The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewGuillaume Durocher Archive
Hitler and/or Chomsky on Capitalist Democracy
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Adolf Hitler holding a speech, about 1925.

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I can think of only one thing which unites Adolf Hitler and Noam Chomsky: a shared contempt for and critique of capitalist mass-media democracy. Concerning Hitler’s speeches, we usually think of rapturous exhortations to his party-comrades. However, the Führer could sometimes strike a more pedagogical note. Such was the case in a December 1940 speech on what Hitler called “the so-called democracy” in the “Anglo-French world” and the United States. Listening to this speech, I was struck at how similar Hitler’s critique of capitalist democracy was to Noam Chomsky’s. For both Hitler and Chomsky, the corporate media, oligarchic influence, and an incestuous political class make a mockery of Western capitalist regime’s claims of being “democratic.”

Copies of the speech appear to have been eliminated in the recent YouTube purges, however, a copy is still available on archive.org. (The only edition left on YouTube is one uploaded by someone who has heavily spliced the speech with his own critical commentary, who was also struck by the similarities between fascist and left-wing critiques of capitalist democracy.)

Hitler observes that, in theory, the people rule in Britain, France, and America. However, as the people cannot spontaneously make and express their opinion on a mass scale, the media comes to play a critical role in shaping public opinion: “The decisive question is: Who enlightens the people? Who educates the people?” The answer is, of course, the media. In this, Hitler’s assessment is an exaggerated version of what Alexis de Tocqueville had observed a century earlier in his classic work, Democracy in America:

When a large number of press organs manage to march along the same path, their influence in the long run becomes almost irresistible, and public opinion, always struck upon the same side, ends up giving way under their blows.

In the United States, each newspaper has little power individually; but the periodical press is still, after the people, the first of powers.[1]Alexis de Tocqueville, De la Démocratie en Amérique (Paris: Gallimard, 1986), volume 1, p. 283-84. Hitler and Tocqueville shared a surprising number of views concerning mordern democracy, see: https://www.counter-currents.com/2016/08/tocqueville...itler/

In Western democracies, Hitler claims: “Capital actually rules in these countries, that is, nothing more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth.” Furthermore “freedom” refers primarily to “economic freedom,” which means the oligarchs’ “freedom from national control.” In a classic self-reinforcing cycle, the rich and powerful get richer and more powerful through influence over the political process. Today, this has culminated in the existence of the notorious “1%” so demonized by Occupy Wall Street.

The oligarchs, according to Hitler, establish and control the media:

These capitalists create their own press and then speak of “freedom of the press.” In reality, every newspaper has a master and in every case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor tries to write something other than what suits the master, he is outed the next day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and character slave of its owners, molds public opinions.

Hitler also emphasizes the incestuous relations and purely cosmetic differences between mainstream democratic political parties:

The difference between these parties is small, as it formerly was in Germany. You know them of course, the old parties. They were always one and the same. In Britain matters are usually so arranged so that families are divided up, one member being conservative, another liberal, and a third belonging to the Labour Party. Actually all three sit together as members of the family and decide upon their common attitude.

This cliquishness means that “on all essential matters . . . the parties are always in agreement” and the difference between “Government” and “Opposition” is largely election-time theatrics. This critique will resonate with those who fault the “Republicrats,” the “Westminster village,” or indeed the various pro-EU parties for being largely indistinguishable. This is often especially the case on foreign policy, Chomsky’s area of predilection.

Hitler goes on, with brutally effective sarcasm, to describe how it was in these democracies where the people supposedly rule that there was the most inequality: “You might think that in these countries of freedom and wealth, the people must have an unlimited degree of prosperity. But no!” Britain not only controlled “one-sixth of the world” and the impoverished millions of India, but itself had notoriously deep class divisions and suffering working classes. There was a similar situation in France and the United States: “There is poverty – incredible poverty – on one side and equally incredible wealth on the other.” These democracies had furthermore been unable to combat unemployment during the Great Depression, in contrast to Germany’s innovative economic policies.

Hitler then goes on to mock the Labour Party, which was participating in the government for the duration of the war, for promising social welfare and holidays for the poor after the war: “It is is remarkable that they should at last hit upon the idea that traveling should not be something for millionaires alone, but for the people too.” Hitlerite Germany, along with Fascist Italy, had long pioneered the organization of mass tourism to the benefit of working people. (Something which traditionalists like the Italian aristocrat Julius Evola bitterly criticized them for.)

Ultimately, in the Western democracies “as is shown by their whole economic structure, the selfishness of a relatively small stratum rules under the mask of democracy; the egoism of a very small social class.” Hitler concludes: “It is self-evident that where this democracy rules, the people as such are not taken into consideration at all. The only thing that matters is the existence a few hundred gigantic capitalists who own all the factories and their stock and, through them, control the people.”

Strikingly, Hitler does not mention Jewish media ownership or influence at all, at least in the available extract (I cannot find the full text online).

What is striking about Hitler’s critique is how little has changed since those days, almost 80 years ago. Today still, from both the left and right, one hears critiques of corporate influence in politics, of corporate ownership of the media and manipulation of public opinion, and of the minor differences between the self-serving mainstream political parties. Hitler’s attack of the oligarchic “democracy-makers” is quite similar to Chomsky’s critique of the corporate “manufacturers of consent” or Occupy Wall Street’s opposition to the “1%.”

How well has Hitler’s critique held up over the years? The fact is that, from the 1930s onward, the Western bourgeois democracies made serious efforts to reform in the face of the fascist and communist threats. They established social-democratic welfare states which redistributed vast amounts of wealth. However, since then inequality has ramped up in the era of globalization and neoliberalism.

In practice, Western liberal regimes’ democratic pretensions are exaggerated. Various studies have found that when elite and majority opinion clash, the American elite is over time able to impose its policies onto the majority (examples of this include U.S. intervention in both World Wars and mass Third World immigration since the 1960s, opposed by the people and promoted by the elite). Leftists like to emphasize the American mainstream media’s monolithic support for a belligerent foreign policy and a corrupt political class, but in fact their unanimity is far more pronounced in favor an egalitarian multiracialist agenda.

In fact, all regimes have different elite factions and bureaucracies competing for power. All regimes have a limited ideological spectrum of authorized opinion, a limited spectrum of what can and cannot be discussed, criticized, or politically represented. This isn’t to say that liberal-democratic and openly authoritarian regimes are identical, but the distinction has been exaggerated. I have known plenty of Westerners who, frothing at the mouth at any mention of the “authoritarian” Donald Trump or Marine Le Pen, were quite happy to visit, do business, or work in China, Singapore, the United Arab Emirates, or Israel (the latter being a perfect Jewish democracy but highly authoritarian towards the Palestinians). Westerners really are sick in the head.

The liberals’ claim to uphold freedom of thought and democracy will ring hollow to many: to the Trump supporters and academics (such as Charles Murray) who were physically assaulted for attending public events and to those fired or punished for their scientific beliefs (James Watson, James Damore, Noah Carl).

What the ideal regime is surely depends on time and place. Jean-Baptiste Duchasseint, a politician of the French Third Republic, had a point when he said: “I prefer a parliamentary chamber than the antechamber of a dictator.” Liberal-democracies allow for regular changeovers of power, transparent feedback between society and government, and the cultivation of a habit of give-and-take between citizens. But it would be equally dishonest to deny liberal-democracy’s leveling tendency, its unconscious (and thereby, dangerous) elitism and authoritarianism (dangerous because unconscious), its difficulty in enforcing values, its promotion of division among the citizenry, or, frequently, its failure to act in times of emergency. The democrats claim they are entitled to undermine and destroy, whether by peaceful or violent methods, every government on this Earth which they consider “undemocratic.” This strikes me as, at best, unwise and dangerous.

The question is not whether a society “really has” free speech or democracy. In the absolute, these are impossible. The question is whether the particular spectrum of free discussion and the particular values promoted by the society are, in fact, salutary for that society. In China, unlike the West, you are not allowed to attack the government. Yet, I understand that in China one is freer to discuss issues concerning Jews, race, and eugenics than in the West. These issues, in fact, may be far more important to promoting a healthy future for the human race than the superficial and divisive mudslinging of the West’s reality-TV democracies.W

Notes

[1] Alexis de Tocqueville, De la Démocratie en Amérique (Paris: Gallimard, 1986), volume 1, p. 283-84. Hitler and Tocqueville shared a surprising number of views concerning mordern democracy, see: https://www.counter-currents.com/2016/08/tocqueville-and-or-hitler/

 
Hide 248 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. What are you talking about?

  2. the alt-right really needs to abandon talking about Hitler to be taken serious. I’m a former Nazi, but recently gave this up for a more moderate discussion.

  3. anon[421] • Disclaimer says:
    @Fake Mikemikev

    Durocher is Nordicist, you can’t expect him to stop talking about Hitler, especially “watered down and slightly spiced with American Nordicist theories” version of Hitler.

  4. Durruti says:

    Nice well written & researched thought provoking article by Guillaume Durocher.

    Hitler most likely served the Zionist Bankers, as his “Night of the Longknives” – 1934, rid the Nazi movement of its anti-capitalist element.

    Hitler did not effectively criticize Zionism or the ruinous financial system. He blamed the Versailles Treaty for most of Germany’s ills.

    Noam Chomsky has had more serious political and economic analysis to offer over the decades, than most any other American. He has authored more than 100 books.

    Hitler and his movement led the German people into the trap (perhaps a Zionist trap), of ruinous (to Europe), Imperialist Conflict, and in that, and in his racialist approach, resembles Churchill, and the British Royal Family more than he could ever admit.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @GMC
    , @anonymous zazer
  5. Strikingly, Hitler does not mention Jewish media ownership or influence at all,

    At 3:21 in the archive.org video he refers to “das auserwählte Volk” (the chosen people) which supposedly controls and directs all parties for its own interests.
    Anyway, do you really think it’s a good idea for modern nationalists to link themselves to Hitler and the 3rd Reich (because many of your articles could be interpreted that way, as if Hitler was some profound thinker who has to be read by every nationalist today)? Yes, the man wasn’t as stupid as is often claimed today, and some elements of Nazism are certainly attractive if seen in isolation…but the fact remains that Hitler, without any really compelling necessity, initiated one of the most destructive wars in history and then had his followers commit some of the worst mass murders ever. The “revisionists” posting on UR may be able to ignore that, but most people won’t.

  6. Big Daddy says:

    Hitler takes power in 1933-40% unemployment. 1938-0% unemployment. And he didn’t do it by rearmament.

    • Agree: Blankaerd
  7. Paw says:

    Hypocrisy or Hitler. When he repressed easily everything in his way of his Oligopoly…
    Even the nation and socialism …./NSDAP/. Even his friend Rohm. Rohm fought and won .
    Hitler’s coup 1923 /4 police dead/ earned him instead of dead sentence ,only 6 years in prison and “the democratic judge ” declared , in only 6 month, he can go home…
    Hitler then elected to gain power , the democratic way, to be elected….
    Hitler admired Britain. Until democratic Chamberlain /and Daladier/,started to crawl like a worm to him.. Complain against democracy, that gave and provided Hitler with everything he dreamed of ? Even did dream ?
    What they never teach in schools? Hitler hated Jews, but Marx too !!
    The worst still repeats? From democracy comes forever, the unspeakable evil…
    Democracy everywhere nurtured and still nurtures the worst…And never has enough..

  8. @Fake Mikemikev

    I’m an anarcho-socialist personally, but if the man speaks sense, then no reason to shut your ears to what he is saying.

    • Agree: Moi, Miggle
    • Replies: @Moi
  9. Biff says:

    Brilliant essay. One of the best here at Unz…

    Americans need more enlightenment about their own “Democracy Theater” “The Big Show” “The Carnival Barkers Univoice known as the media” “Under The Big Tent – go the voters” the sham of electing another face to hate.

    If Americans would listen to the Russians but only once “Your presidents change – your policies don’t”.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  10. Rich says:

    Who is this Hitler fellow being referred to? The name sounds slightly Germanic. I don’t think I’ve heard his name mentioned at least 6 million times.

    • Replies: @anonymous tazer
  11. Fox says:
    @German_reader

    Shed your basic belief system as beaten into your head by the German schooling system. Think of something in better accord with reality than the obsessive neurotic mantra of the FRG lalaland.

  12. refl says:
    @German_reader

    The speech has to be seen in context: in december 1940 the swift action against Poland over the corridor had led Germany into a year long war, the formidable victory over France had not ended the war, the destruction of German cities fron RAF bombing had begun, the husbands were gone of to war and the people were about to suffer a rerun of 1917 style starvation. Hitler had ordered to take on the Soviet Union, which necessarily would lead Germany to its doom.
    In this situation the Führer thinks that it is an adecuate answer to educate his people to the fact that democracy is Shtonk (to quote from the Charlie Chaplin film) – he is probably right, but still the speech seems a slight little bit out of place.
    He should have admited that he had miscaculated. He had thought that he had a deal with the Anglosaxon establishment, in which they would leave him to deal with the continent and they take to the high seas. He thought that he had made a great deal with the Zionists, in which he would scare the Jews out of Europe and they would allow him to become the greater Napoleon. He should have told the people that he had messed up in believing that the Angloamerican elite would accept him and shoot himself on the spot. Exposing the criminality of the democratic West is childs play ( though one that is to little in the public sphere). It is not the job of an acting head if state. If I had heard the speech, I would have been desperate

    • Replies: @Malla
  13. Wally says:
    @Durruti

    without a clue said:

    “Hitler and his movement led the German people into the trap (perhaps a Zionist trap), of ruinous (to Europe), Imperialist Conflict, and in that, and in his racialist approach, resembles Churchill, and the British Royal Family more than he could ever admit.”

    – What countries didn’t have a “racialist approach”?

    – There simply was no choice for Germany, they fought to defend themselves. Hitler led that defense. Perfect examples here:

    Roosevelt Conspired to Start World War II in Europe: http://www.unz.com/article/roosevelt-conspired-to-start-world-war-ii-in-europe/

    Why Germany Attacked the Soviet Union, Hitler’s Declaration of War Against the USSR – Two Historic Documents, by Mark Weber: http://www.unz.com/article/why-germany-attacked-the-soviet-union/

    [Video] A Last Appeal To Reason – Hitler’s various peace offers: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=12662

    Hitler’s Peace Offers: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=10192

    Operation Barbarossa Was A Preventive Attack: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7999
    and:
    http://www.unz.com/announcement/the-remarkable-historiography-of-david-irving/

    • Agree: Cucksworth
    • Replies: @Durruti
  14. Fox says:

    The few comments so far seem to fall into the rut of the usual Hitler bashing and speculation mill and not saying anything about what he said in his speech; his view of Parliamentary Democracy gives evidence for his insightfulness. Had he not been a capable individual, why, how could he have lifted Germany out of the ruin the Dictate of Versailles had thrown it into, and, why should he be hated with such a passion nearly (soon to be!) 100 years after his death, if he had not had ideas not endearing to the heart of democratic leaders who have managed to lead the world of the European Western People to the brink of annihilation in merely 70 years?

    • Agree: Malla, Carolyn Yeager
  15. Well… some democratic checks and balances against Hitler would have done some good.

    • LOL: byrresheim
    • Replies: @Biff
    , @Dieter Kief
    , @Realist
    , @Anon
  16. 1. that quote is bogus, made up by a lying libertarian autist…should be: only factions of the business party

    2. chomsky also said that hitler is still the most genuinely popular german politician ever, because his economic policies worked.

    3. paul krugman agrees that national socialism is what the majority of the american electorate actually wants. a democratic version is what denmark now has. there’s nothing right wing about so-called “right wing populism”. it’s just name calling by a moribund, discredited ruling class that uses idpol as distraction, entertainment, facade. politics isn’t politics. it’s professional wrestling. what percentage of americans know this?

    • Agree: Digital Samizdat
    • Replies: @Loren
  17. Liberal-democracies allow for regular changeovers of power, transparent feedback between society and government, and the cultivation of a habit of give-and-take between citizens.

    you just said a few sentences before this that this is precisely what liberal democracies do NOT do.

    The question is not whether a society “really has” free speech or democracy. In the absolute, these are impossible.

    as chomsky also said, the french are totally incapable of understanding the concept of freedom of speech. 100% freedom of speech is 100% possible where “speech” means the “speech” of the first amendment to the US constitution.

    if i were president of the US i’d nuke france if it refused to eliminate its “hate speech” laws. “hate speech” laws = you’re country is a fucking shithole of retardation and gayness.

    • Replies: @anonymous tazer
    , @Zumbuddi
  18. Willem says:

    I think the author read the following, and then spinned his own version of Chomsky vs facism.

    Chomsky:

    Suppose it was discovered tomorrow that the greenhouse effects has been way understimated, and that the catastrophic effects are actually going to set in 10 years from now, and not 100 years from now or something.

    Well, given the state of the popular movements we have today, we’d probably have a fascist takeover-with everybody agreeing to it, because that would be the only method for survival that anyone could think of. I’d even agree to it, because there’s just no other alternatives right now.”

    More: https://ohtarzie.wordpress.com/2014/07/08/rancid-discussion-thread-chomskys-provisional-fascism/

    • Replies: @anonymous tazer
  19. How well has Hitler’s critique held up over the years? The fact is that, from the 1930s onward, the Western bourgeois democracies made serious efforts to reform in the face of the fascist and communist threats. They established social-democratic welfare states which redistributed vast amounts of wealth. However, since then inequality has ramped up in the era of globalization and neoliberalism.

    Take capital needed to maintain industrial society [1] and spend it on immediate consumption (such as maintaining urban areas that have lost their economic base) and you get a pre-industrialized society; such societies are much more highly stratified as the workforce is more fungible than in an industrial society, hence has less bargaining power.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] Consider the expansion in power generation and usable resources that have not happened since WW II. They were shut down, along with American industry, as capital was diverted to urban maintenance as part of regime protection.

  20. In practice, Western liberal regimes’ democratic pretensions are exaggerated. Various studies have found that when elite and majority opinion clash, the American elite is over time able to impose its policies onto the majority (examples of this include U.S. intervention in both World Wars and mass Third World immigration since the 1960s, opposed by the people and promoted by the elite).

    That’s it? “Western liberal regimes’ democratic pretensions are exaggerated”?

    There are differences in _every_ society between different groups, which include different income levels. In the Western liberal regimes of the 1950s and 1960s, daily life was more or less left alone, and it was quite possible to over-rule the rich. There was a 90% tax on income over a fairly modest amount of income! As for the “American elite is over time able to impose its policies onto the majority” it wasn’t the rich who do that back then, nor is it the rich who do it now. It’s the Left, acquiesced to by the rich. The difference is that the rich now rich with political sufferance, or perhaps because of politics, which was much less the case back then.

    In other words, the article as a deception from start to end. Minerva’s owl flies at dusk (you understand things when they’re ending), and the deception becomes more obvious as our current system fails.

    Counterinsurgency

  21. Good one, Guillaume! As a person of National Socialist inclination myself, I say this is precisely the discussion we should be having. It is time for us to explore the real, historical NS, rather than the fake boogy-man of the Jew-media.

    Britain not only controlled “one-sixth of the world” and the impoverished millions of India, but itself had notoriously deep class divisions and suffering working classes. There was a similar situation in France and the United States: “There is poverty – incredible poverty – on one side and equally incredible wealth on the other.”

    This is why I always laugh when campus lefties try and tell me how ‘the West’ benefited from imperialism. Sure they did–if by ‘the West’ you mean Cecil Rhodes and John D. Rockefeller. But consider how the average man in the West lived back then: dark and dangerous mines, where the men died of black lung by the time they were forty; dingy factories tailor-made for industrial accidents. Pick up a book by Charles Dickens or Upton Sinclair some time to see what life was like for the little people back then.

    Strikingly, Hitler does not mention Jewish media ownership or influence at all, at least in the available extract (I cannot find the full text online).

    I’m sure it was understood from context.

    Westerners really are sick in the head.

    Well, some of them.

    Liberal-democracies allow for regular changeovers of power, transparent feedback between society and government, and the cultivation of a habit of give-and-take between citizens. But it would be equally dishonest to deny liberal-democracy’s leveling tendency …

    Hmmm. Doesn’t this kind of contradict everything you (and Hitler, and Chomsky) said before?

  22. Nik says:

    I found this piece puzzling

    Why compare and contrast Hitler to Xhomsky at all? He makes no mentiib of why he conducts this exercise and what he hopes to achieve

    In discussing Hitler… Trump may have been a better candidate to compare him to

    I got exrrememly bored of this article in the middle and left it

    AIMLESS

  23. GeeBee says:

    ‘Strikingly, Hitler does not mention Jewish media ownership or influence at all, at least in the available extract (I cannot find the full text online).’

    I have copies of all of Hitler’s speeches from 1922 to 1945, in PDF format. He made two in December 1940, and the one from which you quote was made to workers at a Berlin factory on the tenth of that month. A search of the text (4,278 words) reveals that the words ‘Jew’ or ‘Jewish’ do not appear at all.

  24. GeeBee says:
    @German_reader

    ‘the fact remains that Hitler, without any really compelling necessity, initiated one of the most destructive wars in history and then had his followers commit some of the worst mass murders ever. The “revisionists” posting on UR may be able to ignore that, but most people won’t.’

    The only ‘fact’ your comment reflects is that of Allied propaganda, put out in the late 1930s and still – remarkably – widely believed today. Revilo P Oliver, who was a very important head of an American Intelligence department in the Second World War, came to understand who had really started that tragic and unnecessary conflict. Roosevelt and his handlers, who had engineered their dupe Churchill into power early in the war, were determined to embark upon what must be understood as the earliest and greatest of all America’ criminal and despicable ‘regime change’ wars. Oliver later remarked that up until about 1956 he still thought that the truth of what had happened would come out, and that the American people would rise up in fury against those who had caused so much carnage among their own and among so many others throughout Europe and beyond. But as he put it: “in 1956 I still believed that there was a significant intellectual difference between the American middle-classes and those beasts on sees peering down from between the slats in those high-sided vehicles, contentedly munching hay on their was to the abattoir”.

    As for your curt dismissal of ‘revisionists’, the Jew Murray Rothbard had this to say in 1966:

    ‘Revisionism has the general function of bringing historical truth to a public that had been drugged by wartime lies and propaganda. Now revisionism teaches us that this entire myth, so prevalent then and even now about Hitler, and about the Japanese, is a tissue of fallacies from beginning to end. Every plank in this nightmare evidence is either completely untrue or not entirely the truth.

    ‘If people should learn this intellectual fraud about Hitler’s Germany, then they will begin to ask questions, and searching questions, about the current World War III version of the same myth. Nothing would stop the current headlong flight to war faster, or more surely cause people to begin to reason about foreign affairs once again, after a long orgy of emotion and cliché. For the same myth is now based on the same old fallacies. And this is seen by the increasing use that the Cold Warriors have been making of the “Munich myth”: the continually repeated charge that it was the “appeasement” of the “aggressor” at Munich that “fed” his “aggression” (again, the Fu Manchu, or Wild Beast, comparison), and that caused the “aggressor,” drunk with his conquests, to launch World War II. This Munich myth has been used as one of the leading arguments against any sort of rational negotiations with the Communist nations, and the stigmatizing of even the most harmless search for agreement as “appeasement.” It is for this reason that A.J.P. Taylor’s magnificent Origins of the Second World War received probably its most distorted and frenetic review in the pages of National Review.

    ‘The task of revisionism has been to penetrate beneath these superficialities and appearances to the stark realities underneath — realities which show, certainly in this century, the United States, Great Britain, and France — the three great “democracies” — to be worse than any other three countries in fomenting and waging aggressive war. Realization of this truth would be of incalculable importance on the current scene.

    ‘For revisionism, in the final analysis, is based on truth and rationality. Truth and rationality are always the first victims in any war frenzy; and they are, therefore, once again an extremely rare commodity on today’s “market.” Revisionism brings to the artificial frenzy of daily events and day-to-day propaganda, the cool but in the last analysis glorious light of historical truth. Such truth is almost desperately needed in today’s world.’

    And here Rothbard has hit upon the most important reason to refute you and others’ assertion that ‘we must forget Hitler’. Until the truth about Hitler and WWII finally emerge, and gain popular understanding, there will be no progress made. The mythology that has been all too successfully placed around the Third Reich and WWII now forms the entire foundation of the ugly, corrupt, deracinated cesspit that is late-Western pathology.

    Adolf Hitler was potentially its saviour. Today, he has been turned into Emmanuel Goldstein. Like Winston Smith, it is our duty to tell the truth.

    • Agree: Malla, Fox
    • Replies: @refl
    , @Joe Levantine
  25. GMC says:
    @Durruti

    Hitlers Mein Kamp , translation by Ford will show that Hitler criticized the Jews – many many times. He spoke of how they created Communism in the Soviet Union, how they took control of the media and publishing companies also. He was very aware of how they worked. Over 150,000 jews served in the German Army, and the rest could have gone to Palestine , or go to work in the Work Camps. If the Americans can’t see that the Zionists are doing that same thing to them, as happened to Germany and Russia – they’re doomed – Again. Of course the Zionists have already looted and destroyed the US populace, society and economy.

    • Replies: @sally
    , @Durruti
    , @Loren
  26. Parfois1 says:

    Another one whitewashing Fascism to make it an acceptable ideology to save the white race. The first edition killed 12 million Germans, twice as many Russians and many more millions of other Europeans. What for? To make America great, perhaps …

    The author is unfurling his full colours; maybe grateful for Hitler’s mercy on France?

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @Wally
  27. Biff says:
    @Priss Factor

    Well… some democratic checks and balances against Hitler would have done some good.

    And some democratic checks and balances against:

    Trump
    Obama
    Bush
    Clinton
    Etc…….Lincoln.

  28. Realist says:

    I note that most of the commenters ‘aren’t from around here’.

  29. Methinks the article’s author takes Chomsky too seriously:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/04/01/merge/

    ^

  30. Malla says:
    @Parfois1

    Another one whitewashing Fascism to make it an acceptable ideology to save the white race.

    And Democracy and Capitalism have done a wonderful job of saving the White race! Hitler was forced into his wars. If no war had taken place, no 12 million dead.

  31. @Big Daddy

    You could also compare unemployment in the USSR and Eastern Europe during the communist phase (0%) to today, and don’t forget to add all so many who have emigrated since the fall of the Iron Curtain, now competing for jobs with the workers in the west and helping to lower wages, as well as causing annoyance. But it’s called progress I suppose.

    • Replies: @FvS
  32. @Priss Factor

    True. Lots of mistakes made Hitler big. A lack of checks and balances in the constitution of Weimar Germany is a crucial one.

    • Replies: @Fox
    , @Miggle
  33. Agree that the article is a very good one. Clever idea to compare Hitler with Chomsky, “bien étonnés de se trouver ensemble.” However, Hitler was certainly not alone in his lucid criticism of “western democracy,” nor is Chomsky the only lucid post-Hitlerian critic of what is called democracy. Who does not recall Michael Parenti’s wonderful Democracy for the Few, from 1974?

    As for Hitler being genuine, or intellectually honest in his criticism, better not even ask. Like all major politicians, including FDR, the repulsive Churchill, Stalin e tutti quanti, Hitler was a psychopath and a murderer. Anyone still nurturing romantic thoughts on Hitler better read Guido Giacomo Preparata, Conjuring Hitler. How Britain and America Made the Third Reich (2005). Best proof that Preparata was absolutely right with his richly documented book is the fact that his academic career was abruptly ended: no tenure for dissidents, especially when they write books containing uncomfortable truths.

    The only people allowed to tell “uncomfortable truths” are used-car salesmen and swindlers such as Al Gore.

    • Replies: @Sollipsist
  34. Realist says:
    @Priss Factor

    Well… some democratic checks and balances against Hitler would have done some good.

    Drink the Kool-Aid.

  35. There is another thing which has not been looked into with enough sharpness: Hitler talked pretty much like a reader of – (Jonathan Franzens critical hero!) Karl Kraus, founder of the famous periodical Die Fackel (The Torch).

    Die Fackel
    was the periodical of aggressive (press-) criticism in Austria in the first half of the twentieth century (from 1899 – 1932). Chomsky almost looks like a Kraus-channeler – and Kraus, being Jewish too, did not hesitate to attack not least the Jewish owners of the Austrian press as – opportunistic, corrupt, ruthless, worthless, unresponsible, etc. pp.

    It would not astonish me, if it turned out, that Hitler read Die Fackel. Karl Kraus did not only criticize the Jewish Vienna establishment (and even outsiders like Sigmund Freud), Kraus was also in favor of Houston Stewart Chamberlain’s attacks on Jews. He adored him so much, that he even printed articles from Houston Stewart Chamberlain in Die Fackel.

    And in his apocalyptic play “The Last Days of Humankind” from 1922, Kraus’ character of “the Inner Enemy” (“der innere Feind”) – was characterized by the Jewish nose (“eine Krumm-Nas’”).

    This stuff is hardly noticed, but British Kraus-Biographer Edward Timms got these aspects quite right. Franzen in his book-length essay “The Kraus Project” did not write much about those things, unfortunately.

    PS

    Karl Kraus asked the (European) Jews to assimilate = become either Christians or atheists.

  36. Malla says:

    The National Socialists were against both American style Capitalism and Wall Street style Capitalism. It stood for the Third Way where the best of Socialism and Free Market system can be used best for the people’s interest. The Working class and the upper classes need not fight but need to come together to benefit each other, the Jews/Commies use class divisions to crack open a society, to come to power. Classes are artificial and not deep as race. A German worker has more in similarity with a Gentile German Industrialist than he has with a Sri Lankan worker. A Sri Lankan street sweeper in Colombo will readily understand & accept this but most brainwashed White libtards will look at you with disgust when this ideas is presented to them.

    In today’s ZOG Western world what matters ins money. You can be white or brown, you are welcome if you have money. Thus you have an artificial fake superficial world in which all which defines you is your money (which may disappear tomorrow) and fake lifestyles. No wonder, from the poor to he rich all are suffering of deep depression.

    International Communism is nothing but the bastardised Judaised version of socialism, supported by Jew oligarchs behind the scenes. That is why may Communists came to the NS/Fascist side after realizing the true nature of Communism.
    Henri Barbé & Jacques Doriot were both ex French communists who joined the Nationalist right winged Vichy Government of France.
    Pierre Clémenti and his Parti français national-collectiviste were French Nationalist Communists and opposed Jewish influence on the economy and culture of Europe. And they later came on to support the German National Socialists.

    Before the war, Louis-Ferdinand Céline campaigned for an alliance between France and Third Reich Germany. In L’École des cadavres he contrasted Hitler with the French Communist party leader Maurice Thorez, writing:
    “Who is the true friend of the people? Fascism is. Who has done the most for the working man? The USSR or Hitler? Hitler has… Who has done the most for the small businessman? Not Thorez but Hitler!”
    Otto Weininger, who was himself Jewish wrote:
    “It is notable that the Jews, even now when at least a relative security of tenure is possible, prefer moveable property, and, in spite of their acquisitiveness, have little real sense of personal property, especially in its most characteristic form, landed property. Property is indissolubly connected with the self, with individuality. It is in harmony with the foregoing that the Jew is so readily disposed to communism. Communism must be distinguished clearly from socialism, the former being based on a community of goods, an absence of individual property, the latter meaning, in the first place a co-operation of individual with individual, of worker with worker, and a recognition of human individuality in every one. Socialism is Aryan (Owen, Carlyle, Ruskin, Fichte). Communism is Jewish (Marx). Modern social democracy has moved far apart from the earlier socialism, precisely because Jews have taken so large a share in developing it. In spite of the associative element in it, the Marxian doctrine does not lead in any way towards the State as a union of all the separate individual aims, as the higher unit combining the purposes of the lower units. Such a conception is as foreign to the Jew as it is to the woman.”

    To know what a scumbag Karl Mordechai was, check this out

    The guy was an arrogant parasite who actually looked down upon working class people as his inferiors and used others whenever he could. What a messiah of the Working Classes!!!!

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @Digital Samizdat
  37. Blankaerd says:
    @Fake Mikemikev

    No matter what we say or talk about, people will never stop calling us nazis. We shouldn’t try to appeal to the left by ceding that territory to them, it’s a losing strategy.

  38. @Fake Mikemikev

    Why …..”alt-right really needs to abandon talking about Hitler”?
    Was Hitler so bad??????
    What bad things cause to America??????

  39. Malla says:

    What rubbish. They made Hitler and then destroyed the Third Reich.
    The truth is Hitler’s revolution was a true revolution against the oligarchic bankers and their Communist Arm in Moscow. Both the Oligarchic controlled West and their Soviet Satellite came together and crushed the Third Reich, the true people’s revolution against banker rule.

    • Agree: GeeBee
  40. Exile says:

    To commenters kvetching or concern-trolling about Hitler, I say enough already. Durocher’s not romanticizing or white-washing here, he’s making a serious point: if sources as divergent as Hitler and Chomsky agree on the flaws of capitalism/neo=liberal democracy, it lends credibility to those criticisms and makes it harder to refute them by ad hominem or accusations of bias on the part of the critics. I’ll add a third illiberal critic of neo-liberal democracy and capitalism – Vladimir Putin, who attacks these sacred cows on a similar basis. Solzhenitsyn is also in this group.

    Hitler’s been dead for 70+ years and we’re increasingly becoming aware that much of the “evil” of the Nazis is a product of US, Soviet and Jewish postwar propaganda. Readers of this site have seen enough counter-arguments to develop a healthy skepticism. The Pavlovian denunciations and evil-eye gestures the name of the evil one still evokes around here are just demonstrations of the lasting power of WWII era propaganda. Stop with the hysterics, ladies, so the grown men can get back to analyzing history’s lessons for modern politics and cultures. Whether you know it or not, this lasting mythology is intended to stifle dissent to modern political agendas, and your clucking and pear-clutching is either useful idiocy or propaganda in its own right.

    • Replies: @JackOH
    , @Counterinsurgency
  41. refl says:
    @GeeBee

    Until the truth about Hitler and WWII finally emerge, and gain popular understanding, there will be no progress made. The mythology that has been all too successfully placed around the Third Reich and WWII now forms the entire foundation of the ugly, corrupt, deracinated cesspit that is late-Western pathology.

    Quite right, but you must not forget, what will happen, when the western pathology breaks down. I will not let the Nazis of the hook for the simple reason that they were not opposed to the pathology but just wanted their fair share in it.
    Hitler thought that he would be allowed at the table of the big guys, but he would never be. Awkwardly the same as with Russians who believe that they could negotiate with the West. Only, that they had the means to stand up for themselves, that Germany had not.

    • Replies: @Joe Levantine
  42. Mulegino1 says:

    The Atlanticist-Zionist dominated world has a morbid and indefatigable obsession with the comic book version of the Fuehrer.

    Hitler is a deus ex machina to the oligarchical plutocrats and their social revolutionary leftist foot soldier pawns in academia and the media. More nonsense has been written about him than any figure in recorded history.

    Do you want to criticize Hitler from the left? He was obviously a tool of the reactionaries and their minions in corporate America such as Prescott Bush and the Rockefeller family, a man who engineered the war to destroy six million Jews and conquer the world and impose a stifling totalitarian right wing ideology upon it.

    Do you want to demonize him from the right? He was really a Jew himself, a tool of international Zionism and a socialist who hated capitalism and the Jews and who started the war to conquer the world and destroy the 6 million while abolishing Christianity in Europe, and eventually throughout the world.

    Hitler as bloodthirsty warmonger, lusting after the evil sounding lebensraum and the murder of all of the Jews and Slavs in Europe is the most evil man in the history of the Manichean comic book universe.

    Hitler without the above, i.e., the real Hitler, was an effective and incredibly prescient and even prophetic statesman whose misfortune was to restore Germany to prosperity and greatness, buck economic orthodoxy by initiating the greatest economic recovery in recorded history and clean up German society and culture by removing the usual subversive suspects from power and influence. Such accomplishments have been shown to be recipes for war. A prosperous Germany which extricated itself from the financial hegemony of Wall St. and the City of London had to be destroyed no matter what.

  43. This piece is a historical inquiry or revisionist speculation and examination. Many historical events will never be completely known, but simply rise to a certain confidence level or interval, much like statistics. Definitive statements of whom, where, how, cause and effect through the retrospective lens are pure inductive-a set of observations that lead to a deductive statement or a conclusion or thesis.

    As for its relevancy today for survival of the Indo-Europeans Peoples (imprecisely called “White” or “Aryan”, it has almost no value. Just as a steam turbine power plant does not compare with a diesel powered one, the former has no useful or utilitarian {let’s say very limited} utility or usefulness. The knowledge gained in one, will not start the plant up and provide the knowledge base to keep it producing power. Sorry for bursting your bubbles, you folks out there who have no idea of a roadmap, outlined steps to save your race, or even to begin to alleviate its suffering.

    I will post here what I just posted on The Occidental Observer. On this subject, I have posted many comments here, on TOO, IrishSavant, and American Renaissance. We should be discussing Sun Tsu, tactics, and strategy. Instead we genuflect on what Western Philosophers said and how they defined such and such, or such or constant refined and redefine, and substitute theory and abstraction for action. Here is my take, a comment posted on the article titled, “Exclusive Interview with Andrew Clarke on the National Action Trials and His 18 Months in Prison” on The Occidental Observer:

    [MORE]

    This is a good and brave man. While he represents a noble spirit, the soporific and somnambulant lumpen, intelligencia, and all in between, will not be changed in their inertia and conformity and slow walk to their oblivion. Struggles like his will, tragically, be but an irritation against the Colossus [David Horowitz’ word] of the International Anglo Zionist NWO and their virtual allies, e.g., Bill Gates, Eric Schmidt, Tim Cook, Warren Buffet, Jeff Bezos, etc, etc, etc. This is not even a pyrrhic victory; it’s a crack pipe high. Anybody who believes this is a seminal or catalyst is delusional.

    They have full auto 50 caliber ordinance, mortars and RPGs. We have slingshots.

    We need desperately to rebuild. To do that, we must separate ourselves, the Indo-European Tribe, into self governing autonomous units. Russia could be an entire branch of our Tribe due to relative homogeneity. The Americas present problems due to the interspercing of aboriginal people, but these are not by any means insurmountable. Many large sections of South American countries are sizable pure European stock already, and provide a natural shift toward self autonomy.

    I say this: our salvation is analogous to a military operation or engineering mission. Goals must be set, resources evaluated, timetables calculated, and real action initiated. It will start when White Nationalism changes from a contrived pejorative “meme” or “narrative” to a wholly legitimate and comprehensive concept. We should use the momentum of the “Protected Victim Groups” own rhetoric and demands for a national separate homeland. If they get theirs, we get ours.

    We have to have an ENGINEERED solution, where real world assets and liabilities are dealt with, incremental plans move forward ineluctably. In case you missed it, this is EXACTLY what the Illuminati have done for thousands of years. Set goals and markers. Moved forward at different speeds, depending on deception, acceptance, and opportunity. Never giving up, constantly advancing and always increasing assets and power. POWER is everything. There is nothing else. Our opponents will not bend or retreat a nanometer unless the resistance, cost, and pain compels them.

    The monetary assets of the NWO are well over a trillion dollars. George Soros gives away millions every month just on the interest of his 20+ billion dollars. Bloomberg the same. Jews and their Shabbos surrogates control every major institution of Western Civilization. As an indicator and test sample: the Lutheran Church is hurriedly and assiduously is transporting Somalis and other Africans to Nordic descendants’ communities in North and South Dakota. All major Christian denominations EXCEPT the Eastern Orthodox are acting as active agents in the clandestine dispersal of the World’s bottom sludge and bilge into Western lands.

    If we do not adopt the long term focus and dedication of the Communist Sojourners, the constancy of the Frankfurt School, the compulsiveness of the ADF and SPLC, we will perish.

  44. Saggy says: • Website

    From an even more pointed speech, …

    Adolf Hitler Speech: Löwenbräukeller Munich November 8 1940

    When I came to power, I took over from a nation that was a democracy. Indeed, it is now sometimes shown to the world as if one would be automatically ready to give everything to the German nation if it were only a democracy. Yes, the German people was at that time a democracy before us, and it has been plundered and squeezed dry. No. what does democracy or authoritarian state mean for these international hyenas! That they are not at all interested in. They are only interested in one thing: Is anyone willing to let themselves be plundered? Yes or no? Is anyone stupid enough to keep quiet in the process? Yes or no? And when a democracy is stupid enough to keep quiet, then it is good. And when an authoritarian government declares: “You do not plunder our people any longer, neither from inside nor from outside,” then that is bad. If we, as a so-called authoritarian state, which differs from the democracies by having the masses of the people behind it; if we as an authoritarian state had also complied with all the sacrifices that the international plutocrats encumbered us with; if I had said in 1933, “Esteemed Sirs in Geneva” or “Esteemed Sirs,” as far as I am concerned, somewhere else, “what would you have do? Aha, we will immediately write it on the slate: 6 billion for 1933, 1934, 1935, all right we will deliver. Is there anything else you would like? Yes, Sir we will also deliver that” Then they would have said: “At last a sensible regime in Germany.”

    • Replies: @Digital Samizdat
  45. Vicent says:

    Hitler was not a dichtator but the SOUL of the nation ,
    making a last stand against against the evil that was swallowing all europe .

    Rest in peace

    • Agree: Saggy
  46. @German_reader

    Anyway, do you really think it’s a good idea for modern nationalists to link themselves to Hitler and the 3rd Reich (because many of your articles could be interpreted that way, as if Hitler was some profound thinker who has to be read by every nationalist today)? Yes, the man wasn’t as stupid as is often claimed today, and some elements of Nazism are certainly attractive if seen in isolation…but the fact remains that Hitler, without any really compelling necessity, initiated one of the most destructive wars in history and then had his followers commit some of the worst mass murders ever.

    He made several irrecoverable mistakes, most of which would have been condemned as evil by the Catholic Church and the major Protestant churches of his time:
    * Hitler financed his regimes with confiscations, some very crude and brutal, others just cruel, from the Jewish population (an evil act under Christianity as it was in the 1930s). [1] This left Hitler with little choice other than warfare when the Jewish money ran out, and made the Jewish establishment into his and Germany’s enemy.
    * Hitler accepted half of Poland in a deal with the USSR. Not a “just war” [2], and one that gave the Allies cause to do about whatever came into their heads. Note that “just war” theory was ignored by all participants in WW II, wherever it was fought, and that this had bad consequences that we are only now beginning to see.
    * Additionally, Hitler failed to see Stalin’s larger plan for expanding the USSR over all Europe be forcing a repetition of WW I, followed by a massive Soviet invasion. The Soviet military establishment was so superior to Germany’s (who had not spent massively in military buildup) that even after the surprise attack by Germany on the USSR, followed by the loss of all arms and most personnel intended for the invasion of Europe, the USSR was able to recover by (a) using the massive industrial plant behind the Urals, (b) remaining in alliance with the other Allied nations, (c) bleeding the USSR’s military manpower pool dry.

    Granted that Hitler was charismatic and brave, he was, in the end, not a strategist or a deep thinker, but instead a satisficer who thought he was the biggest plotter and baddest national leader of his time. His estimate in this regard was not even close; Hitler was markedly inferior to Stalin in both respects. Until he attacked the USSR in a satisficing move called “use it or lose it”, he was a patsy.

    As for the Western leaders (and Japan’s leaders) they appear as strategists, but also as simple fools, inviting and planning for a second World War when their societies were ready to disintegrate from the consequences of the first World War. [4]

    It’s difficult to imagine what Stalin would have done had the Europeans failed to be provoked into WW II. After the partition of Poland, judging from Hitler’s success in France, a surprise attack on Germany at any time would have carried Stalin to the Atlantic coast of Europe. Retaining that conquest might have been difficult, the more so since Russia was effectively leaderless [5] after Stalin die in 1953 (about 7 years after WWII ended). Had the Japanese not attacked Pearl Harbor or any other US installation, it’s still hard to see how they could have retained their Asian mainland conquests for more than two generations.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] Götz Aly.
    _Hitler’s Beneficiaries_.
    Picador Paper; 2008/01/08.

    2] “Summary of Just War Theory”.
    _Reason and Meaning_, 2015-06-08
    https://reasonandmeaning.com/2015/05/08/the-essence-of-just-war-theory/

    3] Viktor Suvorov.
    _The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II_.
    Naval Institute Press; Reprint edition 2013/03/15.
    Also see Youtube videos on this subject.

    4] Apparently Western leaders were inspired by this nursery rhyme:
    There was a man in our town
    and he was wondrous wise
    He jumped into a bramble bush
    and scratched out both his eyes!

    And when he saw what he had done
    with all his might and main
    he jumped back in that bramble bush
    and scratched them in again!

    Or, in plain English, they thought that this was an age of empires, that there would be only one surviving empire, and that the surviving empire would endure indefinitely. It is ironic that the one nation whose organization and population were utterly unsuited for such a role was the USA, the winner of WWII. As we can see now, attempting to play Imperial Power has destroyed the USA as it was in 1945. In retrospect, the western leaders were as wondrous wise as was man in the above nursery rhyme.

    5] Stalin had killed pretty much anybody capable of initiative. Nicky the K survived because he was considered a lout, incapable of posing a threat to Stalin, and he was easily the best leader available in
    1953.

  47. Concerning the article:

    Right, Hitler was a man of the Left. So was FDR, so was Stalin, and so Chomsky.

    Hardly news anymore.

    Counterinsurgency:

  48. Arnieus says:

    Western media is not “cooperative”, they are owned.
    JP Morgan famously bought up controlling interest in major newspapers in 1917 to prevent significant media opposition to the US entering WWI. The Counsel on Foreign Relations was created in the early 1920s to maintain control over the national dialog and they have ever since. The CIA Project Mockingbird tightened control. Every presidential cabinet since is saturated with CFR members. As a result most Americans are disastrously misinformed about just about everything. 1984 happened decades before 1984.

    • Replies: @Saggy
  49. All that need be known about Chumpsky is he’s all for high taxation but shielded his own millions from the bite of taxes with trust funds for his children.

  50. @Hans Vogel

    Parenti’s book is one of the few assigned college textbooks I still have on my shelf. A classic that I rarely hear spoken of; I guess my liberal arts education wasn’t entirely wasted.

  51. anon[414] • Disclaimer says:

    My ancestors didn’t sign up to live in a democracy, capitalist or otherwise, they came for the Republic with a constitution. No one came here originally to live in a land they won’t own but will be given to everyone who moves in after them. Their families and future generations forced from their homes, while everyone votes themselves a free ride and special treatment for not being an American, Chomsky included. So why should I care about that old opposition’s side of the dialectic?
    Everyone knows what a democracy is in writing, a sheep and tow wolves deciding whats for dinner, they just can’t seem to tell when they are living in and perpetuating it. Just like everyone sees and reads about dystopian futures but can’t see it around them either. Movies have a lot to do with that.

  52. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    Hitler had criptorquidia , hypospadias and micropenis , thats to say a small penis with too many holes and only one testicle . Maybe ig God had endowed him with a better instrument history would have been different .

  53. Extolling Hitler and/or the Nazis is, apart from anything else, totally counter-productive. We can argue about the rewriting of history but the simple fact is that any association with him/them is poisonous to the public mind.

  54. Malla says:
    @Malla

    The National Socialists were against both American style Capitalism and Wall Street style Capitalism.

    Sorry, I meant, were against both Wall Street Style Capitalism and Marxism.

    “Socialism,” he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, “is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.”

    “Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.”

    “We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one.” – Adolf Hitler, interviewing with George Sylvester Viereck

    • Replies: @foobb1
  55. BCB232 says:

    What I took from the piece was that Hitler, despite being an evil bastard, was right about some things. This shouldn’t be surprising and isn’t a defense of Nazism (which as a Christian I have to regard as evil.) The fact that Hitler and Chomsky agree shows this isn’t a defense of Nazism.

    • Replies: @The_seventh_shape
  56. @Fake Mikemikev

    Once a Nazi, always a Nazi… a leopard can’t change its spots. And moderation won’t get you to the promised land!

  57. @German_reader

    So called revisionists are bunch of morons. Hitler was, without lapsing into moralizing, a very specific product of a very specific time, a charismatic leader of a great humiliated nation during a deep crisis in all Western civilization (this includes Russia, too).

    Now, Europe & Europe-derived peoples face a completely different crisis (or various crises), so that what Hitler was or wasn’t is utterly irrelevant to our contemporary condition & its challenges.

    • Agree: German_reader
    • Replies: @Anon
    , @fnn
    , @John Regan
    , @Marcus
  58. Malla says:
    @refl

    Deal with the Anglo Saxon establishment or deal with the Zionist all sound rubbish to me. The Anglo Saxon establishment more or less hated Third Reich Germany and were very pro-Soviet. They hated Mussolini far less than Hitler.

    In his dairy entry of march 7, 1942, Goebbels noted with dismay the support for the Jews in British House of Lord. “It was astonishing how much the English people, especially the upper classes, have become Jewified (verjudet) and scarcely have any English character anymore. This development was due to the fact that the upper ten thousand have been so Jewishly infected through marriages to Jews that they are scarcely any longer able to think as English people.”

  59. sally says:
    @GMC

    right on.. that is exactly what the Oligarchs in charge are trying to get the elected USA government in position to do to America; worse, it is is being done by the relatives of the people that did it to Kaiser Wilhelm, II and then again by the Queens own representative in Germany, Hitler and by Lenin’s Bolsheviks in Russia .. The Oligarchs in charge of the elected USA want Americans to engage in a civil war so the Oligarchs can use the military to break America into tiny controllable parts (just as did in Ukraine). Every where you can see divide, polarize and conquer at work. Everywhere you see the on going depletion of America’s resources and the elimination of jobs that could lead to new technology. But in my opinion America is already so different from the USA that it will be difficult for those who lead the USA to accomplish such a goal, no matter the money the Oligarchs make available for that purpose. No one believes a thing the elected politicians or the privately owned media have to say.

    WWI was about gaining political and territorial control over the Ottoman empire that was done by weaponizing Jewish Immigration (see the Balfour Agreement) and imposing by a series of Treaties on WWI defeated Germany, that led to British and French Palestine (and opened the oil rich land to BP, Exxon and others cause that’s where the oil was) and the 1919 Bolsheviki Revolution in Russia was about getting the Jews to move to Palestine, and destroying the power of the Eastern Christian church. WWII was about destroying Germany and entangling and containing Russia so neither Germany nor Russia could participate in the oil under the now defeated Ottoman Empire (Syria, Palestine, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Yemen, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt) would make available.

    • Replies: @Malla
  60. Saggy says: • Website
    @Arnieus

    JP Morgan famously bought up controlling interest in major newspapers in 1917 to prevent significant media opposition to the US entering WWI. The Counsel on Foreign Relations was created in the early 1920s to maintain control over the national dialog and they have ever since. The CIA Project Mockingbird tightened control. Every presidential cabinet since is saturated with CFR members. As a result most Americans are disastrously misinformed about just about everything. 1984 happened decades before 1984.

    Damn !

  61. Fox says:
    @Dieter Kief

    What kind of checks and balances are on your mind?

  62. Emslander says:

    It does no good to try to defend Hitler, regardless of the many correct observations he made over the years of his public life. He was as important a commentator as, say, Paul Krugman, but his opinions will never overcome his actions. Comparing him to Krugman or Chomsky makes an interesting debating point, but ultimately fails for lack of context.

    If you are trying to argue that capitalist democracy, Anglo-American style, has grievous flaws, you’re going to have to show what they are and why they will lead to calamity. I’d say we need a real discussion on federal budgeting insanity, for one, which threatens the economic downfall of the West and, probably, of the universe, except maybe for Russia, which has already suffered through its great downfall. How that connects to Anglo-American democracy is simple: the British borrowed and made war around the world to its virtual collapse and then had the great insight to be able, via FDR, to tie the prosperity of the United States to its failures, until the great engine of prosperity that we once were comes clanking to pieces.

    The fascists weren’t wrong on policy during peacetime, but were too optimistic about being able to take over the world by war.

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @BCB232
  63. “History is written by the winners.”

    ― Napoleon Bonaparte

  64. Durruti says:
    @Wally

    There simply was no choice for Germany, they fought to defend themselves. Hitler led that defense.

    Thanks for your intelligent response.

    You (and other commentators) appear to idealize Hitler. You cannot let go, anymore than some who still cling to the wretched farce of Casino Trump – and the Game of twin political gangs.

    I ask for some more intelligent responses (no more citations – how do you explain?)

    1. I would ask you to explain Hitler/German Government’s actions concerning Czechoslovakia.
    After the Czechs surrendered their border fortresses, and the German Government promised to respect Czechoslovakia’s (what remained of it), National integrity, they invaded and absorbed the rest of that nation.

    Excuses here…………………………….

    2. After Mussolini’s Italy invaded Ethiopia, and with the use of poison gas and airpower, seized that nation, Hitler announced his support for Italy’s imperialist aggression. What right did Italy have to Ethiopia? or to Greece? What did Germans gain (before the courts of History and God), by supporting Italian Imperialism?

    You may cough here……………………….

    3. Germany/Hitler and Italy/Mussolini (along with the USA, and England), supported the overthrow of the democratically elected Government of the Spanish Republic. [Understand who you are talking to here]

    Enter your excuses here………………………

    4. Had Germany/Hitler/Nazis conquered Russia, what was his plan for the conquered Russian people?

    Answer here………………………………..

    5. Did Germany need a land route to East Prussia? Was the issue worth a war? Could Poland have been left in peace?

    Park your Volkswagen here…………………………

    Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Obomber, Bushes, Casino Trump, the Clintons, Zionist controlled American Congress, are indefensible. Oh! I left Djugashvili & his cohorts out; kindly put them in the list.

    I set you an impossible task. You should refuse to answer the questions.

    We must Restore Our American Republic!

    God Bless!

  65. Malla says:
    @sally

    There are three smelly gutters which flow parallel to each other. They all look distinct from each other but when you take a weather balloon and you have a wider picture, you observe something curious, all three gutters have the same source and the same destination.

    What does all these gutters means? I am describing three movements which have the same source and the same destinations. And the world wars gave a big advantage or push to these three movements. What are they? they are Globalism, Zionism and Communism.

    WW1-
    Zionism – Balfour Declaration
    Globalism – League of Nations
    Communism – First Communist State Soviet Russia.
    German Empire, Habsburg Austro-Hungarian Empire, Ototman Empire, Tsarist Russia etc.. destroyed.

    WW2-
    Zionism- State of Israel
    Globalism- United Nations
    Communism – Communism spreads to half of Eurasia from Vietnam to East Germany.
    British, French, Dutch etc…empires destroyed

    Ww3/4 (final end game)-
    WW1-
    Zionism- Greater Israel, the sole superpower on Earth
    Globalism – One World Government
    Communism – Global Corporate Communism
    USA, Russia, China, Japan, European nations etc…all destroyed as powers.

  66. @Fake Mikemikev

    Someone who was a former Nazi would never give such a faggoty response.

    ‘Moderate discussion.’

    Whatever else they may be, a Nazi is a person of hard opinions and will.
    Black, white – yes, no – good, evil – live, die.
    That doesn’t change with a change of ideology.

    Someone who never had the will to be a Nazi should not claim to be one – now or then.

    And they should never ask for ‘moderate discussion’.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  67. annamaria says:
    @Biff

    https://thesaker.is/the-russiagate-hoax-is-now-fully-exposed/
    Eric Zuesse:

    Both the liberal (Democratic) and conservative (Republican) wings of the U.S. aristocracy hate and want to conquer Russia’s Government. The real question now is whether that fact will cause the book on this matter to be closed as being unprofitable for both sides of the U.S. aristocracy; or, alternatively, which of those two sides will succeed in skewering the other over this matter.

    At the present stage, the Republican billionaires seem likelier to win if this internal battle between the two teams of billionaires’ political agents continues on. If they do, and Trump wins re-election by having exposed the scandal of the Obama Administration’s having manufactured the fake Russiagate-Trump scandal, then Obama himself could end up being convicted. However, if Trump loses — as is widely expected — then Obama is safe, and Trump will likely be prosecuted on unassociated criminal charges.

    To be President of the United States is now exceedingly dangerous. Of course, assassination is the bigger danger; but, now, there will also be the danger of imprisonment. A politician’s selling out to billionaires in order to reach the top can become especially risky when billionaires are at war against each other — and not merely against some foreign (‘enemy’) aristocracy. At this stage of American ‘democracy’, the public are irrelevant. But the political battle might be even hotter than ever, without the gloves, than when the public were the gloves.

    • Replies: @Biff
  68. Bill says: • Website

    Hilter and Chomsky may had similar views on Capitalist democracy in that they were both ardent anti-Communists. Socialism-Communism defeated Capitalist Germany utterly, and without much help either. It’s also outrageous to compare capitalist Germany with the Socialist-communist Soviet Union.

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
    , @Malla
  69. Malla says:
    @Emslander

    were too optimistic about being able to take over the world by war.

    Except that they did not wan to take over the Whole World via war. That was just Allied Propaganda.
    I do not remember the name exactly but a German soldier wrote in his memoirs about capturing some American soldiers as POWs. The Americans were obviously de-armed and on their way both the German soldiers and American POWs decide to stop for a rest. Cigarettes shared all around. So this German soldier asks to the American POWs,”So why are you American here in Europe?” and one American soldier replies “To stop you Germans to conquer the World”. And the Germans were all burst out laughing/stunned. The Germans had themselves not heard or even dreamed that they, the Germans wanted to take over the World!!!
    All Allied propaganda.

    • Replies: @Emslander
    , @S
    , @Anon
  70. BCB232 says:
    @Emslander

    I think it might be useful to show the wide diversity of thinkers that see the same issues with capitalist-democracy. You can’t get much more diverse than Hitler and say, anyone alive.
    But I can see where the very mention of his name shuts down all rational thought so maybe mentioning Hitler at all is useless or worse.

  71. Dennis says:

    “…struck by the similarities between fascist and left-wing critiques of capitalist democracy.”

    No kidding…because Fascism and National Socialism are also fundamentally products of Leftist thought. There was nothing “right-wing,” (to say nothing of “conservative” or “reactionary”) about Hitler, Mussolini, et al.

  72. Hitler had great economic policies but he was a private in strategy.. Goes to show you, just because you can bullshit your way through everything, you dont need to know the inner working of anything. A self centered moron who thought he was the next coming of pontius pilot..

  73. Durruti says:
    @GMC

    Of course the Zionists have already looted and destroyed the US populace, society and economy.

    This is your best sentence.

    Your other points:

    <

    blockquote>Over 150,000 jews served in the German Army, and the rest could have gone to Palestine , or go to work in the Work Camps.

    Unclear: From German Army participation (what is your point?) to sending the “rest” to Palestine, (the Palestinians thank you for that thought).

    Work in Work Camps.

    ? Did European Jews ever work in “Work Camps”?

    In occupied Palestine, Palestinians do almost all the Physical labor. They build homes, settlements (kibbutzes), walls, and Jails (for themselves), roads, cleaning, servants in Jewish homes, gardening/farming-on what used to be their land.

    Good point about Mein Kamp. He did criticize Jews-there.

  74. Many here seem caught up in the man Hitler, and maybe that’s ok. But, to validate your complaints do some serious research.
    The point the author makes is clear. Without placing checks on the oligarchs ability to buy all media, the same oligarchs will control every political party, and public policy, all to favor them.

  75. Emslander says:
    @Malla

    Yes. I exaggerated. Hitler actually hoped, it is said, that he could establish a status agreement with Great Britain after he’d finished with France. Some believe that he consciously allowed the removal of the Expeditionary Force from Dunkirk with amelioration of the British in mind. The same cannot be said for his colonization intentions in the East, which, I suppose, I had more in mind.

    With respect to the German troops in your anecdote, I’m not sure any line soldier is ever a good reflection of what the leadership intends. They just want to get on with it and get out in some kind of shape with a modicum of honor.

  76. Malla says:
    @Durruti

    Maybe some of your questions can be answered here.

    https://www.bitchute.com/playlist/hmv3AI5oVvJm/

    And more here

    Czechoslovakia.

    Czechoslovakia was an abnormal creation dominated by Czechs where the dominated the Slovaks and also the Sudenten Germans. No wonder after the fall of WW2, the Czechs and Slovaks decided on a peaceful divorce. But that is still allright but I believe one British commented that ‘Czechoslovakia is a fiefdom of Jewish landlords’ or something to that effect

    What right did Italy have to Ethiopia? or to Greece?

    Mussolini dreamt of having a new Roman Empire. It was not Hitler’s idea.

    What did Germans gain (before the courts of History and God), by supporting Italian Imperialism?

    Well everything is not gain. Sometimes you have to support your allies.

    Germany/Hitler and Italy/Mussolini (along with the USA, and England), supported the overthrow of the democratically elected Government of the Spanish Republic.

    England and USA and their press have always supported the Commies behind the scenes.
    The question is why did 30,000 Spaniards volunteer for Operation Barbarossa to destroy Communism. What they had to do with all this? They had seen some vile shit like commies burning down churches with nuns and villagers inside.

    Did the Communists in Russia come to power by elections? Or was it imposed upon them? If Communism had not existed would all these problems of WW2 existed at all?

    When the divisions of empires after WW1 done, why were they done in such as manner as to leave some Germans inside Poland and some Germans inside the newly created nation of Czechoslovakia? Did the World not have enough time and resources to go on the ground and draw accurate borders to represent the various ethnic groups accurately?

    Why did Britain and France take such a risky step as to declare war on Germany for Poland. And why did they keep mum when the Soviets attacked from the East? Why did the Imperialist Capitalist exploiter Britain and France not take a chance to get at the revolutionary Soviet heroes when they invaded Poland? Why did they keep mum when Soviet Russia invaded the Baltic nations? Why did they not take such a big step then?
    And after fighting this great war of righteousness, why did the British and Americans lose their love for Poland and leave Poland to be vassals of the Soviets? Why not take such a risky step for Poland again now?
    And here–>

    Did any of the nations of Eastern Europe (Poland to Yugoslavia) ever vote in those Communist regimes? But the war was a war to save Democracy? How was democracy saved in these countries? How did this great war to save Democracy include allies like Communists like Uncle Joe Stalin and dictators like Chaing Kai Shek?

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Paw
  77. Wally says:
    @Durruti

    – No one here “idealizes Hitler”, But they do want factual history known & taught.
    – Trump is flawed, so what? I never said he wasn’t. Much better than Hillary and any known alternatives

    1. I demolished that propaganda repeatedly, search my comments at this site for Czechoslovakia and learn something for a change.
    http://www.unz.com/?s=czechoslovakia&Action=Search&ptype=all&commentsearch=only&commenter=Wally
    BTW, Hacha asked for Protectorate status.

    2. Germany did not support the use of mustard gas by Italy.
    facts:

    – Britain & France did not declare war on the communist USSR which invaded from the east and took 60% of Poland.
    – USSR invaded Finland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, invaded & annexed parts of Romania, invaded Iran, invaded northern Norway and the Danish island of Bornholm, yet the ‘Allies’ did nothing.
    – Lithuania, Iran, and invasion & annexation of parts of Romania.
    – Poland threaten Lithuania with an ultimatum.
    – Poland invaded and annexed parts of Czechoslovakia, held large parts of German territory, was engaged in atrocities against German civilians. Yet the ‘Allies’ did nothing.
    – The “neutral” US had been attacking German U-boats & shipping, while supplying both Britain & the USSR long before Germany’s declaration of war on the US.
    – Brits invaded & were mining Norway at Narvik before Germany arrived & stopped it.
    – France had positioned 2 million soldiers on the Belgian border, and the BEF had almost another half million.
    – France and England were already violating Belgian and Dutch “neutrality” with impunity by flying aircraft over the lowlands.
    – It is important to remember that France had already invaded Germany, the Saar in 1939, and that throughout this entire period Hitler was begging Churchill to negotiate a return to the status quo.
    – British invaded Iceland and Iran
    – Norway, who claimed neutrality, in fact aided & abetted Britain by not mobilizing it’s armed forces against British mining of their ports & sea lanes.
    – “Neutral” Belgium actually aided & abetted France & britain by allowing France to position 2 million if it’s soldiers in Belgium, and also allowed the British to add another half million troops within Belgium.
    – France and England were also allowed to use Belgian and Dutch airspace with impunity for their military aircraft.

    3. Proof for your “democratically elected” Spanish Communists is where?

    4. To free them from Communism and Stalin’s atrocities against them.

    5. Yes, Germany wanted it’s stolen land back and insisted that Polish atrocities against Germans be stopped.

    – What about Stalin’s son “Djugashvili & his cohorts”?

    That was easy. Cheers.

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @Durruti
  78. Wally says: • Website
    @Parfois1

    said:
    “The first edition killed 12 million Germans, twice as many Russians and many more millions of other Europeans. ”

    Except that your Zionist propaganda has been repeatedly & easily shown to be false, please review this site.

  79. Republic says:

    “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”

    Yes that quotation by Chomsky is exactly correct, and Chomsky is an expert in that area.
    He is a loyal servant of the oligarchs, the MIT intellectual who has devoted his life
    to keeping the lid on acceptable debate but is silent on the most important event of the 21st Century in order to serve his Zionist masters.

    Any person who goes beyond that accepted level of debate is either ostracized, imprisoned or assassinated.

  80. Agonies of epistemology aside, there are real Truths in this world

    If the radical Right and the radical Left agree in their judgements of what lies between, perhaps they are getting to this.

    Apparently +1 and a -1 can equal a whole in some cases.

  81. G says:

    Liberal-democracies allow for regular changeovers of power, transparent feedback between society and government, and the cultivation of a habit of give-and-take between citizens.

    Except that is not true at all. All major Western countries today, UK, France, USA and Germany, are ruled by an effective one-party state, stabilized and its agenda multiplied by its media companies, often state owned, the agenda enforced by apparatschiks, secured by the police force and internationalized physically with the military and with great propaganda by the media-entertainment complex – today even effectively monopolized by US companies like Google/YouTube and Facebook.

    Whether you look at BREXIT, votes on an EU constitution, or the Donald Trump presidency: what the majority of the people want is not important to the permanent ruling and owning class.

    The politicians and sanctioned talking-heads are there to deceive us. Obama und Trump are two sides of the same coin: carefully crafted advertisement campaigns to secure the interests and goals of the elite in the long run.

    Progressiv interests first with Obama and now reactionary interests have been encorporated as messages and propaganda to neuter both. Now the left talks about gender neutral toilets, trans kids and pronouns, instead of stagnant wages for decades and a predatory elite. Just like the right talks about Trump’s tweets, Q and is lost in the media skinner-box and his personality cult, while Trump himself broke every single point he campaigned on (Except those that serve the 1% and Israel.) and is owned by the same lobby which produces the artificial reality Trump cultists bought into.

    Political-media theater was and is orchestrated, so the true core of power stays untouched and stable: the very small capitalist class who owns 90% of the net wealth in the USA (it’s getting increasingly similar in Europe as it is being Americanized in the process of globalization); the superordinate megacompanies; the military-industrial complex; Wall Street and (Central) Banking; special interests and lobbies of which the Israeli-Jewish Lobby is the strongest.

    And the cultural totalitarianism of today and its artifical reality is superior to that of the old physical dictatorships, because in mass-media democracy not only does the subject believe himself to be free, because the tools of his own enslavement are not visible; only in it the subject gives his own concession to his own subjugation by his vote. While all paths to real change, revolution or revolt are as cut off from him as under Stalin or Mao.

    • Replies: @The Nine Tailed Fox
  82. Malla says:
    @Wally

    You missed that Rudolf Hess went with a peace plan to Britain. Rudolf Hess, the second in command in the Third Reich went personally. A peace plan which could have save many British lives. But Churchill had him imprisoned, later for life and then the British ZOG elites had him killed in prison to prevent this fact coming out. Hitler was trying all he could for peace.

    • Replies: @Matra
  83. Durruti says:

    You did not answer my questions.

    Excuse is that allies support allies – Germany was not allied to Italy when Italy invaded Ethiopia.

    Morality is lost when one uses excuses & digressions, & supports blindly allies..

    Spanish ‘volunteers’ were encouraged, organized & PAID, as were Belgian ‘volunteers” as are ISIS-Al Quaida (branches of the terrorist Haganah).

    How did Chiang Kai Shek get in here?

    You are definitely a good person: I could be wrong – & it would be the first time!

  84. niceland says:

    Well, if the idea is to spread the message, any mention or reference to Hitler will be totally devastating in the public arena. It’s like participating in a marathon run and start off by cutting off your legs.

    Just recently I saw some posts on facebook from someone local to me preaching about Nordic brotherhood. He posted few pictures and all of them had Hitlers face somewhere in the background. FB shut it down within hours…

    What’s interesting is the same message could have been presented differently without much effort. Sliding past FB filters for days or even weeks and possibly influenced some people in the meantime. So I wonder who was actually behind it – my guess is either a complete idiot or someone eager to vilify nationalism and people concerned with racial issues.

  85. @G

    As always, the best slaves are those who don’t know they’re wearing chains.

  86. Durruti says:
    @Wally

    3. Proof for your “democratically elected” Spanish Communists is where?

    Never wrote that. Wrote – Democratically elected Spanish Republic. Republic Government in 1936 had NO Communist members. Do not let facts stand in your way.

    Do not have all day to answer all your misconceptions. When Germany finished dining on Czechoslovakia, Hitler agreed to let Poland annex a portion of Northern Czech, as a payoff for Poland’s support for the German gluttony.

    The Polish government was a military/police dictatorship, much as was Germany’s & Russia’s & Italy. I prefer Democratic Republics when I can get them.

    Polish atrocities against Germany? And Epstein hanged himself!

    That was easy, if a bit dreary.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @Alden
  87. FvS says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Except Hitler did it without mass murder, mass starvation, and 18 hour work shifts.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  88. bjondo says:

    Toss in a professor or two to complement media.

  89. FvS says:

    • Agree: Miro23
    • Replies: @FvS
    , @Republic
  90. S says:
    @Malla

    Except that they did not wan to take over the Whole World via war. That was just Allied Propaganda.

    I saw this WWII era film made for US public consumption, a portion of which was a scene circa 1940 of German school children singing the Deutschlandlied, the German national anthem.

    The film was presented as an ‘authentic’ German made film and everything indeed seemed in place, but for this one very brief part of the film that clearly wasn’t original, and had been obviously grafted in (they didn’t have photoshop then and it very much showed) after the fact.

    It’s of a banner being held aloft of a Roman eagle with its claws gripped into a globe of the world. ‘Deutschland Uber Alles!’ was scrawled across the top of it.

    • Replies: @Malla
  91. Matra says:
    @Malla

    A peace plan which could have save many British lives

    Much like Molotov-Ribbentrop saved Soviet lives and Munich saved Czechoslovakia. lol

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @Wally
  92. @Big Daddy

    The German Army grew from one division to 36 by the beginning of 1938, and armaments expenditure went from near zero to one-fifth of economic output–financed without increases in taxation.

    In other words the labor supply contracted while demand increased massively, both owing to rearmament.

    What purpose does it serve to make such transparently preposterous claims? To let others know you may be an idiot?

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @Curmudgeon
    , @Sparkon
  93. FvS says:
    @FvS

    It should be noted that Marc Randolph (co-founder of Netflix) has some interesting ancestors. Randolph’s paternal great-granduncle was psychoanalysis pioneer Sigmund Freud and his paternal great-uncle was Edward Bernays.

  94. Moi says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    Yup, real history/facts is never black or white. I like to keep and open mind.

  95. Anonymous[251] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Nine Tailed Fox

    This might explain –

    https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/mikemikev
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Michael_Coombs

    Looks like a massive troll or someone with severe mental problems rather than ever a real neo-nazi.

  96. Malla says:
    @S

    Thanks for this info. People do not realise how much propaganda the Allies were into.

  97. Malla says:
    @Bill

    Socialism-Communism defeated Capitalist Germany utterly, and without much help either. It’s also outrageous to compare capitalist Germany with the Socialist-communist Soviet Union.

    Jewish banker controlled Capitalism and Communism defeated National Socialist Germany utterly. It is outrageous to compare National Socialist Germany with the Marxist Communist Soviet Union.
    There, corrected it for you.

  98. Anon[339] • Disclaimer says:
    @obwandiyag

    What are you talking about?

    Its interesting that you have negro speed in replying and parallel negro intelligence in understanding.

  99. Anon[397] • Disclaimer says:
    @Fake Mikemikev

    the alt-right really needs to abandon talking about Hitler to be taken serious. I’m a former Nazi, but recently gave this up for a more moderate discussion.

    Why?

    Abandoning Hitler is equivalent to abandoning his beliefs, which were perfectly correct and perfectly necessary to effectively counter Jewish Marxism and everything associated with it.

    Anything less will cede ground to the Judeo-Marxists, the speed of retreat depending on how far away from Hitler one is.

    This is essentially the tack that the so called conservatives (led by the Jewish Neocons) have taken: give lip service to social conservatism, unless it touches on anything that Hitler believed in. Therefore, mass immigration, de-racination, etc is not only okay but desirable. This is a strategy to boil the frog, not make progress on being “taken serious”.

    There is no way forward aspiring for the Left’s approval (you cuck). The Right has already lost if that is their goal. This is war and it will only end in war, as the left and its Jewish masters perfectly well know, because those heading the Left are the same as those that destroyed Russia and its peoples with communism in the early 20th century. Their religious books demand total war against non-Jews.

    I would love to see your face and know your name to be able to ferret out just how likely it is that you were a “Nazi”. I have my doubts. This is more concern trolling “Hello fellow White people” lies that have been flooding these boards lately.

    There is no coming back from realizing the nature of the world and what you need to do to assure the survival of your family and extended people. Ergo, most “former Nazis” are liars in regard to their past convictions. Its about as credible and common as “former Jew” and makes as much logical sense.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
    , @Joe Levantine
  100. Anon[397] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    but the fact remains that Hitler, without any really compelling necessity, initiated one of the most destructive wars in history and then had his followers commit some of the worst mass murders ever. The “revisionists” posting on UR may be able to ignore that, but most people won’t.

    Your statements about the so-called Holocaust are counter the the mountainous evidence presented within defining articles on this website.

    No German under decades of forceful Judeo-communist trauma, control, brainwashing, and current oppression has any credible platform to lecture anyone on facts. No offense.

    I feel bad for you and your people, but that doesn’t mean that we begin to listen to those whose minds have been thoroughly routed and are not their own.

    You cannot credibly lecture anyone on what “most people” will admit to thinking until they are legally and socially free to weigh and argue the facts and then admit their conclusions.

    • Replies: @Emslander
  101. Anon[397] • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    Well… some democratic checks and balances against Hitler would have done some good.

    The universally disastrous social results of modern Western democracies act as strong counter-evidence to your assertion.

    • Agree: Carolyn Yeager
  102. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:
    @Malla

    It was a good example of projection , they ( the yankees ) were the ones who wanted to conquer the world , the yankee is always stopping someone to conquer the world .

    • Replies: @Malla
  103. @FvS

    Between 1950’s and 1990’s there was none of that in USSR or Eastern Europe, except some murder in Hungary in 1956.

  104. @Malla

    If I recall correctly, it was Goebbels who once summarized National Socialism thus: ‘Neither Godless Bolshevism nor soulless capitalism!’

    Some would complain that this was merely a negative definition of NS. But I believe that to have been a feature rather than a bug, since it lent NS a great deal of flexibility in addressing the real needs of the nation; which is to say that NS practiced properly would not look the same in different countries, as it would have to take into account differences in race, culture and national interest.

    • Replies: @Malla
  105. Anonymous[384] • Disclaimer says:

    Kust a thought, from some of the comments above, esp. #5, German_reader (but Hebrew speaker??) and most of the ordained history:

    Hitler & Nazis appear to be the only force in history that fought both sides of a war and lost both.
    Not like Italy, that switched sides & was duped by both its “allies” — German_reader & others would have us believe Hitler fought Germany’s adversaries and Germany also fought itself.

  106. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:
    @Malla

    …….The question is why did 30,000 Spaniards volunteer for Operation Barbarossa to destroy Communism….

    No regular spanish soldiers were sent .The 250 Blau , Division Azul , was all volonteers . why did they go ? :

    someones for the pay , there was misery in Spain after the Civil war , others because they were anticommunists because the Soviet Union helped the spanish republicans , others because they had been in the republican army and they wanted to clean their curricullums , other because they wanted to do a military career etc….

    Franco let them go to pay Germany for the help received from Hitler in the Spanish civil war .

    It seems that the Division azul soldiers were nor very happy with the cruel treatment that the germans gave to russian civilians .

  107. Malla says:
    @Anon

    Very true. Also Jewish projection. Jews consider themselves a Master race destined to rule the world. Of course not ALL Jews agree with this but many do.

  108. @Saggy

    Same shit, different day! Banksters never change …

  109. @obwandiyag

    Go back to grinding millet and brewing home made beer umfufu, this is a little too complex for you.

  110. @Fake Mikemikev

    I’m a (((former nazi)))

    Thats national socialist to you son. I see the hasbarats are out in force. Wouldnt want people linking Hitler with your own favoured controlled opposition closet Zionist now would you?

  111. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Little Hungary send an Army of about 500.000 men to fight for the Fhürer .

    They were severely defeated in Stalingrad , Voronetz front … 300.000 dead hungarian soldiers .

    https://ww2db.com/country/hungary

    • Replies: @Marcus
  112. @German_reader

    Oh, nonsense, German_Reader, Hitler didn’t initiate WW2, he tried several times to talk peace to England but Churchill and Roosevelt and the Zionists were determined to crush Germany. Educate yourself. You can start with Pat Buchanan’s Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War, but there are many others. Revisionist historians are the true historians. The first histories written by the victors are just more war propaganda. “Mass murders”, you say. You mean the holyhoax, I assume. Educate yourself.

  113. i apologize for my retardation and gayness.

    it should have been obvious to me that…

    “guillaume durocher” is NOT a french person…

    he’s an american doing a travesty, lampoon, send-up of a french person.

    i mean imagine thinking that freedom of speech absolutism wasn’t possible?

    very funny!

  114. @Durruti

    ‘Noam Chomsky has had more serious political and economic analysis to offer over the decades, than most any other American. He has authored more than 100 books.’

    Chomsky is a grade A bullsh*tt*r whose whole puropse is to limit debate by talmudic hair-splitting and by making certain topics forbidden. Somebody once accused Chomsky of being an intellectual bully and its true. Allow me to discuss Jewish issues and I would soundly defeat Chomsky in five minuites flat.

    Anybody who understands the Jewish problem and cannot see through Chomsky like a plane of glass is a moron.

    • Agree: Republic, Alden
  115. @Rich

    Believe it or not Hitler was a well known German Jewish name (I know he was Austrian). His family changed it from another variant to Hitler.

  116. @Simon Legree

    Hate speech laws were brought about by French Jews as in every other western country. Chomsky is full of sh*t.

  117. @Willem

    Yes but is it good for the Jews?

  118. onebornfree says: • Website

    G. Durocher says: “I was struck at how similar Hitler’s critique of capitalist democracy was to Noam Chomsky’s.”

    Which reveals an extreme political naivete on your part.

    You might as well be “struck” by how similar Hitlers, Chomskys, Lenins, Stalins, Maos, Xis, Lincolns, Wilsons, FDRs, etc. , [all the way through to Reagan, Clinton the Bushes, Obama and Trump – and lets not forget 99.9% of all political so-called “intellectuals”], ideas are to each other , when all of the fol de rol and fancy trimmings are removed.

    As Mao said: “political power comes from the barrel of a gun” [ or words to that effect].

    And by the way, capitalism has very little to do with modern “democracy” as that term is usually bandied about, as all “democracy” stands for these days is mob rule, enforced via the barrels of many, government guns[and prisons] .

    “Democracy is a sort of laughing gas. It will not cure anything, perhaps, but it unquestionably stops the pain.” H.L. Mencken

    [MORE]

    “Liberty and democracy are eternal enemies, and every one knows it who has ever given any sober reflection to the matter. ” H.L. Mencken

    “Democracy is the worship of jackals by jackasses.” H.L. Mencken

    “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” H.L. Mencken

    “If x is the population of the United States and y is the degree of imbecility of the average American, then democracy is the theory that x times y is less than y.” H.L. Mencken

    “All of democracy’s axioms “resolve themselves into thundering paradoxes, many amounting to downright contradictions in terms. The mob is competent to rule the rest of us – but it must be rigorously policed itself. There is a government, not of men, but laws – but men are set upon benches to decide finally what the law is and may be.” H.L. Mencken

    “Regards”, onebornfree

  119. Malla says:
    @Digital Samizdat

    NS practiced properly would not look the same in different countries, as it would have to take into account differences in race, culture and national interest.

    Very true.

  120. Well…using the sillogism on an inverse way, I can say Hitler was a smart guy because everyboy can recognize the very great intelectual dimension of Chomsky . I only can say thanks to the author of this snob article

  121. Zumbuddi says:
    @Simon Legree

    If you were president of USA you’d have to get permission from Elan Carr at US State Dept, office of special privileges for Jews, before speaking harshly to France about its hate speech laws.

    Carr would inform you, Mr / Ms President, that hate speech laws are necessary to protect Jews from being turned into soap, and firthermore, why has the president of USA failed to abrogate First Amendment?

    Does he want to start another holocaust?

  122. JackOH says:
    @Exile

    ” . . . [I]f sources as divergent as Hitler and Chomsky agree on the flaws of capitalism/neo=liberal democracy, it lends credibility to those criticisms . . .”.

    Exile, that’s exactly how I read it.

    Our political problems aren’t that difficult to understand:

    Democrats – Sell-out to crony capitalism and global capitalism. Offers an Identity Politics Plantation for rent-seekers and legitimacy-seekers as political camouflage.

    Republicans – Sell-out to crony capitalism and global capitalism. Offers a Freedom and Opportunity Plantation as political camouflage.

    As far as I can tell, we really don’t have an American or Americanist politics that tells me I ought to give a meaninful damn about my fellow citizens in the ‘hood, the gated ‘burbs, and everywhere else because, fuckin’ ‘ey, they’re my fellow Americans.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
  123. Hitlers main points seem taken from Spengler’s Man and Technics, especially the last chapter. He also covers it in more detail in volume 2 of Decline of the West

  124. @Exile

    Durocher’s not romanticizing or white-washing here, he’s making a serious point: if sources as divergent as Hitler and Chomsky agree on the flaws of capitalism/neo=liberal democracy, it lends credibility to those criticisms and makes it harder to refute them by ad hominem or accusations of bias on the part of the critics.

    Lordy. _That_ is your argument? The big loser in WW II and an academic agree that US society should be reorganized? Add in Pol Pot, Stalin, Marx, Trotsky, Putin, Mussolini, and BLM, not to mention the Wobblies, if you like. The argument remains unconvincing. Peterson’s “first, demonstrate your competence by cleaning and organizing your room and then your home and your affairs, _then_ try to re-make the world. None of the above, except perhaps Putin, could have passed that test.
    Q: Is Marxism a science or a philosophy?
    A: Philosophy. If it were a science they’d have tried it out on dogs first.

    Counterinsurgency

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  125. lysias says:

    Hitler’s speech was delivered on Dec. 10, 1940. A full text in German can be found with Google using the title “Hitler Und Die Demokratie”.

