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
Goebbels gives two main motives for their war against Russia.
1) Securing Ukraine as a "granary" (Lebensraum)
Diary 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.
2) Giving the Japanese confidence with a defeated Russia that they can now take on America in open conflict
Diary 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.
He also says that they planned to attack England after Russia was defeated and the new resources acquired.
@redideologies
1) Securing Ukraine as a "granary" (Lebensraum)
Diary 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.
2) Giving the Japanese confidence with a defeated Russia that they can now take on America in open conflict
Diary 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.
He also says that they planned to attack England after Russia was defeated and the new resources acquired.
@redideologies
👍5⚡4😇2
Hitler said Germans would have been better off if the Muslims had conquered and converted them to Islam instead of retaining their Christian faith. Reason given that the militant nature of Islam would have led the Germans to conquer more. It all comes back to Hitler's lust for empire.
> "For theirs was a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and subjugating all nations to that faith... the Germanic peoples would have become heirs to that religion... such a creed was perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament... Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire."
@redideologies
> "For theirs was a religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and subjugating all nations to that faith... the Germanic peoples would have become heirs to that religion... such a creed was perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament... Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire."
@redideologies
👍12⚡4👏2
Forwarded from Exposing Hitler as Zionist
Yes, the Nazis were the FIRST TO bomb civilians, that is simply indisputable.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Wieluń
"Located near the German border, the town of Wieluń was completely undefended, lacking anti-air capabilities and a military garrison. Despite Wieluń having no military targets, airstrikes continued. German intelligence reports had stated there was a Polish cavalry brigade stationed in the town. The Luftwaffe bombed the nearby towns of Działoszyn, Radomsko, and Sulejów, which also had no military targets.
The attack on the town has been described as the first war crime committed by Germany in World War II. The Luftwaffe had reportedly bombed a "clearly marked" hospital, and strafed fleeing civilians. In the aftermath, 127 civilian casualties were reported – possibly "several hundred" – but the exact number remains unknown.[70% of the town (90 percent, in the city center) was destroyed"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Wieluń
"Located near the German border, the town of Wieluń was completely undefended, lacking anti-air capabilities and a military garrison. Despite Wieluń having no military targets, airstrikes continued. German intelligence reports had stated there was a Polish cavalry brigade stationed in the town. The Luftwaffe bombed the nearby towns of Działoszyn, Radomsko, and Sulejów, which also had no military targets.
The attack on the town has been described as the first war crime committed by Germany in World War II. The Luftwaffe had reportedly bombed a "clearly marked" hospital, and strafed fleeing civilians. In the aftermath, 127 civilian casualties were reported – possibly "several hundred" – but the exact number remains unknown.[70% of the town (90 percent, in the city center) was destroyed"
Wikipedia
Bombing of Wieluń
The bombing of Wieluń is considered by many to be the first major act of World War II, and the September Campaign. After Luftwaffe air units moved into Polish airspace in the early morning of 1 September, they reached the town of Wieluń by 04:40–45. Around…
👍10
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Even the Nazis guesstimated that only 50% of Germans are "Nordic" and the rest are mixed with Alpine and other types, stating that Germans are a "people" not a pure ethnicity.
They went on to guesstimate percentages of "Nordicness" in other neighboring countries too. None of this was scientific, but this is what they based their race policies on.
Full video
@RedIdeologies
They went on to guesstimate percentages of "Nordicness" in other neighboring countries too. None of this was scientific, but this is what they based their race policies on.
Full video
@RedIdeologies
👍12⚡3
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
Incorrect. Anti-capitalism was the essence of Hitler's cause. Anti-communism was rhetorical trickery to discredit a group of rival socialists fighting over the same turf. Hitler's anti-Communism was the same as his anti-Strasserism: venom thrown at rivals of a very similar nature who stepped in front of his path to power.
@MartinezPolitix
@MartinezPolitix
👍12⚡3🫡3
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
Ironically enough, the first great ethnic replacement policy in Europe was attempted by Nazi Germany, who aimed to conquer parts of Poland, Ukraine and Russia in order to remove Slavs and move in Germans.
> “From the point of view of cultural policy, the German Reich is in a position to promote and direct national culture and science in many fields. It will be necessary that in some territories an uprooting and resettlement of various racial stocks [Voelkerschaften] will have to be effected.”
> "In his “Instructions for a Reich Commissar in the Baltic Countries and White Russia” (officially referred to together as the “Ostland”), Rosenberg directs that the Ostland be transformed into a part of the Greater German Reich by Germanizing racially possible elements, colonizing Germanic races, and banishing undesirable elements."
> “From the point of view of cultural policy, the German Reich is in a position to promote and direct national culture and science in many fields. It will be necessary that in some territories an uprooting and resettlement of various racial stocks [Voelkerschaften] will have to be effected.”
> "In his “Instructions for a Reich Commissar in the Baltic Countries and White Russia” (officially referred to together as the “Ostland”), Rosenberg directs that the Ostland be transformed into a part of the Greater German Reich by Germanizing racially possible elements, colonizing Germanic races, and banishing undesirable elements."
👍9
Hitler's financial system was not drastically different than anything we have today. He had a state-run central bank. We have that in most of the world today.
Natsocs go off about muh "fiat currency" but that's exactly what Hitler had. A true gold standard had been abandoned years before he came into power and he didn't change that. He operated a purely fiat currency with no commodity backing.
This bullshit about "labor backed currency" was just a fancy way for Hitler to say fiat currency. You can't physically "back" a currency with "labor", meaning you can't redeem paper or coin money with "labor" at a bank. A bank can't give you "labor" in exchange for paper currency. What are they gonna do send six laborers to your house in exchange for paper currency? It makes no sense. You would simply buy labor in the economy with your paper, not redeem it at a bank.
What that means is that the labor of the workers and productivity of businesses (goods/services) is what's "backing" the FIAT currency like in every single modern economy today. There's no gold or silver standard anymore so the strength of the economy itself and people's faith in it is what gives value to the currency not anything else. That's what fiat is, that's what Hitler had and what we have now.
Natsocs go off about muh "fiat currency" but that's exactly what Hitler had. A true gold standard had been abandoned years before he came into power and he didn't change that. He operated a purely fiat currency with no commodity backing.
This bullshit about "labor backed currency" was just a fancy way for Hitler to say fiat currency. You can't physically "back" a currency with "labor", meaning you can't redeem paper or coin money with "labor" at a bank. A bank can't give you "labor" in exchange for paper currency. What are they gonna do send six laborers to your house in exchange for paper currency? It makes no sense. You would simply buy labor in the economy with your paper, not redeem it at a bank.
What that means is that the labor of the workers and productivity of businesses (goods/services) is what's "backing" the FIAT currency like in every single modern economy today. There's no gold or silver standard anymore so the strength of the economy itself and people's faith in it is what gives value to the currency not anything else. That's what fiat is, that's what Hitler had and what we have now.
👍13⚡4
The Third Reich did not abolish "usury" as you can see here with the MEFO bills. They had a 4% interest rate paid out by the state.
They basically operated as government bonds to gain access to the cash reserves of big businesses so the German state could finance rearmament.
If there was no interest rate paid on these MEFO bonds, then no private company would have invested in them voluntarily. Nobody would just lend money to the state for nothing in return, unless forced to at gunpoint.
Full video
@redideologies
They basically operated as government bonds to gain access to the cash reserves of big businesses so the German state could finance rearmament.
If there was no interest rate paid on these MEFO bonds, then no private company would have invested in them voluntarily. Nobody would just lend money to the state for nothing in return, unless forced to at gunpoint.
Full video
@redideologies
👍10💯2
Does any of this sound like "anti-Communism" to you?
“[Hiter] had become a vehement critic of the system of free enterprise and a confirmed adherent of the system of a planned, state-controlled economy.”
— Dr. Rainer Zitelmann, historian
ㅤ
“[Hitler’s] concept of organized economy was close to genuine socialism”
— Dr John Toland, historian
ㅤ
“It is now clear beyond all reasonable doubt that Hitler and his associates believed they were socialists, and others, including democratic socialists, thought so too.”
— Dr George Watson, historian
ㅤ
“Another source of the Nazi Party’s popularity was its liberal borrowing from the intellectual tradition of the socialist left. Many of the men who would become the movement’s leaders had been involved in communist and socialist circles.”
— Götz Aly, historian
ㅤ
“One final point of similarity between Nazi and Soviet policies should be noted, although its meaning is far from clear. Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity”
— Peter Temin, economic historian
ㅤ
“Government finances for state-owned enterprises rose from RM 4,000m. in 1933 to RM 16,000m. ten years later; the capital assets of state-owned industry doubled during the same period, and the number of state-owned firms topped 500”
— Richard Overy, historian
“Those [capitalist] firms and organizations that regularly engaged in large-scale political funding continued—right down to the last election prior to Hitler’s appointment as chancellor—to bestow the bulk of their funds on opponents or rivals of the Nazis.”
