Skip to content

Today’s A Is A Lesson: Ladd Ehlinger Schools The Ignorant On The Left And The Right

26 November 2011 @ 17:17

Filmmaker and CEO of the Motion Picture Division of the VRWC, Ladd Ehlinger recently caused a bit of a scene on Twitter:

For those whose knowledge of history comes from Indiana Jones movies or American public education, it may surprise you to know that the word “Nazi” derives from the official title “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei.” In English: National Socialist German Workers’ Party. The nickname is based on how it sounds when pronounced in German and is not a straight acronym. Otherwise it would have been known as the NDA.

It is apparently bad manners to point out what the real words behind the term “NAZI” means. Especially to modern socialists. They don’t want to remember that the Nazis were, in part, their philosophical ancestors.

So I caused a bit of a kerflufle by tweeting this last night: “Oh and for all those #occupy #socialists out there, do a little Google on the words “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei’.”

Please do take the time to click here and read what happened next.

As with so many Socialists, once they got into power the Nazis realized it was much more efficient for their immediate purposes to erect and maintain a Fascist [or Corporatist] system for the time being, where private property still existed, but was totally controlled by the government.  This freed-up the Nazi officials to pursue other aims and let the citizens be charged with the responsibility for maintaining the companies and properties.  Their goal was to eventually abolish private property — that idea was never abandoned —  but for expediencies sake, it best served the Nazi’s interests to let it exist for a while longer.

It would appear that something like that is now happening within The United States.  It certainly is hard to deny the evidence that Corporatism is being practiced by the Leftists in the government, helped along by the Useful Idiots, Dupes, and Fellow Travellers of the non-committed Left.

What exactly is ‘Corporatism’?

First of all, it is merely an attempt to come up with a more accurate name for Fascism [Benito Mussolini: ‘Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism’].

Secondly, I think Sheldon Richman’s explanation is the best I’ve seen:

As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.

Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners. Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.) Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace. Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.

Fascism is to be distinguished from interventionism, or the mixed economy. Interventionism seeks to guide the market process, not eliminate it, as fascism did. Minimum-wage and antitrust laws, though they regulate the free market, are a far cry from multiyear plans from the Ministry of Economics.

Under fascism, the state, through official cartels, controlled all aspects of manufacturing, commerce, finance, and agriculture. Planning boards set product lines, production levels, prices, wages, working conditions, and the size of firms. Licensing was ubiquitous; no economic activity could be undertaken without government permission. Levels of consumption were dictated by the state, and “excess” incomes had to be surrendered as taxes or “loans.” The consequent burdening of manufacturers gave advantages to foreign firms wishing to export. But since government policy aimed at autarky, or national self-sufficiency, protectionism was necessary: imports were barred or strictly controlled, leaving foreign conquest as the only avenue for access to resources unavailable domestically. Fascism was thus incompatible with peace and the international division of labor—hallmarks of liberalism.

Fascism embodied corporatism, in which political representation was based on trade and industry rather than on geography. In this, fascism revealed its roots in syndicalism, a form of socialism originating on the left. The government cartelized firms of the same industry, with representatives of labor and management serving on myriad local, regional, and national boards—subject always to the final authority of the dictator’s economic plan. Corporatism was intended to avert unsettling divisions within the nation, such as lockouts and union strikes. The price of such forced “harmony” was the loss of the ability to bargain and move about freely.

To maintain high employment and minimize popular discontent, fascist governments also undertook massive public-works projects financed by steep taxes, borrowing, and fiat money creation. While many of these projects were domestic—roads, buildings, stadiums—the largest project of all was militarism, with huge armies and arms production.

If you accept this definition [and it is well-researched] then it is clear that right now America is in the transitioning stage from Interventionism to Fascism.

  1. M. Thompson permalink
    26 November 2011 @ 19:10 19:10

    Only if we fail. There’s still hope left, it’s small, but it’s there.

  2. Adobe Walls permalink
    27 November 2011 @ 00:17 00:17

    We may have already failed, we wont know till later perhaps much later.

  3. 27 November 2011 @ 18:04 18:04

    Yup, history is repeating itself, Bob.

    I caught John Hagee this morning, his sermon, comparing ancient Rome to what is happening today, and it’s really frightening how the two are the same. We all know how ancient Rome turned out, and it’s NOT good.

  4. DavidD permalink
    28 November 2011 @ 21:42 21:42

    Go read Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism if you want to know more.


  1. Sunday Links: Vintage Toy Commericials Edition » Conservative Hideout 2.0
  2. Robo-Love: Link It Forward

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: