The Vampire Economy: Doing Business Under Fascism

by Günter Reimann

Here is a study of the actual workings of business under national socialism. Written in 1939, Reimann discusses the effects of heavy regulation, inflation, price controls, trade interference, national economic planning, and attacks on private property, and what consequences they had for human rights and economic development. This is a subject rarely discussed and for reasons that are discomforting,: as much as the left hated the social and cultural agenda of the Nazis, the economic agenda fit straight into a pattern of statism that had emerged in Europe and the United States, and in this area, the world has not be de-Nazified. This books makes for alarming reading, as one discovers the extent to which the Nazi economic agenda of totalitarian control--without finally abolishing private property--has become the norm. The author is by no means an Austrian but his study provides historical understanding and frightening look at the consequences of state economic management.

Genres: Economics, History, Politics, Nonfiction, Germany, World War II, European History

368 pages, Paperback

First published September 1, 1939

Reviews

[Ed Kless · Rating 4 out of 5]

Far too many people I encounter seem to think that Fascism/Nazism is associated with free-market capitalism. This book written by a Communist-leaning German economist destroys that notion.

As the full name of the Nazi Party suggests, the National Socialist German Workers' Party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei) was in every way Socialist where society (in this case defined as Arians) is more important than the individual.

The burdensome regulations that changed on the whims of both national and local leaders kept more business owners in a perpetual state of instability.

In addition, while the government leaders encouraged the sciences to assist with the military's demands, entrepreneurialism and innovation with other ares of the private sector were discouraged.

The book does tend to get repetitive in parts, so some skim reading of those areas is recommended. However, do not give up on the book completely. Some of the later chapters are well worth the investment.

[Joshua · Rating 5 out of 5]

This remarkable book, written in 1939 by a leftist economist, is one of the most interesting accounts of the rise of fascistic Germany I've ever read. Relying on explicit Nazi policies, guidance letters, first-hand accounts, and contemporary reports, Reimann effectively describes the Orwellian nightmare of Germany's command economy of the 1930s - eventually becoming completely dominated by war preparation. Nazi Germany engaged in a wholesale expropriation of capital and and the complete destruction of competitive enterprise. Businessmen became subservient to the Party - their precarious existence continuing at the sufferance of the state. Only those with connections to the Party or willing/able to make massive bribes could continue operating their businesses. However, as economic difficulties - inherent to a command economy - multiplied, even favored industrialists had to fear being sacrificed by the authoritarian regime in the "interest of the state."

The Nazis absolutely rejected longstanding rights in private property, instead subjecting its citizenry to rabid nationalistic economic policies. As Reimann put it, "Under Bolshevism all your cows will be taken away from you because you are a kulak. Under National Socialism, you are allowed to keep the cows; but the State takes all the milk, and you have the expense and labor of feeding them."

Overall, this book provides great, contemporary insight into the operation of the Nazi economy. It's also an effective rebuttal against modern denialists who claim Nazi Germany had a privatized economy - examples of state control over the means of production are discussed at length (e.g., price controls, employment controls, licensing/permitting controls, direct state management, import/export controls, ruinous taxation, removal of racial minorities and Jews from the economy, military takeover of industry, etc.).

"The life of the German businessman is full of contradictions. He cordially dislikes the gigantic, top-heavy, bureaucratic State machine which is strangling his economic independence. Yet, he needs the aid of these despised bureaucrats more and more, and is forced to run after them, begging for concessions, privileges and grants in fear that his competitor will gain the advantage."

[Ietrio · Rating 5 out of 5]

Reading this text in 2018: mind blowing!

I could not believe it was written by a communist (!), with knowledge of economy (!!), in 1939 (!!!).

He perfectly describes the workings of the Communist countries, with the mention that the failure was faster as there were no more entrepreneurs, just state bureaucrats.

He perfectly describes the economy of the "West", meaning Europe and North America. It used to be for the Nation and than the people. Now it's Safety for the people. The results are the same. At least Animal Farm is an allegory, so one can get some comfort from it not being real. This is real.

[Daniel Healy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really interesting to read about the economy and business activities of Nazi Germany from someone who lived through it. The government controlled practically every facet of the economy, I'm amazed that Germany didn't collapse a lot sooner. Unfortunately the book has a lot of redundancy which started to bore me half way through. The book should be edited and cut by at least 30%.

[Taylor · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very informative but the author does confuse Fascism and National Socialism as being the same. He is also a communist so will be writing through that lense but in doing so accidentally shows how similar the Nazi policies are to his own without realizing it.

[Frederick Sterling · Rating 5 out of 5]

While Hitler's National Socialism by Rainer Zitelmann does a spectacular job providing a meticulous overview of Hitler's political/social philosophy of National Socialism, The Vampire Economy: Doing Business Under Fascism by Günter Reimann provides an incredibly in-depth study of the actual economics of Nazism. There is no other book (as far as I am aware of) that provides such a comprehensive investigation of the economics of Nazism alone from other topics. However, there is one mistake I would like to correct right away with the title of this book: Nazism is not Fascism. The two ideologies are distinctly different from each other, even if they share some similarities. I would correct the title to say: The Vampire Economy: Doing Business Under Nazism. I cannot blame Mr. Reimann; lumping Fascism with Nazism has been common parlance ever since the 1930s.

Metaphorically relating the Nazi economy akin to a vampire is very appropriate. Stealing a definition from Wikipedia, a vampire is: "a creature from folklore that subsists by feeding on the vital essence (generally in the form of blood) of the living.". Since we now have a general understanding of what a vampire is, how is it fair to relate the Nazi economy with this terrible creature? Let us examine a excerpts from this wonderful book (please read them, they are essential to my main point):

[Quote 1] A considerable part of the liquid funds of all companies is requisitioned by the State either for the financing of State-sponsored industrial projects, or as tax payments. The latter have risen to such an extent that many industrial enterprises have had to reduce their reinvestments.

[Quote 2] Most textile manufacturers have had to buy new machinery in order to work with German cotton and wool ersatz. According to the official figures on new investments and production of capital goods, Germany’s industrial capital has increased greatly. But these reports do not indicate the amount of “capital goods” used for armaments; they say nothing about the extent to which machinery must be replaced so that ersatz may be used. The boom in many German industries indicates that the whole industrial structure is undergoing a rapid transformation at the hands of the State in order to meet present emergency situations and in preparation for a future wartime economy. New factories arise for the satisfaction of special demands, springing from unforeseen raw material shortages. No one knows how long such emergencies will last. Industrialists, therefore, feel that they should be prepared for future losses and the probability that much machinery will soon have to be renewed or may, in a relatively short time, become obsolete. Consequently they try to recover the money spent on new plant investments as rapidly as possible. This is often impossible, because the State has so many investment schemes of its own. It has created new technical difficulties which can be overcome only through new investments.

[Quote 3] The flow of capital is no longer regulated by a capital market which directs it into industries that are particularly profitable. The State has supplanted the capital market. It compels private capitalists to make investments in a future wartime economy and creates economic conditions which cause old investments to decline in value. Thus the State makes drastic preparation for a still greater scarcity of raw materials and labor supply—all this in the expectation that wartime economy is not far off.

[Quote 4] These big banks are today again under private ownership. This fact easily misleads the foreign observer. For under fascism “private banks” are as much under State control and are as co-ordinated as ordinary State banks.

[Quote 5] The Nazi State was unable to find enough capitalists willing to buy State debentures. Yet it raised huge short-term credits and even loans by compelling capitalists and financial institutions, unwilling and unable to risk their money in new investments, to invest their capital in the riskiest form of large-scale, short-term financing of State “investments.” This explains the impressive ability of the Nazi State to spend and spend extravagantly, to finance huge deficits without an immediate breakdown of the economic system. The Nazi State takes advantage of the fact that Germany is a highly industrialized country where the savings of several generations have accumulated in the form of gigantic investments and in an industrial machine bigger than that of France or even England. In comparison with Germany, Italy is a poor country; its technical equipment and industrial capital is merely a fraction of such investments in Germany. Mussolini, therefore, finds it much more difficult to finance excessive State deficits than does Hitler, and Mussolini’s deficits have a greater and more immediate effect upon private economy than Hitler’s. Yet the final consequences of living at the expense of the savings of the past are more fatal for a system which can feed its population only by means of a highly industrialized economy and not entirely or mainly by means of agricultural labor. This living on the capital of the nation finds expression in the growing indebtedness of the State to private economy. It has been authoritatively estimated 7 that in Germany today direct and indirect State indebtedness in all forms—bonds, other securities, bank credits and so on—amounts to over 55 per cent of the total indebtedness, with private debts accounting for the remaining 45 per cent. Excluding mortgage debts, the indebtedness of the State amounts to something like 75 per cent of the total. If traditional relations between creditor and debtor prevailed, the debtor should be under the control of the creditor—in receivership—if there were any difficulties in paying interest and amortization charges. Figures and words have changed their meaning. Many private enterprises have managed to pay off debts under the Nazi regime. The fight against “interest slavery”—a propaganda slogan of the Nazis before they came to power—has in part been successful insofar as private debts are concerned, and interest payments have shrunk. But this shrinkage of debt and interest payments has been more than offset by the growth of debt and interest obligations of the State, and also by a tremendous growth of taxation. Yet this does not mean that the State as a debtor is “enslaved” to its creditors—the bondholders. For the State has the power, at any time it pleases, to refuse fulfillment of its obligations as a debtor. “National Socialism does not allow either the level of interest rates or the distribution of new money capital to be determined by the free play of demand, supply and quotations. The present interest rate is the result of a number of planned and carefully adjusted economic measures which are not based on the impracticable idea of giving interest laws the character of police orders but which are based on the desire to control all factors which influence the rate of interest.

[Quote 6] With the growth of this control system, bureaucratic requirements have grown tremendously. Even the smallest artisan must fill out dozens of questionnaires and must read long circulars. One circular of the Reich Estate for German Handicrafts with regard to applications for a supply of iron and steel asks thirty-one questions which have to be answered with great care by all independent artisans in Germany. The clash between different groups and authorities who simultaneously claimed to represent the most urgent and most important “interests of the State” and therefore insisted on preferential treatment, resulted in such anarchy, in such a flood of complaints, investigations and wasted correspondence, that as a final solution, a new authority was created for the most important branches of industry. Three commissars were appointed: one for the building trades, one for the machine-tool industry, and one for the iron and steel industry. These new commissars are plenipotentiaries extraordinary who can overrule decisions of all other authorities; they are responsible solely to Goering. This “reform” might have made superfluous a part of the paper war between different offices and authorities, but the relationship between supply and demand did not improve. Nor was a method found for the elimination of preferential treatment for those having “good contacts.”

[Quote 7] The businessman needs every bit of his ingenuity to circumvent regulations and restrictions and to avoid interruptions in production. Rubber, for example, is extremely scarce, and it is consequently very difficult to buy a new rubber tire. It has become an officially decreed rule that no new tires may be sold unless the old tire is returned completely worn out. But this system does not work out in practice. Reserve tires are needed so badly that firms have resorted to buying entire new trucks just to obtain new tires. These tires were then removed and the new trucks sold without the tires as scrap iron. Business ingenuity in circumventing the State bureaucracy thus results in fantastic waste of materials, all in the name of preventing waste.

One can notice a theme throughout all of these excerpts: bureaucracy bonanza. Contrary to popular belief, the Nazi economy was heavily state regimented. By the 1940s, there was barely anything a businessman could do without a permit, certificate, or verification from the local Nazi government office. Laissez-faire was not in the Nazi lexicon. Complete government control of trade, heavy protectionism, currency manipulation / currency colonialism abroad, insanely strict price/wage/rent controls, forceful confiscation of wealth/savings from entrepreneurs to fund the rearmaments program, hundreds of bureaucracy organizations created for the most simple trade tasks, endless permits/licenses required for basic business tasks, using the government to forcefully negotiate on behalf of both employers and employees through the Deutsche Arbeitsfront, and much more. Using the Hegelian dialectic model (HDM), one can deduce how these ideologies came to existence. Let us have "capitalism" as the thesis and "communism" as the antithesis; the synthesis is the conglomeration of these two ideologies that manifest themselves as a form of a "mixed-economy" or, as some may be inclined to say, "socialism" (though the scale is heavily weighed towards the economic interventionism side). These are known as "Third Positions" (i.e. Italian Fascism and Nationalism Socialism). Despite what some people on the left may try to say about these ideologies, they are just another form of etatism.

Since the basics have been covered, how does the Nazi economy appear to be like a "vampire"? The quotes that I had provided above are just a clue / sneak-peak to the myriad details that have been provided in the entire book. Essentially, the Nazi economy took advantage of Germany's industrialization that was only made possible due to private enterprise and "freer" trade, and wished to squeeze and suck the blood out of that success. All the progress that had been made since Bismarck to make Germany the industrial powerhouse of Europe had been taken for granted. National Socialists had convinced the German people that private enterprise was not enough; heavy economic interventionism and astoundingly high levels of protectionism and economic isolationism were embraced as the only solutions to Germany's woes. The Nazi economy did not just leech off of the progress that had been made within Germany-proper, but had also leeched off of other countries (whether we are talking about the countries that were subjected to Hitler's lebensraum or countries who had to deal with Hjalmar Schacht's currency manipulation schemes). In order for the Nazi economy to succeed, it had to suck the blood, sweat, tears, and currency/money of Germans and other peoples.

This is a highly recommended book for anyone who wants more than just a cursory glance at the intricacies of National Socialist bureaucracy and political economy. The book may be a bit dry at times, but if you are able to get over the "textbook" feel of this fantastic read, it pays off in the end.

[Dominic · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very disappointing. I’ve heard others claim this is one of the best books covering National Socialist economics and public policy, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. This is rather a propaganda piece full of misinformation, inaccuracies, and dishonest representations of what was actually going on in Germany under Hitler’s regime, and has very questionable source material.

It should first be mentioned that the author, Hans Steinicke (Gunter Reimann was his pen name), is not exactly an unbiased, neutral observer. Steinicke was born in 1904 and was a contemporary of National Socialist Germany, and while that may seemingly give him credibility compared to modern historians, his personal bias bleeds through the pages of this book. He was a Communist, and as such misrepresents the information and data regarding Germany’s economy, even when it may be more in line with his Communism than with Capitalism. One may point out that everyone will have some bias, especially when it comes to politics, and that is understandable. However, there are several indicators that his bias comes with dishonesty. For example, many sources are anonymous; in other words, nonexistent. In the preface he writes:

“These collaborators must remain anonymous; the confidence and trust they reposed in me have placed upon me the grave responsibility of concealing their identity so that no evil will come to them or to their friends in Germany or Italy.”

You read that right. He is going to provide “eye-witness” testimony (such testimonies are already unreliable, which is why they rarely hold up in court), and you are supposed to take his word for it. He uses letters written by contemporary businessmen that supposedly help his thesis. His source: Trust me bro.

Further, it is difficult to take him seriously by the mere fact that he uses the word “Nazi.” This is a slang word, with the real terminology being “National Socialist.” Imagine if a historian wrote a book about Communism and referred to the states and people as “Tankies.” Would you take that author seriously? Continuing with this point, he conflates National Socialism with Fascism as if they were the same thing. Any person who has undertaken serious study of either political theory would know that this is a novice mistake, let alone from a man who was alive during the height of each movement.

Each chapter is worth critiquing heavily, but I’ll point out just a few to get the point across. In the very first chapter he writes about “one of the largest landowners in Eastern Prussia” and his complaints about the German government. One case that made him furious was when he wanted to invest his money in Africa rather than Germany, but the government wouldn’t let him leave the country with more than ten marks. What evil! How dare the state force the wealthy to keep wages in their own country rather than abroad, and to spend it on domestic business rather than a foreign one!

There is a section where Reimann criticizes the distribution of raw materials throughout Germany. There were certain supervisory boards that would dictate how many raw materials could be purchased by each man or business. “These supervisory boards” he writes, “estimate how much iron, steel, copper, rubber and other raw materials are needed by the whole country in order to carry out certain production programs. They even know how great the demand is from individual industries and plants. But this knowledge is of little practical use when it is impossible to obtain an adequate supply and to regulate the demand.”

It is hard to say what point he is trying to make here. If raw materials were difficult to obtain for Germany (as they were for many other countries at the time), is that not more reason for the supervisory boards to exist? And Reimann, as a Communist, should be sympathetic to the fact that Germany did not want anyone to monopolize anything, especially raw materials. Certain corporations should be given preferential treatment if they are involved in producing subsidized materials for the working class, or are working with the state for rearmament. What is the issue here?

Reimann writes a great deal about how Germany destroyed trade unions and did not help the working class; an untenable and laughable claim at best. First of all, the trade unions were abolished for a centralized union, the DAF. For the countless pages he spends writing about how Germany favored its party members when it came to employment, he conveniently leaves out the fact that the member count for the DAF was approximately quadruple the size of the National Socialist Party itself, meaning that the National Socialists even helped Germans that were not aligned with them politically!

Continuing, many of the “sources” used here are a repeat of what has already been covered; greedy capitalists complaining that they have to hire unemployed party members, that they have to provide assistance to soldiers, and one even complaining that the government required some factories to build gymnasiums and swimming pools for workers to use after hours! The horror! How dare a government provide better working and living conditions for the working class! How dare they assist those who voted for them in getting employment and benefits!

Lastly, I would like to address Reimann’s insistence on stagnant wages in Germany. This is true; wages did not rise and often did not keep up with other European nations. He is conveniently leaving out the fact that the standard of living for the average German increased drastically in other ways. In the first sense, Germany faced extreme unemployment like the rest of Europe after the depression, but solved this problem by forcing capitalists to hire Germans who were able to work. The average savings of each German household increased dramatically. German workers also saved money by purchasing subsidized tools and equipment. Rearmament also stimulated the economy in the private and public sectors. They also provided marriage and homeowner stipends. All of this you can read about here: The Nazi Economic Recovery 1932–1938. To claim that the German economy failed because wages did not increase is either pure ignorance or intentionally misleading.

If you want to read quality material about National Socialist economics, I highly recommend the book cited above from Overy. Reimann does not mention Fascist Italy nearly as much as National Socialist Germany, but for those who are interested in Fascist economics, I recommend Mussolini: A New Life. Not only does this book fall short because it is inaccurate and unreliable, but also because it does not appear to know which side it wants to fight for. On the one hand it proves that National Socialism was anti-capitalist and refutes the propaganda that it was somehow in favor of big-business and free-market economics, but on the other hand tries to distance it from protectionist and nationalist economic measures. Oftentimes you will read this book nodding in agreement, while even more often shaking your head in utter disbelief at the dishonest rhetoric.

[wally · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Vampire Economy (1939), is a fascinating read, a study in easy-to-understand language, that makes no attempt to be pedantic, I read it with an eye toward comparing how America the Beautiful compares w/this time period of Germany. Granted, there are vast differences, but the similarities are troubling. Being a self-employed man for more than twenty years now and seeing the slow but steady encroachment of the State and witnessing, almost on a daily basis, the cry for more of the same, more of what almost destroyed the world and did destroy Germany, I am troubled.

Reimann talked with businessmen from Germany, including in this study things they wrote in letters, many, if not most, written when they were away from Germany, away from the censors. Their candid words about the course of Germany at the time reveal a system spiraling out of control, its final destination illustrated with a comparison to the good soldier Schweik, that Reimann uses in the final pages, a chapter called “A World of Absurdities.” (Hajek, The Good Soldier Schweik)

Schweik, hiding from his superiors in the gunpowder room, smokes his pipe, and when the sergeant surprises him, sparks fly from the pipe. Though the sergeant tries to coax Schweik from the gunpowder room, Schweik replies that he is quite content there on the gunpowder.

“The fascist dictator is in the same position as Schweik. The preponderant weight of force, both internally and externally, is against him, but he, like Schweik, with lighted pipe in hand, is seated on a keg of gunpowder. The conservative forces which helped the fascist dictator thought they would be able to control him, but now they do not dare to make use of their power against him. They know that nothing of the old system would remain if the structure he has built were to fall.”

There are many ideas presented in the work, the idea that the business man who failed did so to sabotage the Party.

In court, one could more readily win or not be bruised, not by an appeal to law, but by an appeal to Party.

There is a line in the first chapter, written by an honest businessman on a trip out of the country--and even that--leaving the country was difficult. But he writes a letter, free from censorship--and this in a day when he didn’t have a facility like the NSA listening to his every call, reading his every internet transmission…he writes, “Everyone has his doubts about the system unless he is very young, very stupid or is bound to it by the privileges he enjoys.”

The Party ignored economic conditions unless they agreed with Party notions.

“The full force of propaganda…used to force consumption of goods which were abundant. The same means were brought into play to prevent the use of goods which were scarce. Medical experts were conscripted and had to prove that available foods were of greater health value that those which were scarce.”

“All of us in business are constantly in fear of being penalized for the violation of some decree or law.”

One businessman is forced to build a gymnasium and athletic field for his workers who are too tired to want it, but the Party decreed it and it was so. If moral is low, free beer and sausage, as a substitute to a better wage. There was a “Strength through Joy” movement.

With all the controls and decrees, “hundreds of thousands of small businessmen and their customers are forced to violate the law daily, and a whole army of policeman has been subsidized to catch these lawbreakers.” “The most repressed and restricted businessman in Germany will not be found in the ranks of big businessmen.”


“Shopkeepers were told the Nazis would destroy the competition of the chain stores, trusts and Jewish shopkeepers. The State was going to give them special protection.” The State apparatus got rid of the Jewish shopkeeper, but then turned its eye to the next in line as it sought to keep itself in power.

“The old type of conservative employer who tried to establish some kind of patriarchal relations w/his workers and who could afford to pay a relatively high wage to those workers he needed most, cannot survive under fascism.” One businessman tried to attract efficient workmen by offering higher wages. That was forbidden by the regime. He was breaking the law!

The State sent out a decree that “buna” and “brabag” shall be produced, even though those in business knew it was a waste of everything concerned, buna, or synthetic rubber, and brabag, a kind of synthetic gas.

After Hitler took Czecho-Slovakia, an industrialist wrote in an uncensored letter, “Wait and see…when we [the workers] get arms in our hands, many things might happen.” Though Reimann says nothing more about personal arms, my assumption is that the fascists had already outlawed personal arms. Perhaps there were guns that a few maintained, and if anything, the work does a disservice to that aspect of personal liberty, for only a handful of men in the Warsaw ghetto (one who passed away a year ago, though I’ve forgotten his name, alas.) were able, w/a few small arms, to delay the might of the German was-machine.

“Most State agencies and commissars start functioning by issuing prohibitions. One is forbidden much more often than permitted.” The Party, the bureaucrats produced nothing, took everything, and they existed by and large, only to prohibit.

An interesting story within: Kaffee Haag. Maker of caffeine-free coffee almost was able to make a nicotine-free cigarette. After extensive research, a factory was started. Other decrees by the Party made advance impossible.

In Germany at the time, too, jewelry, diamonds and platinum, was desired more so than currency and gold. The jewelry business was flourishing.

“The totalitarian state will not have an empty treasury so long as private companies or individuals still have ample cash or liquid assets.”

“Under fascism, big bankers…have become State officials in everything but name.”

The president of the Reichsbank, in 1935 “must have foreseen that the huge financial deficit of the State could not continue forever. But Dr. Schacht did not expect that a financial crisis would endanger his position as economic dictator.” His speech was not free. So he printed and distributed it himself. He was belittled as “an old woman.” He replied, “My comrades and fellow-Germans, to dismiss the gravity of the situation and our task as Germans with cheap phrase-mongering is not only silly but damned dangerous.”

Dr. Schacht lost his job.

“…an artificial belief in credits and financial obligations has to be maintained in open conflict with realities.”

There existed a State Commissar for the Stock Exchange pre-Hitler. “The ‘Aryan’ members of the Berlin Stock Exchange have lost much more than they gained by the removal of the ‘Non-Aryans.’” The S.E. still retained the function of evaluating the “earning power” of private companies. Yet any knowledge gained by that must have been willfully ignored as anything that did not jive w/the want of the Party was not used--the more a raw material had to be imported, the harder the Party tried to find a synthetic replacement, resulting in higher cots, lower quality--they even spent more on one product, way more--than it would have cost to import it!
There’s information about world trade, a line or two about the Versailles Treaty that I understand was instrumental in Hitler’s rise to power. The chapter on trade reminded me of Heller’s Catch-22 and more recently, his Closing Time. (Heller, by da vay, made good usage of the good soldier Schweik in Closing Time). Milo Minderbinder engages in incompressible trades practices, the likes of which I can’t recall in detail to include here, other than cotton, eggs, and chocolate, among other items, are involved, as well as a bombing run on friends, all in the name of trade.

I thought it was interesting in a review of Closing Time, a reviewer pointed out Milo’s “capitalist” tendencies, still at the forefront, as they are in the better-known Catch-22. I find statements like this telling. What I can see now, having read The Vampire Economy, in which the good solider Schweik is featured, as he is in Heller’s latter work, is that Heller’s Milo could be interpreted as not only a nefarious “capitalist”---that darling whipping boy of the world press, the American media in the forefront--but the wrong kind of capitalist, the kind that the fascists in Germany tried to become.

In fascist Germany, “the greater the scarcity of raw materials, the stronger becomes the pressure of the State to extend production of ersatz, regardless of expense and in spite of insufficient technical experience.” Too, they used subsidies to foster the product the Party desired, regardless of cost. By subsidizing one commodity, they penalized another, and the entire economy suffered. They tried to make synthetic products to meet the demand for resources they would have otherwise had to import. It was a miserable failure. It led to their economic collapse, it led to world war.

There’s a frightening quote, considering what happened, “The pig is still the best fat producer. We have not been able to discover an industrial process for producing fat so effectively.” 1939 this was.

The fascists, Reimann suggests at one point, wanted a kind of State capitalism--the nature of which Milo practiced in Catch-22. That might have been their goal and of course they were blind to their own faulty logic though there were those who tried to dissuade them, ironically, the Army leadership, who could see the error of the Party and Hitler.

Today, my experience, that you can ignore and minimize at will, I’m ready for that and I’d be surprised to find commiseration--one could substitute the word “American businessman” in all the old Nazi propaganda about “the Jew”. Put another way, the next time you read, see, hear (daily, mind you) something about the nefarious American businessman, try to imagine the same segment using the phrase, “the Jew” or maybe it would be easier if “the Black” were used. But like I said, go ahead and diminish and minimize my experience, tell me I’m some sort of right-wing wacko, in our time, Upright Bipolar Locomotion has become the norm and though we may have two parties here in America the Beautiful, it is the State that is increasing in size, increasing in power, increasingly injecting itself in business.

The Germans did not learn in the small span of time between the world wars. I have much less confidence that liberty will ever be embraced with the same enthusiasm the karaoke machine enables each of us.

“Not the military experts, but the Party leaders, decided the tempo of militarization and rearmament.” Though the “open flouting of the Versailles Treaty” was welcomed by army officers, we know the outcome. They were destined to fail. “The fascist war preparations, however, have defeated their own ends.”

[Dave Martin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gunter Reimann does a good job showing the authoritarian nature of a fascist economy. My only problem with the book is everything is just a slightly different variant of the same storyline. Each "specialized" chapter besides the one on ersatz basically boiled down to the same story. Business worked, the government became heavily involved, business objectively worse and business can't do anything about it. If you want an in-depth understanding of the life of a businessman in Nazi Germany it's your book. If you wanted to better understand the fascist economic structure a YouTube video would've covered the needs. Overall the book was very well-written, it just was a lot of the same with a different mask.

