RSS
In his living room, studded with signed photographs of the rich and famous, Henk Visser, the arms collector and businessman, once told me about his wartime experience. Barely eighteen years old, he had joined the Dutch resistance, was captured by the Germans and sentenced to death. While he was awaiting his execution, his mother wrote a letter to Hitler, begging him not to have her son executed. Hitler granted the request and Henk Visser survived.
This simple anecdote serves to illustrate that Hitler was not the crazed, bloodthirsty monster he is made out to be in the prevailing narrative on the 1930s and 1940s. Such anecdotes compel us to reconsider the concepts and facts that constitute our frame of reference and that consequently determine and shape the way we think, talk and act. The most important events and historical figures are multifaceted, but for clarity’s sake have been narrowed down to one-dimensional proportions.
Whereas history has many protagonists who, to say the least, are controversial, none of them has been vilified to the extent to which Hitler has virtually become the devil incarnate. This may be due in large party because as the leader of Germany, Hitler fought the British Empire and the US. In other words, he was the enemy of the Anglosphere, which would explain the negative image imposed on the world during and especially after the war. More than one century earlier, Napoleon was another sworn enemy of the Anglosphere and one could say that before Hitler appeared on the stage, he was the favorite bad guy. Not in France though. Nor did the English outlaw any references to Napoleon after they invaded Paris after the Battle of Waterloo.
Hitler shares with Napoleon the distinction of being a fascinating subject for biographers, but most are unable to resist the pressures to paint a fundamentally negative portrait. Among biographies of Napoleon on the other hand, there is an impressive number of positive and benevolent studies, outnumbering the negative ones, and this is certainly the case for France.
In the American Empire, Hitler is the embodiment of evil. One might even say he is the negative parallel to Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Hitler would then be the son of the devil, while the satanic equivalent of the Holy Ghost would then be the ideology of National Socialism. The Holy Bible of that evil religion consists of Hitler’s Mein Kampf (the “Old Testament”) and Alfred Rosenberg’s Der Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts (the “New Testament”). As a matter of fact, given the frequency with which since 1945 “New Hitlers” have been identified by American and other Western politicians, “experts” and journalists, proves that there is indeed a religious aspect to the way Hitler is being considered. The determination with which Russia is currently pursuing its goal to “denazify” the Ukraine is an indication that the American way of looking at the issue is shared in Moscow.
As my former professor at the University of Florida, Lyle N. McAlister, would tell say, history is like a store or supermarket, where “you pay your money and you make your choice.” He was referring to interpretations of historical facts and figures, indicating that it is often just impossible to prove anything without a shadow of a doubt, and that in the end, historical interpretations are subjective.
The more recent the past, the harder to study it. The very proximity and the wealth of fresh memories and primary sources are at the same time obstacles for anyone attempting to gain a comprehensive understanding. The sheer act of selecting and locating the sources needed for answering any question will always take considerable time. Historical research on the Second World War is therefore time consuming. The quantity of primary and secondary sources is truly overwhelming.
In history, like in detective work, it is best to start out with some relevant, basic questions. For the sake of clarity and in order to preserve academic rigor, those questions should be simple and straightforward, and not implicitly assume anything beforehand. So one should never start with asking “how” and “why,” since these can only be dealt with after answering the questions of “who,” “what,” “where” and “when.” By the way, most contemporary historical research precisely starts out with asking how and why, making its results more than often shaky and doubtful.
Concerning Hitler, the questions could be the following: 1) Who was Hitler, and what are his roots? 2) Who helped Hitler come to power? 3) What was his policy towards the Jews and who benefited from these? 4) Did he start World War II? and 5) What happened to Hitler after the German defeat in 1945?
Each of these questions has several possible answers and these can be found in the available literature on Hitler, the Second World War and the Interwar period. However, in the more or less unified historical narrative in the US Empire (comprising essentially the EU and the Anglosphere), the answers are simple and one-sided. Basically, these are the answers: 1) A lower-class political adventurer and failed artist from Austria, 2) Hitler came to power riding on a wave of frustration and Right-Wing extremism, 3) Hitler wanted to kill all the Jews, 4) yes, and 5) he committed suicide.
It must be doubted if these standard answers, woven into the standard narrative, are the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Let us take a look at them one by one.
Who was Hitler, and what are his roots? In the first place, one should read Hitler’s book Mein Kampf, but it is not readily available in many Western countries. Then there are hundreds of biographies of Hitler, usually in the form of sturdy volumes, but only a few of these present a non-mainstream-approved picture. The best of these is probably Hitler’s War by David Irving, based on a wealth of sources and interviews, and which shows that Hitler was a complex, highly intelligent, politically savvy individual, who took pains to present a solid, reliable and inspiring public image, and worked relentlessly to serve his country the best he could.
In 2005 New Zealander Greg Hallett published Hitler was a British Agent. Altough replete with typos and information that upon closer scrutiny often seems wrong, incomplete or twisted, on the whole the book deserves attention if only because if its premise is true, a number of what are now still mysteries during Hitler’s reign become understandable and might be fitted into a broader scheme. Hallett’s proposition is upheld by a scholar specialized in financial history: Guido Giacomo Preparata, who in 2005 published Conjuring Hitler. How Britain and America Made the Third Reich. Based on solid research, reliable sources and benefiting from an understanding of the banking world that no ordinary historian can muster, Preparata offers a strong case, which it makes it difficult to reject out of hand. Therefore it is altogether not unlikely that Hitler was not acting in the interest of Germany alone, but that he was directed by powerful groups in London and New York. If such should be the case, most of what has been written about Hitler and the Second World War can be put in the shredder. At the same time this makes it understandable that powerful interests ignore the work by Preparata and Hallett, qualifying it as lunatic conspiracy theories. In this respect one should also refer to the seminal work by Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment. From Rhodes to Cliveden (1981), who based on extensive research shows that German policies under Hitler were in the British interest. Argentinian researcher Abel Basti has made a big effort to unravel several mysteries surrounding Hitler, and also adheres to the version that Hitler and the Nazis cooperated with the US as well as Zionists (Los secretos de Hitler. Los acuerdos de los nazis con los Estados Unidos y los sionistas, y los rastros en la Argentina del Jefe del Tercer Reich, Buenos Aires, 2011).
In itself it makes sense to suppose that Hitler enjoyed the support of powerful groups and individuals when embarking on his political career. Such was notably also the case with another political outsider, namely Vladimir Zelensky in the Ukraine. In 2015 he starred in the TV series Servant of the People, (running for three seasons) in which he played a high school history teacher who was catapulted to national fame and then ran for president, winning the election.
If Hitler was being directed by foreign political and financial interests, these would have included some highly influential Jews as well. This brings us to the Jewish Question and Hitler’s policies. Frankly speaking, much of Hitler’s prewar Jewish policies were quite welcome to German and international Jews. The Nuremberg racial laws prohibiting marriages between Germans and Jews was welcomed not only by fanatical Nazis and Germans with a dislike for Jews, but especially by conservative rabbis. In other words, they felt Hitler was doing a service to the Jewish community. However, this savory and very important detail is scrupulously avoided in the standard narrative.
Another aspect missing in the standard narrative is the formal cooperation between the Nazis and the growing Jewish settler community in Palestine. Known as the Haavara Agreement, this cooperation enabled German Jews to settle in the Holy Land, after selling their property in Germany and depositing the proceeds in German banks. Once in Palestine, they could buy the machinery and equipment they needed, and which was produced in Germany (Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement. The Dramatic Story of the Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine, New York, 1984). Also left out of the standard narrative is the fact that young Polish Jews were receiving military training in Poland before moving to Palestine (see L. Weinbaum, A marriage of convenience. The New Zionist Organization and the Polish Government 1936–1939, New York 1993).
In short, the standard narrative almost exclusively focuses on the antagonistic aspects of the complex relationship that Hitler had with the Jews. Quite apart from the rumors that Hitler had himself Jewish ancestors, his attitude seemed determined by his understanding that there were intimate connections between the Jews and Freemasonry, which he abhorred and tried to eliminate (Arnaud de la Croix, Hitler et la franc-maçonnerie, Brussels, 2013).
As for the question who started World War Two, the answer given by standard historiography is clearly wrong. That war began only when on September 3, 1939 England and France declared war on Germany, after it had invaded Poland two days before. That formal declaration brought the French and English colonial empires (including Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Indochina, Algeria, Morocco and much of the rest of Africa) into the war, turning a purely European conflict into a World War.
Finally, standard historiography is unequivocal about Hitler’s fate at war’s end: he committed suicide in the Führerbunker in Berlin as Red Army troops were moving into the city. The German movie Der Untergang (Downfall, 2004), winning prizes and captivating audiences worldwide, served as a resounding confirmation of the official narrative. Yet there are many indications that Hitler managed to leave Berlin before the Red Army had conquered the city. Greg Hallett claims he was flown to Barcelona, Spain, where he died in 1950. There have long been persistent rumors and quite a bit of secondary evidence (much of it shaky) that Hitler instead fled to Argentina. These rumors began to circulate immediately after the war and Abel Basti has devoted much time and effort to scrutinize these and publish his findings.
Argentinian economist Walter Graziano has further developed the notion that Hitler was somehow an instrument of foreign financial and political interests and has tried to show to what extent Hitler’s economic and administrative policies were continued after the war. In Hitler ganó la guerra (2nd edition, 2008), Graziano argues that the Third Reich was just another necessary step in line with the plans by a small clique to govern the world. He considers the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission, with their efforts to create a New World Order, as heirs to among others the Thule Society (some of whose members were Hitler’s confidantes) and the Third Reich. Graziano also discerns a continuum going back to the late-eighteenth century.
One has to conclude that, as is the case with many very important historical figures, there is not just one Hitler. The Hitler of official historiography is only one of them. There is the alternative Hitler, the one who had quite a complex, multi-layered personality and who also may or may not have served primarily non-German interests and then fled abroad. One should also bear in mind that, like some other important political personalities (Stalin, Albania’s Enver Hoxha, Saddam Hussein, etc.) Hitler had doubles, or political decoys. Thus, when the real protagonist dies or exits from the stage, this tends to be a surrounded by a cloud of doubts and uncertainties that may take a long time to subside. Now that almost a century has passed since Hitler disappeared it is becoming increasingly evident that picturing him as the son of Satan can have no basis in fact.
It would be a tremendous benefit if the fundamentally one-dimensional image of Hitler would be replaced by a historically more correct one. However, the prevailing political structure of much of the world prevents this for the time being.
On the other hand, unbeknownst to most of the world’s population, there is a third Hitler, no longer the one considered as the Savior of Germany in the interwar years, but as the potential savior of the world. This is the Hitler as avatar of the Hindu Deity Vishnu, a concept first developed in the 1930s by Savitri Devi. Chilean diplomat and author Miguel Serrano further elaborated this idea of Esoteric Hitlerism, suggesting that Hitler was the Messias destined to restore the ancient religion of the Aryans.
In the end, the fact that apart from the Hitler of official history (and who is intrinsically transcendent because of his non-official status as the son of Satan), there are two other Hitlers, essentially means that our rulers have failed in their control of the historical narrative.
Note that the third Hitler is a Divinity.
Now isn’t that interesting? It would seem that when you want to turn somebody into a devil, he actually becomes the opposite!
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Try this one: 1938 second edition of Germany’s Hitler by Heinz A. Heinz:
https://dn790008.ca.archive.org/0/items/heinz-a.-heinz.-germany-s-hitler-1938_202008/Heinz%20A.%20Heinz.%20-%20Germany%20s%20Hitler%20%5B1938%5D.pdf
The Jews & Commies are always smearing Hitler & inventing bogus plots about him being a ‘british agent’ or ‘controlled opposition’ etc, because he dispossessed them of their jobs/careers (doctors, lawyers, musicians, artists, scientists, newspaper editors etc) they held during the Weimar Republic. Hitler’s logic was ‘why should a gang of malignant alien interlopers be allowed to rule over a higher civilized race/nation for their own profit? How dare some ‘goy’ not recognize their ‘genius’ & reject their ‘amazing abilities’ & expose them as the pests, vampires & vermin they really are. So they fabricate these various post war yarns about him, so the white race is brainwashed against their own sociopolitical salvation: fascism/nazism.
Napoleon was deeply admired for a long time. They felt he was the greatest commander in history… Except for Wellington, who beat him.
Napoleon’s infamy runs more along the lines of Making War Fun Again. Everybody got into wargaming in the 19th century thanks to Boney.
Why do you think the 20th century was soo much fun?
“Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler” by Antony C. Sutton. American and British academia hated Sutton and his work. All the more reason to give it a look.
I don’t see this article saying anything beyond “dear diary”. “Today I looked at some stuff written about Hitler and I noticed it’s inconsistent. I can’t really tell what’s true from it. I guess that happens, like with Napoleon, people said conflicting stuff about him too. I don’t have any knowledge, understanding or insight of my own which hasn’t been articulated a thousand different ways over the past 90 years, but I thought it was interesting anyway.”
And then we have Satanyahu. I doubt there are three versions of him.
My favorite Hitler is still alive on YouTube:
Video Link
Precisely. All you should know is that WW2 was an an artificially engineered crisis, just like The Great War, the French Revolution, the Bolshevik Revolution, etc, etc. Brought to you by Murder, Inc. —your judeo-masonic neo-feudal overlords.
Dear Sir: your critique would readily dispense with a clear majority of internet commentary. I prithee, consider carefully before advancing further. Back on topic, those last few words were exactly the advice I gave Hitler when he attacked the Soviet Union. But would he listen? Nooo. So, as I said, consider.
Especially when it comes to Hitler’s supposed HoloHOAX…
http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/jews-and-history-lies-galore/
…for which Germany had to pay reparations to a “Jewish state” that didn’t even exist then.
https://bipworldview.wordpress.com/2018/01/10/why-germany-paid-reparations-to-israel/
And let’s not forget that Jesus has been interpreted to be a JEW, when clearly He was NEVER one.
http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2014/07/27/jesus-was-not-a-jew/
Three little Hitlers will fight it out until
Two little Hitlers do the other one’s will
(Apologies to Declan)
Japan not only evaded any disclosure of its true strategic position in the Pacific, but also declined any interference in American shipments being unloaded at Vladivostok and large numbers of men and amounts of material being transported from East Siberia to the German front in the west. Being forced to watch the continued reinforcement of Soviet troops from the east without any Japanese intervention deeply angered Hitler.
During a private briefing on 5 March 1943, Hitler remarked:
They lie right to your face and in the end all their depictions are calculated on something which turns out to be a deceit afterwards!
Adolf Hitler about the Japanese (5 March 1943)
Video Link
The Myth of American Democracy: A Deep Dive into the Ruling Elite’s Grip on Power
In the annals of history, few nations have been more lauded for their democratic credentials than the United States of America. And never was such lauding more undeserved. A closer examination of the nation’s political landscape reveals a stark reality that challenges this cherished narrative. The belief that the U.S.A. is a “Republic”, with democratic elections is a convenient fiction that only fools could swallow.
The U.S. ruling elite, ensconced in the hallowed halls of power, emit only pretence of democratic process. They engage in a cynical game of “selections”, choosing leaders who best serve their interests. Donald Trump is a case in point. His political ascent, spanning over seven decades, was no mere happenstance. The “Crown” in the City of London and the Vatican, the real power brokers on earth, had him earmarked for the nation’s highest office when he was still in nappies.
The cognitive dissonance displayed by White American conservatives is a curious phenomenon. While one faction rails against the “Jews”, another, the evangelical types, lavishly funds mega-churches, led by fake preachers with Jewish backing. This paradox is further compounded by their unwavering support for Israel, even as its military adventures drive millions of Arabs into White nations, including the United States.
The Jesuits – those efficient and loyal earthly servants of Lucifer – are the architects of America’s founding. The so-called “American Revolution” of 1776 – a supposed David versus Goliath tale – was, in reality, a carefully orchestrated spectacle, financed and managed by the City of London and the Vatican via their Jesuit arm. The White House, named after a Jesuit priest, and the city of Washington D.C., laid out in the image of Rome, are enduring testaments to this influence.
The U.S. Constitution, thought of by Americans as a paragon of democratic ideals, is actually a mere curiosity, its worth no greater than excrement smeared toilet paper. The story of America’s “Founding Fathers” and the nation’s emergence as a Republic is horse dung, a narrative concocted to fool American citizens into serving the Vatican and the City of London as they plundered the world and sacrificed millions of gallons of human blood to their god Lucifer.
The selection of U.S. presidents, at least since Woodrow Wilson, has been a process controlled by the Vatican, via the Jesuits. The territory of the United States is little more than a colony of the Vatican and the City of London, its citizen’s enslaved serfs, led by their noses into submission to serve the interests of the ruling class.
American’s don’t really own anything. They don’t own their homes or their country. In fact, it’s them that are owned, they are owned by the Vatican and the City of London. Stuffing them with aluminium and mercury via about 100 “vaccines” before they reach 18-years-of-age keeps them too dumb to know the Jesuits are continuously ramming it up their backsides.
The difference between White American conservatives of today and those of the near future is that the latter will own nothing and be happy, whilst the former think they own everything but can’t be happy.
Napoleon lost in Waterloo because he has been betrayed by a general, paid by Rotschild, who stood still instead of intervening in the battle. R. did the deal himself and then returned to London to organize a’financial coup’ which allowed him to take possession of the BoE. The rest is known.
It was the Russians who took over Paris after Waterloo, not the brits.
Yes I know that book, Sutton was indeed a good historian.
The story is that he flew from Berlin to Denmark, just in time, briefly emerged later at one of the the Canary Islands on his journey to Argentina by submarine. This image purports to show him, on the right, dining with the Eichhorns at the Edén Hotel in the town of La Falda (Córdoba province), Argentina in 1947:
Here is a frontal view:
The hotel was owned by the Eichhorn couple, Walter and Ida, who were personal friends and had been one of his financial sponsors since 1924; they received a Mercedes car from him for their patronage.
Who was the Henk Visser’s mother and why she was Oppenheimer?
Another story like this:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myroslaw_Sitschynskyj
A man killed a personal (and only friend) of Franc-Josef I and got scot free.
It was the only Act of Pardon signed by F-J.
Who was the mother of young Sitschynskyj and why she was Oppenheimer?
In other words: Herr Hitler did not killed his family. Nice.
Of course Stalin, Hoxha, Hussein, but no Franco, Salazar, Papa Doc, Somoza, Papadopoulos to mention just a few!
There is a German author that I recently found who has written a six volume set on Hitler. His name is Michael Grand. He is also on Twitter. Unfortunately his books are in German.
Here is a link to Michael Grandt’s website. He also has a YouTube channel.
https://www.michaelgrandt.de/meine-buecher/adolf-hitler-eine-korrektur-1/
From a broader metaphysical standpoint, the third interpretation—Hitler as a divine or avataric figure—fails precisely because he employed the same instruments of domination that define the control system he opposed. Instead of transcending its logic, he reproduced it: mass hypnosis through fear, ritualized spectacle, mythic nationalism, and the sanctification of violence as purification.
Historically, this dynamic is not new. Ancient regimes, from the Yahwist priesthood to later imperial cults, maintained control through trauma, guilt, and sacrifice—binding populations to authority through emotional polarity. Hitler’s Germany re-enacted that template on an industrial scale: Nuremberg rallies as liturgy, the swastika as sigil, and total war as a collective blood rite promising redemption through destruction.
In metaphysical terms, such methods never dismantle tyranny—they feed it. To fight evil on its own frequency is to strengthen it. Hitler became the shadow he tried to defeat, an inversion rather than a liberation.