    • Replies: @lysias
  126. @Thorfinnsson

    They re-armed, because they were the only ones who had disarmed, in accordance with the peace treaty.
    https://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/fichteEwhobroke.html

    Germany had disarmament proposals before 1935, that would have further reduced arms. They were rejected. http://ihr.org/other/what-the-world-rejected.html

  127. Save this,

    Dr. Noam Chomsky would not have rounded up poor peasants or middle class home dwellers. He would have instead gone right to the heart of the problem bankers, and the elite classes who bankrupted the country a second time after WW! by borrowing money they knew they could not repay . . .

    It is unlikely that Dr, Chomsky would blamed the matter on a single ethnic group.

    • Replies: @Ano ymous
  128. Wally says: • Website
    @Durruti

    LOL again.

    You simply have no answers to my factual rebuttals. You simply dodge them.

    You start fights and then get clobbered.

    You are making a fool of yourself.

  129. fnn says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    The Hitler Question isn’t entirely irrelevant-if only because the Western elites keep telling us they’re still fighting Hitler. Look at Google News and you’ll see AH is in the news every day.

  130. Wally says:
    @Matra

    The Munich agreement is irrelevant.

    Czech President Hacha asked Hitler for protectorate status, for variety of reasons, simple stuff that you dodge.

    recommended:
    Why did Germany annex all of Czechoslovakia? / It didn’t.
    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=9569

    You’ve also dodge the facts presented at The Unz Review which prove that the USSR was planning a massive attack.

    You’ve dodged the many examples of Hitler wanting peace and who really started WWII that I posted in comment #13 and that have been written about at The Unz Review.

    IOW, you’re a juvenile who is full of easily debunked Zionist crap.

    • Agree: Mulegino1
    • Replies: @Mulegino1
  131. Anonymous[384] • Disclaimer says:
    @Counterinsurgency

    Your argument is Peterson?
    Seriously?

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  132. Ano ymous says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    JChomsky “would have —”

    What has Chomsky actually DONE?

    He’s still alive.
    If He’s so smart, why is he not DOING something to correct USA’s many problems?

    Hitler didn’t “blame an ethnic group,” he solved problems, revitalized many aspects of German life.
    You’ve Ingested too much propaga da.

    What has Chomsky done?

  133. Miggle says:
    @Dieter Kief

    True. Lots of mistakes made Hitler big. A lack of checks and balances in the constitution of Weimar Germany is a crucial one.

    Is it checks and balances that made the US government the most corrupt of all time anywhere and reduced close to a majority of its population to living in poverty, led to massive killings by its police even disregarding Waco, massive prison incarceration rates for profit: far, far higher rates than in Russia, China and Iran? Or are the checks and balances themselves a chief source of the vast corruption, leading to and covered by super-elaborate legalisms like passing a law authorizing the theft of an Iranian ship and its cargo in the Mediterranean, thousands of miles from the USA?

    • Replies: @Miggle
  134. Miggle says:
    @Miggle

    And how can there be “checks” when everything is “classified”, and when Julian Assange has to be murdered in a US prison but it will be made to look like suicide?

  135. anonymous[251] • Disclaimer says:

    World War II was a disaster. Disaster for Germany, Germans, Germany allies, disaster for the British Empire which quickly folded after Britain supposedly “Won” World War II.

    That said, Hitler did many great things before the invasion of Poland, and Hitler had many reasonable and just intelligent “observations”.

    Hitler was against mass German unemployment and mass German inflation.

    When Hitler and his National Socialist Party came to power – he/they ended mass unemployment and mass inflation.

    Are we now supposed to be FOR mass unemployment and mass inflation?

    Hitler also had good taste in music, art, architecture and women. His girl friend Eva Braun was a babe.

    Lots of leader like John F Kennedy and Loyd George had positive things to say about Hitler.

    I take the same view with this Noam Chomsky.

  136. Paw says:
    @Malla

    Deliberately they created Czechoslovakia and even they did not /Versailles/ suppress the agresivity of Germans..
    France destroyed and was decayed by Jewish financial frauds, in period between wars. Close to real democracy Czechoslovakia , Slovaks mostly /hated /Czechs and they gradually admired more and more Hitler.. After war, they always ready to push knife into Czech backs, started to love Stalin very much and destroyed reforms leading to socialism with” human face” /in 1968/. Now Slovaks try return again onto Czech country and one is present prime minister. In Czech govt.
    The Sudetenland Germans were the Austria Germans and not the German Reich populations., where they wanted to come “home”.
    Now the same Germans want to come home again into the Czech republic.. And Czech govt. is ready to give to the NAZI officers assets to they son and daughters… They both Slovaks and Germans apparently can not exists without “addiction” on everything Czech..
    Czech did not dominate the state , between wars ,the strongest party was The Sudetenland Party ,all Germans were in one party ,but they were not interested to join in democratic processes , they were only interested in destroying the state..!!!
    Dominating is easy to say for many , and there are many misleading articles in Global Research too and by German authors.. Conclusion , mostly authors repeat the false official propaganda..

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @Fox
  137. “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate. – Noam Chomsky”

    https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/516842-the-smart-way-to-keep-people-passive-and-obedient-is

    COMMENT: Chomsky is talking about the Overton window: the range of ideas that “The Powers That Be” (TPTB) will allow in public discussion.

    EXAMPLES:
    (1) Tucker Carson recently went outside the Overton window, when he said “white supremacy is a hoax”, then TPTB immediately “vacationed” him for political reeducation, and now he is safely back within the window, rattling his cage on issues harmless to TPTB.

    (2) The Controlled Protest Press (CPP) will often blame economic problems on the Federal-Reserve making wrong moves, and suggest the right moves the Fed should make instead, as the correct solution. But the CPP will never suggest that the correct solution is to end the Fed and the private currency they issue, and to return the currency-issuing power to the government, as required by the constitution (Article I Section 8). Because that’s outside the Overton window.

    (3) The CPP will often complain about the government ignoring warning signs before the 9/11 attack, and botching their response after it happened. But the CPP will never suggest the whole thing was an inside job to garner public support for bankers oil wars in the middle east. Because that’s outside the Overton window.

    • Replies: @Professional Stranger
  138. …when elite and majority opinion clash, the American elite is over time able to impose its policies onto the majority (examples of this include U.S. intervention in both World Wars and mass Third World immigration since the 1960s, opposed by the people and promoted by the elite).

    True. True. True.

  139. “What has Chomsky done?”

    Hmmmmm . . . interesting.

    None of my comments deny that Chancellor Hitler managed to marshall a sense of destiny, and revitalization of both German spirit, group and individual well being and as well as industry.

    However, that really is beside the point condoning the persecution whether by death of ten and the incarceration of millions hardly something I can support. Notably as they were not the cause of Germany’s economic problems as a group. That second round on investments after WWI led to a disasterous series of events.

    My point here is that Dr. Chomsky would have targeted the power structure. And while he and I do not agree on all his strategic policy critiques, his body of work and advocacy on power relational dynamics has contributed a global understanding to the same and has enormous impact on international policy formulation to decrease tensions.

    But as someone in the communication field, I am not sure anything will surpass his contribution to learning and language of children in their formative years was ground breaking knowledge toward understanding and improving childhood knowledge for more than fifty years across the globe all to the betterment of society at large – on a global scale.

    I am not taking anything away from Chancellor Hitler in what he did for the people of Germany — not at all.

    But the impact from an overall developmental standpoint the scope and breadth of Dr. Chomsky’s work might surpass that of Chancellor Hitler in real outcomes long after you and have passed.

    Again, the difference here is how each would have dealt with supposed cause and effects and Dr. Chomsky most likely would have targeted a far smaller and responsible population. It does not mean I agree with everything that Dr. Chomsky advocates. Cases in point: Our success in Vietnam and our response to the Serb-Kosovar conflict.

    Just a reminder, none of my comments deny that Chancellor Hitler accomplished some positives for Germans — no question. That is not the issue. The issue is in comparing the two men. And I have no doubt that despite Dr. Chomsky’s critique of capitalist corporate military hegemony his method would not have included rounding the least responsible, if he rounded up anyone at all.

    • Replies: @anon
  140. @Professional Stranger

    CHOMSKY himself always stays within the Overton window, and makes a show of it:

    Chomsky goes beyond maintaining a strategic silence on 9/11, to inciting smear-campaigns against skeptics of the official narrative of 9/11. He demeans “truthers”: “Their lives are no good… Their lives are collapsing…They are people at a loss… Nothing makes any sense… They don’t understand what an explanation is… They think they are experts in physics and civil engineering on the basis of one hour on the Internet.”

    • Agree: turtle
    • Replies: @turtle
  141. Pater says:

    I think you should ask the Slavic untermenschen; Poles, Czechs, Serbs, Byelorussians & Ukranians what their experience of occupation by the Wehrmacht was like. Poland alone lost 5 million civilians with Ukraine losing a similar number.

    • Agree: Miro23
  142. Malla says:
    @Paw

    The Sudetenland Germans were the Austria Germans and not the German Reich populations., where they wanted to come “home”.

    Hitler considered all Germans, Austrian or German as one people.

    Maybe you are right. It is very hard to know the truth as all ethnic groups put their point of view. If the Reich had unfairly treated Czechs, then I do not support that. It was important to build a European brotherhood with all including Russians as all Europeans (and widely all humans) were targets of exploitation for the Banking elites.

  143. @German_reader

    rats killed more people than hitler.

  144. Fox says:
    @Paw

    Don’t know where you get your info from, but it’s not from sources relating to reality.
    So, if there were seven million Czechs, 4 million Germans, some 2.5 million Slovaks, some Hungarians, Ruthenians and Poles, in all about 14 million people, it is not very sensible to state that the 4 million Germans dominated the seven million Czechs; the hyper chauvinistic Czechs, who were telling tall tales to the ignorant Wilson about the extent of their dominions, and who occupied directly after the Armistice in 1918 the German provinces, knew very well what they wanted and how to get it from the big brothets at versailles. At a price of course, to join theencirclement alliance again to guarantee France’s desire to be the dominant power in Europe. Likewise, the Slovaks desired to leave the state where they had to dance to the Czechs’s rule. That was no different in 1939 as in the early 1990s, when they wanted to cut their ties with the domineering Czechs. I see the evidence for a failed state in both events, much as I see the same with Yugoslavia.

    Austrians, like Bavarians, Alsatians, Prussians, Saxons, Swabians, and so on, are Germans, a fact felt in all German provinces from the Etsch to the Belt, from the Maas to the Memel (these are bodies of water delineating the borders of German reach), expressed by several Austrian governments between 1918 and the early 1930s, attempted to put in practice repeatedly by Austria after the First War, but was forbidden to unite with the greater part of Germany by the Blackmail Powers of versailles, led in particular by France.
    Both Masaryk and Benes were chauvinistic madmen who primarily defined their own being through their opposition to Germans and Germany, their neighbors of a thousand years.

    I find it astonishing that after the catastrophic events in the 20th century there are still people who do not understand that small-minded, provincial thinking led to the disaster of Versailles and all its consequent catastrophes, the latest being the planned elimination of Europe and the European part of mankind.

  145. foobb1 says:
    @Malla

    Aryans were never socialist since no Socialist ideas exist in the Aryan holy books – (the 4 veddas), or in any Aryan mythology (Mahabharata being the main Aryan epic).

    I’m not sure why you are confusing Germanic and Aryan. The Nazis specifically disowned their German religion and adopted the Hindu Aryan ones – that included Aryan books that were never written in any Germanic language – they are all in Sanskrit.

    The closest eddas to the Aryan ones are the Norse – but Aryan is not a Norse religion term, only a Hindu religion one. Odin never appears in any Aryan story, epic or pantheon. Brahma/dyeus never appears in Norse.

    • Replies: @Malla
  146. @Fake Mikemikev

    The great post war gentile brainwashing began with lies abut Hitler’s supposed capitalist -imperialist plans and efforts We cannot change who we are until we understand how we got to be this way. This is not about our becoming “Nazi”

  147. Biff says:
    @annamaria

    To be President of the United States is now exceedingly dangerous. Of course, assassination is the bigger danger; but, now, there will also be the danger of imprisonment. A politician’s selling out to billionaires in order to reach the top can become especially risky when billionaires are at war against each other — and not merely against some foreign (‘enemy’) aristocracy.

    Interesting concept. When the elites go after each other; that is when you know empire is in rapid decline.
    Other powers may just simply wait it out.

    • Replies: @lysias
  148. Parfois1 says:
    @JackOH

    You summed up very well the nature of the duopoly ruling the US for donkey’s years. Representative democracy is a licence for political power by a small clique over the people. Obviously, both Fascism (Hitler) and Socialism (Marx) agree on that, but for different reasons. And so does anyone with some basic understanding of how the political process works.

    But the article goes further than stating the obvious: the intention – in my mind – is to show that, because Hitler and Chomsky are in agreement about the deception of “democracy”, then Fascism is a reputable ideology, so much so that Chomsky, by association, gives his imprimatur to that perception. Durocher (a self-declared racist) is just another purveyor of the Nazis’ lies attempting to dress that ideology with respectable robes.

    Nothing new there. Afterall Hitler also called his political party “Socialism”, the term stolen from the party he infiltrated for its popular appeal. As soon as he grabbed dictatorial power he imprisoned the socialists.

    • Replies: @JackOH
  149. Emslander says:
    @Anon

    Another important point that ought to be made about Hitler is that his Anti-Jewish statements were pretty moderate in the context of European commentators of the 1920’s. That’s hard for modern readers to understand, because he can be quoted devastatingly in the context of what is now acceptable.

    The holocaust isn’t going to be proven to the satisfaction of those who can’t find proof of it in the historical records and it isn’t going to be disproven to the satisfaction of current acceptable opinion. I’m interested in a truthful treatment of the nationalist movements that seemed ready to dominate and save Europe between the wars and that were very successful in neutralizing international Bolshevism, the most negative influence on human culture in the history of the post paleolithic world. If we could see Hitler, Franco, Musolini and others objectively, rather than as characters in our cartoonish modern cinema, we might learn something important.

  150. @Patrikios Stetsonis

    Hitlor wasn’t bad at all. Germany is crying out for someone like him today.

    Do you think he’d have let all these turd wotlrld million rapefugees into Europe the way that beagle-faced trouser-suited frump Judas Markel has????

  151. @Anonymous

    The argument is “first clean up your own life and then try for cleaning up the world”, and the assertion that the people named couldn’t do it. Jordan Peterson has stated this requirement and its rationale better than any other contemorary writer.

    Further, the critiques of Peterson’s work I’ve seen have been content free, rather like yours: pointing with contempt and making (or in some cases chanting) insults. “Aroma, flavor, but no caffeine”, to quote and old coffee advertisement.

  152. @BCB232

    Christian passivism and meekness will be the death of us all.

    • Replies: @BCB232
  153. “Christian passivism and meekness will be the death of us all.”

    Obviously someone who doesn’t know or comprehend what christianity is.

    ————————————

    “first clean up your own life and then try for cleaning up the world”

    This of course trite cliche nonsense, used as a ploy to avoid accountability for self and others. It has some usefulness to hypocrisy, but minus that —-

    zilch worth.

  154. Malla says:
    @foobb1

    The Vedic roots of Hinduism came from Central Asia and is not local to India. These central Asians also went to the Middle East And Europe.

  155. Mulegino1 says:
    @Wally

    Indeed, Wally.

    These people are unable to digest the most documented historical facts without a kosher narrative to follow.

  156. Sparkon says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    The German Army grew from one division to 36 by the beginning of 1938, and armaments expenditure went from near zero to one-fifth of economic output–financed without increases in taxation.

    I wonder what the order of battle was for the Red Army by 1938.

    In any event, Hitler’s first four-year plan began in 1936, by which time the Soviet Union was well into Stalin’s second Five Year Plan, the first, having begun in 1929, was declared successful and complete nine months ahead of schedule, as was the second. Stalin’s taxation amounted to several million Soviet citizens who were starved to death so that the USSR might sell grain abroad and feed the factory workers building the weapons of war.

    According to most accounts, as a result of Stalin’s two five year plans and by the outset of Barbarossa, the Soviet Union had not only the largest army, and the largest tank park, but also the largest air force in the world. Because of the frenzied pace of Soviet military industrialization and rearmament in the 1930s, the Red Army found itself equipped with many obsolete types by 1940, and it was primarily these outmoded weapons that were positioned to intimidate and bait Hitler into launching his foolish and ultimately futile attack on the Soviet Union in June 1941.

    By then, Hitler had already squandered his best chance for prevailing in WWII by failing to smash the BEF at Dunkirk and possibly knock England out of the war, and if that didn’t do it, by following up with an all-out Luftwaffe attack on Fighter command and all its vital infrastructure.

    Hitler’s biggest mistake and ultimate failure was in seeking solutions through military action, but the man with the little mustache was no warlord, and his many military mistakes are too numerous to recount here beyond mentioning Dunkirk and Barbarossa itself.

  157. Mulegino1 says:

    Anyone who will pay big money for a ticket to hear some kosher exhorter say, “clean up your room” and “stand up with your shoulders straight” is either too cucked to make a difference or too dumb to matter.

    The contemporary cuckoisie is in a pitiful state. All it can do is to play a lame Tweedle-GOP echo to Tweedle-Dem’s demands for the imposition of violent Jacobin revolution.

    The right needs an intelligent and forceful voice which is willing to go on the offensive in the current Kulturkampf, not a bunch of George Will cuckservative clones.

    • Agree: Ron Unz
    • Replies: @G
    , @Biff
  158. lysias says:
    @Biff

    Roman elites started to attack each other in 133 B.C., and the civil wars lasted a century. The Roman Empire survived several centuries after that.

    • Replies: @Biff
  159. lysias says:
    @lysias

    Sorry, the text that that search turns up is also incomplete. The full text of the speech is given at the end of volume 3 of Max Domarus, “Hitler Reden,” under the date Dec. 10, 1940.

  160. cassandra says:

    Chomsky and Hitler’s thesis, that democracy is flawed, is so reflexively opposed it might be easier to openly discuss the holocaust or climate change, so effectively have democracy’s “benefits” been inculcated. But as with those examples, I don’t believe “the science is settled”. Consider the article’s statement:

    Liberal-democracies allow for regular changeovers of power, transparent feedback between society and government, and the cultivation of a habit of give-and-take between citizens.

    1. Now regularity may be beneficial for certain biological functions, but I don’t see why the ability to eliminate a poor regime quickly, or to keep a competent one in place, is necessarily a bad characteristic.

    2. Given the example of post WWII US, I don’t see how any one can see transparency as being characteristic of, much less intrinsic to, democracy. The are structural reasons: democracy diffuses (electoral) power as widely as possible, in principle to every individual (currently even including non-citizens). But few, if any, individuals have the time or ability to develop opinions truly free of oligarchic manipulations, who now have masses of voters at their disposal, easily organized into political armies by subconscious propaganda.

    Press manipulation has been documented since the 19th century, and has come to be used

    [MORE]
    unapologetically in every war since that time. More recently, large sections of the electorate have been convinced, on nothing but the say-so of our secret police, that Russians have corrupted an election outcome, at the same time that a related voting block was persuaded that research showing that Google swung 5-20 million votes to Hillary by changing its search algorithms, was fringe. It’s hard to imagine a more opaque form of power.

    3. As for give-and-take between citizens, just have a look at Antifa, domestically. Geopolitically, the exacerbation of ethnic strife seems to be an engine of the “democracy” of color revolutions.

    4. These criticisms aren’t new, but they are pretty much sidelined. For instance, at the end of his military history, The Civil Wars of England, author John Kenyon makes the surprising political assertion that the formation of the British Parliament was a recipe for oligarchy (though he doesn’t explain why he thinks that ended post-WWI).

    Non-democratic governments, like autarchy or monarchy, have the feature that the source of power is identifiably localized. Even Machiavelli gives a sort of back-handed compliment to open autarchy: his Prince’s manipulations have to a large extent the function of maintaining public opinion, which must be respected one way or another.

    Putin’s rule is often describes as autocratic, yet it can hardly be described as incompetent or especially brutal. He probably has killed some political opponents, but few powerful factions will tolerate a serious political threat (Gary Webb, Seth Rich, Julian Assange, maybe JFK). Putin’s rule, however, like most competent autarchies, respects the fate of its citizens, and promotes the national interests, traditions, and characteristics of its people, a nationalist view shared by other “pariahs” like Brexiteers, Orban, Salvini, and the “right wing”. I suspect that’s the real crime, as viewed through the elitist prism of internationalist oligarchy.

    I can’t speak for other readers, but I myself need to take a closer look at exactly what ideas were discussed by Metternich and his cohorts at the Congress of Vienna.

  161. Skeptikal says:
    @Fake Mikemikev

    Why not stick to discussing the ideas in the essay?
    It is pathetic to fall back on the ad hominem “Hitler!” excuse for not engaging with the ideas.
    Perhaps Durocher is wrong in the ideas he attributes to Hitler.
    For myself I have always found it interesting that the basic concept of “national” “socialism” (let’s just look at those words separately) seems to bear thinking over: A socialism that is not a international system but is based on a nation. Obviously how you define a nation is pretty important.

    Interestingly, now the Jews/Zionists have defined themselves as a nation (whether or not the citizens of this nation actually live in Israel). And the point of this nation certainly appears to be to confer all of the benefits of citizenship in the nation only on that nation’s citizens and on no others. Many of the benefits of citizenship seem to be of a socialist nature: quite a few freebies such as education, health care, vacations at the seashore in special hotels, free housing (on land stolen from the natives), etc. etc. So, this Jewish nation certainly seems to espouse a version of socialism that is nation-based. I.e., national socialism.

  162. G says:
    @Mulegino1

    Would the real GOP EMPEROR please stand up.

  163. turtle says:
    @Professional Stranger

    There is. or at least was, a professor in the Department of Materials Science & Engineering at MIT, where Chomsky is Professor Emeritus of Linguistics, who spoke out publicly regarding certain anomalies found in the debris of the twin towers (not Building 7). Prof. Chomsky could have simply walked across campus and, no doubt, gotten an audience with his fellow faculty member, had he chosen to do so.

    Ridiculing the public statements of someone with actual expertise in a relevant field by implying that none who have spoken out are qualified to do so is intellectually dishonest in the extreme.

    Chomsky is a fraud.

    • Replies: @Professional Stranger
  164. BCB232 says:
    @The_seventh_shape

    We’ll see. Stalin asked “how many divisions does the Pope have?” The Chair is still there, the Soviet Union is gone – God works in mysterious ways.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  165. Mefobills says:
    @Anon

    I agree. Understanding of the natural world leads one to a Nazi position. You cannot unlearn.

    People who are not antisemites are ignorant or dupes or lacking in morality.

  166. JackOH says:
    @Parfois1

    Parfois1, thanks.

    I’m not seeing all that much in Guillaume’s choice of disparate shipmates to show that two men with wildly different fan bases can nonetheless agree that liberal democracy is something of a sham.

    Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader held a pow-wow some time in the 1990s, and I think both more or less agreed that the political superiority of corporations, which are profoundly soulless entities in my opinion, is a stumbling block to both Left and Right conceptions of society.

    They’re right. If I were an unscrupulous zillionaire, I’d “work” the feminist and immigrationist Left for cheap labor, and the corporate-hugging Right for direct subsidies and preferences of all sorts. I’d welcome the weakening of the family and all sorts of traditional ties to safeguard against uppity White males pushing for wage increases to protect their breadwinner status and capacity for family formation. Of course, I’d make sure I had the right political camouflage to make the whole thing work right. I’m a bit gloomy, but that’s how I’m seeing things.

  167. TURTLE in COMMENT 169: There is. or at least was, a professor in the Department of Materials Science & Engineering at MIT, where Chomsky is Professor Emeritus of Linguistics, who spoke out publicly regarding certain anomalies found in the debris of the twin towers (not Building 7). Prof. Chomsky could have simply walked across campus and, no doubt, gotten an audience with his fellow faculty member, had he chosen to do so.

    Ridiculing the public statements of someone with actual expertise in a relevant field by implying that none who have spoken out are qualified to do so is intellectually dishonest in the extreme.

    Chomsky is a fraud.

    STRANGER: Agreed! There are also the 1500 architects and engineers at “Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth” https://www.ae911truth.org/ who have spoken out, and who are well qualified to do so. Same goes for Pilots for 9/11 Truth http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ .

  168. “Ridiculing the public statements of someone with actual expertise in a relevant field by implying that none who have spoken out are qualified . . .”

    That all depends on the veracity of the content and its rationale. For example a study on a particular behavior that examines people from completely different walks of life and then assigns results based on benign qualities that don’t into account said different environmental factors —

    One doesn’t need to be a statistician or a behavioral scientist to call the results into question. matters not a lick the person’s expertise those results will be questionable on their face.

    Measuring what is occurring in environments of conflict simply are not comparable to what takes place in relatively stable environments.

  169. @BCB232

    This bizarre and creepy religious jargon again. “The Chair” refers to the papacy, I presume?

    That “sede” would be better off “vacant” given the liars and enablers/apologists for sexual perverts and harassers who fill and have filled it.

    You’re really still proud of “The Pope”, trust his corrupt, dishonest, America-hating, heavily homosexualized institution, and honor his, um, “Chair”? What would it take for you to ever give up on that organization?

    “The Pope” will find that his legions have dissipated recently and will keep declining, at least as concerns actual Americans. We left that church and won’t trust it again. He can have his Third World peoples, whom he seems to consider entitled to flout our laws, disrespect us, not learn our language before coming here, not assimilate into our culture after coming here, and demand everything we have.

    Keep on worshipping the magic Chair and the sodomites in silly hats.

    • Replies: @BCB232
  170. Alden says:
    @Durruti

    The Socialist Democratically elected Spanish government of 1933 had few communists.

    But by 1936, Spanish and Russian communists had assassinated all the socialists and taken over Spain with to the applause of every Jew and liberal in the world.

    Then the greatest man of the 20th century, General Francisco Franco and the Spanish Catholics rose in rebellion, killed the communists, and got their country back.

    One thing I admire greatly about the Russian communists who ruled Spain before Franco defeated them. The Soviets sent the American sissy city boys of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade to the front lines to be slaughtered by the Spanish fighting to throw the Russians out of Spain.

    • Replies: @Durruti
  171. anon[108] • Disclaimer says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Was Chomsky the linguist a stickler for proofreading?

  172. Molly says:

    Fascinating! I’m reminded of Noam Chomsky’s Manufactured Consent quite a bit lately due to the reckless deplatforming. As a “recovering anarchist,” I sometimes wonder… have I moved right? Or has the left moved left? Thank you for writing!

  173. “Was Chomsky the linguist a stickler for proofreading?”

    Given the volume of his research, I rather think he was.

  174. Chomsky has valid critiques of US power and its use. He points out the evil done in the name of the people re: capitalism (which benefits those who live off their capital. These people travel the world in search of people to screw over and drop like bad habits. See – wood and coal industries in West Virginia, USA.

    That Israel is a ethno state is no coincidence, it is exactly the belonging to the group which makes for a strong nation. All of “us” against all of “them”. That Israel doesn’t have the mass influx of aliens as white European nations must suffer should be instructive. They learned this from the NDSP as evidenced by the tactics of ghettoization on the Palestinians. They even have the strange belief that walls work. 😉

    Civic nationalism makes a lotta sense, but one must feel connection to the land, the people and the overarching nation of which they are a part. What multicultural gubbamint has lasted without friction between its peoples and for how long? Most western nations are the only ones with the multiculti death wish. Why do people migrate to hideous racist white nations? Do they can gripe about whatever they want while living high on the hog, of course! 😉

    Why don’t people migrate to Israel, Japan, Cape Verde or Burundi? Because they either don’t let many “others” in by defacto law or nobody wants to go because of dejure common sense.

  175. Lively debate in only allowed spectrum = echo chambers.

    Even some of the more robotic unz commenters want this.

    Complaints about whataboutism is also attempts at forming echo chambers

  176. Biff says:
    @lysias

    Roman elites started to attack each other in 133 B.C., and the civil wars lasted a century. The Roman Empire survived several centuries after that.

    What have the Romans ever done for us?!”

  177. Biff says:
    @Mulegino1

    The right needs an intelligent and forceful voice which is willing to go on the offensive in the current Kulturkampf, not a bunch of George Will cuckservative clones.

    How do you think an idiot like Trump got elected?

  178. BCB232 says:
    @RadicalCenter

    Chesterton wrote:

    “All the empires and the kingdoms have failed, because of this inherent and continual weakness, that they were founded by strong men and upon strong men. But this one thing, the historic Christian Church, was founded on a weak man, and for that reason it is indestructible. For no chain is stronger than its weakest link.”

    Yes, Francis is bad in his own way but, fortunately, not immortal. I pray Cardinal Sarah is elected next. A black African traditionalist, he will make the Left’s head explode. He is against the invasion of Europe. A black Cardinal is a better advocate for whites than almost all white men.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  179. @Fake Mikemikev

    “[T]he alt-right really needs to abandon talking about Hitler”. Well, maybe the alt right would abandon the topic if they didn’t hear about the Holocaust ad nauseum – that’s “talking about Hitler” too. In fact, “talking about Hitler” is a major fundraising method.

  180. Durruti says:
    @Alden

    But by 1936, Spanish and Russian communists had assassinated all the socialists and taken over Spain with to the applause of every Jew and liberal in the world.

    Welcome to your fantasy world.

    I prefer Tolkien.

  181. @Bardon Kaldian

    So called revisionists are bunch of morons. Hitler was, without lapsing into moralizing, a very specific product of a very specific time, a charismatic leader of a great humiliated nation during a deep crisis in all Western civilization (this includes Russia, too).

    Now, Europe & Europe-derived peoples face a completely different crisis (or various crises), so that what Hitler was or wasn’t is utterly irrelevant to our contemporary condition & its challenges.

    I would actually say, quite the contrary. If one looks to the Nazis’ own statements of their political aims (rather than the globohomo propaganda version then and later), it is in fact strikingly obvious that they were fighting the exact same problems as we are having today: globalist capitalism, “democracy” and Weimar-style cultural degeneracy. This very article makes this point very well. Studying their problem formulations and attempted solutions thus make a fair bit of sense, even if (of course) one doesn’t necessarily have to agree with everything they said and did, or copy it mechanically. Learning from the past is distinct from imitating it.

    There are of course various differences between their situation and ours, from demographic to sociological to geopolitical, but most of them can be summarized in the few words that things have gotten very much worse still for us today than they were for them in the 1930s. Except perhaps for the added complications of emergent artificial intelligence and human engineering (which are mostly still potential rather than actual threats), the fundamental issues would seem to be the same in just about every important respect – only now metastatized and increased by seventy years’ compound interest.

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  182. Marcus says:
    @Anon

    Hitler considered the Hungarian troops to be the worst of his allies, I guess he probably regretted being so favorable to them at the Vienna settlement

  183. @Durruti

    overthrow of the democratically elected Government of the Spanish Republic

    Really? And I suppose Pinochet overthrew the democratically elected government of Argentina.

  184. @German_reader

    …but the fact remains that Hitler, without any really compelling necessity, initiated one of the most destructive wars in history and then had his followers commit some of the worst mass murders ever. The “revisionists” posting on UR may be able to ignore that, but most people won’t.

    Initiating World War II was a complicated process, and Hitler was by no means the only person responsible. Perhaps he was not even the chief culprit. That, at least, was what Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain thought, or so he told Joseph Kennedy (US Ambassador to England and JFK’s father). The following comes from the published diary of James Forrestal, US Secretary of Defense (1951, page 121):

    December 27 1945
    Played golf today with Joe Kennedy. I asked him about his conversations with Roosevelt and Neville Chamberlain from 1938 on. He said Chamberlain’s position in 1938 was that England had nothing with which to fight and that she could not risk going to war with Hitler.

    Kennedy’s view: That Hitler would have fought Russia without any later conflict with England if it had not been for Bullitt’s urging on Roosevelt in the summer of 1939 that the Germans must be faced down about Poland; neither the French nor the British would have made Poland a cause of war if it had not been for the constant needling from Washington.

    Bullitt, he said, kept telling Roosevelt that the Germans wouldn’t fight, Kennedy that they would, and that they would overrun Europe. Chamberlain, he said, stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war.

    Quite startling, isn’t it? I emphasize again, these were the Prime Minister of England and the US Ambassador talking privately. So, not exactly tinfoil hat people. Kennedy then told this to US Secdef Forrestal, who wrote it down. After his death, selections from his diary were published in 1951 by the Viking Press, including this. In other words, this is not a fake quote. If you doubt it, you can look up the book for yourself in a public library.

    Of course, these few lines don’t prove that Hitler was a good guy. But they are fairly persuasive evidence that he did not start World War II singlehandedly just because he was evil (as most history textbooks would have it). At the very least, they prove that his enemies didn’t think so when talking freely behind closed doors.

    If you look into this topic in further depth, just by reading the more exhaustive works of “mainstream” scholarship and checking the footnotes, you will find much interesting material which is likewise rarely mentioned in the history textbooks. Much of it agrees more with Neville Chamberlain’s interpretation of how the war came about than those of the likes of Richard Evans or Victor Davis Hanson.

    The “revisionists” posting on UR may be able to ignore that, but most people won’t.

    Obviously this article is not aimed at “most people” in the United States. In his writings here at UR, M. Durocher is not seeking to propagandize the ignorant masses, who are conditioned by simple Pavlovian psychology to scream and cry like million-headed babies whenever certain disagreeable topics are mentioned. At the present time (if hopefully not forever), that’s a lost cause.

    Rather, M. Durocher is discussing history, culture and current affairs, in an initiated and fairly objective manner, with more selected audiences that have already overcome part of their conditioning and are interested in facts as opposed to narrative. And for that purpose, this article is eminently well suited.

  185. Sin says:

    Read it and check out: The Last Battle of Europe , 10 parts

  186. Marcus says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Germany didn’t have to be “humiliated” it only looked that way to some of the population because of a lingering arrogant nationalism that was bent on succeeding where the 2nd reich had failed in forcing their will on the rest of the continent by force of arms. Subsequent history showed that for Germany (and Japan) economic competition was more fruitful.

  187. @BCB232

    Nice try, but neither “The Pope” nor this particular pope is the only or main problem.

    The bulk of the clergy and officials — archbishops, bishops, and priests — are the problem, as is the whole blindly obedient and unaccountable structure of that church.l, as is the unnatural immature unhealthy life the priests and nuns are (theoretically) required to live.

    As for an African controlling that church, you certainly reveal a lot by your statement. Good way to drive away even more normal self-respecting European people (including in the USA) from “The Church.”

    The truth is, nothing evil that that church could do would ever drive you away. You are a pope-worshipper or RCC-worshipper and hence an apologist for clear persistent evil. Calling this serial liar and protector of perverts and harassers “bad in his own way” is disgusting understatement.

    • Replies: @BCB232
  188. Fantastic article and analysis, extremely insightful. It’s not the least bit surprising that that the usual coven of cucks, Hasbara, etc. are shrieking over it.

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  189. Incitatus says:

    Interesting article, more for the fungus it grows.

    In Western democracies, Hitler claims: “Capital actually rules in these countries, that is, nothing more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth.” Furthermore “freedom” refers primarily to “economic freedom,” which means the oligarchs’ “freedom from national control.” In a classic self-reinforcing cycle, the rich and powerful get richer and more powerful through influence over the political process. Today, this has culminated in the existence of the notorious “1%” so demonized by Occupy Wall Street.

    Capital rules, cliques, oligarchs? Terrible indeed. Let alone international capital (which suckled/stabilized/saved Weimar, the NSDAP demon).

    Yes Versailles was bad. But not nearly as severe as Ludendorff’s Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (3 Mar 1918).

    Hitler’s Solution? Personally assault political rivals (Engineer Otto Ballerstedt, 14 Sep 1921 – kill him (and many others) 30 Jun 1934); Default on international debts after demonizing international finance that stabilized Germany; Abolish labor unions and rival political parties, murder or imprison leaders, confiscate their funds; Criminalize dissent and individual freedom (Volk ist alles); Curtail foreign exchange and travel; Establish a state-run re-armament economy benefiting régime-friendly titans (Thyssen, Krupp, IG Farben, Daimler-Benz, Bosch, Deutsche Bank, Messerschmitt, Heinkel, Dornier, etc.); Direct an ‘uncertainty principle’ (random) economy via a small number of rapacious party cronies (e.g. Hermann Göring) who report to an all-powerful, vain, windbag Austrian ex-gefreiter (PFC), accountable to no one, who can’t seem to awake before 10am, but wants to invade neighbors (yes, all of them) before noon.

    Result? Hitler’s very own “clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth”. Most from robbing fellow Germans and conquered neighbors. Beginning with party comrade ‘Call me Meyer’ Hermann Göring (Four Year Plan, Reichswerke Hermann Göring, Plan Oldenburg, etc.) and Treuer Heinrich Himmler (SS murder, looting, confiscation, retail slaves-for-starvation enterprises, etc.).

    Appetite, criminality, incompetence. Does it rival demon Capitalism? I think so, but you decide.

    Hitler’s solution was a (ME-ME-ME) suicide pact that killed 50+ million plus (including German millions), leveled Germany and most neighbors. All to gratify what? What sort of gambler-pervert willfully kills tens of millions to assuage his ego?

    Fast forward to 1 May 1945 Berlin and stalwart Aryan Club-foot Joe:

    “Doctor, I would be very grateful if you help my wife kill the children…[saving them] is impossible. They are the children of Göbbels.”
    – Göbbels to SS Dentist Helmut Kunz, Führerbunker Berlin 1 May 1945 [Beevor ‘The Fall of Berlin 1945’ p. 380]

    “”It’s all over with the children.”
    – Magda Göbbels to husband Joseph after sedating her six children by morphine (administered by SS Dentist Kunz), then crushing cyanide capsules in their mouths with the assistance of SS-Obersturmbannführer Ludwig Stumpfegger 1 May 1945 [Beevor ‘The Fall of Berlin 1945’ p. 380-381]

    “Let’s be quick. We’re short of time”
    – Göbbels to wife Magda vis-à-vis suicide [Beevor ‘The Fall of Berlin 1945’ p.381]

    What did Guillaume write? “Hitler and/or Chomsky on Capitalist Democracy”?

    What bullshit.

    How many people has Chomsky killed?

    • Troll: Malla
    • Replies: @refl
  190. Incitatus says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    “Fantastic article and analysis, extremely insightful. It’s not the least bit surprising that that the usual coven of cucks, Hasbara, etc. are shrieking over it.”

    “Coven of cucks”? Really? That’s all you’ve got, Mr. ‘involuntary-assisted suicide’?

    • 13 Jan 1943: German soldiers at Stalingrad are urged to write a last letter, as Luftpost ceases. Letters are intercepted, read and summarized by Captain Graf von Zedtwitz. Göbbels deems them too dangerous to deliver (they may expose régime incompetence – you know BM: no food, no ammunition, no winter clothes, etc.). The letters are held and destroyed, none are delivered to German families/next of kin. [Beevor ‘Stalingrad’ p.349];

    Why, mighty BM?

    Clubfoot Joe earlier wrote:

    “The impact of letters from the front, which had been regarded as extraordinarily important, has to be considered more than harmful today…Soldiers are pretty blunt when they describe the great problems they are fighting under, the lack of winter gear…insufficient food and ammunition.”
    – Göbbels remarks on Barbarossa reverses Winter 1941 [Stargardt ‘The German War’ p.223]

    “The great problems they are fighting under, lack of winter gear…insufficient food and ammunition”?

    Who determined such, BM?

    The same morons that launched war?

    BTW: they lost. Sorry.

  191. Richard S says:
    @obwandiyag

    Uh .. in a very obvious and self-explanatory way, he’s saying that the range of acceptable topics for public discussion will vary radically, depending on the nature of the political regime (ie who are the secret wire-pullers behind the scenes, who own and run society).

    Plainly self-evident, yes?

  192. refl says:
    @Incitatus

    Rest assured, lots of such letters did get through. Goebbels certainly had very specific examples in mind.

    Hitlers speech, apart from making rather sensible points about the fake nature of democracy, shows a complete detachment from his people. He had messed up and was about to lead his country to utter destruction. He should have honestly said what had gone wrong and tried to end it at whatever price. Instead, he comes up with a speech worth of a professor in his ivory tower.
    Besides, to Germans of his time the flaws of democracy stood out clearly. Post-WWII Germans got their Wirtschaftswunder in the West. You can say that for two Generations the Americans made good on their crime of destroying the country. That was certainly not the case post WWI. Anyone knew it and they just did noch want the destruction again.

  193. refl says:
    @Incitatus

    Let alone international capital (which suckled/stabilized/saved Weimar, the NSDAP demon).

    Yes Versailles was bad. But not nearly as severe as Ludendorff’s Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (3 Mar 1918).

    Stabilize Germany just so much as to crush it in the Great Depression and roll out the Hitler guy.
    You should inform yourself a bit on Brest Litowsk. The German high command wanted the war material for the war in the West, right. At the same time, while fighting on in the West they were the only to prevent the Bolsheviks from taking over Russia – all the while american banksters were making their deals in Petrograd. In Brest Litowsk there were conventional old style peace negotiations. The Germans were a year later quite astonished not even to be allowed into the conference room in Versailles. Versailles was not bad, it stands out as a shame in the history of International rekations. It in only topped by the treatment of Germany post WWII, when the country was abolished once and for all.

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  194. mikemikev says:
    @Fake Mikemikev

    This is not me but an imposter. Note the capital letter. Not sure what happened.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  195. BCB232 says:
    @RadicalCenter

    Christians reproduce themselves (Muslims do too). Secular people don’t. I have eight blond haired, blue/green eyed children. How about you?

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  196. Marcus says:
    @Incitatus

    Yes, the evil genius Hitler who didn’t send antifreeze with an army invading Russia. LOL!

  197. @Anon

    Agree.

    Your contention that to try to bring the left to reason is doomed to failure is absolutely true.

