are you serious?
housing, security, I have no idea how they think they will make sure everyone has healthy foods, are they going to outlaw the junk food and put every one of those workers out of a job
Public ownership translation … no one one will own more than one property for now, and if there is still a shortage private property will be abolished and public property will take its place for a more fairer equitable society
No. The Nazis originated from the Freikorps movements, which were formed to combat workers movements in Germany in 1919-1923. They were from their very inception diametrically opposed to socialists and workers movements.
Now regarding their own economic policy, there were parts of the NSDAP that were fairly close to socialism. Those parts were exterminated in the night of the long knives. After that the Nazis privatized more than they nationalized (though they did both) and outlawed unions.
If the British were not themselves racist murderers, perhaps they would have moved much much much earlier to compel Germany and Italy to not be racist murderers and we wouldn’t have had WW2 at all.
I want to see if I get this , so if the British racist murderers stopped the German Racists murderers and Italian racist murderers in the 1930’s, world war 2 could have been prevented?
Liberal education for you , one small step for liberalism and a giant step for ignorance
Yeah, maybe you’re right. When the government is forcing you to buy product X and regulating anything else out of existence, it’s really not socialism. 
If the government controls it and mandates it, they effectively own it.
Yeah, try again.
While on the surface, they were returning corporations to private ownership, the mandate was that they fall within the framework of the Nazi party. Essentially, government was 100% in control.
exactly and also the people that ran these businesses were members of the Nazi party and can prove their bloodline , if there was any trace of ■■■■■■ blood, you were shipped out
Bring in enough uneducated illegal immigrants to outnumber the workers. Let them vote to get free stuff paid for by the workers. The majority win. Wealth redistribution. Democratic Socialism.
LOL does that mean a socialist who likes to vote on some things as he redistributes wealth???
And that is exactly how the voters in californicate gave high income earners a 13.3% state income tax. The politic of envy works for redistribution every time.
It’s also why the politicians campaign for these tax hikes by focusing their ads on the people who don’t pay them. If you aren’t paying the tax, are you more or less likely to vote for it? Hmm…
Contrary to the Marxists, the Nazis did not advocate public ownership of the means of production. They did demand that the government oversee and run the nation’s economy. The issue of legal ownership, they explained, is secondary; what counts is the issue of control. Private citizens, therefore, may continue to hold titles to property—so long as the state reserves to itself the unqualified right to regulate the use of their property.
If “ownership” means the right to determine the use and disposal of material goods, then Nazism endowed the state with every real prerogative of ownership. What the individual retained was merely a formal deed, a contentless deed, which conferred no rights on its holder. Under communism, there is collective ownership of property de jure. Under Nazism, there is the same collective ownership de facto.
The truth is winner can see losses from a mile off I’m a big time winner so obviously I see losers from a mile off and Socialism=losing big time
trust me that’s all you need to know
Socialism comes down to taking power away from the people and giving that power to a hand full of elected politicians. Instead of thousands of people making financial decisions it’s left up to the Politicians to make those decisions.
And don’t think that the government will be fair about it. We already know from experience that our government has no issues suppressing our civil liberties in the name of safety.
Exactly.
I’ve seen that defense by the left multiple times along with what is supposed go be a heartfelt and justified guffaw at the ignorance of their debate opponent. It is mere deception that fools only the most ignorant.
You are correct. When “control” has the same priviledge and prerogative that is normally given to an “owner”, then the controller is essentially and operationally the owner, regardless of what deception is printed on some legal document.
Well you know, “In this day and age”… we all need to lick government boots for safety…
The best line I’ve seen is one of the 1st amendment auditors reversed it on them… “Why don’t you want to ID”… “Well sir, in this day and age, citizens have to keep their identify private or they’ll end up losing rights after they get placed on the terrorist watch list for holding a camera”…
I’ve always asked “What day and age? The day and age where murder is half what it was in the 80’s?”