Genuine freedom arises only through non-participation in that polarity game—by withdrawing energy from the mechanisms of control rather than mirroring them. In that light, Hitler was not the destroyer of the false order but one of its most effective extensions, proving that even opposition—when conducted in the same vibration—still serves the same master.
There is a book called :Hitler the occult messiah:. One cannot disperse an evidence of strong occult connections with Adolf. Swastika was everywhere in Hitler’s Germany, SS as well.
Hans Vogel, do you know how many young men he killed in in Germany ,just because they were evangelical Christians? so please do not whiten him .
Hitler must have friends in high places that’s why he was elevated to that position, position to kill young men in war, and he is guilty of that.
Comparison with Napoleon is simply idiotic.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/11142846/Napoleon-the-Great-Andrew-Roberts-review.html?
Napoleon the Great by Andrew Roberts, review: ‘masterly’
[W]hen asked who was the greatest captain of the age, the Duke of Wellington himself replied: ‘In this age, in past ages, in any age: Napoleon.’”
In a 1944 speech, Churchill explicitly stated that comparing Napoleon and Hitler was “an insult to the great Emperor and warrior”.
To understand Hitler (as he is taught today) one has to understand the role of ontological evil in judeo-christianity.
War and politics of the last thousand years transformed the European man into pseudo jews. As semitic theology and myth is not truly compatible with us, our inherent understanding of religous practise, spirituality and aesthetics exacted a lot of compromises.
First and foremost, monotheism wouldn’t fly. Maybe an Isaac Newton or an Immanuel Kant could truly be at peace with abstract rationality, radiating self-contained, goodly wisdom around the cosmos using perfect wave functions. Most people wouldn’t. So be welcome ye who enter the pluralistic halls of Mount Sinai: Recognise the tripartite -a rather common arrangement- Godhead of father, son & spirit, whatever that exactly means. There’s also a mother goddess who is frequently more venerated than the men.
We see many lesser gods running around busily, so-called saints or angels and possibly their half-God offspring, the Nephilim.
But that is only the boring side of the pantheon.
Thing is, boring procedures like following the rules, adhering to sacred principles or repeating empty rituals is in some sense barely noteworthy as religion. This is what foragers already did 100.000 year ago. And their Gods, without fail, didn’t care. Oblivious to the fates of men, they maybe occasionally provided aetiological grounding. But they remained absolutely uninterested in being worshipped and did not interfere.
Religion, in some sense, starts with war, slavery, raids, illnesses and catastrophes. Most people thought they knew already what to do in life and how to do it. The harder questions were about conflicts and dangerous “lifestyle choices” like seamanship. What’s to be done with that? And who is doing “IT” to me?!
In other words, the question of evil and its practical application.
Naturally, judeo-christianity would never be able to square the circle. Go deeper and meet the devil, fallen angels and especially nasty sinners like warlocks. (*)
Not only laymen but also scholars often find themselves absolutely at sea when trying to explain the infatuation with the (unofficial)pantheon’s darker side. Why did judeo-christian people care so much? Didn’t they know the church’s complicated copes? (they all boil down to: “Evil don’t exist, brah“)
No and/or they didn’t care.
With good reason. Evil was more significant, more frequent, more profoundly real in everybody’s life.
While the “good side” doesn’t even have to be reasoned with, the church simply expected you to do your duties, pray and show up, just avoiding evil seemed so much more complicated and time-consuming.(**)
And certainly this didn’t change: Evil is more real even today.
In this peaceful, uber-rational time of ours, spaces for demons or witches are gone. This logically means the need for understanding and reifying evil has only gotten more powerful.
Meet the last member of the judeo-christian pantheon – the God with the small moustache in whose shadow we live every day. The eeriness with which the name is implied or his dark power –Nazi things- threatens to rise mirrors any witchburning period.
Atheism has shown how modern people explicitly can and arguably like (or pretend) to live without god. But they – or rather:
the system cannot live without ontological evil.
(*)
in the beginning of judeo-christianity’s reign, those devils were simply the old Gods and rites, a rather mundane and predictable reversal of roles. Some of the most holy rituals were twisted and repackaged as straight up devil-worship. For those who can read with that in mind, Brothers Grimm’s “fairy” tales is actually the most comprehensive collection of Pagan cosmology we can buy and study off the shelf.
(**)
The oblique nature of this unholy predicament did not escape clergy. Which is why more and more religious duties came into being. And why labour would eventually be recognised as devotion. Classic Protestantism is a natural progression and mirthless endpoint, trying to feel Yahwe harder through back-aching labour and schizoid devotion to detail.
David Bowie (Jones) R.I.P. at one stage saw Hitler primarily as a kind of pop star. Many photographs and much film footage (most notably, of course, in Triumph of the Will) support that angle.
As for N.S.D.A.P. liaison with jews, Eichman was a star on that point. He even learnt modern ‘ebrew, and, IIRC, once visited Palestine.
What thanks did he get for that?
Kidnapped, run through a kangaroo court, kept in a sound-proof booth through the trial so that his words were never fully recorded nor reproduced, then executed.
Most jews are really psycho. They were really pissed off when the U.S. writer Kurt Vonnegut wrote Slaughterhouse Five, which included accurate depictions of both the Dresden firebombing (he was there as a P.o.W., fortunately for him, outside the city) and his painful later walk.
Sure, I know that it is a work of fiction, but he stated that those parts of it were as he had experienced them. Found both the novel and film pretty great.
Jews were furious, so they made him write Mother Night, reflecting the title of Eli Weasel’s Night (also a work of fiction) as a kind of apology.
I never read that novel (Mother Night), but the film is quite good, and also full of lies, the centrepiece is the Eichman trial, but the cast is great, one just has to remember that, on at least several levels, it is black propaganda.
As if Churchill had any admirable qualities, drunken slob, debtor, gambler, fat pig, and politician for hire.
This book is a very different portrayal of the most evil man in the history of the entire world!!!
Hitler’s Vienna: A Portrait of the Tyrant as a Young Man (Tauris Parke Paperbacks) Paperback – February 28, 2011
Shy Guy Young Adolf
I found this to be an unusual book in that most books about Hitler demonize him, either directly or tangentially. I was surprised at the picture of young Hitler this book described.The picture you get is of an aesthete, dreamy, hesitantly feeling his new way in the world.He shyly attends Wagner operas, while he went through life in MittelEuropa, hoping to find some direction.He wrote a letter to an unrequited love asking her to wait for him, she had no idea who he was!!But mostly it was the description of an excruciatingly well mannered aesthete sort of personality, who paid what little money he had, to attend Wagner at standing room only venues.
Usually this part of Hitler’s life is glossed over until he emerges from WW1 with two iron crosses, eager to lead the German people to revenge.but this dreamy beauty catcher shy guy,was a new view to me.I wondered about the contrast between Hitler and the juvenile delinquent bank robber Stalin?? and speculated that was why Stalin had such a hard time believing this high-class guy(Hitler) had gone back on his word.
Stalin could believe the betrayal of his fellow bank robbers but not from this high minded aesthete Hitler guy.
Anyway a different view of the world’s most famous Azezal.
Ron Unz, there are no words for what you do, promoting Hitler in article after article to the point where the ADL will bestow upon you the Goldeneh Menorah Award for having been the top supplier of excuses/pretexts for them, and for every other jewish organization (AIPAC, etc.), to fire that ammo at us “Amalekite Edoimite Goyim Gentiles.” It’s how you people have been operating for the last 2,500 years. You, bubbelah, have done more harm to us than most other jews (and there’s no shortage of those, like Unit 8200 ops. on this site and elsewhere, y’know, all those fake jewish Nazi “fans”) who’ve been pretending to support your Moshiach ben Yoseph Hitler.
Interesting! I always thought, it is outrageous to compare the two backward entities, Hindus (Modi) and Jews (Netanyahu), to Fascist Germany. The Germans were highly educated people who, despite engaging in very destructive wars, were deeply immersed in the humanities. It is also outrageous to compare the German leader, Adolf Hitler, with the Jewish leader, Netanyahu. Hitler was an educated and cultured leader, while Netanyahu, by contrast, is a dirty and unconscionable Jew who has time and again proven to the world that he is a bloodthirsty child killer. People are using “fascism” and “fascist” to make Jews look like civilised and law-abiding people, like the Nazis were. Trump is not a Fascist; he is a barbaric monster dog on a Jewish leash.
How many?
And how many of them did Stalin do in? Five pointed stars all over.
One would think that the further historical events recede into the past, the likely result would be more objectivity. If you watch war movies made during WWII, they are obvious propaganda. As time passed, however, war movies became more objective. The Germans were not necessarily nice guys, but they weren’t portrayed as demons. They were simply the opponents. Then, I think, around the time of the Holocaust mini-series (1978), the portrayals reverted to demonization. It was impossible to make a World War II movie that took place in Europe that didn’t involve the Holocaust in some form or fashion. Other aspects of the war took a back seat. To this day, movies about the Holocaust, its victims, survivors, and descendants, are still being made. So to sell the Holocaust, Hitler had to be resurrected and propped up as the man you love to hate.
Much the same is true of the Civil War. After 160 years, objectivity should be a given, and for a long time this was the case. But slavery and the Confederacy are made to order for anti-racism propaganda so Robert E. Lee, et al are monsters.
Orwell said it best: “He who controls the past controls the future: he who controls the present controls the past.”
Non-Aggression Treaty with the Soviet Union; and Japan once tried to broker Peace btwn Germany and the Soviet Union.
Germany nixed offer; and the Soviets turned after Germany’s Defeat, reneging the Treaty Terms and started to attack Japan.
Not every Party in Wars plays the “straight and narrow” path…
Take that into context.
The familiar defense that “he had no choice but to fight” is one of the oldest illusions in politics—the belief that annihilation is the only alternative to aggression. Yet history repeatedly shows that nations perish not merely from foreign attack but from their own decision to mirror the very pathology they claim to oppose.
Germany in the 1930s faced undeniable humiliation and hardship, but its leadership chose to meet darkness on its own frequency—mass propaganda, dehumanization, and the sanctification of violence as purification. That decision sealed its fate long before the first Allied bomb fell. Once a people accepts that survival requires moral inversion, defeat becomes internal before it ever arrives from without.
There were alternatives. Elite non-cooperation could have stopped radical consolidation before it matured into tyranny; had more military and civil leaders refused unlawful decrees, the system would have fractured from within. Civic resistance—as later shown by Denmark’s rescue of its Jewish citizens or the White Rose students in Munich—demonstrates that coordinated moral courage preserves a culture’s integrity even under occupation. And diplomatic and narrative restraint, grounded in transparency and economic repair rather than messianic revenge, could have rebuilt Germany’s dignity without re-igniting catastrophe. None of these paths required surrender—only the discipline to withdraw energy from the machine of destruction.
Those who insist that the Allies were determined to destroy Germany miss the deeper mechanism of collapse. Nations rarely fall because enemies conspire; they fall because they internalize the enemy’s logic. By 1939, Germany’s destiny was already sealed—not by inevitability, but by resonance. Its immense intelligence, industry, and cultural vitality were converted into fuel for a self-devouring engine. The tragedy was not simply defeat; it was self-annihilation through imitation.
Even amid hostility, other outcomes were possible. A defensive, economically restorative Germany could have survived as a neutral, respected state—as postwar Austria did. What doomed it was the confusion of power with preservation, the fatal equation of domination with survival. Every empire that fights to “endure” at any cost ultimately enacts its own extinction, because the cost itself becomes the mechanism of death.
True endurance—of a nation, a civilization, or an individual—arises from maintaining moral coherence under pressure. When a people remembers that no external enemy can destroy what it refuses to betray from within, it begins to step outside the cycle entirely. That is not surrender; it is evolution—the only defense the machine cannot digest.
I hope more of these get revealed, cross examined, and brought into the Public Discourse including Primary&Secondary School (edited for age) Curricula for All to see and think for themselves.
When the brainwashed and gullible boomers enter their graves it’s likely a new understanding of Hitler and NS can fully emerge.
It’s quite sad the way Sutton’s “Wall Street” trilogy is intentionally overlooked. Poor Antony, he was another in a long line of brilliant and honest men that have been relegated to truthteller oblivion.
Another “anon”zio- propagandist troll eager to display its idiocy in the competition that has become more fierce than ever before on UR because of the growing number of impostors, poseurs, moronic liars or simple genocide fans.
Judeo-Christianity? This is strange construct as Jews hate Christians, but Christians for strange reasons do not hate Jews as much as they could because of their behavioir
About Hitler’s survival, it appears that this has been put to rest when his jawbone which is kept in Moscow was examined and matched Hitler’s dental records.
Had Visser been Polish, Belarusian, Russian or something similar there would have been no question of any clemency. The Germans would have probably killed a whole host of hostages in retaliation, as was their practice. Stalin and his Russians destroyed Hitler and his superior beings even after being surprise attacked. This deification of Hitler verges on occult thinking, no longer grounded in reality. What’s the point?
This comment section proves the Unz Review is infested by agents on Hasbarah payroll and feds.
Because its pattern confirms a trend: the few initial posts are regular commenters.
Then, the creatures swarm in, always at a certain time in the day, if:
– the article title is controversial and has visibility on TUR homepage
– a certain threshold of published comments is surpassed
In case they need to kill a thread, they either resort to the guy monomaniac about Serbia, or to John Johnson starting some off-topic, nonsensical diatribe about the Ukraine good, Putin bad
David Irving once said: “There are two Hitlers. The real one and the Hollywood Hitler. I talk about the real one and that’s why they hate me.”
Sadly, Hitler is the example par excellence of the truth Shakespeare put in the mouth of Marc Antony when he eulogized Julius Caesar: the good that men do is oft interred with their bones.
The ironic statement that follows is also apt: But Brutus is an honorable man / As are they all, all honorable men…
Hitler also shares with Napoleon the distinction of driving a British invasion force out of Europe.
True. You forgot to mention the so called “American” “revolution,” however.
Both of them are guilty of mass murder, both did it under the pentagram.
What, precisely did Churchill achieve?
He gave the entire state gold reserve to the U.S.A., or at least U.S. banking interests, threw the empire away, impoverished his people for years (at least six, the time rationing continued, to fifteen or so) post-war, and placed the place in debt to the U.S. for forty to sixty years (or perhaps forever).
Napoleon’s reputation greatly varies from place to place to place. Napoleon was perhaps the major innovator in jurisprudence since Justinian, and the system in Japan of now is largely based on Napoleonic law.
I don’t think that it is a very good system.
Of course, the system of law in N.S.D.A.P. Germany was also based on Napoleonic lines, as it is in loony-toons Deutschland of now.
The trouble with the judge-tribunal system of justice is that whether or not it delivers justice is dependent on higher layers of the polity.
If Herr Hitler was a British agent (and there are some surprisingly factual actions that make it plausible) whose agent was Churchill? He destroyed the British empire, handed the world off to the Soviets and the Americans and left Britain a beaten, broken country to the point where British DNA will cease to exist as a distinct people in the foreseeable future. Which British king will be the first to bow towards Mecca five times a day? It’s coming.
For the early years prior to WW1, I found Brigitte Hamann’s, “Hitler’s Vienna: A Dictators Apprenticeship” useful. Then “Mein Kampf” (an early translation in English by the NSDAP) and David Irving’s excellent books “The War Path: Hitler’s Germany 1933-1939” and “Hitler’s War”.
In trying to approach these questions without pre-conceptions (difficult) and just letting the evidence build a picture of events, then what emerges seems to be the following:
– A major formative experience was Hitler’s WW1 military action on the front lines (where he was awarded the Iron Cross). He had great loyalty to his unit. He didn’t accept that Germany was defeated militarily, seeing treason from the German political left. The treason promoted by the Jewish media and resulting in a Versailles Treaty designed to destroy Germany. Hence the subtitle of Mein Kampf – “Eine Abrechnung” ( A Reckoning).
– Prior to enlisting, he was a resident in a Men’s Hostel in Vienna -Brigenttenau, making a minimal living from selling his art. Hamann: The hostel was a well known six-story building. A Viennese journalist Errnst Kläger described it, “Compared to the other smaller houses around and the bare factory buildings in the back, the shelter looks proud. I open the door and to my surprise find myself in a vestibule which no good hotel would put to shame. I am embraced by comfortably warm air.” Hamann: “The men’s hostel had both electric and gas lights and was heated by a modern, central low-pressure heater. At the counter the reporter had no difficulty obtaining a ticket for one night for thirty kreuzer (sixty heller). Kläger described the dining room in the upper mezzanine: “Again I am pleasantly surprised by the elegance of the room, which is lighted by two arc lamps and whose walls are covered halfway up with pale green tiles.” Hamann: Then he tried the dirt cheap food and found the meals “all very good.”
Hitler was a voracious reader of newspapers. Hamann: Hanisch writes that Hitler’s speeches and participation in political discussions took up most of his working hours: “It was impossible to make Hitler work. In the morning he sat in the hall of the Home, and was supposed to be making drawings while I was busy canvassing the frame manufactures and upholsterers. But then political discussion would start and generally Hitler would become the ringleader. When I came back in the evening, I often had to take the T-square out of his hands, because he would be swinging it over his head, making a speech.”
Hamann: Hitler’s admiration for Vienna’s most popular politician. Karl Lueger was also obvious. A further source is Albert S. Lindemann’s, “Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews.” As Lindemann says, “The rise of the Jews in Austria-Hungary may well have been the most sudden , impressive rise of Jews in modern history.” He quotes a German-Jewish writer who had moved to Vienna from the German Reich, “….all public life was dominated by Jews. The banks, the press, the theater, literature, social organizations, all lay in the hands of the Jews…. The aristocracy would have nothing to do with such things…. The small number of untitled patrician families imitated the aristocracy; the original upper-middle class had disappeared….. The court, the lower middle class and the Jews gave the city its stamp. And that the Jews, as the most mobile group, kept all the others in continual motion is, on the whole, not surprising.”
Another unique source to catch the chaotic ambience is Fritz Lang’s 1922 film, “Dr Mabuse, the Gambler” (Dr Mabuse, der Spieler” (3 hrs 15 min!).
As a German nationalist/activist Hitler had a great hostility towards the Jewish domination of German Viennese society and also rejected the large Slavonic element incorporated in the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
– On attaining power, Irving shows that Hitler’s main driving force was an unshakeable belief in the ethnic superiority of the German race (with the Dutch and English classed as Germanic) coupled with the ethnic inferiority of other races – particularly those he encountered in Vienna – principally Jews and Slavs.
He dedicated his time to improving German society and economic conditions and straightforwardly planning his revenge ref. the Versailles Treaty plus dealing with the Jews and the Slavs. Jews were to be removed from Germany and Slav lands were to form the basis of his Lebensraum project – the partial ethnic cleansing of Eastern Europe/ Russia-Ukraine to the Urals with the settlement of ethnic German farmers complete with exclusive ethnic German towns, administrations and communications networks. Operation Barbarossa was the culmination of a project that had been in the works since the early 1930’s.
In the event his racial contempt for Russians caused him to underrate the strategic/military difficulties he encountered in Russia (also underrating the resistance of Jews transmitted through the Anglo world). Hitler genuinely thought that he could ally with the British – making a global alliance of his German land Empire and their British sea Empire.
Hitler was neither a devil nor a saint. He was a politician. He did some kind and generous things, and he did some atrocious things. He was a vegan, a non-drinker, a non-smoker and an animal lover who gave awards to German women for motherhood, yet he also ordered the death of one of his closest comrades, Ernst Rohm, and his regime had a euthanasia program for human beings.
In may ways Hitler followed in the footsteps of Bismarck by uniting the German people. Hitler alone among Western leaders was willing to confront Soviet Bolshevism (whereas Churchill and FDR sickeningly allied with it) which was commendable, though he did so with great cost in human suffering and arguably botched the effort by micromanaging the Eastern Front and by stupidly declaring war against the U.S.
His army was more disciplined and professional than his Soviet adversaries; the Wehrmacht did not commit mass rapes of Soviet women the way the Red Army raped German women.
Almost certainly he was a better person than Josef Stalin or Pol Pot. He was described as polite and charming by Oswald Moseley’s wife.
The Hitler-as-devil caricature is the result of Allied propaganda to justify Allied war crimes, such as incinerating women and children at Dresden and Nagasaki (as Gen. Curtis Lemay said, if the Allies had lost the war, they would have been the ones charged with war crimes) and Jewish propaganda to justify Jewish terrorist attacks on the British in Mandatory Palestine, the creation of Israel, and the displacement of Arabs.
Stop the nonsense about the Jesuits. The Jesuits wish and dreamed they had power over Deists that set up American republic. And you forgot the masons dear helena ?!!!
April 16, 2024 History: Adolph Hitler was Financed by Wall Street, the U.S. Federal Reserve and the Bank of England US Investments in Nazi Germany. Rockefeller Financed Adolf Hitler’s Election Campaign
From World War I to the Present: Dollar denominated debt has been the driving force behind all US led wars. Wall Street creditors are the main actors. They were firmly behind Nazi Germany. They financed Operation Barbarossa and the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/history-of-world-war-ii-nazi-germany-was-financed-by-the-federal-reserve-and-the-bank-of-england/5530318
https://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/392cd-feature-hitler-schacht-prescott-bush-1024×611.jpg
Feb 19, 2023 The Rise of Corporate Fascism
“The Rise of Corporate Fascism” Michael Rectenwald Author, Beyond Woke. This speech was given on November 13, 2022, during a Hillsdale College CCA seminar on “Parallel Economies.”
Video Link
The issue is more complicated than that. It was known that he had doubles. Those who claim he committed suicide said he shot himself and took cyanide. Many years ago I saw an image of his alleged corpse lying outside the bunker, just before he was burned. It did not look like him. That corpse was purportedly a double who was shorter. I thought I could find that image on the Internet, but perhaps disappeared because too many viewers might have come to the same conclusion.
There was difficulty getting reliable eyewitnesses, who had different recollections, that were partially contradictory. It was said that at least his skull had been preserved in Moscow. Then they finally got around to testing it.
‘
The jaw and dental explanation is also problematic. Both jaw and skull fragment were assumed to be from the same person. As staed above, the jaw fragment was tested in a lab but the jaw was purportedly just a photograph. It is unlikely that a man his age and resources would have had only five teeth left. And why would only his lower jaw remain but hardly anything else? The reliability is subject to doubt.
The following image does not really look like like him:
https://www.gettyimages.de/detail/nachrichtenfoto/the-body-claimed-to-be-that-of-the-german-dictator-nachrichtenfoto/613460114
Note that the images I presented above, embedded in comment #17, appear more plausible and genuine than this Getty image. He does look older and has a different hair style at the forehead. Anyone insisting that the purported photos of him in Argentina were really taken sometime prior to May 1945, when he was known to have been alive, ought to produce contemporaneous public photos showing him in that way.
Peculiarly, the formal death certificate was not issued until October 1956, more than eleven years after the war:
https://newsroom.ap.org/editorial-photos-videos/detail?itemid=1bc3d33e28bb42fe8ad521c890c644d3&mediatype=video&source=youtube
‘ title=’https://newsroom.ap.org/editorial-photos-videos/detail?itemid=1bc3d33e28bb42fe8ad521c890c644d3&mediatype=video&source=youtube
‘ >https://newsroom.ap.org/editorial-photos-videos/detail?itemid=1bc3d33e28bb42fe8ad521c890c644d3&mediatype=video&source=youtube
Perhaps he actually had died by then, wherever he might have been in the interim. Though millions of people wanted to have a sense of closure, the issue continues to remain inconclusive, as may have been intended. At least everyone can agree that he is no longer alive now.
More rambling nonsense.
Schicklgruber aka ‘Hitler’ forgives an arms dealer and you’re calling that compassion because he’s really a nice guy? What are your feelings for the people killed by those arms sold to those who couldn’t procure them legally because they were committing war crimes?
‘Hitler’ the Aryan messiah is completely consistent with him as Rothschild agent sent to undermine the Germans. The ‘ar’ in Aryan was first spelled heir as in hierarchy or One Divine Heir over the archons or rulers. They organized the Habiru/ Hebrew terrorist rape gangs who pillaged pre-patriarchy Egypt. They wrote the scriptures–all of them–and the Aryan-root languages.
Aryan doesn’t mean white people, it means rulers in a hierarchy. ‘Hitler’ like Trump was messiah-for-a-day, fooling both Germans and Jews. He was a heiro to IsRaEl’s owner, the Rothschilds, by making sure that the Transfer Agreement and ‘holocaust’ reparations paid for its construction. There were two Hitlers, but neither one was a friend to the German people. He set them up for their brilliant plan to fail: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/was-schicklgruber-an-actor-playing and https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/gottfried-feder.
What’s important is that after a quick perusal of Twitter, Gab, even Youtube comment threads is that it’s quite clear that young men and specifically the young White men that will be in positions of power are wholesale rejecting the WWII mythology and post-WWII Judeo-bolshevik narrative that’s been shoved down their throats in public schools.
They’re reading David Irving, they’re noticing patterns en masse, they’re watching Europa, they’re (rightfully) mocking the holocaust nonsense and they are observing – first hand – the multicultural destruction of the West that Hitler warned Europe and the world about 80+ years ago.
The real guy, a sodomite, PTSD victim, and police spy…well,ok, that’s pretty ordinary. The mythic fella…that’s a constructed pharmacos… Necessary inorder to colonize and “rehabilitate” the vast number of nazis of various European nationalities and use them to continue the war against the USSR…by the same people who raised up and financed the nazi party. Galen, von Braun, and the multitudes ratlined into Canada and other places went right back to work. To-day the goal remains, colonize Russia. And who runs zone 404 (aka “Ukraine”? Nazis. And who’s financing?
Edwin Black’s book and the ‘transfer’ event are too-often cited in a way that shifts culpability for the dispossession of Palestinians to Germans.
A closer reading would reveal what I call the drop of ink in the milk of the holocaust narrative: Edwin Black quotes Rabbi Stephen Wise’s statement, uttered “within a fortnight” of Hitler’s nomination to chancellorship, that “all Jews must leave Germany … All 587,000 Jews must leave.”
In mid-February 1933, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, informal leader of world-wide zionism, that “all German Jews must leave Germany.”
German Jews did not want to leave Germany.
Ilan Pappé told Aaron Bastani
:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1Iw2fm58FY
This was within a time-frame that, in Stephen Wise’s words, “Polish Foreign Minister Joseph Beck threatened to expel three million ‘‘surplus’’ Jews” and nobody, least of all the British, were willing to take them in. https://archive.org/details/voicethatspokefo0000urof/page/370/mode/2up
However, throughout the pre-war, WWI, and inter-war period, HIAS [Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society] energetically funneled tens of thousands of Eastern European Jews into Germany.
This was in addition to the thousands of Eastern European Jews who flocked to German and Austrian universities in the late-19th century Jewish ‘enlightenment’, when Eastern European Jews began seriously to pursue secular education. https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001401870
Back to Pappé’s conversation with Bastani;
he continued:
Why, then, did Brandeis insist that German Jews leave Germany?
Edwin Black explains that:
Executive summary:
— The zionist project in Palestine was floundering
— The British experienced ‘seller’s remorse’, fearful of losing control of Arabs,
— So the British limited Jewish migration to Palestine to only wealthy Jews;
— Only German Jews had the wealth to fit that requirement;
— But German Jews did not want to migrate to Palestine ..
— So Louis Brandeis dispatched Stephen Wise to create fear & chaos among Germany’s assimilated Jews
[Enter “Haganah’s Mossad le Aliyah Bet (Committee for Illegal Immigration), set up in 1938 to facilitate the “illegal” movement of Jewish refugees from Central Europe to Palestine.”
https://archive.org/details/zionismantisemit0000nico/mode/2up?q=mossad
But that’s another story for another time, at which time the cockamamie notion that Kristallnacht was pursued by Goebbels in a bid to overcome his disgraceful affair with an Austrian actress will be addressed ]
Most excellent purview of a specific phenomenon that can be linked and extrapolated to other, related, and parallel cases in point and history. Many people lack the skill and motivation to justifiably generalize, analogize a specific set of occurrences, e.g., and epoch, set of events, vignette, etc., to others that share common and seminal circumstances, internal and external.
Please continue to add to the commentariat, in order to raise the general mean of useful in expository wisdom and information.
You may think whatever you want.
1. the world’s scientific system is metric-Napoleon
2. except Anglospheroid countries- world’s legal system is Napoleonic
3. the world’s orientation towards meritocracy- Napoleon
4. the greatest military commander in history- Napoleon
5. the greatest historical figure in all high culture- Napoleon (British literature, French literature, Russian literature, all painting..)
6. the greatest myth for modern man- you can become everything, even Napoleon, never mind your origins
7. spinoffs like definitely destroying feudalism, creation of nationalism that defines modern world, dissemination of ideas that drive modern world to progress, enlarged the US territory massively…won’t bother to expatiate on
I believe every word. I have it on good, reliable sources, that Adoph underwent plastic surgery to facially alter his face, and steroid treatments to increase his muscle mass. Also, according to a female insider her, he had penile implants installed.
Video Link
Hitler was a Great Man. Far above those who write books about him filled with Jewish bullshit. People saying Trump is Hitler. ROTFLMMFWAO. I only wish he were…….. Some dipshit writing shit about Hitler who never made any sacrifices in his life, fought in a War, brought his country back in a mere 5 years and gave a third of the World a run for their money from 1939-1945 before Germany was simply overwhelmed. A leader who actually cared about his people, imagine that as “our” Hitler cohorts with AI billionaires taking away thousands of jobs, kisses Jew ass, and builds a ball room. Who the fuck goes ball room dancing but weird rich shitheads? Nixon putting up a bowling alley, totally relatable to normal people and unlike Hitler, Trumpstein hates dogs. NEVER trust anyone who hates dogs.
When dealing with gods, one should always be circumspect. Don’t presume too much, if anything at all. And choose your gods wisely. For my part, I’ve always followed advice from that famous theologian, Howard Lovecraft, who wrote:
And let’s face it. I think we can all agree that the last thing any of us want is a meet n greet, or lunch n learn, with the Crawling Chaos, Nyalarthotep– hideous soul and messenger of the Other Gods.
Anyone seeking to understand Hitler and his place in history should certainly read David Irving’s magisterial text, Hitler’s War. Another essential text is R. H. S. Stolfi’s Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny. Stolfi argues that Hitler is best understood as a man who saw himself as Germany’s messiah and was uniquely suited by talent, temperament, and the post-WW I milieu of Germany and Europe to assume that role. As a result, Stolfi succeeds far more successfully than any other biographer in explaining Hitler and his place in history.
Two other important books that help place Hitler in historical context are Viktor Suvorov’s The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II and Icebreaker: Who Started the Second World War? Suvorov uses Soviet archives to argue very persuasively that Stalin was poised to invade western Europe in July of 1941. Unfortunately for Stalin, Hitler acted first and caught Stalin’s armies flat footed. Stalin’s army was much better equipped than the German Wehrmacht but the Soviet army’s offensive posture was unsuited for defense. As a result it took the Soviet Union nearly three years to regain the immense advantage it had over the Third Reich’s army in both equipment and manpower.
It is frightening to speculate the result, had Hitler not invaded the Soviet Union before the Soviet Union invaded Europe. The Wehrmacht easily crushed the western European armies it faced and the Soviet Union eventually crushed the Wehrmacht. An invading Soviet Army would easily have swept aside any opposing western European armies. Furthermore, the Comintern would have supplied Stalin with a large fifth column. All of Europe would have become part of a Soviet dominated hegemon, like Post WW II Eastern Europe. Hitler may have unintentionally been a European savior.
We’ve been over this many times, it’s hard to take the idea of jewish animosity towards christianity seriously. Especially when jews explicitly promote christianity like never before these days.
Do they like it? Do they want christianity inside israel? Obviously not. But both sects need and feed off of each other.
Without ancient jews, no christianity at all
Without modern jews, no funding for christian leaders (starting from day 1, id est Charlemagne, William the conquerer et cetera)
Without ancient christians, no jews outside of the middle east
Without modern christians, no jews in power
Trump: “Jews controlled congress, and rightly so!”, “we’re only in the middle east for israel” et cetera
Von der Leyen: “Europe embodies the values of the Talmud”
A breath of fresh air, coming and displacing the fetid, turdgid, odious Hitler worship and projection of a paper mace-ché surrogate Daddy and ancient re-iteration of a phallus worshipping cult of the Satan Matrix and its appendage of another Evil Empire. Timeless. Another historical episode of Satanic rampage.
TALES OF THE NOBLE AIRYAM AND TEUTONIC CONTESTANTS OF THE NORDC BEAUTY CONTEST.
“Military Necessity”, “Willed by Divine Impression of the Old Gods”
https://www.museum-zwangsarbeit.de/en/geschichte/einfuehrung
WHAT WAS FORCED LABOR UNDER NAZI RULE?
During World War II, more than 20 million people were coerced into performing forced labor for Germany in occupied Europe and in the German Reich. The Germans profited from this exploitation, which by no means took place in secret but out in the open. After the war, this slave labor was not recognized as a mass crime. Not until sixty years after the war were surviving victims given minimal payments as a nominal compensation.
Germany’s aim of World War II was the subjugation and exploitation of Europe. Extending the Atlantic to the Caucasus and from Scandinavia to the Mediterranean, the countries that they occupied were plundered, and millions of men, women, and children were abducted and forced to work for the German Reich. [Nota Bene: This was a FEATURE NOT A BUG]. A total of more than 20 million people from almost all parts of Europe performed forced labor—as civil foreign workers, prisoners of war, or prisoners in the camps of the SS, the Gestapo, or the justice system: over 13 million within Germany and some 7 million in German-occupied areas. The work extracted from people was essential to the German war apparatus, and it also contributed to securing the living standards of the German people during the war.
Forced laborers were used everywhere: in the arms industry, on construction sites, in agriculture, in the skilled crafts, in public institutions, and in private households. Whether as a soldier occupying Poland or as a farmer in Thuringia—the entire German populace came face to face with forced laborers. The use of this slave workforce was no secret. It was a predominantly public crime.
Some 2.5 million people, largely Soviet prisoners of war and concentration camp inmates from throughout Europe did not survive forced labor in the German Reich. Most Germans kept silent about the crime of forced labor or completely denied it. Maybe it was their conscious and a sense of complicit guilt that led to denial and decades of silence.. [Hence the term “GOOD GERMANS”] The demands of former forced laborers for compensation went unheard. When in the 1990s Jewish victim organizations initiated a class-action lawsuit against German companies, the federal government and companies, facing pressure, paid into a common fund, which made one-time payments to living former forced laborers in the amount of several hundred or at most several thousand dollars. The payments were coupled with having to sign a waiver giving up the right to any further legal action. Since most former forced laborers had already died, the German state and industry got off the hook for a relatively small sum. Only 1.7 million former slave laborers received any financial support from Germany.
WORK AT BMW
For German companies, economic gain took precedence over the well-being of forced laborers.
Four men are working in pairs on an aeroplane engine. Two of the men can be seen from behind. A “Z” can be seen on the back of their uniforms.
Amongst the camps surrounding the BMW-factories was the “SS and Police Penal Camp Dachau” for convicted members of SS and police forces. The “Z” stood for “Zuchthaus”, marking those sentenced to especially harsh conditions of imprisonment.
Amongst the camps surrounding the BMW-factories was the “SS and Police Penal Camp Dachau” for convicted members of SS and police forces. The “Z” stood for “Zuchthaus”, marking those sentenced to especially harsh conditions of imprisonment.
Weapons manufacturers had no scruples about using cheap and potentially well-trained forced laborers, but they had little concern for how they were housed and fed. Forced laborers usually lived in barracks in camps within close proximity to the factory halls. Many suffered from constant hunger. They were policed and harassed during work, in camps, and during their free time.
Towards the end of the war, 90 percent of the labor force at the BMW Werk II in Munich-Allach, the largest airplane motor factory of the German Reich, was forced laborers from occupied Europe, prisoners of war, or concentration camp inmates. Between 1939 and 1944 the number of employees rose from 1,000 to 17,000 people.
Forced laborers not only worked in production but also in expanding the factory. Due to its significance for the weapons industry, BMW was given preference by the offices of the Labor Administration in terms of worker allocations. The company’s labor needs were still never fully met.
All wars are bankers wars. The list is long and depressing of American and German large companies – including financial concerns – that profited immensely from the commission of the WWII. Just as in today’s world, the arms manufacturers want the Ukraine War, and America’s bellicosity to contiunue, creating demand for materiel and armaments. Human blood is convertible and fungible into gold and geld. Subject to market fluctuations.
Corporate fascism is largely redundant. The modern term is public-private partnership or something similar.
Backed by Jewish finance capital. Clausewitz too.
Napoleon imposed his Code Napoléon on France and the countries that he conquered. Now known as the “civil law,” it is still in use by many European countries and IMO it’s much better than the “common law” used in the English speaking world.
Napoleon had a very curious mind. Interested in science and archeology, he toured Egypt where his expedition discovered the “Rosetta Stone.”
He confronted the French genius, Pierre Simon Laplace, whose contributions to mathematics and physics were groundbreaking. Napoleon said to Laplace, “They tell me you have written a large book on the system of the universe, and have never mentioned its Creator.” Laplace famously replied, “Sire, I have no need of that hypothesis”.
August Kubizek, The Young Hitler I Knew
Thank you for that clear and verifiable set of facts. Most Panzers, Hitler apologists, solipsists, spiritually shallow, and outsourced pillars for their sagging and weak personalities, egos, and thin skinned Egos.
Two strong, intelligent, wise, and extremely capable women of today: Maria Zarkharova and Alice Weidel.
Yep, that’s right. Then he went on to buy and run a dry goods store just north of me on route 412 up in Perry County. The locals loved him and he was known as “the friendly merchant that talked real funny.” He even ran for mayor of Beardstown twice but without any luck.
Get the grammar right. It’s “you pays yer money and you takes yer choice.”
You misunderstand me, Poupon Marx. Read my articles. ‘Hitler’ and the Germans are opposing forces because ‘Hitler’ whose real name was Schicklgruber, was Rothschild’s agent and possibly grandson. So when you say all wars are bankers’ wars, it was Hitler on behalf of Rothschild who forced war on Germany–which did NOT want rearmament. German people wanted to provide for themselves, as they were doing nicely under Gottfried Feder’s economic plan. So don’t blame Germans for forced labor–the majority of inmates at Dachau were Catholic. Germans had the most successful rebellion against the bankers since the American colonies before the Revolutionary War and their re-enslavement by the Constitution.
Wrong, Adolf’s name was never Schicklgruber but it was a family name. Schicklgruber was Adolf’s grandmother’s last name. Because Adolf’s father Alois was born out of wedlock he used the name Schicklgruber until he became an adult. In 1876 Alois changed his last name to Hitler when he added his stepfather’s name to his birth certificate. Hitler was one spelling of the last name Heidler, Alois Hitler gave his last name to his children including Adolf Hitler.
