Forwarded from Martinez Politics
Notice that when fascists criticize communists it is only ever from a social angle and not economic. Their lament is that commies are "not racist enough, not homophobic enough, etc." The critique is not economic because both fascists and communists share the same economic views that the state must control all or most of the major means of production, set prices, wages, production quotas, etc. Two sister ideologies fighting over turf.
👍18👌4
Forwarded from Debunking Zoomer Historian
ZH: "Wikipedia will suggest Germany wanted to push to the east towards the Urals... This isn't true at all."
Adolf Hitler: "We shall have to be very anxious that no military power should ever arise on this side of the Urals: our western neighbours would always be the allies of our eastern neighbours; so the French have been with the Turks, and so the English are now with the Soviets. By this side of the Urals I mean a line 200-300 kilometres to the east of it. It must be possible for us [Germans] to dominate this [Urals] eastern area with 250,000 men and a few good administrators. Just look at the English, who rule 400 million Indians with a total of 250,000 men, of whom the Wehrmacht has about 50,000. This area should always be dependent on German rulers. Nothing would be more wrong than to want to educate the masses. We only have an interest in the people learning to distinguish, say, the road signs; they are illiterate now and they should remain so. But they must be able to live well; that is our own interest." (July 27, 1941, in Monologe im Führerhauptquartier 1941–1944: Die Aufzeichnungen Heinrich Heims, ed. Werner Jochmann)👍9👌3
Ukrainians who larp as Natsocs are severely deluded about history.
> "Hitler had remarked in the summer of 1942 that the Ukraine ought to be Germanized within twenty years ; and Koch had approvingly spread the good word. When Himmler, on a visit to the Führer’s headquarters at Vinnitsa, echoed the thought by commenting that the partisans were menacing the Volksdeutsche and that there ought to be ‘ only German spoken here’, his anxious aides interpreted this as an order to Germanize the area — specifically, the ethnic German settlement of Hegewald, near Himmler’s field headquarters. In mid-August 1942, Himmler actually sanctioned a ‘ consolidation’ of German villages there after the harvest was in; 10,000 ethnic Germans were to be moved into the Hegewald district, where the settlers (unlike the rest of the population) were to receive land in private ownership. Indeed, in November 1942 the first seven villages were cleared of their Ukrainian inhabitants, and ethnic Germans from Volhynia were moved in."
Follow @Redideologies
> "Hitler had remarked in the summer of 1942 that the Ukraine ought to be Germanized within twenty years ; and Koch had approvingly spread the good word. When Himmler, on a visit to the Führer’s headquarters at Vinnitsa, echoed the thought by commenting that the partisans were menacing the Volksdeutsche and that there ought to be ‘ only German spoken here’, his anxious aides interpreted this as an order to Germanize the area — specifically, the ethnic German settlement of Hegewald, near Himmler’s field headquarters. In mid-August 1942, Himmler actually sanctioned a ‘ consolidation’ of German villages there after the harvest was in; 10,000 ethnic Germans were to be moved into the Hegewald district, where the settlers (unlike the rest of the population) were to receive land in private ownership. Indeed, in November 1942 the first seven villages were cleared of their Ukrainian inhabitants, and ethnic Germans from Volhynia were moved in."
Source: German rule in Russia, 1941-1945: a study of occupation policies: Alexander DallinFollow @Redideologies
👍19⚡3
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
German women of the Third Reich say that they fetishized and fantasized sexually about the "exotic" Indian soldiers who had joined the German side in the war.
@redideologies
@redideologies
😇17🏆3👏2👌2
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
If Hitler wanted to "save Europe from Communism" and that motivated Barbarossa then why did he sign the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact which gave Stalin the green light to invade the Baltics and half of Poland and communize them? Saving by spreading? Poland was an anti-communist state but he helped Stalin gobble up half of it in that deal. And how can someone who is a socialist and implemented a highly socialized economic system save countries from an economic system that he admired and implemented in his own country? Saving you from communism with socialism? That's like saving you from Islam with Judaism.
😇15👍10👌2
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Bjerknes on the radical Marxist socialist roots of both fascism and National Socialism.
Source
Follow 👉 @redideologies
Source
Follow 👉 @redideologies
👍12👌6
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
🇩🇪 Hitlerism had nothing to do with "White nationalism". That's a post-war American bastardization of the ideology. Hitlerism is Germanic supremacy/imperialism.
In 1930 Hitler told Strasser this:
"...the Anglo-Saxons have the mission to govern the people they have subdued, precisely in the name of their superiority. The Nordic race is called to dominate the world, and this right must guide our foreign policy. The goal was the Nordic domination of Europe, and through America Nordic-Germanic domination of the world."
He said more or less the same thing in MK:
"We National Socialists must go still further: The right to land and soil becomes a duty when a great nation seems destined to go under, unless its land is extended. Germany will either be a world power, or not at all. But in order to become a world power, it needs that size which gives it the necessary importance today, and gives life to its citizens."
He didn't see non-Nordic Europeans as equals and wished to dominate them. He did not believe in "nationalism for everyone" either, even among Europeans, he believed in "might is right" as he said in MK, writing:
"only an imbecile could look upon the Earth’s geography as unchangeable as granite–which, in reality, represents a definite stage in a given development, created by the mighty forces of Nature, and which may be altered tomorrow by greater forces of destruction and change–so too the borders of living spaces in the lives of nations. State borders are made by man, and can be changed by man. The fact that a nation has acquired an enormous area is no reason why it should hold it forever. At most, it proves the strength of the conqueror and the weakness of the defeated. And in this strength alone lies the right. If the German people are imprisoned within an impossible area, and face a miserable future, this is not by the command of Fate, anymore than to oppose such affairs is to disobey it." (Chapter 14)
His entire rationale behind Lebensraum, seizing new territory from Poland, Ukraine and Russia to facilitate Germanic ethnic expansion, was outlined vividly in his thoughts there.
Hitler declared Slavs (whose land he coveted) an "inferior race" in MK and other sources:
"In delivering Russia over to Bolshevism, it robbed the Russian people of that intelligentsia that had once created and secured the Russian state. The organization of the Russian state-structure was not a result of Russian Slavic political ability, but rather was a marvelous example of the state-building capacity of the Germanic element amidst an inferior race."
This man was in no way a "White nationalist" or an advocate for "White unity," he was a destructive force of division within Europe hell bent on occupying lands that were not his own and colonizing them through forced displacement and mass murder.
Why any "pro-White" person would cite Hitler as a source of inspiration is either because they are ignorantly unaware of his actual ideology, views and policies or they have created a bastardized version of it, selectively cherry picking out only what they want it to be and not what it actually was.
@MartinezPolitix
In 1930 Hitler told Strasser this:
"...the Anglo-Saxons have the mission to govern the people they have subdued, precisely in the name of their superiority. The Nordic race is called to dominate the world, and this right must guide our foreign policy. The goal was the Nordic domination of Europe, and through America Nordic-Germanic domination of the world."
He said more or less the same thing in MK:
"We National Socialists must go still further: The right to land and soil becomes a duty when a great nation seems destined to go under, unless its land is extended. Germany will either be a world power, or not at all. But in order to become a world power, it needs that size which gives it the necessary importance today, and gives life to its citizens."
He didn't see non-Nordic Europeans as equals and wished to dominate them. He did not believe in "nationalism for everyone" either, even among Europeans, he believed in "might is right" as he said in MK, writing:
"only an imbecile could look upon the Earth’s geography as unchangeable as granite–which, in reality, represents a definite stage in a given development, created by the mighty forces of Nature, and which may be altered tomorrow by greater forces of destruction and change–so too the borders of living spaces in the lives of nations. State borders are made by man, and can be changed by man. The fact that a nation has acquired an enormous area is no reason why it should hold it forever. At most, it proves the strength of the conqueror and the weakness of the defeated. And in this strength alone lies the right. If the German people are imprisoned within an impossible area, and face a miserable future, this is not by the command of Fate, anymore than to oppose such affairs is to disobey it." (Chapter 14)
His entire rationale behind Lebensraum, seizing new territory from Poland, Ukraine and Russia to facilitate Germanic ethnic expansion, was outlined vividly in his thoughts there.
Hitler declared Slavs (whose land he coveted) an "inferior race" in MK and other sources:
"In delivering Russia over to Bolshevism, it robbed the Russian people of that intelligentsia that had once created and secured the Russian state. The organization of the Russian state-structure was not a result of Russian Slavic political ability, but rather was a marvelous example of the state-building capacity of the Germanic element amidst an inferior race."
