# Why did so many Germans support Hitler?



## bigrebnc1775

I thought this might be a good topic of discussion


----------



## strollingbones

after ww1 german was wanting to regain what they had lost...their pride their lands...hitler promised to give them that...to restore the country to the greatest nation in the world...(even if it was only in their minds)...the jews were an easy target.  Having found refugee in germany and having become part of germany.

German society changed enormously as a result of the war. During the war the percentage of women in the workforce had risen to 37%, a massive rise. At the end of the war this figure did not fall dramatically, meaning that from now on women had a significant role to play in the german economy. The reaction of many Germans to the ending of the war also had a large impact on German Society. Many of the former soldiers were of the opinion that they had not lost the war, they believed that the army had been cheated. (Hitler later phrased this as 'The Stab in the back'). As a consequence of this many germans looked for people to blame. Some lay the blame in the hands of the Kaiser. Others, many others, looked to the new Government. They had immediately sued for peace and accepted the terms of the Armistice. For many Germans this showed that they were largely to blame. Other theories that were popular amongst the former soldiers were that it was the result of Communists or Jews. So in the immediate Post War era, there is a mass of suspicion within Germany. Combined with these factors is the potential threat to the social order. Under the Kaiser the armed forces and aristocratic Prussian elite had enjoyed many privileges. These groups now had to try and reestablish their authority. In a democracy this proves difficult and can lead to further tension. The first President of the Weimar republic, Ebert, worked hard to try and win the support of the elite groups. he wanted their support in order to maximise the stability of the new republic. Likewise he had to work hard to gain the support of the army, who in return needed his support if they were to survive as a significant political power in the years following the peace settlement. 

The impact of the First World War on Germany


----------



## strollingbones

Nazi Party methodology

"Citizens! Do not believe that the Germany of misfortune and misery, the nation of corruption and usury, the land of Jewish corruption, can be saved by parties that claim to stand on a foundation of facts. Never!" 


the jews were an easy target..


----------



## Epsilon Delta

Because most Germans were terrified and angry, at their leadership, at the War result, at their totally dysfunctional economy. They gave up a lot and got nothing in return. What Hitler managed to do was funnel that angre by offering a solution based on total exclusion and blame - it was the fault of the gays, of the Jews, of the communists, etc, and people bought it, because it was easier to believe that than to handle the truth and the thought of real solutions based on inclusion and peace. It's always easier to side with the people that want more guns and bigger armies and more violence. And of course, the Allies didn't help.


----------



## Zoom-boing

I think it was the mustache.


----------



## Mad Scientist

That's a fairly good summation of events leading to Hitlers election HellBitch. What I always tell people who want to know how Hitler got into power is a couple of things.

Socialism and Communism were gaining popularity in post WWI Europe and during the great depression in America. America had quite a large American Nazi Party itself. And that yes, Hitler was popularly elected but the people also stood by as Hitler consolidated power for himself.


----------



## Truthmatters

He divided the german people and got them to attack their own.

They were depressed and feeling like losers. He told they were gods not losers and they only reason they were in trouble was those phoney germans who didnt have pure german blood.

Its much the same shit the republican party is doing today with brown people.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

bigrebnc1775 said:


> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion



He offered them Hope and a Change from the past. 

He had a real infectious "Yes we can!" attitude.

He used Greek temples as a prop for his speeches.

He railed at the evils of capitalism

He took over his nations car companies...and banks


----------



## Truthmatters

jesus you are stupid frank


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Truthmatters said:


> He divided the german people and got them to attack their own.
> 
> They were depressed and feeling like losers. He told they were gods not losers and they only reason they were in trouble was those phoney germans who didnt have pure german blood.
> 
> Its much the same shit the republican party is doing today with brown people.



As I scrolled through the replies I came to this one. OMG, since you want to compare the Republican Party to the Nazis would you give some facts to your opinion? The Republican Party isn't the one who is attacking anyone it would be obama and his administration, and the mainstream media, (the obama propaganda machine)

Hellbitch I would like to thank you for taking the time to post that information without attacking any political party.

Mad Scientist were you saying that hitler wasn't popularly elected? If that is the case I would have to agree. He was appointed to his position of power.

Epsilon Delta good points

Zoom-boing silly


----------



## Truthmatters

Tell us why the republican party is treating brown people like they are the cause of all this countries problems right now?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

CrusaderFrank said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He offered them Hope and a Change from the past.
> 
> He had a real infectious "Yes we can!" attitude.
> 
> He used Greek temples as a prop for his speeches.
> 
> He railed at the evils of capitalism
> 
> He took over his nations car companies...and banks
Click to expand...


Is that why the German people support Hitler? Or are you making comparisons?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Truthmatters said:


> Tell us why the republican party is treating brown people like they are the cause of all this countries problems right now?



Who in the republican party is doing it?


----------



## Truthmatters

Tell me why there is so much hate in the R party for the brown Americans who KNOW this Arizona law is descriminatory?


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Truthmatters said:


> He divided the german people and got them to attack their own.
> 
> They were depressed and feeling like losers. He told they were gods not losers and they only reason they were in trouble was those phoney germans who didnt have pure german blood.
> 
> Its much the same shit the republican party is doing today with brown people.



You're definately vying for asshole of the year......now instead of bomb throwing like a little 2 year old...why not attempt to back up your lies with what you perceive as facts.


----------



## blu

hellbitch said:


> Nazi Party methodology
> 
> "Citizens! Do not believe that the Germany of misfortune and misery, the nation of corruption and usury, the land of Jewish corruption, can be saved by parties that claim to stand on a foundation of facts. Never!"
> 
> 
> the jews were an easy target..



you know he targetted many more groups than jews right?


----------



## blu

Epsilon Delta said:


> Because most Germans were terrified and angry, at their leadership, at the War result, at their totally dysfunctional economy. They gave up a lot and got nothing in return. What Hitler managed to do was funnel that angre by offering a solution based on total exclusion and blame - *it was the fault of the gays, of the Jews, of the communists, etc,* and people bought it, because it was easier to believe that than to handle the truth and the thought of real solutions based on inclusion and peace. It's always easier to side with the people that want more guns and bigger armies and more violence. And of course, the Allies didn't help.



wow an educated poster here? what a rarity


----------



## CrusaderFrank

He used economic hardship to increase his political power


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Truthmatters said:


> Tell me why there is so much hate in the R party for the brown Americans who KNOW this Arizona law is descriminatory?



Wow...sounds like your gardner and maid might be illegals.....looks like you will have to haul your fat ass around and do some yard work....


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Truthmatters said:


> jesus you are stupid frank



Are you familiar at all with how Hitler came to power, Sally Swallows?


----------



## Truthmatters

PatekPhilippe said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> He divided the german people and got them to attack their own.
> 
> They were depressed and feeling like losers. He told they were gods not losers and they only reason they were in trouble was those phoney germans who didnt have pure german blood.
> 
> Its much the same shit the republican party is doing today with brown people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're definately vying for asshole of the year......now instead of bomb throwing like a little 2 year old...why not attempt to back up your lies with what you perceive as facts.
Click to expand...


No I telling the truth.

The republicans hate gays , brown people who fight against discrimination, democrats and anyone else they dont agree with.


I see it here every day.


----------



## Truthmatters

CrusaderFrank said:


> He used economic hardship to increase his political power



He also used lies and propaganda just like your avatar which is a lie and propaganda


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Truthmatters said:


> PatekPhilippe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> He divided the german people and got them to attack their own.
> 
> They were depressed and feeling like losers. He told they were gods not losers and they only reason they were in trouble was those phoney germans who didnt have pure german blood.
> 
> Its much the same shit the republican party is doing today with brown people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're definately vying for asshole of the year......now instead of bomb throwing like a little 2 year old...why not attempt to back up your lies with what you perceive as facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I telling the truth.
> 
> The republicans hate gays , brown people who fight against discrimination, democrats and anyone else they dont agree with.
> 
> 
> I see it here every day.
Click to expand...


You, rdean and epsilon delta sound just like Hitler....it's the republicans!!!!!!  It's all their fault!!!!!!


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Truthmatters said:


> PatekPhilippe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> He divided the german people and got them to attack their own.
> 
> They were depressed and feeling like losers. He told they were gods not losers and they only reason they were in trouble was those phoney germans who didnt have pure german blood.
> 
> Its much the same shit the republican party is doing today with brown people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're definately vying for asshole of the year......now instead of bomb throwing like a little 2 year old...why not attempt to back up your lies with what you perceive as facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I telling the truth.
> 
> The republicans hate gays , brown people who fight against discrimination, democrats and anyone else they dont agree with.
> 
> 
> I see it here every day.
Click to expand...


The democrats in power do not give a shit about anyone but themseleves. They givew a few groups of people a few handouts in an attempt to mask their true reasons behind those handouts. Its all about control You give someone enough stuff then you have the power to control them.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Truthmatters said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> He used economic hardship to increase his political power
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He also used lies and propaganda just like your avatar which is a lie and propaganda
Click to expand...


I thought it was humorous because it looks so fake.  Did it fool you, oh dimmest of bulbs?

Why are you trying to divide us?


----------



## Truthmatters

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PatekPhilippe said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're definately vying for asshole of the year......now instead of bomb throwing like a little 2 year old...why not attempt to back up your lies with what you perceive as facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No I telling the truth.
> 
> The republicans hate gays , brown people who fight against discrimination, democrats and anyone else they dont agree with.
> 
> 
> I see it here every day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The democrats in power do not give a shit about anyone but themseleves. They givew a few groups of people a few handouts in an attempt to mask their true reasons behind those handouts. Its all about control You give someone enough stuff then you have the power to control them.
Click to expand...


See I was right you are full of nothing but hate and want this country divided.


----------



## Epsilon Delta

PatekPhilippe said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PatekPhilippe said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're definately vying for asshole of the year......now instead of bomb throwing like a little 2 year old...why not attempt to back up your lies with what you perceive as facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No I telling the truth.
> 
> The republicans hate gays , brown people who fight against discrimination, democrats and anyone else they dont agree with.
> 
> 
> I see it here every day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You, rdean and epsilon delta sound just like Hitler....it's the republicans!!!!!!  It's all their fault!!!!!!
Click to expand...


What the fuck is your problem? When, pray tell, did I ever mention Republicans? 0_o

Jesus christ...


----------



## Truthmatters

CrusaderFrank said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> He used economic hardship to increase his political power
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He also used lies and propaganda just like your avatar which is a lie and propaganda
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought it was humorous because it looks so fake.  Did it fool you, oh dimmest of bulbs?
> 
> Why are you trying to divide us?
Click to expand...


Right you lying sack of shit.

You dont care whats true you just hate Obama and half of America


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Truthmatters said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> He also used lies and propaganda just like your avatar which is a lie and propaganda
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was humorous because it looks so fake.  Did it fool you, oh dimmest of bulbs?
> 
> Why are you trying to divide us?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right you lying sack of shit.
> 
> You dont care whats true you just hate Obama and half of America
Click to expand...


Yes, Obama is a lying scumbag Marxist Mulatto who is doing so much damage that we might have to hit Ctrl+Alt+Del and reboot the whole system.

As recently as this morning I thought we could turn it around in 30-35 years but Obama and the Dem Congress are like Ebola on steroids; they just won't stop.


----------



## Mad Scientist

Truthmatters said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> He also used lies and propaganda just like your avatar which is a lie and propaganda
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was humorous because it looks so fake.  Did it fool you, oh dimmest of bulbs?
> 
> Why are you trying to divide us?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right you lying sack of shit.
> 
> You dont care whats true you just hate Obama and half of America
Click to expand...

TM is the worst poster here. She can't just talk about Hitler and what brought him to power in an honest way. She just attacks posters like the good student of Saul Alinsky that she is.

*Thanks for fuckin' up and shitting all over what could have been a nice discussion thread. *


----------



## rikules

CrusaderFrank said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He offered them Hope and a Change from the past.
> 
> He had a real infectious "Yes we can!" attitude.
> 
> He used Greek temples as a prop for his speeches.
> 
> He railed at the evils of capitalism
> 
> He took over his nations car companies...and banks
Click to expand...



"He offered them Hope and a Change from the past. "



but
isn't that what people like palin offer to conservatives?

essentially...palin and glenn beck are saying

"our only HOPE is CHANGE from the (democratic/liberal/moderate/republican) past!"


"He had a real infectious "Yes we can!" attitude."

ridiculous comparison.
first, I have no evidence that is true of hitler.  did he have real infectious "Yes we can!" attitude?

I would need evidence.

second...if having a real infectious "Yes we can!" attitude makes you bad  then I offer up sarah palin as being bad because SHE has a REAL infectious YES WE CAN attitude.


"He used Greek temples as a prop for his speeches."

omygod!
you are deranged!


"He railed at the evils of capitalism"

obama does NOT rail against capitalism.
In fact he is merely a rational person who understands that UNFETTERED CAPITALISM can cause major disasters


"He took over his nations car companies...and banks"

if it hadn't been for unfettered capitalism and greed perhaps it never would have come to that.

however
let's give some other points regarding the reasons hitler was able to pull the wool over the eyes of millions of conservatives...I mean "dittoheads"...er...I mean "tea baggers"...oops...I mean..."german citizens"


hitler promoted STRONG PATRIOTISM

and he promoted STRONG TRADITIONAL FAMILY VALUES;
father head of household, stay at home mom, lots of aryan children

he strongly opposed "IMMORALITY" like sex outside of marriage, divorce, homosexuality

he urged and promoted strong CHRISTIAN religious beliefs

he gave his tea baggers people to blame; liberals, feminists, atheists, intellectuals, communists, blacks, jews, minorities
all of whom were the ENEMY of America (I mean Germany)

all of who were presented as degenerates, stupid, inferior, undeserving....

sounds like glenn beck
and rush limbaugh
and ann coulter
and bill oreilly


----------



## Truthmatters

Mad Scientist said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was humorous because it looks so fake.  Did it fool you, oh dimmest of bulbs?
> 
> Why are you trying to divide us?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right you lying sack of shit.
> 
> You dont care whats true you just hate Obama and half of America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> TM is the worst poster here. She can't just talk about Hitler and what brought him to power in an honest way. She just attacks posters like the good student of Saul Alinsky that she is.
> 
> *Thanks for fuckin' up and shitting all over what could have been a nice discussion thread. *
Click to expand...


Oh booo hooo booo hooo , you dont get to control what people say.

I know it chaffs your ass because you love to shut down the words of others being a die hard con and all.


Hitler did just what I said he did, he had the german people pitted against each other and told his followers that they were better than the "fake" germans.


That is what you fuckers do all day long.

You spew hate on brown people , gay people, liberal people and poor people.


Lets just remember the PALIN bullshit about REAL Americans and the like.

Its what the republicans do.


----------



## B. Kidd

......and, did someone mention the economy had crumbled and hyper-inflation occurred.......?


----------



## L.K.Eder

germans are just natural born assholes.


----------



## Zoom-boing

Truthmatters said:


> Tell us why the republican party is treating brown people like they are the cause of all this countries problems right now?



Brown?  Wrong.  It's the fact that they are ILLEGAL, _not_ BROWN, that is the problem.  Get it?  Stop spewing shit.


----------



## Zoom-boing

L.K.Eder said:


> germans are just natural born assholes.



But they make a mean strudel.


----------



## Luissa

Fear.. In my opinion is the number one reason.
He made them fear the opposition through propaganda and lies. Sound familiar?




And I think it is funny you started this topic, I just picked my new sig yesterday. lol


----------



## Luissa

L.K.Eder said:


> germans are just natural born assholes.



For sure, you Nazi bastard.


----------



## AllieBaba

L.K.Eder said:


> germans are just natural born assholes.



I think the genes that make them think they're genetically superior also make them fucking insane killing machines.


----------



## L.K.Eder

AllieBaba said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> germans are just natural born assholes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the genes that make them think they're genetically superior also make them fucking insane killing machines.
Click to expand...



yeah, but the recipe was robbed from us after the defeat. along with a lot of other useful stuff and people.


----------



## AllieBaba

Wannabe Blonde said:


> Fear.. In my opinion is the number one reason.
> He made them fear the opposition through propaganda and lies. Sound familiar?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I think it is funny you started this topic, I just picked my new sig yesterday. lol



Do you know anything about any subject?
The German people weren't afraid of Hitler. They EMBRACED him. They loved him. He made them feel better about being (assholes) German and promised to re-establish Germany's standing in the world.


----------



## Bfgrn

Mad Scientist said:


> That's a fairly good summation of events leading to Hitlers election HellBitch. What I always tell people who want to know how Hitler got into power is a couple of things.
> 
> Socialism and Communism were gaining popularity in post WWI Europe and during the great depression in America. America had quite a large American Nazi Party itself. And that yes, Hitler was popularly elected but the people also stood by as Hitler consolidated power for himself.



Is this something you learned listening to rodeo clowns like Glenn Beck, or do you just 'feel' that is what happened?

Because the OPPOSITE is what really happened...

 After the First World War right-wing German and Italian critics abused the governments of Weimar Germany and pre-Mussolini Italy for their commitment to social welfare, which their critics linked to an unwillingness to use force in international relations. To use Robert Kagans expression, the Weimar Republic could only do the dishes, not prepare the feast.

German and Italian critics of liberalismwriters such as Ernst Jünger and Giovanni Gentilelonged for the military spirit that allegedly typified the front-fighter generation that had lived through the horrors of trench warfare during World War I. The experience of war, they said, could redeem the anti-national Weimar Republic and the spineless decadence of Italian liberalism by reintroducing them to the necessity of using forcewhich would mean a much more ready resort to military power and a reorientation of government to promote its use. Both men and nations could thereby reestablish their virility.

Extreme right-wing theoreticiansfor example, German jurist and political philosopher Carl Schmittbelieved that the European states in general had to choose between defending the interests of their national communitiesat the end of the day by forceand sustaining a debilitating commitment to popular welfare, which more and more absorbed the energies of a weak-kneed liberalism that precariously clung to power in many European states. Schmitt believed that the state existed exclusively to oppose the enemies of the national community and ensure domestic order. Politics, he famously said, is founded on the friend-enemy polarity. Liberals had embarked on a fruitless crusade to escape inevitable political conflict within their societies by expanding the welfare function of the modern state to appease the demands of the masses, and thereby weakening its executive function.

The proximate causes of this revulsion against liberalism in Italy, Germany, and elsewhere are not far to seek. And the underlying anti-liberal logic was more cultural than political-economic. After defeat in World War I neither Germany nor Italy was able to advance its interests effectively in Europe. The Italians were widely regarded as pathetic soldiers. The Italians, Bismarck said, have such large appetites and such poor teeth. Giovanni Gentile, subsequently a Fascist minister for Mussolini, lamented the dolce far niente (sweet do nothing) that he found characterized the Italians as a nation. As for the Germans, they had of course lost the war, but they were encouraged to believe that their armies and fighting men had not been defeated on the battlefield but had been betrayed by an unpatriotic cabal of Jews, Francophiles, liberals, and socialists.

So for these men and like-minded others, there was a necessary connection between reviving militarism and imperialism and curtailing the states commitment to popular welfare. Only a new political elitebattle-hardened, ruthless, and devoted to authoritarian governmentcould achieve the reforms needed to restore these states to the ranks of the European powerful. The new governments would not be parliamentary: talk shops never get anything done. In Italy the Fascist elite developed an imperial ideology focusing on Rome; in Germany, too, there was an imperial elementthe Thousand Year Empirealthough we correctly understand the racism of the National Socialists to have been their most memorable contribution to the horrors of the 20th century. 

The Hard Road to Fascism


----------



## MikeK

The influence of Lutheranism and Catholicism in Germany contributed to a powerful subliminal authoritarian orientation, which enabled the persecution of Jews and homosexuals and facilitated the rise of the Third Reich.  Interestingly, the same influences are operating in a significant percentage of the U.S. population.

Anyone who thinks it couldn't happen here should look more closely.  It is happening.  Just more slowly.


----------



## Mr.Fitnah

They would fall for anything after 8 years of GW Bush.


----------



## Zona

Zoom-boing said:


> I think it was the mustache.



And the really cool uniforms.


----------



## B. Kidd

AllieBaba said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> germans are just natural born assholes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the genes that make them think they're genetically superior also make them fucking insane killing machines.
Click to expand...


As far as insane fukin' killing machines go, Koreans have it hands down.
Remember the Rodney King riots(?), when the police cordoned off neigborhoods where they feared to tread?
Korean storekeepers made all the 'Death Wish' movies rolled into one, look faggity!


----------



## Luissa

AllieBaba said:


> Wannabe Blonde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fear.. In my opinion is the number one reason.
> He made them fear the opposition through propaganda and lies. Sound familiar?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I think it is funny you started this topic, I just picked my new sig yesterday. lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know anything about any subject?
> The German people weren't afraid of Hitler. They EMBRACED him. They loved him. He made them feel better about being (assholes) German and promised to re-establish Germany's standing in the world.
Click to expand...


Do you know how to read? I never said they were afraid of Hitler.


----------



## rikules

bigrebnc1775 said:


> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion



this question is far broader than just hitler and the nazis

the real question is;

why are there SOOOO many stupid, ignorant people upon whom hate, lies and fear work so well!?


----------



## Luissa

AllieBaba said:


> Wannabe Blonde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fear.. In my opinion is the number one reason.
> He made them fear the opposition through propaganda and lies. Sound familiar?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I think it is funny you started this topic, I just picked my new sig yesterday. lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know anything about any subject?
> The German people weren't afraid of Hitler. They EMBRACED him. They loved him. He made them feel better about being (assholes) German and promised to re-establish Germany's standing in the world.
Click to expand...


And after your Kent State thread, you really shouldn't throw stones.
But way to make yourself look like an idiot, once again.


----------



## Tom Clancy

Truthmatters said:


> No I telling the truth.
> 
> The republicans hate gays , brown people who fight against discrimination, democrats and anyone else they dont agree with.
> 
> 
> I see it here every day.



Then you're obviously very stupid.. 

1st: I don't hate Gays.    I say let them to whatever, I don't approve of em nor em I against them, But it's Discrimination to not let them Marry just because they're different. Simple. 

2: I don't hate Brown people.. Here we go with the Strawman tactic once again... Who told you people on the right hate Blacks who fight against Discrimination?   

3: Same thing could be said about you TM.. You hate Republicans, Conservatives, Classic Liberals.. Em i right? (see how i played your game there?)  Or, is hate just something the Right made up? 

4: I don't hate anyone who doesn't agree with me, that's stupid.. I have a diverse family. (Brother: Anarcho-Communist,  Sister: Die hard Liberal.  and one of my best friends is a Liberal.)  You think i hate them just because they're different? 

What a sad person you are.. 

Shame, shame..


----------



## CrusaderFrank

The funniest thing is how "Progressives" keep calling Hitler a "right winger" LOL

He's a National Socialist, a Leftist, Obama's spiritual father


----------



## Bfgrn

CrusaderFrank said:


> The funniest thing is how "Progressives" keep calling Hitler a "right winger" LOL
> 
> He's a National Socialist, a Leftist, Obama's spiritual father



Yea, 'Old dolf' as us socialists warmly referred to him was the true bastion of socialist beliefs...He advocated racism over racial tolerance, eugenics over freedom of reproduction, merit over equality, competition over cooperation, power politics and militarism over pacifism, dictatorship over democracy, capitalism over Marxism, realism over idealism, nationalism over internationalism, exclusiveness over inclusiveness, common sense over theory or science, pragmatism over principle, and even held friendly relations with the Church, even though he was an atheist.


----------



## Epsilon Delta

CrusaderFrank said:


> The funniest thing is how "Progressives" keep calling Hitler a "right winger" LOL
> 
> He's a National Socialist, a Leftist, Obama's spiritual father



Frank, I'm sure you know that what you're saying is just silly. Nazism was a far-right ideology, and it stood in direct opposition to the left wing socialists and communists in Germany: in fact, when he was appointed Chancellor, he became head of a coalition of the Nazis and the National-Conservative Party. And you know what, just because Hitler was a right-winger and he governed thanks to a coalition with a conservative party STILL does not mean that Hitler is the Republicans' spiritual father, because that'd be a claim almost as absurd as the above.

Claiming that National Socialism is Socialism is virtually the same as claiming that the Democratic Republic of Algeria is democratic. It isn't. It's just a name.


----------



## strollingbones

if one looks at the history...yes nazis were after more than the jews...but in reality the jews were the main targets....easy to blame the jews for all the hyper inflation and social problems.....look at the locations of the death camps.....they put them in an area where they knew the common people where extremely prejudice and would not cause an uproar.

as far a nazis being left or right....you do understand the nazis believe in mystic powers etc.  a dictator is just that....short and simple...the death camps were the result of several years of studying how to rid germany of jews....the cheapest and most effective ways.

i am not a supporter of zionist but you cannot deny what was done to the jewish people....it was done without remorse or shame.


----------



## strollingbones

one thing that has always amazed me...is the refusal of the west to use the information discovered by the medical experiments of the nazis.


----------



## Ringel05

Bfgrn said:


> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a fairly good summation of events leading to Hitlers election HellBitch. What I always tell people who want to know how Hitler got into power is a couple of things.
> 
> Socialism and Communism were gaining popularity in post WWI Europe and during the great depression in America. America had quite a large American Nazi Party itself. And that yes, Hitler was popularly elected but the people also stood by as Hitler consolidated power for himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this something you learned listening to rodeo clowns like Glenn Beck, or do you just 'feel' that is what happened?
> 
> Because the OPPOSITE is what really happened...
> 
> After the First World War right-wing German and Italian critics abused the governments of Weimar Germany and pre-Mussolini Italy for their commitment to social welfare, which their critics linked to an unwillingness to use force in international relations. To use Robert Kagan&#8217;s expression, the Weimar Republic could only do the dishes, not prepare the feast.
> 
> German and Italian critics of liberalism&#8212;writers such as Ernst Jünger and Giovanni Gentile&#8212;longed for the military spirit that allegedly typified the &#8220;front-fighter&#8221; generation that had lived through the horrors of trench warfare during World War I. The experience of war, they said, could redeem the anti-national Weimar Republic and the spineless decadence of Italian liberalism by reintroducing them to the necessity of using force&#8212;which would mean a much more ready resort to military power and a reorientation of government to promote its use. Both men and nations could thereby reestablish their virility.
> 
> Extreme right-wing theoreticians&#8212;for example, German jurist and political philosopher Carl Schmitt&#8212;believed that the European states in general had to choose between defending the interests of their national communities&#8212;at the end of the day by force&#8212;and sustaining a debilitating commitment to popular welfare, which more and more absorbed the energies of a weak-kneed liberalism that precariously clung to power in many European states. Schmitt believed that the state existed exclusively to oppose the enemies of the national community and ensure domestic order. Politics, he famously said, is founded on the friend-enemy polarity. Liberals had embarked on a fruitless crusade to escape inevitable political conflict within their societies by expanding the welfare function of the modern state to appease the demands of the masses, and thereby weakening its &#8220;executive function.&#8221;
> 
> The proximate causes of this revulsion against liberalism in Italy, Germany, and elsewhere are not far to seek. And the underlying anti-liberal logic was more cultural than political-economic. After defeat in World War I neither Germany nor Italy was able to advance its interests effectively in Europe. The Italians were widely regarded as pathetic soldiers. &#8220;The Italians,&#8221; Bismarck said, &#8220;have such large appetites and such poor teeth.&#8221; Giovanni Gentile, subsequently a Fascist minister for Mussolini, lamented the dolce far niente (&#8220;sweet do nothing&#8221 that he found characterized the Italians as a nation. As for the Germans, they had of course lost the war, but they were encouraged to believe that their armies and fighting men had not been defeated on the battlefield but had been betrayed by an unpatriotic cabal of Jews, Francophiles, liberals, and socialists.
> 
> So for these men and like-minded others, there was a necessary connection between reviving militarism and imperialism and curtailing the state&#8217;s commitment to popular welfare. Only a new political elite&#8212;battle-hardened, ruthless, and devoted to authoritarian government&#8212;could achieve the reforms needed to restore these states to the ranks of the European powerful. The new governments would not be parliamentary: talk shops never get anything done. In Italy the Fascist elite developed an imperial ideology focusing on Rome; in Germany, too, there was an imperial element&#8212;the &#8220;Thousand Year Empire&#8221;&#8212;although we correctly understand the racism of the National Socialists to have been their most memorable contribution to the horrors of the 20th century.
> 
> The Hard Road to Fascism
Click to expand...


Abbott Gleason eh?  Interesting source you've chosen and the worst aspect is you probably believe his philosophical, revisionist spoon bending as opposed to real, concrete history.  You need to read a lot more historical documentation.  There are about 10 books I could recommend off hand.
By the 30s Russia had finally succumbed to Bolshevism, in the 20s Europe was in the throws of political upheaval due to the world-wide great depression.  In most European countries pitched battles were being fought in the streets between socialists, communists and fascists with the traditional imperialist monarchists mostly caught in the middle and except in Spain trying to stay in the background while plying one off the other.  The Fascists in Germany finally won out over the socialists and communists after Hitler and the main Nazi cabal eventually used the legal system (and force in the streets against political opponents) to gain seats in the government then finally take over completely.    
The vast majority of Germans went along with the Nazis, to a degree, because they had ended the uncertainty and brought economic, social and political stability to the country, Germans love order and the Weimar Republic was blamed for allowing the economic social and political chaos attributed to the Untermensch to continue and grow.  
German however did not initially buy into the Nazi propaganda.  Even during the supposed countrywide boycott the Nazis called down on Jewish businesses the majority of German citizens opposed the Nazi program and many even continued to defy the Nazis and patronize their Jewish neighbors businesses.  The Nazis where forced to take it "underground" for the time being. 
Before Kristallnacht Hitler had already distanced himself from the excesses of the Brown Shirts so the citizenry blamed them for the rampage, not Hitler.  It was also one of the stepping stones Hitler used to rid himself of the radical elements of the SA.  Hitler was, at first, always able to distance himself from the excesses of those who actually served him by allowing his lackeys to build up individual fiefdoms following his "divide and rule" policies which had the appearance of him being above the fray and not accountable for the actions of his subordinates.
If Hitler had died in 1939 before he invaded Poland he would to this day be revered by the German peoples as one of the greatest leaders of all time.


----------



## Bfgrn

Ringel05 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a fairly good summation of events leading to Hitlers election HellBitch. What I always tell people who want to know how Hitler got into power is a couple of things.
> 
> Socialism and Communism were gaining popularity in post WWI Europe and during the great depression in America. America had quite a large American Nazi Party itself. And that yes, Hitler was popularly elected but the people also stood by as Hitler consolidated power for himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this something you learned listening to rodeo clowns like Glenn Beck, or do you just 'feel' that is what happened?
> 
> Because the OPPOSITE is what really happened...
> 
> After the First World War right-wing German and Italian critics abused the governments of Weimar Germany and pre-Mussolini Italy for their commitment to social welfare, which their critics linked to an unwillingness to use force in international relations. To use Robert Kagans expression, the Weimar Republic could only do the dishes, not prepare the feast.
> 
> German and Italian critics of liberalismwriters such as Ernst Jünger and Giovanni Gentilelonged for the military spirit that allegedly typified the front-fighter generation that had lived through the horrors of trench warfare during World War I. The experience of war, they said, could redeem the anti-national Weimar Republic and the spineless decadence of Italian liberalism by reintroducing them to the necessity of using forcewhich would mean a much more ready resort to military power and a reorientation of government to promote its use. Both men and nations could thereby reestablish their virility.
> 
> Extreme right-wing theoreticiansfor example, German jurist and political philosopher Carl Schmittbelieved that the European states in general had to choose between defending the interests of their national communitiesat the end of the day by forceand sustaining a debilitating commitment to popular welfare, which more and more absorbed the energies of a weak-kneed liberalism that precariously clung to power in many European states. Schmitt believed that the state existed exclusively to oppose the enemies of the national community and ensure domestic order. Politics, he famously said, is founded on the friend-enemy polarity. Liberals had embarked on a fruitless crusade to escape inevitable political conflict within their societies by expanding the welfare function of the modern state to appease the demands of the masses, and thereby weakening its executive function.
> 
> The proximate causes of this revulsion against liberalism in Italy, Germany, and elsewhere are not far to seek. And the underlying anti-liberal logic was more cultural than political-economic. After defeat in World War I neither Germany nor Italy was able to advance its interests effectively in Europe. The Italians were widely regarded as pathetic soldiers. The Italians, Bismarck said, have such large appetites and such poor teeth. Giovanni Gentile, subsequently a Fascist minister for Mussolini, lamented the dolce far niente (sweet do nothing) that he found characterized the Italians as a nation. As for the Germans, they had of course lost the war, but they were encouraged to believe that their armies and fighting men had not been defeated on the battlefield but had been betrayed by an unpatriotic cabal of Jews, Francophiles, liberals, and socialists.
> 
> So for these men and like-minded others, there was a necessary connection between reviving militarism and imperialism and curtailing the states commitment to popular welfare. Only a new political elitebattle-hardened, ruthless, and devoted to authoritarian governmentcould achieve the reforms needed to restore these states to the ranks of the European powerful. The new governments would not be parliamentary: talk shops never get anything done. In Italy the Fascist elite developed an imperial ideology focusing on Rome; in Germany, too, there was an imperial elementthe Thousand Year Empirealthough we correctly understand the racism of the National Socialists to have been their most memorable contribution to the horrors of the 20th century.
> 
> The Hard Road to Fascism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Abbott Gleason eh? * Interesting source you've chosen and the worst aspect is you probably believe his philosophical, revisionist spoon bending as opposed to real, concrete history.  You need to read a lot more historical documentation.  There are about 10 books I could recommend off hand.
> By the 30s Russia had finally succumbed to Bolshevism, in the 20s Europe was in the throws of political upheaval due to the world-wide great depression.  In most European countries pitched battles were being fought in the streets between socialists, communists and fascists with the traditional imperialist monarchists mostly caught in the middle and except in Spain trying to stay in the background while plying one off the other.  The Fascists in Germany finally won out over the socialists and communists after Hitler and the main Nazi cabal eventually used the legal system (and force in the streets against political opponents) to gain seats in the government then finally take over completely.
> The vast majority of Germans went along with the Nazis, to a degree, because they had ended the uncertainty and brought economic, social and political stability to the country, Germans love order and the Weimar Republic was blamed for allowing the economic social and political chaos attributed to the Untermensch to continue and grow.
> German however did not initially buy into the Nazi propaganda.  Even during the supposed countrywide boycott the Nazis called down on Jewish businesses the majority of German citizens opposed the Nazi program and many even continued to defy the Nazis and patronize their Jewish neighbors businesses.  The Nazis where forced to take it "underground" for the time being.
> Before Kristallnacht Hitler had already distanced himself from the excesses of the Brown Shirts so the citizenry blamed them for the rampage, not Hitler.  It was also one of the stepping stones Hitler used to rid himself of the radical elements of the SA.  Hitler was, at first, always able to distance himself from the excesses of those who actually served him by allowing his lackeys to build up individual fiefdoms following his "divide and rule" policies which had the appearance of him being above the fray and not accountable for the actions of his subordinates.
> If Hitler had died in 1939 before he invaded Poland he would to this day be revered by the German peoples as one of the greatest leaders of all time.
Click to expand...


Abbott Gleason eh?...Yea, asshole, where's your source?







*Abbott Gleason*

Professor:
History, Slavic Languages, Watson Institute
Phone: 863-2326
Abbott_Gleason@Brown.edu

Biography

Abbott (Tom) Gleason's areas of interest include the history of the Cold War and national identity in Russia/the Soviet Union and the United States from 1830-1930.

A Brown professor for over 30 years, he is the former chair of the University's History Department.

He has been a long-time member of the Watson Institute's administration and faculty, having served as the Institute's director from 1999 to 2000, among other positions including associate director, director for university relations and special projects, and senior fellow. He is currently an adjunct professor.

He is also a former director of the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC.

His is editor of A Companion to Russian History (Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, 2009) and author of a memoir, A Liberal Education (TidePool Press, 2009).

He co-edited with Martha Nussbaum Nineteen Eighty-Four: George Orwell and Our Future (Princeton University Press, 2005) and Nikita Khrushchev (Yale University Press, 2000), with Sergei Khrushchev and William Taubman.


----------



## Ringel05

Bfgrn said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is this something you learned listening to rodeo clowns like Glenn Beck, or do you just 'feel' that is what happened?
> 
> Because the OPPOSITE is what really happened...
> 
> After the First World War right-wing German and Italian critics abused the governments of Weimar Germany and pre-Mussolini Italy for their commitment to social welfare, which their critics linked to an unwillingness to use force in international relations. To use Robert Kagan&#8217;s expression, the Weimar Republic could only do the dishes, not prepare the feast.
> 
> German and Italian critics of liberalism&#8212;writers such as Ernst Jünger and Giovanni Gentile&#8212;longed for the military spirit that allegedly typified the &#8220;front-fighter&#8221; generation that had lived through the horrors of trench warfare during World War I. The experience of war, they said, could redeem the anti-national Weimar Republic and the spineless decadence of Italian liberalism by reintroducing them to the necessity of using force&#8212;which would mean a much more ready resort to military power and a reorientation of government to promote its use. Both men and nations could thereby reestablish their virility.
> 
> Extreme right-wing theoreticians&#8212;for example, German jurist and political philosopher Carl Schmitt&#8212;believed that the European states in general had to choose between defending the interests of their national communities&#8212;at the end of the day by force&#8212;and sustaining a debilitating commitment to popular welfare, which more and more absorbed the energies of a weak-kneed liberalism that precariously clung to power in many European states. Schmitt believed that the state existed exclusively to oppose the enemies of the national community and ensure domestic order. Politics, he famously said, is founded on the friend-enemy polarity. Liberals had embarked on a fruitless crusade to escape inevitable political conflict within their societies by expanding the welfare function of the modern state to appease the demands of the masses, and thereby weakening its &#8220;executive function.&#8221;
> 
> The proximate causes of this revulsion against liberalism in Italy, Germany, and elsewhere are not far to seek. And the underlying anti-liberal logic was more cultural than political-economic. After defeat in World War I neither Germany nor Italy was able to advance its interests effectively in Europe. The Italians were widely regarded as pathetic soldiers. &#8220;The Italians,&#8221; Bismarck said, &#8220;have such large appetites and such poor teeth.&#8221; Giovanni Gentile, subsequently a Fascist minister for Mussolini, lamented the dolce far niente (&#8220;sweet do nothing&#8221 that he found characterized the Italians as a nation. As for the Germans, they had of course lost the war, but they were encouraged to believe that their armies and fighting men had not been defeated on the battlefield but had been betrayed by an unpatriotic cabal of Jews, Francophiles, liberals, and socialists.
> 
> So for these men and like-minded others, there was a necessary connection between reviving militarism and imperialism and curtailing the state&#8217;s commitment to popular welfare. Only a new political elite&#8212;battle-hardened, ruthless, and devoted to authoritarian government&#8212;could achieve the reforms needed to restore these states to the ranks of the European powerful. The new governments would not be parliamentary: talk shops never get anything done. In Italy the Fascist elite developed an imperial ideology focusing on Rome; in Germany, too, there was an imperial element&#8212;the &#8220;Thousand Year Empire&#8221;&#8212;although we correctly understand the racism of the National Socialists to have been their most memorable contribution to the horrors of the 20th century.
> 
> The Hard Road to Fascism
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Abbott Gleason eh? * Interesting source you've chosen and the worst aspect is you probably believe his philosophical, revisionist spoon bending as opposed to real, concrete history.  You need to read a lot more historical documentation.  There are about 10 books I could recommend off hand.
> By the 30s Russia had finally succumbed to Bolshevism, in the 20s Europe was in the throws of political upheaval due to the world-wide great depression.  In most European countries pitched battles were being fought in the streets between socialists, communists and fascists with the traditional imperialist monarchists mostly caught in the middle and except in Spain trying to stay in the background while plying one off the other.  The Fascists in Germany finally won out over the socialists and communists after Hitler and the main Nazi cabal eventually used the legal system (and force in the streets against political opponents) to gain seats in the government then finally take over completely.
> The vast majority of Germans went along with the Nazis, to a degree, because they had ended the uncertainty and brought economic, social and political stability to the country, Germans love order and the Weimar Republic was blamed for allowing the economic social and political chaos attributed to the Untermensch to continue and grow.
> German however did not initially buy into the Nazi propaganda.  Even during the supposed countrywide boycott the Nazis called down on Jewish businesses the majority of German citizens opposed the Nazi program and many even continued to defy the Nazis and patronize their Jewish neighbors businesses.  The Nazis where forced to take it "underground" for the time being.
> Before Kristallnacht Hitler had already distanced himself from the excesses of the Brown Shirts so the citizenry blamed them for the rampage, not Hitler.  It was also one of the stepping stones Hitler used to rid himself of the radical elements of the SA.  Hitler was, at first, always able to distance himself from the excesses of those who actually served him by allowing his lackeys to build up individual fiefdoms following his "divide and rule" policies which had the appearance of him being above the fray and not accountable for the actions of his subordinates.
> If Hitler had died in 1939 before he invaded Poland he would to this day be revered by the German peoples as one of the greatest leaders of all time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbott Gleason eh?...Yea, asshole, where's your source?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Abbott Gleason*
> 
> Professor:
> History, Slavic Languages, Watson Institute
> Phone: 863-2326
> Abbott_Gleason@Brown.edu
> 
> Biography
> 
> Abbott (Tom) Gleason's areas of interest include the history of the Cold War and national identity in Russia/the Soviet Union and the United States from 1830-1930.
> 
> A Brown professor for over 30 years, he is the former chair of the University's History Department.
> 
> He has been a long-time member of the Watson Institute's administration and faculty, having served as the Institute's director from 1999 to 2000, among other positions including associate director, director for university relations and special projects, and senior fellow. He is currently an adjunct professor.
> 
> He is also a former director of the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC.
> 
> His is editor of A Companion to Russian History (Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, 2009) and author of a memoir, A Liberal Education (TidePool Press, 2009).
> 
> He co-edited with Martha Nussbaum Nineteen Eighty-Four: George Orwell and Our Future (Princeton University Press, 2005) and Nikita Khrushchev (Yale University Press, 2000), with Sergei Khrushchev and William Taubman.
Click to expand...


Russian studies makes him and expert in discussing fascism.  Suuuuurrrreeee, right!  
_World War Two through German Eyes _James Lucas (a prolific historical author concerning many aspects of WWII Germany and it's peoples), _The German Army, 1933 - 1945, It's Political and Military Failure_by Mathew Cooper, _An Illustrated History of the Gestapo_ by Rupert Butler, _Before the Deluge_ by Otto Friedrich, _Warfare and the Third Reich_ by Christopher Chant, _Inside the Third Reich_ by Albert Speer, _A History of the Weimar Republic_ by Erich Eyck and probably the most comprehensive book covering the 1930s world wide _The Dark Valley, a Panorama of the 1930s_ by Piers Brandon just to name a few.  All these Books contain either tombs or random snippets of information concerning this subject though in most the exact history is discussed in detail and none agree with your authoric saint who views this period of history though the prism of modern norms and obvious "liberal" bias.  Shall I continue or would you simply decide to take the courses and do the readings and research I have done before you continue your hoof-in-mouth routine.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

I am surpriused at the responces thus far. Impressed with some of the comments.


----------



## Bfgrn

Ringel05 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Abbott Gleason eh? * Interesting source you've chosen and the worst aspect is you probably believe his philosophical, revisionist spoon bending as opposed to real, concrete history.  You need to read a lot more historical documentation.  There are about 10 books I could recommend off hand.
> By the 30s Russia had finally succumbed to Bolshevism, in the 20s Europe was in the throws of political upheaval due to the world-wide great depression.  In most European countries pitched battles were being fought in the streets between socialists, communists and fascists with the traditional imperialist monarchists mostly caught in the middle and except in Spain trying to stay in the background while plying one off the other.  The Fascists in Germany finally won out over the socialists and communists after Hitler and the main Nazi cabal eventually used the legal system (and force in the streets against political opponents) to gain seats in the government then finally take over completely.
> The vast majority of Germans went along with the Nazis, to a degree, because they had ended the uncertainty and brought economic, social and political stability to the country, Germans love order and the Weimar Republic was blamed for allowing the economic social and political chaos attributed to the Untermensch to continue and grow.
> German however did not initially buy into the Nazi propaganda.  Even during the supposed countrywide boycott the Nazis called down on Jewish businesses the majority of German citizens opposed the Nazi program and many even continued to defy the Nazis and patronize their Jewish neighbors businesses.  The Nazis where forced to take it "underground" for the time being.
> Before Kristallnacht Hitler had already distanced himself from the excesses of the Brown Shirts so the citizenry blamed them for the rampage, not Hitler.  It was also one of the stepping stones Hitler used to rid himself of the radical elements of the SA.  Hitler was, at first, always able to distance himself from the excesses of those who actually served him by allowing his lackeys to build up individual fiefdoms following his "divide and rule" policies which had the appearance of him being above the fray and not accountable for the actions of his subordinates.
> If Hitler had died in 1939 before he invaded Poland he would to this day be revered by the German peoples as one of the greatest leaders of all time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abbott Gleason eh?...Yea, asshole, where's your source?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Abbott Gleason*
> 
> Professor:
> History, Slavic Languages, Watson Institute
> Phone: 863-2326
> Abbott_Gleason@Brown.edu
> 
> Biography
> 
> Abbott (Tom) Gleason's areas of interest include the history of the Cold War and national identity in Russia/the Soviet Union and the United States from 1830-1930.
> 
> A Brown professor for over 30 years, he is the former chair of the University's History Department.
> 
> He has been a long-time member of the Watson Institute's administration and faculty, having served as the Institute's director from 1999 to 2000, among other positions including associate director, director for university relations and special projects, and senior fellow. He is currently an adjunct professor.
> 
> He is also a former director of the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC.
> 
> His is editor of A Companion to Russian History (Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, 2009) and author of a memoir, A Liberal Education (TidePool Press, 2009).
> 
> He co-edited with Martha Nussbaum Nineteen Eighty-Four: George Orwell and Our Future (Princeton University Press, 2005) and Nikita Khrushchev (Yale University Press, 2000), with Sergei Khrushchev and William Taubman.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Russian studies makes him and expert in discussing fascism.  Suuuuurrrreeee, right!
> _World War Two through German Eyes _James Lucas (a prolific historical author concerning many aspects of WWII Germany and it's peoples), _The German Army, 1933 - 1945, It's Political and Military Failure_by Mathew Cooper, _An Illustrated History of the Gestapo_ by Rupert Butler, _Before the Deluge_ by Otto Friedrich, _Warfare and the Third Reich_ by Christopher Chant, _Inside the Third Reich_ by Albert Speer, _A History of the Weimar Republic_ by Erich Eyck and probably the most comprehensive book covering the 1930s world wide _The Dark Valley, a Panorama of the 1930s_ by Piers Brandon just to name a few.  All these Books contain either tombs or random snippets of information concerning this subject though in most the exact history is discussed in detail and none agree with your authoric saint who views this period of history though the prism of modern norms and obvious "liberal" bias.  Shall I continue or would you simply decide to take the courses and do the readings and research I have done before you continue your hoof-in-mouth routine.
Click to expand...


Hey fuck face...I'm not impressed. Why? Probably because you are a right wing pea brain. Why don't we take a real hard look at some major underlying causes that created the climate for Hitler's rise. The Treaty of Versailles. It has to do with that age old George W. right wing philosophy of PUNISH; Revanchism. &#8216;The Tiger&#8217; Georges Clemenceau won out in his desire the terms of Versailles smash Germany, where Wilson and even David Lloyd George realized that when you smash a country, you are smashing the people, and you open the door for future conflict by creating hated foreign enemies to rally that hatred around...

BTW, do you dispute the influences of Ernst Jünger, Giovanni Gentile and Carl Schmitt? 

Hey, get back to me when you can borrow a liberal's brain.


----------



## Ringel05

Bfgrn said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Abbott Gleason eh?...Yea, asshole, where's your source?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Abbott Gleason*
> 
> Professor:
> History, Slavic Languages, Watson Institute
> Phone: 863-2326
> Abbott_Gleason@Brown.edu
> 
> Biography
> 
> Abbott (Tom) Gleason's areas of interest include the history of the Cold War and national identity in Russia/the Soviet Union and the United States from 1830-1930.
> 
> A Brown professor for over 30 years, he is the former chair of the University's History Department.
> 
> He has been a long-time member of the Watson Institute's administration and faculty, having served as the Institute's director from 1999 to 2000, among other positions including associate director, director for university relations and special projects, and senior fellow. He is currently an adjunct professor.
> 
> He is also a former director of the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC.
> 
> His is editor of A Companion to Russian History (Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, 2009) and author of a memoir, A Liberal Education (TidePool Press, 2009).
> 
> He co-edited with Martha Nussbaum Nineteen Eighty-Four: George Orwell and Our Future (Princeton University Press, 2005) and Nikita Khrushchev (Yale University Press, 2000), with Sergei Khrushchev and William Taubman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian studies makes him and expert in discussing fascism.  Suuuuurrrreeee, right!
> _World War Two through German Eyes _James Lucas (a prolific historical author concerning many aspects of WWII Germany and it's peoples), _The German Army, 1933 - 1945, It's Political and Military Failure_by Mathew Cooper, _An Illustrated History of the Gestapo_ by Rupert Butler, _Before the Deluge_ by Otto Friedrich, _Warfare and the Third Reich_ by Christopher Chant, _Inside the Third Reich_ by Albert Speer, _A History of the Weimar Republic_ by Erich Eyck and probably the most comprehensive book covering the 1930s world wide _The Dark Valley, a Panorama of the 1930s_ by Piers Brandon just to name a few.  All these Books contain either tombs or random snippets of information concerning this subject though in most the exact history is discussed in detail and none agree with your authoric saint who views this period of history though the prism of modern norms and obvious "liberal" bias.  Shall I continue or would you simply decide to take the courses and do the readings and research I have done before you continue your hoof-in-mouth routine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hey fuck face...I'm not impressed. Why? Probably because you are a right wing pea brain. Why don't we take a real hard look at some major underlying causes that created the climate for Hitler's rise. The Treaty of Versailles. It has to do with that age old George W. right wing philosophy of PUNISH; Revanchism. &#8216;The Tiger&#8217; Georges Clemenceau won out in his desire the terms of Versailles smash Germany, where Wilson and even David Lloyd George realized that when you smash a country, you are smashing the people, and you open the door for future conflict by creating hated foreign enemies to rally that hatred around...
> 
> BTW, do you dispute the influences of Ernst Jünger, Giovanni Gentile and Carl Schmitt?
> 
> Hey, get back to me when you can borrow a liberal's brain.
Click to expand...


Just as I thought attack the person (me) and you're not the first moron to call me right wing, or wing nut, or libtard or obamabot, etc ad nauseum.... The point i was making, if you had the ability of discernment, was his premise is to narrow in a complex study.  He omits complete segments of causative factors in a vain attempt to condense the reasons behind the rise of Hitler, et al. and does so without reaching into the mind of the peoples of the time.  
Yes, the Treaty of Versailles was the primary reason for the rise of a Hitleresque figure but it wasn't the only cause of Hitler's rise to power.  It was, by his manipulations only one of the reasons the German people came to love or admire him early on but there where other reasons the primary being he wiped out unemployment and most Germans enjoyed the highest standards of living in the world and more importantly he brought social stability to a peoples who yearned for order.  I don't dispute the influences of any of those listed by you as long as said influence is placed in it's proper perspective.  Look at the bigger picture not just that which fits your chosen paradigm.


----------



## logical4u

Is the punchline: because Obama wasn't runnig?


----------



## PatekPhilippe

AllieBaba said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> germans are just natural born assholes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the genes that make them think they're genetically superior also make them fucking insane killing machines.
Click to expand...


You're mistaken there.....there is no "I'm superior to you gene."  There is however a long history of battles and wars fought by the Teutonic Knights, Hessians and Visogoths (sacked Rome) among other groups in what is now known as greater Germany.  They are some bad ass motherfuckers and they know how to engineer weapons and weapons systems...that doesn't make them genetically superior...just smart.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

logical4u said:


> Is the punchline: because Obama wasn't runnig?



It could be.

But I will let you know after I have completed my research.
I will add this; the government does not care for anyone, and notice I said the government its main goal is to control. We must unify ourselves against the government before it creates a bigger division between the people of this country. The government can create a division between the people separate the strong and make them look like the enemy and what you will have is the ones that will comply and easiest to manage.


----------



## PatekPhilippe

hellbitch said:


> one thing that has always amazed me...is the refusal of the west to use the information discovered by the medical experiments of the nazis.



Mistaken....it is used to this very day.


----------



## Bfgrn

Ringel05 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Russian studies makes him and expert in discussing fascism.  Suuuuurrrreeee, right!
> _World War Two through German Eyes _James Lucas (a prolific historical author concerning many aspects of WWII Germany and it's peoples), _The German Army, 1933 - 1945, It's Political and Military Failure_by Mathew Cooper, _An Illustrated History of the Gestapo_ by Rupert Butler, _Before the Deluge_ by Otto Friedrich, _Warfare and the Third Reich_ by Christopher Chant, _Inside the Third Reich_ by Albert Speer, _A History of the Weimar Republic_ by Erich Eyck and probably the most comprehensive book covering the 1930s world wide _The Dark Valley, a Panorama of the 1930s_ by Piers Brandon just to name a few.  All these Books contain either tombs or random snippets of information concerning this subject though in most the exact history is discussed in detail and none agree with your authoric saint who views this period of history though the prism of modern norms and obvious "liberal" bias.  Shall I continue or would you simply decide to take the courses and do the readings and research I have done before you continue your hoof-in-mouth routine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey fuck face...I'm not impressed. Why? Probably because you are a right wing pea brain. Why don't we take a real hard look at some major underlying causes that created the climate for Hitler's rise. The Treaty of Versailles. It has to do with that age old George W. right wing philosophy of PUNISH; Revanchism. &#8216;The Tiger&#8217; Georges Clemenceau won out in his desire the terms of Versailles smash Germany, where Wilson and even David Lloyd George realized that when you smash a country, you are smashing the people, and you open the door for future conflict by creating hated foreign enemies to rally that hatred around...
> 
> BTW, do you dispute the influences of Ernst Jünger, Giovanni Gentile and Carl Schmitt?
> 
> Hey, get back to me when you can borrow a liberal's brain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just as I thought attack the person (me) and you're not the first moron to call me right wing, or wing nut, or libtard or obamabot, etc ad nauseum.... The point i was making, if you had the ability of discernment, was his premise is to narrow in a complex study.  He omits complete segments of causative factors in a vain attempt to condense the reasons behind the rise of Hitler, et al. and does so without reaching into the mind of the peoples of the time.
> Yes, the Treaty of Versailles was the primary reason for the rise of a Hitleresque figure but it wasn't the only cause of Hitler's rise to power.  It was, by his manipulations only one of the reasons the German people came to love or admire him early on but there where other reasons the primary being he wiped out unemployment and most Germans enjoyed the highest standards of living in the world and more importantly he brought social stability to a peoples who yearned for order.  I don't dispute the influences of any of those listed by you as long as said influence is placed in it's proper perspective.  Look at the bigger picture not just that which fits your chosen paradigm.
Click to expand...


Why don't you try this next time if you have the ability of discernment. READ the original piece. Gleason was not trying to provide a comprehensive history of the rise of fascism. His premise is narrow...Mutatis mutandis. He was comparing the political environment and attitudes that led to the rise of fascism with the political environment and attitudes created by the Bush administration after 9/11. I used the piece because it concisely and totally smashes the right wing pea brain bizzaro world of morons like Jonah Goldberg.

"O con noi o contro di noi"--You're either with us or against us.
Benito Mussolini

"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
George W. Bush


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Bfgrn said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey fuck face...I'm not impressed. Why? Probably because you are a right wing pea brain. Why don't we take a real hard look at some major underlying causes that created the climate for Hitler's rise. The Treaty of Versailles. It has to do with that age old George W. right wing philosophy of PUNISH; Revanchism. The Tiger Georges Clemenceau won out in his desire the terms of Versailles smash Germany, where Wilson and even David Lloyd George realized that when you smash a country, you are smashing the people, and you open the door for future conflict by creating hated foreign enemies to rally that hatred around...
> 
> BTW, do you dispute the influences of Ernst Jünger, Giovanni Gentile and Carl Schmitt?
> 
> Hey, get back to me when you can borrow a liberal's brain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just as I thought attack the person (me) and you're not the first moron to call me right wing, or wing nut, or libtard or obamabot, etc ad nauseum.... The point i was making, if you had the ability of discernment, was his premise is to narrow in a complex study.  He omits complete segments of causative factors in a vain attempt to condense the reasons behind the rise of Hitler, et al. and does so without reaching into the mind of the peoples of the time.
> Yes, the Treaty of Versailles was the primary reason for the rise of a Hitleresque figure but it wasn't the only cause of Hitler's rise to power.  It was, by his manipulations only one of the reasons the German people came to love or admire him early on but there where other reasons the primary being he wiped out unemployment and most Germans enjoyed the highest standards of living in the world and more importantly he brought social stability to a peoples who yearned for order.  I don't dispute the influences of any of those listed by you as long as said influence is placed in it's proper perspective.  Look at the bigger picture not just that which fits your chosen paradigm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why don't you try this next time if you have the ability of discernment. READ the original piece. Gleason was not trying to provide a comprehensive history of the rise of fascism. His premise is narrow...Mutatis mutandis. He was comparing the political environment and attitudes that led to the rise of fascism with the the political environment and attitudes created by the Bush administration after 9/11. I used the piece because it concisely and totally smashes the right wing pea brain bizzaro world of morons like Jonah Goldberg.
> 
> "O con noi o contro di noi"--You're either with us or against us.
> Benito Mussolini
> 
> "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
> George W. Bush
Click to expand...


You dishonest fuckwit....Democrats do the very same thing including Obama!!!!
Obama says GOP making life harder for the jobless - Yahoo! News


----------



## AllieBaba

PatekPhilippe said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> germans are just natural born assholes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the genes that make them think they're genetically superior also make them fucking insane killing machines.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're mistaken there.....there is no "I'm superior to you gene."  There is however a long history of battles and wars fought by the Teutonic Knights, Hessians and Visogoths (sacked Rome) among other groups in what is now known as greater Germany.  They are some bad ass motherfuckers and they know how to engineer weapons and weapons systems...that doesn't make them genetically superior...just smart.
Click to expand...


I was trying to be funny but I guess I missed the mark.


----------



## JW Frogen

I know it is conventional historical wisdom the Treaty of Versailles helped cause the rise of Hitler and though he did use resentment about the treaty to his advantage, I posit the treaty did not cause the rise of fascism because it was never actually enforced.

The UK in particular kept changing the terms over the objections of France to appease both Weimar politicians and latter Hitler.

The proscribed penalties for violations where rarely implemented.

The fact is German politicians of almost very party propagated the myth that Germany was not really defeated in WWI but was betrayed and the treaty thus was unfair. 

Germany was not occupied and this re-enforced the myth, and German Weimar politicians, wanting to re-arm (this process started before Hitler) inflated their currency to pay back war debt thus hurting the middle class, but the victorious powers kept changing the terms in Germany&#8217;s favor.

If anything I think the Treaty of Versailles was too lenient. Germany did not know or feel she was a defeated.

Look at the difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, after WWII Germany is occupied, partitioned, her war leaders put on trial and her new government validated and dictated to by the victorious allies, and Germany never threatens European peace again.

The problem with Versailles is it caused resentment but did not punish seriously or contain a defeated enemy.


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Nationalism was present in German politics long before the Treaty of Versailles.  Deutsche Vaterlandspartei.  They were the pro-war party and after the German Revolution of 1918 when they were disbanded did many members form the NDSAP.

What the Nazi's did was provide a scapegoat to blame all of Germany's ill fate on.  The Jews and Capitalism....THAT'S WHY they got the support they got.....they took the blame game to a whole new level.

and much like todays Democrat party...we hear the same thing.....except this time instead of the jews and capitalism it's the whites and capitalism.
The parallels are striking if one looks at the whole picture....and one has to think what the fuck is Soro's thinking and what he stands to gain from all this.


----------



## ConHog

Why did people support Hitler?







Just saying


----------



## Madeline

I think the US has already approached the same climate as must have existed in Germany before WW II.  Anyone familiar with the McCarthy Hearings?  Loyalty oaths?  Black lists?

We crawled off the ledge and Germany did not, but we did not have the economic problems that they did, and we were not being taught to hate an ethnic group.


----------



## ConHog

Madeline said:


> I think the US has already approached the same climate as must have existed in Germany before WW II.  Anyone familiar with the McCarthy Hearings?  Loyalty oaths?  Black lists?
> 
> We crawled off the ledge and Germany did not, but we did not have the economic problems that they did, and we were not being taught to hate an ethnic group.



Are you talking about the US now, or the US then?

I see similarities to now. I won't go so far as to call Obama a Hitler, but there's some scary stuff going on Madeline. And yes there is a ethnic group that is being hated. The Whites. I'm not a crazy survivalist. But I have enough cash,food,water,gas,guns,ammo to fight my families way out of here just in case. I'm seriously scared for my kids futures. That isn't right.


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Madeline said:


> I think the US has already approached the same climate as must have existed in Germany before WW II.  Anyone familiar with the McCarthy Hearings?  Loyalty oaths?  Black lists?
> 
> We crawled off the ledge and Germany did not, but we did not have the economic problems that they did, and we were not being taught to hate an ethnic group.



Well...we got the economic problems now...we got the scapegoats now...we have the hated ethnic group now....all it'll take is just a little push from somewhere.....


----------



## editec

bigrebnc1775 said:


> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion


 
FEAR AND GREED...fueled on a steady diet of PROPAGANDA.

The exactly same diet we've been feed for generations.

To much of the world, folks, WE are the NAZIs.


----------



## Ringel05

Bfgrn said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey fuck face...I'm not impressed. Why? Probably because you are a right wing pea brain. Why don't we take a real hard look at some major underlying causes that created the climate for Hitler's rise. The Treaty of Versailles. It has to do with that age old George W. right wing philosophy of PUNISH; Revanchism. The Tiger Georges Clemenceau won out in his desire the terms of Versailles smash Germany, where Wilson and even David Lloyd George realized that when you smash a country, you are smashing the people, and you open the door for future conflict by creating hated foreign enemies to rally that hatred around...
> 
> BTW, do you dispute the influences of Ernst Jünger, Giovanni Gentile and Carl Schmitt?
> 
> Hey, get back to me when you can borrow a liberal's brain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just as I thought attack the person (me) and you're not the first moron to call me right wing, or wing nut, or libtard or obamabot, etc ad nauseum.... The point i was making, if you had the ability of discernment, was his premise is to narrow in a complex study.  He omits complete segments of causative factors in a vain attempt to condense the reasons behind the rise of Hitler, et al. and does so without reaching into the mind of the peoples of the time.
> Yes, the Treaty of Versailles was the primary reason for the rise of a Hitleresque figure but it wasn't the only cause of Hitler's rise to power.  It was, by his manipulations only one of the reasons the German people came to love or admire him early on but there where other reasons the primary being he wiped out unemployment and most Germans enjoyed the highest standards of living in the world and more importantly he brought social stability to a peoples who yearned for order.  I don't dispute the influences of any of those listed by you as long as said influence is placed in it's proper perspective.  Look at the bigger picture not just that which fits your chosen paradigm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why don't you try this next time if you have the ability of discernment. READ the original piece. Gleason was not trying to provide a comprehensive history of the rise of fascism. His premise is narrow...Mutatis mutandis. He was comparing the political environment and attitudes that led to the rise of fascism with the political environment and attitudes created by the Bush administration after 9/11. I used the piece because it concisely and totally smashes the right wing pea brain bizzaro world of morons like Jonah Goldberg.
> 
> "O con noi o contro di noi"--You're either with us or against us.
> Benito Mussolini
> 
> "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
> George W. Bush
Click to expand...


So that's all you got out of the OP:
(Here's the original - just incase you missed it).


> *Why did so many Germans support Hitler?*
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion


I was trying hard this time not to slam dunk your stupid ass again but I see you're just a glutton for punishment.  You are the perfect example of a waisted education as evidenced by the fact that as a leftist hack you are no different from those on the right you so vehemently decry, i.e. no objective reasoning functions.


----------



## editec

rikules said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this question is far broader than just hitler and the nazis
> 
> the real question is;
> 
> why are there SOOOO many stupid, ignorant people upon whom hate, lies and fear work so well!?
Click to expand...

 
Consider the fact that lies and fear mongering work just as well on SMART people and there's your answer.

Plenty of smart people voted for Hitler just like plenty of smart people vote for Ds and Rs.

If you're fed a line of bullshit and you have no way of seeing that it's bullshit, that doesn't mean you're stupid.

That just makes you a dupe.

Who among us has NOT discovered that we'd been lied to and because we believed those lies, we acted upon them to our detriment?

Intelligent does NOT mean *incapable* of being fooled.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Bfgrn said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The funniest thing is how "Progressives" keep calling Hitler a "right winger" LOL
> 
> He's a National Socialist, a Leftist, Obama's spiritual father
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, 'Old dolf' as us socialists warmly referred to him was the true bastion of socialist beliefs...He advocated racism over racial tolerance, eugenics over freedom of reproduction, merit over equality, competition over cooperation, power politics and militarism over pacifism, dictatorship over democracy, capitalism over Marxism, realism over idealism, nationalism over internationalism, exclusiveness over inclusiveness, common sense over theory or science, pragmatism over principle, and even held friendly relations with the Church, even though he was an atheist.
Click to expand...


NeoNational Socialists are lead by a Mulatto who espouses "White folks greed" and "Typical white behavior"

NeoNational Socialists have Eugenicists in the Ministry of Health and Healing (ObamaCare)

NeoNational Socialists have swallowed whole our Health care and financial industries and have Pay Czars to flatten out any outlying performers and make those sectors run like public schools.

Seig Heil, my little Fascist Friend, Seig Heil

Democrats Uber Alles


----------



## editec

CrusaderFrank said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The funniest thing is how "Progressives" keep calling Hitler a "right winger" LOL
> 
> He's a National Socialist, a Leftist, Obama's spiritual father
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, 'Old dolf' as us socialists warmly referred to him was the true bastion of socialist beliefs...He advocated racism over racial tolerance, eugenics over freedom of reproduction, merit over equality, competition over cooperation, power politics and militarism over pacifism, dictatorship over democracy, capitalism over Marxism, realism over idealism, nationalism over internationalism, exclusiveness over inclusiveness, common sense over theory or science, pragmatism over principle, and even held friendly relations with the Church, even though he was an atheist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> NeoNational Socialists are lead by a Mulatto who espouses "White folks greed" and "Typical white behavior"
> 
> NeoNational Socialists have Eugenicists in the Ministry of Health and Healing (ObamaCare)
> 
> NeoNational Socialists have swallowed whole our Health care and financial industries and have Pay Czars to flatten out any outlying performers and make those sectors run like public schools.
> 
> Seig Heil, my little Fascist Friend, Seig Heil
> 
> Democrats Uber Alles
Click to expand...

 
Well...you got half of it about right.

Now try putting down your partisan blinders and check what your favorite party has done to america in the last fifty years.

Some day you will, as I had to, wake up from your partisan delusions.

The more you study the issue from REAL sources, the more you'll understand that NOBODY is working on your behalf.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

editec said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, 'Old dolf' as us socialists warmly referred to him was the true bastion of socialist beliefs...He advocated racism over racial tolerance, eugenics over freedom of reproduction, merit over equality, competition over cooperation, power politics and militarism over pacifism, dictatorship over democracy, capitalism over Marxism, realism over idealism, nationalism over internationalism, exclusiveness over inclusiveness, common sense over theory or science, pragmatism over principle, and even held friendly relations with the Church, even though he was an atheist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NeoNational Socialists are lead by a Mulatto who espouses "White folks greed" and "Typical white behavior"
> 
> NeoNational Socialists have Eugenicists in the Ministry of Health and Healing (ObamaCare)
> 
> NeoNational Socialists have swallowed whole our Health care and financial industries and have Pay Czars to flatten out any outlying performers and make those sectors run like public schools.
> 
> Seig Heil, my little Fascist Friend, Seig Heil
> 
> Democrats Uber Alles
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well...you got half of it about right.
> 
> Now try putting down your partisan blinders and check what your favorite party has done to america in the last fifty years.
> 
> Some day you will, as I had to, wake up from your partisan delusions.
> 
> The more you study the issue from REAL sources, the more you'll understand that NOBODY is working on your behalf.
Click to expand...


I put Dubya under Satan's ass in Dante's Inferno for betraying Conservatism.

I know the RNC is not my friend, and did you know I consider Bush41 one of the most evil, trecherous men who ever walked the face of the Earth?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Ringel05 said:


> So that's all you got out of the OP:
> (Here's the original - just incase you missed it).
> 
> 
> 
> *Why did so many Germans support Hitler?*
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> 
> 
> I was trying hard this time not to slam dunk your stupid ass again but I see you're just a glutton for punishment.  You are the perfect example of a waisted education as evidenced by the fact that as a leftist hack you are no different from those on the right you so vehemently decry, i.e. no objective reasoning functions.
Click to expand...


When you make your first attempt please let me know. A gnat like you is only a bother when they fly around your face. One quick swat and they're gone. What in the hell are you talking about? I asked a question if the responses are making America look like the beginning of 1929 Germany, there could very well be some similarities to both. It would be you who is being subjective; your protection of the "ONE" with any hint of a description of Nazi Germany is very reveling.


----------



## strollingbones

the us is not in a pre nazi state....one only has to look at history to determine that. the nazis had clear targets...the morally bankrupt...gays....the lesser of races...gypsies....and the jews were their major targets of oppression...show me one clear cut example of anyone being targetted like these groups were?

Many on here have no concept of history.  that is a shame.  history is much more than dates....its all kinds of movements ...social and economically intregrated into one timeline


----------



## bigrebnc1775

editec said:


> rikules said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this question is far broader than just hitler and the nazis
> 
> the real question is;
> 
> why are there SOOOO many stupid, ignorant people upon whom hate, lies and fear work so well!?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Consider the fact that lies and fear mongering work just as well on SMART people and there's your answer.
> 
> Plenty of smart people voted for Hitler just like plenty of smart people vote for Ds and Rs.
> 
> If you're fed a line of bullshit and you have no way of seeing that it's bullshit, that doesn't mean you're stupid.
> 
> That just makes you a dupe.
> 
> Who among us has NOT discovered that we'd been lied to and because we believed those lies, we acted upon them to our detriment?
> 
> Intelligent does NOT mean *incapable* of being fooled.
Click to expand...


Very nice response


----------



## strollingbones

one has to remember the mass exodus that took place as people escaped pre nazi germany....artistians, scientist and common people fled. 

Nazi Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## bigrebnc1775

hellbitch said:


> the us is not in a pre nazi state....one only has to look at history to determine that. the nazis had clear targets...the morally bankrupt...gays....the lesser of races...gypsies....and the jews were their major targets of oppression...show me one clear cut example of anyone being targetted like these groups were?
> 
> Many on here have no concept of history.  that is a shame.  history is much more than dates....its all kinds of movements ...social and economically intregrated into one timeline



Are you stating this as a fact or is it an opinion? I say it's an opinion because the facts remain. The left has attacked or labeled many who oppose obama as enemies of this country. And when Bush was president the same thing happened. It's just that obama agenda is going in the wrong direction. It's taking this country with the people into a government control of everything system. Less individual rights and more collectivism.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

hellbitch said:


> one has to remember the mass exodus that took place as people escaped pre nazi germany....artistians, scientist and common people fled.
> 
> Nazi Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The difference is that real Americans don't run, we stand and fight


----------



## bigrebnc1775

CrusaderFrank said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> NeoNational Socialists are lead by a Mulatto who espouses "White folks greed" and "Typical white behavior"
> 
> NeoNational Socialists have Eugenicists in the Ministry of Health and Healing (ObamaCare)
> 
> NeoNational Socialists have swallowed whole our Health care and financial industries and have Pay Czars to flatten out any outlying performers and make those sectors run like public schools.
> 
> Seig Heil, my little Fascist Friend, Seig Heil
> 
> Democrats Uber Alles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...you got half of it about right.
> 
> Now try putting down your partisan blinders and check what your favorite party has done to america in the last fifty years.
> 
> Some day you will, as I had to, wake up from your partisan delusions.
> 
> The more you study the issue from REAL sources, the more you'll understand that NOBODY is working on your behalf.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I put Dubya under Satan's ass in Dante's Inferno for betraying Conservatism.
> 
> I know the RNC is not my friend, and did you know I consider Bush41 one of the most evil, trecherous men who ever walked the face of the Earth?
Click to expand...


Exactly the government does not care about what happens to the people.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

CrusaderFrank said:


> hellbitch said:
> 
> 
> 
> one has to remember the mass exodus that took place as people escaped pre nazi germany....artistians, scientist and common people fled.
> 
> Nazi Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is that real Americans don't run, we stand and fight
Click to expand...


These colors do not run


----------



## strollingbones

tell that to the vietnamese in sagion.....these colors dont run

it is my opinion that we are not in a 'prenazi' stage.  please show me where anyone is being made a target by the government to be rounded up and held and murdered?


----------



## Old Rocks

PatekPhilippe said:


> Nationalism was present in German politics long before the Treaty of Versailles.  Deutsche Vaterlandspartei.  They were the pro-war party and after the German Revolution of 1918 when they were disbanded did many members form the NDSAP.
> 
> What the Nazi's did was provide a scapegoat to blame all of Germany's ill fate on.  The Jews and Capitalism....THAT'S WHY they got the support they got.....they took the blame game to a whole new level.
> 
> and much like todays Democrat party...we hear the same thing.....except this time instead of the jews and capitalism it's the whites and capitalism.
> The parallels are striking if one looks at the whole picture....and one has to think what the fuck is Soro's thinking and what he stands to gain from all this.



Look, you want to portray the President and the Dems as Nazis? Who invaded a small nation on the basis of lies? Where is the WMD? 

The fomenting of discord that so many of you Conservatives have been doing of late, is much more reminiscent of Germany in the '30s, than anything that the Dems are doing. And has nothing at all to do with conservative values. In fact, is quite contrary to the values of such men as T. Roosevelt and Eisenhower.


----------



## Old Rocks

bigrebnc1775 said:


> hellbitch said:
> 
> 
> 
> the us is not in a pre nazi state....one only has to look at history to determine that. the nazis had clear targets...the morally bankrupt...gays....the lesser of races...gypsies....and the jews were their major targets of oppression...show me one clear cut example of anyone being targetted like these groups were?
> 
> Many on here have no concept of history.  that is a shame.  history is much more than dates....its all kinds of movements ...social and economically intregrated into one timeline
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you stating this as a fact or is it an opinion? I say it's an opinion because the facts remain. The left has attacked or labeled many who oppose obama as enemies of this country. And when Bush was president the same thing happened. It's just that obama agenda is going in the wrong direction. It's taking this country with the people into a government control of everything system. Less individual rights and more collectivism.
Click to expand...


Damn!  Look at the posts on this board. Where has anyone on liberal side talked of "eliminating" the people on the right? Yet we have seen many on the right use exactly that word to define their intentions concerning liberals and anyone else they disagree with at the moment.

I intend to work to get people that represent my point of view elected to office in local and national elections. Even though I am a gun owner, I do not feel the need to threaton those of a differant opinion with that fact, as so many on the right on this board do.

When you fellows start speaking and posting in a civil manner, without overt and covert threats, then I will respect your opinions.


----------



## Madeline

Anyone else see the movie "Judgment at Nuremburg"?  The plot concerns the trial of several judges who are charged with war crimes, and the premise of the movie is that German people outside the camps and the SS knew about the Final Solution.  

Germany did not just "focus" on certain ethnic groups; it went _insane_.  



> Once in power Adolf Hitler began to openly express anti-Semitic ideas. Based on his readings of how blacks were denied civil rights in the southern states in America, Hitler attempted to make life so unpleasant for Jews in Germany that they would emigrate. The campaign started on 1st April, 1933, when a one-day boycott of Jewish-owned shops took place. Members of the Sturm Abteilung (SA) picketed the shops to ensure the boycott was successful.
> 
> The hostility of towards Jews increased in Germany. This was reflected in the decision by many shops and restaurants not to serve the Jewish population. Placards saying "Jews not admitted" and "Jews enter this place at their own risk" began to appear all over Germany. In some parts of the country Jews were banned from public parks, swimming-pools and public transport.
> 
> Germans were also encouraged not to use Jewish doctors and lawyers. Jewish civil servants, teachers and those employed by the mass media were sacked. Members of the SA put pressure on people not to buy goods produced by Jewish companies. For example, the Ullstein Press, the largest publisher of newspapers, books and magazines in Germany, was forced to sell the company to the NSDAP in 1934 after the actions of the SA had made it impossible for them to make a profit.
> 
> Many Jewish people who could no longer earn a living left the country. The number of Jews emigrating increased after the passing of the Nuremberg Laws on Citizenship and Race in 1935. Under this new law Jews could no longer be citizens of Germany. It was also made illegal for Jews to marry Aryans.
> 
> The pressure on Jews to leave Germany intensified. Hitler, Joseph Goebbels and Reinhard Heydrich organized a new programme designed to encourage Jews to emigrate. Crystal Night took place on 9th-10th November, 1938. Presented as a spontaneous reaction of the German people to the news that the German diplomat, Ernst vom Rath, had been murdered by Herschel Grynszpan, a young Jewish refugee in Paris, the whole event was in fact organized by the NSDAP.
> 
> During Crystal Night over 7,500 Jewish shops were destroyed and 400 synagogues were burnt down. Ninety-one Jews were killed and an estimated 20,000 were sent to concentration camps. Up until this time these camps had been mainly for political prisoners. The only people who were punished for the crimes committed on Crystal Night were members of the Sturm Abteilung (SA) who had raped Jewish women (they had broken the Nuremberg Laws on sexual intercourse between Aryans and Jews).
> 
> After Crystal Night the numbers of Jews wishing to leave Germany increased dramatically. It has been calculated that between 1933 and 1939, approximately half the Jewish population of Germany (250,000) left the country. This included several Jewish scientists who were to play an important role in the fight against fascism during the war. A higher number of Jews would have left but anti-Semitism was not restricted to Germany and many countries were reluctant to take them.



http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERcrystal.htm

The movie concludes that yes, the average German was aware of the Final Solution and all Germans are partially responsible for it.  When peering at any one individual, it is tempting to conclude that mebbe they did not know or felt powerless to resist.  Personally, I think it was very widely known.  How could it have been otherwise?  There were six million corpses.


