It increased because from '42-'43 on the entire german workforce was mobilized.Up until 1942 there still were cases when Germans hired other Germans for housekeeping and cleaning.The total mobilization of the German people for the war production in the 3. Reich began very late in contrast to the Societ Union.

The reason for it? The popular belief of the inferiority of the slavic people and a quick victory over the SU.

It increased because from '42-'43 on the entire german workforce was mobilized.Up until 1942 there still were cases when Germans hired other Germans for housekeeping and cleaning.The total mobilization of the German people for the war production in the 3. Reich began very late in contrast to the Societ Union.

But they had a much better foundation from which to start. The economy was bad, but the resources and educated people were still there.

Germany's production actually INCREASED as the strategic bombing increased. It peaked some time in 1944. However, the Soviet Union had already passed it long ago. Nazi Germany released propaganda films about the Soviet Union belittling their production and capabilities(The Soviet Paradise is one example). The German people were a little pissed years later when they discovered the quantities and quality of Soviet production.

I'm pretty sure that The Soviet Paradise was mostly about the poor living standards of the workers in Russia.

I'm pretty sure that The Soviet Paradise was mostly about the poor living standards of the workers in Russia.

That's true but it was based on propaganda. Russia was still in a period of struggle to industrialize, but their standard of living was far greater than pre-revolutionary times.

But they had a much better foundation from which to start. The economy was bad, but the resources and educated people were still there.

I think i've already answered that one.Scroll up.

That's true but it was based on propaganda. Russia was still in a period of struggle to industrialize, but their standard of living was far greater than pre-revolutionary times.

Yes.

Germany's production actually INCREASED as the strategic bombing increased. It peaked some time in 1944. However, the Soviet Union had already passed it long ago. Nazi Germany released propaganda films about the Soviet Union belittling their production and capabilities(The Soviet Paradise is one example). The German people were a little pissed years later when they discovered the quantities and quality of Soviet production.

There is a glaring error in your reasoning. If Germany was actually able to increase production under such conditions, it only goes to show what she would have been achieving under a more favourable situation.

Be that as it may, the grotesquery of Finance Capitalism, and the flaws in the fledgling National Socialist economy are not about to convince me to embrace the imbecilic doctrine of Marxist-materialism and its dogmas of man as an economic animal, history as class-warfare etc. The measure of a nation's health is not to be found in economics, and as far as addressing this, both Finance Capitalism and Marxism fail miserably.

There is a glaring error in your reasoning. If Germany was actually able to increase production under such conditions, it only goes to show what she would have been achieving under a more favourable situation.

My point was the Soviet Union had far surpassed German production even before that point, and they came from a greater disadvantage because of the past civil war and blockade, as well as all the historical problems Russia had prior to the revolution. Russia was the most backward power in Europe at the time of the revolution.

I should also point out that you can't sever Third Reich economic policy from the war itself. Germany started the war. So you cannot pretend that the war's effects on German production were something outside of NSDAP policy. By contrast, problems in the USSR related to the war are understandable because THEY were invaded, not the other way around.

Be that as it may, the grotesquery of Finance Capitalism, and the flaws in the fledgling National Socialist economy are not about to convince me to embrace the imbecilic doctrine of Marxist-materialism and its dogmas of man as an economic animal, history as class-warfare etc. The measure of a nation's health is not to be found in economics, and as far as addressing this, both Finance Capitalism and Marxism fail miserably.

The flaw was the German nationalism that led them to invade numerous nations, including neutral ones. Furthermore, Marxism does not see humans as simply economic units. It simply states that things like the state or other conditions are driven by material conditions. Looking at the problems of today, you must realize that these are being pushed forward because they benefit the people in charge. Degeneracy and immigration benefit the ruling class, so it will be continually pushed until the state collapses. There is no way around that.

The flaw was the German nationalism that led them to invade numerous nations, including neutral ones. Furthermore, Marxism does not see humans as simply economic units. It simply states that things like the state or other conditions are driven by material conditions. Looking at the problems of today, you must realize that these are being pushed forward because they benefit the people in charge. Degeneracy and immigration benefit the ruling class, so it will be continually pushed until the state collapses. There is no way around that.

Excellent, yes, that was the major flaw. I for one am very much opposed to Nationalism. However, as a neo-Spenglerian I have to disagree on the issue of material conditions driving the state and history. The external can only retard or confine the articulation of a culture, not direct or determine will itself. I also have no objections to a ruling class per se]Spiel.

Excellent, yes, that was the major flaw. I for one am very much opposed to Nationalism. However, as a neo-Spenglerian I have to disagree on the issue of material conditions driving the state and history. The external can only retard or confine the articulation of a culture, not direct or determine will itself. I also have no objections to a ruling class per se]Spiel.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Spengler basically theorize that Western civilization was not only in decline but that it could not be recovered? Of what use can that be to us today?

The problem with a ruling class is that while at times they can be great leaders of a nation and, based on personal altruism dedicate their activities to the betterment of the nation, there is always the tendency toward developing an interest in class-loyalty above national or racial loyalty. Savitri Devi wrote at length about the disconnect between the cultural elite and the populace in A Warning to the Hindus. Though she was anti-Communist and anti-Christian, she basically stated that the lack of social consideration by the elite led to a disconnect when the great culture and traditions of the nation simply ceased to apply to the vast majority.

It increased because from '42-'43 on the entire german workforce was mobilized.Up until 1942 there still were cases when Germans hired other Germans for housekeeping and cleaning.The total mobilization of the German people for the war production in the 3. Reich began very late in contrast to the Societ Union.

The reason for it? The popular belief of the inferiority of the slavic people and a quick victory over the SU.

alex, Has Europe done away with spaces after a period altogether? I know there is debate about the "one space" vs "two space" method, but no spaces? Kinda hard to read.

The American people, due to its fragmentary and eclectic nature, is drawn to, yet fears, an integrated, cohesive, unitary society. I.e. one people, one culture, one spirit etc. This is European and alien to America. It is like arguing religion, religion comes from the soul, it is the expression of a person's self and arguing about it is futile. America is made up of anti-social mixed up elements from different peoples etc. So Communism suits Russia, Capitalism suits the U.S.A. and something in between suits Europe. Out of minstram situations. Of course we need to improve the populations of these areas, and then the correct social system will emerge organically.

alex, Has Europe done away with spaces after a period altogether? I know there is debate about the "one space" vs "two space" method, but no spaces? Kinda hard to read.

I wasn't aware of any debate. Two spaces between sentences is correct.

Economics creates culture and therefore culture doesn't exist. Such claptrap. That kid hasn't been exposed to anything outside of Marxism.