Yes, but there is a huge difference. You see, there has been a 1984-esque disinformation campaign to change the meaning of "socialism".
It use to mean: "Any measure taken to prevent the ever greater accumulation of wealth and resources by the few at the expense of the many."
Which is why it was used by the NSDAP, as well as the commies. Both went at it in completely different ways.
Nowadays, English-speakers think "socialism" means only "state-owned means of production". This helps the commies tremendously, as it cuts out a big chunk of socioeconomic policy thought processes.
Welcome to 1984:
Ignorance is strength;
War is peace;
Freedom is slavery;
Socialism is communism;
So National Socialism was a monopsony. A command economy where the government ordered and paid for production.
The government was, effectively, the only buyer for goods. National Socialism is superior to Marxism, because the market can determine value for goods under Fascism.
Under Marxism the government commands what to produce and what price to sell the products for; which does not allow cost, demand or utility to play a direct factor in setting the price.
This is why the CCP has switched over to a similar system and hasn't gone broke yet, rather than the USSR which went out of business.
None the less, both are authoritarian, command economies where the people (as represented by the Party) effectively own and run everything. You know, socialism.
National Socialists were also socialists.
They just hated the Marxists.
The GDR was also a democracy. They just hated the Capitalists.
Yes, but there is a huge difference. You see, there has been a 1984-esque disinformation campaign to change the meaning of "socialism".
It use to mean: "Any measure taken to prevent the ever greater accumulation of wealth and resources by the few at the expense of the many."
Which is why it was used by the NSDAP, as well as the commies. Both went at it in completely different ways.
Nowadays, English-speakers think "socialism" means only "state-owned means of production". This helps the commies tremendously, as it cuts out a big chunk of socioeconomic policy thought processes.
Welcome to 1984:
Ignorance is strength; War is peace; Freedom is slavery; Socialism is communism;
So National Socialism was a monopsony. A command economy where the government ordered and paid for production.
The government was, effectively, the only buyer for goods. National Socialism is superior to Marxism, because the market can determine value for goods under Fascism.
Under Marxism the government commands what to produce and what price to sell the products for; which does not allow cost, demand or utility to play a direct factor in setting the price.
This is why the CCP has switched over to a similar system and hasn't gone broke yet, rather than the USSR which went out of business.
None the less, both are authoritarian, command economies where the people (as represented by the Party) effectively own and run everything. You know, socialism.
Razorfist did a pretty good video on it.
https://youtu.be/9-SLqdhkvJo?si=yktF1WPkVEpG9mKR