Seriously guys, we have *got* to start regulating Wall Street and investments more. And do something about wealth inequality. There is way, way too much money at the top and they're throwing it around recklessly. The next crash is going to make 2008 look like the.com boom.
> Seriously guys, we have *got* to start regulating Wall Street and investments more. And do something about wealth inequality.
That's a mixed message. "Doing something about wealth inequality" can be very risky. It's precisely what the National Socialist Party did about foreigners and Jews who'd invested their money in education and businesses, "returning the wealth to the people". It's what Russia did to the Ukraine at nearly the same time, redistributing the land and tools of the wealthier farmers to t
You are attempting to link the Holocaust to Nai policies regarding "wealth redistribution" (which weren't remotely socialist, as we know the word today)
You're also attempting to link the Holocaust and the Holodomor together when they have almost nothing in common.
Not a political ideology, not an economic ideology, not a motive (unless you're one of the Stalin wanted to ice the Ukrainians nuts)
I get the distinct impression you're trying to paint the deadliest white nationalist uprising in history with y
I link the Nazi seizure of Jewish property and foreign assets, and the Russian communist redistribution of working farms, as both being forms of "redistributing the wealth" deeply involved in the death of millions. Whether the National Socialist party was what Bernie Sanders would call socialism isn't the point: it's that both cried out for the "redistribution of wealth" and both slaughtered millions in the process.
The Nazi party painted themselves as saviors from Communism. Each fostered extreme fear of th
I link the Nazi seizure of Jewish property and foreign assets, and the Russian communist redistribution of working farms, as both being forms of "redistributing the wealth" deeply involved in the death of millions.
That's just it.
The Názi seizure of Jewish property and foreign assets was an aside. That was merely the logical thing to do to some group you were planning to exterminate.
Those 2 things can't be linked as "consequences of wealth distribution"
The actions of the Soviet Union and what happened to the Ukrainians, yes. Though of course with even a little bit of nuance, the real problem there wasn't wealth distribution.
> The Názi seizure of Jewish property and foreign assets was an aside. That was merely the logical thing to do to some group you were planning to exterminate.
But it wasn't "an aside". Redistributing wealth fro "those people who don't deserve it!" was part of the point. It didn't have to be logical, it _did_ gain votes and supporters. The same thing happens in Communist revolutions, and it happens in revolutions against royalty. It's a very popular political theme, and one that has often destroyed the wealth it tried to redistribute.
But it wasn't "an aside". Redistributing wealth fro "those people who don't deserve it!" was part of the point.
No, dude.
The wealth of the paltry amount of Jews (relative to the population) of Germany didn't accomplish shit. It was a microscopic fraction of the total wealth of the country.
It was simply part of the racist trope fed to the impoverished masses.
You said:
"Doing something about wealth inequality" can be very risky. It's precisely what the National Socialist Party did about foreigners and Jews who'd invested their money in education and businesses, "returning the wealth to the people".
The "redistribution of wealth" wasn't risky business because it was what the Nàzis were all about.
The goal was quite clear: To elevate aryans above everyone non-aryan in their country, with a particular extra level of spite toward Jews.
What you
The wealth of the paltry amount of Jews (relative to the population) of Germany didn't accomplish shit. It was a microscopic fraction of the total wealth of the country. It was simply part of the racist trope fed to the impoverished masses.
That is - unfortunately - completely wrong. The wealth of the jews financed the beginning and the first year fo the war. Go figure.
And you are, unfortunately, completely full of shit.
While there is no doubt that plunder took place, the claim that Jewish plunder was a large part of the war funding is nonsensical, period.
Total plunder from Jews across the entire war is estimated at around 8 billion 2021 dollars.
This is to be compared with the yearly spending of Nàzi Germany of around $751 billion 2021 dollars.
The idea that the 1% of the population that was Jewish had "20% of the wealth" or other racist tropes were just that- tr
The Nazis simply where a fascist regime, finding a minority which happens to be relatively rich, deprive them from their wealth and kill them.
While both might be (similar?) disgusting, it is quite a difference.
Aka: there is no big difference between "communist revolutions" and e.g. the French revolution, or the American revolution. The communists btw. considered themselves democrats, giving the people option to vote: if they joined the party. At that time, in th
> While both might be (similar?) disgusting, it is quite a difference.
The Communists also hated the Jews. Look up the "Jewish Autonomous Oblast", the Communist prison camp for Jews during World War II.
"Redistributing the wealth" has been a powerful indicator that a political party is rallying hatred and jealousy to kill people, seize the assets, and ruin the economy. More recent examples include South Africa, whose economy effectively collapsed and has still not recovered since the end of apartheid with
"redistribution of wealth" formerly in the hands of Afrikaners, the white colonists of South Africa. There was no such redistribution as they did not get stripped from their wealth.
They _tried_ to transfer the wealth, especially farm land and industries. Then AIDS hit: South Africa currently has roughly 20% of their population suffering from HIV, and it's according to some studies it's more than 40 times as prevalent among the African population as the Afrikaaners. That's a recipe for racial disparity in the ability to collect or retain wealth, especially as AIDS treatment remains expensive, and a recipe for racial discrimination in hiring workers.
That's nothing (Score:3)
Seriously guys, we have *got* to start regulating Wall Street and investments more. And do something about wealth inequality. There is way, way too much money at the top and they're throwing it around recklessly. The next crash is going to make 2008 look like the
Re: (Score:0, Flamebait)
> Seriously guys, we have *got* to start regulating Wall Street and investments more. And do something about wealth inequality.
That's a mixed message. "Doing something about wealth inequality" can be very risky. It's precisely what the National Socialist Party did about foreigners and Jews who'd invested their money in education and businesses, "returning the wealth to the people". It's what Russia did to the Ukraine at nearly the same time, redistributing the land and tools of the wealthier farmers to t
Re: (Score:2)
You're also attempting to link the Holocaust and the Holodomor together when they have almost nothing in common.
Not a political ideology, not an economic ideology, not a motive (unless you're one of the Stalin wanted to ice the Ukrainians nuts)
I get the distinct impression you're trying to paint the deadliest white nationalist uprising in history with y
Re: (Score:2)
I link the Nazi seizure of Jewish property and foreign assets, and the Russian communist redistribution of working farms, as both being forms of "redistributing the wealth" deeply involved in the death of millions. Whether the National Socialist party was what Bernie Sanders would call socialism isn't the point: it's that both cried out for the "redistribution of wealth" and both slaughtered millions in the process.
The Nazi party painted themselves as saviors from Communism. Each fostered extreme fear of th
Re: (Score:2)
I link the Nazi seizure of Jewish property and foreign assets, and the Russian communist redistribution of working farms, as both being forms of "redistributing the wealth" deeply involved in the death of millions.
That's just it.
The Názi seizure of Jewish property and foreign assets was an aside. That was merely the logical thing to do to some group you were planning to exterminate.
Those 2 things can't be linked as "consequences of wealth distribution"
The actions of the Soviet Union and what happened to the Ukrainians, yes. Though of course with even a little bit of nuance, the real problem there wasn't wealth distribution.
Re:That's nothing (Score:2)
> The Názi seizure of Jewish property and foreign assets was an aside. That was merely the logical thing to do to some group you were planning to exterminate.
But it wasn't "an aside". Redistributing wealth fro "those people who don't deserve it!" was part of the point. It didn't have to be logical, it _did_ gain votes and supporters. The same thing happens in Communist revolutions, and it happens in revolutions against royalty. It's a very popular political theme, and one that has often destroyed the wealth it tried to redistribute.
Re: (Score:2)
But it wasn't "an aside". Redistributing wealth fro "those people who don't deserve it!" was part of the point.
No, dude.
The wealth of the paltry amount of Jews (relative to the population) of Germany didn't accomplish shit. It was a microscopic fraction of the total wealth of the country.
It was simply part of the racist trope fed to the impoverished masses.
You said:
"Doing something about wealth inequality" can be very risky. It's precisely what the National Socialist Party did about foreigners and Jews who'd invested their money in education and businesses, "returning the wealth to the people".
The "redistribution of wealth" wasn't risky business because it was what the Nàzis were all about.
The goal was quite clear: To elevate aryans above everyone non-aryan in their country, with a particular extra level of spite toward Jews.
What you
Re: (Score:2)
The wealth of the paltry amount of Jews (relative to the population) of Germany didn't accomplish shit. It was a microscopic fraction of the total wealth of the country.
It was simply part of the racist trope fed to the impoverished masses.
That is - unfortunately - completely wrong.
The wealth of the jews financed the beginning and the first year fo the war.
Go figure.
Re: (Score:2)
That is - unfortunately - completely wrong.
And you are, unfortunately, completely full of shit.
While there is no doubt that plunder took place, the claim that Jewish plunder was a large part of the war funding is nonsensical, period.
Total plunder from Jews across the entire war is estimated at around 8 billion 2021 dollars.
This is to be compared with the yearly spending of Nàzi Germany of around $751 billion 2021 dollars.
The idea that the 1% of the population that was Jewish had "20% of the wealth" or other racist tropes were just that- tr
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, you are an idiot.
The jewish population was not 1%.
And is not today.
It was roughly 30% in Germany at that time, no idea about other countries.
No idea where you got your numbers from ...
Re: (Score:2)
But in case I'm missing something, can you go ahead and solve for "n" for me?
n = 505000 / 67000000
Seriously dude, do you ever get tired of looking like a dumbfuck? [ushmm.org]
I mean seriously... 30%? You think there were 20 million Jews in Germany?
How fucking stupid can you be?
Re: (Score:2)
The communist revolutions deposed aristocrats.
The Nazis simply where a fascist regime, finding a minority which happens to be relatively rich, deprive them from their wealth and kill them.
While both might be (similar?) disgusting, it is quite a difference.
Aka: there is no big difference between "communist revolutions" and e.g. the French revolution, or the American revolution. The communists btw. considered themselves democrats, giving the people option to vote: if they joined the party. At that time, in th
Re: (Score:2)
> While both might be (similar?) disgusting, it is quite a difference.
The Communists also hated the Jews. Look up the "Jewish Autonomous Oblast", the Communist prison camp for Jews during World War II.
"Redistributing the wealth" has been a powerful indicator that a political party is rallying hatred and jealousy to kill people, seize the assets, and ruin the economy. More recent examples include South Africa, whose economy effectively collapsed and has still not recovered since the end of apartheid with
Re: (Score:2)
"redistribution of wealth" formerly in the hands of Afrikaners, the white colonists of South Africa.
There was no such redistribution as they did not get stripped from their wealth.
Re: (Score:2)
They _tried_ to transfer the wealth, especially farm land and industries. Then AIDS hit: South Africa currently has roughly 20% of their population suffering from HIV, and it's according to some studies it's more than 40 times as prevalent among the African population as the Afrikaaners. That's a recipe for racial disparity in the ability to collect or retain wealth, especially as AIDS treatment remains expensive, and a recipe for racial discrimination in hiring workers.
Re: (Score:2)
They're still trying to redistribute it, in more recent efforts with a constitutional amendment.
https://abcnews.go.com/Interna... [go.com]