Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30

Thread: 'National Socialist Europe Ideology' [Prof. Paul Kluke]

  1. #11
    Mein Glaube ist die Liebe zu meinem Volk. Juthunge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    6 Hours Ago @ 07:15 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordid-CM
    Gender
    Religion
    Religion of the Blood
    Posts
    1,624
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    450
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    612
    Thanked in
    265 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by solkorset View Post
    Nothing true about NS or Germany 1933-45 will ever be tolerated in allied postwar publications. Every source to the truth about NS was BANNED after the war, all copies discovered destroyed, and any german found in possession of such literature was KILLED. The allies (i.e. the jews) planned a complete falsification of history: Everything was to be changed to fit the marxist account of "fascism" in history.

    The allied power wielders after the war have NEVER republished any NS documents or writings UNCHANGED. If you're honest and want to achieve something you must PROVE your statements. Allied allegations are not evidence, they are at best hypotheses. But you take them at face value as facts.

    Every allied atrocity story about NS germans that has been investigated by truthseekers has turned out to be false. That goes for the holocaust, Verbrechen der Wehrmacht in the east, massacres in France and all the rest. No serious student of history believes a word of these allegations any more.
    How do you want to know something is faked if, by your own statement, no document or proof exists to the contrary anymore?
    I never understood the obsession to try to deny what happened. Even if it didn’t, you can’t convince anyone of that anymore, as it’s ingrained in the public thought of the whole world.
    It’s a useless hobby now and undermines our credibility. So much even, that it could actually be a tactic used against us.

    No doubt some of the more gruesome details were invented and some were already proven wrong even in mainstream study, like lampshades made of human skin. But I nevertheless believe, it happened roughly along the lines we are told in serious studies of history.
    It would otherwise entail such a massive Orwellian operation/conspiracy over decades, with millions of people involved through all nations and agencies, that it is beyond belief. With so many people involved, we would have much more proof than a few fringe theories by some “not so credible” people. It would’ve been impossible to conceal.

    But so what?
    I don’t support what happened but neither do I feel guilty. It has no influence on me as a German or my feelings for my people and fatherland. It is irrelevant to our modern circumstances.
    The problem is not, that what happened was faked but that Germans since 70 years are indoctrinated officially with guilt, for something not even (most of) our ancestors were guilty of.
    Likewise the use of the argument against us, that it was a singular occurrence in history or the denial of the help of many other Europeans. All while our own victims are denied or belittled.

    Even if it were something, most Germans of that time were personally guilty of, it has no bearing on their descendants. You can only be guilty of something you have committed yourself. It’s exactly the same tactic as with the use of the slavery argument against Whites in the USA.

    That all being said, making revisionism illegal and even a crime to question it, is a ridiculous farce and obviously only encourages doubt.
    As a “serious student of history” though, I know what people through all times, places, races and peoples could do and have done to one another. And all believed they were in the right.
    So I have no reasons to generally doubt what happened.
    And the day they sold us out, Our hearts grew cold
    'Cause we were never asked, No brother, we were told!
    What do they know of Europe, Who only Europe know?



    Ancient DNA: List of All Studies analyzing DNA of Ancient Tribes and Ethnicities(post-2010)


  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    Sunday, November 12th, 2017 @ 07:54 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Silesia Silesia
    Gender
    Posts
    853
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Juthunge View Post
    How do you want to know something is faked if, by your own statement, no document or proof exists to the contrary anymore?
    Something is true, juridically, if it has been proven on a court trial, not by anyone, yet by an independent, impartial jury, and if it was ruled by an independent, impartial judge.

    First, any 'documents' written on paper, alone and by themselves, prove nothing. If somebody has written on a paper that I have killed somebody, it doesn't 'prove' that I really killed somebody.

    To prove a crime, hard, forensic evidence is needed. And if there is no such hard, forensic evidence, then there is no other conlcusion to reach at than that the crime simply did not happen. Full stop.

  3. #13
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    6 Hours Ago @ 07:17 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,984
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,278
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,394
    Thanked in
    610 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Juthunge View Post
    It would otherwise entail such a massive Orwellian operation/conspiracy over decades, with millions of people involved through all nations and agencies, that it is beyond belief. With so many people involved, we would have much more proof than a few fringe theories by some “not so credible” people. It would’ve been impossible to conceal.
    It's not really that complicated to fabricate that history. As you said, most people were simply normal citizens living their lives, they're not really in a position to judge whether a claim is true or not. Those who could have judged that mostly ended up dead, and the main sources of "history" on that matter are Yad Vashem and the Wiesenthal Center.

    Involves millions? Count again. Like with the international banking system, all threads go down to a handful sources. Plus having UN disseminate that "history" to everyone else, make them believe it and today we have a ton of false testimonies from people who werent even born then who claim to have survived the gas chambers and what not. In psychological terms it's called mass hysteria, and 70 years of 24/7 propaganda certainly did its job on that matter.

    Also, from our, personal, point of view we might rightfully say all that doesnt affect us. Unfortunately, our enemies are of the opinion that 7 generations have to stand in for what happened/they claim to have happened, so this terror will go on for another 100 years, at least. It's their justification for the genocide they bring upon us, it's the justification for flooding our countries with third world scum and it's the justification to denying us identity and the rights granted to every people/Volk on earth except us, it's the justification for the United States of Europe project, "overcoming" nations, peoples and cultures to create the new consumer race. Our "collective guilt" is extended to entire Europe/white people around the globe meanwhile, so it's actually becoming more important to find out the truth.

    To ignore this topic generates the same result for the designers of this "history" as all those who fall for the mass hysteria: they remain the only source of everything. Every few months they come up with a "new" finding to keep the fairytale going and drive another goat through the medias, even more spectacular than the last one, even more sensational, even more shocking, and just like the fake news about Iraq frying babies, Iran's weapons of mass destruction, Assad's fass bombing his "own" people, Russia's hacked the US election... every bit of it becomes "common knowledge" within days without ever seeing a proof of it and an asset in the fight against scrutiny. "We just have to believe it" because US / UN / "an anonymous, but trustworthy source" or whoever said so. And nothing is ever being questioned.

    Unfortunately, it's an essential part of our struggle, whether we like it or not.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  4. #14
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member


    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Gender
    Posts
    841
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    115
    Thanked in
    45 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Spjabork View Post
    On November 11 and 12 in 1940, Adolf Hitler negotiated with Wjatscheslaw Molotow in Berlin. He suggested a military alliance between Germany and the Soviet Union, and said Germany had already conquered so much new land that it would take decades to build it up. At the same time, all the Balten-Deutschen, who had settled in the east for 740 years, and the Wolhynien- and Bessarabien-Deutschen, were deported to Germany.

    Seven months later, war between Germany and the Soviet Union broke out, for reasons which in November 1940 had not been foreseeable, and which had not at all been wished for by German Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop, who personally proposed to Molotow he was ready to fly to Tokyo and help settle all issues between Japan and the Soviet Union, in order to make a joining of the Soviet Union to the Tripartite Pact possible.
    Isn't it plausible that German political strategy could change in face of new opportunities that arose out of new circumstances, because the germanization of the east was accepted in principle?
    Germanization of the east was inherently tied to NS ideology; the extent to which this would be put in practice could be dependent on other circumstances. But the main point is that there was no ideological limit to stop the Germans from further expansion towards the east, if the occasion presented itself, f.e. in the form of a war with the Soviet Union.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    Sunday, November 12th, 2017 @ 07:54 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Silesia Silesia
    Gender
    Posts
    853
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    Isn't it plausible that German political strategy could change in face of new opportunities that arose out of new circumstances, because the germanization of the east was accepted in principle?
    May I ask you first, what is the concrete, political purpose of your post? I mean: what do you want to achieve by acclaiming all those -- well known by all of us -- crimes against humanity, commited by the evil German mad brute? Think about it twice! CVI BONO? Do you know, what you do is the same as if you, with your own fingers, insert cartridges into the enemy's rifle, and then hand the rifle over to him, so that he may shot you. Wouldn't that be utterly stupid?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    Germanization of the east was inherently tied to NS ideology;
    No! THIS IS A LIE. 'Germanization of the east' was NO PART of the NSDAP party program. It wasn't in 1920, and it wasn't in 1945.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    the extent to which this would be put in practice could be dependent on other circumstances.
    Ah yeah. And what if the 'circumstances' would never come up?? What then? Do you think, if the 'circumstances' to conquer the whole Soviet Union would NEVER occur, then Nationalsozialismus would not have existed, or would have had no basis? If you really think so, then it only proves that you did not understand what Nationalsozialismus is, and what it means.

    I tell you something. We Germans, we do not need anybody. We do not need jews, we do not need russians. We do not need anybody. We also do not need slaves, as certain 'Afrikaaners', and 'Southerners' do'. We need just ourselves. And with ourseleves, with the work of our own hands, we build up a new life form that has been never seen before on the earth.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    But the main point is that there was no ideological limit to stop the Germans from further expansion towards the east, if the occasion presented itself, f.e. in the form of a war with the Soviet Union.
    And the lack of an 'ideological' limit is the juridical proof that it was done? Have you any idea of jurisdiction?

  6. #16
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member


    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Gender
    Posts
    841
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    115
    Thanked in
    45 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Spjabork View Post
    May I ask you first, what is the concrete, political purpose of your post?
    There is none.
    I answered this question because I'm a polite guy, but I'm going to ignore the things of which I don't have any clue how they ended up in your reply and focus on what matters:

    Quote Originally Posted by Spjabork View Post
    No! THIS IS A LIE. 'Germanization of the east' was NO PART of the NSDAP party program. It wasn't in 1920, and it wasn't in 1945.
    What do you make of this chapter of Mein Kampf then?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spjabork View Post
    Ah yeah. And what if the 'circumstances' would never come up?? What then? Do you think, if the 'circumstances' to conquer the whole Soviet Union would NEVER occur, then Nationalsozialismus would not have existed, or would have had no basis? If you really think so, then it only proves that you did not understand what Nationalsozialismus is, and what it means.
    The circumstances did not alter the principle.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spjabork View Post
    And the lack of an 'ideological' limit is the juridical proof that it was done? Have you any idea of jurisdiction?
    This was not an argument to prove that it was 'done'. It merely showed the contingency of the 'evidence' you brought up to support your claim that it was not in line with the goal set out by NS politics.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 09:41 PM
    Ethnicity
    Norse
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Gender
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Norse/German
    Posts
    71
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Juthunge View Post
    How do you want to know something is faked if, by your own statement, no document or proof exists to the contrary anymore?
    I didn't say that. Forgeries can be exposed in many ways. Finding the original authentic document (if it ever existed) is only one of them. If a purportedly german NS doc was written with an american typewriter? If the text mentions germans by title and in positions which they attained only after the date of the doc? If the text makes linguistic mistakes that no german would make? If the text alleges something about the conditions in the Reich that can be disproved by other means and that all NS germans must have known about?

    I never understood the obsession to try to deny what happened.
    There is no such obsession. We try to REFUTE what did NOT happen.

    Even if it didn’t, you can’t convince anyone of that anymore, as it’s ingrained in the public thought of the whole world.
    It’s a useless hobby now and undermines our credibility. So much even, that it could actually be a tactic used against us.
    I can't believe what I'm hearing. You want to give up the struggle for truth? You want to plead guilty to a horrible crime you didn't commit? Credibility?? What credibility remains with us if we abandon truth?

    You are also wrong, I think, in your estimate of the impact of revisionism. After the advent of the internet this has reached the millions. The position of the holocaust story is much weakened in the public mind today, I believe.

    No doubt some of the more gruesome details were invented and some were already proven wrong even in mainstream study, like lampshades made of human skin. But I nevertheless believe, it happened roughly along the lines we are told in serious studies of history.
    By "serious" studies I suppose you mean jewish disinformation and falsification of history. If you believe in them then you have a problem. Fortunately more and more of us don't.

    It would otherwise entail such a massive Orwellian operation/conspiracy over decades, with millions of people involved through all nations and agencies, that it is beyond belief. With so many people involved, we would have much more proof than a few fringe theories by some “not so credible” people. It would’ve been impossible to conceal.
    This is not a problem of history but of mass psychology. A false allegation is not true just because millions believe in it. Yes, there are still millions of people who believe in the holocaust and other lies. That's because jews and their collaborators have ruled virtually all countries after the war. With monopoly on schools, TV, cinema, publishing houses etc you can brainwash the vast majority of people. The internet has broken that monopoly and we are struggling towards freedom and truth.

    But so what?
    I don’t support what happened but neither do I feel guilty. It has no influence on me as a German or my feelings for my people and fatherland. It is irrelevant to our modern circumstances.
    Then you are a very untypical german! If german at all?

    The problem is not, that what happened was faked but that Germans since 70 years are indoctrinated officially with guilt, for something not even (most of) our ancestors were guilty of.
    Likewise the use of the argument against us, that it was a singular occurrence in history or the denial of the help of many other Europeans. All while our own victims are denied or belittled.
    It's absurd to begin discussing the complicity and degree of guilt of ordinary germans for crimes that weren't committed. It's also absurd to expect justice from somebody who is massively falsifying history. And how about yourself? What justice can we expect from you who don't care about truth? You are the kind of person who would gladly condemn the innocent to death if by so doing you could secure your own acquittal. You are ready to brand your ancestors for ever as devils if only the jews would let you go...

    That all being said, making revisionism illegal and even a crime to question it, is a ridiculous farce and obviously only encourages doubt.
    As a “serious student of history” though, I know what people through all times, places, races and peoples could do and have done to one another. And all believed they were in the right.
    So I have no reasons to generally doubt what happened.
    What hypocrisy! Making revisionism illegal?? Holocaust revisionism in Germany IS forbidden! And who would trust you to change that, who don't care about truth? By your own statement you're NOT a serious student of history. You're NOT looking for the truth. You only want to save your own skin. And give a damn about everybody else.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 09:41 PM
    Ethnicity
    Norse
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Gender
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Norse/German
    Posts
    71
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    Isn't it plausible that German political strategy could change in face of new opportunities that arose out of new circumstances, because the germanization of the east was accepted in principle?
    Germanization of the east was inherently tied to NS ideology; the extent to which this would be put in practice could be dependent on other circumstances. But the main point is that there was no ideological limit to stop the Germans from further expansion towards the east, if the occasion presented itself, f.e. in the form of a war with the Soviet Union.
    The goal of german foreign policy under NS was to obtain more land for agriculture so that the german people could be fed. Also that the land mass of the Reich would be defensible by military means. Bread and national security were the top objectives. This policy was called Lebensraum. It was the same policy that germanic tribes had followed since antiquity.

    In Mein kampf, vol 2 ch 14, Hitler discusses this. He stresses that he does NOT want to go to war to reinstate the 1914 borders of the Reich. He does NOT want war with France or Poland. What he mentions is the possibility of a breakdown of bolshevism in Russia, in which case german intervention might take place. I think his vision is of a new germanic ruling aristocracy in Russia, like before the revolution. He estimates that most valuable human material in Russia has been exterminated by the bolsheviks. There was much truth to that. After the holodomor the cossacks were indeed virtually extinct and vast stretches of arable land lay waste.

    Hitler's writings in MK were of course purely theoretical. At the time (1926) NSDAP was a tiny party. It needed to seize power and rebuild the german economy and army before any foreign intervention could be considered. That might reasonably take 20 years. Even if Soviet Russia had collapsed in say 1930 there would have been nothing the germans could do about it.

    So Hitler's vision at the time of writing MK was of a newborn Russia with a germanic or nordic ruling elite in alliance with Germany, allowing german farmers to settle and cultivate the land. This was almost the case before 1914 under Bismarck (f.ex. the Wolga germans) and today under Putin german farmers are in fact invited to Russia for the Ostsiedlung of the "nazis". It's mutually beneficial to germans and russians.

    Operation Barbarossa had nothing to do with Ostpolitik or Ostsiedlung. Germany long sought appeasement with Soviet R but Stalin and his jews were preparing for war and when Germany finally invaded, the Soviet attack was only weeks away. The invasion was forced and ought to have started earlier.

    As the Wehrmacht made rapid advance the Ostsiedlung project was brought on the table. However, because of the partisans the security of the german farmers could not be guaranteed and the project was soon dropped. It was difficult enough to protect the Wehrmacht against the partisans. The Soviet military was also much more formidable than the germans had thought at the outset. All resources were channeled into the war effort and the war economy. No Ostpolitik ever became relevant.

  9. #19
    Mein Glaube ist die Liebe zu meinem Volk. Juthunge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    6 Hours Ago @ 07:15 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordid-CM
    Gender
    Religion
    Religion of the Blood
    Posts
    1,624
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    450
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    612
    Thanked in
    265 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by solkorset View Post
    I didn't say that. Forgeries can be exposed in many ways. Finding the original authentic document (if it ever existed) is only one of them. If a purportedly german NS doc was written with an american typewriter? If the text mentions germans by title and in positions which they attained only after the date of the doc? If the text makes linguistic mistakes that no german would make? If the text alleges something about the conditions in the Reich that can be disproved by other means and that all NS germans must have known about?
    If the evidence is objectively clear in the cases you mentioned, then yes, one should use that to disprove that document. The pursuit of truth is always important, no doubt.
    But it’s not always entirely strategically wise, in a given situation. But see below.

    I can't believe what I'm hearing. You want to give up the struggle for truth? You want to plead guilty to a horrible crime you didn't commit? Credibility?? What credibility remains with us if we abandon truth?
    I don’t plead guilty to anything. As I said before, I only could feel guilty for something I did myself anyway, not for something my ancestors or other Germans could have done. Which I don’t think is true for 99% of them, nevertheless.

    Credibility, in the eyes of anyone not already on our side, even if they are otherwise sympathetic, is undermined much rather by clinging to theories that are, most likely, untrue.

    You are also wrong, I think, in your estimate of the impact of revisionism. After the advent of the internet this has reached the millions. The position of the holocaust story is much weakened in the public mind today, I believe.
    We will have to agree to differ then, revisionism seems to me, at least in Germany and Austria, a small fringe theory. Anything else would be political and public suicide anyway and wouldn’t get us any further in the current situation.

    By "serious" studies I suppose you mean jewish disinformation and falsification of history. If you believe in them then you have a problem. Fortunately more and more of us don't.
    No, I mean using scientific methods and objective evaluation of sources.

    This is not a problem of history but of mass psychology. A false allegation is not true just because millions believe in it. Yes, there are still millions of people who believe in the holocaust and other lies. That's because jews and their collaborators have ruled virtually all countries after the war. With monopoly on schools, TV, cinema, publishing houses etc you can brainwash the vast majority of people. The internet has broken that monopoly and we are struggling towards freedom and truth.
    No, a false allegation obviously doesn’t become true merely if repeated often enough or advocated by the masses. Everything around us is proof for that, indeed.

    Whether I personally believe it happened or not, is actually irrelevant, though. From my own researches on the subject I think it did. But the subject isn’t relevant enough to me to argue about it per se.

    The problem is much more, that the allegation at hand, it’s so massively ingrained in public thought after 70 years, for the reasons you've mentioned, that it doesn’t even matter anymore, in this respect, whether it is true or faked. It would be impossible to convince even a fraction of the population, even if there was much more evidence, than a few circumstantial signs.

