imontheloose
Just a guy
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2024
- Posts
- 3,108
- Reputation
- 7,363
Saying Slavs can be National Socialists "for their own interests" ignores the fact the original ideology literally saw them as inferior. Yes, some Slavs were praised when useful, or kidnapped as children if they looked Nordic, but that was exploitation, not inclusion. The historical record doesn't lie. You can call yourself whatever you want today, but don't pretend it matches what the NSDAP actually believed or had planned. The original Generalplan Ost is available in Germany. In fact, from Oxford, I can go to my uni and get a Robert Gellately copy of Backing Hitler detailing Generalplan Ost adroitly.Never claimed being a national socialist. That doesn't stop the fact that anyone can be a national socialist striving for their own interests.
You forgot the part where you show me the plan and what it says.
North eastern european children who look nordic are in fact at least half of the population, because they are very similar people.
Oh God. More of this. It's all the same arguments. The Germans used Slavs. Used. If you read what I said, you'd see how they viewed you as slaves and free labour. Mein Kampf: "Slavs are an obstacle to German expansion and must be removed for lebensraum". Notice how you were only recruited as soldiers when the Germans were losing? Himmler bent the rules. And many times the Nazis did. You're aware how they ignored Jewish links way before even considering Slavs, right? Ideological consistency and power are realistically mutually exclusive. The concept of calling them honourary Aryans or corrupted Aryans was to justify military expediency. I can't believe this is your argument...
They were mainly motivated by hatred of the USSR and nationalism. You didn't mention, conveniently, how they were segregated, had worse equipment, and had lower status than Germanic units. Not to mention you were seen as such terrible fighters that many were called divisions only nominally. Some never reached full divisional strength, got disbanded, or were actually brigades, legions, and battalions instead. They were for primarily second-line duties. Hitler actually opposed Slavic enlistment and only when Himmler overrode him as they got desperate did they allow you in.You weren't even allowed into the SS's inner circles, or even Germany itself. Moot point.
Hitler was strategic, not consistent. Using 1923 speeches, even 1920 is ludicrous. You do realise Goebbels and Hitler both believed Jews could assimilate into German culture for a while, right? Way after them speeches too. Was he a fan of Jews too? Seems so according to your odd logic. But wait, 1925... Mein Kampf... like I've already used a bunch. "The German people have no interest in any alliance with the Slavic peoples. Slavs are not the bearers of cultures, rather the destroyers." straight from Chapter 14 of vol 2. Now, Hitler's table talks... "The Slavs are born as a servile race. They are only capable of being ruled by Germans." & "The Russian is a mixture of Asiatic and inferior racial elements. We must be ruthless in removing them." So far you've just proved he used you Slavs when necessary whilst keeping his true thoughts of you to himself and those around him, then later publicly at greater power. Why would a growing politician remove a whole group of people from liking him? This argument is ridiculous.
Notice that Goring vehemently denied the extermination of Jews at Nuremberg... yet the only thing he wasn't so vehement about was the destruction of Slavs. If you actually speak to a historian, they will tell you about Goring's silence or cold justification about destroying the Slavs. He justified all actions against Slavs, but not Jews. He refused to deny, and actually defended, brutal occupation policies, mass starvation, and forced labour in Slavic territories.
Racial policy of Nazi Germany - Wikipedia
Generalplan Ost - Wikipedia
Anti-Slavic sentiment - Wikipedia
inb4 "only my source from Wikipedia is valid"
It is called two step propaganda. The idea of the Germans in all of your paraphrases is, "The Jews took you over, so now I'll take you over and purify you all." And this really meant, you'll all be exterminated and lebensraum will be made for Germans.
This is genuinely all slop. Selective Aryanism was used all the time. Even with Jews. Especially the Japanese and Italians too.
You're not even quoting sources correctly. This has to be copy and pasted.
Almost all these sources are just anti-Jewish, not pro-Slavic. And that's the best propaganda you can find... They're weaponising Slavic suffering to whip up resentment towards the Jew, and once they're done using you, like they planned, and even now you still fall for it, they would exterminate you. In 1937, future support for Eastern aggression was needed thus could be branded to Slavs as a moral crusade, not a imperial aggression. The Nazis contradicted themselves a lot, so does every single government. You can do this same thing for all racially concerned governments.
Notice he doesn't walk back on Mein Kampf even when mentioned? He's trying to sound diplomatic to international audiences, not correcting his anti-Slavic writings in Mein Kampf. Your sources literally say, "most Russians are subhumans and only a small sliver may be redeemable."
I literally have some DAF books here right now. You have no idea what you're even posting. The DAF was for propaganda and labour control. Calling them Aryan was a propaganda tool. The fact you cannot see this shows you Slavs are still gullible to this. Contradiction isn't evidence of tolerance. It's proof of how far propaganda can stretch.
You have no idea about National Socialism and the history of it. The other half I have read now and it is the same regurgitated propaganda to get you all fighting the USSR and benefiting Germany all whilst they called you subhuman and planned your extermination behind your back.
As a Pole you should know, the Nazis were opportunists. It wasn't meant to be consistent when garnering power. Can you name one ideology which was entirely consistent yet also held power? No. You cover this in any first-year politics/history course.
In public to propagandise Slavs, they praised them occasionally (although many of your sources was just weaponising Slavs' suffering for benefit of the Wehrmacht). But, they planned 85% of Poles to be removed, 50-75% of Czechs to be removed too. And note the Hunger Plan too. The systematic murder and ideological view of Slavs by the Germans is very well documented. Any historian will concur this. Without fail. Himmler openly stated, "we will never Germanise the East, only kill or enslave it."
Slavic POWs were starved deliberated too. Denied medical care, shelter, and food. It wasn't neglect. It was policy.
To the Nazis, Slavs were Aryan when needed, and subhuman when they weren't. Basic propaganda. Welcome to it.
If you have actual key points you want addressing, adroitly express them. Writing German propaganda proving you were strategically manipulated into fighting your leaders only to then be exterminated if they had won really wasn't worth that slab of text.
And remember, "Whether 10,000 Russian women fall down from exhaustion while digging an anti-tank ditch interests me only in so far as the ditch is finished for Germany." - Himmler
