View Poll Results: What do you think of Hitler and old German NS?

Voters
1075. You may not vote on this poll
  • Completely admire/support Hitler and old German NS

    351 32.65%
  • Admire some of the positive points of Hitler and old German NS but condemn negative points

    446 41.49%
  • Completelty condemn Hitler and old German NS

    181 16.84%
  • Do not care about Hitler and Old German NS

    97 9.02%
Page 2 of 54 FirstFirst 12345671252 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 540

Thread: What do you Think of Hitler and National Socialism?

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    Saturday, November 13th, 2010 @ 05:37 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Family
    Married parent
    Politics
    Independent
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    41
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe McCarthy View Post
    Good post. I'll only part ways by saying that the Jews could have been given Palestine without Hitler and with European backing. They could have served as an outpost of European imperialism against the intractable Muslims, much in the way they service the US now. The Jews were, on the whole, a subversive force in Europe, and leading Zionists like Chaim Weitzmann even acknowledged this.

    Unfortunately, we can indeed partially thank the Jews for Hitler being needed as Hitler's rise was in part a response to Bolshevism (though the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution is overstated some). The bourgoisie forces were proving wholly inadequate to the task of fighting Communism. In that respect Hitler is to be thanked.

    On the whole though a man must be assessed on his legacy and results, not his intentions. I think even Yockey, a man that admired Hitler, said that a leader must be judged on the basis of whether he leaves his country stronger than he found it. In this sense Hitler is among history's worst leaders, and Stalin among the best.
    Yet, because of inherent cultural strengths of the Germans over the Russians, Germany is now reunited, economically strong, and doing well. Russian, OTOH, is a train wreck, with rampant alcoholism, organized crime, pitiful economic growth, and low life expectancy.

    So, Germany was able to overcome its setbacks, while Russian keeps shooting itself in the foot.

    Incidentally, Stalin, I believe, was quite the mass murderer, was he not?

  2. #12
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Online
    Monday, January 9th, 2012 @ 03:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Posts
    974
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Walhalla-Wacht View Post
    The end result of his reign is the product of the forces that worked against him, forces that were ultimately stronger than Deutschalnd during those 13 years of progressive might. Though Hitler's military blunders (Invasion of Soviet Union, Failed Invasion of Britain, helping the Italians at all) cost him the war, he was (literally) fighting against the world, Contra Mundum, it's a wonder Germany held on that long.

    He must have some something right
    That Hitler got smashed was his own fault. The moronic invasion of Poland got him, Germany, and possibly ultimately the white race itself, crushed. That's nothing to admire him for.

    Originally Posted by Northmen
    Yet, because of inherent cultural strengths of the Germans over the Russians, Germany is now reunited, economically strong, and doing well. Russian, OTOH, is a train wreck, with rampant alcoholism, organized crime, pitiful economic growth, and low life expectancy.
    Yet we're discussing the quality of leaders, not the quality of peoples. A bad leader can lead a good quality people and a good leader can lead a bad quality people.

    Incidentally, Stalin, I believe, was quite the mass murderer, was he not?
    Many great men are mass murderers. Charlemagne, Alexander the Great, etc. But in consequentialist terms they did much good for civilization. What does Hitler have to show for his efforts, a bombed out Germany, a destroyed racial ethic, and a greatly empowered Jewry? Conversely, Stalin turned an agricultural backwater into a superpower through deft employment of Realpolitik. That isn't to say Stalin was ultimately good for civilization at large, but he did empower the USSR.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Joe McCarthy For This Useful Post:


  4. #13
    Cascadian Elessar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 06:40 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Western-European
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Oregon Oregon
    Gender
    Age
    26
    Politics
    Traditionalism
    Posts
    1,985
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe McCarthy View Post
    That Hitler got smashed was his own fault. The moronic invasion of Poland got him, Germany, and possibly ultimately the white race itself, crushed. That's nothing to admire him for.
    And that's where I draw the line, I admire his bravery and charisma, not the way the Reich ended up.
    The fact that he only had the best intentions is something to admire, not the way it ended up.

  5. #14
    Senior Member Godwinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, May 13th, 2018 @ 06:25 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    English, Anglo-Saxon
    Country
    England England
    Location
    South Coast
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Self Employed
    Politics
    Fascist
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    2,940
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Ah, Joe, you Americans do love a winner

    Seriously though, if it was all about who won and who lost then I'd take your point and history would be so much simpler to judge, wouldn't it? We'd just dismiss all the "losers" and adopt a might is right perspective on the whole thing, but as we're discussing who we admire then I personally rate Hitler amongst the greatest historical figures of all time!