    If someone wants to try to disprove it, I’ll let him do it. But generally speaking we are few nationalists and, in my opinion, it’s currently a waste of resources as we have much more pressing issues at hand.
    We stand on the edge of the abyss and don’t have the time to try to convince anyone of something that might be true or not and, especially, is irrelevant right now.

    Best would be, to simply let that subject rest for the time being, never to drag it into the open again and leave it to the historian and antiquarian. That’s where this subject belongs to, with all the other true or alleged crimes of history.

    Then you are a very untypical german! If german at all?
    I don’t know why you have to doubt my ethnicity when I disagree with you, but well: I’m a German from Germany, with purely German ancestors.
    But I’m untypical indeed, that’s why I’m one of the few Germans on a preservationist forum.

    What hypocrisy! Making revisionism illegal?? Holocaust revisionism in Germany IS forbidden! And who would trust you to change that, who don't care about trut?
    I am well aware, that it is illegal in Germany, that’s why I was saying that in the first place, obviously. “Making it illegal” was clearly generally speaking.
    I’m an advocate for free speech and believe in the objective criticism of everything. That’s why I don’t want revisionism to be illegal.
    That doesn’t mean I have to believe everything that’s said by anyone not of a “mainstream” opinion nor that I find it currently clever, however.

    To the rest of your unfounded allegations against me I won’t respond, as I have no idea how you even made that up from my own words.
    And the day they sold us out, Our hearts grew cold
    'Cause we were never asked, No brother, we were told!
    What do they know of Europe, Who only Europe know?



    Ancient DNA: List of All Studies analyzing DNA of Ancient Tribes and Ethnicities(post-2010)


  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    Sunday, November 12th, 2017 @ 07:54 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Silesia Silesia
    Gender
    Posts
    853
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    There is none.
    So, we are different then. Because I do have a clear political aim, with everything and anything I say, write, and do.

    And this my clear political aim is: help save first, and resurrect then, my folk and my fatherland.

    Each and everything that is helpful for this my clear political aim, I will use and apply. Each and everything that is detrimental to this my clear political aim, I will discard and combat.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    I answered this question because I'm a polite guy,
    You don't need to be polite with me, I am used to the manners of any antifa dude that are imaginable, and even that are unimaginable.

    What you need, though, is to be somewhat cautious. Because what you say will be heard, and what you write will be read, by some, or the other person.

    I reiterate: what you do is highly unwise. Let aside that it is also partly untrue.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    What do you make of this chapter of Mein Kampf then?
    I 'make' nothing of it. I read it, I think about it, and I put it into its full historical context.

    Adolf Hitler himself, in later years, as Head of the Reich, has called his own book 'fantasies behind bars', and this it certainly was. He added, that he would not write it in this form again.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    The circumstances did not alter the principle.
    As I have set out above, in November 1940, 14 years after volume 2 of Mein Kampf had been published, the circumstances were such that any program of gaining 'Lebensraum im Osten' had been rendered obsolete and in fact impossible. Adolf Hitler wrote in that book, in 1926, -- and at that time it wa strue -- that the Russians were unable to build even one single engine for a motor truck. Yet by 1940 the Russians meanwhile had been able to build 25,000 tanks, not lorries. If such circumstance would not at least cause a rethinking of a principle, then the principle itself would be insane.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    This was not an argument to prove that it was 'done'. It merely showed the contingency of the 'evidence' you brought up to support your claim that it was not in line with the goal set out by NS politics.
    Following. There exists a people, it is called 'German'. This German people used to have its own political entity, called 'German Reich'. Within this, there existed many different political movements and currents. One of these currents was the so called völkisch-nationale, and within this current again there existed one movement called 'NSDAP'. And over a certain timespan, this NSDAP was led by a certain man, by the name of Adolf Hitler. Adolf Hitler did neither start the völkisch-nationale current, nor did he invent National Socialism, nor even did he found the party DAP, yet as that specific German political party was remodeled on the leader principle (Führerprinzip) after he became its chairman, and even renamed into NSDAP by him, it follows that Adolf Hitler, at his time, indeed was a very important, and highly influential man in that party-movement, and also in the wider völkisch-national political current, as well as in the overall political landscape of Germany.

