Why did People vote for Hitler?

[Tooting Carmen]

Well obviously the Taliban gave a successful and fruitful vision to their young men that resulted in the defeated of the strongest military organisation in human history, that's a pretty impressive achievement.

A different society without ideals would simply surrender.

Far from all being enemies, I see a strong continuity between the West, Islam and Communism: whatever their important differences, all three of them are based on messianic and universalist ideas where they claim to hold the Absolute Truth to which all must submit. Thus it is no accident that most recent Empires have been one of the above. (Contrast that with pre-Communist China: however ruthless it may have been within its own borders, by and large it left the rest of the world alone, and its belief in non-interference IMHO motivates much of its foreign policy and behaviour even today).

[Teutone]

Far from all being enemies, I see a strong continuity between the West, Islam and Communism: whatever their important differences, all three of them are based on messianic and universalist ideas where they claim to hold the Absolute Truth to which all must submit. Thus it is no accident that most recent Empires have been one of the above. (Contrast that with pre-Communist China: however ruthless it may have been within its own borders, by and large it left the rest of the world alone, and its belief in non-interference IMHO motivates much of its foreign policy and behaviour even today).

The modern west only has economic universalist ideals of promoting free markets world wide, as it couldn't care less when completely authoritarian dictatorships like saudi arabia are solid and reliable trading partners but intervene when socialists get democratically elected.

[Tooting Carmen]

The modern west only has economic universalist ideals of promoting free markets world wide, as it couldn't care less when completely authoritarian dictatorships like saudi arabia are solid and reliable trading partners but intervene when socialists get democratically elected.

That's partly it. But also the NGOs play their part: I have become increasingly sceptical of human rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, since they also have a very absolutist and rigid idea of everything which they seek to impose on the world. For example, Amnesty automatically blacklists any country that keeps the death penalty as "retentionist", no matter how free the society is in most other respects. (BTW, I oppose the death penalty, but nevertheless I recognise that sovereign nations have the right to use it if they wish).

[Teutone]

That's partly it. But also the NGOs play their part: I have become increasingly sceptical of human rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, since they also have a very absolutist and rigid idea of everything which they seek to impose on the world. For example, Amnesty automatically blacklists any country that keeps the death penalty as "retentionist", no matter how free the society is in most other respects. (BTW, I oppose the death penalty, but nevertheless I recognise that sovereign nations have the right to use it if they wish).

Rare TC W

[Tooting Carmen]

Rare TC W

If there is one idea I find both really loathsome and really silly simultaneously, it is the "End of History" thesis: that one human culture or ideology must beat all others and be accepted, no questions asked. Instead, my two main principles (obviously within reason and with some caveats) are: (1) non-interference and (2) "when in Rome, do as the Romans do". It is (2) in particular which motivates my suspicion towards the global spread of English, much to the bemusement of many forum users (including you IIRC).

[Anglo-Celtic]

It was a perfect storm after World War I of draconian sanctions, a destroyed economy, commie riots, and degenerates. It's a bit like it is here now, and people will still vote for Slow Joe, the real fascist.

[Your Old Comrade]

[gixajo]

[IM..IMG]

I've only read one book by Stephan Zweig and I really liked it.

He was Jew by the way...

[Florstadt]

The generals and the monarchy were the ones who danced recklessly with militaristic madness, leading to a spectacular faceplant in the war. Yet, it was the left-wingers who ended up signing the surrender, handed the hot potato while everyone else dodged the blame. This kicked off the "stab-in-the-back" legend, a tall tale whipped up to tickle the gullible masses, painting the left and the Jews as the villains who supposedly sold Germany down the river at its most critical moment.

And who dreamed up this dramatic saga? None other than the German military brass, Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff. Imagine them, twirling their mustaches and plotting away, unable to admit defeat without choking on it. So, they pointed fingers at the civilians, trying to dodge the blame. When they testified before the Reichstag’s investigative committee, they claimed that Germany’s surrender was due to a "stab in the back" by the leftists (with a cheeky nod to the Jews), insisting the German army had never really been beaten in battle. It was their way of explaining the defeat, but the truth was, it was the German army that suggested surrender, preferring to let the Social Democrats take the fall, who, out of sheer necessity, formed a new government in 1918.

[Italicus]

The generals and the monarchy were the ones who danced recklessly with militaristic madness, leading to a spectacular faceplant in the war. Yet, it was the left-wingers who ended up signing the surrender, handed the hot potato while everyone else dodged the blame. This kicked off the "stab-in-the-back" legend, a tall tale whipped up to tickle the gullible masses, painting the left and the Jews as the villains who supposedly sold Germany down the river at its most critical moment.

And who dreamed up this dramatic saga? None other than the German military brass, Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff. Imagine them, twirling their mustaches and plotting away, unable to admit defeat without choking on it. So, they pointed fingers at the civilians, trying to dodge the blame. When they testified before the Reichstag’s investigative committee, they claimed that Germany’s surrender was due to a "stab in the back" by the leftists (with a cheeky nod to the Jews), insisting the German army had never really been beaten in battle. It was their way of explaining the defeat, but the truth was, it was the German army that suggested surrender, preferring to let the Social Democrats take the fall, who, out of sheer necessity, formed a new government in 1918.

Ever hear of something called the German Revolution of 1918? Rosa Luxembourg, Kurt Eisner, any of that ring a bell? Your race is known for being duplicitous and lying through your teeth, don't you try to pilpul me you disgusting snake.