    It’s a shame you choose to blame him for all of our woes today but I know your pro-USA jingoism well enough to realize that this is just an attempt to cover up for one of the main culprits – the other being Britain's own half-American drunkard, Winston Churchill. If these two Jewish lackeys hadn’t taken their gold the world would be a far better place right now, but you go ahead and blame Hitler for invading Poland if it’s a more palatable option for you.

    Fact is, millions of people still revere Hitler for his stirling (but ultimately fruitless) efforts to save Europe but at least he raised awareness of the Jewish problem and I believe that posterity will one day give him his due for this. The wheels of history turn very slowly, Joe, and 65 years is nothing so you just keep booing the Nazis in keeping with the times you live in whilst others like myself remain loyal to NS and its immutable ideals.

  6. #15
    Funding Member Ingvaeonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 08:21 AM
    Ethnicity
    English/German combo
    Country
    Australia Australia
    Location
    Eastern Australia
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Posts
    1,775
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    There was a lot to admire in National-Socialist Germany. But the fact is that since the Second World War right-wing ethnically or racially based politics have become anathema in the West. If there had been no Second World War and its attendant and immense propaganda against National Socialism there would have been no liberal backlash against right-wing ethnically or racially based political parties and right-wing ethnically or racially based politics; the polities of Western countries would be far more balanced and ethnically/racially and culturally conscious people, such as members of Skadi, would not be seen as anything out of the ordinary; indeed, our views here could well have been the majority consensus in many Western/Germanic-Celtic countries if not for the Second World War.
    Between the devil and the deep blue sea.

  7. #16
    Senior Member Wynterwade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Monday, February 6th, 2012 @ 08:41 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    England, Germany
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    Gender
    Posts
    497
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    This is going to sound strange to most of you.

    But I think just like Quantum Mechanics history acts much like probability waves. We can never know for certain what things would be like had things gone a certain way. But the probabilities of the outcomes need to be calculated individually by each person.

    Place yourself in Germany during the early 1930's- What did he say at the beginning of his office?
    -Germany belongs to Germans
    -Capitalism has become too centralized
    -Culture and the media have become degenerate
    -Family values need to be emphasized

    These are all ideals that I would support 100%.

    How were we to know that he would cause the Holocaust or the most deadly war in human history? These possibilities weren't even considered in the early years.

    I think Hitler was a man that fought for Germans more than anybody else but he did it so sternly as to the irrelevance of the wellbeing of other people. He may have been a good leader during peace but during war he became a savage. He is a character so complex that the definition of good or bad doesn't apply to him; he was both- and often at the extremes.
    I don't like him because his bad- the deaths of millions of Germans, Russians, Jews, etc. were worse than his good- being ethnically proud.

    The life of millions of your own people is greater than the identity of your people. But that statement is taking into account what actually happened. Back in early NS that statement would have been extremely hypothetical.

    (would be nice to have a leader that strives for both peace and cherishing cultural and ethnic identities)

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Wynterwade For This Useful Post:


  9. #17
    Spenglerian Caledonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 26th, 2011 @ 05:30 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Scottish
    Ancestry
    Scotland,England, Germany,Austria,Switzerland
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Sverige snart nog
    Gender
    Age
    31
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    RecyclingPlant / College Student
    Politics
    Socially Progressive Nationalism
    Religion
    Atheist, Nihilist, And Mystic
    Posts
    2,470
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    I honestly see the man as a mediocre leader myself as there are more examples of leaders in the history of western civilization who's reign was longer,more successful, and contributed far more than Adolph Hitler.

    However I do admit that there are probally some purposeful and intentional kept secret dishonesties about the third reich in world war II otherwise there wouldn't be so many thought crimes in Europe today that can lead a person in prison for such thoughts alone on the subject.

    There certainly are some unanswered discrepancies on the topic.


    That much I'm willing to agree with.

    Still I somewhat do agree more with this statement by Northman:

    I think you have to judge outcomes. Any initial positives are so far overshadowed by the horrible negatives. Because of Hitler, now the Germans, and the White race in general, are constantly on the defensive. Instead of the more civilized Jews, who practice birth control effectively, Europe is being overrun by Muslims, who have large families and are prone to violence and terrorism.

    Because of Hitlers mad excesses, in attempting to wipe out 'undesirable' population groups, now any attempt to even limit the fertility of mental defectives and welfare recipients is considered akin to Nazism. The Jews have been able to capitalize on world sympathy and create an artificial State based on merely a Biblical claim, which has stirred up a lot of anger and trouble in that region. I think it was better when they were integrated, more or less in European society, since they had culturally (and genetically) become much more European in nature.

    So, in my opinion, Hitler did nothing but ultimate harm to all of Europe.
    Adolph Hitler could of been more reasonable in his dealings of Europe which could of probally saved World War II from ever happening in the first place but the fact is he didn't in that bit of past history. We all now suffer because of his inability to be reasonable in that time period.

    [In a parallel context anybody today who is a white ethnic European of some kind that whole heartedly supports their race and culture in a ardent fervor for nationalism is deemed a neo - nazi as such has become the stereo typical negative cliche of defamation in response by ideological politically correct multiculturalism.]

    His goals and ideals might of been sincere enough but the means that he set to achieve those goals ultimately were destructive that almost destroyed all of Europe in flames.

    [The numbers of people who died in that war should make us shun it's praise altogether.]

    If the stain of world war II did not happen I can imagine our present situation would be much more different.

    As for national socialism I see nothing special about it's social or economical model. I abhor fascism.

    However Hitler is not to be blamed for World War II alone since we can also blame the treaty of Versailles and the negative effects of World War I that led Hitler to power to begin with.

    We can also blame the collusion of Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt for their antagonisms for starting the war too.

    There is much blame for the war to go around.

    History is a set of many series of events that lead up towards the next.
    National Socialism is the only salvation for Germanics and Europids everywhere. Capitalism, libertarianism, and communism is the enemy.

    National socialized collectivism must prevail over radical individualism.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Caledonian For This Useful Post:


  11. #18
    Senior Member Rächer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Online
    Monday, August 20th, 2012 @ 08:34 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Germany
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Transvaal Transvaal
    Gender
    Family
    Married parent
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Posts
    81
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Godwinson View Post
    Ah, Joe, you Americans do love a winner

    Seriously though, if it was all about who won and who lost then I'd take your point and history would be so much simpler to judge, wouldn't it? We'd just dismiss all the "losers" and adopt a might is right perspective on the whole thing, but as we're discussing who we admire then I personally rate Hitler amongst the greatest historical figures of all time!

    It’s a shame you choose to blame him for all of our woes today but I know your pro-USA jingoism well enough to realize that this is just an attempt to cover up for one of the main culprits – the other being Britain's own half-American drunkard, Winston Churchill. If these two Jewish lackeys hadn’t taken their gold the world would be a far better place right now, but you go ahead and blame Hitler for invading Poland if it’s a more palatable option for you.

    Fact is, millions of people still revere Hitler for his stirling (but ultimately fruitless) efforts to save Europe but at least he raised awareness of the Jewish problem and I believe that posterity will one day give him his due for this. The wheels of history turn very slowly, Joe, and 65 years is nothing so you just keep booing the Nazis in keeping with the times you live in whilst others like myself remain loyal to NS and its immutable ideals.
    Superb answer, well done! Well, Joe, is that not quite true?

  12. #19
    Anachronism "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Huginn ok Muninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Germany, Norway, England
    Subrace
    Nordeby
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Farther right than you.
    Posts
    2,702
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    61
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    104
    Thanked in
    58 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe McCarthy View Post
    Alas, we can't move on as Herr Hitler provided our enemies with a bloody shirt to demonize any healthy thinking white person. I'm unsure which is the greater absurdity - the establishment's non-stop Hitler obsession, or those who play neo-Nazi dress-up in reaction to it.
    I think your biggest problem here is your failure to realize that if Hitler had never existed, the jews would have made him up. And in great part, they did.

  13. #20
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    Thursday, July 5th, 2012 @ 06:07 AM
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Metropolis
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Family
    Single
    Occupation
    Journalist
    Religion
    Protestant
    Posts
    6,765
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    8 Posts
    I have mixed feelings about it, I even think he was a bit crazy.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Northern Paladin For This Useful Post:


Page 2 of 54 FirstFirst 12345671252 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What Would You Choose? National Socialism or National Anarchism?
    By DieMenschMaschine in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: Tuesday, June 28th, 2011, 05:51 PM
  2. Chauvinism, National-Socialism or Racial-Socialism?
    By Lusitano in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Thursday, May 4th, 2006, 06:02 PM
  3. On National Socialism & World Relations [Adolf Hitler, 30th of January 1937]
    By Prussian in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, November 22nd, 2004, 01:12 PM
  4. Would There have Been National Socialism Without Hitler?
    By ogenoct in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: Monday, August 9th, 2004, 01:47 AM
  5. National Socialism and National Anarchism
    By Aethrei in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: Saturday, January 31st, 2004, 05:05 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •