Darryl1958:
What in your opinion would be an example of a socialist state then?
USSR, Cuba, China used to be but certainly not anymore. I would say that Norway may be fairly called effectively socialist, but having the North Sea oil reserves allows them to do things not practical to those not so lucky. Even the Spanish Socialist party disappointed the hardcore socialists in the extent to which it has carried through with socialism. In fact I thought it was the Spanish Socialist Party admin that recently decided to privatize, err, was it transportation (I know Germany is privatizing some of its railways), I really can’t remember, I think they were privatizing something big, to the chagrin of the far left there.
Anyway, the major economies, Germany, France, Britain, aren’t socialist. Nor Ireland, Austria, most of the smaller states, though I can’t be sure, I don’t know much about them. All I know about Luxembourg is it’s built on banks that largely replaced Switzerland as the world’s chief money launderers.
The Protestant work ethic is still perhaps strong in Germany long after Protestant itself has died off. There is a cultural component to be sure to whether or not socialism will work.
Certainly is strong. Though to be fair, Catholic Bavaria is doing at least as well as the rest of the country.
But then Greece comes along and throw a monkey wrench in that well-oiled system of Teutonic efficiency and rationality…
That must really bug the Germans.
The Mediterranean countries are all quite problematic. Of course, the thing is, they never really became industrialized capitalist countries, not the way the north did. Most of those countries went straight from monarchy into fascism or Francoism or anti-industrial agrarianism in Portugal’s case. That’s why the EU wasn’t really an equal partnership And the Germans are indeed quite POed about all their hard work at keeping the deficit down being on the verge of being tossed out because the Greeks like working 5 hours a day and 4 days a week with all the benefits of a welfare state. To make things worse, their only retort to the Germans was to call them Nazis, about the most passe and taseteless thing they could say to the only people who could save their economy.
Yes, I think Bismark is a very good example of how extreme conservatism and socialistic policies can mesh with each other quite well. Perhaps given that kind of German history, the example of National Socialism and the rise of fascism is not such a revolutionary concept after all.
Not wuite as much of a surprise as thought. But I don’t like to associate Bismark with fascism, if only because the reason for the Nazis’ infamy is not their economic policies but their crimes against humanity (of course Bismarck’s attitude toward Jews, and Catholics for that matter, was not remotely ‘enlightened’).
Rather than rail against the capitalists like the socialists were doing in the 1930’s, Hitler found the perfect diversion by railing against the Jewish banks. It effectively stole the thunder of the German socialists for sure as the cause of the economic collapse.
Unlike Bismark though, Hitler was by all accounts a true believer.
A true believer in his conspiracy theory for sure. But for him, it was truly about race, not econmics. The Jews, by his account, were equated both with the Bolsheviks and with the bankers. He was having his cake and eating it too. Of course, he was also chillingly pragmatic, taking money from any industrialist who was willing to contribute, even one Jewish one if I remember correctly. I may be mistake. I don’t recall the misguided donor’s name, but talk about shooting oneself in the foot.
