们你们能不能别造谣。 after the Nazis took power, industries were privatized en masse. Several banks, shipyards, railway lines, shipping lines, welfare organizations, and more were privatized. The Nazi government took the stance that enterprises should be in private hands wherever possible. State ownership was to be avoided unless it was absolutely necessary for rearmament or the war effort, and even in those cases "the Reich often insisted on the inclusion in the contract of an option clause according to which the private firm operating the plant was entitled to purchase it."
们你们能不能别造谣。 after the Nazis took power, industries were privatized en masse. Several banks, shipyards, railway lines, shipping lines, welfare organizations, and more were privatized. The Nazi government took the stance that enterprises should be in private hands wherever possible. State ownership was to be avoided unless it was absolutely necessary for rearmament or the war effort, and even in those cases "the Reich often insisted on the inclusion in the contract of an option clause according to which the private firm operating the plant was entitled to purchase it." teabucket 发表于 2024-01-11 15:18
https://fee.org/articles/were-the-nazis-really-socialists-it-depends-on-how-you-define-socialism/ The Nazis didn’t call their ideology “national socialism” because they thought it sounded good. They were fervently opposed to capitalism. The Nazi Party’s chief propagandist, Joseph Goebbels, even once remarked that he’d sooner live under Bolshevism than capitalism. The Nazis instituted major public works projects such as the Autobahn, promised full employment, and dramatically increased government spending.… The Nazi government did not own the means of production in Germany, but they certainly controlled them. They set up control boards, cartels, and state-sponsored monopolies and konzerns, which they then carefully planned and regulated. Democratic socialists don’t believe in total government ownership of the means of production, nor do they wish to technocratically manage the economy. Industrial leaders hardly objected. In surrendering control of their enterprises to the state, they insulated themselves from market forces, ensuring they’d remain at the top of their respective industries …
https://fee.org/articles/were-the-nazis-really-socialists-it-depends-on-how-you-define-socialism/ The Nazis didn’t call their ideology “national socialism” because they thought it sounded good. They were fervently opposed to capitalism. The Nazi Party’s chief propagandist, Joseph Goebbels, even once remarked that he’d sooner live under Bolshevism than capitalism. The Nazis instituted major public works projects such as the Autobahn, promised full employment, and dramatically increased government spending.… The Nazi government did not own the means of production in Germany, but they certainly controlled them. They set up control boards, cartels, and state-sponsored monopolies and konzerns, which they then carefully planned and regulated. Democratic socialists don’t believe in total government ownership of the means of production, nor do they wish to technocratically manage the economy. Industrial leaders hardly objected. In surrendering control of their enterprises to the state, they insulated themselves from market forces, ensuring they’d remain at the top of their respective industries …
strawberrykiwi 发表于 2024-01-11 15:43
according to historian Richard Overy, the Nazi war economy was a mixed economy that combined free markets with central planning
多国右翼势力新纳粹势力发展越来越快
经济不好了，人心散了，只能靠民粹来凝聚人心了。。 美国也是这样。。。 惨。。。
你可真逗，佛州迪士尼门口那么长时间恐吓游客的新纳粹除了打出来纳粹标识以外，还打着DeSantis的旗号，你认为他们是左还是右。
另外你在这说说就算了，要是真说出啊希特勒的德国是左派，会被人笑掉大牙的
都这个认知，无语了
反中也需要点脑子，名称不等于政党，你不就想把纳粹和中国绑在一起吗？民主党和奴隶制有啥关系，为什么以前民主党代表奴隶主的利益？
左右不看名字，希特勒的政党名字里面虽然有个socialist 的字眼，但是政策和社会主义没任何关系，执行的是极右的极端民族主义和种族主义。 那时候的德国以排外、打击同性恋、抓铺共产党、抓铺移民和犹太人为主要目标，搞的是种族清洗。
真正的左派社会主义的政策是消减贫富差距。
右派搞的是反移民、种族清洗。
难以想象受过高等教育的人对于政治理念的左右划分都不明白，还在抠字眼
你怎么知道该层主受过高等教育？
欧洲的极右翼都是关心本国多于外国，他们对援助乌克兰并不积极。
德国意大利是排外，你干什么他们并不在乎，美英是伪君子，澳大利亚是真小人。
ACLU 的使命是支持言论自由，就是“我不同意你的观点，但我用生命来保护你表达观点的自由”这种。你觉得ACLU 是支持种族歧视排挤外来移民的组织吗？
德国会再选出个落榜美术生吗？这次让谁排队洗澡？
中国还叫人民共和国呢，你选过领导人？
手动点赞
岂止是笑掉大牙，会被人不齿吧。啥都不懂还敢谈论政治。
纳粹这次洗白了？！
朝鲜人民民主主义共和国
什么“真正的左派社会主义的政策是消减贫富差距。右派搞的是反移民、种族清洗。” 这种重新定义左右、给对方贴标签的宣传口号，只要喇叭够大就行了，事实可以放一边。每次STEM绿卡方案是那个党提出来的？又是哪个党给否决的？Chicago，NYC那些反对难民涌入的人，都是选共和党的右派？
无知狂妄，你拿出什么学历来，我都不会比你低
稍微有点常识再说这些啊，真不知道给你点赞的那几个都历史盲成啥了。
没有可能，极右翼党派也是以右翼为主，两个党主席都不是极右翼，还曾经驱逐纳粹领袖，欢迎正常入境德国，不欢迎偷渡，伊斯兰教是主要攻击目标，反伊斯兰，反对蒙面。
德国不是经济因素，主要是移民问题，帮派林立，犯罪率飙升，默克尔的移民政策导致德国全民转右，关键默克尔自己还是一个右翼政党，导致德国人被迫支持极右翼。
同意这里面大部分的观点。很多不同的意识形态观念，是统治阶层创造出来对屁民分而治之的，政客不分左右都是为自己谋利益的动物.
这是真傻 还是在装傻
那是版上的很多现在还支持共和党极右政策的人为了和纳粹划分关系的新动向。就是混淆左右。我看了好几的差不多的帖子了。 等极右公开支持纳粹的时候她们不知道还能怎么spin,或者是发自内心也觉得纳粹是对的
啥叫重新定义，左右的定义在政治上的划分有很明确的定义，何来的重新定义。你随便读一下这方面的资料，就能知道以social justice 为主要目标的理念在政治上叫做左派，以maximum security 为主要目标的理念在政治上为右派，所谓的大小政府都是衍生品，不是驱动因素。要看目标。 为了maximum security 的右派在极端情况下一样走极权的道路。 反之，实现social justice 也不一定非走极权道路，也可以按照民主法治程序执行social justice
再说了，左右标签你一脑子浆糊搞不清，那你就说新纳粹你反对不反对就行了？如果你非要把新纳粹贴上左派标签，那你自认右派，岂不是要更加反对他们了？ 迪斯尼门口举旗的新纳粹如果你也坚决反对，那还争论啥。我也本来就是反对那拨人的。
是这样的，病急乱投医
我也被那位月亮骑士惊呆了，这都是什么脑子
纳粹党没收私人企业搞社会主义公有制，大力提高国民福利，否则你以为为什么它在德国人气那么高 共产党和同性恋在纳粹党早期也是革命战友，上台之后才搞清洗，类似共产党的党内大清洗
共产媒体几十年如一日歪曲历史把自己美化成反纳粹英雄，就像中共成了抗日的中流砥柱 😂
们你们能不能别造谣。
after the Nazis took power, industries were privatized en masse. Several banks, shipyards, railway lines, shipping lines, welfare organizations, and more were privatized. The Nazi government took the stance that enterprises should be in private hands wherever possible. State ownership was to be avoided unless it was absolutely necessary for rearmament or the war effort, and even in those cases "the Reich often insisted on the inclusion in the contract of an option clause according to which the private firm operating the plant was entitled to purchase it."
论造谣谁比得过左媒？
https://mises.org/wire/yes-they-were-socialists-how-nazis-waged-war-private-property
纳粹党把别人的财产变成党产和党魁的私产，然后把这个叫做privatization。。。
The Nazis didn’t call their ideology “national socialism” because they thought it sounded good. They were fervently opposed to capitalism. The Nazi Party’s chief propagandist, Joseph Goebbels, even once remarked that he’d sooner live under Bolshevism than capitalism. The Nazis instituted major public works projects such as the Autobahn, promised full employment, and dramatically increased government spending.…
The Nazi government did not own the means of production in Germany, but they certainly controlled them. They set up control boards, cartels, and state-sponsored monopolies and konzerns, which they then carefully planned and regulated. Democratic socialists don’t believe in total government ownership of the means of production, nor do they wish to technocratically manage the economy. Industrial leaders hardly objected. In surrendering control of their enterprises to the state, they insulated themselves from market forces, ensuring they’d remain at the top of their respective industries …
according to historian Richard Overy, the Nazi war economy was a mixed economy that combined free markets with central planning
你说蒋介石搞个人独裁的年代，白色恐怖并党产控制一些大企业的年代，算是资本主义还是社会主义？
现在的中国经济制度社会主义还是资本主义？ 你说的明白吗
资本主义= 市场经济，这个你理解吧，这是个经济制度范畴的话题。这个资本主义概念本身仅局限于经济制度的范畴，不牵涉政治制度，它本身不代表左也不代表右。 另外社会主义确又不等于计划经济，这个概念本身覆盖很广泛也有模糊性。 另外社会主义的概念和共产主义的概念又是两个不同的概念。 再给你一个例子，没有共产主义标签的印度，直到九十年代还在用计划经济作为经济制度，这个常识你知道吧。
现在社会，经常混有社会主义因素和资本主义因素，共同存在，这种情况越来越多。 仅仅看到社会主义因素或者资本主义因素，根本不代表这个社会的政治理念左倾还是右倾，因为经济和政治是不同的概念。
总结一下，经济制度倾向性不是判断政治频谱的决定因素，经济不等同政治。 我前面都解释过了，你纠结的这些都是手段。政治理念划分是看目的,不看手段。
我靠，这智商。。朝鲜的全称还是“朝鮮民主主义人民共和国”呢
惊呆。。看了你的发言，这楼里所有人都油然而生智商优越感
经济制度本身确实没啥政治属性，政治属性主要来自于对社会内部阶级/贫富分化等现象的看法
从这角度来说，纳粹党当时也确实有相当大部分的国内经济政策是针对广大中下阶层，提升底层民众的生活水平，挂个socialist的标签其实也没啥
这种偏左的经济政策，和其在种族问题上极右的立场，其实并不矛盾 本来就没有任何政党是完全的极左或者极右的
整个欧洲打了几千年的仗，流干了血，就是为了成立民族国家nation state，就是为了实现民族统一
没想到二战后，在美国压制下又被迫采取了昂撒殖民帝国那套多民族融合的政策，好不容易完成统一的国家里涌进了海量其他族裔其他文化其他信仰的移民，这不出问题才奇怪了。。
笑死。现在美国那些支持懂王的铁锈带红脖子是要扩大贫富差异吗？ 现在的民主党搞全球化，侵犯的难道不是那些丢掉工作的红脖子的利益，造福的是华尔街金融财阀？
说的很对。 左右本来就是相辅相成的。对某些人左，对某些人右。都是维护国家利益的措施。
这才是正解
整个欧洲都是搞大政府的社会主义，政府支出占GDP比重远比中国高
除了说些插科打诨的话赚下嘴皮子便宜，你也拿不出个自圆其说的逻辑。如你所说，叫什么名字代表不了真正意识形态，那号称要均贫富social justice的左派，难道就真是在均贫富？嘴上说得好听谁不会？Chicago和NYC那些人平日装圣母，真到难民来了立马原形毕露，你装看不见？
美国如果遇到挫折，华人大概率是发泄对象