• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When Big Business Rolled Over For Fascism, And Cashed In

aociswundumho said:
You mean offer people jobs?
Click to expand...

So jobs in a building that collapses and kills over 1000 was good?

aociswundumho said:
The choice at the time for most was working for wages or subsistence farming. Working in the factory was better, even with the bad conditions.
Click to expand...

So this was fine then?

Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
aociswundumho said:
I have never said that because it's incoherent. Furthermore, corporations are products of the state. The exist in order to protect rich people from liability. They would not exist in a free market.
Click to expand...

And how would they go away then? What stops them from becoming de facto governments like the East India Company?
aociswundumho said:
They don't want small government, they want big government because only big government can spend 100s of billions on weapons and prisons.
Click to expand...

And how many corporate business models depend on using the government as a customer?

aociswundumho said:
No, they don't overlap. You may quit your job any moment you choose to. If you don't like the pay or the conditions, then quit. Nobody owes you anything.
Click to expand...

What if corporations lie and say it's safe until the building collapses or you die of radiation poisoning? What about corporations that use slave labor?

And that's pretty easy for you to say, when you live in the US and not in an exploited developing world country kept poor to provide cheap labor.
aociswundumho said:
No. Quit if you don't like the job.



Of course not, but that was clear, criminal behavior, and the government-run court let them get away with it.
Click to expand...

And how many corporations would be willing to use criminal means to make a buck if you gave them the chance? Pretty well everyone on that list I posted, and you have no way to stop them.
 
Yes_Minister said:
And how many corporations would be willing to use criminal means to make a buck?
Click to expand...

A very, very small percentage. People in business are not all cold-hearted monsters. The overwhelming majority of business owners want their customers and their employees to be happy.
 
aociswundumho said:
A very, very small percentage. People in business are not all cold-hearted monsters. The overwhelming majority of business owners want their customers and their employees to be happy.
Click to expand...

What is that based on? A lot businessmen are that cold hearted, because they will choose the quickest way to make a buck, damn the employee, the customer or any sort of morality or long term thinking.

If your ideology actually worked, Enron or Lehman Bros wouldn't have existed, and we wouldn't see corporations use slave labor in the third world or try to poison people to cut corners.

This stuff wouldn't happen:

Tesla workers report explosions, concussions, and grisly robot injuries at Texas factory

Tesla has a history of autoworker injuries at its factories.
www.theverge.com

Amazon warehouse injuries '80% higher' than competitors, report claims

A union-led group says Amazon's injury rate is twice that of its closest competitor.
www.bbc.com

You keep ignoring that list I post because it demonstrates your ideology doesn't work.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Do you also think the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea practices democracy?
Click to expand...
Of course we need to ignore Hitler's words from a 1932 interview.

"Socialism’, he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, ‘is the science of dealing with the common weal [health or well-being]. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.

‘Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality and, unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.

‘We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our Socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the State on the basis of race solidarity. To us, State and race are one…"

Adolf Hitler on the Nazi form of "socialism" (1932)

In July 1932 Adolf Hitler offered his definition of the Nazi form of "socialism". It differs from that of Marxists who, Hitler says, have "stolen the term".
alphahistory.com
It's indeed absurd that so-called Leftists seek to deny Hitler's words with sneering at Conservatives to mask their bloody heritage. In classic socialist dictator fashion Hitler solicited support from all quarters with a grand socialist altruistic vision. Once in power he violently eliminated all potential rivals including those in the Nazi party again in classic socialist dictator fashion. Look at how Stalin dealt with Trotsky.
 
Early in the Nazi days, the socialists were co-opted and then eventually killed while the party reshaped itself around right wing authoritarianism. That is from the co-option period.
 
Slartibartfast said:
Early in the Nazi days, the socialists were co-opted and then eventually killed while the party reshaped itself around right wing authoritarianism. That is from the co-option period.
Click to expand...
Stalin, Mao, and Castro all carried out identical violent purges to Hitler's of political opponents while maintaining their identity as socialists. Socialist dictators idea of transition is exterminate all rivals. No amount of denial counters Hitler's declaration and the history of bloody purges.

I note the absence of any response to the example of Stalin's brutal "co-opting" his rival Trotsky.
 
Left wing authoritarian also exists.

In both cases it’s a bad thing.
 
skews13. said:
The biggest injustice at Nuremburg, was none of those financiers, or corporations had their assets seized.
Click to expand...

How is that an injustice?
 
ConWolf said:
How is that an injustice?
Click to expand...
After the Nazis seized power in Germany, Krupp supported the regime and was one of many German businesses that profited from slave labor during World War II. Upon the war's end, the head of the company, Alfried Krupp, was tried and convicted as a war criminal for employing prisoners of war, foreign civilians and concentration camp inmates under inhumane conditions in support of the Nazi war effort.[1] Despite being sentenced to imprisonment for twelve years, he served just three and was pardoned (but not acquitted) by John J. McCloy.[2] As a result of this pardon, all of Krupp's holdings were restored.[2]

Krupp - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
 

Would very much enjoy a specific name.
bongsaway said:
They didn't like his social programs, it took away from their profits.
Click to expand...

Assume that is addressed in the documentary.

I've heard that food companies are the biggest proponents of food stamps....but that is just rumor (to me).

bongsaway said:
So, nothing new from the people with obscene amounts of money, they are still doing their best to use their money to influence American politics.
Click to expand...

Uh...that is fundamental. Economic power is political power and political power is economic power. That is a given. When Harris announced, some of her supporters poured in several million dollars.

bongsaway said:
Can you say Elon musk?
Click to expand...

I can. I can also say Tesla....cars I don't like. I think Musk has embarassed himself in his little play.

I can also say Bill Gates.

Bill Gates Privately Says He Has Backed Harris With $50 Million Donation

Mr. Gates said in a statement to The Times that “this election is different,” reflecting a significant change in his political strategy.
www.nytimes.com

bongsaway said:
And republicans who think the GOP cares about you,
Click to expand...
Would be as stupid as the decomcrats who think the party with a jackass for an Avatar cares about them.

bongsaway said:
you have been duped for so long you think your kind of government is good.
Click to expand...

How are the two related? Good government is government that does not care about people, but cares about a level playing field. You are on your own after that. If you think democrats offer anything better, you've been taken.
 

They were restored?

That means they were intially siezed?

I am still unclear on how not siezing them (which may have actually happened) an injustice. According to who ?
 
ConWolf said:
They were restored?

That means they were intially siezed?

I am still unclear on how not siezing them (which may have actually happened) an injustice. According to who ?
Click to expand...
Wait, you are changing the argument, if they had been seized but then that is reversed, Alfred Krupp ultimately DID NOT have them taken away permanently.

That is an injustice to those slave laborers.
 
You think trump and his billionaire buddies are playing on a level field with you?
4+ hours of conspiracy theories that turned out to be true...you can find it on YouTube. Rather enlightening. It's about eight different stories and man is our government dirty in so many different ways that we have no idea. The FBI making up false stories and passing them to the press and other niceties.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Wait, you are changing the argument, if they had been seized but then that is reversed, Alfred Krupp ultimately DID NOT have them taken away permanently.

That is an injustice to those slave laborers.
Click to expand...

I am not changing anything. I simply read the link you supplied.

A court decided to return them.

Now, to the comment that was made.

First, why was it an injustice?

Second, how would justice be served? Just seizing their assets? To what end?
 
bongsaway said:
You think trump and his billionaire buddies are playing on a level field with you?
Click to expand...

I did not say that. I think I said economic power is political power and political power is economic power. I don't like it, but it's a sad hard fact. Biden wasn't either. Neither was Obama or Bush or most any president (or congresscritter).

I also said that if you believe that Trump cares about you, that you (in the general sense) are as stupid as those who think that Biden or Harris care about them.
 

If this is news to you, then you've got some catching up to do.

When you work for a big corporation, you serve the interest of the top level executives. It's rather disgusting. But it's true. Rich as they are, they will still use company resources to fund their lifestyle (in one instance, I know a board meeting (including all the top brass) was called for a Friday in the city the Super Bowl was to be played in. Did they really need the company to fund that trip?
 
All you've done is acknowledge how ****ed up things are in america and how the top dis-proportionally makes out way better than the average person who they **** constantly with high prices. You think you know, but you don't. I was shocked by some of the stories.
 
bongsaway said:
All you've done is acknowledge how ****ed up things are in america and how the top dis-proportionally makes out way better than the average person who they **** constantly with high prices.
Click to expand...

Yes, I did. I don't believe I was trying to hide anything. I am not a fan of large corporations. One reason is that you can't tell where they stop and where government begins. I've worked for a couple where we gained access by hiring away top government officials who knew how to work the system. And when a guy can become a billionaire selling carmel colored sugar water (Roberto Goizueta), something is wrong. The big problem for you is that you want more government (or so it seems) and why would I vote for that when I know they are sleeping with industry ?

bongsaway said:
You think you know, but you don't.
Click to expand...

This is where you lose me. You don't know what I know. Stop sounding like a moronic lefty.

bongsaway said:
I was shocked by some of the stories.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about?
 
aociswundumho said:
If the Nazi government controlled the German economy, then it was a socialist state.
Click to expand...
Mussolini's government controlled the Italian economy, was it a socialist state?

You're employing an overly simplistic perspective.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Hitler was not even remotely “left wing”.
Click to expand...
National socialism wasn't socialism. Read post 54 in this thread. Hitler discusses his brand of socialism.

Your claim is not even remotely true.
 
Lycanthrope said:
Mussolini's government controlled the Italian economy, was it a socialist state?
Click to expand...

Judge for yourself:

Mussolini's economic policies during this period would later be described as "economic dirigisme", an economic system where the state has the power to direct economic production and allocation of resources.[39]
Click to expand...

and


Economy of fascist Italy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
 
aociswundumho said:
The Nazis also allied with the USSR, so I guess that counts as evidence for my side. In the early years of the war, it was the USSR that gave the Nazis everything they needed regarding food, oil, steel, rubber, and lots more.
Click to expand...
Stalin had said he was fine sitting on the sideline while the capitalist states rip each other apart. Hitler always planned on invading the USSR.

It was a mutual beneficial deal while two dictators carved up Europe. The similarity is they were dictators against a liberal democracy world order. None of them considered each other ideological allies. It would be news to both Staling and Hitler that they were ideologically on the same side.
No, Marxism is an actual ideology with an economic and social underpinning. Fascism is reactionary, anti-liberalism, anti-pluralism, anti-democracy with a heavy does of nationalism and a cult of personality around a demagogue. That's why it's difficult to create a clear definition of Fascism. It's core tenants along with nationalism is mainly anti-everything else. State control, oligarchy, they didn't care. Ultimately everything ran through Hitler and his vision of a white Christian nationalist Germany.
aociswundumho said:
No one can argue that there were secure property rights in Nazi Germany. So what ideology is consistent with no property rights?
Click to expand...
Using this lazy definition, any dictatorship is communism. Secure property rights is something that you see in liberal democracies. Something the Nazi's opposed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…