- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Was Hitler just a response to what Germany saw going on in Russia?
Posted on 6/20/20 at 8:54 am
Posted on 6/20/20 at 8:54 am
Treading lightly here. Hitler and his minions were no doubt an evil, genocidal, fascist, force who should have been defeated and I’m glad they were. It was a monsterous regime, but as Nietzsche once said, “When fighting monsters, beware that you don’t become one.”
It has occurred to me, in my musings about what happens when an opposition to this current wave of Marxism takes hold, that an opposing force tends to look an awful lot like a fascistic, racist dictator, and that usually when there is an agitative, acting force an equal and opposite force begins to emerge.
Was the emergence of Nazism a self-preservatory response to what Germans saw going on in Russia? The same subversive, cultural tactics are being used by today’s leftists and I’m afraid of what a festering counter movement might look like. Extremism on both sides looks like evil, and the loudest voices from the extreme are typically the agents for change.
PSA: This is a purely academic inquiry in no way advocating Nazism. I know there are some smart, knowledgeable people on here and interested in their thoughts.
It has occurred to me, in my musings about what happens when an opposition to this current wave of Marxism takes hold, that an opposing force tends to look an awful lot like a fascistic, racist dictator, and that usually when there is an agitative, acting force an equal and opposite force begins to emerge.
Was the emergence of Nazism a self-preservatory response to what Germans saw going on in Russia? The same subversive, cultural tactics are being used by today’s leftists and I’m afraid of what a festering counter movement might look like. Extremism on both sides looks like evil, and the loudest voices from the extreme are typically the agents for change.
PSA: This is a purely academic inquiry in no way advocating Nazism. I know there are some smart, knowledgeable people on here and interested in their thoughts.
28
Posted on 6/20/20 at 8:55 am to Mohican
Hitler was right about one thing. Communists suck.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 8:55 am to Mohican
Sure and apparently Trump to follow.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 8:56 am to Mohican
Hitler was a response to a people being bullied and subjected to harsh financial sanctions for the crime of losing a war.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 8:57 am to Mohican
The fascistic response throughout Europe was directly tied to the rise of Communism.
What was going on in Russia was caused by Germany desperately sending Vladimir Lenin into Russia in a last ditch effort to destabilize Russia to help fight WWI. The Germans are keenly aware of what they were facing
What was going on in Russia was caused by Germany desperately sending Vladimir Lenin into Russia in a last ditch effort to destabilize Russia to help fight WWI. The Germans are keenly aware of what they were facing
This post was edited on 6/20/20 at 9:00 am
Posted on 6/20/20 at 8:58 am to Mohican
Was the force that defeated Hitler evil? If not, let’s use that force.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 8:58 am to Blitzed
quote:
Sure and apparently Trump to follow.
Then we get into a chicken vs egg argument. Was Trump the agitating force or a response to it?
Seems to me the winning side gets to decide in these cases.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 8:59 am to Dentarthurdent
quote:
Was the force that defeated Hitler evil? If not, let’s use that force
Communism did defeat Hitler, then it defeated itself.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:01 am to joshnorris14
Communist essentially took over Russia in a vacuum. Lenin’s take over is one of the biggest WTFs in history.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:01 am to Mohican
The Nazi party was a nationalist movement, first and foremost, with the designs to return Germany to her prior might. Any additional ideology was secondary to seizing and maintaining power. If Mussolini's tactics with Italian Fascism had proven ineffective, the Nazis would have used a completely different strategy, possibly embracing communism itself.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:02 am to Mohican
quote:
Sure and apparently Trump to follow.
Then we get into a chicken vs egg argument. Was Trump the agitating force or a response to it?
Seems to me the winning side gets to decide in these cases.
If Trump would have been treated half as good as Obama by the press and the media, he would have had no need to counter attack on Twitter or any where else. Matter of fact, the Dems would have had an opportunity to make many deals.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:02 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
Hitler was a response to a people being bullied and subjected to harsh financial sanctions for the crime of losing a war.
And extreme moral degeneracy. For example, Berlin was the transgender capital of the world in the 20’s.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:02 am to Mohican
No
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:04 am to pkloa
quote:
The Nazi party was a nationalist movement, first and foremost, with the designs to return Germany to her prior might. Any additional ideology was secondary to seizing and maintaining power
This is the sanitized version of history that ignores the upheaval of Germany and the rise of Communism for no apparent reason
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:05 am to Ancient Astronaut
quote:
Lenin’s take over is one of the biggest WTFs in history.
It's not the only WTF Marxist takeover. Mao's takeover as well, and most perplexing is the case of Cuba - where the Castro's and Ché fought Batista in the New York Times and Washington Post
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:08 am to joshnorris14
quote:
This is the sanitized version of history that ignores the upheaval of Germany and the rise of Communism for no apparent reason
Yes that tends to be what we do as human to avoid any ambiguity and simplify things. There is an “official” story.
Reality is much more layered.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:15 am to Mohican
Hitler was appointed Chancellor by the elected president because he had no choice after Hitler revived 35% of the vote and Nazis running the Reichstag. Hitler ran on a nationalist platform, which registered with the people because of the horrible Treaty of Versailles . Hitler understood the danger of communism , that’s why he eliminated them when he got to power , by orchestrating the burning of the Reichstag and blaming it in the communist. Resulting in the “Night Of the Long Knives “.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:20 am to Mohican
The German people had rejected the Nazis big time in the 1928 election. Then the Nazis were gifted a miracle for them, the Stock Market and the Great Depression. Hitler had predicted financial disaster from 26-28 and then it happened. Hitler looked like a prophet. Germany was seeing good economics times up to the crash mainly based on American loans. Then the crash happened and the loans were called in. Hyper-inflation and unemployment sky rocketed over night.
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:22 am to AU86
Your analysis doesn't explain why Germany didn't fall to the rising Communists who also predicted economic turmoil
Posted on 6/20/20 at 9:24 am to Mohican
My readings over the last 2 weeks have focused on Russian history.
Pre-WWII Hitler realized that Marxism had a sizeable following in Germany. He wasn't so much afraid that Russia would eventually invade Germany. He considered the Russians inferior and inept. But he was afraid of Germany being absorbed by the global communist movement.
But he also did not believe in free market capitalism. He believed that centralized govt should control businesses. But not actually run the businesses like the Soviets were doing.
Hitler takes a lot of criticism for opening the Russian front. But when that operation started the US hadn't entered the war. Even after Pearl Harbor Hitler didn't believe the US had the military resources to wage war in the Pacific against the Japanese and in Europe against Germany simultaneously.
Both he and the Japanese underestimated America's industrial power to mobilize and innovate in weapons production so quickly.
Pre-WWII Hitler realized that Marxism had a sizeable following in Germany. He wasn't so much afraid that Russia would eventually invade Germany. He considered the Russians inferior and inept. But he was afraid of Germany being absorbed by the global communist movement.
But he also did not believe in free market capitalism. He believed that centralized govt should control businesses. But not actually run the businesses like the Soviets were doing.
Hitler takes a lot of criticism for opening the Russian front. But when that operation started the US hadn't entered the war. Even after Pearl Harbor Hitler didn't believe the US had the military resources to wage war in the Pacific against the Japanese and in Europe against Germany simultaneously.
Both he and the Japanese underestimated America's industrial power to mobilize and innovate in weapons production so quickly.
Page 1 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News