    A former Nazi would never yield over the fundamental truth that the so called ‘ Liberal Democracy’ is one big hoax that is at the service of the oligarchs and their lackeys, and if this gem of truth came from Hitler, then so much the better.

    I personally abide by the theory of a true old school leftist American writer, Dean Anderson, who traces the origin of the word Zionist to the word ‘scion’ (a descendant of a notable family or one with a long lineage, Oxford Dictionary) which implicates the blood lines primarily with the Jews acting as their agents; hence Chomsky’s assertion that the Jews act as intermediaries between exploiters and exploited.

    Hitler saw the scam and acted upon it. He threatened the big lie of democracy and he found an alternative to the left/right paradigm. That is why his non stop demonisation will never seize.

    • Replies: @Joe Levantine
  198. @Joe Levantine

    The writer Dean Henderson not Anderson

  199. @GeeBee

    Agree. You put a great case for the much needed revisionism without which history will keep repeating its tragic side.
    Unfortunately, German- reader is the epitome of the brainwashed European, whose education combined with the MSM and the rule of the Merkelites, makes them zombie like citizens who are passively watching the genocide of their race and culture by the schemes of the One World Government agents while their main pursuit is self flagellation and a total lack of critical thinking.

  200. @refl

    Which pushes the case for a German Russian alliance that could relieve these two long suffering countries from the deadly schemes of the so called Western democracies of France, UK and the United States of America, all dominated by Zionist capitalism.

    In both World Wars, such an alliance would have spared both countries all the horrors for which they are still paying a price until today. More likely a Russo German alliance would have stopped WWI and subsequently the world would have skipped Bolshevism and WWII and the Western “ pathology” of our time.

  201. @German_reader

    “but the fact remains that Hitler, without any really compelling necessity, initiated one of the most destructive wars in history and then had his followers commit some of the worst mass murders ever. The “revisionists” posting on UR may be able to ignore that, but most people won’t.”

    Fighting a recalcitrant Poland manipulated by the UK and the USA into obstinacy as a means of perpetrating the ignoble aims of the Treaty of Versailles is hardly an initiation of war. I wonder if they ever taught you that it was Britain and France that declared war against Germany when Hitler was suing for peace ever evident by his letter to Daladier invoking him not to repeat the horrors of the WWI and reminding him that Germany had no qualms about its borders with France.

    Yet Hitler made many strategic mistakes of which I would list the following:

    – a great fascination with the British Empire
    – stopping nuclear research from 1936 till 1939
    – stopping Heinz Guderian from blocking the British army retreat from Dunkirk in the hope that he would give the British the chance to sign an honourable peace.
    – trusting the input of his intelligence service about the military and industrial state of the Soviet Union.
    -refusing the development of Von Ohain’s successfully designed jet engine.

    History never exonerates a loser. Had Hitler won the war, I am sure your comments along with most of the German intelligentsia would have been if a totally different nature. This is what is called ‘judging by hindsight’.

  202. Anonymous[243] • Disclaimer says:
    @mikemikev

    [Bad website behavior has consequences.]

  203. @Mulegino1

    The harsh reality that the status quo can not be survived longterm by our people, so the choice is to passively become extinct or make the supreme effort to strive for righteousness which is sure to be met with an immediate genocidal military attack by the Jew using his golem:

    …an effective and incredibly prescient and even prophetic statesman whose misfortune was to restore Germany to prosperity and greatness, buck economic orthodoxy by initiating the greatest economic recovery in recorded history and clean up German society and culture by removing the usual subversive suspects from power and influence. Such accomplishments have been shown to be recipes for war. A prosperous Germany which extricated itself from the financial hegemony of Wall St. and the City of London had to be destroyed no matter what.

    So the there is a main question and a subordinate issue:

    Which Way Western Man(1978)?

    and

    Who comprises the Jew’s golem most likely to attack us intending our genocide,
    the Sunni Arab, The American Negro(1901), the Evangelical WASP, or other?

  204. Incitatus says:
    @refl

    Thanks for interesting posts, refl.

    “Stabilize Germany just so much as to crush it in the Great Depression and roll out the Hitler guy.”

    Are you saying the Great Depression was induced by Western Powers? Designed to defeat Weimar/install Hitler? Don’t think so. I’d agree loan defaults/withdrawals (lending funds disappeared) had an effect. Especially for a country unrepentant on launching war that devastated neighbors, but had not experienced visible damage on their Vaterland, and blamed it all on the cowardly Home-Front, Freemasons, Jews, etc.

    German conservatives had an on-going romance with gefreiter Hitler from the time he was employed by Karl Mayr to spy on Bavarian political parties in 1919. They stupidly believed the immensely talented (clinically insane) agitator Hitler could be controlled. They (Ludendorff, Hindenburg, Papen, etc.) were wrong. As Hugenberg admits:

    “Yesterday I committed the greatest stupidity of my life. I joined forces with the greatest demagogue in world history.”
    -Alfred Hugenberg 31 Jan 1933 Reich Minister of Economics, Food and Agriculture [Childers ‘The Third Reich’ p.226]

    Hitler long promised to void Versailles, cancelling reparation payments. Why would Wall-Street creditors (with everything to lose) engineer his ascent?

    “You should inform yourself a bit on Brest Litowsk.”

    Always willing to learn.

    Ludendorff gave Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and injected him into Russia (arrived 16 Apr 1917 St-Petersburg). Less than a year later (3 Mar 1918) Ludendorff dictates the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. Russia cedes a quarter of its population and industry, 90% of its coal mines, 1+ million square miles of territory (home to 50 million people), 33% of its rails, 73% of its iron, and 5000 factories. It’s also forced to pay a 6-billion mark ‘indemnity’.

    Did I miss anything?

    Ludendorff (pal/rival of Hindenburg) was an early associate of gefeiter Hitler and ultimately an 8 Nov 1923 Putsch-mate (until the trials). Why would a Generalquartiermeister, one of three most powerful Wilhelmine figures responsible for failed WW1 strategy, a man ponderously laden with ‘manly’ ostrich-plumes and pounds of Cracker-Jack medals, commune with a gefeiter (PFC)?

    Here’s WW1 master-mind Ludendorff’s ‘philosophy’:

    “War is the natural state of man, which brings out the best in a people. War is without end and is the magnificent contest for which Germany is better qualified than all others. Peace is the bothersome interval between your last war and the next. It is neither desirable nor manly.”
    –Generalquartiermeister Eric Ludendorff ‘The Next War’ 1931

    Eric helped kill millions of Germans and fellow Europeans 1914-18. He failed abysmally, ruined his nation and neighbors. His choice for new leadership? Hitler – “the only man…who has any political sense”. Rematch anyone?

    Hitler was, at the beginning, the proxy choice of WW1 fuck-ups and Versailles deadbeats (Germany – after ruining Northern France and Belgium – never paid what it demanded – and received – from France in 1871). Ultimately, Hitler proved how dumb his sponsers were. Given unrestricted power in the Enabling Act (Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich) by Hindenburg 24 Mar 1933, Mr. Big had unlimited power. He destroyed Germany, then Europe, then himself.

    “The Germans were a year later quite astonished not even to be allowed into the conference room in Versailles. Versailles was not bad, it stands out as a shame in the history of International rekations”

    Agree. Engagement is everything. Its lack permitted a decade of rent-free Weimar blame, terrorism, assassination. Humiliation endowed incompetents like Wilhelm II, Hindenburg, Ludendorff with the golden ‘stab-in-the-back’ excuse covering their own stupidity.

    Rewind to 21 Mar 1918 and Ludendorff’s miraculous ‘Spring Offensive’ on the Western front. It fails by late April. Germany loses 880,000 men by July. For what? Each of those 880,000 men had a life, a family. Why were they wasted?

    Was it because the German General Staff was dumb as a rock and – after feeding their own men into the cosmic wood-chipper – didn’t anticipate mutiny? Or was is because ‘the Home Front, Jews, Freemasons [you name it] stabbed these saints in the back?

    You decide.

    • Replies: @refl
    , @Parfois1
  205. @Incitatus

    Right on cue. The coven includes those off their meds, BTW.

  206. FB says: • Website

    @ Incitatus…

    Very informative and fact filled REAL historical info you’ve been posting…

    You do realize that you’re dealing with half-wits that are immune to common sense or rationality…?

    I think I am beginning to see a subtle purpose to Mr Unz’s apparent madness here…

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  207. refl says:
    @Incitatus

    The love affair of German conservatives with Hitler was most certainly due to the fact that he had been Meldegänger (charged with delivering communications) at staff level – he was known to some higher ups and he was sent into the newly formed Nazi party as intelligence. It was Ludendorff who had the fatal idea to point the American military attachee (or was it a deputy, I am not sure now) to that able young politician in Munich. From there his ominous wealthy German-American friend Ernst Hanfstaengl who had studied with Roosevelt.
    Hitler had his origin in intelligence – if he knew who were his enablers is doubtful, but when he shot himself he certainly took some really awkward truths with him.
    It was certainly not the “Western powers”, who arranged for the depression but rather the banksters behind them. Reparations were the real war aim in WWI, to deliver Germany and all the participants to financialisation – Germany paying WWI debt up to – 2012!!! And to this day the Bank of International Settlement is in the back of the secret bankster deals – take home from that what you want.

    When you are into scandalous remarks by political leaders, how about french minister Clemenceau: “There are 20 million Germans to many?” Germany in WWII and after lost some 15 millions, so they at least came close. How about Roosevelt at Teheran? Stalin proposed to shoot some 50 000 members of German intelligentsia, Churchill protests, then Roosevelt: “Oh no!We can’t do that! Lets make it 49 500!” You may say that these assasinations were carried out. WWII will be settled, when people can mention these truths without losing there careers and their livelyhood. Unfortunately, when these truths enter the public mind, the West as we know it, will cease to exist.
    When they Nuremberg Tribunal handed down its sentences, the West lost the war.

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  208. @John Regan

    If one looks to the Nazis’ own statements of their political aims (rather than the globohomo propaganda version then and later), it is in fact strikingly obvious that they were fighting the exact same problems as we are having today: globalist capitalism, “democracy” and Weimar-style cultural degeneracy. This very article makes this point very well. Studying their problem formulations and attempted solutions thus make a fair bit of sense, even if (of course) one doesn’t necessarily have to agree with everything they said and did, or copy it mechanically. Learning from the past is distinct from imitating it.

    Post WW I every country in Eastern and Southern Europe tried Parliamentary government. They could not make it work. Elected representatives used it as a license to steal (same as Tammany Hall back in the US). In the resulting chaos, the nations blamed Parliamentary government. It’s amazing how poorly the institution worked when transplanted. Now, of course, the same thing is happening in the US. Omar and AOC, not to mention the BCC, show just how badly parliamentary government (or other representative form of government) works when implemented by people are ruthless outside their genetic relatives (including ethnic groups) and don’t think beyond immediate goals.
    Consider the morning headlines (2019/08/24) — Obama administration member says that a Supreme Court vacancy would “tear this country apart”. This is understood as _he_ and his friends will tear the country apart. That’s no government, it’s an attempt to use escalation dominance (threats) – “do this and I will destroy things you want to preserve, and if you try to stop me I will win that fight by escalating the conflict”)

    So, yes, exactly the same problems — a government form that didn’t fit their population, extreme foreign influence, a society that doesn’t fit its underlying economics, a political system that had deteriorated to threats and violence.

    So – what have we learned, if anything? Serious question. The media propaganda is all about the burning issues of 1910. No learning there.

    Counterinsurgency

  209. Parfois1 says:
    @Incitatus

    Ludendorff gave Lenin 40 million gold marks ($100 million) and injected him into Russia (arrived 16 Apr 1917 St-Petersburg).

    I have come across similar assertions to the effect that Lenin was no more then a puppet in the hands of the the Wall St bankers; now I am also told that he was in the hands of the German general conducting the Spring Offensive on the Western Front to the tune of 40 million marks. That, in addition to similar donations by the bankers (also $40 million in gold, plus Schiff’s $20 million, etc.) made Lenin a multimillionaire even before he boarded the sealed train, which was already loaded with more gold! With all that dosh one wonders why Lenin didn’t sit tight in the safety of Zurich to remotely conduct the “revolution” instead of risking life across Germany and into certain danger in Russia. If he was so evil as to be puppeted around by the bankers and Germans – and a traitor to boot – why not?

    What astounds me is the gullibility and gross ignorance of those who glibly display such nonsense. True, the UR commentariat are capable of amazing feats of bovine reasoning, (see how they bleat, cackle and groan about being ruled by a tiny number of Jews!) but the shocking thing about it is their mental stupor.

    According to the prevailing view here, History is only a succession of events conjured up by Bankers, Satanists, Stalinists, Jews, Freemasons, Templars, Jesuits, Astrologists, Alchemists and sundry nutcases. People are incapable of feeling, thinking, getting together and revolting, mere amorphous matter… No wonder, with that type of homo sapiens, the US is stuffed!

  210. Loren says:
    @Simon Legree

    Chump sky, Krugman…why be ruled by such ‘intellectuals?’

  211. @Parfois1

    Parfois1,

    I have used the argument that Lenin was a German agent often to counter those who claim that he was working for Wall Street. It could be argued also that after the Bolsheviks plundered Russia and the wealth of the Tzar and the aristocrats, they paid back those funds as well as enriching themselves personally. I did read somewhere the amounts that Lenin, Trotsky, and another Bolshevik leader had deposited in their personal Swiss accounts after the revolution and these were astronomical, but can’t remember the reference. You’d be surprised, or maybe not, how many revolutionaries were members of secret societies like the Masons. I suppose it could be explained that they had to be since they had to plot their conspiracies in secret. No doubt the workers and the people have genuine grievances that need to be addressed, and they often riot or show their displeasure at their rulers in various ways, but those who would lead them to stage the revolutions and take power away from the rulers are de facto themselves conspirators and have to run their own activities as a conspiracy until they get the power, and often even thereafter. Also all terrorist groups have to, by the nature of their activities, work as conspirators engaged in a conspiracy, to avoid detection and capture. So yes, many great events in history, especially wars, were started in secret as secret plots or conspiracies, as doing it in the open would not offer the advantage of surprise necessary to win against the existing order. Whether the fact that they were conspirators delegitimises the work of these revolutionaries is another matter.

    • Replies: @FB
  212. FB says: • Website
    @Commentator Mike

    I would not be disinclined to believe that Lenin and the early Bolsheviks were financed by German interests…certainly the Brest-Litovsk treaty was disastrous for Russia…

    However, after Stalin took over we see a whole new ballgame…he cleaned house of the ridiculous and counterproductive elements and set the nation on a course of recovery…

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
    , @refl
  213. JackOH says:
    @Parfois1

    “According to the prevailing view here, History is only a succession of events conjured up by Bankers, Satanists, Stalinists, Jews, Freemasons, Templars, Jesuits, Astrologists, Alchemists and sundry nutcases. People are incapable of feeling, thinking, getting together and revolting, mere amorphous matter… No wonder, with that type of homo sapiens, the US is stuffed!”

    Well said, Parfois1.

    Seems to me any theory that has a monotonic, omnipotent power, such as those you mentioned, calling all the shots does violence to the very real individual dissenters within and without government, and for political counsel offers no more than despair, capitulation, and passivity, sometimes coupled with angry posing.

    If the Martians are, indeed, calling all the shots all the time and ever, and the possibility of moral agency has been extinguished, why not just shut our yaps, make our peace with our overlords, and call it a day.

    Meaningful dissent is extremely difficult, but not completely impossible. Even if you’re working theory is we’re governed by a Martian Council, it may be possible to frame your arguments so as to find favor with a faction or individual of that Martian Council. That’s the goal, right, to find a place in the sun for the arguments you’re vested in?

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  214. Sparkon says:
    @Parfois1

    (see how they bleat, cackle and groan about being ruled by a tiny number of Jews!)

    According to the prevailing view here, History is only a succession of events conjured up by Bankers, Satanists, Stalinists, Jews, Freemasons, Templars, Jesuits, Astrologists, Alchemists and sundry nutcases. People are incapable of feeling, thinking, getting together and revolting, mere amorphous matter… No wonder, with that type of homo sapiens, the US is stuffed!

    There is a prevailing view here? If there were, there would not be so much spirited even contentious back and forth.

    You seem to be under the spell of a plodding interpretation of history that is more like checkers than chess.

    The TPTB can create or identify new game pieces, and put them into play when the time is right.

    It was a devilishly clever scheme to find talented or engaging crackpots of various stripes and promote them to the masses with the organs of propaganda, and so the world got Madame Blavatsky and Theosophy, Marx and Communism, Freud and Psychoanalysis, Nordau and Zionism, Picasso and Cubism, Bernays and Feminism…the list goes on.

    Stalin played his role and so did Eisenhower.

  215. @JackOH

    the “weakly god-like organization” theory is a variant on any religion that sees the world as a stage of conflict between two or more strongly god-like beings. Consider the paleo-religion Zoroasterism [1]:

    Ahura Mazda is considered to be all-good with no evil emanating from the deity. Ahura Mazda works in gētīg (the visible material realm) and mēnōg (the invisible spiritual and mental realm) through the seven (six when excluding Spenta Mainyu) Amesha Spentas

    and

    Though Ahura Mazda has no equal contesting force, Angra Mainu (destructive spirit/mentality) is considered the main adverserial force of the religion standing against Spenta Mainyu (creative spirit/mentality), whose forces are born from Aka Manah (evil thought). Middle Persian literature developed further Angra Mainyu into Ahriman and advancing him to be the direct adversary to Ahura Mazda.

    This theme shows up in several religions and in folklore. Just to show the reach of a good story, it’s been suggested that there were 7 dwarfs in the Snow White myth because it’s a re-telling of the above blockquoted story.

    So: Devil theories can’t be entirely dismissed, as there really are powerful evil entities in the world (e.g. those who actively worked to bring about the mass slaughters of the World War historic interval, Cardinal Richelieu during the slaughters of the 30 years war [2]), but often enough devil theories are simply appealing excuses for some historic defeat.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroastrianism

    2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_Richelieu

    • Replies: @JackOH
  216. @FB

    FB,

    I’m just relaying some information I come across that runs counter to accepted views, and I’m not myself always sure what to make of it or what its implications are.

    For example, William Guy Carr in his short book Satan – Prince of this World, states that Lenin inherited the post at the top of the Global Conspiracy from Adriano Lemmi who was preceded by Mazzini and Albert Pike, with Pike mostly setting the whole thing up. Carr wrote:

    Lenin was an adept of the highest degrees in Grand Orient Masonry. He knew the final secret as did Mazzini and Lemmi before him.

    Actually I wouldn’t be surprised if all the leaders of the First International, Marx, Engels, Bakunin, and Kropotkin weren’t in some secret Masonic organisation. Obviously it’s difficult to prove as such organisations are secret, but they were very popular among these types of individuals. For example Engels was an affluent industrialist owning several factories in England and I’d think you’d be hard pressed to find any such high level capitalist at that time who wasn’t a member of a Masonic lodge. I haven’t bothered to research whether anyone has come across such evidence, but I’d venture a guess that Bakunin was in a Masonic lodge, considering the secrecy surrounding him and his work. Often revolutionaries would have been in the same Masonic lodge as the chiefs of police, judges, and aristocrats they were fighting against. For example Giuseppe Garibaldi, Simon Bolivar, Jose Rizal and many more anti-royalist and anti-colonialist revolutionaries were all long standing high level Freemasons.

  217. Incitatus says:
    @refl

    Thomas Weber’s ‘Hitler’s First War’ and ‘Becoming Hitler’ profile Hitler’s wartime experience and gilding the Führerlegende of ‘front-line’ service.

    Couriers had a dangerous job (perfect for cultivating gambling addictions), but didn’t serve in the trenches. Real heros? Stoßtrupp veteran Ernst Jünger (his ‘Storm of Steel’ is worth reading). Trench grunts thought couriers like Hitler privileged. The latter slept comfortably at HQs 2-3km behind the lines, closely associating with officers who favored them with decorations. It’s curious in four years Hitler was promoted only once, to gefreiter (non-NCO level ala PFC, couldn’t order anyone to do anything).

    Hitler was smart enough to carefully edit/control his record over the years, and to snuff inconvenient witnesses in Operation Hummingbird – not least former Chancellor General Kurt von Schleicher, Frau von Schleicher and Generalmajor Ferdinand von Bredow (each confronted at home and shot in the face). They were said to have Hitler’s medical records, including Pasewalk convalescence for ‘temporary blindness’ after his 15 Oct 1918 encounter with mustard gas, recording Hitler (lacking genuine injury) was housed in the psychiatric ward.

    As for the romance of German conservatives and other disappointed Deutscher plutocrats, Hugenberg, too late, got it right:

    “Yesterday I committed the greatest stupidity of my life. I joined forces with the greatest demagogue in world history.”
    -Alfred Hugenberg 31 Jan 1933 Reich Minister of Economics, Food and Agriculture [Childers ‘The Third Reich’ p.226]

    Not to worry. Unreliable Hugenberg was dispensed forthwith like a soiled diaper.

