Dissident right-sympathetic billionaires

submitted by DisgustResponse from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (20 children)

No, you said there were rich Germans in Ford's place that were donating to the NSDAP. Which is ridiculous, the well off people in Germany who gave money to the NSDAP were nowhere near oligarch status,

That's very well subjective. Ford wasn't even the richest in America. That title would go more likely to Rockefeller.

Larger donations provided practically none of the financial base of the NSDAP.

Show citations. My sources at least mention Hitler came out of prison with better living conditions (courtesy of the help he got). Since Germany was in economic toil during this period, it seems odd to suggest every German at the time had similar standards?

I also never said the Nazis never made money at all. I merely pointed out there was still help before they rose to power.

I didn't say anything about capitalism, I just pointed out your statement that the NSDAP had any support from big capital is absurd. They had none.

Then we have to agree to disagree on what "big capital" means. Follow the thread, and I make it clear what my stance on Ford (or anyone wealthy enough to donate) is.

https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/8ha6/dissident_rightsympathetic_billionaires/vhjw

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

That's very well subjective. Ford wasn't even the richest in America. That title would go more likely to Rockefeller.

It's not subjective at all, Ford was an internationally renowned industrial capitalist who was objectively an oligarch of America.

Show citations. My sources at least mention Hitler came out of prison with better living conditions. Since Germany was in economic toil during this period, it seems odd to suggest every German at the time had similar standards?

German Big Business and the Rise of Hitler spells out quite clearly that no major industrialists or finance capitalists supported the NSDAP.

Then we have to agree to disagree on what "big capital" means. Follow the thread, and I make it clear what my stance on Ford (or anyone wealthy enough to donate) is.

Seems to be that way because you're somehow unable to comprehend that there's a difference between billionaires and people with a couple million.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

It's not subjective at all, Ford was an internationally renowned industrial capitalist who was objectively an oligarch of America.

Then I will say both groups were respectively wealthy, especially when you consider the German middle class had nearly disintegrated that decade, and inflation was higher in Germany than anywhere else in the world at the time.

Seems to be that way because you're somehow unable to comprehend that there's a difference between billionaires and people with a couple million.

Assuming these sources contain little bias, my research has shown that the Nazi Party was indeed bankrupt at one point, but where still offered millions from private companies like Krupp and I.G Farben.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-big-business-bailed-out-nazis

According to The Arms of Krupp, the Nazi Party was essentially bankrupt in late 1932. Joseph Goebbels, who would later become the Minister of Propaganda, complained, “[w]e are all very discouraged, particularly in the face of the present danger that the entire party may collapse….The financial situation of the Berlin organization is hopeless. Nothing but debts and obligations.”

Regardless of the party’s financial problems, Hitler was named Chancellor in late January 1933. He called for elections in early March. With less than two weeks left before the vote, Herman Goering sent telegrams to Germany’s 25 leading industrialists, inviting them to a secret meeting in Berlin on February 20, 1933. Attending the gathering were four I.G. Farben directors and Krupp chief Gustav Krupp. Hitler addressed the group, saying “private enterprise cannot be maintained in a democracy.” He also told the men that he would eliminate trade unions and communists. Hitler asked for their financial support and to back his vision for Germany.

Within context and who I was originally arguing with, I believe my point still stands. You don't need to be as rich as Henry Ford to still make the same (or arguably) a bigger impact in terms of donations.

Edit: Sources I found for I.G Farben said they had an estimated wealth of 1.4 Billion Reichsmark in 1929.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=xxl85t-mNbYC&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=i.g.+farben+1.4+billion+Reichsmark&source=bl&ots=ZjoQcYSxKm&sig=ACfU3U1U_oEPP52iiGlsPmPNUZ6AR5EyhA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjhst2WqtHzAhXxq3IEHQfzDhcQ6AF6BAgYEAM#v=onepage&q=i.g.%20farben%201.4%20billion%20Reichsmark&f=false

Another source said that Krupp also pledged 100,000,000 Reichsmarks to Hitler.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=Ql_FeGlS2oIC&pg=PP269&lpg=PP269&dq=krupp+100,000,000+Reichsmarks&source=bl&ots=jxyabYp77_&sig=ACfU3U02FUK9LdH4QH3b_HjPURmIfrM5hg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjmkqK-rNHzAhVkdc0KHWy5DlIQ6AF6BAgCEAM#v=onepage&q=krupp%20100%2C000%2C000%20Reichsmarks&f=false

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Neither IG Farben nor Krupp funded them to get them into power.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

Neither IG Farben nor Krupp funded them to get them into power.

Keyword "into power". You formerly said "no major industrialists or finance capitalists supported the NSDAP".

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

WOW bro you mean to say that once the NSDAP were in power they could collect taxes and strong arm capitalists into giving them what they want or risk being nationalised? CRAZY!

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

No, I'm saying they were broke at this point, because whatever the NSDAP was doing up until 1932 wasn't very profitable. This is only a stronger argument that non-Capitalist movements always need to absorb or takeover someone elses wealth in order to survive.

Within context, it was obviously better for Germany to let the state have an increased budget to fix its social problems. But it's disingenuous to say private enterprises also had no hand in helping to bankroll this process. Just saying "well we're going to tax them" is not good enough. Every country has similar policies yet disparities still exist. Even in my country right now, I remember a major party promised they were going to tax the rich to fund their social programs. But what they didn't tell us is the same Socialist party also has massive debt issues as a result of spending their own money. Or if they got elected but the 1% decided to leave right away, then their promises of funding big projects would thus fail out of the gate, because they themselves are bankrupt.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

What? I don't think you understand what a political party is. They don't run the country until they're already in power. There's no difference between their economic system until they actually implement it dummy.

Within context, it was obviously better for Germany to let the state have an increased budget to fix its social problems. But it's disingenuous to say private enterprises also had no hand in helping to bankroll this process. Just saying "well we're going to tax them" is not good enough. Every country has similar policies yet disparities still exist. Even in my country right now, I remember a major party promised they were going to tax the rich to fund their social programs. But what they didn't tell us is the same Socialist party also has massive debt issues as a result of spending their own money. Or if they got elected but the 1% decided to leave right away, then their promises of funding big projects would thus fail out of the gate, because they themselves are bankrupt.

Completely irrelevant dogshit. The NSDAP was NOT funded by any big capital, I don't give a fuck about anything else that you're babbling about I simply corrected your false statement.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

What? I don't think you understand what a political party is. They don't run the country until they're already in power. There's no difference between their economic system until they actually implement it dummy.

And tell me what that system is, genius? They had to borrow/take donations that came from where to fund this? It was never originally the State that held this, it was private companies that supported them generously. But Hitler still needed their support, or else they could have just gone about their business and leave. Such is the story of other Socialist takeovers of any country.

Completely irrelevant dogshit. The NSDAP was NOT funded by any big capital, I don't give a fuck about anything else that you're babbling about I simply corrected your false statement.

If you have to resort to unnecessary swearing, then perhaps you're not taking your own argument seriously.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

And tell me what that system is, genius?

It's not relevant is what it is. You said the NSDAP was funded by people comparable to Ford, they weren't. That's it. Anything else you're talking about is completely irrelevant whataboutism I have zero interest in. You were wrong, get over it.