0
Debatable, slavic enslavement as mentioned in General Plan Ost is just Soviet Propaganda. There was an anti-slavic sentiment among many germans at that time but to mention plans of enslavement is totaly out of line, just historical distortion.
Apart from soviet and allied propaganda the facts are:
-between 600.000 and 1.5 million russians served under the swastika.
-Of 12.000 dutch volunteers that flooded the recruiting offices, the SS only accepted 3.000 (25%) into the original Dutch legion.
-Ukranian recruitment: 29.000 were accepted out of 82.000 applicants (35%).
)Maybe dislike is too strong a word, since Hitler's active hatred was mainly concentrated on Slavs and especially Jews. However, he certainly didn't have a high opinion of the mongrelized racial types that are sadly represented in Southern Europe, and would probably exclude them from the German gene pool. (Don't get me wrong, though, I'm not saying all Southern Europeans are racial mongrels.
I'm not going to open a debate of what Hitler thought (altough i could), i will just point that the concept of racial purity/mongrelization by that time is completely outdated and was a product of the ignorance about a science that was on it's infancy.
Genetic studies have consistently proven that the only pure europeans are the basques and perhaps some baltic countries (if they count the haplogroup N as european and not indo-european) in all others there's a small to moderate percentage of non-european DNA that is very ancient (paleolithic and neolithic and in some cases a little more recent but still quite ancient).
Just look at the results of the admixture tests from Dodecad and Eurogenes.
These are the results from the European Admixture (presence of authocthone european DNA in several countries):
South Italy and Greece show lower percentages than the european average because there is substantial presence of eastern mediterranean DNA wich is caucasian of course.
The point is: there are several subtypes of european races, having darker features (eyes, skin, hair) doesn't mean mongrelization as it was tought by some nordicists theorists in the 1920's and it is still spread around by some circles.
As you know the basques (like other southern europeans) have predominatly dark hair and brown/hazel eyes and yet they are racially purer than scandinavians who have predominatly light hair, blue eyes and fairer skin and yet show a small degree of asian (uralic-mongoloid), and other non-european DNA.
With all due respect but D.Irving is not credible in that matter, he was involved in the negotiation of the fake "Hitler's Diaries" to Stern Magazine in the early 80's by around 3 million US$, he said by that time that the diaries were legitimate when it was proven an obvious fake, wich he recognized later.Meh. If it's verified by David Irving, it's good enough for me. On the other hand, it's possible that the court eunuch, Bormann, tampered with his boss Adolf's quotes, but who knows...
About the "Hitler Table Talk" it was proved already that the last part of the book is a complete fake (even D.Irving says that) and other parts were heavily adulterated, so it is not reliable, most likely the book reflects Bormann's views, not Hitler's.
Another fake that D.Irving considers legitimate is the Zweites Buch (Hitler's Second Book), wich was supposedly found in a box of an american military wharehouse in the late 50's. The finder of that alleged book (never analyzed by experts or scientists) was the communist jew Gerhard Weinberg.
Bookmarks