At this point I am nearly convinced that most antisocialists seriously think that capitalism is just when good stuff happens. Even if we had the most obvious and unambiguous example linking capitalism to atrocities — the Kill Corp. employing somebody whose job is literally just to go around and massacre innocents for the sake of shareholders and mad $$$ — antisocialists would still be scratching their heads wondering what that has to do with capitalism. While so far I haven’t seen anybody unkiddingly say that orgasms are capitalism and stubbed toes are socialism, there isn’t much left stopping antisocialists from making that call either.
Nazis nationalized most of their war industry and still went to war.
This is very, very misleading. Just because a business falls under state‐ownership doesn’t mean that the businessman’s autonomy is gone. Quoting Clarence Y.H. Lo’s Business Collaboration within the Nazi War Machine: Corporations and the State in the Austrian Semiperiphery:
During the [Third Reich’s] military buildup Gustav Krupp was chosen Führer der Wirtschaft (leader of the economy) in the “alter kruppscher Tradition” (old Krupp tradition) and later pledged not to offend [Fascism] (Manchester 1968:354, 367). In response to [Berlin’s] demands, Krupp increased its military production from RM 50 to 150 million between 1937/1938 to 1940/1941 (Manchester 1968:369; Overy 1994:136–38).
Gustav Krupp personally lobbied Hitler between 1941 and 1943 for a special law that would change the Krupp Aktiengesellschaft corporation into a family enterprise that would pay no capital gains tax (which would have been RM 70 million) when Gustav Krupp passed ownership on to his heir (Overy 1994:140). In return for the family tax exemption, increased depreciation (raising profit, James 2012:202; 207), and interest‐free state loans, Krupp was willing to have his armaments production determined by [Axis] officials.
The [Fascists], dependent on Krupp, were glad to see collaborative arrangements reducing the uncertainties (Pfeffer and Salancik 1978) of military supply (Overy 1994:137,139, 140).
Furthermore, businesses that were beyond ‘state ownership’ still made substantial contributions to the Fascist war machine, and the presumption that the Fascist state micromanaged everything has a more serious consequence as it pardons capitalists involved in atrocities:
The point is that industrial behavior under [Fascism] cannot be reduced to simple structural explanations. Even within the context of a dictatorship that demanded high levels of production for war, industrialists made choices as individuals. They approached the SS for cheap labor; they decided whether to buy a Jewish company at a fraction of its value; they determined how forced and [neo]slave laborers would be treated in their factories.
(Source.)
I suppose that this is only quibbling, though. The fact of the matter is that the Fascist empires never reduced let alone abolished capital, the law of value, and generalized commodity production.
I hope that I don’t have to explain how terrible this reply is.
The U.S.S.R. increased its military spending to forcibly neocolonize somebody else’s land…? Oh, whom am I kidding. Of course antisocialists believe that.
I could go on, but I’ll stop here so as to prevent further testing your patience.
That source is awesome, great reading and insight. Thank you for sharing it and your commentary.