Oh sure.
Totally not left wing at all.

these people need to be taught a very painful lesson

They where the classic model of a gov by the powerful including corp owners

exactly

people seem to think corporate interests don't typicaly overlap gov interests

they USUALLY involve the same groups of people looking to assert power over others

Makes sense considering the whole historical context of Germany

people today can't even relate to the Great Depression in America

a lot of incorrect history surrounding Germany in WW2

Weinmar Germany was orders of magnitude WORSE

**They will** <:hypersmugon:544638648721604608>

Germany in WW2? Try Germany BEFORE WW2

Germany before the Nazis... was why Germany embraced the Nazis.

Shit was insane.

A lot of the ideas where already present

Have you seen europa the last battle?

Including the racial ones

One Word: COMMUNISTS

Wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/s1nPYDj7KBEQ/

That too

Weinmar was PLAUGED by Communist thugs

and Weinmar gov was too WEAK to do anything about them

WHen hitler promised to clean up the trash and round up the rioters, everyone cheered

Pic related

anyone?

Antifa very cleared stopped the Nazis taking over and didn't in fact contribute to it

yup; although that doesn't really apply as the Communists were an issue BEFORE fascism became a thing

I watched recently Greatest.Events.of.World.War.II.in.HD.Colour.

pretty decent allied version of events

Allies didn't realy fight in germany

By the time they crossed the Rhein, the Germans were in retreat

Each side focus on atrocities against them

The germans didn't want to fight the British or Americans

Na, Germans DESPISED the Soviets

Not initially they might have in the future

Anyway I'm already late, I've gotta go

the jewish bolshveriks had murdered millions of white russians and that same bolsherivms was spreading across europe

night, samaratian

Peace

it wasn't that the germans didn't wANT to fight the Allies it's because they didn't consider the Allies a REAL threat

Oh its 11:00 for me, I'll be back at 18:00

the Russians were the real threat

It's 2020 here

It was that they didn't want to fight the allies

that's propaganda

Hitler saw the british as the same folk

the western front was NEVER a concern for the germans

propaganda lol

said who the allies ?

the jews?

no, said the GERMANS

eh?

sprichst du Deutsch?

no

https://derpicdn.net/img/2019/12/9/2216884/large.png

The germans after the war were brainwashed in to accepting the blame for ww2

Do you know people that grow up behind the Iron Curtain and had parents that lived through during and after?

cease, brony

muh history is more correct than yours because my dad was as mechanic in the war

Virtualy all 'Ossies' (people from East Germany) agree that as a whole, germans didn't want to deal with the Soviets.

yeah, because books are more accurate than the people who LIVED it

welcome to 2019

the modern left claims that Hitler was a white supermacist, this is a common narrative

that's a retarded narrative also

if Hitler was a white supermacist why did he go to war with only white countries?

动态网自由门天安门天安门法轮功李洪志Free Tibet 六四天安门事件The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安门大屠杀The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派斗争The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大跃进政策The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人权Human Rights 民运Democratization 自由Freedom 独立Independence 多党制Multi-party system 台湾台湾Taiwan Formosa 中华民国Republic of China 西藏土伯特唐古特Tibet 达赖喇嘛Dalai Lama 法轮功Falun Dafa 新疆维吾尔自治区The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 诺贝尔和平奖Nobel Peace Prize 刘暁波Liu Xiaobo 民主言论思想反共反革命抗议运动骚乱暴乱骚扰扰乱抗暴平反维权示威游行李洪志法轮大法大法弟子强制断种强制堕胎民族净化人体实验肃清胡耀邦赵紫阳魏京生王丹还政于民和平演变激流中国北京之春大纪元时报评论共产党 独裁 专制 压制 统一 监视 镇压 迫害 侵略 掠夺 破坏 拷问 屠杀 活摘器官 诱拐 买卖人口 游进 走私 毒品 卖淫 春画 赌博 六合彩 天安门 天安门 法轮功 李洪志 Winnie the Pooh 刘晓波动态网自由门

in fact he was not white supermacist, he was just against jewish communism

first of all, the term 'white supremiscist' doesn't have the same meaning in Europe compared to the US

the whole narrative that hitler was trying to make a master race is propaganda

its made up

Black immigrants don't have the same subculture as they did and do in the US

irrelevant

well, that's partialy true

people tend to forget that Eugenics was actually an AMERICAN ideal which was very popular before the war

It wasn't something Hitler made up

the jews were responsible for the war to be honest, they created communism and propagandised the west against germany

then they claimed to be the biggest victims of the war

jews didn't create communism; that's ridiculous

N

jews power base was banking and trade

they did, all the leading Bolsheviks were jewish

they were completely OPPOSED to communist ideas

jews were nazis and it was all against the polish

http://www.bentoandstarchky.com/dec/intro.htm

it's all here

Hitler wasn’t a white supremacist, he was an Aryan supremacist.
But that was secondary to him being a nationalist.

bolsheviks weren't 'jews' in any meaningful sense

Goodnyaght everynyan! I am jealous of those with talent. I hope someone will smile at me one day. Draconian laws to stop porn and human trafficking are justified.

