it's almost as if pure evil caricatures are extremely rare in history. That everyone that has ever done something great, good or bad, has done it for a multitude of nuanced reasons. it's almost as if looking at history through the lens of purely good or evil is pointless; that the real lessons are in understanding the true reasons why people did what they did, from every angle, and judging them after you know the facts.
Luckily the facts on Hitler are insurmountable and obvious. Turns out, like with Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Ivan The Terrible, and others; he was absolutely one of those pure evil characters that are rare in history.
"But you don't understand. Mao didn't know about the killings! Overall, he did more good than bad! His ideas were good, but things just didn't work out!" Nope, fuck all of those shithead apologetics.
the facts on Hitler are insurmountable and obvious
Insurmountable? Obvious? Like we haven't had decades of propaganda, misinformation, half-truths, and sometimes straight up lies being fed to us?
When did doubt, skepticism, and disbelief fall out of favor with the common man? When did it become fashionable to be a good little drone, to toil until you broke, being fed with syrup and dyes? Do you really think Hitler was a cartoon villain? Really? That one day, for no reason at all, he just decided that a whole demographic of people needed to die? No reason, just 'cuz?
Do you believe things because the talking heads in the box tell you they happened? Do you believe inflation isn't real because KJP says it isn't as bad as it feels?
Turns out, like with Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Ivan The Terrible, and others; he was absolutely one of those pure evil characters that are rare in history.
Real people aren't one dimensional Overwatch characters.
It's one of the things that helped me connect the dots, to put the perfectly fitting puzzle pieces together. Before becoming red pilled on WW2, I already knew that the people in power lied to us, about everything, in the news, in media, in government, about our history (specifically about slavery and the civil war), but I still adamantly believed what I was told about WW2 history, for reasons I could never adequately explain. Then, through curiosity, I began to visit demonized free speech forums, where I was exposed to censored information and discussion, including everything surrounding WW2, and the world began to make a lot more sense.
Looking back, it's rather astounding how flimsy the current "conservative" normie right position is, about how contradictory my position was before. It posits the well supported position that the people in power are liars, that they have control of pretty much all aspects of society, and yet WW2 history is sacrosanct. The lesson is clear as day: don't trust liars. And yet, many on the right continue to trust liars on specific subjects. It's rather maddening. Fortunately, though, more and more are waking up.
Skepticism is fine, but why are you trying to rehabilitate Hitler's public image or deny what the Nazis did from the burning of the Reichstag to the capture of Berlin?
You're making his point. You're question is loaded. "Why try to rehabilitate his image" implies he is horrible to begin with and doesn't even attempt to ponder if he was actually as bad as we've been taught. You ask as if it's a foregone conclusion. We're not even sure what happened with the Hawaii fires and that was just 2 weeks ago with smart phones and internet etc. But we're supposed to just accept whatever we're fed about the Holocaust?
When did doubt, skepticism, and disbelief fall out of favor with the common man? When did it become fashionable to be a good little drone, to toil until you broke, being fed with syrup and dyes? Do you really think Hitler was a cartoon villain? Really? That one day, for no reason at all, he just decided that a whole demographic of people needed to die? No reason, just 'cuz?
We could have asked that to the people who voted for him. Don't even almost
Do you believe things because the talking heads in the box tell you they happened?
No you faux sentimental, twat. We have evidence. We have records. We have witnesses. We have bodies. And best of all: we have confessions. That's my favorite part of all this. You will stand there with a thumb up your dick and pretend like you have intellectual grace like, but you're just an old-style sophist. As a sophist of the modern era, you run apologetics for someone who never asked for an apology, and would refuse to give one. None of the people you are begging the question for deny their crimes, nor their objectives, nor their rationale. The only thing they ever said is that they weren't responsible because Hitler was just so persuasive. They still signed the orders, they still made the budgets, they still attacked civilians, and they still slaughtered millions, jews or otherwise, because they all believed it was the right thing to do at the time.
Oh I know, why can't we just believe the lies and half truths of the propagandists you like? Why can't we just accept the deceptions of the regime that literally invented all modern political propaganda and most film making techniques. Because those lies formed the basis of the unelected, revolutionary, Nazi regime. It was a very progressive, modern, and intellectual movement that many experts thought was for the best in Germany. Gobbels saw to that that the National Socialist state would be a technocratic one. It's why many experts and authorities in Austria simply bent over for Anschluss. In fact, since you mentioned "ticking the box", the single most infamous bit of ridiculous ballot engineering took place under the Anschluss annexation. But I suppose I should continue to reject the evidence and accept the claims of the old experts who were explicitly lying.
But why can't I just play moral relativism, and stand just stand around "just asking questions?" Because I have answers. Answers we both know you would be giddy to see replicated; because that's the real point. You're not intellectually curious, you're singularly driven, as all sophists are. You're engaging in rhetorical warfare to hopefully worm your way into getting a future of blood and death, because it's the one you want. It's the one they wanted to.
I don't understand why some people feel the need to whitewash Hitler's Third Reich. Of course he was a human being. That's part of the horror of his rise and fall, the fact that most anyone is capable of dehumanizing his perceived enemies. It's what we need to do if there's any sort of conscience at all or if we need to create "plausible deniability."
They need to read William Shirer's book, at least.
Hitler was a dumbass, and the war he initiated combined with his brutally authoritarian policies in the homeland definitely makes him one of the great assholes and losers of History, but I think you missed the point of my comment.
it's very important to focus on the "why" of History. In the case of Hitler, he was voted into power by a populace that was tired of being absolutely fucked by the politics of the Great War aftermath, fucked by the banks inflating their currency into oblivion, and fucked by rampant degeneracy in their major cities (sound familiar?). To my knowledge, his initial actions improved Germany immensely, enough for him to be praised by foreign leaders and propaganda rags like Time Magazine. But he got too zealous. where he was initially trying to catch the economic saboteurs and kid fuckers, he was soon catching all dissidents to the state, all jews, and all gays. 99.9% of the people he rounded up were not a threat to Germany or the German populace. Combine that with him making military enemies out of Europe and Russia simultaneously, and he ended up fucking Germany worse than when he had inherited it.
The narrow-minded view of good versus evil really only exists in Hollywood and Religion. people who view history in this lens are very prone to the crusader's fallacy, where they will be the ones committing the atrocities while believing that they are the good guys this time.
I lost a long winded reply, so I'm going to make this shorter.
Everything you said is wrong and/or a continuance of one group's propaganda or another. Hitler was never voted into power. The NSDAP never had a majority. The western elites favored Hitler, Mussolini, and Fascism because it was progressive. The NSDAP never stopped degeneracy, they continued it in private among themselves. There are no economic saboteurs in reality. The SDP controlled the banks and set the inflation rate. They did that to punish the Entente countries for the reparations payments by making those payments worthless. It also funded their socialist programs. After even more concessions were made by the Entente, the SDP fixed the economy by having the "Hunger Chancellor" cut programs and government spending. Hitler stepped in after the recovery and had his own Great Reset politically and economically; seizing control over society with emergency declarations and the institution of a new currency. He never went to far, he went exactly as he said he would because he declared that all jews were a literal bourgeois race that needed to be physically removed from all of Europe. He converted more Socialists and Communists than he killed because his war was with the jews in his mind. He made enemies only because Stalin and the West were wildly gullible. Instead of backing off a war (that he needed to save his economy and political stability), he chose voluntarily to risk it with everyone. Then when he lost he basically ordered Germany to be destroyed.
You can stand here and pretend that Hitler might not have been evil, but his actions, policies, and words are clear as day. The crusades are sometimes absolutely moral and righteous.
it's almost as if pure evil caricatures are extremely rare in history. That everyone that has ever done something great, good or bad, has done it for a multitude of nuanced reasons. it's almost as if looking at history through the lens of purely good or evil is pointless; that the real lessons are in understanding the true reasons why people did what they did, from every angle, and judging them after you know the facts.
Luckily the facts on Hitler are insurmountable and obvious. Turns out, like with Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Ivan The Terrible, and others; he was absolutely one of those pure evil characters that are rare in history.
"But you don't understand. Mao didn't know about the killings! Overall, he did more good than bad! His ideas were good, but things just didn't work out!" Nope, fuck all of those shithead apologetics.
Insurmountable? Obvious? Like we haven't had decades of propaganda, misinformation, half-truths, and sometimes straight up lies being fed to us?
When did doubt, skepticism, and disbelief fall out of favor with the common man? When did it become fashionable to be a good little drone, to toil until you broke, being fed with syrup and dyes? Do you really think Hitler was a cartoon villain? Really? That one day, for no reason at all, he just decided that a whole demographic of people needed to die? No reason, just 'cuz?
Do you believe things because the talking heads in the box tell you they happened? Do you believe inflation isn't real because KJP says it isn't as bad as it feels?
Real people aren't one dimensional Overwatch characters.
It's one of the things that helped me connect the dots, to put the perfectly fitting puzzle pieces together. Before becoming red pilled on WW2, I already knew that the people in power lied to us, about everything, in the news, in media, in government, about our history (specifically about slavery and the civil war), but I still adamantly believed what I was told about WW2 history, for reasons I could never adequately explain. Then, through curiosity, I began to visit demonized free speech forums, where I was exposed to censored information and discussion, including everything surrounding WW2, and the world began to make a lot more sense.
Looking back, it's rather astounding how flimsy the current "conservative" normie right position is, about how contradictory my position was before. It posits the well supported position that the people in power are liars, that they have control of pretty much all aspects of society, and yet WW2 history is sacrosanct. The lesson is clear as day: don't trust liars. And yet, many on the right continue to trust liars on specific subjects. It's rather maddening. Fortunately, though, more and more are waking up.
Skepticism is fine, but why are you trying to rehabilitate Hitler's public image or deny what the Nazis did from the burning of the Reichstag to the capture of Berlin?
You're making his point. You're question is loaded. "Why try to rehabilitate his image" implies he is horrible to begin with and doesn't even attempt to ponder if he was actually as bad as we've been taught. You ask as if it's a foregone conclusion. We're not even sure what happened with the Hawaii fires and that was just 2 weeks ago with smart phones and internet etc. But we're supposed to just accept whatever we're fed about the Holocaust?
We could have asked that to the people who voted for him. Don't even almost
No you faux sentimental, twat. We have evidence. We have records. We have witnesses. We have bodies. And best of all: we have confessions. That's my favorite part of all this. You will stand there with a thumb up your dick and pretend like you have intellectual grace like, but you're just an old-style sophist. As a sophist of the modern era, you run apologetics for someone who never asked for an apology, and would refuse to give one. None of the people you are begging the question for deny their crimes, nor their objectives, nor their rationale. The only thing they ever said is that they weren't responsible because Hitler was just so persuasive. They still signed the orders, they still made the budgets, they still attacked civilians, and they still slaughtered millions, jews or otherwise, because they all believed it was the right thing to do at the time.
Oh I know, why can't we just believe the lies and half truths of the propagandists you like? Why can't we just accept the deceptions of the regime that literally invented all modern political propaganda and most film making techniques. Because those lies formed the basis of the unelected, revolutionary, Nazi regime. It was a very progressive, modern, and intellectual movement that many experts thought was for the best in Germany. Gobbels saw to that that the National Socialist state would be a technocratic one. It's why many experts and authorities in Austria simply bent over for Anschluss. In fact, since you mentioned "ticking the box", the single most infamous bit of ridiculous ballot engineering took place under the Anschluss annexation. But I suppose I should continue to reject the evidence and accept the claims of the old experts who were explicitly lying.
But why can't I just play moral relativism, and stand just stand around "just asking questions?" Because I have answers. Answers we both know you would be giddy to see replicated; because that's the real point. You're not intellectually curious, you're singularly driven, as all sophists are. You're engaging in rhetorical warfare to hopefully worm your way into getting a future of blood and death, because it's the one you want. It's the one they wanted to.
Very well-put, as usual.
I don't understand why some people feel the need to whitewash Hitler's Third Reich. Of course he was a human being. That's part of the horror of his rise and fall, the fact that most anyone is capable of dehumanizing his perceived enemies. It's what we need to do if there's any sort of conscience at all or if we need to create "plausible deniability."
They need to read William Shirer's book, at least.
Hitler was a dumbass, and the war he initiated combined with his brutally authoritarian policies in the homeland definitely makes him one of the great assholes and losers of History, but I think you missed the point of my comment.
it's very important to focus on the "why" of History. In the case of Hitler, he was voted into power by a populace that was tired of being absolutely fucked by the politics of the Great War aftermath, fucked by the banks inflating their currency into oblivion, and fucked by rampant degeneracy in their major cities (sound familiar?). To my knowledge, his initial actions improved Germany immensely, enough for him to be praised by foreign leaders and propaganda rags like Time Magazine. But he got too zealous. where he was initially trying to catch the economic saboteurs and kid fuckers, he was soon catching all dissidents to the state, all jews, and all gays. 99.9% of the people he rounded up were not a threat to Germany or the German populace. Combine that with him making military enemies out of Europe and Russia simultaneously, and he ended up fucking Germany worse than when he had inherited it.
The narrow-minded view of good versus evil really only exists in Hollywood and Religion. people who view history in this lens are very prone to the crusader's fallacy, where they will be the ones committing the atrocities while believing that they are the good guys this time.
I lost a long winded reply, so I'm going to make this shorter.
Everything you said is wrong and/or a continuance of one group's propaganda or another. Hitler was never voted into power. The NSDAP never had a majority. The western elites favored Hitler, Mussolini, and Fascism because it was progressive. The NSDAP never stopped degeneracy, they continued it in private among themselves. There are no economic saboteurs in reality. The SDP controlled the banks and set the inflation rate. They did that to punish the Entente countries for the reparations payments by making those payments worthless. It also funded their socialist programs. After even more concessions were made by the Entente, the SDP fixed the economy by having the "Hunger Chancellor" cut programs and government spending. Hitler stepped in after the recovery and had his own Great Reset politically and economically; seizing control over society with emergency declarations and the institution of a new currency. He never went to far, he went exactly as he said he would because he declared that all jews were a literal bourgeois race that needed to be physically removed from all of Europe. He converted more Socialists and Communists than he killed because his war was with the jews in his mind. He made enemies only because Stalin and the West were wildly gullible. Instead of backing off a war (that he needed to save his economy and political stability), he chose voluntarily to risk it with everyone. Then when he lost he basically ordered Germany to be destroyed.
You can stand here and pretend that Hitler might not have been evil, but his actions, policies, and words are clear as day. The crusades are sometimes absolutely moral and righteous.
This fact is what makes the case of Ernst Rohm so interesting. Hitler outed his bro as a homo pedophile as part of his liquidating of the SA.
Understatement of the year.