This man was in no way a "White nationalist" or an advocate for "White unity," he was a destructive force of division within Europe hell bent on occupying lands that were not his own and colonizing them through forced displacement and mass murder.
Why any "pro-White" person would cite Hitler as a source of inspiration is either because they are ignorantly unaware of his actual ideology, views and policies or they have created a bastardized version of it, selectively cherry picking out only what they want it to be and not what it actually was.
@MartinezPolitix
👍13👌5💯4🫡1
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
Hitlertard: "You're right, you're correct, but you're BAD FAITH INSECURE CRYPTO WORKING FOR THE JEEEWSS MAAAAN!"
What could be more "bad faith" than someone admitting you're right and then resorting to Saul Alinsky bad jacketing tactics to attack the messenger while admitting his message is true.
Typical deranged cognitive dissonance of the cult. What he's really saying is that he's mad that someone is finally breaking through the Meme ideology ("just overlook the particulars man!") and bringing the truth to people.
What could be more "bad faith" than someone admitting you're right and then resorting to Saul Alinsky bad jacketing tactics to attack the messenger while admitting his message is true.
Typical deranged cognitive dissonance of the cult. What he's really saying is that he's mad that someone is finally breaking through the Meme ideology ("just overlook the particulars man!") and bringing the truth to people.
💯11👌6
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Hitler was anti-Christian
"Positive Christianity" was nothing more than an attempt to replace traditional Christian religion with National Socialism as the state religion.
Internal documents show the Nazi German state aimed to remove Christianity from public life eventually.
Source
@redideologies
"Positive Christianity" was nothing more than an attempt to replace traditional Christian religion with National Socialism as the state religion.
Internal documents show the Nazi German state aimed to remove Christianity from public life eventually.
Source
@redideologies
👍13
Himmler was also a crazed Islamophile who lamented that the Turkish Ottoman Muslims didn't succeed in conquering Vienna.
Hitler and Himmler's Islamophilia mainly comes down to their view that Islam is a militant religion hell-bent on conquest and embraces death and suicide for the cause.
They wished for Germans to adopt a similar kind of militancy for the cause of expropriating land from the Slavs for Lebensraum.
@redideologies
Hitler and Himmler's Islamophilia mainly comes down to their view that Islam is a militant religion hell-bent on conquest and embraces death and suicide for the cause.
They wished for Germans to adopt a similar kind of militancy for the cause of expropriating land from the Slavs for Lebensraum.
@redideologies
👍15👏2😇2
Forwarded from Red Ideologies
The very title 'Forced War' is totally demolished by none other than Hitler himself in his November 1939 speech, where he clearly says he always wanted to wage war.
> Hitler wanted the war. It was the logical end to the path which he had taken since being appointed chancellor on 30 January 1933, and upon which conservative elites – generals, diplomats and industrial arms manufacturers – with few exceptions had willingly followed him. As the dictator himself emphasised in a speech to his commanders a few weeks after the conclusion of the Polish campaign in the autumn of 1939, he would never have undertaken to ‘educate the people, build up the Wehrmacht and rearm’ if he had not had the will to use force ‘right from the beginning’ [¹]. There was no room for the idea of lasting peace in Hitler’s social-Darwinist world view. Peace, Hitler often reiterated privately, would only ‘lead humanity into a quagmire’. Every generation, he believed, had to ‘steel itself anew and collect new experiences’.[²]
The only fault that can be attributed to the Western powers is that they failed to stay Hitler’s arm while that was still possible. They had tried everything they could, to the point of self-abnegation, to tame his drive for expansion in the interests of preserving peace in Europe. It was not until the policy of appeasement had definitively failed in the spring of 1939 that the Western powers decided to confront Germany’s Führer – too late to undermine Hitler’s determination to wage war, if indeed that drive could have been checked under any circumstances. By contrast, in order to buy time for a conflict it knew was coming, the Soviet Union temporarily allied itself with its mortal enemy and became complicit, in the short term, in Hitler’s policies of aggression.
— Vᴏʟᴋᴇʀ Uʟʟʀɪᴄʜ, Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ Dᴏᴡɴꜰᴀʟʟ: 1939-45
[1] Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ’s sᴘᴇᴇᴄʜ ᴛᴏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴄᴏᴍᴍᴀɴᴅᴇʀs, 23 Nᴏᴠᴇᴍʙᴇʀ 1939; Gʀᴏsᴄᴜʀᴛʜ, Tᴀɢᴇʙüᴄʜᴇʀ ᴇɪɴᴇs Aʙᴡᴇʜʀᴏꜰꜰɪᴢɪᴇʀs, ᴘ. 415. A ᴅɪꜰꜰᴇʀᴇɴᴛ ᴀᴄᴄᴏᴜɴᴛ ʜᴀᴅ Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ sᴀʏɪɴɢ, ‘Tʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴄɪsɪᴏɴ ᴛᴏ sᴛʀɪᴋᴇ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴀʟᴡᴀʏs ᴇxɪsᴛᴇᴅ ᴡɪᴛʜɪɴ ᴍᴇ.’ Dᴏᴍᴀʀᴜs, Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ, ᴠᴏʟ. 2, ᴘᴀʀᴛ 1, ᴘ. 1423.
[2] Gᴏᴇʙʙᴇʟs, Tᴀɢᴇʙüᴄʜᴇʀ, ᴘᴀʀᴛ I, ᴠᴏʟ. 8, ᴘᴘ. 332ꜰ. (ᴇɴᴛʀʏ ꜰᴏʀ 18 Sᴇᴘᴛ. 1940). Iɴ Mᴀʀᴄʜ 1939 ɪɴ Sᴀɴ Fʀᴀɴᴄɪsᴄᴏ, Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ’s ꜰᴏʀᴍᴇʀ ᴀᴅᴊᴜᴛᴀɴᴛ Fʀɪᴛᴢ Wɪᴇᴅᴇᴍᴀɴɴ ʀᴇᴄᴀʟʟᴇᴅ ᴛʜᴇ ᴅɪᴄᴛᴀᴛᴏʀ ꜰʀᴇǫᴜᴇɴᴛʟʏ sᴀʏɪɴɢ ɪɴ ᴛʜᴇ sᴜᴍᴍᴇʀ ᴏꜰ 1938: ‘Eᴠᴇʀʏ ɢᴇɴᴇʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ ɴᴇᴇᴅs ᴛᴏ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ɢᴏɴᴇ ᴛʜʀᴏᴜɢʜ ᴀ ᴡᴀʀ.’ BA Kᴏʙʟᴇɴᴢ, N 1720/4.
Follow @redideologies
> Hitler wanted the war. It was the logical end to the path which he had taken since being appointed chancellor on 30 January 1933, and upon which conservative elites – generals, diplomats and industrial arms manufacturers – with few exceptions had willingly followed him. As the dictator himself emphasised in a speech to his commanders a few weeks after the conclusion of the Polish campaign in the autumn of 1939, he would never have undertaken to ‘educate the people, build up the Wehrmacht and rearm’ if he had not had the will to use force ‘right from the beginning’ [¹]. There was no room for the idea of lasting peace in Hitler’s social-Darwinist world view. Peace, Hitler often reiterated privately, would only ‘lead humanity into a quagmire’. Every generation, he believed, had to ‘steel itself anew and collect new experiences’.[²]
The only fault that can be attributed to the Western powers is that they failed to stay Hitler’s arm while that was still possible. They had tried everything they could, to the point of self-abnegation, to tame his drive for expansion in the interests of preserving peace in Europe. It was not until the policy of appeasement had definitively failed in the spring of 1939 that the Western powers decided to confront Germany’s Führer – too late to undermine Hitler’s determination to wage war, if indeed that drive could have been checked under any circumstances. By contrast, in order to buy time for a conflict it knew was coming, the Soviet Union temporarily allied itself with its mortal enemy and became complicit, in the short term, in Hitler’s policies of aggression.
— Vᴏʟᴋᴇʀ Uʟʟʀɪᴄʜ, Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ Dᴏᴡɴꜰᴀʟʟ: 1939-45
[1] Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ’s sᴘᴇᴇᴄʜ ᴛᴏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴄᴏᴍᴍᴀɴᴅᴇʀs, 23 Nᴏᴠᴇᴍʙᴇʀ 1939; Gʀᴏsᴄᴜʀᴛʜ, Tᴀɢᴇʙüᴄʜᴇʀ ᴇɪɴᴇs Aʙᴡᴇʜʀᴏꜰꜰɪᴢɪᴇʀs, ᴘ. 415. A ᴅɪꜰꜰᴇʀᴇɴᴛ ᴀᴄᴄᴏᴜɴᴛ ʜᴀᴅ Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ sᴀʏɪɴɢ, ‘Tʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴄɪsɪᴏɴ ᴛᴏ sᴛʀɪᴋᴇ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴀʟᴡᴀʏs ᴇxɪsᴛᴇᴅ ᴡɪᴛʜɪɴ ᴍᴇ.’ Dᴏᴍᴀʀᴜs, Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ, ᴠᴏʟ. 2, ᴘᴀʀᴛ 1, ᴘ. 1423.
[2] Gᴏᴇʙʙᴇʟs, Tᴀɢᴇʙüᴄʜᴇʀ, ᴘᴀʀᴛ I, ᴠᴏʟ. 8, ᴘᴘ. 332ꜰ. (ᴇɴᴛʀʏ ꜰᴏʀ 18 Sᴇᴘᴛ. 1940). Iɴ Mᴀʀᴄʜ 1939 ɪɴ Sᴀɴ Fʀᴀɴᴄɪsᴄᴏ, Hɪᴛʟᴇʀ’s ꜰᴏʀᴍᴇʀ ᴀᴅᴊᴜᴛᴀɴᴛ Fʀɪᴛᴢ Wɪᴇᴅᴇᴍᴀɴɴ ʀᴇᴄᴀʟʟᴇᴅ ᴛʜᴇ ᴅɪᴄᴛᴀᴛᴏʀ ꜰʀᴇǫᴜᴇɴᴛʟʏ sᴀʏɪɴɢ ɪɴ ᴛʜᴇ sᴜᴍᴍᴇʀ ᴏꜰ 1938: ‘Eᴠᴇʀʏ ɢᴇɴᴇʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ ɴᴇᴇᴅs ᴛᴏ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ɢᴏɴᴇ ᴛʜʀᴏᴜɢʜ ᴀ ᴡᴀʀ.’ BA Kᴏʙʟᴇɴᴢ, N 1720/4.
Follow @redideologies
👍7⚡4
Hitler cultists will tell you that Hitler only wanted to restore the 1914 German borders, but Hitler himself said the exact opposite in Chapter 14 of MK:
> "To demand the restoration of the 1914 borders is a political absurdity that’s fraught with such consequences as to appear criminal. The 1914 Reich borders were anything but logical. They were not really complete, in the sense of including all the members of the German nation, nor were they reasonable, in light of military-geographical effectiveness. ...Even if it could be really carried out, the result would be so miserable that, by God, it wouldn’t be worthwhile to risk our people’s blood for it."
> "The 1914 borders are of no significance for the German future. They neither served to protect us in the past, nor do they offer any strength for the future. With these borders, the German people cannot attain an inner unity, nor can they assure their sustenance, nor, from a military viewpoint, are they advantageous, nor can they improve our relations with the other world powers–or better, with the real world powers. We won’t narrow the gap with England, and we won’t achieve the size of the American Union; indeed, not even France would be diminished in terms of world political importance."
So Hitler states clearly the 1914 borders are not sufficient living space, they're "illogical," and not worth "shedding blood" to get back. He wished to push deeper into Russia, as he states in the same and other chapters of MK.
Neo-Nazis are lying about all of this in order to rehabilitate Hitler and make him appear like the good guy in the worst war on the European continent that he deliberately started.
@redideologies
> "To demand the restoration of the 1914 borders is a political absurdity that’s fraught with such consequences as to appear criminal. The 1914 Reich borders were anything but logical. They were not really complete, in the sense of including all the members of the German nation, nor were they reasonable, in light of military-geographical effectiveness. ...Even if it could be really carried out, the result would be so miserable that, by God, it wouldn’t be worthwhile to risk our people’s blood for it."
> "The 1914 borders are of no significance for the German future. They neither served to protect us in the past, nor do they offer any strength for the future. With these borders, the German people cannot attain an inner unity, nor can they assure their sustenance, nor, from a military viewpoint, are they advantageous, nor can they improve our relations with the other world powers–or better, with the real world powers. We won’t narrow the gap with England, and we won’t achieve the size of the American Union; indeed, not even France would be diminished in terms of world political importance."
So Hitler states clearly the 1914 borders are not sufficient living space, they're "illogical," and not worth "shedding blood" to get back. He wished to push deeper into Russia, as he states in the same and other chapters of MK.
Neo-Nazis are lying about all of this in order to rehabilitate Hitler and make him appear like the good guy in the worst war on the European continent that he deliberately started.
@redideologies
👍9⚡5🔥3
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
New Article
"The traditional Hitler apologist line for his invasion of the USSR is that it was all a “pre-emptive strike” predicated on a perceived threat of imminent invasion from Moscow. That narrative was the one spun by Hitler and his generals – public-facing propaganda that continues to be dutifully repeated by Hitlerists today – to justify what was unmistakably pre-mediated aggression to secure Lebensraum. Several primary sources severely undermine those claims."
https://martinezperspective.net/2023/11/goebbels-diaries-proves-nazi-germany-perceived-no-imminent-threat-from-the-ussr/
"The traditional Hitler apologist line for his invasion of the USSR is that it was all a “pre-emptive strike” predicated on a perceived threat of imminent invasion from Moscow. That narrative was the one spun by Hitler and his generals – public-facing propaganda that continues to be dutifully repeated by Hitlerists today – to justify what was unmistakably pre-mediated aggression to secure Lebensraum. Several primary sources severely undermine those claims."
https://martinezperspective.net/2023/11/goebbels-diaries-proves-nazi-germany-perceived-no-imminent-threat-from-the-ussr/
Martinez Perspective
Goebbels’ Diaries Proves Nazi Germany Perceived No Imminent Threat from the USSR
The traditional Hitler apologist line for his invasion of the USSR is that it was all a “pre-emptive strike” predicated on a perceived threat of imminent invasion from Moscow. That narr…
👍7⚡6
Forwarded from Red Ideologies
Rosenberg admits at Nuremberg the plan for Ukraine and the East in general: acquisition of their land for German settlement/expansion and exploitation of their labor. He says that while in Germany top officials publicly declared their contempt of the "inferior" Eastern Slavs, it was unwise to publicly declare such things in the East to not agitate their subjects.
——
MR. DODD: All right, I accept your interpretation; we won't have any trouble about that. Now, will you please look at this document? This is a memorandum found in your files, for your information.
ROSENBERG: Yes.
MR. DODD: You set out there, in the second paragraph, what you call the aim of German politics, notably in the Ukraine, as having been laid down by the Fuehrer. They are, you say, exploitation and mobilization of raw materials, a German settlement in certain regions, no artificial education of the population towards intellectualism, but the preservation of their labor strength; apart from that, an extensive unconcern with the interior affairs.
Then, moving down a little bit-because I don't think it is necessary to read all of it, much of it has been referred to in another document-we come down to the 12th line from the bottom of that paragraph. Beginning at the 14th line:
"After continuous observation of the state of affairs in the Occupied Eastern Territories, I am convinced that German politics may have their own, possibly contemptuous opinion of the qualities of the conquered peoples, but that it is not the mission of German political representatives to proclaim measures and opinions which could eventually reduce the conquered peoples to dull despair instead of promoting the desired utilization of manpower to capacity."
Then, in the next paragraph, you say:
"If at home we had to announce our aims to the whole nation most openly and aggressively, in contrast to the others, the political leaders in the East must remain silent where German policy calls for necessary harshness. They must remain silent as to any derogatory opinions which they may form about the conquered peoples. Yes, a clever German policy may in certain circumstances do more in the German interest through alleviations which do not affect policy and certain humane concessions, than through open, inconsiderate brutality."
Were you honestly expressing your views when you wrote that memorandum on the 16th of March 1942?
ROSENBERG: This document is correct.
Follow @redideologies
——
MR. DODD: All right, I accept your interpretation; we won't have any trouble about that. Now, will you please look at this document? This is a memorandum found in your files, for your information.
ROSENBERG: Yes.
