Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 109

Thread: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

  1. #81

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops
    Bland idiocy like asserting "Nazis were Socialists" is stupidly wrong, and obscures the nature of Nazi evil by conflating it with other rotten systems like Stalinism and Maoism (which used the theory of Marxism and other Socialist thought to justify their atrocities).
    Boring stupidity like asserting “Nazis were capitalists” is idiotically incorrect, and is the same as sympathizing with said Nazis by conflating their evil with other degenerate systems like America or Japan, (which use capitalism to justify atrocities like cartoon pr0n and Black Friday).
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  2. #82

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Otto Strasser's fate is very similar to what happened to Stalin's "comrades" when he grew paranoid. Truth is, majority of socialists to ever be killed were killed by... other socialists. Certainly not an argument that would prove modern neomarxist cope mythology that 30s Germany "wasn't really socialist".

  3. #83
    Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    8,355

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leonard View Post
    Overpopulation is the only real enemy. Which Nazi group are you enemies with? And are modern Nazi's naught but poor larpers. To Cyclops, my observation was Cope and most of the posters advocating for comparisons between mid 20th century German Fascists, Russian Fascists and places where people went crazy not pursuing capitalism with modern calls to use society's wealth to better the lives of various marginalized groups and the poor along with continuing to prop up the lives of the dominant populations as comparable socialisms, especially in our modern western societies which are all already fully past or closer and closer to socialist leaning in institutional and public policy, is unsound because it is clearly underpinned by just such intent that they cry foul against.

    Do you disagree?
    Your first point was laconic to the point of incomprehensibility, thanks for clarifying.

    Understanding the past helps us muddle through the present.

    I disagree with Cope's understanding of the past (I think I have them on ignore IIRC) but knowing your facts does help the discussion.

    I think overpopulation is a relative term, its not really an enemy. Nazis, they were enemies of my country.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  4. #84
    dogukan's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Middle freaking east
    Posts
    7,777

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Nazis literally defined themselves by their opposition to left and socialism...and here some people talk about revisionism...

    That the Stalin USSR and Nazi Germany were similar models is an argument one can make. That their practices were similar is an argument one could made.
    But saying the ideological premises of Nazis and various Marxist circles are same is ridiculous, and is driven simply by bad-intensions rather than an honest take on the issue.

    What is being a Marxist anyway? Do Marxists or various Marxist schools even promote Nazism, their core beliefs and practices?
    Even the fundamental issue both adress are different, whereas Marxism deals with concepts like class in its take on futurism, Nazis directly define and use concepts of race. The political discourse and practices are built from these points.

    Regardless of whether a state is ultra-nationalist or Marxist or any other extremist ideology, practices of totalitarianism are similar. And that is that. Governance practices and "ideologies" are two different things. A state does not have to be that much extremist to have include totalitarian tones.

    In any case, Nazism is a very specific form of fascism. It is a derivation of fascism for the specific case of Germans with core tenets like Lebensraum, ethnic expansion, eugenics based on ethnicity and eradication of "lower" ethnic identities. Such fundamental drivers are the opposite of the drivers of radical left. You can debate whether the goals-ideals of radical left and Marxism inspired ideologies are plausible at all, but you cannot equate it to socialism. That is completely ridiculous both from an intellectual content side but also from the fact that Nazism (as a derivation of fascism) defined itself by it's very opposition to Marxism which it declared as a Jewish conspiracy to destroy the German race.
    "Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner. On the contrary, we must try to help the dogmatists to clarify their propositions for themselves. Thus, communism, in particular, is a dogmatic abstraction; in which connection, however, I am not thinking of some imaginary and possible communism, but actually existing communism as taught by Cabet, Dézamy, Weitling, etc. This communism is itself only a special expression of the humanistic principle, an expression which is still infected by its antithesis – the private system. Hence the abolition of private property and communism are by no means identical, and it is not accidental but inevitable that communism has seen other socialist doctrines – such as those of Fourier, Proudhon, etc. – arising to confront it because it is itself only a special, one-sided realisation of the socialist principle."
    Marx to A.Ruge

  5. #85
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    8,406

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Nazism = Socialism?

    A comparison of pictures and photos:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    translation: Death to Marxism!

    US cold war right wingers:



    NSDAP election poster:





    sounds similar, right ?


    There are more similarities between US far right/extremist rightwing positions and Nazism than between Nazism and Socialism.
    Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
    And tomorrow you'll be on your way
    Don't give a damn about what other people say
    Because tomorrow is a brand-new day


  6. #86

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Aaaand we’ve finally arrived at “the Nazis weren’t socialist because US Republicans are the real Nazis.” I appreciate the honesty; a lesson to other leftist posters who might prefer to spam historicized text walls just to say the same thing. GG.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  7. #87
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    8,406

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Thesaurian View Post
    Aaaand we’ve finally arrived at “the Nazis weren’t socialist because US Republicans are the real Nazis.” I appreciate the honesty; a lesson to other leftist posters who might prefer to spam historicized text walls just to say the same thing. GG.
    If you put that hat on, its not my fault.

    I didn't say republican = far right/extremist rightwing. You made that equation.
    Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
    And tomorrow you'll be on your way
    Don't give a damn about what other people say
    Because tomorrow is a brand-new day


  8. #88

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.



    The absolute state of leftist political discourse.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  9. #89
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    8,406

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.



    And leftis are even OT with their memes.

    OT:

    The WaPo with a short summary of why the Nazis were no socialists:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...re-socialists/
    Last edited by Morticia Iunia Bruti; September 01, 2021 at 08:34 AM.
    Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
    And tomorrow you'll be on your way
    Don't give a damn about what other people say
    Because tomorrow is a brand-new day


  10. #90

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Leftists: Yeah Stalin was bad but he wasn’t all that important and anyway you can’t stereotype glorious Soviet Union like that.

    Also leftists: Stalin was so based. Total chad.

    Leftists: capitalism bad

    Also leftists: editorial cope blocked by paywall.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  11. #91
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    8,406

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Which paywall? But ok, i do everything to enlight my conserrrrrrvative frrrrriends.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    The right needs to stop falsely claiming that the Nazis were socialists
    The Nazis hated socialists. It was the governments that rebuilt Europe that embraced social welfare programs.

    By Ronald J. Granieri



    Did you know that “Nazi” is short for “National Socialist”? That means that Hitler and his henchmen were all socialists. Bernie Sanders calls himself a socialist, too. That means Bernie Sanders and his supporters are the same as Nazis … doesn’t it?


    Anyone who has been on political Twitter in the past decade has seen a version of this syllogism. Conservatives, seeking to escape the “fascist” and “Nazi” labels tossed at them by leftist critics since the 1960s, have turned the tables. Books such as Jonah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism” have noted that many leading fascists, such as Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, started out as socialists, just as many early 20th-century “progressives” embraced eugenic ideas ultimately linked to Nazi racist genocide. This connection has become a silver bullet for voices on the right like Dinesh D’Souza and Candace Owens: Not only is the reviled left, embodied in 2020 by figures like Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren, a dangerous descendant of the Nazis, but anyone who opposes it can’t possibly have ties to the Nazis’ odious ideas.



    There is only one problem: This argument is untrue. Although the Nazis did pursue a level of government intervention in the economy that would shock doctrinaire free marketeers, their “socialism” was at best a secondary element in their appeal. Indeed, most supporters of Nazism embraced the party precisely because they saw it as an enemy of and an alternative to the political left. A closer look at the connection between Nazism and socialism can help us better understand both ideologies in their historical contexts and their significance for contemporary politics.




    The Nazi regime had little to do with socialism, despite it being prominently included in the name of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. The NSDAP, from Hitler on down, struggled with the political implications of having socialism in the party name. Some early Nazi leaders, such as Gregor and Otto Strasser, appealed to working-class resentments, hoping to wean German workers away from their attachment to existing socialist and communist parties. The NSDAP’s 1920 party program, the 25 points, included passages denouncing banks, department stores and “interest slavery,” which suggested a quasi-Marxist rejection of free markets. But these were also typical criticisms in the anti-Semitic playbook, which provided a clue that the party’s overriding ideological goal wasn’t a fundamental challenge to private property.


    Instead of controlling the means of production or redistributing wealth to build a utopian society, the Nazis focused on safeguarding a social and racial hierarchy. They promised solidarity for members of the Volksgemeinschaft (“racial community”) even as they denied rights to those outside the charmed circle.


    Additionally, while the Nazis tried to appeal to voters across the spectrum, the party’s founders and initial base were small-business men and artisans, not the industrial proletariat of Marxist lore. Their first notable electoral successes were in small towns and Protestant rural areas in present-day Thuringia and Saxony, among voters suspicious of cosmopolitan, secular cities who associated both “socialism” and “capitalism” with Jews and foreigners.


    This fear of social revolution and a sense that democracy, with its cacophony of voices and the need for compromises, would threaten their preferred social hierarchy gave Nazism its appeal with these voters — even if it meant sacrificing democracy. While Communists abetted the destruction of German democracy, seeing it as a way to eventually produce the revolution they wanted, the only German political party that consistently resisted Nazi arguments, the Social Democratic Party (SPD), offered another sign of the discontinuity between socialism and Nazism.


    Those outside Germany who embraced Nazi ideas were also generally anti-leftists. When Frenchmen murmured “Better Hitler than [Socialist Party Leader and Prime Minister Léon] Blum,” they were well aware what National Socialism represented, and it was most emphatically not “socialism.” When many of those same Frenchmen set up the puppet Vichy government in 1940, they did so under the banner of “Travail, famille, patrie,” (Work, family fatherland), happy to use state resources to support their idea of authentic Frenchmen — even as they criticized capitalism for providing benefits to people they didn’t view as French.


    Unlike much of the European left, many conservatives proved willing to work with Nazis — something they later regretted — an association that tainted postwar European conservatism. When it came time to rebuild European politics after the war, therefore, it fell to center-left parties such as Labour in Britain, the Socialists in France and the SPD in Germany, which abandoned rigid Marxist doctrines, alongside the new center-right movement of Christian Democracy, which rejected traditional nationalism, to take up the challenge. This was the hour of the welfare state, supported by social and Christian Democrats, which encouraged social solidarity within a democratic and capitalist framework.


    Despite this reality, linking socialism and Nazism to critique leftist ideas became a political weapon in the post-World War II period, perhaps unsurprisingly given that the Cold War followed directly on the heels of World War II. Scholars as diverse as Zbigniew Brzezinski and Hannah Arendt used the larger concept of “totalitarianism” to fuse the two. This formula made it easier for Americans to slip comfortably from considering the Soviet Union a wartime ally to recognizing it as an existential threat. Totalitarianism emphasized the structural similarities and violent practices of Nazi and Stalinist regimes.


    This concept, however, proved controversial as an explanation of the origins or subsequent appeal of either communism or Nazism/fascism. Although Hitler and Stalin had cooperated in an effort to conquer Eastern Europe in 1939 to 1941, this was more a marriage of convenience than a byproduct of ideological synergy. Indeed, the two sides eventually fought a genocidal war against each other.


    Austrian economist and future Nobel laureate Friedrich von Hayek added an extra layer to the conversation about socialism and Nazism with his 1943 bestseller, “The Road to Serfdom.” As a staunch free marketeer, Hayek was appalled by the rise of economic planning in democratic states, embodied by Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. Hayek warned that any government intervention in the market eroded freedom, eventually leading to some form of dictatorship.


    Hayek was enormously influential across the globe within the rising conservative movement during the second half of the 20th century. He advised future leaders such as Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, and his book became foundational for the right. Hayek’s assertion that all government interventions in the economy led to totalitarianism continues to animate popular works such as D’Souza’s “The Big Lie,” reinforcing the idea that the welfare state is a gateway drug to genocide.


    But while these ideas may make sense to free market purists, the history shows that it was the parties that arose in reaction to the Nazi horrors that built such welfare states. Denouncing their programs as “socialism” or warning of a tie between the two is nothing less than historical and political sophistry that attempts to turn effect into cause and victim into victimizer.


    Historical analogies have a useful purpose to simplify and clarify, but they work best when used carefully. As manifest problems with global capitalism, as well as political gridlock, encourage a new hunger for fundamental political transformation, it is especially important that we understand the tragic decisions of the 1930s and their consequences in their full context, rather than simply transposing words from the past onto the debates of the present.


    National Socialism preserved private property, while also putting the entire resources of society at the service of an expansionist and racist national vision, which included the conquest and murderous subjugation of other peoples. It makes no sense to think that the sole, or even the primary, negative aspect of this regime was the fact that it used state power to allocate financial resources. It makes as little sense to suggest that using state power to allocate some financial resources today will automatically result in the same dire consequences.


    Historical “gotcha” threatens to reduce our political conversations to meaninglessness, and we should resist it. Debates over the proper role of the state in protecting citizens against the negative exigencies of the market are necessarily complex. Finding the proper balance of interests within a democratic political order depends on the measurement of results, not on the power of magic words to devalue competing ideas.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...re-socialists/
    Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
    And tomorrow you'll be on your way
    Don't give a damn about what other people say
    Because tomorrow is a brand-new day


  12. #92

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Granieri is attacking a strawman buttressed by “not real socialism” cope, as have others here parroting similar points about private property and corporatism. Temin concisely differentiated the similarities between Nazi and Bolshevik socialist economic planning from these caveats, as covered extensively - not to mention that according to Granieri’s criteria, communist China wouldn’t count as socialist either. It just goes to show the absurd lengths the left is willing to go in order to guard their affection for socialism and demonize conservative opponents as Nazis.
    Last edited by Lord Thesaurian; September 01, 2021 at 09:04 AM.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  13. #93

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morticia Iunia Bruti View Post


    And leftis are even OT with their memes.

    OT:

    The WaPo with a short summary of why the Nazis were no socialists:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...re-socialists/
    Stalin filled GULAGs primarily with innocent people that were labeled as "spies" and "harmers" as per "arrest quotas" that NKVD was ordered to fullfill by basically torturing people into "confessing" for their crimes. They they arrested more people for being, for example, Polish spy then total number of people being employed by Polish intelligence throughout its whole existence. Majority of the victims were workers and peasants, the very people leftists claim to protect.
    The fact that leftists are posting memes making light of Stalin's crimes against most vulnerable demographics only further proves the point that leftists simply do not care about inhumanity of this or another regime, they simply think that proving that Stalin and marxist regimes were "better" and different from Reich means they get to "win". They don't care about the people that died or anything else, its only about distancing themselves from heavier social stigma, and nothing more.
    So all the "Nazis weren't real socialists" arguments are nothing but cope from modern left, which simply doesn't like the stigma of being associated to one of its own, but is perfectly fine with mass-murder as long as there is no offensive racial component within the ideology under which it happened.
    The WaPo with a short summary of why the Nazis were no socialists:
    Every argument from this journo's word salad has already been debunked.
    Last edited by Heathen Hammer; September 01, 2021 at 09:03 AM.

  14. #94
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    8,406

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Temin is a ecomomist, not a historian. So its no wonder, that his thesis is wrong, as Kritias already has proven.
    Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
    And tomorrow you'll be on your way
    Don't give a damn about what other people say
    Because tomorrow is a brand-new day


  15. #95

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morticia Iunia Bruti View Post
    Temin is a ecomomist, not a historian. So its no wonder, that his thesis is wrong, as Kritias already stated.
    Sig worthy. Granieri made economic arguments as to why Nazism wasn’t socialist, as did Kritias.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  16. #96

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    If you make light of Stalin mass-murdering socialists in his own country, you can't make an argument "Hitler wasn't a socialist because he targeted other socialists", without making it painfully obvious that you are arguing in extremely bad faith.

  17. #97
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    8,406

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    You have refuted no single argument from Kriteas so long. The only thing you have done so far is reciting Temins thesis again and again.

    Temin has no clue, what he is talking about, as for example Panther and Panzer IV were built only by some firms which had the license from MAN/Krupp, which was unnecessary for the T 34 in the Sovietunion, as there was a centralized socialistic economy without private property.
    Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
    And tomorrow you'll be on your way
    Don't give a damn about what other people say
    Because tomorrow is a brand-new day


  18. #98

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morticia Iunia Bruti View Post
    You have refuted no single argument from Kriteas so long. The only thing you have done so far is reciting Temins thesis again and again.


    Temin has no clue, what he is talking about, as for example Panther and Panzer IV were built only by some firms which had the license from MAN/Krupp, which was unnecessary for the T 34 in the Sovietunion, as there was a centralized socialistic economy without private property.
    You’re misrepresenting Temin’s argument the same way Kritias did, and just as crudely. Temin discussed private property, I quoted it, and commented on it as well. I also pointed out that the Soviets were happy to do billions of dollars worth of business with American capitalists prior to the Cold War, including, since you mentioned it, the purchase of tank designs from American and British firms (on which aspects of the T-28, 34 and 35 were based), and loads of British and American tanks from the Civil War all through WW2. You have no argument.
    Last edited by Lord Thesaurian; September 01, 2021 at 10:28 AM.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  19. #99
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    8,406

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Thesaurian View Post
    You’re misrepresenting Temin’s argument the same way Kritias did, and just as crudely. Temin discussed private property, I quoted it, and commented on it as well. I also pointed out that the Soviets were happy to do billions of dollars worth of business with American capitalists prior to the Cold War, including, since you mentioned it, the purchase of tank designs from American and British firms (on which aspects of the T-28, 34 and 35 were based), and loads of British and American tanks from the Civil War all through WW2. You have no argument.
    Cool, the US built tanks already in the Civil War? Were the dragged by horses?

    The T 26 and the BT series was built on british and US designs, but the T 34 is a unique soviet design.

    In 1937, the Red Army had assigned engineer Mikhail Koshkin to lead a new team to design a replacement for the BT tanks at the Kharkiv Komintern Locomotive Plant (KhPZ). The prototype tank, designated A-20, had a modified BA-20 engine and was specified with 20 mm (0.8 in) of armour, a 45 mm (1.77 in) gun, the production model used a Model V-2-34 engine, a less-flammable diesel fuel in a V12 configuration designed by Konstantin Chelpan. It also had an 8×6-wheel convertible drive similar to the BT tank's 8×2, which allowed it to run on wheels without caterpillar tracks.[18] This feature had greatly saved on maintenance and repair of the unreliable tank tracks of the early 1930s, and allowed tanks to exceed 85 kilometres per hour (53 mph) on roads, but gave no advantage in combat and its complexity made it difficult to maintain. By 1937–38, track design had improved and the designers considered it a waste of space, weight, and maintenance resources, despite the road speed advantage.[19] The A-20 also incorporated previous research (BT-IS and BT-SW-2 projects) into sloped armour: its all-round sloped armour plates were more likely to deflect rounds than perpendicular armour.[20]

    During the Battle of Lake Khasan in July 1938 and the Battles of Khalkhin Gol in 1939, an undeclared border war with Japan on the frontier with occupied Manchuria, the Soviets deployed numerous tanks against the Imperial Japanese Army (IJA). Although the IJA Type 95 Ha-Go light tanks had diesel engines,[21][page needed] the Red Army's T-26 and BT tanks used petrol engines which, while common in tank designs of the time, often burst into flames when hit by IJA tank-killer teams[22] using Molotov cocktails. Poor quality welds in the Soviet armour plates left small gaps between them, and flaming petrol from the Molotov cocktails easily seeped into the fighting and engine compartment; portions of the armour plating that had been assembled with rivets also proved to be vulnerable.[23] The Soviet tanks were also easily destroyed by the Japanese Type 95 tank's 37 mm gunfire, despite the low velocity of that gun,[24] or "at any other slightest provocation".[25] The use of riveted armour led to a problem whereby the impact of enemy shells, even if they failed to disable the tank or kill the crew on their own, would cause the rivets to break off and become projectiles inside the tank.


    Medium tank A-32


    After these battles, Koshkin convinced Soviet leader Joseph Stalin to let him develop a second prototype, a more heavily armed and armoured "universal tank" that reflected the lessons learned and could replace both the T-26 and the BT tanks. Koshkin named the second prototype A-32, after its 32 mm (1.3 in) of frontal armour. It had an L-10 76.2 mm (3 in) gun, and the same Model V-2-34 diesel.[5] Both were tested in field trials at Kubinka in 1939, with the heavier A-32 proving to be as mobile as the A-20. A still heavier version of the A-32, with 45 mm (1.77 in) of front armour, wider tracks, and a newer L-11 76.2 mm gun, was approved for production as the T-34. Koshkin chose the name after the year 1934, when he began to formulate his ideas about the new tank, and to commemorate that year's decree expanding the armoured force and appointing Sergo Ordzhonikidze to head tank production.[26]
    Valuable lessons from Lake Khasan and Khalkhin Gol regarding armour protection, mobility, quality welding, and main guns were incorporated into the new T-34 tank, which represented a substantial improvement over the BT and T-26 tanks in all four areas.[27] Koshkin's team completed two prototype T-34s in January 1940. In April and May, they underwent a grueling 2,000-kilometre (1,200 mi) drive from Kharkiv to Moscow for a demonstration for the Kremlin leaders, to the Mannerheim Line in Finland, and back to Kharkiv via Minsk and Kiev.[26] Some drivetrain shortcomings were identified and corrected.[28]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34#Origins


    I'm still waiting for an explanation, why the other german firms needed licences from MAN/Krupp to produce Panzer IV and Panther in a socialistic economy.

    But as we are still waiting:

    Cooperation between Nazi scientist Wernher von Braun and US-Army and Nasa:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun

    And im still waiting:

    I'm still waiting for an explanation, why the other german firms needed licences from MAN/Krupp to produce Panzer IV and Panther in a socialistic economy.
    Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
    And tomorrow you'll be on your way
    Don't give a damn about what other people say
    Because tomorrow is a brand-new day


  20. #100
    Sir Adrian's Avatar the Imperishable
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nehekhara
    Posts
    17,363

    Default Re: Capitalism and the Second World War cont.

    One more time: not all socialists are marxists. You can be a socialist and be anti-marxist. You can be a communist and be anti-marxist. Socialism refers to the entire left wing of politics and economics. No, american democrats are not leftists. Economically and politically the nazis were leftists, i.e. socialists. You can believe in private property and be a socialist. Lenin actively encouraged private property after the civil war for example.

    Racism is not specific to nazis, socialists, republicans or any other ideological current. Jingoism and hawk politics are not specific to nazis, socialists, republicans or any other kind of ideological current.
    Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!


Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •