Some minor points...

Paul writes: > People do often say that the Nazis took conscious policy
measures that were proto-Keynesian, but I believe it is a bit of an
urban legend. [Although, of course, a budget deficit does not a social
democrat make (ask GW)....<

It's not an urban legend, though I would say that a lot of their
proto-Keynesianism was dumb luck. The NSDAP was in no ways
social-democratic, since the SDs don't usually use violence to suppress
peaceful opposition parties and labor unionism. And when I looked at the
data years ago, I found that the distribution of income in Germany
shifted hard to the right (in favor of profits) during the NSDAP's
1930s. 

> Hitler DID get the credit for the relative flush that comes from
stabilization a few years after serious hyper-inflation. But we have
seen the same transient rebound effect in our times in the 3rd world
hyperinflation -- with credit going to IMF stabilization programs. It is
a spurious economic association. In fact, mostly Nazi economic growth
came from breaking the unions and wage repression. Of course there were
some high profile Nazi govt initiatives: rearmament and, the much
smaller autobahn program, but the net effect of govt actions was not to
stimulate aggregate demand nor to promote accumulation\technological
transformation. The Nazis really used the 'tried and true' formula.<

The NSDAP didn't come to power in the wake of hyperinflation (which
occurred approximately a decade earlier) but in response to the steep
fall of GDP and employment, as Germany had one of the worst experiences
with the early Depression. Their proto-Keynesian policies were thus
applied in an appropriate context (as were the Swedish SD
proto-Keynesian policies of the same time). Their "tried and true"
formula was in many ways similar to that applied by other capitalist
countries during wars (e.g., the US during WWs I and II), though they
started it before the wars began. 

> The ephemeral nature of growth through wage repression AND without
technological transformation came home to roost during WWII. Having
repressed working class wages (and people!) for so long the Nazis had
little ability to impose adequate sacrifices for the war effort and yet
did not have a deep enough transformed industrial base to provide both
'guns and butter'. They had frittered away their good years (tax cuts
for the rich?)....<

Part of the Nazi problem was that they organized much of production as a
large slave-labor camp (involving many actual slave-labor camps, of
course). That's very good for promoting a sudden increase in production,
but not good in the long run. It makes "technical transformation" very
difficult to arrange. 

Jim Devine 

Reply via email to