The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewGuillaume Durocher Archive
Of Nazis in Comic Books and Everyday Life
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
A particularly rare issue of Signal.

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

There is a striking contrast for the historian between how popular culture portrays National Socialism and how the historians present it. In popular culture, the portrayal is uniformly negative, to the point that National Socialism becomes a wholly incomprehensible phenomenon. At the same time, Nazi aesthetics and themes – whether or not these are framed within a noble struggle against Nazism – continue to enjoy widespread popular appeal. This is evident in the copious output of TV documentaries and Hollywood films dealing with World War II.

It is also evident in European and in particular francophone comics. Go into any European comic book store and Nazi iconography and themes feature in and on many of the books. Indeed, Nazism may well be the single most common topic, even among comic books not primarily dealing with history. Here is a sampling:

Dutch comic “The Kennedy Files: The Man Who Wanted to Be President,” on Joseph P. Kennedy’s tenure as U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain, including his antiwar efforts, fascist sympathies, and criticism of the Jews.

Bruxelles 43: A look at ordinary life in German-occupied Belgium viewed through the eyes of a young girl.

Sixth volume in the “Children of the Résistance” series.

Promotional material for the Nazi superhero “der Ritter Germania,” part of the Block 109 comic series featuring an alternate timeline in which Nazis battle zombies.

Nazi furries portrayed in the Spanish noir detective series Blacksad.

Bruxelles 43 and Les Dossiers Kennedy make a serious effort to portray a sense of day-to-day normalcy and be historically accurate. The general tendency however is to have Nazis as generic go-to bad guys. As one might expect, most of these comic book artists are stronger on striking imagery than on history

This is particularly the case in the Block 109 series, which abounds in both evocative aesthetics and sadistic cartoon Nazis. Life and government in the Third Reich is imagined as a perpetual Night of the Long Knives-Kristallnacht-Auschwitz. Even military buddies are shown slaughtering each other at sociopathic random.

Paradoxically, the evils of Nazism serve as a pretext for artists to express their own sadistic tendencies. Cruel and sadistic revenge fantasies are a common theme, perhaps most famously portrayed in Quentin Tarantino’s popular 2009 film Inglourious Basterds.

Even the popular culture sometimes comments humorously on the Nazi-/Judeo-centrism of much of our cultural output. Seth MacFarlane’s American Dad! had this to say on the surest way to win an Oscar:

Or consider the following scene from the excellent French spoof spy thriller OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies in which our dashing hero is interrogated by Nazis:

Agent OSS 117: “I won’t tell you anything, Moeller. The Third Reich and Nazi ideology have always left me . . . skeptical.”

Gerhard Moeller: “Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Isn’t it funny that Nazis always play the bad guys? It’s 1955! Can we have a second chance already? Thank you.”

And the classic scene in the Cohen brothers’ The Big Lebowski:

The historians – while virtually all acknowledging the great scale of Nazi atrocities in Poland and the Soviet Union – are also willing to take a more holistic view of the Hitlerian experience. Each historian, from his or her particular angle and area of expertise, is willing to go beyond demonological caricature and thus actually understand why National-Socialism was appealing to so many and why the Third Reich was so powerful.

Consider American historian Claudia Koonz’ 2005 The Nazi Conscience, which emphasizes that the appeal of National-Socialism was in being morally demanding. Harvard University Press presents the book as follows:

The Nazi conscience is not an oxymoron. In fact, the perpetrators of genocide had a powerful sense of right and wrong, based on civic values that exalted the moral righteousness of the ethnic community and denounced outsiders.

Claudia Koonz’s latest work reveals how racial popularizers developed the infrastructure and rationale for genocide during the so-called normal years before World War II. Her careful reading of the voluminous Nazi writings on race traces the transformation of longtime Nazis’ vulgar anti-Semitism into a racial ideology that seemed credible to the vast majority of ordinary Germans who never joined the Nazi Party. Challenging conventional assumptions about Hitler, Koonz locates the source of his charisma not in his summons to hate, but in his appeal to the collective virtue of his people, the Volk.

This is the paradox, actually not particularly surprising in evolutionary terms, of National Socialism: simultaneously inspiring great altruistic idealism among the people and great ruthlessness towards ethnic outsiders. A recent book on foreign tourists in the Third Reich similarly emphasizes how many travellers were impressed by the idealism and activism they found, particularly among young people.

Or consider Clarkson University professor Sheila Weiss’ The Nazi Symbiosis: Human Genetics and Politics in the Third Reich, which is at pains to dispel facile stereotypes about “Nazi pseudoscience”:

Moreover, in discussing the actual science pursued by these human geneticists, the book will reinforce the efforts of other scholars who have tried to dispel a second myth common among the nonspecialist: that eugenics and racial anthropology, two essential subspecialties under the rubric of human heredity in the first half of the twentieth century, were “pseudoscientific” pursuits. Whatever one might think about them today, both were internationally respected and practiced by world-renowned human geneticists for most of the first half of the twentieth century. As the first chapter will make clear, neither eugenics nor racial anthropology was a Nazi invention. Both flourished inside and outside of Germany prior to the advent of the Third Reich. . . .

Moreover, Germany was unique, even among fascist countries, in functioning as a “racial state”—a nation where the criterion for citizenship was determined by race and heredity. National Socialist Germany approached a biocracy, that is, a government where biomedical ideals and biomedical professionals were central for the regime in both word and deed. (pp. 8-9)

A “biocracy” in which actual life scientists were “central for the regime in both word and deed”! No wonder the racialist American patriot Charles Lindbergh, who had been enthralled by Plato’s visionary Republic, also found much to admire in the Third Reich. (Lindbergh’s friend Alexis Carrel, the Nobel Prize-winning French surgeon and biologist had similar dreams of a world governed and breeding according to the discoveries of life scientists. As a Frenchman, Carrel was much more alarmed by the National-Socialists’ extreme ethnic chauvinism however.)

Indeed, there is a common pattern among historians of the Third Reich. Often, their first book will have a highly moralistic tone and will be dedicated to pointing and shaming. This is an easy exercise: simply document how some apparently respectable figure(s) in fact collaborated with the Nazis, had sympathies, or shared their ideas. More generally, a historian may simply show how said figure(s) followed a moral code deemed reprehensible by the oh-so-elevated standards of the Current Year.

Once that is out of the way, the historian will by the time of their second book have developed more compassion and will rather attempt to show these human beings’ logic and viewpoint, as well as their sincerity and achievements. In short, the historian will not only denounce the abuses and mistakes but also try to give credit where it is in fact due.

Consider Robert Proctor’s books on medical professionals in the Third Reich. The description of evocatively-titled The Nazi War on Cancer describes such an evolution:

Collaboration in the Holocaust. Murderous and torturous medical experiments. The “euthanasia” of hundreds of thousands of people with mental or physical disabilities. Widespread sterilization of “the unfit.” Nazi doctors committed these and countless other atrocities as part of Hitler’s warped quest to create a German master race. Robert Proctor recently made the explosive discovery, however, that Nazi Germany was also decades ahead of other countries in promoting health reforms that we today regard as progressive and socially responsible. Most startling, Nazi scientists were the first to definitively link lung cancer and cigarette smoking. Proctor explores the controversial and troubling questions that such findings raise: Were the Nazis more complex morally than we thought? Can good science come from an evil regime? What might this reveal about health activism in our own society? Proctor argues that we must view Hitler’s Germany more subtly than we have in the past. But he also concludes that the Nazis’ forward-looking health activism ultimately came from the same twisted root as their medical crimes: the ideal of a sanitary racial utopia reserved exclusively for pure and healthy Germans.

Author of an earlier groundbreaking work on Nazi medical horrors, Proctor began this book after discovering documents showing that the Nazis conducted the most aggressive antismoking campaign in modern history. Further research revealed that Hitler’s government passed a wide range of public health measures, including restrictions on asbestos, radiation, pesticides, and food dyes. Nazi health officials introduced strict occupational health and safety standards, and promoted such foods as whole-grain bread and soybeans. These policies went hand in hand with health propaganda that, for example, idealized the Führer’s body and his nonsmoking, vegetarian lifestyle. Proctor shows that cancer also became an important social metaphor, as the Nazis portrayed Jews and other “enemies of the Volk” as tumors that must be eliminated from the German body politic.

The French historian Johann Chapoutot also provides an example of this. Chapoutot’s works essentially paraphrase and summarize the Nazis’ vast ideological and intellectual literature. His first work – Greeks, Romans, Germans – documents how Hitler and the National-Socialists were enthralled by Greco-Roman antiquity and sought to model their aesthetics and politics on the Ancients, particularly Hellenic art, Plato, and Sparta. The tone of the book is often disparaging.

By contrast, Chapoutot’s next book on Nazi ideology as such, The Law of Blood (which I have reviewed for The Occidental Observer), is scrupulously objective and documents the innumerable ways that Germany’s lawyers, doctors, scientists, and philosophers sought to ground the theory and practice of government in biological human nature. Chapoutot is at pains to point out that the output of official ideologues like Alfred Rosenberg was sophisticated and coherent, and by no means an endless vomit of worthless gibberish. With detached objectivity, Chapoutot argues that the Third Reich’s biocentric ideology was a necessary, but by no means sufficient, precondition for the extermination of the Jews.

One can find innumerable other books in this vein: on the Nazis’ pioneering environmental and animal welfare programs, on the formidable philosophical foundations of the German critique of liberal democracy, on the Germans’ grand development plans for Northern Europe, on Hitler’s aesthetics, on Hitler’s decidedly un-demonic youth (on which see my review of Brigitte Hamann’s excellent book on the subject), and much else.

In general, I encourage the curious reader to go directly to the documents themselves, insofar as he can have access to them: browse a few issues of Signal, watch footage from the 1930s and 40s (while the videos are still online . . .), read Jeremy Noakes’ excellent series of collected documents on the National-Socialist movement and government, and, while you are at it, also look at a photo album or two of the often gruesome warfare on the Eastern Front.

Ultimately, National Socialism drew on deep-rooted longings and impulses within the human soul: aggressive masculinity and tribalism, but also a will to health, idealism, and a spirit of self-sacrifice. In fact, the Hitlerian experience suggests that these traits, whether considered positively or negatively, cannot so easily be separated.

In our popular culture and intellectual discourse, there is little serious engagement with the Darwinian biological realities underpinning National-Socialist ideology or with the failings of parliamentary democracy, which led many people in the interwar years, even mainstream figures like the godfather of the EU Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, to pine for a different system of government.

Today, we live in an era of profound incoherence and hypocrisy. On the one hand, Darwinism is celebrated as an antidote to religious ignorance. The rapidly-developing fields of evolutionary psychology and, especially, behavioral genetics are proving the importance of heredity and the reality of sex differences. But these have virtually no impact on policymaking, to the chagrin of men like the geneticist Robert Plomin or the cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker (who popularized the critique of the “blank slate” model of human psychology). Instead, equal outcomes, the denial of sex differences, and race-denial are the order of the day. Given these egalitarian assumptions, the perennial failure to achieve equality leads to resentment and frustration. A scapegoat then must and is easily found: White men and Western culture are, of course, to blame.

What’s more, much like in the 1920s, our societies are suffering from increasingly severe forms of democratic entropy, mitigated by more-or-less severe and hypocritical elite authoritarianism. Social media has made our media, cultural, and ideological landscape more pluralistic. In theory, our liberal-democratic elites should be welcoming this, but in fact they are now discovering that this pluralism – predictably – makes it difficult to impose their liberal, egalitarian, anti-borders, and climate-focused agenda.

Many demoliberals are rediscovering the original Socratic critique of democracy grounded in expertise, even as they still claim to loath “authoritarian” systems of government. Their solution? To hypocritically tighten official and unofficial censorship by governments and social media. Ideological conformity within elite institutions is being tightened in general and becoming outright suffocating.

While I cannot say where our societies are ultimately going, I can say the tensions and hypocrisies will steadily grow as ethno-social inequalities and fragmentation get more severe. We like to hope that one day, there will be a breaking point after which some candor will reign, with scientific truth and the frank exercise of authority being the order of the day. There are signs.

 
Hide 332 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Ray P says:

    Nazi health officials introduced strict occupational health and safety standards, and promoted such foods as whole-grain bread and soybeans.

    The fearsome Nazis were soyboys.

  2. Another excellent article by Durocher, I’ve always looked forward to reading pieces by this columnist not merely because of his analysis but also because he links a wealth of information for the reader to explore themselves, many interesting books were referenced in this article that I had not heard of before.

    In regards to the last picture of the Brazilian sperm donation story, it would be a supreme irony if instead of the world populace becoming a “European-Negroid race” of Kalergi fame, it become fully “Aryan”, a sort of reverse White genocide.

    This would certainly end racism for good, within 10 generations, the whole world would be White if non-White groups were provided and made use of European eggs and sperm.

    • Agree: Coconuts
  3. jamie b. says:

    We like to hope that one day, there will be a breaking point after which some candor will reign, with scientific truth and the frank exercise of authority being the order of the day.

    Gawd how I hope so. Unfortunately, successful religions seem to require believing three impossible things before breakfast.

    • Agree: Jett Rucker
  4. @Ray P

    Better soy than gruel!

    William L. Shirer, who was in Germany at the time, writes in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich

    The young in the Third Reich were growing up to have strong and healthy bodies, faith in the future of their country and in themselves and a sense of fellowship and camaraderie that shattered all class and economic and social barriers. I thought of that later, in the May days of 1940, when along the road between Aachen and Brussels one saw the contrast between the German soldiers, bronzed and clean-cut from a youth spent in the sunshine on an adequate diet, and the first British war prisoners, with their hollow chests, round shoulders, pasty complexions and bad teeth- tragic examples of the youth that England had neglected so irresponsiblyin the years between the wars.

  5. “A “biocracy” in which actual life scientists were “central for the regime in both word and deed”!”

    Well, there’s the problem. Here at Unz we know that “Life sciences” are pseudo-sciences favored by girls who can’t do math. Our manly hard science, physics, produced the weapons that ended the war. Science!

  6. “Their solution? To hypocritically tighten official and unofficial censorship by governments and social media. Ideological conformity within elite institutions is being tightened in general and becoming outright suffocating.”

    An example of “revolution within the form.” Rather than admit that democracy — or rather, “universal suffrage” — is absurd, they use censorship, mass media, advertising, etc. to ensure that everyone, or at least sufficient numbers, will agree with what the elite wants. The voting is purely pro forma.

    Why do you think they have levers in voting machines? As long as they can pull a lever, the monkeys are happy, and think they are free.

    Unless you believe in racial solidarity, or class solidarity, in which case you want the best treatment for your race/class, it’s hard not to agree with the elite on this. Anyone who promotes universal suffrage is either a stooge or a fool. If you do disagree with the elite, you want a new elite, not universal suffrage.

    PS: I don’t see how iStevers and other IQ nerds can disagree with the elite. If you disdain racial solidarity and class consciousness, and promote IQ and meritocracy, you are essentially on the same page as Soros, Schwab, and the other Big Brains.

    • Agree: Digital Samizdat
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
  7. Regarding the ‘Demand for American Sperm is Skyrocketing in Brazil’ – the American media wanted to make it sound ‘strange’¹ that the requested looks are blue-eyed and light-haired i.e. so ‘non-Brazilian’… But no appearance of the women requesting them is provided, but oh, they tell us these women are ‘wealthy’: there we go – these women are White themselves, although, it’s true, in general, they chose men with more ‘Nordic’ phenotype than themselves.

    1. And who knows what else! Perhaps they even intended to use this as evidence of how racist the USA is (!), that Americans have exported ‘colourism’ to Latin America. LOL!

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  8. @James O'Meara

    I am not sure what you are getting at. Care to elaborate?

  9. lysias says:

    Tobacco and cigarettes in particular were too important for the U.S. economy for U.S. authorities to admit that they were a health hazard until the evidence became overwhelming.

  10. For the Durocher files on both France and Nazis – Adolf Hitler’s apparent descendants in France, deriving from an affair German Army Corporal Hitler had with French farm girl Charlotte Lobjoie in 1917, a young woman whom Adolf also painted on canvas.

    Their son Jean-Marie, born in 1918, taking the name Loret from Charlotte’s eventual husband, had 10 children from two marriages, who would thus be Adolf’s grand-children … who in turn now have grand-children of their own, so Hitler’s French family is now in its 5th generation. The resemblance to Hitler in the photos of the family – just below – is notable, despite dodgy ‘DNA debunking’ claims by people too-eager to deny that Adolf Hitler has a large family alive in France today.

    German sources supplied funds for Jean-Marie’s education in French boarding schools. After losing track of his lover, Hitler had Himmler track down Charlotte, and German officers brought Charlotte funds during the German occupation, when Charlotte told her son Hitler was his father. Jean-Marie published a 1981 book, ‘Ton père s’appelait Hitler’, ‘Your Father’s Name Was Hitler’. Here is Charlotte first as Hitler painted her in ‘Portrait of a Lover’, and then later in life in Paris:

    Adolf Hitler’s French grandson Philippe Loret, born 1956, also openly acknowledges the relationship; quite striking photos, look at the chins of Adolf and Philippe:

    Photos of Hitler along with his apparent biological son with Charlotte, Jean-Marie Loret

    [MORE]

    Photo – cover of 1981 book by Hitler’s son, ‘Ton père s’appelait Hitler’, ‘Your Father’s Name Was Hitler’

    • Thanks: Digital Samizdat
    • Replies: @Joseph Doaks
    , @karel
  11. jamie b. says:
    @James O'Meara

    Here at Unz we know that “Life sciences” are pseudo-sciences favored by girls who can’t do math.

    Who makes this claim?

  12. @James O'Meara

    Anyone who promotes universal suffrage is either a stooge or a fool. If you do disagree with the elite, you want a new elite, not universal suffrage.

    Thank you – how very true! All societies have élites – hierarchy is a part of human nature. The aim ought to be to have a virtuous and honorable élite, rather than a nomenklatura like the one that now so broadly prevails.

    Every successful republic in history restricted the franchise in some way. In ancient Athens the only way to become a citizen entitled to the franchise was to have been born into one of the Athenian demes. Free residents who were foreigners (e.g., Aristotle) were called metics, and although they enjoyed many of the liberties, and some of the duties associated with citizenship, could not vote. Of course, large numbers of the Athenian population were slaves and had neither the liberties nor the duties of citizens.

    Similarly, ancient Rome limited its citizenship and franchise, distinguishing its citizens from the subjects of its empire. The Republic of Venice, which lasted over a thousand years, with few exceptions limited its franchise to those descended from its founding population, whose names were listed in the “Golden Book.” Even the early United States limited the franchise to freeholders.

    The failure of the universal franchise can be seen throughout Africa, where the departing colonial powers left their former possessions with parliaments and prime ministers, courts of law, and all the paraphernalia of modern civil government, the whole underpinned by “one man, one vote.” This slogan could well have been completed with the added words “one time,” as the new countries quickly descended into anarchy or dictatorship.

    It’s interesting to note that the United States has had the universal franchise only since 1964, when the Twenty-Fourth Amendment, forbidding any tax qualification for voting, was ratified. The deterioration of American politics could well be dated to that event. It has led to the development of a class that “votes for a living” rather than working for one.

    Only net taxpayers – those that foot the bill for government – ought to be able to vote. Those that receive welfare, food stamps, and other benefits at the expense of the taxpayers ought to lose their right to vote until they can show that they have again become net taxpayers over a rolling five-year period.

  13. “Paradoxically, the evils of Nazism serve as a pretext for artists to express their own sadistic tendencies. Cruel and sadistic revenge fantasies are a common theme, perhaps most famously portrayed in Quentin Tarantino’s popular 2009 film Inglourious Basterds.”

    Calling Quentin Tarantino an “artist” is like calling someone who kills cows for a living a veterinarian.

    • LOL: Rob McX
    • Replies: @El Dato
    , @Che Guava
  14. Let’s face it westerners are Fascists.

  15. El Dato says:
    @American Asian

    Excellent.

    Which, of course, means that the current regime makes them crazy.

    Time to ally with Japan again for great justice?

    This time slavs can join, too.

  16. El Dato says:

    Translation error:

    Promotional material for the Nazi superhero “der Ritter Germania,” part of the Block 109 comic series featuring an alternate timeline in which Nazis battle zombies.

    It actually say “Ein Ritter für Germania” which means “A Knight for Germania”.

    This reminds me of the pseudo-Nazis in the Blake&Mortimer series “The Mystery of the Swordfish” who were actually Chinese (well, the Führer for some reason was sitting in Lhasa, so maybe they where not Nazis but Ultra-Bhuddists?)

    That was great post-WWII reading. A world-wide #Resistance against the Yellow Peril led by stiff-upper-lip moustache-wearing Brits and their Subcontinental Indian loyal retainers. Mortimer even has to endure some light torture at the hands of an Asian specialist while race-traitor Olrik looks on approvingly. And the weapon systems are 40s-styled.

  17. El Dato says:
    @Joe Paluka

    Same as there is Fast Food catering, there is Primal Instinct catering.

  18. My first “red pill” moment about National Socialist Germany came in the 1980s when I bought a large collection of Nazi era German magazines and newspapers, including many issues of Signal. I was shocked to read in a 1942 issue the prediction of the U.S. invasion of Vietnam, and more: how the phony American “democracy of dollars” is in fact run by Wall Street plutocrats and is scheming to provoke a world war from the ruins of which it plans to emerge as the global superpower. And I read that the German Reich was as fearlessly committed to breaking the stranglehold of international capitalism as it was to destroying totalitarian communism, to building a new world order in which war would be outlawed and international relations would be based on cooperation and recognition of mutual interests among disparate peoples.

    The idea that Germany’s entire philosophy and national purpose was based on destroying Jews is absurd, like imagining that our Founders created the federal government solely to exterminate Indians and enslave Africans. In thirty years of part-time research I have found that there is always a credible alternative explanation of what the Germans did and why, that contradicts the official narrative of their unspeakable evil and the truly bizarre theory that they wanted to take over the world. Here’s a link to the full text of Richard Tedor’s study “Hitler’s Revolution,” the best one-volume account of what National Socialism was actually about and what it accomplished: https://archive.org/details/HitlersRevolutionByRichardTedor_383

    Historical revisionism is difficult and dangerous today because it exposes the truth that history’s bloodiest war was not good or necessary. The successful demonizing of the Third Reich is the foundation for today’s propaganda effort against China, Russia, Iran, Syria, etc., nations which also refuse to meekly accept American global hegemony. It is the foundation that made possible, even inevitable, the destruction of Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Libya, the wars in Southeast Asia, and creation of the modern total war state that has replaced our republic, just as the America First patriots of 1940 predicted.

  19. Hillaire says:

    The incessant stream of anti National Socialist programing spewed interminably from the jewish media serves two functions.

    Firstly it provides counterpoint and support to the questionable but profitable holocaust cult.

    Secondly by equating them with the gravest of evil, any serious positive inquiry into their methodologies is effectively neutered.

    Economic policy was the rope that hanged them, but you wont hear much honesty about that on the hitler channel.

    • Agree: Clay Alexander
    • Replies: @Wally
    , @Alexandros
  20. With detached objectivity, Chapoutot argues that the Third Reich’s biocentric ideology was a necessary, but by no means sufficient, precondition for the extermination of the Jews.

    Except, of course, it didn’t happen. Quite the contrary, there are now more of them than there ever have been.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  21. unit472 says:

    Strange how easily the Japanese were rehabilitated after WW2 when they were even more disciplined/fanatical than Hitler’s armies and every bit as ruthless. That they didn’t achieve the numbers of murders of Americans, Australians, British etc was not due to their benevolence but their inability to occupy areas with large Western populations. If a Japanese Army had managed to seize Australia or California it would not have gone well for the civilian populations.

    The whole Germany first strategy was probably misguided after Pearl Harbor. We couldn’t do much to stop Germany until 1944 but faced a powerful Japanese fleet that out gunned our own. Without the Miracle at Midway in June,1942 we likely would have lost Hawaii and had Japanese carrier attacks and naval bombardments on West Coast cities.

  22. MarkNiet says:
    @Observator

    “I was shocked to read in a 1942 issue the prediction of the U.S. invasion of Vietnam.”

    Wow, do you still have this edition? You should make this available.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  23. songbird says:

    This idea of bio-centrism is interesting.

    I’ve long thought that society could benefit from policymakers thinking in biological analogies, even without touching on race or heritability. In the past, I’ve naively attributed the obvious dearth of such thinking to lack of imagination or education, but I think the real explanation is more sinister. I think that a non-racist regime is simply not capable of nuanced thinking about biology. I think it has such a natural aversion to biology that it simply cannot utilize the lessons of biological science.

  24. songbird says:
    @Observator

    I wish there was a “greatest hits” version of the long list of books, magazines, etc. that the allies banned, during de-nazification. I imagine that some of the material is very interesting and worthwhile to read.

  25. Trinity says:

    Well, we know who runs (((Marvel))) and (((DC))) comics, the two biggest names in the comic book industry. Seems like everyone from Captain America to Wonder Woman has fought those “evil Nazis” at one time or another.

    Good ole Captain America, a scrawny, blonde, blue-eyed, goyim was so skinny that he had to be injected with some sort of super soldier serum ( good steroids, huh) because Steve Rogers “wanted to serve his country and protect Americans from fascism.” LMAO. America is now more fascist in 2020 under Jewish rule than Germany ever thought about being under Hitler, go figure. Anyhow, IF Marvel or DC comics were being written and illustrated by truth speakers, they would have had Cap and Wonder Woman knocking the hell out of Jewish Bolsheviks like Genrikh Yagoda and Lazar Kaganovich, and that little rodent Lev Bronstein aka Leon Trotsky. Superman might have leveled Leningrad or Stalingrad as well. The Caped Crusader could have captured Jewish propagandist and evil bastard, Ilya Ehrenburg, the sadistic little pig of a man who urged Russian and Mongolian soldiers to rape and kill anything German from animals to humans, from young to the very old.

    It only made sense for Jews to latch on to the comic book industry as a way to indoctrinate young and impressionable minds. Nowadays from what I understand, there are homosexual super heroes, there was a Black version of Captain America or Spider-Man, forget which, a Muslim Green Lantern, haha, and who can forget the mythical “Wakanda.” LMAO.

  26. Cyrano says:

    What made the Nazis tick? It’s actually very simple. Humans are at their beastliest when they believe that they have been wronged by someone. That’s what the mass Nazi hysteria was all about. You see, the Germans were “superior” “race” (yeah right) and yet they had been wronged by such “inferiors” like the Jews, the Slavs and the Communists. Therefore, they were able to commit some of the most appalling atrocities in human history, because they believed that they were simply paying back to those who “wronged” them. Sure. It never occurred to those degenerates that maybe they were not wronged by the Jews, or the Slavs or Communism, but they were wronged by the good old Capitalism. That’s what caused WW2, not the above mentioned holy trinity of Jews, Slavs and Communism. That rotten system caused WW2 by its inability to deal with the Great Depression properly. As bad as the Germans were at blaming factors outside of the realm of real culpability, they were not as bad as what’s taking place today in the western world. Today, the degenerate elites of the west have discovered the “magic formula” of who is to blame for all the ills in this world. According to those elites, the main culprit for all the ills in the world is the white man. The degenerate elites postulate the theory that almost anybody in the world at some point in history has been wronged by the white man. That’s why they encourage 3rd world immigration as a form of reparation for the wrongs committed by the white people. Not just any white people, though. Because of the fact that the white elites are the ones who “discovered” these “atrocities” committed by the whites – they are automatically exonerated from any responsibility themselves. Ultimately, it’s up to the deplorables to pay for all the atrocities committed by the whites. If that’s not the most degenerate idea of all times, I don’t know what is. The belief that the elites can shift the blame of some historic injustices to the lower classes of people of their own race and that they will manage to get away unscathed and harm free is degeneracy of the highest order. Their “awareness” of “historic” injustices committed by people of their own race will not save them. That “awareness” might just buy them some time, but in the end they will pay the price for their idiocy too. They just lack the vision to look that far ahead. There is one saving grace in all of this. The western elites might think that they are the cream de la crop of the white race. But they are not the white race. They are just the worst elements of it. And that thing that I said about the Germans that they were able to commit amazing atrocities based on their belief that they have been “wronged”, – the world should be wary if one day the whole white race (minus their degenerate elites) adopts that attitude – that the white race has been wronged by pretty much everybody at that point. The fallout will be tremendous. One main moral advantage that the Nazi elites had over the current “western” elites is that the Nazi elites identified with their German citizens based on common ethnicity. The US has never had that homogeneity (there are a lot of homos there now, but that doesn’t count) of the population. The US was originally made of hodge-podge of Europeans of different backgrounds, and never had that national cohesion based on genetics like the Germans had. Thus the US elites don’t identify with their “own” people, they identify only with themselves. I guess that’s what makes them truly “exceptional” and what makes everybody else replaceable – except the precious elites. It’s that fear of “replaceability” that drives the degeneracy of the western elites today. In their bright minds, they believe that the only ones who have the capacity to replace them, are people from their own genome – that’s why they import 3rd worlders, whom they claim that they are “equal” to them, but not quite good enough equal to be able to replace them – the unique western elites. They shouldn’t worry about being replaced by people of their own kind – most of them are brainwashed idiots after nearly a century of propaganda. The only thing that might prompt the current western great unwashed to start thinking about replacing their elites is exactly the insane program of replacement of themselves – the ordinary westerners. So the insanity comes a full circle. The mass immigration from the 3rd world was invented in order to prevent the replacement of their elites by the equally genetically capable homegrown population, which actually might give some ideas to domestic population that it’s not them that needs replacing – but their idiotic elites.

    • Replies: @Anon
  27. saggy says:

    The historians – while virtually all acknowledging the great scale of Nazi atrocities in Poland and the Soviet Union

    What complete BS. Yet another article on Unz promoting the hoax.

    • Agree: Carolyn Yeager
    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
  28. Anon[305] • Disclaimer says:
    @Cyrano

    Here’s a tip, Cyrano. You have something called an “enter” key on your keyboard. It can be used to make paragraphs. You just hit the “enter” key a couple of times, and suddenly a giant block of text like your stupid comment becomes much more readable. You might even convince someone your stupid comments are worth reading!

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  29. Anon[305] • Disclaimer says:
    @unit472

    The Japanese had no interest in attacking America, they wanted imperial conquest of Asia. The only reason they even attacked America is because America had been goading Japan and interfering with their plans. What’s the point in accusing Japan of wanting to murder civilians? The fact is that the Allied forces are the ones responsible for murdering Japanese civilians mostly by indiscriminate firebombing, which even our guys admitted was a war crime.

    • Agree: HeebHunter
    • Replies: @Ugetit
  30. @Crawfurdmuir

    HEY !
    Guess what…
    The Founders were…
    WHITE NATIONALISTS !

    And…
    The current insanity that is a Black breeder sow with multiple chirrinz ON WELFARE for EVERYTHING…
    having The Vote…
    would in the early days of this Republic Turned To Oligarchy…
    been considered an hilarious fantastical SICK JOKE.

    Civil War with concurrent Balkanization will see What’s Old Made New Again.

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
  31. @American Asian

    Oriental Hive Mind whiney bitch soyboy Chin Wah dog and bat jerky muncher sez…WHUT ?

    • LOL: GeneralRipper
  32. Cyrano says:
    @Anon

    You know what, that enter key can be quite handy, but it still can’t be used to penetrate your thick skull, you stupid monkey.

    • Replies: @anon
  33. @Verymuchalive

    Something I find striking is how many more gypsies there are than ever before. Sure they do multiply, but still I would have expected their extermination in Nazi occupied Europe, especially Eastern Europe, to have been the easiest as they stand out easily visually given their skin colour, and they would have found it hardest to hide from the scrutinising eyes of selectors for transports. No doubt many were transported or otherwise exterminated but still so many were able to survive. After all many more Jews can pass themselves off as whites or natives of European countries but gypsies stand out distinctly, except those that have almost fully blended.

    • Replies: @Sollipsist
  34. anon[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Cyrano

    Uncivilized Balkans trash like you should be banned from the comments section, you don’t deserve the privilege of commenting on UR. Go comment on some Turkish site instead.

    • Agree: Carolyn Yeager
    • Replies: @Cyrano
    , @Thorfinnsson
  35. Trinity says:

    The average American needs to be set free from deJewification more than any Nazi needed to face denazification.

    First and foremost are the Christian Zionist, just the name itself is an oxymoron just like Judeo-Christian values. Judeo-Christian values?? WHAT? Christianity and Judaism have little in common except maybe the Old Testament.

    Do these Christian Zionist know that even Evangelical Pentecostals like Jimmy Swaggart admit that the “anti-Christ” spoken about in the Bible will be a Jew? There are a few verses in the Bible that many have cited in referencing that the “anti-Christ” will be a Jew. So why would a religion based on recognizing Jesus Christ as the Son Of God allow themselves to be beholden to a religious sect who do not believe that Jesus was the Son Of God. Very, very strange to say the least.

    Next would be the patriotards who feel that Israel is our bestest best friends in the whole wide world. Never mind that Israel has attacked the USS Liberty, bombed American and British installations in Egypt in an effort to start a war between Americans and the West against Egypt by blaming the bombings on the Egyptians, etc. This scenario known as The Lavon Affair sounds eerily similar to 9-11, does it not. Then we have Jonathan Pollard, the Rosenbergs, the 5 Dancing Israelis, speaking of 9-11. Yet, these patriotards like the Christian Zionist are all in for bowing at the feet of people who have absolutely no love, compassion or loyalty whatsoever for them, matter of fact, the average Israeli/Jew has contempt for the gullible goy, especially the White Gentile Christian.

    Anyone seen the latest commercial about sending money to “holocaust survivors” who are suffering during the Covid-19 crisis in Israel? My gawd, what next? smdh. I guess sending A MINIMUM OF 3.8 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR OF AMERICAN TAXPAYER MONEY ISN’T ENUFF FOR A COUNTRY THE SIZE OF NEW JERSEY. smdh. And we all know that Israel receives far more than the reported 3.8 billion in all likelihood.

  36. In our popular culture and intellectual discourse, there is little serious engagement with the Darwinian biological realities underpinning National-Socialist ideology or with the failings of parliamentary democracy, which led many people in the interwar years, even mainstream figures like the godfather of the EU Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, to pine for a different system of government.

    I very much doubt that Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi was a mainstream figure in the interwar years or even widely known. A better case could be made for the Nazi origins of the EEC/EU and that the real godfather of the EU was Walter Hallstein:

    https://www.dr-rath-foundation.org/2016/06/the-hidden-nazi-background-of-walter-hallstein-founding-president-of-the-brussels-eu-commission/

    • Replies: @Guillaume Durocher
  37. Wielgus says:
    @Observator

    Signal was a German Army publication and it toned anti-Semitism down considerably as it was translated into numerous languages (including English) and sought to present the Nazi message in a subtle form. The vagaries of German propaganda affected it, too: one issue of 1940 stressed the tradition of Russian-German state friendship, although my recollection of the article is that it did not directly allude to the USSR. It mentioned German-Russian cooperation at the 1878 Congress of Berlin, slipping in a slighting reference to the British prime minister of the time, Disraeli, who was one of those present. The magazine did not go overboard on it, in keeping with its subtle technique, but a Nazi publication could not present a Jew in a favourable light and it didn’t. The article was clearly designed to sell the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact to audiences who might have found it surprising. This particular theme disappeared after Barbarossa, of course.
    Other propaganda outlets, such as posters, were much less subtle and considerably more anti-Semitic.

  38. Cyrano says:
    @anon

    It looks like it’s you that needs to learn how to post comments on Turkish websites – probably very soon in Turkish too. At least we had a common sense to fight them for close to 5 centuries. While you German degenerates dropped your pants for them in less than 70 years. According to this information there are more than 7 million Turks in Germany today. That’s almost 10% of the population of Germany, you stupid ape.

  39. E_Perez says:

    A very interesting article of Mr. Durocher.

    It comes as no surprise that much of NS values have been in fact the values/virtues of the White Race in general and in many areas they have been pioneers (environment and animal protection, health care,…).

    So what really are the objections to NS, why it is the most evil of all ideologies? Lets analyze the main accusations.

    1) racism
    NS claimed that
    – races exist (which nobody denied at that time)
    – races have or don’t have their own intrinsic values (not interesting to NS Germany)
    – the White Race is the “Aryan” race (which may be a dubious term), not the Germans alone
    – races should have their own nation/country (that’s why NS favored a Jewish state)
    – the German “Volksgemeinschaft” is not open to all races (it needs some German heritage to belong to it)

    2) chauvinism
    To call pre-WWII Germany “chauvinist” is like calling a dog a “quadruped”.
    All nations were chauvinist at that time. There were no more chauvinist countries than Poland and Czechoslovakia, Italy was chauvinist, England was and Mr. Durocher’s France contributed the term to international vocabulary.

    3) Jews
    – Germany had accepted Jews from the east after their (supposed or real) progromes.
    – Jews thanked it by playing an important role in pushing the US into WWI (Balfour declaration) and in Versailles, and their organizations ‘declared war on Germany’ in 1933, so there was a comprehensible anti-semitism in NS-Germany
    – The NS considered Jews a race, which even the current immigration policies of Israel are confirming (if you don’t believe it, try to immigrate)
    – so, logically, before WWII, NS policy was ‘divorce’ (NS Germany wanted Jews to emigrate)
    – during WWII Jews were considered enemies, rounded up and put in camps (as enemy citizens were in most belligerants countries, even the US).
    The “holocaust” need not be discussed here, it has been so sufficiently debunked that it needs legal protection.

    In fact there is not much left to denigrate National Socialism.

    • Agree: Ugetit
    • Thanks: HeebHunter
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    , @Ugetit
  40. Art says:

    Moreover, Germany was unique, even among fascist countries, in functioning as a “racial state”—a nation where the criterion for citizenship was determined by race and heredity. National Socialist Germany approached a biocracy, that is, a government where biomedical ideals and biomedical professionals were central for the regime in both word and deed. (pp. 8-9)

    “biocracy” — Gee today there is another biocracy — it is also fascist and racist – The Jewish State – Israel

  41. Metropole says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    That’s not a bad idea. And all the best examples of white manhood will be able to make a good living spending all their time wanking off.

    • Replies: @Malla
  42. An interesting/informative article. Thank you.

  43. One interesting theme to look at in what might be called the demonology of Nazism is how what is considered ‘demonic’ has evolved in accord with the changing ethical fashions of the West.

    I can remember — back when sexual degeneracy was a bad thing — that it was common to accuse Nazis and the Nazi leadership of various rather improbable forms of sexual deviance and abnormality.

    Then of course increasing emphasis was laid on their racism as we moved into the Sixties and racism became a bad thing. Come the Seventies and Eighties, and it was their sexism that received attention.

    Finally, we traveled full circle. From having been bad because they themselves were supposedly sexual degenerates, Nazis became bad because they persecuted sexual degenerates. Once, Ernst Rohm’s frank homosexuality would have been emphasized. Now, it would probably be considered in bad taste to point it out.

    What the Nazis actually were has become almost irrelevant. We make them into whatever we wish, and what becomes significant is what we make them into. The Nazis become whatever we seek to cast out, to mark as beyond the pale. They become a kind of reverse ideal, the epitomy of what we would not be — and so they keep changing to fit.

  44. @saggy

    As soon as I saw this, right at the beginning of the article, I knew I had to call Durocher on it. Thanks for doing it, saggy. This is a big problem Durocher has – his belief, or his position anyway, that the Slavs were innocent victims of the Germans. He can’t defend it, and doesn’t try, but just states it as a fact, and uses the word “atrocities” without specifying what they are. He is no historian and he admits it. I guess he’s some kind of entertainer.

  45. frontier says:
    @Ray P

    The fearsome Nazis were soyboys.

    More importantly, they were stupid boys, thus the emphasis on aesthetics.

    Article: Nazi aesthetics and themes – whether or not these are framed within a noble struggle against Nazism – continue to enjoy widespread popular appeal.

    No, they don’t. On purely aesthetic grounds, even when removing the swastikas and the retarded meanings behind it, Nazi imagery is vomit-inducing. All characters look like bombastic caricatures of people, very similar to commie propaganda.

    aggressive masculinity and tribalism, but also a will to health, idealism, and a spirit of self-sacrifice

    Add the massive amounts of amphetamines and you get a perfect description of the ideal useful idiots to employ as suicide bombers – not surprisingly, the exact same can be said about ISIS.

  46. @Commentator Mike

    It’s interesting to know that the vaunted EU’s origins aren’t squeaky clean.

    That’s said, bureaucrats believe in nothing & effortlessly bend with the wind. In this sense they are not the “origin” of anything.

  47. Nazis going after Jews had as much to do with WWII as freeing slaves did with the American Civil War, a sidebar at best.

  48. Wally says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    Conditioned a la Pavlov’s dog, you said:

    “The historians – while virtually all acknowledging the great scale of Nazi atrocities in Poland and the Soviet Union … ”

    – But there is no proof of your “great scale of Nazi atrocities”.

    – If you really believed it you would at least attempt to proof it.

  49. Wally says:
    @Hillaire

    “Questionable but profitable holocaust” is a serious understatement.

    – Fraud / scam are better descriptors.

    recommended:

    Depiction of a guided tour of an alleged ‘gassing’ at Auchwitz / from 1978 TV mini-series ‘Holocaust’: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13673

    “I assume the gullible were / are supposed to believe that this depiction is based upon verifiable facts as to how it was all supposedly accomplished.”

  50. @unit472

    Japan suffered a lack of oil the entire Pacific War.

    The reason the IJN attacked Midway wasn’t as a stepping stone to Hawaii. It was to lure the US carrier fleet there and sink it to buy the time for Japan to reinforce its Western Pacific perimeter and increase Dutch East Indies oil production. They never had enough fuel to invade Hawaii or bomb the US West coast.

  51. gotmituns says:

    Anyone who really wants to get to the root of National Socialism must read Alfred Rosenberg’s, “Myth of the Twentieth Century,” no comic book. Take notes as you read, read more than once. Hitler panned the book only because as a man working to bring his nation out of a depression he had no time to sit and actually digest what Rosenberg was saying. But over a million other people took the book seriously, including the allies, who executed Rosenberg for writing it and refusing to recant.

  52. @Carolyn Yeager

    Mrs. Yeager, what do you think of German policies towards occupied Poland? Or the various Soviet territories?

    I would be happy to look at your suggested sources on the matter.

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
    , @Jaxa
  53. @Wally

    There’s much more to the matter of Nazi atrocities than just the Jews. I think it’s fair to say that, on the whole, German occupation of Western Europe was no more brutal than, say, that of Napoleon. The East is different, just have a look at the annihilation of the elite and population policies in occupied Poland.

    I am of course open to alternative sources and accounts.

    • Agree: frontier
    • Replies: @Wally
    , @utu
  54. @gotmituns

    tl/dr? Chapoutot takes the book quite seriously.

    • Replies: @gotmituns
  55. neutral says:

    The appeal is simple, it was the last time whites ruled themselves. There is nothing appealing in this jew run world, which is why so many people live their lives in escapist fiction.

  56. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    Early Soviet tolerance of homosexuality had disappeared by the 1930s, and homosexuality was described in the USSR as a “fascist perversion” with Röhm etc as the classic example. A Communist leaflet circulated in 1934 in Germany’s Rhineland – illegally of course – reached the optimistic conclusion that the Night of the Long Knives was “the beginning of the end of the Nancy Boy government”.
    The shape-shifting of outcasts is not unique to Nazis, though. Witches, real or presumed, tended to take on different guises in the 16th and 17th centuries. During the Red Scares in the USA it was the same with Communists. One writer about the period, David Caute, noted that Americans had a more demonic view of Communists, separated from reality, than did the French, even though the PCF was a major party. According to Caute, a French anti-Communist might well have feared the followers of Moscow but in a country where one in four of the people he passed in the street voted for the party, certain demonic assumptions about Communists could not be entertained.

  57. After getting an earful from a German about how she couldn’t understand how anyone could have wanted to be a National Socialist, I remarked that this was easy to see in retrospect, but one had to see it through the eyes of one living in 1930s Germany to understand their appeal, and jokingly added, “Just because they were Nazis doesn’t mean that everything they did was bad.” To my surprise, she replied, “My Grandmother used to say that.”

    • Thanks: Ugetit
  58. Ugetit says:
    @Wally

    “The historians – while virtually all acknowledging the great scale of Nazi atrocities in Poland and the Soviet Union … ”

    Yeah, that pissed me off too.

    Generally this dude is worth reading, but then he then sullies it all with a load of utter crap like that. Gratuitously genuflecting at the altar of PC and rank stupidity is an excellent way to discredit oneself. Besides, haven’t we all been constantly overdosed on that sort of overblown rubbish already?

    What the …???

  59. @Colin Wright

    Portrayal of Germans in older British war films seemed to be more sympathetic in my view. They were shown as honourable and worthy opponents.

    It seems back in those days, there was an element of Clean Wehrmacht in the films, the real baddies were the SS

    Nowadays they are just portrayed either as sadistic zombies or as anonymous, faceless helmets in the distance like in Dunkirk or Fury

  60. Rob McX says:

    Many demoliberals are rediscovering the original Socratic critique of democracy grounded in expertise, even as they still claim to loath “authoritarian” systems of government. Their solution? To hypocritically tighten official and unofficial censorship by governments and social media.

    True. In their view, the people should be allowed to choose their rulers only if they’re blinkered enough by censorship to choose people who want to destroy them.

  61. Ugetit says:
    @unit472

    Strange how easily the Japanese were rehabilitated after WW2 when they were even more disciplined/fanatical than Hitler’s armies and every bit as ruthless.

    You have to be kidding.

    Are you aware of the concept of war propaganda? You want “fanatic”? “Ruthless”? Brush up on the history of the Bolsheviks and other Marxist swine, including Lenin, Churchill, and FDR, and you’ll see who wrote the book on “fanatic” and “ruthless.” At least Stalin had some method to his murders when he knocked off a bunch of them, including one of the depraved kings of ruthlessness, ‘Ol Ice Pick Trotsky.

    “During the graduation of General Staff officers from the Military
    Academy in May of this year, among other things, Stalin said, ‘War with Germany is coming whether Germany wants it or not.’” 46

    On August 6, 1941, a German record referring to the Artillery Com¬
    mander of the 49 th Armored Division, Colonel Liubimov, stated:

    “The prisoner confirmed earlier statements that Stalin, in early May,
    during the graduation of officers from the Military Academy, said, ‘War with Germany is coming in any case.’” 47

    -Joachim Hoffmann, Stalin’s War of Extermination, p 41. (2001)
    https://archive.org/stream/stwxt/sttrmn_djvu.txt

    For the sole purpose of entering the war in the Pacific, FDR sacrificed thousands by effectively sending them to their deaths at PH. Remember, too, Truman’s use of “the bombs.”

    Fanatic? Ruthless????

  62. anarchyst says:
    @Trinity

    We have to get away from the “judeo-Christian” mindset…
    Using the “Old Testament” for “laws” is wrong. Yes, the Ten Commandments are a good guide which proscribes certain behaviors, but the rest of mosaic law relies on a vindictive, vengeful “god” to exact “punishment” on “his people”.
    That my work fine for jews, as they have their supremacist “Talmud” to rely on, but “for the rest of us”, it won’t wash.
    Judaism is an insular belief system that shuns outsiders, prohibits proselytization, and promotes a form of supremacy, relegating all gentiles (non-jews) to the status of livestock-subhumans with souls, only to be used for the advancement and benefit of jews.
    In fact, slavery (of goyim) is still condoned and encouraged in the jewish Talmud. In addition, the jewish Talmud condones pedophilia, allowing lecherous old jews to rape children as long as they are “three years and a day” of age.
    The barbaric practice of circumcision (male genital mutilation) is also suspect, the mohel fellating the infant after the “deed is done” passing on (who knows what) STDs to the infant. Sick…
    In fact, every jewish “holiday” (holy day) is based on the celebration of genocide and destruction of gentiles.
    Our present troubles are a result of a jewish cabal taking over political decisions in our nominally “multicultural” country.
    Tying Judaism to Christianity was a clever trick used by the jews to “cement” their claim to the “land of Israel” and of the covenant, to which I reply, “God is not a real estate agent”.
    Jews rejected the covenant when they murdered Jesus Christ. Their covenant with (their) God was then “null and void”.
    It is the flawed Schofield translation of the Bible that elevated jews to the status of Christianity’s “elder brothers”, which was then reinforced by the Catholic (flawed) “Vatican II Ecumenical Council” in the 1960s.
    I cringe when I hear well-meaning people talk about out judeo-Christian heritage.
    Nothing could be further from the truth.
    The god of judaism is a vengeful god, totally unlike the merciful and welcoming God of Christianity.
    Christianity welcomes ALL, regardless of nationality or social status, not true of judaism.
    Jews DID murder Jesus Christ and TOOK FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR DOING SO.
    Sad to say, even the present-day (post-Vatican II ecumenical council) Catholic church has bought into absolving the jews for Jesus Christ’s murder.
    As is the case, even today, the jews got others, the Romans to do their dirty work for them, the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.
    How can Christians have the same values as the Jews; the very people who denounced and betrayed the founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ, and call for his execution (by others, of course, that is the Jewish way).
    It makes absolutely no sense at all.
    Jews have no respect for Christianity, for Jesus Christ or Mary, his mother, who are both honored as Prophets in Islam, but instead, Jews spit on hearing their names and do the same while passing a Christian of any kind or a Christian Church in Israel. They have no respect for Christians or any other religion.
    It is time the Jewish lobbies and the American Government leaders as well as the evangelical Christian leaders who mislead the poor American young into joining the military and believing that they are doing something for God and Christianity by fighting Israel’s wars were named, shamed and arrested and tried for treason.
    In a perverse sort of way, israel’s favorite “war song” is “Onward Christian Soldiers”…
    There…I’ve said it…

    • Agree: Trinity, R2b, Clay Alexander
    • Replies: @John Q Duped
  63. Ugetit says:
    @Anon

    The Japanese had no interest in attacking America, they wanted imperial conquest of Asia.

    Not all of them. The militarists were those mostly culpable in that respect. Even then, like the Nazis, they were probably more interested in not being the subjects of imperial conquests and Marxism’s (Talmudic) globalism where the goyim are the eternal slaves of the “chosen” race.

  64. Wielgus says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    The first clip is from The Battle of Britain – Adolf Galland, an ace fighter pilot before becoming a senior Luftwaffe commander, was one of the advisors on the film set.

  65. @E_Perez

    One element of German national socialism was expansionism. Hitler first decided that all ethnic Germans needed to be in the Third Reich, hence union with Austria, the Sudetenland and the demand for the return of Danzig. These might have been aggressive, but were well within German historical experience. But occuping Bohemia and Moravia, and setting up some kind of protectorate in Slovakia went well beyond ethinic German unity. And Barbarossa was a clear attempt to gain Lebensraum, at the expense of the Baltic countries, Belorussia, Ukraine and Russia.

    A national socialism confined to even an expanded Germany might have made for an interesting experiment, but that’s not how it worked out.

  66. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    The British upper class mingled with the money types saw their deplorables, who provided the fighting men, as expendable thus no need to take care of them, just as the American elite, now heavily involved with the same money types, see the lower class as equally expendable hence don’t see the need to take care of them… hopefully, the Americans will better in the long run compared to their cousins across the pond given that they still have their guns.

    • Agree: Old and Grumpy
  67. Rob McX says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    …along the road between Aachen and Brussels one saw the contrast between the German soldiers, bronzed and clean-cut from a youth spent in the sunshine on an adequate diet, and the first British war prisoners, with their hollow chests, round shoulders, pasty complexions and bad teeth- tragic examples of the youth that England had neglected so irresponsibly in the years between the wars.

    It’s over 30 years since I read that book, yet that passage sticks in my mind to this day. The 1920s and 1930s were times of horrific poverty in Britain, with widespread malnutrition.

  68. Ugetit says:
    @E_Perez

    – during WWII Jews were considered enemies, rounded up and put in camps (as enemy citizens were in most belligerants countries, even the US).

    Overall yours is a good comment, but that particular concept could use a bit of refining.

    Here you go…

    Dr. Kastein’s presentation is typical: he says the Inquisition persecuted “heretics and peoples of alien creeds” and then adds, “that is to say, principally Jews”, and from that point on he conveys the impression of a solely Jewish persecution. (In the same way. in our century. Hitler’s persecution was through four stages of propagandist misrepresentation transformed from one of “political opponents” into one of “political opponents and Jews”, then of “Jews and political opponents”, and last, “of Jews”).

    -Douglas Reed, “the Controversy of Zion,” p. 99

    Elsewhere, Reed makes the correct point that it was violent Commies who were rounded up because they were Commies and/ or violent, not because they were Jews.

    All emphases mine.

  69. @Diversity Heretic

    After reading Mein Kampf , it struck me how much Hitler reminded me more of Austria’s Metternich than some sort of German nationalist. What really was the point of going East if it weren’t to do some old Austrian business? For that matter why even cut a military alliance with the Italians? In the end most of the National Socialists were unwitting tools of the globalists. Pity since WWII was pivotal for facilitating the mess we’re currently in.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    , @fnn
  70. TG says:

    “There is no work of fiction that cannot be improved by the addition of Nazis.”

    – Attributed to a noted military historian and editor.

  71. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    I thought of that later, in the May days of 1940, when along the road between Aachen and Brussels one saw the contrast between the German soldiers, bronzed and clean-cut from a youth spent in the sunshine on an adequate diet, and the first British war prisoners, with their hollow chests, round shoulders, pasty complexions and bad teeth– tragic examples of the youth that England had neglected so irresponsibly in the years between the wars.

    My father fought in the Belgian trenches in WWI. He was still so traumatized he never once spoke about it to me. So when the WWI documentary They Shall Not Grow Old came out two years ago I felt obligated to watch it. It was a difficult film to watch, but not just for senseless killing and scenes of death. The British soldiers even then overwhelmingly displayed all the characteristics I’ve bolded in the above description. It was not just a between-the-wars problem.

    Compare that with the situation today. Even at the start of the pandemic it was obvious to anyone who has an interest in and ability to read medical literature that adequate Vitamin D would be one of the more important preventative measures against Covid19. That has now been corroborated by perhaps two or three studies as well. The best way to ensure that we get adequate Vitamin D is of course to encourage us to get out into the fresh air and sunshine.

    That did not happen. We were told to lock ourselves up inside and stay out of the sun. Then we were told to cover our faces with those masky things that block the sun from the one part of our bodies that were always exposed. (Only just this past week do I read that the Brits are starting to give Vitamin D to their nursing home patients.)

    The attitudes of our masters towards us have changed but little in the past 150 years. Was WWII an episode in Cancel Culture?

    • Agree: frontier
  72. gotmituns says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    Thanks much sir, Through googling Chapoutot, I came up with “The Politics of Despair” authored by Fritz Stern. I’ll give that a try.

  73. @Old and Grumpy

    Hitler was, after all, Austrian; born in Branau am Inn and spending a considerable portion of his youth in Vienna. He did not want, however, to serve in the polyglot Austro-Hungarian Army when World War I began, so he petitioned the King of Bavaria to be allowed to serve in a Bavarian unit within the German Army. The Third Reich had little interest in an Italian alliance–German net assessors before the war concluded that German interests would be better served by Italian neutrality than belligerance on the German side–a point of view that proved true. Hitler was more interested in an alliance with Franco’s Spain but El Caudillo had better geopolitical sense than to ally with the Third Reich;

    Your characterization of Hitler as seeking somehow to recreate and expand the Austro-Hungarian Empire strikes me as intriguing; a point of view that I had never considered. It might even have been a factor in his decision to turn the Panzer divisions to the south in August 1941 rather than drive on Moscow.

  74. Trinity says:

    So lemme get this straight, Whites are demonized for taking the Indians land and colonialism by the Jewish publishing companies, (((historians))), Hymiewood, etc. And yet, World Jewry was seeking to conquer White Europeans and Europe for a long, long time. (((French Revolution, Bolshevik Revolution, Spanish Civil War, and of course World War II. ))) Long before Mein Kampf was published, the book La France Juive published in 1886 was the most widely read book in France. It dealt with the JQ in the nation of France. Still smarting from its defeat in the Franco-Prussian War, the French, particularly the military became paranoid of the Jewish influence in France. You very well might suggest a Jewish influence in the Franco-Prussian War along of course with WWI as well as the other aforementioned events in European history.

    So anyhow, we can see that Jews were seeking to colonize Europe and Europeans subversively for a long, long time, and one could even make the claim today that the West has indeed been colonized by Jews. The British Empire was under heavy Jewish influence for centuries and is to this day, so spare me the White man bad, Injun good theme when it comes from a Jewish narrative. And isn’t it funny how people will demonize the White man for killing off the Indian and taking his land, but yet where is the blame for the Jew doing the same identical thing to Palestine and Palestinians. I admit I do not take pride in what happened to the Native American, no decent person would, but for a Jew to criticize this part of history and ignore what has happened to Palestinians is beyond the pale. But then again when it comes to lying, double standards, hypocrisy, and (((chutzpah))) the Jew has no equal.

    Now back to those evil “Nazis” and the Austrian with the funny moustache. The Germans were doing nothing but fighting for their survival against World Jewry. The Germans actually had the nerve to refuse to be under the Jewish boot heel like much of Eastern Europe, imagine the nerve of Hitler and the Germans, not wanting to be subjugated and servile to “the Chosen.” Germany and Hitler are only guilty of doing what any creature on earth has the God given right to do, and that is the right to defend itself. IF we lived in a just, decent and honest world, World Jewry and their allies would be demonized for the atrocities they committed in WWII and not the other way around.

    • Agree: Malla
  75. 37 says:
    @James O'Meara

    “…weapons that ended the war. Science!”

    Another false historical (by the victors) narrative.

    Formally perhaps, but hardly militarily/tactically.

    Hiroshima & Nagasaki (the epicenter of Christianity in Japan at the time) were nothing but tests to see the results of nuclear weaponry.

    Much in the same way that our own troops were used as guinea pigs in the immediately ensuing years.

  76. @Diversity Heretic

    With the caveat: Hitler hated the Habsburg monarchy and its perpetual attempts to find messy compromises between its component ethnies. He was clearly shaped and shocked by German-Austrians’ decline from hegemony in Austria-Hungary and gradual subjection to a non-German majority. In that sense German hegemony over a multiethnic Reich came very naturally to Hitler and probably his Austrian experience also accounts for his obsession with Czechoslovakia. A more ecumenical approach probably would have yielded an Axis victory.

    • Agree: Skeptikal
  77. TGD says:

    Re the Nazis “grand development plan” for northern Europe, one component was Himmler’s “Lebensborn” project, where SS soldiers copulated with acceptable Aryan females both in Germany and the occupied countries. This was applied big time in Norway. Now, anyone who has visited Norway probably noticed the tall statuesque young females and beautiful platinum blond children there.

    These are not products of the Lebensborn. They are native Norwegians. The Lebensborn children were ostracized and shunned and suffered a miserable childhood, which still continues.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-chosen-ones-the-war-children-born-to-nazi-fathers-in-a-sinister-eugenics-scheme-speak-out-771017.html

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  78. E_Perez says:
    @Diversity Heretic

    “One element of German national socialism was expansionism. Hitler first decided that all ethnic Germans needed to be in the Third Reich, hence union with Austria, the Sudetenland and the demand for the return of Danzig”

    This distorts the facts a little too much and defies every concept of self-determination.

    – National Socialism ideology was (declared to be) for Germany, not for export, contrary to Communism and democracy/capitalism, which could work only when the whole world is under their heels.

    – Sudeten and Danzig were both 97% German and the Austrian parliament voted for joining Germany 1n 1919. This was forbidden by the universal champions of liberty, democracy and self-determination.

