I am very frustrated because of a paper I just wrote and having the professor tell me that while it was good I had “no foundation” for my political/econonomic “opnions”. I am writing about Orwell’s contradicitons with his novels and his other writings with regard to his political/economic views and I stressed how Orwell hated Hitler and Nazism but then went and endorsed many of the same policies such as nationalizing industry. Basically this lady was telling me I was completely wrong and that there was a huge difference between socialism (of today she says) and national socialism. I said that maybe aside from the mass murder there was difference, but economically they were completely similar. They both relied upon the government owning the means of production, allocating resources, directing labor, and of course compelting infringing upon economic freedom. I’m sure there are differences, but funamentally this is one in the same.
More or less this lady blew up at me and told me I didn’t know what I was talking about. I told her fascism was corporatism and the blending of government and corporations. She told me “capitalism is corporatism” and I said no to which she asked me what capitalism was then. I told her capitalism did not involve government assisting or stifling business which is inherent in fascism, socialism, etc.. She then asked “Aren’t we capitalist?” and I said no and she then asked what we (US) are and I said “hmm…probably crony fascism”. She said I was clueless and she “knew I hated this country but…”
Needless to say she didn’t even finish goign through my rough draft with me and called the next person up. She said I “didn’t have to change these things” but I should know my logically is totally flawed. Sometimes I’m surprised, but other times I just know it’s coming. God help us.
So use a different word? That’s exactly my problem with the word capitalism. To libertarians capitalism is the free market, and to everybody else capitalism is what we have now. Ultimately it means that a lot of people end up attacking the free market unintentionally and a lot of libertarians end up defending corporatism on accident.
Nonetheless, the best course of action is to just laugh and realise that the whole situation proves Orwell to be right. Your teacher is the same as any of the fools in Nineteen Eighty Four, who spew pro “The Party” nonsense, your teacher’s job isn’t to teach anybody, it’s to indoctrinate them. I wonder when the final Newspeak dictionary will be finished.
If you ask me you should right an essay to your teacher explaining why National Socialism is socialism and sign it Winston Smith.
I like your letter idea, Giles. I just added in a bunch of information from Hayek explaining the links between socialism and National Socialism and found Orwell himself admitting the fundamental similarities between socialism and fascism and then went on to show how although he claimed to hate Nazism and fascism his ideology was very similar. I’ve had some not so great professors in the past but this lady is just completely ignorant and it honestly is pathetic.
I haven’t read anything about him criticizing Stalin or Trotsky but he wrote a great deal expressing his hatred for Hitler. He was a democratic socialist but it’s paradoxical because he said “It has always been obvious that a planned and centralized society is liable to develop into an oligarchy or a dictatorship" From this quote and some other statements Orwell made it seems as if he understands socialism and planning will lead to totalitarianism, the same kind he appeared to be so fervently against in 1984 but he still went on to propose the nationalization of all major industries and central economic planning.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with the word. Capitalism was defined by Marx, and later accepted by Mises, as the economic system under which there is private ownership of factors of production. A free market is a market without any government intervention. Since government intervention is a form of ‘social control’ over factors of production, and social control negates private ownership, capitalism necessarily implies a free market.
While it is true that these things are not really polar opposites as a typical flawed analysis of the political spectrum often suggests, it is also true that these things are not identical. What’s most relevant is their tendency to be authoritarian, and indeed in this regaurd they are all similar.
I agree but they all do share basic principles of Collectivism, so I would say they are all cousins, in a way.
I think that they are not entirely the same, but related due to principle Collectivist ideas at the core of their philosophies, & further posit that the collectivist hierarchy (obviously, hierarchy alone could be suggested) can allow for a greater & more frequent abuse of power by authoritarians, regardless of political affiliation.