That's absurd and completely false. He used the term "Socialist" in NatSoc because it had populist appeal, as per Mein Kampf. He was not a socialist economically in any fashion. He was fascist and instituting a meritocracy in Germany.
http://www.renegadetribune.com/ayn-rand-plagiarized-adolf-hitler/
This article does a good job of highlighting Hitler's economics. He believed in the Individual which is direct opposite of communism.
Hitler's Second Book boldly proclaims the socialist interventionist roots of his economics:
"The present world commodity market is not unlimited. Te number of industrially active nations has steadily increased. Almost all of the European nations suffr from an inadequate and unsatisfactory relation between soil and population. Hence they are dependent on world export. In recent years the American Union has turned to export, as has also Japan in the east. This a struggle automatically begins for the limited markets, which becomes tougher the more numerous the industrial nations become and conversely, the more the markets shrink.".
This is a repackaging of Marx's "Tendency of the Rate of Profit to Fall" insanity. This is a part of what the Austrians refer to as The Business Cycle. The socialists use this incorrectly as a central idea from which to demonize "capitalism" & the utter conviction of pronouncing that it (capitalism) is about to fail.
If there truly is a (((big evil))) machination happening in the world, then both "capitalism" and "socialism" are separate wings of its marketing divisions. By virtue of examining his actions and his words, we find that Hitlers belief in the individual is mostly word-play sophistry. Every man is secondary to Hitler's conception of the individual as fully submitted to The State. He rationalizes this by proclaiming that blood is the collective which operates above the individual.
Vis-a-vis he uses linguistic tricks to run proclaim "individualism" when it's obviously collectivism. This is the same sort of hocus pocus which is at the heart of Hitler's "privatization". It was all nothing more than cronyism.
I am not a Randian. Neither do I have the perfect idea of how Power and Market interact together. I'm fine with ethno-states. I accept that there is a massive (((ethnicity))) at war with the world, and maybe we don't have any good choices.
But, Hiter's economics are socialist, and lying about it is just another (((trick))).
>Vis-a-vis he uses linguistic tricks to run proclaim "individualism" when it's obviously collectivism. This is the same sort of hocus pocus which is at the heart of Hitler's "privatization". It was all nothing more than cronyism.
So you don't believe in what Hitler actually said he intended for Germany? Might as well call him full of it. Pretty ridiculous. You think this quote is sophistry??
“A human community is well organized only when it facilitates to the highest possible degree individual creative forces and utilizes their work for the benefit of the community…the duty of an organized folk-community is to place the inventor in a position where he can be of the greatest benefit to all…It is in the interests of all to ensure men of creative brains a decisive influence and facilitate their work.”
Socialism would never allow that.
(post is archived)