/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.22888078]

>talks about how marxism tricks workers into thinking they are fighting the top 1%, when in reality they end up doing bidding of the elite, who are the ones funding marxist ideology in secret
>predicts how a jewish state in palestine will turn the region into a powerful political centre that will allow jewry to gain total influence over all nations across the world
>predicts how jews will start countless wars between nations and economically undermine them
>predicts how jews will import blacks into europe to create a mongrel race(there were no blacks in europe in 1925)
>predicts the rise of bland abstract art and making all forms of entertainment, media intentionally ugly
>predicts how jews will pretend to be white people and talk on behalf of europeans to mask their own intentions
>predicts how christians will continue to be useful idiots for jewry
>predicts how past history will be vilified and masses told their ancestors were evil
>predicts how economic conditions will get worse and worse under international finance
>predicts how right-wingers will point out issues on the surface level, but never go deep enough to notice the true cause, and point out the jews
Has anyone here read his book? I finished Volume 1 and i'm mind-blown by his thought-process. Especially chapter 11 gives me goosebumps, because it reads like it was written by someone in 2023 that knows about current politics.

[Anonymous No.22888084]

>>22888078
>tried to invade Poland
>failed
>killed himself in a hole
I get that you're mentally 12 and "edgy" hasn't gotten old yet, but find better material

[Anonymous No.22888087]

>>22888078
He was a man ahead of his time.

[Anonymous No.22888123]

>>22888084
The mein kampf gives no hint that the author hates slavs or considers them inferior. It constantly talks about how "Aryans" which is the 20th century word for indo-european are the creators of culture and art making them the best race. Hitler talks about how all non-europeans are inferior to europeans and that aryans should never racially mix with them. He praises russia saying it was a great nation until jews enslaved russians via bolshevism. One of his criticisms of german policies before ww1 was that the german policy on poles neither helped germans nor ethnic poles that wanted independence, but instead just made enemies with russia. Hitler considers greece the birth place of european aryan civilization and respects it for it's contribution to humanity

[Anonymous No.22888130]

>>22888084
I'm not a nazi but OP made a bunch of potentially interesting and worthwhile points to think about and you reductio'd it all into a stupid dismissal. Why?

[Anonymous No.22888133]

>>22888123
> He praises russia saying it was a great nation until jews enslaved russians via bolshevism
He says that Russia was a functioning state as long as it was in the hands of a tiny Aryan minority so he definetly did not consider the Slavs proper to be part of the Aryan group.
> Hitler considers greece the birth place of european aryan civilization and respects it for it's contribution to humanity
Hitler had quite the deterministic view on history, that it's all tied together. Civilization began in the Southern regions, he says, because technology was non-existent, by white people, in sometimes ridiculously small numbers, he says, taking power over masses of niggers who made the work force for the construction of the first civilizations. These first civilizations would make some progresses, collapse, and become succeeded by civilizations a few degrees whiter than the prior ones, but still nigger enough to compensate with human labour what technology could not provide, until the modern era, where technology, wich replaced the nigger, allowed the whitest regions of the planet to flourish. 'The moor has served, the moor can go', he writes, paraphrasing a sentence Schiller wrote in his plays.

[Anonymous No.22888134]

tldr

ramblings of a fried meth head

you are the company you keep

[Anonymous No.22888142]

>>22888087
>The mein kampf gives no hint that the author hates slavs or considers them inferior.
The first how many pages are seething about Slavs in the Austrian Monarchy? He considered them retards incapable of nation building.
> The Russian State did not result from
the political abilities of the Slavic race in Russia, but its creation was a wonderful example of the state-forming ability possessed by the Germanic element that still exists within an **inferior race**. Numerous powerful empires on the earth have been created this same way when inferior races, led by Germanic organizers and masters, have grown into huge states and they continued to exist as long as the racial nucleus of the state-forming race survived.
Aryanism, Hitlerism and all this racialist nonsense is outdated, wrong and self-contradictory with their petty nationalism.

[Anonymous No.22888149]

>>22888142
> Numerous powerful empires on the earth have been created this same way when inferior races, led by Germanic organizers and masters, have grown into huge states and they continued to exist as long as the racial nucleus of the state-forming race survived
What part exactly of this has been debunked?

[Anonymous No.22888154]

>>22888149
Was responding to >>22888123 , notice the quoted text.

[Anonymous No.22888173]

>>22888078
>>predicts the rise of bland abstract art and making all forms of entertainment, media intentionally ugly
I advance to attack, and I climb to assault,
Like a swarm of maggots after a cadaver,
And I cherish, implacable and cruel beast,
Even that coldness which makes you more beautiful.

[Anonymous No.22888184]

>>22888078
>predicts
>things that were happening in Weimar
Must have been revealed to him on his trip to Agartha.

[Anonymous No.22888224]

>>22888078
You have to be 18 to post here.

[Anonymous No.22888229]

>>22888154
So shit has been debunked, it just doesn't fit your molly bolly philanthropic humanistic views?

[Anonymous No.22888288]

>>22888078
Hitlerfags and their homosexual idolatry... please leave, this is a board meant for serious literature, not your le based edgy politics. It's not novel, it's not profound, it's not enlightening.

[Anonymous No.22888333]

There's a reason Mein Kampf is the most important political treatise of the 20th century and its influence will likely endure for the next few centuries, at least. It should be required reading for this board.

[Anonymous No.22888379]

>>22888288
>Well poisoning, the post

[Anonymous No.22888380]

>>22888078
the aryans are the jews, Germany was controlled opposition

[Anonymous No.22888403]

>>22888078
>predicts the fall of the moustache

[Anonymous No.22888411]

>>22888379
I'm not reading your schizophrenic garbage, illiterate retard. Go wank off to your Erwin Rommel posters, you gargantuan fucking faggot, and fuck off this literature board.

[Anonymous No.22888429]

>>22888379
Not even remotely related to my post, but good try, I suppose.

[Anonymous No.22889643]

>>22888084
Shit-tier r3ddit response. It's like you think you're in a marvel movie.

[Anonymous No.22889657]

>>22888084
>>killed himself in a hole
The CIA would like a word with you

[Anonymous No.22889658]

>>22888134
If he actually was that, you leftards would probably praise him and simp for him like you still do for george floyd (rest in piss, junkie pos)

[Anonymous No.22889660]

>>22888380
Other way around. jews are Anglo patsies.

[Anonymous No.22889663]

>>22888288
>>22888411
Not him but you're literally seething. Why are you so emotional? Do you think Swindlers List actually happened? Kek

[Anonymous No.22889668]

>>22888084
>killed himself in a hole
How do you explain his grandson Javier Milei then?

[Anonymous No.22889675]

>>22889660
>implying Anglos have any collective identity and will to organize as a political (or any other sort) of entity
My sides

[Anonymous No.22889679]

>>22888078
>>predicts how right-wingers will point out issues on the surface level, but never go deep enough to notice the true cause
Ironic

[Anonymous No.22889691]

>>22889668
Fuck you and fuck that fashist

[Anonymous No.22889697]

>>22888333
Checked. The subverters of Evropa will pay the biggest price ever paid.

[Anonymous No.22889730]

>>22888380
The Jews are not Aryans, even according to Arthur de Gobineau, and he even counted the Jeets among the Aryans, to the disadvantage of the Slavs and the Celts.

[Anonymous No.22889763]

>>22889679
Nice redditpost m'dude!

[Anonymous No.22889772]

>>22888084
Just as arabs are free to believe that arabs are superior why is it wrong for whites to believe they’re superior or to desire prosperity and stability in their own homelands? If you like other races and get along with them then that’s good. But there ought to be no compulsion to favour anybody but your own people. Why does this make you seethe?
t. good faith non-white anon

[Anonymous No.22889793]

>>22889772
Based non-white

[Anonymous No.22889798]

>>22888411
>Ad-hominen, the post

[Anonymous No.22889851]

Hitler was an atrocious man, but and because of his misanthropic actions, although he has grandiously failed, his movement has become immortal.

[Anonymous No.22889855]

Reminder:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgdS5HYgaGk

[Anonymous No.22889860]

>>22889772
You're absolutely right and the endgoal of multiculturalism is to destroy all worthy cultures, including the ones being transported to a new host nation

[Anonymous No.22889885]

>>22889860
Ethnic group. Culture can be reborn and rebuilt, ethnic groups can not. One broad ethnic group, White/Western/Europeans, is being destroyed and erased.

[Anonymous No.22889888]

>>22889885
> Europeans are all the same ethnic group
Kike detected

[Anonymous No.22889908]

>>22888078
>>predicts how a jewish state in palestine will turn the region into a powerful political centre that will allow jewry to gain total influence over all nations across the world
say what you will about jews but this is just objectively not true. many american jews despise israelis for the same reason reason many american gentiles despise their own, that being "muh racism and not lgbtqp+ friendly enough". america and its progressivism is the boss of israel, not the other way around. sure (((neocons))) might make you figure otherwise but nigh everyone in USG hates those clowns now. and also
>>predicts how jews will start countless wars between nations and economically undermine them
>>predicts how economic conditions will get worse and worse under international finance
>>predicts the rise of bland abstract art and making all forms of entertainment, media intentionally ugly
these are hardly unique to jewry, the only reason this has been a big problem is because of fiat currency and tax manipulation.

[Anonymous No.22889925]

>>22889855
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuwfR9YrNp4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vow1qFOTmEw

[Anonymous No.22889936]

>>22888078
>"You must lie and tell people what they want to hear in order to gain power"
>"Oh by the way, here is what you want to hear"
His book is absolutely bizarre. It's literally a manual on propaganda while also using the principles of that propaganda on the reader of that very book! Take for example his conception of the party (core group of powerful individuals, outer group of party members, large group of followers). Imagine a magician telling you how to do a trick and then expecting that trick to work on you in the next moment.

[Anonymous No.22889959]

>>22889908
>many american jews despise israelis
That's not the point (besides, jews have never been one block. I'm sure many orthodox jews are no big fans of the degenerate atheist ones, but ultimately they carry jewish blood which is what matters to them). The point is that an Israeli/Jewish controlled middle east means Israel will have full control over the literal land centre of trade between Europe and Asia
Not that they don't have other means that they're already using, but this will add a significant measure of extra global control

[Anonymous No.22889974]

>>22889936
Isn't he just highlighting the means by which you can spread a message and influence people? Your argument doesn't really hold up because in his own eyes Hitler wasn't using these means to mislead anyone, whereas subversion was definitely the motivation he saw in others, and uses the same methods

[Anonymous No.22889996]

>>22889974
I believe he wanted power for power's sake and saw the current moment as an opportunity. True believers are easily manipulated and a requirement for the consolidation of power. The ends for him was power and the means were to appeal to latent bitterness and resentment. Now, if you claim "people had every right to be bitter and resentful" you simply confirm that Hitler chose the right means to complete his rise to power. If you still don't believe me, take the fact that he explicitly says in his book that he is doing the work of God. He uses God quite often as a justification for why people should join him. Pair that with his actual views recorded elsewhere and you will begin to see how easily he projects false beliefs in himself to convince those who sincerely hold those beliefs to follow him.

[Anonymous No.22889999]

>>22888078
Serious question here, what does it matter if you can identify the problem if your solutions cannot work and only make matters worse, which is what happened? Hitler was objectively the worst thing to happen to western civilization.

[Anonymous No.22890007]

>>22889999
Read Nomos of the Earth. He was the last shot at saving Europe from the Anglo-American Establishment (Quigley).

[Anonymous No.22890023]

>>22889999
Western society was tottering and rotting away in his times already.
What Hitler did was immortalize it's ideas.
Thousands years from now someone might pick a history book and re-etablish the European glory by reading about Hitler alone.

[Anonymous No.22890027]

>>22889996
>I believe he wanted power for power's sake
I'm sure he was not reluctant to take power, nor did he believe anyone else was suitable for the task, but this motive you ascribe to him is quite contrary to what I think was the case. I believe he wanted power to manifest his personal ideal of the world, which was a healthy (in his eyes) and united German people (again, what consisted of German and united in his eyes)
A friend of his youth described him as extremely principled and idealistic. In WW1 he was known to tell his fellow soldiers to stop smoking and drinking and he didn't like their lewd humour. He was also described as reckless and he received multiple awards for bravery
I don't think that person is some opportunist who wants power for power's sake

[Anonymous No.22890036]

>>22889999
checked

[Anonymous No.22890042]

>>22889999
>what does it matter if you can identify the problem if your solutions cannot work and only make matters worse
his solutions the problem worked. The problems being the financial disasters and degeneracy of the Weimar Republic. He lost the war due to a myriad of reasons and I by no means consider him blameless for it, but if he hadn't done anything, we'd simply be 100 years further into our current downfall. Hitler is only "the worst thing to happen to western civilization." because he lost

[Anonymous No.22890050]

>>22890027
Hitler wanted power in the same way if you come across a man being savagely beaten by an obvious brute and thug, you "want" a rock to hit the brute with. Politics at the end of the day is about values like "Don't let brutes destroy what is good and noble." Hitler saw a brutal act in progress, Europe being kicked to death by monsters, and acted on instinct like a prehistoric man would if he saw it.

Asking why he went through the channels he did is like asking why he didn't take the pieces of paper out of the back pockets of the men who were kicking Europe to death and take the time to read them all solemnly, while the man continues to be kicked to death, since those pieces of paper in the back pockets of the brutes were all the nice "guarantees of peace in Europe" (confinement strategies designed to weaken the last anti-Anglo forces in Europe until capital could completely dominate the continent).

In a world filled with such hypocrisy, instinct starts to matter a hell of a lot more. We're still in that world, we've just been buried in ten billion additional pieces of paper saying we're not.

>Is it the healthy peace, or the ominous unhealthy, that rests on France, for these next Ten Years? Over which the Historian can pass lightly, without call to linger: for as yet events are not, much less performances. Time of sunniest stillness;—shall we call it, what all men thought it, the new Age of Gold? Call it at least, of Paper; which in many ways is the succedaneum of Gold. Bank-paper, wherewith you can still buy when there is no gold left; Book-paper, splendent with Theories, Philosophies, Sensibilities,—beautiful art, not only of revealing Thought, but also of so beautifully hiding from us the want of Thought! Paper is made from the rags of things that did once exist; there are endless excellences in Paper.—What wisest Philosophe, in this halcyon uneventful period, could prophesy that there was approaching, big with darkness and confusion, the event of events? Hope ushers in a Revolution,—as earthquakes are preceded by bright weather.
(Carlyle)

[Anonymous No.22890057]

>>22890042
>because he lost
Except from any reasonable sane stand point he never could have won. It was completely impossible from a purely logistical perspective. And because of his methods he turned nationalism into a fringe taboo belief while destroying all the remaining European power structures turning the entire planet into a vassal of America and bolshevism while simultaneously providing the proof of concept-casus belli for the anti-European politics that completely dominate the world today. The Holocaust is quite literally the modern world's creation myth.

[Anonymous No.22890068]

>>22890057
> The Holocaust is quite literally the modern world's creation myth.
If you are a slave npc, maybe.

[Anonymous No.22890074]

>>22890027
So you will not address his use of God to manipulate the readership of his book while he held private beliefs against that same God?

[Anonymous No.22890075]

>>22890068
No, if you're an enormously powerful political leader and/or billionaire. The fact you post stupid edgy shit on 4chan doesn't mean you aren't subject to the powers that rule the world, in fact it's the opposite.

[Anonymous No.22890089]

>>22890057
The "Holocaust" was a ho-hum systematic killing of probably under a million people that was easily outstripped by what the USSR did in a dozen different ways, and what all the Western nations had been doing to colonial and indigenous peoples and their enemies (the Boers) for years anyway. It was a drop in the bucket of the inevitable phenomenon of modern technology applied to total war. In fact it was rather mild compared to what the Nazis were capable of. Everybody was interested in eugenics at the time, it was normal right into the 1940s to talk about sterilizing retards and so on. Even nowadays Israel sterilizes Ethiopian Jews when it can get away with it. The biopolitical engineering that is to come will make the 20th century look like a warm-up, especially from countries like China when the gloves are off and they can convert entire historic peoples into slave drones, probably using MKULTRA style mind control and who fucking knows what else.

This shows "The Holocaust" is 98% narrative, 2% fact. Take the narrative away and place it back in its actual historical context and it's no unique creation myth. The Allies would have found their creation myth even if there had been nothing at all to work with. They were already doing pic related in WW1, another creation myth, but one nobody remembers now because the Jews are much better victim characters than the Belgians.

[Anonymous No.22890169]

>>22890057
>It was completely impossible from a purely logistical perspective
then we were doomed anyway, and it doesn't matter if he did anything or not, because the world was going the exact same way it is now back then and he stopped it, but he ultimately failed, which did make things worse but the point is that if he hadn't tried, we'd be even further down the road now, and the things going on today would have happened all the same
That's the reason the "nationalism is now controversial because of hitler" is such a dumb argument, because if Hitler had not done anything, nationalism would have been just as taboo, because then the downfall he fought against (which is the same one we exist in right now) would have gone on unchecked
>>22890050
amazingly put
>>22890074
Did he not mainly criticize the Christian church, while still believing in the divinity Christ? Christianity is not Catholicism nor is it Protestanthism. It is purely the belief in the divinity of Christ. He disliked the Christian Church because he felt it made his people weak. Was this his view on Christianity as a whole? Did he then also think the Crusaders were weak? Or the Christian soldiers who fought back against the Moors and the Huns and the Mongols and the Turks?

And let's say he did not believe in Christ and really did condemn Christianity as a whole and not just the Christian church, and used his false faith as a means to control the masses. This still does not mean he wanted power for power's sake. If a million blind people are going to jump off a cliff and you're the only one who can stop them from jumping, and you wanted nothing more in the world than to save them, but they will only listen to you if they think you are also blind, would you tell them the truth or would you manipulate and lie to them?

[Anonymous No.22890201]

>>22890169
>>then we were doomed anyway, and it doesn't matter if he did anything or not
I completely disagree. This is like saying you're going to die anyway so stab yourself in both kidneys and the liver since you've lost an army already.

[Anonymous No.22890212]

>>22888084
Why even bother commenting with this weak response? You just give more power to OP

[Anonymous No.22890213]

>>22890057
>And because of his methods he turned nationalism into a fringe taboo belief while destroying all the remaining European power structures turning the entire planet into a vassal of America and bolshevism while simultaneously providing the proof of concept-casus belli for the anti-European politics that completely dominate the world today.
Also further weakened Britain and France which hastened the decline of their colonial empires. I think the radical right -- distinct from conservatives -- have a tendency to accelerate the changes they don't want to see happen. Fascism doesn't like chaos but its solution is more chaos, or it doesn't like big cities and promises a return to agrarianism so it launches a big war to conquer lands for settlement of the surplus urban population, but involves a massive expansion of state power and industry for the purposes of warmaking. Quite contradictory.

[Anonymous No.22890217]

>>22890201
>This is like saying you're going to die anyway so stab yourself in both kidneys and the liver since you've lost an army already.
This is only true if you think there was another way to save Europe that does not involve Hitler

[Anonymous No.22890220]

>>22890213
>Quite contradictory.
it's "waging war so we can have peace" which is a principle that has existed since the birth of civilisation

[Anonymous No.22890224]

>>22890075
I'm not, the only governmental institution that has any real power over me is the local commune building for the fishing permit.

[Anonymous No.22890230]

>>22888078
>sees the world changing and does not understand it
>spergs
>gets millions of germans killed and guarantees immunity for the Jews he so dreaded
>fails and dies

[Anonymous No.22890236]

>>22890220
Fair. The communists also had a line like that:
https://youtu.be/-a-o2_O3CGg

But when it comes to war (but it can go for many things), if someone is more successful, then he understands the situation better, or is better attuned or adapted to it than someone who is unsuccessful. I think that's common sense. The fact that the unsuccessful one was superior -- in your view (I'm assuming) -- in morals, in loving kindness, in intellect or any of the other virtues I see attributed to the Third Reich on this website, is entirely beside the point. You could hardly hold up Stalin and his followers has models of civilized people. But they succeeded within their environment. They were better adapted to their period.

[Anonymous No.22890268]

>>22890217
There might have been, you base this idea that nationalism would become taboo anyway on nothing. I'm not interested in speculative alternative history. But it's a fact what Hitler did accomplish was physically socially and economically shatter Europe and open it up to American domination while providing incredibly strong political precedent for the "Jewish" machinery now at play. A slow decay into 'degeneracy' as you put it might well have resulted in some organic and sensible counter politics. Blowing up all the old empires was truly fucking stupid, Hitler is quite directly responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of Europe's best and brightest and the current economic slavery that defines the west today.

[Anonymous No.22890272]

>>22890169
>Did he not mainly criticize the Christian church, while still believing in the divinity Christ?
No, according to Allan Bullock in his biography Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, "In Hitler's eyes, Christianity was a religion fit only for slaves; he detested its ethics in particular. Its teaching, he declared, was a rebellion against the natural law of selection by struggle and the survival of the fittest."

Second, if you believe your country is in grave danger from a group which lies and deceives in order to enact the downfall of your nation, are you really justified in deceit and lies yourself with the only difference being your noble intentions? No, Hitler's actions betray that he was no better than the picture he painted of the Jews, and there is a dark irony in that.

[Anonymous No.22890285]

>>22889888
Every.
Single
Fucking.
Time.

[Anonymous No.22890316]

>>22890236
>The fact that the unsuccessful one was superior -- in your view (I'm assuming) -- in morals, in loving kindness, in intellect or any of the other virtues I see attributed to the Third Reich on this website, is entirely beside the point. You could hardly hold up Stalin and his followers has models of civilized people. But they succeeded within their environment. They were better adapted to their period.
I think all of what you say here is not incorrect and also very well put together (except your assumption about my view but that's beside the point, it still holds true to a lot of people), but I don't see how it refutes anything I have suggested (if refutal was your intention)
>But when it comes to war (but it can go for many things), if someone is more successful, then he understands the situation better, or is better attuned or adapted to it than someone who is unsuccessful. I think that's common sense.
I don't agree with this. The brutes of the world may win over the intellectuals simply because they're brutes and the intellectuals, despite understanding more about the world and war and even the brutes themselves, refuse to come to action, even if they are aware that their reluctance will mean their downfall. Quantity can beat quality, without deterring the quality itself, and I think this was the case with Nazi Germany losing the war. Look at most battles on the eastern front, especially the famous ones with 1 million casualties. The German casualties usually take up only about 20% of the total, whereas the outnumbering Soviets often make up 80%. There are German accounts of soldiers being surrounded by mountains of corpses and destroyed tanks, and being out of ammunition, having no idea how many of the enemy there are left
I suppose you could argue that the Germans were tactically better but lost on a strategic level (tactics being the smaller scaled operations themselves and strategy being the wider movements of larger numbers)

[Anonymous No.22890320]

>>22890285
Ok, SlavoGermanoSpanyoItaloAngloFinno-mutt.

[Anonymous No.22890361]

>>22889908
Just because they say they hate Israel doesn’t mean they don’t secretly support it. You have no idea what they are really like. They are masters of lies and putting on a performance.

[Anonymous No.22890385]

>>22890268
>on nothing
I base it on the fact that what Hitler resisted is still going on today, meaning it would have gone on if he hadn't done anything. The idea that something better could have come up to stop it is what's based on nothing, because it's the very "speculative alternative history" that you denounce.
>providing incredibly strong political precedent for the "Jewish" machinery now at play.
it was at play before Hitler and only because they ultimately won could they use the Nazis as such a precedent.
>A slow decay into 'degeneracy' as you put it might well have resulted in some organic and sensible counter politics
speculative and alternative
>Blowing up all the old empires was truly fucking stupid
what old empires did he blow up? France, which declared war on him? Russia and even the Germans themselves were blown up old empires after ww1. I don't understand your point here
>Hitler is quite directly responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of Europe's best and brightest and the current economic slavery that defines the west today.
Because he failed. You said you don't like speculative history, but given the direction of the Weimar Republic and the threat of the Soviet Union, as well as Britain's desire to remain the foremost superpower in Europe, what realistic way do you think there was for Germany to not just survive but escape the degeneracy and cultural decay it was undergoing, other than turn into what Hitler made it? (Of course not exactly each and everything that Hitler changed, but in essence)

[Anonymous No.22890433]

>>22890272
>No, according to Allan Bullock in his biography Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, "In Hitler's eyes, Christianity was a religion fit only for slaves; he detested its ethics in particular. Its teaching, he declared, was a rebellion against the natural law of selection by struggle and the survival of the fittest."
When he says Christianity, is he talking about believing in the divinity of Christ or is he talking about what the influences of the particular Christian churches? Does the "rebellion against the natural law of selection by struggle and survival of the fittest" not apply to what the Churches did influence the masses to believe, and not those very Christian soldiers that I mentioned, who fought against non Christian invaders of Europe in name of their Christian God?
>Second, if you believe your country is in grave danger from a group which lies and deceives in order to enact the downfall of your nation, are you really justified in deceit and lies yourself with the only difference being your noble intentions? No,
you say no but clearly your grounds for it are rooted in your own belief regarding justice. How can anyone dictate what is universal justice? Neither you nor I can do that, nor any person
>Hitler's actions betray that he was no better than the picture he painted of the Jews
Hitler accused the Jews of a passive subversion of the nation from the shadows. It is only a dark irony as you say if you make the presumption that he was indeed deceiving his people for personal power, and not deceiving (if deceiving them at all) to save them

[Anonymous No.22890543]

>>22889885
I don't think you're wrong, I said culture because it fits better with the term multiculturalism, but it is ultimately about the ethnic groups behind the cultures. You said "one broad ethnic group, White/Western/Europeans". To me this doesn't suggest all whites are exactly the same, but that what we share is that we're European and we're all facing the same detriment. The other posters are just seething

[Anonymous No.22890550]

>>22890543
> muh Europe
Zzzzzz

[Anonymous No.22890715]

>>22890433
>you say no but clearly your grounds for it are rooted in your own belief regarding justice. How can anyone dictate what is universal justice? Neither you nor I can do that, nor any person
My grounds are simple honesty. If you hate a group for using deception and subversion to achieve their outcomes, but then you use deception and subversion to achieve your outcomes, you lack the grounds to criticize those means, and your only possible arguments are in regard to the ends. But if you point to the deception and subversion of your opponents as part of the reason you oppose them, you are literally a hypocrite for using the same means for your own ends. This has nothing to do with my set of values, it is simply an observation of hypocrisy.

[Anonymous No.22890726]

>>22888134
>you are the company you keep
Take a look.

[Anonymous No.22891574]

>>22890320
>t. Shitskinned turd worlder

[Anonymous No.22891581]

>>22890550
You're not even White, go back to your 3rd world toilet with your stinky immigrant family

[Anonymous No.22891596]

>there are people here who are more bluepilled on ww2 and H. than my boomer parents
Lurk more redditcucks

[Anonymous No.22891992]

>>22890285
>NOOOOOO THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS RIGHT WING INFIGHTING
>IT'S THE JOOOOOOOOOS
>AN IDEOLOGY PREMISED ON EXCLUSION WOULD NEVER TURN INWARD AND EXCLUDE MANY OF ITS ADHERENTS
>SUCH A THING WOULD IMPLY EXCLUSIONARY IDEOLOGIES CONTAIN THE SEEDS OF THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION
>NOOOOOO IDEAS ARE FIXED AND STABLE, AND NEVER SUBJECT TO DIALECTICS
>AAAAAAAAH ITS THE JOOOOS ITS THE JOOOOOOOOOOOOS

[Anonymous No.22892001]

>>22891992
all ideologies are premised on exclusion thougheverbeit, some just more than others

[Anonymous No.22892003]

>>22891992
please stop this, it makes you look like a retarded toddler and has the opposite effective of what you're intending

[Anonymous No.22892325]

>>22888087
No. He was a man who had understood that this same time has repeated over and over again, since the time of the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Christian Europe, to modern era, and knew how it would play out. The JQ is as old as civilization (or maybe even older).

[Anonymous No.22892530]

>>22890715
you literally wrote
>if you believe your country is in grave danger from a group which lies and deceives in order to enact the downfall of your nation, are you really justified in deceit and lies yourself with the only difference being your noble intentions? No,
This is what you wrote. It doesn't matter if your ends are different from your opposition, you are still unjustified in using their means. Following from your conclusion that Hitler was not justified in using deception, despite his different "noble" intentions in doing so, because he criticized his opposition for it. Is my interpretation wrong?
And if this is the case, then it is definitely to do with your personal values regarding justice, because only a sense of justice that ignores intentions and desired outcomes but only looks at means would render such a thing hypocritical

>But if you point to the deception and subversion of your opponents as part of the reason you oppose them, you are literally a hypocrite for using the same means for your own ends
And it has never been proven that this is the case for Hitler, only theorised and not very convincingly

[Anonymous No.22892934]

>>22891992

[Anonymous No.22892945]

>>22888078
>predicts
Maybe he gave jews the ideas

[Anonymous No.22893065]

>>22891992
Not an argument, tranny. This is why the so-called far right keeps growing, none of its opposition can refute them.

[Anonymous No.22893070]

>>22892945
Ya Hitler actually made jewish doctors push transgender children and tranny operations in weimar

[Anonymous No.22893078]

>>22889772
You are brown

[Anonymous No.22893143]

>>22891574
>>22891581
> n-no, you can't say that, t-that's racist!
Kys

[Anonymous No.22893577]

>>22893070
I talked about the stuff in OP, not about the trannies that live rent free in your head

[Anonymous No.22893615]

Even if all this were true, you’d have to be a retard to think that it’s a good idea to turn anti-Jewry into a political and religious dogma. If the friend-enemy distinction is a fundamental aspect of political leadership and the Jews really are the enemy, then anti-Jewry is a fundamental aspect of political leadership but it is not synonymous with political leadership. This is just a basically logical argument that BTFOs Nazi anti-semitism.

[Anonymous No.22893639]

>>22889999
Were it not for industrial warfare technology, Hitler would have been one of many failed warlords in history. The catastrophic destruction of Germany and Europe was made possible by planes, bombs, and information technology.

[Anonymous No.22893676]

>>22890057
Blaming Hitler for jewish brain control is such pathetic beaten woman behavior. That angloid-amerigoy retards fell for war mongering is proof that they were already broken and to believe they would otherwise have resisted the quieter, subtler methods of deterioration is a wish in absence of evidence to the highest degree. YGWYFD.

[Anonymous No.22893731]

Lots of Marxists in here. I'm gonna very douchely post something I said in a live thread on this same board.

Tl;dr is, Marxists are incels. They want the equality Marxism advertises because they think they'll finally have sex.

[Anonymous No.22893759]

>>22893731

[Anonymous No.22893770]

>>22893759

No u

[Anonymous No.22893782]

>>22893770
well played anon

[Anonymous No.22893808]

>>22893782

I should have edited the No U gook into the lens. That college freshmen lib arts major nufag would be hella confused.

[Anonymous No.22893825]

>>22893808
both posts are me anon, i'm simply acknowledging the funny

[Anonymous No.22893874]

>>22893825

If you can laff at yourself maybe you're not a nufag after all. Maybe you could even be... a fren.
Marx is dum tho. Hitler was right about how bad he is...