— Henry Ashby Turner, historian
ㅤ
“The [Nazi] government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham.”
— Dr Ludwig von Mises, economist
“the state, not the market, would determine the shape of economic development.”
— Ian Kershaw, historianㅤ
ㅤ
“The [Nazi] government did place restraints on foreign exchange, imports and exports, prices, wages, and the allocation of labor. It determined the quantity and nature of what should be produced. Profits were limited and directed by the government back into reinvestment for expansion or for the acquisition of government bonds”
— Jackson Spielvogel, historian
ㅤ
“The economic tendencies of fascist states… … would be more correctly described as anti-capitalist than capitalist.”
— Alan Milward, historian
@redideologies
“[Hiter] had become a vehement critic of the system of free enterprise and a confirmed adherent of the system of a planned, state-controlled economy.”
— Dr. Rainer Zitelmann, historian
ㅤ
“[Hitler’s] concept of organized economy was close to genuine socialism”
— Dr John Toland, historian
ㅤ
“It is now clear beyond all reasonable doubt that Hitler and his associates believed they were socialists, and others, including democratic socialists, thought so too.”
— Dr George Watson, historian
ㅤ
“Another source of the Nazi Party’s popularity was its liberal borrowing from the intellectual tradition of the socialist left. Many of the men who would become the movement’s leaders had been involved in communist and socialist circles.”
— Götz Aly, historian
ㅤ
“One final point of similarity between Nazi and Soviet policies should be noted, although its meaning is far from clear. Both governments reorganized industry into larger units, ostensibly to increase state control over economic activity”
— Peter Temin, economic historian
ㅤ
“Government finances for state-owned enterprises rose from RM 4,000m. in 1933 to RM 16,000m. ten years later; the capital assets of state-owned industry doubled during the same period, and the number of state-owned firms topped 500”
— Richard Overy, historian
“Those [capitalist] firms and organizations that regularly engaged in large-scale political funding continued—right down to the last election prior to Hitler’s appointment as chancellor—to bestow the bulk of their funds on opponents or rivals of the Nazis.”
— Henry Ashby Turner, historian
ㅤ
“The [Nazi] government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham.”
— Dr Ludwig von Mises, economist
“the state, not the market, would determine the shape of economic development.”
— Ian Kershaw, historianㅤ
ㅤ
“The [Nazi] government did place restraints on foreign exchange, imports and exports, prices, wages, and the allocation of labor. It determined the quantity and nature of what should be produced. Profits were limited and directed by the government back into reinvestment for expansion or for the acquisition of government bonds”
— Jackson Spielvogel, historian
ㅤ
“The economic tendencies of fascist states… … would be more correctly described as anti-capitalist than capitalist.”
— Alan Milward, historian
@redideologies
👍12🔥3
According to David Irving (Hitler's War pgs. 656-657), Hitler turned down an offer by his foreign minister Ribbentrop to assassinate Stalin.
Yet more evidence that he personally liked Stalin.
@redideologies
Yet more evidence that he personally liked Stalin.
@redideologies
⚡4💯4
Forwarded from Martinez Politics
The idea that WW2 was about Hitler's supposed magical banking system is nonsense. He had a state-run central bank (it was state-run since its founding in 1876, actually, he just inherited what was already there) as do virtually all countries today.
The Bank of England for example was nationalized in 1946, after the war. So if England were working exclusively on behalf of "private banking interests" as these people claim, and that's why they fought Hitler, then why would they do that with their own central bank after the war? It makes no sense.
On top of that, the German central bank today is still government run and owned, with its profits going to the German treasury. Of course these tards will tell you because it's "independent" that means it's private but it's not. The nationalized Bank of England is also "independent" that is nothing more than a separation of powers. All their board members are appointed by the German federal government.
This is just another silly myth pushed by the Greatest Meme Never Told crowd of non-historian 4channers.
@MartinezPolitix
The Bank of England for example was nationalized in 1946, after the war. So if England were working exclusively on behalf of "private banking interests" as these people claim, and that's why they fought Hitler, then why would they do that with their own central bank after the war? It makes no sense.
On top of that, the German central bank today is still government run and owned, with its profits going to the German treasury. Of course these tards will tell you because it's "independent" that means it's private but it's not. The nationalized Bank of England is also "independent" that is nothing more than a separation of powers. All their board members are appointed by the German federal government.
This is just another silly myth pushed by the Greatest Meme Never Told crowd of non-historian 4channers.
@MartinezPolitix
💯8👏3⚡2