Socialism, is when you have two cows, and you are made to share the milk with everyone else who doesn’t have a cow.
Communism, is when you have two cows, the government takes them, and gives you the milk.
Fascism, is where you have two cows, the government takes your cows, and sells you the milk.
Nazism, is when the government takes your cows and shoots you.
Capitalism, is where you have two cows, sell one, buy a bull, and make more cows.
Source: http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2685.htm
view the rest of the comments →
14528750? ago
Biased, bluepilled, and borderline retarded. Fixed :
Socialism : you have two cows, the government takes 60%+ of your milk and gives it to people without a cow
Communism : you have two cows, you have to work to milk them, but you don't have any say in how the milk is distributed (it almost entirely goes to other people)
Fascism : you have two cows, you get to milk them, you get to do whatever you like with the milk, provided you pay a relatively high rate of tax (lets say 25%, but it really varies because fascism isn't some kind of simplistic box like the rest). If you overstep your bounds and challenge the safety of the nation, the government kills you and reallocates your cows to loyal citizens
Nazism : you have two cows, you get to milk them, you do whatever you like with the milk, provided you pay a high rate of tax (lets say 40%). You use [insert nice huwhite nationality here] cows, because they're the best (and we'll shoot you if you say otherwise) (but to be fair, they are amongst the best cows in the world), and if you overstep your bounds and challenge the safety and security of the nation or shelter the long nose cows (which are grade A shits who keep trying to collapse your nation), then they kill you and reallocate your cows
^^^everything above this line has some kind of safety net from unforeseen disasters, to some degree, generally decreasing from top to bottom
Capitalism : You have two cows, and your success is partially determined by your ability to make the most of the situation, but you still pay taxes (about 20%), which still go to people without cows, and you have little to no safety net (in hardcore capitalism) if a tornado comes through and kills your cows. Some people who started with lots of money generally get to play a different game where their wealth just generates more wealth with minimal effort, and they can simply buy your milk for a comparative pittance, whilst being free to gut the nation and its people in favour of buying milk en masse from a foreign country with less strict rules.
The presumption that more capitalism = more better is fucking retarded - anyone with a brain understands the importance of balance between two extremes.
The presumption that fascism = unequivocally evil, or bad for citizens is just fucking weird. Under that kind of extreme metric fascism (including nazism) = governemnt takes your cows and shoots you, and capitalism = government takes your cows, exports them overseas, and tells you its your fault as you starve to death. You confuse small government, low regulations with capitalism. They're not the same thing. You mean 'libertarianism', not capitalism, and even then its more debatable. An-cap is not a divinely inspired philosophy, its a mass famine waiting to happen.
Do you really think a true explanation of nazism (which, lets remember, managed to take a country from zimbabwe tier economics to taking on most of the fucking planet in WW2 in the space of 5 years), consists of 'government takes your cows and shoots you'?
Why do so many retards post here?
14545718? ago
I wonder if Nazism got up to a higher tax rate because of the desperation of the war? If the war didn't happen I have a feeling the rate would have been lower because they got rid of the international bankers and usury.
14545924? ago
Probably - I'm not even 100% sure quite how high their tax rate was, and given the uniqueness of the economic system, it may not even directly translate. Glancing around it seems it actually rarely went much higher than 15%, so some way below that of Britains, but they were also using war spoils for costs instead of increasing taxes, so again its kind of hard to say for sure. Either way, cutting out the middlemen would have been helpful
14550835? ago
There is actually very little information readily available on Nazi economics. I think it is that way for a reason. Probably pretty good. The TRS guys mentioned this a few weeks ago and someone recently sent them a rare book about it. This podcast from a few years ago by another podcast group is very interesting also. They talk about the economics and stuff like what mortgages were like. Fascinating. Germany's National Socialism Vs. Marxist Leftist Ideologies (full)
14552015? ago
Sweet - thanks for the link, i've not seen it before, and as you say its very hard to come by this info. I definitely agree r.e minimising information on it for a reason though. It's interesting so many Americans here would want a return to a system somewhat similar to capitalism greenbacks style, and miss how close this is to the nat-soc system of being paid based on production.
Kind of interesting how much and what types of information got shut down post war. Nazi era fitness manuals were basically all destroyed, really erased from history. Given the physical prowess even under starvation conditions demonstrated by many of them, I suspect the 'jews/cabal didn't want to face aryan warriors' again theory is pretty based, possibly even true. Might not be a surprise (((they've))) created a system where so many people across the world are hugely fat and lazy today, and the cult of physical fitness has been massively stamped down.