Q&A incoming!

Sorry not real a question just more of a discussion about a paper I found. http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capitalisback/CountryData/Germany/Other/Pre1950Series/RefsHistoricalGermanAccounts/BuchheimScherner06.pdf This is on Piketty's website you can expect some slant. The paper was vague just saying what nazi Germany was transcends economics. Of course it did socialism is more than just economics but a whole social structure. Anyway there is an important point in it. "Paragraph 48 of the law on the Reich's budget (Reichshaushaltsordnung [RHO]) together with paragraph 60 of the regulations concerning the financial and economic behavior of the Reich (Wirtschaftsbestimmungen fiir die Reichsbehorden [RWB]) permitted entrepreneurial engagement of the Reich only when important interests of the Reich were not attainable otherwise and only with the consent of the Reich Finance Minister. These decrees, originating in the Weimar Republic, were never repealed during the Third Reich and thus placed the more liberally minded bureaucracy of the Reich Ministry of Finance in a strong position. It insisted that all institutions of the Reich had to strictly apply those regulations. Otherwise it would not agree to any such industrial engagement of the Reich with the result that it would be unlawful.80 In" They make a false case that because the other parts of the government had to bow to the "liberal" Reich's ministry this meant some kind of autonomy. What I think is important it shows the Reich wanted nationalized industries unless there was no option not will only nationalize if we have to. I find it amazing they say we should take socialist in the name as propaganda but we should take what they called privatization at face value for what the word means. The paper even points out investment was less than 2/3 of 1928 in 1938. They explain it away as risk from a rearmament bubble not that the investment was controlled by the state. They try to explain away Reichswerk Herman Goering is because there was no profit in low quality iron ore and not the state trying to nationalize the steel industry. Still I find the fact those Weimar laws not being repealed being key. The Reich Ministry had to approve any entrepreneurship. If we can't take socialisms in the name as evidence of anything then why should we believe the public speeches and internal meetings with industry captains promoting entrepreneurship seriously? The authors want to take these statements at face value but the I am a socialist statements.

Hi there, as an avid RKKA-boo (like Wehraboos but less cringy and with more selfirony), here are some additional things from the Soviet perspective concerning Warsaw. 1: The map does not represent reality. During Bagration RKKA moved forward quite quickly and flexibly, with the understanding that "it does not matter if our logistics get fucked, as long as their logistics are significantly more fucked then ours" one can advance. Given the "well known excellence of the German logicstal effort", this is hardly unreasonable or unachievable, and it was quite succesfull. However, it meant that when Pravda stated that 6 guards army crossed the Vistula, yes, it was kind of true, but it was just an advance element that got lucky and showed some unusual initative, while some of the main elements were hundreds of kilomenters behind wondering where the hell headquarters was. 2: Soviet propaganda. Basically, Rokosovsky was quite aware of the Logistal and cohesion issues, but basically wanted to push as far as he could, pushing was easier if the Germans were confused or ideally convinced that the might of the Soviet steamroller would turn them into pancakes if they dont relocate to their side of the Elbe posthaste. Russian propagnda in the aim of "yeah, we are totally going to take Warsaw from them accursed Hiterlites!" were 1/3 wishfull thinking, 1/3 bluffing (it looked way more important to cut off HG Nord) and 1/3 trying to project strength to make the Germans run away more and farther. One of the reasons for the whole Warsaw fuckup is that Bor Komorowski fell the bluff (they were probably not even the intendend target) and the Model didnt. 3: Operation "Stalingrad on the Vistula" RKKA (Rokosovsky in particular) had a cunning plan (kind off but not fully in the Monty Python sense) to save Warsaw. Essentially the plan was to perform a most cunning double encirclement on the Wehrmacht, with the added cunning feature of cleverly outsourcing the part where you hold the Germans in place with incredibly bloody and savage city warfare to the Polish home army. The plan didnt quite work for several reasons: A) AK fell too quickly. B) Stalin, in contrast to Zhukov, didnt approve of it and C) the situation just didnt develop like that, partly because of this really unpleaseant counter attack by Model (lets not go into that or a milion of rapbid Wehraboos will be summoned) , partly because the Red armies best cityfighters were in the Magnuzew bridgehead.