“However, if these[i.e work-slaves] want to have children they should have them somewhere else, not with us. Starting families, nest-buildings and the rest one may and will never tolerate. They will work here and in the winter be transported again. They can be concentrated in camps. They can have brothels, they can easily have them in abundance, I have nothing against that. But with our German Volk, they HAVE NOTHING TO DO. Any Slave families, of good Polish agricultural worker- and miner-origin we will RADICALLY DESTROY. If they want to breed, they should do it outside. Certainly, we need new slaves, but not with us in Germany. There may be no infiltration or suchlike.”

𝐇𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐇𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐥𝐞𝐫
Speech on 9.6.1942, T–175, Roll 90, Fr. 2664, Himmler Reichsführer-SS, Peter Padfield

“The future of Germany depends SOLELY AND ALONE ON THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE WEHRMACHT.”
- Adolf Hitler, February 1933

"But the short-term effect on unemployment of building the autobahn was only marginal."

"THE STRONGEST LONG-TERM STIMULI DRIVING ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND THE DECREASE IN UNEMPLOYMENT CAME FROM THE REARMAMENT OF GERMANY, WHICH HITLER BEGAN PURSUING IMMEDIATELY AFTER BEING NAMED REICH CHANCELLOR. "

“The Slavs are to work for us [Germans]. Insofar as we do not need them, they [Slavs] may die. Therefore, compulsory vaccination and German health service are superfluous. The fertility of the Slavs is undesirable. They may use contraceptives or practice... abortion, the more the better. Education is dangerous. It is enough if they can count up to 100. At best an education which produces useful coolies for us is admissible. Every educated person is a future enemy. Religion we leave to them as a means of diversion. As for food, they will not get any more than is necessary. We are the masters; we come first.”

𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧 𝐁𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐧
Memorandum dated 23 July 1942, Nuremberg Trial Proceedings Volume 11

«If he [Adolf Hitler] could wish the German people one thing, he remarked on another occasion, IT WOULD BE TO HAVE A WAR EVERY FIFTEEN TO TWENTY YEARS. If reproached for the loss of 200,000 lives, he would reply that he had enlarged the German nation by 2½ million, and felt justified in demanding the sacrifice of the lives of a tenth. ‘Life is horrible (grausam). Coming into being, existing, and passing away, there’s always a killing (ein Töten). Everything that is born must later die. Whether it’s through illness, accident, or war, that remains the same.’»

𝐈𝐚𝐧 𝐊𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐰
Hitler 1936-1945: Nemesis

It's astonishing to me that there are so many idiotic Telegram Channels dedicated to Nazism/Hitler. Imagine thinking a mass murderer of Europeans and plunderer of European cultures is somehow "based" and worthy of daily admiration. These people are dillusional and the antithesis of what they think they are projecting. Hitlerites are under a spell of cult of personality.
@exposinghitler

«When Hans Frank visited the Protectorate, he noted with surprise that

“There were large red posters in Prague announcing that today seven Czechs had been shot. I said to myself: if I wanted to hang a poster for every seven Poles that were shot, then all the forests in Poland would not suffice in order to produce the paper necessary for such posters.”

As this comment suggests, the destiny of the General Government was much grimmer.»

𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐌𝐚𝐳𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫
Hitler's Empire Nazi Rule in Occupied Europe

«Heinz Reinefarth received an extraordinary three-part order from [Heinrich] Himmler: all Polish combatants were to be shot; all Polish non-combatants, including women and children, were also to be shot; and the city itself was to be razed to the ground. The police formations and the SS Special Commando Dirlewanger carried out these orders to the letter on 5 and 6 August 1944, shooting some forty thousand civilians in the course of those two days alone. They had a military objective: they were to march through the west-central Wola neighborhood and relieve German headquarters in the Saxon Gardens. They lifted the Home Army’s barricades on Wola Street by marching Poles in front of them and forcing them to do the work, using women and children as human shields in the meantime...»

𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐲 𝐃. 𝐒𝐧𝐲𝐝𝐞𝐫
Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin

“However, if these [i.e work-slaves] want to have children they should have them somewhere else, not with us. Starting families, nest buildings, and the rest one may and will never tolerate. They will work here and in the winter be transported again. They can be concentrated in camps. They can have brothels, they can easily have them in abundance, I have nothing against that. But with our German Volk, they HAVE NOTHING TO DO. Any Slave families, of good Polish agricultural worker- and miner-origin we will RADICALLY DESTROY. If they want to breed, they should do it outside. Certainly, we need new slaves, but not with us in Germany. There may be no infiltration or suchlike.”

𝐇𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐇𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐥𝐞𝐫
Speech to the senior section leaders and heads of the main office at the Haus der Flieger in Berlin on 9.6.1942 (Memorial Speech for Reinhard Heydrich)
T–175, Roll 90, Fr. 2664
[T–175 Microfilm class at US National Archives, Washington DC (Fr. = frame number)]

Hitler was not a great moralist he was a piece of shit, Hitler was FULLY AND COMPLETELY AWARE that Ernst Rohm was g*y. But he had no issues with it, I know that Nazis will say that Rohm was killed, yes Hitler even used Rohm's g*yness as a reason, but the real reason behind Rohm's execution was that he was trying to take over Army, it was a power struggle before this power struggle started Hitler DEFENDED Rohm.
So UNTIL this power struggle began, Hitler had ZERO problem with Ernst Rohm being g*y.
Now what kind of a person would defend a g*y???
No person with an ounce of morality would ever defend g*y, but Hitler definitely did.


«In the battle for power that commenced with Röhm, Hitler had no qualms about publicising the former’s homosexuality and using it as a weapon against him. In mid-May, he had a one-to-one discussion with Goebbels, after which the propaganda minister noted: “Complaint about Röhm and his personnel policies under paragraph 175. Revolting.” Previously Hitler had shielded Röhm from attacks on his well-known homosexual leanings. In a decree in early February 1931, Hitler had particularly emphasised that the SA “was not a moral institution for the education of well-born daughters but a band of rough-hewn fighters.” Members’ private lives were only an issue “if they ran truly contrary to the National Socialist world view.” Moreover, during the presidential elections in March 1932, when the left-wing Welt am Montag and Münchener Post newspapers published compromising letters written by the SA chief of staff, Hitler had sworn: “Lieutenant Colonel Röhm will remain my chief of staff. Even the dirtiest and most repulsive smear campaigns will not change that fact in the slightest.” In the spring and early summer of 1934, however, Hitler tried to use Röhm’s homosexuality as a noose to hang him with.»  
~ Volker Ullrich, Hitler Ascent.

More evidence of the Marxist influences behind National Socialism.

> "He was proud of a knowledge of Marxist texts acquired in his student days before the First World War and later in a Bavarian prison, in 1924, after the failure of the Munich putsch. The trouble with Weimar Republic politicians, he told Otto Wagener at much the same time, was that "they had never even read Marx", implying that no one who had failed to read so important an author could even begin to understand the modern world"

> "even in the autobiography he observes that his own doctrine was fundamentally distinguished from the Marxist by reason that it recognised the significance of race - implying, perhaps, that it might otherwise easily look like a derivative."

> "Without race, he went on, National Socialism "would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground". Marxism was internationalist. The proletariat, as the famous slogan goes, has no fatherland. Hitler had a fatherland, and it was everything to him."

> "Yet privately, and perhaps even publicly, he conceded that National Socialism was based on Marx. On reflection, it makes consistent sense. The basis of a dogma is not the dogma, much as the foundation of a building is not the building, and in numerous ways National Socialism was based on Marxism. It was a theory of history and not, like liberalism or social democracy, a mere agenda of legislative proposals."

> "Hitler's discovery was that socialism could be national as well as international. There could be a national socialism. That is how he reportedly talked to his fellow Nazi Otto Wagener in the early 1930s. The socialism of the future would lie in "the community of the volk", not in internationalism, he claimed, and his task was to "convert the German volk to socialism without simply killing off the old individualists", meaning the entrepreneurial and managerial classes left from the age of liberalism"

> "They should be used, not destroyed. The state could control, after all, without owning, guided by a single party, the economy could be planned and directed without dispossessing the propertied classes."

> "As for communists, he opposed them because they created mere herds, Soviet-style, without individual life, and his own ideal was "the socialism of nations" rather than the international socialism of Marx and Lenin. The one and only problem of the age, he told Wagener, was to liberate labour and replace the rule of capital over labour with the rule of labour over capital."

> "These are highly socialist sentiments, and if Wagener reports his master faithfully they leave no doubt about the conclusion: that Hitler was an unorthodox Marxist who knew his sources and knew just how unorthodox the way in which he handled them was. He was a dissident socialist... "What Marxism, Leninism and Stalinism failed to accomplish," he told Wagener, "we shall be in a position to achieve.""

> "On 16 June 1941, five days before Hitler attacked the Soviet Union, Goebbels exulted, in the privacy of his diary, in the victory over Bolshevism that he believed would quickly follow. There would be no restoration of the tsars, he remarked to himself, after Russia had been conquered. But Jewish Bolshevism would be uprooted in Russia and "real socialism" planted in its place - "Der echte Sozialismus". Goebbels was a liar, to be sure, but no one can explain why he would lie to his diaries. And to the end of his days he believed that socialism was what National Socialism was about."

Follow @redideologies

Continuation of : https://t.me/exposinghitler/587

«Hitler has sometimes been credited, notably by the American historian Gerhard Weinberg, with exercising a degree of flexibility in his command of the German armed forces during the years of defeat and retreat, but even had this been the case, in the regime’s final months it gave way to a stubborn insistence that retreat was treason, tactical withdrawal military cowardice and realism weakness of willpower. Exuding confidence in ultimate victory, he continued to move his armies around long after they had become desperate, disorganised and depleted rabbles. On occasion the mask of self-belief would slip, and he would confess that all was lost; at the end, he announced to his intimates, he would put a bullet through his brain. ‘We’ll not capitulate. Never. We can go down. But we’ll take a world with us.’ THE GERMAN PEOPLE, HITLER CONCLUDED, DID NOT DESERVE TO SURVIVE. THEY HAD FAILED THE TEST OF HISTORY. On 19 March 1945 he issued the infamous ‘Nero order’, telling his commanders to destroy everything that might fall into the hands of the advancing enemy But Hitler’s self-destructiveness and contempt for the German people in some ways only deepen the mystery of why they fought on. Part of the answer clearly lies in the psychological power he still wielded. »

~ The Third Reich in History and Memory, Richard J Evans

«In February 1944, as the German occupation in Russia neared its end, one of [Alfred] Rosenberg’s closest collaborators gave a damning indictment of their overall approach, referring to

“that masterpiece of WRONG TREATMENT and the most remarkable and astonishing achievement – to have, within a year, chased into the woods and swamps, as partisans, a people which was absolutely pro-German and had jubilantly greeted us as their liberator and to have thus influenced the course of events in the East in a decisively negative way …”

But it was [Adolf] Hitler himself who had laid down the lines of this policy at the crucial meeting he had held with [Hermann] Göring, Rosenberg, [Martin] Bormann and Keitel two and a half years earlier at his Rastenburg headquarters in the Masurian forests. The date was 16 July 1941, and he was confident that the war would not last long, for the Wehrmacht had already won a number of crushing victories, while the Red Army was falling back so rapidly that hundreds of thousands of Soviet troops were being encircled and captured.

Hitler could scarcely have been blunter. He started the meeting by emphasizing that this was a campaign whose fruits would benefit GERMANY ALONE. In the short run, it might be tactically useful to play the role of liberators. But the important thing was to avoid superfluous declarations and, above all, for the Germans to know what they wanted as they divided up ‘this vast cake’. They needed to prevent any other military power emerging in the region, and beyond that, ‘first to rule, secondly to administer and thirdly to exploit’ the people and resources they found there. This was a programme for a colonial war of extraction. GERMANS SHOULD BE THE ONLY ONES TO BEAR ARMS; LOOKING TO OTHER NATIONALITIES FOR SUPPORT WAS A FALSE ILLUSION. Pacification would be achieved by ‘shooting everyone who looked in any way suspicious’.