    “But occupying Bohemia and Moravia, and setting up some kind of protectorate in Slovakia went well beyond ethinic German unity”

    Although president Emil Hácha called for it, yes, this was an error.
    As was the British protectorate of Palestine, the French protectorate of Syria/Lebanon, the US “protectorate” of Hawaii, and so on. But, hey, wait: These weren’t white people and they didn’t call for protection, so these protectorates were justified.

    “And Barbarossa was a clear attempt to gain Lebensraum, at the expense of the Baltic countries, Belorussia, Ukraine and Russia.”

    No, Barbarossa was a clear preventive strike against a pending attack, the Baltic countries didn’t exist at that time, they had been swallowed by Soviet expansionism. And before WWII Poles and Czechs took Lebensraum from Germany.

    • Agree: L.K
    • Replies: @karel
  79. @gotmituns

    You’re (we’re all) in luck. Thomas Dalton is working on a new translation of Rosenberg’s “Myth” that he says is much more reader-friendly. I myself did not finish reading the book back in the days when I was a more ready and willing reader than I am now. You’re right that its an important book for understanding National Socialism. The new translation should be out within the year.

  80. R2b says:

    Its not a race war.
    Its a religious war.
    Now we have a White man, a resurrected carcas, speaking english, with a prussian accent, resetting the World.
    A true nazi goul haunting us with corona-bollocks.
    As Jacques Ellul said, Hitler won the war.
    He, Hitler, disliked the Old Testament, just like The Rabbis, who replaced the commandments of God, with the tradition of the Elders.
    Nazis and Jewish supremacists are one of a feather.
    That said, I dont believe the victors.
    We lack a murder-weapon.
    We lack the corpses.
    We lack documentary evidence.
    Faurisson asked the crucial question.
    Kollerstrom pointed to the cyanid-problem, which he solved.
    Likewise Rudolf.
    But that doesn’t dissolve Hitler.
    Is he really that interesting.
    Two fronts and Dunkirk.

  81. Che Guava says:
    @Joe Paluka

    I agree, except for True Romance, where only wrote the script, everything is over-rated. I have seem every one, except Django (I am not impressed by someone turning one of the best Macaroni westerns into some kind of race hate bullshit) and Inglourious (same thing, also do want to see such pandering).

    Most of them have their great and very bad points.

    However, I was fortunate enough to see Once upon a Time in Hollywood this summer, on the big screen.

    A true masterpiece.

  82. Peter Frost says: • Website

    Alexis Carrel had a strong influence on Pierre Trudeau (a former Canadian prime minister). While at college, he described Carrel’s book L’homme, cet inconnu as “a summary of all the sciences and the philosophies. For that it’s arduous [to read] but it’s passionately interesting. … It’s a book one must completely assimilate.”

    There are parallel’s between Trudeau’s writings and Carrel’s. In his manifesto for a national revolution, Trudeau wrote:

    Human equality being considered neither desirable nor possible, an aristocracy or an elite may form freely, deriving its worth not so much from wealth, which will be limited by legislation, as from the more human qualities of moral and intellectual excellence.

    This corresponds closely, even in the wording, to Carrel’s book:

    It is chiefly the intellectual and moral deficiencies of the political leaders, and their ignorance, which endanger modern nations. … But, despite the immense sums spent on education, we have failed to develop completely their intellectual and moral activities. Even in the elite of the population, consciousness often lacks harmony and strength. … Indeed, human beings are equal. But individuals are not. … To disregard all these inequalities is very dangerous. The democratic principle has contributed to the collapse of civilization in opposing the development of an elite. (Carrel, 1939, pp. 22, 140, 271.)

    We see this same thinking after the war, in an article written by Trudeau in 1948 for the Montreal weekly Notre temps. In it, he criticized Canada’s participation in the war:

    Thus our leaders believed in government of the people for the people but not by the people. They nursed a secret thought that the people can err, that the elite’s duty is to save this formless mass that is led by passion rather than reason and which may not want to be saved [malgré elle]. Certainly, there are things to say in favor of that theory, which is called elite theory, and against the convention that 51% of the population always has a monopoly on wisdom. But we could not help but be astonished that we were being called up to serve under the flag (God knows which one!) precisely to fight theories in other places that were being brazenly applied at home. And we had to conclude that our “elite” was seeking to save by force of arms something else than democracy, and perhaps something less honorable.

    Essentially, Trudeau was arguing that elites are inevitable. The question is whether the elite serves the nation or itself

    Were other postwar leaders influenced by Alexis Carrel?

  83. @brabantian

    Thanks for this. I’m always learning something new in the comments section!

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
  84. lysias says:
    @Crawfurdmuir

    The ordinary farmers of Attica who appear in Aristophanes’s comedies were Athenian citizens. The urban poor who rowed Athens’s triremes were citizens. As Athens’s democracy became fully developed, there was pay for fulfilling civic functions: attending the Assembly, serving on juries, serving in the Council. The urban poor eagerly made themselves available for these tasks, so that they would get the pay.

    One of the main reasons Rome succeeded against its rivals was that it was by far the most generous in granting its citizenship to surrounding peoples. By the 1st century B.C. all inhabitants of Italy were Roman citizens. By the 1st century A.D., local elites like Paul were Roman citizens. Caracalla around 200 gave the citizenship to all free men in the Roman Empire.

    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
  85. @Guillaume Durocher

    Thank you, Guillaume. (By the way, I’m not “Mrs. Yeager,” since that would mean Yeager is my married name. It is my birth name; the Yeager’s in my life are my blood relatives.)

    Please look at the following sources for a start – I think they would help you understand the larger situation in which the war developed as it did. Very important. The anti-Nazis would have us focus only on what took place after war was unleashed. Once at war, attitudes are hardened. But we must understand why war was unleashed and who wanted it, for what purposes. Yes?

    Podcasts
    https://carolynyeager.net/hitler-and-slavs
    with special attention to Part 3 and 4:
    Poland – the Great Pretender https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-hitler-and-slavs-3
    How Poland became such a regional troublemaker https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-hitler-and-slavs-4
    Ukrainian nationalism
    https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-hitler-and-slavs-6

    Articles
    How the Poles conspired with the Americans to falsely blame Germany for “aggression” against Poland in 1939.
    https://carolynyeager.net/gleiwitz-%E2%80%9Cfalse-flag%E2%80%9D-incident-pure-fiction
    Poland claims 6 million of its citizens were killed during WWII, half (3 million) of them Jews. This is a lie. https://carolynyeager.net/search-wwii-mass-graves

    Auschwitz
    https://carolynyeager.net/auschwitz-underground-guided-tour

    Poland now demands “reparations”
    https://carolynyeager.net/shameless-poles-use-falsified-history-demand-more-money-hard-working-germans

    From The Scriptorium
    The Polish Atrocities Against the German Minority in Poland
    https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/atrocities/pagmp000.html
    Poland from the Inside
    https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/polandinside/pfi00.html
    Unknown History of the 1939 German-Polish Conflict
    https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/wrsynopsis.html
    Death in Poland: The Fate of the Ethnic Germans
    https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/deathinpoland/dp00.html
    Long Night’s Journey Into Day
    https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/longnightsjourney/lnjid00.html

    Soviet Union
    https://carolynyeager.net/goebbels-vlasov-irving-question
    https://carolynyeager.net/goebbels-vlasov-irving-question-part-2

  86. @Carolyn Yeager

    The new translation should be out within the year.

    Dalton’s translation of Mein Kampf was certainly far superior to the previous attempts, I am looking forward to his translation of Rosenberg. By “within the year” do you mean by the end of this year or within a period of one year?

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
  87. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    The latter. But maybe sooner rather than later.

  88. gibby says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Where’s the Nazi’s genocidal ideation? Where’s a Nazi equivalent of Germany Must Perish Or Ilya Ehrenburg’s booklet simply titled Kill in which he wrote the following:

    “The Germans are not human beings. From now on, the word ‘German’ is the most horrible curse. From now on, the word ‘German’ strikes us to the quick. We have nothing to discuss. We will not get excited. We will kill. If you have not killed at least one German a day, you have wasted that day … If you cannot kill a German with a bullet, then kill him with your bayonet. If your part of the front is quiet and there is no fighting, then kill a German in the meantime … If you have already killed a German, then kill another one – there is nothing more amusing to us than a heap of German corpses. Don’t count the days, don’t count the kilometers. Count only one thing: the number of Germans you have killed. Kill the Germans! … – Kill the Germans! Kill!”

    Germany Must Perish by Theodore Kaufman lays out a detailed plan for the sterilization and extermination of the Germanic peoples yet for all the BS I hear about genocidal Nazi’s there seems to be no authentic genocidal propaganda created by them. Where are the books and pamphlets making the case to the Nazi public that they need to exterminate some folks?

    • Agree: MrVoid, Fox, HeebHunter
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  89. lysias says:
    @Peter Frost

    Robert Michels’s Iron Law of Oligarchy holds that, whatever the ostensible form of government, in fact an elite governs. Josiah Ober in his book “Knowledge and Democracy” argues that Athenian democracy, with its use of sortition (the lot) to appoint average citizens to government functions and offices, was an exception to Michels’s rule. Athens of course had an elite, but its power was limited and it was often overruled. And the elite resented this, as we can see from the writings of people like Plato and Thucydides.

    • Replies: @Guillaume Durocher
  90. Malla says:
    @Diversity Heretic

    And Barbarossa was a clear attempt to gain Lebensraum, at the expense of the Baltic countries, Belorussia, Ukraine and Russia.

    Bullshit, Barbarossa was a pre-emptive strike against a planned Soviet invasion of Central and Western Europe.

  91. @lysias

    Athens is an interesting case of an often quite effective direct democracy. Arguably Athens also had a political elite. Especially those with the rhetorical skills to sway the Assembly or jurors. Pericles first among them.

  92. Agent76 says:

    Nov 12, 2020 Why I Love an Incompetent Government

    A lot of tiny tyrants will never have the opportunity to be as effective as Hitler, thank god, but they would reach such evil heights if they could. And they would do it in the name of their righteous cause that they care so deeply about.

    • Replies: @HeebHunter
  93. Malla says:
    @Metropole

    And all the best examples of white manhood will be able to make a good living spending all their time wanking off.

    Watching Jew created porn!!! Oy Vey!!!

  94. Keltikus says:

    Thanks to Durocher for this generally excellent article.

    I’ve long questioned the extent and severity of German atrocities in Poland
    and the East–the Poles and the Soviets don’t seem to have been able to come
    up with anything as well documented as Katyn.

    Durocher’s general acceptance of those atrocity accusations is most perplexing in his
    formuation “The historians–while virtually all acknowledging the great scale of
    Nazi atrocities…” From this, the unsuspecting reader might take it that the likes of
    Koonz, Proctor, and the rest of the academic pack only grudgingly concede “the great
    scale of Nazi atrocities.”

    But in fact these historians don’t acknowledge “Nazi atrocities”–they rapturously wallow in them.

  95. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    ‘Portrayal of Germans in older British war films seemed to be more sympathetic in my view. They were shown as honourable and worthy opponents…’

    I’ve only heard about the genre second-hand — but weren’t German U-boat skippers in British ‘B’ films of the sixties pretty vile? Surface and machine-gun the survivors in the water ‘n stuff?

    It could be. After all, the U-Boat arm was the one that had the most to do with the most onerous aspect of the war from the British point of view: the unending material deprivation. Nobody over forty would want to see them as chivalrous knights of the sea. Not to mention all those civilian sailors drowning…the U-boat arm wouldn’t be very popular in Liverpool et al.

    …If there’s anything to this in the first place, it’d be interesting if the Germans had been permitted to be similarly uninhibited. Scene: a Bomber Command base in 1944. Having finished torturing a kitten to death, Group Captain Trevor Double-Hammer Bottomwood suits up for the night’s mission…

  96. @TGD

    ‘Re the Nazis “grand development plan” for northern Europe, one component was Himmler’s “Lebensborn” project, where SS soldiers copulated with acceptable Aryan females both in Germany and the occupied countries…”

    I assumed that was mythology, along with soap made from Jewish fat and lampshades made from human skin. Weren’t the ‘Lebensborn’ homes just shelters for unwed mothers?

    • Replies: @Mulegino1
  97. Did I miss it or was their no mention of Lothrop Stoddard’s Into The Darkness ?

    • Replies: @Guillaume Durocher
  98. Che Guava says:

    Signal,

    I read and looked at some issues, and a book on it, in libraries. What struck me at the time (apart from the cheerful tone!) was how obviously this had been the model for Life mag. and others from the U.S.A. Imitation being the highest form of flattery, Goebbels was certainly a genius there, and in many other ways. I have read much of his writing, on his own life (autobio and diaries), political speech, others.

    Very intelligent.

    I find the constant claims of western and zio idiots re. ‘the big lie very funny. Both Hitler and Goebbels wrote of it only as a tactic of their enemies, the former more easily taken out of context.

    Both said that the best propaganda was to tell the trtuth.

  99. @gibby

    ‘Where’s the Nazi’s genocidal ideation? Where’s a Nazi equivalent of Germany Must Perish Or Ilya Ehrenburg’s booklet simply titled Kill in which he wrote the following…’

    Some people talk the talk, others walk the walk?

  100. @anarchyst

    Probably most of the Scofield Reference Bible was written by Jews because the felon Cyrus Scofield wasn’t smart enough nor able to do it all on his own. The Jews stamped his name on it and mass marketed the book as only the tribe can do while money was slipped to many leading Christian Protestant clergy to aid the scam.
    One has to question whether the New Testament is also flawed and accomplished by the same people. Often the Old Testament says one thing while the New Test. says the exact opposite. For Yahweh’s people the Old Test. said to be separate from outsiders but the New Test says all are equal and mixing is right, all races and all people are the same.
    The same thing occurs in the NT itself … i.e. “Love your enemies, do good to them, welcome them while hating your family, yourself and your spouse and children.” Those aren’t my words they are from the New Testament spoken (supposedly) by Jesus.
    In other words God is a God who can’t make his mind up and changes it often. Then again humans may have changed his Word which is more probable. No Christian on earth could ever keep all the new rules in the New Testament. Many are driven to madness trying …..

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  101. Wielgus says:
    @Diversity Heretic

    No. Hitler despised the A-H Empire. Technically he was an A-H draft dodger but the German authorities never turned him over to be conscripted by Austria-Hungary in WW1, leaving him be as a soldier in a Bavarian regiment in the German Reich. Continuing any A-H project was the last thing on his mind.

  102. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    Certain German films expressed anti-British propaganda in WW2. A Life For Ireland and The Fox Of Glenarvon depicted British oppression of the Irish, and Ohm Krüger showed them as oppressors of the Boers. I have seen the last of these films and it is pretty virulent, I know of the plots of the other two only from reviews.

  103. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    iirc, Spirit … Sink the Bismarck! (1960) drew very irate protests from British nationalists because it painted the Germans as such bumbling idiots it became hard to explain how samesaid idiots tore the Royal Navy ™ (pbuhn) a new one whenever they were outnumbered only 2-to-1 😛
    But you knew that of course …

    My impression is the (((British))) ones are the most hate-filled;
    the German ones made under the still fresh impression are the most neutral;
    in the American ones (there´s a sociological study on that) the dying enemy always squeal like pigs while Johnny waxes profound about apple pie an sheet.

    But what M. Durocher meant (and I agree) is there is a morbid erotic fascination with Nazi imagery in certain circles, and not only in Jewish BDSM dens.
    Tiens …

    https://cdn7.bigcommerce.com/s-ydriczk/products/48019/images/47885/ss2223624_-_photograph_of_charlotte_rampling_as_lucia_atherton_from_il_portiere_di_notte_available

    Charlotte, Charlotte … how could you? 😀

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Orville H. Larson
  104. Wally says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    – IOW, you still cannot present the requested proof for your claimed “great scale of Nazi atrocities”, so you dodge.

    I remind you, Gillaume, that it’s your mentioned “historians” who claim that millions upon millions of Jews & ‘others’ human remains exist in known locations, yet there are no such human remains.

    you said: “I am of course open to alternative sources and accounts.”

    – OK then, good for you, here is just one of your “great Nazi atrocities” utterly debunked, once again, no claimed human remains:

    Babi Yar: The [alleged] Einsatzgruppen ‘Killings’: https://www.unz.com/article/babi-yar/
    !! Excavation Result: No Human Remains of alleged 34,000 Jews as claimed at Babi Yar !! In fact, no remains period.’: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11314
    79th anniversary of ‘Babi Yar Massacre’ Fraud: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13562
    plus
    What Happened to Jews Sent to the Aktion Reinhardt Camps?: by John Wear : https://www.unz.com/article/what-happened-to-jews-sent-to-the-aktion-reinhardt-camps/
    much more at:
    https://www.unz.com/topic/holocaust/feature/
    More where those came from.

  105. Still trying to try to understand how people are simultaneously pro-Hitler, pro-Nazi, and pro-Russia. It is apparently the new normal for some, romanicizing aspects of an era and place that they never lived through combined with the present situation about Russia, and while the focus has been on discrediting the holocaust, the fact that Nazis and Germans fought against eachother in WW2 is justified since Russia is no longer communist, in other words, it was justified for the Nazis to do what they did to Russians since they were communists, but it was more than that, it was also about the land and power. So are they suggesting that Russia and Germany merge and resurect Hitler as their new national leader?

    Andrea Iravani

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  106. @Colin Wright

    …it’d be interesting if the Germans had been permitted to be similarly uninhibited. Scene: a Bomber Command base in 1944. Having finished torturing a kitten to death, Group Captain Trevor Double-Hammer Bottomwood suits up for the night’s mission…

  107. Tom67 says:

    I am German and I have to say that I really appreciate your writing. Not that I agree with all of it. Far from it! I also dare say that some things you get wrong as your information is incomplete. Like about German jews.
    But wow, as a way of looking at things Nazi in a dispassionate way you really have things to teach. I might add that I have read quite a few of your other articles by now. I believe only a Frenchman is able to do that. I recently read Dominique Venner on the Freikorps. There is really no book like that in German. None at all. Maybe there are also books in German that look at France in a reciprocal similar way.
    I live in a place that was settled by French protestants who had fled to Germany. There is still quite a bit of French in the local dialect. Just a few hundred meters from where I write this there´s a forest track that is called Pariser Weg. And most boundary markers here date from after the French revolution when Napoleon remade Germany. So there is a very deep connection to France. Just as there is certainly a very deep connection vice versa. After all Charlemagne stands at the beginning of both of our countries. Actually the far right in Germany today is inspired and very influences by France. Benoist and Elements.
    I just hope and pray that this coming together will be productive and not end mutual recrimination. I believe we stand and fall together. I fear the latter is more likely. But let us hope for the future and let Hitler finally be history. History in the French sense and not the German sense.

    • Replies: @Bookish1
    , @Colin Wright
  108. Rob McX says:
    @Peter Frost

    Very interesting info on Trudeau. It reinforces my belief that he was not the father of the current PM of Canada.

    • Replies: @Fox
  109. Mulegino1 says:
    @Colin Wright

    Weren’t the ‘Lebensborn’ homes just shelters for unwed mothers?

    Yes.

    There was hardly anything sinister about the program, but the establishment’s default position for anything with even the most tenuous connection with “Nazi Germany” is the attribution of diabolical evil.

    • Replies: @TGD
  110. Ray P says:
    @Colin Wright

    Sounds like a Monty Python sketch.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  111. Bookish1 says:
    @Tom67

    It is important to understand the connection between Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, and Hitler. Nietzsche was very pessimistic because he saw that Christianity no longer had a hold on people and there was a spiritual void that nothing could fill which meant that the people of the west were lost and were going to enter troubled waters. Think of ww1 and ww2. It drove Nietzsche crazy to see his kinsman lost. Literally crazy by the way. Not that Nietzsche was a Christian, he was very critical of Christianity. Hitler saw the same thing that Nietzsche saw and it drove Hitler to the edge. So Hitler went into politics and did something about it. With his National Socialism Hitler led his people out of their depression and filled the spiritual void that both he and Nietzsche had seen. Schopenhauers thoughts formed the basis of both Nietzsches and Hitlers views on the world. Someday Hitler will be regarded in a positive way.

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
  112. fnn says:
    @Old and Grumpy

    From the beginning of WW1, the British had the goal of starving Germany into submission via the naval blockade. IIRC, about a million German civilians died of starvation-related illness during the war. A lot of Germans wanted control of the Ukrainian Breadbasket to prevent that from happening again.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  113. anarchyst says:
    @John Q Duped

    Thank you for your insightful comments. You are correct that Schofield was a “tool of the jews” whose purpose was to debase true Christianity, and once again subordinate Christianity to judaism.

    In my studies, I came to the conclusion that “the god of judaism” was and is not the same as “the God of Christianity”.

    The jewish “god” had to be vengeful as “his people” were constantly misbehaving, transgressing and had to be dealt a firm hand in order to keep them in line.

    Yes, their “god” commanded that they commit genocide against others and were also commanded to “dwell apart” as there would be no way that they could get along with others.

    Judaism is a poison that deserves to be placed “on the trash heap of history…

    In my humble opinion, the jewish “god” is Lucifer, a “fallen angel”…

    Regards,

  114. karel says:
    @brabantian

    Cannot these descendants of Adolf donate some sperm to those eager Brazilian women? It could be done within a framework of a foreign aid.

  115. @Ray P

    ‘Sounds like a Monty Python sketch.’

    At least two Mitchell & Webb skits seem relevant: ‘Are We the Baddies?’ and ‘Heil Donitz.’

  116. @No Friend Of The Devil

    ‘Still trying to try to understand how people are simultaneously pro-Hitler, pro-Nazi, and pro-Russia…’

    It seems perfectly plausible to me. Back in the Thirties, Orwell observed that many of the same people who had been Communists in the Twenties were now Fascists. He decided that it was a matter of violent hostility to British society. They wanted to destroy: whatever ideology would let them do that would serve.

    Presumably, the same applies today to anyone who is indifferently approving of Stalin’s Russia or Hitler’s Germany. Personally, although I’d rather not actually go there, I think there’s a lot to be said for Hitler’s Germany. Stalinism completely fails to appeal.

    • Replies: @lysias
  117. One has only to watch the new StarTrek Discovery series to see how diversity and inclusive mandates will alter the future of life in the universe. By promoting Galactic Homo, (Global Homo’s replacement) the universe will be one big happy family of sentient beings living under the rule of tyrants who call themselves ‘The Federation Of Planets”.
    Beam me up Scotty, warp speed ahead.

  118. @Tom67

    ‘…I just hope and pray that this coming together will be productive and not end mutual recrimination. I believe we stand and fall together. I fear the latter is more likely. But let us hope for the future and let Hitler finally be history. History in the French sense and not the German sense.’

    I’m reminded of something DeGaulle once said. He was visiting Stalingrad, and remarked ‘What a people!’

    He aide asked if he meant the Russians. No, De Gaulle meant the Germans — to have come so far.

    It’s interesting. Both nations are facing similar crises in their identity at this point too.

  119. TGD says:
    @Mulegino1

    There was hardly anything sinister about the program (Lebensborn), but the establishment’s default position for anything with even the most tenuous connection with “Nazi Germany” is the attribution of diabolical evil.

    The really sinister part of Lebensborn was the kidnapping of certain young children from the occupied countries to be raised in Germany. Poland and the Czech lands bore the brunt of this abomination. It’s still a sore point in Poland and the Czechs made a movie in 2000 about Lebensborn, Pramen životarn.

    The subject of Lebensborn is something that the “wannabe” Nazis who post on Unz don’t want to acknowledge.

    • Replies: @Alexandros
  120. utu says:
    @nokangaroos

    “there is a morbid erotic fascination with Nazi imagery”

    Stalag fiction: Stalag (Hebrew: סטאלג‎) was a short-lived genre of Nazi exploitation Holocaust pornography in Israel that flourished in the 1950s and early 1960s, and stopped after the time of the Eichmann Trial, because of a ban by the Israeli government. These books did not include Jews to avoid taboos. They are no longer available for a reading today in terms of traditional publication, although the advent of the Internet has allowed for peer-to-peer file sharing.

    Purported to be translations of English-language books by prisoners in concentration camps, these books were highly pornographic accounts of imprisonment, generally of Allied soldiers, sexual brutalization by female SS guards (or in some cases by Imperial Japanese women), and the prisoners’ eventual revenge, which usually consisted of the rape and murder of their tormentors.[2] The books, with titles like I Was Colonel Schultz’s Private Bitch, were especially popular among adolescent boys, often the children of concentration camp survivors.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  121. karel says:
    @E_Perez

    And before WWII Poles and Czechs took Lebensraum from Germany.

    Why should only Germans need more Lebensraum? Other nations need it too and that is the reason why they had to take it from Germany to stop their craving for a Drang nach Osten.

    ,Emil Hácha called for it

    Oh really? You are just a stupid liar.

    • Replies: @HeebHunter
  122. lysias says:
    @Colin Wright

    Stalin’s Russia published lots of cheap editions of classical Russian literature. (I bought a lot of them when I was stationed in Berlin years later.) They played a lot of great classical music. (I have a lot of those records.) They furnished good free education and good free medical care to all citizens.

    Now, granted, there was a lot that was wrong in that system then, and I certainly thought then that life in the West was far preferable. Which is why I served in the Cold War U.S. military.

    But, as life in the U.S. deteriorates, it becomes less and less clear that life in Stalin’s Russia was worse than life in the U.S. now .

    • Replies: @Bookish1
  123. @fnn

    It seems very unlikely that starvation was in anyone’s mind at “the beginning of WW1” . Sources needed.

    Perhaps the Germans sending cruisers to shell civilians in NE cities like Hartlepool in December 1914 may have helped the Brits toughen up.

    • Replies: @fnn
    , @Skeptikal
  124. Fox says:
    @Rob McX

    About two years ago I read an article that made a good point about Fidel Castro being Justin Trudeau’s father. He was born about nine months after a state visit of either Castro to Canada or the Trudeau’s to Cuba (can’t remember). Justin Trudeau’s picture was compared with a young Castro’s one, and the similarity I remember was quite striking. I am citing this from memory and important details are therefore missing, but this blood relationship struck me as quite possible.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  125. utu says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    “The East is different, just have a look at the annihilation of the elite and population policies in occupied Poland.”

    Exactly. German actions (AB-Aktion and Intelligenzaktion) starting on the day one of the occupation of Poland were unprecedented in the history of Europe except for the actions of Bolsheviks in Russia and they were pretty well known. French politicians who negotiated the armistice and surrender in 1940 were very much aware of what Germans were capable of and wanted to avoid the ‘polonization’ of France.

    THE RECONSTRUCTION OF FRANCE: MARSHAL PETAIN’S POLICIES, 1940-1942, AS EVALUATED BY AMERICAN JOURNALISTS AND SCHOLARS
    https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/215275781.pdf

    At the time of the French defeat, too short a time had elapsed since the beginning of the war for a general assessment to develop regarding German occupation patterns or to predict the effects of the German occupation on the conquered states; only from the case of Poland could conclusions be drawn. In some respects, the situation of Poland bore similarities to that of France. Both countries had German minorities and had received territories from Germany in the Treaty of Versailles which were by culture and language German. Poland therefore could serve as a precedent for the French government as it groped for clues regarding German policies after conquest. While Germany’s annexation of its pre-World War I territory in Poland had been expected, nobody anticipated the destruction of the Polish elite and the expropriation, expulsion, and resettlement of one million Poles. International law was violated. While annexation in the case of total conquest and in the absence of a functioning government was permissible, the expropriation of private property was not.

  126. @Joseph Doaks

    You didn’t learn anything actual from brabantian, only rumors. Some DNA testing would be in order. I’m sure the various governments have artifacts belonging to Hitler. There are also German relatives. Why doesn’t the French-Hitler family try for that to prove their case?

    • Replies: @Winnetou1889
    , @R2b
    , @Skeptikal
  127. @Agent76

    Such retardation can only come from a mutt.
    Don’t disarm yourself, but do dislodge your only useful power in normal life.

    Lolberturdianism is clearly a kike made mental disease.

  128. @karel

    Because your subhuman “people” have already proven to us your contribution as “victors”. Enjoy the cheap meth and thanks for the porn actresses.

  129. Bookish1 says:
    @lysias

    Good point about which would be better usa or soviet. I don’t think the Allies had much better to offer than the soviets.

  130. @utu

    Not exactly what I meant – though I remember
    Im Folterhaus der Nazi-Hexen 😀 😀 😀
    That crap is so over the top it is useless as porn even for adolescents –
    you gotta have a serious ding in the apricot
    (probably the reason they had to ban it 😛 )

  131. Will there be a day, in the far-flung future, when ‘we’ will say ‘Germans’ instead of [the zionists’ promoted word] nazis?

  132. @utu

    ‘French politicians who negotiated the armistice and surrender in 1940 were very much aware of what Germans were capable of and wanted to avoid the ‘polonization’ of France.’

    If that was their motive, their gesture was futile. After all, the governments of both Norway and Holland simply fled and defied Hitler from afar; but their peoples were treated no worse than the French were.

    In fact, it was either Mazower or Paxton who observed that in the upshot, the Germans got more out of France (and the French got fewer calories) than any other occupied country in Western Europe. All French cooperation got them was a more thorough milking.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Wielgus
    , @Skeptikal
  133. Anonymice says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    No thanks. You can keep your genocidal genes to yourself.

  134. @utu

    ‘Exactly. German actions (AB-Aktion and Intelligenzaktion) starting on the day one of the occupation of Poland were unprecedented in the history of Europe except for the actions of Bolsheviks in Russia and they were pretty well known…’

    Perhaps. There really does need to be a dispassionate, properly researched book on the experience of gentile Poland during World War Two.

    Everyone always seems to drift off into the — to say the least — well-trodden terrain of the Jewish experience…and then endlessly fret about whether the gentile Poles themselves were nice to them or not. Seriously: there’s at least one book I had high hopes for that turned out to concern itself primarily, not with what happened to the Poles themselves, but with (rather unconvincingly) demonstrating that they were really very helpful towards the Jews.

    …not what I was looking for.

    Enough is enough. Could we have a book entitled: ‘Poland: What Happened to Everyone Except the Jews’?

    • Replies: @lysias
    , @utu
  135. @Trinity

    I’ve long wondered how and when the Old Testament got tacked onto the Christian Bible in the first place. Sabotage? Warning?

  136. lysias says:
    @Colin Wright

    I’ve never understood why Hitler and the Nazis treated the Poles, in contrast to the Czechs, so badly. I would have thought that someone with Hitler’s views wiuld have respected how the Poles had the spunk to fight against him.

  137. utu says:
    @Colin Wright

    After all, the governments of both Norway and Holland simply fled. – Not true in case of Denmark. The king remained in Denmark. In Norway new government was formed by Quisling.

    While there was not enough evidence yet what German occupation of Denmark and Norway would look like there was enough evidence flowing from Poland to avoid the ‘polonization’ and prefer Danish or Norwegian solution.

    it was either Mazower or Paxton or possibly you have just made it up?

    Maréchal Pétain decision to negotiate with Germans was the most heroic act that saved many lives. He knew that after the war he would be tried and sentence to death. The French should be eternally grateful for it. Charles de Gaulle’s and his Free France in London was a side show that primarily served French geopolitical interest for the post war and gave the sense of saving honor of France to those Frenchmen who had a need for such intangibles like honor.

  138. lysias says:
    @utu

    De Gaulle made sure Petain was not actually executed. Pity he couldn’t prevent the execution of Laval.

    • Replies: @Fox
    , @for-the-record
  139. utu says:
    @Colin Wright

    Enough is enough. Could we have a book entitled: ‘Poland: What Happened to Everyone Except the Jews’?

    Nobody will do it in Poland because murdered Polish Jews were Polish citizens even though Jews like to keep the two martyrologies separate. History of Polish Jews belongs to history of Poland.

    There really does need to be a dispassionate, properly researched book on the experience of gentile Poland during World War Two.

    I am sure there are many books. Most of them written by Poles so probably they are not dispassionate enough for you, so all you are left with is Carolyn Yeager and her dispassionate claims that no atrocities against Poles took place and if they did Poles were asking for it.

    Bloodlands, Timothy D. Snyder
    Poland’s Holocaust, Tadeusz Piotrowski
    The Forgotten Holocaust: The Poles Under German Occupation, 1939-1944, Richard C. Lukas

    The Polish White Book
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Polish_White_Book

    The Black Book of Poland
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Poland

    Here at UR on several occasions I expressed my doubts in the official numbers of killed in Poland and had an exchange with the commenter ‘szopen’ about it. One thread begins here:

    https://www.unz.com/tengelhardt/whats-the-matter-with-eastern-europe/#comment-2108909

    And another thread:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-holocaust-in-the-ussr/#comment-2487553
    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-holocaust-in-the-ussr/#comment-2487645
    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-holocaust-in-the-ussr/#comment-2488057
    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-holocaust-in-the-ussr/#comment-2488824

    • Replies: @German_reader
  140. @utu

    ‘…it was either Mazower or Paxton or possibly you have just made it up?’

    …and you may go fuck yourself.

    Congratulations.

    • Replies: @utu
  141. utu says:
    @lysias

    You may respect the people who fight against you but still it is a historical tradition that you kill those who resist you. Look at the history of sieges during crusades or Mongols. The treatment of Poles possibly payed off in lack or weak resistance in Denmark, Norway and France.

    Czechoslovakia was entirely different case. For the acceptance of peaceful dissolution of Czechoslovakia Czechs were rewarded with very mild occupation and in the initial stage with some benefits and improvements like working conditions and number of days off. And Slovaks got a sovereign state though for participation in the war against Poland in 1939 and USSR in 1941 while Czechs did not have to provide any military force or manpower to Germany expect towards the end of war they had some units doing guarding duty in Italy. What Bohemia and Moravia provided is the industry working at full speed for German war machine.

  142. Ron Unz says:
    @utu

    Maréchal Pétain decision to negotiate with Germans was the most heroic act that saved many lives. He knew that after the war he would be tried and sentence to death. The French should be eternally grateful for it. Charles de Gaulle’s and his Free France in London was a side show that primarily served French geopolitical interest for the post war and gave the sense of saving honor of France to those Frenchmen who had a need for such intangibles like honor.

    Well, I happened to look at this thread and notice some discussion of the Petain/De Gaulle issue. A couple of years ago, I pointed out that the entire standard history of that period was entirely upside-down, and those so interested might want to read my article on the subject:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-post-war-france-and-post-war-germany/

    Here’s a short excerpt:

    …the French army collapsed in May of 1940, and the government desperately recalled Petain, then in his mid-80s and the country’s greatest war hero, from his posting as the Ambassador to Spain. Soon he was asked by the French President to form a new government and arrange an armistice with the victorious Germans, and this proposal received near-unanimous support from France’s National Assembly and Senate, including the backing of virtually all the leftist parliamentarians. Petain achieved this result, and another near-unanimous vote of the French parliament then authorized him to negotiate a full peace treaty with Germany, which certainly placed his political actions on the strongest possible legal basis. At that point, almost everyone in Europe believed that the war was essentially over, with Britain soon to make peace.

    While Petain’s fully-legitimate French government was negotiating with Germany, a small number of diehards, including Col. Charles de Gaulle, deserted from the army and fled aboard, declaring that they intended to continue the war indefinitely, but they initially attracted minimal support or attention. One interesting aspect of the situation was that De Gaulle had long been one of Petain’s leading proteges, and once his political profile began rising a couple of years later, there were often quiet speculations that he and his old mentor had arranged a “division of labor,” with the one making an official peace with the Germans while the other left to become the center of overseas resistance in the uncertain event that different opportunities arose.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Daniel Rich
  143. @lysias

    ‘…I’ve never understood why Hitler and the Nazis treated the Poles, in contrast to the Czechs, so badly. I would have thought that someone with Hitler’s views wiuld have respected how the Poles had the spunk to fight against him.’

    It’s a good question. The oddity is that young Hitler’s racial obsession was with the Czechs. Poles he didn’t care about — and in fact, Polish Nationalists in the Austro-Hungarian Empire found a modus vivendi to be in their interests, while the Czechs seemed bent on being as difficult as possible.

    1. Germans respond badly to defiance. In 1938-1939, the Czechs were submissive; the Poles weren’t?

    2. The Czechs were used to being ruled by the Germans; Poles weren’t? But then, Poles had been ruled by Germans…

    3. The German schema called for deciding which Czechs were ‘racially acceptable,’ which weren’t…and in the meantime, not going apeshit. Poles were right out from day one?

    4. Sheer coincidence? Czechs were ruled by first von Neurath, second, Heydrich — both interested in order, contentment, and production. The authorities in Poland were both more fragmented and less assured.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
    , @Wielgus
  144. utu says:
    @Ron Unz

    Here is a comment under tour article about Churchill’s effort of tying up France with the UK into a union so France would fight Germany longer (or forever):

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-post-war-france-and-post-war-germany/?showcomments#comment-2410399

    Reynaud presented the proposal to the French Council of Ministers, but it was rejected as a British plot to seize the French empire. Marshal Pétain, 84 years old and the great hero of World War I, believed it was his duty to save France from total destruction and accept an armistice with Germany. Britain was doomed, he said, and union would be “fusion with a corpse.” Another minister concluded: “Better be a Nazi province. At least we know what that means.”

  145. fnn says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Read Walter Karp’s Politics of War: The Story of Two Wars Which Altered Forever the Political Life of the American Republic and Thomas Fleming’s The Illusion Of Victory: America In World War I.

  146. So Nazis were soyboys. Some are even saying Nazis were just really angry Libtards as well..

    https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/10/14/liberalism-and-fascism-partners-in-crime/

    Haha. I’ve also recently heard that the German commies around the time of NSDAP had accused Hitler and NSDAP of being a Jewish plot.

    I’m still searching the web for more on that. I ran across this

    https://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/pdfs/Themen/GK_Geschichte/Resistance_of_Small_Groups.pdf

    The KPD had always opposed any kind of anti-Semitism, despite some anti-Semitic feelings among its rank-and-file, and the KPD was sharply critical of Nazi anti-Semitism. However, in 1930, KPD leader Hermann Remmele wrote a booklet entitled Sowjetstern oder Hakenkreuz? (Soviet Star or Swastika?), in which he wrongly asserted that Nazi anti-Semitism was not genuine and that Hitler and his accomplices would make a great show of anti-Semitism but in the long run would amend agreements with Jewish and nonJewish capitalists alike. While a number of press reports supported this interpretation, this view did not stop the KPD (mainly through the German section of International Red Aid) from helping victims of anti-Semitism, who were mostly Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe.

    On a few occasions, however, the KPD included anti-Semitic slogans among its appeals to nationalistic radicals. The SPD paper Vorwärts reported that Communist delegates on Berlin’s City Council had joined with Nazis in shouting “Out with the Jews!” to prevent members of the bourgeois parties from being heard.
    When in August 1930 Die Rote Fahne printed a denunciation of “Jewish stock-market jobbers,”10 the SPD accused it of competing with Hitler in the anti-Jewish fervor.11 The next day the KPD organ expressed regret for what was called a misprint: instead of “Jobber Juden,” it should have read “Jobber, Juden” (stockmarket jobbers and Jews) – asserting its commitment to fight anti-Semitism uncompromisingly.

    Strange stuff!

  147. Skeptikal says:
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Lots of healthy outdoor activities =>> adequate vitamin D.

    Which is needed for just about every process in the healthy human body.

  148. @Ron Unz

    While Petain’s fully-legitimate French government was negotiating with Germany, a small number of diehards, including Col. Charles de Gaulle, deserted from the army and fled aboard

    Did you mean to say: “While Petain’s fully-legitimate French government was negotiating with Germany, a small number of diehards, including Col. Charles de Gaulle, deserted from the army and fled abroad…”?

  149. @TGD

    There is not much to acknowledge about Lebensborn. It was a child care program for Aryan children. If it was a kidnapping scheme for breeding purposes, you would think most of the kidnappings would take place where the majority of Lebensborn homes were located, in Norway. That would also be the place where the Germans considered the best racial material to be, so certainly a breeding program would have focused on it heavily.

    But you only hear such tall tales from the Czech’s and the Poles because they are liars, something the Norwegians are not.

  150. @lysias

    Well lysias, it’s all because of the behavior of the Poles vs the behavior of the Czechs, which had a lot to do with the direction coming from their leadership. The Czechs agreed to cooperate with the Germans, while the Poles decided to continue to resist, in alliance with the British (London). Poland chose to be Germany’s enemy, even though occupied. An occupier does not appreciate that kind of “spunk” from the citizens it needs to control to assure a peaceful, well-regulated society.

    Further, don’t we all agree that Jews are disliked because of their obnoxious behavior in non-Jewish societies? It’s the same with the Poles. The Poland between the wars was created as a multi-ethnic republic. In the eastern territory that was taken from Germany and given to the new Polish Republic, a million Germans lived and worked on their own lands and in their own towns. The majority Polish govt. had agreed to honor the rights of all it’s minorities, but in fact decided to treat them with a very heavy hand. The majority Polish govt. passed laws and regulations with the overall intention of disenfranchising the Germans and actually robbing them. You can read about a lot of it in this online book: https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/polandinside/pfi00.html

    It will explain how the attitude of the Poles toward the Germans affected the attitude of the Germans toward the Poles. It’s no mystery. Please take the time to educate yourself.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
    , @Colin Wright
  151. German_reader says:
    @utu

    Bloodlands, Timothy D. Snyder

    Snyder has some pretty severe biases (obviously against Russia, both in its Soviet and its present-day form, but also very anti-German, e.g. he casually dismisses and justifies the post-war expulsions with “They had known about the Holocaust and probably approved of it, so they deserved it”). imo he’s downright misleading on some issues, because he doesn’t tell his readers that they’re controversial even among mainstream historians, but presents the most extreme interpretations as if they were generally accepted facts.
    His book is also basically just a long and tedious catalogue of atrocities. There isn’t even much analysis of the motives of the perpetrators of mass crimes (because “they just were evil, I’d rather focus on the victims”). Not much insight to be gained there imo.

    • Agree: Carolyn Yeager
    • Replies: @utu
    , @Colin Wright
  152. Fox says:
    @lysias

    Never understood why Petain would be regarded a traitor, while de Gaulle withdrew to England, leaving the common French man and woman and child to their own fate. France lost the war declared by herself fair and square, and to recognize defeat and draw the necessary conclusions in order to avoid further useless bloodshed and destruction is an act of courage and of honor. This is in stark opposition to the rejection of France and England to agree to cessation of hostilities and restore the situation to that as existing before the war as proposed by Germany in fall of 1916. They were already holding out for Wilson’s America to switch from pro-Entente sham neutrality to becoming involved on the battlefield. The result was the catastrophic outcome of the First War. And indeed, had not the maniacal Churchill left no stone unturned to continue and expand the war, it could have ended after the signing of the armistice at Compiegne in June of 1940 to everyone’s benefit.
    In a future world, should our people reach manage to survive the current last gasp of post-WWII, Petain will be held in high esteem, while the foolish Churchill will be torn off from all monumental plinths, may they carry his reputation or likeness in stone or metal.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  153. @Commentator Mike

    It struck me while reading your comment what an utter failure the Nazis were at exterminating anybody.

    One of the phrases that you never hear about the populations targeted by Nazis is “only now are they starting to recover.”

    However many they actually killed, all of the populations represented barely even saw a blip in their growth. I’m sure we could easily find better historical genocidal boogeymen to scare children with.

  154. utu says:
    @German_reader

    What is interesting is that the initial response to Snyder’s book was negative in American media because he shifted the center of the hell from Auschwitz further to the East and that he gave a face to non-Jewish victims and non-German perpetrators though the latter was not explicitly stated by the critics. But at some point the critics got the message that Snyder’s book is politically correct at this stage of evolving narratives and that there was a political purposes to shine the light as the reach of the Wrest was moving further East to Ukraine and Belarus so they shut up and began to praise the book.

    He is not anti-Russian but anti-Soviet. Germans should welcome his book because he created the background or the scenography so rich that Germans no longer stand out as a sole actors. His book was very needed.

    More books are needed to show Soviet crimes.

    “long and tedious catalogue of atrocities” – Each item on the list has some research that was done in past behind it. Often the research is insufficient and the numbers are wrong. It is possible that some item are completely fictitious. Who is going to fix it? We had the discussion on responsibility of Germans to take charge of their own history. You were not too exited about it. I happened to look Ron Unz article he linked today and ran at our old exchange under it:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-post-war-france-and-post-war-germany/?showcomments#comment-2409859
    But there is some lesson to be learned from it for a German and Germans in general. You need to start putting some resistance mostly along the T-truth line and J-justice line. The latter is because Germany has been vilified enough and has paid enough. There is no more justice to be extracted from Germany and Germany should speak the truth about its own suffering and about the un-truths that are being told.

    To which you responded:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-post-war-france-and-post-war-germany/?showcomments#comment-2409898

    I tend to agree, though there are problems with that, German crimes during the Nazi era can’t be denied, and Germany needs to find some kind of mutually acceptable relationship with her neighbours and Russia…excessive revisionism could harm that.

    You are a lukewarm noodle man. You whine and all that you see are obstacles.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    , @Adûnâi
  155. utu says:
    @Colin Wright

    it was either Mazower or Paxton or possibly you have just made it up? – Which one is it?

  156. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    The average French civilian under German occupation in the cities was knocking along on 1,200 calories a day, and quite a few women sold themselves to German soldiers to eat better. (French farmers often ate better than urban dwellers, however and a certain divide between the country and the city grew wider.) Then at the Liberation such women had their heads shaved while more deeply-involved collaborators, such as industrialists, escaped.
    I agree, the French did not get much out of trying to accommodate the Germans.

  157. Wielgus says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    Polish Catholics were often blonde, blue-eyed, anti-Bolshevik and anti-Semitic. If the Germans could not make friends of them, they could make friends of nobody. One Polish journalist who wrote for a pro-German news sheet was asked by German officers in late 1943 or early 1944 what could be done to win Polish support. He replied that it was too late and they should have thought about that earlier.

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
  158. @Fox

    Justin Trudeau’s picture was compared with a young Castro’s one, and the similarity I remember was quite striking.

    https://www.vice.com/en/article/jmk95b/we-investigated-those-damning-rumours-about-fidel-castro-being-justin-trudeaus-real-dad

    • Replies: @Fox
  159. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    More Poles than Czechs, so more potentially threatening. The Czechs were considered easier to assimilate – the Czech language had looked on the way to dying out, replaced by German, until it was revived in the 19th century.
    Poles were pressurised in many places to claim to be ethnic Germans, to “sign the Volksliste”. This was particularly true in areas of 1939 Poland directly occupied by Germany. The ultimate aim with both Poles and Czechs was their national destruction – some would be assimilated as Germans, the rest driven out or killed.
    The Germans seem to have had a particular fear of Polish nationalism, which has historically been quite intense and resulted in numerous rebellions breaking out, even in the face of hopeless odds.

  160. @Wielgus

    Germans aren’t so shallow that they are attracted to people because of blonde hair and blue eyes. As usual, the things you say are based on nothing. Therefore they are worth nothing.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  161. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    Hans Frank, the German governor of Poland, seems to have thought von Neurath was too soft. A quote by Frank mentioning von Neurath’s death sentences against some Czech student protesters made it into Frank’s guilty verdict at Nuremberg. Frank boasted that there was not enough paper in Poland to carry the names of the people he had had sentenced to death and executed.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  162. @Carolyn Yeager

    Some DNA testing would be in order. … Why doesn’t the French-Hitler family try for that to prove their case?

    It has been said that the Lorets submitted to DNA testing many years ago and the results were inconclusive. Most recently, in 2018, Phillipe Loret was supposedly granted access to Hitler DNA from a purported Hitler jaw fragment held by Russia. There don’t seem to be any reported results of that test, if it was in fact performed.

    All that being said, there are elements in the facial features of Jean-Marie and Phillipe that do resemble those of Hitler.

  163. German_reader says:
    @utu

    He is not anti-Russian but anti-Soviet. Germans should welcome his book because he created the background or the scenography so rich that Germans no longer stand out as a sole actors. His book was very needed.

    More books are needed to show Soviet crimes.

    Well, a lot of Germans did welcome his book because for that reason, but imo they’re daft simpletons. When one reads Snyder closely, it’s pretty clear that he’s just another asshole American who believes in German collective guilt, without any real gradations of responsibility. He’s basically promoting a historical narrative convenient to Poles and Ukrainians, who are invited to regard themselves as martyr nations whose own dark spots in the WW2 era are minimized. It’s no accident that he’s written idiotic journalistic pieces about the alleged threat posed by Putin’s Russia, his historical work needs to be seen in the context of contemporary politics. He’s fine with guilt-tripping Germans (iirc he’s even said in interviews that “Germany’s guilt is even greater than commonly accepted”), he just wants them to feel guilty only towards Jews, Poles and Ukrainians, not towards Russians who feature as secondary baddies in his work and whose WW2 losses he doesn’t seem to care that much about.
    As for “excessive revisionism”, I stand by that comment in regard to the “Hitler did nothing wrong” stuff posted on Unz review. But the thing with Snyder is that one doesn’t even need to be much of a revisionist to be sceptical of many of his claims (e.g. the alleged Nazi “hunger plan”, similarly with the famine in Soviet Ukraine), because they’re far from consensus positions even among mainstream historians.

    • Agree: Colin Wright
    • Replies: @utu
  164. @Winnetou1889

    There is also a story of Hitler visiting this woman after the fall of France. Don’t know if it is true.

    The other side of the coin is the stories about Hitler disapproving of sexual liaisons with the enemy in WW1. According to witnesses he considered mixing with a French woman to be a racial sin.

    On the other hand Loret and his son both look a lot like Hitler.

    I find it funny that they all the wear the mustache and, in contrast to William Patrick Hitler’s descendants in America, are proud to be related to Hitler.

    • Replies: @Trinity
    , @Colin Wright
  165. Trinity says:
    @Alexandros

    The moustache style that Hitler wore was worn by a lot of people back then, must have been in style like platform shoes in the early 1970s. Jewish MASS MURDERER and one of the chief architects of the Holodomor, Genrikh Yagoda, wore an identical moustache. smdh. Have no idea what wearing a moustache like Hitler has to do with anything. Interestingly, we all have doppelgangers lurking somewhere out there, I found out I even had mine living in the same area. haha. There was a building in Clearwater, Florida where people swore they saw a reflection of Mother Mary, I don’t know who took the photo of a crowd gathered around and my mother has no idea who gave her the photo, but someone in the photo looks a great deal like yours truly. My niece and nephew asked my mother, was that Uncle Trinity (hehe) in that photo. God as my witness I would go to certain clubs in the area and people would tell me that someone who looked just like me came in the same club or clubs. Admittedly I thought that good looking bastard did look like me after viewing the photo. hehe.

    • Agree: Carolyn Yeager
    • Replies: @Alexandros
  166. Fox says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Definite proof could be had from DNA analysis. Until then, every more or less clever attempt as the one you linked to to disprove this interesting speculation is no more than that: An attempt. Equally much is true for the opposite: It’s a speculation, but an interesting one.

  167. @German_reader

    ‘…“They had known about the Holocaust and probably approved of it, so they deserved it”)…’

    It’s worth noting that Johnson (What We Knew) demonstrates that was not in fact the case. The average German in the Third Reich had no clearer an idea of the scale of the Holocaust than, say, the average modern American has of the multiplicity of Israel’s crimes — at best, there was a vague idea that bad things were happening.

    Johnson’s most telling piece of evidence comes from an intriguing source: there were several hundred Jews who passed as gentiles and lived as Germans in Germany through the war. Unlike gentile Germans, they would have had no reason to deny or minimize any knowledge of the Holocaust — and yet most of them were largely unaware that any such thing had happened until after the war (cue Wally).

    Nazi Germany was, if not quite the police state of legend, certainly a place where the authorities had made it clear they would promptly punish behavior that displeased them. In such a climate, if anyone did wonder what had happened to the Jews, he would have been hesitant to probe past ‘they’ve been resettled in the East — now go away.’

    There were isolated stories of shootings soldiers on leave retailed and such — but no widespread awareness that anything on the scale of the Holocaust had occurred. So that nice Herr Eisenstein the grocer had lost his business in 1937 and then sort of disappeared from sight. Now, he didn’t seem to be in the city at all. But there was no reason to assume someone had killed him.

    Interestingly, I recall a Palestinian family who lived in our neighborhood prior to 9/11. They used to go out for evening walks — conspicuous in their large number. Come the Twin Towers, they abruptly stopped coming out.

    Eventually they…moved away. However, I’d be genuinely surprised to learn the government had killed them. After all, that sort of thing doesn’t happen in America.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  168. @Alexandros

    ‘On the other hand Loret and his son both look a lot like Hitler.’

    Yeah — but that could be the source of the story right there. ‘Gee…no offense, but you look kind of like Hitler. Hey: do you think…’

    I find it improbable. Hitler was decidedly puritanical when it came to sex — it’s not especially likely he would have fathered an illegitimate child.

    • Replies: @Alexandros
  169. @Wielgus

    ‘More Poles than Czechs, so more potentially threatening. The Czechs were considered easier to assimilate – the Czech language had looked on the way to dying out, replaced by German, until it was revived in the 19th century.’

    That raises the intriguing possibility that had some Austrian Emperor been more aggressive about universal elementary school education in — say — the late eighteenth century, Czech nationalism might never have arisen. After all, a lot of the inhabitants of East Prussia apparently only started to think of themselves as German when they began going to school and were informed of the fact. Ditto for the various groups that came to think of themselves as ‘French’ in the Nineteenth Century (see From Peasants into Frenchmen.)

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  170. Wielgus says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    So they had no preference for blonde hair and blue eyes (widespread among Poles by the way) as opposed to brown eyes and dark hair (stereotypically Mediterranean and even Jewish)? Nazis certainly had a definite preference for the former, as a cursory examination of their propaganda and Leni Riefenstahl films will show.
    I don’t find your “The Third Reich Dindoo Nuffin” line worth anything either. But it is rather amusing.
    I notice you don’t contradict my assertion that many non-Jewish Poles were anti-Communist (more consistently than the Third Reich, actually) and frequently anti-Semitic. But since the Third Reich demonology included Poles as well as the other two categories, this counted for little.
    Jan Emil Skiwski, the Polish journalist in question, was sentenced to life imprisonment in absentia by a Polish court for collaboration in 1949. He had escaped to Latin America, dying in Venezuela in 1956. If someone like him thought the German occupation had blown any chance it had with the Polish people it says something about the nature of that occupation.
    In December 1940, the occupation authorities in Poland banned the phrase “zmarl nieoczekiwanie” (“died unexpectedly”) in Polish newspaper obituaries. The reason? It was a euphemistic way of saying German execution commandos had killed them.

    • Replies: @Trinity
  171. @Wielgus

    ‘…The Germans seem to have had a particular fear of Polish nationalism, which has historically been quite intense and resulted in numerous rebellions breaking out, even in the face of hopeless odds.’

    It occurs to me also that while most ethnic Germans remained in the Czech Republic, the majority of Germans in Poland — over a million of them — were driven out in the early twenties. Nothing too horrific, but a concerted campaign of harassment and dispossession that did the job.

    Moreover, these were Germans that had been accustomed to being top dog in an avowedly ethnic state — Imperial Germany, as opposed to Austro-Hungary. The Hapsburgs were decidedly cool towards expressions of German chauvinism.

    So when it comes to Poland, we’ve got a million-odd dispossessed and embittered expatriates in Germany — presumably, giving all their new neighbors the real low-down when it comes to Poles and Poland.

    It could have the effect of making Germans in general less than benevolently inclined when it came to Poles.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
  172. Rob McX says:
    @Colin Wright

    It occurs to me also that while most ethnic Germans remained in the Czech Republic, the majority of Germans in Poland — over a million of them — were driven out in the early twenties.

    One thing is certain from looking at the history of Europe from WWI till the mid twentieth century – Europeans at that time weren’t squeamish about forcibly moving people in their millions when it was decided they didn’t belong somewhere. Nowadays, they can spend years and millions in legal fees to shift a single non-white immigrant, even if he’s a known terrorist.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  173. @Wielgus

    ‘Hans Frank, the German governor of Poland, seems to have thought von Neurath was too soft. A quote by Frank mentioning von Neurath’s death sentences against some Czech student protesters made it into Frank’s guilty verdict at Nuremberg. Frank boasted that there was not enough paper in Poland to carry the names of the people he had had sentenced to death and executed.’

    Without subscribing to Irving’s ‘Hitler knew nothing’ thesis, I think this points to the importance of personality in what Nazi policy boiled down to in practice.

    The proconsuls in Bohemia-Moravia were rational and restrained; Frank wound up running a kind of morbid circus of anarchic misery in the General-gouvernment. Greiser in the Warthegau pursued a policy of merciless expulsion towards the ethnic Poles in his district; if memory serves, it was Forster in West Prussia who hit upon the happier device of simply declaring whole villagefuls of Poles, ‘Germans.’

    Ditto for the distinction between the three satraps in the occupied Soviet Union: Koch in the Ukraine, some less energetic type in White Russia, and a guy up in the Baltic States who literally had visions of passing on his realm to his son, prosperous and tranquil.

    Obviously, the different circumstances of their territories dictated their behavior — but equally obviously, they had a great deal of leeway in their behavior, which ranged from ferociously abusive to relatively benignly authoritarian.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  174. @Carolyn Yeager

    ‘It will explain how the attitude of the Poles toward the Germans affected the attitude of the Germans toward the Poles. It’s no mystery. Please take the time to educate yourself.’

    Well now, there you go. If you are right in that German behavior was often a reaction to the behavior of others, that isn’t a sufficient justification for Nazi brutality and atrocities.

    Take the British in Ireland by comparison. Irish nationalists were quite unpleasant all through the nineteenth century, culminating in the Easter Uprising of 1916, right in the middle of a war.

    …yet the British never found anything even remotely approaching Nazi crimes in Poland to be necessary. When we found ourselves starting to head down that slope in the Philippine Insurrection around 1900, we drew back, rethought our drink, and went with the ‘little brown brothers’ tack instead.

    German crimes may have had a motive. That’s not the same thing as demonstrating they were justified. You’re often right in that it wasn’t a matter of the Germans being entirely wrong and their opponents entirely right. It’s a long way from that to saying the Germans were the good guys, though.

    I don’t think they were.

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  175. Trinity says:
    @Wielgus

    Hmm, my aunt is German and she has dark hair, brown eyes, and Max Schmeling definitely was blonde or blue eyed. I think maybe “da Joos” like a lot of nonwhites view the blonde, blue eyed, White with more hatred than our more darker haired, darker eyed White brothers and sisters. The blonde and blue eyed White is everything they can’t be or wish to be. Matter of fact, I think the recent mocking of “gingers” started with ((( the usual suspects))) as well. There are dark Irish as well, along with Irish gingers and Irish blondes, WE WHITES, are the most diverse race on the planet. You see there is truth to some stereotypes about “they all look alike to me.” teehee. Ann-Margret was Swedish and yet she had reddish hair/strawberry blonde. There are even Norwegians with darker hair.

    Speaking of Norwegians, some poster mentioned how the Black race was a more masculine race espousing some ridiculous nonsense that the Black male was the epitome of masculinity and the White female was the epitome of the feminine form. Has this poster ever taken a look at the average African Black male? The average African male is slender compared to the mixed African American, most African Americans are definitely mixed with 15-20% White DNA. Muhammad Ali for example had Irish blood flowing through his veins. Scandinavians are the tallest breeds by average on the planet and have definitely proven to be the strongest race in pure strength. However, like the myth that all Scandinavians are blonde, one of my friends was Norwegian and he was all of 5’9″ tops.

    The White female is tops in my book, but that is my personal preference and not a fact. I doubt the Black male is tops in anybody’s book though.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  176. @Winnetou1889

    Thanks so much. You’re obviously saying that the DNA testing that was done failed to prove their claims. That’s what “inconclusive” means. As far as resemblance, if you get any two people of the same sex with regular features (nothing extreme) in a similar pose and expression, most can “see” a resemblance if they’re looking for one. But think – if you passed that person on the street or were even introduced to them, would you say or think, “Wow, you look so much like Adolf Hitler!” Answer: No, never.

    We always have to guard against what we want to believe. That’s the value of proofs over mere speculation. Plus, anything from Henry Makow’s site is usually wrong, lol.

  177. @Rob McX

    ‘One thing is certain from looking at the history of Europe from WWI till the mid twentieth century – Europeans at that time weren’t squeamish about forcibly moving people in their millions when it was decided they didn’t belong somewhere. Nowadays, they can spend years and millions in legal fees to shift a single non-white immigrant, even if he’s a known terrorist.’

    Yeah — but demonstrating the absurdity of the latter does nothing to justify the former.

    As far as the German expulsions from Poland go, the Allied insistence on giving the Poles a corridor to the sea was really fatal to any hopes of the settlement ever being accepted by the Germans.

    First off, it was absurd to expect East Prussia to be permanently separated from the rest of Germany. Secondly, the creation of the corridor necessitated turning over the areas of heaviest German settlement to Poland; Bromberg, for example, had been 85% German in the 1910 census.

    Thirdly, it wasn’t like there was a sharp dividing line between what was a Pole and what was a German, and as the results of plebiscites elsewhere demonstrated, a lot of ‘Poles’ actually preferred to be under German rule, given the choice. Had a plebiscite been held in the corridor, a majority of the inhabitants would probably have voted to remain with Germany.

    There’s nothing intolerable about being a land-locked country. Nobody felt it was necessary to carve a corridor to the sea for Switzerland or Austria or Hungary. Poland could have been assigned borders that would have given it some hope of finding a modus vivendi with its neighbors.

    The real problem was that at Versailles, punishing Germany took precedence over finding borders that could last.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    , @Skeptikal
  178. R2b says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    Here I agree.
    These fotos are not provning anything.
    The texts, maybe?
    The important thing is, that under Hitler, a system of a sane economy was erected, with success, and then made to be abhorable!
    This is the economic system we should have, that is, further developed with a lot of small enterprises.
    And of course, down-playing the totalitarian state, so near in their endevours.
    And lastly, never wage war like that.
    No two fronts.
    No blitzkrieg.
    No letting prisoners of war in Dunkirk go.

  179. Rob McX says:
    @Colin Wright

    Yeah — but demonstrating the absurdity of the latter does nothing to justify the former.

    Of course. My point was that whites are far more willing to inflict suffering on fellow whites than on other races.

    What you say about the Polish corridor is true. Then again, you have to ask whether it had much to do with the real reason for going to war, considering how little the Allies cared about Poland when it came to carving up Europe with Stalin when the war was over.

  180. Great article, Guillaume. On the level of your groundbreaking “Hitler vs. the Untermenschen”. I like your approach: deconstructing the demonization of Hitler is the way to go! And it’s fun too! As-tu une version française?

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
  181. utu says:
    @German_reader

    “As for “excessive revisionism”, I stand by that comment in regard to the “Hitler did nothing wrong” stuff posted on Unz review. “ – I know and I agree, but I meant – and I am sure you understood – to look at, verify, revise each individual item in Snyder’s litany of crimes and atrocities. Jews, Poles, Ukrainians, Russians won’t do it for you.

  182. Skeptikal says:
    @Diversity Heretic

    Many of the German-speaking population of the western portions of the Austrian Reich or Austria proper desired to be included in a Greater Germany. I don’t know whether this extended to the German diaspora populations in Bohemia and Moravia but I suspect that it did, despite the obvious problem of Czech nationalism and the recent creation of the country of Czechoslovakia. Hence the Anschluss of Austria certainly held a logic for both Germans and German-speaking Austrians. One cannot begin to understand Hitler without taking on board the fact of his being a German-speaking Austrian.

    • Replies: @E_Perez
  183. Skeptikal says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    fnn is right.
    It is a matter of historical record that the British aimed to starve the Germans into submission.
    And they succeeded.

    Just look up “WW1 British Blockade of Germany.”

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  184. Skeptikal says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    I hate to say it but Charlotte looks quite homely.

    Somehow doesn’t seem like a likely lover for Hitler . . .

    • Agree: Carolyn Yeager
  185. Skeptikal says:
    @Colin Wright

    ” the Germans got more out of France (and the French got fewer calories) than any other occupied country in Western Europe”

    Surely that was because France was much bigger and much wealthier and more productive than any other country the Germans occupied . . .

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  186. E_Perez says:
    @Skeptikal

    One cannot begin to understand Hitler without taking on board the fact of his being a German-speaking Austrian.

    Funny statement. Are there non-German-speaking Austrians?

    Regarding Austria, perhaps “one can begin understanding Hitler taking on board the fact” that the Austrian Parliament in 1919 voted to join Germany. In other words, the so-called “Anschluss” was not a dictatorial idea but the democratically expressed wish of the Austrians long before Hitler.
    And this was forbidden by the victors of WWI, crying loud for self-determination and “make the world safe for democracy”.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  187. @Skeptikal

    ‘Surely that was because France was much bigger and much wealthier and more productive than any other country the Germans occupied . . .’

    If I recall aright, the assessment was per capita. At any rate, Frenchmen gave up more calories from their ration and contributed more labor than anyone in the West — primarily because their government kept trying to ‘negotiate’ with the Germans from a position of weakness.

    You can’t negotiate from a position of weakness. Interestingly, it’s kind of similar to what the Palestinians have discovered. It turns out the Jews are willing to let the Palestinian Authority serve as their occupation police.

    The Germans treated Vichy the same way. ‘You’re falling behind in your deliveries of forced labor.’

    • Replies: @Fox
    , @Alexandros
    , @utu
  188. @Colin Wright

    Perhaps, but I also find it very unlikely his valet would lie about it:

    In his book With Hitler to the End: The Memoirs of Adolf Hitler’s Valet (1980), Heinz Linge states that Hitler had stated to a number of people his belief that he had a son, born in 1918 as the result of a relationship Hitler had had with a French girl as a soldier in 1916–1917 in northern France and Belgium

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  189. @Alexandros

    ‘Perhaps, but I also find it very unlikely his valet would lie about it:

    In his book With Hitler to the End: The Memoirs of Adolf Hitler’s Valet (1980), Heinz Linge states that Hitler had stated to a number of people his belief that he had a son, born in 1918 as the result of a relationship Hitler had had with a French girl as a soldier in 1916–1917 in northern France and Belgium’

    I’m still skeptical, but the claim is of interest.

    • Replies: @Alexandros
    , @Winnetou1889
  190. Skeptikal says:
    @Colin Wright

    I suppose “Holocaust” refers specifically to death camps in far-off Eastern Europe.

    I am not in disagreement with you . . .
    Most obnoxious to me are self-righteous Americans who eagerly pass judgment on Germans—every German an antisemite (still) and every jew a victim (still) and they are just looking for confirmation of this smidgeon of “knowledge” that they have about Germany and WW2. They have one preoccupation: “How much did you know and why didn’t you do anything about it?”) while possessing very sketchy knowledge of the actual history of the Third Reich and also being clueless as to what it meant to live in a totalitarian state.

    That said, I do think that many people had an inkling of what was going on but what could they actually do? Especially once the country was actually at war?

    Mainly, there was plenty of evidence within Germany, not just people who disappeared from Germany but the millions who suddenly appeared i n Germany.

    There were also labor camps where slave labor was used throughout Germany and millions were brought from the East to work in them. These people could often be seen in the morning and evening being taken to their place of work, if they were working in quarries or farms or other outdoor labor. Some Germans saw them pass every day , recognized certain individuals, and tried to pass them some food in secret, and were successful in doing this.

    They were also working throughout Germany in factories of all sorts.

    https://www.zwangsarbeit-archiv.de/en/zwangsarbeit/zwangsarbeit/index.html

    Per Wiki, “Millions of Jews, Slavs and other conquered peoples were used as slave labourers by German corporations, such as Thyssen, Krupp, IG Farben, Bosch, Daimler-Benz, Demag, Henschel, Junkers, Messerschmitt, Siemens, and even Volkswagen,[9] not to mention the German subsidiaries of foreign firms, such as Fordwerke (a subsidiary of the Ford Motor Company) and Adam Opel AG (a subsidiary of General Motors) among others.[10] Once the war had begun, the foreign subsidiaries were seized and nationalized by the Nazi-controlled German state, and work conditions there deteriorated as they did throughout German industry. About 12 million forced labourers, most of whom were Eastern Europeans, were employed in the German war economy ***inside Nazi Germany*** throughout the war. . . . In the late summer of 1944, German records listed 7.6 million foreign civilian workers and prisoners of war in the German territory, most of whom had been brought there by coercion.[13] By 1944, slave labour made up one quarter of Germany’s entire work force, and the majority of German factories had a contingent of prisoners.”

    So, there were plenty of slave workers in Germany and plenty of Germans saw them.

    Of course it is possible that seeing these slave laborers within the Reich made it easier to assume that those who had disappeared were also working in labor camps (as many of them were, even if the idea was to work them to death . .. ). Twenty-twenty hindsight is so clear!! Perhaps we will soon get some valuable insights as to how much average Germans “knew” and “understood” when we can observe from up close and in real time how decisively average Americans respond to the Great Reset that is coming our way and the gradual suppression of dissent and who know what else is just around the corner!! A great social experiment, at the very least . . .

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @E_Perez
    , @Fox
  191. Fox says:
    @Colin Wright

    Why write ” ‘negotiate’ “. Why use the quotation marks?

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  192. @Trinity

    When you look like Hitler, believe you are the son of Hitler and this is publically known, I do find it funny that somebody would adopt a stasch’. It’s not like the guy is redpilled Holohoaxer. The normal reaction would be that of William Patrick’s descendants. Or the Himmlers, or the Haenfstangels etc. who denounce Hitler today.

    It is obviously no proof of genetic familiarity, of course.

  193. Skeptikal says:
    @Trinity

    “Scandinavians are the tallest breeds by average on the planet”

    Actually, I think the Dutch are the tallest on average.

  194. Skeptikal says:
    @Colin Wright

    Well, Austria-Hungary did set a lot of store on getting control of Slovenia and its major port, Trieste, the home of the Austro-Hungarian Navy. Yes!! Die Kriegsmarine.

    Very important in the opener to WW1, as a matter of fact, patrolling the Adriatic and the Med.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austro-Hungarian_Navy

    Loss of that corridor to the sea was a major loss to rump Austria.

  195. @Colin Wright

    Your proposition does not make sense. Which defeated nation does not negotiate from a position of weakness? Or do you suppose refusing to negotiate at all would make the enemy more magnamonious towards you?

    If those numbers are true, and of course we should never accept on faith that they are in the most propagandized war of all time, it likely has to do with the France being a huge country which needed to import both oil and food to sustain itself. With the Royal Navy sinking their fleet and now blockading their trade, those needs now had to be met by Germany. This is why Spain never joined the Axis. The offer was there, but there was simply no way to meet their demands of not only military material, but food and oil and anything else Spain was currently getting from their sea trade. Germany is not exactly a country overflowing with surplus resources itself. Really the French should thank the Germans for being able to alleviate imminent starvation and economic collapse in a very precarious situation.

    The generosity was not reciprocated, of course. When Germany was defeated surplus resources were deliberately witheld to starve Germans. They were even denied drinking water from their own streams. So punitive was the policy that there was talk of “all of Germany becoming Nazi, something even Hitler had not managed to do”.

    • Agree: Malla, E_Perez
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  196. @Fox

    ‘Why write ” ‘negotiate’ “. Why use the quotation marks?’

    Because you can’t actually negotiate under such conditions. Your supposed partner will simply take what he wants and toss you some worthless bone in exchange for your acquiescence.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
  197. @Skeptikal

    ‘…Twenty-twenty hindsight is so clear!! Perhaps we will soon get some valuable insights as to how much average Germans “knew” and “understood” when we can observe from up close and in real time how decisively average Americans respond to the Great Reset that is coming our way and the gradual suppression of dissent and who know what else is just around the corner!! A great social experiment, at the very least . . .”…’

    People tend to believe whatever won’t require them to do anything.

    I long suspected that when it came to global warming denial; deny it’s happening and the need for action disappears. Now we see the same thing, but from a different set of folks: Biden won fair ‘n square. There was no massive fraud.

    Voila. No need to do anything.

    If you’re in Nazi Germany, and it’s 1943, you have two choices: accept that something reasonably humane has been done with the Jews — or start looking into it.

    Which is easier?

    This is how people reason. It really is.

  198. @Colin Wright

    For once wikipedia is a good source:

    The critics of this account pointed out that Maser had no evidence of this beyond Loret’s own claims, which were secondhand at best. A genetic certification of his biological inheritance, done at the University of Heidelberg, resulted in the findings that “at best, Loret could be Hitler’s son”, but that he need not be such.

    Maser claimed that evidence for Hitler’s paternity included Charlotte Lobjoie’s commitment to a French sanatorium (allegedly at Hitler’s instruction) after the German invasion of France, and a protracted interrogation of Loret by the Gestapo in the Hotel Lutetia, the Gestapo headquarters in Paris, as well as Loret’s alleged collaboration with the Gestapo as a policeman.

    Maser’s questioning of Alice Lobjoie, Loret’s aunt and Charlotte’s sister, whom he had wanted to bring into play as “crown witness” for his claim, rendered, instead, a negative result: Alice Lobjoie stated that her sister had indeed entertained a love relationship with a German soldier, but she disputed vehemently that this soldier had been Adolf Hitler. She stated that she could remember the man’s face quite well and knew that this face had no resemblance to Hitler’s. In addition, she stated for the record:

    “Jean is a nutcase. Only the Germans talked up that Hitler story to him.”[9]

    Reading this, what might have happened is that Loret always looked like Hitler. He knew his father was a German soldier from WW1 (or believed so because his mother had a relationship with one), and when the occupying Germans in the 40s saw him, it became a thing, a joke that he looked like Hitler. All Loret needed to do then was to concoct the two and believe that this German soldier was actually Adolf Hitler, despite his aunt who saw this man said he looked nothing like Hitler.

    I find myself not believing the story anymore now. Because the above is a typical example of how a feather becomes five chickens.
    And I guess Linge indeed must have been lying about it, which is surprising when he refuses to condemn Hitler like so many others. Not a very malicious lie perhaps he thought, or maybe he believed it himself when looking at Loret?

    I am also very disappointed in Maser. My impression was the he was thorough and honest about his work.

  199. Skeptikal says:
    @E_Perez

    “Funny statement. Are there non-German-speaking Austrians?”

    Well, I see your point, and I didn’t stop long enough to come up with a better formulation.

    But as others have pointed out, Austria comprised a lot of nationalities. There were a lot of diaspora Germans all over the empire and there were a lot of other nationalities in the “core” areas of Austria. The relationship to Germany was really an ongoing issue for the German speakers within Austria (and also for pre-Unification Germans), one with deep historic roots (see link below). The House of Hapsburg had strong ties to the Wittelsbach dynasty in Bavaria (the two Catholic German dynasties), which with the unification of Germany in 1871 had “signed on” with the Reich. Again, as others have pointed out. My point, a limited one, is that Hitler is often seen as a non-German who managed to come out of nowhere and take over Germany. But I think this distorts the cultural reality, which is that many Austrians had wanted their country to be part of a Greater Germany for a century or more already, and culturally, Bavaria almost felt like an extension of Austria.

    For more see
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Question

    • Replies: @E_Perez
  200. E_Perez says:
    @Skeptikal

    By 1944, slave labour made up one quarter of Germany’s entire work force, and the majority of German factories had a contingent of prisoners.”

    So, there were plenty of slave workers in Germany and plenty of Germans saw them.

    Wow! One quarter?
    Hey, that’s exacly like today! You made a geat discovery.

    Current statistics: In Germany 26,2% of the population has a “migrational background”
    (https://www.bpb.de/nachschlagen/zahlen-und-fakten/soziale-situation-in-deutschland/61646/migrationshintergrund-i).

    These are plenty of slave workers, underpaid, mal nourished, in bad living conditions. Despite being urgently needed in their technologigally booming countries, they were brought to Germany where all factories have now a contingent of them.

    And the Germans, instead of sending them home to where they belong, see them and look the other way…

    Nothing has changed.
    Or, as Mr. Durocher would put it: “Plus ça change, plus ça reste le même”.

  201. E_Perez says:
    @Skeptikal

    “Austria comprised a lot of nationalities”

    Nope.

    I think you confuse Austria and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The latter being dead and gone by the time Hitler took power.

    Indeed, Austro-Hungary comprised many nationalities and languages and is (or should be) a warning to our politicians: Multicultural Monsters will never be functional as political/economical entity.

    The former – Austria – is a pure German nation, no foreigner could distiguish it from Bavaria.

  202. @lysias

    Caracalla around 200 gave the citizenship to all free men in the Roman Empire.

    Roman citizenship meant less and less as it was extended to more and more people. It was not long after Caracalla’s final extension of citizenship that Diocletian abandoned the pretense of maintaining most of the ancient republican forms, and the Dominate replaced the Principate.

    I suspect that we are well along the same path as Rome under the emperors just before Diocletian. Perhaps Kamala Harris, after deposing the doddering Biden, will be the first ruler of the new American Dominate.

    • Replies: @Alexandros
  203. Fox says:
    @Skeptikal

    The propaganda expression “slave laborer” appears to have been coined around the year 1990. Before that time, foreign workers were named “Fremdarbeiter”. A large part of them were voluntary workers who were recruited in the occupied areas and, once in Germany subject to the labor rules extant in Germany, they paid into health, retirement, accident, invalid insurance; this was also true for POWs who were employed in industry as well as for forced laborers.
    These rules should also have extended into the concentration camp administration; there is the so-called Ghettorente, i.e. ghetto pension for work voluntarily performed by Jews in the ghetto. It would be of great interest to know more about the whole system, especially now after all foreign workers have become officially “slave workers”.
    Also, not only foreigners, Germans were as well in the class of forced laborers. (E.g., in the work service or later, women to work in industry to make good for the absent men).
    A few numbers from the book “Leben mit dem Feind” by Werner Rings (an emigre who spent the war years in Switzerland): In the first 16 months after the capitulation 59000 French workers applied for work in Germany, sometime before August of 1942 403000 Belgians were seeking work with German industry and Wehrmacht, 312000 of whom were on their own wish transferred to Germany, 82000 of them were joining Organisation Todt to do work on the defense system along the coast in Belgium. According to the same book, by the end of September of 1941 were working voluntarily in Germany: 1000000 Poles; 272000 Italians; 140000 Czechs; 122000 Belgians; 109000 Serbians and Croats, 93000 Dutch; 80000 Slovaks; 59000 French; 35000 Hungarians and 190000 of other nationalities. (Total 2.1 million at that time)

    Incidentally, my uncle was as a POW employed in cotton harvest in the US, how much he got paid, whether he acquired any retirement benefits, that is unknown to me and unfortunately I never asked him. As far as I know, he bore no bitter feelings, perhaps he was even glad to have something to do.

    • Agree: L.K
  204. @Crawfurdmuir

    Yes, it no doubt helped that Caracalla was a Syrian and Diocletian an Illyrian who had no loyalty to Italy or Rome. Thinking about Rome, Trump reminds me a bit about Maximinus Thrax. Just a brute completely unacceptable to the aristocracy. I imagine the Pupienus and Balbinus set out to replace him were equally charismatic to a Joe Biden of today.

  205. @Fox

    ‘…Incidentally, my uncle was as a POW employed in cotton harvest in the US, how much he got paid, whether he acquired any retirement benefits, that is unknown to me and unfortunately I never asked him. As far as I know, he bore no bitter feelings, perhaps he was even glad to have something to do.’

    Everybody had to work, and often without being paid. My mother, who was a school girl in England during the war, had to work in the fields along with German and Italian P.O.W.’s. Her comment was that the Germans all worked very diligently, but the Italians kept chasing the English school girls around.

    A Dutch girl I met in the early seventies mentioned that her father was carried off as forced labor to Germany in 1944.

    The thing was, he had a great time! He was on a farm with a lot of other Dutch boys and girls, and the farmer basically put them in the barn at night and let them take care of themselves.

    …which they did. Nothing like that would have ever happened if they’d stayed in Holland.

    The war was probably different for everybody.

    • Thanks: profnasty
  206. utu says:
    @Colin Wright

    If I recall aright, the assessment was per capita. – So why don’t you check before you have start making things up. Anyway one would expect that richer countries provided more to Germany per capita. I am pretty sure that Czechs provided more rifles, cars, trucks and parts for planes and tanks per capita than Danes and possibly more than the French. It is likely that Danes provided more pigs and potatoes per capita than Poles. Does it mean that Danes were more exploited than Poles? Does it mean that Poles had some leverage that Danes did not have?

    “kept trying to ‘negotiate’ with the Germans from a position of weakness.” – while the Dutch, Denmark, Norway and Czechs could negotiated from the position of strength, right? And Poland that showed so much strength in 1939 that it even did not want to negotiate at all ended up with caloric intake according to the official rations at about 30% lower level than France.

    The caloric intake as measured by what food rations prescribed is totally inaccurate. There were caloric foods that were not rationed. Like root vegetables (rutabaga or turnips) or fish or even bread in the first phase of the occupation in France. And then there was the black market. One have to look at how large was the rural population that never experience any food shortage and was the source for the black market. People were not starving even in Poland (except for Jewish Ghettos). People were malnourished as the increase of TB cases after the war shows but they were not starving. In general populations in occupied countries in terms of food were doing OK because of resourcefulness and also because of German corruption. Germans were bribable and looked the other way when food contingents from farmers were sidelined for the local consumption via the black market. There were more bribable German Schindlers that one may think.

    The harshness of occupation should be measured by harassments, arrests, round ups, involuntary labor in Germany, executions and pacifications not by the nominal food rations. Only by this metric the occupation in various countries can be compared. Were French better off than Poles? Yes, by orders of magnitude. Were French worse off from Danes? Yes a little bit. Only now one may ask what was the reasons for the differences? Why Czechs comparing to Poles had it so much better? To what extent the differences are due to German plans and preconceptions and to what extent it was due to cooperation and not showing resistance by the occupied population? To what extent it was due to having its own semi-sovereign government? And to what extent it was the initial condition imposed by the degree of initial resistance? How Danish or Czech occupations would be different if they initially fought Germans as Poland did? Would they be able to retain most of the old state administration? Or would they have Gestapo or SS supervisors at every level? Would their secondary and higher education schools remained open? And when it comes to plans and preconceptions would Czech or Danish resistance be stronger if Germans came with proscription list and began to rounding up people sending them to camps and executing them on the first day of occupation? To what extent Polish resistance during the occupation was a part of the viscous circle of resting and retaliations because of the initial German actions after September 1939? And what about Yugoslavia? What if the deal between Hitler and Yugoslavia held and there was no coup that derailed it? Would Yugoslavs avoided the inferno they ended up in?

    I will say it again that Petain and his Vichy government were the blessings for the French. Anything else would be worse. The French were even helped by their communists in the first year of occupation who obeying Stalin directives cooperated with Germans and Gestapo sometimes even denouncing anti-German resistance that was under the auspices of London. The French avoided the ‘polandization’ of occupation to large extent because of Petain’s sacrifice of his honor.

    Bu if you wanted honor and heroism you could go to Poland, Yugoslavia, Belarus and Ukraine where Stalin and Churchill succeed waging their war against Germans with hands of local civilian populations. This struggle did not shorten the war but spilled enormous amount of blood in the vicious circle of actions by the glorious partisans and German reprisals. Its purpose was to create a lot of bad blood to prevent local population from accepting German occupation which particularly for Stalin was damming because initially his subjects preferred Nazis to Communists.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  207. @Skeptikal

    It helps discussion on these UR threads if one bothers to read the other person’s comment. Try again please. Yes, by mid 1917 it was no holds barred on both sides.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  208. @Hillaire

    The never ending prevalence of Nazi themes in our culture is about more than Jewish propaganda. The latter shapes the former, but it does not feed it. The market exists because there is an unquenchable thirst for WW2, Hitler and National Socialism in the West. Despite the endless propaganda and demonization, we love Nazi’s and we love Hitler. We can not get enough of them. I still see “news stories” about it weekly in our national papers. Hitler gold, Hitler soldiers, Hitler youth, Hitler women, Hitler this, Hitler that. At the store in the magazine stand you are guaranteed to see at least one image of Adolf Hitler. Or five.

    It extends beyond the white race too. In places like India Hitler is big. A negro like Michael Jackson was fascinated by Nazi imagery and modeled many of his costumes on the SS uniform. He even showed up to his court case in one. In Mongolia they have little battalions playing Waffen SS divisions.

    If the Jews think they can contain this they are sorely mistaken.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  209. @utu

    I see that Ron hasn’t taken you up on the point but you have gone over the top in saying Pétain would have expected to be sentenced to death after the war. As someone has noted elsewhere on this thread he turned down Churchill’s offer of unification because he explicitly saw it as being shackled to a corpse and expected Britain to make peace very soon. He wasn’t very heroic in defence of Jews either.

  210. @Sollipsist

    If you are looking for a better genocidal boogyman than the Germans, try the Jews I am too lazy to look up specifics but I know that in classical times they did some swell massacres in certain ME cities. And then there is there Hebrew Bible which is a profession of genocide against the Canaanites. Of course the thing is made up but you can tell a lot about a people by their fantasies

  211. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    Wilhelm Kube, the less energetic type in Belarus, seems to have been pleased to discover that Belarusian women were often blonde and blue-eyed and liked them as mistresses. (This is in the somewhat racy account of Barbarossa by Alan Clark, which I dedicate to Yaeger.) A fatal mistake as it appears one of them slipped a bomb disguised as a bed-warmer into his bed, and he was fatally wounded in the explosion.
    Nazi satraps had considerable leeway, and Forster and Greiser were both allowed to pursue quite different policies. Hitler, who was not known for any fascination with bureaucratic routine, seems to have let them get on with it.

  212. Jaxa says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    Guillaume, your reader here, great article, as always.

    Here’s a Wermacht soldier reminiscing on German atrocities against Polish civilians during the Warsaw Uprising in 1944, Beyond horrifying. In Polish (narrator) and German (subtitles). Hope you’ll find it interesting.

    “When bodies are on fire, they move. There are noises like moans. Back then I thought they were really still alive. And those flies, worms. How many people were killed in Warsaw? Probably 350 thousand. Yes?”

  213. Jaxa says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    Deutsche Welle’s documentary about kidnapped Polish children. So much for Germany’s “defender of Europe” legend. “Destroyers of Europe” would fit much better. German narrator, Polish subtitles:

    • Troll: Carolyn Yeager
    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  214. Jaxa says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    Czesława Kwoka, a village girl aged 14. Ethnic Pole. Catholic. Not a partisan, not a soldier. Not part of the resistance. She, and thousands like her. Sent to Auschwitz and killed there.

    You say Germans had reasons to kill Poles. What was the reason in case of Czesława?

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
  215. Skeptikal says:
    @Alexandros

    “France being a huge country which needed to import both oil and food to sustain itself.”

    This is surprising to me—not the oil part but the food part.

    France is a large country, and would have thought that French agriculture plus fisheries etc. could at least supply the food needs of France, and even some occupying forces on top of that.

    Or did France have to divert some of its own food to Germany?

    In your account it sounds as though German food resources (from the East?) were diverted to France.

  216. Skeptikal says:
    @Fox

    Interesting.
    IOW there was no forced labor in Germany and everyone was part of the pension scheme?

    “Forced labor” obviously comprises lots of different statuses

    I don’t question your assertions regarding pensions for imported labor, etc. This is not a field where I have expertise (you don’t provide any sources).

    I have read oral histories and other sources in which people described seeing troupes of workers who were in very poor shape, and most of these were foreign men and women. I can’t cite these because they were library books.

    The point of my post, however, was the issue of “what Germans knew,” not an analysis of the labor profile in Germany.

    I.e., what could be openly seen in Germany, as opposed to what was hidden in the East. Many of these foreign workers were “forced labor,” “slave labor” (the time frame of a term’s coinage does not automatically invalidate the term), whatever you want to call it, working under inhumane conditions.

    And Germans could see that.

    I made my general p.o.v. clear in my original post.

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
    , @Fox
  217. Skeptikal says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Oh oh oh how very hoity-toity of you!!

    It helps discussions *on these UR threads* if one recalls what one wrote oneself!
    Namely:
    “It seems very unlikely that starvation was in anyone’s mind at “the beginning of WW1” . Sources needed.”

    Yes, the blockade started in 1914. That was at the beginning of WW1. And the purpose was to starve the Germans of both food and materiel.

    So, two posts wasted “on these UR threads” regarding a simple point of fact.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  218. Ron Unz says:
    @Fox

    Never understood why Petain would be regarded a traitor, while de Gaulle withdrew to England…

    The De Gaulle story is actually a bit more complicated that post-war histories suggest. I think until the last year or two of the conflict, De Gaulle was a relatively minor figure, not necessarily solidly established in the Allied camp.

    For example, earlier this year I read the second volume of Irving’s Churchill history, and apparently during 1942 or maybe 1943, the top Allied leaders got very irritated with De Gaulle’s arrogance and “independence” and came pretty close to getting rid of him through a fatal “accident.”

    That would have been very similar to the 1943 death in a plane crash of Marshal Sikorski, the head of the Polish government in exile, who was very likely killed for raising a huge fuss about the Katyn Forest massacre, and thereby endangering good relations with Stalin.

    And according to the later memoirs of FDR’s son-in-law, the American government also decided to arrange the deaths of Chinese President Chiang Kai-shek and his wife in a fatal plane crash, viewing them as so corrupt and troublesome that they hindered the Allied war effort. But one thing or another caused delays in their “accident,” and eventually the Allies decided to keep them around, so after they lost China to the Communists, they remained our staunchest regional allies on Taiwan for decades.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Fox
  219. @Colin Wright

    From a 2018 Daily Mail article about the Lorets and DNA – a 1944 diary entry shows a British soldier named Wilkes writing upon visiting where Hitler was billeted in 1917, of meeting Loret’s mother who claimed to have had a child with Hitler:

    Although historians scoff at the notion that Hitler, who was always believed to have been childless, fathered a baby when he was serving in France, the unearthing in 2012 of a diary kept by a British soldier called Leonard Wilkes during World War II has offered a scrap of evidence to suggest Mr Loret’s extraordinary claim might — just might — be true.

    ‘An interesting day today,’ wrote Wilkes on September 30, 1944. ‘Visited the house where Hitler stayed as a corporal in the last war, saw the woman who had a baby by him and she told us that the baby, a son, was now fighting in the French army against the Germans.’

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5658195/Will-DNA-test-prove-man-Adolf-Hitlers-grandson.html

  220. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    Czech nationalism tended to look to Jan Hus, who was an early Protestant martyr a century before Luther. After 1620 Czechs, up to then mostly Protestant, were forced back into Catholicism, and this went hand in hand with Germanisation. Huge numbers of Czech-language books were burned, as they tended to be Protestant, and the language was hardly written at all for nearly two centuries, being mainly preserved by illiterate peasants in the countryside. Germanisation was aggressive but did not involve encouraging literacy, so this may have given an opening to Czech cultural nationalists. Prague was to all intents and purposes German-speaking and the Czech National Revival started in the countryside. However, it did have a past to look back to, which got in the way of Germanisation. This might not have been the case in East Prussia. Also Catholicism was perceived as somewhat alien and even as imposed, something that distinguishes Czechs culturally from Poles for whom Catholicism is part of the national identity.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  221. @Jaxa

    Who says she was killed? Produce a record of such. This little film doesn’t even claim that. It is cheap Polish propaganda that we’re all familiar with. Who would take and keep photographs of children they intend to kill? Maybe people as dumb as you would, but not Germans. You are a joke, and a troll … damaging to your own cause.

    • Replies: @Jaxa
    , @Jaxa
  222. @Ron Unz

    ‘The De Gaulle story is actually a bit more complicated that post-war histories suggest. I think until the last year or two of the conflict, De Gaulle was a relatively minor figure, not necessarily solidly established in the Allied camp…’

    Yes. Roosevelt, in particular, was always very reluctant to accept De Gaulle, while Churchill often got fed up with him.

    He was a minor figure — which, ironically, makes his ascent all the more impressive. The post-war fairy tale would have him always the leader of Free France, there by some act of nature. Not at all; De Gaulle pulled himself up by his bootstraps, so to speak. Politically, he was a self-made man. He created not just his part, but his movement, and even his ideology.

  223. @Skeptikal

    You start with “slave labor” and then switch to calling the same thing “forced labor.” This is a common occurrence among those wanting to be critical of Germany–over and above the rest of Europe which also utilized forced (and even slave) labor.

    But they are not the same. Forced laborers were paid, in many cases paid well, and benefits were often given to their families. They were even given family leave – that is, returning home for a week or so at intervals. It was just that they didn’t have a choice; they were “forced” to work for the Reich. They usually had been unemployed at home, but not always, if they had special skills. The Germans were themselves forced to do this because they were in a war for their very existence. As you may have noticed, THAT Germany no longer exists today–they lost.

    It’s not okay to say “I read about this in books I checked out of the library so I can’t document it.” Better go back and prove to yourself what you’re now believing, and note the context and if a reliable source.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  224. @utu

    ‘If I recall aright, the assessment was per capita. – So why don’t you check before you have start making things up.’

    That’s enough of that.

  225. @Alexandros

    ‘…In Mongolia they have little battalions playing Waffen SS divisions…’

    I wonder if the Mongolians are fond of anyone who stuck it to the Russians.

  226. @Laurent Guyénot

    Hi Laurent,
    Would you kindly contact me on my carolynyeager.net contact page or email carolyn at carolynyeager.net. I have something important to relay to you that I don’t want to advertise here. Thanks very much.

  227. @lysias

    Pity he couldn’t prevent the execution of Laval.

    He could have, but didn’t want to, I believe.

  228. Fox says:
    @Skeptikal

    If your post’s title was “what Germans knew” then it’s just another one of the countless moralistic edicts couched in self-adulating mushy words. Let’s write about “what the English knew” (about starvation and bombing campaigns); “what the Americans knew”; “what the Russians knew”, what the Poles knew (about the treatment of the Germans who had been put under their rule).
    It was of course known in factories in which foreign workers, POWs or concentration camp inmates were working that they were working there. What’s so scandalous about that? Foreigners working on German farms were probably quite often sent there, e.g. as POWs or drafted.
    As regards being subjected to normal German laws while working in Germany, that was apparently the case for foreign workers who sent in many cases money home (just as the Turks in Germany or the Mexicans in the US today). I believe that was also the case for forced labor (that’s like being drafted: You might object to this curtailment of your freedom, but you get paid and accumulate benefits such as retirement or health insurance).
    As for people in Ghettoes and concentration camps: To my knowledge the so-called Ghettorente (Ghetto Pension) has been paid to Jews since the beginning of such disbursements and it was based on their contribution to the general retirement fund as mandated by the laws of the time when they were working for pay. I am not certain whether inmates of concentration camps were working under these conditions as well, but it would be likely from an administrative point of view. The French and British did it that way with the German POWs they used for forced labor after the war.
    The purpose of the concentration camps was to intern people for many reasons, and in wartime they represented a huge working potential which, considering the labor shortage brought about by the war, was exploited.
    All other popular interpretations of their purpose are atrocity propaganda – quite successful, for the time being.
    It does make a difference which term one uses to describe something. It has all to do with manipulation, power, money, a purpose being aimed at. So it does make a difference whether you speak of the erstwhile foreign and forced laborers after passing through demonizing evolution exclusively as slave laborers.

  229. @Wielgus

    ‘Czech nationalism tended to look to Jan Hus, who was an early Protestant martyr a century before Luther. After 1620 Czechs, up to then mostly Protestant, were forced back into Catholicism, and this went hand in hand with Germanisation. Huge numbers of Czech-language books were burned, as they tended to be Protestant, and the language was hardly written at all for nearly two centuries, being mainly preserved by illiterate peasants in the countryside. Germanisation was aggressive but did not involve encouraging literacy, so this may have given an opening to Czech cultural nationalists. Prague was to all intents and purposes German-speaking and the Czech National Revival started in the countryside. However, it did have a past to look back to, which got in the way of Germanisation…’

    Peter Wilson, in his The Thirty Years War, is a real kill-joy. He seems bent on debunking every generalization about the Thirty Years War ever proposed. As I recall, among his targets is the notion that there was any component of ethnic conflict at all to the Bohemian part of the struggle — which might be true. Nationalism and ethnic identity simply didn’t figure as largely in people’s minds back then as it does now — and certainly not as it did in the Nineteenth Century, which was the high summer of European nationalism.

    So while I wouldn’t precisely disagree with you, I’d suggest that the elements you mention may have only been assigned importance in the Nineteenth Century. In other words, first Czech nationalists appeared, and then they found their heritage, rather than the reverse.

    One can compare and contrast, say, to Occitan, which was a language spoken in what is now Southern France, and whose people (I think) were subjected to the Albigensian Crusade. Well, there’s been some sort of Occitan revival — but no serious nationalist movement has ever gotten off the ground.

    The Nineteenth Century Czechs wanted a national heritage, and they found it. But that only happened because they wanted it. Certainly their national identity was less recent and less fully developed than that of the Poles, who are inarguably one of Europe’s national peoples, so to speak. In fact, they’ve proven quite irrepressible.

    • Replies: @Fox
    , @Wielgus
    , @Skeptikal
  230. L.K says:
    @Fox

    Another good post, Fox, about a subject most take for granted( the ‘slave labor ‘ thing);

    Touching on what you said, a while ago I replied to a certain Troll(anonFromTN) in this connection, but more specifically on the use of eastern workers in Germany during the war:

    Even German Court historian, Ulrich Herbert, professor of modern history at the University of Freiburg, in an article about forced laborers, whether concentration camp inmates, prisoners of war (POW’s), or foreign workers, concedes:

    “Soviet workers, however, received especially fixed wages, which were considerably lower than those of the German and foreign workers—nominally at about 40%, but in most cases probably even lower than that.”

    Hans-Jürgen Witzsch comments on this:

    On March 23, 1943, the German authorities decreed a law about the employment conditions of the east-workers, which determined the wages in § 2:

    “The same wage and salary conditions apply for east-workers as for all other foreign workers. East-workers will be paid only for actual work performed.”

    With this new law, former practices to pay east-workers less than others were outlawed, a fact which Professor Herbert evidently is unaware of. Even before this new law was enacted, the deductions made for east-workers were not as high as Herbert implies, as union representatives confirmed.

    §5 of the above law confirms that “east-workers receive vacation and home trips to their family”, which by itself renders absurd the thesis of east-workers as ‘slaves’.

    • Replies: @Fox
  231. Skeptikal says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    “This is a common occurrence among those wanting to be critical of Germany”

    LOL.
    You are tilting at windmills.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  232. You needto use the complete, and correct word- ashkeNAZI, instead of the fake news buzz phrase- nazi. Using the complete, and correct word refocuses the subject 100% more accurately.

  233. Skeptikal says:
    @Fox

    Keep your shirt on, Fox. Yeager, ditto.

    My original post was a response to Colin Wright’s @ 174.

    So stop grinding your axes.

  234. Skeptikal says:
    @Jaxa

    What is trollish about this post and the linked film?

  235. Fox says:
    @Colin Wright

    I also took exception to Wielgus’ “Germanization”. That’s straight from the 20th century whip-up recipe book.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  236. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    When Protestant Swedish armies entered Bohemia in the 1640s, they were not regarded as liberators by Czechs for the most part, despite resentment at the Hapsburgs imposing Catholicism. In fact many Czechs seem to have fought against them. However, as the Thirty Years’ War ground on religion became less important and there were some hints of nationalism developing. Spanish armies started the war with “Sancta Maria” as a slogan but by the 1640s Viva Espana became common. Anyway invading armies were destructive, whatever their religious pretensions, and the locals may have regarded the Hapsburgs as the devil they knew.
    National identity in the past was perhaps not the all-consuming thing it later became. There is a tug of war between Poles and Germans over Copernicus, for example, but he may not have himself cared one way or the other.
    Fox does not like my reference to “Germanisation” but as Latin lost ground in Bohemia and Moravia, as indeed in most places, officialdom switched to German and there was no official place for Czech until the 19th century. So it was German that was being pushed, if only for the convenience of officials for whom it was a native language. The later Austro-Hungarian Empire was more tolerant of minority cultural assertion than Germany or Russia, and far more than Nazi Germany was, but one aristocratic member of parliament in Vienna came into the assembly with a single large book, said the book was the sum total of the Slovenian language literary corpus and questioned why Slovene should have rights equivalent to those of German.
    The Nazis were probably correct in thinking Czech national consciousness was weaker than that of Poles and that the Czechs were easier to Germanise.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  237. Skeptikal says:
    @Colin Wright

    I don’t know who Peter Wilson is, but if you are looking for an 18th-century emperor who would have encouraged literacy, Joseph II gave it a very good try. But things didn’t work out terribly well and his educational reforms seem to have had the opposite effect than the intended one. . .

    From an interesting webpage recounting the history of Bohemia (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_voice_of_an_oppressed_people/Bohemia_and_the_European_crisis):

    “4. The opposition of the Bohemian aristocracy to Joseph II. was only the political side of a national revival. The whole of Europe awakened in the eighteenth century; it was the period of humanitarianism in philosophy and literature, the age of reason and free thought, the age of Rousseau, Kant and Paine. Absolutism could not oppose such a movement indefinitely, and even the absolutist monarchs of Austria, Prussia and Russia—Joseph, Frederick, and Catherine II.—paid their tribute to the age, and became “enlightened” despots. It was this European movement which worked for the revival of the Bohemian nation; for the principles of humanitarian philosophy and of the French Revolution, the principles of “Liberté—Egalité—Fraternité” were the natural outcome and continuation of the Bohemian Reformation and Chelcicky’s religion of Fraternity. The suppression of the Jesuits sanctioned by the Pope himself, clearly showed the character of the general upheaval of thinking Europe.”

    I think the whole extended essay is by Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk, so may be worth a gander.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  238. Skeptikal says:
    @Fox

    Well, Masaryk certainly throws the term around quite a lot.

    Or perhaps Masaryk is one of your whipper-uppers.

    • Replies: @Fox
  239. Skeptikal says:
    @Skeptikal

    Here you go; read for yourself:
    https://www.bpb.de/geschichte/nationalsozialismus/ns-zwangsarbeit/

    If you don’t like that, go to Google.de and do a search for “Zweiter Weltkrieg Zwangsarbeit” or “Sklavenarbeit.”

    Zum Beispiel, hier:
    https://www.bpb.de/mediathek/227592/sklavenarbeit

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
  240. @Skeptikal

    ‘…It was this European movement which worked for the revival of the Bohemian nation; for the principles of humanitarian philosophy and of the French Revolution, the principles of “Liberté—Egalité—Fraternité” were the natural outcome and continuation of the Bohemian Reformation and Chelcicky’s religion of Fraternity. The suppression of the Jesuits sanctioned by the Pope himself, clearly showed the character of the general upheaval of thinking Europe.”

    I think the whole extended essay is by Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk, so may be worth a gander.’

    To be frank, it sounds like a somewhat unreasonable attempt to make Czechs more central to the history of Western Europe than they in fact were. I suspect the French Revolution would have occurred regardless of what had transpired in Bohemia centuries before.

  241. @Wielgus

    ‘…The Nazis were probably correct in thinking Czech national consciousness was weaker than that of Poles and that the Czechs were easier to Germanise.’

    The interesting thing to contemplate is that Czechs probably had been getting Germanized for centuries. In Bohemia, the traditional model of peasants moving into towns and eventually settling in would have translated into Czechs becoming Germans. A city like Budweis might have still been linguistically all-German in 1850, but I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts it was genetically at least 50% Czech.

    Czech nationalism can be seen as a function of that acculturation failing as industrialization prompted an accelerated movement of the peasantry into the cities and improvements in public health meant that fewer of the newly arrived peasants died.

    The Czechs were simply coming in faster than they could be digested, and Czech nationalist consciousness was the result.

    It’s actually a warning — a warning that isn’t being heeded — for the societies of North America and Western Europe. Past a certain point, admitting immigrants will have socially catastrophic results. Not because anyone’s good or bad, but because it takes time to absorb immigrants, and only so many can be taken in without jeopardizing the host culture itself.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  242. @Skeptikal

    This is a German state (Federal) website for civic education. Gosh! What would we expect?!

    Not surprising, it makes the usual claims that are not supported by any evidence or specifics.

    I want you to know I stand behind my statement: “This is a common occurrence among those wanting to be critical of Germany.” It is. And there are none so critical of NS Germany than the leadership of the establishment parties — servants of World Globalism. It’s just that they have to go slow with the mass of the German people because that change doesn’t go down well.

    At least I’m glad to see what you consider convincing. Guess that’s why you call yourself only Skeptikal.

    • Replies: @Fox
    , @Skeptikal
  243. @Skeptikal

    Wriggling still… why draw attention to the fact that you are, at best, obtuse? Starvation in its ordinary meaning could hardly have been in the minds of people who thought the war would be short (which was almost everyone) and which stated on 4 August. A quick Google search and you would have discovered that the blockade began in November 1914 (and must have been anticipated by German military planners who knew exactly how Britain had used its naval power in the past, fwiw). Then you could have informed yourself here:

    https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/rationing-and-food-shortages-during-the-first-world-war

    Principal lesson for you: don’t try to out-quibble me😎😉

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
    , @Skeptikal
  244. Fox says:
    @Skeptikal

    You mean a Masaryk of the 167th century? I didn’t know that the 20th century liar and calumner had a like-minded forebear at the time of the 30 Year War.
    Jan Masaryk also doesn’t seem to have minded getting his academic career launched by the despised Germans. In Paris, when his schemes to establish “Czecho-Slovakia” he was using the term “de-Germanization” apparently referring to the future wind that was going to blow in the -now-defunct- artificial and unnatural entity. Is that what you meant with “Germanization” when bringing Masaryk into play?

  245. Fox says:
    @Ron Unz

    I didn’t know that de Gaulle had made himself such an enemy in Churchill and Roosevelt (and Stalin?) that an accident was being considered to deal with him. Likewise, I did not know that Chiang Kai-shek was also so close to an accident arranged by the icons of the Free World.
    In comments here and elsewhere one quite often encounters the opinion that Petain was a traitor for having signed the armistice and worked with the German occupation authorities. But what choice did he have under the circumstances? I have always regarded his actions as an exceptional act of honor, as Petain did not abandon his people in the hour of need, he also would have been instrumental in bringing about a relationship with Germany that was far beyond the vengeful and destructive aims of the French governments prior to the war.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @Colin Wright
  246. Ron Unz says:
    @Fox

    I didn’t know that de Gaulle had made himself such an enemy in Churchill and Roosevelt (and Stalin?) that an accident was being considered to deal with him. Likewise, I did not know that Chiang Kai-shek was also so close to an accident arranged by the icons of the Free World.

    Well, the De Gaulle story seems pretty solidly established in Irving’s book. FDR’s former son-in-law makes the claim about Chiang in his memoirs, and it seems reasonably credible though hardly documented.

    In comments here and elsewhere one quite often encounters the opinion that Petain was a traitor for having signed the armistice and worked with the German occupation authorities.

    The standard Petain history seems totally ridiculous as I pointed out in my article. After all, an overwhelming majority of the duly-elected 1940 French parliament, including most of the leftists, entreated him to negotiate a peace agreement with the Germans, which is exactly what he did.

    Frankly, I think the story told in Huddleston’s 1952 memoirs is vastly more accurate than propaganda-nonsense provided in later history books:

    https://www.unz.com/book/sisley_huddleston__france-the-tragic-years-1939-1947/

    • Replies: @Fox
    , @Colin Wright
    , @Armoric
  247. Fox says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    I have a book that is not blessed by the whole apparatus of the FRG, but very believably informative and when reading it I didn’t have the feeling of being lied to in so many ways as with the FRG-originated stories.
    Peter Dehoust, Zwangsarbeiter – Lüge und Wahrheit Nation- & Europa-Verlag, Coburg.

    • Thanks: Carolyn Yeager
  248. Fox says:
    @Ron Unz

    Thank you for your reply. I will have to order the Churchill biography by Irving, and the Huddleston book is somewhere on my bookshelf, last read quite a few years ago. People’s opinions are being made by the endless stream of subtle and unsubtle history-related stories; hence, I saw in a video store a few years ago a newly-released movie about collaboration of ordinary French people with the German occupation forces, with the upshot that this was really bad, traitorous and weak. These kinds of productions are the source of statements that Petain was a traitor.

  249. @Ron Unz

    ‘…Frankly, I think the story told in Huddleston’s 1952 memoirs is vastly more accurate than propaganda-nonsense provided in later history books…’

    I’m partial to Paxton ‘Vichy France: Old Guard and New Order, 1940-1944.’

    Paxton is sympathetic and yet critical. He analyzes Vichy’s failure as attempting to make a revolution under the wrong circumstances. The Germans were simply going to bleed France white and discredit whoever was in power at the time; now that I think of it, not completely unlike the fate that befell the Weimar Republic.

  250. Skeptikal says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    “At least I’m glad to see what you consider convincing”

    A total ad hominem.
    And, not the only source.
    But it doesn’t matter at all.
    The topic was a side issue to the original post.

    You have one button that get pushed,
    you have tunnel vision,
    and you are forever grinding one ax.
    When your one button gets pushed your tunnel vision kicks in, you fail to notice when someone actually agrees with you on a portion of your terrain.

    • Replies: @Carolyn Yeager
  251. Skeptikal says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Yes, you are indeed quibbling.

    And that is because you led with a silly statement, that things only got seriously in the blockade department in 1917.

    And you are still being very hoity-toity.
    It’s a laff.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  252. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    It is striking how many Czechs have German family names. Not so many Slovaks, though some of them have Hungarian family names instead. One of the major Slovak writers adopted the very Slavonic pen name Hviezdoslav, but was born Pavol Orszagh, Orszagh being a common Hungarian family name.
    If Wikipedia is to be believed Budweis became a majority Czech-speaking town by the census of 1880, albeit narrowly – 11,829 to 11,812. Prior to that it was a mainly German-speaking enclave surrounded by a Czech-speaking countryside. In about 1900 the town’s main square had two public houses – one favoured by German speakers, the other by Czechs. By 1921 the Czech speakers were heavily predominant – about five to one. The decline in the number of German speakers was modest – 7,415 in 1921, but the population had increased dramatically and most of the influx were Czech speakers – 35,800 in that year.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  253. Skeptikal says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    PS.

    Woo Woo:

    “On November 11, 1914, the British set out in the most literal sense to starve the German people into submission; an idea best described by First Lord of the British Admiralty Winston Churchill himself when he stated, “The British blockade treated the whole of Germany as if it were a beleaguered fortress, and avowedly sought to starve the whole population – men, women and children, old and young, wounded and sound – into submission.””40

    40. Winston Churchill, Winston The World Crisis, (New York: Free Press, 1931), 686.

    The blockade/starvation policy was then continued after the Armistice, during the negotiations at Versailles, to force the Germans to cave in and sign on the dotted line, and after.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  254. @Wielgus

    ‘…The decline in the number of German speakers was modest – 7,415 in 1921, but the population had increased dramatically and most of the influx were Czech speakers – 35,800 in that year.’

    Of course, too, one has to consider the probable effect of the creation of Czechoslovakia on whether people defined themselves as ‘German speakers’ or ‘Czech speakers.’ After all, for quite a few, both must have been defensible statements.

    Here, I’m thinking about how the number of ‘Volksdeutsch’ in Poland ballooned from less than a million to more than three million after the Germans overran the place in 1939. Obviously, many who had preferred to think of themselves as ‘Poles’ in the rampantly chauvinist Poland of the pre-war years suddenly found it to be useful to be ‘German’ after all.

    Presumably — if to a lesser degree — similar considerations played into whether one came to regard oneself as a ‘Czech-speaker’ after the creation of Czechoslovakia. Any cachet, prestige, or advantage attached to being German would have pretty much vanished.

    You mention an earlier figure of 11,800 ‘German speakers.’ I’d guess the population that referred to didn’t decline as much as the figures suggest. It could well have been about the same 11,800, speaking about the same mixture of languages they always had. We could easily still have had about 4000 Budweisers (couldn’t resist), speaking Czech in the home but perfectly capable of speaking German at work that had always been there. It’s just that earlier, they were pleased to call themselves ‘German speakers’ but now it made them feel more secure to decide they were ‘Czech speakers.’

    • Replies: @Wielgus
    , @Skeptikal
  255. @Skeptikal

    “At least I’m glad to see what you consider convincing”

    A total ad hominem.

    ??!. … I guess it’s what you have coming though. You can’t admit when you’re wrong? 1800 comments of pure opinion by Skeptikal. Congratulations. And goodbye.

  256. Jaxa says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    “Czesława Kwoka was born in Wólka Złojecka, a small village in Poland, to a Catholic mother, Katarzyna Kwoka.[1] Along with her mother (prisoner number 26946), Czesława Kwoka (prisoner number 26947) was deported and transported from Zamość, General Government, to Auschwitz, on 13 December 1942.[1] On 12 March 1943, less than a month after her mother died (18 February 1943), Czesława Kwoka died at the age of 14; the circumstances of her death were not recorded.[1]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czes%C5%82awa_Kwoka

    She died in Auschwitz.

    If you sent a 14 years old child to a harsh labor camp, you basically kill the child, one way of another.

    Let me rephrase – what reasons the Germans had to send a 14 years old girl to a concentration camp? Defenders or Europe? Or rather Wagner-loving barbarians?

  257. Jaxa says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    Polish women led to mass execution in a forest near Palmiry:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmiry_massacre

    Killing Polish women… for what? For being European?
    Aryan?
    Intelligent?
    Educated?
    Ant-communist?
    Anti-semitic?
    Blond and blue eyed?

    Or maybe jealousy got them killed… after all German women are kind of uglier, nastier and sluttier… the whole Europe knows that.

    Bravo Germans, the most cultured barbarians Europe even had!

  258. @Skeptikal

    Perhaps you should try hoity toity. You need something to help with your reading and comprehension and/or memory problems. I didn’t “le[a]d” with anything about 1917. What set you off, though you seem to have forgotten, was about 1914.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  259. @Skeptikal

    A pity you are not really Skeptical but a sucker for a made up or misused quote. I can’t find my copy of Churchill’s “The World Crisis” but the word “avowedly” was the trigger for a search and so I put the key purported quoted words into Google and found more scholarly and honest stuff there which you might profit from reading (that’s a compliment I am possibly too generously offering) e.g.
    https://scottmanning.com/content/churchill-had-no-starvation-blockade/

    PS Apparently Germany imported about one third of its foodstuffs before WW1. Loss of that didn’t mean starvation. Having all their farm labour killing people did

  260. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    It would be interesting to know how much Czech-German bilingualism there was. Quite a lot in the 1920s, but one source I read says it was less common in the 1930s.
    Prague Jews quite often knew both languages – Franz Kafka could speak Czech but was not confident writing in it, and Grete Reiner produced the first German translation of The Good Soldier Svejk

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grete_Reiner
    The number of Volksdeutsche in Poland ballooning had many causes, and the Germans officially broke them down into four different categories. Category I and probably also II were genuinely German but III and IV seem to have been regarded as nominally German but actually Polish. There were definite advantages in claiming German status – you might be able to hang on to property and not be expelled from it so it could be given to an ethnic German, and you were allowed significantly more in the rationing system than if you were a Pole (or Czech). Bertolt Brecht in Svejk In The Second World War has Svejk trying to prevent the gluttonous character Baloun claiming German status and perhaps being conscripted into the Wehrmacht purely in order to be able to eat better than he would as a Czech.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  261. Fox says:
    @L.K

    Thanks,
    this is very interesting and shows yet again that one has to look into several sources for particular statements and. I have come to deeply distrust anything a FRG-employed individual, such as this Prof. Herbert, is presenting with regards to particularly pre-FRG times, especially the time 1933 – 1945. Everything else is simple-mindedly called the “pre-democratic time” by the dyed-in-the-wool denizens of the the post-war construct “Federal Republic of Germany” in the establishment of which Germans had no say.

  262. @Colin Wright

    Because you can’t actually negotiate under such conditions. Your supposed partner will simply take what he wants and toss you some worthless bone in exchange for your acquiescence.

    What matters is whether you can effect a positive difference through such negotiation compared to what you’d get with no negotiation (ie fighting on). Since the occupier wants to lighten the burden of occupation for himself, it obviously stands to reason to think you could indeed improve your position by negotiation and collaboration. It may not work out that way in practice, but you have solid grounds for thinking it could.

  263. @Wielgus

    ‘…The number of Volksdeutsche in Poland ballooning had many causes, and the Germans officially broke them down into four different categories. Category I and probably also II were genuinely German but III and IV seem to have been regarded as nominally German but actually Polish…’

    I doubt if one could draw a clear line anywhere — or alternatively, one could draw it wherever one pleased.

    Having only recently made my escape from California, I spent most of my life in that increasingly ‘diverse’ state. There, the two primary ethnic groups are whites and Hispanics of varying mixtures of Spanish and Indian blood.

    Both racially and culturally these two groups would be considerably further apart than Poles and Germans…and yet, I can think of examples I have known of individuals lying at every imaginable point along a continuum from Guatemalan Indians who spoke Spanish as a second language to individuals who might have been able to check ‘Hispanic’ in perfect honesty for their ethnicity if it suited them but were essentially white in every respect.

    I would assume it was the same for Germans and Poles. Most would be definitely either German or Pole — but there would be quite a few for whom it really was a matter of choice. In Account Rendered, Melita Maschmann recounts staying with a family of ‘German’ farmers in Poland. There was the German farmer, of course, but then, his wife would chatter in Polish with the kitchen maids, but then, those maids would go about singing German folk songs.

    So most of the household could have considered themselves German — or they could have considered themselves Polish. It strikes me as perfectly reasonable that the number deciding they were ‘German’ would suddenly quadruple if being ‘German’ started to be a very good idea.

    California now must be about 50% white and 40% Hispanic. No doubt if it were decided to deport all Hispanics tomorrow, the state would suddenly turn out to be 60% white and only 30% Hispanic. There would be a good 10% of the population who could reasonably consider themselves either one — depending. The same presumably was true of Poland.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  264. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    Classifying people seems to have been an official German passion, even if the classifying was not necessarily accurate. Ambiguities were probably the bane of bureaucrats, not necessarily just German ones.
    Klaus Kinski, for example, was originally called Klaus Nakszynski and originated from near Danzig. He identified as German, perhaps his father did too, but it is likely that a grandfather or great-grandfather was Polish or Kashubian and moved over to German identity. A commemorative plaque in Polish has been placed on the house where he was born, which to me suggests a certain desire to lay claim to Kinski in a way, even though he is somewhat controversial. The Polish Wikipedia entry on him says his father was “of Polish origin” but does not specify how far back this went.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  265. nbsummer says:

    In my childhood in the 1960’s I had opportunities to meet Germans that certainly had been members of NSAPD. We called them waffenbruders as we were not Germans. One of them served in Peenemunde and was employed by the Volkische Beobachter, too. Another one wrote a textbook of political nature for German prewar schools.

    They were regular law respecting people. Hollywood nazis never existed in real life.

  266. @anon

    No one should be banned from the comments section other than commercial spammers or thread wreckers.

    Do not promote cowardice.

    It should also be noted that Balkanoid chimpouts are one of the more amusing features of the internet.

    • Agree: Yevardian
  267. @Jaxa

    When a comment thread dies out through lack of continuing interest, then trollish vultures show up to pick at its dead carcass. That’s what you’re doing and I shall not play along. Polish propagandists have placed a great many pages on Wikipedia – because they can – and I have yet to find a one that provides the necessary evidence to support its claims.

    You began by telling me: “She, and thousands like her. Sent to Auschwitz and killed there.” Where are the thousands like her? Now you have to backtrack – ‘she died. cause unknown.’ According to the Polish museum-keepers in Poland, her death is known from the Death Books kept by the Germans. Did they decide not to record her death, as no doubt the Poles would have done if the roles were reversed? No, they, as civilized people, recorded it. They even recorded her in photography. For what purpose, if she was intended only to die?

    Why was she sent to Auschwitz? Her mother (and family) were probably serious-enough resistance fighters to be a threat to German troops, and so was she. Age 14 is not so young (no one considers themselves a child at age 14) and it’s not at all unusual that she was inculcated with hatred for Germans. What were the Germans to do with her? They had no choice but to keep her with her mother. Many Poles survived Auschwitz (even thrived there), so she was just one of the unlucky ones. She was indeed intended for labor, but most probably succumbed to typhus during the epidemic of 1943 … unfortunate for all concerned because losing laborers to typhus or anything else did not benefit Germans at all.

    Furthermore, the “Palmiry massacre” is another Polish hoax, built on creative interpretation of a few photographs that are conclusive of nothing. I’ve addressed it before. Your whole game is to Seek Sympathy, but because of the real atrocities and thefts Poles have committed against Germans (who are not sympathy-seekers), you are seeking in vain. Stand up and live your life instead of being the embodiment of a wimp-burger. Poland got everything it wanted but still wants more. Germans will defend their honor!

    • Agree: Fox
    • Replies: @Incitatus
  268. @Wielgus

    ‘Klaus Kinski, for example, was originally called Klaus Nakszynski and originated from near Danzig. He identified as German, perhaps his father did too, but it is likely that a grandfather or great-grandfather was Polish or Kashubian and moved over to German identity. A commemorative plaque in Polish has been placed on the house where he was born, which to me suggests a certain desire to lay claim to Kinski in a way, even though he is somewhat controversial. The Polish Wikipedia entry on him says his father was “of Polish origin” but does not specify how far back this went.’

    It’s interesting to realize that until rather recently, ethnic identity was in some sense a matter of choice. If you started speaking German, and acting German, and socializing with Germans, you were German. I believe August Kubizek, Hitler’s childhood friend, was actually half-Czech. But Hitler apparently thought of him as German, and treated him as German.

    And, if you look up Kubizek’s life, he seems to have essentially been German.

    Ditto here in the US, where we’ve absorbed enormous numbers of immigrants — traditionally, by the rather simple device of agreeing they were American as soon as they could act like it.

    Indeed, given how the Germans seemed to often compromise in just this way even in the heyday of the Third Reich — with various very dubiously ‘German’ Germans being accepted as such as a matter of convenience — it would have been interesting to see how it all would have played out had the Germans actually won.

    I mean, they did and might well have continued to commit atrocities on a scale not seen since Genghis Khan — but I suspect they would have run out of steam sooner or later. For one, all that Lebensraum rhetoric notwithstanding, what evidence there is suggests to me that not many Germans were actually interested in being militarized farmers in the Ukraine or whatever. Ergo, some sort of de facto accommodation would have had to occur.

    But then, that takes us into considerations of how internally stable the Third Reich would have proved in any case. However, whatever would have been the eventual result, I’m fairly sure it all wouldn’t have gone according to plan.

  269. Incitatus says:
    @Carolyn Yeager

    “When a comment thread dies out through lack of continuing interest, then trollish vultures show up to pick at its dead carcass.”

    Nonetheless you’re there to police deviants (i.e. anyone who disagrees with you). What a surprise!

    Given your family legacy of peasants in Hungary and their America 20C emigration, can you really speak for Germans? Why did they flee Hungary and the Vaterland? Give us a hint.

    You certainly can’t speak for Americans here from 1620.

    “Why was she sent to Auschwitz? Her mother (and family) were probably serious-enough resistance fighters to be a threat to German troops…”

    There’s nothing like an Amero-Hungarian-want-to-be-holier-than-German spewing bogus smoke.

    Here’s a thought, Carolyn. Emigrate to Germany.

    No? Didn’t think so.

  270. Fox says:

    Carolyn Yeager’s post you are referring to made poignant, meaningful remarks to which you just add your sour displeasure. Why do you think she or her forebears in Transylvania were Hungarians? Were all of the millions of people the Poles drove away at gunpoint from Eastern Germany as soon as they had been given free reign to do so Poles or why commit this millennial crime that will hang around Poland’s neck forever?

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  271. Incitatus says:
    @Fox

    “Carolyn Yeager’s post you are referring to made poignant, meaningful remarks”

    Do you mean Hausfrau’s “trollish vultures show up to pick at its dead carcass”bit?

    Wonderful, but who is she – a diminutive character at best in the Third Reich she worships. Why is she enjoying the US, which her forbears did little/nothing to secure, and larking about poisoning discourse with neo-NSDAP nonsense? Under her admired régime, she’d be voiceless. Full stop.

    Carolyn should emigrate to Germany – no matter her Hungarian grandparents chose the USA instead (wonder why?).

    • Thanks: Skeptikal
  272. @nokangaroos

    ” . . . “Sink the Bismarck!” (1960) drew very irate protests from British nationalists because it painted the Germans as such bumbling idiots it became hard to explain how samesaid idiots tore the Royal Navy (pbuhn) a new one whenever they were outnumbered only 2-to-1. . . .”

    I presume you mean the Battle of Denmark Strait (May 24, 1941), in which BISMARCK and heavy cruiser PRINZ EUGEN sank the battlecruiser HOOD and damaged the battleship PRINCE OF WALES?

    Three days later, BISMARCK was sunk after a hopeless–and gallant!–action against Admiral Sir John Tovey’s battleships KING GEORGE V and RODNEY. The tactical situation was against BISMARCK. Owing to her damaged rudder, she was steering an erratic course, and could only make slow headway. Thus, she couldn’t keep her guns bearing. The British battleships, of course, had full freedom of action.

    But BISMARCK fought to the last. . . .

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  273. Bookish1 says:
    @Jaxa

    Why put a 14 year old girl in a camp? So they wouldn’t have to split the family. Otherwise the Germans would be accused of taking children away from their parents. It’s the same old victims stand with have heard over and over again and again.

  274. Mulegino1 says:

    Why do so many find it necessary to jump through the hoop of attributing absolute evil to National Socialist Germany? It must be some kind of shibboleth which serves as an unconditional pre-requisite for entering polite, politically correct society.

    There are many that concede that virtually all of the atrocities impugned to the “evil Nazis” were committed during a war for which neither Germany nor its leadership bear either sole or even preponderant responsibility. The Manichean Narrative of unchecked German bloodlust and aggression under the leadership of an unhinged madman has been demolished by many objective and scrupulously accurate historians.

    The Anglo-American Allies killed far more civilians in the European theater than did the Axis. It was the Allies (specifically the British) who began the deliberate area bombing of German cities with the express intention of killing and displacing as many civilian non-combatants as possible; this was not only admitted by officials of the RAF and Air Ministry, it was proudly and publicly boasted about, as in Spaight’s “Bombing Vindicated.” They were later joined in the perpetration of these monumental crimes by the USAAF.

    One wonders in what alternate universe the area bombing and deliberate infliction of death by incineration of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, is in any way morally comparable to forced conscription for labor, the taking of prisoners or the execution of partisans or hostages in a war zone. Both were morally wrong, but in no sense comparable in moral terms or magnitude.

    The latter wrongdoings involve the exigencies of a land war where the enemies (the Soviets and the partisans, and in many cases involving the so called ” Polish underground”*) were not bound by any rules regarding land warfare. The former involved deliberate and utterly indiscriminate mass murder.

    The same goes for the mass rapes perpetrated by the Soviets and, much lesser known, those carried out by the Allied “liberators” in the western European theater. We almost never hear about the thousands of rapes committed on the women in the villages around Monte Cassino, which were committed mostly by Moroccans fighting with the Free French forces under General Juin. Why not?

    There were undoubtedly rapes committed by Axis forces, but not on a scale comparable to the Allies. As far as deliberate mass murder by ground forces, nothing compares to the rampages of the Red Army, which were virtually indescribable, or the horrendous massacres carried out by Tito’s partisans in Yugoslavia.

    Among the many uses of the “Holocaust lie” is that of the easing of the feelings of guilt of the victors for their own real crimes. It never really happened, so it was necessary to extrapolate an untouchable sacred legend from crude Russian, international Jewish and Polish propaganda.

    *Interestingly enough, the uniformed members of the Polish Home Army captured by the Germans were given prisoner of war status.

  275. @Orville H. Larson

    To paraphrase Patton, you do not win a war by dying for your country but by making the other guy die for his country 😀
    After that particular incident they duly stopped the “heroic” operations.

    – What I meant is Germany never thought of herself as “ruling the waves”
    (Das Lied vom deutschen Admiral is a cry for national unity, not sea power),
    but in every instance (Coronel, Penang, Jutland, the La Plata estuary, the Denmark Strait etc.) it took more than 2x British superiority to win – which cannot have been good for their self-esteem 😛

  276. @Mulegino1

    They are running with the holohoax mythos because they are cowards.
    The “huwhite” who support these ridiculous lies are the scum who allowed every single suffering caused by liberalism/leftism/materialism to manifest. Their scumbag ancestors fought for it. It is logical that they too, will defend this wicked legacy to the end.

    “By their fruits you shall know them”.
    No repentance. Not one bit.
    And they will pay for that. Not one bullet will be fired. They are digging their own trap. The waves upon waves of invaders are divine retribution.

    • Agree: Mulegino1
  277. Incitatus says:
    @Mulegino1

    “The Anglo-American Allies killed far more civilians in the European theater than did the Axis.”?

    Being modest? 5,800,000 Polish civilians perished, (a fifth of pre-war population). In 1939 Polish ethnic Germans helped kill as many as 30,000 of 65,000 Poles. The death list included over 1,000 RC priests; nobility and intelligentsia; and – believe it or not – Polish Boy Scouts (used as army couriers). 57% of Polish judges and lawyers, 29% of Polish clergy were killed. An average 3,000 Poles (half Christian, half Jewish) died per day in occupation 1939-45.

    Add to that 76,000 Belgian civilians; 390,000 French civilians; 171,000 Greek civilians; 187,300 Dutch civilians; 8,200 Norwegian civilians; 67,200 British civilians; 4,100,000 Russian civilians; 3,700,000 Ukrainian civilians

    Estimates of German civilians killed by Allied bombing range between 353,000 to 434,000 souls, all tragic. But, sad to say, not “far more” than the millions the NSDAP inflicted. Quite the opposite.

    More telling: German domestic victims of the party are estimated at 400,000 to 600,000 deaths 1933-45. In other words, the NSDAP killed more Germans than Allied bombing! Any tears for them?

    Consider Warsaw civilians 1 Aug – 2 Oct 1944. 150,000-200,000 were killed, 700,000 were expelled from the city by forces under SS-Obergruppenführer Eric von dem Bach-Zelewski, including the Kaminski Brigade (SS-Sturmbrigade RONA) and the SS-Sturmbrigade Dirlewanger (both responsible for the Wola Massacre, the systemic murder of 40,000-50,000 Warsaw Poles 5-12 Aug ’44).

    “…yesterday only the men, in the days before also the women and children were killed…long columns of civilians [taken to western city outskirts]…the civilians are to be sorted out. There is said to be an order from Himmler to kill all the men. [The SS unit commander asked the 9th Army CIC] ‘What should I do with the civilians? I have less ammunition than prisoners’…From hour to hour the city is sinking through conflagrations and bombing into rubble. Streets of houses have to be systematically burned down. You have to close your eyes and your heart. The population is being destroyed pitilessly.”
    -Hauptmann Wilm Hosenfeld Tagebuch 8 Aug 1944 on clearing Polish civilians from Warsaw buildings

    This is what ‘Aryan’ Reichsführer-SS [former manure clerk who never served in combat] Heinrich Himmler decreed for Warsaw (17 Oct 1944):

    “The city [Warsaw] must completely disappear from the surface of the earth and serve only as a transport station for the Wehrmacht. No stone can remain standing. Every building must be razed to its foundation.”

    85% of Warsaw was leveled by Jan ’45 [10,455 buildings, 923 historical buildings (94%), 25 churches, 14 libraries (including the National Library) 81 primary schools, 64 high schools, University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology]. Warsaw population dropped from 1,310,000 [1939] to 162,000 [1945]. Soviet Captain Klochkov records:

    “We saw the destruction of Warsaw when we entered its empty streets on that memorable day 17 Jan 1945. Nothing was left but ruins and ashes covered by snow. Badly starved and exhausted residents were making their way home.”

    Any tears for them Mulegino1?

    Naturally, Heinie took a mulligan in defeat pretending to be Sergeant Heinrich Hitzinger. Discovered, he valiantly committed suicide. Why didn’t he desire to stand trial? Any thoughts?

    • Thanks: Skeptikal, Adûnâi
    • Troll: L.K, HeebHunter
  278. @Incitatus

    More crocodile tears and hilarious lies to cover up for the commie and kike lovers. Keep it up. It might just stop those right wing types in based pooland from importing more Bangladeshi and Pakistani “Aryans”.

    • Agree: Mulegino1, nokangaroos
  279. Bookish1 says:
    @Mulegino1

    And then there is the story I have heard many times how we could have killed all Germans. The truth is Stalin had a message for the west Germans that read all you have to do is be good communists and we will not kill you. American intelligence intercepted the message and gave the order hands off Germans. We all know what would have happened if the message would have gotten through and the west Germans would have accepted it. But it gives a little good guy feeling to know that we were decent enough not to commit genocide of the Germans.

    • Replies: @Mulegino1
    , @Bookish1
  280. Mulegino1 says:
    @Incitatus

    Being modest? 5,800,000 Polish civilians perished, (a fifth of pre-war population). In 1939 Polish ethnic Germans helped kill as many as 30,000 of 65,000 Poles. The death list included over 1,000 RC priests; nobility and intelligentsia; and – believe it or not – Polish Boy Scouts (used as army couriers). 57% of Polish judges and lawyers, 29% of Polish clergy were killed. An average 3,000 Poles (half Christian, half Jewish) died per day in occupation 1939-45.

    Add to that 76,000 Belgian civilians; 390,000 French civilians; 171,000 Greek civilians; 187,300 Dutch civilians; 8,200 Norwegian civilians; 67,200 British civilians; 4,100,000 Russian civilians; 3,700,000 Ukrainian civilians

    Estimates of German civilians killed by Allied bombing range between 353,000 to 434,000 souls, all tragic. But, sad to say, not “far more” than the millions the NSDAP inflicted. Quite the opposite.

    None of these figures- which appear to be totally free and arbitrary inventions of Soviet, Polish, international Jewish propaganda- can be even remotely corroborated. Did you include among the total the over 2,000,000 gassed victims of Majdanek, which have been revised downwards to a few tens of thousands- virtually all of disease? How about the 4,000,000 allegedly murdered at Auschwitz-Birkenau, when the death albums show something like 60,000 or so- of all causes, principally typhus? Where are the thousands of mass graves which must exist- to this day- of your alleged over 5,000,000 Polish victims? The only such mass graves commensurate with tens of thousands of victims are the ones such as those at Katyn- victims of the Soviet NKVD, not the SS or the German Army. These mass graves were exhumed and forensically examined in the presence of international observers and even Allied prisoners of war. Please enlighten

    Hearsay, coerced testimony- such as that of Dembach-Zelewski- and claims of diary entries (which can certainly be forged or altered by the winning side) are not reliable as evidence unless they can be corroborated as physical evidence.

    The Warsaw Uprising was a major battle of the war, not a skirmish or a police action. Yet the fact remains that the soldiers of the Polish Home Army-who were fighting the Germans at the behest of their Soviet “liberators” watching from across the Vistula River (and doing nothing to help their “Slavic brothers”)- were given p.o.w. status. It was only natural that Warsaw would be dealt with harshly by the Germans. All one has to do is recall what the Americans did to the Iraqi city of Fallujah in retaliation (for far less). But there was no German plan to exterminate the Poles. It was the Soviets, not the Germans, who ended up enslaving the Poles for nearly 50 years.

    We have actual photographs of Polish p.o.w.’s at Dachau taken by Allied correspondents after the US Army captured the camp showing them to be in high spirits and by all appearances well fed.

    As far as the Soviet and Ukrainian casualties go, you appear to imply that over 10,000,000 were the victims of German barbarity, as opposed to casualties of war. These numbers are greatly inflated (there are now estimated to have been approximately 7,500,000 casualties sustained by the USSR. You fail to take into consideration the brutality of Red Army commanders’ tactics with regard to their own men, the penal batallions, and the NKVD blocking units, and Stalin’s conditional sentence of death to any members of the Soviet military who allowed themselves to be taken prisoner. It was the USSR and not Germany that refused to abide by the rules of land warfare and the treatment of prisoners of war. Without a reciprocal agreement to feed and care for prisoners of war, how were the Germans supposed to adequately feed and care for the millions of Soviet p.o.w.’s, when most German soldiers captured by the Soviets were starved or transported to the Gulag?

    Have you ever heard of the Vlasov Army? Nearly a million Red Army prisoners of war chose to fight against the USSR on the side of the Germans? I wonder why.

    The death tolls you quote for countries such as France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, etc. appear to be total deaths from the war (mostly due to Allied bombing) and not German brutality. Again, where are these enormous mass graves- in France, Belgium, the Netherlands, etc. of “Nazi victims”? How does such horrendous brutality explain the tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of non-German volunteers in the Waffen SS? The last unit defending the Chancellery during the Battle of Berlin were French members of the Waffen SS Charlemagne Division.

    It is clear that you are using the alleged “Nazi” genocide of the Poles and other non-Germans as an attempt to garner sympathy for your 6,000,000 fraud and pseudo-religion. You’re not fooling anyone. Stop trolling.

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  281. Mulegino1 says:
    @Bookish1

    The truth is Stalin had a message for the west Germans that read all you have to do is be good communists and we will not kill you.

    Stalin- Antifa and BLM?

    The irony is that such Trotskyites as they would take a page from their hero’s deadliest enemy.

  282. “Jews have no respect for Christianity, for Jesus Christ or Mary, his mother, who are both honored as Prophets in Islam, but instead, Jews spit on hearing their names and do the same while passing a Christian of any kind or a Christian Church in Israel. They have no respect for Christians or any other religion.”

    Julius Streicher the publisher of the so called “virulently anti-Semitic” Der Sturmer, was disgusted by the portrayal of Jesus in the Talmud but nobody calls out the Jews as being virulently anti-Christian although the spirit of the Talmud is exactly that from the passages which I have read recently.

    Incidentally Streicher, whilst waiting for his turn at the kangaroo court in Nuremberg, had the guards force “open his mouth two or three times a day so that they could spit into it…forced him to drink out of the urinal.. eat putrid leftovers” as well as being beaten around the genitals daily. (p. 51). Yes that sure taught the evil Nazis to behave like the blessed allies and learn how civilized people operate.

    Of the 22 on the initial Nuremberg hit list of major German players who would be subject to predetermined verdicts by hypocrites 13 were Lutheran, 5 Catholic and the remaining 4 who listed themselves as “non-sectarian” (p. 104, Nuremberg, Irvine).

    Adolf Hitler. Heinrich Himmler, Joseph Goebbels were all formed as Catholics which reflects the profile of the early National Socialist movement – see “Catholicism & The Roots of Nazism” (Derek Hastiings, Oxford University Press),

    People who are critical of Christianity because of a perceived passivity based on how the Churches have been transformed in Judeo-Christianity are being seriously misled and should research how Jews and Judaisers were not allowed to do what they do today which is a very modern phenomena. They were regarded, based on the words of Jesus, as the children of the devil because that is the way they behaved.

    • Replies: @HeebHunter
  283. @Jack McArthur

    The clown trial called Nürnbergprozess is the biggest evidence why the (((west))) deserves to be exterminated.
    What they did to Streicher wasn’t even the worse. Not one unrepentant bastard will escape divine judgement.
    Hope the kikes, amerimutts and their other lackeys enjoy what is to come.

  284. Bookish1 says:
    @Bookish1

    The truth is we were genociding the Germans. We took from them any means that they had of self survival after causing the greatest human engineered destruction in the history of the world.

  285. Skeptikal says:
    @Colin Wright

    “I’m thinking . . . I’d guess . . .presumably . . .”

    You are just winging it.

    I don’t think you actually know anything about the history you are making all of these “logical” presumptions about.

    I doubt that you know anything about why there would be a big increase in the number of “Volksdeutsche” in Poland after 1939.

    • Troll: Colin Wright
  286. Skeptikal says:
    @Jaxa

    Hey, don’t blame Wagner for the people who liked his music, or made use of the mythic themes in this operas.

    Wagner was a leftist revolutionary who had to flee Germany after the political turbulence of 1848.

    Later his political views changed. But in the meantime he led an extraordinary life and produced extraordinary art under very challenging circumstances.

    So I think puny minds should probably just leave Wagner out of it.

    • Agree: Colin Wright
  287. Skeptikal says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Here’s what you said, #130:

    “@fnn

    It seems very unlikely that starvation was in anyone’s mind at “the beginning of WW1” . Sources needed.

    Perhaps the Germans sending cruisers to shell civilians in NE cities like Hartlepool in December 1914 may have helped the Brits toughen up.”

    After this snotty and ignorant comment you wrote:
    “Yes, by mid 1917 it was no holds barred on both sides.”

    It was no holds barred long before that. But first on the British side.

    Both of these statements of yours are negated by Churchill’s own statement regarding the commencement and the purpose of the British Navy’s blockade of Germany.

    Your lofty “it seems very unlikely” means zero.

    This was your initial dumb comment that got you into trouble. Since then you have been spewing testosterone.

  288. @Mulegino1

    ‘Interestingly enough, the uniformed members of the Polish Home Army captured by the Germans were given prisoner of war status.’

    Yeah — but I doubt it was out of the goodness of the Germans’ hearts. Rather, while the Polish position had become hopeless, they were obviously going to fight on for some time if they had nothing to lose — and the Germans really had other problems at the time.

    So the Germans agreed to terms so that they could end the fighting and get on with the rest of their war…or so I would assume.

  289. @Incitatus

    ‘…Estimates of German civilians killed by Allied bombing range between 353,000 to 434,000 souls, all tragic. But, sad to say, not “far more” than the millions the NSDAP inflicted. Quite the opposite…’

    I don’t object to your recitation of the numbers of the victims of German atrocities.

    However, to then proceed to completely omit the massive slaughter inflicted on the German civilian populations of Silesia, East Prussia, and Eastern Europe is decidedly repellent. To take one small sample, when Konigsberg fell to the Russians, 100,000 German civilians were caught there. Two years later, when the survivors were deported, only 25,000 were left.

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  290. @Fox

    ‘…In comments here and elsewhere one quite often encounters the opinion that Petain was a traitor for having signed the armistice and worked with the German occupation authorities…’

    I think the French of 1940 can hardly be called ‘traitors.’ At most, they can be accused of a kind of egotism; France had been overrun, ergo the war was lost. It must have seemed to them that Britain was simply refusing to accept the obvious.

    One has to remember that up to June 1940, France was considered — and certainly considered herself — a great power. In fact, her army was commonly accounted the most powerful in the world. So if she was beaten, attempting to continue the struggle was transparently futile.

    That this view of affairs turned out to be mistaken does not demonstrate that Petain et al were traitors. They were the government of France, taking the necessary steps in the face of accomplished facts. Germany had won the war.

  291. @Skeptikal

    Still digging I see. BTW you don’t seem to have followed up on the Churchill quotes. He may have been quite callous about non-Europeans and low class colonies like Australians but he didn’t want Germans to starve.

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  292. Incitatus says:
    @Mulegino1

    “None of these figures [civilian deaths inflicted by Germany] – which appear to be totally free and arbitrary inventions of Soviet, Polish, international Jewish propaganda- can be even remotely corroborated.”

    It’s reasonable to disagree on figures if you can offer something more than innuendo. Sadly, I’m not a Soviet/Polish/Jewish propagandist (do you check under your bed every night for them)? Instead, the inevitable whining KZ body count. Never mentioned it, don’t care. Waste of time on UR, which usually descends into a tit-for-tat ‘who’s the bigger victim’ body count.

    “We have actual photographs of Polish p.o.w.’s at Dachau taken by Allied correspondents after the US Army captured the camp showing them to be in high spirits and by all appearances well fed. “

    Doubtless you also have codoh post-cards hawking Dachau as a vacation destination with ample amenities (all credit-cards accepted)!

    2720 clergy were imprisoned in Dachau from 1935 (2579 RCs, 109 Lutherans, 22 Greek Orthodox, etc.). 447 were German priests. 697 Polish clerics arrived December 1941, another 500 – mainly elderly – October 1942. Inadequately clothed, 82 survived. Many were chosen for medical experiments (look up Dr. Klaus Schilling: malaria experiments were conducted on 1200 prisoners 1941-45 on Himmler’s orders; as many as 440 died from malaria and other diseases related to reduced immunity).

    Yes, indeed “high spirits” at Dachau 29 Apr 1945 liberation. Against all odds, some survived.

    What of Pastor Niemöller (imprisoned 1937-45)? WW1 U-Boat Kapitaine hero, Freikorp veteran and early Hitler supporter who – as a Christian – parted ways with the Führer. Why was he a threat to Clubfoot Joe and the Austrian?

    “Pastor Niemöller finally arrested [1 Jul 1937]. Small mention of this in the press. The thing now is to break him so that he can’t believe his eyes or ears. We must never let up.”
    – Joseph Göbbels Tagebücher Teil 1, Vol 4 entry for 3 Jul 1937 p.208 [Ulrich ‘Hitler: Ascent’ p.655]

    “[Pastor Niemöller] will not be released until he has been broken. Opposition to the state will not be tolerated.”
    – Adolf Hitler to Joseph Göbbels en route to Ludendorff’s funeral [Göbbels Tagebücher Teil 1, Vol 5 entry for 22 Dec 1937 p.65; Ulrich ‘Hitler: Ascent’ p.655]

    What do you think “broken” meant? Ruined body and spirit? Rendered dysfunctional?

    Was “opposition to the state” a crime applied to anyone who disagreed with the former Austrian dropout/vagabond?

    [MORE]

    Tell us why Niemöller was held for eight years at Dachau.

    “The death tolls you quote for countries such as France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, etc. appear to be total deaths from the war (mostly due to Allied bombing) and not German brutality.”

    Most estimates are ± 70,000 French civilians killed by Allied bombing, leaving 320,000 otherwise killed.

    Hint. Look up Herbert Backe and his ‘Hunger-Plan’. The French were rationed 1180 calories per day (Germans got 2700-4650), all while France payed 146 billion francs [7.3 billion Reichmarks] per year for occupation [=400 million francs/day, six times the actual cost, a sum sufficient to maintain a modern army of 18 million men]. Germany milked France for every penny, starved them at the same time.

    Backe (on record expecting 20-30 million ‘Slavs’ will starve to death in order to feed the Fatherland and German army) hanged himself 6 Apr 1946. Wonder why.

    “But there was no German plan to exterminate the Poles.”

    Are you sure?

    “Close your hearts to pity! Act brutally!…Be harsh and remorseless! Be steeled against all signs of compassion! …[I want] the physical annihilation of the enemy…I have put my Death’s Head formations at the lead with the command to send man, woman, and child of Polish descent and language to their deaths, pitilessly and remorselessly.”
    -Adolf Hitler address to military commanders prior to Case White 21 Aug 1939
    Shirer: ‘Rise and Fall of the Third Reich’ p.532;
    Evans: ‘The Third Reich at War’ p.11;
    Wittman & Kinney: ‘The Devil’s Diary’ p.246.

    What did Mr. Big mean by “physical annihilation”? How does that differ with “extermination”? Give us a hint.

    “It is clear that you are using the alleged “Nazi” genocide of the Poles and other non-Germans as an attempt to garner sympathy for your 6,000,000 fraud and pseudo-religion. You’re not fooling anyone. Stop trolling.”

    LOL! The murder of Polish intelligentsia is well established. Mentioning it means I’m default Jewish on a Holocaust quest? Are you serious? Can’t answer basic questions, so you switch the subject? Sad joke. The 6 million is your white whale, good luck!

    “How does such horrendous brutality explain the tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of non-German volunteers in the Waffen SS? The last unit defending the Chancellery during the Battle of Berlin were French members of the Waffen SS Charlemagne Division.”

    Indeed Beevor’s ‘The Fall of Berlin 1945’ amply portrays it. Why were French Waffen SS defending Hitler (where were the Germans)? Spent after the selfish, sucidal Austrian wanted to kill their families if they surrendered?

    Foreign (and other) nationals in the Waffen-SS were aspiring German-want-to-be careerists. Enlist in the dominate power, make the most of yourself). Léon Degrelle (claimed Hitler thought of him as a son, ended up in Spain). Why didn’t he go back to Belgium? Maybe because he’d be hung a traitor – and he knew it?

    • Replies: @Mulegino1
  293. Incitatus says:
    @Colin Wright

    Am I missing something?

    “I don’t object to your recitation of the numbers of the victims of German atrocities.”

    Does that include German victims of NSDAP “atrocities”? Do you even know about them? Doubt it.

    “However, to then proceed to completely omit the massive slaughter inflicted on the German civilian populations of Silesia, East Prussia, and Eastern Europe is decidedly repellent.”

    Well, sorry for that.

    Any thoughts about Baltic German ethnics forcibly ‘relocated’ (expelled as refugees) under the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact 1939-40? Was it OK for Hitler/Stalin to strip ethnics of property and force them to move to confiscated Polish property (the happy millennial Third Reich) after 1 Sep 1939?

    What about them – the first German victims?

    Of course ethic Germans were expelled from the east in the collapse of the Third Reich, and many died. Each one tragic. It was a transaction ignited by a short-lived Austrian media star that made Germans into lemmings. No less in 1939-40 when he screwed them in the Baltics.

    • Replies: @Fox
  294. Fox says:
    @Incitatus

    There was nothing in the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact that stipulated the Soviet occupation of the Baltic States. That’s what they did the following year after occupying Congress Poland (also not stipulated in the pact) in September of 1939, attacking Finnland (in December of 1939) and beginning to build up military strength along the line of demarcation with Germany in summer 0f 1940.

  295. Mulegino1 says:
    @Incitatus

    “Close your hearts to pity! Act brutally!…Be harsh and remorseless! Be steeled against all signs of compassion! …[I want] the physical annihilation of the enemy…I have put my Death’s Head formations at the lead with the command to send man, woman, and child of Polish descent and language to their deaths, pitilessly and remorselessly.”

    This is the speech Hitler supposedly gave to his generals before the invasion of Poland? I believe the longer quote has Goering jumping up on a table and dancing a happy jig at Hitler’s alleged brutal admonition.

    The idea that Hitler would have spoken to a cadre of high ranking officers in this fashion is ludicrous. It is a fraudulent quote.

    However unhappy the lot of Pastor Niemoller was, or how unjust his imprisonment may have been, he was not executed and lived until 1984. In the vast majority of cases, the members of the clergy imprisoned in the camps were not there because of their beliefs, but because of their political activism.

    In this regard, is interesting that the Archbishop of Munster, (later Cardinal) Von Galen the leader of the public protest against the T-4 euthanasia policy, circulated a letter protesting the policy among the Catholic hierarchy which was read publicly by all Bishops in Germany in their pulpits on a given Sunday. Yet no member of the Catholic hierarchy was imprisoned for this, and Hitler, under public pressure, rescinded the policy.

    The Christian clergy certainly fared far, far better in Hitler’s Germany than it did in the USSR, under the Spanish Republic, or during the Reign of Terror of the “Grande Revolution.”

    With respect to the number of French civilians killed- how many were killed as “collateral damage” from combat operations during the so called “Liberation of France”? How many of those innocent French citizens murdered by the French Maquis immediately after the war were included in this total?

    You try to pull the trick of attributing all civilian deaths on German brutality.

    Answer me this? Did the French or Belgian people as a whole ask the Allies to invade their countries? Did the Italians? Were they all enamored of bombs or shelling of their cities, towns and villages because those dropping the bombs and firing the artillery were “liberators”? How did “liberation” by the Red Army work out for the Poles? No doubt every dead Pole, according to you, was a victim of German barbarity- as if the Soviets had not invaded Eastern Poland a little over two weeks after the outbreak of the war. If the Nuremberg IMT attempted to blame the Germans for the NKVD massacres at Katyn, what crimes the victors committed would not be blamed on the Germans?

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
    , @Incitatus
  296. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Mulegino1

    > “The idea that Hitler would have spoken to a cadre of high ranking officers in this fashion is ludicrous. It is a fraudulent quote.”

    From what I know, Hitler’s reference to the so-called “Armenian genocide” is faked, at least.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler’s_Armenian_reference

    > “The Christian clergy certainly fared far, far better in Hitler’s Germany than it did in the USSR, under the Spanish Republic, or during the Reign of Terror of the “Grande Revolution.””

    This is precisely the reason I admire the Communists – not in their transvestite principles, but in their brutal reality.

    > ” Did the French or Belgian people as a whole ask the Allies to invade their countries? Did the Italians?”

    Yes and yes – in part. The French society was torn apart in a civil war between the French State of Maréchal Pétain and traitor de Gaulle (the one with the Lotharingian cross on his flag). Italy experienced a coup d’état (or what people would call these days, a “colour[ed] revolution” à la 2014 Ukraine), and concluded a separate peace treaty with the Christians.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_France
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Fascist_regime_in_Italy

    > “How did “liberation” by the Red Army work out for the Poles? No doubt every dead Pole, according to you, was a victim of German barbarity- as if the Soviets had not invaded Eastern Poland a little over two weeks after the outbreak of the war.”

    Poland still exists as a state to this very day. What the USSR did in 1939 was take back the East Slavic territories the imperialist régime of bourgeois Poland had illegally tore away from the Land of the Councils. Meanwhile, the Germans intended to destroy the Polish people as a biological race. The two are incomparable. The membership in the Warsaw Pact was not an act of genocide (if anything, it saved them from rampant transvestitism of the Christians).
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_crimes_against_the_Polish_nation

    > “If the Nuremberg IMT attempted to blame the Germans for the NKVD massacres at Katyn, what crimes the victors committed would not be blamed on the Germans?”

    Katyn was perpetrated by the Germans. That PaediWikia does not mention the German pistols used at the site does not incriminate the USSR, but instead puts blame on the success of the capitalist brainwashing machine. Modern researchers don’t doubt that Gorbachev faked the archives to incriminate the Communist Party. That’s how traitors work, and Gorbachev was a traitor.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Katyn

    • Replies: @Mulegino1
    , @HeebHunter
  297. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Sollipsist

    > “One of the phrases that you never hear about the populations targeted by Nazis is “only now are they starting to recover.””

    Try reading the demographics of any Eastern European city for once in your life. The Jews disappear when the Germans come. The Poles disappear when the Bolshevik Russians come. The entire Yiddish language is almost extinct due to the Holocaust. Flaunting your ignorance is not a good sight.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yiddish

    Prior to the Holocaust, there were 11–13 million speakers of Yiddish among 17 million Jews worldwide. 85% of the approximately 6 million Jews who died in the Holocaust were Yiddish speakers, leading to a massive decline in the use of the language.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaunas#Demographics

    1897 – Yiddish 25,052 – 35%
    1923 – Jews – 27.1% (25,044)
    2011 – Other – 1.6%

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Sollipsist
  298. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @utu

    > “More books are needed to show Soviet crimes.”

    The Soviets lost 27 million people to save the ungrateful Polish nation from sure extermination, and the Western Christianity from annihilation at the hands of the Hitlerjugend.

    > “He is not anti-Russian but anti-Soviet.”

    Time and time again, the two terms are synonymous. Liar Solzhenitsyn was both. Jew Garry Kasparov is both. Traitor Gorbachev and Yeltsin were both. The fall of the USSR was as suicidal for the Russian Volksgemeinschaft as school negrification under JF Kennedy was for the remaining Aryans of the USA.

    On the Poles and the Ukrainians – the two nations hate one another vehemently, and killed tens of thousands of one another in WW2 under the German occupation. And they are both Christian – when I visited a local museum in Western Ukraine, there was nothing about the Volhynian massacre there. (Obviously, as an anti-Christian Ukrainian, I would celebrate those “atrocities” as they furthered the agenda of my people and my family who no longer have to suck the noble Polish cock thanks to those genocides and to Stalin – the silence around those heroic deeds is one of the reasons our whole race is dying.)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  299. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Colin Wright

    > “…yet the British never found anything even remotely approaching Nazi crimes in Poland to be necessary. When we found ourselves starting to head down that slope in the Philippine Insurrection around 1900, we drew back, rethought our drink, and went with the ‘little brown brothers’ tack instead.”

    How can a functional brain produce something like this? Are you literally putting forward the failure of the European/American Empires as an argument against the brutality of the National Socialist régime? Christians, ladies and gentlemen, you may learn everything about them in 10 seconds (Galatians 3:28), but they will still surprise you by their sheer audacity!

    Patrick J. Buchanan – Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War, pp. 186, 187

    “Shoot Gandhi!”
    A startled Halifax fell silent, as Hitler went into a rant:
    “Shoot Gandhi! And if that does not suffice to reduce them to submission, shoot a dozen leading members of Congress; and if that does not suffice, shoot 200 and so on until order is established.”
    “During this tirade,” writes biographer Andrew Roberts, citing a diplomat present, Halifax, a lay leader in the Anglican Church, “gazed at Hitler with a mixture of astonishment, repugnance and compassion. He indicated dissent, but it would have been a waste of time to argue.”

  300. Mulegino1 says:
    @Adûnâi

    One point re:

    Katyn was perpetrated by the Germans. That PaediWikia does not mention the German pistols used at the site does not incriminate the USSR, but instead puts blame on the success of the capitalist brainwashing machine.

    The NKVD did use German Walther pistols, because they were of smaller caliber than the standard Soviet issue sidearms, which had a much stronger kick when fired. The use of German sidearms does not implicate the Germans, since Germany and the USSR were trading partners at the time of the executions.

    In addition, the Germans carried out a forensic examination of the mass graves which remains the gold standard for such investigations, and conducted them in the presence of both neutral observers and Allied prisoners of war.

    With all due respect, coherence does not appear to be your strong point. What language are you thinking in? What are “transvestite principles”?

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  301. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Mulegino1

    > “The NKVD did use German Walther pistols, because they were of smaller caliber than the standard Soviet issue sidearms, which had a much stronger kick when fired.”

    Then how did the Soviets murder that trillion of innocent kulaks? Was Katyn unique in that respect?

    Even if they did it, the Poles deserved it, as Wikipedia points out. The Poles had starved 20k Russian POWs to death in concentration camps. But of course, the Western Nazis would rather talk about “Jewish Bolsheviks hating Jew-worshippers” than the legitimate grievances of the great Russian race. (I’m also of the opinion that Stalin should have ethnically cleansed the GDR, so my “defending” Katyn is a mere tribute to Leninism.)

    [MORE]

    > “In addition, the Germans carried out a forensic examination of the mass graves which remains the gold standard for such investigations, and conducted them in the presence of both neutral observers and Allied prisoners of war.”

    If anything remains the gold standard, that’s the immortal meme of lying Dr. Goebbels. Either way, you have to concede that Katyn is politicised, that National Socialists wanted to incriminate the Soviets, the Bolsheviks sought to exonerate themselves in turn, and the bourgeois gays have had a gag reflex since Fulton at the mere mention of the USSR like a demon at the sign of the cross (excuse the Christian idiom), so forgive me for taking the [slightly and formerly] more heterosexual side.

    > “With all due respect, coherence does not appear to be your strong point. What language are you thinking in? What are “transvestite principles”?”

    Even though I have missed a few definite articles in my previous post (“the blame”), I do try to convey in my American speech thoughts Americaphobic to the extreme. Transvestitism is clearly the ultimate conclusion of both Christianity and liberal capitalism. And from what I understand, even the atheistic Communists in America support those sick perversions these days. This is why I try to separate the good name of the USSR, especially under Stalin, from the terrible fame of the Communists of the West. That filth comes from Christianity – case in point, neither Socialist Korea nor China are gay or Christian. (I would even say that old European Marxism might have been gay because Marx was a Jew, and early Soviet Russia was still Christian, thus prone to gay universalism.)

  302. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Observator

    > “…and more: how the phony American “democracy of dollars” is in fact run by Wall Street plutocrats and is scheming to provoke a world war from the ruins of which it plans to emerge as the global superpower.”

    That’s quite obvious to anyone outside America. Not a breakthrough propaganda point.

    > “And I read that the German Reich was as fearlessly committed to breaking the stranglehold of international capitalism as it was to destroying totalitarian communism…”

    Fighting against the bankers by… destroying the only worker’s dictatorship in the world! Nice.

    > “…to building a new world order in which war would be outlawed and international relations would be based on cooperation and recognition of mutual interests among disparate peoples.”

    This is literally what the Gaymericans such as Bush, Habermas and Apel have done to the world since 1945. Why didn’t America settle Hokkaido with blonde Aryans? Why didn’t they nuke Hanoi?

    > “The idea that Germany’s entire philosophy and national purpose was based on destroying Jews is absurd…”

    Nobody outside stupid America believes such nonsense. The main point of Hitlerian Germania was the attack on the USSR. The biggest invasion in the history of man, it led to the death of 27 mil. Soviet citizens. And it was an act of aggression, i.e., an unprovoked war. Goes against Christian principles, to which the Soviets used to appeal.

    > “…the truly bizarre theory that they wanted to take over the world.”

    Yes, they wanted to. No, the Germans did not intend to conquer France or England, let alone America, so the declaration of war by the Powers of the West on 1939-09-03 was merely a suicidal, self-righteous crusade against the revived Heathenry in Mitteleuropa.

    > “The successful demonizing of the Third Reich is the foundation for today’s propaganda effort against China, Russia, Iran, Syria, etc., nations which also refuse to meekly accept American global hegemony.”

    Healthy America would have exterminated all those foreign countries. What you are saying, this friendship of the free peoples nonsense, would have been approved by Roosevelt himself.

  303. Incitatus says:
    @Mulegino1

    “Close your hearts to pity! Act brutally!…”
    “This is the speech Hitler supposedly gave to his generals before the invasion of Poland? I believe the longer quote has Goering jumping up on a table and dancing a happy jig at Hitler’s alleged brutal admonition.”

    Really? Doubt Göring could “jump” any more than hippos can fly.

    If you can disprove mainstream sources, please do so. Of course Ron Unz thinks you need no evidence, just passive-aggressive ‘feelings’ born of an otherwise insignificant life looking at the dull-blue screen to re-wright history. Hence the golden border (stay tuned, maybe he’ll offer you a star).

    “However unhappy the lot of Pastor Niemoller was, or how unjust his imprisonment may have been, he was not executed and lived until 1984.”

    True. But why was Niemöller imprisoned without trial after serving his sentence in 1937? What did Göbbels and Hitler mean by “breaking” him? Second request. Give us a hint.

    Tell us about Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer, hung 9 Apr 1945 at Flossenburg with six others. What was his crime?

    “the members of the clergy imprisoned in the camps were not there because of their beliefs, but because of their political activism.”

    Most were imprisoned because of their beliefs, otherwise known as religious conscience, which conflicted with paranoid, suicidal Austrian Mr. Big (who wanted to “break” them”). Try again.

    “The Christian clergy certainly fared far, far better in Hitler’s Germany than it did in the USSR, under the Spanish Republic, or during the Reign of Terror of the “Grande Revolution.””

    You were talking about NSDAP Germany, now (unable to defend yourself) you hunt far afield? Why not mention Roman persecution of early Christians (fed to lions, wild beasts)? Slipping?

    “Answer me this? Did the French or Belgian people as a whole ask the Allies to invade their countries?”

    LOL! Did they ask Germans to invade? Think carefully.

    “Did the Italians [ask the Allies to invade]”?

    Ah Germany’s problematic love-hate unfaithful ally.

    Didn’t Italy surrender to the Allies late 1943? Prompting Germany to be the first to invade? Any thoughts on that, the million Italian POWs – 700,000 sent to Germany as forced labor without Geneva protection? How many died? Tell us about that.

    “You try to pull the trick of attributing all civilian deaths on German brutality.”

    Really? Projection? Quotes please.

    You seem unable to distinguish between corrupt, incompetent crony NSDAP leadership (the party comprised at best of 10% population) and ordinary Germans. Why?

    “How did “liberation” by the Red Army work out for the Poles?

    Ask the Poles.

    “No doubt every dead Pole, according to you, was a victim of German barbarity- as if the Soviets had not invaded Eastern Poland a little over two weeks after the outbreak of the war. If the Nuremberg IMT attempted to blame the Germans for the NKVD massacres at Katyn, what crimes the victors committed would not be blamed on the Germans?”

    Really? Projection again? Quotes please?

    Combatant nations kill people. Remarkable you want only to exonerate Germany (first to invade, first to ignite the mess).

    • Replies: @Fox
  304. Fox says:
    @Incitatus

    Since you ask so dumbly, the French did declare war on Germany on Sept. 3, 1939 (a few hours after Britain’s declaration of war). That did entail the use of force against her by Germany. Belgium was colluding with Britain and France in 1940 as in 1914 by pretending to be neutral but in reality acting in concert with these two countries to wage war against Germany. That is like asking for trouble and is equivalent to inviting armed conflict.

    I am writing this comment solely for the benefit of those readers of your comment whom I want to remind of the unpopular knowledge: It was France and England declaring war on Germany and they refused to reconsider despite several German attempts to end the state of war before May 10, 1940; this included the agreement by Germany to the proposal of Mussolini on September 1, 1939 to call all parties to a conference. Everyone agreed but England. Germany was even willing to halt all further military operations. But that was not enough for the people in London who up to September 1, 1939 left no stone unturned to make sure that there was no solution without conflict of arms.

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
    , @Incitatus
  305. @Adûnâi

    Even the numbers you yourself employ don’t support your claims.

    If there were 11-13 million speakers of Yiddish, and 85% of the six million Jews you claim the Germans killed were Yiddish speakers, then 5.1 million Yiddish speakers died, leaving between 5.9 and 7.9 million alive.

    Given that, it’s obvious nonsense to claim, as you do, that ‘The entire Yiddish language is almost extinct due to the Holocaust. ‘

    • Thanks: Sollipsist
  306. @Adûnâi

    ‘The Soviets lost 27 million people to save the ungrateful Polish nation from sure extermination, and the Western Christianity from annihilation at the hands of the Hitlerjugend.’

    They had selfish motives for resisting as well.

    …you’re kinda fun. Maybe you could marry Fran Taubman and live happily ever after.

  307. Adûnâi says: • Website
    @Fox

    > “Belgium was colluding with Britain and France in 1940 as in 1914 by pretending to be neutral but in reality acting in concert with these two countries to wage war against Germany.”

    Patrick J. Buchanan – Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War, p. 224 (Shirer, Third Republic, p. 356)

    In May 1938, in the unkindest cut of all, Belgian troops maneuvered on the French frontier, as the Belgian foreign minister put it, to “show you that if you come our way in order to support Czechoslovakia, you will run up against the Belgian army.”

    What had changed between the two Septembers? Hitler showed his untrustworthiness by occupying Böhmen, that’s what.

  308. Incitatus says:
    @Fox

    “Since you ask so dumbly, the French did declare war on Germany on Sept. 3, 1939 (a few hours after Britain’s declaration of war).”

    Earth-shattering news, Fox. Thanks.

    Just like Mr. Big’s:

    <i>“This [Sudetenland] is the last territorial demand I have to make in Europe, but it is a demand on which I will not yield.”
    – Adolf Hitler, Berlin 26 Sep 1938

    Of course, after winning Sudetenland (Müncher Abkommen 30 Sep 1938) and signing Chamberlains “peace in our time” (while ordering the invasion of Czechoslovakia), he had new ‘territorial demands’ (including Memel: planned from 21 Oct 1938)). Forget that?

    Tell us why Sudetenland wasn’t (as promised) Hitler’s “last territorial demand”. Was he lying 26 Sep 1938? Buying time while rearming? Give us a hint.

    Ordinary Germans embraced Chamberlains “peace in our time”, spoiling the Führer’s mood:

    “There is no way I can wage war with this [German] people.”
    -Adolf Hitler on popular delight at Chamberlain’s ‘peace in our time’ and the bloodless Munich Agreement [Erich Kordt ‘Nicht aus dem Akten…Die Wilhelmstrasse in Frieden und Krieg, p.260; Volker Ullrich ‘Hitler: Ascent’ p.745]

    Don’t get me wrong – kudos for stepping in for Mulegino1’s not-so-brave defense:

    “Answer me this? Did the French or Belgian people as a whole ask the Allies to invade their countries?”
    LOL! Did they ask Germans to invade? Think carefully.

    Belgium didn’t declare war on Germany. But, like Luxembourg, Holland, Denmark, Norway, it was vital. Not to worry:

    “The fate of the Reich depends only on me…Wars are always ended by the annihilation of the opponent. Anyone who believes otherwise is irresponsible…Breach of neutrality of Belgium and Holland is of no importance. No one will question that when we have won
    -Adolf Hitler Address to Military Staff Justifying Western Attack Plans 23 Nov 1939 [Childers ‘The Third Reich’ p.456];

    Guess what? They didn’t win.

    I’d ask you to explain the German invasion of ally Italy and forced labor, but what’s the point?

    “people in London who up to September 1, 1939 left no stone unturned to make sure that there was no solution without conflict of arms.”

    Wait! Doesn’t this (after sucking up to Adolf the peaceful in München, only to be proven wrong) comport with the Führer’s own Darwinian (dog-eat-dog) world-view?

    “He who wants to live should fight, therefore, and he who does not want to battle in this world of eternal struggle does not deserve to be alive.”
    -Adolf Hitler ‘Mein Kampf’ Chapter 11 Volume 1, 1925

    “Truly, this earth is a trophy cup for the industrious man. And this rightly so, in the service of natural selection. He who does not possess the force to secure his Lebensraum in this world, and, if necessary, to enlarge it, does not deserve to possess the necessities of life. He must step aside and allow stronger peoples to pass him by.”
    -Adolf Hitler Speech to officer cadets at the Berlin Sportpalast, 18 December 1940

    “[The Führer said] if the German People turned out to be weak, they would deserve nothing else than to be extinguished by a stronger people; then one could have no sympathy for them.”
    – Adolf Hitler to Joseph Göbbels, Tagebücher 8 Feb 1943 [part II vol. 7 p.296; Beevor ‘The Second World War’ p.544]

    Guess what? Under the suicidal Austrian gefreiter, Germany failed. By his code, it deserved to be destroyed. The Führerstaat was a suicide pact.

    He ruined ordinary Germans, destroyed Germany, killed millions of Germans and ten-of-millions of others – for what?

    Give us a hint.

  309. Fox says:

    You wrote: “Germany invaded Italy”. That’s a good one. Humor relieves the somberness of daily drudgery.

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  310. Incitatus says:
    @Fox

    “You wrote: “Germany invaded Italy”. That’s a good one. Humor relieves the somberness of daily drudgery.”

    Right. ‘Fall [Operation] Achse” 8-19 Sep 1943.

    Any questions?

    • Replies: @Fox
  311. Fox says:
    @Incitatus

    The operation was a defensive measure against the coup led by Badoglio; German troops were in Italy allied with Italy. When your erstwhile ally points his guns at you and you strike back, while being in his country, you are not invading. Quit playing simpleton word games.

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  312. Skeptikal says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Still spraying, Tomcat WOO.

    Churchill’s words are and meaning are crystal clear.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  313. @Adûnâi

    Fair enough, the already declining Yiddish dialect took a big hit — I suppose you could argue that had things turned out differently, it would have taken maybe an extra century or so before it was spoken as seldom as it is today.

    But as far as what I actually wrote (which was nothing more than a tongue-in-cheek observation about the inability of the Nazis to achieve their goals), changing the demographics in some areas is a bit different than dealing a unrecoverable blow to a population. Even if St. Patrick really drove the snakes out of Ireland, snakes had the last laugh worldwide — they continue to breed more successfully than Irish Catholics, and that’s saying something.

  314. @Skeptikal

    But 1919 not 1914 just as one conclusive point in the context of my original comment and your obfuscatory replies

  315. Armoric says:
    @Ron Unz

    “The standard Petain history seems totally ridiculous as I pointed out in my article.”

    The “résistance” narrative is ridiculous too. It was created at the end of the war and has been cultivated by the authorities ever since. Their theory seems to be that the French government should not have acknowledged its military defeat and the German invasion. The German presence should simply have been ignored, as if you didn’t notice the German soldiers in the street. Or maybe the French should have fled abroad or gone into hiding. It doesn’t make sense.

    The French authorities have pushed the idea that terrorist attacks against German soldiers were remarkable acts of courage, while German reprisals against the population were terrible examples of Nazi barbarity. The French population was supposed to see the German occupation itself as a terrible outrage, as if the French government had not declared war on Germany.

    There was also the implicit idea that terrorism by civilians was a sensible way to win the war against the German army, which is absurd. My guess is that the main targets of terrorist attacks were French people, not Germans. The Gaullists and communists were vying to seize power when the Germans would go home.

    A quote from the article about Post-War France and Post-War Germany:

    “[Huddleston] describes what eventually became known as “the Liberation of France” during 1944-45 when the retreating German forces abandoned the country and pulled back to their own borders. Among other things, he suggests that the number of Frenchmen claiming “Resistance” credentials grew as much as a hundred-fold once the Germans had left and there was no longer any risk in adopting that position.
    And at that point, enormous bloodshed soon began, by far the worst wave of extra-judicial killings in all of French history.”

    People didn’t necessarily lie out of vanity about their involvement in the “résistance”. They did so to protect their safety. After the war, everyone looking for an important job in the governement or the administration had to claim they had been part of the “résistance” at least morally if not in action. They would be given medals by the government and would have to take part in fastidious official ceremonies. Everyone had to go along with the phony narrative. There was no choice.

    I think what caused the bloodshed was not the German retreat, but the neutralization of the French police by the Anglo-American forces. I think the French police could have easily destroyed the terrorists of the “résistance”, whether they were communists or Gaullists. Most people were still supportive of Pétain.

    Another quote from the other article:

    “Another factor was that many of the Communists who had fought in the Spanish Civil War, including thousands of the members of the International Brigades, had fled to France after their military defeat in 1938, and now often took the lead in enacting vengeance against the same sort of conservative forces who had previously vanquished them in their own country.”

    And another factor was that the Jews had grievances against Pétain. He had worked with Hitler and partly removed the Jews from the administration. The Jews were dominant among the French communists and in De Gaulle’s circle, and they had influence over the US top brass. With the US-backed De Gaulle and his communist friends, the Jewish influence was reestablished in France.

    The ridiculous thing is that De Gaulle later came to be seen as a conservative and a defender of French identity.

  316. @Skeptikal

    Having come across this again en passant I take the opportunity of reiterating a major reason for not blaming Churchill for the bombing of German cities. They didn’t t just shell civilians from the sea in 1914. From May 1915 to 1918 German bombers and Zeppelins bombed civilians in London 30 times.

    • Replies: @Fox
  317. @Adûnâi

    Katyn was perpetrated by the Germans

    I never thought that this kind of chutzpah will emerge again on UNZ of all places. Haha.

    Goddamn that poolish shithole. I hope they are preparer for hindudindu Kamala after that whole (((Fort Trump))) theater.
    Are the low IQ poolish race trying to win the best goyim award?

  318. Fox says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    You would do well to read J.M.Spaight’s “Bombing Vindicated”, available as a facsimile re-print from Ostara publications. Spaight an official (Principal Assistand Secretary of the British Air Ministry) discusses at length how it was decided on May 11, 1940 to start the air war against German civilians (soon to be extended to French and Italian civilians) by a “splendid decision”. The decision was made by Churchill.
    Spaight freely discusses -to say ‘bragged about’ is not too strong of an expression- the purpose of this city bombing: to kill civilians, spread terror. No mention of destroying industry or communications as the intended targets. Hence, working class neighborhoods and inner cities were preferred because they were more densely built and would cause a greater conflagration. His “scientific” advisor was one Prof. Frederick Lindemann.
    Spaight states that they (the Churchill people) were quite aware of Hitler’s desire to come to an understanding about prohibiting attacks on open cities. This was taken as a sign that it was a weak point in Hitler’s armor and therefore as a reason to really go ahead and bomb cities with the aim of targetting the population.
    The Zeppelin bombings in the First War were targetting industrial works and communications.
    The first aeroplane attack I know of was apparently an English attempt at bombing the great Zeppelin hangars in Cologne in 1914.
    The question is not who dropped the first bomb within city limits but rather: “What was the intent of it?”
    Terrorize women, children, families, old people, common people, school boys and school girls or try to interrupt railway or car traffic at a switch yard or by destroying a bridge, disable industrial works such as an aeroplane factory or munition works? The German use of airpower had decidedly military aims and not to spread terror. When Warsaw was bombed the civilians were forewarned and given time to leave the city. At Guernica, the target was a bridge over which extensive rebel troop movements were channeled and in Rotterdam the target was the citadel, but the incident was an unfortunate event, as the city had already surrendered and the bombers were re-called which, however, failed for a few of them through interrupted communications.

    • Agree: L.K
    • Thanks: Orville H. Larson
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  319. @Fox

    Thanks for the civil tone to one whom you clearly regard as ignorant. Until I have read the book you mention and its reviews U had better say less. But I think you are quite wrong about the WW1 German attacks. They did very little to damage or even appear to be aimed at military, transport or communicatios targets and indeed one school was bombed and 25 young children killed. It is hardly surprising if the British memory was of German Schrecklichkeit (fortified by by some phony, some true stories from Belgium, German WW1 shelling of Paris and Picasso’s take on Guernica). After WW1, apart from banning gas (though not trusting), the logic of terror was, logically, that it was probably no worse than comprehensive blockade which actually starved people to death (mostly prisoners actually) because making people leave the big industrial cities would do the job just fine. Human instincts should be assumed normal. The Germans killed fewer Western POWs just as the Americans took far fewer Japanese prisoners even when they could. The Germans did do a My Lai in France but there wasn’t as much sheer cruelty or torture as in earlier centuries….

    • Replies: @Fox
  320. Fox says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    I don’t know whether there is a competent and comprehensive work about air-ship warfare in the First War. I found, however, that L 33 (Airship 33) was on a mission targeting, on Sept. 24, 1916, the East London industrial areas Bromley and Bow, which set the oil storage facility Homelight Oil Co. (owned by British Petroleum Co.) ablaze.
    Air-ship attacks were undertaken at night.
    Given the time and its technical possibilities, finding and hitting a target at night would have been rather difficult and it would have to be lit up, as with an industrial plant. Just throwing a bomb into a black blanket underneath would have been pointless.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  321. @Fox

    I suppose the lit up parts when they weren’t forewarned and prepared would have included the West End so it probably only took one or two bombings of the Strand to create lasting impressions and preconceptions.

    As a matter of interest I heard Albert Speed being interviewed and, without there being any obvious reason for him to lie that I could think of, he said that the war would have been over if the Allies had kept up their saturation bombing. From recollection he said or implied that another couple of 1000 bomber raids on Hamburg would have done it. I remembered that when reading of the diversion of Bomber Command from German cities to supporting the invasion., against Harris’s preference.

  322. Incitatus says:
    @Fox

    “The operation [Achse – the German invasion of Italy 8-19 Sep 1943] was a defensive measure against the coup led by Badoglio; German troops were in Italy allied with Italy. When your erstwhile ally points his guns at you and you strike back, while being in his country, you are not invading. Quit playing simpleton word games.”

    Interesting.

    Why did “erstwhile ally” Italy “point his guns” at NSDAP Germany? Give us a hint.

    Was disarming/enslaving Italians without Geneva protection acceptable? How many tens of thousands died in Germany as slave laborers? Give us a hint.

  323. @James O'Meara

    So, how’s that hard sciency, ever so manly technical mastery working out for you in Biden’s America?

Current Commenter
says:

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


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Guillaume Durocher Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings