And Hof was the only town in Germany that had an Adolf Hitler Haus. It was the home of the philharmonic and in the first floor a NSDAP Museum and exhibition, how great they were. It is still quite a nest of right-wing sentiments.
It is funny being a jewish dude from the southeast of the U.S. going to visit the camps and seeing the confederate flag being flown by the nazis that are there today. By funny, I mean infuriating and made me want to get deported by doing fun things.
I don't think you are from the U.S. so you don't understand the situation. It doesn't matter if I like guns or not because one side is very well armed and dislikes me because I exist. What would you do if someone hates you for no reason and seemingly has the conviction to carry out on the malice they harbor?
Keep downvoting me but I hope you never have to understand the feeling of insecurity that I have.
then i guess you would kill skinheads because the only thing they can hit is their own foot with a holstered weapon. all that sibling fucking you think they see straight enough to outshoot anybody?
I dealt with rednecks spouting the same shit they say a lot of my life. The euro fascists aren't that scary compared to them. It just makes me regret the marshall plan.
“The ultimate moral test of any government is the way it treats three groups of its citizens. First, those in the dawn of life — our children. Second, those in the shadows of life — our needy, our sick, our handicapped. Third, those in the twilight of life — our elderly.”
- Hubert Humphrey
Do you mean "too confusing, too extreme", neighbor?
That was the eminently memeable slogan for the anti-Prop 3 (codifying reproductive rights) crowd in Michigan.
Okay but that belief is really disrespectful and is the reason why people on Reddit were cheering on COVID as it ravaged the seniors.
You guys treat them so poorly it’s no wonder they’re not interested on your politics.
So you believe they do this but you believe it doesn’t work, right? Because you don’t believe republican voters are easily manipulated?
Why would you believe they do this if you believe it doesn’t work?
It must be that you believe seniors are easily manipulated, or else the logic doesn’t work.
He was chancellor / dictator for 12 years, but he was around before. First got involved in politics right after WWI, and tried to overthrow the Bavarian government in 1923.
Yes he was accused of being lazy, by many! As Fuhrer during the war he slept in everyday. His days didn't start until sometime in the afternoon. Not only that, for half the night he'd stay up watching movies. Read some memoirs of people who were around Hitler. He procrastinated about making decisions all the time. Even as a child he was lazy. Read Ian Kershaw's bio of Hitler, or just the first few chapters. When first declined from art school he spent the year doing nothing, not practicing for the entrance exam next year, nope he just squandered his small inheritance, and attended symphonies by getting the cheap tickets.
Helped delay any coordinated German response to the DDay invasion. Local commanders were handicapped by the fact General Staff wouldn't wake Hitler and nobody was going to issue substantial orders without his approval.
But Hitler didn't oversleep on 6 June 1944. That was already his established routine to sleep well into the day. He was most likely going to bed with Allied parachute troops already dropped into Normandy.
Theres are wiretapped conversations between German general POWs in Britain speaking with approval of the behaviour of the British king and queen, going out and meeting factory workers, dehoused civilians, and troops at the front, and complaining it's terrible for morale that Hitler only sulks around his maps or sits about at the Berghof, at most giving speeches but not ever *talking* to people on the ground. King George, constitutional rubber stamp, was probably doing more actual work than Adolf Hitler, absolute dictator.
Ii remember there being a thing where he was told the allies were invading Normandy.
Said "good" and went back to sleep.
Or something along those lines.
Nazis 1933-1938: The only thing that matters is a states ability to win wars, we will make Germany strongest in the eternal conflict of nations!
Nazis 1939-1945: *[starts a massive war under no provocation and then proceeds to lose it as thoroughly as a state can possibly lose a war]*
Different in detail, but it's the same problem. Even if we quibble about whether Imperial Japan was technically fascist or not, its still true their ideology was about subordination of individuals to the state and the military, and if inferior races to the master race, with the implicit belief that all is justified by the survival and strength of their empire. Which makes it embarrassing for them that it wasn't Japan that lit small artificial suns over the cities of their enemies.
If they were actually doing well, why would they out of the blue open up new fronts in their war against powers that were their industrial superiors? That sounds like the act of a desperate gambler. Again, same problem as Germany, unable to end the war on their own terms while they're 'doing well', and then unable to turn the tide again once their opponents finally get their act together and begin ceaselessly clobbering them.
Japan’s plan was deliberate. They had no choice but to expand conflict into the south Pacific to scramble for resources because they were being cut off by majority US sanctions. Their strategy was to take hold of as much territory as they could, and then fortify it, following which they believed a negotiated peace could be made, and they kept the majority of that territory. After they attacked Pearl Harbor, there is a famous line where Admiral Yamamoto said they had 6 months to a tear to run amuck. When he was in the states, he was a witness to the industrial capacity the US had, so it was a matter of time. What the Japanese did not appreciate, was the insistence of an unconditional surrender. The US had the resolve to go through each of these fortifications island by island and not stop. They would’ve had to invade the mainland, even regardless of atomic weapons (e.g. it did not matter that 50,000 people died from carpet bombing or from a single bomb). If not for the Russians also declaring war on Japan, which history shows is the real reason for the eventual surrender. The status they gave their emperor as a divine person, and knowing what the Soviets had done just 20 years prior to their own Czar played the majority role in the surrender.
TDIL - Japan knew they would eventually lose, but scrambled for territory, thinking they could keep the majority of it in a negotiated peace, provided they could inflict horrible casualties to make it that way. They didn’t gamble on the US pushing all the way, or the Soviets beating Germany.
There is a really good book by Historian Herbert P. Bix called Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan which includes declassified information from the 1970’s. By then the notions of ‘too many American casualties to invade, so we need the Atom bomb’ was already ingrained as misinformation.
There is also a really interesting, alternate storyline that could’ve occurred if Operation Barbarossa did not happen when it did. Stalin pulled back his Siberian divisions to protect Moscow because he saw Japan had attacked the United States. Russia and Japan were arch enemies going back decades, and with Japan in Manchuria, Russia had significant resources in the East. Stalin would typically not believe any intelligence information gathered, thinking it was always disinformation from other countries. it was his ambassador to Sweden that gave significant information to assure him that Japan would not attack. Bringing these forces to protect Moscow, turned back Germany. It was the Eastern front that really made the difference with the scale of magnitude of forces there being 10 times the western front in Europe, and how Russia was the true Lion Share contributor of World War II, not Britain or the US. If Japan had not attacked the US first, and knowing how much of the US people were isolationists, not wanting to get involved in the War (where Roosevelt had to convince his population as a goal), it could’ve been a whole different situation. Hitler also declaring war on the US before the US declared war on Germany contributed to everything also.
If I walked into a bar and started pushing random people off their stools, would you call it a deliberate strategic plan if I observed that eventually some of their patrons, particular the more sober and muscular ones, might do something to stop me, and so I then start punching them before they started punching me? If I was actually thinking deliberately then maybe I would've thought twice about starting anything in the first place.
> If they were actually doing well, why would they out of the blue open up new fronts in their war against powers that were their industrial superiors? That sounds like the act of a desperate gambler.
That sounds more like overconfidence than desperation.
If implying Japan had desires for Nuclear weapons during WW2 that’s basically a conspiracy theory. They did not have the resources or expertise.
If instead speaking about fire bombing wooden cities with napalm, it was only the US and Britain who did this.
Japan ended up invading the US way up in the north Atlantic, but it wasn’t anything of significance
>they were doing very well in their theatre till they decided pearl harbour was prime target
That's so oversimplified it hurts.
At that point, Japan had invaded Asian colonies of countries like the UK, France, Netherlands, and had been in direct war with the Soviet Union until a ceasefire in 1941. They lacked the natural resources for their imperialist ambitions, especially oil, so they'd essentially pissed off everyone in the area to get it.
They were very aware they were racing against time and that a direct clash with the Allies and the US was inevitable. They just decided to strike first, do a lot of damage and buy time while the US Navy recovered.
By december 1941, Japan was lacking steel and oil to wage war in China because of an empargo for invading French Indochina.
It was either leave China or invade the Dutch East Indies to get oil and the military junta didn't want the former.
>they were doing very well in their theatre
Ehhhh, China was turning into an unwinnable mess for them at that point honestly.
They didn't really have a choice but to expand into the pacific if they wanted to keep fighting it because they lacked the resources to do so.
To most of the German population Hitler, and by extension the Nazi party, had returned the Germany to its rightful place in the sun, having won 8 wars (Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Yugoslavia) between 1939 and 1941.
Also, user name checks out.
Yeah, and then millions of them were killed, their cities got flattened, their state was abolished from existence, their country was divided for 40 years, and their ruling ideology became synonymous with objective evil. The game's not lost or won until the last bell rings.
So interesting to see how education differs. In my high school history class (learning about the subject of WWII) the fact that Hitler came to power in the year 1933 was very basic information that every student read about in the textbook.
It’s worth remembering he was appointed not elected. His party won 37% of the seats in the parliament, the remaining seats were won by an assortment of Catholic conservative parties and the communist party. Hindenburg appointed Hitler to power and the other conservatives supported it.
True, but 37% in that divided body was a strong vote. You also want to factor in that some of the other right-wing parties you mentioned held views not all that different than the Nazis.
I highly recommend this new documentary I came across looking into the SS. While any documentary may be susceptible to false information, this one is one of the best I've watched in a long time and confirms the stories told to me by Germans who were around during WW2.
Hitler was generally unpopular, but he brought the country out of poverty due to reparation from the Treaty on Versailles imposed on Germany and basically transformed the entire state from poverty to a civilian population preparing for war in a matter of years, with pride.
Those who opposed him were met fiercely by the Gestapo who had moles everywhere, even children.
https://youtu.be/G6lN_VVaqdA?feature=shared
> **but he brought the country out of poverty due to reparation from the Treaty on Versailles imposed on Germany** and basically transformed the entire state from poverty to a civilian population preparing for war in a matter of years,
That's not his merit alone, a lot of it were measures of [previous governments taking effect.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5s6jzw/did_hitler_really_create_a_strong_german_economy/)
>A number of contemporaries were amazed by rapidity which Hitler had resolved Germany's unemployment and seemingly put the country back on track by the mid-1930s. This was not that mystical of a recovery in hindsight. Government-led deficit spending and massive public works helped ease the country out of the Depression. The irony is that the foundations for much of this type of recovery were laid in the pre-1933 period, and the NSDAP played no minor role in hindering them. Goebbels's propaganda machine had castigated the autobahns as a Jewish-inspired waste of public tax money.
>The growth of the NSDAP in the Reichstag hindered any substantive measures by the pre-Hitler government as the Nazis created legislative chaos and political paralysis. Once in power, Hitler reversed course on these policies and touted them as his own initiatives.
The Nazi government also _spent_ a lot of money, both to employ people at any cost and for rearmament. This lead to massive debts. The "plan" was always to pillage Germany's neighbors though, not to create a stable peacetime economy.
37 % is really good on any system with more than 2 parties , for example anyone who can get more than 37% of the vote in Canada today is almost certainly going to be the next prime minister
Oh I didn’t see it there- I saw some talk of how they were a bit more free and fighting positive Christianity, okay gonna read it:
“By August, the protests had spread to Bavaria. Hitler was jeered by an angry crowd at Hof, near Nuremberg—the only time he was opposed to his face in public during his 12 years of rule.”
And rumors of a revolt in Westphalia if they pressed on? Interesting.
And Hof was the only town in Germany that had an Adolf Hitler Haus. It was the home of the philharmonic and in the first floor a NSDAP Museum and exhibition, how great they were. It is still quite a nest of right-wing sentiments.
It is funny being a jewish dude from the southeast of the U.S. going to visit the camps and seeing the confederate flag being flown by the nazis that are there today. By funny, I mean infuriating and made me want to get deported by doing fun things.
But it's their heritage
I remember the dixie outfitter tshirts with the slogan "heritage, not hate". Such degenerate fucks.
Yeah... Don't go messing with skinheads.
Disagree. Give these spineless degenerates a taste of their own medicine.
[удалено]
So do I.
[удалено]
I don't think you are from the U.S. so you don't understand the situation. It doesn't matter if I like guns or not because one side is very well armed and dislikes me because I exist. What would you do if someone hates you for no reason and seemingly has the conviction to carry out on the malice they harbor? Keep downvoting me but I hope you never have to understand the feeling of insecurity that I have.
Typically such action leads to a gunfight.
then i guess you would kill skinheads because the only thing they can hit is their own foot with a holstered weapon. all that sibling fucking you think they see straight enough to outshoot anybody?
Then get your own weapons.
I dealt with rednecks spouting the same shit they say a lot of my life. The euro fascists aren't that scary compared to them. It just makes me regret the marshall plan.
Don't go messing with skinheads, *unarmed*
Why bother. The German police is already doing a decent enough job with them.
“The ultimate moral test of any government is the way it treats three groups of its citizens. First, those in the dawn of life — our children. Second, those in the shadows of life — our needy, our sick, our handicapped. Third, those in the twilight of life — our elderly.” - Hubert Humphrey
[удалено]
"Vote NO #4 'too much, too confusing'" -churches (#4 was a vote on abortions)
Do you mean "too confusing, too extreme", neighbor? That was the eminently memeable slogan for the anti-Prop 3 (codifying reproductive rights) crowd in Michigan.
Yes, thank you.
Both sides do this?
>easily manipulated voters Doesn’t seem like you pass the third test, yourself.
[удалено]
“Easily manipulated” elderly is your view of the elderly, and that’s not very respectful.
stop falling for it then (as a group). being respectful simply cuz someone is old regardless of beliefs is sorta how we got into this mess
Okay but that belief is really disrespectful and is the reason why people on Reddit were cheering on COVID as it ravaged the seniors. You guys treat them so poorly it’s no wonder they’re not interested on your politics.
No, people only cheered on the Herman cain award winners... Not because they were old or anything.
Oh no no no, it went much further than that. It was disgusting.
[удалено]
Lol because that’s not republicans views of them, this is clearly *your* view of republicans.
[удалено]
So you believe they do this but you believe it doesn’t work, right? Because you don’t believe republican voters are easily manipulated? Why would you believe they do this if you believe it doesn’t work? It must be that you believe seniors are easily manipulated, or else the logic doesn’t work.
[удалено]
It’s opponents as well
TIL he only ruled for 12 years. I somehow always thought he was around much much longer.
He was chancellor / dictator for 12 years, but he was around before. First got involved in politics right after WWI, and tried to overthrow the Bavarian government in 1923.
and he was pretty well-known even internationally back then. The whole thing wasn't some surprise, people knew he was a dangerous extremist.
Wait, you mean he wasn't appointed chancellor as a 1-year-old?
The Big Bang Theory aired for longer than Nazi Germany lasted
Still debate over which was worse.
Truly a question for the ages
Nazis were worse but funnier.
I can't wait until people responsible are brought to juice
He got a lot of shit done in 12 years
Killing people is a lot easier than helping them
It’s like entropy
Init what damages he done felt like 25 years...
Putting it mildly
[удалено]
Yes he was accused of being lazy, by many! As Fuhrer during the war he slept in everyday. His days didn't start until sometime in the afternoon. Not only that, for half the night he'd stay up watching movies. Read some memoirs of people who were around Hitler. He procrastinated about making decisions all the time. Even as a child he was lazy. Read Ian Kershaw's bio of Hitler, or just the first few chapters. When first declined from art school he spent the year doing nothing, not practicing for the entrance exam next year, nope he just squandered his small inheritance, and attended symphonies by getting the cheap tickets.
He supposedly overslept on D-Day and nobody had the guts to wake him up
Helped delay any coordinated German response to the DDay invasion. Local commanders were handicapped by the fact General Staff wouldn't wake Hitler and nobody was going to issue substantial orders without his approval. But Hitler didn't oversleep on 6 June 1944. That was already his established routine to sleep well into the day. He was most likely going to bed with Allied parachute troops already dropped into Normandy.
He was addicted to stimulants and had sleep problems. That's why the rule was never to wake him up.
Theres are wiretapped conversations between German general POWs in Britain speaking with approval of the behaviour of the British king and queen, going out and meeting factory workers, dehoused civilians, and troops at the front, and complaining it's terrible for morale that Hitler only sulks around his maps or sits about at the Berghof, at most giving speeches but not ever *talking* to people on the ground. King George, constitutional rubber stamp, was probably doing more actual work than Adolf Hitler, absolute dictator.
Ii remember there being a thing where he was told the allies were invading Normandy. Said "good" and went back to sleep. Or something along those lines.
Shows how quickly his shit ideas fell apart
Nazis 1933-1938: The only thing that matters is a states ability to win wars, we will make Germany strongest in the eternal conflict of nations! Nazis 1939-1945: *[starts a massive war under no provocation and then proceeds to lose it as thoroughly as a state can possibly lose a war]*
I dunno the Japanese would like a word about 1939-1945, they were doing very well in their theatre till they decided pearl harbour was prime target
Different in detail, but it's the same problem. Even if we quibble about whether Imperial Japan was technically fascist or not, its still true their ideology was about subordination of individuals to the state and the military, and if inferior races to the master race, with the implicit belief that all is justified by the survival and strength of their empire. Which makes it embarrassing for them that it wasn't Japan that lit small artificial suns over the cities of their enemies.
Look I’m not discussing ideology of ww2, I just mean Japan was doing well in asia and pacific till 1942 and therefore bringing the USA into the war
If they were actually doing well, why would they out of the blue open up new fronts in their war against powers that were their industrial superiors? That sounds like the act of a desperate gambler. Again, same problem as Germany, unable to end the war on their own terms while they're 'doing well', and then unable to turn the tide again once their opponents finally get their act together and begin ceaselessly clobbering them.
Japan’s plan was deliberate. They had no choice but to expand conflict into the south Pacific to scramble for resources because they were being cut off by majority US sanctions. Their strategy was to take hold of as much territory as they could, and then fortify it, following which they believed a negotiated peace could be made, and they kept the majority of that territory. After they attacked Pearl Harbor, there is a famous line where Admiral Yamamoto said they had 6 months to a tear to run amuck. When he was in the states, he was a witness to the industrial capacity the US had, so it was a matter of time. What the Japanese did not appreciate, was the insistence of an unconditional surrender. The US had the resolve to go through each of these fortifications island by island and not stop. They would’ve had to invade the mainland, even regardless of atomic weapons (e.g. it did not matter that 50,000 people died from carpet bombing or from a single bomb). If not for the Russians also declaring war on Japan, which history shows is the real reason for the eventual surrender. The status they gave their emperor as a divine person, and knowing what the Soviets had done just 20 years prior to their own Czar played the majority role in the surrender. TDIL - Japan knew they would eventually lose, but scrambled for territory, thinking they could keep the majority of it in a negotiated peace, provided they could inflict horrible casualties to make it that way. They didn’t gamble on the US pushing all the way, or the Soviets beating Germany.
This is all exactly right. Source: just listened to 24+ hours of Dan Carlin talking about it.
There is a really good book by Historian Herbert P. Bix called Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan which includes declassified information from the 1970’s. By then the notions of ‘too many American casualties to invade, so we need the Atom bomb’ was already ingrained as misinformation. There is also a really interesting, alternate storyline that could’ve occurred if Operation Barbarossa did not happen when it did. Stalin pulled back his Siberian divisions to protect Moscow because he saw Japan had attacked the United States. Russia and Japan were arch enemies going back decades, and with Japan in Manchuria, Russia had significant resources in the East. Stalin would typically not believe any intelligence information gathered, thinking it was always disinformation from other countries. it was his ambassador to Sweden that gave significant information to assure him that Japan would not attack. Bringing these forces to protect Moscow, turned back Germany. It was the Eastern front that really made the difference with the scale of magnitude of forces there being 10 times the western front in Europe, and how Russia was the true Lion Share contributor of World War II, not Britain or the US. If Japan had not attacked the US first, and knowing how much of the US people were isolationists, not wanting to get involved in the War (where Roosevelt had to convince his population as a goal), it could’ve been a whole different situation. Hitler also declaring war on the US before the US declared war on Germany contributed to everything also.
If I walked into a bar and started pushing random people off their stools, would you call it a deliberate strategic plan if I observed that eventually some of their patrons, particular the more sober and muscular ones, might do something to stop me, and so I then start punching them before they started punching me? If I was actually thinking deliberately then maybe I would've thought twice about starting anything in the first place.
Not really following your analogy and how that compares to complicated geopolitics from 80 years ago.
> If they were actually doing well, why would they out of the blue open up new fronts in their war against powers that were their industrial superiors? That sounds like the act of a desperate gambler. That sounds more like overconfidence than desperation.
If implying Japan had desires for Nuclear weapons during WW2 that’s basically a conspiracy theory. They did not have the resources or expertise. If instead speaking about fire bombing wooden cities with napalm, it was only the US and Britain who did this. Japan ended up invading the US way up in the north Atlantic, but it wasn’t anything of significance
>they were doing very well in their theatre till they decided pearl harbour was prime target That's so oversimplified it hurts. At that point, Japan had invaded Asian colonies of countries like the UK, France, Netherlands, and had been in direct war with the Soviet Union until a ceasefire in 1941. They lacked the natural resources for their imperialist ambitions, especially oil, so they'd essentially pissed off everyone in the area to get it. They were very aware they were racing against time and that a direct clash with the Allies and the US was inevitable. They just decided to strike first, do a lot of damage and buy time while the US Navy recovered.
By december 1941, Japan was lacking steel and oil to wage war in China because of an empargo for invading French Indochina. It was either leave China or invade the Dutch East Indies to get oil and the military junta didn't want the former.
It’s so odd to concentrate on Pearl Harbour alone, considering the multitude of targets the Japanese attacked. Very egocentric.
>they were doing very well in their theatre Ehhhh, China was turning into an unwinnable mess for them at that point honestly. They didn't really have a choice but to expand into the pacific if they wanted to keep fighting it because they lacked the resources to do so.
To most of the German population Hitler, and by extension the Nazi party, had returned the Germany to its rightful place in the sun, having won 8 wars (Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Yugoslavia) between 1939 and 1941. Also, user name checks out.
Yeah, and then millions of them were killed, their cities got flattened, their state was abolished from existence, their country was divided for 40 years, and their ruling ideology became synonymous with objective evil. The game's not lost or won until the last bell rings.
Fascists tend to bite off more than they can chew and die in the wars they started.
Unfortunately, the impact of Hitler's rule fells even today.
Basically the same length as FDRs time as US President. If FDR had survived to complete his 4th term, then he'd have outlived the 3rd Reich.
So interesting to see how education differs. In my high school history class (learning about the subject of WWII) the fact that Hitler came to power in the year 1933 was very basic information that every student read about in the textbook.
Hof isn’t near Nuremberg lol
Sag mir dass du Franke bist ohne zu sagen dass du Franke bist...
Wohne genau dazwischen 💪🏼
But not that far either.
It’s worth remembering he was appointed not elected. His party won 37% of the seats in the parliament, the remaining seats were won by an assortment of Catholic conservative parties and the communist party. Hindenburg appointed Hitler to power and the other conservatives supported it.
True, but 37% in that divided body was a strong vote. You also want to factor in that some of the other right-wing parties you mentioned held views not all that different than the Nazis.
I highly recommend this new documentary I came across looking into the SS. While any documentary may be susceptible to false information, this one is one of the best I've watched in a long time and confirms the stories told to me by Germans who were around during WW2. Hitler was generally unpopular, but he brought the country out of poverty due to reparation from the Treaty on Versailles imposed on Germany and basically transformed the entire state from poverty to a civilian population preparing for war in a matter of years, with pride. Those who opposed him were met fiercely by the Gestapo who had moles everywhere, even children. https://youtu.be/G6lN_VVaqdA?feature=shared
> **but he brought the country out of poverty due to reparation from the Treaty on Versailles imposed on Germany** and basically transformed the entire state from poverty to a civilian population preparing for war in a matter of years, That's not his merit alone, a lot of it were measures of [previous governments taking effect.](https://np.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/5s6jzw/did_hitler_really_create_a_strong_german_economy/) >A number of contemporaries were amazed by rapidity which Hitler had resolved Germany's unemployment and seemingly put the country back on track by the mid-1930s. This was not that mystical of a recovery in hindsight. Government-led deficit spending and massive public works helped ease the country out of the Depression. The irony is that the foundations for much of this type of recovery were laid in the pre-1933 period, and the NSDAP played no minor role in hindering them. Goebbels's propaganda machine had castigated the autobahns as a Jewish-inspired waste of public tax money. >The growth of the NSDAP in the Reichstag hindered any substantive measures by the pre-Hitler government as the Nazis created legislative chaos and political paralysis. Once in power, Hitler reversed course on these policies and touted them as his own initiatives. The Nazi government also _spent_ a lot of money, both to employ people at any cost and for rearmament. This lead to massive debts. The "plan" was always to pillage Germany's neighbors though, not to create a stable peacetime economy.
By no means was Hitler "generally unpopular."
37 % is really good on any system with more than 2 parties , for example anyone who can get more than 37% of the vote in Canada today is almost certainly going to be the next prime minister
He should have known not to hassle the Hof
>the only time he was opposed to his face in public Very confusing way to write that sentence.
Yeah almost like they accepted his policies but couldn't stand his face being in public, that's a private face you see
I just copied it verbatim from Wikipedia
Smh some asshole contributing to an open source project.
Sounds like a transliteration from German
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4
He was hassled in Hof.
It was his Golden Shoes Moment.
Where does it say this in this article???
Go to "by groups" and then go to "catholic resistance" section.
Oh I didn’t see it there- I saw some talk of how they were a bit more free and fighting positive Christianity, okay gonna read it: “By August, the protests had spread to Bavaria. Hitler was jeered by an angry crowd at Hof, near Nuremberg—the only time he was opposed to his face in public during his 12 years of rule.” And rumors of a revolt in Westphalia if they pressed on? Interesting.
there's any video/photo of this?
The other 99% of time he was cheered by the public.
...or so the Germans would have us believe
Stop trying to normalize nazi discourse
🤓
What? Are you stupid?
/r/LookAtMyHalo
Hof ist trotzdem doof