One of the best on RUclips. No bias, straightly factual and things are explained clearly with examples. I could develop a near complete understanding of the economic workflow, reason, and progression.
it was inflation..... nothing more than printing money today and not worrying about tomorrow. by 1940 germany was finacialy destroyed. it lived of a wartime economy and slave labour accounting for 25% of workforce by mid to late war. The mefo bills was a suicide pact
I've always been puzzled by how Germany went from the horrors of the depression to becoming an apparent industrial powerhouse in just a few short years. In particular it seemed to make no sense that they could fund their massive military expansion. The Mefo bills provide the explanation - they did it on the never-never, a policy that never works in the longer term unless it is extremely skilfully managed and carefully restrained. Very few individuals have the self discipline and intellect to run such a policy successfully and I have been led to believe by my teachers that many of the Nazi leadership may have actually been nuts.
This unfortunately completely ignores the difference between a wartime-economy, where the UK and US similarly took control indirectly of most industry and the original policies of Nazism which first cut public spending and lowered wages, since it the movement had originally been an esoteric middle class reacting to rising socialism and thus needed (and got) a violent repression of worker's bargaining power. The party was as much "socialist" as the current ruling party of north korea is "democratic" in name. I recommend the work of political economists Michael Kalecki and Clara Mattei to underscore how fascism originally represented a self-defense reaction of capitalism. Be it totalitarian capitalism like we see today in Nigeria, Saudi Arabia or Russia.
@@nicknolte8671 Oh really, then how do you explain the 170 Soviet divisions massed on Germany's border and why they were setup in attack formations? Some say that Germany broke the treaty with Stalin, wrong again, Stalin had been taking over a little bit in Romania, and then in the Balkans, and in Yugoslavia, Stalin had broken the treaty many times but of course this is not openly discussed, the Soviets won that war, you have to do some research to read about those things. Suvorov's book 'Icebreaker' ca not be debunked, it is based on Soviet declassified documents and Suvorov himself was with Soviet intelligence before defecting to the west. nice try.
@@rosesandsongs21 I don't have to explain anything. Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat. The onus of proof lies on those making the (positive) claim, not on the one denying. You and the OP are making a positive claim that hasn't been proven and has a ton of evidence against. It's akin to the story that Hitler escaped to Argentina - tons of evidence and every eyewitness says otherwise. The US has plans for invading every country in the world, does that mean it's going to do it? Nope. So there's a difference between contingency plans and actual intent. The Nazis started planning for war since they came to power. They were always going to go to war. And your sh$tty premise falls apart based on the fact the Nazis invaded half of Europe and then some. Yes, it was totally necessary to rob and plunder half of Europe. Howyesno
@@rosesandsongs21 Soviet intelligence was much superior to German intelligence. Two examples. The Soviets knew in 1941 that their flank is secure and that the Japanese wouldn't attack Siberia and so they transferred winter-hardened troops from Siberia to the Eastern Front. The Nazis didn't actually know how many tanks the Soviets had prior to invasion. Hitler, in one of his drug-fueled outbursts said that he would never have invaded the USSR had he known how many tanks they had... So where's this Nazi intelligence that the Soviets were definitely going to attack? Point us to it. Oh, right. It doesn't exist, because German intelligence was dogs/it, they didn't even figure out the strength of their opponent. The Nazis thought they could roll over the Soviets in a season and that's why they didn't even prepare for the MOST EXTREME WEATHER IN THE 20TH CENTURY. Yes, the year 1941 was the coldest in all of 20th century and the Nazis wore summer clothes.
@@nicknolte8671 The US has over 1000 military bases all over the world, there is no preef that Hitler flew to Argentina and if you say that the nazis began to plan war as soon as they were elected the ball is in your camp, I never heard about that so show me.
Did Germany impose tariffs on foreign good before the four year plan in 1936, three years after Hitler comes to power? You state that they did it almost as soon as they came to power, but I am having trouble finding sources that support this claim. If you know more than me, then please help.
Before the four-year plan was imposed in 1936, the Minister of the Economy Hjalmar Schacht began to selectively decouple Germany from the world economy. Trade was still possible with countries Germany was friendly with, as long as the trade involved raw materials being imported to Germany.
@@GavinTheFifer Alright - I spend most my time doing research and watching yt videos like this and thus my paper was a bit unstructured and not completely finished. At the end of the day the content of my paper was good and that I can only contribute to videos like this and other sources/reports, but overall structure did not work as I had planned and the subject was too broad. Thanks for asking though
For those arguing about the Nazi, just watch the Economic History of Socialism first. There are many variations of socialism. The Nazi is the "Third Way" sect.
