Posted on 02/02/2002 7:49:21 PM PST by ATOMIC_PUNK
I have thought that exact same thing so many times.
The critics called it drivel and basically slammed every aspect of his book, but I thought allot of it was brilliant and incredibly insightful. Especially for someone of such limited means, and to this day I hear people on both sides of the political isle repackaging these same observations and ideas as new, but Hitler wrote them in the 30's
(I don't mean to imply plagiarism or anything, I think allot of them are just simple truths that can't be denied. And many people come to these conclusions independent of reading Mien Kamph)
Then, about the time he started seeing Jews "controlling" everything, he just flipped out.. Later I can imagine a senario where he was so powerfull, no one dared tell him he flipped his wig.
I did say a perverse admiration, JHoffa....I am not an admirer of Hitler, as you know.
I don't think he much admired his "Fatherland" as he found it, more or less in the form which Bismark had created. His first step in foreign policy was to bring Austria back into Germany, reversing a policy which took Bismark a generation to accomplish. The Germany he wanted seemed to be more like the medeival German Empire, but without Christianity.
Say, aren't we getting a bit off topic here? Maybe we need AMMON-CENTRIST back to bring us to our senses -- LOL!
To the East. As he says over and over again. By conquering the 'inferior' Slavic peoples.
My point is I don't think he wanted to emulate anything about us.. I got the inmpression that Hitler looked at other nations, their land and resources (as you said) like a fox looks around a chicken coop.
If he thought we were fat, lazy and didn't deserve our resources because we were squandering them it wouldn't suprise me.
Furthermore, he defended this as a God given right. Total darwinism, no appreciation for anything or anyone.
And this would not be colonialism because??
----Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf
Again Lucius, think about what he is saying here.
He is basically saying that Europe has it backwards, that the states of Europe with their 'small' landmasses have quite a task in subjugating 'larger' foreign areas due to this fact; he states that America, due to its immense 'base territory' was better suited to project its power through the world.
He is clearly offering this supposition, and wanted the same for Germany.
See post #152. We are on the same page for the most part.
A small state trying to control large expanses of far off territories (Africa, etc.) was a huge task; by expanding the size of the German state (as America and Russia enjoyed), Germany would be in a far greater position to enjoy first class world power status.
See?
Like I really give a rats rectum!
Darth Falar - member since January 26th, 2002
There seem to be a number of individuals who arrived after 9-11, coincidentally just in time to do their best to spread defeatism and malicious fantasies about the war against terrorism.
Ammon-Centrist has apparently received his long-overdue removal from this part of the civilized world. Should we have a contest for the first to spot what screenname he appears under next?
Maybe it is Darth Falar?
Looks like he was saying that conquering and oppressing your neighbors is fine, because you end up with a cohesive state, as opposed to a far flung commercially oriented empire like Britain's. I had heard that the book was heavily derivative of earlier versions of the 'Heartland' geopolitical theory, I guess this proves it. It was this analysis that 'proved' that the USSR, by controlling the Hearland of Eurasia was unstoppable. Guess not, huh?
What, did he miss his meeting of the Log Cabin Republicans?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.