The Nazi-Communist Pipeline Was Real | Poal: Say what you want.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.

[–] • 0 pt

(edited )

The Wikipedia sourcing was phenomenal.

There’s a simple explanation for this. Just as with Mao, Lenin, Obama, and Ho Chi Minh, desperate and downtrodden people want somebody who will provide answers or change, even if the answers turn out to be wrong or the change results for the worse.

Hitler didn’t rise to popularity because his political promises were qualitatively the best answers, but because they were appealing and seemed plausible. EDIT: The same demographic of angry, destitute and disenfranchised people who looked to Marxism saw a greater appeal in NatSoc for a variety of reasons. They weren’t Bolshies, Marxists, or even NatSocs, ideologically, but sad, angry, broke, hungry and demoralized by jews posing as “capitalists,” in an ongoing false dichotomy of “jew run communism vs jew run capitalism” that continues to this day.

What should be judged, rather than the perceived will of the electorate, should be the results of Hitler taking power, and his results, those being of rapid, repeated successes, both socially and economically, were what scared the living daylights out of those pursuing a globalist agenda and wishing to extinguish nationalism.

Had Hitler not been forced to fight a war on two fronts against the entire western world, Germany would have become the preeminent superpower inside of twenty years. His message grew in popularity as it went from theory to practice and bore fruit.

NatSoc is not the only path to success for advancing civilizations. There are solid arguments for a Lockean free market model, restricted Monarchy, and others. The key is that these models must allow for the acceptance of reality: meaning that certain races are superior, just as certain others are inferior, and others still have deception, destruction and enslavement as core values and mechanisms. As such, homogeneity solves many of these problems. By grouping races together as nation states, it becomes easier to design a simple working model, rather than a more complex one that requires accommodations and allowances to shore up the weaker or nonconformist races.

The Wikipedia sourcing was phenomenal. There’s a simple explanation for this. Just as with Mao, Lenin, Obama, and Ho Chi Minh, desperate and downtrodden people want somebody who will provide answers or change, even if the answers turn out to be wrong or the change results for the worse. Hitler didn’t rise to popularity because his political promises were qualitatively the best answers, but because they were appealing and seemed plausible. EDIT: The same demographic of angry, destitute and disenfranchised people who looked to Marxism saw a greater appeal in NatSoc for a variety of reasons. They weren’t Bolshies, Marxists, or even NatSocs, ideologically, but sad, angry, broke, hungry and demoralized by jews posing as “capitalists,” in an ongoing false dichotomy of “jew run communism vs jew run capitalism” that continues to this day. What should be judged, rather than the perceived will of the electorate, should be the results of Hitler taking power, and his results, those being of rapid, repeated successes, both socially and economically, were what scared the living daylights out of those pursuing a globalist agenda and wishing to extinguish nationalism. Had Hitler not been forced to fight a war on two fronts against the entire western world, Germany would have become the preeminent superpower inside of twenty years. His message grew in popularity as it went from theory to practice and bore fruit. NatSoc is not the only path to success for advancing civilizations. There are solid arguments for a Lockean free market model, restricted Monarchy, and others. The key is that these models must allow for the acceptance of reality: meaning that certain races are superior, just as certain others are inferior, and others still have deception, destruction and enslavement as core values and mechanisms. As such, homogeneity solves many of these problems. By grouping races together as nation states, it becomes easier to design a simple working model, rather than a more complex one that requires accommodations and allowances to shore up the weaker or nonconformist races.

link