Reply #79: Yeah, that's nice.

[OnyxCollie]

Both German and Italian Totalitarians reached power by the active help of influential business men
who looked upon them as their political body-guard. These groups did not mind a socialist program
provided it did not give power to trade unionists. They were not much worried by distant promises
of nationalization, but objected to strikes and collective bargaining. In Germany they had made
sure of their position by securing all important ministerial departments for their appointees; they
were quite prepared to leave political and cultural jobs to their allies.

Bonn, M.J. (1940). The economics of the totalitarian states. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 82(1), 77-87.

There is no indication in all the available evidence that the fanatical, often irrational and usually brutal,
Nazi leadership was in any way deterred from its purposes by the influence or orientations of the German
technocrats or bureaucrats. With few exceptions, the German bureaucrats and technocrats adjusted
meekly to the requirements of the totalitarian movement and were happy to reap any material benefits
that Nazi successes produced. It was not until the Nazi regime began to crumble that the bureaucratic
and technocratic elements, e.g., Speer, showed any initiative or purposeful action of their own. Until then,
it was more a matter of the bureaucrats absorbing Nazi values, e.g., in the treatment of slave laborers,
than of the Nazis absorbing a bureaucratic orientation. It seems, therefore, that a violent, arbitrary
totalitarianism can, at least, arise and maintain itself in an industrially advanced area without loss of its
revolutionary zeal and fanatic brutality.

Brzezinski, Z. (1956). Totalitarianism and rationality. The American Political Science Review, 50(3), 751-763.