[Anonymous No.22893904]

>>22893874
sorry friend, but the surplus value analysis is still the most coherent explanation of where profit comes from
>adding labor to raw materials worth $X produces a good that sells for $Y
>so the value of the labor V = Y - X
>but the worker is paid a wage W < V
>and the profit P = V - W
understood this way, all profit is exploitative, as it originates from paying a worker less than the full value of his labor

contrast with a guild or co-operative system where workers earn the full value of their production, but pay dues to remain in good standing with the managing organization, and you'll see that the average worker takes home much more pay outside a capitalist context

hitler claimed to be a friend of workers, but his actions in office largely served the rich. marx, despite his flaws, used his celebrity to support organized labor, which led to material improvements in the condition of workers in germany and england

[Anonymous No.22894236]

>>22888078
>the ramblings of a Zionist plant

Of course he knows, he was part of the plan.

[Anonymous No.22894244]

>>22893904

Who gets to decide what the value of that labor is?

What is a "capitalist context"? Where can we find the pure capitalism necessary to evaluate this?

If only labor has value (apparently you're assigning value to material here too, but material is not obtained without labor...), what reason is there for me to hold any esteem for this opinion?

Here's the most important point though: what reason is there to believe anything Marx said aligns with the natural predilections of the species homo sapien? At what point does Marx dig rigorously into archeological and anthropological study, to make certain determinations on what a human is designed to do, by nature, by evolution? What is more, if contemporary study in these fields tends to suggest our species does not lend itself to Marx's description... why talk about him anymore? What reason is there to take him, or any of them, from Hobbes to Durkheim, seriously, if scientific study of the human animal says they are wrong?

Tl;Dr. Nah senpai. Marx sucked.

[Anonymous No.22894494]

>>22893078
You are a jew

[Anonymous No.22894770]

>>22894244
>Who gets to decide what the value of that labor is?
In a market economy, the exchange-value added by labor is the purchase price of the finished product minus the non-labor inputs.

>What is a "capitalist context"?
A social organization where property holders hire laborers for wages. Contrast with a feudal context, where serfs aren't paid wages, or a guild context, where tradesmen are paid per piece.

>Where can we find the pure capitalism necessary to evaluate this?
Anywhere in the west.

>If only labor has value (apparently you're assigning value to material here too, but material is not obtained without labor...), what reason is there for me to hold any esteem for this opinion?
You're confusing exchange-value with use-value. Information is useful, even if it's cheap to acquire.

>Here's the most important point though: what reason is there to believe anything Marx said aligns with the natural predilections of the species homo sapien?
Why would "nature" matter? He's analyzing a social process as it happens, not making claims about the essence of humankind.

>At what point does Marx dig rigorously into archeological and anthropological study, to make certain determinations on what a human is designed to do, by nature, by evolution?
Non sequitor. He's an economist; he analyzed economics and arrived at conclusions that we can empirically prove (e.g. the tendency of the rate of profit to fall).

>What is more, if contemporary study in these fields tends to suggest our species does not lend itself to Marx's description... why talk about him anymore?
You'd have to prove this claim before I could engage with it. The empirical economics literature broadly supports most of Marx's macroeconomic claims.

>What reason is there to take him, or any of them, from Hobbes to Durkheim, seriously, if scientific study of the human animal says they are wrong?
Again, you have to prove this assertion.

[Anonymous No.22894794]

>>22888078
>predicts
>predicts
>predicts
>predicts
looks like you've been rused by edgy astrology

[Anonymous No.22894895]

>>22893904
>hitler claimed to be a friend of workers, but his actions in office largely served the rich
These aren't mutually exclusive. If you think they are you've been duped by marxism most likely.

[Anonymous No.22894897]

>>22893577
Point is they was doing that before H.

[Anonymous No.22894903]

>>22893904
>hitler claimed to be a friend of workers, but his actions in office largely served the rich.

What was the psychological state and social condition of German youth as the war came to an end? There is little doubt that the Nazis' comprehensive youth programme had left a deep impression. More than any previous regime, the Third Reich had created a unified youth, with mentality, attitudes and values that transcended differences of class and region ...

In this context the Hitler Youth generation also argued that there had been
a stronger 'social side' to National Socialism than later generations
and most outsiders have been willing to acknowledge. Such things as
the training competitions, for example, the fact that there were no
school fees for the poor, the introduction of coeducation, com-
petitions for the most social factory or more generally working for
'the community' were cited as examples.

Most had formed, as we
have seen, their own complex picture of positive and negative
experiences and were now outraged by the blank negative judge-
ment being cast on the Third Reich. Even those who had never
regarded themselves as Nazis found that it was no longer permissible
to mention even the 'positive things' about the Third Reich without
being treated as such.

In fact, the legacy of the HJ experience was ambiguous. On the
one hand, the HJ had encouraged many members and particularly
those who had taken on significant responsibilities within the move-
ment, to be very active. It had conveyed the powerful experience
that for those willing to put in the effort to the collective, the reward
could be considerable personal advancement. The dissolution of the
HJ consequently left a vacuum in the post-war period that cried out
to be filled with new activity ...

The resulting ambivalent outlook was probably extremely significant
in explaining the particular pattern of behaviour which emerged in
both Germanies after the war. Both societies seem to have been
characterised by a willingness to put in enormous effort in return for
recognition and personal advancement.
...

The lesson the HJ generation drew from
the past, then, was Pflichtbewusstsein, a willingness to do one's duty, or
better Leistungsbereitschaft, a willingness to give it everything one
had, largely irrespective of whatever state form or political system
happened to be in operation at the time.

[Anonymous No.22894905]

>>22888078
The 1%...

Do you ever stop thinking the 1% was Hitler?

[Anonymous No.22894906]

>>22894903
Perhaps the most important positive experience was the fact that
socially, too, the HJ and other institutions helped youngsters dis-
cover new territory. Because the HJ aspired to bridge class barriers,
many of its members were able to meet youngsters or adults from
different backgrounds and thus break out of their own milieus.
Ambitious HJ members could rise up through the ranks. Sometimes
working-class children found themselves in authority over young-
sters with a grammar-school background. Those who performed
well in the HJ might well also find their social mobility enhanced
outside the organisation. A good HJ record could open up oppor-
tunities for youngsters whose parents' social status would in the past
have denied them much chance of advancement. For example,
successful HJ members might be able to get into one of the National
Socialist political academies or into a better school; they might be
able to obtain an apprenticeship in a sought after occupation or gain
entry into a white-collar profession. For many youngsters, the old
adage from the working-class milieu of the 1920s 'them up on top, us
down below', no longer seemed to fit.

The HJ also encouraged youngsters to take on positions of leader-
ship and responsibility. At some time or other almost all boys and
girls took on some office or higher rank, be it in the DJ or the HJ.
Those who joined the Jungvolk as 1 o-year-olds, for example, moved
in only their second year into positions of seniority over the new
entrants. Thus the old youth movement principle that 'youth should
be led by youth' became a reality for many young people. Those
promoted received new badges and insignia as marks of their auth-
ority. The chevrons and frogging were highly important for the
self-esteem of those involved, And, again, outside the HJ, too, the
uniform or the higher rank brought recognition. Many of our
interview partners mentioned the fact that when you wore the
uniform you 'were somebody' and could not just be dismissed as a
child.

Many of the respondents - and not just the enthusiasts - dwelt on
the fact that they had been involved in useful and socially meaning-
ful activity. They helped on farms or in land reclamation or col-
lected metal for recycling; they looked after elderly members of the
community, collected for the Nazis' 'winter help scheme', knitted for
the poor or sent parcels to soldiers at the front. Because of the
blanket condemnation of the HJ in the post-war period, our inter-
viewees were at pains to emphasise this positive useful side.
Respondents of both sexes believed that their HJ activities had been
a lot more worthwhile than the activities of modern youth who 'just
hang around outside discos' and did nothing useful.

>Alexander von Plato, "The Hitler Youth generation and its roles in the two postwar German states," in Mark Roseman, ed., Generations in Conflict: Youth Revolt and Generation Formation in Germany, 1770-1968 (Cambridge, England, 1995), 29

[Anonymous No.22894908]

>>22894244
Marxists are midwits. The posts refuting Marx from the far right are always more convincing. Marxists have a bizarre pseudo-religious tendency where they just repeat axioms as if that proves anything.

[Anonymous No.22894909]

>Codreanu’s most effective propaganda in these years was to be work, action, and [leading by] example. Hundreds of voluntary labor camps of the Legion, then called the TPT Party, dotted the map of Romania, repairing village bridges, roads, and churches, building dams, digging wells and working “for the collective and national solidarity.” In these camps, the boyar son worked side by side with the son of the laborer and the peasant, creating a powerful feeling of national unity and renovation. If the new intellectuals who graduated (or failed to graduate) in increasing numbers from the universities and joined the ranks of the Legion were strongly anti-Semitic because of the Jewish middle classes blocking their way, the lower classes came to the Legion because they hoped to fulfill their desires for a social justice on a national rather than a Russian Bolshevik platform.

>As the Legion increased in importance, it had to take a certain number of stands on practical issues of the day despite its acute revulsion to dealing with the problems of the sordid twentieth-century industrial age. These stands and attitudes were taken on an ad hoc basis when the Legion had to face them, and the result was a curious mixture of their ideology and more realistic considerations. Although it concentrated its activities in the villages, the Legion formed the Corps of Legionary Workers in 1936 and in addition to the dozens of labor camps, Codreanu ordered the Legion to enter a very new field for Romanians, commerce. He wanted to prove that not only Jews could be successful in this area. "In less than a year, the Battalion of Legionary Commerce founded a chain of Legionary restaurants, groceries, and repair shops covering Bucharest and the provincial towns. The income from these establishments financed vacations for underprivileged children and provided funds for the movement.” Besides the commercial establishments, there was a Legionary welfare organization, and steps were taken to organize Legionary cooperatives. At the opening of the Legionary sanatorium in Predeal, different payment rates were established. Everybody was to pay according to his conscience; the poor were not to pay at all.

[Anonymous No.22894921]

>fascism was just capitalism in decay!

>Prof. A. J. P. Taylor, the eminent British historian, and hardly a Nazi sympathizer, writes:

>"Fascism, it was claimed, represented the last aggressive stage of capitalism in decline, and its momentum could be sustained only by war. There was an element of truth in this, but not much. The full employment which Nazi Germany was the first European country to possess, depended in large part on the production of armaments; but it could have been provided equally well (and was to some extent) by other forms of public works from roads to great buildings. The Nazi secret was not armament production; it was freedom from the then orthodox principles of economics . . . the argument for war did not work even if the Nazi system had relied on armaments production alone. Nazi Germany was not choking in a flood of arms. On the contrary, the German Generals insists unanimously in 1939 that they were not equipped for war and that many years must pass before “rearmament in depth” had been completed."

>Answering predictions of ruin by orthodox economists throughout the world, Hitler explained that Germany had not withdrawn from world trade but had bypassed the international financial system by means of barter, stating:

>"If certain countries combat the German system this is done in the first instance because through the German method of trading their tricks of international currency and Bourse speculations have been abolished in favor of honest business transactions. . . . We are buyers of good foodstuff and raw materials and suppliers of equally good commodities!"

>More recently a professional economist, Henry C K Liu[18], who can hardly be suspected of Hitlerism, analyzed the methods by which Germany emerged from the Depression:

>"The Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933, at a time when its economy was in total collapse, with ruinous war-reparation obligations and zero prospects for foreign investment or credit. Yet through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full-employment public-works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies it could exploit, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began. In fact, German economic recovery preceded and later enabled German rearmament, in contrast to the US economy, where constitutional roadblocks placed by the US Supreme Court on the New Deal delayed economic recovery until US entry to World War II put the US market economy on a war footing. While this observation is not an endorsement for Nazi philosophy, the effectiveness of German economic policy in this period, some of which had been started during the last phase of the Weimar Republic, is undeniable."
https://counter-currents.com/2011/08/breaking-the-bondage-of-interesta-right-answer-to-usury-part-4/
https://counter-currents.com/2012/11/two-volumes-by-gottfried-feder/

[Anonymous No.22894979]

>>22894770
>In a market economy, the exchange-value added by labor is the purchase price of the finished product minus the non-labor inputs
That's extremely oversimplified.
>Anywhere in the west.
That's idiotic. The West is more socialist now, even in the US. 50% of my income goes to the government, if I want to start a real business venture it is basically impossible because of all the regulations and taxes. We don't have actual capitalism (i.e., free market). I'm not a dedicated capitalist by any means. Many marxist criticisms of capitalism are accurate but the alternatives they suggest are laughable.
>You're confusing exchange-value with use-value. Information is useful, even if it's cheap to acquire.
He refuted you and now you're muddying the waters. You can't even write an actual reply, you faggot redditor, you just have little quips in your redditpost.
>He's analyzing a social process as it happens, not making claims about the essence of humankind.
His analysis is obviously extremely flawed. Maybe he should have considered something as fundamental as human nature, but that is asking too much since he's a simple-minded materialist
>He's an economist; he analyzed economics and arrived at conclusions that we can empirically prove (e.g. the tendency of the rate of profit to fall).
So were many other jewish midwits 200 years ago. He was wrong. Labour theory of value is retarded, so is communism and egalitarianism. His writings are badly out of date and were flawed from the beginning.
>You'd have to prove this claim before I could engage with it. The empirical economics literature broadly supports most of Marx's macroeconomic claims.
Lmfao, like what? Do you have any proof of it "broadly supporting" marx? Sounds like you get your info from commie youtubers. No serious economist takes marx seriously, he's a joke and badly out of date. Btw, graduate high school and get a job before having an opinion on economics.
>Again, you have to prove this assertion
He wasn't even making an assertion you utter retard. Re-read the sentence.

You are further proof that Marxists are pseudointellectual midwits who think they're smart because they're the stupid kids studying arts in college who are intelligent enough to follow marxist ramblings. If only your IQ was a little higher.

[Anonymous No.22894993]

>>22894921
Marxcucks can't compete

[Anonymous No.22894996]

I wanna read it sometime, what is the definitive translation?

[Anonymous No.22895073]

>>22893731
The only real Marxist stronghold is Communist China which is currently ascending to be the top global superpower. Learning the lessons of Marx, it becomes easy to manipulate a Capitalist society to sell their children's future for their own immediate enjoyment. Ironically, it's exactly because people like you are incapable of learning the lessons of Marx that this has become possible, and instead of a socially cohesive Capitalist market with Socialist society, we will instead be overrun by bugmen. Healthy societies are set up for the benefit of their citizens, not for the benefit of Capital. If you sell out your citizens' interest for the interest of Capital, your country will collapse. It's that simple.

[Anonymous No.22895109]

>>22888078
>Each animal mates only with one of its own species. The titmouse cohabits only with the
titmouse, the finch with the finch, the stork with the stork, the field-mouse with the field-mouse, the house-mouse with the house-mouse, the wolf with the she-wolf, etc

Hitler wrote this, yet it sounds very similar to something Muhammad Ali the boxer said later on

>In the jungle, lions are with lions and tigers with tigers, and redbirds stay with redbirds and bluebirds with bluebirds

[Anonymous No.22895115]

>>22895109
In the jungle, lions are with lions and tigers with tigers, redbirds stay with redbirds and bluebirds with bluebirds.
It is only among humans that the white woman lusts after the BBC.

[Anonymous No.22895233]

>>22889730
Fucking cringe.

[Anonymous No.22895245]

>>22890230
>>sees the world changing and does not understand it
Yes and the change was objectively for the worse.

[Anonymous No.22895697]

>>22895115
Sounds like you're projecting your fetish onto women that find you repulsive, tranny incel. Really the only White women who settle for blacks are pizza-faced hogs. That's why blacks have to rape so much. Let it also be noted that the average black woman barely looks any better than the average black "man".

[Anonymous No.22895703]

>>22894996
The German one

>>22895073
Are China really marxist in practice??

[Anonymous No.22895793]

>1926
>Hitler writes a polemic expressly designed to propagandize 90 IQ lemmings into dying for his delusions
>100 years later
>anon reads the book halfway through
>posts to 4chan "whoa.... guys.... this is SO DEEP...."
>>22888084
fpbp. Hitler destroyed Europe and murdered millions of Europeans. Chuddies who claim to care about Europe will spend their lives inventing mental gymnastic routines to try to deny this, but deep down they know it's true and lash out in foaming rage whenever someone reminds them of it.

[Anonymous No.22895814]

>>22895793
How long have you been trying this routine, and people just get more and more interested in Hitler with every passing year?

[Anonymous No.22895832]

>>22895793
Nobody believes this anymore. The generation that was fed for atrocity lies, holocaust guilt and anti-racism are slowly coming to the conclusion that what we were tols does not reflect what happened. Few deny the holocaust happened, but the majority believe there was more to it than we were told.

[Anonymous No.22895892]

>>22895703
Marx is required reading for all government officials. They use Marxist insights to gain power. If you read about Xi and the people he has around him, they have very deliberately and adroitly examined the West's mode of Capitalism and have been playing the long game to wrest power from them for decades now. That old saying is more true now than ever, a Capitalist will sell you the rope you hang him with.

[Anonymous No.22895949]

>>22888078
hitler was based but dude was retarded for overextending too much and attacking russia

[Anonymous No.22895966]

>>22895949
The Soviet Union was setting up to invade Germany, the attack would of been far harder to repel.

[Anonymous No.22895976]

>>22895892
Ah ok so they're secretly marxist? Makes sense given how they treat their citizens far worse than any capitalist country, china is a dystopian shithole like all marxist countries, good job dummie.

[Anonymous No.22895977]

>>22894906
Love it, thanks for sharing.

[Anonymous No.22896048]

>>22890023
>Thousands years from now
Two more epochs?

[Anonymous No.22896130]

>>22895966
Wow, you read Nazi propaganda and got Nazi propaganda? That's wild.

[Anonymous No.22896242]

>>22894908

Marxism is a religion without a god, like Buddhism. When you recognize that, it's easier to understand.

[Anonymous No.22896294]

>>22895814
Based. As more goys begin to learn, the jewish seethe only increases.

[Anonymous No.22896314]

>>22896130
Here's the major mainstream historical work on Darre which also presents him in a mostly positive light

[Anonymous No.22896327]

>>22895976
A shithole Marxist country which currently has the USA over a barrel on literally every supply line that matters. The USA can't even manufacture paper masks without China. The USA has been pilfered by Capitalists and sold out to the Commies. What a glorious end to a clusterfuck of an empire.

[Anonymous No.22896487]

>>22888084
Have you... Ahem. Did you even manage to help your country after a devastating war? Did you even write a book, let alone manage a coherent argument besides pointing out obvious things?

[Anonymous No.22896500]

>>22896487
He's just a dumb libtard

[Anonymous No.22896650]

>>22894909
Is that image from a book, anon?

[Anonymous No.22896655]

>>22894996
The Stalag edition is the one they gave British POWS in camps, I believe. I have also heard good things about the Ford translation

[Anonymous No.22896657]

>>22889663
I don't give a shit, retard schizo. I want my literature board to be about literature, not your stupid ideological ramblings.

[Anonymous No.22896675]

>>22888084
based

[Anonymous No.22896714]

>>22896657
>Books i dont like arent books
Warnings about kikes and general jew-hating is one of the central themes of any historical writer. Judenhass is arguably the most /lit/ related topic given its wide ranging an a diverse history.

[Anonymous No.22897396]

>>22894979
>50% of my income goes to the government,
Private interests own the means of production, which is the defining characteristic of capitalism. The tax rate is irrelevant.

>Long list of non-arguments & ad homs.
Try harder.

>Do you have any proof of it "broadly supporting" marx?
There's a large economics & business literature about the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, and non-marxist economists have arrived at the same conclusions via game theory. There are special circumstances where profit doesn't trend downwards (e.g. monopolies, luxury goods, extremely weak labor markets), but the general macroeconomic trend in even somewhat-competitive markets has historically been lower profit over time.

>He wasn't even making an assertion
He was asserting that "human nature" exists and contradicted marx. Both of those claims have to be proven.

[Anonymous No.22897608]

It's all a horseshoe desu

[Anonymous No.22897709]

>>22897396

While I can and already have, I feel I no longer need to address anything you say beyond the human nature thing. You're making a metaphysical claim suggesting human nature doesn't exist, even if you don't realize that. Humans are a variety of animal, a living thing, and thereby have a nature, a theory of design, structured by evolution.

That is to say, if you would presume to suggest your arguments come from a scientific understanding of the issue.

It is in the nature of a hummingbird to drink nectar. It is NOT in the nature of a hummingbird to dam streams like a beaver, and it doesn't take much thinking to recognize a hummingbird would be dysfunctional at that.

Humans are certainly social, but the capacity for socialization doesn't mean communism is natural to humans. Lions are social and hyenas as social, but there's nothing communistic about their social structure. The closest we get with mammals is naked mole rats, and I feel there's really something cosmic in that. A rather ugly looking subterranean creature, blind and pain insensitive, is our best example of a mammal engaged in the eusocial behavior that would be necessary for a Marxist state.

I started off using the example from the revelation in the 5th Dune book, when I was accused of projection. There is no Marxism for a species of animal that has the sort of competitive sexual strategy that humans have. Just like there's no hummingbird building a dam in a river, and there's no tortoise that nests in a tree. To be a communist would require a change to the physiology of our species. One that might make that new creature, Homo Spaiens Marxius, or whatever you like, so different from Homo Sapiens as to potentially be a wholly different (and most likely Uncanny Valley disgusting to us) creature.

Or,

Admit that your beliefs are faith based, not predicated on logic and science, and I have nothing more to say but: God bless, Happy New Year, and enjoy the rest of your journey through life, celebrating the perception of God you appear to have. Though it is strange to me, I cannot fault you for it, and certainly cannot presume to know anything about the nature of God, just as no man can.

Tl;dr

I hate to say it but Bloodhound Gang has this right, not Marx. Either way, they're all degenerate Jews.

[Anonymous No.22897755]

>>22895073

There's nothing to learn from Marx you can't pick up from someone else. Even class consciousness, Marx's only interesting idea, isn't original and is at best convergenet to or a development of, Rousseau's General Will.

The folly of all of these men, every last one of them, from Aristotle, to Machiavelli, to Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau. Hegel, Mill, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Marx...

Fuck, even modern day psueds like Peterson and Zizek, the mistake they ALL make, is predicated on their hubristic anthrocentrism. None of them wanted or want to believe you could figure something out about human nature from human physiology. All of them wanted to attribute human nature exclusively to "spirit", Marx included, no matter how much he tried to deny it.

It really is ironic, the quintessential materialist, ignoring the material reality of the human form... makes sense he was an ugly fat fuck. Let me remind everyone about the truth of the words of ugly fat fucks, picrel.

A lot of what you're saying about how China is attacking America is true. And China certainly is Marxist, in so far as Marxism is evil for its materialism, denying the value of the human spirit and claiming no such thing exists, while depending on the existence of the human spirit to found its arguments. Maybe capitalism fails, but so does Marxism, when enough young men become angry enough to do what the male of the human species is designed to do: kill.

[Anonymous No.22897873]

>>22897709
>You're making a metaphysical claim suggesting human nature doesn't exist, even if you don't realize that.
I'm claiming that there's not sufficient evidence to prove such a nature exists. If we're being "scientific," you can't treat "human nature" as fact until you've established it as such.

>Humans are a variety of animal, a living thing, and thereby have a nature, a theory of design, structured by evolution.
Teleology doesn't follow from evolution. Darwin is explicit about this, and modern evolutionists are even more explicit.

>[...] I started off using the example from the revelation in the 5th Dune book
Science fiction is not science. Least of all the later Dune books, which pretty explicitly play on sexual complexes.

>There is no Marxism for a species of animal that has the sort of competitive sexual strategy that humans have.
You're assuming all humans view sex through a competitive lens, which is untrue. The "free love" movement of the 60s, for example, was a mass phenomenon where perception of sexuality shifted from hierarchical to polymorphous. (I don't endorse the movement in its entirety; it's just a useful counterexample to this line of thinking.) Social attitudes about sex and work change the way that we have sex and do work.

This is fairly obvious in e.g. factory settings, where the division of labor and the introduction of specialists changed many jobs from crafts requiring years of study to brute tasks that can be learned in a few weeks. It's not "natural" for manufacturing to be either a craft or a mere task. We can arrange it in either way.

Likewise, in a feudal system, the landlords extracted wealth from peasants in the form of tribute, whereas in a capitalist system the propertied class extracts wealth from workers in the form of profit. They're two distinct relations, neither of which is "natural."

Setting aside theories of communism (Marx himself didn't claim to know how it would look), it's fairly easy to see that capitalism isn't the only way to organize society, and if society is allowed to evolve, it won't be our final form of organization.

Maybe we'll return to a quasi-feudal system, where corporations and the state fully merge. Maybe we'll usher in an age of worker ownership of companies, and do socialism. Maybe something else will happen. I don't claim to know. But I'm extremely skeptical that capitalism is "human nature," given that precapitalist humans existed, and many humans today live in communes that eschew profit.

[Anonymous No.22898024]

>>22897873

You are STILL ignoring the physical character of a human... rather obtusely at this point...

[Anonymous No.22898166]

>>22897755
"The Human Spirit", in materialist terms, is analogous to software which runs on hardware. The software is also material, but it affects the manifest characteristics and behavior of the hardware. This is the synthesis you are looking for and it's actually shocking you didn't piece this together yourself. Human motivation is rooted in material antecedents, coded in the DNA and shaped by evolutionary forces. The complexity therein leads most to label it a term with the commensurate level of mysteriousness, but this is simply a way of expressing a lack of complete knowledge, not a capitulation to spiritualism.

[Anonymous No.22898261]

>>22898024
What about the "physical character of a human" contradicts the fact that different social structures emerged over the course of history?

[Anonymous No.22898283]

>>22898166

I haven't missed anything.

Your teleology is all fucked up. Hardware informs software in nature. Thinking it's otherwise for humans is a metaphysic. It's also absurd, frankly. You're forcing that magic Weber says you've been missing.

Look, all I want is for someone in this fucking thread to tell me something about the human shoulder, or the nuchal ligament, or the depilation of the human body. Any-fucking-thing. Christ it's like this subject has been noxious to the amateur and the scholar alike since Diogenes showed Plato his plucked chicken. What is the human body designed to do!? YOU tell me, give me an idea. You'll discount it if I so much as point thr direction out for you.

If you can't even give a rudiment for that, you cannot say ANYTHING about what civic structure SHOULD look like. It will ALWAYS get torn down, like Great whites dying in captivity.

[Anonymous No.22898635]

>>22888078
Nobody will read this, but Hitler was unironically a 160+ IQ supergenius. He correctly predicted ZOG and Globohomo, but also predicted the global renaissance of the National Socialist movement within the chaos of Jewish world tyranny, which hasn’t happened - yet.
I would go a step further as to call him the greatest political philosopher of the past 2000 years, easily.

[Anonymous No.22898786]

>>22898283
Interesting, just from the text of your post I can observe that you are emotional and not thinking clearly. This is most unfortunate for you. It appears as though you resort to things like "metaphysics" or "spirits" when you can't understand something.

As I stated, the software which animates the physical body is rooted in the same DNA that directs the construction of that physical body. This includes instructions for building the brain, which in turn is capable of plasticity and learning from inputs in the environment. This combination of biological inclination and environmental factors intertwine in manifold ways and with such an extremely high degree of complexity that the result is merely referred to as "The Human Spirit" due to the vast number of variables and complexity, as I have mentioned. The only teleology that exists in nature is based upon that which continues to exist. Anything otherwise would cease to exist. You'll forgive me if this sounds like a tautology, but that simply illustrates how worthless the concept of teleology is. "Purpose" applies more to how humans conceptualize things as useful and it is inappropriate to apply it to nature generally.

If you ask "what is the human body designed to do?" the answer is very simple. It is designed to carry and convey genes from one body to another, or to aid in the transmittance of closely related genes to other bodies. Out of this design there arises complexity with tertiary attributes which are not directly in line with the original goal of reproduction. But one may be led to ask, "designed by what mechanism?" Here, too, we have a very robust answer in the form of the genes themselves. But to put it in the most rudimentary forms, it boils down to another tautology: "those systems which are stable continue to exist, and those systems which are unstable will cease to exist".

[Anonymous No.22898788]

>>22898635
>Hitler was unironically a 160+ IQ supergenius
But he couldn't figure out that war with the Soviets was instant failure? kek

[Anonymous No.22898800]

>>22898786
nta but you're using overly complex language to make a simple point. the fact that the brain's complex (initial) structure is encoded in DNA doesn't imply a "human spirit."

you could say there's such a thing as a "human psychology" or "human mind," but that wouldn't justify sweeping metaphysical claims about the nature of mankind.

[Anonymous No.22898893]

>>22898800
The fact of the matter is that the complexity of the brain dictates that it will have the characteristic of being both unique and of containing so many variables and processes as to manifest the phenomenon of consciousness. The way most people engage with this phenomenon is to use the lexicon of "The Human Spirit". I contend that the attributes imbued into the human mind are not diminished by recognizing their material structures. Thus, when we refer to "The Human Spirit" we are all referencing the same phenomenon, the only difference is whether an appeal to Divinity or Metaphysics is made (which is an erroneous appeal).

[Anonymous No.22898907]

>>22898788
Soviets were preparing to invade all of Europe with operation Thunderbird. Hitler’s actions saved Western Europe from Jewish Bolshevism, but sadly not from Jewish capitalism

[Anonymous No.22899292]

>>22898786

I can tell from your text that you're younger than me...

I'm not gonna read your long ass post senpai, sorry. I read a subsequent one you made though. I don't think you're wrong, I KNOW you are. The complexity of the human brain doesn't mean you get to escape the physical impositions of the human body, and again, thinking otherwise is utterly absurd. The brain isnt even the whole story, anyways. Mind is the gestalt processes of the entire human body. Anyone whos ever been hungry, I mean REALLY hungry, can understand that. At the end of the day, ya still gotta eat. Ya still gotta take shits. "Society" doesn't change anything about human physiology. If anything, it trapped us. Technology evolving while we have only suffered domestication syndrome.

I've been enjoying this conversation up until now, but you're stuck in the mud over this physiology thing and it's turning boring. You don't get to discount material reality because it's inconvenient to your argument. You ESPECIALLY don't get to do that when you're defending fucking Marx, kek.

Anyways... Marx was evil, man. He is the most evil human ever to have lived. More than the typical smooth brain response of Hitler. More than Stalin, or Mao, or Pol Pot. More than Kissinger even.

I'm not saying this in a douchey libtard out of arguments way either. "Ontologically evil" or whatever nauseating nonsense was trending on twitter when Trump got elected. Start throwing the word "evil" around because I'm "emotional". He is basically a direct agent of the Demiurge. "Marxism" independent of Marx, is an Archon. Nothing he said helped anyone in the long run, and he didn't want to help anyone. He wanted society to be destroyed, and us reduced to a grubbing pathetic ape creature, like the Eloi or something. THAT is the antithesis. That is the OPPOSITE of what mankind is about. Because humanity is for exploration. Expansion. Consciousness is the answer for that amoeba Nietzche constructed at the end of Will to Power. Nothing alive will ever consume everything.

But consciousness might, ideally.

And Marx was against that, and so he was against the most fundamental feature of our behavior. And so he hated humans, and so he wanted them destroyed. Even if he was too emotional to recognize that.

Oh well whatever *belch* I'm just some nerd on 4chan. I dunno why I'm even doing this shit anyways... I actually do get pussy, even though no one will ever believe that on here.

Tl;dr here's a picture I drew.

[Anonymous No.22899352]

>>22899292
>I'm not gonna read your long ass post
You probably shouldn't lead with that if you expect me to read any significant part of your post, idiot lol

[Anonymous No.22899843]

>>22888133
The NSDAP certainty did consider Slavs Aryan. See pic rel. Or if you want here is a PDF of Hitler Youth handbooks from 1984 that says the same things >>>/sci/15936062
All of you too easily fall for propaganda.

[Anonymous No.22899846]

>>22899843
>1984
1938*

[Anonymous No.22900044]

>>22899843
>"Gigenschasten"
Lmao, it say's "Eigenschaften". Gigenschasten is not even a word. Who the fuck made that pic?

[Anonymous No.22900065]

>>22899843
It's as simple as looking at the issued Ahnenpass (Ancestorpass), really. It documented who had Aryan or Non-Aryan ancestors. It has a short section at the end of it explaining that Non-Aryan races are: Africans, Asians, Jews, Gypsies and Native Americans and Australian Aborigines. The Slavic groups inhabiting Continental Europe are therefore still considered Aryan, as long as they do not have blood of any of the aforementioned groups in their recent ancestry.
By the way, there was, in fact, a racial hardline-movement within National Socialism which proposed that only blue-eyed blondes (Nordic Aryans) were to be considered truly Aryan, but the more moderate faction ended up winning the debate. This is where msot of the false modern impressions of what Nazis considered Aryans originate from

[Anonymous No.22900075]

>>22900065
>By the way, there was, in fact, a racial hardline-movement within National Socialism which proposed that only blue-eyed blondes (Nordic Aryans) were to be considered truly Aryan, but the more moderate faction ended up winning the debate. This is where msot of the false modern impressions of what Nazis considered Aryans originate from
Yes. I believe Himmler was in this camp, was he not? Something about Aryan Hyperborrean Nordic Aliens or something?

[Anonymous No.22900094]

>>22900075
I only know that most higher-ranking Nazis were part of the moderate team but I'm not aware of the allegiances of the specific people like Himmler, even if it wouldn't surprise me if he was a hardliner. Sorry

[Anonymous No.22900224]

>>22888078
they weren't predictions of the future but observations of his present
weimar germany had conditions familiar to us today

[Anonymous No.22900263]

>>22888084
>someone did something wrong
>that means they never did anything right
This is /lit/ not your gay little circlejerk buttbuddy club

[Anonymous No.22900701]

>>22889657
The myth that this homo lives in Argentina waiting to hug you and tell how much he loves you,was a communist invention used an an excuse to divide and enslave Germany post Wwii, also why would he left the country when they needed him the most. Doesn't that make him look like a coward?

[Anonymous No.22900806]

>>22899843
>Germans living in slavic dominated areas, not the slavs themselves.

Read anything by them, they are not friends of the slavs. At all.

[Anonymous No.22900922]

>>22888078
98% of the time its a miracle.
mice get the rest.
or rats

[Anonymous No.22901677]

>>22899292
>if i just keep repeating biological essentialism, they'll give up and agree with me!

[Anonymous No.22901869]

>>22900806
>This applies to all peoples inhabiting the encloses spaces of Europe
But whatever -- I don't care to argue; I know for most this is a religion where Hitler is the devil, "Nazis" his demon army, and the WW2 mythos the founding myth. They were just pure incarnations of evil and wanted to kill everyone :)

[Anonymous No.22901898]

>>22901869
I do care though, perhaps too much. Not of Slavs exactly, but of foreign feet walking across the soil of Europe thinking it belongs to them.

[Anonymous No.22902450]

>>22901677

Tf does that even mean dude? We all have faery tales, I just happen to know what mine is.

Hey check me out... I'm Socrates!

[Anonymous No.22902456]

>>22899352

You came back and read it tho, didn't you lonely ass. It's OK. I'm back too.

[Anonymous No.22904142]

>>22888084
>failed to invade poland
huh?

[Anonymous No.22904502]

>>22888078
Hitler was a Christian and his government fought the church for separation of church and state (in so far as the Vatican controlled education) but his government was very involved in promoting Christianity.

Also a lot of this was more of the run of the mill anti semtiism of the time. It wasn’t really his idea, he just put it one place

[Anonymous No.22905000]

>>22888411

[Anonymous No.22905013]

>>22888084
fpbp; based.

[Anonymous No.22905074]

>>22899843
Kys.

[Anonymous No.22905134]

>>22905074
No u haha xd

[Anonymous No.22905188]

>>22888380
Every. Single. Fucking. Time.

[Anonymous No.22905242]

>>22905188

[Anonymous No.22905324]

>>22905242
>>22905188

[Anonymous No.22905385]

>>22889668
Wasn't his first act after getting elected was converting to Judaism?

[Anonymous No.22905448]

Why is this dumpster fire of a thread still up?

[Anonymous No.22905599]

>>22899843
I think people also get the wrong idea about National Socialism by imagining it as some heinous and unique alternative to "normal" politics, as if it wasn't relatively normal. Asking whether the NSDAP hated Slavs (it didn't) or if random Nazis had bizarre omnicidal fantasies (I'm sure a few did) is like asking if modern Israel has the same distribution of ideological weirdness. Of course it does, it's full of settlers who are literally apocalyptic Jewish supremacists and rabbis who say the goyim will be washing Israeli feet for eternity. But even in Israel of all places, these people are basically irrelevant, for one simple reason: politics is complicated and serious, and this tends to iron out idiosyncrasies. At the end of the day 95% of what ANY regime does is "just make the trains run on time" and "just maintain a basic military."

When you picture fascist countries, don't picture some retarded Hunger Games shit where everybody is walking around "being a Nazi" 24/7. Picture a normal society and culture, basically in continuity with 1920s and 1950s German society, for the simple reason that culture and society are deeper and broader strata than politics (in fact this idea is one of fascism's most basic rationales: the PEOPLE always comes first, we just want to give the people a healthy "mirror" in its state-form; even a people WITHOUT a state-form can exist, and often do very well -- it's just better if it's fully "awake and alert" via its state-form-consciousness, so to speak).

Fundamentally one of the most pressing issues facing the Mitteleuropa "hinge-point" of the continent, which Germany was geopolitically forced to unite in the mid-20th century due to France's decadence and cooptation by Anglo finance, was the issue of the Central and Eastern European hinterland. Russia had the same issue, and so they clashed. To shift your perspective and adopt the appropriate geopolitical and historical vantage point, consider that the same process is still taking place in Russia and NATO fighting over Ukraine. Russia has wanted a protective "veil" of Central/East European states since the 18th century at least, and Germany has wanted a hinterland equivalent to the American West and Britain's colonies since the 19th.

All the broken pre-WW2 collective security arrangements you learn about in a typical history class, all the invasions and annexations by Germany, were not "Germany breaking the status quo for no reason!," they were Germany counter-moving against French/British moves of encirclement, containment, and forced stagnation of Germany as a great power. France and Britain wanted Germany to mature as a vassal or satellite of themselves, and not as a "hinge-point" of a third "great space." Now you understand what Lebensraum actually meant.

[Anonymous No.22905600]

>>22905599
It is exactly the same as Russia desiring its veil of buffer states (to prevent those Napoleon/Hitler invasions of the Muscovite core territory), and Russia's famous seeking of warm-water ports which we all worry about. To "protect" Turkey from Russia, as Bismarck did in undoing the gains of the Russo-Turkish war in 1878, was not "protecting" Turkey at all but validly (from a realpolitik perspective) counter-moving against a valid Russian move to secure its natural interests, just as NATO is doing today, and just as Russian vs. Austrian attempts to foment and suppress Pan-Slavism in the Balkans were both valid, understandable moves around 1900.

Every move made by the NSDAP and by Mussolini in Italy was part of this game, and everybody understood the stakes, especially the British, who had just spent two centuries doing it in colonial nations with no scruples about committing atrocities (for example deliberately targeting Boer women and children because they couldn't beat the Boers in an asymmetrical war). The real problem is that Germany did what it did after the Brits had established a post-war "international consensus," the forerunner of today's American hegemony which articulates itself in moral terms but really just wants to gridlock the world in a permanent geopolitical stasis so that consumer capitalism and finance imperialism can seep into every country and permanently destroy their ability to form integral cultures.

The problem is, the "international consensus" of Versailles was not even taken seriously by Brits, because too many people still understood that the Central Powers were basically doing what they had to do, basically no better or worse than the Brits, etc. Everybody was still an instinctive Mearsheimer in 1920. People weren't yet raised on generations of Hollywood schmalz deliberately crafted to depict politics and wars as childish moral dispute with obvious protagonists and antagonists. People didn't yet see Mussolini's invasions of Libya as "the evil white man wants to beat up random black people for no reason!" and start picturing cornball Hollywood movie scenes of white people ordering black guys around in an especially aggressive tone (as opposed to... administering it like a colony like every other great power did). They saw Mussolini as making valid moves, moves that necessarily shifted the plane of great power politics in a way that, if continued, would eventually break England's recently acquired soft-power hegemony over the continent.

[Anonymous No.22905606]

>>22905600
That doesn't mean morality doesn't exist, it simply means that real men were capable of looking at something as messy as the geopolitical situation around 1938 and saying "I see why they did that," with "that" being the long-term plans to break out of the completely cynical British collective security arrangements (encirclement and containment strategy) before the highly erratic and dangerous USSR simply shattered those arrangements from the other side anyway. Once you realize that this "that" was 95% of what WW2 actually was, it becomes a lot easier to read something like Buchanan's book The Unnecessary War. And it begins easier to read something like Quigley and realize that most of these decisions and forecasts were made a hundred years out, and that's why something like Quigley's Round Table Group is fundamentally plausible. Once you can plot all the lines, all the inevitable conflicts, etc., it's simply a matter of forecasting a few decades or even half a century down the line.

The English could not abide an autonomous, autochthonously governed European continent. In fact this struggle to decide who really governs Europe, in its current form, is arguably as old as Cromwell and Louis XIV, but it's at least as old as the colonial wars of the 18th century and the French Revolution -- in which, surprise!, a mixture of genuine French revolutionary democratic idealism AND Napoleonic imperialist realpolitik mixed to create a new continental order in Europe; essentially a reformation of the Roman Empire, if Napoleon had his way, and thus the creation of an autonomous European order that could incidentally stand up to English commercial and colonial superiority. England is very much like Russia, in that it only feels safe when the continent to its east just across the pond is "held down." This instinct is built into every English statesman and strategist through centuries of harmonizing common sense opinions about it.

It's just that England typically uses commerce and lawfare rather than direct conquest, because it intuitively finds the prospect of maintaining a permanent garrison on the continent unrealistic -- as it has since Cromwell decided not to invade Europe to intervene in religious wars, despite having the best army in the world at his disposal and every opportunity to do so. Both England and Russia pursue soft power projection whenever possible for this reason: "Americanization" (Anglo-Americanization), viz. commercial, financial, and cultural colonization, in the case of England, and the notorious "Russification" (including its late form, Sovietization) policies in Russia's case.

[Anonymous No.22905613]

>>22905606
In any case, the parallel between Napoleon's threat to Anglo and Russian hegemony and Hitler's threat to that same hegemony in its 20th century form should be considered. Why did proudly democratic England suppress democratic revolutions, why did it collaborate with the arch-neofeudal Metternich and barbarous serfdom-upholding Russia in imposing an obviously inorganic and inauthentic return to early modern absolutism in Europe? Why did it care about Napoleon's breakup of the tangled feudal mess of the Holy Roman Empire, his rationalization of commercial and legal codes, his planting of democratic republics in their place everywhere he went? Was it because they "hated France?" Such petty hatreds rarely govern geopolitics, even in the absolute monarchies, where the monomania of a monarch should theoretically have a greater than usual influence. No, it's because Napoleon was setting up an independent European ORDER: what Carl Schmitt called a NOMOS of the Earth. The English saw that the "principle" underlying the nascent Napoleonic order was far more vital than the long-dying and merely reactive Habsburg/HRE one. They saw that he would inevitably take Spain and Italy (as he did), inevitably do to Germany what they themselves were doing or planning to do to their own colonial hinterlands: govern it indirectly through soft power while organically "growing together" into a power bloc, over a few generations of shared commerce and interests.

The EXACT SAME CONFLICT played itself out in the build-up to WW1. All that stuff about the construction of the German fleet -- you can't have a fleet capable of striking England and colonies capable of putting you in a position of parity with us, you need to stay fundamentally locked-in and stagnant while WE run world commerce from our navally impregnable aircraft carrier of a homeland! Jeez, we JUST finished turning France into an economic vassal by tricking the French into thinking they can slowly compete with us in 18th century fashion while we are clearly in the ascendent over the long term, why is Germany trying to upset the board when everything is going great?

Suddenly a clique among the English elite finds out that England is best friends with all those "democratic" nations in Eastern Europe -- you know, the ones that allied with Napoleon in his democratic revolutions against Russian imperialism, like Poland under Dabrowski. Yeah, suddenly our entire raison d'etre in the world is to uphold.. uh.. Wilsonian Idealism!! We really mean it! Meanwhile the French want to uphold the cordon sanitaire mostly because they have a petty and short-sighted hatred of Germany at a merely national level -- the French are essentially content to be absorbed by English commerce in the long term as long as they can kick Germany in the Ruhr in exchange.

[Anonymous No.22905615]

>>22905613
Now you can see why it's such an incredible miracle that the Germans rebuilt a private paramilitary to overcome the restrictions on the size of the Wehrmacht (what kind of conquering "good guy" power restricts the size of its enemy's MILITARY so that it stays permanently un-sovereign forever??? Now you see why even most Brits thought Versailles was painfully cynical and frankly an embarrassment to English honor), after the humiliation of Versailles. Especially after sincerely feeling like they could have won in the Ludendorff offensive -- did you know ARCH-LIBERAL Max Weber was totally unwilling to surrender, because he thought it meant Germany would be dismembered into commercial satellites of England and France just like Napoleon did to the HRE and just like actually happened after WW2, and so Weber advocated a complete fight to the literal death of the German people, going to guerrilla war like another Thirty Years' War? This should tell you something -- and thus keenly feeling the "stab in the back" narrative.

Imagine how much YOU would hate the liberals and leftists responsible for the latter, for putting the homeland in its now seemingly permanent position of geopolitical slavery in all but name. Then imagine how amazing you would feel if a nativist movement overcame all this and raised the country up to another French Revolution with its legendary elan vital and total unity of the people, in the span of 5-10 years. All mainstream histories of NSDAP Germany report the same thing: 90% of the population loved it and just saw it as the ideal nationalist state.

Again, nobody was walking around pissing on Jews' faces, in fact most Germans didn't like that stuff at all. But because most ordinary people also thought that countries like Germany were being especially preyed upon by financial cliques -- look up Rathenau's famous quote about the "300 men who control the destiny of Europe" -- and because most people agreed that Jews were a major player in this process due to being well-established in elite institutions -- see the Jewish author Simon Wolf's quote that "We all know that the first bankers of the world -- Rothschilds -- are Jews; we know they control not only the money market, but also the political destiny of the European world. The press of Europe is mostly controlled by Jews; the leading editors are Jews" -- most people were OPEN to the idea of a "final solution" to the "Jewish question" (which, recall, had been MADE into a "question," for Jews and non-Jews alike, by Napoleon's making Jews citizens in the last great European upheaval). And by open, I mean people generally agreed that a gradual migration of Jews to America -- which was then already a massive phenomenon -- or elsewhere was probably a good idea, and that this would be accomplished by gradual restrictions on Jewish overrepresentation in German society.

[Anonymous No.22905618]

>>22905615
That's fascism in a nutshell: just Round 2 of Napoleon attempting to address the arbitrary geopolitical mess of Europe, lying supine between Anglo commercial power and Russian imperial power, neither of which were felt to be germane to Europeanness. And just like in the Napoleonic era, fascism "tapped" something, some kind of common well of feeling, so that even nations conquered by fascist nations, like France, somehow intuitively understood that what was being blasted away was not "Frenchness" but the accidental commercial and financial order (with its political facade of course) imposed on France by English interests. Again: Just like Germans were not pissing on Jews, and Mussolini was not pissing on Libyans, Vichy France was not some "evil empire." It was an organic manifestation of the suppressed integralist side of France, in the new Nomos of the Earth taking shape in Europe. Now you understand why people like Brasillach supported fascism despite it conquering "his" country (the atavistic state form imposed on it by England).

Now you also understand how hypocritical and disgusting the English and Americans were after the war. Executing William Joyce was an illegal act done out of pure spite, as was deliberately torturing Ezra Pound and trying to drive him mad. Real men still understood that these men had simply made their decisions in the recent geopolitical throwdown, and that their decisions were perfectly noble: Ezra Pound fucking hated finance capitalism and wanted it out of Europe.

But the post-WW2 era is the era of the rise of the OSS/CIA world-order, Peter Dale Scott's "deep state," and it tended to promote psychopaths who feared the USSR so much that they were willing to destroy every trace of autochthonous Europeanness to prevent its spread. Hence Operation Gladio, and working with the Gehlen Org (what political idealism!) and many similar post-Nazi orgs. At this time, the old elite that sincerely believed in England's permanent ascendency over Europe was allowed to die off on its country estates, just as the original Dulles Brothers OSS/CIA elite who established the "deep state" were allowed to die off in the 70s once they became unnecessary and inconvenient. They established the apparatus, that's what matters. Thus the center of power shifted from the Anglo to the American wing of the Anglo-American Establishment (Quigley), although as you can probably see, neither side is essential to the process.

[Anonymous No.22905622]

>>22905618
What was always essential to the process was the emergence of what Samuel Francis calls the Leviathan: the global soft managerial state, Kojeve's/Fukuyama's "universal homogeneous state," Carl Schmitt's hypothesized "depoliticized" world-order, etc. All simply carrying out at a "planetary" scale (Schmitt) what the English had carried out in their wars to make the nations of the world "nations accidentally; English commercial vassals essentially." One big process taking place centuries, finally culminating in the current order, with Hitler being the last real "Napoleonic" obstacle to crush, and the USSR being a challenging but in principle perfectly simple contain-and-mop-up operation after that.

So the next time you see Hitler, or Napoleon for that matter, look PAST his idiosyncrasies, the accidents of his time that propelled him rather than Strasser or Ludendorff or Papen to be the one to did what he did. Look instead at what was essential in the fascist revolution, the same way that we now dispassionately look at the essential in the French Revolution -- now that its essential features are far enough away historically and thus geopolitically that we can be allowed to look at it, that is. You can even look at the Central Powers in WW1 the same way: you can humanize the Germans, you can scoff and laugh at contemporary English propaganda that the Germans were melting Belgians into soap and flaying their skin into lampshades (pissing on those Belgians! pure evil!). Your permission to scoff at such things is a function of their political "viability": few or no people feel themselves "close" to Kaiser Wilhelm II's vision of Europe. Therefore we can let them read and say what they like. But people do still see something in the fascist revolution, so it has to be smothered in as much cartoonish simplification and Hollywood schmalz as possible. Even joking about or qualifying the existence of chattel slavery is less potentially dangerous (because it has no risk of actually inspiring any political activity or structuring any new, alternative geopolitical mentalities) than merely acknowledging the banality of Mussolini's Italy.

[Anonymous No.22905747]

why do Uncle A threads always generate so much seethe

[Anonymous No.22906051]

>>22905747
Because there is a genuine curiosity to know more beyond the caricature we are told about, this causes some 'groups' to worry.

[Anonymous No.22906583]

>>22906051

[Anonymous No.22906594]

>>22888084
Gee, I wonder who could be behind this post...

[Anonymous No.22907036]

>>22888133
He did not say Aryan minority, but did attribute the success of the Russian state to the organizing ability of its Germanic component.

[Anonymous No.22907055]

What’s the best Hitler biography

[Anonymous No.22907060]

>>22907055
For his ideology at it's most fleshed, out I recommend "Hitler as Philosophe". Also the book here>>22899843
For a biography, "Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny". For an autobiography up to his mid late 30s, the first volume of Mein Kampf.

[Anonymous No.22907236]

>>22905599
>>22905600
>>22905606
>>22905613
>>22905615
>>22905618
>>22905622
nice post, anon

[Anonymous No.22907239]

>>22888084
circumcised jew nigger cunt

[Anonymous No.22907327]

>>22888078
>“You bear a great and very beautiful name,” he said. “Do you know who Adso of Montier-en-Der was?” he asked. I did not know, I confess. So Jorge added, “He was the author of a great and awful book, the Libellus de Antichristo, in which he foresaw things that were to happen; but he was not sufficiently heeded.”

>“The book was written before the millennium,” William said, “and those things did not come to pass…”

>“For those who lack eyes to see,” the blind man said. “The ways of the Antichrist are slow and tortuous. He arrives when we do not expect him: not because the calculation suggested by the apostle was mistaken, but because we have not learned the art.” Then he cried, in a very loud voice, his face turned toward the hall, making the ceiling of the scriptorium re-echo: “He is coming! Do not waste your last days laughing at little monsters with spotted skins and twisted tails! Do not squander the last seven days!”

[Anonymous No.22907339]

>>22888084
>WW2 was the greatest conflict in history in which we defeated the ultimate evil and became the heroes of the world
>But also the other side were a bunch of pathetic idiots we barely even had to try lol