----------



## Bfgrn

JW Frogen said:


> I know it is conventional historical wisdom the Treaty of Versailles helped cause the rise of Hitler and though he did use resentment about the treaty to his advantage, I posit the treaty did not cause the rise of fascism because it was never actually enforced.
> 
> The UK in particular kept changing the terms over the objections of France to appease both Weimar politicians and latter Hitler.
> 
> The proscribed penalties for violations where rarely implemented.
> 
> The fact is German politicians of almost very party propagated the myth that Germany was not really defeated in WWI but was betrayed and the treaty thus was unfair.
> 
> Germany was not occupied and this re-enforced the myth, and German Weimar politicians, wanting to re-arm (this process started before Hitler) inflated their currency to pay back war debt thus hurting the middle class, but the victorious powers kept changing the terms in Germanys favor.
> 
> If anything I think the Treaty of Versailles was too lenient. Germany did not know or feel she was a defeated.
> 
> Look at the difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, after WWII Germany is occupied, partitioned, her war leaders put on trial and her new government validated and dictated to by the victorious allies, and Germany never threatens European peace again.
> 
> The problem with Versailles is it caused resentment but did not punish seriously or contain a defeated enemy.



Well, now that you've dried out, we get to see the real you...a Bushie or maybe more of a Cheney...

History's neither one dimensional, nor can it be neatly defined by facts and historical events alone. History is the continuing saga of human existence and human conditions. Those human conditions, good or bad serve to fuel benign or aggressive behaviors. Actual outcomes of events, treaties and policies are determined as much by human perception as they are by fact. The Treaty of Versailles was perceived as very punitive in the eyes of the German people who anticipated Wilson's 14 Points, which was perceived as fair, a way to rebuild their economy, their country, re-enter the world community and retain some dignity. Instead they received Clemenceau's punitive ruler across the knuckles; total blame for the war, and with that total blame; reparations that would have taken until the late 20th century to repay. Add territorial clauses that would later become a rallying cry all combined to create animosity in Germany towards their 'enemies' and toward their own government that signed it.  

If we are really going to get into that period of history and try to correlate events and consequences, there are MANY. Post WWI Germany saw a period of political instability. There were many factions vying for power. There was even a 'Red scare' not unlike right wing fear-mongering during our own Cold war. You seem to insinuate there was some pre-Hitler mental inevitability with your comment that Weimar politicians wanting to re-arm. It WAS the Treaty of Versailles that created the pre-Hitler mental inevitability. And it will remain in the annals of history as a leading cause that led to the rise of Hitler and ultimately WWII.

The main difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, the Treaty of Versailles was punitive and destructive. The Marshall Plan was not punitive, it was constructive...

These lessons will NEVER be learned by the right wing mind. They will continue to FEEL that punishment is the only way, and when it ultimately fails, it was only because the punishment was not severe enough. And they will continue to blindly follow authoritarian despots like Bush and Cheney that turned a gang of terrorists into an army of thousands.
_
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

Then they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.__
Pastor Martin Niemöller_


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Old Rocks said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hellbitch said:
> 
> 
> 
> the us is not in a pre nazi state....one only has to look at history to determine that. the nazis had clear targets...the morally bankrupt...gays....the lesser of races...gypsies....and the jews were their major targets of oppression...show me one clear cut example of anyone being targetted like these groups were?
> 
> Many on here have no concept of history.  that is a shame.  history is much more than dates....its all kinds of movements ...social and economically intregrated into one timeline
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you stating this as a fact or is it an opinion? I say it's an opinion because the facts remain. The left has attacked or labeled many who oppose obama as enemies of this country. And when Bush was president the same thing happened. It's just that obama agenda is going in the wrong direction. It's taking this country with the people into a government control of everything system. Less individual rights and more collectivism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Damn!  Look at the posts on this board. Where has anyone on liberal side talked of "eliminating" the people on the right? Yet we have seen many on the right use exactly that word to define their intentions concerning liberals and anyone else they disagree with at the moment.
> 
> I intend to work to get people that represent my point of view elected to office in local and national elections. Even though I am a gun owner, I do not feel the need to threaton those of a differant opinion with that fact, as so many on the right on this board do.
> 
> When you fellows start speaking and posting in a civil manner, without overt and covert threats, then I will respect your opinions.
Click to expand...


I have no control nor do I want the contol of what someone post. So tell me since you posted this comment to my last replky where have I threaten anyone woith a DIFFERANT VIEW FROM MINE?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Old Rocks said:


> PatekPhilippe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nationalism was present in German politics long before the Treaty of Versailles.  Deutsche Vaterlandspartei.  They were the pro-war party and after the German Revolution of 1918 when they were disbanded did many members form the NDSAP.
> 
> What the Nazi's did was provide a scapegoat to blame all of Germany's ill fate on.  The Jews and Capitalism....THAT'S WHY they got the support they got.....they took the blame game to a whole new level.
> 
> and much like todays Democrat party...we hear the same thing.....except this time instead of the jews and capitalism it's the whites and capitalism.
> The parallels are striking if one looks at the whole picture....and one has to think what the fuck is Soro's thinking and what he stands to gain from all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look, you want to portray the President and the Dems as Nazis? Who invaded a small nation on the basis of lies? Where is the WMD?
> 
> The fomenting of discord that so many of you Conservatives have been doing of late, is much more reminiscent of Germany in the '30s, than anything that the Dems are doing. And has nothing at all to do with conservative values. In fact, is quite contrary to the values of such men as T. Roosevelt and Eisenhower.
Click to expand...

Those lies as you call them were also pushed as fact by Clinton.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> JW Frogen said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know it is conventional historical wisdom the Treaty of Versailles helped cause the rise of Hitler and though he did use resentment about the treaty to his advantage, I posit the treaty did not cause the rise of fascism because it was never actually enforced.
> 
> The UK in particular kept changing the terms over the objections of France to appease both Weimar politicians and latter Hitler.
> 
> The proscribed penalties for violations where rarely implemented.
> 
> The fact is German politicians of almost very party propagated the myth that Germany was not really defeated in WWI but was betrayed and the treaty thus was unfair.
> 
> Germany was not occupied and this re-enforced the myth, and German Weimar politicians, wanting to re-arm (this process started before Hitler) inflated their currency to pay back war debt thus hurting the middle class, but the victorious powers kept changing the terms in Germanys favor.
> 
> If anything I think the Treaty of Versailles was too lenient. Germany did not know or feel she was a defeated.
> 
> Look at the difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, after WWII Germany is occupied, partitioned, her war leaders put on trial and her new government validated and dictated to by the victorious allies, and Germany never threatens European peace again.
> 
> The problem with Versailles is it caused resentment but did not punish seriously or contain a defeated enemy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, now that you've dried out, we get to see the real you...a Bushie or maybe more of a Cheney...
> 
> History's neither one dimensional, nor can it be neatly defined by facts and historical events alone. History is the continuing saga of human existence and human conditions. Those human conditions, good or bad serve to fuel benign or aggressive behaviors. Actual outcomes of events, treaties and policies are determined as much by human perception as they are by fact. The Treaty of Versailles was perceived as very punitive in the eyes of the German people who anticipated Wilson's 14 Points, which was perceived as fair, a way to rebuild their economy, their country, re-enter the world community and retain some dignity. Instead they received Clemenceau's punitive ruler across the knuckles; total blame for the war, and with that total blame; reparations that would have taken until the late 20th century to repay. Add territorial clauses that would later become a rallying cry all combined to create animosity in Germany towards their 'enemies' and toward their own government that signed it.
> 
> If we are really going to get into that period of history and try to correlate events and consequences, there are MANY. Post WWI Germany saw a period of political instability. There were many factions vying for power. There was even a 'Red scare' not unlike right wing fear-mongering during our own Cold war. You seem to insinuate there was some pre-Hitler mental inevitability with your comment that Weimar politicians wanting to re-arm. It WAS the Treaty of Versailles that created the pre-Hitler mental inevitability. And it will remain in the annals of history as a leading cause that led to the rise of Hitler and ultimately WWII.
> 
> The main difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, the Treaty of Versailles was punitive and destructive. The Marshall Plan was not punitive, it was constructive...
> 
> These lessons will NEVER be learned by the right wing mind. They will continue to FEEL that punishment is the only way, and when it ultimately fails, it was only because the punishment was not severe enough. And they will continue to blindly follow authoritarian despots like Bush and Cheney that turned a gang of terrorists into an army of thousands.
> _
> When the Nazis came for the communists,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a communist.
> 
> Then they locked up the social democrats,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a social democrat.
> 
> Then they came for the trade unionists,
> I did not speak out;
> I was not a trade unionist.
> 
> Then they came for the Jews,
> I did not speak out;
> I was not a Jew.
> 
> When they came for me,
> there was no one left to speak out for me.__
> Pastor Martin Niemöller_
Click to expand...


My revised version
When the department of homeland security came for the Iraqi war vet,
I remained silent;
I was not an Iraqi war vet.

When they caame for the Tea party member
I remained silent
Because I was not a member of the TEA party

When they came for the gun owners
I remained silent
Because I owned no guns

Then they came for me
And there was no one to speak for me.


----------



## Madeline

If post WW I Germany had been divided as it was after WW II, it is unlikely that the Final Solution would have occured.


----------



## Bfgrn

Ringel05 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just as I thought attack the person (me) and you're not the first moron to call me right wing, or wing nut, or libtard or obamabot, etc ad nauseum.... The point i was making, if you had the ability of discernment, was his premise is to narrow in a complex study.  He omits complete segments of causative factors in a vain attempt to condense the reasons behind the rise of Hitler, et al. and does so without reaching into the mind of the peoples of the time.
> Yes, the Treaty of Versailles was the primary reason for the rise of a Hitleresque figure but it wasn't the only cause of Hitler's rise to power.  It was, by his manipulations only one of the reasons the German people came to love or admire him early on but there where other reasons the primary being he wiped out unemployment and most Germans enjoyed the highest standards of living in the world and more importantly he brought social stability to a peoples who yearned for order.  I don't dispute the influences of any of those listed by you as long as said influence is placed in it's proper perspective.  Look at the bigger picture not just that which fits your chosen paradigm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you try this next time if you have the ability of discernment. READ the original piece. Gleason was not trying to provide a comprehensive history of the rise of fascism. His premise is narrow...Mutatis mutandis. He was comparing the political environment and attitudes that led to the rise of fascism with the political environment and attitudes created by the Bush administration after 9/11. I used the piece because it concisely and totally smashes the right wing pea brain bizzaro world of morons like Jonah Goldberg.
> 
> "O con noi o contro di noi"--You're either with us or against us.
> Benito Mussolini
> 
> "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
> George W. Bush
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So that's all you got out of the OP:
> (Here's the original - just incase you missed it).
> 
> 
> 
> *Why did so many Germans support Hitler?*
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was trying hard this time not to slam dunk your stupid ass again but I see you're just a glutton for punishment.  You are the perfect example of a waisted education as evidenced by the fact that as a leftist hack you are no different from those on the right you so vehemently decry, i.e. no objective reasoning functions.
Click to expand...


Are you having a tough time keeping up Bugs? I'm well aware of the original OP. I was not responding directly TO the OP, I was responding TO Mad Scientist's response to the subject and addressed the genesis of his/her ignorance...that Hitler was a socialist/leftist. And BTW, Mad Scientist's claim that Hitler was elected is also false.
post56.html


----------



## bigrebnc1775

For those who claim Hitler wasn't a socialist. The best way to find out is read Mein Kampf
At about five o'clock in the morning after this meeting, I thus lay awake in my cot, watching the chase and bustle. Since I could no longer fall asleep, I suddenly remembered the past evening and my mind fell on the booklet which the worker had given me. I began to read. It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described how he had returned to national thinking out of the Babel of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases; hence also the title: My Political Awakening.l Once I had begun, I read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which I myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily I saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day I reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, I received a postcard saying that I had been accepted in the German Workers' Party; I was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following Wednesday............
......After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'

Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler


----------



## bigrebnc1775

bigrebnc1775 said:


> For those who claim Hitler wasn't a socialist. The best way to find out is read Mein Kampf
> At about five o'clock in the morning after this meeting, I thus lay awake in my cot, watching the chase and bustle. Since I could no longer fall asleep, I suddenly remembered the past evening and my mind fell on the booklet which the worker had given me. I began to read. It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described how he had returned to national thinking out of the Babel of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases; hence also the title: My Political Awakening.l Once I had begun, I read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which I myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily I saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day I reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, I received a postcard saying that I had been accepted in the German Workers' Party; I was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following Wednesday............
> ......After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'
> 
> Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler



*Volume Two - The National Socialist Movement
Chapter I: Philosophy and Party *
For these people change their convictions just as the soldier changes his shirt in war  when the old one is bug-eaten. In the new programme everyone gets everything he wants. The farmer is assured that the interests of agriculture will be safeguarded. The industrialist is assured of protection for his products. The consumer is assured that his interests will be protected in the market prices. Teachers are given higher salaries and civil servants will have better pensions. Widows and orphans will receive generous assistance from the State. Trade will be promoted. The tariff will be lowered and even the taxes, though they cannot be entirely abolished, will be almost abolished. It sometimes happens that one section of the public is forgotten or that one of the demands mooted among the public has not reached the ears of the party. This is also hurriedly patched on to the whole, should there be any space available for it: until finally it is felt that there are good grounds for hoping that the whole normal host of philistines, including their wives, will have their anxieties laid to rest and will beam with satisfaction once again. And so, internally armed with faith in the goodness of God and the impenetrable stupidity of the electorate, the struggle for what is called 'the reconstruction of the Reich' can now begin. 
Mein Kampf - Volume II, Chapter I


----------



## PatekPhilippe

hellbitch said:


> the us is not in a pre nazi state....one only has to look at history to determine that. the nazis had clear targets...the morally bankrupt...gays....the lesser of races...gypsies....and the jews were their major targets of oppression...show me one clear cut example of anyone being targetted like these groups were?
> 
> Many on here have no concept of history.  that is a shame.  history is much more than dates....its all kinds of movements ...social and economically intregrated into one timeline



Just because they're not rounding up Republicans and tea party members then shipping them off to Sobibor doesn't mean they're not being villified in the public's eyes.  Obama is using them as scapegoats and playing the blame game....it's fucking pathetic.


----------



## Madeline

One ginormous difference between the US in 2010 and pre-WW II Germany is that a healthy debate is on-going here.  There are factions of enormous numbers of people who vigourously disagree with one another, and the actions of almost every pol is scrutinized and either lauded or demonized, depending.  

There is no almost-universal silence on injustices dealt to any one group.  Apart from the McCarthy era, I can't think of another time when conditions in the US resembled those of Germany before WW II.


----------



## Truthmatters

PatekPhilippe said:


> hellbitch said:
> 
> 
> 
> the us is not in a pre nazi state....one only has to look at history to determine that. the nazis had clear targets...the morally bankrupt...gays....the lesser of races...gypsies....and the jews were their major targets of oppression...show me one clear cut example of anyone being targetted like these groups were?
> 
> Many on here have no concept of history.  that is a shame.  history is much more than dates....its all kinds of movements ...social and economically intregrated into one timeline
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just because they're not rounding up Republicans and tea party members then shipping them off to Sobibor doesn't mean they're not being villified in the public's eyes.  Obama is using them as scapegoats and playing the blame game....it's fucking pathetic.
Click to expand...


WHAT THE FUCK????????


Its that your ideas are utter failures dude.

Dont expect ANYONE to just go along with the right wing lies.


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Madeline said:


> If post WW I Germany had been divided as it was after WW II, it is unlikely that the Final Solution would have occured.


Divide them into what?
I don't buy into it because what led to the "Final Solution" was a platform of the Nazi party.  Plus you are not taking into account that the Russians refused to leave Germany and therefore at Potsdam made the demands that they needed to remain in those countries for "security" reasons and war reparations.


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Truthmatters said:


> PatekPhilippe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hellbitch said:
> 
> 
> 
> the us is not in a pre nazi state....one only has to look at history to determine that. the nazis had clear targets...the morally bankrupt...gays....the lesser of races...gypsies....and the jews were their major targets of oppression...show me one clear cut example of anyone being targetted like these groups were?
> 
> Many on here have no concept of history.  that is a shame.  history is much more than dates....its all kinds of movements ...social and economically intregrated into one timeline
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just because they're not rounding up Republicans and tea party members then shipping them off to Sobibor doesn't mean they're not being villified in the public's eyes.  Obama is using them as scapegoats and playing the blame game....it's fucking pathetic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WHAT THE FUCK????????
> 
> 
> Its that your ideas are utter failures dude.
> 
> Dont expect ANYONE to just go along with the right wing lies.
Click to expand...


You're so stupid you can't see the truth before your very eyes....


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> For those who claim Hitler wasn't a socialist. The best way to find out is read Mein Kampf
> At about five o'clock in the morning after this meeting, I thus lay awake in my cot, watching the chase and bustle. Since I could no longer fall asleep, I suddenly remembered the past evening and my mind fell on the booklet which the worker had given me. I began to read. It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described *how he had returned to national thinking out of the Babel of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases*; hence also the title: My Political Awakening.l Once I had begun, I read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which I myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily I saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day I reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, I received a postcard saying that I had been accepted in the German Workers' Party; I was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following Wednesday............
> ......After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'
> 
> Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler



Pea brain alert...!!!

"*how he had returned to national thinking*..... out of the *Babel *of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases

*Babel *
&#8211;noun
1. an ancient city in the land of Shinar in which the building of a tower (Tower of Babel)  intended to reach heaven was begun *and the confusion of the language of the people took place*. Gen. 11:4&#8211;9.

&#8212;Synonyms
confusion, bedlam, clang, din, discord, hubbub, hullabaloo, jargon, pandemonium, racket, tower, tumult, turmoil.


----------



## Madeline

PatekPhilippe said:


> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> If post WW I Germany had been divided as it was after WW II, it is unlikely that the Final Solution would have occured.
> 
> 
> 
> Divide them into what?
> I don't buy into it because what led to the "Final Solution" was a platform of the Nazi party.  Plus you are not taking into account that the Russians refused to leave Germany and therefore at Potsdam made the demands that they needed to remain in those countries for "security" reasons and war reparations.
Click to expand...


Nazism flourished in part because there was rampant jingoism.  



> Background: The following essay was published in Der Angriff, 21 January 1929. Goebbels founded the newspaper in Berlin in 1927 shortly after taking over as the partys leader there. This article is a typical attack on the Jews.
> 
> The source: Der Jude, Der Angriff. Aufsätze aus der Kampfzeit (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP., 1935), pp. 322-324.
> 
> The Jew
> 
> by Joseph Goebbels
> 
> Everything is discussed openly in Germany, and every German claims the right to have an opinion on any and all questions. One is Catholic, the other Protestant, one an employee, the other an employer, a capitalist, a socialist, a democrat, an aristocrat. There is nothing dishonorable about choosing one side or the other of a question. Discussions happen in public, and where matters are unclear or confused one settles it by argument and counter argument. But there is one problem that is not discussed publicly, one that it is delicate even to mention: the Jewish question. It is taboo in our republic.
> 
> The Jew is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a scoundrel, parasite, swindler, profiteer, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a Jew and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: Ive been found out.
> 
> One cannot defend himself against the Jew. He attacks with lightning speed from his position of safety and uses his abilities to crush any attempt at defense.
> 
> Quickly he turns the attackers charges back on him, and the attacker becomes the liar, the troublemaker, the terrorist. Nothing could be more mistaken than to defend oneself. That is just what the Jew wants. He can invent a new lie every day for the enemy to respond to, and the result is that the enemy spends so much time defending himself that he has no time to do what the Jew really fears: to attack. The accused has become the accuser, and loudly he shoves the accuser into the dock. So it always was in the past when a person or a movement fought the Jew. That is what would happen to us as well were we not fully aware of his nature, and if we lacked the courage to draw the following radical conclusions:
> 
> 1. One cannot fight the Jew by positive means. He is a negative, and this negative must be erased from the German system, or he will forever corrupt it.
> 2. One cannot discuss the Jewish question with the Jews. One can hardly prove to a person that one has the duty to render him harmless.
> 3. One cannot allow the Jew the same means one would give an honest opponent, for he is no honorable opponent. He will use generosity and nobility only to trap his enemy.
> 4. The Jew has nothing to say about German questions. He is a foreigner, an alien, who only enjoys the rights of a guest, rights that he always abuses.
> 5. The so-called religious morality of the Jews is no morality at all, rather an encouragement to betrayal. Therefore, they have no claim to protection from the state.
> 6. The Jew is not smarter than we are, rather only cleverer and craftier. His system cannot be defeated economically  he follows entirely different moral principles than we do. It can only be broken through political means.
> 7. A Jew cannot insult a German. Jewish slanders are but badges of honor for a German opponent of the Jews.
> 8. The more a German person or a German movement opposes the Jew, the more valuable it is. If someone is attacked by the Jews, that is a sure sign of his virtue. He who is not persecuted by the Jews, or who is praised by them, is useless and dangerous.
> 9. The Jew evaluates German questions from the Jewish standpoint. As a result, the opposite of what he says must be true.
> 10. One must either affirm or reject anti-Semitism. He who defends the Jews harms his own people. One can only be a Jewish lackey or a Jewish opponent. Opposing the Jews is a matter of personal hygiene.
> These principles give the anti-Jewish movement a chance of success. Only such a movement will be taken seriously by the Jews, only such a movement will be feared by them.
> 
> The fact that he shouts and complains about such a movement therefore is only a sign that it is right. We are therefore delighted that we are constantly attacked in the Jewish gazettes. They may shout about terror. We answer with Mussolinis familiar words: Terror? Never! It is social hygiene. We take these individuals out of circulation just as a doctor does to a bacterium.



Compare McCarthy's propaganda:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGbW4a4EAAE]YouTube - Red Nightmare- Part 1[/ame]


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Madeline said:


> PatekPhilippe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Madeline said:
> 
> 
> 
> If post WW I Germany had been divided as it was after WW II, it is unlikely that the Final Solution would have occured.
> 
> 
> 
> Divide them into what?
> I don't buy into it because what led to the "Final Solution" was a platform of the Nazi party.  Plus you are not taking into account that the Russians refused to leave Germany and therefore at Potsdam made the demands that they needed to remain in those countries for "security" reasons and war reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nazism flourished in part because there was rampant jingoism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Background: The following essay was published in Der Angriff, 21 January 1929. Goebbels founded the newspaper in Berlin in 1927 shortly after taking over as the party&#8217;s leader there. This article is a typical attack on the Jews.
> 
> The source: &#8220;Der Jude,&#8221; Der Angriff. Aufsätze aus der Kampfzeit (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP., 1935), pp. 322-324.
> 
> The Jew
> 
> by Joseph Goebbels
> 
> Everything is discussed openly in Germany, and every German claims the right to have an opinion on any and all questions. One is Catholic, the other Protestant, one an employee, the other an employer, a capitalist, a socialist, a democrat, an aristocrat. There is nothing dishonorable about choosing one side or the other of a question. Discussions happen in public, and where matters are unclear or confused one settles it by argument and counter argument. But there is one problem that is not discussed publicly, one that it is delicate even to mention: the Jewish question. It is taboo in our republic.
> 
> The Jew is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a scoundrel, parasite, swindler, profiteer, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a Jew and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: &#8220;I&#8217;ve been found out.&#8221;
> 
> One cannot defend himself against the Jew. He attacks with lightning speed from his position of safety and uses his abilities to crush any attempt at defense.
> 
> Quickly he turns the attacker&#8217;s charges back on him, and the attacker becomes the liar, the troublemaker, the terrorist. Nothing could be more mistaken than to defend oneself. That is just what the Jew wants. He can invent a new lie every day for the enemy to respond to, and the result is that the enemy spends so much time defending himself that he has no time to do what the Jew really fears: to attack. The accused has become the accuser, and loudly he shoves the accuser into the dock. So it always was in the past when a person or a movement fought the Jew. That is what would happen to us as well were we not fully aware of his nature, and if we lacked the courage to draw the following radical conclusions:
> 
> 1. One cannot fight the Jew by positive means. He is a negative, and this negative must be erased from the German system, or he will forever corrupt it.
> 2. One cannot discuss the Jewish question with the Jews. One can hardly prove to a person that one has the duty to render him harmless.
> 3. One cannot allow the Jew the same means one would give an honest opponent, for he is no honorable opponent. He will use generosity and nobility only to trap his enemy.
> 4. The Jew has nothing to say about German questions. He is a foreigner, an alien, who only enjoys the rights of a guest, rights that he always abuses.
> 5. The so-called religious morality of the Jews is no morality at all, rather an encouragement to betrayal. Therefore, they have no claim to protection from the state.
> 6. The Jew is not smarter than we are, rather only cleverer and craftier. His system cannot be defeated economically &#8212; he follows entirely different moral principles than we do. It can only be broken through political means.
> 7. A Jew cannot insult a German. Jewish slanders are but badges of honor for a German opponent of the Jews.
> 8. The more a German person or a German movement opposes the Jew, the more valuable it is. If someone is attacked by the Jews, that is a sure sign of his virtue. He who is not persecuted by the Jews, or who is praised by them, is useless and dangerous.
> 9. The Jew evaluates German questions from the Jewish standpoint. As a result, the opposite of what he says must be true.
> 10. One must either affirm or reject anti-Semitism. He who defends the Jews harms his own people. One can only be a Jewish lackey or a Jewish opponent. Opposing the Jews is a matter of personal hygiene.
> These principles give the anti-Jewish movement a chance of success. Only such a movement will be taken seriously by the Jews, only such a movement will be feared by them.
> 
> The fact that he shouts and complains about such a movement therefore is only a sign that it is right. We are therefore delighted that we are constantly attacked in the Jewish gazettes. They may shout about terror. We answer with Mussolini&#8217;s familiar words: &#8220;Terror? Never! It is social hygiene. We take these individuals out of circulation just as a doctor does to a bacterium.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compare McCarthy's propaganda:
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGbW4a4EAAE]YouTube - Red Nightmare- Part 1[/ame]
Click to expand...


Compare Obama's propaganda.....
All we've heard for 2 years is "It's the Republican's...It's Bush's fault...yada yada yada


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> For those who claim Hitler wasn't a socialist. The best way to find out is read Mein Kampf
> At about five o'clock in the morning after this meeting, I thus lay awake in my cot, watching the chase and bustle. Since I could no longer fall asleep, I suddenly remembered the past evening and my mind fell on the booklet which the worker had given me. I began to read. It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described *how he had returned to national thinking out of the Babel of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases*; hence also the title: My Political Awakening.l Once I had begun, I read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which I myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily I saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day I reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, I received a postcard saying that I had been accepted in the German Workers' Party; I was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following Wednesday............
> ......After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'
> 
> Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pea brain alert...!!!
> 
> "*how he had returned to national thinking*..... out of the *Babel *of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases
> 
> *Babel *
> noun
> 1. an ancient city in the land of Shinar in which the building of a tower (Tower of Babel)  intended to reach heaven was begun *and the confusion of the language of the people took place*. Gen. 11:49.
> 
> Synonyms
> confusion, bedlam, clang, din, discord, hubbub, hullabaloo, jargon, pandemonium, racket, tower, tumult, turmoil.
Click to expand...


Read my addition to this.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

bigrebnc1775 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> for those who claim hitler wasn't a socialist. The best way to find out is read mein kampf
> at about five o'clock in the morning after this meeting, i thus lay awake in my cot, watching the chase and bustle. Since i could no longer fall asleep, i suddenly remembered the past evening and my mind fell on the booklet which the worker had given me. I began to read. It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described how he had returned to national thinking out of the babel of marxist and trade-unionist phrases; hence also the title: My political awakening.l once i had begun, i read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which i myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily i saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day i reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, i received a postcard saying that i had been accepted in the german workers' party; i was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following wednesday............
> ......after two days of agonized pondering and reflection, i finally came to the conviction that i had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so i registered as a member of the german workers' party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> mein kampf: The 'german workers' party'
> 
> mein kampf by adolf hitler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *volume two - the national socialist movement
> chapter i: Philosophy and party *
> for these people change their convictions just as the soldier changes his shirt in war  when the old one is bug-eaten. In the new programme everyone gets everything he wants. The farmer is assured that the interests of agriculture will be safeguarded. The industrialist is assured of protection for his products. The consumer is assured that his interests will be protected in the market prices. Teachers are given higher salaries and civil servants will have better pensions. Widows and orphans will receive generous assistance from the state. Trade will be promoted. The tariff will be lowered and even the taxes, though they cannot be entirely abolished, will be almost abolished. It sometimes happens that one section of the public is forgotten or that one of the demands mooted among the public has not reached the ears of the party. This is also hurriedly patched on to the whole, should there be any space available for it: Until finally it is felt that there are good grounds for hoping that the whole normal host of philistines, including their wives, will have their anxieties laid to rest and will beam with satisfaction once again. And so, internally armed with faith in the goodness of god and the impenetrable stupidity of the electorate, the struggle for what is called 'the reconstruction of the reich' can now begin.
> mein kampf - volume ii, chapter i
Click to expand...


b


----------



## Madeline

You ain't listening, PatekPhillipe.  There was no contingent of people denouncing Hitler in Germany.  There is now in the US.  

Both sides employ propaganda.  It's the fact that there ARE two (or more) sides that matters.


----------



## PatekPhilippe

Madeline said:


> You ain't listening, PatekPhillipe.  There was no contingent of people denouncing Hitler in Germany.  There is now in the US.
> 
> Both sides employ propaganda.  It's the fact that there ARE two (or more) sides that matters.



I am too listening...and I also know there were in fact people denouncing or challenging Hitler's power...but when they were found out they were murdered.  I hope it never comes to this in America but we've already seen the beginnings of it...with the DHS memo saying "Watch out for those crazy right winger vets coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Night of the Long Knives - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Political Prisoners


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> for those who claim hitler wasn't a socialist. The best way to find out is read mein kampf
> at about five o'clock in the morning after this meeting, i thus lay awake in my cot, watching the chase and bustle. Since i could no longer fall asleep, i suddenly remembered the past evening and my mind fell on the booklet which the worker had given me. I began to read. It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described how he had returned to national thinking out of the babel of marxist and trade-unionist phrases; hence also the title: My political awakening.l once i had begun, i read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which i myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily i saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day i reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, i received a postcard saying that i had been accepted in the german workers' party; i was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following wednesday............
> ......after two days of agonized pondering and reflection, i finally came to the conviction that i had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so i registered as a member of the german workers' party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> mein kampf: The 'german workers' party'
> 
> mein kampf by adolf hitler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *volume two - the national socialist movement
> chapter i: Philosophy and party *
> for these people change their convictions just as the soldier changes his shirt in war  when the old one is bug-eaten. In the new programme everyone gets everything he wants. The farmer is assured that the interests of agriculture will be safeguarded. The industrialist is assured of protection for his products. The consumer is assured that his interests will be protected in the market prices. Teachers are given higher salaries and civil servants will have better pensions. Widows and orphans will receive generous assistance from the state. Trade will be promoted. The tariff will be lowered and even the taxes, though they cannot be entirely abolished, will be almost abolished. It sometimes happens that one section of the public is forgotten or that one of the demands mooted among the public has not reached the ears of the party. This is also hurriedly patched on to the whole, should there be any space available for it: Until finally it is felt that there are good grounds for hoping that the whole normal host of philistines, including their wives, will have their anxieties laid to rest and will beam with satisfaction once again. And so, internally armed with faith in the goodness of god and the impenetrable stupidity of the electorate, the struggle for what is called 'the reconstruction of the reich' can now begin.
> mein kampf - volume ii, chapter i
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> b
Click to expand...


What I would suggest to 'word bound' pea brains is to find a 'summary' or 'synopsis' of Mein Kampf. This way, adults have already deciphered it for pea brains.

You could start with Wikipedia and work from there...

At this time the Nazi party was one of many small extremist groups in Munich, but Hitler soon discovered he had two remarkable talents, one for public oratory and another for inspiring personal loyalty. His street-corner oratory, attacking Jews, socialists and liberals, capitalists  and Communists, began attracting adherents.
Adolf Hitler's political views - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## editec

CrusaderFrank said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> NeoNational Socialists are lead by a Mulatto who espouses "White folks greed" and "Typical white behavior"
> 
> NeoNational Socialists have Eugenicists in the Ministry of Health and Healing (ObamaCare)
> 
> NeoNational Socialists have swallowed whole our Health care and financial industries and have Pay Czars to flatten out any outlying performers and make those sectors run like public schools.
> 
> Seig Heil, my little Fascist Friend, Seig Heil
> 
> Democrats Uber Alles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...you got half of it about right.
> 
> Now try putting down your partisan blinders and check what your favorite party has done to america in the last fifty years.
> 
> Some day you will, as I had to, wake up from your partisan delusions.
> 
> The more you study the issue from REAL sources, the more you'll understand that NOBODY is working on your behalf.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I put Dubya under Satan's ass in Dante's Inferno for betraying Conservatism.
> 
> I know the RNC is not my friend, and did you know I consider Bush41 one of the most evil, trecherous men who ever walked the face of the Earth?
Click to expand...

 

That is _extremely_ heartening to read, Cru.

We might have a very different approach to solving these problems, but at least we can agree that the emperor has no clothes.

I don't really think there's nope for this Republic any more, but I defintiely do believe there's still hope for America.


----------



## editec

hellbitch said:


> the us is not in a pre nazi state....one only has to look at history to determine that. the nazis had clear targets...the morally bankrupt...gays....the lesser of races...gypsies....and the jews were their major targets of oppression...show me one clear cut example of anyone being targetted like these groups were?
> 
> Many on here have no concept of history. that is a shame. history is much more than dates....its all kinds of movements ...social and economically intregrated into one timeline


 

One can easily be a believer in a  FASCIST form of governance without even a hint of racism.

One of the smartest guys I _ever _met was an unabashed fascist.

He simply believed that the unwashed masses simply could NOT maintain a truly democratic government.

Sadly, I'm beginning to think he might be right about that.


----------



## Ringel05

Bfgrn said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you try this next time if you have the ability of discernment. READ the original piece. Gleason was not trying to provide a comprehensive history of the rise of fascism. His premise is narrow...Mutatis mutandis. He was comparing the political environment and attitudes that led to the rise of fascism with the political environment and attitudes created by the Bush administration after 9/11. I used the piece because it concisely and totally smashes the right wing pea brain bizzaro world of morons like Jonah Goldberg.
> 
> "O con noi o contro di noi"--You're either with us or against us.
> Benito Mussolini
> 
> "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
> George W. Bush
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So that's all you got out of the OP:
> (Here's the original - just incase you missed it).
> 
> 
> 
> *Why did so many Germans support Hitler?*
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was trying hard this time not to slam dunk your stupid ass again but I see you're just a glutton for punishment.  You are the perfect example of a waisted education as evidenced by the fact that as a leftist hack you are no different from those on the right you so vehemently decry, i.e. no objective reasoning functions.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you having a tough time keeping up Bugs? I'm well aware of the original OP. I was not responding directly TO the OP, I was responding TO Mad Scientist's response to the subject and addressed the genesis of his/her ignorance...that Hitler was a socialist/leftist. And BTW, Mad Scientist's claim that Hitler was elected is also false.
> post56.html
Click to expand...


Obviously I'm having a tough time keeping up when you keep changing your story.


> READ the original piece.


Your indication was you _were_ responding to the OP, (reread what you wrote above).  You are correct, Hitler was not a leftist he was a _reactionary_ conservative and as you stated no he was not elected as Chancellor, he was reluctantly appointed by Hindenburg.  The correlation you and Gleason expound is fallacy, the link you two are trying to make between Bush and Hitler and corresponding socio-political attitudes is bogus.  While some striking similarities exist the key cultural and historical aspects of the rise of fascism are not existent in our culture at this time, you're reaching.  A few simple correlations combined with wishful thinking does not make a valid argument, once again look at the whole not just convenient parts.


----------



## editec

CrusaderFrank said:


> hellbitch said:
> 
> 
> 
> one has to remember the mass exodus that took place as people escaped pre nazi germany....artistians, scientist and common people fled.
> 
> Nazi Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is that real Americans don't run, we stand and fight
Click to expand...

 
Yeah...when does that happen exactly?

We seem to be kneeling, right now.


----------



## westwall

For anyone who truly wishes to know how it happened by far the best book on the subject is William Sheridan Allen's "The Nazi Seizure of Power, The Experience of a Single German Town 1922-1945"  The city is not named in the book but it is most likely Wurzburg.

Many people here are not very conversant with history at all.  In the 20th Century there were three great experiments with socialism, Nazi Germany and Communist Russia are of course known by all.  What most people forget however is the US also flirted with socialism under FDR.  The New Deal had many elements of socialism as part of its agenda of 1st recovery from the Great Depression then the second phase of the New Deal (193541), while continuing with relief and recovery measures, provided for social and economic legislation to benefit the mass of working people.   This is the period that saw the enactment of Social Security, Ntional Youth Administration, Works Project Administration,
and also the Fair Labor Standards Act was passed.  This does not include the many organisations and projects that were struck down by the Supreme Court.  Also Roosevelt tried very strenuously to reorganise the Supreme Court which thankfully he failed at.

There is one other correlation between all three experiments....they all used concentration camps.  The Nazi camps are well known of course, as are the gulags of Stalin, but most forget the forced internment of the Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor where at least 10,000 died prematurely.  Were we as bad as  Stalin and Hitler?  Of course not.  But the fact that the infrastructure was actually built should give any thinking person pause.  One of the main camps (Manzanar) is three hours south of my home and it is a very sobering experience to wander through the area and imagine what could have and in fact did occur.


----------



## Douger

CrusaderFrank said:


> hellbitch said:
> 
> 
> 
> one has to remember the mass exodus that took place as people escaped pre nazi germany....artistians, scientist and common people fled.
> 
> Nazi Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is that real Americans don't run, we stand and fight
Click to expand...

As with Germany. There's nothing there worth fighting for.
Murka was founded by runaways and it's population is made up of runaways.
The various elites made sure religion remained a focus of their various peoples for one reason and one reason only.

It has worked like a champ.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

editec said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hellbitch said:
> 
> 
> 
> one has to remember the mass exodus that took place as people escaped pre nazi germany....artistians, scientist and common people fled.
> 
> Nazi Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is that real Americans don't run, we stand and fight
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah...when does that happen exactly?
> 
> We seem to be kneeling, right now.
Click to expand...


We have two choices: outright revolution or take a generation to turn around the economy, society and culture.

A Revolution is messy and really bad if you don't win, but we turn the ship around if we realize it will take 8 4-year terms to get us fully there.

Also, it's not just enough to repeal Obama's Marxist Agenda, we have start today to show what will replace it. We have to sell our worldview.

For example: Eliminate the Department of Education does not mean the end of education like the Statists hysterically bleat, it means communities and parents will have much more power and input into their childs education.  Only Marxists and People who have CrazyGlues their lips to the Government will be against that!


----------



## editec

Bfgrn said:


> JW Frogen said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know it is conventional historical wisdom the Treaty of Versailles helped cause the rise of Hitler and though he did use resentment about the treaty to his advantage, I posit the treaty did not cause the rise of fascism because it was never actually enforced.
> 
> The UK in particular kept changing the terms over the objections of France to appease both Weimar politicians and latter Hitler.
> 
> The proscribed penalties for violations where rarely implemented.
> 
> The fact is German politicians of almost very party propagated the myth that Germany was not really defeated in WWI but was betrayed and the treaty thus was unfair.
> 
> Germany was not occupied and this re-enforced the myth, and German Weimar politicians, wanting to re-arm (this process started before Hitler) inflated their currency to pay back war debt thus hurting the middle class, but the victorious powers kept changing the terms in Germany&#8217;s favor.
> 
> If anything I think the Treaty of Versailles was too lenient. Germany did not know or feel she was a defeated.
> 
> Look at the difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, after WWII Germany is occupied, partitioned, her war leaders put on trial and her new government validated and dictated to by the victorious allies, and Germany never threatens European peace again.
> 
> The problem with Versailles is it caused resentment but did not punish seriously or contain a defeated enemy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, now that you've dried out, we get to see the real you...a Bushie or maybe more of a Cheney...
> 
> History's neither one dimensional, nor can it be neatly defined by facts and historical events alone. History is the continuing saga of human existence and human conditions. Those human conditions, good or bad serve to fuel benign or aggressive behaviors. Actual outcomes of events, treaties and policies are determined as much by human perception as they are by fact. The Treaty of Versailles was perceived as very punitive in the eyes of the German people who anticipated Wilson's 14 Points, which was perceived as fair, a way to rebuild their economy, their country, re-enter the world community and retain some dignity. Instead they received Clemenceau's punitive ruler across the knuckles; total blame for the war, and with that total blame; reparations that would have taken until the late 20th century to repay. Add territorial clauses that would later become a rallying cry all combined to create animosity in Germany towards their 'enemies' and toward their own government that signed it.
> 
> If we are really going to get into that period of history and try to correlate events and consequences, there are MANY. Post WWI Germany saw a period of political instability. There were many factions vying for power. There was even a 'Red scare' not unlike right wing fear-mongering during our own Cold war. You seem to insinuate there was some pre-Hitler mental inevitability with your comment that Weimar politicians wanting to re-arm. It WAS the Treaty of Versailles that created the pre-Hitler mental inevitability. And it will remain in the annals of history as a leading cause that led to the rise of Hitler and ultimately WWII.
> 
> The main difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, the Treaty of Versailles was punitive and destructive. The Marshall Plan was not punitive, it was constructive...
> 
> These lessons will NEVER be learned by the right wing mind. They will continue to FEEL that punishment is the only way, and when it ultimately fails, it was only because the punishment was not severe enough. And they will continue to blindly follow authoritarian despots like Bush and Cheney that turned a gang of terrorists into an army of thousands.
> 
> _When the Nazis came for the communists,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a communist._
> 
> _Then they locked up the social democrats,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a social democrat._
> 
> _Then they came for the trade unionists,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a trade unionist._
> 
> _Then they came for the Jews,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a Jew._
> 
> _When they came for me,_
> _there was no one left to speak out for me._
> _Pastor Martin Niemöller_
Click to expand...

 
Beautiful post, BF, with one minor addendum.

THE LEFT IS NO LESS LIKELY TO BECOME FACISTIC THAN THE RIGHT.

Seriously, do NOT be fooled into thinking otherwise.

Idealogues of _every persuasion_ are a menace to humanity.


----------



## L.K.Eder

i have nothing serious to add to this thread. but most of you just plain suck at this. especially the brainiac who started the thread.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *volume two - the national socialist movement
> chapter i: Philosophy and party *
> for these people change their convictions just as the soldier changes his shirt in war  when the old one is bug-eaten. In the new programme everyone gets everything he wants. The farmer is assured that the interests of agriculture will be safeguarded. The industrialist is assured of protection for his products. The consumer is assured that his interests will be protected in the market prices. Teachers are given higher salaries and civil servants will have better pensions. Widows and orphans will receive generous assistance from the state. Trade will be promoted. The tariff will be lowered and even the taxes, though they cannot be entirely abolished, will be almost abolished. It sometimes happens that one section of the public is forgotten or that one of the demands mooted among the public has not reached the ears of the party. This is also hurriedly patched on to the whole, should there be any space available for it: Until finally it is felt that there are good grounds for hoping that the whole normal host of philistines, including their wives, will have their anxieties laid to rest and will beam with satisfaction once again. And so, internally armed with faith in the goodness of god and the impenetrable stupidity of the electorate, the struggle for what is called 'the reconstruction of the reich' can now begin.
> mein kampf - volume ii, chapter i
> 
> 
> 
> 
> b
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What I would suggest to 'word bound' pea brains is to find a 'summary' or 'synopsis' of Mein Kampf. This way, adults have already deciphered it for pea brains.
> 
> You could start with Wikipedia and work from there...
> 
> At this time the Nazi party was one of many small extremist groups in Munich, but Hitler soon discovered he had two remarkable talents, one for public oratory and another for inspiring personal loyalty. His street-corner oratory, attacking Jews, socialists and liberals, capitalists  and Communists, began attracting adherents.
> Adolf Hitler's political views - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


I understand it's would be whether hard to part of a system that hitler chose to be in. But that is the price to pay for being a socialist. 
This is hitlers book you don't like to bad. Philosophy and party deal with it.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

CrusaderFrank said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is that real Americans don't run, we stand and fight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah...when does that happen exactly?
> 
> We seem to be kneeling, right now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We have two choices: outright revolution or take a generation to turn around the economy, society and culture.
> 
> A Revolution is messy and really bad if you don't win, but we turn the ship around if we realize it will take 8 4-year terms to get us fully there.
> 
> Also, it's not just enough to repeal Obama's Marxist Agenda, we have start today to show what will replace it. We have to sell our worldview.
> 
> For example: Eliminate the Department of Education does not mean the end of education like the Statists hysterically bleat, it means communities and parents will have much more power and input into their childs education.  Only Marxists and People who have CrazyGlues their lips to the Government will be against that!
Click to expand...


What we need is to end all federal programs and place domestic agenda's back in the control of the state. The state would have more oversight less fraud, less handouts to people who do not need them illegal immagration would be a thing of the past. if you aren't  a citizen I am sure the states would not allow freeloaders.


----------



## Bfgrn

editec said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JW Frogen said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know it is conventional historical wisdom the Treaty of Versailles helped cause the rise of Hitler and though he did use resentment about the treaty to his advantage, I posit the treaty did not cause the rise of fascism because it was never actually enforced.
> 
> The UK in particular kept changing the terms over the objections of France to appease both Weimar politicians and latter Hitler.
> 
> The proscribed penalties for violations where rarely implemented.
> 
> The fact is German politicians of almost very party propagated the myth that Germany was not really defeated in WWI but was betrayed and the treaty thus was unfair.
> 
> Germany was not occupied and this re-enforced the myth, and German Weimar politicians, wanting to re-arm (this process started before Hitler) inflated their currency to pay back war debt thus hurting the middle class, but the victorious powers kept changing the terms in Germany&#8217;s favor.
> 
> If anything I think the Treaty of Versailles was too lenient. Germany did not know or feel she was a defeated.
> 
> Look at the difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, after WWII Germany is occupied, partitioned, her war leaders put on trial and her new government validated and dictated to by the victorious allies, and Germany never threatens European peace again.
> 
> The problem with Versailles is it caused resentment but did not punish seriously or contain a defeated enemy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, now that you've dried out, we get to see the real you...a Bushie or maybe more of a Cheney...
> 
> History's neither one dimensional, nor can it be neatly defined by facts and historical events alone. History is the continuing saga of human existence and human conditions. Those human conditions, good or bad serve to fuel benign or aggressive behaviors. Actual outcomes of events, treaties and policies are determined as much by human perception as they are by fact. The Treaty of Versailles was perceived as very punitive in the eyes of the German people who anticipated Wilson's 14 Points, which was perceived as fair, a way to rebuild their economy, their country, re-enter the world community and retain some dignity. Instead they received Clemenceau's punitive ruler across the knuckles; total blame for the war, and with that total blame; reparations that would have taken until the late 20th century to repay. Add territorial clauses that would later become a rallying cry all combined to create animosity in Germany towards their 'enemies' and toward their own government that signed it.
> 
> If we are really going to get into that period of history and try to correlate events and consequences, there are MANY. Post WWI Germany saw a period of political instability. There were many factions vying for power. There was even a 'Red scare' not unlike right wing fear-mongering during our own Cold war. You seem to insinuate there was some pre-Hitler mental inevitability with your comment that Weimar politicians wanting to re-arm. It WAS the Treaty of Versailles that created the pre-Hitler mental inevitability. And it will remain in the annals of history as a leading cause that led to the rise of Hitler and ultimately WWII.
> 
> The main difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, the Treaty of Versailles was punitive and destructive. The Marshall Plan was not punitive, it was constructive...
> 
> These lessons will NEVER be learned by the right wing mind. They will continue to FEEL that punishment is the only way, and when it ultimately fails, it was only because the punishment was not severe enough. And they will continue to blindly follow authoritarian despots like Bush and Cheney that turned a gang of terrorists into an army of thousands.
> 
> _When the Nazis came for the communists,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a communist._
> 
> _Then they locked up the social democrats,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a social democrat._
> 
> _Then they came for the trade unionists,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a trade unionist._
> 
> _Then they came for the Jews,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a Jew._
> 
> _When they came for me,_
> _there was no one left to speak out for me._
> _Pastor Martin Niemöller_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Beautiful post, BF, with one minor addendum.
> 
> THE LEFT IS NO LESS LIKELY TO BECOME FACISTIC THAN THE RIGHT.
> 
> Seriously, do NOT be fooled into thinking otherwise.
> 
> Idealogues of _every persuasion_ are a menace to humanity.
Click to expand...


Wanna bet editec? Please provide evidence. Because ALL the studies and evidence accumulated over the last 50+ years says your accusation is false. What you are describing is called an authoritarian personality. It is an overwhelmingly conservative trait. It occurs in approximately 1% of the left, and that would be the FAR left...anarchists.

Listen to this interview...the expert John Dean's referring to Robert Altmeyer, who is the leading researcher and expert on the authoritarian personality. A reliable part of his results are based on what's called an RWA scale test, where people freely answer questions about themselves that determine their authoritarian personality markers and tendencies.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jA0OVtvqjk]YouTube - Keith Olbermann interviews John Dean[/ame]

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer

The Authoritarians


----------



## Ringel05

Bfgrn said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, now that you've dried out, we get to see the real you...a Bushie or maybe more of a Cheney...
> 
> History's neither one dimensional, nor can it be neatly defined by facts and historical events alone. History is the continuing saga of human existence and human conditions. Those human conditions, good or bad serve to fuel benign or aggressive behaviors. Actual outcomes of events, treaties and policies are determined as much by human perception as they are by fact. The Treaty of Versailles was perceived as very punitive in the eyes of the German people who anticipated Wilson's 14 Points, which was perceived as fair, a way to rebuild their economy, their country, re-enter the world community and retain some dignity. Instead they received Clemenceau's punitive ruler across the knuckles; total blame for the war, and with that total blame; reparations that would have taken until the late 20th century to repay. Add territorial clauses that would later become a rallying cry all combined to create animosity in Germany towards their 'enemies' and toward their own government that signed it.
> 
> If we are really going to get into that period of history and try to correlate events and consequences, there are MANY. Post WWI Germany saw a period of political instability. There were many factions vying for power. There was even a 'Red scare' not unlike right wing fear-mongering during our own Cold war. You seem to insinuate there was some pre-Hitler mental inevitability with your comment that Weimar politicians wanting to re-arm. It WAS the Treaty of Versailles that created the pre-Hitler mental inevitability. And it will remain in the annals of history as a leading cause that led to the rise of Hitler and ultimately WWII.
> 
> The main difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, the Treaty of Versailles was punitive and destructive. The Marshall Plan was not punitive, it was constructive...
> 
> These lessons will NEVER be learned by the right wing mind. They will continue to FEEL that punishment is the only way, and when it ultimately fails, it was only because the punishment was not severe enough. And they will continue to blindly follow authoritarian despots like Bush and Cheney that turned a gang of terrorists into an army of thousands.
> 
> _When the Nazis came for the communists,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a communist._
> 
> _Then they locked up the social democrats,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a social democrat._
> 
> _Then they came for the trade unionists,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a trade unionist._
> 
> _Then they came for the Jews,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a Jew._
> 
> _When they came for me,_
> _there was no one left to speak out for me._
> _Pastor Martin Niemöller_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beautiful post, BF, with one minor addendum.
> 
> THE LEFT IS NO LESS LIKELY TO BECOME FACISTIC THAN THE RIGHT.
> 
> Seriously, do NOT be fooled into thinking otherwise.
> 
> Idealogues of _every persuasion_ are a menace to humanity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wanna bet editec? Please provide evidence. Because ALL the studies and evidence accumulated over the last 50+ years says your accusation is false. What you are describing is called an authoritarian personality. It is an overwhelmingly conservative trait. It occurs in approximately 1% of the left, and that would be the FAR left...anarchists.
> 
> Listen to this interview...the expert John Dean's referring to Robert Altmeyer, who is the leading researcher and expert on the authoritarian personality. A reliable part of his results are based on what's called an RWA scale test, where people freely answer questions about themselves that determine their authoritarian personality markers and tendencies.
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jA0OVtvqjk]YouTube - Keith Olbermann interviews John Dean[/ame]
> 
> While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
> Robert Altmeyer
> 
> The Authoritarians
Click to expand...


Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Fidel, Jaques Necker and ARJ Turgot, Robespierre, Rewbell, Jean-Baptiste Carrier and the list goes on and on and on.  Please don't insult anyone's intelligence and try to claim these people are or were conservatives.  Altmeyer!??  I've seen tons of bad "science" in my life time but he takes the cake.  Empirical my ass!  Speaking of Nazism, he's on a par with the Nazi scientists who were "proving" Eugenics.


----------



## rightwinger

bigrebnc1775 said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah...when does that happen exactly?
> 
> We seem to be kneeling, right now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have two choices: outright revolution or take a generation to turn around the economy, society and culture.
> 
> A Revolution is messy and really bad if you don't win, but we turn the ship around if we realize it will take 8 4-year terms to get us fully there.
> 
> Also, it's not just enough to repeal Obama's Marxist Agenda, we have start today to show what will replace it. We have to sell our worldview.
> 
> For example: Eliminate the Department of Education does not mean the end of education like the Statists hysterically bleat, it means communities and parents will have much more power and input into their childs education.  Only Marxists and People who have CrazyGlues their lips to the Government will be against that!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What we need is to end all federal programs and place domestic agenda's back in the control of the state. The state would have more oversight less fraud, less handouts to people who do not need them illegal immagration would be a thing of the past. if you aren't  a citizen *I am sure the states would not allow freeloaders*.
Click to expand...


----------



## geauxtohell

bigrebnc1775 said:


> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion



You know, I thought this was going to be a thread bashing Obama and drawing Hitler comparisons, but am pleasantly surprised.   

There is a good book on this if you are interested.  Needless to say, this question has been asked before.

They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45 by Milton Mayer, an excerpt


----------



## geauxtohell

CrusaderFrank said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He offered them Hope and a Change from the past.
> 
> He had a real infectious "Yes we can!" attitude.
> 
> He used Greek temples as a prop for his speeches.
> 
> He railed at the evils of capitalism
> 
> He took over his nations car companies...and banks
Click to expand...


Disregard my last sentiments.

Of course Francis would be the guy to do it.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

geauxtohell said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know, I thought this was going to be a thread bashing Obama and drawing Hitler comparisons, but am pleasantly surprised.
> 
> There is a good book on this if you are interested.  Needless to say, this question has been asked before.
> 
> They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45 by Milton Mayer, an excerpt
Click to expand...


Truthfully it is my opinion that obama is a close comparison to a beginning hitler. But I am trying to keep my opinion out of the subject. I want people to discuss the subject of why so many germans supported hitler, and see what we come up with.
Thanks for the book suggestion.


----------



## Bfgrn

Ringel05 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beautiful post, BF, with one minor addendum.
> 
> THE LEFT IS NO LESS LIKELY TO BECOME FACISTIC THAN THE RIGHT.
> 
> Seriously, do NOT be fooled into thinking otherwise.
> 
> Idealogues of _every persuasion_ are a menace to humanity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wanna bet editec? Please provide evidence. Because ALL the studies and evidence accumulated over the last 50+ years says your accusation is false. What you are describing is called an authoritarian personality. It is an overwhelmingly conservative trait. It occurs in approximately 1% of the left, and that would be the FAR left...anarchists.
> 
> Listen to this interview...the expert John Dean's referring to Robert Altmeyer, who is the leading researcher and expert on the authoritarian personality. A reliable part of his results are based on what's called an RWA scale test, where people freely answer questions about themselves that determine their authoritarian personality markers and tendencies.
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jA0OVtvqjk]YouTube - Keith Olbermann interviews John Dean[/ame]
> 
> While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
> Robert Altmeyer
> 
> The Authoritarians
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Fidel, Jaques Necker and ARJ Turgot, Robespierre, Rewbell, Jean-Baptiste Carrier and the list goes on and on and on.  Please don't insult anyone's intelligence and try to claim these people are or were conservatives.  Altmeyer!??  I've seen tons of bad "science" in my life time but he takes the cake.  Empirical my ass!  Speaking of Nazism, he's on a par with the Nazi scientists who were "proving" Eugenics.
Click to expand...


Define conservatism. WHAT values, teachings, traditions, indoctrinations, orthodoxy would a Lenin want to 'conserve' and protect?


----------



## uscitizen

Why did so many Germans support Hitler? 


Pack mentality of humans.


----------



## Ringel05

Bfgrn said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wanna bet editec? Please provide evidence. Because ALL the studies and evidence accumulated over the last 50+ years says your accusation is false. What you are describing is called an authoritarian personality. It is an overwhelmingly conservative trait. It occurs in approximately 1% of the left, and that would be the FAR left...anarchists.
> 
> Listen to this interview...the expert John Dean's referring to Robert Altmeyer, who is the leading researcher and expert on the authoritarian personality. A reliable part of his results are based on what's called an RWA scale test, where people freely answer questions about themselves that determine their authoritarian personality markers and tendencies.
> 
> YouTube - Keith Olbermann interviews John Dean
> 
> While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
> Robert Altmeyer
> 
> The Authoritarians
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Fidel, Jaques Necker and ARJ Turgot, Robespierre, Rewbell, Jean-Baptiste Carrier and the list goes on and on and on.  Please don't insult anyone's intelligence and try to claim these people are or were conservatives.  Altmeyer!??  I've seen tons of bad "science" in my life time but he takes the cake.  Empirical my ass!  Speaking of Nazism, he's on a par with the Nazi scientists who were "proving" Eugenics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define conservatism. WHAT values, teachings, traditions, indoctrinations, orthodoxy would a Lenin want to 'conserve' and protect?
Click to expand...


  Don't tell me you plan to play some farcical, esoteric, philosophical circle jerk with the term "conservative" to prove Lenin was one.  Lenin was a radical with "liberal" ideas as with all the others I mentioned, all of which were battling the conservative, laissez-faire systems they existed in.  Each one was, to differing degrees, brutally repressive and each was a liberal in their own right.  One side does not hold exclusive license to goodness or evil no matter how much wishing or skewed "science" is applied by either side.


----------



## uscitizen

All good poiints but you are being dazzled by all the points at the tips of the branches.

Go for the main root cause.  Pack mentality.


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> b
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I would suggest to 'word bound' pea brains is to find a 'summary' or 'synopsis' of Mein Kampf. This way, adults have already deciphered it for pea brains.
> 
> You could start with Wikipedia and work from there...
> 
> At this time the Nazi party was one of many small extremist groups in Munich, but Hitler soon discovered he had two remarkable talents, one for public oratory and another for inspiring personal loyalty. His street-corner oratory, attacking Jews, socialists and liberals, capitalists  and Communists, began attracting adherents.
> Adolf Hitler's political views - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand it's would be whether hard to part of a system that hitler chose to be in. But that is the price to pay for being a socialist.
> This is hitlers book you don't like to bad. Philosophy and party deal with it.
Click to expand...


Do you have ANY clue what Hitler is saying in this chapter? He is trashing the German Workers' Party. He loathes them, calls them *philistines*. (barbarian, boob, brute, buffoon, cad, chuff, churl, dork, goon, lout, oaf, peasant, rube, vulgarian, yahoo)

Hitler ends up joining because he wants to take it over.  

I suggest you READ the whole chapter, and if you don't understand it, find someone to explain it to you.


----------



## Bfgrn

Ringel05 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Fidel, Jaques Necker and ARJ Turgot, Robespierre, Rewbell, Jean-Baptiste Carrier and the list goes on and on and on.  Please don't insult anyone's intelligence and try to claim these people are or were conservatives.  Altmeyer!??  I've seen tons of bad "science" in my life time but he takes the cake.  Empirical my ass!  Speaking of Nazism, he's on a par with the Nazi scientists who were "proving" Eugenics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define conservatism. WHAT values, teachings, traditions, indoctrinations, orthodoxy would a Lenin want to 'conserve' and protect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't tell me you plan to play some farcical, esoteric, philosophical circle jerk with the term "conservative" to prove Lenin was one.  Lenin was a radical with "liberal" ideas as with all the others I mentioned, all of which were battling the conservative, laissez-faire systems they existed in.  Each one was, to differing degrees, brutally repressive and each was a liberal in their own right.  One side does not hold exclusive license to goodness or evil no matter how much wishing or skewed "science" is applied by either side.
Click to expand...


Did Lenin and Stalin want to 'conserve' and protect free market capitalism, western values and traditions? 

Your political awareness and assessment is based parochial indoctrination. Something along the lines that water swirls clockwise when you leave the northern hemisphere.

Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
Me


----------



## CrusaderFrank

geauxtohell said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought this might be a good topic of discussion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He offered them Hope and a Change from the past.
> 
> He had a real infectious "Yes we can!" attitude.
> 
> He used Greek temples as a prop for his speeches.
> 
> He railed at the evils of capitalism
> 
> He took over his nations car companies...and banks
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Disregard my last sentiments.
> 
> Of course Francis would be the guy to do it.
Click to expand...


Hitler did all the above, why the long face?


----------



## MikeK

uscitizen said:


> Why did so many Germans support Hitler?
> 
> 
> Pack mentality of humans.


While I do agree that humans in general do manifest pack (tribal) behavior, which accounts in some measure for our species' close affinity with dogs, the German people were uniquely receptive to to Adolf Hitler's militant agitation because of the fundamentally authoritarian aspect of the German disposition, which is believed to derive from rigidly Lutheran and Catholic influences.   Hitler's extreme incitements would have been ignored in any less authoritarian (more Protestant) culture.  

So while the result of Hitler's exhortations may be regarded as pack behavior, in the case of the German people of that era there was a unique extra dimension.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I would suggest to 'word bound' pea brains is to find a 'summary' or 'synopsis' of Mein Kampf. This way, adults have already deciphered it for pea brains.
> 
> You could start with Wikipedia and work from there...
> 
> At this time the Nazi party was one of many small extremist groups in Munich, but Hitler soon discovered he had two remarkable talents, one for public oratory and another for inspiring personal loyalty. His street-corner oratory, attacking Jews, socialists and liberals, capitalists  and Communists, began attracting adherents.
> Adolf Hitler's political views - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I understand it's would be whether hard to part of a system that hitler chose to be in. But that is the price to pay for being a socialist.
> This is hitlers book you don't like to bad. Philosophy and party deal with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you have ANY clue what Hitler is saying in this chapter? He is trashing the German Workers' Party. He loathes them, calls them *philistines*. (barbarian, boob, brute, buffoon, cad, chuff, churl, dork, goon, lout, oaf, peasant, rube, vulgarian, yahoo)
> 
> Hitler ends up joining because he wants to take it over.
> 
> I suggest you READ the whole chapter, and if you don't understand it, find someone to explain it to you.
Click to expand...


*If he's trashing them why did he join them card carrier number 7 or did you miss that part?*
......After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7
*So who needs the help in having it explained to them?*


----------



## JW Frogen

editec said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JW Frogen said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know it is conventional historical wisdom the Treaty of Versailles helped cause the rise of Hitler and though he did use resentment about the treaty to his advantage, I posit the treaty did not cause the rise of fascism because it was never actually enforced.
> 
> The UK in particular kept changing the terms over the objections of France to appease both Weimar politicians and latter Hitler.
> 
> The proscribed penalties for violations where rarely implemented.
> 
> The fact is German politicians of almost very party propagated the myth that Germany was not really defeated in WWI but was betrayed and the treaty thus was unfair.
> 
> Germany was not occupied and this re-enforced the myth, and German Weimar politicians, wanting to re-arm (this process started before Hitler) inflated their currency to pay back war debt thus hurting the middle class, but the victorious powers kept changing the terms in Germany&#8217;s favor.
> 
> If anything I think the Treaty of Versailles was too lenient. Germany did not know or feel she was a defeated.
> 
> Look at the difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, after WWII Germany is occupied, partitioned, her war leaders put on trial and her new government validated and dictated to by the victorious allies, and Germany never threatens European peace again.
> 
> The problem with Versailles is it caused resentment but did not punish seriously or contain a defeated enemy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, now that you've dried out, we get to see the real you...a Bushie or maybe more of a Cheney...
> 
> History's neither one dimensional, nor can it be neatly defined by facts and historical events alone. History is the continuing saga of human existence and human conditions. Those human conditions, good or bad serve to fuel benign or aggressive behaviors. Actual outcomes of events, treaties and policies are determined as much by human perception as they are by fact. The Treaty of Versailles was perceived as very punitive in the eyes of the German people who anticipated Wilson's 14 Points, which was perceived as fair, a way to rebuild their economy, their country, re-enter the world community and retain some dignity. Instead they received Clemenceau's punitive ruler across the knuckles; total blame for the war, and with that total blame; reparations that would have taken until the late 20th century to repay. Add territorial clauses that would later become a rallying cry all combined to create animosity in Germany towards their 'enemies' and toward their own government that signed it.
> 
> If we are really going to get into that period of history and try to correlate events and consequences, there are MANY. Post WWI Germany saw a period of political instability. There were many factions vying for power. There was even a 'Red scare' not unlike right wing fear-mongering during our own Cold war. You seem to insinuate there was some pre-Hitler mental inevitability with your comment that Weimar politicians wanting to re-arm. It WAS the Treaty of Versailles that created the pre-Hitler mental inevitability. And it will remain in the annals of history as a leading cause that led to the rise of Hitler and ultimately WWII.
> 
> The main difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, the Treaty of Versailles was punitive and destructive. The Marshall Plan was not punitive, it was constructive...
> 
> These lessons will NEVER be learned by the right wing mind. They will continue to FEEL that punishment is the only way, and when it ultimately fails, it was only because the punishment was not severe enough. And they will continue to blindly follow authoritarian despots like Bush and Cheney that turned a gang of terrorists into an army of thousands.
> 
> _When the Nazis came for the communists,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a communist._
> 
> _Then they locked up the social democrats,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a social democrat._
> 
> _Then they came for the trade unionists,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a trade unionist._
> 
> _Then they came for the Jews,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a Jew._
> 
> _When they came for me,_
> _there was no one left to speak out for me._
> _Pastor Martin Niemöller_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Beautiful post, BF, with one minor addendum.
> 
> THE LEFT IS NO LESS LIKELY TO BECOME FACISTIC THAN THE RIGHT.
> 
> Seriously, do NOT be fooled into thinking otherwise.
> 
> Idealogues of _every persuasion_ are a menace to humanity.
Click to expand...


The Marshall plan was based on a destructive peace; Germany was totally defeated and divided. This is what allowed the Democratic West to implement, and impose the Marshall plan.

That and the Soviet plunder of East Germany whitch gave West Germany a Hobbsian offer they could not refuse.

Unlike the Treaty of Versailles which gave Germany an offer they chose to refuse. And they did, and so did the victors, and so the treaty was neve imposed, unlike the treaty post WWII.

Rule number one of war, when you win, impose  your terms to the letter.

That happened after WWII, it did not happen after WWI.


----------



## eots

bigrebnc1775 said:


> i thought this might be a good topic of discussion



because propaganda works ...same reason we support the invasion of soverign nations..torture and illegal detainment


----------



## JW Frogen

The fact the victors did not impose their terms after WWI is the reason WWII happened.

The fact that the victors imposed their terms after WWII is the reason WWIII never happened.


----------



## editec

Bfgrn said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, now that you've dried out, we get to see the real you...a Bushie or maybe more of a Cheney...
> 
> History's neither one dimensional, nor can it be neatly defined by facts and historical events alone. History is the continuing saga of human existence and human conditions. Those human conditions, good or bad serve to fuel benign or aggressive behaviors. Actual outcomes of events, treaties and policies are determined as much by human perception as they are by fact. The Treaty of Versailles was perceived as very punitive in the eyes of the German people who anticipated Wilson's 14 Points, which was perceived as fair, a way to rebuild their economy, their country, re-enter the world community and retain some dignity. Instead they received Clemenceau's punitive ruler across the knuckles; total blame for the war, and with that total blame; reparations that would have taken until the late 20th century to repay. Add territorial clauses that would later become a rallying cry all combined to create animosity in Germany towards their 'enemies' and toward their own government that signed it.
> 
> If we are really going to get into that period of history and try to correlate events and consequences, there are MANY. Post WWI Germany saw a period of political instability. There were many factions vying for power. There was even a 'Red scare' not unlike right wing fear-mongering during our own Cold war. You seem to insinuate there was some pre-Hitler mental inevitability with your comment that Weimar politicians wanting to re-arm. It WAS the Treaty of Versailles that created the pre-Hitler mental inevitability. And it will remain in the annals of history as a leading cause that led to the rise of Hitler and ultimately WWII.
> 
> The main difference between the aftermath of WWI and WWII, the Treaty of Versailles was punitive and destructive. The Marshall Plan was not punitive, it was constructive...
> 
> These lessons will NEVER be learned by the right wing mind. They will continue to FEEL that punishment is the only way, and when it ultimately fails, it was only because the punishment was not severe enough. And they will continue to blindly follow authoritarian despots like Bush and Cheney that turned a gang of terrorists into an army of thousands.
> 
> _When the Nazis came for the communists,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a communist._
> 
> _Then they locked up the social democrats,_
> _I remained silent;_
> _I was not a social democrat._
> 
> _Then they came for the trade unionists,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a trade unionist._
> 
> _Then they came for the Jews,_
> _I did not speak out;_
> _I was not a Jew._
> 
> _When they came for me,_
> _there was no one left to speak out for me._
> _Pastor Martin Niemöller_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beautiful post, BF, with one minor addendum.
> 
> THE LEFT IS NO LESS LIKELY TO BECOME FACISTIC THAN THE RIGHT.
> 
> Seriously, do NOT be fooled into thinking otherwise.
> 
> Idealogues of _every persuasion_ are a menace to humanity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wanna bet editec? Please provide evidence. Because ALL the studies and evidence accumulated over the last 50+ years says your accusation is false. What you are describing is called an authoritarian personality. It is an overwhelmingly conservative trait. It occurs in approximately 1% of the left, and that would be the FAR left...anarchists.
Click to expand...

 
USSR, PRP, North Korea, Cuba

Nuf said?

No?

Here's the thing, BK...totalitarians and authoritarians don't really CARE about ideologies...what they care about is having a pre-packaged answer, and attaining POWER though the application of same.

If that kind of personality is thwarted from getting power thought the right, they're more than willing to climb the authority ladder via the left.=, right center, up down or bottom.

Stalinists, Maoist, Peronists, Francoians, and Hitlerist are all cut from the same bolt of cloth, my friend.

I don't know how many times I've been in the company of my fellow leftist that have truly expected me to apologise for being a White male, but I'd have to say it's pretty much every time I've been involved with them. And that was... oh, I don't know, for about two decades of political activity.

Extreme lefties are as fucked up as these right wing cranks we see on this board, and quite a few of them are just as stupid, too.

They are just as prejudiced, just as clueless and just as *anti-humanitarian* as any neo-con.

Maybe that hasn't been your experience, (and if not lucky you!) but I can assure you it's been mine, and I have been involved in poltical activities most of my adult life.

The weak minded types who cling to _any_ ideology for direction, rather than taking each circumstance on its face to find its solution, tend to be clueless authoritarians (they seek their authority from their ideology, you see?) regardless of what brand of ideology they happen to be clinging to for guidance.


So my advise is that you don't put you faith in movements (that you don't run) parties (you don't run) or ideologies that are claiming to have THE comprehenive SOLUTION TO EVERTHING. 

Joining those limits your freedom to seek solutions appropriate to circumstance, and forces you into the lockstep of a theories that might not make sense for the circumstance.

Ideologists of every persuasion are people who, as far as I have seen, are too fucking lazy or too fucking stupid to _think and ACT for or by themselves._

And THAT is the hallmark of the authoritarian mind AND the tools that cleave to them,_ regardless of what political theory they happen to be ascribing to._


----------



## Ringel05

Bfgrn said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define conservatism. WHAT values, teachings, traditions, indoctrinations, orthodoxy would a Lenin want to 'conserve' and protect?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't tell me you plan to play some farcical, esoteric, philosophical circle jerk with the term "conservative" to prove Lenin was one.  Lenin was a radical with "liberal" ideas as with all the others I mentioned, all of which were battling the conservative, laissez-faire systems they existed in.  Each one was, to differing degrees, brutally repressive and each was a liberal in their own right.  One side does not hold exclusive license to goodness or evil no matter how much wishing or skewed "science" is applied by either side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did Lenin and Stalin want to 'conserve' and protect free market capitalism, western values and traditions?
> 
> Your political awareness and assessment is based parochial indoctrination. Something along the lines that water swirls clockwise when you leave the northern hemisphere.
> 
> Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth.
> Me
Click to expand...


Okay, that cinches it.  You're hopelessly self delusional.  In parochial terms: 'you're so full of shit your eyes are brown.'  Conservatism and liberalism are not just western constructs.  Enjoy your fantasies.


----------



## editec

> Conservatism and liberalism are not just western constructs.


 
As they are being applied in the America political scene, they are not only constructs, they are constucts DESIGNED to mislead the easily mislead.


----------



## Ringel05

editec said:


> Conservatism and liberalism are not just western constructs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As they are being applied in the America political scene, they are not only constructs, they are constucts DESIGNED to mislead the easily mislead.
Click to expand...


Here I disagree.  The constructs were not designed to mislead, it's the twisted usage wherein the deception lies.
The true definition of conservatism is Laissez-faire in the sense of 'let it be or leave it as is'.  In this sense liberalism, by definition is the opposite.  These are the original definitions of the two terms that have been twisted over time to mean what people want them to mean to fit their particular agendas.


----------



## Bfgrn

editec said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beautiful post, BF, with one minor addendum.
> 
> THE LEFT IS NO LESS LIKELY TO BECOME FACISTIC THAN THE RIGHT.
> 
> Seriously, do NOT be fooled into thinking otherwise.
> 
> Idealogues of _every persuasion_ are a menace to humanity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wanna bet editec? Please provide evidence. Because ALL the studies and evidence accumulated over the last 50+ years says your accusation is false. What you are describing is called an authoritarian personality. It is an overwhelmingly conservative trait. It occurs in approximately 1% of the left, and that would be the FAR left...anarchists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> USSR, PRP, North Korea, Cuba
> 
> Nuf said?
> 
> No?
> 
> Here's the thing, BK...totalitarians and authoritarians don't really CARE about ideologies...what they care about is having a pre-packaged answer, and attaining POWER though the application of same.
> 
> If that kind of personality is thwarted from getting power thought the right, they're more than willing to climb the authority ladder via the left.=, right center, up down or bottom.
> 
> Stalinists, Maoist, Peronists, Francoians, and Hitlerist are all cut from the same bolt of cloth, my friend.
> 
> I don't know how many times I've been in the company of my fellow leftist that have truly expected me to apologise for being a White male, but I'd have to say it's pretty much every time I've been involved with them. And that was... oh, I don't know, for about two decades of political activity.
> 
> Extreme lefties are as fucked up as these right wing cranks we see on this board, and quite a few of them are just as stupid, too.
> 
> They are just as prejudiced, just as clueless and just as *anti-humanitarian* as any neo-con.
> 
> Maybe that hasn't been your experience, (and if not lucky you!) but I can assure you it's been mine, and I have been involved in poltical activities most of my adult life.
> 
> The weak minded types who cling to _any_ ideology for direction, rather than taking each circumstance on its face to find its solution, tend to be clueless authoritarians (they seek their authority from their ideology, you see?) regardless of what brand of ideology they happen to be clinging to for guidance.
> 
> 
> So my advise is that you don't put you faith in movements (that you don't run) parties (you don't run) or ideologies that are claiming to have THE comprehenive SOLUTION TO EVERTHING.
> 
> Joining those limits your freedom to seek solutions appropriate to circumstance, and forces you into the lockstep of a theories that might not make sense for the circumstance.
> 
> Ideologists of every persuasion are people who, as far as I have seen, are too fucking lazy or too fucking stupid to _think and ACT for or by themselves._
> 
> And THAT is the hallmark of the authoritarian mind AND the tools that cleave to them,_ regardless of what political theory they happen to be ascribing to._
Click to expand...


You clearly don't understand what conservatism IS in another culture and country. 

Can you understand the concept of parochial indoctrination? That Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth? Let's take Joseph Stalin. He was born, raised, educated (indoctrinated) and exposed his whole life to THAT culture's doctrines, traditions, values and orthodoxy. Stalin attended Georgian Orthodox seminary. What HE wants to 'conserve' and protect has NO relation to, and is diametrically opposed to western values. His conservatism is based on a totally different set of doctrines, traditions, values and orthodoxy. BTW, Russia and North Korea are extremely conservative cultures...

Here's are example... 

A Tea Party of Stalinists


----------



## PatekPhilippe

JW Frogen said:


> The fact the victors did not impose their terms after WWI is the reason WWII happened.
> 
> The fact that the victors imposed their terms after WWII is the reason WWIII never happened.



Disagree.  WW3 never happened because of the MAD doctrine.  The United Nations was formed to specifically prevent future World Wars by letting smaller, regional wars take place and when they got outta hand then UN peacekeepers stepped in.


----------



## Ringel05

Bfgrn said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wanna bet editec? Please provide evidence. Because ALL the studies and evidence accumulated over the last 50+ years says your accusation is false. What you are describing is called an authoritarian personality. It is an overwhelmingly conservative trait. It occurs in approximately 1% of the left, and that would be the FAR left...anarchists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> USSR, PRP, North Korea, Cuba
> 
> Nuf said?
> 
> No?
> 
> Here's the thing, BK...totalitarians and authoritarians don't really CARE about ideologies...what they care about is having a pre-packaged answer, and attaining POWER though the application of same.
> 
> If that kind of personality is thwarted from getting power thought the right, they're more than willing to climb the authority ladder via the left.=, right center, up down or bottom.
> 
> Stalinists, Maoist, Peronists, Francoians, and Hitlerist are all cut from the same bolt of cloth, my friend.
> 
> I don't know how many times I've been in the company of my fellow leftist that have truly expected me to apologise for being a White male, but I'd have to say it's pretty much every time I've been involved with them. And that was... oh, I don't know, for about two decades of political activity.
> 
> Extreme lefties are as fucked up as these right wing cranks we see on this board, and quite a few of them are just as stupid, too.
> 
> They are just as prejudiced, just as clueless and just as *anti-humanitarian* as any neo-con.
> 
> Maybe that hasn't been your experience, (and if not lucky you!) but I can assure you it's been mine, and I have been involved in poltical activities most of my adult life.
> 
> The weak minded types who cling to _any_ ideology for direction, rather than taking each circumstance on its face to find its solution, tend to be clueless authoritarians (they seek their authority from their ideology, you see?) regardless of what brand of ideology they happen to be clinging to for guidance.
> 
> 
> So my advise is that you don't put you faith in movements (that you don't run) parties (you don't run) or ideologies that are claiming to have THE comprehenive SOLUTION TO EVERTHING.
> 
> Joining those limits your freedom to seek solutions appropriate to circumstance, and forces you into the lockstep of a theories that might not make sense for the circumstance.
> 
> Ideologists of every persuasion are people who, as far as I have seen, are too fucking lazy or too fucking stupid to _think and ACT for or by themselves._
> 
> And THAT is the hallmark of the authoritarian mind AND the tools that cleave to them,_ regardless of what political theory they happen to be ascribing to._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You clearly don't understand what conservatism IS in another culture and country.
> 
> Can you understand the concept of parochial indoctrination? That Conservatism is based on latitude, longitude and date of birth? Let's take Joseph Stalin. He was born, raised, educated (indoctrinated) and exposed his whole life to THAT culture's doctrines, traditions, values and orthodoxy. Stalin attended Georgian Orthodox seminary. What HE wants to 'conserve' and protect has NO relation to, and is diametrically opposed to western values. His conservatism is based on a totally different set of doctrines, traditions, values and orthodoxy. BTW, Russia and North Korea are extremely conservative cultures...
> 
> Here's are example...
> 
> A Tea Party of Stalinists
Click to expand...


You are neglecting the historical context.  Yes, Communist Russia and North Korean government systems are conservative due to the fact of their established organization over a long period of time.  Modern Russia, China and early North Korean governments were/are the representative radical change from the local norm hence, liberal in nature.


----------



## topspin

because they hate jews?


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand it's would be whether hard to part of a system that hitler chose to be in. But that is the price to pay for being a socialist.
> This is hitlers book you don't like to bad. Philosophy and party deal with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have ANY clue what Hitler is saying in this chapter? He is trashing the German Workers' Party. He loathes them, calls them *philistines*. (barbarian, boob, brute, buffoon, cad, chuff, churl, dork, goon, lout, oaf, peasant, rube, vulgarian, yahoo)
> 
> Hitler ends up joining because he wants to take it over.
> 
> I suggest you READ the whole chapter, and if you don't understand it, find someone to explain it to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *If he's trashing them why did he join them card carrier number 7 or did you miss that part?*
> ......After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7
> *So who needs the help in having it explained to them?*
Click to expand...


My God bigrebnc, why don't you READ what Hitler says, instead of continuing to make a total ass out of yourself. It is not someone's interpretation of Hitler's beliefs, it IS Hitler's beliefs.

He TELLS you that he didn't join because he embraced ANY of their beliefs...he calls their beliefs_ " their absurd philistinism"_ (absurd barbarism), he says the people in the room are _"chiefly from the lower classes of the population'_. He says they spewed _"the Babel _(noise and confusion) _of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases; hence also the title"_ (hence the title German Workers' Party)

He brags how he couldn't sit and listen to one of them talk about_ "peace...and more similar nonsense. At this point I could not help demanding the floor and giving the learned gentleman my opinion on this point-with the result that the previous speaker, even before I was finished, left the hall like a wet poodle."
_
He describes the reaction he got from the gathering: _"As I spoke, the audience had listened with astonished faces, and only as I was beginning to say good night to the assemblage and go away did a man come leaping after me, introduce himself (I had not quite understood his name), and press a little booklet into my hand, apparently a political pamphlet, with the urgent request that I read it."_

That _"political pamphlet"_ leads us to YOUR first out of context misinterpretation. Hitler says _"It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described how he had returned to *national thinking*_" (*NATIONALISM*)...*NOT* _"the Babel _(noise and confusion)_ of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases". _

Hitler TELLS you when he received a postcard saying he had been accepted in the German Workers' Party: _"I didn't know whether to be angry or to laugh. I had no intention of joining a ready-made party, *but wanted to found one of my own*. What they asked of me was presumptuous and out of the question."_

If you continue to READ on, you will see him go through a process of self rationalization: although he wanted to _"found a party of his own",_ he would never be accepted by a major party because they would look down on him for his _"lack of schooling"_. He rationalizes that he wouldn't really want to be accepted because they were the _"'intelligentsia'...these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lick these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me" _

SO, he confronts the reality of how to start his OWN party...he can't take over a major party of elites and he didn't have any people for his own party. 

SO...Hitler decides the best way to HAVE his own party is to start it by enlisting these barbarians, the German Workers' Party. _"Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing."_


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Since Progressives tend to believe their own bullshit, here a little handy chart showing ideology and control

Left Wing Ideology
Progressivism, Marxist, Liberalism
Fascism, Communism, Socialism
State Control

Right Wing Ideology
Libertarianism, Conservatism
People Control

Moderate Ideology
I can't decide if I want fries or onion rings


----------



## Bfgrn

CrusaderFrank said:


> Since Progressives tend to believe their own bullshit, here a little handy chart showing ideology and control
> 
> Left Wing Ideology
> Progressivism, Marxist, Liberalism
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism
> State Control
> 
> Right Wing Ideology
> Libertarianism, Conservatism
> People Control
> 
> Moderate Ideology
> I can't decide if I want fries or onion rings




Frank, you are the most delusional moron I've ever encountered. 'People control' is PURE socialism. Socialism = more people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the society, country and government are run.

Conservatism is NOT based on 'people control', it is based on hierarchy control. The goals of conservatism throughout history is the domination of society by an aristocracy. The only thing that has changed is WHO represents that hierarchy and aristocracy.

Conservatism: I can't decide if I want fries AND onion rings

In America from 2000- 2008, the hierarchy and aristocracy conservatives embraced included corporations, CEO's, the captains of industry and the government.   

In America today, the hierarchy and aristocracy conservatives embrace includes corporations, CEO's, the captains of industry...with NO government (hold the onion rings)


----------



## PatekPhilippe

CrusaderFrank said:


> Since Progressives tend to believe their own bullshit, here a little handy chart showing ideology and control
> 
> Left Wing Ideology
> Progressivism, Marxist, Liberalism
> Fascism, Communism, Socialism
> State Control
> 
> Right Wing Ideology
> Libertarianism, Conservatism
> People Control
> 
> Moderate Ideology
> I can't decide if I want fries or onion rings



Where does the "Ive been duped...it's all his fault" ideology fit in?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have ANY clue what Hitler is saying in this chapter? He is trashing the German Workers' Party. He loathes them, calls them *philistines*. (barbarian, boob, brute, buffoon, cad, chuff, churl, dork, goon, lout, oaf, peasant, rube, vulgarian, yahoo)
> 
> Hitler ends up joining because he wants to take it over.
> 
> I suggest you READ the whole chapter, and if you don't understand it, find someone to explain it to you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *If he's trashing them why did he join them card carrier number 7 or did you miss that part?*
> ......After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7
> *So who needs the help in having it explained to them?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My God bigrebnc, why don't you READ what Hitler says, instead of continuing to make a total ass out of yourself. It is not someone's interpretation of Hitler's beliefs, it IS Hitler's beliefs.
> 
> He TELLS you that he didn't join because he embraced ANY of their beliefs...he calls their beliefs_ " their absurd philistinism"_ (absurd barbarism), he says the people in the room are _"chiefly from the lower classes of the population'_. He says they spewed _"the Babel _(noise and confusion) _of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases; hence also the title"_ (hence the title German Workers' Party)
> 
> He brags how he couldn't sit and listen to one of them talk about_ "peace...and more similar nonsense. At this point I could not help demanding the floor and giving the learned gentleman my opinion on this point-with the result that the previous speaker, even before I was finished, left the hall like a wet poodle."
> _
> He describes the reaction he got from the gathering: _"As I spoke, the audience had listened with astonished faces, and only as I was beginning to say good night to the assemblage and go away did a man come leaping after me, introduce himself (I had not quite understood his name), and press a little booklet into my hand, apparently a political pamphlet, with the urgent request that I read it."_
> 
> That _"political pamphlet"_ leads us to YOUR first out of context misinterpretation. Hitler says _"It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described how he had returned to *national thinking*_" (*NATIONALISM*)...*NOT* _"the Babel _(noise and confusion)_ of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases". _
> 
> Hitler TELLS you when he received a postcard saying he had been accepted in the German Workers' Party: _"I didn't know whether to be angry or to laugh. I had no intention of joining a ready-made party, *but wanted to found one of my own*. What they asked of me was presumptuous and out of the question."_
> 
> If you continue to READ on, you will see him go through a process of self rationalization: although he wanted to _"found a party of his own",_ he would never be accepted by a major party because they would look down on him for his _"lack of schooling"_. He rationalizes that he wouldn't really want to be accepted because they were the _"'intelligentsia'...these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lick these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me" _
> 
> SO, he confronts the reality of how to start his OWN party...he can't take over a major party of elites and he didn't have any people for his own party.
> 
> SO...Hitler decides the best way to HAVE his own party is to start it by enlisting these barbarians, the German Workers' Party. _"Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing."_
Click to expand...


What in the hell was hitler card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, hitler joined because he wanted to take over the workes socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be as me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party.


----------



## L.K.Eder

you can even join the dap without knowing it, like hitler. his number was 55 alphabetically. to sound bigger than they were, they started numbering with 501.

so hitler's card number of the dap was 555.


----------



## westwall

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *If he's trashing them why did he join them card carrier number 7 or did you miss that part?*
> ......After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7
> *So who needs the help in having it explained to them?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My God bigrebnc, why don't you READ what Hitler says, instead of continuing to make a total ass out of yourself. It is not someone's interpretation of Hitler's beliefs, it IS Hitler's beliefs.
> 
> He TELLS you that he didn't join because he embraced ANY of their beliefs...he calls their beliefs_ " their absurd philistinism"_ (absurd barbarism), he says the people in the room are _"chiefly from the lower classes of the population'_. He says they spewed _"the Babel _(noise and confusion) _of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases; hence also the title"_ (hence the title German Workers' Party)
> 
> He brags how he couldn't sit and listen to one of them talk about_ "peace...and more similar nonsense. At this point I could not help demanding the floor and giving the learned gentleman my opinion on this point-with the result that the previous speaker, even before I was finished, left the hall like a wet poodle."
> _
> He describes the reaction he got from the gathering: _"As I spoke, the audience had listened with astonished faces, and only as I was beginning to say good night to the assemblage and go away did a man come leaping after me, introduce himself (I had not quite understood his name), and press a little booklet into my hand, apparently a political pamphlet, with the urgent request that I read it."_
> 
> That _"political pamphlet"_ leads us to YOUR first out of context misinterpretation. Hitler says _"It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described how he had returned to *national thinking*_" (*NATIONALISM*)...*NOT* _"the Babel _(noise and confusion)_ of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases". _
> 
> Hitler TELLS you when he received a postcard saying he had been accepted in the German Workers' Party: _"I didn't know whether to be angry or to laugh. I had no intention of joining a ready-made party, *but wanted to found one of my own*. What they asked of me was presumptuous and out of the question."_
> 
> If you continue to READ on, you will see him go through a process of self rationalization: although he wanted to _"found a party of his own",_ he would never be accepted by a major party because they would look down on him for his _"lack of schooling"_. He rationalizes that he wouldn't really want to be accepted because they were the _"'intelligentsia'...these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lick these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me" _
> 
> SO, he confronts the reality of how to start his OWN party...he can't take over a major party of elites and he didn't have any people for his own party.
> 
> SO...Hitler decides the best way to HAVE his own party is to start it by enlisting these barbarians, the German Workers' Party. _"Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing."_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What in the hell was hitler card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, hitler joined because he wanted to take over the workes socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be as me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party.
Click to expand...






I fear Bfgrn has been talked at a lot, and told what to think but I doubt he has done much serious reading on the subject.  As evidenced by the above post.


----------



## germanguy

Funny how a debate about german history easily gets the furor into you Yanks.

What most here do is to view at this question while only seeing your own agenda.

The Germans did not support Hitler-
In 1933 he came to power as head of a multi-party coalition, brought to office by the far-right, a half-senile President (who definitely was not a friend of the republic, but notwithstanding took his oath to the constitution serious).

He certainly had a mandate in 1933 to end partisanship, economic crisis and the fear of bolshevism.
That he had a mandate to start a war, to lay Europe in ruins and to kill more than 50 million people was not the case. The end of 1945 was not easily foreseen in 1933.

And:

Hitler was no socialist. All this crap about Obama as a Nazi or Socialism equals Nazism is not getting the point.

As Goebbels once stated:

We do not want low bread prices, we do not want high bread prices, we want National Socialist bread prices.

The Nazis mostly gave a shit about ideology. 
How to get Himmlers germanic mystizism, with his believe in astrology, Hitlers religious belief in Wagner etc. into one ideology ? 
Just tell everybody what he wants to hear.

Interestingly, if you look at the respective ideological groups, the Nazis in general did not succeed with their ideology. 
To the conservatives, especially the old-fashioned ones, Hitler was just an upstart, a corporal in the War. 
To a lot of workers the Nazis were no Socialists. There were enough workers quarters in Germany, where being out azt night in a Party uniform was a very stupid idea. 
So, with the proclaimed best supporters of the Nazis, the far right and the Socialists, Hitlers "ideology" did not work.

So, did the Germans support him ? All and in every aspect ? I really doubt it.

regards
ze germanguy


----------



## L.K.Eder

westwall said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> My God bigrebnc, why don't you READ what Hitler says, instead of continuing to make a total ass out of yourself. It is not someone's interpretation of Hitler's beliefs, it IS Hitler's beliefs.
> 
> He TELLS you that he didn't join because he embraced ANY of their beliefs...he calls their beliefs_ " their absurd philistinism"_ (absurd barbarism), he says the people in the room are _"chiefly from the lower classes of the population'_. He says they spewed _"the Babel _(noise and confusion) _of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases; hence also the title"_ (hence the title German Workers' Party)
> 
> He brags how he couldn't sit and listen to one of them talk about_ "peace...and more similar nonsense. At this point I could not help demanding the floor and giving the learned gentleman my opinion on this point-with the result that the previous speaker, even before I was finished, left the hall like a wet poodle."
> _
> He describes the reaction he got from the gathering: _"As I spoke, the audience had listened with astonished faces, and only as I was beginning to say good night to the assemblage and go away did a man come leaping after me, introduce himself (I had not quite understood his name), and press a little booklet into my hand, apparently a political pamphlet, with the urgent request that I read it."_
> 
> That _"political pamphlet"_ leads us to YOUR first out of context misinterpretation. Hitler says _"It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described how he had returned to *national thinking*_" (*NATIONALISM*)...*NOT* _"the Babel _(noise and confusion)_ of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases". _
> 
> Hitler TELLS you when he received a postcard saying he had been accepted in the German Workers' Party: _"I didn't know whether to be angry or to laugh. I had no intention of joining a ready-made party, *but wanted to found one of my own*. What they asked of me was presumptuous and out of the question."_
> 
> If you continue to READ on, you will see him go through a process of self rationalization: although he wanted to _"found a party of his own",_ he would never be accepted by a major party because they would look down on him for his _"lack of schooling"_. He rationalizes that he wouldn't really want to be accepted because they were the _"'intelligentsia'...these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lick these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me" _
> 
> SO, he confronts the reality of how to start his OWN party...he can't take over a major party of elites and he didn't have any people for his own party.
> 
> SO...Hitler decides the best way to HAVE his own party is to start it by enlisting these barbarians, the German Workers' Party. _"Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What in the hell was hitler card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, hitler joined because he wanted to take over the workes socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be as me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear Bfgrn has been talked at a lot, and told what to think but I doubt he has done much serious reading on the subject.  As evidenced by the above post.
Click to expand...


i did mucho serious reading on the subject. bfgrn has it dead right, and you and fatboyrebel et al are seriously out of sync with reality and history.


----------



## José

*Why did so many Germans support Hitler?

Why do so many Americans believe the jewish racial dictatorship is in fact a democracy?

Massive propaganda bombardment.*


----------



## westwall

L.K.Eder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What in the hell was hitler card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, hitler joined because he wanted to take over the workes socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be as me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear Bfgrn has been talked at a lot, and told what to think but I doubt he has done much serious reading on the subject.  As evidenced by the above post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i did mucho serious reading on the subject. bfgrn has it dead right, and you and fatboyrebel et al are seriously out of sync with reality and history.
Click to expand...






I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.  

The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.

As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"


----------



## bigrebnc1775

germanguy said:


> Funny how a debate about german history easily gets the furor into you Yanks.
> 
> What most here do is to view at this question while only seeing your own agenda.
> 
> The Germans did not support Hitler-
> In 1933 he came to power as head of a multi-party coalition, brought to office by the far-right, a half-senile President (who definitely was not a friend of the republic, but notwithstanding took his oath to the constitution serious).
> 
> He certainly had a mandate in 1933 to end partisanship, economic crisis and the fear of bolshevism.
> That he had a mandate to start a war, to lay Europe in ruins and to kill more than 50 million people was not the case. The end of 1945 was not easily foreseen in 1933.
> 
> And:
> 
> Hitler was no socialist. All this crap about Obama as a Nazi or Socialism equals Nazism is not getting the point.
> 
> As Goebbels once stated:
> 
> We do not want low bread prices, we do not want high bread prices, we want National Socialist bread prices.
> 
> The Nazis mostly gave a shit about ideology.
> How to get Himmlers germanic mystizism, with his believe in astrology, Hitlers religious belief in Wagner etc. into one ideology ?
> Just tell everybody what he wants to hear.
> 
> Interestingly, if you look at the respective ideological groups, the Nazis in general did not succeed with their ideology.
> To the conservatives, especially the old-fashioned ones, Hitler was just an upstart, a corporal in the War.
> To a lot of workers the Nazis were no Socialists. There were enough workers quarters in Germany, where being out azt night in a Party uniform was a very stupid idea.
> So, with the proclaimed best supporters of the Nazis, the far right and the Socialists, Hitlers "ideology" did not work.
> 
> So, did the Germans support him ? All and in every aspect ? I really doubt it.
> 
> regards
> ze germanguy



What does nazi mean. Have you by chance read his book? Oh and by the way mr. German guy I lived in Germany for two years. I have talked with the older Germans who were alive when Hitler took control. I call you post BS


----------



## bigrebnc1775

westwall said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> I fear Bfgrn has been talked at a lot, and told what to think but I doubt he has done much serious reading on the subject.  As evidenced by the above post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i did mucho serious reading on the subject. bfgrn has it dead right, and you and fatboyrebel et al are seriously out of sync with reality and history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.
> 
> The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.
> 
> As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"
Click to expand...


edgar is a little moron who thinks he knows what he is talking about. I too have lived in Germany and have some of the same exprinces as you. I lived in the efile region in Spangdalhem. I went to Bastogne Belgum seeing the sights and had this elderly Gentlman looking at a sherman tank, with a hole in the rear with a memorial to General McAuliffe  in the middle of town square. He had this very angry look on his face and state with German accent that shouldn't be here. I turned around and walked away. He looked to be about late 60's early 70's and that was back in 1983


----------



## westwall

bigrebnc1775 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> i did mucho serious reading on the subject. bfgrn has it dead right, and you and fatboyrebel et al are seriously out of sync with reality and history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.
> 
> The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.
> 
> As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> edgar is a little moron who thinks he knows what he is talking about. I too have lived in Germany and have some of the same exprinces as you. I lived in the efile region in Spangdalhem. I went to Bastogne Belgum seeing the sights and had this elderly Gentlman looking at a sherman tank, with a hole in the rear with a memorial to General McAuliffe  in the middle of town square. He had this very angry look on his face and state with German accent that shouldn't be here. I turned around and walked away. He looked to be about late 60's early 70's and that was back in 1983
Click to expand...




Spangdahlem is near Trier isn't it?  I lived in Bad Kissingen for the vast majority of my time there.  Beautiful country.


----------



## Bfgrn

westwall said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> My God bigrebnc, why don't you READ what Hitler says, instead of continuing to make a total ass out of yourself. It is not someone's interpretation of Hitler's beliefs, it IS Hitler's beliefs.
> 
> He TELLS you that he didn't join because he embraced ANY of their beliefs...he calls their beliefs_ " their absurd philistinism"_ (absurd barbarism), he says the people in the room are _"chiefly from the lower classes of the population'_. He says they spewed _"the Babel _(noise and confusion) _of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases; hence also the title"_ (hence the title German Workers' Party)
> 
> He brags how he couldn't sit and listen to one of them talk about_ "peace...and more similar nonsense. At this point I could not help demanding the floor and giving the learned gentleman my opinion on this point-with the result that the previous speaker, even before I was finished, left the hall like a wet poodle."
> _
> He describes the reaction he got from the gathering: _"As I spoke, the audience had listened with astonished faces, and only as I was beginning to say good night to the assemblage and go away did a man come leaping after me, introduce himself (I had not quite understood his name), and press a little booklet into my hand, apparently a political pamphlet, with the urgent request that I read it."_
> 
> That _"political pamphlet"_ leads us to YOUR first out of context misinterpretation. Hitler says _"It was a little pamphlet in which the author, this same worker, described how he had returned to *national thinking*_" (*NATIONALISM*)...*NOT* _"the Babel _(noise and confusion)_ of Marxist and trade-unionist phrases". _
> 
> Hitler TELLS you when he received a postcard saying he had been accepted in the German Workers' Party: _"I didn't know whether to be angry or to laugh. I had no intention of joining a ready-made party, *but wanted to found one of my own*. What they asked of me was presumptuous and out of the question."_
> 
> If you continue to READ on, you will see him go through a process of self rationalization: although he wanted to _"found a party of his own",_ he would never be accepted by a major party because they would look down on him for his _"lack of schooling"_. He rationalizes that he wouldn't really want to be accepted because they were the _"'intelligentsia'...these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lick these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me" _
> 
> SO, he confronts the reality of how to start his OWN party...he can't take over a major party of elites and he didn't have any people for his own party.
> 
> SO...Hitler decides the best way to HAVE his own party is to start it by enlisting these barbarians, the German Workers' Party. _"Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What in the hell was hitler card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, hitler joined because he wanted to take over the workes socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be as me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear Bfgrn has been talked at a lot, and told what to think but I doubt he has done much serious reading on the subject.  As evidenced by the above post.
Click to expand...


TOLD what to think? WOW. I READ the chapter of Mein Kampf  we are discussing and gave a synopsis. Hey westfall, do me a favor. Read the chapter from Mein Kampf we are discussing and give me YOUR synopsis. 

I'll be waiting...

Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'


----------



## bigrebnc1775

westwall said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.
> 
> The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.
> 
> As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edgar is a little moron who thinks he knows what he is talking about. I too have lived in Germany and have some of the same exprinces as you. I lived in the efile region in Spangdalhem. I went to Bastogne Belgum seeing the sights and had this elderly Gentlman looking at a sherman tank, with a hole in the rear with a memorial to General McAuliffe  in the middle of town square. He had this very angry look on his face and state with German accent that shouldn't be here. I turned around and walked away. He looked to be about late 60's early 70's and that was back in 1983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spangdahlem is near Trier isn't it?  I lived in Bad Kissingen for the vast majority of my time there.  Beautiful country.
Click to expand...

Yes Spang is about 45 minutes north of Trier traveling on B-51


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What in the hell was hitler card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, hitler joined because he wanted to take over the workes socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be as me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear Bfgrn has been talked at a lot, and told what to think but I doubt he has done much serious reading on the subject.  As evidenced by the above post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> TOLD what to think? WOW. I READ the chapter of Mein Kampf  we are discussing and gave a synopsis. Hey westfall, do me a favor. Read the chapter from Mein Kampf we are discussing and give me YOUR synopsis.
> 
> I'll be waiting...
> 
> Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'
Click to expand...

I'll clean up the last reply I made to you
What in the hell was Hitler&#8217;s card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, Hitler joined because he wanted to take over the worker's socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be like me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party. My knowledge of the views of the German people towards Hitler did not come from any books it came from meeting some of the people that actually heard hitler speak in person.
So your opinion is to moronic for it to be plausible


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> I fear Bfgrn has been talked at a lot, and told what to think but I doubt he has done much serious reading on the subject.  As evidenced by the above post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TOLD what to think? WOW. I READ the chapter of Mein Kampf  we are discussing and gave a synopsis. Hey westfall, do me a favor. Read the chapter from Mein Kampf we are discussing and give me YOUR synopsis.
> 
> I'll be waiting...
> 
> Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'll clean up the last reply I made to you
> What in the hell was Hitler&#8217;s card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, Hitler joined because he wanted to take over the worker's socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be like me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party. My knowledge of the views of the German people towards Hitler did not come from any books it came from meeting some of the people that actually heard hitler speak in person.
> So your opinion is to moronic for it to be plausible
Click to expand...


My view of Hitler and the German Workers' Party come from a guy named ADOLPH HITLER. 

READ the fucking thing YOU posted!!! Give me YOUR synopsis...I will be waiting...

Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'


Hitler wasn't looking to join a glee club. He didn't CARE what they believed because he thought they were useful idiots. He believed that HIS views would become theirs.

Adolf Hitler, then a corporal in the German army, was ordered to spy on the DAP in September 12, 1919 during one of its meetings at the Sterneckerbräu, a beer hall in the center of the city.[3]  While there, he got into a violent argument with one guest. Following this incident, Anton Drexler was impressed with Hitler's oratory skills and invited him to join the party. After some thinking, Hitler left the army and accepted the invitation, joining in late September. At the time when Hitler joined the party there were no membership numbers or cards. It was on January 1920 when a numeration was issued for the first time: listed in alphabetical order, *Hitler received the number 555. In reality he had been the 55th member, but the counting started at the number 501 in order to make the party appear larger. Also, his claim that he was party member number 7, which would make him one of the founding members, is refuted.* However, in his work Mein Kampf, Hitler states that he received a membership card with the number 7. After giving his first speech for the Party on October 16 in the Hofbräukeller,Hitler quickly rose up to become a leading figure in the DAP.
wiki


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> TOLD what to think? WOW. I READ the chapter of Mein Kampf  we are discussing and gave a synopsis. Hey westfall, do me a favor. Read the chapter from Mein Kampf we are discussing and give me YOUR synopsis.
> 
> I'll be waiting...
> 
> Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'
> 
> 
> 
> I'll clean up the last reply I made to you
> What in the hell was Hitler&#8217;s card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, Hitler joined because he wanted to take over the worker's socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be like me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party. My knowledge of the views of the German people towards Hitler did not come from any books it came from meeting some of the people that actually heard hitler speak in person.
> So your opinion is to moronic for it to be plausible
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My view of Hitler and the German Workers' Party come from a guy named ADOLPH HITLER.
> 
> READ the fucking thing YOU posted!!! Give me YOUR synopsis...I will be waiting...
> 
> Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'
> 
> 
> Hitler wasn't looking to join a glee club. He didn't CARE what they believed because he thought they were useful idiots. He believed that HIS views would become theirs.
> 
> Adolf Hitler, then a corporal in the German army, was ordered to spy on the DAP in September 12, 1919 during one of its meetings at the Sterneckerbräu, a beer hall in the center of the city.[3]  While there, he got into a violent argument with one guest. Following this incident, Anton Drexler was impressed with Hitler's oratory skills and invited him to join the party. After some thinking, Hitler left the army and accepted the invitation, joining in late September. At the time when Hitler joined the party there were no membership numbers or cards. It was on January 1920 when a numeration was issued for the first time: listed in alphabetical order, *Hitler received the number 555. In reality he had been the 55th member, but the counting started at the number 501 in order to make the party appear larger. Also, his claim that he was party member number 7, which would make him one of the founding members, is refuted.* However, in his work Mein Kampf, Hitler states that he received a membership card with the number 7. After giving his first speech for the Party on October 16 in the Hofbräukeller,Hitler quickly rose up to become a leading figure in the DAP.
> wiki
Click to expand...


*What you posted is not in that chapter.
Its starts like this.*

*He goes to spy on the newly formed group.*
ONE DAY I received orders from my headquarters to find out what was behind an apparently political organization which was planning to hold a meeting within th next few days under the name of 'German Workers' Party'-with Gottfried Feder as one of the speakers. I was told to go and take a look at the organization and then make a report.

*Second paragraph*
*Brief description as to why the army wanted the group investigated.*
Not until the moment when the Center and the Social Democracy were forced to recognize, to their own grief, that the sympathies of the soldiers were beginning to turn away from the revolutionary parties toward the national movement and reawakening, did they see fit to deprive the troops of suffrage again and prohibit their political activity.

*Hitler stated in the beginning of the 3rd paragraph:*
It was illuminating that the Center and the Marxists should have taken this measure,

*In the middle of the chapter Hitler states*
My impression was neither good nor bad; a new organization like so many others. This was a time in which anyone who was not satisfied with developments and no longer had any confidence in the existing parties felt called upon to found a new party. Everywhere these organizations sprang out of the ground, only to vanish silently after a time. The founders for the most part had no idea what it means to make a party-let alone a movement out of a club. And so these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism.


*Hitler continues with the feeling that he is happy with what he heard*

I judged the 'German Workers' Party' no differently. When Feder finally stopped talking, I was happy. I had seen enough and wanted to leave when the free discussion period, which was now announced, moved me to remain, after all. But here, too everything seemed to run along insignificantly until suddenly a 'professor' took the floor; he first questioned the soundness of Feder's arguments and then-after Feder replied very well- suddenly appealed to 'the facts,' but not without recommending most urgently that the young party take up the 'separation' of Bavaria from 'Prussia' as a particularly important programmatic point. 

*Hitler was defending Feder*
With bold effrontery the man maintained that in this case German-Austria would at once join Bavaria, that the peace would then become much better, and more similar nonsense. At this point I could not help demanding the floor and giving the learned gentleman my opinion on this point-with the result that the previous speaker, even before I was finished, left the hall like a wet poodle.


*No fight but was given a booklet to read*
 As I spoke, the audience had listened with astonished faces, and only as I was beginning to say good night to the assemblage and go away did a man come leaping after me, introduce himself (I had not quite understood his name), and press a little booklet into my hand, apparently a political pamphlet, with the urgent request that I read it.

*Hitler found the pamlet to be agreeable even though he did not hold themn in a high regard at the time the man left a good impression on Hitler*
This was very agreeable to me, for now I had reason to hope that I might become acquainted with this dull organization in a simpler way, without having to attend any more such interesting meetings. Incidentally this apparent worker had made a good impression on me. And with this I left the hall.

*Hitler stated in this paragraph and does give his intent*
Once I had begun, I read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which I myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily I saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day I reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, I received a postcard saying that I had been accepted in the German Workers' Party; I was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following Wednesday.

*Hitler starts to question himself about joining the party*
I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?
Reason could advise me only to decline, but my feeling left me no rest, and as often as I tried to remember the absurdity of this whole club, my feeling argued for it.


*Sounds like he is going to join the party* 
The longer I tried to think it over, the more the conviction grew in me that through just such a little movement the rise of the nation could some day be organized, but never through the political parliamentary parties which clung far too greatly to the old conceptions or even shared in the profits of the new regime. For it was a new philosophy and not a new election slogan that had to be proclaimed.
Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?

*In no way does this sound like the way you discribed it*

After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
*WHEN YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING MORE CONVINCING I WILL BE WAITING *


----------



## L.K.Eder

westwall said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> I fear Bfgrn has been talked at a lot, and told what to think but I doubt he has done much serious reading on the subject.  As evidenced by the above post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i did mucho serious reading on the subject. bfgrn has it dead right, and you and fatboyrebel et al are seriously out of sync with reality and history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.
> 
> The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.
> 
> As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"
Click to expand...



ah, so living in germany and talking to germans makes you an expert. lol.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> i did mucho serious reading on the subject. bfgrn has it dead right, and you and fatboyrebel et al are seriously out of sync with reality and history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.
> 
> The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.
> 
> As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ah, so living in germany and talking to germans makes you an expert. lol.
Click to expand...


More so then you.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.
> 
> The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.
> 
> As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ah, so living in germany and talking to germans makes you an expert. lol.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More so then you.
Click to expand...


remember, i am on ignore, as you stated. you fool. and it is "than", expert at fail.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> ah, so living in germany and talking to germans makes you an expert. lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More so then you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> remember, i am on ignore, as you stated. you fool. and it is "than", expert at fail.
Click to expand...


Yes you are on ignore but when I need a laugh I will  click on the view post. And I don't give a shit what it is. I'll use any word that I damn well please.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> More so then you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> remember, i am on ignore, as you stated. you fool. and it is "than", expert at fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes you are on ignore but when I need a laugh I will  click on the view post. And I don't give a shit what it is. I'll use any word that I damn well please.
Click to expand...


you do that, failrebel.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> remember, i am on ignore, as you stated. you fool. and it is "than", expert at fail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes you are on ignore but when I need a laugh I will  click on the view post. And I don't give a shit what it is. I'll use any word that I damn well please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you do that, failrebel.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the laugh. I'm doing a good job busting your chops. It's funny that someone you think is stuipd is busting your chops.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes you are on ignore but when I need a laugh I will  click on the view post. And I don't give a shit what it is. I'll use any word that I damn well please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you do that, failrebel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thanks for the laugh. I'm doing a good job busting your chops. It's funny that someone you think is stuipd is busting your chops.
Click to expand...


yes, you are speshial.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> you do that, failrebel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the laugh. I'm doing a good job busting your chops. It's funny that someone you think is stuipd is busting your chops.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yes, you are speshial.
Click to expand...


I think you mean special. Nevertheless, when you have had the chance to speak in person to people who were alive at the time you might get a better understanding of what westwall and I are talking about. Sure you can read a book but you are only getting the opinion of the authors.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the laugh. I'm doing a good job busting your chops. It's funny that someone you think is stuipd is busting your chops.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes, you are speshial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you mean special. Nevertheless, when you have had the chance to speak in person to people who were alive at the time you might get a better understanding of what westwall and I are talking about. Sure you can read a book but you are only getting the opinion of the authors.
Click to expand...



no, i meant speshial. as in retaaaaarded. and stoopit. now, when will you announce your next "i will ignore you" flailing, fatrebel?

PS. let's just say that if spending time in germany and talking with germans about hitler makes one an expert, then l o l. reading and comprehension ability is not optional, btw.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> yes, you are speshial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you mean special. Nevertheless, when you have had the chance to speak in person to people who were alive at the time you might get a better understanding of what westwall and I are talking about. Sure you can read a book but you are only getting the opinion of the authors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> no, i meant speshial. as in retaaaaarded. and stoopit. now, when will you announce your next "i will ignore you" flailing, fatrebel?
> 
> PS. let's just say that if spending time in germany and talking with germans about hitler makes one an expert, then l o l. reading and comprehension ability is not optional, btw.
Click to expand...


I said it made westwall more of an expert then you. It will with anyone. How do you think the experts became experts on a certain subject? By reading books, or talking with people who were alive during that time period? By reading books you are only getting the opinion of the author. By talking with People from that period of tim,e you are getting more then one opinion. You lose.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you mean special. Nevertheless, when you have had the chance to speak in person to people who were alive at the time you might get a better understanding of what westwall and I are talking about. Sure you can read a book but you are only getting the opinion of the authors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no, i meant speshial. as in retaaaaarded. and stoopit. now, when will you announce your next "i will ignore you" flailing, fatrebel?
> 
> PS. let's just say that if spending time in germany and talking with germans about hitler makes one an expert, then l o l. reading and comprehension ability is not optional, btw.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I said it made westwall more of an expert then you. It will with anyone. How do you think the experts became experts on a certain subject? By reading books, or talking with people who were alive during that time period? By reading books you are only getting the opinion of the author. By talking with People from that period of tim,e you are getting more then one opinion. You lose.
Click to expand...


i win by default. think about it.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> no, i meant speshial. as in retaaaaarded. and stoopit. now, when will you announce your next "i will ignore you" flailing, fatrebel?
> 
> PS. let's just say that if spending time in germany and talking with germans about hitler makes one an expert, then l o l. reading and comprehension ability is not optional, btw.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I said it made westwall more of an expert then you. It will with anyone. How do you think the experts became experts on a certain subject? By reading books, or talking with people who were alive during that time period? By reading books you are only getting the opinion of the author. By talking with People from that period of tim,e you are getting more then one opinion. You lose.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i win by default. think about it.
Click to expand...

I won through knowledge and exprince, you won what?


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I said it made westwall more of an expert then you. It will with anyone. How do you think the experts became experts on a certain subject? By reading books, or talking with people who were alive during that time period? By reading books you are only getting the opinion of the author. By talking with People from that period of tim,e you are getting more then one opinion. You lose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i win by default. think about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I won through knowledge and exprince, you won what?
Click to expand...



good knight, sweet exprince.


----------



## editec

Why did so many ________________s support _______________?

Nothing special about the Germans or Hitler, folks.

Authoritarian governments never have much trouble finding quislings and mininions to support them.


----------



## midcan5

I have Goldhagen's book (see below) but have never read it completely. The holocaust, as well as the other massacres in the early 20th century, greatly influenced my childhood thinking. On mom's side we are Austrian and Hitler and Germany were a topic of conversation even though her parents immigrated in the early part of the 20th. I think people make a large mistake when they think what the Germans did was so unusual that it could only happen there. Consider genocide throughout history and you wonder if evolution includes a moral componenet. Evil is possible when fear grows, foes build groups, and groups don't think. 


The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century


"Thus for the time being I have sent to the East only my 'Death's Head Units' with the orders to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of Polish race or language. Only in such a way will we win the vital space that we need. Who still talks nowadays about the Armenians?"   Adolf Hitler to his Army commanders



http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...-where-does-evil-come-from-6.html#post2457564

The Holocaust & holocausts

History in Focus: Holocaust websites


edit:

I removed link to Goldhagen book review as after I read the piece, I did not agree with it completely. My point was only to reference the book as it relates to the thread topic. I added the Amazon link below.  I try to present links that are honest about any particular topic even if ironic, satirical, controversial or off the wall. 

[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Willing-Executioners-Ordinary-Holocaust/dp/0679772685/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8[/ame]


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'll clean up the last reply I made to you
> What in the hell was Hitlers card number? Do you realize just how stupid you sound, Hitler joined because he wanted to take over the worker's socialist party? You don't join a group of people you don't like. That would be like me saying I am going to become a liberal democrat to take over the party. My knowledge of the views of the German people towards Hitler did not come from any books it came from meeting some of the people that actually heard hitler speak in person.
> So your opinion is to moronic for it to be plausible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My view of Hitler and the German Workers' Party come from a guy named ADOLPH HITLER.
> 
> READ the fucking thing YOU posted!!! Give me YOUR synopsis...I will be waiting...
> 
> Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'
> 
> 
> Hitler wasn't looking to join a glee club. He didn't CARE what they believed because he thought they were useful idiots. He believed that HIS views would become theirs.
> 
> Adolf Hitler, then a corporal in the German army, was ordered to spy on the DAP in September 12, 1919 during one of its meetings at the Sterneckerbräu, a beer hall in the center of the city.[3]  While there, he got into a violent argument with one guest. Following this incident, Anton Drexler was impressed with Hitler's oratory skills and invited him to join the party. After some thinking, Hitler left the army and accepted the invitation, joining in late September. At the time when Hitler joined the party there were no membership numbers or cards. It was on January 1920 when a numeration was issued for the first time: listed in alphabetical order, *Hitler received the number 555. In reality he had been the 55th member, but the counting started at the number 501 in order to make the party appear larger. Also, his claim that he was party member number 7, which would make him one of the founding members, is refuted.* However, in his work Mein Kampf, Hitler states that he received a membership card with the number 7. After giving his first speech for the Party on October 16 in the Hofbräukeller,Hitler quickly rose up to become a leading figure in the DAP.
> wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *What you posted is not in that chapter.
> Its starts like this.*
> 
> *He goes to spy on the newly formed group.*
> ONE DAY I received orders from my headquarters to find out what was behind an apparently political organization which was planning to hold a meeting within th next few days under the name of 'German Workers' Party'-with Gottfried Feder as one of the speakers. I was told to go and take a look at the organization and then make a report.
> 
> *Second paragraph*
> *Brief description as to why the army wanted the group investigated.*
> Not until the moment when the Center and the Social Democracy were forced to recognize, to their own grief, that the sympathies of the soldiers were beginning to turn away from the revolutionary parties toward the national movement and reawakening, did they see fit to deprive the troops of suffrage again and prohibit their political activity.
> 
> *Hitler stated in the beginning of the 3rd paragraph:*
> It was illuminating that the Center and the Marxists should have taken this measure,
> 
> *In the middle of the chapter Hitler states*
> My impression was neither good nor bad; a new organization like so many others. This was a time in which anyone who was not satisfied with developments and no longer had any confidence in the existing parties felt called upon to found a new party. Everywhere these organizations sprang out of the ground, only to vanish silently after a time. The founders for the most part had no idea what it means to make a party-let alone a movement out of a club. And so these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism.
> 
> 
> *Hitler continues with the feeling that he is happy with what he heard*
> 
> I judged the 'German Workers' Party' no differently. When Feder finally stopped talking, I was happy. I had seen enough and wanted to leave when the free discussion period, which was now announced, moved me to remain, after all. But here, too everything seemed to run along insignificantly until suddenly a 'professor' took the floor; he first questioned the soundness of Feder's arguments and then-after Feder replied very well- suddenly appealed to 'the facts,' but not without recommending most urgently that the young party take up the 'separation' of Bavaria from 'Prussia' as a particularly important programmatic point.
> 
> *Hitler was defending Feder*
> With bold effrontery the man maintained that in this case German-Austria would at once join Bavaria, that the peace would then become much better, and more similar nonsense. At this point I could not help demanding the floor and giving the learned gentleman my opinion on this point-with the result that the previous speaker, even before I was finished, left the hall like a wet poodle.
> 
> 
> *No fight but was given a booklet to read*
> As I spoke, the audience had listened with astonished faces, and only as I was beginning to say good night to the assemblage and go away did a man come leaping after me, introduce himself (I had not quite understood his name), and press a little booklet into my hand, apparently a political pamphlet, with the urgent request that I read it.
> 
> *Hitler found the pamlet to be agreeable even though he did not hold themn in a high regard at the time the man left a good impression on Hitler*
> This was very agreeable to me, for now I had reason to hope that I might become acquainted with this dull organization in a simpler way, without having to attend any more such interesting meetings. Incidentally this apparent worker had made a good impression on me. And with this I left the hall.
> 
> *Hitler stated in this paragraph and does give his intent*
> Once I had begun, I read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which I myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily I saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day I reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, I received a postcard saying that I had been accepted in the German Workers' Party; I was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following Wednesday.
> 
> *Hitler starts to question himself about joining the party*
> I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?
> Reason could advise me only to decline, but my feeling left me no rest, and as often as I tried to remember the absurdity of this whole club, my feeling argued for it.
> 
> 
> *Sounds like he is going to join the party*
> The longer I tried to think it over, the more the conviction grew in me that through just such a little movement the rise of the nation could some day be organized, but never through the political parliamentary parties which clung far too greatly to the old conceptions or even shared in the profits of the new regime. For it was a new philosophy and not a new election slogan that had to be proclaimed.
> Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
> What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?
> 
> *In no way does this sound like the way you discribed it*
> 
> After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> *WHEN YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING MORE CONVINCING I WILL BE WAITING *
Click to expand...


"Nothing is worse than active ignorance" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

You can't read something and actually learn what it says if you have preconceived beliefs you are looking to justify. THAT is what you are doing here. You are taking 'words' and hacking up sentences out of context and using them to justify YOUR preconceived beliefs, instead of reading and learning what Hitler's beliefs REALLY were.

My entry that you said 'is not in that chapter' is NOT in the chapter. I noted it was from 'wiki' (Wikipedia). I posted it to explain Hitler's false claim he was #7.

I am not going to go through each of your misrepresentations. Some are just total nonsense, where you don't have a clue who or what Hitler is talking about. And others, it hard to understand how you come up with your conclusions, unless you are stupid or being deceitful. 

Example: *Hitler continues with the feeling that he is happy with what he heard*

You have managed to hack this up and cut off the pretext just enough to remove the real meaning. I will reinsert the proper pretext and highlight the key phrases...

_The founders for the most part had no idea what it means to make a party-let alone a movement out of a club. And so *these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism.*
*
I judged the 'German Workers' Party' no differently*. When Feder *finally stopped talking, I was happy. I had seen enough and wanted to leave...
*_
He wasn't happy with what he heard...he was happy the guy was DONE. He was happy in the sense that WHAT he just heard and seen reinforced his belief _'these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism'_... and he wanted to LEAVE.

Hitler was attracted to 2 thing: 

1) What he read in the pamphlet...Drexler's desire to building a strong nationalist, pro-military, anti-Semitic party.

2) And a small, ready-made group of usable minions to _"found one _(party) _of my own" _

Here is a very key passage that explains Hitler's reason for joining and his intent once he was a member.

_"This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here, the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined..."_


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> My view of Hitler and the German Workers' Party come from a guy named ADOLPH HITLER.
> 
> READ the fucking thing YOU posted!!! Give me YOUR synopsis...I will be waiting...
> 
> Mein Kampf: The 'German Workers' Party'
> 
> 
> Hitler wasn't looking to join a glee club. He didn't CARE what they believed because he thought they were useful idiots. He believed that HIS views would become theirs.
> 
> Adolf Hitler, then a corporal in the German army, was ordered to spy on the DAP in September 12, 1919 during one of its meetings at the Sterneckerbräu, a beer hall in the center of the city.[3]  While there, he got into a violent argument with one guest. Following this incident, Anton Drexler was impressed with Hitler's oratory skills and invited him to join the party. After some thinking, Hitler left the army and accepted the invitation, joining in late September. At the time when Hitler joined the party there were no membership numbers or cards. It was on January 1920 when a numeration was issued for the first time: listed in alphabetical order, *Hitler received the number 555. In reality he had been the 55th member, but the counting started at the number 501 in order to make the party appear larger. Also, his claim that he was party member number 7, which would make him one of the founding members, is refuted.* However, in his work Mein Kampf, Hitler states that he received a membership card with the number 7. After giving his first speech for the Party on October 16 in the Hofbräukeller,Hitler quickly rose up to become a leading figure in the DAP.
> wiki
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *What you posted is not in that chapter.
> Its starts like this.*
> 
> *He goes to spy on the newly formed group.*
> ONE DAY I received orders from my headquarters to find out what was behind an apparently political organization which was planning to hold a meeting within th next few days under the name of 'German Workers' Party'-with Gottfried Feder as one of the speakers. I was told to go and take a look at the organization and then make a report.
> 
> *Second paragraph*
> *Brief description as to why the army wanted the group investigated.*
> Not until the moment when the Center and the Social Democracy were forced to recognize, to their own grief, that the sympathies of the soldiers were beginning to turn away from the revolutionary parties toward the national movement and reawakening, did they see fit to deprive the troops of suffrage again and prohibit their political activity.
> 
> *Hitler stated in the beginning of the 3rd paragraph:*
> It was illuminating that the Center and the Marxists should have taken this measure,
> 
> *In the middle of the chapter Hitler states*
> My impression was neither good nor bad; a new organization like so many others. This was a time in which anyone who was not satisfied with developments and no longer had any confidence in the existing parties felt called upon to found a new party. Everywhere these organizations sprang out of the ground, only to vanish silently after a time. The founders for the most part had no idea what it means to make a party-let alone a movement out of a club. And so these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism.
> 
> 
> *Hitler continues with the feeling that he is happy with what he heard*
> 
> I judged the 'German Workers' Party' no differently. When Feder finally stopped talking, I was happy. I had seen enough and wanted to leave when the free discussion period, which was now announced, moved me to remain, after all. But here, too everything seemed to run along insignificantly until suddenly a 'professor' took the floor; he first questioned the soundness of Feder's arguments and then-after Feder replied very well- suddenly appealed to 'the facts,' but not without recommending most urgently that the young party take up the 'separation' of Bavaria from 'Prussia' as a particularly important programmatic point.
> 
> *Hitler was defending Feder*
> With bold effrontery the man maintained that in this case German-Austria would at once join Bavaria, that the peace would then become much better, and more similar nonsense. At this point I could not help demanding the floor and giving the learned gentleman my opinion on this point-with the result that the previous speaker, even before I was finished, left the hall like a wet poodle.
> 
> 
> *No fight but was given a booklet to read*
> As I spoke, the audience had listened with astonished faces, and only as I was beginning to say good night to the assemblage and go away did a man come leaping after me, introduce himself (I had not quite understood his name), and press a little booklet into my hand, apparently a political pamphlet, with the urgent request that I read it.
> 
> *Hitler found the pamlet to be agreeable even though he did not hold themn in a high regard at the time the man left a good impression on Hitler*
> This was very agreeable to me, for now I had reason to hope that I might become acquainted with this dull organization in a simpler way, without having to attend any more such interesting meetings. Incidentally this apparent worker had made a good impression on me. And with this I left the hall.
> 
> *Hitler stated in this paragraph and does give his intent*
> Once I had begun, I read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which I myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily I saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day I reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, I received a postcard saying that I had been accepted in the German Workers' Party; I was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following Wednesday.
> 
> *Hitler starts to question himself about joining the party*
> I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?
> Reason could advise me only to decline, but my feeling left me no rest, and as often as I tried to remember the absurdity of this whole club, my feeling argued for it.
> 
> 
> *Sounds like he is going to join the party*
> The longer I tried to think it over, the more the conviction grew in me that through just such a little movement the rise of the nation could some day be organized, but never through the political parliamentary parties which clung far too greatly to the old conceptions or even shared in the profits of the new regime. For it was a new philosophy and not a new election slogan that had to be proclaimed.
> Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
> What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?
> 
> *In no way does this sound like the way you discribed it*
> 
> After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> *WHEN YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING MORE CONVINCING I WILL BE WAITING *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Nothing is worse than active ignorance" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
> 
> You can't read something and actually learn what it says if you have preconceived beliefs you are looking to justify. THAT is what you are doing here. You are taking 'words' and hacking up sentences out of context and using them to justify YOUR preconceived beliefs, instead of reading and learning what Hitler's beliefs REALLY were.
> 
> My entry that you said 'is not in that chapter' is NOT in the chapter. I noted it was from 'wiki' (Wikipedia). I posted it to explain Hitler's false claim he was #7.
> 
> I am not going to go through each of your misrepresentations. Some are just total nonsense, where you don't have a clue who or what Hitler is talking about. And others, it hard to understand how you come up with your conclusions, unless you are stupid or being deceitful.
> 
> Example: *Hitler continues with the feeling that he is happy with what he heard*
> 
> You have managed to hack this up and cut off the pretext just enough to remove the real meaning. I will reinsert the proper pretext and highlight the key phrases...
> 
> _The founders for the most part had no idea what it means to make a party-let alone a movement out of a club. And so *these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism.*
> *
> I judged the 'German Workers' Party' no differently*. When Feder *finally stopped talking, I was happy. I had seen enough and wanted to leave...
> *_
> He wasn't happy with what he heard...he was happy the guy was DONE. He was happy in the sense that WHAT he just heard and seen reinforced his belief _'these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism'_... and he wanted to LEAVE.
> 
> Hitler was attracted to 2 thing:
> 
> 1) What he read in the pamphlet...Drexler's desire to building a strong nationalist, pro-military, anti-Semitic party.
> 
> 2) And a small, ready-made group of usable minions to _"found one _(party) _of my own" _
> 
> Here is a very key passage that explains Hitler's reason for joining and his intent once he was a member.
> 
> _"This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here, the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined..."_
Click to expand...


*You used wiki? You do realize wikipedia is an edit source anyone can edit that information. Plus the information in wiki is done by anyone. Wikipedia versus Mein Kampf the actual words of hitler.*

*You said you read this chapter*?Volume One - A Reckoning
Chapter IX: The 'German Workers' Party'
*This is the last part of of that chapoter I suggest that if you respond back that you read it first. I will not be so kind the next time.*
I knew what these men felt: it was the longing for a new movement which should be more than a party in the previous sense of the wold.
That evening when I returned to the barracks I had formed my judgment of this association.
I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?
Reason could advise me only to decline, but my feeling left me no rest, and as often as I tried to remember the absurdity of this whole club, my feeling argued for it.
I was restless in the days that followed.
I began to ponder back and forth. I had long been resolved to engage in political activity; that this could be done only in a new movement was likewise clear to me, only the impetus to act had hitherto been lacking. I am not one of those people who begin something today and lay it down tomorrow, if possible taking up something else again. This very conviction among others was the main reason why it was so hard for me to make up my mind to join such a new organization. I knew that for me a decision would be for good, with no turning back. For me it was no passing game but grim earnest. Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing.
And this way of thinking constituted one of the main reasons why I could not make up my mind as easily as some others do to found a cause which either had to become everything or else would do better not to exist at all.
Fate itself now seemed to give me a hint. I should never have gone into one of the existing large parties, and later on I shall go into the reasons for this more closely. This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined, which in the existing great parties was impossible from the outset.
The longer I tried to think it over, the more the conviction grew in me that through just such a little movement the rise of the nation could some day be organized, but never through the political parliamentary parties which clung far too greatly to the old conceptions or even shared in the profits of the new regime. For it was a new philosophy and not a new election slogan that had to be proclaimed.
Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?
That I was poor and without means seemed to me the most bearable part of it, but it was harder that I was numbered among the nameless, that I was one of the millions whom chance permits to live or summons out of existence without even their closest neighbors condescending to take any notice of it. In addition, there was the difficulty which inevitably arose from my lack of schooling.
The so called 'intelligentsia' always looks down with a really limitless condescension on anyone who has not been dragged through the obligatory schools and had the necessary knowledge pumped into him. The question has never been: What are the man's abilities? but: What has he learned? To these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lack these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me, and in this I erred only in so far as even then I still regarded people as better than in cold reality they for the most part unfortunately are. As they are, to be sure, the exceptions, as everywhere else, shine all the more brightly. Thereby, however, I learned always to distinguish between the eternal students and the men of real ability.
After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.


----------



## westwall

L.K.Eder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> i did mucho serious reading on the subject. bfgrn has it dead right, and you and fatboyrebel et al are seriously out of sync with reality and history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.
> 
> The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.
> 
> As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ah, so living in germany and talking to germans makes you an expert. lol.
Click to expand...





No,

It doesn't, far from it.  However it does give me a tad bit more knowledge of how the regular people felt about Hitler.  I also have been able to interview Admiral Erich Topp (who was the fourth highest scoring U-Boat "Ace"), General Gunther Rall (275 aircraft shot down), Erich Hartmann (352 aircraft shot down), and a whole host of military people from the war.

Experts must do the same thing to write  their books no?  So I am not an expert but I am more knowledgable than you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

westwall said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.
> 
> The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.
> 
> As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ah, so living in germany and talking to germans makes you an expert. lol.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No,
> 
> It doesn't, far from it.  However it does give me a tad bit more knowledge of how the regular people felt about Hitler.  I also have been able to interview Admiral Erich Topp (who was the fourth highest scoring U-Boat "Ace"), General Gunther Rall (275 aircraft shot down), Erich Hartmann (352 aircraft shot down), and a whole host of military people from the war.
> 
> Experts must do the same thing to write  their books no?  So I am not an expert but I am more knowledgable than you.
Click to expand...



Don't be so modest.


----------



## germanguy

Reading Hitler´s "Mein Kampf" will not get you very far in answering the question of this thread. 

The book itself is (in German) a nearly unreadable book. According to what I have read, the more readable parts are co-written by Rudolf Hess. 

My suggestion would be to closely study the after-war period. There are literally piles of works about this period, but I personally would recommend "The Meaning of Hitler" by Sebastian Haffner and "Defying Hitler" by the same author.

The first book has only onehundred something pages, but you will not easily find a more comprehensive and lucid analysis of Hitler.

"Defying Hitler" is even better, as it is the authors personal story, the story of a young man and how he experienced the rise to power of the Nazis. 
If you read this book, you will get a better understanding of this time and to what extent the Nazis were supported by "the Germans".

Or you might plow yourself through the vast literature on this subject.

I have done this while studying and I can only say, that I have not the one and only answer to this. 

As most Americans identify Nazi Germany with wartime Germany, it is not to be forgotten, that the war helped the Nazis. Any outside danger unifies people. This worked of course during the war. Also, in this time people were occupied with their problems and blended other things out. 

Anyway, it will take more than this few words to answer this question.

Kind regards

ze germanguy


----------



## bigrebnc1775

germanguy said:


> Reading Hitler´s "Mein Kampf" will not get you very far in answering the question of this thread.
> 
> The book itself is (in German) a nearly unreadable book. According to what I have read, the more readable parts are co-written by Rudolf Hess.
> 
> My suggestion would be to closely study the after-war period. There are literally piles of works about this period, but I personally would recommend "The Meaning of Hitler" by Sebastian Haffner and "Defying Hitler" by the same author.
> 
> The first book has only onehundred something pages, but you will not easily find a more comprehensive and lucid analysis of Hitler.
> 
> "Defying Hitler" is even better, as it is the authors personal story, the story of a young man and how he experienced the rise to power of the Nazis.
> If you read this book, you will get a better understanding of this time and to what extent the Nazis were supported by "the Germans".
> 
> Or you might plow yourself through the vast literature on this subject.
> 
> I have done this while studying and I can only say, that I have not the one and only answer to this.
> 
> As most Americans identify Nazi Germany with wartime Germany, it is not to be forgotten, that the war helped the Nazis. Any outside danger unifies people. This worked of course during the war. Also, in this time people were occupied with their problems and blended other things out.
> 
> Anyway, it will take more than this few words to answer this question.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> ze germanguy



You are a revisionist.


----------



## topspin

Europeans are racist muther fuckers to hid day big time. At soccer games they throw bananas at plack players and chant monkey sounds. It's breeding grounds for Nazis. Italy had to play 2 pro games without crowds due to racist crowds.


----------



## germanguy

bigrebnc1775 said:


> germanguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how a debate about german history easily gets the furor into you Yanks.
> 
> What most here do is to view at this question while only seeing your own agenda.
> 
> The Germans did not support Hitler-
> In 1933 he came to power as head of a multi-party coalition, brought to office by the far-right, a half-senile President (who definitely was not a friend of the republic, but notwithstanding took his oath to the constitution serious).
> 
> He certainly had a mandate in 1933 to end partisanship, economic crisis and the fear of bolshevism.
> That he had a mandate to start a war, to lay Europe in ruins and to kill more than 50 million people was not the case. The end of 1945 was not easily foreseen in 1933.
> 
> And:
> 
> Hitler was no socialist. All this crap about Obama as a Nazi or Socialism equals Nazism is not getting the point.
> 
> As Goebbels once stated:
> 
> We do not want low bread prices, we do not want high bread prices, we want National Socialist bread prices.
> 
> The Nazis mostly gave a shit about ideology.
> How to get Himmlers germanic mystizism, with his believe in astrology, Hitlers religious belief in Wagner etc. into one ideology ?
> Just tell everybody what he wants to hear.
> 
> Interestingly, if you look at the respective ideological groups, the Nazis in general did not succeed with their ideology.
> To the conservatives, especially the old-fashioned ones, Hitler was just an upstart, a corporal in the War.
> To a lot of workers the Nazis were no Socialists. There were enough workers quarters in Germany, where being out azt night in a Party uniform was a very stupid idea.
> So, with the proclaimed best supporters of the Nazis, the far right and the Socialists, Hitlers "ideology" did not work.
> 
> So, did the Germans support him ? All and in every aspect ? I really doubt it.
> 
> regards
> ze germanguy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does nazi mean. Have you by chance read his book? Oh and by the way mr. German guy I lived in Germany for two years. I have talked with the older Germans who were alive when Hitler took control. I call you post BS
Click to expand...


ROFL - two years in Germany obviously make you an expert of this country and it´s history.
Still:
Ich bin der Überzeugung, dass Du, mein amerikanischer Freund, Deine Zeit in zu vielen Kneipen um die amerikanischen Kasernen herum verbracht hast. Inwieweit dies als seriöse Studie der deutschen Geschichte gelten kann, lassen wir einmal dahingestellt sein.

kind regards

ze germanguy


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *What you posted is not in that chapter.
> Its starts like this.*
> 
> *He goes to spy on the newly formed group.*
> ONE DAY I received orders from my headquarters to find out what was behind an apparently political organization which was planning to hold a meeting within th next few days under the name of 'German Workers' Party'-with Gottfried Feder as one of the speakers. I was told to go and take a look at the organization and then make a report.
> 
> *Second paragraph*
> *Brief description as to why the army wanted the group investigated.*
> Not until the moment when the Center and the Social Democracy were forced to recognize, to their own grief, that the sympathies of the soldiers were beginning to turn away from the revolutionary parties toward the national movement and reawakening, did they see fit to deprive the troops of suffrage again and prohibit their political activity.
> 
> *Hitler stated in the beginning of the 3rd paragraph:*
> It was illuminating that the Center and the Marxists should have taken this measure,
> 
> *In the middle of the chapter Hitler states*
> My impression was neither good nor bad; a new organization like so many others. This was a time in which anyone who was not satisfied with developments and no longer had any confidence in the existing parties felt called upon to found a new party. Everywhere these organizations sprang out of the ground, only to vanish silently after a time. The founders for the most part had no idea what it means to make a party-let alone a movement out of a club. And so these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism.
> 
> 
> *Hitler continues with the feeling that he is happy with what he heard*
> 
> I judged the 'German Workers' Party' no differently. When Feder finally stopped talking, I was happy. I had seen enough and wanted to leave when the free discussion period, which was now announced, moved me to remain, after all. But here, too everything seemed to run along insignificantly until suddenly a 'professor' took the floor; he first questioned the soundness of Feder's arguments and then-after Feder replied very well- suddenly appealed to 'the facts,' but not without recommending most urgently that the young party take up the 'separation' of Bavaria from 'Prussia' as a particularly important programmatic point.
> 
> *Hitler was defending Feder*
> With bold effrontery the man maintained that in this case German-Austria would at once join Bavaria, that the peace would then become much better, and more similar nonsense. At this point I could not help demanding the floor and giving the learned gentleman my opinion on this point-with the result that the previous speaker, even before I was finished, left the hall like a wet poodle.
> 
> 
> *No fight but was given a booklet to read*
> As I spoke, the audience had listened with astonished faces, and only as I was beginning to say good night to the assemblage and go away did a man come leaping after me, introduce himself (I had not quite understood his name), and press a little booklet into my hand, apparently a political pamphlet, with the urgent request that I read it.
> 
> *Hitler found the pamlet to be agreeable even though he did not hold themn in a high regard at the time the man left a good impression on Hitler*
> This was very agreeable to me, for now I had reason to hope that I might become acquainted with this dull organization in a simpler way, without having to attend any more such interesting meetings. Incidentally this apparent worker had made a good impression on me. And with this I left the hall.
> 
> *Hitler stated in this paragraph and does give his intent*
> Once I had begun, I read the little book through with interest; for it reflected a process similar to the one which I myself had gone through twelve years before. Involuntarily I saw my own development come to life before my eyes. In the course of the day I reflected a few times on the matter and was finally about to put it aside when, less than a week later, much to my surprise, I received a postcard saying that I had been accepted in the German Workers' Party; I was requested to express myself on the subject and for this purpose to attend a committee meeting of this party on the following Wednesday.
> 
> *Hitler starts to question himself about joining the party*
> I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?
> Reason could advise me only to decline, but my feeling left me no rest, and as often as I tried to remember the absurdity of this whole club, my feeling argued for it.
> 
> 
> *Sounds like he is going to join the party*
> The longer I tried to think it over, the more the conviction grew in me that through just such a little movement the rise of the nation could some day be organized, but never through the political parliamentary parties which clung far too greatly to the old conceptions or even shared in the profits of the new regime. For it was a new philosophy and not a new election slogan that had to be proclaimed.
> Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
> What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?
> 
> *In no way does this sound like the way you discribed it*
> 
> After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> *WHEN YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING MORE CONVINCING I WILL BE WAITING *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Nothing is worse than active ignorance" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
> 
> You can't read something and actually learn what it says if you have preconceived beliefs you are looking to justify. THAT is what you are doing here. You are taking 'words' and hacking up sentences out of context and using them to justify YOUR preconceived beliefs, instead of reading and learning what Hitler's beliefs REALLY were.
> 
> My entry that you said 'is not in that chapter' is NOT in the chapter. I noted it was from 'wiki' (Wikipedia). I posted it to explain Hitler's false claim he was #7.
> 
> I am not going to go through each of your misrepresentations. Some are just total nonsense, where you don't have a clue who or what Hitler is talking about. And others, it hard to understand how you come up with your conclusions, unless you are stupid or being deceitful.
> 
> Example: *Hitler continues with the feeling that he is happy with what he heard*
> 
> You have managed to hack this up and cut off the pretext just enough to remove the real meaning. I will reinsert the proper pretext and highlight the key phrases...
> 
> _The founders for the most part had no idea what it means to make a party-let alone a movement out of a club. And so *these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism.*
> *
> I judged the 'German Workers' Party' no differently*. When Feder *finally stopped talking, I was happy. I had seen enough and wanted to leave...
> *_
> He wasn't happy with what he heard...he was happy the guy was DONE. He was happy in the sense that WHAT he just heard and seen reinforced his belief _'these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism'_... and he wanted to LEAVE.
> 
> Hitler was attracted to 2 thing:
> 
> 1) What he read in the pamphlet...Drexler's desire to building a strong nationalist, pro-military, anti-Semitic party.
> 
> 2) And a small, ready-made group of usable minions to _"found one _(party) _of my own" _
> 
> Here is a very key passage that explains Hitler's reason for joining and his intent once he was a member.
> 
> _"This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here, the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined..."_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *You used wiki? You do realize wikipedia is an edit source anyone can edit that information. Plus the information in wiki is done by anyone. Wikipedia versus Mein Kampf the actual words of hitler.*
> 
> *You said you read this chapter*?Volume One - A Reckoning
> Chapter IX: The 'German Workers' Party'
> *This is the last part of of that chapoter I suggest that if you respond back that you read it first. I will not be so kind the next time.*
> I knew what these men felt: it was the longing for a new movement which should be more than a party in the previous sense of the wold.
> That evening when I returned to the barracks I had formed my judgment of this association.
> I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?
> Reason could advise me only to decline, but my feeling left me no rest, and as often as I tried to remember the absurdity of this whole club, my feeling argued for it.
> I was restless in the days that followed.
> I began to ponder back and forth. I had long been resolved to engage in political activity; that this could be done only in a new movement was likewise clear to me, only the impetus to act had hitherto been lacking. I am not one of those people who begin something today and lay it down tomorrow, if possible taking up something else again. This very conviction among others was the main reason why it was so hard for me to make up my mind to join such a new organization. I knew that for me a decision would be for good, with no turning back. For me it was no passing game but grim earnest. Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing.
> And this way of thinking constituted one of the main reasons why I could not make up my mind as easily as some others do to found a cause which either had to become everything or else would do better not to exist at all.
> Fate itself now seemed to give me a hint. I should never have gone into one of the existing large parties, and later on I shall go into the reasons for this more closely. This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined, which in the existing great parties was impossible from the outset.
> The longer I tried to think it over, the more the conviction grew in me that through just such a little movement the rise of the nation could some day be organized, but never through the political parliamentary parties which clung far too greatly to the old conceptions or even shared in the profits of the new regime. For it was a new philosophy and not a new election slogan that had to be proclaimed.
> Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
> What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?
> That I was poor and without means seemed to me the most bearable part of it, but it was harder that I was numbered among the nameless, that I was one of the millions whom chance permits to live or summons out of existence without even their closest neighbors condescending to take any notice of it. In addition, there was the difficulty which inevitably arose from my lack of schooling.
> The so called 'intelligentsia' always looks down with a really limitless condescension on anyone who has not been dragged through the obligatory schools and had the necessary knowledge pumped into him. The question has never been: What are the man's abilities? but: What has he learned? To these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lack these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me, and in this I erred only in so far as even then I still regarded people as better than in cold reality they for the most part unfortunately are. As they are, to be sure, the exceptions, as everywhere else, shine all the more brightly. Thereby, however, I learned always to distinguish between the eternal students and the men of real ability.
> After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
Click to expand...



I am aware of wiki...that is why I provided wiki's embedded reference link. YOU said you were in Germany, so reading German should be a 'piece of cake' for you...But if you need them in English, how MANY sources do you want pea brain? 

Hitler: A Biography, pg. 76
NSDAP
Golden Party Badge of the NSDAP
Hitler, Adolf
Nazi Party : Origins And Early Existence: 1918 1923
-----------------------------------------
Yes, I read the WHOLE chapter more than once. My question is WHAT do you need help understanding?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

germanguy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> germanguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how a debate about german history easily gets the furor into you Yanks.
> 
> What most here do is to view at this question while only seeing your own agenda.
> 
> The Germans did not support Hitler-
> In 1933 he came to power as head of a multi-party coalition, brought to office by the far-right, a half-senile President (who definitely was not a friend of the republic, but notwithstanding took his oath to the constitution serious).
> 
> He certainly had a mandate in 1933 to end partisanship, economic crisis and the fear of bolshevism.
> That he had a mandate to start a war, to lay Europe in ruins and to kill more than 50 million people was not the case. The end of 1945 was not easily foreseen in 1933.
> 
> And:
> 
> Hitler was no socialist. All this crap about Obama as a Nazi or Socialism equals Nazism is not getting the point.
> 
> As Goebbels once stated:
> 
> We do not want low bread prices, we do not want high bread prices, we want National Socialist bread prices.
> 
> The Nazis mostly gave a shit about ideology.
> How to get Himmlers germanic mystizism, with his believe in astrology, Hitlers religious belief in Wagner etc. into one ideology ?
> Just tell everybody what he wants to hear.
> 
> Interestingly, if you look at the respective ideological groups, the Nazis in general did not succeed with their ideology.
> To the conservatives, especially the old-fashioned ones, Hitler was just an upstart, a corporal in the War.
> To a lot of workers the Nazis were no Socialists. There were enough workers quarters in Germany, where being out azt night in a Party uniform was a very stupid idea.
> So, with the proclaimed best supporters of the Nazis, the far right and the Socialists, Hitlers "ideology" did not work.
> 
> So, did the Germans support him ? All and in every aspect ? I really doubt it.
> 
> regards
> ze germanguy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does nazi mean. Have you by chance read his book? Oh and by the way mr. German guy I lived in Germany for two years. I have talked with the older Germans who were alive when Hitler took control. I call you post BS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROFL - two years in Germany obviously make you an expert of this country and it´s history.
> Still:
> Ich bin der Überzeugung, dass Du, mein amerikanischer Freund, Deine Zeit in zu vielen Kneipen um die amerikanischen Kasernen herum verbracht hast. Inwieweit dies als seriöse Studie der deutschen Geschichte gelten kann, lassen wir einmal dahingestellt sein.
> 
> kind regards
> 
> ze germanguy
Click to expand...


Mein deutscher Freund den ich habe nicht ausgegeben meine ganze Zeit in vielem Gasthofs ich bin ausgestiegen und habe die Leute
getroffen


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Nothing is worse than active ignorance" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
> 
> You can't read something and actually learn what it says if you have preconceived beliefs you are looking to justify. THAT is what you are doing here. You are taking 'words' and hacking up sentences out of context and using them to justify YOUR preconceived beliefs, instead of reading and learning what Hitler's beliefs REALLY were.
> 
> My entry that you said 'is not in that chapter' is NOT in the chapter. I noted it was from 'wiki' (Wikipedia). I posted it to explain Hitler's false claim he was #7.
> 
> I am not going to go through each of your misrepresentations. Some are just total nonsense, where you don't have a clue who or what Hitler is talking about. And others, it hard to understand how you come up with your conclusions, unless you are stupid or being deceitful.
> 
> 
> Example: *Hitler continues with the feeling that he is happy with what he heard*
> 
> You have managed to hack this up and cut off the pretext just enough to remove the real meaning. I will reinsert the proper pretext and highlight the key phrases...
> 
> _The founders for the most part had no idea what it means to make a party-let alone a movement out of a club. And so *these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism.*
> *
> I judged the 'German Workers' Party' no differently*. When Feder *finally stopped talking, I was happy. I had seen enough and wanted to leave...
> *_
> He wasn't happy with what he heard...he was happy the guy was DONE. He was happy in the sense that WHAT he just heard and seen reinforced his belief _'these organizations nearly always stifle automatically in their absurd philistinism'_... and he wanted to LEAVE.
> 
> Hitler was attracted to 2 thing:
> 
> 1) What he read in the pamphlet...Drexler's desire to building a strong nationalist, pro-military, anti-Semitic party.
> 
> 2) And a small, ready-made group of usable minions to _"found one _(party) _of my own" _
> 
> Here is a very key passage that explains Hitler's reason for joining and his intent once he was a member.
> 
> _"This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here, the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined..."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *You used wiki? You do realize wikipedia is an edit source anyone can edit that information. Plus the information in wiki is done by anyone. Wikipedia versus Mein Kampf the actual words of hitler.*
> 
> *You said you read this chapter*?Volume One - A Reckoning
> Chapter IX: The 'German Workers' Party'
> *This is the last part of of that chapoter I suggest that if you respond back that you read it first. I will not be so kind the next time.*
> I knew what these men felt: it was the longing for a new movement which should be more than a party in the previous sense of the wold.
> That evening when I returned to the barracks I had formed my judgment of this association.
> I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?
> Reason could advise me only to decline, but my feeling left me no rest, and as often as I tried to remember the absurdity of this whole club, my feeling argued for it.
> I was restless in the days that followed.
> I began to ponder back and forth. I had long been resolved to engage in political activity; that this could be done only in a new movement was likewise clear to me, only the impetus to act had hitherto been lacking. I am not one of those people who begin something today and lay it down tomorrow, if possible taking up something else again. This very conviction among others was the main reason why it was so hard for me to make up my mind to join such a new organization. I knew that for me a decision would be for good, with no turning back. For me it was no passing game but grim earnest. Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing.
> And this way of thinking constituted one of the main reasons why I could not make up my mind as easily as some others do to found a cause which either had to become everything or else would do better not to exist at all.
> Fate itself now seemed to give me a hint. I should never have gone into one of the existing large parties, and later on I shall go into the reasons for this more closely. This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined, which in the existing great parties was impossible from the outset.
> The longer I tried to think it over, the more the conviction grew in me that through just such a little movement the rise of the nation could some day be organized, but never through the political parliamentary parties which clung far too greatly to the old conceptions or even shared in the profits of the new regime. For it was a new philosophy and not a new election slogan that had to be proclaimed.
> Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
> What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?
> That I was poor and without means seemed to me the most bearable part of it, but it was harder that I was numbered among the nameless, that I was one of the millions whom chance permits to live or summons out of existence without even their closest neighbors condescending to take any notice of it. In addition, there was the difficulty which inevitably arose from my lack of schooling.
> The so called 'intelligentsia' always looks down with a really limitless condescension on anyone who has not been dragged through the obligatory schools and had the necessary knowledge pumped into him. The question has never been: What are the man's abilities? but: What has he learned? To these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lack these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me, and in this I erred only in so far as even then I still regarded people as better than in cold reality they for the most part unfortunately are. As they are, to be sure, the exceptions, as everywhere else, shine all the more brightly. Thereby, however, I learned always to distinguish between the eternal students and the men of real ability.
> After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware of wiki...that is why I provided wiki's embedded reference link. YOU said you were in Germany, so reading German should be a 'piece of cake' for you...But if you need them in English, how MANY sources do you want pea brain?
> 
> Hitler: A Biography, pg. 76
> NSDAP
> Golden Party Badge of the NSDAP
> Hitler, Adolf
> Nazi Party : Origins And Early Existence: 1918 1923
> -----------------------------------------
> Yes, I read the WHOLE chapter more than once. My question is WHAT do you need help understanding?
Click to expand...


Ich bin nicht das einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Welcher obama die Angst von Anhänger ist, dass sie in einem Spiegel anschauen, wenn sie einen Anhänger des Hitler anschauen. Das ist der Grund, den sie Vergleiche nicht mögen.


----------



## germanguy

Well, let us stop Heine, Schiller and Goethe rotating in their graves. 
Frankly: Your german is -errrr- not nice. I do get your point, but your command of this language gives me an idea about the scope of your knowledge.

regards
ze germanguy

P.S:
BTW : in what regard I am a Revisionist ?


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *You used wiki? You do realize wikipedia is an edit source anyone can edit that information. Plus the information in wiki is done by anyone. Wikipedia versus Mein Kampf the actual words of hitler.*
> 
> *You said you read this chapter*?Volume One - A Reckoning
> Chapter IX: The 'German Workers' Party'
> *This is the last part of of that chapoter I suggest that if you respond back that you read it first. I will not be so kind the next time.*
> I knew what these men felt: it was the longing for a new movement which should be more than a party in the previous sense of the wold.
> That evening when I returned to the barracks I had formed my judgment of this association.
> I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?
> Reason could advise me only to decline, but my feeling left me no rest, and as often as I tried to remember the absurdity of this whole club, my feeling argued for it.
> I was restless in the days that followed.
> I began to ponder back and forth. I had long been resolved to engage in political activity; that this could be done only in a new movement was likewise clear to me, only the impetus to act had hitherto been lacking. I am not one of those people who begin something today and lay it down tomorrow, if possible taking up something else again. This very conviction among others was the main reason why it was so hard for me to make up my mind to join such a new organization. I knew that for me a decision would be for good, with no turning back. For me it was no passing game but grim earnest. Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing.
> And this way of thinking constituted one of the main reasons why I could not make up my mind as easily as some others do to found a cause which either had to become everything or else would do better not to exist at all.
> Fate itself now seemed to give me a hint. I should never have gone into one of the existing large parties, and later on I shall go into the reasons for this more closely. This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined, which in the existing great parties was impossible from the outset.
> The longer I tried to think it over, the more the conviction grew in me that through just such a little movement the rise of the nation could some day be organized, but never through the political parliamentary parties which clung far too greatly to the old conceptions or even shared in the profits of the new regime. For it was a new philosophy and not a new election slogan that had to be proclaimed.
> Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
> What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?
> That I was poor and without means seemed to me the most bearable part of it, but it was harder that I was numbered among the nameless, that I was one of the millions whom chance permits to live or summons out of existence without even their closest neighbors condescending to take any notice of it. In addition, there was the difficulty which inevitably arose from my lack of schooling.
> The so called 'intelligentsia' always looks down with a really limitless condescension on anyone who has not been dragged through the obligatory schools and had the necessary knowledge pumped into him. The question has never been: What are the man's abilities? but: What has he learned? To these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lack these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me, and in this I erred only in so far as even then I still regarded people as better than in cold reality they for the most part unfortunately are. As they are, to be sure, the exceptions, as everywhere else, shine all the more brightly. Thereby, however, I learned always to distinguish between the eternal students and the men of real ability.
> After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware of wiki...that is why I provided wiki's embedded reference link. YOU said you were in Germany, so reading German should be a 'piece of cake' for you...But if you need them in English, how MANY sources do you want pea brain?
> 
> Hitler: A Biography, pg. 76
> NSDAP
> Golden Party Badge of the NSDAP
> Hitler, Adolf
> Nazi Party : Origins And Early Existence: 1918 1923
> -----------------------------------------
> Yes, I read the WHOLE chapter more than once. My question is WHAT do you need help understanding?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ich bin nicht das einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie.
Click to expand...


Did you mean: Ich bin nicht dass einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie?


----------



## germanguy

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware of wiki...that is why I provided wiki's embedded reference link. YOU said you were in Germany, so reading German should be a 'piece of cake' for you...But if you need them in English, how MANY sources do you want pea brain?
> 
> Hitler: A Biography, pg. 76
> NSDAP
> Golden Party Badge of the NSDAP
> Hitler, Adolf
> Nazi Party : Origins And Early Existence: 1918 1923
> -----------------------------------------
> Yes, I read the WHOLE chapter more than once. My question is WHAT do you need help understanding?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ich bin nicht das einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you mean: Ich bin nicht dass einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie?
Click to expand...

Urgh - If I would be a teacher of German, I would run out of red ink.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware of wiki...that is why I provided wiki's embedded reference link. YOU said you were in Germany, so reading German should be a 'piece of cake' for you...But if you need them in English, how MANY sources do you want pea brain?
> 
> Hitler: A Biography, pg. 76
> NSDAP
> Golden Party Badge of the NSDAP
> Hitler, Adolf
> Nazi Party : Origins And Early Existence: 1918 1923
> -----------------------------------------
> Yes, I read the WHOLE chapter more than once. My question is WHAT do you need help understanding?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ich bin nicht das einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you mean: Ich bin nicht dass einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie?
Click to expand...


Vielleicht ich hat shouId dies gesagt: bin nicht das einer, der das Verständnis braucht,. es ist Sie, der die Hilfe mit dem Verständnis braucht, wovon Hitler gesagt hat.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

germanguy said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ich bin nicht das einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you mean: Ich bin nicht dass einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Urgh - If I would be a teacher of German, I would run out of red ink.
Click to expand...


Seien Sie kein Scheißer


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware of wiki...that is why I provided wiki's embedded reference link. YOU said you were in Germany, so reading German should be a 'piece of cake' for you...But if you need them in English, how MANY sources do you want pea brain?
> 
> Hitler: A Biography, pg. 76
> NSDAP
> Golden Party Badge of the NSDAP
> Hitler, Adolf
> Nazi Party : Origins And Early Existence: 1918 1923
> -----------------------------------------
> Yes, I read the WHOLE chapter more than once. My question is WHAT do you need help understanding?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ich bin nicht das einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you mean: Ich bin nicht dass einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie?
Click to expand...


Anyway Mein Kampf  is all the source you need whenit pretains to this discussion. between you and I. CARD NUMBVER 7 at least according to hitler.


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> germanguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you mean: Ich bin nicht dass einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie?
> 
> 
> 
> Urgh - If I would be a teacher of German, I would run out of red ink.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Seien Sie kein Scheißer
Click to expand...


Well bigrebnc1775, we are even...I don't understand German, and you don't understand English.
_

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

Then they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller_


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> germanguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Urgh - If I would be a teacher of German, I would run out of red ink.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seien Sie kein Scheißer
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well bigrebnc1775, we are even...I don't understand German, and you don't understand English.
> _
> 
> When the Nazis came for the communists,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a communist.
> 
> Then they locked up the social democrats,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a social democrat.
> 
> Then they came for the trade unionists,
> I did not speak out;
> I was not a trade unionist.
> 
> Then they came for the Jews,
> I did not speak out;
> I was not a Jew.
> 
> When they came for me,
> there was no one left to speak out for me.
> Pastor Martin Niemöller_
Click to expand...


I am trying to be nice but you are making it very hard to do. I fail to understand how you do not understand when hitler said that when he decided to do something he did it with everything he had. He was torn between not joining or joining the Germans workers union. This does not sound like a person who would join a group just to take over a party. It appears that youy are the one who has a hard time understanding english.


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seien Sie kein Scheißer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well bigrebnc1775, we are even...I don't understand German, and you don't understand English.
> _
> 
> When the Nazis came for the communists,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a communist.
> 
> Then they locked up the social democrats,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a social democrat.
> 
> Then they came for the trade unionists,
> I did not speak out;
> I was not a trade unionist.
> 
> Then they came for the Jews,
> I did not speak out;
> I was not a Jew.
> 
> When they came for me,
> there was no one left to speak out for me.
> Pastor Martin Niemöller_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am trying to be nice but you are making it very hard to do. I fail to understand how you do not understand when hitler said that when he decided to do something he did it with everything he had. He was torn between not joining or joining the Germans workers union. *This does not sound like a person who would join a group just to take over a party.* It appears that youy are the one who has a hard time understanding english.
Click to expand...


Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler
Volume One - A Reckoning
Chapter IX: The 'German Workers' Party'

...*Terrible, terrible! This was club life of the worst manner and sort. Was I to join this organization?*

Next, new memberships were discussed; in other words, *my capture* was taken up.
I now began to ask questions-but, aside from a few directives, *there was nothing, no program, no leaflet, no printed matter at all, no membership cards, not even a miserable rubber stamp, only obvious good faith and good intentions.
*
*I had stopped smiling, for what was this if not a typical sign of the complete helplessness and total despair of all existing parties, their programs, their purposes, and their activity? *The thing that drove these few young people to activity that was outwardly so absurd was only the emanation of their inner voice, which more instinctively than consciously showed them that all parties up till then were suited neither for raising up the German nation nor for curing its inner wounds. I quickly read the typed 'directives' and in them I saw more seeking than knowledge. *Much was vague or unclear, much was missing, but nothing was present which could not have passed as a sign of a struggling realization.*
I knew what these men felt: it was the longing for a new movement which should be more than a party in the previous sense of the wold.
That evening when I returned to the barracks I had formed my judgment of this association.

I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?
*Reason could advise me only to decline, but my feeling left me no rest, and as often as I tried to remember the absurdity of this whole club,* my feeling argued for it.
I was restless in the days that followed.

I began to ponder back and forth. I had long been resolved to engage in political activity; that this could be done only in a new movement was likewise clear to me, only the impetus to act had hitherto been lacking. I am not one of those people who begin something today and lay it down tomorrow, if possible taking up something else again. *This very conviction among others was the main reason why it was so hard for me to make up my mind to join such a new organization.* I knew that for me a decision would be for good, with no turning back. *For me it was no passing game but grim earnest. Even then I had an instinctive revulsion toward men who start everything and never carry anything out These jacks-of-all-trades were loathsome to me. I regarded the activity of such people as worse than doing nothing.*
*And this way of thinking constituted one of the main reasons why I could not make up my mind as easily as some others do to found a cause which either had to become everything or else would do better not to exist at all.*
Fate itself now seemed to give me a hint. I should never have gone into one of the existing large parties, and later on I shall go into the reasons for this more closely. *This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined, which in the existing great parties was impossible from the outset.*
The longer I tried to think it over, the more the conviction grew in me that through just such a little movement the rise of the nation could some day be organized, but never through the political parliamentary parties which clung far too greatly to the old conceptions or even shared in the profits of the new regime. For it was a new philosophy and not a new election slogan that had to be proclaimed.
Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?
That I was poor and without means seemed to me the most bearable part of it, but it was harder that I was numbered among the nameless, that I was one of the millions whom chance permits to live or summons out of existence without even their closest neighbors condescending to take any notice of it. In addition, there was the difficulty which inevitably arose from my lack of schooling.
The so called 'intelligentsia' always looks down with a really limitless condescension on anyone who has not been dragged through the obligatory schools and had the necessary knowledge pumped into him. The question has never been: What are the man's abilities? but: What has he learned? To these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lack these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me, and in this I erred only in so far as even then I still regarded people as better than in cold reality they for the most part unfortunately are. As they are, to be sure, the exceptions, as everywhere else, shine all the more brightly. Thereby, however, I learned always to distinguish between the eternal students and the men of real ability.
After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

You like pointing out somethings but in the end of that chapter is how hitler felt. What is Hitler saying here?

*Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?*
That I was poor and without means seemed to me the most bearable part of it, but it was harder that I was numbered among the nameless, that I was one of the millions whom chance permits to live or summons out of existence without even their closest neighbors condescending to take any notice of it. In addition, there was the difficulty which inevitably arose from my lack of schooling.
The so called 'intelligentsia' always looks down with a really limitless condescension on anyone who has not been dragged through the obligatory schools and had the necessary knowledge pumped into him. The question has never been: What are the man's abilities? but: What has he learned? To these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lack these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me, and in this I erred only in so far as even then I still regarded people as better than in cold reality they for the most part unfortunately are. As they are, to be sure, the exceptions, as everywhere else, shine all the more brightly. Thereby, however, I learned always to distinguish between the eternal students and the men of real ability.
*After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.*


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> You like pointing out somethings but in the end of that chapter is how hitler felt. What is Hitler saying here?
> 
> *Truly a very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality!
> What prerequisites did I myself bring to this task?*
> That I was poor and without means seemed to me the most bearable part of it, but it was harder that I was numbered among the nameless, that I was one of the millions whom chance permits to live or summons out of existence without even their closest neighbors condescending to take any notice of it. In addition, there was the difficulty which inevitably arose from my lack of schooling.
> The so called 'intelligentsia' always looks down with a really limitless condescension on anyone who has not been dragged through the obligatory schools and had the necessary knowledge pumped into him. The question has never been: What are the man's abilities? but: What has he learned? To these 'educated' people the biggest empty-head, if he is wrapped in enough diplomas, is worth more than the brightest boy who happens to lack these costly envelopes. And so it was easy for me to imagine how this ' educated ' world would confront me, and in this I erred only in so far as even then I still regarded people as better than in cold reality they for the most part unfortunately are. As they are, to be sure, the exceptions, as everywhere else, shine all the more brightly. Thereby, however, I learned always to distinguish between the eternal students and the men of real ability.
> *After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7.*



Megalomania, delusions of grandeur, self inflated ego, over inflated self importance, melodrama.

Do you have ANY awareness or 'feel' for the attitudes Hitler exudes in this chapter? He shows utter disdain for everyone but himself. He is egotistical, condescending, dismissive, narcissistic and even his attempts at humor are belittling or cruel. 

There is NO subservience, or 'joining others' in Hitler's mind. He has no desire to 'belong' to this or ANY organization. Hitler sees himself only as a leader, not a follower. The ONLY person he shows any affinity for in this whole chapter is Anton Drexler, because Drexler's 'pamphlet' expressed a desire to build a strong nationalist, pro-military, anti-Semitic party, which is what Hitler planned to do. And Drexler flattered Hitler and it fed his ego. 

The _'very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality'_ is Hitler's intention ONLY; to found a party of his own.

He said: "I had no intention of joining a ready-made party, but wanted to found one of my own." NOW, he has decided the best way to turn that 'intention to found a party of his own' was by taking over this party comprised of men of 'absurd philistinism' that HE _"could put into the proper form"  _ HIS!


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> Megalomania, delusions of grandeur, self inflated ego, over inflated self importance, melodrama.
> 
> Do you have ANY awareness or 'feel' for the attitudes Hitler exudes in this chapter? He shows utter disdain for everyone but himself. He is egotistical, condescending, dismissive, narcissistic and even his attempts at humor are belittling or cruel.
> 
> There is NO subservience, or 'joining others' in Hitler's mind. He has no desire to 'belong' to this or ANY organization. Hitler sees himself only as a leader, not a follower. The ONLY person he shows any affinity for in this whole chapter is Anton Drexler, because Drexler's 'pamphlet' expressed a desire to build a strong nationalist, pro-military, anti-Semitic party, which is what Hitler planned to do. And Drexler flattered Hitler and it fed his ego.
> 
> The _'very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality'_ is Hitler's intention ONLY; to found a party of his own.
> 
> He said: "I had no intention of joining a ready-made party, but wanted to found one of my own." NOW, he has decided the best way to turn that 'intention to found a party of his own' was by taking over this party comprised of men of 'absurd philistinism' that HE _"could put into the proper form"  _ HIS!




*He had no intention of joining a group and did want to start his own that part is true. But why would he agonize for two days over joining this group if it was his intent to take it over?*
_"After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."_


_"I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?"_
*Why would it be the hardest question for him to answer if it was his intent to join this group and take it over?*

*Why would he even have to question it? if he knew what he was going to do?*

Also here is Hitlers socialist views from Chapter VIII: The Beginning of My Political Activity 
*The fight against international finance and loan capital became the most important point in the program of the German nation's struggle for its economic independence and freedom.*
As regards the objections of so-called practical men, they can be answered as follows: All fears regarding the terrible economic consequences of the ' breaking of interest slavery ' are superfluous; for, in the first place, the previous economic prescriptions have turned out very badly for the German people, and your positions on the problems of national self-maintenance remind us strongly of the reports of similar experts in former times, for example, those of the Bavarian medical board on the question of introducing the railroad. It is well known that none of the fears of this exalted corporation were later realized: the travelers in the trains of the new 'steam horse ' did not get dizzy, the onlookers did not get sick, and the board fences to hide the new invention from sight were given up-only the board fences around the brains of all so-called 'experts' were preserved for posterity.
In the second place, the following should be noted: every idea, even the best, becomes a danger if it parades as a purpose in itself, being in reality only a means to one. *For me and all true National Socialists there is but one doctrine: people and fatherland.*
What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purity of our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the creator of the universe.


----------



## L.K.Eder

germanguy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> germanguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how a debate about german history easily gets the furor into you Yanks.
> 
> What most here do is to view at this question while only seeing your own agenda.
> 
> The Germans did not support Hitler-
> In 1933 he came to power as head of a multi-party coalition, brought to office by the far-right, a half-senile President (who definitely was not a friend of the republic, but notwithstanding took his oath to the constitution serious).
> 
> He certainly had a mandate in 1933 to end partisanship, economic crisis and the fear of bolshevism.
> That he had a mandate to start a war, to lay Europe in ruins and to kill more than 50 million people was not the case. The end of 1945 was not easily foreseen in 1933.
> 
> And:
> 
> Hitler was no socialist. All this crap about Obama as a Nazi or Socialism equals Nazism is not getting the point.
> 
> As Goebbels once stated:
> 
> We do not want low bread prices, we do not want high bread prices, we want National Socialist bread prices.
> 
> The Nazis mostly gave a shit about ideology.
> How to get Himmlers germanic mystizism, with his believe in astrology, Hitlers religious belief in Wagner etc. into one ideology ?
> Just tell everybody what he wants to hear.
> 
> Interestingly, if you look at the respective ideological groups, the Nazis in general did not succeed with their ideology.
> To the conservatives, especially the old-fashioned ones, Hitler was just an upstart, a corporal in the War.
> To a lot of workers the Nazis were no Socialists. There were enough workers quarters in Germany, where being out azt night in a Party uniform was a very stupid idea.
> So, with the proclaimed best supporters of the Nazis, the far right and the Socialists, Hitlers "ideology" did not work.
> 
> So, did the Germans support him ? All and in every aspect ? I really doubt it.
> 
> regards
> ze germanguy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does nazi mean. Have you by chance read his book? Oh and by the way mr. German guy I lived in Germany for two years. I have talked with the older Germans who were alive when Hitler took control. I call you post BS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROFL - two years in Germany obviously make you an expert of this country and it´s history.
> Still:
> Ich bin der Überzeugung, dass Du, mein amerikanischer Freund, Deine Zeit in zu vielen Kneipen um die amerikanischen Kasernen herum verbracht hast. Inwieweit dies als seriöse Studie der deutschen Geschichte gelten kann, lassen wir einmal dahingestellt sein.
> 
> kind regards
> 
> ze germanguy
Click to expand...



der typ ist eine offensichtliche matschbirne, deswegen gebe ich mir keine mühe, seine "frage" zu beantworten. du siehst ja, was die antwort auf einen ernsthaften beitrag ist.  "du bist ein revisionist", hahahahahaha.


----------



## L.K.Eder

westwall said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> I too have done some pretty serious reading and lived in Germany for two years and actually talked to a lot of the folks involved as well as a ton of combat soldiers, (I am a member of a couple of their kameradschafts) and the people absolutely *DID* support Hitler for almost the whole time he was in power.
> 
> The whole goal of the NAZI's was to develop a "volksgemeinschaft" (look it up, it will mean more to you that way).  But they were successful in developing a "frontgemeinschaft" and that was why the Deutsche soldaten were able to accomplish so much with so little.  One of my German friends was captured at Anzio and even after being captured was certain the Germans would win...till he got to North Africa and saw 7 miles of fuel containers.
> 
> As he told me "had we had that amount of supply there would have been no stopping us, we never had anything approaching that amount...amazing!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ah, so living in germany and talking to germans makes you an expert. lol.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No,
> 
> It doesn't, far from it.  However it does give me a tad bit more knowledge of how the regular people felt about Hitler.  I also have been able to interview Admiral Erich Topp (who was the fourth highest scoring U-Boat "Ace"), General Gunther Rall (275 aircraft shot down), Erich Hartmann (352 aircraft shot down), and a whole host of military people from the war.
> 
> Experts must do the same thing to write  their books no?  So I am not an expert but I am more knowledgable than you.
Click to expand...


give it up, with your agreeing with the brain damaged threadstarter about the dap and how hitler joined, you hopped on the idjit train. no interviews with generals can save you from that. and since i barely put anything serious into this thread, you have no idea about the extent of my knowledge about this.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> germanguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you mean: Ich bin nicht dass einer, der das Verständnis braucht. Es ist Sie?
> 
> 
> 
> Urgh - If I would be a teacher of German, I would run out of red ink.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Seien Sie kein Scheißer
Click to expand...



hahaha, kehr vor deinem eigenen haus, dösbaddel.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> germanguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Urgh - If I would be a teacher of German, I would run out of red ink.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seien Sie kein Scheißer
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> hahaha, kehr vor deinem eigenen haus, dösbaddel.
Click to expand...


Haben Sie irgendeine Idee, was Sie Idioten gesagt haben?


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seien Sie kein Scheißer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hahaha, kehr vor deinem eigenen haus, dösbaddel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Haben Sie irgendeine Idee, was Sie Idioten gesagt haben?
Click to expand...



englisch kannste nicht, deutsch kannste nicht, lesen kannste nicht. wat kannste denn überhaupt?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> hahaha, kehr vor deinem eigenen haus, dösbaddel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haben Sie irgendeine Idee, was Sie Idioten gesagt haben?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> englisch kannste nicht, deutsch kannste nicht, lesen kannste nicht. wat kannste denn überhaupt?
Click to expand...


Your best bet is to stick with a language that you understand. Die deutsche Sprache ist nicht für Sie. gut tschüs zurück auf ignoriert


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Haben Sie irgendeine Idee, was Sie Idioten gesagt haben?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> englisch kannste nicht, deutsch kannste nicht, lesen kannste nicht. wat kannste denn überhaupt?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your best bet is to stick with a language that you understand. Die deutsche Sprache ist nicht für Sie. gut tschüs zurück auf ignoriert
Click to expand...


tja, tranlator-bots kommen an ihre grenzen, wenn ich Umgangssprache schreibe, hahaha.

Es war ein großer Spaß, wie immer.


----------



## editec

Interesting watching you two amateur foresensic psychologists trying to unravel Hitler's mind.

You're not the only people who are fascinated by the question of who Hitler was and how he got to be that way. 

You BOTH might find _THE CASTLE IN THE FOREST_ by Norman Mailer worth your time. I read a few years ago and found it quite fascinating.

Here's what the _Villiage Voice_ said of the work



> Mailer accomplishes the counter-myth. Hitler is not a monster: Monsters aren't human, and hence aren't responsible for inhuman behavior. Mailer accepts this without letting Adolf off the hook. Nor does he neglect to acknowledge what is terra incognita. Everything in Hitler's life that _Castle _paints for us resonates with the sour music of chance, the Manichean flexibility of human will, and the mystery embedded in every creature.


----------



## L.K.Eder

editec said:


> Interesting watching you two amateur foresensic psychologists trying to unravel Hitler's mind.
> 
> You're not the only people who are fascinated by the question of who Hitler was and how he got to be that way.
> 
> You BOTH might find _THE CASTLE IN THE FOREST_ by Norman Mailer worth your time. I read a few years ago and found it quite fascinating.
> 
> Here's what the _Villiage Voice_ said of the work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mailer accomplishes the counter-myth. Hitler is not a monster: Monsters aren't human, and hence aren't responsible for inhuman behavior. Mailer accepts this without letting Adolf off the hook. Nor does he neglect to acknowledge what is terra incognita. Everything in Hitler's life that _Castle _paints for us resonates with the sour music of chance, the Manichean flexibility of human will, and the mystery embedded in every creature.
Click to expand...


"Interesting watching you two amateur foresensic psychologists trying to unravel Hitler's mind."

i am doing nothing of the sort.


----------



## editec

L.K.Eder said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting watching you two amateur foresensic psychologists trying to unravel Hitler's mind.
> 
> You're not the only people who are fascinated by the question of who Hitler was and how he got to be that way.
> 
> You BOTH might find _THE CASTLE IN THE FOREST_ by Norman Mailer worth your time. I read a few years ago and found it quite fascinating.
> 
> Here's what the _Villiage Voice_ said of the work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mailer accomplishes the counter-myth. Hitler is not a monster: Monsters aren't human, and hence aren't responsible for inhuman behavior. Mailer accepts this without letting Adolf off the hook. Nor does he neglect to acknowledge what is terra incognita. Everything in Hitler's life that _Castle _paints for us resonates with the sour music of chance, the Manichean flexibility of human will, and the mystery embedded in every creature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Interesting watching you two amateur foresensic psychologists trying to unravel Hitler's mind."
> 
> i am doing nothing of the sort.
Click to expand...

 
No?

Okay if you say so, who am I to disagree?


----------



## L.K.Eder

editec said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting watching you two amateur foresensic psychologists trying to unravel Hitler's mind.
> 
> You're not the only people who are fascinated by the question of who Hitler was and how he got to be that way.
> 
> You BOTH might find _THE CASTLE IN THE FOREST_ by Norman Mailer worth your time. I read a few years ago and found it quite fascinating.
> 
> Here's what the _Villiage Voice_ said of the work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Interesting watching you two amateur foresensic psychologists trying to unravel Hitler's mind."
> 
> i am doing nothing of the sort.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No?
> 
> Okay if you say so, who am I to disagree?
Click to expand...


i am just being a jerk. i "debated" the rise  of hitler and the third reich on this board before, and i realized early on that this is the wrong venue, haha. so now, i am just having fun with idjits.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

editec said:


> Interesting watching you two amateur foresensic psychologists trying to unravel Hitler's mind.
> 
> You're not the only people who are fascinated by the question of who Hitler was and how he got to be that way.
> 
> You BOTH might find _THE CASTLE IN THE FOREST_ by Norman Mailer worth your time. I read a few years ago and found it quite fascinating.
> 
> Here's what the _Villiage Voice_ said of the work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mailer accomplishes the counter-myth. Hitler is not a monster: Monsters aren't human, and hence aren't responsible for inhuman behavior. Mailer accepts this without letting Adolf off the hook. Nor does he neglect to acknowledge what is terra incognita. Everything in Hitler's life that _Castle _paints for us resonates with the sour music of chance, the Manichean flexibility of human will, and the mystery embedded in every creature.
Click to expand...


Why read someone else's works/books on hitler? If you want to know Hitler you would read his work's/books and talk with the people who were alive when hitler was in power.


----------



## editec

bigrebnc1775 said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting watching you two amateur foresensic psychologists trying to unravel Hitler's mind.
> 
> You're not the only people who are fascinated by the question of who Hitler was and how he got to be that way.
> 
> You BOTH might find _THE CASTLE IN THE FOREST_ by Norman Mailer worth your time. I read a few years ago and found it quite fascinating.
> 
> Here's what the _Villiage Voice_ said of the work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mailer accomplishes the counter-myth. Hitler is not a monster: Monsters aren't human, and hence aren't responsible for inhuman behavior. Mailer accepts this without letting Adolf off the hook. Nor does he neglect to acknowledge what is terra incognita. Everything in Hitler's life that _Castle _paints for us resonates with the sour music of chance, the Manichean flexibility of human will, and the mystery embedded in every creature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why read someone else's works/books on hitler? If you want to know Hitler you would read his work's/books and talk with the people who were alive when hitler was in power.
Click to expand...

 
How about just  because it's a good book?

It's not a history, it's a work of historical fiction.

But given that it delves into the psychology of Hitler, I thought I'd mention it for the benefit of people that seemed interested in that subject.


----------



## midcan5

Kinda funny or maybe telling but debates often degenerate into a I'm right you're wrong. Supporting content soon disappears. Now extrapolate and carry it to extremes, add a weak and insecure person to the mix. 

The war metaphor mentioned above is crucial to understanding group thought. Enemies focus people. "We do not usually look for allies when we love. Indeed, we often look on those who love with us as rivals and trespassers. But we always look for allies when we hate." Eric Hoffer

Broken down, isolated, how really does Hitler's mind differ from the rabid racist? 

Much of this is Freudian mumbo jumbo but it is interesting. 

Psychology, History  Inside the Mind of Adolf Hitler


'Recreated Study Finds that People Still Willing to Torture Others' by Denis Cummings
A replication of the famous 1961 Milgram Experiment has found that the majority of people will comply with orders to administer painful shocks to an innocent person. Recreated Study Finds that People Still Willing to Torture Others


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Megalomania, delusions of grandeur, self inflated ego, over inflated self importance, melodrama.
> 
> Do you have ANY awareness or 'feel' for the attitudes Hitler exudes in this chapter? He shows utter disdain for everyone but himself. He is egotistical, condescending, dismissive, narcissistic and even his attempts at humor are belittling or cruel.
> 
> There is NO subservience, or 'joining others' in Hitler's mind. He has no desire to 'belong' to this or ANY organization. Hitler sees himself only as a leader, not a follower. The ONLY person he shows any affinity for in this whole chapter is Anton Drexler, because Drexler's 'pamphlet' expressed a desire to build a strong nationalist, pro-military, anti-Semitic party, which is what Hitler planned to do. And Drexler flattered Hitler and it fed his ego.
> 
> The _'very grave decision-to begin transforming this intention into reality'_ is Hitler's intention ONLY; to found a party of his own.
> 
> He said: "I had no intention of joining a ready-made party, but wanted to found one of my own." NOW, he has decided the best way to turn that 'intention to found a party of his own' was by taking over this party comprised of men of 'absurd philistinism' that HE _"could put into the proper form"  _ HIS!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *He had no intention of joining a group and did want to start his own that part is true. But why would he agonize for two days over joining this group if it was his intent to take it over?*
> _"After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."_
> 
> 
> _"I was facing the hardest question of my life: should I join or should I decline?"_
> *Why would it be the hardest question for him to answer if it was his intent to join this group and take it over?*
> 
> *Why would he even have to question it? if he knew what he was going to do?*
> 
> Also here is Hitlers socialist views from Chapter VIII: The Beginning of My Political Activity
> *The fight against international finance and loan capital became the most important point in the program of the German nation's struggle for its economic independence and freedom.*
> As regards the objections of so-called practical men, they can be answered as follows: All fears regarding the terrible economic consequences of the ' breaking of interest slavery ' are superfluous; for, in the first place, the previous economic prescriptions have turned out very badly for the German people, and your positions on the problems of national self-maintenance remind us strongly of the reports of similar experts in former times, for example, those of the Bavarian medical board on the question of introducing the railroad. It is well known that none of the fears of this exalted corporation were later realized: the travelers in the trains of the new 'steam horse ' did not get dizzy, the onlookers did not get sick, and the board fences to hide the new invention from sight were given up-only the board fences around the brains of all so-called 'experts' were preserved for posterity.
> In the second place, the following should be noted: every idea, even the best, becomes a danger if it parades as a purpose in itself, being in reality only a means to one. *For me and all true National Socialists there is but one doctrine: people and fatherland.*
> What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purity of our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the creator of the universe.
Click to expand...


Hitler is NOT expressing any socialist views. Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'... 

'The fight against international finance and loan capital' = the fight against JEWS

'people and fatherland' = nationalism, Aryan supremacy

I am starting to have some questions of my own:

Shouldn't you be outside riding your Big Wheels instead of playing around with mommy's computer?

Do you just have to be in the house, or do you have to be in bed when the street lights come on?


----------



## germanguy

Perhaps you should stop to read "Mein Kampf", as it is not a very good book.

Just look how Hitler ended and what legacy is left of his achievements. 
Think hard: there are nearly none.
He ended with a bullet in his head burning in a ditch. His empire was taken over partly by the plutocrats he loathed and partly by the bolsheviks he hated as well. And in his testament he blamed the Germans not having fought strong enough and so being worthless.
Apart from a lot of other failures, we see a man who has failed big time.

So if you take this into calculation, you see a gambler and a bohemian character, who was not able to do something productive.

And:

Lass die Finger von Fremdsprachen. Translator-Bots sind kein Ersatz für eine vernünftige 
Schulbildung. Was im übrigen die Frage aufwirft, wie der Kollege seine Gespräche mit den deutschen Lamettaträgern so geführt haben will.

regards 
ze germanguy


----------



## Bfgrn

germanguy said:


> Perhaps you should stop to read "Mein Kampf", as it is not a very good book.
> 
> Just look how Hitler ended and what legacy is left of his achievements.
> Think hard: there are nearly none.
> He ended with a bullet in his head burning in a ditch. His empire was taken over partly by the plutocrats he loathed and partly by the bolsheviks he hated as well. And in his testament he blamed the Germans not having fought strong enough and so being worthless.
> Apart from a lot of other failures, we see a man who has failed big time.
> 
> So if you take this into calculation, you see a gambler and a bohemian character, who was not able to do something productive.
> 
> And:
> 
> Lass die Finger von Fremdsprachen. Translator-Bots sind kein Ersatz für eine vernünftige
> Schulbildung. Was im übrigen die Frage aufwirft, wie der Kollege seine Gespräche mit den deutschen Lamettaträgern so geführt haben will.
> 
> regards
> ze germanguy



AND...Perhaps everyone should read 'Mein Kampf'...because it serves as a reminder of where that kind of destructive thinking and actions lead. Hitler and his henchmen may be gone, but were all the lessons learned? 

Why is a there such a rabid following for modern day propaganda ministers like Rush Limbaugh? His propaganda of hate towards liberals is embraced in some segments of this country as much as Goebbel's propaganda of hate towards Jews was in Germany. 




Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism. 
Barry Goldwater


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Hitler is NOT expressing any socialist views. Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'... 

'The fight against international finance and loan capital' = the fight against JEWS

'people and fatherland' = nationalism, Aryan supremacy

I am starting to have some questions of my own:

Shouldn't you be outside riding your Big Wheels instead of playing around with mommy's computer?

Do you just have to be in the house, or do you have to be in bed when the street lights come on? 

*You are a moron stupid jackass if you think that hitler wasn't expressing a socialist view. You even said it yourself*
 Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism' 

*Bush was a conservative he was a closet liberal.*

No one who is intent on taking over a group will be torn between desiding to join a group or not join a group. If it is their intent to take a group over thgey will have planed to do it without worring about it.
Stop being a revisionist moron


----------



## L.K.Eder

germanguy said:


> Perhaps you should stop to read "Mein Kampf", as it is not a very good book.
> 
> Just look how Hitler ended and what legacy is left of his achievements.
> Think hard: there are nearly none.
> He ended with a bullet in his head burning in a ditch. His empire was taken over partly by the plutocrats he loathed and partly by the bolsheviks he hated as well. And in his testament he blamed the Germans not having fought strong enough and so being worthless.
> Apart from a lot of other failures, we see a man who has failed big time.
> 
> So if you take this into calculation, you see a gambler and a bohemian character, who was not able to do something productive.
> 
> And:
> 
> Lass die Finger von Fremdsprachen. Translator-Bots sind kein Ersatz für eine vernünftige
> Schulbildung. Was im übrigen die Frage aufwirft, wie der Kollege seine Gespräche mit den deutschen Lamettaträgern so geführt haben will.
> 
> regards
> ze germanguy



hahaha, tja. so sieht es aus. aber ich denke, du meintest, er soll aufhören "mein kampf" zu lesen, und nicht anhalten, um "mein kampf" zu lesen. (stop reading anstatt stop to read), hey, ich bin zweisprachiger grammatik nazi.

er kann ruhig "mein kampf" anschauen. sind aber wenig bilder drin, hahaha.


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Hitler is NOT expressing any socialist views. Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'...
> 
> 'The fight against international finance and loan capital' = the fight against JEWS
> 
> 'people and fatherland' = nationalism, Aryan supremacy
> 
> I am starting to have some questions of my own:
> 
> Shouldn't you be outside riding your Big Wheels instead of playing around with mommy's computer?
> 
> Do you just have to be in the house, or do you have to be in bed when the street lights come on?
> 
> *You are a moron stupid jackass if you think that hitler wasn't expressing a socialist view. You even said it yourself*
> Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'
> 
> *Bush was a conservative he was a closet liberal.*
> 
> No one who is intent on taking over a group will be torn between desiding to join a group or not join a group. If it is their intent to take a group over thgey will have planed to do it without worring about it.
> Stop being a revisionist moron



How old are you? Seriously...


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler is NOT expressing any socialist views. Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'...
> 
> 'The fight against international finance and loan capital' = the fight against JEWS
> 
> 'people and fatherland' = nationalism, Aryan supremacy
> 
> I am starting to have some questions of my own:
> 
> Shouldn't you be outside riding your Big Wheels instead of playing around with mommy's computer?
> 
> Do you just have to be in the house, or do you have to be in bed when the street lights come on?
> 
> *You are a moron stupid jackass if you think that hitler wasn't expressing a socialist view. You even said it yourself*
> Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'
> 
> *Bush was a conservative he was a closet liberal.*
> 
> No one who is intent on taking over a group will be torn between desiding to join a group or not join a group. If it is their intent to take a group over thgey will have planed to do it without worring about it.
> Stop being a revisionist moron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How old are you? Seriously...
Click to expand...


I'm a lot older then you stupid. What does age have anything to do with have the common sense to understand that someone will not be torn between making a choice to join a group just to take control of that group.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler is NOT expressing any socialist views. Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'...
> 
> 'The fight against international finance and loan capital' = the fight against JEWS
> 
> 'people and fatherland' = nationalism, Aryan supremacy
> 
> I am starting to have some questions of my own:
> 
> Shouldn't you be outside riding your Big Wheels instead of playing around with mommy's computer?
> 
> Do you just have to be in the house, or do you have to be in bed when the street lights come on?
> 
> *You are a moron stupid jackass if you think that hitler wasn't expressing a socialist view. You even said it yourself*
> Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'
> 
> *Bush was a conservative he was a closet liberal.*
> 
> No one who is intent on taking over a group will be torn between desiding to join a group or not join a group. If it is their intent to take a group over thgey will have planed to do it without worring about it.
> Stop being a revisionist moron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How old are you? Seriously...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm a lot older then you stupid.
Click to expand...


come on, at least try, i already feel a little bad for kicking a retard.


----------



## editec

midcan5 said:


> I have Goldhagen's book (see below) but have never read it completely. The holocaust, as well as the other massacres in the early 20th century, greatly influenced my childhood thinking. On mom's side we are Austrian and Hitler and Germany were a topic of conversation even though her parents immigrated in the early part of the 20th. I think people make a large mistake when they think what the Germans did was so unusual that it could only happen there. Consider genocide throughout history and you wonder if evolution includes a moral componenet. Evil is possible when fear grows, foes build groups, and groups don't think.
> 
> 
> The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century
> 
> 
> "Thus for the time being I have sent to the East only my 'Death's Head Units' with the orders to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of Polish race or language. Only in such a way will we win the vital space that we need. Who still talks nowadays about the Armenians?" Adolf Hitler to his Army commanders
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...-where-does-evil-come-from-6.html#post2457564
> 
> The Holocaust & holocausts
> 
> History in Focus: Holocaust websites
> 
> 
> edit:
> 
> I removed link to Goldhagen book review as after I read the piece, I did not agree with it completely. My point was only to reference the book as it relates to the thread topic. I added the Amazon link below. I try to present links that are honest about any particular topic even if ironic, satirical, controversial or off the wall.
> 
> Amazon.com: Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust&#8230;


 
Yeah that's sort of my point, too.

Genocidal slaughter is _so common in history_, that thinking that there's something unique about the German character is preposterous.

Mass slaughters of people based on race, or ethnic, or religion, or just based on YOU GOT WHAT WE WANT is a fairly common occurrance.


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hitler is NOT expressing any socialist views. Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'...
> 
> 'The fight against international finance and loan capital' = the fight against JEWS
> 
> 'people and fatherland' = nationalism, Aryan supremacy
> 
> I am starting to have some questions of my own:
> 
> Shouldn't you be outside riding your Big Wheels instead of playing around with mommy's computer?
> 
> Do you just have to be in the house, or do you have to be in bed when the street lights come on?
> 
> *You are a moron stupid jackass if you think that hitler wasn't expressing a socialist view. You even said it yourself*
> Hitler's version of 'socialism' is kindred to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney's version of 'socialism'
> 
> *Bush was a conservative he was a closet liberal.*
> 
> No one who is intent on taking over a group will be torn between desiding to join a group or not join a group. If it is their intent to take a group over thgey will have planed to do it without worring about it.
> Stop being a revisionist moron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How old are you? Seriously...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm a lot older then you stupid. What does age have anything to do with have the common sense to understand that someone will not be torn between making a choice to join a group just to take control of that group.
Click to expand...


The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...*MY* struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.

Hitler never plans to join up, he plans to take over. He alludes to it in the very chapter YOU posted. But you don't read to LEARN Hitler's beliefs. You read looking for snippets of paragraphs, sentences and words you can take out of context, hack up and use it to promote YOUR preconceived beliefs.

Hitler is not a socialist. He doesn't believe in inclusiveness, he believes in exclusiveness and exclusion. A 'you are with us or against us' attitude for those he would include. People who must first pass a purity test and a then pledge undying subservience and loyalty to HIS state. For the people he will exclude, there is no membership option. They already fail his purity test. They are of the wrong religion, ancestry, sexual orientation or IQ level. Those to be excluded will be eliminated.


----------



## theHawk

Mad Scientist said:


> Socialism and Communism were gaining popularity in post WWI Europe and during the great depression in America. America had quite a large American Nazi Party itself. And that yes, Hitler was popularly elected but the people also stood by as Hitler consolidated power for himself.



Sounds a lot like today right here in America.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> How old are you? Seriously...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a lot older then you stupid. What does age have anything to do with have the common sense to understand that someone will not be torn between making a choice to join a group just to take control of that group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...*MY* struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.
> 
> Hitler never plans to join up, he plans to take over. He alludes to it in the very chapter YOU posted. But you don't read to LEARN Hitler's beliefs. You read looking for snippets of paragraphs, sentences and words you can take out of context, hack up and use it to promote YOUR preconceived beliefs.
> 
> Hitler is not a socialist. He doesn't believe in inclusiveness, he believes in exclusiveness and exclusion. A 'you are with us or against us' attitude for those he would include. People who must first pass a purity test and a then pledge undying subservience and loyalty to HIS state. For the people he will exclude, there is no membership option. They already fail his purity test. They are of the wrong religion, ancestry, sexual orientation or IQ level. Those to be excluded will be eliminated.
Click to expand...


You are a stuipd son of a bitch Did I say the book was about other fucking people stupid? I have always said it was about hitler. One more fucking time for stupid

"After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."

*This does not sound like someone who was joining a group just to take it over. If it was his plan to take it over, he would never had such a struggle between joining and not joining.*
And hell yes Hitler was a socialist if not why did he call the nazis, nazis?

The National Socialist German Workers Party


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a lot older then you stupid. What does age have anything to do with have the common sense to understand that someone will not be torn between making a choice to join a group just to take control of that group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...*MY* struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.
> 
> Hitler never plans to join up, he plans to take over. He alludes to it in the very chapter YOU posted. But you don't read to LEARN Hitler's beliefs. You read looking for snippets of paragraphs, sentences and words you can take out of context, hack up and use it to promote YOUR preconceived beliefs.
> 
> Hitler is not a socialist. He doesn't believe in inclusiveness, he believes in exclusiveness and exclusion. A 'you are with us or against us' attitude for those he would include. People who must first pass a purity test and a then pledge undying subservience and loyalty to HIS state. For the people he will exclude, there is no membership option. They already fail his purity test. They are of the wrong religion, ancestry, sexual orientation or IQ level. Those to be excluded will be eliminated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a stuipd son of a bitch Did I say the book was about other fucking people stupid? I have always said it was about hitler. One more fucking time for stupid
> 
> "After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."
> 
> *This does not sound like someone who was joining a group just to take it over. If it was his plan to take it over, he would never had such a struggle between joining and not joining.*
> And hell yes Hitler was a socialist if not why did he call the nazis, nazis?
> 
> The National Socialist German Workers Party
Click to expand...


you are still a retard, fatrebel.

zoom-boing was right, it was the mustache.


----------



## elvis

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...*MY* struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.
> 
> Hitler never plans to join up, he plans to take over. He alludes to it in the very chapter YOU posted. But you don't read to LEARN Hitler's beliefs. You read looking for snippets of paragraphs, sentences and words you can take out of context, hack up and use it to promote YOUR preconceived beliefs.
> 
> Hitler is not a socialist. He doesn't believe in inclusiveness, he believes in exclusiveness and exclusion. A 'you are with us or against us' attitude for those he would include. People who must first pass a purity test and a then pledge undying subservience and loyalty to HIS state. For the people he will exclude, there is no membership option. They already fail his purity test. They are of the wrong religion, ancestry, sexual orientation or IQ level. Those to be excluded will be eliminated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a stuipd son of a bitch Did I say the book was about other fucking people stupid? I have always said it was about hitler. One more fucking time for stupid
> 
> "After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."
> 
> *This does not sound like someone who was joining a group just to take it over. If it was his plan to take it over, he would never had such a struggle between joining and not joining.*
> And hell yes Hitler was a socialist if not why did he call the nazis, nazis?
> 
> The National Socialist German Workers Party
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you are still a retard, fatrebel.
> 
> zoom-boing was right, it was the mustache.
Click to expand...

Looks like Nena in your avatar.


----------



## L.K.Eder

elvis said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are a stuipd son of a bitch Did I say the book was about other fucking people stupid? I have always said it was about hitler. One more fucking time for stupid
> 
> "After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."
> 
> *This does not sound like someone who was joining a group just to take it over. If it was his plan to take it over, he would never had such a struggle between joining and not joining.*
> And hell yes Hitler was a socialist if not why did he call the nazis, nazis?
> 
> The National Socialist German Workers Party
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you are still a retard, fatrebel.
> 
> zoom-boing was right, it was the mustache.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Looks like Nena in your avatar.
Click to expand...



it is not Nena. it is also not my ex-girlfriend.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> you are still a retard, fatrebel.
> 
> zoom-boing was right, it was the mustache.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like Nena in your avatar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> it is not Nena. it is also not my ex-girlfriend.[/QUOT]
> 
> Ex girl friend? she looks like a skank, well a bridge troll couldn't do any better.
Click to expand...


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elvis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like Nena in your avatar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it is not Nena. it is also not my ex-girlfriend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ex girl friend? she looks like a skank, well a bridge troll couldn't do any better.
Click to expand...



quote fail, ignore fail, generic fail.

go to bed.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...*MY* struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.
> 
> Hitler never plans to join up, he plans to take over. He alludes to it in the very chapter YOU posted. But you don't read to LEARN Hitler's beliefs. You read looking for snippets of paragraphs, sentences and words you can take out of context, hack up and use it to promote YOUR preconceived beliefs.
> 
> Hitler is not a socialist. He doesn't believe in inclusiveness, he believes in exclusiveness and exclusion. A 'you are with us or against us' attitude for those he would include. People who must first pass a purity test and a then pledge undying subservience and loyalty to HIS state. For the people he will exclude, there is no membership option. They already fail his purity test. They are of the wrong religion, ancestry, sexual orientation or IQ level. Those to be excluded will be eliminated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a stuipd son of a bitch Did I say the book was about other fucking people stupid? I have always said it was about hitler. One more fucking time for stupid
> 
> "After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."
> 
> *This does not sound like someone who was joining a group just to take it over. If it was his plan to take it over, he would never had such a struggle between joining and not joining.*
> And hell yes Hitler was a socialist if not why did he call the nazis, nazis?
> 
> The National Socialist German Workers Party
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you are still a retard, fatrebel.
> 
> zoom-boing was right, it was the mustache.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't call you retarded, because I wouldn't want to insult the people by comparing you to them. And as for me being fat Big is for my height 6'7" you don't know me at all you would be very surprised.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

L.K.Eder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> it is not Nena. it is also not my ex-girlfriend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ex girl friend? she looks like a skank, well a bridge troll couldn't do any better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> quote fail, ignore fail, generic fail.
> 
> go to bed.
Click to expand...


I hear a faint cry from the village, they are calling their idiot you better move along chump. I only responded because I read elvis's reply and saw your bridge troll comment.


----------



## L.K.Eder

bigrebnc1775 said:


> L.K.Eder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ex girl friend? she looks like a skank, well a bridge troll couldn't do any better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> quote fail, ignore fail, generic fail.
> 
> go to bed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I hear a faint cry from the village, they are calling their idiot you better move along chump.
Click to expand...


finally, a decent effort. did you copy and paste that weak line from somewhere?


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a lot older then you stupid. What does age have anything to do with have the common sense to understand that someone will not be torn between making a choice to join a group just to take control of that group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...*MY* struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.
> 
> Hitler never plans to join up, he plans to take over. He alludes to it in the very chapter YOU posted. But you don't read to LEARN Hitler's beliefs. You read looking for snippets of paragraphs, sentences and words you can take out of context, hack up and use it to promote YOUR preconceived beliefs.
> 
> Hitler is not a socialist. He doesn't believe in inclusiveness, he believes in exclusiveness and exclusion. A 'you are with us or against us' attitude for those he would include. People who must first pass a purity test and a then pledge undying subservience and loyalty to HIS state. For the people he will exclude, there is no membership option. They already fail his purity test. They are of the wrong religion, ancestry, sexual orientation or IQ level. Those to be excluded will be eliminated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a stuipd son of a bitch Did I say the book was about other fucking people stupid? I have always said it was about hitler. One more fucking time for stupid
> 
> "After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."
> 
> *This does not sound like someone who was joining a group just to take it over. If it was his plan to take it over, he would never had such a struggle between joining and not joining.*
> And hell yes Hitler was a socialist if not why did he call the nazis, nazis?
> 
> The National Socialist German Workers Party
Click to expand...


Did you ever consider that WHAT he was agonizing over was taking the step from being a soldier, to finally entering politics? He spend the whole last paragraphs justifying his decision.
_
"I began to ponder back and forth. *I had long been resolved to engage in political activity; that this could be done only in a new movement was likewise clear to me*, only the impetus to act had hitherto been lacking"_

_*"Fate itself now seemed to give me a hint. I should never have gone into one of the existing large parties*, and later on I shall go into the reasons for this more closely. This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and *the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined, which in the existing great parties was impossible from the outset."*_

So, because there is the WORD Socialist in the party name, THAT means he was a socialist? What KIND, a Marxist?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...*MY* struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.
> 
> Hitler never plans to join up, he plans to take over. He alludes to it in the very chapter YOU posted. But you don't read to LEARN Hitler's beliefs. You read looking for snippets of paragraphs, sentences and words you can take out of context, hack up and use it to promote YOUR preconceived beliefs.
> 
> Hitler is not a socialist. He doesn't believe in inclusiveness, he believes in exclusiveness and exclusion. A 'you are with us or against us' attitude for those he would include. People who must first pass a purity test and a then pledge undying subservience and loyalty to HIS state. For the people he will exclude, there is no membership option. They already fail his purity test. They are of the wrong religion, ancestry, sexual orientation or IQ level. Those to be excluded will be eliminated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a stuipd son of a bitch Did I say the book was about other fucking people stupid? I have always said it was about hitler. One more fucking time for stupid
> 
> "After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."
> 
> *This does not sound like someone who was joining a group just to take it over. If it was his plan to take it over, he would never had such a struggle between joining and not joining.*
> And hell yes Hitler was a socialist if not why did he call the nazis, nazis?
> 
> The National Socialist German Workers Party
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you ever consider that WHAT he was agonizing over was taking the step from being a soldier, to finally entering politics? He spend the whole last paragraphs justifying his decision.
> _
> "I began to ponder back and forth. *I had long been resolved to engage in political activity; that this could be done only in a new movement was likewise clear to me*, only the impetus to act had hitherto been lacking"_
> 
> _*"Fate itself now seemed to give me a hint. I should never have gone into one of the existing large parties*, and later on I shall go into the reasons for this more closely. This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and *the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined, which in the existing great parties was impossible from the outset."*_
> 
> So, because there is the WORD Socialist in the party name, THAT means he was a socialist? What KIND, a Marxist?
Click to expand...


Stop it you are grasping for straws. That was why he was agonizing he didn't want to leave the army. 

He was in the socialist party. he was a socialist.


----------



## sparky

Well it seems to me that Hiltler's gift was his ability to demonize and thus silence his opposition more than anything else

Ironically, we so loath this sort of oppression  when it's manifest by an _individual_, yet subscribe to it when it appears in systemic forms that insiduosly amount to the same thing

the degreg of media _(remember Mike Powell)_ , net nuetrality, VNR's and of course the numerous white house press correspondents who's entire modus operandi is to run interference all could _easily_ be painted as Hilter's disciples were this 1937 Germany

oh but, your _free _right? YOU have free speech in America, how could i forget that which was paid for in blood has granted you the inalienable right to grow an_ a*s the shape of your seat here howling your brains out in this 2010 American wilderness _eh?

right then, carry on.....

~S~


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are a stuipd son of a bitch Did I say the book was about other fucking people stupid? I have always said it was about hitler. One more fucking time for stupid
> 
> "After two days of agonized pondering and reflection, I finally came to the conviction that I had to take this step.
> It was the most decisive resolve of my life. From here there was and could be no turning back.
> And so I registered as a member of the German Workers' Party and received a provisional membership card with the number 7."
> 
> *This does not sound like someone who was joining a group just to take it over. If it was his plan to take it over, he would never had such a struggle between joining and not joining.*
> And hell yes Hitler was a socialist if not why did he call the nazis, nazis?
> 
> The National Socialist German Workers Party
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you ever consider that WHAT he was agonizing over was taking the step from being a soldier, to finally entering politics? He spend the whole last paragraphs justifying his decision.
> _
> "I began to ponder back and forth. *I had long been resolved to engage in political activity; that this could be done only in a new movement was likewise clear to me*, only the impetus to act had hitherto been lacking"_
> 
> _*"Fate itself now seemed to give me a hint. I should never have gone into one of the existing large parties*, and later on I shall go into the reasons for this more closely. This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and *the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined, which in the existing great parties was impossible from the outset."*_
> 
> So, because there is the WORD Socialist in the party name, THAT means he was a socialist? What KIND, a Marxist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stop it you are grasping for straws. That was why he was agonizing he didn't want to leave the army.
> 
> He was in the socialist party. he was a socialist.
Click to expand...


I AM grasping at straws? THAT is ALL you have brought to this argument from the start. You have taken right wing propaganda and dogma and made it YOUR truth, even though it has NO basis in reality or history. Hitler's beliefs and the German workers party platform was based on a* folkish philosophy*. Hitler absolutely DESPISED Marxists and socialists.

*Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler - Philosophy and Party*
Mein Kampf - Volume II, Chapter I

_Though at present a part of the Marxists shrewdly try to pretend that they are inseparably linked with the principles of democracy, do not forget if you please that in the critical hour these gentlemen didn't care a damn about a majority decision in the Western democratic sense! This was in the days when the bourgeois parliamentarians saw the security of the Reich guaranteed by the monumental small-mindedness of a superior number, while *the Marxists, with a band of bums, deserters, party bosses, and Jewish journalists*, abruptly seized power, thus giving democracy a resounding slap in the face. 

The Marxists will march with democracy until they succeed in indirectly obtaining for their criminal aims the support of even the national intellectual world, destined by them for extermination. 

His *Marxist doctrine* is a brief spiritual extract of the philosophy of life that is generally current today. And for this reason alone any struggle of our so-called bourgeois world against it is impossible, absurd in fact, since this bourgeois world is also essentially *infected by these poisons*, and worships a view of life which in general is distinguished from the Marxists only by degrees and personalities. The bourgeois world is Marxist, but believes in the possibility of the rule of certain groups of men (bourgeoisie), while* Marxism itself systematically plans to hand the world over to the Jews.*

*In opposition to this, the folkish philosophy finds the importance of mankind in its basic racial elements.* In the state it sees on principle only a means to an end and construes its end as the preservation of the racial existence of man. *Thus, it by no means believes in an equality of the races*, but along with their difference it recognizes their higher or lesser value and feels itself obligated, through this knowledge, to promote the victory of the better and stronger, and demand the subordination of the inferior and weaker in accordance with the eternal will that dominates this universe. Thus, in principle, it serves the basic aristocratic idea of Nature and believes in the validity of this law down to the last individual. It sees not only the different value of the races, but also the different value of individuals. From the mass it extracts the importance of the individual personality, and thus, in contrast to disorganizing Marxism, it has an organizing effect. It believes in the necessity of an idealization of humanity, in which alone it sees the premise for the existence of humanity. But it cannot grant the right to existence even to an ethical idea if this idea represents a danger for the racial life of the bearers of a higher ethics; for in a bastardized and niggerized world all the concepts of the humanly beautiful and sublime, as well as all ideas of an idealized future of our humanity, would be lost forever._


----------



## editec

How did we go from a discussion about: 

"*Why did so many Germans support Hitler?" *​to this debate about whether or not Hitler was a socialist?

Do we think that the German people are _unique _in wanting some basic social welfare from their governments, or something?

Hitler was what he was.

What you call him depends on whether or not you have a CLUE what socialism really is.

Which, most of you , apparently, do_ NOT._


​


----------



## Bfgrn

editec said:


> How did we go from a discussion about:
> 
> "*Why did so many Germans support Hitler?" *​to this debate about whether or not Hitler was a socialist?
> 
> Do we think that the German people are _unique _in wanting some basic social welfare from their governments, or something?
> 
> Hitler was what he was.
> 
> What you call him depends on whether or not you have a CLUE what socialism really is.
> 
> Which, most of you , apparently, do_ NOT._
> 
> 
> ​



Hey, editec...maybe you can't read between the lines, or notice the 800 lb. gorilla in the room...

WHAT bigrebnc1775 is saying:

Hitler was a leftist, Obama and Democrats are leftist =  Obama is a Hitler and Democrats are fascists.

AND the right wingers are the protectors of America...


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you ever consider that WHAT he was agonizing over was taking the step from being a soldier, to finally entering politics? He spend the whole last paragraphs justifying his decision.
> _
> "I began to ponder back and forth. *I had long been resolved to engage in political activity; that this could be done only in a new movement was likewise clear to me*, only the impetus to act had hitherto been lacking"_
> 
> _*"Fate itself now seemed to give me a hint. I should never have gone into one of the existing large parties*, and later on I shall go into the reasons for this more closely. This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity. Here it was still possible to work, and *the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined, which in the existing great parties was impossible from the outset."*_
> 
> So, because there is the WORD Socialist in the party name, THAT means he was a socialist? What KIND, a Marxist?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop it you are grasping for straws. That was why he was agonizing he didn't want to leave the army.
> 
> He was in the socialist party. he was a socialist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I AM grasping at straws? THAT is ALL you have brought to this argument from the start. You have taken right wing propaganda and dogma and made it YOUR truth, even though it has NO basis in reality or history. Hitler's beliefs and the German workers party platform was based on a* folkish philosophy*. Hitler absolutely DESPISED Marxists and socialists.
> 
> *Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler - Philosophy and Party*
> Mein Kampf - Volume II, Chapter I
> 
> _Though at present a part of the Marxists shrewdly try to pretend that they are inseparably linked with the principles of democracy, do not forget if you please that in the critical hour these gentlemen didn't care a damn about a majority decision in the Western democratic sense! This was in the days when the bourgeois parliamentarians saw the security of the Reich guaranteed by the monumental small-mindedness of a superior number, while *the Marxists, with a band of bums, deserters, party bosses, and Jewish journalists*, abruptly seized power, thus giving democracy a resounding slap in the face.
> 
> The Marxists will march with democracy until they succeed in indirectly obtaining for their criminal aims the support of even the national intellectual world, destined by them for extermination.
> 
> His *Marxist doctrine* is a brief spiritual extract of the philosophy of life that is generally current today. And for this reason alone any struggle of our so-called bourgeois world against it is impossible, absurd in fact, since this bourgeois world is also essentially *infected by these poisons*, and worships a view of life which in general is distinguished from the Marxists only by degrees and personalities. The bourgeois world is Marxist, but believes in the possibility of the rule of certain groups of men (bourgeoisie), while* Marxism itself systematically plans to hand the world over to the Jews.*
> 
> *In opposition to this, the folkish philosophy finds the importance of mankind in its basic racial elements.* In the state it sees on principle only a means to an end and construes its end as the preservation of the racial existence of man. *Thus, it by no means believes in an equality of the races*, but along with their difference it recognizes their higher or lesser value and feels itself obligated, through this knowledge, to promote the victory of the better and stronger, and demand the subordination of the inferior and weaker in accordance with the eternal will that dominates this universe. Thus, in principle, it serves the basic aristocratic idea of Nature and believes in the validity of this law down to the last individual. It sees not only the different value of the races, but also the different value of individuals. From the mass it extracts the importance of the individual personality, and thus, in contrast to disorganizing Marxism, it has an organizing effect. It believes in the necessity of an idealization of humanity, in which alone it sees the premise for the existence of humanity. But it cannot grant the right to existence even to an ethical idea if this idea represents a danger for the racial life of the bearers of a higher ethics; for in a bastardized and niggerized world all the concepts of the humanly beautiful and sublime, as well as all ideas of an idealized future of our humanity, would be lost forever._
Click to expand...


*Thats right you are grasping for straws. In this comment you were graping for straws.*
The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...MY struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.

*Why would you try to make it look like I had no idea MEIN Kampf was about Hitler?*
*Do you think stalin sturggled whern he had all those people murded when he took control? Do you think Hitler sturggled when he had all those people murdered. No he did not it was his intent to do it. If Hitlers intent was to take control of that group he would never have sturggled with doing it. *


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> How did we go from a discussion about:
> 
> "*Why did so many Germans support Hitler?" *​to this debate about whether or not Hitler was a socialist?
> 
> Do we think that the German people are _unique _in wanting some basic social welfare from their governments, or something?
> 
> Hitler was what he was.
> 
> What you call him depends on whether or not you have a CLUE what socialism really is.
> 
> Which, most of you , apparently, do_ NOT._
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, editec...maybe you can't read between the lines, or notice the 800 lb. gorilla in the room...
> 
> WHAT bigrebnc1775 is saying:
> 
> Hitler was a leftist, Obama and Democrats are leftist =  Obama is a Hitler and Democrats are fascists.
> 
> AND the right wingers are the protectors of America...
Click to expand...


Thats why you are fighting the truth about hitler.


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop it you are grasping for straws. That was why he was agonizing he didn't want to leave the army.
> 
> He was in the socialist party. he was a socialist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I AM grasping at straws? THAT is ALL you have brought to this argument from the start. You have taken right wing propaganda and dogma and made it YOUR truth, even though it has NO basis in reality or history. Hitler's beliefs and the German workers party platform was based on a* folkish philosophy*. Hitler absolutely DESPISED Marxists and socialists.
> 
> *Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler - Philosophy and Party*
> Mein Kampf - Volume II, Chapter I
> 
> _Though at present a part of the Marxists shrewdly try to pretend that they are inseparably linked with the principles of democracy, do not forget if you please that in the critical hour these gentlemen didn't care a damn about a majority decision in the Western democratic sense! This was in the days when the bourgeois parliamentarians saw the security of the Reich guaranteed by the monumental small-mindedness of a superior number, while *the Marxists, with a band of bums, deserters, party bosses, and Jewish journalists*, abruptly seized power, thus giving democracy a resounding slap in the face.
> 
> The Marxists will march with democracy until they succeed in indirectly obtaining for their criminal aims the support of even the national intellectual world, destined by them for extermination.
> 
> His *Marxist doctrine* is a brief spiritual extract of the philosophy of life that is generally current today. And for this reason alone any struggle of our so-called bourgeois world against it is impossible, absurd in fact, since this bourgeois world is also essentially *infected by these poisons*, and worships a view of life which in general is distinguished from the Marxists only by degrees and personalities. The bourgeois world is Marxist, but believes in the possibility of the rule of certain groups of men (bourgeoisie), while* Marxism itself systematically plans to hand the world over to the Jews.*
> 
> *In opposition to this, the folkish philosophy finds the importance of mankind in its basic racial elements.* In the state it sees on principle only a means to an end and construes its end as the preservation of the racial existence of man. *Thus, it by no means believes in an equality of the races*, but along with their difference it recognizes their higher or lesser value and feels itself obligated, through this knowledge, to promote the victory of the better and stronger, and demand the subordination of the inferior and weaker in accordance with the eternal will that dominates this universe. Thus, in principle, it serves the basic aristocratic idea of Nature and believes in the validity of this law down to the last individual. It sees not only the different value of the races, but also the different value of individuals. From the mass it extracts the importance of the individual personality, and thus, in contrast to disorganizing Marxism, it has an organizing effect. It believes in the necessity of an idealization of humanity, in which alone it sees the premise for the existence of humanity. But it cannot grant the right to existence even to an ethical idea if this idea represents a danger for the racial life of the bearers of a higher ethics; for in a bastardized and niggerized world all the concepts of the humanly beautiful and sublime, as well as all ideas of an idealized future of our humanity, would be lost forever._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Thats right you are grasping for straws. In this comment you were graping for straws.*
> The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...MY struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.
> 
> *Why would you try to make it look like I had no idea MEIN Kampf was about Hitler?*
> *Do you think stalin sturggled whern he had all those people murded when he took control? Do you think Hitler sturggled when he had all those people murdered. No he did not it was his intent to do it. If Hitlers intent was to take control of that group he would never have sturggled with doing it. *
Click to expand...


WHAT don't you comprehend about Adolf Hitler??? His 'struggle' in the book is never about him having anguish over joining up with, conforming to or being a servant to the beliefs of OTHERS or being a member of their organizations. It is about HIM...what decisions HE makes that will lead to HIS goals. Everyone ELSE is either a useFUL idiot, or a useLESS idiot.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I AM grasping at straws? THAT is ALL you have brought to this argument from the start. You have taken right wing propaganda and dogma and made it YOUR truth, even though it has NO basis in reality or history. Hitler's beliefs and the German workers party platform was based on a* folkish philosophy*. Hitler absolutely DESPISED Marxists and socialists.
> 
> *Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler - Philosophy and Party*
> Mein Kampf - Volume II, Chapter I
> 
> _Though at present a part of the Marxists shrewdly try to pretend that they are inseparably linked with the principles of democracy, do not forget if you please that in the critical hour these gentlemen didn't care a damn about a majority decision in the Western democratic sense! This was in the days when the bourgeois parliamentarians saw the security of the Reich guaranteed by the monumental small-mindedness of a superior number, while *the Marxists, with a band of bums, deserters, party bosses, and Jewish journalists*, abruptly seized power, thus giving democracy a resounding slap in the face.
> 
> The Marxists will march with democracy until they succeed in indirectly obtaining for their criminal aims the support of even the national intellectual world, destined by them for extermination.
> 
> His *Marxist doctrine* is a brief spiritual extract of the philosophy of life that is generally current today. And for this reason alone any struggle of our so-called bourgeois world against it is impossible, absurd in fact, since this bourgeois world is also essentially *infected by these poisons*, and worships a view of life which in general is distinguished from the Marxists only by degrees and personalities. The bourgeois world is Marxist, but believes in the possibility of the rule of certain groups of men (bourgeoisie), while* Marxism itself systematically plans to hand the world over to the Jews.*
> 
> *In opposition to this, the folkish philosophy finds the importance of mankind in its basic racial elements.* In the state it sees on principle only a means to an end and construes its end as the preservation of the racial existence of man. *Thus, it by no means believes in an equality of the races*, but along with their difference it recognizes their higher or lesser value and feels itself obligated, through this knowledge, to promote the victory of the better and stronger, and demand the subordination of the inferior and weaker in accordance with the eternal will that dominates this universe. Thus, in principle, it serves the basic aristocratic idea of Nature and believes in the validity of this law down to the last individual. It sees not only the different value of the races, but also the different value of individuals. From the mass it extracts the importance of the individual personality, and thus, in contrast to disorganizing Marxism, it has an organizing effect. It believes in the necessity of an idealization of humanity, in which alone it sees the premise for the existence of humanity. But it cannot grant the right to existence even to an ethical idea if this idea represents a danger for the racial life of the bearers of a higher ethics; for in a bastardized and niggerized world all the concepts of the humanly beautiful and sublime, as well as all ideas of an idealized future of our humanity, would be lost forever._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Thats right you are grasping for straws. In this comment you were graping for straws.*
> The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...MY struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.
> 
> *Why would you try to make it look like I had no idea MEIN Kampf was about Hitler?*
> *Do you think stalin sturggled whern he had all those people murded when he took control? Do you think Hitler sturggled when he had all those people murdered. No he did not it was his intent to do it. If Hitlers intent was to take control of that group he would never have sturggled with doing it. *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WHAT don't you comprehend about Adolf Hitler??? His 'struggle' in the book is never about him having anguish over joining up with, conforming to or being a servant to the beliefs of OTHERS or being a member of their organizations. It is about HIM...what decisions HE makes that will lead to HIS goals. Everyone ELSE is either a useFUL idiot, or a useLESS idiot.
Click to expand...


The book itself is not just about him joining that group but that chapter is the battle within himself as to join or not join that group.
Put yourself in this position. Would you struggle  choosing to join a group that you intended to take over. Most normal people would not have a hard time to decide on doing this. If it was me and I was going to try and take control of a group I wouldn't sturggle with that choice. It would be second nature.


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Thats right you are grasping for straws. In this comment you were graping for straws.*
> The name of the book is MEIN Kampf...MY struggle. It is not about other people. It is about HIM. It is NOT about Hitler joining up with, prescribing to, being subservient to, or assimilating OTHER people's views or beliefs. It is the opposite. In his mind, HE HAS the answers. And the book is a blueprint that spells out HIS intentions, HIS aspirations, and the conscription HE will apply TO other people.
> 
> *Why would you try to make it look like I had no idea MEIN Kampf was about Hitler?*
> *Do you think stalin sturggled whern he had all those people murded when he took control? Do you think Hitler sturggled when he had all those people murdered. No he did not it was his intent to do it. If Hitlers intent was to take control of that group he would never have sturggled with doing it. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WHAT don't you comprehend about Adolf Hitler??? His 'struggle' in the book is never about him having anguish over joining up with, conforming to or being a servant to the beliefs of OTHERS or being a member of their organizations. It is about HIM...what decisions HE makes that will lead to HIS goals. Everyone ELSE is either a useFUL idiot, or a useLESS idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The book itself is not just about him joining that group but that chapter is the battle within himself as to join or not join that group.
> Put yourself in this position. Would you struggle  choosing to join a group that you intended to take over. Most normal people would not have a hard time to decide on doing this. If it was me and I was going to try and take control of a group I wouldn't sturggle with that choice. It would be second nature.
Click to expand...


Read the chapter over again... his ONLY 'struggle' was if that was the right time and vehicle to fulfill what he saw as his destiny. He even tells you: 

_"This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but* left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity*. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined,..."_

The 'real personal activity' is HIS activity.

WHAT he struggled with was if THIS (party) was the right time, place and vehicle to fulfill HIS aspirations and goals...OR if another avenue would be better. He want his OWN party. He rationalizes why he can't join a major party, and he has no members to start his own.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> WHAT don't you comprehend about Adolf Hitler??? His 'struggle' in the book is never about him having anguish over joining up with, conforming to or being a servant to the beliefs of OTHERS or being a member of their organizations. It is about HIM...what decisions HE makes that will lead to HIS goals. Everyone ELSE is either a useFUL idiot, or a useLESS idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The book itself is not just about him joining that group but that chapter is the battle within himself as to join or not join that group.
> Put yourself in this position. Would you struggle  choosing to join a group that you intended to take over. Most normal people would not have a hard time to decide on doing this. If it was me and I was going to try and take control of a group I wouldn't sturggle with that choice. It would be second nature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Read the chapter over again... his ONLY 'struggle' was if that was the right time and vehicle to fulfill what he saw as his destiny. He even tells you:
> 
> _"This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but* left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity*. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined,..."_
> 
> The 'real personal activity' is HIS activity.
> 
> WHAT he struggled with was if THIS (party) was the right time, place and vehicle to fulfill HIS aspirations and goals...OR if another avenue would be better. He want his OWN party. He rationalizes why he can't join a major party, and he has no members to start his own.
Click to expand...


That wasn't his struggle stop trying to revise hitler into something he wasn't


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The book itself is not just about him joining that group but that chapter is the battle within himself as to join or not join that group.
> Put yourself in this position. Would you struggle  choosing to join a group that you intended to take over. Most normal people would not have a hard time to decide on doing this. If it was me and I was going to try and take control of a group I wouldn't sturggle with that choice. It would be second nature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the chapter over again... his ONLY 'struggle' was if that was the right time and vehicle to fulfill what he saw as his destiny. He even tells you:
> 
> _"This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but* left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity*. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined,..."_
> 
> The 'real personal activity' is HIS activity.
> 
> WHAT he struggled with was if THIS (party) was the right time, place and vehicle to fulfill HIS aspirations and goals...OR if another avenue would be better. He want his OWN party. He rationalizes why he can't join a major party, and he has no members to start his own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That wasn't his struggle stop trying to revise hitler into something he wasn't
Click to expand...


Stop PROJECTING...

You continue YOUR narration and ignore Hitler's...

READ this chapter and bring me back all of Hitler's 'socialist' beliefs...
Mein Kampf - Volume II, Chapter I - Philosophy and Party


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Read the chapter over again... his ONLY 'struggle' was if that was the right time and vehicle to fulfill what he saw as his destiny. He even tells you:
> 
> _"This absurd little organization with its few members seemed to me to possess the one advantage that it had not frozen into an 'organization,' but* left the individual an opportunity for real personal activity*. Here it was still possible to work, and the smaller the movement, the more readily it could be put into the proper form. Here the content, the goal, and the road could still be determined,..."_
> 
> The 'real personal activity' is HIS activity.
> 
> WHAT he struggled with was if THIS (party) was the right time, place and vehicle to fulfill HIS aspirations and goals...OR if another avenue would be better. He want his OWN party. He rationalizes why he can't join a major party, and he has no members to start his own.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That wasn't his struggle stop trying to revise hitler into something he wasn't
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stop PROJECTING...
> 
> You continue YOUR narration and ignore Hitler's...
> 
> READ this chapter and bring me back all of Hitler's 'socialist' beliefs...
> Mein Kampf - Volume II, Chapter I - Philosophy and Party
Click to expand...


I have read it maybe you shoulkd take your own advice, I know you have read it also.....I guess it didn't stick.


----------



## Bfgrn

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That wasn't his struggle stop trying to revise hitler into something he wasn't
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop PROJECTING...
> 
> You continue YOUR narration and ignore Hitler's...
> 
> READ this chapter and bring me back all of Hitler's 'socialist' beliefs...
> Mein Kampf - Volume II, Chapter I - Philosophy and Party
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have read it maybe you shoulkd take your own advice, I know you have read it also.....I guess it didn't stick.
Click to expand...



Then you are either a liar or a moron, which one is it? Here's what you do, put a < next to his 'socialist' beliefs...

Nationalism over internationalism
Exclusiveness over inclusiveness
Militarism over pacifism
Individualism over collectivism
Racism or racial segregation over racial tolerance
Merit over equality
Religion over secularism
Capitalism over Marxism


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Bfgrn said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop PROJECTING...
> 
> You continue YOUR narration and ignore Hitler's...
> 
> READ this chapter and bring me back all of Hitler's 'socialist' beliefs...
> Mein Kampf - Volume II, Chapter I - Philosophy and Party
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have read it maybe you shoulkd take your own advice, I know you have read it also.....I guess it didn't stick.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then you are either a liar or a moron, which one is it? Here's what you do, put a < next to his 'socialist' beliefs...
> 
> Nationalism over internationalism
> Exclusiveness over inclusiveness
> Militarism over pacifism
> Individualism over collectivism
> Racism or racial segregation over racial tolerance
> Merit over equality
> Religion over secularism
> Capitalism over Marxism
Click to expand...


Tell me something how did blacks fair in the russian socialist system? since you mentioned racism
Hitler wasn't a capitalist
Hitler didn't believe in Individualism
And if you think socialism has anything to do with equality you are historically stupid.
There is always that crowd next to the powers that be that fair better then the rest.

Militarism over pacifism are the Russians pacifist? Are the Chinese?


----------



## Charles_Main

PatekPhilippe said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> He divided the german people and got them to attack their own.
> 
> They were depressed and feeling like losers. He told they were gods not losers and they only reason they were in trouble was those phoney germans who didnt have pure german blood.
> 
> Its much the same shit the republican party is doing today with brown people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're definately vying for asshole of the year......now instead of bomb throwing like a little 2 year old...why not attempt to back up your lies with what you perceive as facts.
Click to expand...


People that say things like truth should be time machined back to Nazi Germany and left naked in the streets of Berlin with the Word Jew tattooed on them, so they can see what real Nazis were like and stop comparing people to them.


----------



## Douger

Because they were told they needed their freeDumb protected and that terrorristas were going to invade.
Sound familiar ?


----------



## sparky

Bfgrn said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> How did we go from a discussion about:
> 
> "*Why did so many Germans support Hitler?" *​to this debate about whether or not Hitler was a socialist?
> 
> Do we think that the German people are _unique _in wanting some basic social welfare from their governments, or something?
> 
> Hitler was what he was.
> 
> What you call him depends on whether or not you have a CLUE what socialism really is.
> 
> Which, most of you , apparently, do_ NOT._
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, editec...maybe you can't read between the lines, or notice the 800 lb. gorilla in the room...
> 
> WHAT bigrebnc1775 is saying:
> 
> Hitler was a leftist, Obama and Democrats are leftist =  Obama is a Hitler and Democrats are fascists.
> 
> AND the right wingers are the protectors of America...
Click to expand...


so is _that_ the pitter patter of little jackboots heard as we near november here?

~S~


----------



## editec

Bfgrn said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> How did we go from a discussion about:
> 
> "*Why did so many Germans support Hitler?" *​
> to this debate about whether or not Hitler was a socialist?​
> Do we think that the German people are _unique _in wanting some basic social welfare from their governments, or something?​
> Hitler was what he was.​
> What you call him depends on whether or not you have a CLUE what socialism really is.​
> Which, most of you , apparently, do_ NOT._​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, editec...maybe you can't read between the lines, or notice the 800 lb. gorilla in the room...
> 
> WHAT bigrebnc1775 is saying:
> 
> Hitler was a leftist, Obama and Democrats are leftist = Obama is a Hitler and Democrats are fascists.
> 
> AND the right wingers are the protectors of America...
Click to expand...

 
Yeah, so noted.

Basically that was Hitler's POV, too.

That the government was awash with leftists (most of them Jews) and therefore the VOLK needed to kill all the leftists (and Jews).

This board is awash with NAZIs overt and crypto.


----------



## sparky

well, so when do we start burning the unemployed then?

~S~


----------



## jillian

Epsilon Delta said:


> Because most Germans were terrified and angry, at their leadership, at the War result, at their totally dysfunctional economy. They gave up a lot and got nothing in return. What Hitler managed to do was funnel that angre by offering a solution based on total exclusion and blame - it was the fault of the gays, of the Jews, of the communists, etc, and people bought it, because it was easier to believe that than to handle the truth and the thought of real solutions based on inclusion and peace. It's always easier to side with the people that want more guns and bigger armies and more violence. And of course, the Allies didn't help.



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

what he said.


----------

