|
Posts:
85
From:
Michigan
Registered:
2/11/08
|
|
(61 of 78)
Re: Summer reading suggestion - Mein Kampf
Jul 2, 2009 8:01 AM
|
> I was staggered by Hitler's good writing, sharp
> political and social analysis, affinity for the
> working man, and most of all, the relevance of
> Hitler's situation and analysis to what is happening
> to the US today.
I have found Hitler's prose a meandering mess whose objectionable qualities (mythologization of history, racism, pathological nationalism, intolerance toward people that had to be similar to Germans in culture (Poles, Czechs), and religious stereotyping. Hitler, had he known the Jews better, should have recognized that they were no monolith, and that Jewish Marxists and Jewish entrepreneurs were not opposite sides of the same coin.
>
> The situation in post war Germany, according to
> Hitler -
>
> 1. The national spirit had been destroyed by the
> left.
In fact it was the breakdown of a right-wing society that had fended off the Left through clever compromises and could no longer do so that caused the German Left to act without the usual counterweight of credible conservatives in public life. The (First World) War had broken the blind allegiance to the Nation as a war machine.
The Hard Left was comparatively new in Germany, and among Germans the so-called Independent Socialists (many of whom would become Communists) could alone claim to have never made compromises with the militarism that exacerbated a war into the mindless slaughter that it was.
>
> 2. The economy had been destroyed by the
> international financiers for their own benefit.
>
No, the German government resorted to inflation to repudiate the costs of war as the costs of war became more severe. Inflation is never the choice of financiers, but instead of governments.
> 3. The working class was dispossessed and in dire
> straits.
Through inflation that by 1918 was already ravaging a worker's savings!
>
> Hitler, regardless of what else may be said of him,
> resolved these problems and restored Germany's spirit
> and honor.
>
> Well? In the US today -
>
> 1. The assault on the American spirit of say the
> 50's has been relentless and effective. The public
> school system has been destroyed, Christianity has
> become a laughing stock, the WASPs that built the US
> are rapidly approaching minority status, US foreign
> policy is controlled by AIPAC, etc., etc., etc. Even
> English as the national language is criticized.
> Abortion is a right. Homosexuality is approved and
> protected. It's beyond amazing.
Accident, demographic shift, and even moral progress. The wrecking of public schools results from the permanent degradation of the colleges that churn out public-school teachers. College students used to learn (supposedly) a predictable curriculum that included history, philosophy, and specific literature that taught them what was most necessary to know, with such corollaries as "money isn't everything", "power implies responsibility toward others", and "high culture brings meaning to life" . As for the WASP elite "building" America -- the Irish had a huge role in building the railroads, Germans had a huge role in prairie agriculture, Southern-and East-European immigrants had huge roles in building trades, Jews in innovative businesses... and in the South, blacks tended to do the real work under the "harsh guidance" of white slavemasters and semi-feudal exploiters.
AIPAC? Often questionable indeed. The United States has never had an official language. Homosexuality? Quite natural.
>
> 2. For 20 years the US media and political
> establishment has endlessly repeated absurdities,
> that international free trade is no threat to US
> workers, that de-industrialization is desirable, that
> financial services will be the basis US
> 'productivity', that the imbalance of trade has no
> downside, that the resulting debt is manageable.
> Finally, the financial oligarchs have taken to
> outright and open raiding of the US treasury to the
> tune of trillions of dollars. Are we in a downward
> spiral? I don't know, but some smart people are
> saying we are.
>
Which one reasonably expects from people who look out only for their own self-indulgence irrespective of the harm done to others -- people who would live like aristocrats off the desperation of others. Such reflects the values of people who see no responsibility in power, who think only of themselves and their cronies, and who have a myopic disregard for the long term. Such people become horrible exploiters until they are overthrown -- unless they establish their dominion with extreme brutality and violence. Downward spiral? It could be over.
> 3. The working class in the US is an object of overt
> contempt and has been for 20 years, now the white
> collar middle class is being decimated by prices,
> taxes, and debt.
>
The white-collar middle class came to the conclusion in 2006 that what passed as conservatism was little more than an effort to impose a pure plutocracy upon America in which, after the middle class was drained of all assets as well as debased to a new proletariat, a sociopathic and egoistic elite would live like slavemasters arrogating all of the fruits of everyone else's labor.
> Mein Kampf should be required reading for anyone
> interested in the current political and social
> situation in the US.
Mein Kampf is dreadful, derivative material. One could learn far more from Sigmund Freud, let alone the old canon of the liberal arts that at least forced some values upon leaders.
Material indulgence isn't everything.
History is a continuum from antiquity.
Power and privilege imply responsibilities toward those who lack power and privilege/
|
|
|
Posts:
1,803
Registered:
10/30/07
|
|
(62 of 78)
Re: Summer reading suggestion - Mein Kampf
Jul 2, 2009 8:24 AM
|
> Something to do with the German economy going
> broke due to all the money spent on armaments
> maybe?
>
> That is laughablel. The Versailles treaty, written
> by the 'international financiers' bankrupted Germany
> with incredible demands, and following the bankruptcy
> they moved in to claim the most productive areas. I
> don't know the details, but I'm sure others here do,
> but they ain't tellin !
That was in the 20s and hardly "the most productive areas". I'm pretty sure that by the time Hitler came to power German territory wasn't controled by foreign powers anymore. Furthemore the German economy had started to recover and the Germas stood a pretty good chance of renegotiating the reperations. Then Hitler came in. Suggested reading for those interested: Wages of Destruction.
> You could make a weak argument of this from Mein
> Kampf, Vol. 1, but standing alone that argument
> doesn't amount to much. Is there other evidence?
How about his speaches?
> .... Plus, the
> results of Hitler's wresting control of the country
> from the leftists and 'financiers' who had destroyed
> it is amazing. I'd argue that on that basis alone he
> was the greatest leader of the 20th century.
Sorry but Germany was recovering quite nicely in part due to the financiers when Hitler came to power. He "fixed" that though.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,021
From:
Britain
Registered:
9/18/07
|
|
(63 of 78)
Re: Summer reading suggestion - Mein Kampf
Jul 2, 2009 8:34 AM
|
That is laughablel. The Versailles treaty
Rubbish. look up how many repayments Germany made before defaulting. This could be an excuse in the 20's but not in the late 30's with Hitler in charge - he took over a nation emerging from the depression, took the credit, and bankrupted it again. Dont believe me, see what Speer said.
Is there other evidence?
The talks with the military about this subject from the moment he was securely in office.
Hitler says that the German population was increasing by approx. 1 million per year.
So there are 130 million Germans now? Even between WWI and WWII the population increased by nowhere near this figure. A famous quote from Clemenceau said that the problem with the 60m Germans is that there were 20m too many of them, this was at the time of WWI, even by WWII this was nowhere near 80m - probably closer to 65m in Germany without any add ons like Austria.
Now, the population is probably decreasing, unless it's supplemented by Muslims.
Visit Germany. Muslims are there certainly, but nowhere near in the numbers some people would want you to believe, or to increase the population by 1m per year.
Mein Kampf is full of very sharp, and probably accurate, observation and analysis.
The insane often have insights into certain areas while total inability to relate in others cripples them.
Plus, the results of Hitler's wresting control of the country from the leftists and 'financiers' who had destroyed it is amazing.
Papen invited Hitler to be Chancellor, he did not wrest it from anyone. Sham legality (Goering) then secured the power.
I'd argue that on that basis alone he was the greatest leader of the 20th century.
You could try, and I think you would fail. After all, he had the rather insurmountable problem of losing. Great leaders tend to win.
Of course, he's gotten a lot of bad press lately.
No kidding. Hence the rather strange intent of some to fixate on him rather than find a new 'prophet' that would have far less trouble being accepted.
|
|
|
Posts:
6,921
From:
Billings MT.
Registered:
2/11/03
|
|
(64 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 8:44 AM
|
Hitler had nothing to do with the immediate post-war economic recovery, that was the Dawes (American) Plan which had inflation under control well befor 1928m and unemployment was at less the 8%.
The war reparations had been altered to a sliding scale, and Germany was making its payments. The Ruhr wasn't occupied by the allied troops, but administered by Germans. The only thing the Germans were NOT able to do was station military troops in the de-militarized zone. When the "Crash" happened, the Germans defaulted on their payments and the French marched into the Ruhr and made the situation worse by confiscating German property in lieu of reparations payments.
The Young plan replaced the Dawes Plan, and the war reparations were completely put "on hold" and not demanded until the economic situation in the whole world became more stable. But, long before that happened Herr Hitler managed to gain control of the government, and it all went downhill from there.
The "Wall Street Crash" put the entire globe into financial distress, and it had nothing to do with Jewish financiers either. Hitler's "financial miracle" was nothing but a giant Ponzi scheme, which even dwarfs Madolf's version. Hitler "shrunk" unemployment by making Jews non-citizens whom could not be tallied as either employed or unemployed. He drove married women out of both the professions and the work force, so they couldn't be tallied either.
--
Happy Trails,
Clint
|
|
|
Posts:
372
From:
CA
Registered:
9/2/07
|
|
(65 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 9:04 AM
|
Hitler had nothing to do with the immediate post-war economic recovery,
Immediate post-war economic recovery? LOL.
The 'financiers' were picking over the ruins of the German economy following disastrous inflation, just as they are planning to do in the US right now ! Already US industries are disappearing into foreign hands controlled by the 'financiers'.
The Young plan replaced the Dawes Plan, and the war reparations were completely put "on hold" and not demanded until the economic situation in the whole world became more stable. But, long before that happened Herr Hitler managed to gain control of the government, and it all went downhill from there.
Downhill? He restored the German spirit and sent the financiers packing. And, here is the thing, he reorganized the banks to support the country, rather than vice-versa. He created the greatest war machine the world has seen. He alone was willing to confront the communist ghouls in Russia.
|
|
|
Posts:
6,921
From:
Billings MT.
Registered:
2/11/03
|
|
(66 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 9:14 AM
|
Two plans (Dawes early, Young last), were both before Hitler. He rose to power after the "crash", and before the Young plan could be put into effect in total. Even though the reparations had been "forgiven" before his rise, he took credit for "standing up to the financial interests (read Jews)", even though he had nothing to do with it. The Weimar Government had unilaterally refused to pay any more of the payments in view of the growth of the Depression, and the Lucerne group overseeing the gathering of the payments took Young's advice and approved the forgiving of the moneys. The rest of the Young plan never was implemented until post-war. The Young Plan most likely would have pulled Germany out faster than the now superseded Dawes Plan which had done the job from early 20's until the "crash", with Weimar Germany’s unemployment in the single digits, and inflation controlled. After the "crash" of '29 the situation world-wide altered in many ways NO-ONE could have predicted. The Young Plan address the "new" reality, but before anything besides the forgiving of the reparations payments could be instigated pre-Hitler, there he was taking credit for things he never did!
Oddly enough, the post-war German Bonn Republic "reassumed" those debts as established by the Young Plan, and repaid them before the re-unification of the German state.
The traditional view is that onerous war reparations drove the German economy to the collapse that brought Hitler and the Nazis to power in 1933. But Ms. MacMillan demonstrates that the reparations demanded of Germany were less than those paid by France after its defeat in the 1870 Franco-Prussian war. Further, she notes, Germany paid only about one-third of what it owed in compensation for its occupation and destruction of Belgium and northern France. Reparations for the Great War were initially set at $33 billion. But Germany paid only about $4.5 billion in the entire period between 1918 and 1932. Slightly less than what France paid after the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71 with a much smaller economy. And the French paid in gold, on time and in full (Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World, MacMillan)
Stephen Schuker, a University of Virginia historian and author of American 'Reparations' to Germany, 1919- 1933, believes the Germans, by using the proceeds of American Dawes Plan loans to pay off their debts in Europe, ultimately paid no reparations at all. And when the Germans defaulted in the early thirties as a result of the "depression" (Schuker argues), American bankers had effectively paid reparations to Germany. Indeed, according to Schuker's calculations, the total net transfer from the United States to Germany in the period 1919-1931, adjusted for inflation, "amounted to almost four times the total assistance that the United States furnished West Germany under the Marshall Plan from 1948 to 1952."
The Dawes Plan of the twenties halted their "hyperinflation" and put them back on track to pay the Versailles "reparations". Much to the dismay of both the Left and the Right, then when the "great depression" hit, the Young Plan again halted "inflation" in Germany and put the reparations on a "sliding scale" (adjusted to the GNP), rather than a fixed amount. The Lucerne conference put the payment of reparations off the "radar", and projected it well into the sixties when it might be possible for a "non-warring" Germany to begin repaying their original war debt.
BTW, the "war debt" reparations paid by the French to the Germans (in gold) post Franco-Prussian war was larger "percentage-wise" in time and destruction than WW1. And guess what? The French paid on time and in total. Mayhaps that is why they were SO intransigent in requiring "reparations" at the Paris Peace talks?
When speaking of "economics" of Germany post-WW1 there is only one guy you should remember and it isn’t Hitler. It is Hjalmar (Horace Greely) Schacht. He was in executive positions in several major German banks before becoming (1923) commissioner of currency. Inflation had reached its height and the paper mark had become virtually worthless. Schacht substituted the rentenmark, in theory secured by a mortgage on all land and industry. By various stringent deflationary measures, and aided by loans under the Dawes Plan, the rentenmark was stabilized and the budget balanced. All before Hitler was appointed Chancellor.
In 1924, Germany (Schacht) obtained the first foreign loan under the Dawes Plan, and in 1925 the rentenmark was replaced by the reichsmark, based on a gold standard. I believe this is the time period when Herr Hitler was still serving his time in Landsburg prison, NOT in power nor having anything to do with putting Germany back on the gold standard.
As for books on the economics of the time frame, I can suggest these two:
Schacht’s autobiography, Confessions of the Old Wizard [1953, translated-1956]; or A. E. Simpson’s, Hjalmar Schacht in Perspective [1969].
--
Happy Trails,
Clint
|
|
|
Posts:
372
From:
CA
Registered:
9/2/07
|
|
(67 of 78)
Re: Summer reading suggestion - Mein Kampf
Jul 2, 2009 9:14 AM
|
That is laughablel. The Versailles treaty...
Rubbish. ..... Dont believe me, see what Speer said.
At Nuremberg? LOL.
Is there other evidence?
The talks with the military about this subject from the moment he was securely in office.
Really? Wasn't the military surprised when it happened, and didn't they argue against it? Note: I don't know the answers to these questions.
Of course, he's gotten a lot of bad press lately.
No kidding. Hence the rather strange intent of some to fixate on him
I confess I've never even read anything on the internet by anyone 'fixated' on Hitler. This is a Zionist fantasy. The fact is Hitler's analysis of the Jews role in Germany was probably spot on, and the Zionists are as a result exerting every effort to demonize Hitler and suppress his writings. I admit they have been very successful. I saw a copy on a friend's, a very weird friend, I might add, bookshelf, and though that he had to be some kind of nut, but it played no part in his conversation that I could see.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,803
Registered:
10/30/07
|
|
(68 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 9:29 AM
|
> The 'financiers' were picking over the ruins of the
> German economy following disastrous inflation,
Actually they were the ones in severe trouble. Unless perhaps you have a really wierd defintion of "financier"
> Already US industries are disappearing into foreign
> n hands controlled by the 'financiers'.
So you don't like investments? On the otherhand you don't like the left either?
> Downhill? He restored the German spirit
Possibly but given the way he did it I don't think that's a good thing.
> and sent the financiers packing.
Actually he courted them. They were fundamental to his programs.
> And, here is the thing, he reorganized the
> banks to support the country, rather than vice-versa.
Hardly. He organized things to support his plans which ruined Germany.
> He created the greatest war machine the world has seen.
As long as you stop history in 1941. By the end of 43 it was a distant 3rd or 4th and heading down.
> He alone was willing to
> confront the communist ghouls in Russia.
I suggest you read a bit more history.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,021
From:
Britain
Registered:
9/18/07
|
|
(69 of 78)
Re: Summer reading suggestion - Mein Kampf
Jul 2, 2009 9:46 AM
|
I confess I've never even read anything on the internet by anyone 'fixated' on Hitler. This is a Zionist fantasy.
Look on YouTube to see samples of skinheads and extremists praising Hitler, or just talk to a few and get to know them?
Dont believe me, see what Speer said.
At Nuremberg? LOL.
No, look at his estimates of the Nazi building programs that needed an 870% increase in manpower to achieve, his writing after he was released from prison too.
Wasn't the military surprised when it happened, and didn't they argue against it? Note: I don't know the answers to these questions.
The military were not sure the idea was practicle, but it was not the first time they had heard the idea in 1940.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,021
From:
Britain
Registered:
9/18/07
|
|
(70 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 10:01 AM
|
Clint
Are you sure facts are the way to go in examining this topic? French raparations after the 1870 war are always forgotten by those who like to insist on the iniquities of Versailles, as are the state of German payments in the years following Versailles.
Wages of Destruction and Paris 1919 are good books, but some people seek to avoid reading them for some reason.
|
|
|
Posts:
6,344
Registered:
2/27/03
|
|
(71 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 11:01 AM
|
He created the greatest war machine the world has seen.
To what extent should Hitler get credit for the formidable power of the German war machine? He does deserve credit for some things like supporting the panzer concept developed by Guderian and others, but how much else?
Much of the Wehrmacht's success was due to doctrine and tactics developed and put into practice by the professional soldiers. They rarely enjoyed material superiority; the greatest success of the blitzkrieg came while the majority of tanks were inferior types, Pz I/II or Czech models. Hitler refused to allow military production to significantly impact consumer goods or the civilian economy until 1942-43.
|
|
|
Posts:
372
From:
CA
Registered:
9/2/07
|
|
(72 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 12:29 PM
|
To what extent should Hitler get credit for the formidable power of the German war machine?
All credit to Hitler. As he writes in Ch. 12 .....
"Consequently the question of regaining German power is not: How shall we manufacture arms? but: How shall we manufacture the spirit which enables a people to bear arms? If this spirit dominates a people, the will finds a thousand ways, every one of which ends in a weapon ! But give a coward ten pistols and if attacked he will not be able to fire a single shot."
|
|
|
Posts:
3,021
From:
Britain
Registered:
9/18/07
|
|
(73 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 12:56 PM
|
All credit to Hitler.
So the German army prior to Hitler were a bunch of cowards? They only became good soldiers after Hitler took power and made them swear an oath to him? How on earth can Hitler get credit for Germany having a good army or navy? The airforce would allow a greater degree of credit to Hitler simply because it did not exist as such prior to his coming to power.
The German armed forces have always had a good reputation and have fought some of the most important campaigns in history, to suggest they owed much to Hitler is to ignore German history. The one sure thing they did owe to Hitler was the scale of the defeat in 1945, it was his policies that led to this. Even if you believe he was right to start a war, it was certainly wrong to fight all the potential enemies at the same time.
|
|
|
Posts:
6,921
From:
Billings MT.
Registered:
2/11/03
|
|
(74 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 12:58 PM
|
we certainly cannot allow historical facts and realities to get in the way of a good story or "opinion" can we!
--
Happy Trails,
Clint
|
|
|
Posts:
372
From:
CA
Registered:
9/2/07
|
|
(75 of 78)
Jul 2, 2009 2:27 PM
|
So the German army prior to Hitler were a bunch of cowards?
Hitler doesn't criticize the fighting men. But he does describe the treachery of the social democrats, Marxists, and communists, in undermining the war effort and destroying the German self-image and will to fight. I think his observations are probably right. And, to make it interesting, I have described how the 'left' in the US has done everything it can to destroy the US's own mythology and self-image. For crying out loud, my kid studies US history using a textbook by Howard Zinn ! Lord help us.
Even if you believe he was right to start a war, it was certainly wrong to fight all the potential enemies at the same time.
That's for sure. It does raise an interesting question, that is, what in hell was the US doing supporting Russia, given that the Marxists had announced intentions to destroy capitalism, etc. Weird.
|
|
|
|
|
