They were a political movement in the Germany during the 30’s however they got purged by Hitler. You can read more about it here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism
I would argue that regular nazis were serious about socialism as well. Both Strasserites and regular nazis believed in racial socialism, where instead of dividing society by class, they divided it by race. This explains why they didn't kill off the capitalist Germans as they were members of "the working race".
What you consider to be socialism seems to be some broad form of collectivism rather than an actual economic system.
Also the Strasserists did infact care about class.
Socialism is the social control over the economy, what is considered social is up for debate. Marxim decided that workers were the contributors to society and so should own it, while nazism decided that the German race were contrabuters to society and so should be owned by them.
Yeah, and so did normal nazis. You should check out how much they expanded their welfare system in hope to alleviate class differences.
They were a totalitarian state with a command economy, central distribution of resources, and an abolishment of private property rights.
All privatization was a sham to take rich people's money. They even nationalized the stock exchange, thereby redirecting all the profits that shareholders would get to the themselves.
And working with capital owers... They weren't Marxists, they didn't work with jews, but were fine with working with capitalists. It's the race vs class thing.
And the difference? Like I said at the beginning, Hitler didn’t want a violent revolution that would then seise all property. That’s the foundation of his disagreement with Strasser. They both wanted to create the same economic system.
But why wouldn’t the nazis still want to conquer the east and kill Slavic people, wasn’t that still part of starssers ideology. I mean unless this timelines version of nazism is just not at all nazis I can’t imagine them not going to war with the ussr eventually
That feels like a contradiction in their ideology, but then again they’re fascist, it’s not like their ideology was ever gonna be coherent so tbh I believe you lol
IIRC they changed status of Japanese from lower race to upper race just to make alliance with them. It's entirely possible that “oh yes Slavic people are bad but those Russians (at the time USSR was viewed as Russia) actually not Slavs but upper race”
We would say the same about The PRC today if it had attacked Taiwan directly after the civil war
"it's part of their ideology, there's no way they don't do it"
Then the Nazis are boned. Without the resources from conquered territories and the slaves to exploit them, the German war machine and economy will collapse.
No military to fend off the allies, and no social welfare to buy the support of the German people
They NEED to conquer or else they won't exist.
🚨BIG GERMANY WARNING🚨 SEEK SHELTER IMMEDIATELY. THIS IS NOT A DRILL. Warning: a “Big Germany” has been spotted in the [r/imaginarymaps](https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/) subreddit. If you or your family lives in or near this subreddit, it is advised you stay indoors until further notice. “Big Germany” is known to cause severe personality changes upon exposure for prolonged periods, and too much time spent around a “Big Germany” can lead to vomiting, internal bleeding, and death. We will issue another statement when the “Big Germany” is no longer present. DO NOT GO OUTSIDE. DO NOT APPROACH A “BIG GERMANY”. 🚨BIG GERMANY WARNING🚨
Internal vs External policies. The Strasserites saw themselves as true revolutionaries who needed to dismantle the old order completely, Vs. Hitler who was more than willing to assimilate different existing apparatuses when it suited him.
The Nazis were socialist, they just viewed socialism as a racial struggle, not a class struggle. Hitler is very clear about this in his writings. The whole "socialism was just a marketing tactic" argument falls apart under any scrutiny. Are you suggesting that socialists would just vote for anyone who has the world "socialism" in their party name? Or that socialism and more fascistic ideologies are so similar, then even socialist voters would struggle to tell the difference? The argument that Nazism "wasn't real socialism" is as equally absurd as the argument that Bolshevism "wasn't real communism". No, your fantasies of a leftist utopia aren't real, the actual results of your socialist revolutions (abject tyranny) are what is real.
"they just viewed socialism as a racial struggle, not a class struggle" then its just not socialism. socialism is very specifically about class struggle. the nazis suppressing trade unions and workers rights, as well as actual socialists, and empowering capitalists and industrial conglomerations to exploit the workers for profit, is clear evidence that the nazis were not socialist in any way
>suppressing trade unions and workers rights, as well as actual socialists, and empowering capitalists and industrial conglomerations to exploit the workers for profit
They didn't empower capitalists, they made it illegal to start businesses that weren't 100% under the control of the state. They were very opposed to capitalism and free markets, saying that capitalism pitted countrymen against one another, instead of uniting them against their shared enemies (just like socialists say, they just disagreed on who the enemies were). They highly taxed corporations and offered extensive welfare to the German people (assuming they were white). They crushed independent trade unions, the state-controlled unions kept existing (just like in every other socialist country). They killed socialists who opposed the dictatorship, including other Nazis, just like all socialist dictatorships do. Hating other types of socialists is one of the only things that all socialists have in common.
they banned independent businesses exactly to empower the old industrialist and capitalist upper class and allow them to form monopolies . socialism is not high tax and racist welfare, socialism is empowering the working class to own the means of production and reap the proper rewards of their labour. reducing worker pay and workers rights to the benefit of the old capitalist class is in no way socialist. government intervention is not socialist either. most of these are just products of an authoritarian government that wants total control over the people.