We can look at Mussolini. "Mussolini, a leading member of the Italian Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Italiano) before World War I, became a fierce antisocialist after the war. After coming to power, he banned all Marxist organizations and replaced their trade unions with government-controlled corporatist unions. Until he instituted a war economy in the mid-1930s, Mussolini allowed industrialists to run their companies with a minimum of government interference. Despite his former anticapitalist rhetoric, he cut taxes on business, permitted cartel growth, decreed wage reduction, and rescinded the eight-hour-workday law. Between 1928 and 1932 real wages in Italy dropped by almost half. Mussolini admitted that the standard of living had fallen but stated that “fortunately the Italian people were not accustomed to eating much and therefore feel the privation less acutely than others."
Excellent. Nazism was not Marxian socialism as we understand it today, (the winning model), but with its collectivism, authoritarianism and scientism, not to mention its name, it was indeed socialism.
@@martinko4086 What's the difference between the state directly owning the property and the state directing the private owner on how to use it? Seems like a distinction without a difference and people insisting that it was not real socialism want to prevent the taint of Nazism from touching their cherished ideology.
@@rutessian You are very uneducated if you believe there is "no difference " between state owning property vs private owner who has to obey state regulations . FIRST if i work for state, i do not give a fuck about state property , because it is NOT mine and i am not going to pay for it , and i am not making decisions, not collecting profit, i am just on salary/ they do not pay me enough/ so , Any stupid decisions by democratic/collective / including alcoholic janitor/ =NOT my problem .Loses will spread all over society until economic collapse. i will steal from state every time i can , because they TOOK AWAY my private property rights . SEE eastern Europe , USSR , and still hanging there socialist CUBA who pays worker $ 25 / a month. YOU can be happy with it , NOT ME . Please, Show me successful socialist country . IF i own my business, i do make majority of decisions , i keep majority of my profits , i will work overtime if i want to , because it pays me and State have ONLY LIMITED control over my production , my time , my pay etc and I cannot STEAL from what is already MINE !! Successful capitalist countries with private property RIGHTS are USA , Australia , France , Germany , UK , Norway , Sweden , Switzerland , New Zeeland , Canada, Japan , Denmark etc
@@martinko4086 This is what happens when you misunderstand a question, get overexcited and barf an answer nobody asked for. "What's the difference between the state directly owning the property and the state directing the private owner on how to use it?" - refers to scenarios similar to this one: In one case you are an administrator of a state owned factory and you are told what to make and how much to make of it. In the other case you own the factory but the State is your only client, you're told what to produce and how much and it's also your only supplier of raw materials.
So it's like how the US government is now running the US economy... Those in Washington offer all kinds of money for companies and NGO's that do what the current regime wants, but can't do directly because of laws, regulations, and pesky things like the Constitution... Thanks for explaining that..
2 Trillion in one year to keep it afloat. That is what the government spent, most ever in history and rising. The economy is a Potemkin village.@@julianshepherd2038
It was a racist form of socialism. Hitler talks about it in mein kampf. Divide society by race and not class Fascism on the other hand was an Uber nationalistic form of socialism. Both Musilini and Hitler rejected Marxism/class socialism and internationalism by default. If you read the doctrine of facism written by Mussolini. He writes at length about how he envisioned that the state would be kind of spiritual. Acting in unity for everybody's benefit. Both of them saw democracy as weak Musilini says in it that even one tyrant running the place would be better than many as you get in a democracy apparently. But anyway the main point is the distinction between these two forms of socialism is race and nation. Under Musilini the people served the State Under Hitler the State served the Arian race. Under the Soviet's the State served the worker's. Well that was the thought process of those idealogies. In reality it served the psychotic killers at the top and the party.
@@subscriptions007 thanks. But don't take my word for it. Read mein kampf the 25 point Nazi program or as many of the literature on there economy's as possible and it will be as clear as day. Anyway are you by any chance Japanese? Just going by your name. Have you read anything about the Japanese economy in WW2 I'd love to read or watch videos about it. But I would'nt even know where to start. I say that because there is so much misinformation.
@@bolgert911 Nope, but had a very heavy Japanese influence. For the Japanese Economy, the WW2 system had survived with modifications until around the end of the Cold War, having learnt from the Germans and the Soviets to allocate credit strategically. There is a film and a book named "Princes of the Yen" which contains no-nonsense info about the nature of the Japanese economy after an extensive research by Prof. Richard Werner.
National Socialism was quite different than anything before it & One could say anything after it . The Artist A.Hitler spoke about differences in an unusual manner. As not to evade the differences in realities artificial & or natural. National Socialism is an Economic Dynamic System based on non - physical currency as a means to control the plagues of value & loss that affected the uniform German monetary standard of an earned income. I must clarify because this National Socialism economy doesn’t rely on an earnings based system . The German process within National Socialism is unto itself almost as a People in regard to their status State identity as National Socialists. Being part of the worldly earth systems means you must utilize the transfer of earth substances within your human legal sphere & or realm of subject. That means you need a process currency to do this measure to accomplish the conduct of a currency transferable to other Nations. The Adolf Hitler currency system does not have a currency but a simple computer system of a regime credit based on the socialist model. Your work standard is Your Birth Right to an Economic Credit Card of the Reich State of Germany 🇩🇪! Auto Tabulation by Merit first of Credit & Employment after based on personal investment as in your abilities. The Interior standard of the Nazi State Economy under Adolf Hitler German Third Reich of National Socialism. The Aryan Nazi German State of the Economy of Freedom in the Reich ! Deutschland Uber Alles !
You hear a lot of nonsense about Nazis and economy these days..but that was a very good video. Just two small additions. The unemployment did not peak in 1933 but in 1932 (with over 5 Mio...compared with slightly under 5 Mio) That seems important to me since it deals with the idea that Hitler was the main reason unemployment went down...while a lot of that was simply attributed to the recovery from the crises..and companies that had many workers before started re-hiring. So many of those created jobs weren't really "new". ..at least not as far as I can tell. Another aspect that might be added is the habit of the Nazis of stealing from their own citizens and from the countries they occupied before the war started. Anyway...that was a great summary. ..thank you for that.
Its all right. Lots of wild acorns have tannins in them wich are bitter. You have to boil them out. Before you eat the nut. I think this Is what the coffee is made from
Dang, that is interesting. Everyone calls the republicans nazis so i looked them up but yeah clearly they have very different views on how to run an economy. Good video!
This video is quite relevant to our current situation especially the slide around industrial policy at 08:20: every line on that slide could apply to the current UK government
Is that so? I would agree that the government is taking a Progressive approach to the economy in places, the "green recovery" for example, but a focus on large firms and cartelisation? I'm not currently aware of any examples.
Nonsense. If you put the data side by side, you'd see that any normal economy uses these instruments with restraint. As the author shows, Nazism was a special kind of autocratic and extreme political ideology. The UK isn't.
No it wasn't and you should STFU. MEFO bills, slave labor, maßive import versus export imbalance, and economy based on war production were all unsustainable and bordering on a scam.
Great video! One critique I would have is that imo Nazism was more relient on racism then nationalism. For instance the intent of Lebensraum, and the better social welfare treatment of Arians, than the other people's in the state. Also the fact is that most other people's at that time saw socialism as international. So calling themselves nationalist is a clear distinction to differentiate themselves from the Marxists and other international socialist's. Aswell as distancing themselves away from the bad economic policy's of the Bolsheviks and the proceeding Soviet failures. What I'm basically saying is that racism is Fundamental to Nazi ideology and not nationalism that was secondary. Imo these are best discribed this way. National socialism= racist socialism Fascism= national socialism Marxism= class socialism Soviet Union progressed away from socalism as time went on and more to state capitalism as they themselves called it. Obviously because they could never pull of the utopian dream. The core principles of these types of socialism had effects on how those economy's played out and how those regime's and supporters seen the rest of the world. Obviously most socalist's before these new types where internationals because of Marx's influence. So they sought to free the people's of the world. The Nazi's saw the people's of the world as people that should serve them as in Arians and higher race's. The Fascist's saw the rest of the world through a national lens. In there eyes there state was kind of spiritual in nature as musilini described. They where less concerned of what others where doing and more on advancing themselves.
Hey just a question what is wrong with putting people in your own country first why is it racist? Are the chinese racist because the do things that benefit the Chinese first? The Japanese? Nigerians?
@@Valhura77 if it is based off of race and not citizenship then it is racist by definition, What the Nazi's had was socialist welfare programs and benefits for Arians and treated other race's like slave's while stealing there property and there lives also. Racist socialism. Nothing wrong with nationalism or patriotism, but if you go to the extreme nationalism then you can conceive like Musilini did a bringing back of the Roman empire, where they other nations existed to be concurred and or plundered.
Good bullet points Walter. But the Soviets practiced a anti-religious form of racism too and arguably the same way the Nazis did. Soviets sent Gypsies and Jews to labor camps too, including Muslims (like the CCP is doing now in modern times). Genocide and Democide occur throughout many collectivist regimes.
@@Valhura77 ...True. I also think that Westerners think of themselves as some perfect beings... Because being asian, as far as I know, a lot of people would rather have their own race as their neighbourhood than some other races. Not to mention, how these homogenous nations like east asia have much stronger economies and grew much much faster in general(china, south korea, singapore, Vietnam and so on)...We aren't 'racist' by any means but it's just what it is I.e human nature in general. It is problem when you start to take their lands and force them out from their native land tho....Else than that, things like slavery has been quite common in history. . They are willified more than others(the likes of Soviet, what Churchill did in india, the century of humiliation and opium wars against china)....just because 'they' lost the war and the other faction won. That's all there is to it.
