‘In Poland we already have our first casualty,’ Goebbels reported gleefully in mid-May 1939. ‘Everything is taking its preordained path.’
~ Volker Ullrich.

"Everything is taking its preordained path"

It is abundantly clear that the Nazis welcome these kinds of events because they provide them with a pretext and rationale for invading. However, there were no massacres before the invasion of Poland, as Goebbels himself makes no record of them in his Diaries; instead, he speaks gleefully and welcomingly about the "first casualty" in this entry. Furthermore, Hitler makes no mention of the persecution of the German people in his secret addresses as the only reason they had to invade.

"The Poles are stirring things up against us. The Führer welcomes this."
~ Joseph Goebbels, Diary entry on 2 May 1939.

"stirring things" had nothing to do with the atrocities; rather, Goebbels used it to describe Poland's unwillingness to cede territory to the Nazis and their cooperation with Britain.

Rather than caring about the welfare of Ethnic Germans living in non-German lands, it seems clear that the Nazis intended to worsen their living conditions in order to use this as justification for invading those regions.

https://telegra.ph/Hitler-did-not-care-about-the-Ethnic-Germans-rather-he-only-cared-to-conquer-territories-05-17

How can we be sure that the alleged crimes against the German ethnic community that Poles are accused of committing are nothing more than Nazi propaganda that is spread by neo-Nazis over and over again?

1) Hitler makes no mention of massacres in any of his secret speeches; in fact, in his most well-known secret speech, which was delivered on August 22, 1939, he said nothing about massacres. It should be emphasized that multiple military commanders in attendance took notes during the address, resulting in various transcripts of the speech, none of which included references to the alleged crimes.

2) In his diaries, Goebbels—unquestionably a maestro of propaganda—writes the following instead of reporting any massacres.

"Poland is not important",

"Everything is quiet in Danzig",

"Hitler doesn't take the Poles seriously at all",

"The Poles have become noticeably more reserved"

The WW2 topic has memetards on both sides presenting a black and white "good vs evil" narrative. The mainstream says the Allies were the undisputed force for good and the "revisionists" just invert that to present the Axis as the cartoonish pure white hats. The truth is much more complicated and somewhere in the middle.

The "revisionists" are wrong on many major points though. With the full appeasement of the British and French, Hitler tore up Versailles and refused to pay the reparations, reoccupied the Rhineland, got the Sudetenland in the Munich Agreement, annexed Austria, then occupied the rest of Czechoslovakia.

He got back nearly every each of territory Germany lost after WWI with the exception of a city in northern Poland before 1939 and yet he invaded Poland and Russia anyway to fulfill his plans for an expanded land empire. Nothing was forced upon him, he forced his way upon the world and was willing to risk war and escalation with the great powers to achieve his mission of Lebensraum and German global power.

@MartinezPolitix

Hitler's National Socialism is in essence Nordicism. It preaches the inferiority of the Slavs and Meds and seeks to subjugate them as "second class" Europeans not worthy of governing themselves. It is not "White nationalism" in any sense.

German NS (and Italian fascism) also takes much inspiration from Marxism as it seeks to fuse together race and class struggle (in the German case) or national identity and class struggle (in the Italian case).

If you read the literature it rarely critiques Communism and when it does, they attack it mostly on philosophical grounds and not on economic grounds because they shared most of the same economic premises. Their focus of attack was against "liberalism" (aka any kind of 'civil rights' for citizens), democracy and capitalism as they sought to implement their totalitarian socialism modeled on Marxist-inspired Sorelian syndicalism.

@MartinezPolitix

The Nazis were definitely economic leftists (socialists).

Source

Follow @redideologies

Otro fascista admite que el fascismo y el comunismo son dos caras de la misma moneda.

Lo que está diciendo aquí es que cree que los fascistas son mejores socialistas que los comunistas.

Él dice:

"Las corporaciones estatales supervisaron, dirigieron, controlaron y planificaron todos los aspectos de la economía, convirtiéndose de facto en una economía planificada"

"En la República de Salo Mussolini socializó los medios de producción y los puso en manos del pueblo"

Define el fascismo como lo opuesto al "capitalismo liberal", no al comunismo. Dice que el fascismo es el "socialismo real" y que los comunistas no eran lo suficientemente socialistas (socializaron todo, pero este fascista quiere la medalla de oro de ser el más rojo de los rojos).

The core of Marxism is anti-capitalism. Fascists will twist the truth to emphasize the anti-religion element of early Marxism as a means of separating themselves from it despite being heavily inspired by it.

That was reformed and later Marxists adopted both nationalism and religion as tools to sway people towards economic socialism. Communism does not stop being Communism by adding a racial, religious or national flavour to it.

@MartinezPolitix

PraxBen nails it here showing the collaboration between Nazis and communists even before they got into power.

He says: "Communists and fascists will side with each other before anyone else because they're so similar."

Also shows natsoc/nazbol Matt Heimbach flying the Soviet flag and Mexican NazBol Nick Fuentes praising Stalin. These are crypto-Red Bolsheviks wrapped up in a flag, a religion or other identity.

@MartinezPolitix

But but they're different maaaan!

🚨 Natsoc-to-Communist Pipeline

Former Neo-Nazi Matt Heimbach explains his conversion to Marxist-Leninism.

Really, there was no major change here because he already had most of these points down as a beefsteak nazi. As a natsoc he was also "international" insofar as he preached solidarity with other movements and countries that he thought aligned with his views (Palestine, Hamas, Hezbollah, North Korea, Iran, Russia, China, etc.) He even offered to be an emissary of North Korea at one point.

All he's done here is deemphasized some of the race politics issues while keeping all of the same economic and social views as before.

The easy transition from fascist to communist and vice versa is because they're cut from the same cloth and share about 80%-90% of the same source material. They're sister ideologies with immense overlap, that's why it's easy traffic from one to the other.

A historian says that 55% of new SA recruits came from the communist party (KPD). Hitler said this:

"We National Socialists wish precisely to attract all socialists, even the Communists; we wish to win them over from their international camp to the national one."

@redideologies

4chan teenager masquerading as a "historian" debunked https://youtu.be/BeAIZaoFFdc?si=UkBfJyKjoEF0k-Wj

Spaniard explains the NSDAP were left-wing socialists. Fascists, Nazis and Marxists are all fundamentally anti-private property. They despise money, business and anything related to wealth. They worship poverty and low-status. They all want a collectivized/equalized economy, the only difference is the former want a racially exclusive socialism and the latter a racially inclusive version.

@MartinezPolitix

Even David Irving (Hitler's War) admits that Hitler and Goebbels ordered the embellishing of "anti-German persecution" propaganda to frame Poland and justify their pre-planned aggression.

@redideologies

Zoomer Historian debunked: Yes Hitler planned to invade the British Isles after he conquered Russia.

Goebbels dairies also confirms this.

Hitler's attitude toward England changed after it became apparent they weren't going to allow him to take Lebensraum and dominate continental Europe. How could the English trust Hitler to not attack England at a later date even after signing an armistice? He broke every other agreement before that time and invaded country after country.

Operation Sea Lion was Nazi Germany's plan to invade the UK. They simply didn't get around to it before losing the war on the Eastern Front.

Full video

@redideologies