[Stefania Vede · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a great book ! Filled with a bulk of history of The Third Reich which would otherwise be difficult to find in any history account, this book offers really interesting insights into Nazi economy and its manny paralels with the USSR economy at that time.
It is worth while to mention that some common economic policies of modern states today mirror disturbingly well a great deal of Nazi policies (unfair government susidies at the expens of others to branches of industry deemed of national interest, an overgown bureaucracy apparatus to handle economic affairs, the ever important existance of a skilled accountant to handle the every changing policy of governments etc.)

[Barry Linetsky · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was written in 1938, before WWII. Interesting contemporaneous journalistic perspective of how business people fared and how the ability to do business and adapt to bureaucratic and state intervention deteriorated as Hitler exerted more and more control over the running of the economy in preparation for war. Of course, those who complied were allowed to live, and those who could not meet their arbitrarily imposed production targets had to fear for their lives and bribe party officials to save them.

[Karl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Got through about half. A dry read. However, a good survey on the nazi's relationship to capitalism: Nazi means National Socialists. That is what they were. The state simply extorted every business and controled means of production by proxy. Dont give license to the smoke screen narrative out there.

[Paul Fox · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very Good.

Fascinating book about Nazi fascism and business in Hitler's Germany. Though they loathed one another's system's of government, it's interesting to read of the many similarities in outcome between Hitler's Socialism and Stalin's.

[G.S. Richter · Rating 3 out of 5]

Vital information, bone-dry delivery. Reads like a textbook written by a Vulcan. Reimann has a deep understanding of capitalism and economics--which is odd for a professed communist.

Everyone should read at least some part of this book.

[Marek Dohojda · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book all should read

The best I've read about actual interworking of German economy. It's social implications and results. The books lays it out in black and white why fascism, national socialism and communism are all ultimately one and the same .

[Ben · Rating 4 out of 5]

A little harder to read due to overall pacing and sectioning, but a good overview of German economic policy changes under national socialist rule, even if the Author I believe has other political leanings

[Craig Scott · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating.

[Carlos "CAP" · Rating 4 out of 5]

Useful to understand the workings of the German economy during the Nazi period just before WW2.

[Robin Case · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nazi Economic System

Period analysis of the NAZI economic system and it's social impact from the inside perspective. Many very interesting observations and insights.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

The initial dozen or so chapters are needed background but it is in the last several chapters that lessons and insights applicable to today’s business climate are found.

[Chris Ricklefs · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good book but also very dry. I would recommend to read chapters your interred in and not necessarily in order.

[Jacek Niesmaczny · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book for understanding how the Nazi economy worked. Shows how hard it was to be a business owner in the Hitler's Germany.

[Marc A · Rating 4 out of 5]

Unlike communist Russia, the National Socialist German Workers Party did not seize ownership of all of the means of production when they took power in 1933. Businesses remained with private owners, but they now had to follow the government's orders. From time to time, they also had to compete against government enterprises. The whole process is described in The Vampire Economy: Doing Business Under Fascism. Although published shortly after the German invasion of Poland, The Vampire Economy describes the business environment in the years leading up to the Second World War, including the effects of the re-armament program. Men who were skillful in dealing with the bureaucracy (either due to their schmoozing abilities or political connections) were in high demand. Bribes in the form of contributions to the Nazi Party were common. Shortages of raw materials were a constant headache. One example was a company that desperately needed tires. They would buy new trucks, remove the tires and scrap the rest. The German economy under the Nazis was wasteful, inefficient and corrupt. "The Vampire Economy" describes it in detail. Well worth reading if you are interested in that era.

[D. Jason · Rating 4 out of 5]

Published in 1939, this survey of how the fascist economy actually worked (or, mostly, didn't) in Germany under Nazi rule is fascinating and scary in equal measure. It lays out the kind of detail that you don't usually get, explaining just how the National Socialists took control, and kept things running even as they ran them into the ground.

It bogs down a bit in a couple of chapters, when Reimann lays many, many charts and numbers on the reader. But that sort of detailed comparison is precisely what makes the book so valuable, along with the snapshot of pre-war Germany inherent in the book having been written in 1939.

[Jon]

This should be a fascinating read.

[Red Tide · Rating 5 out of 5]

Joshua wrote a thorough and helpful book review. His is a better insight than I would probably have delivered. Read his review.