    Adolf Hitler led the party NSDAP from 1921 till 1933 in stark opposition to the Reich government. During this time he himself was imprisoned, the party officially dismanded and legally banned. Thereafter, in early 1925, he vowed he would take power only by legal means. In 1930 again, at a court trial, he assured and swore he would only resort to legal means. Then led the newly refounded NSDAP from early 1933 till mid 1934 as head of the Reich government, yet under the surveillance and restriction of the Reich President. And finally, from 1934 on, he led the Reich as Head of State, yet still under the surveillance and restriction of the League of Nations. Only in 1937 he was able to untie his hands, when he 'solemenly withdrew' the German signature under the Versailles Dictate. From this time on, he was politcally 'free', the surveillance he was under now was that of the German people, and the restriction he was under now was Germany's lack of natural ressources.

    Yet these two ultimate, irremovable restrictions dictated him what he could do, and what he could not do.

    During all that time, Adolf Hitler was not the only member of the NSDAP, and he certainly was not the only member of the German Reich state apparatus. Adolf Hitler based, and had to base, his policy and conduct on the approval of the German people. This is quite different from the power position Stalin held in his Soviet Union. Stalin was able to wipe out millions of inhabitants of his empire, and to kill even tens of thousands of his own followers, just at his will. Stalin was able to let Russian children starve in order to make more tanks. Adolf Hitler was never able to do such things in Germany, at no time, not even at war.

    To illustrate the domestic position Adolf Hitler held, and the problems he faced in Germany, I quote just one influential man. Oswald Spengler wrote in his diary in 1935: "We [the German conservatives] wanted to get rid of all the parties, yet the most terrible one is still there!" ("Wir wollten die Parteien loswerden, die schlimmste ist geblieben!")

    Oswald Spengler is not just a random anyone. He exchanged letters with Benito Mussolini, and Mussolini highly admired him, and wrote even a foreword to one of Spengler's books. In early 1940, before the German push in the west, Mussolini wrote a letter to Adolf Hitler in which he tried to convince him not to improve his relations with the Soviet Union any further, because this would lead to a 'irreparable breach' between 'fascism' and National Socialism. Instead, Mussolini recommended an immediate attack on the Soviet Union, which was weakened internally and about to collapse anyway, whereas -- said Mussolini -- the western democracies, weak and rotten as they were, still might be re-consolidated by a blow from the outside. Mussolini, that experienced statesman, obviously did not detect the contradiction in his own line of argument.

    As for the international position Adolf Hitler held, it may be illustrated by his stance toward the neutral countries. On September 1, 1939, when war broke out, Adolf Hitler solemnly declared in the German Reichstag that he would respect under all circumstances the neutrality of all non-belligrent countries, provided that also the enemy would do the same. This is the reason why no German armed forces entered Sweden, Ireland, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, and Turkey, although it would have been advantageous for the Germans to do so, because in all these cases the enemy, by and large, also respected their neutrality. And this is as well the sole and only reason why German armed forces did enter Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Yugoslavia, and Greece, although in some cases it might have been more favorable not to do so, because in all these cases, the enemy already had violated their neutrality, or was imminent to do so.

    Do you understand?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Is National Socialism a Germans' Only Ideology?
    By Siebenbürgerin in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 274
    Last Post: Tuesday, July 24th, 2012, 11:27 AM
  2. The New National Socialist Party
    By Caledonian in forum Parties, Organizations, & Activism
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Tuesday, June 7th, 2011, 01:24 AM
  3. National Socialist Toys!
    By frippardthree in forum Parenthood & Family
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Wednesday, February 24th, 2010, 08:08 AM
  4. National AND Socialist?
    By ogenoct in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: Friday, August 5th, 2005, 06:51 AM
  5. While A National Socialist Travels...
    By Aristotle in forum The Hearth
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Monday, October 4th, 2004, 12:13 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
  •