The russians were treating the jews terribly then the jews took over and murdered all the leading white people in russia, including the monarchy

the bolshveriks were 100% jews

ALSO bolsheviks just wanted the Czars out of the way

```Nazi Jewmany occupied Poland in 1939. Hitler JEW gang made Nazi JEW HANS FRANK total governor of Poland with his JEW gangs, provinces rulers, high Gestapo, military S.S. etc. Many of these Nazi Jews lived in the luxurious city site JEW GHETTO of the capital city, Warsaw. ALL DURING WWII, AS ALWAYS, like ALL European cities, Warsaw had a luxurious JEW GHETTO section, similar to JEW CENTRAL $$$$ PARK SECTION in New York City, JerUSAlem. By 1943, Jewmany was doomed. Kosher USSR offered secret treacherous TOTAL peace treaty to Nazi Jewmany, giving Jewmany ALL 1941 borders, including the lands of USSR SLAVE ALLY, Poland.```

this is the first paragraph

of one of the rants

in that website I just linked

they didn't nessecarily want communism

The Bolsheviks were not 100% Jews.

the fucker in question wrote **dozens**

@Danacrag GN Dana. I'm starting to think I'm autistic and my parents haven't told me.

The bolsheviks were made up of tonnes of different people, some of them Jews.

<:GWcentrallGoodNightBOYE:395626850887532544>

correct, the bolsheviks that were Jews were opposed to communism. that's not why they fought to get rid of the Czar

but once the old power structure was torn down, lenin, stalin and company filled the power vacuum

all of the leading Bolsheviks were jewish and the communism revolution in spain was jewish led as well

jews were in control of the communism organisations across europe

what part of the above statement don't you understand?

what part of you are incorrect don't you understand?

the impetus of the Bolshevik revolution was NOT communism

it was 100%

no, that is PROPAGANDA

lol

so there was no threat to white people form jews in europe?

in fact, many bolsheiviks were in favor of democracy

is that just propaganda?

the revolution devours it's own

this is where the phrase comes from

“Before 1917 there were 300,000 Zionists in Russia, while the main Jewish socialist organization, the Bund, had 33,000 members. Only 958 Jews had joined the Bolshevik Party before 1917; thousands joined after the Revolution.”

-Overy, Richard (2004). The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia. W. W. Norton Company, Inc. ISBN 9780141912240.

So no, overwhelmingly, the Jews didn’t support the Russian revolution.

which is consistent with what i have been saying

They just glommed onto it after the fact.

all the leading Bolsheviks were Jewish, the ones that ordered the murder of millions of white russians

they just have a nice way of trying to hide the truth

that jews were responsible

again, you don't understand the difference betweeen intent and result

of COURSE the jews are going to be in favor of displacing the old and putting thei own in it's place

the Soviets want everyone to beleive that EVERYONE was in support of the Socialists who seized power

the point is that the reason Hitler was going to war against russia was not because of white supermacy or germany supermacy it was because they were fighting against jewish communism and tyranny that was murdering christians

but this was FAR from the truth

A thing happened.
The thing was caused by non Jews.
Some Jews benefitted.

SimonTV: See! Jewish conspiracy!
Everyone else: 🤦‍♂️

amazing how jews get off without any responsibilty

Hilter only fought the Soviets because he underestimated the amount of oil he would require

its all explained in the documentary that I posted

https://www.bitchute.com/video/s1nPYDj7KBEQ/

Who?
Who is getting off without responsibility?
Give me names.
Give me the names of the socialists who you think aren’t being held responsible.

I've seen the documentary... and MANY documentaries in both english and german as well as read many books over 30 yrs or so

my statements don't just come from a single source with a bias that is all one way or the other

I doubt you have seen it

Don't take one documentary and use that to frame your entire perspective

so you accuse me of what you are doing

you are dense, you know that?

only you know the true history, you must be so happy with yourself

never made that claim; strawman

did you watch the greatest story never told?

however a perspective informed by BOTH sides from MULTIPLE sources is more balanced that a perspective from a single perspective

yes, i have seen that one a few times

oh please, how can one not know the allied side of ww2, it has been bombarded in to westerners from the very young age

I am pointing out documenteries that show the german side to the story

funny how few people realize that the DNC was rigged by the Mob BEFORE

Truman

then you claim oh you musn't get your information from on place, do you understand how stupid you sound?

I DO know the allied side of wwii

everyone does

but the allied side is exaggerated

*Yawn*

both sides focus on their own atrocities as i said earlier

not always

did you watch hellstorm ?

also, there is a SIGNIGIFICANT difference between books that were written pre-internet and afterwards

