Nazism: Rational Evil?

[CountDeMoney]

Traditionally, I've always thought the Third Reich was basically batshit insane. But the author makes a fairly interesting argument, that much of what Hitler was trying to do was basically a last-ditch effort to allow Germany the economic and demographic base to compete in a world of empires and continent-sized economies, like the United States and the British Empire.

No, you were right the first time: they were batshit insane.
Now, they possessed certain cultural aspects that contributed to the "Germanness" of Nazism, like a penchant for accounting and their soldiering, but really, they were nuttier than squirrel shit.

[FunkMonk]

Economic Policy: Really dumb.
Military Policy: Really really dumb.
Social Policy: Completely batshit.

The Nazis were the type of government you might anticipate if undereducated and racist right wing thugs took control of a western government. Maybe their ideas were rational within their worldview, but there worldview was still dumb.

Agree. They were rational only in their own distorted world view.

[Valmy]

Indeed, at one point Tooze explicitly compares Hitler's ideology to the "Weimar consensus" of raising the German standard of living through free trade, foreign investment, and gradual economic development, which frankly hadn't worked, as the Depression indicated.

Free trade?  Foreign investment?  In the 1920s?

Unfortunately the iron claw of protectionism and autarky was quite strong.

Tooze proves he is a moron by blaming the depression on "free trade, foreign investment, and gradual economic development".  I mean what rational person would hold that position?  I am afraid even countries who did not value those things still had to experience the depression.

[Martinus]

I don't think Nazism was that rational, I've always viewed it as German Romanticism taken to the ultimate extreme.

It certainly had a strong Romanticist trend. But if you look at what they tried to do, it makes a disturbing amount of sense if you start from certain premises.

For instance, Versailles was all about national-determination, and showed how centuries of German rule could be undone based on it. But if you get rid of the Poles, well...

Another interesting look was how Germany's policy of extermination grew out of the simple shortages brought on by the war. The Central government lacked the resources to feed everyone during wartime, especially with German demands. The solution? Set of a ration system based on nationality, with Jews given the least. Once you're already okay with starving them to death, it's a small step to try to make more active steps to get rid of them.

Wow that seems to be patently untrue - the "final solutions" have been widely criticised (including by German military of the time) because it consumed resources that were needed elsewhere. Certainly, it wasn't caused by food shortages and resources dedicated to Holocaust exceeded any "savings" by a magnitude.

What kind of book is that? It looks like a load of crap

[Faeelin]

Indeed, at one point Tooze explicitly compares Hitler's ideology to the "Weimar consensus" of raising the German standard of living through free trade, foreign investment, and gradual economic development, which frankly hadn't worked, as the Depression indicated.

Free trade?  Foreign investment?  In the 1920s?

Unfortunately the iron claw of protectionism and autarky was quite strong.

Tooze proves he is a moron by blaming the depression on "free trade, foreign investment, and gradual economic development".  I mean what rational person would hold that position?  I am afraid even countries who did not value those things still had to experience the depression.

Well, Tooze's argument is more that because Germany was dependent on those things, and could at best aspire to be in the shadow of America and perhaps Britain, the Third Reich was a last ditch effort to boostrap Germany to superpower status.

It's not so much that he blames the Depression on free trade; rather, he blames the Third Reich's rise on the way free trade and liberalism were discreditted in the Weimar years.

[Legbiter]

Economic Policy: Really dumb.

Agree, but with one caveat: They sure knew how to plunder their conquests. Aside from outright theft/enslavement, the Nazis paid the occupation troops in the local currency of the conquered country in question, which caused massive inflation in the countries and areas which the Nazis occupied. They were very efficient in exporting the inflation which would have been felt at home in the Reich onto the conquered nations. 

[Josquius]

Weimar was working though sort of. Just before the depression it was finally getting its act together and beginning to become a decent country...The depression was a nasty unforseen event that ruined that though. No depression=no nazis,

I really don't think the nazis were very rational. That they only came to power in such irrational times shows this. They were more about faith than logic.

[Zanza]

undereducated and racist right wing thugs

Actually, quite a few of the top Nazis weren't undereducated thugs. Goebbels, Frick, Ley, Rosenberg, Sauckel, Speer, Frank, Seyss-Inquart, Funk etc. were university educated. That's actually more scary than if they really had all been undereducated thugs.

[CountDeMoney]

Actually, quite a few of the top Nazis weren't undereducated thugs. Goebbels, Frick, Ley, Rosenberg, Sauckel, Speer, Frank, Seyss-Inquart, Funk etc. were university educated. That's actually more scary than if they really had all been undereducated thugs.

Big deal, most of us are college-educated, too.  What's your point.

[Zanza]

Big deal, most of us are college-educated, too.  What's your point.

You should have taken logic in college.

[CountDeMoney]

Big deal, most of us are college-educated, too.  What's your point.

You should have taken logic in college.

Meh, I got an A.  I've forgotten it all, as there is no use for logic in life.

[grumbler]

No, it can build a vibrant economy on skilled labor in an atmosphere of liberalism and free trade. In the 1920s and early 1930s, America was protectionist; Britain ran towards protectionism in 1931, etc. In this situation, Germany was left with... what?

Germany was left with eastern and southern Europe, South America, portions of Asia, and some of the Middle East.  Quite a bit, really.

[Sheilbh]

Also the myth of British free trade is one that deserves punctuating.  Britain operated free trade within the Empire, but there was always an element of protectionism without.  I don't know about the world but in Britain the collapse of internation trade happened after WW1.  I think it was only in the 1990s that, as a proportion of our economy, imported goods reached the same level they were at in 1914.

[Neil]

No depression=no nazis

That's a rather bold statement, given that the Nazis predate the depression.

So long as communism was allowed to exist, the Nazis were inevitable.

[derspiess]

Big deal, most of us are college-educated, too.  What's your point.

You'd be a scary Nazi.