Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: JohnGalt
I was asking why you were towing the government line.

What "government line?" Can you point out anything I've said that is incorrect?

Churchill wrecked his country but that is considered noble, so clearly we are diametrically opposed to views on him.

Riiiiiighhht. You seem to be forgetting that Churchill is rightly venerated for his role in a certain World War (that was started by certain German "political moderates").

Hitler was a political moderate in Germany during the 20s and early 30s.

Why I guess you're right -- that is, if it is normal for German political moderates to attempt to overthrow the German government. (You've heard of the Putsch, no doubt....)

Ernst Rhom was a radical in his own party to the left, and the conservative monarchists on the Right were publishing books calling for conquoring Russia, France and England.

And for all of that, it was Hitler who went 2 for 3 on the conquest front. The other guys, BTW, were killed by Hitler's "moderate" goon squads just as soon as "politically moderate" Hitler was able to "moderately" gain absolute political power.

Hitler's 1928 book merely called more Lebenstraum.

Well, let's just call the book, Mein Kampf by name, why don't we? Lebensraum was not Hitler's invention -- it had been a German goal for a very long time before him. Mein Kampf merely expressed a different approach to the problem:

For centuries Russia drew nourishment from this Germanic nucleus of its upper leading strata. Today it can be regarded as almost totally exterminated and extinguished. It has been replaced by the Jew. Impossible as it is for the Russian by himself to shake off the yoke of the Jew by his own resources, it is equally impossible for the Jew to maintain the mighty empire forever. He himself is no element of organization, but a ferment of decomposition. The Persian empire in the east is ripe for collapse. And the end of Jewish rule in Russia will also be the end of Russia as a state.

You seem to be suffering from the delusion that Hitler did not mean what he said in his "1928 book." Subsequent events prove that he meant exactly what he said.

He was not a man of peace, and used murder and racketeering to secure his position, but he was, nevertheless, a political moderate: a Third Way Socialist.

A man who advances his goals through racketeering and murder isn't generally considered "moderate." That you think otherwise says a whole lot about you.

Who was the first country to invade Czechoslovakia during the Munich summit Sept-Oct 1938?

Both Hungary and Poland invaded. Both countries had been prone to adventurism after WWI, and both took advantage of the Sudeten crisis to further their own territorial aims.

Then again, neither of these countries acted right after they had signed an agreement saying they wouldn't invade Czechoslovakia. Only one, Germany, led by the "moderate politician" one Adolph Hitler, had done that.

240 posted on 07/11/2003 12:55:48 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies ]


To: r9etb
You are first government line FR member to actually have any clue about Munich. What a relief, I can't tell you how many people cite Munich as if it as some point about appeasement but then quickly prove to me that they know nothing about it.

Government line = conventional view as reported by government propaganda

Its your point of view, it can be neither correct or incorrect in the way you are using those terms.

Hitler behaved as a radical, a criminal and a murderer, but his politics were moderate. I believe this was just a heat of the moment oversight on your part since its such a glaring misunderstanding, but do we really need to go over the difference between politics and character?

Bill Clinton, a political moderate, used criminality and murder (?) to achieve power...got it?

Sadly in the Weimar Republic it was; there was constant parading in the streets; the political party you were associated with defined whether you were beaten or spared. Why do you think Hitler, an Austrian, only got 2 years for his attempting to overthrow the government?

Hitler was lied to by Goering and Himmler who were anxious to remove Rohm who was an absolute homosexual Marxist lunatic by 1934. Hitler could pull off a Munich, never a Rhom.

Hitler said a lot of things; the current debate amongst serious historians is studying when exactly Hitler decided on the 'fate' of the Jews. The current fad in this line of scholarship is on a train in June 1941; there is a fascinating debate on this subject well documented and reported on in Ron Rosenbaum's Explaining Hitler.


Do you hold any 'unconventional' historical views or mostly government lines?

244 posted on 07/11/2003 1:09:36 PM PDT by JohnGalt (They're All Lying)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson