I suggest you listen to "Hardcore history" podcast by dan carlin. He has a series called "Supernova in the East" explaining in depth the rise of imperialist Japan before and during WWII.
This video is right: those nations were opposed to the socialists -- including the Nazis. Drexler, the "actual founder of National Socialism" (RaFotTR, p. 36), had originally created the "Committee of Independent Workmen" to combat the Marxism of the Free Trade Unions on March 7, 1918. It was a branch of the much larger Association for the Promotion of Peace on Working-Class Lines. It merged with the Political Workers' Circle in 1919, and was called the German Workers' Party.
RaFotTR states: "A good many paragraphs of the party program were obviously merely a demagogic appeal to the mood of the lower classes at a time when they were in bad straits and were sympathetic to radical and even socialist slogans. Point 11, for example, demanded abolition of incomes unearned by work; Point 12, the nationalization of trusts; Point 13, the sharing with the state of profits from large industry... Point 16 called for a sound middle class."
What's up with the worship here? Sure, Sal is a cool guy, but he certainly is not a god. Adoring people too much blocks your individuality and stops you from thinking for yourself. But don't get me wrong, it's OK to have a rolemodel but as long as you always remain critical to everything.Even at Sal. Because he is only shining a light to the WW2 issue from a certain angle. And it's up to us to shine a light from some other angles.
i read that mussolini only took ethiopia because it was so underdeveloped at the time that people were defending themselves with literal bows and arrows. is that true?
Well I have noticed, british and german , have some kind of respect for ITALIAN because Italian are basically ROMAN, and all these German tribe including German British Frank Dutch Lombardi Vandal etc have lots of respect for Roman , except in America when Italian comes to America in early 19 they were called N word,
After the fall of the Bavarian people's state in 1919 (which took power without firing a single shot), the workers set up a soviet republic. It was overthrown by the Berlin and Bavarian "free corps" (Freikorps) in Munich, heavily armed right-wing militias funded by the Reichswehr, who slaughtered several hundred people (even communists). Hitler incurred the "disapproval" of the left-wing govt. in 1918, and joined one of these groups after the overthrow of the Communist regime.
Mussolini waited for France to fall to join the war. Italy could not have fought against both the French and the British at the same time. The generals had told Mussolini that, in case of a simultaneous war with both France and Britain, Italy would have immediately lost Libya (squeezed between French Tunisia and British Egypt) and therefore any mediterranean maneuvre. However, when France was about to fall, Mussolini joined the war. He thought the Brits would have surrendered too. His plan was to just take part at the peace conference and gai Savoy, Nice, Corsica, Tunsia, Malta, Egypt, Sudan as a reward. He thought the war was going to be short and that Italy only had to fight in Egypt and the Horn of Africa. But Britain did not surrender to the Germans and then concentrated its forces on taking down Italy. Britain was the largest of the great powers, Italy the least of the great powers. There was no chance of success at that point. Mussolini made a bet and lost it. Had Britain surrendered he would have got everything he wanted.
Anti-socialists? Germany under National SOCIALISM was highly socialists. Price and wage controls, profit controls, public works, national healthcare etc... They were against scientific socialism (otherwise known as Communism), not socialism.
Mr.Kahn is very bright and engaging. However he is not God and neither are you or I.Might I add, Noremac, that you are not "Great" either. In fact after reviewing your very brief contributions to thought and fact might I suggest "Noremac The Ordinary" as a more fitting nom de plume ?
Ahem, the National Socialists and Mussolini were certainly NOT "anti-socialist". They were anti-CAPITALIST. Since you have missed this fundamental distinction, I encourage you to please revisit the origins of the definitions of 'private' vs 'public', 'state' vs 'individual' etc; each going at least as far back as Ancient Rome and Greece. Mussolini did not need to do much more than go from being an internationalist revolutionary to a nationalist one, since his entire ideology translated from Marxism/Leninism into fascism. Little more was required to make the ideological changes, beyond some tinkering from Giovanni Gentile and the like. The emphasis of primary concern(s) was merely diverted from class warfare.... into nationalist, racial and colonial ones. It is also important to actually _read_ Mein Kampf( or read it again with more care). Hitler made many, many errors - but failing to describe exactly what he intended by his implementation of national socialism was not one of them. Better luck next time :)
Mussolini and his ideology were 100% anti-socialist. He was part of the socialist party before being kicked out for insisting on Italy joining the war during WW1, eventually creating what we know now as fascism. As George Jackson states in his book “Blood in my eye” : “ The point here is that fascism emerged out of weakness in the preexisting economic arrangement and in the old left. And the weakness must be assigned to the vanguard party, not the people. The People's Party failed to direct the masses properly with positive suppression of their class enemies and their goons. Mussolini was able to proclaim that fascism held the only solution to the people's problem--by default. Fascism, the new arrangement, the rearrangement, the strengthening and reforming of laissez-faire competitive capitalism, was antisocialist from its inception. It attempted to conceal the reality of class struggle by disguising itself as a new solution to "national problems," by deifying the interests of the "whole state" which turned out to be the interests only of the state's ruling classes.”
Just can't get enough of these videos. Great content.
Bravo; informative, concise, and easily understandable.
These videos are REALLY entertaining.
Can you cover Japan in the early 1930s in depth
I suggest you listen to "Hardcore history" podcast by dan carlin. He has a series called "Supernova in the East" explaining in depth the rise of imperialist Japan before and during WWII.
A little bit simplistic. What about the Stresa Front and Dolfuss?
That's very nice.......and it proves a point.
When pride gets in the way of a mans judgement
Very Good !
more please!
France and England, of course, has a massive history of imperialism. So was there issue with Mussolini totally humanitarian or territorial?
This video is right: those nations were opposed to the socialists -- including the Nazis. Drexler, the "actual founder of National Socialism" (RaFotTR, p. 36), had originally created the "Committee of Independent Workmen" to combat the Marxism of the Free Trade Unions on March 7, 1918. It was a branch of the much larger Association for the Promotion of Peace on Working-Class Lines. It merged with the Political Workers' Circle in 1919, and was called the German Workers' Party.
RaFotTR states: "A good many paragraphs of the party program were obviously merely a demagogic appeal to the mood of the lower classes at a time when they were in bad straits and were sympathetic to radical and even socialist slogans. Point 11, for example, demanded abolition of incomes unearned by work; Point 12, the nationalization of trusts; Point 13, the sharing with the state of profits from large industry... Point 16 called for a sound middle class."
They were also anti Capitalist
What's up with the worship here? Sure, Sal is a cool guy, but he certainly is not a god. Adoring people too much blocks your individuality and stops you from thinking for yourself.
But don't get me wrong, it's OK to have a rolemodel but as long as you always remain critical to everything.Even at Sal. Because he is only shining a light to the WW2 issue from a certain angle. And it's up to us to shine a light from some other angles.
i read that mussolini only took ethiopia because it was so underdeveloped at the time that people were defending themselves with literal bows and arrows. is that true?
He took Ethiopia to connect Italian Eritrea and Italian Somalia.
Sometimes I wonder, if the Axis powers had won, would Hitler and Tojo have fought it out?
Well I have noticed, british and german , have some kind of respect for ITALIAN because Italian are basically ROMAN, and all these German tribe including German British Frank Dutch Lombardi Vandal etc have lots of respect for Roman , except in America when Italian comes to America in early 19 they were called N word,
After the fall of the Bavarian people's state in 1919 (which took power without firing a single shot), the workers set up a soviet republic. It was overthrown by the Berlin and Bavarian "free corps" (Freikorps) in Munich, heavily armed right-wing militias funded by the Reichswehr, who slaughtered several hundred people (even communists). Hitler incurred the "disapproval" of the left-wing govt. in 1918, and joined one of these groups after the overthrow of the Communist regime.
I think you left the "c" out of Francisco Franco
So when does Tojo come into all of this?
"Tojo"? To jo mama?
nom nom nom
Why the Italians did stay neutral though? Like, why wait and see what's the better side to join in if you could stay neutral?
Mussolini waited for France to fall to join the war. Italy could not have fought against both the French and the British at the same time. The generals had told Mussolini that, in case of a simultaneous war with both France and Britain, Italy would have immediately lost Libya (squeezed between French Tunisia and British Egypt) and therefore any mediterranean maneuvre. However, when France was about to fall, Mussolini joined the war. He thought the Brits would have surrendered too. His plan was to just take part at the peace conference and gai Savoy, Nice, Corsica, Tunsia, Malta, Egypt, Sudan as a reward. He thought the war was going to be short and that Italy only had to fight in Egypt and the Horn of Africa. But Britain did not surrender to the Germans and then concentrated its forces on taking down Italy. Britain was the largest of the great powers, Italy the least of the great powers. There was no chance of success at that point. Mussolini made a bet and lost it. Had Britain surrendered he would have got everything he wanted.
6:09
AKA the swastika pizza
Please more I over ur vids
Salman Khan is the god of the god of the gods.
Anti-socialists? Germany under National SOCIALISM was highly socialists. Price and wage controls, profit controls, public works, national healthcare etc... They were against scientific socialism (otherwise known as Communism), not socialism.
Hitler killed socualists
Mr.Kahn is very bright and engaging. However he is not God and neither are you or I.Might I add, Noremac, that you are not "Great" either.
In fact after reviewing your very brief contributions to thought and fact might I suggest "Noremac The Ordinary" as a more fitting nom de plume ?
Salman Khan is God.
Lord Khan.
Those... were... jokes... are you people seriously using Khan Academy and can't understand a simple joke? God doesn't exist.
Ahem, the National Socialists and Mussolini were certainly NOT "anti-socialist".
They were anti-CAPITALIST. Since you have missed this fundamental distinction, I encourage you to please revisit the origins of the definitions of 'private' vs 'public', 'state' vs 'individual' etc; each going at least as far back as Ancient Rome and Greece. Mussolini did not need to do much more than go from being an internationalist revolutionary to a nationalist one, since his entire ideology translated from Marxism/Leninism into fascism. Little more was required to make the ideological changes, beyond some tinkering from Giovanni Gentile and the like. The emphasis of primary concern(s) was merely diverted from class warfare.... into nationalist, racial and colonial ones.
It is also important to actually _read_ Mein Kampf( or read it again with more care). Hitler made many, many errors - but failing to describe exactly what he intended by his implementation of national socialism was not one of them.
Better luck next time :)
Hitler killed socialists
Mussolini and his ideology were 100% anti-socialist. He was part of the socialist party before being kicked out for insisting on Italy joining the war during WW1, eventually creating what we know now as fascism.
As George Jackson states in his book “Blood in my eye” : “ The point here is that fascism emerged out of weakness in the preexisting economic arrangement and in the old left.
And the weakness must be assigned to the vanguard party, not the people. The People's Party failed to direct the masses properly with positive suppression of their class enemies and their goons. Mussolini was able to proclaim that fascism held the only solution to the people's problem--by default. Fascism, the new arrangement, the rearrangement, the strengthening and reforming of laissez-faire competitive capitalism, was antisocialist from its inception. It attempted to conceal the reality of class struggle by disguising itself as a new solution to "national problems," by deifying the interests of the "whole state" which turned out to be the interests only of the state's ruling classes.”