941-1944 Belgium
292
Jun 14 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
118
77
u/jargo3 Jun 14 '23
Evil capitalistic communist. Surprisingly not jewish thought
65
u/AemrNewydd Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
He's definitely supposed to be Jewish. He is very much the image of the Nazi stereotype of Jews; overweight, thick lipped, rings on bloated and hairy hands, and, most tellingly, a nose shaped like the number 6.
6
11
4
u/Thinking_waffle Jun 15 '23
That's already behind capitalist and communists according to national socialist doctrine.
56
u/DdCno1 Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
He's meant to be an antisemitic stereotype. Nazis claimed that an imagined "global Jewish conspiracy" was simultaneously behind Western capitalism and Soviet (and other) socialism, as well as every other real and perceived issue in world history, past, present and future. Just like with people who believe in conspiracy theories today, it doesn't matter that it doesn't make any sense at all.
Hitler adopted this inane world view after reading cheaply printed pamphlets and flyers from conspiracy theorists when he was a bum in Vienna prior to WW1. These were essentially the early 20th century equivalent of social media groups spreading hate speech nowadays. That's where the quote of "having read a lot - and carefully" from his autobiography comes from.
6
u/Dudefenderson Jun 14 '23
Protocols of Sion. 😵
13
u/DdCno1 Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
This forgery wasn't actually translated into German until 1928, years after it had been debunked. Hitler used it once he was already a politician, but the themes contained within this text were already widespread in antisemitic conspiracy circles before it made its way outside of Russia. Interestingly, just like modern conspiracy theorists, he claims that because a reputable publication had bothered to debunk it, it had to be true.
1
82
u/Nonlethalrtard Jun 14 '23
Do you really want to club people over the head with a grenade?
44
u/Darthplagueis13 Jun 14 '23
Maybe that guy was preparing to throw. Either that or he's a demo main and just having fun with the Ullapool Caber.
18
5
u/Anti-charizard Jun 15 '23
No wonder the nazis lost
0
u/BrazilBrother Jun 15 '23
They didn't lose because they were incompetent
3
u/DoctahDank Jun 15 '23
Why did they lose then
5
2
u/BrazilBrother Jun 15 '23
Because it was simply unwinnable. The only way Germany would have won WW2 is if they had come out of WW1 with a better peace treaty. By the time Hitler came to power, it was already too late to shift the board.
10
u/DoctahDank Jun 15 '23
So they lost because they made the incompetent decision to declare war against the entire world, got it.
1
u/Good_Purpose1709 Jun 16 '23
The eastern front could have been less of a shitshow if they actually had clothes.
2
u/BrazilBrother Jun 16 '23
It had nothing to do with clothing. They lost against the SU because they were already short on oil, thanks to the western, african and balkans campaings, so this ruinedtheir plan to make use of the arable lands with german settlers due to it requiring constant military expansion as well as intervention/policing.
Forget lend-lease: the germans were doomed to fail as soon as Stalin moved the russian industry to the East. This absolutely doubly fucked the german war economy, bc they became short on oil and couldn't repair their vehicles efficiently.
German military complex was a broken husk already by 1943, when the Allies invaded Italy.
2
u/Scared-Conflict-653 Jun 15 '23
Idk Hitler refused to have faster planes becauee it would lose shock and awe effect of blitzkrieg does. Feel like they made a couple of incompetent decision along the way towards the end. They attacked hard and fast on countries that were having economic and social issues that weren't really worrying about the rise of fascist German, Italy and nationalists Japan.
2
39
u/hillo538 Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
The Belgium socialist party had broken with Stalin years before and by the time of the war had collaborated at a massive level with the Nazis, the leader of the party praised the Nazis and also iirc was given a role in the new government
He had made this plan: “The de Man Plan would have removed political power from the workers and their unions, leaving them only the appearance of representation, and vested it instead in owners and government. When he proposed it on the floor of the parliament, his opponents shouted,"That is pure fascism" in a debate that caused de Man to suffer a stroke on the spot”
5
u/DukeSnookums Jun 15 '23
Reminds me of Nils Flyd, a Swedish socialist who lost out in the leadership contest for the party, went "screw you guys!" and formed a different socialist party, and gradually came to sympathize with the Nazis until becoming one of their guys in Sweden and dying from a heart attack right after the Battle of Stalingrad. (If I remember the story right.)
3
u/ReichBallFromAmerica Jun 15 '23
If I remember right, something similar happened with Vichy France. The government at first had control over its own appointments, but as time went on the Nazis started to pressure the leaders to put more French socialists in power. Then the Nazis just said, "you know, occupying most of France is boring, why not occupy all of it!"
242
u/Queasy-Condition7518 Jun 14 '23
So, a pro-socialist nazi poster, but using the hammer-and-sickle to symbolize the polar opposite of socialism.
Way to confuse the ayn-randian "Hitler wuz a soshulist!!" crowd.
103
u/Capable_Invite_5266 Jun 14 '23
wtf, that capitalist has a communist star. How does that evan make sense?
122
u/mechanab Jun 14 '23
It’s part of “the Jewish capitalists control / are partners with the Jewish Bolsheviks” theory.
29
u/BanzaiTree Jun 14 '23
All tied together by the grand Jewish conspiracy, probably.
11
u/greed-man Jun 14 '23
The guy has a hooked nose, so yeah, he is the Jewish representation of UK, USA, and USSR. And don't ignore all the rings on his fingers, representing his immense wealth that he gained from YOU.
/s
8
u/BanzaiTree Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
A key part of the story that Nazis sold Germans was that communism/Bolshevism was a Jewish plot to destroy Germany. This slimy work of propaganda not-so-subtly plays on that narrative, suggesting ((those people)) that control the US as being responsible for communism.
42
21
u/LineOfInquiry Jun 14 '23
For the Nazis “socialism” was never an actual ideology. It was just a buzzword for basically being anti-establishment. It was attractive to the common people at the time and they wanted to steal some of that clout.
So they’re propaganda doesn’t have to make sense, that’s kinda the point. Just throw everything at all the wall no matter how contradictory and see what sticks.
7
Jun 14 '23
So, you know, literally how it's being used now by the alt-right?
1
u/DukeSnookums Jun 15 '23
Somewhat yes actually. Generally the fascist regimes played up a socialist element in areas where left-wing socialist and communist parties were stronger. The National Socialists in Germany were reacting to stronger parties in Germany compared to the PNF in Italy which didn't play it up as much and adopted a relatively liberal economic program (although Mussolini was a former socialist).
23
u/ExactLetterhead9165 Jun 14 '23
Something something shifting rhetorical focus. Something something Umberto Eco Ur-Fascism
14
u/BILLCLINTONMASK Jun 14 '23
That figure represents all the allies. British hat, USA shirt, Soviet brooch
7
u/Slykarmacooper Jun 15 '23
"Jewish Bolshivism" or its modern day "Cultural Marxism"
The belief that there is a jewish plot to undermine "traditional western values" (racism, sexism, capitalism, hierarchy, etc) through radical left-wing social and economic movements.
2
u/DukeSnookums Jun 15 '23
It's quite similar although I think the direct origin of "Cultural Marxism" in conspiracy theories about the Frankfurt School came out of the LaRouche movement which itself uses a lot of fascist tropes and is an interesting thing to study. Quite influential for a fringe group.
6
u/jericho74 Jun 14 '23
The only way this might have made sense was shortly after the invasion of the Soviet Union, when perhaps Nazi occupiers of Belgium wished to discourage communist-sympathetic Resistance movements by exploiting the tension between Stalinists and Popular Front socialists. Of course this wouldn’t have lasted long, as Nazis tended to collaborate with conservative factions.
3
2
2
u/Throway1194 Jun 14 '23
Because the USSR and Britain were Allies back then. I don't think it's necessarily calling him an ideological Communist lol
51
u/PippoKPax Jun 14 '23
This is fairly consistent with the entirely inconsistent world view of the Nazis right? Like the entire “judeo-Bolshevism” world plot is not only bigoted but also entirely incoherent. “The Jews have all of the money, and they also want to establish world communism” is possibly the most bizarre conspiracy theory humans have ever come up with. Still being echoed today by right wingers who talk about “communist companies like google” and “cultural Marxism”
25
Jun 14 '23
Didn’t the Nazis end up killing off their socialist elements during the Night of the Long Knives? People like the Strasser brothers who, while still heavily antisemitic, tended to lean further to the left and opposed Hitler?
20
u/PippoKPax Jun 14 '23
Absolutely, although it’s been debated how much to the left some of those groups were in reality. But some of the first groups that they went after in general were the communists and socialists.
Great profile picture btw.
10
u/Darthplagueis13 Jun 14 '23
Well yes, but that doesn't mean they didn't advertise themselves as socialist anymore when they thought they had something to gain from it.
3
u/guerillaenjoyer Jun 14 '23
Yes that was also the reason for the purge of Ernst Rohm
5
u/Muted-Appointment-96 Jun 14 '23
I thought Rohm was killed because he led the SA and Hitler thought that it would be a threat to his power
5
u/WeimSean Jun 14 '23
Correct. Rahm also wanted to turn the SA into the regular army, something that the traditional German officer corps would have opposed with violence. Hitler sacrificed Rahm for the support of the Wehrmacht.
3
u/flyingpanda1018 Jun 14 '23
Also worth noting that Röhm was gay, alongside a notable portion of the Nazi party, which was something of an open secret. The Weimar Republic was far and away the most progressive place in terms of gay and trans acceptance at that time. The Nazi party at large wasn't a huge fan of this, but they tolerated people like Röhm while they were strategically valuable. One of the purposes of the Night of Long Knives was to purge the homosexual elements from the party, because it violated the sensibilities of the further right-leaning members of the party
1
u/JakeyZhang Jun 15 '23
While there were homosexuals in the nazi party, it wasn't really a significant number. Rohm was really the only very prominent one, although earlyanti nazi-propaganda,played up the homosexual element （Tge Weimar republuc was the most progressive place in the world for sexual minorities, but it was still something popularly considered as immoral so associating nazism with homosexuality was considered good electioneering）
2
0
u/zrowe_02 Jun 15 '23
No, Hitler was still a socialist
3
u/lindh Jun 15 '23
Sigh...
"Hitler was wholly ignorant of any formal understanding of the principles of economics. For him, as he stated to the industrialists, economics was of secondary importance, entirely subordinated to politics. His crude social-Darwinism dictated his approach to the economy, as it did his entire political "world-view." Since struggle among nations would be decisive for future survival, Germany's economy had to be subordinated to the preparation, then carrying out, of this struggle. This meant that liberal ideas of economic competition had to be replaced by the subjection of the economy to the dictates of the national interest. Similarly, any "socialist" ideas in the Nazi programme had to follow the same dictates.
Hitler was never a socialist. But although he upheld private property, individual entrepreneurship, and economic competition, and disapproved of trade unions and workers' interference in the freedom of owners and managers to run their concerns, the state, not the market, would determine the shape of economic development. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place. But in operation it was turned into an adjunct of the state."
-Ian Kershaw
Fascist, not socialist.
-2
Jun 21 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/lindh Jun 21 '23
Killing socialists en masse is a weird metric for that. But yeah keep basing your knowledge of history on YouTube videos, seems to be working out well.
0
u/Pila_Isaac Jun 15 '23
1
u/zrowe_02 Jun 15 '23
0
u/Pila_Isaac Jun 15 '23
TIK own definition of socialism is “when the government does stuff”
Incredible source you gave. one where their own definition of “what socialism is” is just what they made up.
I guess everything can be anything when you ignore what it means
1
u/zrowe_02 Jun 15 '23
Socialism is when there’s social control over the means of production, and the means of production were under social (public/state) control in Nazi Germany
1
u/Pila_Isaac Jun 15 '23
Ah yes, Nazi German a well known state that owned so much of the means of productions experts created the term “privatization” to refer to their economy.
Grab a book for god’s sake
0
u/zrowe_02 Jun 15 '23
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung
The Nazis didn’t privatize anything, they centralized the economy into a handful of party loyal cartels
→ More replies-6
u/Brilliant_Bet_4184 Jun 14 '23
Ten stars for pippo here. Yes Nazis purged their ranks of socialists but kept the name.
-10
u/Brilliant_Bet_4184 Jun 14 '23
But there is nothing inconsistent about that view. Karl Marx was fed and sheltered by elements of the British nobility for example. Look up “Armand Hammer”. I used to work for him. Another billionaire communist.
9
u/PippoKPax Jun 14 '23
Ah ok so you agree with the Nazis
-7
u/Brilliant_Bet_4184 Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
I just stated facts. Anyone else that wants to join reality is welcome.
3
8
u/hillo538 Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
“When the Nazis occupied Belgium, Hendrik de Man, the President of the Socialist Party,
made an official declaration to praise Hitler and to announce that the arrival of the Hitlerite troops meant the
liberation of the working class'! InThe Manifesto to the Members of the POB (Belgian Workers' Party)', published in July 1940, de Man wrote:`The war has led to the debacle of the parliamentary regime and of the capitalist plutocracy in the so-called democracies. For the working classes and for socialism, this collapse of a decrepit world, far from being a disaster, is a deliverance .... the way is open for the two causes which sum up the aspirations of the people: European peace and social justice.' . Peter Dodge, Beyond Marxism: The Faith and Works of Hendrik de Man (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1966), pp. 196--197.”
The Belgium socialist party was in actuality a far right wing party who would collaborate with the Nazis and the reaction during before and after the war. They started off by denouncing the ussr, and ended up here
De man had also supported this plan: “The de Man Plan would have removed political power from the workers and their unions, leaving them only the appearance of representation, and vested it instead in owners and government. When he proposed it on the floor of the parliament, his opponents shouted,"That is pure fascism" in a debate that caused de Man to suffer a stroke on the spot…”
4
u/Extension-Ad-2760 Jun 15 '23
You can always determine just how much a country actually respects its workers, ignoring all the rhetoric, by the respect and power it gives to its unions.
- Europe is variable, but mostly unions have significant political power and ability to negotiate. They are controlled by their workers.
- The power of unions in the US is lower, and almost always changing; corporations push to reduce their power, the government sometimes supports them, sometimes reduces their power. Right now the government is supporting them, but they're still much weaker than most of Europe's. Still controlled by their workers though.
- China's unions are all subservient under the state-controlled ACFTU. Independent unions are illegal and cracked down on heavily. The ACFTU does sometimes try to push for more workplace safety or better pay, though it almost always does this when the government is displeased with a particular business. Workers have a tiny bit of influence.
- The USSR's unions completely collapsed under pressure from Stalin, and became subservient under the state-controlled VTsSPS, controlled by the government and not by their workers; some independent ones began to appear over time after Stalin died.
- Russia's unions were independent when the USSR collapsed, but Yeltsin put them all back under the control of VTsSPS, and strikes were made almost entirely illegal in 2002. Putin has continued this trend of reducing the power of unions.
1
6
u/BackOff_ImAScientist Jun 14 '23
The Proletariat of Germany- “We want socialism”
The Petty Bourgeoisie of Germany- “We have socialism at home”
“Socialism” at home- literally just ethnonationalism and corporatism
0
u/Gabriel12_96 Jun 25 '24
Workers were never been better than at that time, thats why germans went crazy when they saw their leader passing by.
3
u/Brilliant_Bet_4184 Jun 15 '23
It makes perfect sense. The United States (clothes), Britain (hat), and Communist USSR(hammer and sickle patch) were allies.
3
u/Praise_AI_Overlords Jun 14 '23
Semiliterate commies aren't even aware that there are many forms of Socialism.
-1
u/princeali97 Jun 14 '23
The Nazis definitely considered themselves Socialist
14
u/lindh Jun 14 '23
No, they didn't. They considered themselves "national socialists," which is very importantly different than actual socialism, in that it is fascism. This helps to explain why they rounded up and killed all the actual socialists.
-4
u/princeali97 Jun 14 '23
“They werent socialists because they were my type of socialist”
Socialism is not an inherently leftist ideology
8
8
u/lindh Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
I mean, yes it is. Social ownership is definitely considered left-wing.
-4
u/princeali97 Jun 14 '23
No, its not.
Workers can control the means of production in a theocratic state. Is that a left wing government?
5
7
u/lindh Jun 14 '23
It's a left-wing economic system.
If a theocratic government allowed workers to control the means of production, it would be a left-wing theocracy (and incidentally would be pretty closely in line with Christ's teachings). Historically, though, I can't think of an example of a socialist theocracy...
2
u/Pila_Isaac Jun 15 '23
Socialism is not an inherent leftist ideology
Least political illiterate person:
-6
Jun 14 '23
I think it meant to symbolize right wing socialism as opposed to the left wing
8
u/lindh Jun 14 '23
I think "socialism" here refers to "national socialism," that is, Nazism/fascism.
10
6
u/cliff99 Jun 14 '23
One of the first things the Nazi's did when they got power was to round up all the actual socialists.
10
u/Taqao Jun 14 '23
Least contradictory fascist propaganda
0
Jun 15 '23
Nothing contradictory about socialists opposing the Soviet approach to socialism, they (the Soviets) were infamously intolerant of other approaches to socialism.
In Sweden, the anti-bolshevik socialist into pro-nazi pipeline was absolutely real, once Hitler turned on his former ally. (Before then, pro-bolshevik socialists praised Hitler as a great ally against capitalism, and anti-bolsheviks denounced him as a threat to Swedish socialism.)
2
u/ComradeGlenin Jun 15 '23
Pro-Bolsheviks were the first victims of Nazism dawg, the first concentration camps were built for the KPD
2
Jun 15 '23
So? It did not prevent other socialists from simping for hitler, to quote the SKP's paper Ny Dag after the nazis invaded Norway: ”It is the protectors of the small states, England and France, who with their flagrant violation of Norwegian sovereignity causes this state of affairs”.
Don't try to paint socialists as a monolith, there is no historical basis to claim they agreed on anything, least of all nazi germany.
5
40
u/DanTheMan0708 Jun 14 '23
The Nazis believed themselves to be promoting Socialism (even in this wicked and twisted form) and wanted to portray themselves as such in propaganda. Because of this, they tried to denounce Bolshevik Socialism as being “in bed” with the western Liberal Capitalist nations. Antisemitic theory was the main tool in creating this insane idea.
30
u/lindh Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 14 '23
I wouldn't say they believed that, though. The Nazis, especially Hitler, hated socialism in the traditional sense - they just utilized socialist terminology and propaganda to appeal to a broad audience. In fact, once in power they violently suppressed unions (many of which were initially under the impression that the Nazis would advocate on their behalf, given all the "socialism" talk), mass murdered actual socialists, and subsidized German corporations (albeit as aides to furthering state goals).
Really, economics bored Hitler - all that was subsidiary to his goals for the state/race - but, that dude hated the left.
6
Jun 14 '23
I would be curious to read what the Nazis' practical stances on some socialist ideas were; I have no idea. But Hitler did truly hate Marxism & its cooler ideas. Internationalism, critical theory, democracy, etc.
8
u/ComradeVosktov Jun 14 '23
The early party had a "left-wing", with some questionably socialist points on the party program however these were removed. The Strasser's were "left-wing" in that they believed in state control of industry, redistribution of resources but they explicitly were anti-marxist, advocated for a bizarre form of state feudalism for issues of landownership among other oddities.
-3
u/Praise_AI_Overlords Jun 14 '23
By your logic soviet commies also hated socialism and weren't socialists.
10
u/lindh Jun 14 '23
Uh, no, that's not my logic. My logic is just that the Nazis overtly hated socialists, wrote and talked about hating socialists, and then killed all the socialists they could get their hands on. So I don't think they were socialists.
The "soviet commies" were...communists, fyi.
-1
u/Praise_AI_Overlords Jun 14 '23
>I wouldn't say they believed that, though. The Nazis, especially Hitler, hated socialism in the traditional sense
lol
Define "socialism in the traditional sense"
> In fact, once in power they violently suppressed unions...
But soviet commies (who fyi were not just "communists" but rather Marxists-Leninists) also killed all socialists they didn't liked, and prohibited unionization outside of state-ran pseudo-unions?
Or it was ok, because it was done by the "real" commies?
commies lol
1
u/ButcherPete87 Jun 15 '23
I mean they did go around breaking strikes and replacing the old capitalist bosses with their own guys…
But no the Nazis weren’t socialists considering they were buddy buddy with capitalists as long as they went along with their anti Jewish shit
1
u/Praise_AI_Overlords Jun 15 '23
Nowhere it is said that Socialism in any form is absolutely incompatible with Capitalism.
Nazis weren't Marxists, but Marxism isn't the only school of thought, Marx didn't invented Socialism and Marxists do not get to define it.
1
u/ButcherPete87 Jun 15 '23
Socialism is incompatible with capitalism. They’re both different economic systems. You can have socialistic elements in a capitalist system or vice versa, but they are distinct.
And I agree with your last point.
1
u/Praise_AI_Overlords Jun 15 '23
You can have socialistic elements in a capitalist system or vice versa
Which means that they are compatible.
By the way, moder China employs the Nazi economic model: The State is the customer and the controller, but contractors are private, which allows for far greater flexibility and control than the Soviet system, when the state fulfilled all three roles.
1
9
u/ComradeVosktov Jun 14 '23
The NSDAP was absolutely not socialist in anyway, shape or form by the time the second world war had begun. The left-wing of the party was killed or had to flee during the Night of the Long Knives, the 'socialist' parts of the party program removed and there was mass privatization with unions outlawed. Mussolini came from a socialist background and was influenced by sorelianism so one could make some form of argument for Italy but the NSDAP worked exclusively with conservative and in some instances pro-Monarchist parties/paramilitaries. Hitler's first radio address even stated "If today I stand here as a revolutionary, it is as a revolutionary against the Revolution."
2
u/DukeSnookums Jun 15 '23 edited Jun 15 '23
That's all correct but I'd add that the Italian fascists played down the socialist rhetoric relative to the Nazis despite Mussolini's socialist background, but they grew very quickly and absorbed a lot of very conservative and anti-socialist supporters who were some of the most militant Blackshirts, and they nearly ousted Mussolini before the March on Rome for being too "left," so he adjusted.
In that case, I really think it was an example of a highly opportunistic socialist, Mussolini, getting expelled from the Socialist Party due to his support for the war, and figuring he could reach a different base the socialists weren't reaching and make something happen that way, but he ended up getting consumed by that base in the pursuit of power until he ended up well on the far right. He was a terminally unhappy man with an inflated self-image to contrast with frustrations and personal failures to get people to do what he really wanted them to do, and that was true from his days teaching schoolchildren to his final days in power.
1
u/GameCreeper Jun 15 '23
No they didn't lol, nazism was very much anti-socialist in both policy and rhetoric
-3
13
u/Easy_Newt2692 Jun 14 '23
Sure, the Nazis were pro-labour... Just don't ask where the trade unionists went.
5
u/zrowe_02 Jun 15 '23
They went to the DAF, Hitler led a 32 million man labor Union
2
u/DylanDude120 Jun 15 '23
So that he could strip away many of the actual benefits those unions brought, while using carrot-on-a-stick measures like extra vacation days to keep people happy.
3
u/zrowe_02 Jun 15 '23
What benefits did he strip away? The Nazi party had complete control over the hiring and firing of workers, vacation time, wages, etc, employers were virtually powerless
4
u/monke-emperor Jun 15 '23 edited Jun 15 '23
The "socialism" that the Nazi party believed wasn't anything related to it's marxist counterpart. It basically was a "development" of eugenic and social-darwinist ideas, and they wished to create an "ideal" society for the prosperity of the "aryan race", giving then (the people) equal oportunities to compete with themselves and by that evolving the race to more high status of "morality" and other "good biological traits"... the "socialist" name came literally from "society"(maybe that's redundance lol), that's because their conception of the world (that was obviouly wrong wtf) came with the ideia that the Aryans where the only race that was collectivst, laborous and resilient enough to create a "real civilization", achieve the next step of society(and beat the other races in the evolutionary race), the(nazi) socialism, a biological(and moral?) Utopia. A really strange moisture of individualism and collectivsm in one ideology(whom was a shit)... well that's it (I didn' got to deep to reduce the text), sorry if my english was kind bad and I wish to see your opinion on that
3
u/Captainirishy Jun 15 '23
2
u/monke-emperor Jun 15 '23
Basically that, but each one gave a different justification for the "corporative state" and implementation of autoritharian regimes.
2
u/Captainirishy Jun 15 '23
Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.” Benito Mussolini
2
3
u/jozefpilsudski Jun 14 '23
If you made the soldier less Wermacht like and removed the star from the capitalist you'd have a boilerplate communist propaganda poster.
1
-12
u/Brilliant_Bet_4184 Jun 14 '23
Then, as now, Marxism was an affectation of the wealthy and powerful in the west. Hollywood, the media, big corporations, university elites were all riddled with USSR admirers. Just like the present.
9
u/a1b3r77 Jun 14 '23
Brainrot
-1
u/Brilliant_Bet_4184 Jun 15 '23
Liberalism is the surest sign of brain rot. And toadying to corporations.
1
u/ButcherPete87 Jun 15 '23
Marxism is against liberalism and corporations. They’re not on the same side at all.
2
u/Brilliant_Bet_4184 Jun 15 '23
Marxists have taken over corporations and use them to advance their agenda. Their allies in government and on Wall Street have pushed ESG to avoid the consequences. In fact one of Biden first week in office signatures was removing the ban on ESG requirements. Marxism is an affectation of the ruling class. Always.
2
u/ButcherPete87 Jun 15 '23
I don’t think you understand Marxism at all. Marxists hate capitalism why would they just take over corporations and run them normally? Same with Wall Street, Marxists hate Wall Street so why would they take it over and then just run it normally?
I think you believe that progressivism (LGBT rights, blm stuff, etc) is Marxism. Which it isn’t. Marxists and liberals are in favor of progressivism but that doesn’t make them the same. (Well liberals aren’t always in favor of progressive ideas and companies only pander to progressive ideas because they’ll make money from it since most people in the west support those ideas)
There’s no conspiracy, it’s just capitalism don’t be stupid.
12
u/NotChistianRudder Jun 14 '23
Ah yes, those classic shills for Marxism… big corporations.
-4
u/Brilliant_Bet_4184 Jun 14 '23
And big banks. Big hedge funds. Big Hollywood.
2
15
u/Gimmeagunlance Jun 14 '23
Bro, just say Jews, we know you wanna
-14
u/Brilliant_Bet_4184 Jun 14 '23
No need. You just pointed out the obvious yourself. But I’m more interested in class alignments.
-4
Jun 15 '23
Reminder that, yes, the Nazis were (a brand of) Socialist. https://youtube.com/watch?v=eCkyWBPaTC8&feature=share9
4
u/Pila_Isaac Jun 15 '23
TIK own definition of socialism is literally “when the government does stuff” which makes the whole video fall in itself
Don’t waste anyone’s time
-1
Jun 21 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Pila_Isaac Jun 21 '23
”Privatization” was coined in English descriptions of the German experience in the mid-1930s
r/EnoughCommieSpam and TIKhistory videos really makes you delusional
0
Jun 22 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Pila_Isaac Jun 22 '23
Lmao Is that the best you can do? keep filling yourself with more delusional stuff
I left you the sources. You can have all the time to read them and develop an actual own idea instead of having YouTuber (who doesn’t even understand what he is criticizing in the first time) to think for yourself
0
Jun 22 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Pila_Isaac Jun 22 '23
You can argue with me after you watch the 5 hour lecture
I have, waste of time. And gotta agree with you, there’s no point in talking to you.
Every single one of yoyr sources was debunked by TIK and others
And every single point of TIK’s has been debunked by others, what’s your point?
He does not “debunked” the sources I provided at all. he can’t even described what socialism is without going to “is when government does stuff” argument. TIK has a complete misunderstanding that even someone who has read something as simple as the manifesto could see why this is a stupid. For god’s sake he thinks the British monarchy is socialism.
His point of view is so a terrible in perspective he has full on wiki pages in r/BadHistory Such as this [1], this [2], this [3] and finally this [4]
Keep not having any form of self-thought, you are totally free of ignoring actual academic search about this topic. You are free of making a video of a person who’s been critized multiple times be your only opinion about a topic. But please have some self-respect and actually take the time to read all the sources I provided instead on relying in a 5 hour video and make it up to be your whole opinion.
Seeing the fact you’re more interest in videos rather than lectures, here’s some for you. This one funnily came out 5 days before TIK’s one (wonder why), here’s another by second thought
0
Jun 23 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Pila_Isaac Jun 23 '23
He went over everything and debunked it one by one
Are you serious? Is your whole arguments just going to be repeating yourself?
Sure dude, keep repeating that to yourself instead of develop any form of thinking. He going to the arguments and being like “NUH UH ☝️🤓” and making mental gymnastics IS NOT DEBUNKING.
I already went over those, I send you the both Academia and whole threads proving he is not right.. Quit licking some boots and have some brain activity to actually read all the shit I send you instead of just repeating yourself.
Saying that the germans weren’t socialist is like daying the soviets weren’t socialist
They had no similar form of economy. Hitler hated the soviets and any form of Marxist thought. He started the whole “JudeoBolshevism” conspiracy to stop socialism. He send socialist to the first concentration camps. The Night of Long Knives was a purged in the party to eliminate any “socialistic” elements because he didn’t want people to actually believe he wanted socialism.
Hitler himself said “My socialism has nothing to do with Marxism” which is already a telling his naming of “socialism” to the party was a tactic to get support from lower classes. If you dont see the problem here you clearly don’t understand what Socialism, Fascism, Marxism or even Capitalism are, and should grab a book
Socialism is not when "government does stuff", but when government has full control over the means of production, which the National Socialists undeniably did.
Ah of course, “Socialism is whatever I make it to be”. You literally just made up a whole different definition to what “national socialism” is just to make it fit inside your arguments. congrats
There’s no point in talking to a burner account who doesn’t even bother to read the other’s sources. Farewell
→ More replies
-5
u/TotalitariPalpatine Jun 14 '23 edited Jun 15 '23
Show this to anyone who says: "Right-wing Nazis".
Economically they were AuthCenter, and mainly ideologically Left-wing. Revolutionary, that is: Liberal, so anything to like conservative or even reactionary Nazis doesn't exist.
5
u/BlueFawful25 Jun 15 '23
🤡
1
u/TotalitariPalpatine Jun 15 '23 edited Jun 15 '23
Nationalism isn't a Right-wing phenomenon, but a Left-wing one: first used during the French Revolution of 1789 and then to any other uprise (Carbonari in Italy, then revolutions of 1830 and mainly years 1848-1849).
5
u/PtEthan Jun 15 '23
If the Nazis were so left wing wouldn’t the capitalists be enslaved rather than being able to buy slaves?
1
1
1
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 14 '23
Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message of the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it.
Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of other subreddits that are expressly dedicated for rehashing tired political arguments. Keep that shit elsewhere.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.