It vaguely annoys me that a lot of people seem to think the Nazi regime was super efficient. They are conflating the Nazi period with the stereotypical German work ethic. The regime was actually extremely economically inefficient, regardless of how socialist it may or may not have been.
Just saying.
I’m glad you didn’t mention the war.
I’m not sure what your point is (I’m guessing I’d have to reread the thread more carefully) but even when the regime was engaged in full-blown war production, they weren’t efficient about it, or at least not nearly as efficient as they could have been nor as efficient as a lot of people assume on their behalf. Regardless of what economic-system labels one could apply to Germany 1933-1945, there were a number of hampering (indeed crippling) limitations.
I just wanted to make a Fawlty Towers joke. That was my point.
Ah.
Not a fan, personally.
Maybe we get another 3 1/2 year break before he comes back to respond.
Yeah, you would have thought he would be back from school by now.
In 1933, the German economy was not doing well.
In 1945, it had ceased to exist.
So yeah, the Nazis weren’t great at that, either.
The stereotypical German work ethic was/is precise, not efficient. I was recently shopping for a used car and I bounced a Passat off my brother, a VW loyalist. He warned me that there are twelve (or is it eight; whatever; too many) screws to remove the air cleaner cover. “They never stopped building Tiger tanks.” VW founder Ferdinand Porsche designed the Tiger.
Nazis lost the war through 'spectacular inefficiency', new account claims
There’s an old joke: An American gunmaker makes a gun with 25 parts. A Japanese gunmaker makes one with 17 parts. The German’s gun has 75 parts.
The poster who dredged up this thread has been inactive for a full day. Only 1276 more before he gets around to it again.
As long as nobody calls them capitalists, I’m good.
It says something about his character that he found an old thread about “idiots who say the Nazis were Socialists” and came here to report in.
This thread was idle for about 40 days when he first posted in it (observing that adaher had victoriously dominated the discussion). There were about half a dozen posts by others before he came back three and a half years later to revive it. His post count is 86; he has 86 posts in this thread. And it would have been very easy for him to find it, because he would have had a sub to it.
Hopefully his great wisdom will remain confined to this thread alone. Unless the mods decide to lock it, forcing him to find other threads to shit in.
I think you may have missed that I was making a joke.
Calling them capitalists or socialists implies that the Nazi had *any *economic principles, which they didn’t. They didn’t care about money or labor. They cared about race, war, land and pride. Everything else was just a means to an end.
I’m sure there are important socialist leaders in Finland and France. But socialism isn’t really about celebrating leaders. That was part of fascism, since that was a dictatorship-based system. It was also Stalin’s trip, but Stalin was a very large-scale dictator with an anti-capitalistic policy, rather than a textbook socialist. I mean, I don’t completely demonize him, but he was not even a standard Bolshevik, let alone the future Marx and Engels were looking for. Dictatorship as an idea doesn’t come from socialism, even if they sometimes overlap. Dictatorship is apparently older than our oldest historical records; socialist dictators are a tiny fraction of dictators; and not all socialists are pro-dictatorship.
Wait wait, what’s this story now?