The Nazi Economy and the myth of the Third Way
Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933, during a severe economic and social crisis, and implemented a series of measures to recover the country. How did he do that? This is the point that will be addressed throughout this dissertation.
Nazism appeared, at first, as a third-way, something beyond capitalism and beyond socialism. Many theorists argue that National Socialism did, in fact, become one of these options, although, in practice, it was a model of state capitalism with strong government control.
To better understand the context of that time, it is necessary to talk about the 1929 Crisis, the one that collapsed the economy of the United States and significantly affected its position on the global stage. It is notable that the capitalist model of the United States goes far beyond simple industrial capitalism; it encompasses economic liberalism.
The United States adopted the liberal economic ideology as soon as it was created. This allowed the rapid growth of the U.S., expanding its economic influence over other countries, especially in Europe, which had been devastated by World War I. No one would ask for help from the Soviet Union, which, at the time, was seen by many Western countries as a threat to traditional political and economic structures, feeding the fear of socialist uprisings. Thus, the other power remained: the United States. When the stock market crashed, the country sank into a crisis that dragged many other countries along. All countries suffered great impacts on their economies, having adopted and relied on economic liberalism. Now, if the people don't want economic liberalism and don't want Marxist socialism, what exactly do they want?
Hitler presented the best proposal for the German people, which was soon embraced: The "middle ground." Of course, in practice, there is no such middle ground. But when people decide to study the theories and analyze the proposals they offer, Adolf Hitler's National Socialism managed to deceive them very well. By attacking economic liberalism, clearly associated with capitalism, he would not be a capitalist, right? But by attacking communism and Marxist socialism, he would not be a communist, right? What would he be? Hitler did not present a new theory or economy; he presented a new party, the National Socialist German Workers' Party. He offered the people labor rights, good conditions for citizens, recognition, and, most importantly, a sense of value.
Hitler's speeches awakened a strong sense of appreciation and belonging in the German people, which generated greater engagement with his economic proposal. National Socialism provided the people with stability and a sense of "power," largely due to the propaganda used during the Nazi government, which aimed to control the masses based on the desires of the government.
The fact is that Hitler's National Socialism was nothing more than state capitalism, without the use of economic liberalism. State capitalism allows total state control over the economy, private property, and the sectors of industry and agriculture, but it does not remove the owners from their positions. Therefore, it is not socialism, as the state does not own the property. And it is not capitalism shaped around a liberal issue, as it interferes with the economy.
State capitalism usually occurs in countries that adopt nationalist measures, like in Getúlio Vargas' Brazil, or ultranationalist ones, like Adolf Hitler's Germany.
This, therefore, allowed a significant economic advancement in Germany during the early years of Hitler's government, resulting in increased employment, better wages, technological development, and economic growth that also impacted the global scene.
blakekathryn
titsay
theartofmadeline
discoholicmusic
pixelskylines
romaincrisis
amandla