I think you better read The Wandering Jew by Eugene Sue.
It’s a real potboiler and it gives all the skinny on the Jesuits.
Weidel belongs to the Hayek Society. Making her a covert neo-con.
Mr. Crowley: This simple anecdote serves to illustrate that Hitler was not the crazed, bloodthirsty monster he is made out to be in the prevailing narrative on the 1930s and 1940s. No it was the bloodthirsty crazed commie kikes who are rabid mad dogs. Mr. Hitler and other German leadership was taking pro-active steps to try and stop this jew bolshevik menace, period…
Anyone that says “Mr. Hitler” seriously should be immediately slapped across the face.
What an absolute buffoon.
Adolf’s father Alois was born as Schicklgruber to 42 yr old Frau Schicklgruber who was unmarried and worked as a cook or other domestic servant for a wealthy Jewish family. When Alois was 5 and his mother was 47, she married her second cousin Heidler, enabling her son to take his name. This seems entirely a marriage of convenience, since they were related and she was 47. If Alois was his son, why wouldn’t they have married when she became pregnant?
Until Alois was 18, she received money and letters from the wife in the wealthy Jewish family. Meyer Rothschild lived separately from his wife. The name used is Frankenfurter, and the Rothschild started in Frankfurt. There are inconsistencies in the story of the Jewish family that make it possible that it was an alias.
Under patrilineal succession, a son takes the name of his father, yes? Alois changed his name but his birth name was Schicklgruber. Adolf took it a step further and turned Heidler into Hitler, which has an occult meaning in its relationship to Hittites. The only name that indicates ‘Hitler’s’ family history is Schicklgruber. I think it’s significant that we don’t know this name or the potential relationship to Rothschild and the certain relationship to wealthy Jews.
Over simplistic. Like saying X belongs to a particular race and cannot be qualified. Study more, turn off the Spotes Channel.
Your reply totally is derived from I do not know what. Certainly not from anything I said or implied. Populations in the post Napoleonic Era are manipulated and indoctrinated to such an extent so that there thoughts are actually implanted by elites and The Chosen Tribe.
“The German People” is not a quantifiable, recognizable, discreet, or meaningful entity in any useful or utilitarian sense. It has romantic aroma, however.
Hmmm, so the fact that France, Britain, & USA defacto declared war on Germany had nothing to do with it?
Or that Poland was murdering German expatriates in Poland by the thousands and Germany marched in to stop this?
Or that the Soviet Union was poised to invade Germany and western Europe weeks after Germany struck preemptively?
Or that Churchill and Roosevelt conspired as early as 1935 for war against Germany?
Or that in 1933 already “Judea Declares War on Germany”?
Clean up your own stable before you point out to other’s.
Too bad.
If Boney had conquered England and installed his bimetal economic rules on them, it might have froze out the Rothschild influence. It did keep inflation out of France for awhile.
Like his Austrian cousin, Napoleon would have given Europe a good deal. So sure they undermined him.
Free nations is something bankers can’t allow.
I am not passionate about this, but you didn’t tackle the central issue of his dental records matching the jawbone which you say wasn’t his. Did he make sure his (sacrificial) double’s dental records were stored as his own? Or is this something else?
Anyway, if you support that fringe hypothesis, perhaps you’ve heard that, according to some, Argentina was his first but not his last postwar dwelling place. The place in Argentina where he was living was too cold and he couldn’t bear to live there long, so he allegedly moved to warmer Indonesia where he lived to his final days.
Good summary, thanks.
One observation / correction: The USA declared defacto war on Germany when France and Britain plus colonies did so dejure.
Roosevelt ordered his navy to fire on German vessels while the USA was formally neutral, and also interfered with German shipping and trade. Germany did not fight back or retaliate because it did not want war with the USA.
Not until USA attacks on German vessels became so blatant and outrageous did Germany declare war in order to legally fight back. That is, legally from the German perspective because no military orders could be given in Germany without a declaration of war on the enemy.
‘Democracy’ in ANY meaningful sense is IMPOSSIBLE in a capitalist economy. The concepts are antitheses, yet no insect in Western political life dare state this simple truth. The Chinese system, by and of the people (anyone can join the Party of Power and rise according to their merits) and unambiguously FOR the people, not a bunch of parasitic oligarchs, is far, far superior, which is why Western goons hate it so very much.
I’d contend that at this point, there is only one Hitler; The Legend!
The anti-Hitler hysteria has been beaten to death, and most of the idiots that propagate that fable, don’t actually know anything about historical Hitler, the man.
For those that continue to revile him, he’s a just a caricature, a cardboard cutout of a “villain”, but it has no depth. Even today, when “they” try to compare everyone to Hitler, or call everyone they don’t like “The Next Hitler”, they do it as broad brush smear. They don’t actually try to make the case that “person X is doing _____ , and that’s just like the way that Hitler did _____”.
It’s a ad hominem that’s a mile wide, but less than an inch deep. It’s a joke at this stage.
But- For those of us that choose instead to admire Hitler for all that he was, everything he tried, and what he really stood for, those sentiments are a mile deep. None of us think he was perfect, or Godlike, but that he did have a divine goal, and achieved some amazing things during his time on the earth.
Much like other historical figures, over time, their human failings blur, as their legendary status becomes crystalized.
Because today, ew see that everything he said was right, because it’s happening today, all over the White Western world, and the role of the jew, is as obvious as it’s ever been.
That fact, coupled with a never ending 70+ year attempt to cast him as super villain extraordinaire, has elevated his stature to stratospheric heights. As counter-point, consider Mussolini, the founder of fascism. No daily smear campaign, and almost nobody really cares about him today. He’s faded into history. A sub-note to Hitler’s story.
I’d say that ((their)) 70 years of vilifying Hitler, has secured his place in all of human history, and made him into the legend that he is today.
Napoleonic Law seeks the truth-the Common Law operates as a ‘winners and losers’ system, dominated, as with everything else, by money power. Hence the Judeonazis’ love of law-fare to bankrupt their victims. An EVIL system, like everything in the Anglosphere.
I don’t agree, there is no evidence that Maria Anna had an intimate relationship with any jew and certainly not with any Rothschild, so there really isn’t any proof that Adolf was a Jew.
Has a double agent infiltrated UNZ. Comments seem to have been censored.
In 1977 he was seen masterbating in Times Square….btw it was confirmed then that he had only one ball(s)
That’s a really difficult option. Hitler would have needed to reverse Versailles (economic restoration) while getting Germany to morph into a “neutral respected state” like postwar Austria. How was he going to do that?
He successfully reversed Versailles through violence (justice from his point of view) and in line with the usual cycle, chose Imperialism (subjection of the whole of Europe to the German volkish Master Race). His explicit model was a (much harsher) version of the British Empire.
The only salvation for white Americans is to stand up and shout:MAGA, MAGA, MAGA. Make Adolf Great Again!
It’s you too who are being overly partisan in your view of Hitler. For the sake of a clearer picture of him & for purer history, it is best he be analyzed warts & all not just a topic of for or against where each side wants to suppress contradicting info.
There are so many anomalies about him that the contradictions need to be laid bare as well to get a clearer picture. It has been firsthand reported that while in Vienna after WW1, he was a known communist who hung out with fellow Jewish communists who bought his paintings. It’s said he had no German nationalist sentiments at that time – when he then was a male prostitute as well. [And, no, I am not presently going to spend days digging out the original German source documents on this for this comment. You may be aware of such yourself & I do not intend to do a dissertation here.]
Then he suddenly is swept away to Berlin for acting lessons by a you-know-who. Churchill’s papers per Irving’s report that he was paid by Max Warburg & another Jewish banker from Berlin. Such bankers also funded Churchill & Stalin & we know who backed FDR as well – the same crowd. These are known, at the top, as Illuminati. The fact that Borman was rescued from Berlin by the Brits is known and Meli just confirmed Hitler survived to live in Argentina. A bit odd, but telling. Borman’s ‘funkspiele’ to the USSR is more than suspicious & Hitler dismissed this. He made so many deliberate errors militarily (to the benefit of the Soviets) that his sr. staff panicked & plotted his assassination. Only a secret traitor with a hidden agenda to destroy Germany (giving way to a planned take-over by Stalin) would do such things. This can’t be ignored & after the war intel master Gehlen confirmed this also.
Any controlled actor, as well as true partisan, would make all efforts to help ‘his people’ to gain the overwhelming support from them necessary to go to war as unto walking into the jaws of hell. Hitler played this role to perfection – good double agents do so. Then we have issues of Lord Midlothian of the Round Table in 1918 saying ‘they’ needed a dictator in Germany. The Treaty of Rapallo whereby new arms for Germany were being built by the Soviets in the early 1920s. Then the Bank of Intl. Settlements being created by the Rockefellers, Montesquieu Norman & Halmar Schacht just before Hitler took power.
There is also the issue of Adolph doing spy work for Warburg after WW1 in labor union groups. Also, it’s not the issue that Hitler didn’t write “Mein Kampf”, but the question of who did & why. Adolph was clearly Jewish on one side of his family, perhaps two – thus he has Dollfuss killed & destroys Strones & Dollarsheim. He was surrounded by many Jews & Mischlings on his staff, a curious arrangement given the Nuremburg Laws for others. Also, I’ve seen Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi say Hitler was one of theirs & that they wanted the Holocaust to frighten Jews to Palestine as well as reduce assimilated Jews. Other Rabbis have said similar. Yes, they will, have & continue to kill their own to achieve their political purposes, just as the IDF did on 10/7.
My view at this point is that he was an Illuminati operative who was leading Germany to planned destruction in order to reshape the world to their pre-planned objective just as they stated they would do & had done with the FR Revolution, WW1 & the Bolshie Rev. WW2 gave them the set up for world gov via Bretton Woods & the UN. The British empire was felled too as planned. “People for the land” in Palestine had been achieved & the Zionist state was a foregone conclusion as was expanded communist control in E. Europe as well as China. They are forever shaping world events for their Utopia as recently best espoused by Klaus Schwab. The reality is Hitler ruined Germany & much of Europe (whether one wants to think of him as a good guy or not). The two-front war could not be sustained nor won. One might measure this outweighs any positive impact of creating the Volkswagen & such. His economic miracle remains an object lesson of why all nations need to be rid of central banks. It’s best to be steely-eyed re such historic figures rather than be one-note Horst Wessels.
If Hitler wanted to destroy the German people by forcing a war upon them, why did he offer several peace deals to Prime Sinister, Winscum Lurchswill. Including an offer to send troops to defend the the British Empire. Lurchswill in one of his rare moments of lucidity actually was considering Hitler ‘s offer. Then the Rothschild Reich men in black visited Lurchswill and reminded him of his debts and of him having sold his soul to JudeoSatan, Rothschild.
While the Napoleonic Code is different and many lawyers I have known see it as superior, I don’t see it that way. The judges are involved with the prosecution. Bias under the English (and other systems) becomes obvious whereas it is hidden under the Napoleonic Code.
Further, I suggest that, given people in Europe, such as the late Robert Faurisson and Vincent Reynouard, in France are as easily convicted for questioning Holocaust, and in Germany a lawyer can be prosecuted for defending you on that topic, I’ll stick with the “inferior” system, thank you.
The UR comments section is like an online Jerry Springer show for pseudo intellectuals and those with an axe to grind, sometimes entertaining and informative, but mostly annoying.
He was a virulent anti-communist German nationalist. This was the whole essence of his being.
UNZ is attracting some potential prizewinning trolls which is a good sign. It’s touching a nerve.
Hitler IV was a meth head, he used drugs.
Drug use can affect your mental ability to think logically. Might drive you mad. You know how that Prozac works.
Hitler IV was the victim.
When Hitler was born, his newborn brain immediately thought he should exterminate six million Jews when he got to be big and stuff.
Mein Kampf began the day he was born.
“He was the nicest man.” – words I read about Adolf
Must have been before he went postal.
I’ve seen Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi say Hitler was one of theirs
Interesting detail, thanks. A rabbi in Prague in the 1930s was preaching that Hitler is the messia, beacuse he would open the doors of all countries to the Jews. (Douglas Reed). A list of Rabbis endorsing Adolf would be very entertaining.
The forced abandonment of his ancestral villages of Strones and Doellersheim is proof that Hitler wanted to hide his family roots.
Hennecke Kardel did a brilliant, very funny book: Hitler, founder of Israel. He did a lot of research in the 1970s, after a WWII war comrade Jewish-Spanish-Austrian called Jose Auslander told him: Scratch Adolf and after a while you’ll see a Vienna jew like me!
Can we have a fourth Adolf: Comedy Adolf? Kardel’s book seems to be the inspiration behind Mel Brookes The Producers. I think Herr Hans Vogel would be well placed to write a modern version. We’ll get the rich anti-Israeli jews to finance it.
All of those historical factors are real and worth acknowledging — Britain and France’s guarantees to Poland, Allied hypocrisy, the Versailles injustice, the Bolshevik threat, and international agitation all played their part. But context does not erase consequence.
My point isn’t that Germany acted in a vacuum or that its grievances were illegitimate. It’s that the method chosen to address them — total militarization, racial ideology, and mass terror — guaranteed both moral and material ruin. Even a just cause, when fought through the same machinery of dehumanization and mythic vengeance, becomes self-defeating.
Every great power in that era was compromised. Yet the tragedy of Germany is that it possessed the discipline, talent, and cultural depth to chart a third path — a national restoration without totalitarianism. Instead, it adopted the very template of the forces it despised. That’s why the outcome was inevitable regardless of who “fired first.”
Recognizing this isn’t “cleaning someone else’s stable.” It’s understanding how civilizations destroy themselves not merely through enemies, but through resonance with the same energy they claim to oppose. Until that lesson is learned, the pattern repeats — in every age, under new flags.
“If Hitler wanted to destroy the German people by forcing a war upon them, why did he offer several peace deals?”
Maybe it was just for show? He knew Churchill would be forced to continue the war, as he was.
You’re absolutely right that it would have been difficult — but difficulty isn’t impossibility. The tragedy of that era is that the path to restoration did exist, but Hitler rejected it because it lacked the theatrical urgency that his psychology and the regime’s propaganda required.
Germany in the late 1920s had already begun to recover economically under Stresemann through negotiation and gradual normalization — the Dawes and Young Plans, the Locarno Treaties, and renewed trade were restoring strength without war. Even after 1933, Hitler initially used diplomacy and bluff more than force, and the Western powers, exhausted by World War I, were prepared to accept a rearmed but peaceful Germany. A pragmatic leader could have continued along that track, rebuilding sovereignty step by step while projecting reliability rather than menace.
But Hitler’s concept of justice was inseparable from vengeance. He saw restoration as humiliation unless it came through domination. The British Empire became his model not for balance, but for hierarchy — an empire purified by race rather than commerce. In doing so, he turned restoration into expansion, and nationalism into metaphysics.
The irony is that by imitating the imperial pattern, he reproduced the very decadence he claimed to destroy. Germany might have regained dignity through measured diplomacy and moral example; instead, it sought transcendence through subjugation, and thereby ensured its own destruction. That was not fate — it was a choice, and a deeply human one.
Is this an extended visit or will you be returning to your home planet soon?
Three Hitlers are not enough!
The Hitler test is the same as the 9/11 test.
The same as the Iraq test, the Afghanistan test, the Libya test, the Syria test.
The same as the “domestic terrorist” test, the “anybody can be president” test, the “your vote counts” test, the “government is on your side” test.
If you believe what the government says, you’re part of the problem. If you believe what big media tells you, well, then you’re just an idiot, incapable of discernment and a total failure at critical thinking.
There’s a reason I keep saying 90 percent of the opposition to Jewish America’s pathological practices are false.
Such popular “opposition” commentators as Jim Stone, Alex Jones, Mike Rivero, Ryan Dawson, Chris Hedges, Dave Hodges, Mike Adams (to name only a few) . . . they all fail the Hitler test. They all fall for the Jewish propaganda that “Hitlerian” is the worst adjective you can apply to any person, any program, any social movement. They and hundreds of others have all fallen for the popular media lie that World War II was “the good war”, when in reality it was, at the time, the biggest lie ever told.
Whether these writers are merely naive or totally corrupt and paid off is for you to decide.
In either case, they pretend not to know that Adolf Hitler has been vilified in perpetuity by Jewish media to cover up some very important facts that are critical to your continued survival. These facts have been concealed for more than a half century.
Objective facts prove that Holocaust hysteria is a cynical hoax, meant to create new ways of scamming the public ($13.5 billion in Holocaust reparations, at last count; plus laws in almost all European countries mandating jail for anybody who wishes to even discuss the matter).
The two main facts that have been covered up are these.
Germany was destroyed in the 1940s because it was the most serious threat to Jewish worldwide financial hegemony the world has ever seen. While the rest of the world was mired in a Jewish-imposed worldwide depression — and people were starving in the streets everywhere, including the United States — Germany under Adolf Hitler was thriving, because it had freed itself from the shackles of the international bankers and their devastating criminal formula of fractional reserve lending, which is the exact thing that is strangling societies all over the world today.
And the second most important fact that has been covered up is that all this ceaseless and maudlin hoopla about 6 million Jews gassed and burned in German concentration camps obscures the real mass murder crime by Jewish allies America, Britain and the Soviet Union, who terminated with extreme prejudice 12 million innocent German citizens, most of them after the war had supposedly ended.
So the most important lessons to be learned from this massive coverup and social engineering program concocted and reinforced ad nauseum by Jewish media hypocrites is that anybody who escapes the toxic tentacles of the kosher world bankers guarantees themselves financial independence and domestic harmony, but runs the risk of being annihilated by the criminals who control the world financial system.
Which is why I’m fond of saying your choices under this current system of government are either life in prison or instant death. Do not try to sugar coat this. This is what everyone in the world is facing right now.One of the bizarre aspects of this unceasing kosher propaganda blitz is that the Jews have been using this 6 million dead figure since well before World War II. Not only has the credibility of this tale been demolished in the minds of attentive observers, the shibboleth serves as a telling indicator that the tale, and the cynical public relations onslaught that has followed, have sickened the entire world with its maudlin falsehoods like dead Jews made into soap and lampshades and thrown into lakes of fire. None of these stories can be proved, but many people still believe them.
So, the point being that anybody using “Hitlerian” as a relevant adjective to describe some incomprehensibly dastardly deed is actually revealing to the world that their minds are clogged with demented Jewish fairy tales, nightmare sagas concocted by sobbing hypocrites like Elie Wiesel whose works have been disseminated throughout the world only because rich Jews control of the publishing industry, the TV networks, most governments and the Nobel Prize nominating committee.
People from Putin to Obama are still reinforcing this false stereotype. But the story didn’t happen that way. That’s just the way the Jews told that story, and because of their control of the media, that’s what most of the world now believes.
Hitler never wanted to take over the world like the Jews say he did. He only wanted to reclaim what was stolen from Germany in World War I. There were no gas chambers in the work camps. Most of those who died were Poles and other ethnic groups. And that number is nothing in comparison to the number of people murdered by the three Jewish allies — the Soviets, and Brits and the United States — who sought to stamp out the biggest threat to Jewish worldwide financial hegemony ever seen.
So all those writers who use Hitler as an example of the greatest arch villain of all time are merely displaying their own brainwashing, or their own contemptible corruption, to all who have eyes to see.
Hitler’s Eastern Empire never materialized, so it never reached the decadent stage. It was aborted at the gates of Moscow and Stalingrad. Measured diplomacy wasn’t Hitler’s style. He was an extremist totalitarian Empire builder so nothing to do with measured diplomacy and moral example.
The Hitler Test. Click to enlargeThe Hitler test is the same as the 9/11 test.
The same as the Iraq test, the Afghanistan test, the Libya test, the Syria test.
The same as the “domestic terrorist” test, the “anybody can be president” test, the “your vote counts” test, the “government is on your side” test.
If you believe what the government says, you’re part of the problem. If you believe what big media tells you, well, then you’re just an idiot, incapable of discernment and a total failure at critical thinking.
There’s a reason I keep saying 90 percent of the opposition to Jewish America’s pathological practices are false.
Such popular “opposition” commentators as Jim Stone, Alex Jones, Mike Rivero, Ryan Dawson, Chris Hedges, Dave Hodges, Mike Adams (to name only a few) . . . they all fail the Hitler test. They all fall for the Jewish propaganda that “Hitlerian” is the worst adjective you can apply to any person, any program, any social movement. They and hundreds of others have all fallen for the popular media lie that World War II was “the good war”, when in reality it was, at the time, the biggest lie ever told.
Whether these writers are merely naive or totally corrupt and paid off is for you to decide.
In either case, they pretend not to know that Adolf Hitler has been vilified in perpetuity by Jewish media to cover up some very important facts that are critical to your continued survival. These facts have been concealed for more than a half century.
Objective facts prove that Holocaust hysteria is a cynical hoax, meant to create new ways of scamming the public ($13.5 billion in Holocaust reparations, at last count; plus laws in almost all European countries mandating jail for anybody who wishes to even discuss the matter).
The two main facts that have been covered up are these.
Germany was destroyed in the 1940s because it was the most serious threat to Jewish worldwide financial hegemony the world has ever seen. While the rest of the world was mired in a Jewish-imposed worldwide depression — and people were starving in the streets everywhere, including the United States — Germany under Adolf Hitler was thriving, because it had freed itself from the shackles of the international bankers and their devastating criminal formula of fractional reserve lending, which is the exact thing that is strangling societies all over the world today.
And the second most important fact that has been covered up is that all this ceaseless and maudlin hoopla about 6 million Jews gassed and burned in German concentration camps obscures the real mass murder crime by Jewish allies America, Britain and the Soviet Union, who terminated with extreme prejudice 12 million innocent German citizens, most of them after the war had supposedly ended.
So the most important lessons to be learned from this massive coverup and social engineering program concocted and reinforced ad nauseum by Jewish media hypocrites is that anybody who escapes the toxic tentacles of the kosher world bankers guarantees themselves financial independence and domestic harmony, but runs the risk of being annihilated by the criminals who control the world financial system.
Which is why I’m fond of saying your choices under this current system of government are either life in prison or instant death. Do not try to sugar coat this. This is what everyone in the world is facing right now.One of the bizarre aspects of this unceasing kosher propaganda blitz is that the Jews have been using this 6 million dead figure since well before World War II. Not only has the credibility of this tale been demolished in the minds of attentive observers, the shibboleth serves as a telling indicator that the tale, and the cynical public relations onslaught that has followed, have sickened the entire world with its maudlin falsehoods like dead Jews made into soap and lampshades and thrown into lakes of fire. None of these stories can be proved, but many people still believe them.
So, the point being that anybody using “Hitlerian” as a relevant adjective to describe some incomprehensibly dastardly deed is actually revealing to the world that their minds are clogged with demented Jewish fairy tales, nightmare sagas concocted by sobbing hypocrites like Elie Wiesel whose works have been disseminated throughout the world only because rich Jews control of the publishing industry, the TV networks, most governments and the Nobel Prize nominating committee.
People from Putin to Obama are still reinforcing this false stereotype. But the story didn’t happen that way. That’s just the way the Jews told that story, and because of their control of the media, that’s what most of the world now believes.
Hitler never wanted to take over the world like the Jews say he did. He only wanted to reclaim what was stolen from Germany in World War I. There were no gas chambers in the work camps. Most of those who died were Poles and other ethnic groups. And that number is nothing in comparison to the number of people murdered by the three Jewish allies — the Soviets, and Brits and the United States — who sought to stamp out the biggest threat to Jewish worldwide financial hegemony ever seen.
So all those writers who use Hitler as an example of the greatest arch villain of all time are merely displaying their own brainwashing, or their own contemptible corruption, to all who have eyes to see.
Bardon Kaldian: “6. the greatest myth for modern man- you can become everything, even Napoleon, never mind your origins”
I think this is also a source of a lot of Hitler’s appeal for those that find in him many redeeming qualities. He came from nothing — no money, no family connections, living in a flophouse in Vienna — and seemingly, by force of his will and the power of his oratory alone, became the leader of a great nation, building it up into an empire. On the contemporary political right, his analysis of the world situation and his objectives are broadly shared by his fans. They, too, would like to see a restoration of past cultural forms such as women mostly confined to the home as wife and mother, an end to what they imagine is Jewish “control” of culture (even though, to the extent he succeeded in ridding Germany of it, it proved Jews did not have control), and an appreciation of the significance of race. Unfortunately for the right’s prospects of success, they seem stuck on repeating these aspects of Hitler’s approach, which in light of modern developments in technology have been rendered obsolete. The widespread availability and use of reliable birth control technology has made it unlikely that women will ever again be satisfied with just being a wife and mother. Demographic changes brought on by technological “progress” in the ease of relocating populations are gradually eliminating nations as racial mono-cultures. While it’s possible to construct a worldview in which such changes are seen to be a result of Jewish scheming — one could point here to the role that Jewish scientists played in developing birth control pills, or, as Kevin MacDonald does, to the political role that Jews played in revising immigration policies — it’s not at all clear that these technological developments wouldn’t have happened anyway. One thing alone is clear. Jewish “control” or not, should these technologies disappear, the problems they’ve generated would automatically be solved. A collapse of the technological system on a worldwide basis would cause billions of people to die from starvation, war, and disease but, assuming there were any survivors at all, it would preserve biological race and return women to their age-old role as wives and mothers. Yet it has turned out that even Hitler’s biggest admirers are unwilling to pay that price.
Thanks. It’s good to know there’s at least one other person that knows. Bitchute.com took down that video shortly thereafter. I inquired & was told the originator demanded it. Sad. Here’s a report on it, though. Some 5 to 7 Rabbis had been interviewed.
Kabbalists Publicly Discuss Their Plot to Kill Millions – Ryan Messano
https://messanonews.com/2021/11/kabbalists-publicly-discuss-their-plot-to-kill-millions-encore/
Thanks also re the Rabbi of Prague. That Messiah would have been a Moshiach Ben Joseph – one who prepares the way.
There was always something sinister, off, about Hitler that I could not escape in viewing him. It did seem to me he was a ‘stranger’ & had an ulterior purpose. IG Farben mostly sold their buna mfg. to the Rockefellers in exchange for their oil. Overall there were some 110 US companies involved in ‘trading with the enemy’ tho we mostly know about Prescot Bush. Rockefellers seemed connected at the top, Ford too & IBM. It was Hitler’s Aktion T-4 & breeding programs sealed it for me in my 1st disgust of him.
Re the Illuminati links all want to ignore, we need to note IG Farben’s buna manufacturing. Overall there were some 110 US companies involved in ‘trading with the enemy’ and they most circled around the Rockefeller group. Avril Harriman was a big one with his Brown Bros. While that stuck vs. Prescot Bush, no one seems to have delved deeper. Harriman also financed the Bolshies right after the Rev & Stalin too. The Rockefellers created & financed the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute. involved in eugenic studies, which paid for Mengel through the war. One needs to delve into these matters to really get to the bottom of it. Otherwise you’re playing with tin soldiers.
There are also:
– spammers of links about wacky stuff on rosacrucians, jesuits ruling the world, or qatar money influencing us congress on par or worse than the israeli lobby
– people making convoluted arguments full of logical fallacies and non-sequitur that pass off for intellectually deep, but when you actually try to argument against you realise they are immaterial because there is no point to argue against, eg John Johnson
– people spreading recently churned out responses by the system to counter some of the more effective dissident talking points, e.g. “what if the axis had won the war?”. Troll:”it would have been the same as today, because most societal change has been driven by technological progress since WW2, and as a result Germany today would have ended up with no-entry sharia zones even with Nazis in power”
Most of the above work I’d venture to speculate is performed by troll farms in India and such
Let’s welcome yet another psycho windbag with a flair for the dramatic.
Beautiful animal.
Agreed — “measured diplomacy” was never in his nature, and that’s precisely the tragedy. His temperament wasn’t incidental; it was the system’s flaw made flesh. The Eastern Empire didn’t need to reach decadence to collapse — it carried the seed of ruin from inception.
Hitler’s empire failed not because it was cut short, but because it was designed as a closed loop of conquest and purification. Every totalitarian project begins at the endpoint of its own destruction. The moment it demands perpetual expansion to justify its existence, entropy takes over.
That’s why I emphasized moral coherence and restraint — not as idealism, but as survival mechanics. An empire built on terror always devours itself before its enemies finish the job. It doesn’t matter whether it’s at Moscow, Stalingrad, or centuries later — the outcome is written into the design.
His peace offers are indeed the reason I’m not 100% sure of this theory. His relationship with the President of Poland, was it? who was assassinated was very credible. However, leading an opposition when you’re with the other side requires saying and doing all the right things … until the last minute. I’d be curious as to your response to my linked articles. They offer much more depth than fits in a comment box. But it’s important to remember that we’re on the same side, you and I. We both believe the holocaust was a hoax and the world wars were engineered by the Rothschilds with the assistance of the AshkeNazis. So it’s the details, not the big picture, that we’re now working on.
Or was that just a PR move, suggested by his propaganda gurus? Spare one and slaughter the rest, while the press peddles that little story over and over again?
How many Orthodox Christian Serbs and Russians did he spare?
Hitler was one crazed bloodthirsty psycho!
E.g. aside from German mass killings of Russian civilians, another savagery of Nazi losers in the WW2 is rarely mentioned: The official rule to execute 100 Serb civilians for each German soldier killed in combat, and 50 for each wounded one. Yes, you read that right!
Just in one of those cases, in October 1941 (City of Kragujevac, Serbia), German occupiers executed almost 3,000 civilians, mostly high school students, after 10 German soldiers were killed and 26 wounded in combat.
[1] Kragujevac massacre on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kragujevac_massacre
—
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Also, read some excellent comments here on TUR about primitivism of German’s favorite “leader” [2][3]!
Excerpt from [2]: The Slavs are to work for us. In so far as we don’t need them, they may die. The fertility of the Slavs is undesirable. As to food, they are to not get more than necessary. We are the masters; we come first.
Excerpt from [2]: What happens to a Russian, to a Czech, does not interest me in the slightest. What other nations can offer in the way of good blood of our type, we will take, if necessary, by kidnapping their children and raising them here wish us. Whether nations live in prosperity or starve to death interests me only so far as we need them as slaves for our culture; otherwise, it is of no interest to me. Whether 10,000 Russian females fall down from exhaustion while digging an anti-tank ditch interests me only insofar as the anti-tank ditch for Germany is finished.
Excerpt from [3]: Hitler, speaking of Russia: “In ten years four million Germans will have settled there, and in twenty years at least ten million. They will come not only from the Reich but above all from America, and from Scandinavia, Holland, and Flanders too. And the rest of Europe shall play its part in this opening up of the Russian wastes as well”
Excerpt from [3]: This viscous attitude towards the Russians, viewing them as sub-humans, and wanting them expelled and their land taken over for German people is well documented and well known, at least among the educated.
[2] Comment # 492 under Germany Destroyed, by Hans Vogel – The Unz Review
https://www.unz.com/article/germany-destroyed/?showcomments#comment-6700248
[3] Comment #149 under Twice in a Century: Russia Faces a War of Annihilation, by Mike Whitney – The Unz Review
https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/twice-in-a-century-russia-faces-a-war-of-annihilation/?showcomments#comment-5231485
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1000+ Anon001 Comments Archive @ The Unz Review | TUR
https://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=anon001
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Neonazis must be the dumbest people on Earth.
“General Scherff, approached with the letter from my mother and explained the story. Hitler looked up and said, “A friend of yours, eh?” and Hitler himself crossed out “Death Penalty” and wrote “15 years Zuchthaus” instead.’
And here’s who that family friend was:
“Karl Walter Scherff (1 November 1898 – 24 May 1945) was a German army officer and military historian with the rank of Generalmajor, who was appointed by Adolf Hitler to the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht in May 1942 to compile the history of the war, as the Führer’s Commissioner for the Writing of Military History.”
But even if by some miracle the family didn’t have high level nazi connections, to think that one act of a pardon, which we know were few and only to people with personal connections to highest level nazi circles, to claim that this somehow annihilates millions of innocent victims of german nazism?
Only dumb neonazis can come up with something so stupid.
I think you grossly underestimate the existential crises facing Germany as a result of Versailles — geographic partition and territorial dismemberment, stripped of its air force and navy and left with insufficient infantry to defend against a Soviet invasion, the puppet “democratic” Weimar government, the wrecked economy, the hyperinflation caused by reparations, the seizure of natural resources in the Ruhr and Saar by the French, the strength of the KPD in the streets and in the Reichstag, dependent upon the very enemies who defeated it in 1918 for its security, etc. etc.
All of this at the same time Soviet/Jewish Bolshevism was fomenting actual insurrections and seizing governments in Berlin, Bavaria, Hungary, and Ukraine.
Easy for you to say 100 years later what they “coulda, shoulda, woulda” done… completely different story if you were living it then.
This would have been possible because the oral surgeon, Hugo Blaschke, accompanied him in Berlin at the Bunker and left on April 20. According to the following report, identifications were made based on descriptions and the recollections of the dentist. In other words, there were no reports of X-rays on file to be “stored“, which could have then been used as a reference by investigators.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Blaschke
Aside from the fact that it is already suspicious that from a unit consisting of two parts (skull and jaw) one would have been confirmed to have been that of a woman, based on later laboratory analysis, while the other part was not, based on a less reliable method. One cannot rule out the possibility of coercion. If Hitler had escaped, then Blaschke would likely have assumed this, especially if they would have discussed this issue beforehand, so he would have been reluctant to trigger a manhunt by denying that the jaw were his remains.
He had purportedly lived in seclusion at a ski resort near the border with Chile. I have read reports that he eventually moved farther north to a village in Brazil but was not aware of the Indonesian rumor you mentioned, which seems less plausible. The Indonesians might have automatically assumed he was Dutch (which language he could not speak) and put him in a concentration camp.
Germany needs the leadership of a tough guy like Hitler quick.
German industry is collapsing so fast now… Volkswagens iconic car, the VW Golf, production is about to stop for the foreseeable future because they don’t have computer chips from China anymore?
WOW! Wasn’t this Merz a banker? You would think he would understand something about business…or was his position honorary?
This trade war against China is going well…if you have a glass jaw why would you throw a punch at a gorilla?
I cannot believe how incompetent the Germans are?
Just when I thought they couldn’t do any Worst than Scholz along comes Merz…I would be embarrassed to put my hand up for leadership if I had the deficiencies displayed by the likes of Scholz and Merz…but narcissistic people don’t have such self doubt that’s why we have incompetence as leadership in the west.
People vote for confidence even if the braggart exuding confidence is an imbecile.
You’re essentially just regurgitating hardcore propaganda with your angry feelings constituting your supporting arguments.
Nobody ever said the Nazis were peace-loving, feelings-first Volkstherapists. This is the major derrangement your thinking seems to suffer from.
All major nations were stuck in a multi year, existential war effort. ALL of them were not concerned in the slightest with politically correct language, which you seem to demand a priori. Until ’42 or ’43, Germany was actually lagging behind in war-time restrictions on freedom of speech. Allied nations didn’t even hide their genocidal plans.
Compare “they shall work for us” against “Germany shall perish”. There is no comparison.
Next is the item of “massacres” . Of those operations we can can actually critically examine, numbers are without fail inflated while mainstream “scholarship” obviously deflates German losses. But the key point is not a denial: Nobody denies punitive operations. Serbia raised 200.000 (!) partisans. Allies would bomb cities to cinders, killing tens of thousands of civilians in a single night. But it’s okay according to you when the commie-backed illegal partisans do unspeakable things to legal soldiers and retreat to their base. This is mental dissonance at its finest.
tl;dr: the inflated “massacres” were commonly accepted punitive measures done by everybody and the Nazis did the least amount of killings in that regard.
Why is the excerpt from Hitler (“In ten years four million Germans will have settled there…) even in there? How else would it work? Was he supposed to say:
?
Even German civilians had an official lower priority than soldiers when it came to food distribution. The sad realities of big wars.
Finally;
The “Lebensraum” stuff has been debunked over thirty years ago as Stalin forced Hitler’s hand without any doubt whatsoever.
You’re arguing from the 60s. If you still believe in this fairy tale you’re not arguing in good conscience. Russians were not subhumans, the very key sources are twisted e.g. the “Untermensch”. This means you didn’t even bother to do your homework.
Slavic background on its own meant nothing in the Reich. A Nordic Pole could be interned into a work camp, a German from the Slavic subrace (e.g. “Ost-Baltisch”) would be treated as a member of the Reich. And both were classified as Aryans.
Adolph was the Khazar-messiah, paving for Volodymir and Schneersons Bibi. Not important if he lived by Las Ramblas or Bariloche, because his heritage is living strong among us. Subsidized by the usual suspects like Benito btw.
Everything you describe is true. The Germany of the early 1920s was facing one of the most brutal national humiliations in modern history: territorial dismemberment, demilitarization, hyperinflation, foreign occupation of the Ruhr, the collapse of savings and industry, Bolshevik uprisings, and a political class viewed as a puppet of the victors. It was an existential crisis by any standard.
But that is precisely when the method of response determines destiny. History does not condemn nations for being cornered; it condemns them for how they behave when cornered. Desperation explains choices—it does not sanctify them. The same pressure that breaks one civilization can refine another, depending on the consciousness with which it acts.
Germany still possessed avenues for pragmatic recovery. Stresemann’s diplomacy in the mid-1920s had already begun stabilizing currency, rebuilding trade, and regaining limited sovereignty through negotiation. Even after 1933, a disciplined policy of economic renewal and cautious neutrality could have restored dignity without catastrophe. Instead, the path chosen was transcendence through fury—redemption through destruction.
Hitler transformed legitimate grievance into metaphysical vengeance. The Versailles trauma was real, but the cure repeated the disease: domination, purification, and totalization. Once power became the instrument of emotional release, destruction became inevitable, no matter the scale of the initial injustice.
It’s easy to say, “hindsight is perfect,” but hindsight is only clarity without panic. The moral law of history isn’t comfort; it’s consequence. Every civilization faces its own Versailles at some point—economic collapse, invasion, betrayal. The test is whether it can endure suffering without becoming its destroyer.
That is the enduring lesson: crisis explains but never excuses. The fire that forges or consumes a nation is the same; only consciousness determines the outcome.
Every human has multiple manifestations, “faces”, Hitler being not an exception. Generalities…
You touched very lapidary an important theme: what was the relations between Hitler and occult societies.
Hans, a great article, will be to write specifically about this theme. There are some points:
– who were the occult societies before WWI;
– how they influenced the rise of Hitler from 1919 to 1933
– which were the relations between them and Hitler before WWII and during the war
– which were the relations between them and Himmler, Gobbles, Rosenberg and the others reichsfurhers;
– there were any connection of tibetans or asians sects with Hitler/NSDAP, how and what kind
Of course is material more than to one book, but succinct could be an insightful article.
What do you say?
Nonsense 😂
You’re right that to people living through that era, restraint or non-participation would have looked like suicide. But that reaction reveals something deeper: we still judge “success” almost entirely by survival and domination. If a nation, movement, or individual dies, we call it failure. Yet history’s long arc suggests a different accounting.
Measured by immediate outcomes, figures such as Christ, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr. all failed. They were crushed by the systems they opposed. Measured by continuing consequence, they succeeded completely—their refusal exposed the machinery of coercion and rewired the moral vocabulary of entire civilizations. Their deaths proved that the system’s power existed only so long as others accepted its rules of engagement.
The same blindness shapes our reading of 1930s Germany. We assume the only alternative to militarism was national death, because our definition of victory is still mechanical: territory held, enemies subdued, borders intact. But preservation bought through inversion—through becoming what one hates—is another form of extinction. It just takes longer to register.
Every age eventually learns that force preserves nothing if it destroys the principle it meant to defend. Non-participation looks like defeat in the short term, but it’s the only move that breaks the cycle instead of refreshing it. History remembers the conquerors for a season and the refusers for an epoch.
I agree with you.
Certainly the current “justice” system in Germany proves this point.
How can an investigator remain neutral when his position and salary depend upon him finding the politically correct answer? France is the case in point here.
Yes, that is true. There are some monographs, but a broad choice of good, reliable primary sources would be required. Then, it would take quite a bit of time to do the work.
Azov leader Andriy Biletsky severely criticizes Hitler from the right.
In his article Social Nationalism, he argues that German National Socialism gave too many social benefits to racially inferior elements of society, which then multiplied.
This decreased the number of Nordics, leading to their ultimate defeat.
It’s obvious even for Biletsky the “Tartar”.
Alanchik: “Measured by immediate outcomes, figures such as Christ, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr. all failed. They were crushed by the systems they opposed. Measured by continuing consequence, they succeeded completely—their refusal exposed the machinery of coercion and rewired the moral vocabulary of entire civilizations.”
That’s an interesting perspective. Lumping those three together, who are — justly or unjustly — famed primarily as exponents of non-violence, would seem you mean to imply that, in the long run, non-violence triumphs over violence. Is that really what you meant? Because if so, it seems to me that they too failed. When you wrote above, in #34, that “Germany in the 1930s faced undeniable humiliation and hardship, but its leadership chose to meet darkness on its own frequency—mass propaganda, dehumanization, and the sanctification of violence as purification.” Isn’t the world more in the thrall of mass propaganda, dehumanization, and violence than ever? It reminds me of Bertrand Russell’s remark in Why I Am Not a Christian: “One is often told that it is a very wrong thing to attack religion, because religion makes men virtuous. So I am told; I have not noticed it.” Are people acting more Christ-like these days? I haven’t noticed it.
Alanchik: “… we still judge “success” almost entirely by survival and domination. If a nation, movement, or individual dies, we call it failure.”
That was certainly Darwin’s criterion. Only the fit survive, or as I would say, analyzing it in terms of technique, only the superior technique “survives”, because to use anything other than the best technique to achieve an objective only ensures inferior results. The world is more dehumanized than ever because technique — i.e., technological “progress”, in the aggregate — has no regard for humanity at all.
You’re right to note that the world still seethes with propaganda, dehumanization, and mechanized power. Non-violence hasn’t “won” in the sense of erasing violence; it isn’t a final state, but a recurring correction—an opposing current that keeps the human field from total collapse into brutality.
Christ, Gandhi, and King didn’t create permanent peace; they changed the grammar of legitimacy. Before them, domination was self-justifying. After them, every tyrant still feels compelled to disguise coercion as moral necessity. The world remains violent, but the vocabulary of justice has been rewritten in their cadence. That shift of reference—the need for power to pretend to be moral—is itself the mark of their continuing resonance.
Darwin’s law of survival by superior technique also holds, but it’s incomplete. Technique ensures persistence; it doesn’t confer meaning. Civilizations master the machine and then find themselves ruled by it. Non-violence is the counter-technique: not the abandonment of power, but the redirection of energy away from domination toward coherence. It doesn’t abolish conflict; it keeps the possibility of conscience alive within it.
So yes, non-violence “triumphs,” but not as conquest. It’s the pulse that keeps returning whenever technique forgets the soul it was meant to serve—a small, precise signal that prevents extinction from becoming the only kind of order we know.
I read a monography with this subject but it was not only biased but worthless to the core.
When you’ll finished the work I will read it with great interest.
To further expand upon what you call the triumph of “technique” is, I think, the modern form of what earlier writers called the overlay—the mechanism that begins as a tool for clarity and ends as a cage of control. Technology, bureaucracy, even ideology all start as extensions of the human mind, but once they operate faster than reflection, they become autonomous fields that feed on attention.
Non-violence, in this sense, isn’t a sentimental protest against progress; it’s the act of keeping consciousness from being fully absorbed by its own machinery. It reminds the system that it is derivative, not sovereign. Every time someone refuses to treat efficiency as ultimate value, a little air leaks back into the room.
In order to form my own opinion about what kind of person A.H. actually was, I set out to find an original copy of ‘Mein Kampf’. So I contacted an antiquarian bookseller, who couldn’t help but chuckle. Didn’t I know that all copies had been collected and destroyed after the war? Just like the school primers that generations of German-speaking children had used to learn to read, a book with an iconic rooster on the cover.
All copies were confiscated and replaced with a new textbook, which was initially printed in England. From then on, the children learned the same language, but a different spirit. Just like the book I was looking for: who can guarantee that it is genuine? So much effort and expense was put into portraying the author as a psychopath and a fool that I should be sceptical about the authenticity of his manifesto, or at least parts of it, according to the version I’m about to get. I saw the antiquarian’s point and quit, since I also had to get a translator.
At present, I’m convinced of the following:
Since 1940, enormous efforts have been made to label A.H. as megalomaniacal, mentally deficient and psychopathic. Millions of writers circulated true and fabricated stories about him, but a bold claim is far from being good evidence. The only tangible evidence of his personality are the pictures he painted, which reveal sensitivity and a keen eye. One cannot expect a person of humble origins with a mediocre education and traumatic war experiences to be up to the responsibilities of a statesman. He may have integrity and idealism, but he will have to rely on the expertise of his advisers, whoever they may be. His finance minister Hjalmar Schacht, for instance, was well connected internationally and absolutely brilliant. A.H. could have chosen his other advisors more wisely, but first you have to find out who’s suitable. After almost a century has passed, the historical truth can no longer be ascertained, so I’ll stick with Ockham’s razor: A.H. had recognised a fundamental evil and decided to get rid of it. After he failed, said evil ensured that no one would ever be able to challenge them again. End of story.
You forget that the promising youth of an entire continent bled to death on the battlefields of WWI. The attempt to stop Totalitarianism by democratic means failed. The third way, as you propose it from a safe distance in time, is like blowing cotton balls at the horsemen of the apocalypse.
Very eloquent and thoughtful. But if George Washington had chosen the path of Christ and Gandhi the United States would not exist. Had he failed he would have been hanged for treason as the criminal that he was, and his corpse mocked and spat upon.
So it is quite the dilemma, is it not? Should Hitler and the NSDAP have chosen the path of Christ and Gandhi and let the Soviet Union occupy their country and let the Judeo-Bolsheviks kill them like they did the Tsar and his children and his dog?
Imagine how different the 20th century would have been had Guderian taken Moscow instead of his advance column outrunning supply lines 50 miles only away.
I think the difference between Washington and Hitler was that Washington was a more educated, intelligent, disciplined and bourgeois man, whereas Hitler was an impassioned artist who would never have risen to power but for the abysmal circumstances facing Germany during the Weimar Republic.
Perhaps a better analogy would be to Franco. Unlike the “Bohemian corporal” he was a graduate of Zaragosa and a member of the general staff. He was as anti-Bolshevik as anyone, but far more thoughtful, reserved, and educated than Reichskanzler Hitler. He defeated the communists and his country prospered during his forty-year rule.
Ultimately Herr Hitler got what he feared most, half his country occupied by the Soviet Union, mass rapes of German women by the Asiatic hordes of the Red Army, and a communist puppet government for a half-century. He may be denounced in hindsight as a failure, but had he succeeded… one cannot say that things would necessarily have been worse than they were under the bootheel of the USSR.
You’re right about the magnitude of that catastrophe. The youth of an entire continent was lost in trenches designed by men who believed that mechanized violence could end mechanized violence. That was the twentieth century’s great experiment in fighting darkness on its own frequency—and the result was the civilization-wide exhaustion that made totalitarianism possible in the first place.
The failure of democratic systems after 1918 wasn’t proof that restraint is naïve; it was proof that trauma makes moderation impossible when the imagination of peace has been destroyed. Every side emerged convinced that only escalation could guarantee safety. The ideology that followed—whether fascist or communist—was simply the continuation of the same logic by other names.
What I call the “third way” is not cotton-ball pacifism; it’s recognition that the apocalypse is self-propelling. Once a culture accepts destruction as the price of salvation, it ensures repetition. Non-participation doesn’t mean passivity—it means refusing to feed that engine again. It’s the one tactic history has not yet truly tried at scale.
Your point is well taken: if Washington had chosen absolute non-violence, the United States would never have been born. Every nation begins in a collision of necessity and ideal. But even Washington’s success proves the limit of the method—what began as liberation hardened, within a century, into another imperial system wrestling with its own contradictions. Force can found a state; it cannot sustain its integrity indefinitely.
Hitler faced the mirror image of that dilemma. He confronted real threats—Soviet expansion, internal chaos, and the humiliation of Versailles—but his solution reproduced the same machinery of domination he despised. The difference between Washington’s war and Hitler’s is scale, not structure: both relied on violence to secure an idea of order. One achieved temporary prosperity, the other annihilation, yet both demonstrate that victory by force is always rented, never owned.
Franco’s Spain underscores the same paradox. His forty-year rule brought stability, but at the price of silence and fear. Once coercion is the organizing principle, it must be renewed continually; the moment it relaxes, the old divisions reappear.
The dilemma you describe is therefore not between violence and surrender but between short-term survival and long-term coherence. History shows that every power that “wins” through domination inherits the seeds of its undoing. Non-participation, difficult as it seems, is not moral luxury; it is the only strategy that does not mortgage the future to the present.
Wishful thinking, dear. One of the main topics here on TUR is the abuse of power by a clique of super-rich individuals and their lackeys. Modern wars are not the result of territorial conflicts, but are carefully prepared through propaganda. They serve only the interests of a handful of people who are playing global Monopoly.
Read the booklet titled War is a Racket, by General Smedley Butler (quote): “In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. . . . How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? . . . The general public shoulders the bill. And what is this bill? . . . Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. . . . For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.”
https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdf
I think it’s hard to say how educated Hitler really was. He read a lot, especially during his Vienna-years, and and his ability to remember details has amazed many.
To be considered educated back then, you had to know ancient Greek and have read the classics, but honestly, what good is that in a world war?
Smedley Butler was absolutely right. “War is a racket” captures the visible part of what he saw from inside the machine: a self-replicating enterprise where a few harvest gain from the trauma of the many. The profits of the arms trade and reconstruction contracts are the economic face of the same dynamic I’ve been describing in moral and metaphysical terms.
What you call the global-Monopoly elite is how the overlay expresses itself through finance. Its genius is that it no longer needs conquest of territory—it manufactures conflict through narrative control, keeps populations divided, and extracts energy in the form of money, fear, and attention. The racket has simply become continuous rather than episodic.
That’s why non-participation still matters. When individuals, communities, or even nations refuse to believe the story that war is inevitable, the racket loses its leverage. It cannot profit from what it cannot convince us to supply—obedience, outrage, and consumption.
Butler diagnosed the symptom from a general’s perspective; we’re now watching the same mechanism operate through digital propaganda and economic policy. The structure hasn’t changed—only the medium. The real revolution is withdrawing consent from the narrative that feeds it.
There is a fourth Hitler, an aging, suicidal Lothario who preferred young girls. Not amongst the moon-eyed female public, where he was the gallant, chaste savior of Germany and Ayran womanhood. But closer to home in absolute privacy. Some had the wisdom to reject him. Henriette Hoffmann (age 17), daughter of Hitler’s personal photographer Heinrich Hoffmann, wrote of her close encounter with the Führer (41) in 1930:
“He [Hitler] gave himself great airs, with his dark leather coat, his whip and his Mercedes, whose driver waited for him in front of the door. After dinner Hitler—at that time he was still Herr Hitler to us—sat down at the piano and played some Wagner followed by some Verdi. “Do you recognize the leitmotiv of ‘La Forza del Destino’?” He addressed me as Du, for I was only seventeen and he was over forty… Finally, to my great surprise, he asked me with a very serious air: ‘Will you kiss me?’ I was chiefly struck by the fact that he had said Sie to me this time—the first time in our acquaintance. Yet as he put his face down to mine, I said No. He turned round and went out, closing the door behind him. When my father returned to the house, I told him of the incident. He laughed in my face and declared, ‘You’re imagining things, you silly goose.”
Papa Hoffmann had every incentive to laugh it off – he was making a fortune from images and royalties. He also employed young girls that attracted Hitler’s fancy, perhaps enhancing his utility (ala Epstein?). In any case, two years later (1932) Henriette (19) safely married Reich Youth Leader Balder von Schirach (25).
She wasn’t an anomaly. The Führer had a history with teenagers. He explained 26 Jan 1942 [Ullrich ‘Hitler: Ascent’ p.273]:
“There is nothing better than educating a young thing. A girl of 18, 19, 20 years is as malleable as wax. A man needs to be able to put his stamp on a girl. Women themselves want nothing different.”
It’s even better if they’re 16 or 17.
Hitler (37) met Maria ‘Mitzi’ Reiter (16) in 1926 in her mother’s Berchtesgaden dress shop, where they discussed which dogs were most loyal (German shepherds). The courtship included a NSDAP event and private reception to impress his young companion. He wasn’t married, he declared, because he “first had to rescue the German people lying on the ground.” After some clumsy physical advances, Hitler leveled his magic eyes and asked “Don’t you want to give me a kiss goodnight?” Told ‘no’ (she’d never kissed a man), “he pursed his lips, and his gaze lost the warmth it had just had.”
The relationship stumbled on with awkwardness. They finally kissed in a forest glade while chauffeur Emil Maurice sat in the Mercedes. Hitler looked at her “as a painter does a model…He took firm hold of my neck and kissed me. He didn’t know what he was doing.” But the flame was lit.
Absences were bridged with stilted correspondence. When Maria turned seventeen (17) in December 1926, Hitler (37) visited and stayed for Christmas. He gave a leather-bound two-volume edition of ‘Mein Kampf’ and, in turn, received two swastika-embroidered sofa cushions.
In late 1927 Maria (18) visited Munich for an innocent tryst, but the ‘romance’ abruptly ended the following year when Party headquarters received anonymous letters accusing Hitler (39) of rape. Distraught, Maria attempted to hang herself but, saved by her brother-in-law, went on to marry a local hotelkeeper.
Hitler’s second love is better known. He (36) met his half-niece Geli Raubal (17) in 1925. She moved into his Munich apartment four years later (1929) to pursue medical studies, only to be strictly controlled by her manipulative uncle. She was to foreswear interest in all others, including Emil Maurice (dismissed from service). Finally, driven to hopelessness, she shot herself in the chest with Hitler’s pistol 18 Sep 1931, dying at 23. Hitler, devastated, enshrined her room and photographs, ‘romance’ safely entombed.
In October 1929 Hitler (40) met Eva Braun (17), an assistant in Hoffmann’s photography shop. It was the beginning of Hitler’s longest relationship. He began seeing more of her in 1931 after Geli Raubal’s death, though political duties often kept him away. Lonely and despondent, her first suicide attempt was 11 Aug 1932 with a shot to the chest. Her second, perhaps jealous of Unity Mitford, was with sleeping pills in May 1935. Ultimately, she outlasted all rivals to become Frau Hitler for a day, successfully poisoning herself 30 Apr 1945. The third time was the charm.
Last in the teen harem, Unity Valkyrie Mitford (19) first saw Hitler perform in the 1933 Nuremberg Rally: it was love at first sight. She returned to Munich the following year, stalking him for months. Finally they met in a café: “It was the most wonderful and beautiful [day] of my life. I am so happy that I wouldn’t mind a bit, dying. I’d suppose I am the luckiest girl in the world. For me he is the greatest man of all time.” She was 21, twenty-five-years younger than her demi-god (46).
Unity’s very public support of National Socialism woke English fury, but she didn’t seem to mind. She even joined Julius Streicher at a Hesselberg youth festival and gave a rousing paean against the ‘Jewish danger’, later writing “We think with joy of the day when we will be able to say England for the English! Out with the Jews! Heil Hitler!…I want everyone to know I am a Jew hater” in Der Stürmer. She was rewarded with a golden swastika badge, a box at the ’36 Olympics, a ride in a Mercedes and membership in Hitler’s inner circle.
She lodged with Erna Hanfstaengl until brother Ernst fell out of favor in 1938. Hitler gave her the choice of four Munich apartments, where she reportedly discussed decoration in front of the tearful dispossessed Jewish owners. When war came she sought and was assured she would not be detained as an enemy alien. Nonetheless she chose to end her life with a pistol (Hitler’s gift). She survived a gunshot to the head, bullet lodged in brain, and returned to England in December with a mental age of a 10-year-old child.
Hitler seems to have been unable to relate to women his own age as equals. It’s as if the many, many Hoffmann photographs – perfect frozen images – were more genuine than any emotion he may have felt. He affected gallant charm to keep women at a distance, justifying himself with “I am so married to politics that I cannot even consider another ‘engagement’”.
Saving Germany was a full-time job. Seeking secret relationships with star-struck girls half his age relieved him of being anything other than an exploitive divinity. Rather like Prince Andrew (41) and Virginia Giuffre (17). As important, it preserved his chaste public image and left the door open for all the docile female worshippers who still sought his favour.
Finally, the whiff of suicide. Oft publicly threatened by Hitler in adversity, it seems conveyed like a virus to his would-be romances. Four of five attempted to end their lives; two succeeded and a third returned to childhood. So much for Wagnerian liebestod.
So true, sadly
It is tragic, but I’m not without hope. The same system that perfected manipulation is beginning to expose its own circuitry. Many people still stop at labels like capitalism or imperialism, but those are only the visible gears of a larger apparatus. When that apparatus starts showing seams—when propaganda stops working as efficiently, when fear no longer guarantees obedience—that’s the first breach in what I call the firewall.
The change isn’t dramatic; it’s subtle—small refusals, independent voices, an increasing ability to recognize when we’re being played. Every illusion eventually exhausts the energy that sustains it. What looks like decline may actually be disclosure. That’s why, despite everything, I remain optimistic: the pattern that once hid the truth is beginning to show its edges.
Maybe Göbbels was inspired by his Führer in more ways than one.
[Dr. Goebbels – Predatory Sex Pest]
.
.
.
It would seem, a certain relational and sexual deviance comes with reaching high political office. Just think of Epstein’s clients and his famous list, with Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Ehud Barak, etc. Think of Mao Tse Tung’s reported predilection for little girls, look at Emmanuel “Micron” etc. etc. I am sure a very long list could be made.
Please note also that in the Collective West today, sexual deviancy is almost a requirement for rising to higher office. Very useful because it is used as a tool to keep those eager politicians in check and have them follow orders.
Probably Charles De Gaulle was one of the very few high-ranking politicians behaving decently, but perhaps that was because he had a daughter with Down’s syndrome, for whom he felt sorry all his life. Too bad he was removed by the US after the 1968 color revolution.
