[Skybird]

Too much of severla hisatorians over the yearsd who uphold that view as well.

I explained it often enough, and every time everyx word got ignrtoed, for it challemnges the usual narration. Them third reich was a super.exmaple of social cinbst5rcutiojk n you expect to see in a Soviet/cimmunist regime. And Hitlerreiterated in an adress tot he party in feb ruary 1944 or 1945 that in his view there are no fundamental differences between Bolschewism ands Nationalsocialism. It was a state-woned economy, either by expropriation of the fomrer owners or their volunbtary subordination by becoming loyal oarty emmbers. Money was created by the state. Private property was partially expropriated as wanted by the state. The individual meant nothing. The collective and the party meant everything.

Its even in the name: Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands.

That the Sovjets after the war managed to make this similiarty between Hitlers and Stlains reigme forgotten, is maybe the most successful propaganda coup in the history of mankind, it allowed them to be celebrated as liberators while in fact representing the same system of polticla control and oprression as there was in the Third Reich. Be a bad guy but do not get called out for it! Brilliant.

Am I the only one noticing that the methods of opression and state cruelty in both regimes where practically the same, too? They even shared the love for campos, and general antisemitism. Same needs - same solutions.

Two children of one and the same spirit.

And no, I am not the first one saying that, nor was von Mises.

If both things are green, if both things jump and if both things squawk, if both things look alike, do alike and sound alike, I assume that both things are frogs. thats the reaosn why I do not prefer the one over the other, do not prefer Commies over Nazis or the other way around. To me they are all the same evil, and in distributing my contempt for both equally, I am absolutely unbiased.