A syllogism
14 Jun 2018, 3:44 pm
kraftiekortie wrote:
We won't "discover" the "original Indo-European culture" because of the passage of time.
They spread out. They migrated. They didn't stay in one place. They weren't into their "cultural purity."
We can speculate as to where THEY originated----but that's a pretty tall order, too.
They spread out. They migrated. They didn't stay in one place. They weren't into their "cultural purity."
We can speculate as to where THEY originated----but that's a pretty tall order, too.
Still, the Christians did much to destroy the original Pagan culture and beliefs of the Ancient Europeans. In this respect, they operated much like the later Communists of Russia, who, in their turn, abolished much of Orthodox Christianity.
26 Jun 2018, 7:05 am
TwinRuler wrote:
Were it not for Communism there would not be Nazism either. Any who hate the latter, might as well also hate the former.
I can even refine my basic argument down to a simple, easily remembered syllogism: the Communists, the Soviet Communists in particular, carried out many of the very same types of military atrocities and crimes against Humanity usually associated with the Nazis. The Nazis, and by extension the Fascist movement generally, were a reaction to Soviet Communism. Ergo, it would logically follow that any who hate Nazis should, and would, also hate Communists!
I can even refine my basic argument down to a simple, easily remembered syllogism: the Communists, the Soviet Communists in particular, carried out many of the very same types of military atrocities and crimes against Humanity usually associated with the Nazis. The Nazis, and by extension the Fascist movement generally, were a reaction to Soviet Communism. Ergo, it would logically follow that any who hate Nazis should, and would, also hate Communists!
Based on historical details, no, Nazism and Fascism were not mere reactions to Soviet Communism. Fascism originated when the nationalist, pro World War I segment of the Italian socialists, under the leadership of Mussolini, split from the main body of internationalist anti-war Italian socialists, and Mussolini proceeded to form a new political coalition centered on advancing Italian national power.
The Nazi movement was similarly an ultranationalist and antidemocratic movement. While some its activities and appeal related to anticommunism, much of its public appeal was driven by its opposition to the Treaty of Versailles and its promises of improving the German economy.
26 Jun 2018, 7:14 am
TwinRuler wrote:
The way the Communists went on and on about the Bourgeois, though, is a lot like how Conservatives go on and on about Liberals. Indeed, just like Conservatives call those who oppose their wars Liberals; the Communists referred to those who disagreed with them as Bourgeois. I find that very interesting to think about.
Besides, Hitler did not know anything about Race! If he did, he would have realized that the Poles and Russians, whom he referred to as Slavs, were the same type of hybrid between Nordics and Alpines, as the Germans themselves. Very silly to refer to Linguistic groups as Racial groups, or to assume they completely overlapped. And, I suppose to be fair the Jewish people, they were not the only ones to call themselves the Chosen People; but, then again, the Germans were not the only ones who refer to themselves as the Aryan Race. The Higher Castes of the Hindus also refer to themselves as Aryans, or "Arya" to implement the original Sanskrit.
Having said that, I may as well pose this question: who was to Adolf Hitler what Karl Marx was to Vladimir Lenin? Mind you, I personally doubt it was Nietzsche, Fitch, Wagner, or even Martin Luther. You will never guess who I think it is. Indeed, Karl Marx was to Adolf Hitler what Karl Marx was to Vladimir Lenin. Hitler tweaked it, speaking of Race and Race War rather than Class and Class War. And, though Hitler referred to him as the Jew Karl Marx, I think he actually admired the latter. Notice how much Karl Marx, Marxism, and Communism are mentioned in Mein Kamph. Notice, he did many of the same things the Soviets did--send victims to Prison Camps, via cattle cars, to be tortured, butchered, and worked to death in the most horrid and savage ways conceivable; notice he referred to his movement as the National Socialists rather than either the National Fascists or the National Eugenicists.
And, of course, needless to say, the original Indo-European culture of the European Continent was irretrievably obliterated in the name of Christianity and Universal Brotherhood. To endeavor to rediscover it, as well as the Europeans' original Religion is in all likelihood a lost cause!
Besides, Hitler did not know anything about Race! If he did, he would have realized that the Poles and Russians, whom he referred to as Slavs, were the same type of hybrid between Nordics and Alpines, as the Germans themselves. Very silly to refer to Linguistic groups as Racial groups, or to assume they completely overlapped. And, I suppose to be fair the Jewish people, they were not the only ones to call themselves the Chosen People; but, then again, the Germans were not the only ones who refer to themselves as the Aryan Race. The Higher Castes of the Hindus also refer to themselves as Aryans, or "Arya" to implement the original Sanskrit.