    “It was certainly not the “Western powers”, who arranged for the depression but rather the banksters behind them. Reparations were the real war aim in WWI, to deliver Germany and all the participants to financialization”

    No fan of ‘banksters’ (especially after the 2007-08 ‘Great Recession’ rip-off), but find it hard to believe they “arranged” the 1929 depression to deliver Germany (or anybody else) to anywhere. Don’t think they were that smart. Loaning money to revanchists that promised to nullify Versailles debts twice renegotiated? Induce a self-ruining depression to deliver Germany into dictatorship, a war that kills 50-60 million, and ultimately “financialization”? Way beyond my pay grade.

    If anything, ‘banksters’ focus short term – the ‘Here and Now, Have Your Cake and Eat It Too’ School, which all-too-often requires a bail out from honest people ($7 trillion 2007-08). Cronyism doesn’t prevent disaster, but provides a hell-of-a cushion from innate stupidity (e.g. 4+ bankruptcy “king of debt” Donald J. Trump, who routinely stiffed contractors and lenders).

    “When you are into scandalous remarks by political leaders, how about french minister Clemenceau: “There are 20 million Germans to many?”

    Expect politicians to be more honest than whores? Why? They get paid less.

    Clemenceau dealt with the highest proportional WW1 butcher’s bill (save Serbia, which lost a staggering 25% of population) as well as territory/livelihood destroyed 1914-18. Germany (50% larger than France) was untouched by war they launched, yet France endured. Remarkable. It cost France two generations – every small French town had/has a monument to WW1 lost souls.

    A better Clemenceau quote, a response after being blamed for not asserting himself in negotiations 20 May 1919:

    “Que voulez vous que je fasse entre deux hommes dont un se criot Napoléan et l’autre Jésus Crist?” [“What do you expect when I’m between two men- one of whom (Lloyd George) thinks he is Napoleon and the other (Wilson) thinks he’s Jesus Christ?”).

    Clemenceau was the only sane one in the room

    “WWII will be settled, when people can mention these truths without losing there careers and their livelyhood. Unfortunately, when these truths enter the public mind, the West as we know it, will cease to exist. When they Nuremberg Tribunal handed down its sentences, the West lost the war.”

    I think WW2 is settled, but I’m all for free speech and honest inquiry. I may disagree with you; by all means feel free to disagree with me. ‘Civility’ is a wonderful word, akin to ‘community’ and ‘building’. We all start somewhere.

    • Replies: @refl
  218. JackOH says:
    @Counterinsurgency

    CI, thanks.

    “Devil theories can’t be entirely dismissed, as there really are powerful evil entities in the world . . .”.

    I don’t, and I agree. Privately, I sometimes use religious-sounding language, maybe because rational-sounding discourse doesn’t capture what I’m seeing in the world.

    ” . . . [D]evil theories are simply appealing excuses . . .”. That’s sort of making my point in a different way, I guess.

    Do we believe our leaders’ bad actions are a consequence of their being omnipotent Satanic beings? If they are, I guess I don’t have to bother trying to better things.

    If our leaders’ bad actions are a consequence of human frailty, well, maybe I ought to do something, however feeble, to make things better.

    As I mentioned, “meaningful dissent is extremely difficult”, and it can be painful as hell when our leaders exercise their inalienable right to human frailty (LOL) to try and whoop our ass.

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  219. Incitatus says:
    @FB

    Thanks FB.

    You’re right of course. UR is ‘day is night’, ‘black is white’. Ant farm, flea circus, freak show? DARPA ‘nut farm’? Who knows?

    “Mr Unz’s apparent madness”

    Confess wonderment when Unz opined Reinhard Heidrich was beloved given transportation in an open cabriolet without security. No, couldn’t have been because the arrogant little Herrenvolk shit thought himself superior to his sub-human subjects. No way!

    Fascinating so many (few compared to the wider world, but still…) pine for WW2 rematch. Children of divorce with no genuine male parental experience? Besotted by the one-eyed monster, the dull-blue screen? Weaned too long on the ‘Rockford Files’? Whatever!

    Don’t now visit or post much at UR, as Giraldi trashed my posts and banned me for asking if the CIA (as opposed to the “Jewish Power” he regularly profiles) had responsibility in ME turmoil, and asking why his “tax deductible educational foundation” Council for the National Interest 501c3 charity should be considered (excepting lobbying content) any different from AIPAC, AEI, and the rest of the alphabet double-dip, dead-beat-swamp-creatures.

    Has Giraldi ever profiled/enabled Palestinians, offered a vision of a viable ME future? Don’t think so. He’s all about “Jewish Power” in regular op-eds that advertise his 501c3 dead-end charity. Sure bet with loyal like-minded (no-solution) morons.

    Party-on!

    • Replies: @FB
  220. @JackOH

    Jack OH

    Our leaders are people who (like many others) tried for a career in politics. In a contest like that, somebody has to end up winning, but there are so many competitors that exactly who gets the prize is largely from luck. For example, Clinton apparently made it to POTUS because he was an alcoholic’s son, could be counted upon to do whatever pleased his current authority figure, and had had plenty of practice maintaining tolerable relations with troublesome people. He also had an ambitious wife with few scruples. Quite often people are chosen because there is nobody else, Biden for example, or Trump. These people can do an amazing amount of damage — or good, if there is something that obviously needs doing but the everybody is afraid to do. Their special knowledge isn’t going to save us or destroy us — they’re just people (quite often clueless) in a specific job. The real story is more formerly vital institutions that are, one by one, failing.

    I’m trying to provide a bit of technical assistance to the conversations ongoing here, on the off chance that it might help somebody who finds him or her self in a crucial position. The better qualified the people in such positions are, the better chance everybody has. Perhaps Ron Unz is trying to do something very similar. As for direct action in politics, no. Tried it, bounced. It seems to be all professionals now, in it for the rice bowl. When and if things break down and the cities need help from their hinterlands, help that won’t come, at that time our actions here in setting up the general fund of knowledge and assumptions will become effective.

    Counterinsurgency

  221. refl says:
    @Incitatus

    every small French town had/has a monument to WW1 lost souls.

    Sorry, but do you really think that German Small towns do not have the same monuments? The difference is that they are neglected and there are no monuments to the dead of WWII – mention the Rheinwiesenlager and brace yourself for criminal procecution.

    Get me right – I do not even want the monuments, I am certainly no sicko. I want to set the record straight for the sake of all of us. The era of the World Wars was the mother of all regime changes. That truth will sink in.
    Germany’s destruction started with the 1917-18 famine and lasted through to the 1923 Ruhrkampf after which the British took the French on the leash. It is symptomatic that you don’t even know it. In any German cellar you could still in my youth find stocks of Notgeld (emergency currency), funny little images – nice for children, with rows of zeros all over it. The death toll will never be calculated.

    And indeed, the banksters knew that disaster was coming. The restructuring of war debt served one purpose: replace debt to France and Britain with private debt owed to the banking cartel. Try the writings of Carol Quigley, then maybe Anthony Sutton.

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  222. refl says:
    @FB

    The point about Germany financing Lenin is that it was by exposed. Any German document fell into allied hands at the latest in 1945, while american handlers hid lateron behind the Red Scare and post WWII behind cold war anticommunism. They could well hide how they had acted in sync with the Bolsheviks. Besides, they were private contacts and not government for most of the time.

    Stalin had one quality not seen in the West: He never lived abroad and he knew to get money via robberies and extortion – not by licking asses in New York as Trotzky did.

    • Replies: @FB
  223. JackOH says:

    CI, thanks.

    I tried a little citizen-activism. Wore me out, cost me money. I’d’ve continued with serious institutional support, but that wasn’t going to happen. I learned plenty.

    I once asked in an essay: How can you tell the regime you’re living in has gone massively crap? It’s difficult, unless you’re a political targeted for expulsion or liquidation right away. Most folks need to earn a living. Some hop aboard the crap regime’s gravy train with patronage jobs and other economic preferences. Most learn to keep quiet, get hip to the double talk, adapt to the crap.

    Ron Unz, seems to me, has done a great service by offering this platform for people who can’t do double talk, can’t adapt to the crap, and some have suffered definable injury from our crap regime and have no meaningful political remedy at hand.

    Ron mentioned loosely something about focus groups a few days ago, a sort of precursor to putting some of the themes here into play. I trust Ron’s judgment, because he’s actually worked issue politics and electoral politics (that run for the Senate) in a very large state, and because he’s put his money where his mouth is. Plus, that American Pravda series does a great job of demonstrating how our “molded mainstream opinion” is sometimes completely at odds with reality.

  224. refl says:
    @Parfois1

    According to the prevailing view here, History is only a succession of events conjured up by Bankers, Satanists, Stalinists, Jews, Freemasons, Templars, Jesuits, Astrologists, Alchemists and sundry nutcases.

    If I wanted to destroy a meaningful discussion, I would 1) unleash a bunch of cranks with the most absurd views on the honest participants and 2) have all shades of apparently sane types ridicule them.
    Can the host possibly have someone dissect the commentariat and maybe have an article that evaluates them in a statistical manner? It will be difficult but might be illuminating to see which are the techniques to wear down the effort undertaken here.

  225. FB says: • Website
    @Incitatus

    Did they actually remove your comments from that thread…?

    If so, then that is quite disappointing…I do remember seeing your post with that question and absolutely would like to see an answer myself…

    I respect Mr Giraldi who puts out some very sensible critiques of the ‘system’…and I do agree that the Israel lobby is a problem…even sensible Israelis would agree with that…

    But it takes two to tango…Israeli influence could not force an unwilling partner to dance…

    However Mr Giraldi’s support of Tulsi Gabbard is a VERY BIG PLUS…despite the ridiculous critiques of her for supposedly selling out on the Israel question…

    This is absurd…stopping America’s pointless wars by definition entails going against the Israel lobby…which is all about encouraging the war party to continue on this ruinous path…

    Amazing that some so-called ‘antiwar’ commentators…notably the ‘Saker’ have viciously attacked Gabbard on her alleged ‘Shabbos goy’ stance…

    Pretty incredible…at least Mr Giraldi has definitely come through on that score…

    As for the Palestinians…well…you will have noticed that the UNZ antfarm cares not one whit about them…

    It’s all about the Jews…and of course the Shitler adoration…

    Don’t blame you for scaling back…I think Mr Unz, at bottom, is perhaps far more clever than we give him credit for…perhaps a bit too clever…

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  226. FB says: • Website
    @refl

    I agree with you about Trotsky…Uncle Joe fixed that problem the right way…

    As for Lenin’s financing…I am also not disinclined to believe that some financing came from western sources…but definitely not Adam Schiff, which is a complete invention that has no basis in fact whatsoever…it is simply a canard to promote the absolutely ridiculous Judeo-Bolshevik phantasm…

    Schiff was strongly anti-Bolshevik and even demanded that Lenin repay his relatively modest funding of the pre-Bolshevik revolutionaries, whom he did sympathize with…mostly on grounds of pro-Russian Jewish sympathies…

    But Schiff was strongly pro-capitalist and anti-Marxist…he could not brook Lenin and his gang…

    • Replies: @Malla
  227. @refl

    The entire history of the world war era has been blanked out to Americans and, I think, Europeans. To this day I can’t find a reliable history of the Wiemar Republic era, just drips and drabs and snips.

    The vague picture painted to the American Republic has been something like this: Germans are the enemy, Russians don’t exist except as background and would have been helpless without equipment from Lend Lease, the US never did invest heavily or sell industrial equipment and engineers to the USSR, Stalin doesn’t exist except as a bad example, Jewish Bolsheviks do exist, maybe, but it’s evil to discuss them, the Central European wars never happened, FDR did provoke WW II with Germany (not Japan), but that was OK.

    Counterinsurgency

    • Agree: Beefcake the Mighty
  228. “The fact is that, from the 1930s onward, the Western bourgeois democracies made serious efforts to reform in the face of the fascist and communist threats. They established social-democratic welfare states which redistributed vast amounts of wealth. However, since then inequality has ramped up in the era of globalization and neoliberalism.”

    Fox Butterfield, is that you?

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  229. @I Have Scinde

    The fact is that, from the 1930s onward, the Western bourgeois democracies made serious efforts to reform in the face of the fascist and communist threats. They established social-democratic welfare states which redistributed vast amounts of wealth. However, since then inequality has ramped up in the era of globalization and neoliberalism.

    In short, they became very much like their enemies. This happens in every long duration central war. Next step is that the end like their enemies — reorganization from a now system that has no domestic support.

    Historical example: The Spartans won their war against the Athenian Empire, but became like cartoon parodies of the Athenian administrators and lost the territory they gained. Their adoption of Athenian like internal competition led to the great diminution of those able to retain the high class status of a Spartan infantryman, and Sparta was defeated.

    Counterinsurgency

  230. @BCB232

    Good job ignoring my points, as well as the evil systematically worked by your church every day.

    We have our hands full with four young ones thus far, thanks for your sincere concern and attempt at dick-measuring.

    You obey, honor, make excuses for, give money and thus influence to an institution dominated by perverts and thieves. Good that your kids have blue eyes, though. They won’t fare well among the tens of millions of nonChristian Chinese and Indians and Arabs and Africans who are flooding into the USA faster than ever with the strident advocacy of your church.

    • Replies: @BCB232
  231. BCB232 says:
    @RadicalCenter

    Congrats-you are exceptional (no snark)!

    However, what matters is what happens at the aggregate, societal level. Secular people don’t’ have children and men are, by nature, religious. What is your proposed religion to fill the void? Do you think it’s bad if people work on understanding issues of European survival from within Christianity? Are you anti-Catholic or anti-Christian in general?

  232. @Mefobills

    People who are not antisemites are ignorant or dupes or lacking in morality.

    In America the typical common man, black or white, has rare if any interpersonal interface with Jews. (Of course if the common man or his child ascends to wealth that all changes because the Jews are such disgusting ass-kissing fair weather friends out for their rents, termites to any newly constructed or acquired castle.)

    So unless the common man victimized by (((Jo)))o-Fault Divorce with its draconian effects on the man, his children of the marriage, and his solvency is aware that the Jew Bolsheviks invented it and divorce itself is of the Jews as God Incarnate Jesus came here to announce and extinguish, the common man is in the dark about the diabolical nature of the Jews.

    The Roman Catholic Church for 1900 years warned the faithful including commoners of the diabolical nature of the Jews, but has now been compromised into an agency of the devil’s children the Jews.

    Recently the Alt-Right has arisen as a secular preacher in place of The Church informing of Jew evil.

    Maybe goy professionals and entrepreneurs are more Jew aware than the common man because they are so much more likely to see or be victimized by the termite-like behavior of Jews acting in instinctive concert to consume for themselves the bounties built by others.

    So it’s hard to blame the uninformed. But we shouldn’t be too patient with those who won’t heed when informatively warned.

  233. @BCB232

    My wife and I left the RC church, so not pro-catholic overall, I guess 😉

    I definitely don’t think we will be better off with more Americans or Westerners leaving Christianity if that means becoming atheists and/or self-centered childless secularists or, God help us, Muslims.

    Practically, I don’t know any better option right now than encouraging people to remain with — or join — Christianity, just modifying it (ignoring and not following the parts that don’t make sense for our survival, safety, and prosperity, “our” meaning white people, mostly-white people, and all generally decent Western Civilization-supporting people resisting perversion propaganda, the destruction of the traditional family and sex roles, the surveillance State, endless warfare, the destruction of national cultures, and globalism).

    A folk religion that combines our traditional culture and the abundant good of Christianity, while rejecting the worship of the Jewish race, hostility toward marriage, hostility toward normal Herero sexual desire per se, refusal to defend oneself and one’s family physically whenever needed, and other pernicious, unnatural, or counterproductive material in the Bible.)

    We start from where we are, and we neither can. Or should jettison all of Christianity’s Doctrines, values, and influences if we are to get together, stay together, and work/fight together effectively in the face of numerous strong evils.

  234. @BCB232

    PS congratulations and sincere good luck to you raising and protecting those children in this sick environment that we both face.

  235. Johan says:

    It should be noted that at the time Hitler lived, the current further expansion of mass-media through the ever more present idiot screen called TV, and later the democratic publishing system called the internet did not yet exist, and as such Hitler could never have reached an appropriate height of contempt for mass-media.

  236. Incitatus says:
    @FB

    Sorry to be late FB. Reading Peter Longerich’s ‘Göbbels’, a strip-tease (direct quotes) that eviscerates Neo-Nazi pretense.

    “Did they actually remove your comments from that thread…?”

    Yes. Two posts. The first confronted PG on CIA ME blowback, 501c3s etc. The second to Woz recapping same.

    Both axed without warning or explanation. Subsequent thread attempts evoked “Sorry, this particular author [Philip Giraldi] has banned you from commenting on his pieces”.

    “I respect Mr Giraldi who puts out some very sensible critiques of the ‘system’’.

    Agree, though it’s obvious PG doesn’t want to talk about alma-mater CIA (source of his op-ed expertise) or his current 501c3 charity amidst DC tax-exempt swamp creatures.

    Tried not to dis PG, though his weekly ‘Jewish Power” enema to addicted fans get tiresome. Don’t get me wrong. Not Jewish. But tedious is tedious, especially considering the $15+ billion/year CIA protection/non-protection (‘we let it happen’) racket. Guess I went too far.

    Great lesson.

    Not to worry. Don’t feel any further need to post on PG’s latest weekly warmed-up “Jewish Power” outrage, usually augmented by stalwart Scranton hecklers and Greco-Canadian Toronto apologists. Considering the careful absence of their comments, both weighed in on my “removal”. Both (apologies iffen) pellet-droppers? Think so.

    • Replies: @FB
  237. PaulRC says:

    You might want to read Adam Tooze’s book ‘Wages of Destruction”
    Some of the things Hitler did was default on all forign debts. Forbid all labor strikes. Abolish all labor unions. Dictate labor rates that were so low workers were hungry.
    So yes the Nazis reduced unemployment. They made Germans into slaves.

  238. Malla says:
    @FB

    But Schiff was strongly pro-capitalist and anti-Marxist…he could not brook Lenin and his gang…

    Schiff was anti-Tzar. He also funded the Japanese in the Russo-Japanese war. He wanted the Tzar out.

    Capitalist countries have often funded Communist revolutions. Like the Cuban revolution for example.

    Maybe you will be interested in this. The U.S. Government has a long history of spreading communism around the world (as well as squashing communist movements when it does not suit them) while pretending to be a “champion of democracy”.
    An interview with Mr. Earl T. Smith, American Ambassador to Cuba in between 1957 and 1959.

    US Government Brought Fidel Castro to Power

    “A rare detailed account of the Communist takeover of Cuba and America’s role in Fidel Castro’s dictatorship. Former US Ambassador to Cuba, Earl T. Smith is interviewed and reveals the State Department’s involvement in violation of neutrality laws, supporting a known communist with a documented history of violent criminal behavior, and committing high treason by deliberately aiding an enemy of the United States and concealing a clear and imminent threat to our national security. This conspiracy against the citizens of Cuba has cost thousands of lives, devastated families, and has left the dispossessed Cubans stateless and destitute. It is a deliberate case of economic and cultural genocide that merits investigation and restitution. Please watch, share and expose. Smith also details this collusion in his book, “The Fourth Floor”, a curiously hard to find book he wrote in 1962 “as a footnote to history and to the science of government”. He added “I am convinced that my experience as the United States Ambassador to Cuba was unusual in the sense that I lived through the Castro Communist Revolution, and I feel that I owe it to the American people to try to establish the fact that the Castro Communist Revolution need never have occurred. From this experience, i learned not only that our techniques of relations with Cuba were faulty but that the modus operandi for the determination of policy is not only inadequate but dangerous to the defense of our country”

  239. FB says: • Website
    @Incitatus

    Thanks for the reply Incy…sorry for my own tardiness…I just haven’t had time to bother with UNZ lately…

    They have a few decent writers that are worth reading…but those are outnumbered greatly by complete hacks whose stock in trade is racism and revisionism of the worst kind…plus the IQ bullshit…

    Used to be that the comment section had some bright lights and a decent and productive debate could be had…but that appears to be history…a lot of the decent commenters are also scaling back or have left altogether…you just feel like you’re overwhelmed with endless hordes of braindead yahoos…funny that Mr. Unz is trumpeting the rising numbers for this website…I guess that’s what it’s all about…quantity…

    Very interesting to hear about this episode of your comments getting scrubbed and you getting banned from PG threads…maybe Mr. Unz can explore internet censorship in one of his ‘American Pravda’ articles…LOL

    Disappointed to hear this about Mr. Giraldi also…does not look good on him to be so thin skinned…I expected better…

    The CIA runs the global drug trade which finances [at least in part] their global Jihadist business…I’m sure Mr. Giraldi was one of the good guys there, and I would say with confidence that those running the dirty side of the business are kind of out on their own ‘ranch’…

    But considering his credentials as a Company man, it would be nice to hear him address these very troublesome issues…although I don’t think I can blame him for not wanting to go there…

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Guillaume Durocher Comments via RSS
PastClassics
How America was neoconned into World War IV
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings
Shouldn't they recuse themselves when dealing with the Middle East?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.