]
Wrong. Nazis tried to deregulated capitalism and privatize the industry.
Yeah Nazis transforming Germany into a kind of socialist economy is a common misconception based on Peter Temins and Peter Hayes lectures about the economic policies and ideological allignment of Nazis which still persists today. It would also not be really accurate tho to call the economic policies by the Nazis as a ideological paradise for modern right-libertarians, there were too many state regulations and interventions for that.

When Nazis rose to power in 1933, unemployment was at a really high amount of 6 million people and one of the first policies to please industrial moguls, some of them who helped Hitler to get into power (Carl Friedrich von Siemens, Krupp Family, Quandt family, Alfred Hugenberg Franz von Mendelssohn etc.) was to bust worker unions, free trade unions and some freshly gained workers rights in the Weimar Republic that social democracy fought for among with more radical socialists (including Marxists) which are basic standard in most european countries today.

These industrial moguls were supportive of the Nazis who campaigned to squash the rise of the Bolshewiki in Russia and other flavors of Socialism in Germany and Europe. When they met Hitler in 5 February 1933, he was open about planning to turn Germany into a dictatorship. He also told them private enterprise could not be maintained in a Democracy (a idea Peter Thiel in particular propagates these days) and would only be conceivable if people have a sound idea of authority and personality. Germanys biggest companies at the time had no qualm funding the Nazis election campaigns to dissolve Democracy.

As for private property, Nazis saw private property as important incentive to increase economic efficiency and there was actually barely any nationalizations of private firms despite Reichsbank President Hjalmar Schachts plan from 5 May 1934, which is emblematic for a state planned economy on the level such as DDR, USSR and so on, despite no scrupel in applying force and terror and regulating + intervening markets for the transformation into a war economy in order to eventually invading pretty much all of europe as seen in WWII. Despite widespread rationing they still had ample scope to follow their own production plans, the initiative of investing decision despite influence of state regulation remained with the enterprises.

What is also true is that Hitler explained in a memorandum from August 1936 why he believed its necessary for German Economy to achieve autarky in 4 years, which was the basis for the four-year-plan. The new plan for economic management included wage and price controls, centralization of the mobilization of labor and import restrictions. This four-year-plan to get Nazi Germany ready for war had key weaknesses:

- Hitler never allowed the economy to be placed on total war footing
- Hitler still wanted to protect the "golden standard" of living and manage consumer levels without causing a rise of Inflation and they were successful on that front
- Germanys economy was only partially prepared for war which would start early in fall 1939 after "Blitzkrieg" invading Poland, even Hitler predicted that Germany would not be fully ready for war until 1942.
- Economic policy by the Nazis became unsustainable by 1939. While Germanys population kept growing, the Nazis tried to restrict consumer goods industry, especially housing construction
- Thats why some historians argue that this internal pressure gave Hitler a reason to decide to start the war earlier than originally planned even tho it would take at least 3 more years for Germany to be fully ready, again showing the importance and influence of Economy in societal and geopolitical decisions, including war.

1939-1945 the industry was fully focused on providing armament for Germanys military and the expansion wars aswell as the total persecution of the jews gave Nazi Germanys companies free slaves working in fabrics and mines. Blitzkrieg tactics and start-stop wars all over europe, plundering the assets and goods of other european countries were supposed to provide a outlet for Germanys over-heating and heavily in-debt economy. However, Germany obtained less than 30% of its war expenditures from plundering Europe even tho the occupied countries combined GDP was roughly double that of Nazi Germanys. Germany was already in need of more labour in 1939 and the war claimed more and more men, by 1944 the german civil workforce decreased from 39 million to 29 million and the occupied territories had to compensate for these labour shortages in Germany.





Some good academic sources on Nazi Economy include these:

https://www.academia.edu/38280094/Economy_of_the_Third_Reich_LFD_
https://www.academia.edu/8889475/Th...erty_in_the_Nazi_Economy_The_Case_of_Industry
https://germanhistorydocs.org/en/nazi-germany-1933-1945/economy-and-consumer-politics
https://lithub.com/in-the-room-where-german-tycoons-agreed-to-fund-hitlers-rise-to-power/
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...ChAWegQIFBAB&usg=AOvVaw1LtBl-109atS0nSBQI14PH
https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/exploitation-and-destruction-nazi-occupied-europe
 
Last edited:
was to bust worker unions, free trade unions and some freshly gained workers rights in the Weimar Republic that social democracy fought for among with more radical socialists (including Marxists) which are basic standard in most european countries today.
Which is smth USA right wing does a lot these days. Musk is at "war" with union of tesla in Norway or Sweden irc
 
Its hardcore liberal, therefore right wing but what I mean is they are leaning toward what they think is progress. Most mainstream media in the US are like that. The problem is that they mostly use progressism as an facade to avoid looking at the bad stuff. Which leads to things like pinkwashing.

Also please >>

moderate that.
You are not going to get anyone banned,bro. Jail and death penalty for communist is something that has happened in a few based nations.
 
Rome was way more gay than Sparta lmfao
Definetily not. Spartans only married women for offspring. They spent most of their lives around other men. Roman homosexuality is overblown.
Post automatically merged:

Spartans were even a minority in their own region. They subjugated the majority population and for all intents and purooses used them as live target practice and training dummies for their young soldiers in training
Their entire militaristic culture revolved around the fear of a widespread slave revolt.
 
Definetily not. Spartans only married women for offspring. They spent most of their lives around other men. Roman homosexuality is overblown.
Sparta as a city and state was really small, Rome was massive compared to it, and Romans pretty much invented modern Hedonism.

Just the sheer scale of Rome makes Rome way more gay than Sparta ever was, hell Julius Caesar was bisexual
 
Top