for example, William Shreiber's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" is far more thourough than most historical texts written since the fall of the the Soviet Union

have you read "the bad war" ?

what about "The Myth of German Villainy"?

Heard of that one. No, haven't read it. If i remember right, i thought about it but the Foreward was looking to support an argument rather than reveiw the historical events

The Myth of German Villainy is a decent book

i think it lacks sources though

most books these days do

short form books realy

design for the masses

i mean, i'm from the days when if you cited wikipedia, your paper was dismissed out of hand

if wikipedia is valid, THEY have sources somewhere. track these down and cite them AND their sources

wikipedia is a joke these days

always was in my view

There are a lot of wikipedia sources that are literally just advertisement sites now

The older citation domains get bought up and replaced

there was a period when it was ok, but hte marxist moved in and re-wrote all the articles

I still have an old article on the peasants revolt saved

well, the academic community as a whole suffers from the problem that those papers that are POPULAR receive the most citations

it was rewritten and framed from a marxist perspective

and the more citations a paper has, the more credibility it is give

so it's a feed-back loop

it was essentially an anti-tax protest but the wikipedia article now states it was an early example of marxist revolution lol

yea the sources they accept are left wing media sites

which use wikipedia as their source

that drives me crazy when people go back and spin events to suit a particular narrativ

i guess that is history in a nut shell

the trick to learning history is learn which perspective the person who wrote it had and interpret it with a grain of salt.

well, there is a difference between documenting an event and interpreting an event

there is a fine line

from one side they were attacked, from the other they were attacked

used to be because it took TIME and MONEY to compile the history, there were MUCH fewer sources and thus they were held to a higher standard

when less people controlled the narrative it was easier to control

today, the internet devalues things like truth and art

its easier to read history as objectively as possible. the treaty of versaille crippled germany to the point of desperation

and you basically get what happens in the Dark Knight

it was HARDER to control actually

dont salt the earth

you have to go back to the 1800s to understand ww1 and 2

the abandoned child will burn his village to feel its warmth, etc

how is it harder to control?

that is why the church and monarchy didn't like the printing press

because if you are a gate-keeper and everyone has to come to you for information, all eyes are on you making it VERY hard for you to lie and get away with it continually

they didn't want to lose control over the narrative

now we see the same thing today

theres also arguments of authority

the mainstream media is losing control of the narrative

most of what we know is an argument of authority

I think it is very easy to lie not hard

i have no idea if the earth is flat, but scientists tell me it isnt

so i believe them

one thing i came to realize is that people are stupid and believe anything

authorities are important. otherwise there is no true nor is there any facts

i have ways i guess of proving it logically, but im not bothered enough

the moon is made of cheese

prove me wrong

authorites need to be held accountable

you can't just let anyone pose as an engineer and build a bridge

you'll get people killed

the marxists have it right that a lot of things are just interpretation

but they go so far as to say theres no objectionable proof to anything

and that value is constructed

they are half righ

value is subjective

no it ist

Worth and value are distinct.

intepretation IS Important but it's not AS important as WHAT Is being interpreted

a human is more valuable than a spec of dust

i take the austrian economics perspective

A human has universal value but variable worth.

the sun is more important ot our survival than my left sock

value is subjective thougb

more valuable

Worth is the sum of a man's contributions and character.

Value is what a man is born with by virtue of being a man

if that spec of dust is the new power source that will save the planet from an asteroid impact?

yes, unalienable rights

subjective value

natural rights

@ManAnimal Extreme and extraneous.

cringe

rights aren't FREE

they require constant vigilance or you will LOSE them

rights are inherent in the human experience they do not come from government

Creating a ludicrous what-if is not proper rhetorical fodder for securing victory, Manimal.

treating rights as natural per Locke encourages entitlement and opens the door to declaring ANYTHING even what you cannot pay for 'a right'

no it doesn't

The both of you are right but Manimal, you're ironically forgetting the reason why rights require vigilance.

Rights are a function of the agreement a government makes with it's people

You mistakenly leave out the transcendent nature of rights