Grim stuff, but thanks for the summary. Hennecke Kardel quotes a Palestinian journalist who visited Berlin during the war saying that the Germans told him that Eva Braun was half Jewish, like the rest of Adolf’s lovers.
Kardel also suggests Hitler killed Geli Raubal himself – and threatened suicide afterwards. Georg Strasser pulled him out of it.
A list of times that Hitler threatened but didn’t commit suicide would be interesting
I’ve seen photos and film where Hitler is smirking and it seems like the well known Duper’s Delight. That’s not proof of anything, of course, just an instinct.
Over at Christians for Truth, there is a great photo of a crowd of civilian Germans giving enthusiastic Nazi salutes. Only one guy is not saluting. The writer of the article under the photo says that the non-saluter is his own grandfather.
The reason Grandpa didn’t salute is because he felt Adolf was not anti-Jewish enough. The cooperation with the Zionists, the acceptance of Jewish funding, prominent Jews and part-Jews in high places – all this was well known in Germany at the time.
Hitler was pretty brutal with the Germans: A soldier on the chaotic Russian retreat got hanged for opening a box of rations without authority – even though he had starving for weeks. A guy on a train in 1944 started whinging about the war and they executed him, perfectly legally, for it. He ordered the execution of a group of Germans on the day of his supposed suicide. He even sneered at the German soldiers who survived the war in his crazy, nihilistic, destroy-it-all final testament. Something like: the best have fallen in battle, so the survivors are only inferior people.
The guy didn’t salute because his girl-friend was Jewish:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Landmesser
Alanchik: “It is tragic, but I’m not without hope. The same system that perfected manipulation is beginning to expose its own circuitry. ”
Seems like here you’re venturing back onto the path of conspiracy theory, a path well-trodden here at Unz Review. That’s where I have to take leave of you. To my way of thinking, the technological system is inherently and irredeemably anti-human, and hence dehumanizing. Anyone who thinks that it’s instead a plot of shadowy “elites” to take over the world (or whatever), and everything would be hunky-dory if people would just “wake up” to their scheming, is part of the problem.
I don’t usually engage in the academic exercise of recommending books, but you might want to look into Jacques Ellul’s The Technological Society. Ellul is the premier philosopher of technology, and shows how most of the dehumanizing aspects of modern life flow from technology as unintended side-effects. I mentioned a couple of these above in #111. In a nutshell, the problem is that people love “Progress”. It’s killing them, but they love it!
Vogel
I think it is crucial not to replace the usual caricatures with new ones…
The notion that German policies under Hitler and the National Socialists were in the interests of either the British Empire and the US is absurd and inverts reality on its head. Re Zionism, yes, there was cooperation for a time, due to overlapping interests; Hitler considered the Jews as a whole as a troublesome and alien group(not without good reasons) which would always undermine the NS program, and so worked out immigration schemes, to wherever. Unfortunately, also into Palestine with the horrible repercussions for the Palestinian people over many decades culminating now with on camera genocide. Evidently the Zionist movement bears most of the blame here, as it was created in the late 19th century and also perfidious Albion, for the Balfour Declaration. Since the Zionists desired to attract as many Askhanazi Jews as possible to settle in Palestine, for years, especially before the war, both the Nazi party and German Zionists worked together towards that end.
In ‘The Myth of the Big Business-Nazi Axis’, Kerry R. Bolton underlines a curious phenomenon:
Then this, very important:
Bolton proceeds to show the inadequacies/fragility of the arguements of Sutton and various other authors in this connection. So, who finaced the NS party?
The basic flaw here is your opener that to know Hitler one must read “Mein Kampf”. That’s assuming one believes he wrote it, which I do not based upon David Irving’s rejection of it as fully authored by Hitler. I do not recall the reasons for Irving’s rejection of it, but he’s still considered the foremost authority on Hitler, the Nazis & that aspect of WW2. One could contact the Institute for Historical Review (IHR) for further info.
Personally, I do not believe he wrote it as it contradicts who he was completely before that new era of his began. As noted, in Vienna in 1918 he was a communist, male prostitute of Mischling Jewish background & had no known outspoken German nationalist beliefs. He hung with other commie Jews then too. Then he became a speaker at German worker party events to keep an eye on labor unrest. It’s said he was working for Max Warburg then, perhaps as a sort of cointel pro & this book served a purpose for his political rise which his backers clearly needed to promote him. It is also unlikely that an erstwhile commie Jew suddenly goes ultranationalist & vs. his own people. That he had marginal edu is known. It’s not that he maybe couldn’t have written that book, but it’s unlikely.
It’s more likely that he had much help from more intellectual colleagues/handlers.
You seem unaware of the dishonest, conniving form of planning & thought which the Jews do. If their objective was to overthrow Germany (& it was) they had no success with their Bavarian Soviet Revolution of 1918. Their only hope would be to infiltrate national German politics with one of their own who could lead the German people to their destruction. Such a subversive infiltrator would be best of their own & be able to be controlled by them, as Churchill was. That Hitler led Germany to much destruction & loss viz the Soviets is clear. Maybe read The Protocols of the Elders of Zion to get a better grasp on how the Jewish enemy thinks & acts. You want (need) to believe Hitler was genuine, I want to know truth & see too many contradictions to accept simple stories. Some references for your consideration.
Irving on Mein Kampf – Many times Irbing stated he rejected the book as legit.
Video Link
Financiers of Hitler & Churchill – Irving – Bankers
https://ihr.org/journal/v07p498_Okeefe.html/
Hitler’s Jewish Acting Teacher
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Devrient
https://henrymakow.com/hitler_and_bormann_were_traito.html
Incitatus: “There is a fourth Hitler, an aging, suicidal Lothario who preferred young girls. ”
Since he’s become the devil incarnate, Hitler is the sort of man it’s allowable to smear in all sorts of ways, even encouraged. You call him a Lothario and a seducer of young girls. Others say he was a male prostitute and a homosexual. Still others claim he was impotent, for all practical purposes a eunuch, uninterested in sex. “Lothario” would be more accurate, and your list more impressive, if it claimed he impregnated some of those girls, or at least had sex with them.
One that’s not on the list that should probably be added is Hanna Reitsch, the female aviator, test pilot, and twice winner of the Iron Cross, first and second class. In the last days of the war, she volunteered to die for him as part of the Selbstopferkommando. I would think that meant she loved him. She was 23 years his junior.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanna_Reitsch#V1_(1944)
Incitatus: “Hitler seems to have been unable to relate to women his own age as equals.”
Oh, the horror! The horror! LOL
While it’s verboten nowadays, the age gaps aren’t particularly surprising to me. My own father was in his forties when he married my mother, 22. Hitler’s father was 48 when he married Hitler’s mother, 25. In Table Talks, Hitler mentions that Germany had at that time a surplus of two million females. Due to losses of men in WWI, older man/young woman marriages were much more common than today.
Incitatus, quoting Hoffman: ““He [Hitler] gave himself great airs, with his dark leather coat, his whip and his Mercedes, whose driver waited for him in front of the door.”
The whip is something he used to joke made him more Christ-like, since he wanted to whip the Jews out of Germany, just as Jesus whipped them out of the temple. There are more parallels with Jesus that I detailed here:
https://www.unz.com/jtaylor/race-and-literature-why-is-it-always-liberal/#comment-7335368
So there is a fifth Hitler, one who identified with Jesus, who he said must surely have been an Aryan. That may have been unhealthy, even a fatal mistake. Somebody who truly identifies with Jesus will want to be crucified!
Following up on my previous comment;
In his book ‘The Banking Swindle: Money Creation and the State’, Bolton elaborates:
A greater military commander than Genghis Khan? Maybe, maybe not.
Ellul is a brilliant reference; The Technological Society remains one of the clearest descriptions of how technique becomes autonomous. I agree that most of the dehumanizing effects we live with aren’t the product of a secret cabal but of systems that outgrew the control of any single group. What began as tools now sets its own pace and priorities—efficiency, speed, and expansion for their own sake.
When I speak of an “overlay,” I don’t mean a boardroom conspiracy. I mean the same thing Ellul traced in secular language: a feedback loop that eventually replaces human intention with its own momentum. Capital, bureaucracy, and digital infrastructure are expressions of the same logic. The “elites” simply ride the wave; they didn’t invent the tide.
Where I differ slightly from Ellul is in tone: I don’t see this condition as final. Every self-referential system eventually exposes its limits. The current disillusionment with “progress”—the fatigue, the mistrust of media, the longing for authenticity—isn’t regression; it’s the first recognition that the machine is no longer serving its makers. That awareness is the breach in the wall.
So yes, technology itself is the driver, but awareness is still the brake. The hope I hold isn’t that the plotters will be unmasked—it’s that consciousness will recover the capacity to choose when to participate and when to step aside.
What you describe as the autonomous march of technique is, I think, the same process that Jacques Ellul traced in The Technological Society and Dmitry Orlov later called the technosphere. Ellul saw how technical efficiency becomes its own religion; Orlov showed how the global machine begins to function like a self-organizing organism that uses people as components. In my own terminology I’ve called it the overlay—a feedback field that started as a human tool and gradually replaced intention with momentum. When three independent lines of thought converge on the same geometry, that suggests we’re describing one phenomenon at different resolutions. The encouraging part is that awareness itself remains outside the loop; once we can see the pattern, we’re no longer completely ruled by it.
Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Norway, Denmark were all invaded because of necessity, not of any kind of enmity against them. Even Yugoslavia and Greece were taken exclusively because Britain wanted to invade Greece and to turn Yugoslavia against Germany. Therefore, there was no other option except of invading first. These facts are well known and described correctly even in the official histories of WW2; even Soviet 12-volume history presents the overall factual framework of events correctly, but puts them into false vests of Marxist analysis. And as you know, Marxist dialectics allows to prove that white is black and vice versa.
When Britain and France declared war on Germany on the 3rd of September 1939, the chain of events was started, which could not be stopped or even changed; the logic of global war put aside all other questions far behind. In such situations you can’t choose your allies; you should be satisfied with what you have, instead of what you would like. Italians were not the desired allies but the only available ones, the same with Romanians and even Hungarians to some extent.
Hitler always said that he would prefer to have Englishmen as allies. But it was impossible in those circumstances. Englishmen were under such thorough stranglehold of international jewry that they had lost the track of their own interests and tied their national fate to the nefarious agenda of the wicked tribe. I understand the underlying sentiments of Prinz Edelhart in expressing his critical thoughts, but I suppose that this is the result of rather insufficient knowledge of this question, than a product of deep analysis. I can agree with his pointing out on unrealistic internal German propaganda, depicting only victories and eschewing or diminishing losses and defeats. But propaganda always does so, even now. (Wolf Stoner)
She offered to die for Volk and Vaterland.
Please, stop it.
“1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in “advanced” countries.
2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.
3. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later.
4. We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence; it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can’t predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This is not to be a POLITICAL revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society.”
–Ted Kaczynski, The Unabomber Manifesto
Your comments and extensive quotes prove that you intrinsically agree with my point that a thorough revision of the mainstream historical narrative on Hitler and National Socialism is called for. Although its quite likely that wildly divergent interpretations of the man and the movement will continue to find adherents.
In the end, any credible historical interpretation must rely on primary sources. Unfortunately, however, the documentation on highly visible and politically controversial figures inevitably tends to be manipulated by means of destroying sources or keeping them under lock to prevent historians from doing research.
In the end, history as part of the trivium, or the coscienza, as Giambattista Vico called it, can establish only lo vero (truth), which is fundamentally political. Only the hard sciences can establish lo certo (certainty).
“In his book “The Hidden Hitler” Lothar Machtan, a Professor of History at Bremen University says Hitler almost joined the Communists in 1918. He demanded a senior party post that would have exempted him from work but they refused.
“Hitler did not set foot in the extreme right-wing camp until he had been rejected by left-wing groups,” Machtan writes. (71)
Hitler may not have been “rejected.” He may have become their deep cover agent like Martin Bormann.
Machtan’s book asserts that Hitler was an active homosexual with a thick police file of molestation complaints both in Vienna and Munich.
According to Ian Kershaw, Hitler took part in pro-Socialist and Communist demonstrations in 1918-1919 and served as a Socialist Soldiers’ Council representative. (“Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris, p 118-120.)
According to Ian Kershaw, Hitler took part in pro-Socialist and Communist demonstrations in 1918-1919 and served as a Socialist Soldiers’ Council representative. (“Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris, p 118-120.)
In the Controversy of Zion, Douglas Reed writes that Hitler was taken prisoner in 1919 as a Communist serving as an emissary from Moscow.
“In these days when the infiltration of all parties, classes, and governments by agents of the revolution is a known and proven thing, it is of interest that the mass of literature about Hitler ignores his early associations and the strong evidence of his Communist background.”
Hitler described himself as “the executor of Marxism” at the time and modeled the Nazis on the Communists. He wanted to call the Nazis the “Socialist Revolutionary Party.” Reed who met Hitler and studied him at close quarters wrote in 1955 that the truth about Hitler has not yet been written. p. 395.
According to Brigitte Hamann, Hitler’s best friends in pre-war Vienna were Jewish. He benefited from Jewish charities and hospitality. Jews bought most of his artwork. For this reason, real antisemites shunned him. (“Hitler’s Vienna: A Dictator’s Apprenticeship, pp.347-352)”
https://www.henrymakow.com/001936.html
Cptn. Karl Myer – “I Was Hitler’s Boss”
https://henrymakow.com/002132.html
Oh, really!?
Looking at this subject through Christian eyes makes the truth impossible to see. Would Zionists willingly feed Jews into the work-camps? Would Zionists stage a massive music event at the border then shoot concert-goers? How about launching rockets into Jewish schools?
https://www.jewworldorder.org/hitler-was-a-homosexual-prostitute-in-vienna/
Thank you, Ariadna!
Unsurprisingly, shills and idiots could not abstain from posting their ignorant remarks about this excellent article.
Tarnhari: “[Hanna Reitsch] offered to die for Volk and Vaterland. ”
Reitsch was but a young girl during Hitler’s rise. He stamped his imprint upon her.
“A girl of eighteen to twenty is as malleable as wax. It should be possible for a man, whoever the
chosen woman may be, to stamp his own imprint upon her. That’s all the woman asks for, by the way.”
– Adolf Hitler, in Table Talks, night of January 25-26th, 1942
Alanchik: “The hope I hold isn’t that the plotters will be unmasked—it’s that consciousness will recover the capacity to choose when to participate and when to step aside. ”
There’s hope, but I doubt that it will take the form of some kind of democratic renunciation of technology. Ellul himself grasped at that straw, as does the philosopher and occasional UR columnist David Skrbina. In The Metaphysics of Technology Skrbina puts forth the idea that a gradual withdrawal from the technological system is possible. I think an accidental collapse of the system is the most likely possibility, and today human beings have become so dependent on the system that such a collapse would kill billions of people. Right now, from events on the world stage, it’s looking like it may be a global thermonuclear war that ends it. If not, it’s possible too that it might be subject to an intentional takedown via a terrorist attack, such as I have sketched out in previous remarks.
The technological system is very resilient, and even Ted Kaczynski couldn’t think of a way to take it down. But here’s one possibility:
Poaceous plants such as wheat, corn, and rice are the pillars of civilization. It was only their domestication about 10,000 years ago that enabled man to emerge from the hunter-gatherer stage and build all that we see before us today. Eventually, and probably soon, someone in a position to do something about it is going to notice this weakness and respond accordingly. Developing a pathogen to attack these vital cereal grains, all in the grass family, and all of which therefore share a broad degree of genetic similarity and vulnerability, is going to be an obvious method for any group dissatisfied with the existing social and political order to strike out and destabilize it. Once groups such as Al Qaeda realize this, they will no longer be content with relatively harmless stunts like hijacking planes and flying them into skyscrapers. If, for example, Al Qaeda had in its possession a bioweapon such as a strain of wheat virus, smut, rust, or blight, the virulence and pesticide-resistance of which had been enhanced in the laboratory through selective breeding or genetic engineering, it would be in a position to dictate its own terms to the United States. Releasing it would be a devastating blow that would strike directly at the US population, causing famine at home. World prices for these grains would skyrocket, and owing to the large share of the export market controlled by US farmers, mass starvation in the poorer countries of the world would be an expected result.
Yes. Psychopaths, traitors, and fools rule the West. Merkel wrecked the country(even further) before those scumbags followed in her footsteps.
Al Quaida is CIA.
Tarnhari: “Al Quaida is CIA.”
That’s just what (((THEY))) want you to think.
Well it’s not unreasonable to suppose the people who brought down the 3 towers on 9/11 are the same people who have a fascination with bioweapons and perpetrated the plandemic scam/mass culling.
No one has explained why Bibi the genocide yahoo has a plaque with a syringe in his office.
Kingsmeg: “Well it’s not unreasonable to suppose …”
Exactly WHO the perpetrator in my example is is irrelevant. The point is that something of the kind could be done. If white people were truly interested in saving their race, it seems to me that there would be a lot of interest in causing a collapse. There isn’t, so I am forced to conclude they’re not. They love “Progress” more than their own racial existence.
Lies and hypocrisy! The human world consists of little else.
Perhaps if you did inquiry, rather than seek to prop up your hero worship, you also would find that the OSS in 1943 reported similar findings on Hitler which are in CIA files & can be found online. Unless, of course, you want to ignore that too as scurrilous.
Churchill was a sodomite Jew funded by the Illuminati Bankers (Focus Group). FDR was a Jew long controlled by the bankers. Stalin was controlled by them too. But you have no logical progression in your thought & want me to make it a Follie a deux in joining you rather than laying out some uncomfortable facts. Odd all this isn’t better known, as I learned some aspects about 45 yrs. ago.
Further, you might have noted that The Protocols state they will pick our heros for us. Albert Pike wrote the same thing, yet you blithely suck it all up. Of course Hitler had correct, populist programs for Germany, he could not have been a successful leader if he didn’t. But he did lead the nation to destruction.
You might want to read Anthony Sutton’s “The Best Enemy Money Can Buy” to begin to learn how the game is played.
He didn’t lead the nation to destruction. The nation was slated to destruction by outside forces. You are well read but it seems that you are a bit gullible. The extent of lies is vast. Just look at the myriad of anti-Palestinian propaganda. Fifty years later some nonces are still going to use them as if they were documentation.
But if it turns out you were right I will apologise.
He worked for those outside forces who wanted the destruction & he led it from within – the only way it could happen, Ms. Gullible.
It seems you missed my prior info on Borman being such an agent rescued by the Brits from Berlin, as Hitler had escaped to Argentina, admitted of late by Meili. Borman, Hitler’s top man, shared secrets by radio to the Soviets which cost the Germans immensely. Hitler refused to interfere when confronted. Thus, the assassination attempt.
Churchill on this site has been proven to be such an agent. Do you really think he was the only one? Grab on to who & what makes war. Who do you think made & selected Trump?
To force the Jews to move to Palestine, destroy powerful competitor Germany & install communism. which could not be done by direct revolution w/in, per the failed 1918 attempt, a powerful nationalist leader was needed.
Anthony Sutton wrote of these things in “The Best Enemy Money Can Buy”. Just look at when & by whom the BIS was created. Henry Ford was told on his Peace Ship crossing by Jewish journalists that only their banker start & stop wars. Since one Grams had a cousin who was Leibstandardt, I know more than most & all sides of the story. I need no lectures on ‘glorious’ Adolph. Your head would spin if I told you all the names whom I’d encountered in 70 some yrs. on this matter.
As to lies in Palestine, I’m Urwald on that too as a relative had as a tour guide a man who became the 1st PLO Observer to the UN. The primal Antizionist author was a close contact from that time – Alfred M. Lilienthal.
You just go away & keep your fey apologies. There are players & plans above your ken & they’re in action once again. Maybe read The Protocols & take them seriously.
Thanks for this tour-de-force summary of the National Socialist achievement in Germany in so short a time, and putting to lie the assertions that it was due to rearmament.
I’d read snippets of your summary in various places at various times, but never such a succinct assemblage. Thanks again. HdC
Jeder ist selbst seines Glueckes Schmied as an old German proverb has it.
Granted not everyone can be a rocket scientist or brain surgeon, but there is a large area between these high achievements and ditch digging. However, it takes planning and perseverance to make one’s footprint in today’s society. For a young person it also requires guidance by his parents and teachers to guide the youngster into suitable occupations.
And that is sorely lacking in today’s society at all levels; perseverance or simply put: stickwithitness.
LOL! OSS and CIA as reliable sources??? Surely thou jest?
Since ’43, OSS, so it’s hardly new & there are German sources noted. You’ve nothing else at all. Maybe research the Pink Triangle crowd. Now go do a Blut Fanne up yours, moron.
@Prudentia
The OSS is so reliable that they even forgot to mention that supposedly 172 of their agents were at the Nuremberg trials (i have probably been able to identify 30-40 of them) in addition to a to me unknown number of US army intelligence agents of the Ritchie Boys. The OSS even spoke and presented evidence in court including 2 evidence films. “Justice” Jacksons case was mostly built up on them.
One of them was Charles Douglas (C. D.) Jackson, who later was involved in the cover up of the JFK assasination when he took posession of the Zapruder film.
To my understanding the OSS films presented and accepted as evidence at the Nuremberg trial were produced under him:
“Nazi Concentration and Prison Camps (1945)”, November 29, 1945
“The Nazi Plan”, December 11, 1945
Source for the claim of 172 OSS members at the trial:
Waller, Douglas (2011). Wild Bill Donovan: The Spymaster Who Created the OSS and Modern American Espionage. New York: Free Press. ISBN 1-4165-6744-5.
pp. 323–331
“Over the next six months, 172 OSS staffers would join the justice’s team. Navy Lieutenant James Donovan, the OSS’s general counsel,
became one of Jackson’s key trial tacticians”
OSS member names
US National Archives Website:
Records of the Office of Strategic Services (RG 226)
OSS
Records relating to Personnel
Database.
For the claim on the Zapruder film look on wiki and what Ryan Dawson and Cory Hughes say about htis.
You are probably aware of the genocidal book germany must perish by Theodore Newman Kaufman.
Kaufman was admittedly one of the Ritchie Boys (US Army Intelligence) in ww2 but the name can be found in the OSS members list.
Supposedly his DD214 has been lost but his name can be found in the OSS members list on the US national archives website.
I wonder if one could find out what exactly he was involved in and if this is him.
I haven`t contacted them because i don`t think someone from germany should ask for this.
US National Archives Website:
Records of the Office of Strategic Services (RG 226)
OSS
Records relating to Personnel
Database.
Supposedly:
BOX 394
LOCATION 230/86/34/03
Record Group 226: Records of the Office of Strategic Services
Series: Personnel Files of the Office of Strategic Services
File Unit
Not Yet Available Online
Kaufman, Theodore N. – [Serial Number] 18129159
NAID: 203221389
Textual Records
Not Yet Available Online
Access: Unrestricted
Use: Possibly Restricted
Use of these archival materials may be restricted for the following reason:
Copyright
Some of the records may be subject to copyright restrictions. Researchers should contact the publisher for further information.
On the US national archives website:
Office of Strategic Services Personnel Files from World War II
research/military/ww2/oss/personnel-files
Ordering Copies
For information about ordering a copy of an OSS personnel file, please contact the Research Room staff.
It would be good to mention that you would like a copy of the OSS personnel file for [the name of the person], the National Archives Identifier for the file unit, the file unit title, and the Container ID (which can be found under the Archived Copies tab).
The video called “Provenatnuremberg” by Knights Move on youtube shows a bunch of things that have been established legally but appear not to be maintained anymore by a lot of the mainstream. He goes especially into the reliability of the OSS & CIA.
There are even claims that the OSS used “dramatic reenactments” as evidence at the trials without disclosing that they were reenactments.
What if the Nazism that was on offer wasn’t ‘darkness’ but an exciting and revolutionary solution to the various dilemmas of modern life that more conventional regimes seemed to find insoluble?
Through 1939, most people seemed to believe Nazism at least had something to be said for it — and of course the Germans themselves were decidedly pleased with it.
It’d be interesting to examine that theory. In both Is Paris Burning? (1966) and A Bridge Too Far (1977) Germans are portrayed as reasonably sympathetic figures.
Did that change subsequently? What Second World War movies at all have been made in which the Germans appear without reference to the Holocaust et al? Spielberg’s films might be taken as atypical — but he makes sure the Germans are bad guys who should be killed out of hand in Saving Private Ryan (1998). Then of course there’s Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds (2009). I refused to see it, but apparently Jews get to kill Germans because Germans are bad. This would be yet another example of Tarantino’s formula of politically correct pornography — but that it’s politically correct in the first place would support the theory.
That it has become cool to shoot Germans out of hand may be something of a theme. It also occurs in Saving Private Ryan. The improbably Levantine-looking American Jewish soldier is allowed to ‘avenge’ himself by shooting German prisoners. What he could reasonably be avenging himself for isn’t explained. Then later on, the moral is drawn that it was a mistake to take mercy on the unarmed German who pled for mercy. Of course, my suspicion is that Spielberg needed to make such behavior normal primarily in order to justify Israel’s fondness for such behavior — it’s not necessarily indicative of any general change in attitude towards Nazi Germany.
That’s an understandable observation when viewed through the lens of the 1930s. Germany, demoralized by Versailles and crushed by economic despair, was looking for renewal. In that context, Nazism appeared to many as an exhilarating and revolutionary alternative to the paralysis of liberal democracies — a system that seemed to promise meaning, unity, and direction amid civilizational exhaustion.
But that “solution” was only a mirage — a counterfeit vitality born of spiritual disconnection. The true crisis of modernity was never economic or political, but ontological. Humanity had lost its axis — its sense of vertical orientation toward something higher than the material plane. Into that vacuum rushed ideologies that promised transcendence through collective identity, technological mastery, or historical destiny. Nazism was simply one of the most extreme expressions of this substitution: the pursuit of transcendence through domination.
It’s precisely in this substitution that the darkness hides. The Overlay — the control architecture of the age — thrives on this inversion, offering an illusion of order and renewal while deepening the rupture from the Source. What many perceived as “revolutionary” was in truth the recycling of the same spiritual void under a new, more electrified aesthetic.
Real renewal never comes through mass movements or political upheaval. It arises only when the mechanism of inversion itself is seen for what it is — when the false light of the system is recognized as mimicry. Only from that precision of awareness can a genuine new world begin.
But has this ‘real renewal’ ever in fact occurred? I’m reminded of the claim of obstinate socialists that ‘real socialism’ has never been tried.
Maybe it can’t be; human nature simply makes such a system impossible to realize. Perhaps ditto for ‘real renewal.’ After all, it’s certainly been preached often enough, and even attempted.
To date, without any clear successes.
My take on this is that the “bad German” theme was to some extent kept under control during the Cold War. There was a desire not to antagonise the West Germans, and “good Germans” were also brought forward.
This consideration was no longer necessary after the Wall came down and the Soviet Union collapsed.
Very well put. Most Nazi’s are materialists, and measurement of the concrete and sensate is their entire world. German Collective Consciousness has rarely transcended beyond this paradigm of efficiency, dominance, and compensating mechanisms for deep seated sense of inferiority. Most attempts are transcendence into the realm outside of the senses fails due to a lack of Spirit that is not anthropological and tawdry. Clumsy nostalgia for Pagan gods, shallow animism and the general disunity of German existence are a cause of dis-ease in the Collective Mind. That hollow space, vacuum, came about not by INDIVIDUATION-the seeking and discovery of what makes the individual unique and his specific Self, but by connecting to a Network Matrix of Mass Formation Psychosis, Hypnosis. Similar to the hapless and emotionally famished Jonestown hollow heads. The same underlying phenomenon.
Another factor would be that the Cold War saw a lot of American draftees stationed in Germany — and they often found Germans pretty congenial. It wasn’t unheard of for American soldiers to bring home a German bride. Mildly kitschy German restaurants are a kind of 1960-65 artifact; there’s a good one in Coos Bay.
Post-1991, the evil German trope became a lot more plausible.
Du hast Recht!
Thanks for the Lothar Machten reference.
“Your head would spin if I told you all the names whom I’d encountered in 70 some yrs. on this matter.”
Have you written it up? If not, please do. It will be useful for the youngsters.
I’ve mentioned this before, but you would hardly believe this was made less than 20 years after WW2 ended.
I also remember what could be called ruling circles in the UK, including Thatcher, not regarding German reunification with unmixed delight. Germany had been an enemy but divided into two, even if the eastern part was on the other side, it was much less dangerous. German reunification in contrast was rather worrisome.
Tarantino’s film has those Jewish revenge elements, though in one scene, a British lieutenant who is a German film buff, a British general and Winston Churchill touch on the Germans referring to Jewish-controlled Hollywood and nobody contradicts the idea…
Your comments are uniquely satisfying and persuasive. You’re quite right to highlight the dense etheric entrapment of Archontic metaphysics. I guess that daemoni need their loosh and lower vibrational states, engendering antagonistic personalities, is their guarantee of an optimal harvest.
I appreciate your work. Fraternal blessings and the greatest of respect from across the Atlantic.
I appreciate your compliment. I’m glad someone is listening. Sometimes I feel like I’m “talking to the wind”.
Thanks for the compliment . I am glad someone is listening. Sometimes I feel like “I’m talking to the wind.”
Who would enter into a war against the whole world? Just because there were so many threats, Hitler should have stayed still. The fact that he did not, hints toward him being either crazy or a British puppet. By the way, how did my grandparents in Balkan villages threaten Germany?
Well, (1) we didn’t suffer unduly from the Third Reich, (2) we had a lot of pretty congenial contact with the Germans in the Fifties and Sixties, and (3) one of our more attractive national characteristics is a willingness to let bygones be bygones. See also the aftermath of the American Civil War, and our treatment of the Japanese post-war.
The aftermath of the American Civil War produced one great anecdote illustrating this. In 1913, the national passion for dioramas coupled with the fiftieth anniversary of Gettysburg produced a reenactment of Pickett’s Charge — using actual participants of the day.
So the surviving Confederate seventy-somethings did their best to ‘charge’ up that long open slope to the stone wall. Awaiting them were the surviving Union seventy-somethings. When the ‘Confederates’ got to within about twenty yards, the Union reenactors couldn’t stand it any more. They all threw down their muskets and ran out to embrace the fellow survivors of their youth.
Group hug time.
This canard persists. People always need history to have been a fairy tale, with one side all good and other all bad. Well, it’s rarely that way, and reversing the polarity won’t improve matters.
Prior to the German attack, Poland did have a history of harassing, dispossessing, and generally marginalizing its German population. In the run up to the war, there were even isolated physical attacks; one or two actual killings.
However, there were not widespread murders. Those only began on 1 September — in response to the actual German attack.
Repeating falsehoods accomplishes nothing good. Stick to the truth. I rely on the account of what the German population of what became Poland did and did not experience in Richard Blank, Orphans of Versailles: the Germans in Western Poland, 1918-1939.
Beethoven et al? I think your thesis is completely indefensible. One could as reasonably smear the Americans, the French, the Italians, or the Britons with this brush. Any nation, really.
…well, I don’t anyone has ever accused the Italians of efficiency. But the larger point stands.
I’m most grateful that my father and uncles did their best to stop communism from overrunning Germany and western Europe.
I take it that you were happy under communism.
I go by the book Polish Atrocities Against the German Minority in Poland.
Why do you think that the French were so much better off under German occupation than the Poles were?
Do you think this may have had anything to do with those peoples’ behavior during occupation?
Nowadays I read some dialogue on YT when I stumble upon an interesting article about those times. Some of the postings in response to the OP are by French, other’s by Poles. The difference between the two is absolutely astounding; with the French one can have a reasonable dialogue about the issue at hand whereas this is quite impossible with Polish posters.
You can get the French to go off the deep end; that veneer will crack if you hit hard enough. I’ve accomplished this. However, you have something of a point here.
But it’s really irrelevant to the original claim. There were not widespread killings of Germans in Poland prior to 1 September 1939.
I am not talking about creativity or production. I am referring to Consciousness, as in mental hygiene, and in overall psychic and spiritual health.
These screaming little girls, for whom an external personality became internalized to occupy a vacuum and vacancy in their personalities are a mirror and similar to the German people in the 1930s. Hysteria, transference, and complete submersion of their individualization simply dissolving into another person through mysticism and inadequate Ego development of the Self.
https://www.structural-learning.com/post/carl-jungs-archetypes
Why do people think that there is a significant difference between Communism and Fascism? They are the same coin on different sides. Does the jack boot from one or the other feel any different to the citizen? Do restricted individual rights taken away and subjugating feel better under on system then another?
The people at the top just love when fools like you arbitrarily support one form of sameness over the other. A turd is a turd is a turd. Maybe you need to think more and get out in the World, hit the bricks. It is awful and depressing being ignorant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7ES7ueI7p0
Read Henry Makow more.
America and The West worked quite well in the 1950s and 60s. I was always able to get a job while I was in school, and have an apartment and a car. We should like at milieus and societies that work for people, past and present, not blurb out some symbolic tripe of an -ism, or economic system, blah, blah, blah.
Useless generalities are for the weak-minded and callow fellows.
My information regarding NS Germany comes from my parents who became adults and were married during the time of the NS regime. Also by listening to numerous aunts and uncles since my mother was from a very large family. And the odd neighbor, one of whom was a submariner.
You’ll forgive me if I take their opinions ahead of the likes of you and the chorus of Germany baaad, allies and communists goood.
For 50 years or so I have been interested in Germany and the two WW and came to the conclusion that everything one sees/hears/reads in the mass media, court historians, Hollywood, and with the internet those that trumpet the bleating of the forgoing, that the truth is much much closer to the exact opposite of what the trumpeters would have you believe.
Everyday observations over the last 20 or 30 years bear out the value of my conclusion regarding the trumpeters.
Many people in Russia express fondness of nostalgia for the Soviet Union under Stalin. That is why there is a Communist Party segment in the Duma. Your statement has no real intrinsic value unless it is contextualized.
But your statements originated by the trumpeters of Germany baaad allies and communists goood, have intrinsic value. Don’t make me laugh!
At least my information is derived from people who walked the walk ie. lived through it.
The Germans were more cruel and more oppressive in the East than in the West. Foreign workers in Germany from Western Europe were subject to varying qualities of treatment but were not expected to wear discriminatory badges. Poles and Ostvolk were. The former a yellow and purple badge with the letter P, the latter a badge with OST (“East”) on it. Poles were not even given a badge in the national colours white and red – the Nazis feared Polish nationalism.
Really? Do you have a camera in my home? Questioned my family members? Implanted a chip in my brain? What am I thinking this very moment? What a presumptuous bumpkin!
True. Largely due to the irrational and timeless hate and conceit of Germany and Germans toward Eurasian peoples [inferior “Mongol”, demoted and mongrel to the German compensating psychic mechanism of “superiority shielding” to mask and suppress a genuine native feeling of constant inferiority, or not being “good enough”. An outgrowth of self-loathing and externalization of hate and aggression. Even TO THIS DAY, too many Germans regard Eastern Europeans and beyond as being inferior, “not as human as us” [spoken by a German public figure on national television, and indirectly asserted countless times publicly.
As Jung, Wagner, Heine, and others have noted, the Common Conscious of Germania carries a recessive virus of mental and spiritual sickness and pathology. I have written on this at length.
To say the least. He may be overlooking other factors, but Mazower, in Hitler’s Empire, points out that Germany milked France far more effectively than she milked Poland. In fact, France was kind of pathetic. In the name of ‘collaboration,’ they allowed the Germans to siphon massive amounts of goods and labor from them — all for nil cost. Of course Germany had to garrison the coast against Allied invasion, but they would have had to do that regardless. ‘6000’ sticks in my mind as the total number of personnel Germany had to devote to actual security concerns in France.
Of course, it all goes to show the shortcomings of ideology. In the East, the Germans felt compelled to pursue their racial agenda. In the West — in France, in particular — they just treated the cow in the way that would yield the most milk.
Czechoslovakia may be another example. In the upshot, docile Czech workers kept churning out vital armaments for the Germans, while Slovakia fielded a passable division that participated in Fall Blau with some success. That all fell apart at the end — but then, that was the end anyway.
“The difference between the two is absolutely astounding; with the French one can have a reasonable dialogue about the issue at hand whereas this is quite impossible with Polish posters. ”
Thanks!
One year’s stay in France and three years in Poland -as a young adult in the sixties – enabled me to see for myself that your remark is correct.
Yes, I agree. An excellent summary of the situation.
Below are two more outstanding books on Adolf Hitler, compared with so much published writing about Hitler which has been compromised to secure a university career promotion, or the publication and promotion of a book by a Jewish-controlled publishing house.
Hitler: Beyond Evil and Tyranny
By R.H.S. Stolfi • 2011
https://www.amazon.com.au/Hitler-R-H-S-Stolfi/dp/1616144742
R. H. S. Stolfi, professor emeritus at the US Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, and retired colonel in the US Marine Corps Reserve.
The Artist Within the Warlord: An Adolf Hitler You’ve Never Known
By Carolyn Yeager (Editor) and Wilhelm Kriessmann (Translator) • 2018
https://www.amazon.com/Artist-Within-Warlord-Adolf-Hitler/dp/0692179585
It only recently came to my notice, but regulars would know that Carolyn Yeager has her own archive on The Unz Review.
Over many years, in more than one source, I remember reading that Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) had a black Scottish Terrier named Burli, apparently a gift from Martin Bormann (1900-1945). This dog was quite separate from Negus and Stasi, the two black Scotties which belonged to Eva Braun (1912-1945); and Eva’s mother also kept Scotties.
Burli was Hitler’s favorite dog, but being a small dog, and not German-bred, Hitler was always photographed with his larger, macho, wolf-like German Shepherd, Blondi.
A quick search found nothing serious about Burli online. Does anyone have knowledge about this elusive black Scottie?
Scottish Terriers are the only dog breed to have lived in the White House on three occasions: with Presidents Franklin Roosevelt (32); Dwight Eisenhower (34); and George W. Bush (43).
Hi again Biggles,
You must be confusing “Burli” with Blondi, who was gifted to Hitler by Martin Bormann as a puppy. Blondi was, of course, a German Shepherd. It was Eva Braun who had two black Scottish Terriers. You can trust the internet search engines far more than “something you remember reading,” especially at your advanced age. I know, as I’m older than you and have to check out everything before I post it online, as tiresome and time-consuming as that is, because it’s easier than ever to misremember. I don’t like to pass on incorrect information. It’s one of my pet peeves that so many irresponsible people don’t mind at all. I know you’re not irresponsible. Watch out for David Irving; he’s much better than most, but has a penchant for making up details in stories to increase the entertainment value of his books.
Of course, with search engines it’s all in how the question is worded. They will never give you more than you ask for, so you have to be thorough and cover all the bases.
Thanks again for your support for valuing the truth about Adolf Hitler. You can write to me anytime at [email protected] if you want to get my view of any issue.