Having said that, I may as well pose this question: who was to Adolf Hitler what Karl Marx was to Vladimir Lenin? Mind you, I personally doubt it was Nietzsche, Fitch, Wagner, or even Martin Luther. You will never guess who I think it is. Indeed, Karl Marx was to Adolf Hitler what Karl Marx was to Vladimir Lenin. Hitler tweaked it, speaking of Race and Race War rather than Class and Class War. And, though Hitler referred to him as the Jew Karl Marx, I think he actually admired the latter. Notice how much Karl Marx, Marxism, and Communism are mentioned in Mein Kamph. Notice, he did many of the same things the Soviets did--send victims to Prison Camps, via cattle cars, to be tortured, butchered, and worked to death in the most horrid and savage ways conceivable; notice he referred to his movement as the National Socialists rather than either the National Fascists or the National Eugenicists.
And, of course, needless to say, the original Indo-European culture of the European Continent was irretrievably obliterated in the name of Christianity and Universal Brotherhood. To endeavor to rediscover it, as well as the Europeans' original Religion is in all likelihood a lost cause!
Although Hitler didn't establish the Nazis, he was the figure who lad them to power in Germany. Anton Drexler was the founder of the Nazi Party (under its original name, the German Workers Party).
26 Jun 2018, 8:55 am
yelekam wrote:
TwinRuler wrote:
The way the Communists went on and on about the Bourgeois, though, is a lot like how Conservatives go on and on about Liberals. Indeed, just like Conservatives call those who oppose their wars Liberals; the Communists referred to those who disagreed with them as Bourgeois. I find that very interesting to think about.
Besides, Hitler did not know anything about Race! If he did, he would have realized that the Poles and Russians, whom he referred to as Slavs, were the same type of hybrid between Nordics and Alpines, as the Germans themselves. Very silly to refer to Linguistic groups as Racial groups, or to assume they completely overlapped. And, I suppose to be fair the Jewish people, they were not the only ones to call themselves the Chosen People; but, then again, the Germans were not the only ones who refer to themselves as the Aryan Race. The Higher Castes of the Hindus also refer to themselves as Aryans, or "Arya" to implement the original Sanskrit.
Having said that, I may as well pose this question: who was to Adolf Hitler what Karl Marx was to Vladimir Lenin? Mind you, I personally doubt it was Nietzsche, Fitch, Wagner, or even Martin Luther. You will never guess who I think it is. Indeed, Karl Marx was to Adolf Hitler what Karl Marx was to Vladimir Lenin. Hitler tweaked it, speaking of Race and Race War rather than Class and Class War. And, though Hitler referred to him as the Jew Karl Marx, I think he actually admired the latter. Notice how much Karl Marx, Marxism, and Communism are mentioned in Mein Kamph. Notice, he did many of the same things the Soviets did--send victims to Prison Camps, via cattle cars, to be tortured, butchered, and worked to death in the most horrid and savage ways conceivable; notice he referred to his movement as the National Socialists rather than either the National Fascists or the National Eugenicists.
And, of course, needless to say, the original Indo-European culture of the European Continent was irretrievably obliterated in the name of Christianity and Universal Brotherhood. To endeavor to rediscover it, as well as the Europeans' original Religion is in all likelihood a lost cause!
Besides, Hitler did not know anything about Race! If he did, he would have realized that the Poles and Russians, whom he referred to as Slavs, were the same type of hybrid between Nordics and Alpines, as the Germans themselves. Very silly to refer to Linguistic groups as Racial groups, or to assume they completely overlapped. And, I suppose to be fair the Jewish people, they were not the only ones to call themselves the Chosen People; but, then again, the Germans were not the only ones who refer to themselves as the Aryan Race. The Higher Castes of the Hindus also refer to themselves as Aryans, or "Arya" to implement the original Sanskrit.
Having said that, I may as well pose this question: who was to Adolf Hitler what Karl Marx was to Vladimir Lenin? Mind you, I personally doubt it was Nietzsche, Fitch, Wagner, or even Martin Luther. You will never guess who I think it is. Indeed, Karl Marx was to Adolf Hitler what Karl Marx was to Vladimir Lenin. Hitler tweaked it, speaking of Race and Race War rather than Class and Class War. And, though Hitler referred to him as the Jew Karl Marx, I think he actually admired the latter. Notice how much Karl Marx, Marxism, and Communism are mentioned in Mein Kamph. Notice, he did many of the same things the Soviets did--send victims to Prison Camps, via cattle cars, to be tortured, butchered, and worked to death in the most horrid and savage ways conceivable; notice he referred to his movement as the National Socialists rather than either the National Fascists or the National Eugenicists.
And, of course, needless to say, the original Indo-European culture of the European Continent was irretrievably obliterated in the name of Christianity and Universal Brotherhood. To endeavor to rediscover it, as well as the Europeans' original Religion is in all likelihood a lost cause!
Although Hitler didn't establish the Nazis, he was the figure who lad them to power in Germany. Anton Drexler was the founder of the Nazi Party (under its original name, the German Workers Party).
That is actually very interesting. Some say Adolf Hitler was a British agent. An unusual opinion, but an interesting one nonetheless.
26 Jun 2018, 10:17 am
TwinRuler wrote:
... Adolf Hitler ...
GODWIN!I call "Godwin" on this thread.
There is a tradition in many Internet discussion forums (like this one) that, when a Hitler comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever made the comparison loses whatever debate is in progress.
_________________