@@nido.del.aguila2667modern Chinese economy is 70% private sector, same as nazi Germany. Even that private sector is subordinated to the interest of state, just like nazi Germany.
economically, the nazis were in a gray area. they were certainly fascist, but you don’t necessarily need to be right wing to be fascist. The nazis however overall, represent right wing politics more than socialist politics. socialism requires ownership of the means of production by the community as a whole, or state. the nazis privatized more than any other european country in the world at the time. they had involvement with directing the economy in some ways, but most of the ways they did so were in favor of business owners, not the working class.
@@slappab What total garbage, my god. Find one single sample of Hitler saying the Nazis were a Fascist party. The Nazis were National Socialists, or leftwing. They opposed the rightwing capitalists, or bourgeoisie as they called them.
@@CybreSmee hey genius you don’t have to self identify as fascist to be a fascist. Also, the nazi party was the far right of parliament, with actual socialists being to their left. The nazis disliked “jewish capitalism” but they stood in stronger opposition to socialism, bolshevism, communism, anarchism, etc. Hitler’s view of socialism was to remove the *appearance* of class differences and unite as one race. (volksgemeinschaft) Hitler then proceeded to privatize more than any other european country at the time, set wages low in accordance to business owner’s wishes (not to mention he thought business owners were higher evolved beings) abolished unions and sent their leaders to concentration camps, and more. That is not socialism, that is not left wing.
@@slappab Ok, brainiac, so Hitler and all the Nazi party leaders constantly raved about their socialistic achievements and goals, including praise from many other countries, plus the vast majority of Mein Kampf setting out the socialist road map - AND this video explaining in great detail the economic position for Germany - yet you, some nobody on the internet, has decreed - Nope - they are Fascists just because....reasons. I smell a leftoid moron butthurt that his side is actually the Nazis and he's only just coming to that realisation, lol.
They did not build a big military, they still had 750,000 horses when they invaded the USSR. Essentially they were sucked in the war, t6hat was the last thing they wanted.
One of the best on RUclips. No bias, straightly factual and things are explained clearly with examples. I could develop a near complete understanding of the economic workflow, reason, and progression.
The Institute of Economic Affairs is a free market think tank and has a stated goal of promoting free market thinking. It is by definition biased.
@@rugbyguy59ok, if you say so, but that doesn’t mean THIS video is biased.
@@educateyourself3872 It is. The organization doesn't release videos that don't fit its agenda
@@rugbyguy59it was not how I and many others in the comment section saw it, so please expand on what you say.
The Mefo bills idea by Hjalmar Schacht was pure genius.
it was inflation..... nothing more than printing money today and not worrying about tomorrow. by 1940 germany was finacialy destroyed. it lived of a wartime economy and slave labour accounting for 25% of workforce by mid to late war. The mefo bills was a suicide pact
Schacht seems to have ripped off much of the idea of Mefo bills from the Soviet Union.
@@blitzerblazinoah6838and Keynes ripped off Schacht 😂😂
@@Ironhardttrue actually
This was an amazing video. One of the best on the topic on youtube. Thank you.
I've always been puzzled by how Germany went from the horrors of the depression to becoming an apparent industrial powerhouse in just a few short years. In particular it seemed to make no sense that they could fund their massive military expansion. The Mefo bills provide the explanation - they did it on the never-never, a policy that never works in the longer term unless it is extremely skilfully managed and carefully restrained. Very few individuals have the self discipline and intellect to run such a policy successfully and I have been led to believe by my teachers that many of the Nazi leadership may have actually been nuts.
The economics books did not teach us about this part.
That’s because it’s not sustainable
@@davidjackson9680 more sustainable than what we have
@@davidjackson9680 thats not true, stop treating it like communism
@@davidjackson9680Elaborate?
@@nido.del.aguila2667communism was sucessful, economically, for longer.
Thanks for this objective analysis
This unfortunately completely ignores the difference between a wartime-economy, where the UK and US similarly took control indirectly of most industry and the original policies of Nazism which first cut public spending and lowered wages, since it the movement had originally been an esoteric middle class reacting to rising socialism and thus needed (and got) a violent repression of worker's bargaining power.
The party was as much "socialist" as the current ruling party of north korea is "democratic" in name.
I recommend the work of political economists Michael Kalecki and Clara Mattei to underscore how fascism originally represented a self-defense reaction of capitalism. Be it totalitarian capitalism like we see today in Nigeria, Saudi Arabia or Russia.
thank you for this informative video. i've long wondered how the nazi economy functioned. looking forward to watching the other videos.
Thank you for this video.
This is the best explainer of fascists economy ive found so far...
It wasn't technically a fascist regime (like Italy), it was something very separate based on brutality, extreme nationalism and rac1$m.
They attacked the USSR before the USSR attacked them.
This is the best description: "Icebreaker by Viktor Suvorov"
That's abject nonsense and has long been debunked.
@@nicknolte8671 Oh really, then how do you explain the 170 Soviet divisions massed on Germany's border and why they were setup in attack formations? Some say that Germany broke the treaty with Stalin, wrong again, Stalin had been taking over a little bit in Romania, and then in the Balkans, and in Yugoslavia, Stalin had broken the treaty many times but of course this is not openly discussed, the Soviets won that war, you have to do some research to read about those things. Suvorov's book 'Icebreaker' ca not be debunked, it is based on Soviet declassified documents and Suvorov himself was with Soviet intelligence before defecting to the west. nice try.
@@rosesandsongs21 I don't have to explain anything. Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat. The onus of proof lies on those making the (positive) claim, not on the one denying. You and the OP are making a positive claim that hasn't been proven and has a ton of evidence against. It's akin to the story that Hitler escaped to Argentina - tons of evidence and every eyewitness says otherwise.
The US has plans for invading every country in the world, does that mean it's going to do it? Nope. So there's a difference between contingency plans and actual intent.
The Nazis started planning for war since they came to power. They were always going to go to war.
And your sh$tty premise falls apart based on the fact the Nazis invaded half of Europe and then some. Yes, it was totally necessary to rob and plunder half of Europe. Howyesno
@@rosesandsongs21 Soviet intelligence was much superior to German intelligence. Two examples. The Soviets knew in 1941 that their flank is secure and that the Japanese wouldn't attack Siberia and so they transferred winter-hardened troops from Siberia to the Eastern Front.
The Nazis didn't actually know how many tanks the Soviets had prior to invasion. Hitler, in one of his drug-fueled outbursts said that he would never have invaded the USSR had he known how many tanks they had... So where's this Nazi intelligence that the Soviets were definitely going to attack? Point us to it.
Oh, right. It doesn't exist, because German intelligence was dogs/it, they didn't even figure out the strength of their opponent. The Nazis thought they could roll over the Soviets in a season and that's why they didn't even prepare for the MOST EXTREME WEATHER IN THE 20TH CENTURY. Yes, the year 1941 was the coldest in all of 20th century and the Nazis wore summer clothes.
@@nicknolte8671 The US has over 1000 military bases all over the world, there is no preef that Hitler flew to Argentina and if you say that the nazis began to plan war as soon as they were elected the ball is in your camp, I never heard about that so show me.
thank you was very useful
Swiss banks are still selling gold bars. To my knowledge there are no gold mines in Switzerland; so where does the gold come from? Not camps surely?
Did Germany impose tariffs on foreign good before the four year plan in 1936, three years after Hitler comes to power? You state that they did it almost as soon as they came to power, but I am having trouble finding sources that support this claim. If you know more than me, then please help.
Before the four-year plan was imposed in 1936, the Minister of the Economy Hjalmar Schacht began to selectively decouple Germany from the world economy. Trade was still possible with countries Germany was friendly with, as long as the trade involved raw materials being imported to Germany.
@@tsar1547 Thank you very much. I am going to an oral exam defending a paper I wrote about this in 2 weeks. Hopefully it goes well
@@magnusbrandt999 how’d it go?
@@GavinTheFifer Alright - I spend most my time doing research and watching yt videos like this and thus my paper was a bit unstructured and not completely finished. At the end of the day the content of my paper was good and that I can only contribute to videos like this and other sources/reports, but overall structure did not work as I had planned and the subject was too broad. Thanks for asking though
There was no interest for savings in the banking system during their tenure.
because interest is theft in socialism as it is unearned money ie money without labor
Took me half the video to see you in the top right
For those arguing about the Nazi, just watch the Economic History of Socialism first.
There are many variations of socialism. The Nazi is the "Third Way" sect.
Nazis are far right, not even close to socialists
Thanks for the video.
However the peace economy is totally different from war economy.
Could you a make a peace economy video less armament ?
That would be completely impossible for reasons he explained in the lecture.
We can look at Mussolini.
"Mussolini, a leading member of the Italian Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Italiano) before World War I, became a fierce antisocialist after the war. After coming to power, he banned all Marxist organizations and replaced their trade unions with government-controlled corporatist unions. Until he instituted a war economy in the mid-1930s, Mussolini allowed industrialists to run their companies with a minimum of government interference. Despite his former anticapitalist rhetoric, he cut taxes on business, permitted cartel growth, decreed wage reduction, and rescinded the eight-hour-workday law. Between 1928 and 1932 real wages in Italy dropped by almost half. Mussolini admitted that the standard of living had fallen but stated that “fortunately the Italian people were not accustomed to eating much and therefore feel the privation less acutely than others."
@@nicknolte8671 interesting. What about 1943 italian social republic ?
Instead of tanks and guns, build cars and tools and export them.
@duckynado i know but i want details lol
Great video
Lot of info left out, which of course I’m sure is due to constraints of time. Would’ve liked to see a longer format, but excellent work!
Link to what’s left out pls
Very interesting.
Sounds morr like modern day china
that’s pretty based
Nationalism without capitalism
Socialism without internationalism
What does that even mean? Those are just slogans.
Thank you Steve
Great job 👍🏽
Excellent. Nazism was not Marxian socialism as we understand it today, (the winning model), but with its collectivism, authoritarianism and scientism, not to mention its name, it was indeed socialism.
yes
Joseph Lakanal Socialism ABOLISH private property RIGHTS !! NOT in the NAZI Germany.. NOT the SAME !!
@@martinko4086 What's the difference between the state directly owning the property and the state directing the private owner on how to use it? Seems like a distinction without a difference and people insisting that it was not real socialism want to prevent the taint of Nazism from touching their cherished ideology.
@@rutessian You are very uneducated if you believe there is "no difference " between state owning property vs private owner who has to obey state regulations . FIRST if i work for state, i do not give a fuck about state property , because it is NOT mine and i am not going to pay for it , and i am not making decisions, not collecting profit, i am just on salary/ they do not pay me enough/ so , Any stupid decisions by democratic/collective / including alcoholic janitor/ =NOT my problem .Loses will spread all over society until economic collapse. i will steal from state every time i can , because they TOOK AWAY my private property rights . SEE eastern Europe , USSR , and still hanging there socialist CUBA who pays worker $ 25 / a month. YOU can be happy with it , NOT ME . Please, Show me successful socialist country .
IF i own my business, i do make majority of decisions , i keep majority of my profits , i will work overtime if i want to , because it pays me and State have ONLY LIMITED control over my production , my time , my pay etc and I cannot STEAL from what is already MINE !! Successful capitalist countries with private property RIGHTS are USA , Australia , France , Germany , UK , Norway , Sweden , Switzerland , New Zeeland , Canada, Japan , Denmark etc
@@martinko4086 This is what happens when you misunderstand a question, get overexcited and barf an answer nobody asked for.
"What's the difference between the state directly owning the property and the state directing the private owner on how to use it?" - refers to scenarios similar to this one:
In one case you are an administrator of a state owned factory and you are told what to make and how much to make of it. In the other case you own the factory but the State is your only client, you're told what to produce and how much and it's also your only supplier of raw materials.
So it's like how the US government is now running the US economy... Those in Washington offer all kinds of money for companies and NGO's that do what the current regime wants, but can't do directly because of laws, regulations, and pesky things like the Constitution... Thanks for explaining that..
Tour massive exaggeration has not helped you. All governments intervene to some extent but it is not the mainspring of the economy.
2 Trillion in one year to keep it afloat. That is what the government spent, most ever in history and rising. The economy is a Potemkin village.@@julianshepherd2038
Read what H. said about economics in his book.
What about the Economy of Fascist Italy and the Empire of Japan?
Would you be able to post your sources where you gathered this information?
Take a look at this book:
The Nazi Economic Recovery 1932-1938 - Macmillan Education UK (1982)
It could have been a very Nationalistic form of Socialism
It was a racist form of socialism. Hitler talks about it in mein kampf.
Divide society by race and not class
Fascism on the other hand was an Uber nationalistic form of socialism. Both Musilini and Hitler rejected Marxism/class socialism and internationalism by default.
If you read the doctrine of facism written by Mussolini. He writes at length about how he envisioned that the state would be kind of spiritual.
Acting in unity for everybody's benefit. Both of them saw democracy as weak
Musilini says in it that even one tyrant running the place would be better than many as you get in a democracy apparently.
But anyway the main point is the distinction between these two forms of socialism is race and nation.
Under Musilini the people served the State
Under Hitler the State served the Arian race.
Under the Soviet's the State served the worker's.
Well that was the thought process of those idealogies.
In reality it served the psychotic killers at the top and the party.
@@bolgert911 Spot on!
@@subscriptions007 thanks. But don't take my word for it. Read mein kampf the 25 point Nazi program or as many of the literature on there economy's as possible and it will be as clear as day.
Anyway are you by any chance Japanese?
Just going by your name.
Have you read anything about the Japanese economy in WW2 I'd love to read or watch videos about it. But I would'nt even know where to start.
I say that because there is so much misinformation.
@@bolgert911 Nope, but had a very heavy Japanese influence.
For the Japanese Economy, the WW2 system had survived with modifications until around the end of the Cold War, having learnt from the Germans and the Soviets to allocate credit strategically.
There is a film and a book named "Princes of the Yen" which contains no-nonsense info about the nature of the Japanese economy after an extensive research by Prof. Richard Werner.
@@subscriptions007 ok thanks man I'll check it out. Peace ✌️
National Socialism was quite different than anything before it & One could say anything after it . The Artist A.Hitler spoke about differences in an unusual manner. As not to evade the differences in realities artificial & or natural. National Socialism is an Economic Dynamic System based on non - physical currency as a means to control the plagues of value & loss that affected the uniform German monetary standard of an earned income. I must clarify because this National Socialism economy doesn’t rely on an earnings based system . The German process within National Socialism is unto itself almost as a People in regard to their status State identity as National Socialists. Being part of the worldly earth systems means you must utilize the transfer of earth substances within your human legal sphere & or realm of subject. That means you need a process currency to do this measure to accomplish the conduct of a currency transferable to other Nations. The Adolf Hitler currency system does not have a currency but a simple computer system of a regime credit based on the socialist model. Your work standard is Your Birth Right to an Economic Credit Card of the Reich State of Germany 🇩🇪! Auto Tabulation by Merit first of Credit & Employment after based on personal investment as in your abilities. The Interior standard of the Nazi State Economy under Adolf Hitler German Third Reich of National Socialism. The Aryan Nazi German State of the Economy of Freedom in the Reich ! Deutschland Uber Alles !
1 more try
You hear a lot of nonsense about Nazis and economy these days..but that was a very good video.
Just two small additions. The unemployment did not peak in 1933 but in 1932 (with over 5 Mio...compared with slightly under 5 Mio)
That seems important to me since it deals with the idea that Hitler was the main reason unemployment went down...while a lot of that was simply attributed to the recovery from the crises..and companies that had many workers before started re-hiring.
So many of those created jobs weren't really "new". ..at least not as far as I can tell.
Another aspect that might be added is the habit of the Nazis of stealing from their own citizens and from the countries they occupied before the war started.
Anyway...that was a great summary. ..thank you for that.
So, definitely going to try acorn coffee now.
Its all right.
Lots of wild acorns have tannins in them wich are bitter. You have to boil them out. Before you eat the nut. I think this Is what the coffee is made from
Dang, that is interesting. Everyone calls the republicans nazis so i looked them up but yeah clearly they have very different views on how to run an economy. Good video!
This video is quite relevant to our current situation especially the slide around industrial policy at 08:20: every line on that slide could apply to the current UK government
Is that so? I would agree that the government is taking a Progressive approach to the economy in places, the "green recovery" for example, but a focus on large firms and cartelisation? I'm not currently aware of any examples.
Nonsense. If you put the data side by side, you'd see that any normal economy uses these instruments with restraint. As the author shows, Nazism was a special kind of autocratic and extreme political ideology. The UK isn't.
Sources?
Very interesting economic setup just take away the racism and modernize it and it sounds like it would save a lot of places
their economic plan was good and should be used
it was built upon slavery and war with an excessive hand over the market. it’s unsustainable
No it wasn't and you should STFU. MEFO bills, slave labor, maßive import versus export imbalance, and economy based on war production were all unsustainable and bordering on a scam.
I agree, it should be used in Mexico, we need it
@@JmanMachinama not true stop lying through your teeth. Germany wasn't like USA during the slavery era
@@matthewhainer189 dude stfu you are just talking shit. Intimidated by Nazi economy??
Great video!
One critique I would have is that imo Nazism was more relient on racism then nationalism.
For instance the intent of Lebensraum,
and the better social welfare treatment of Arians, than the other people's in the state.
Also the fact is that most other people's at that time saw socialism as international. So calling themselves nationalist is a clear distinction to differentiate themselves from the Marxists and other international socialist's.
Aswell as distancing themselves away from the bad economic policy's of the Bolsheviks and the proceeding Soviet failures.
What I'm basically saying is that racism is Fundamental to Nazi ideology and not nationalism that was secondary.
Imo these are best discribed this way.
National socialism= racist socialism
Fascism= national socialism
Marxism= class socialism
Soviet Union progressed away from socalism as time went on and more to state capitalism as they themselves called it. Obviously because they could never pull of the utopian dream.
The core principles of these types of socialism had effects on how those economy's played out and how those regime's and supporters seen the rest of the world.
Obviously most socalist's before these new types where internationals because of Marx's influence. So they sought to free the people's of the world.
The Nazi's saw the people's of the world as people that should serve them as in Arians and higher race's.
The Fascist's saw the rest of the world through a national lens.
In there eyes there state was kind of spiritual in nature as musilini described.
They where less concerned of what others where doing and more on advancing themselves.
Ackshually true fascism has never been tried
Hey just a question what is wrong with putting people in your own country first why is it racist? Are the chinese racist because the do things that benefit the Chinese first? The Japanese? Nigerians?
@@Valhura77 if it is based off of race and not citizenship then it is racist by definition,
What the Nazi's had was socialist welfare programs and benefits for Arians and treated other race's like slave's while stealing there property and there lives also.
Racist socialism.
Nothing wrong with nationalism or patriotism, but if you go to the extreme nationalism then you can conceive like Musilini did a bringing back of the Roman empire, where they other nations existed to be concurred and or plundered.
Good bullet points Walter. But the Soviets practiced a anti-religious form of racism too and arguably the same way the Nazis did. Soviets sent Gypsies and Jews to labor camps too, including Muslims (like the CCP is doing now in modern times). Genocide and Democide occur throughout many collectivist regimes.
@@Valhura77 ...True. I also think that Westerners think of themselves as some perfect beings... Because being asian, as far as I know, a lot of people would rather have their own race as their neighbourhood than some other races. Not to mention, how these homogenous nations like east asia have much stronger economies and grew much much faster in general(china, south korea, singapore, Vietnam and so on)...We aren't 'racist' by any means but it's just what it is I.e human nature in general. It is problem when you start to take their lands and force them out from their native land tho....Else than that, things like slavery has been quite common in history.
.
They are willified more than others(the likes of Soviet, what Churchill did in india, the century of humiliation and opium wars against china)....just because 'they' lost the war and the other faction won. That's all there is to it.
sounds like modern day china economy
Yes. China is turning fascistic very quickly. Even tho they say they’re working “towards communism”
Except for the war part,for now
@@dn7491 I mean they've invaded their neighbors through war. Vietnam, India, and Russia were the only ones they dare not invade full headed.
Completely true
😂Their economy was really pathetic, and really unsustainable.
Very similar to modern Chinese communism.
Not at all
@@nido.del.aguila2667Yes It is.
@@TheLucasbr152 i tried so hard and got so far but in the end it doesn't even matter i had to fall to lose it all
@@nido.del.aguila2667modern Chinese economy is 70% private sector, same as nazi Germany. Even that private sector is subordinated to the interest of state, just like nazi Germany.
Wieso bin ich ein psych ?
Its TRUE socialism, unlike marxism
Henry Saint Simon and Utopian Socialists approves 👍
Not socialism but state directed economy? So basically proxy socialism?
It wasnt socialist at all. It was welfare capitalism.
@@oathboundsecrets Nah but, it was a version of literally socialism. Just not Marxism or Communism.
National Syndicalism
it wasn't socialism, it was a fascist economy
Corporatism.
Were Nazis right wing or left wing? Fascist or socialist?
economically, the nazis were in a gray area. they were certainly fascist, but you don’t necessarily need to be right wing to be fascist. The nazis however overall, represent right wing politics more than socialist politics.
socialism requires ownership of the means of production by the community as a whole, or state. the nazis privatized more than any other european country in the world at the time. they had involvement with directing the economy in some ways, but most of the ways they did so were in favor of business owners, not the working class.
@Simon Walton I didn't ask what they called themselves, I asked what they were.
@@slappab What total garbage, my god. Find one single sample of Hitler saying the Nazis were a Fascist party. The Nazis were National Socialists, or leftwing. They opposed the rightwing capitalists, or bourgeoisie as they called them.
@@CybreSmee hey genius you don’t have to self identify as fascist to be a fascist. Also, the nazi party was the far right of parliament, with actual socialists being to their left. The nazis disliked “jewish capitalism” but they stood in stronger opposition to socialism, bolshevism, communism, anarchism, etc.
Hitler’s view of socialism was to remove the *appearance* of class differences and unite as one race. (volksgemeinschaft) Hitler then proceeded to privatize more than any other european country at the time, set wages low in accordance to business owner’s wishes (not to mention he thought business owners were higher evolved beings) abolished unions and sent their leaders to concentration camps, and more. That is not socialism, that is not left wing.
@@slappab Ok, brainiac, so Hitler and all the Nazi party leaders constantly raved about their socialistic achievements and goals, including praise from many other countries, plus the vast majority of Mein Kampf setting out the socialist road map - AND this video explaining in great detail the economic position for Germany - yet you, some nobody on the internet, has decreed - Nope - they are Fascists just because....reasons. I smell a leftoid moron butthurt that his side is actually the Nazis and he's only just coming to that realisation, lol.
They did not build a big military, they still had 750,000 horses when they invaded the USSR. Essentially they were sucked in the war, t6hat was the last thing they wanted.
That is a big military, according to the guy cleaning up after the horses.
@@sheriff0017 Yes but small for the guy who serviced the tanks, Russia had more than the rest of the world.
Not “slave” workers, conscripted workers.
propaganda
in 1934, it became hypercapitalist
It wasn't capitalist or marxist. It was something different from both.
In other words, they had no clue.
In other words, you have no clue.
@@BasedPureblood keep coping
average internet argument
@@robotech57 keep Seething.
@@Aurantius_ Dilate.
Thank you for this video.