MR. DODD: You set out there, in the second paragraph, what you call the aim of German politics, notably in the Ukraine, as having been laid down by the Fuehrer. They are, you say, exploitation and mobilization of raw materials, a German settlement in certain regions, no artificial education of the population towards intellectualism, but the preservation of their labor strength; apart from that, an extensive unconcern with the interior affairs.
Then, moving down a little bit-because I don't think it is necessary to read all of it, much of it has been referred to in another document-we come down to the 12th line from the bottom of that paragraph. Beginning at the 14th line:
"After continuous observation of the state of affairs in the Occupied Eastern Territories, I am convinced that German politics may have their own, possibly contemptuous opinion of the qualities of the conquered peoples, but that it is not the mission of German political representatives to proclaim measures and opinions which could eventually reduce the conquered peoples to dull despair instead of promoting the desired utilization of manpower to capacity."
Then, in the next paragraph, you say:
"If at home we had to announce our aims to the whole nation most openly and aggressively, in contrast to the others, the political leaders in the East must remain silent where German policy calls for necessary harshness. They must remain silent as to any derogatory opinions which they may form about the conquered peoples. Yes, a clever German policy may in certain circumstances do more in the German interest through alleviations which do not affect policy and certain humane concessions, than through open, inconsiderate brutality."
Were you honestly expressing your views when you wrote that memorandum on the 16th of March 1942?
ROSENBERG: This document is correct.
Follow @redideologies
👍5⚡4
Some selected quotes from the Goebbels diaries proves they perceived no imminent threat from the USSR and were acting aggressively towards it.
Entry November 1939
On the Führer. He again notes the disastrous condition of the Russian army. It is hardly usable as a fighting force.
Entry 15 March 1940
By the way, it is very good that the Russians no longer have a Germanic leadership; so they can never become dangerous for us. And if Stalin shoots his generals, we don’t even have to do that.
Entry 22nd April 1941
Article in “Pravda”: Nothing against Germany, Moscow wants peace, etc. So Stalin has already smelt a rat and is waving the peace palm. So that’s how strong we are now. The Russian card no longer stings.
Entry 29 March 1941
The big operation comes later: against R. It is carefully camouflaged, only a few people know about it. It is initiated with extensive troop transports to the West. We divert suspicion in all directions, except to the East. A dummy enterprise is prepared against England, and then it’s back and forth in a flash. Ukraine is a good granary. If we sit there, we can last a long time.
Entry May 12 1941
Newsreel checked: not quite as good as the last three, but something can still be made of it. English and Russian newsreels that we confiscated in Belgrade. No competition for us at all. Extremely bad and amateurish. I get really proud of our work in this area. ABOVE ALL, WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR FROM THE RUSSIANS, EITHER MILITARILY OR IN TERMS OF PROPAGANDA. The English subjects are of an indescribable naivety.
Entry 12th June 1941
Report from Bessarabia and the Ukraine: the Russians are staring hypnotically at us and are afraid. They are not doing much. They will be overrun like no people before. And the Bolshevik spook will quickly come to an end.
Entry 14 June 1941
In East Prussia, everything is so massed that the Russians could inflict the most serious damage on us through pre-emptive air raids. But they won’t do that. They lack the courage to do so. You have to be bold if you want to win a war.
Entry 15 June 1941
From intercepted radio messages, on the other hand, we can gather that Moscow is putting the Russian fleet on standby. So they are not quite as harmless over there as they pretend to be. But the preparations are extremely dilettante. Not to be taken seriously for a real action.
Entry 16 June 1941
We must act. Moscow wants to stay out of the war until Europe is tired and bled dry. Then Stalin wants to act, Bolshevise Europe and take up his regiment. He will be thwarted in this. ... Japan is in the alliance. The action is also necessary for this side. Tokyo would never get involved with the USA if Russia were still intact at its back. So Russia must fall for this reason too. ... We must also attack Russia to free people. An undefeated Russia is constantly forcing 150 divisions on us, whose men we urgently need for our war economy.... If Russia is defeated, then we can dismiss whole cohorts and build it, arm it, prepare it. Only then can the Luftwaffe attack England on a grand scale.
As you can see in that last entry, Goebbels said a second reason to attack Russia besides turning Ukraine into a "granary" aka Lebensraum, was to bolster the confidence of Japan to be able to confront the US.
All of those entries prove that at no time did they fear the Russians but rather believed the Russians to be supremely weak and afraid of Germany. It was an underestimation but it proves conclusively that this war was not "pre-emptive" but an act of naked aggression.
@redideologies
Entry November 1939
On the Führer. He again notes the disastrous condition of the Russian army. It is hardly usable as a fighting force.
Entry 15 March 1940
By the way, it is very good that the Russians no longer have a Germanic leadership; so they can never become dangerous for us. And if Stalin shoots his generals, we don’t even have to do that.
Entry 22nd April 1941
Article in “Pravda”: Nothing against Germany, Moscow wants peace, etc. So Stalin has already smelt a rat and is waving the peace palm. So that’s how strong we are now. The Russian card no longer stings.
Entry 29 March 1941
The big operation comes later: against R. It is carefully camouflaged, only a few people know about it. It is initiated with extensive troop transports to the West. We divert suspicion in all directions, except to the East. A dummy enterprise is prepared against England, and then it’s back and forth in a flash. Ukraine is a good granary. If we sit there, we can last a long time.
Entry May 12 1941
Newsreel checked: not quite as good as the last three, but something can still be made of it. English and Russian newsreels that we confiscated in Belgrade. No competition for us at all. Extremely bad and amateurish. I get really proud of our work in this area. ABOVE ALL, WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR FROM THE RUSSIANS, EITHER MILITARILY OR IN TERMS OF PROPAGANDA. The English subjects are of an indescribable naivety.
Entry 12th June 1941
Report from Bessarabia and the Ukraine: the Russians are staring hypnotically at us and are afraid. They are not doing much. They will be overrun like no people before. And the Bolshevik spook will quickly come to an end.
Entry 14 June 1941
In East Prussia, everything is so massed that the Russians could inflict the most serious damage on us through pre-emptive air raids. But they won’t do that. They lack the courage to do so. You have to be bold if you want to win a war.
Entry 15 June 1941
From intercepted radio messages, on the other hand, we can gather that Moscow is putting the Russian fleet on standby. So they are not quite as harmless over there as they pretend to be. But the preparations are extremely dilettante. Not to be taken seriously for a real action.
Entry 16 June 1941
We must act. Moscow wants to stay out of the war until Europe is tired and bled dry. Then Stalin wants to act, Bolshevise Europe and take up his regiment. He will be thwarted in this. ... Japan is in the alliance. The action is also necessary for this side. Tokyo would never get involved with the USA if Russia were still intact at its back. So Russia must fall for this reason too. ... We must also attack Russia to free people. An undefeated Russia is constantly forcing 150 divisions on us, whose men we urgently need for our war economy.... If Russia is defeated, then we can dismiss whole cohorts and build it, arm it, prepare it. Only then can the Luftwaffe attack England on a grand scale.
As you can see in that last entry, Goebbels said a second reason to attack Russia besides turning Ukraine into a "granary" aka Lebensraum, was to bolster the confidence of Japan to be able to confront the US.
All of those entries prove that at no time did they fear the Russians but rather believed the Russians to be supremely weak and afraid of Germany. It was an underestimation but it proves conclusively that this war was not "pre-emptive" but an act of naked aggression.
@redideologies
⚡6👍4
Goebbels diary entry May 12 1941
Newsreel checked: not quite as good as the last three, but something can still be made of it. English and Russian newsreels that we confiscated in Belgrade. No competition for us at all. Extremely bad and amateurish. I get really proud of our work in this area. ABOVE ALL, WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR FROM THE RUSSIANS, EITHER MILITARILY OR IN TERMS OF PROPAGANDA. The English subjects are of an indescribable naivety.
Does this sound like the Hitler regime was fearing an imminent Russian invasion to you?
@redideologies
Newsreel checked: not quite as good as the last three, but something can still be made of it. English and Russian newsreels that we confiscated in Belgrade. No competition for us at all. Extremely bad and amateurish. I get really proud of our work in this area. ABOVE ALL, WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR FROM THE RUSSIANS, EITHER MILITARILY OR IN TERMS OF PROPAGANDA. The English subjects are of an indescribable naivety.
Does this sound like the Hitler regime was fearing an imminent Russian invasion to you?
@redideologies
⚡7👍4