If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
As for my views on Hitler, he was a socialist for this reason:
he cared deeply about his people, and he ensured they had good lives. He ensured they were paid a good wage, they had good educations, and good healthcare and that they felt safe.
Whatever his goal might have been is irrelevant, he still created a good rival to the NHS and education system that we have today.
Killing Jews and Gay people is a non-issue in this debate and is irrelevant as far as his economic policies are being discussed.
His policies on anything BUT health, welfare and jobs were disgusting.
The Japanese have a proverb:
Vision without action is a daydream,
Action without vision is a nightmare.
For me that sums it up, and let's face it heirarchal structures exist for a reason - basically because they have been proven - over time - to work. They just don't acknowledge that it takes sevral components to make the whole thing work, lose one and the structure dies...
If they weren't gay, trade unionists, gypsies, jews etc.
Very socialist, very caring. :rolleyes:
But he was! He loved the Jews so much he gave them 'showers' and a 'community' to live in! He loved the Slavs so much he let them work for free! He loved women so much he had his henchment tie themt o tables and rape them!
Arbeit really did macht frei :yes:
Again, ignoring the rest of what i wrote. I just love people who take pieces of information selectively, not bothering to find out the whole story then twist them for their own purpose. You should write an article for the sun.
Blagsta often does this, but not this time.
Hitlerr did NOT "care deeply about his people" nor ensure "they had good lives". If one disagreed with Hitler, one went up the chimney stack- it wasn't just homosexuals and Jews and Slavs who went up the chimney stacks, any sort of dissent was put on the same trains to the same Auschwitz.
His financial and economic policies could barely be called Socialist either, because of his fondness for elitism and private enterprise. And although he did do them, the argument that he only did it to get power has a lot of truth in it.
Fair enough, I can accept that point of view. It's just a pity it's taken so long for it to be expressed.
Of course me coming up with my own idea, that could have been plausible makes me an ignorant Nazi not worthy of keeping people safe.
The rest of it was irrelevant nonsense.
Did anyone call you a Nazi? I certainly didn't. I did however call you ignorant. Thats because you are.
Oh and it's worth thinking about how the economic policies of hitler were linked to his social policies. After all Hitler murdered those with mental health problems - which hardly shows quality hospitals. It's very difficult to claim a seperation of these issues, which I think, Whowhere, is the point Blagsta is trying to make in his usual brutal way.
From Alber Speer (the man often seem as the creator of the Nazi war efforts economic policies)
"I would like to sit down and write one final blast about the whole damn Nazi mess and mention names and details and let the German people see once and for all what rotten corruption, hypocrisy, and madness the whole system was based on!-I would spare no one, including myself."
Nuremberg defendants
To be fair though this has developed to the point where it needs a new topic unless it can get back to the nazi's direct relevance to a modern transport trade dispute.
They gotta learn. Toughen 'em up. School of hard knocks.
etc etc
Are you denying that he created a good health system?
Are you denying that he turned germany into an economic powerhouse in the space of a few years?
Are you denying that he created full employment?
those are the points I am arguing, the rest is as you say, irrelevant nonsense. I however didn't bring them up, you lot were the ones to empthasise those points, not me.
I was just mentioning his economic ability, if you'd read my first point you'd have seen I didn't agree with it as a whole because of what he did. However i accept these facts as being truths about the German economic climate before the second world war. the sheer fact that Germany was able to create an army superior to anything the world has seen since, in a few years, with no economy, and no industry to speak of proves part of my point.
But you dismiss it because anything so laughable as a dictator actually having some sort of plan other than mass genocide is beyond you.
The idea that MOST of the people in this country have opinions differing to yours on almost every subject also seems just out of your grasp.
Back to the argument in hand. These transport workers earn £26,000 a year. MORE than the national average.
MORE than workers in professions that are a great deal more skilled (nurses, teachers) and MORE than professions that are a great deal more dangerous (police, soldiers).
You expect the majority of the population to believe that £26,000 just isn't enough for a train driver, when most people earn less in harder jobs? You expect the majority to even give a toss what the directors earn?
You explain to us please, without diverting the argument, WHY should a train driver of all people be paid even £26,000 a year, let alone deserve a pay increase. What do they do that is so important that they think they should disrupt one of the country's largest cities to get paid even more than most of the people's who's lives they are disrupting.....
Please answer, i'm sure all of us would like to know your ideas. And any ideas for alternatives would be nice too.
Well, if they'd won then we wouldn't even have trade unions.
So really it's all their fault for losing the war.