Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!lkk
From: lkk@mit-eddie.UUCP (Larry Kolodney)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Whither Are We Drifting? - (nf)
Message-ID: <2231@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 22-Jun-84 19:18:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.2231
Posted: Fri Jun 22 19:18:20 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 23-Jun-84 07:17:54 EDT
References: <1005@ihuxq.UUCP> <9800007@ea.UUCP>
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 22

From: mwm@ea.UUCP:
Whether or not the National Socialists are socialists: They called
themselves socialists, and the German government apparently controlled the
means of production, and ran it "for the good of the people" (isn't that
what socialism's all about?). If these statements are true, then the Nazis
were socialists; if they are false, then the Nazis aren't socialists.
Someone want to let me know how the Nazis really behaved about property?
--------

Not entirely correct.  The Nazis didn't run their govt. "for the good of
the people" as much as "the good of the fatherland".  This was
nationalism, the state for its own sake.  In this respect,
Stalinist Russia was Fascist too, in that all personal rights were
subjugated in the name of the state.  (This is not neccesary for a
Marxist state, but happened to be true in the case of Russia, which had
a long tradition of autocracy.)

Socialism, as defined by the vast majority of socialists in the west, is
"popular control of the means of production".  If an unpopular govt.
controls the means of production, that is no more socialism than any
other oligarchy.