Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door FISHERMAN
(Bericht 1674141)
Hitler was n�*et links.
Ik heb deze discussie al 100den malen op verschillende fora(o.a.PI) gevoerd en heb geen zin om het nog eens te doen.
Maar elke serieuze politicoloog/historicus zal Hitler in het Extreem-rechtse kamp plaatsen.
Ik ga hier geen discussie meer over voeren. Alleen zal ik een link geven naar de site van een rechts-liberaal(een stroming waar ik als linkse weinig tot geen affiniteit mee heb) die klaar en duidelijk zegt dat Hitler extreem-rechts was.
http://lvb.net/item/1128
|
Mooi zo, een artikel zonder inhoud, ik hoef niet te vertellen welke andere regimes allemaal het politieke spel van culturele revolutie doorvoerden?
Lees anders dit:
----------------------
Nevertheless, apart from Mises and his readers, practically no one thinks of Nazi Germany as a socialist state. It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed.
The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.
What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed
in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was
the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the
substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.
De facto government ownership of the means of production, as Mises termed it, was logically implied by such fundamental collectivist principles embraced by the Nazis as that the common good comes before the private good and the individual exists as a means to the ends of the State. If the individual is a means to the ends of the State, so too, of course, is his property. Just as he is owned by the State, his property is also owned by the State.
But what specifically established
de facto socialism in Nazi Germany was the introduction of price and wage controls in 1936. These were imposed in response to the inflation of the money supply carried out by the regime from the time of its coming to power in early 1933. The Nazi regime inflated the money supply as the means of financing the vast increase in government spending required by its programs of public works, subsidies, and rearmament. The price and wage controls were imposed in response to the rise in prices that began to result from the inflation.
-------------------------------
Ik wil ook de volgende aspecten in rekenschap brengen:
1 Het radicaliseren van de eigen cultuur vond ook plaats in de USSR en zeker in de PRChina.
2 Nazi-Duitsland hief restricties op wapenbezit.
3 Het hief de democratie in verregaande mate op en collectiviseerde de politieke strekkingen.
4 Het viseren van joden in Nazi-Duitsland kan worden doorgetrokken naar het verwijderen van de Koelakken in de USSR en het Chinese repressieorgaan tegen de Tibetanen en consoorten, alsook het principe van "russificatie" dat zéér hardnekkig werd doorgevoerd.