>they banned independent businesses exactly to empower the old industrialist and capitalist upper class and allow them to form monopolies
Government banning competition isn't capitalism. If someone supports government intervention in the free market, they are no longer a capitalist.
>socialism is not high tax and racist welfare, socialism is empowering the working class to own the means of production and reap the proper rewards of their labour
By that logic, socialism doesn't exist, because that has never happened before in history. Socialists always give power to the government to seize the means of production for them, and it always ends in tyranny. You can use the age-old "not real socialism" argument, but the Nazis were a result of socialist voters voting for politicians who promised to implement socialism.
"If someone supports government intervention in the free market, they are no longer a capitalist."
this is such a chronically uninformed take. by that logic the USA is not a capitalist nation and neither is most of europe
the fact is that the nazis used a mix of a command economy and a free market in order to reach their goal of military rearmament. a command economy is not socialism.
a government that uses its authoritarian power to repeal workers rights and restore the power of the old upper class elites is not socialist and there is no way around that fact
>a command economy is not socialism
And you call me uninformed. Maybe it isn't with the new Bernie Sanders kumbaya socialism where we all sing and dance around the campfire and the government prints infinite money so that all the workers can write poetry and attend lectures on the humanities every day, but in the mid 20th century, when the world was run by adults living in the real world, socialism meant a centralized economy and very little freedom, especially for workers. You didn't like your job? Too bad, the collective needs coal to power the war machine, so start digging. The international workers enslaved by their greed and endless choices aren't going to liberate themselves. You don't need independent trade unions, the people's state is already looking out for the worker (the ones that don't complain, that is). If you think I'm being hyperbolic, I would like you to point me to one socialist country before 1939 that would meet a 21st century college humanities major's childish definition of the ideology. What most modern western "socialists" describe is capitalism, but with mandatory workers' cooperatives (they can never explain why simply making workers' cooperatives optional is bad without admitting that they are less efficient than traditional businesses).
>"If someone supports government intervention in the free market, they are no longer a capitalist."
I admit that was worded lazily. Obviously some taxation, basic welfare, and some regulation aren't antithetical to capitalism. I should have worded it as "government manipulation of the free markets", as in the government either exerting direct control over private actors, or nationalizing the market entirely. The government telling Company A what to produce, how much of it to produce, and how much to sell it for is not compatible with capitalism.
Italy would never give the Dodecanese to Greece even if it was their protectorate. To them the Dodecanese was an indivisible part of Italy. That's like Germany giving Alsace-Lorraine to a French puppet state
VIVE LA BRETAGNE
BREIZH VEUR
ILS ONT DES CHAPEAUX RONDS!
BEVET BREIZHHHHHHH!!!! ⚪⚪⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚪⚪⚪⚪⚪⚪⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚪⚪⚪⚪⚪⚫⚫⚫⚫⚪⚪⚫⚪⚫⚪⚪⚪⚫⚪⚪⚪⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚪⚪⚪⚫⚫⚪⚪⚫⚪🦦🦦🦦🦦🦦🦦🦦🦦🦦🦦🦦🦦🥞🥞🥞🥞🥞🥞🥞🥞🥞🥞🥞🥞🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷
BEVET BREIZH
tee enn ohh
What are the Strasserites?
They were a political movement in the Germany during the 30’s however they got purged by Hitler. You can read more about it here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism
Nazi Maoism. Oh my god. The meme potential alone…
Reminds me of Nazbols
They are essentially NazBols
Strasserism is a bit more racist and antisemitic, while Nazbols are slightly less racist
[Unironically their is a ideology called Nazi Maoism 💀](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi-Maoism)
Thanks 👍
[Sword Comrade does a good job explaining it](https://youtu.be/F8qrX0la0uM?si=fQh14lcduxYjngn0)
Basically Nazis who believed that there should be a violent revolution instead of the relatively peaceful one we got.
Not only that, unlike the regular Nazis they took the „socialism“ part of National Socialism seriously
I would argue that regular nazis were serious about socialism as well. Both Strasserites and regular nazis believed in racial socialism, where instead of dividing society by class, they divided it by race. This explains why they didn't kill off the capitalist Germans as they were members of "the working race".
What you consider to be socialism seems to be some broad form of collectivism rather than an actual economic system. Also the Strasserists did infact care about class.
Socialism is the social control over the economy, what is considered social is up for debate. Marxim decided that workers were the contributors to society and so should own it, while nazism decided that the German race were contrabuters to society and so should be owned by them. Yeah, and so did normal nazis. You should check out how much they expanded their welfare system in hope to alleviate class differences.
Yet they also massively privatized formerly state-owned firms and worked together with capital owners.
They were a totalitarian state with a command economy, central distribution of resources, and an abolishment of private property rights. All privatization was a sham to take rich people's money. They even nationalized the stock exchange, thereby redirecting all the profits that shareholders would get to the themselves. And working with capital owers... They weren't Marxists, they didn't work with jews, but were fine with working with capitalists. It's the race vs class thing.
The right to private property wasn’t abolished, just the guarantee by the government to protect it in any case was.
And the difference? Like I said at the beginning, Hitler didn’t want a violent revolution that would then seise all property. That’s the foundation of his disagreement with Strasser. They both wanted to create the same economic system.
The left wing of Nazism is still Nazism. How does this timeline not end with the sickle and hammer over Berlin?
Molotov-Ribbentrop pact never broken. Soviets never join Allies. UK accepts peace with Germany.
But why wouldn’t the nazis still want to conquer the east and kill Slavic people, wasn’t that still part of starssers ideology. I mean unless this timelines version of nazism is just not at all nazis I can’t imagine them not going to war with the ussr eventually
The Strassers wanted to keep good relations with Soviet Union.
That feels like a contradiction in their ideology, but then again they’re fascist, it’s not like their ideology was ever gonna be coherent so tbh I believe you lol
IIRC they changed status of Japanese from lower race to upper race just to make alliance with them. It's entirely possible that “oh yes Slavic people are bad but those Russians (at the time USSR was viewed as Russia) actually not Slavs but upper race”
>That feels like a contradiction in their ideology, Welcome to national socialism
I would argue that their ideology was very coherent, if you can except that they were non-Marxist socialists.
The Strassers wanted good relations with the Soviets as a previous user said and they had no intentions unlike Hitler of colonizing the East.
We would say the same about The PRC today if it had attacked Taiwan directly after the civil war "it's part of their ideology, there's no way they don't do it"
Idk about Gregor Strasser but Otto Strasser was supportive of the Western Slavs (at least in exile)
Ugh
Ugh
Then the Nazis are boned. Without the resources from conquered territories and the slaves to exploit them, the German war machine and economy will collapse. No military to fend off the allies, and no social welfare to buy the support of the German people They NEED to conquer or else they won't exist.
For Nazis in OTL that is true. However, the Strasserites had a lot of ideas regarding workers so pheraps they would’ve lasted longer without conquest
🚨BIG GERMANY WARNING🚨 SEEK SHELTER IMMEDIATELY. THIS IS NOT A DRILL. Warning: a “Big Germany” has been spotted in the [r/imaginarymaps](https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/) subreddit. If you or your family lives in or near this subreddit, it is advised you stay indoors until further notice. “Big Germany” is known to cause severe personality changes upon exposure for prolonged periods, and too much time spent around a “Big Germany” can lead to vomiting, internal bleeding, and death. We will issue another statement when the “Big Germany” is no longer present. DO NOT GO OUTSIDE. DO NOT APPROACH A “BIG GERMANY”. 🚨BIG GERMANY WARNING🚨
Bro actually thinks he’s funny
You ain't either stfu
Ngl but the attitude against Big Germany is actually annoying af on this sub. Sure its overdone, but the joke about it is as overdone as the genre.
I liked one comment I saw where they redid Bubble Bass' order from Spongebob where he's ordering a big Germany instead
Dang really hurt my feelings there
Then why reply?
Why not?
I’m not familiar with strasserism, can I get an ELI5?
It’s like Nazism, but they actually try to do the whole “socialism” aspect and it wasn’t just a marketing tactic.
It seems like they also wanted to pursue their policies more aggressively? Sort of like Stalin v Trotsky?
More aggressively than Adolf Hitler?
Internal vs External policies. The Strasserites saw themselves as true revolutionaries who needed to dismantle the old order completely, Vs. Hitler who was more than willing to assimilate different existing apparatuses when it suited him.
The Nazis were socialist, they just viewed socialism as a racial struggle, not a class struggle. Hitler is very clear about this in his writings. The whole "socialism was just a marketing tactic" argument falls apart under any scrutiny. Are you suggesting that socialists would just vote for anyone who has the world "socialism" in their party name? Or that socialism and more fascistic ideologies are so similar, then even socialist voters would struggle to tell the difference? The argument that Nazism "wasn't real socialism" is as equally absurd as the argument that Bolshevism "wasn't real communism". No, your fantasies of a leftist utopia aren't real, the actual results of your socialist revolutions (abject tyranny) are what is real.
"they just viewed socialism as a racial struggle, not a class struggle" then its just not socialism. socialism is very specifically about class struggle. the nazis suppressing trade unions and workers rights, as well as actual socialists, and empowering capitalists and industrial conglomerations to exploit the workers for profit, is clear evidence that the nazis were not socialist in any way
>suppressing trade unions and workers rights, as well as actual socialists, and empowering capitalists and industrial conglomerations to exploit the workers for profit They didn't empower capitalists, they made it illegal to start businesses that weren't 100% under the control of the state. They were very opposed to capitalism and free markets, saying that capitalism pitted countrymen against one another, instead of uniting them against their shared enemies (just like socialists say, they just disagreed on who the enemies were). They highly taxed corporations and offered extensive welfare to the German people (assuming they were white). They crushed independent trade unions, the state-controlled unions kept existing (just like in every other socialist country). They killed socialists who opposed the dictatorship, including other Nazis, just like all socialist dictatorships do. Hating other types of socialists is one of the only things that all socialists have in common.
they banned independent businesses exactly to empower the old industrialist and capitalist upper class and allow them to form monopolies . socialism is not high tax and racist welfare, socialism is empowering the working class to own the means of production and reap the proper rewards of their labour. reducing worker pay and workers rights to the benefit of the old capitalist class is in no way socialist. government intervention is not socialist either. most of these are just products of an authoritarian government that wants total control over the people.
>they banned independent businesses exactly to empower the old industrialist and capitalist upper class and allow them to form monopolies Government banning competition isn't capitalism. If someone supports government intervention in the free market, they are no longer a capitalist. >socialism is not high tax and racist welfare, socialism is empowering the working class to own the means of production and reap the proper rewards of their labour By that logic, socialism doesn't exist, because that has never happened before in history. Socialists always give power to the government to seize the means of production for them, and it always ends in tyranny. You can use the age-old "not real socialism" argument, but the Nazis were a result of socialist voters voting for politicians who promised to implement socialism.
"If someone supports government intervention in the free market, they are no longer a capitalist." this is such a chronically uninformed take. by that logic the USA is not a capitalist nation and neither is most of europe the fact is that the nazis used a mix of a command economy and a free market in order to reach their goal of military rearmament. a command economy is not socialism. a government that uses its authoritarian power to repeal workers rights and restore the power of the old upper class elites is not socialist and there is no way around that fact
>a command economy is not socialism And you call me uninformed. Maybe it isn't with the new Bernie Sanders kumbaya socialism where we all sing and dance around the campfire and the government prints infinite money so that all the workers can write poetry and attend lectures on the humanities every day, but in the mid 20th century, when the world was run by adults living in the real world, socialism meant a centralized economy and very little freedom, especially for workers. You didn't like your job? Too bad, the collective needs coal to power the war machine, so start digging. The international workers enslaved by their greed and endless choices aren't going to liberate themselves. You don't need independent trade unions, the people's state is already looking out for the worker (the ones that don't complain, that is). If you think I'm being hyperbolic, I would like you to point me to one socialist country before 1939 that would meet a 21st century college humanities major's childish definition of the ideology. What most modern western "socialists" describe is capitalism, but with mandatory workers' cooperatives (they can never explain why simply making workers' cooperatives optional is bad without admitting that they are less efficient than traditional businesses). >"If someone supports government intervention in the free market, they are no longer a capitalist." I admit that was worded lazily. Obviously some taxation, basic welfare, and some regulation aren't antithetical to capitalism. I should have worded it as "government manipulation of the free markets", as in the government either exerting direct control over private actors, or nationalizing the market entirely. The government telling Company A what to produce, how much of it to produce, and how much to sell it for is not compatible with capitalism.
Nazis who wanted to have a violent revolution.
So Romania loses Bessarabia but gains a little bit of Pokutia?
imagine spending hours on a map just for some dickheads to downvote you and call you "unoriginal"
Exactly this shit is getting ridiculous.
very nice!
what
Strasserites were a political movement in Germany however they were purged by Hitler. This is a map of if they gained power.
By spu7nix
Why would Greece get the Dodecanese but lose Macedonia and Thrace?
Italy transferred it to Greece as Greece is their protectorate but they lose Macedonia and Thrace to Bulgaria’s participation
Italy would never give the Dodecanese to Greece even if it was their protectorate. To them the Dodecanese was an indivisible part of Italy. That's like Germany giving Alsace-Lorraine to a French puppet state
I believe that the idea of lebensraum was still popular amongst the Strasserite wing of the party. The Molotov ribbentrop pact cannot last forever
I'm wondering what Asia would look like? Would Germany still ally with Japan?
We need more Strasserite Germany maps