As if all of this was not enough, a far cry from Rosenberg’s dreams of seeing Germany lead a coalition of Slavic states, his plans suffered a further blow when Hitler decided to truncate the Ukraine by attaching formerly Habsburg Galicia to the General Government and giving some of the southern Ukraine, including Odessa, to Romania. So much for winning over the Ukrainians. The lands between would exist SOLELY TO SERVE GERMANY, while the Germans themselves would ‘Europeanize’ the steppe, draining marshes, building motorways, establishing plantations and founding new ‘German towns’. ‘Two or three million men’ would come to live in them, Hitler predicted, ‘from Germany, Scandinavia, the Western countries and America’. In the past he had often argued that Europe had been harmed by the mass transatlantic migrations of the previous century; his policy would reverse the direction of the transcontinental flow and send millions eastwards. The ultimate result would be ‘to Germanise this country by the immigration of Germans and TO LOOK UPON THE NATIVES AS REDSKINS’»

~ Mark Mazower
Hitler's Empire Nazi Rule in Occupied Europe

What Nazis did to the Greeks.
https://youtu.be/oT2NPAoXeSk
https://youtu.be/pQ9aacDC5YQ

Hermann Goering to Reich Commissioners and Military Commanders of the occupied territories, 6 August 1942: "In all the occupied territories I see the people living there stuffed full of food, while our own people are going hungry. For God's sake, you haven't been sent there to work for the well-being of the peoples entrusted to you, but to get hold of as much as you can so that the German people can live. I expect you to devote your energies to that. This continual concern for the aliens must come to an end once and for all . . . . I could not care less when you say that people under your administration are dying of hunger. LET THEM PERISH so long as no German starves."

Hammer and sickle mixed in with the eagle and swazi.

"We're not communists we just worship the "working class" as god, want to abolish private property and socialize the means of production!"

From: Volker Ullrich, Hitler: Ascent 1889-1939

Reading through Hitler’s speeches from the period 1920–22, it seems amazing that he attracted larger and larger audiences with such repeated mantra-like phrases. But perhaps it was the monotonous repetition of his accusations, vows of revenge and promises for the future that was the key to his success. In the chapter in Mein Kampf that focuses on propaganda, Hitler wrote:
The receptivity of large masses is very limited. Their capacity to understand things is slight whereas their forgetfulness is great. Given this, effective propaganda must restrict itself to a handful of points, which it repeats as slogans as long as it takes for the dumbest member of the audience to get an idea of what they mean.

Hitler’s analysis was hardly original. In fact, it recalled a pre-war book by the Frenchman Gustave Le Bon entitled The Psychology of the Masses, which by 1919 was in its third edition. Like Hitler, Le Bon described the masses as stupid, egotistical, feminine, fickle, incapable of accepting criticism and ruled by uncontrollable urges. Hitler presumably became acquainted with Le Bon’s ideas through a book by the Munich neurologist J. R. Rossbach called The Soul of the Masses, which appeared in 1919 and quoted the Frenchman extensively.
IRONICALLY, THEREFORE, THE BEER-CELLAR RABBLE-ROUSER, WHO LIKED TO DEPICT HIMSELF AS A MAN OF THE PEOPLE, IN FACT DESPISED THE MASSES, WHICH HE REGARDED AS NOTHING MORE THAN A TOOL TO BE MANIPULATED TO ACHIEVE HIS POLITICAL AMBITIONS. In this respect, too, Hitler was no exception, but rather a mouthpiece of the cultural pessimism represented in particular by the authors associated with the “conservative revolution” in the Weimar Republic. Nonetheless, unlike those theoreticians, Hitler knew how to draw a mass audience, and that in turn attracted the interest of nationalistic conservatives.