We know nothing really about the photo you showed earlier. Is there evidence that a Soviet or Jew ordered this guy to be mutilated?
https://secondeguerremondialeclairegrube.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/russie-guerre-civile-de-1917-1922/
It is from a French newspaper "L’Illustration" published on July 31, 1920. Article is titled “A People Has Become Mad” by Alfred Savoir:
Machine translated by google translate:
“I have before me authentic, irrefutable documents, photographs taken by the Bolsheviks themselves. It is a horror, an unnamed nightmare: flayed women, butchered trunks, torn limbs. The sight of these horrors would be unbearable to you; I wouldn't mind presenting them to you in their sickening ugliness. " “However, I submit to your appreciation, to your astonishment, the execution of Polish Captain Rosinsky, executed in Orscha in 1918 on the order of the Soviet Commissioner, Mr. B .. (by design I do not publish his very honorably known name). In this inhuman document you will find something more terrible than the ordeal, and that is the attitude of the crowd. Look at these figures: they are bored! A horse that falls on the avenue de l'Opéra provokes in the Parisian public more reflexes, more comments. Here, what placidity, what indifference! The savages, at least, dance in front of the people they scalped. " “The people you see were undoubtedly good people before Bolshevism. They weren't bullies as you might think. Peasants, workers or petty bourgeois, before being recruited for the Red Army, they had a certain education, religion, morality, scruples, a conscience. It all vanished. In two years a people suddenly changed its nature, its thought, its sensitivity, its psychology. Bolshevism contains a force of destruction greater, more formidable than that of war. He destroys, he kills souls. It is here - much more than in summary executions, than in learned punishments - the crime of Bolshevism. " “I would like to talk to you again about Mr. B…, People's Commissar, who ordered this beautiful spectacle.” “I once knew him; he was a charming teenager, with an ironic and joking mind. He was familiar with French culture, he admired the novels of Barres and he readily quoted poets that I was completely ignorant of. He was also a great dancer, a great flirtatious and a good bridger. He came to Paris a lot, and he was having fun. " “Today this enjoyable and skeptical bourgeois, this happy boy impales people. Understand who can! “
So the author of the article personally knows the person who had ordered this killing, and directly attributes him to be acting in official function as a Soviet Commissioner. The commissioner's race is not revealed, but I did not mean to imply that he was jewish, only that the Soviet Union did have a precedent for brutality, so it is not unfeasible for me to believe that jewish leaders within the USSR were now using their position to promote a continuation of brutality (like the kind that had been seen in the 20s and 30s) against Germans and Ukrainians due to the racially-charged ongoing war.
Hitler most heavily blamed the Jews for starting the war
View attachment 2778529
did the Jews start the war? ehhh no.
Hitler is speaking to the Reichstag, so he is speaking to party members whom he presumes are already familiar with his views. Once again, this is an accusation of jews as white collar criminals, which is more common in the early war, and not so much accusing jews of barbarism. Hitler believes that the liberal world order is run by banks, and that democratic politicians are often just puppets to wealthy oligarchs, and these wealthy oligarchs are overwhelmingly jewish, and through this means, jewish oligarchy is a shadow government that manipulates formal governments to go to war for it. Hitler wanted to create an autarkic country, which is a completely economically independent country with a local economy which is self-sustaining which the globalist bankers cannot profit from. Hitler has always maintained that the reason why Britain opposed him, was because of this, because this would be an economic system designed to be insulated against global depression, where investors could not capitalize on the German economy, which he felt was being exploited, particularly because of the collapsed post-WW1 economy they suffered from for so many years. So Hitler is using aggressive rhetoric, but is naming financiers as the culprits, and is saying "is this war going to be good for the jews or for the political movements they are attached to? No, if they go to war with us, we will destroy them".
My quick summary here is the Nazis were bullies, and then got told to stop by bigger bullies--the liberal order.
Eh... I don't think they were bullies. Before WW2, Hitler only ever demanded territories with a significant German population, which was actively demanding to be returned to Germany.
-Austria: Austria held a referendum which overwhelmingly voted to join Germany. All contemporaries agreed there was no foul play, and nothing wrong had occurred here, as it was by popular will.
-Sudetenland: Czechoslovakia was going through a crisis where a German separatist political party was being suppressed by the government, which was brewing into a civil war as German separatists were rising up. An international conference was held and it was agreed that they should be returned to Germany by popular will. ("Returned" in the sense that Germany was now the inheritor of Austria's legacy, as the two countries had merged)
-Bohemia and Slovakia: Slovakia declared independence and the Czech government lost control of the military. Commanders were going rogue and firing at German troops arriving in Sudetenland (in the agreed-upon borders), which made President Hacha lose his shit and fear a German military response, so to prevent this, he basically surrendered pre-emptively, recognizing that Czechoslovakia had become a collapsed state and was in need of protection from a great power. Shortly afterwards, the Slovaks did the same, probably fearing Hungarian or Soviet annexation. Even though this was a completely legitimate mutually-agreed on treaty, this was spun as an invasion and a treaty violation by the western powers that be.
-Memel: this was given to Germany by Lithuania without any quarrel. In fact, Memel was supposed to be a free city like Danzig, but the Lithuanians annexed it illegally. It also had a large German population.
-Danzig: Danzig voted for many years in a row to be annexed into Germany, but Hitler never did this because he knew it would upset the Poles. Eventually Hitler asked Britain for permission, and Britain agreed as long as the Poles agreed too. So this led to Hitler opening negotiations with Poland, which actually caused Poland to lose their shit because the Poles thought of Danzig as a Polish city even though it was German by population. This lead to sabre-rattling, ethnic tensions, and quickly escalated, and the rest is history.
So before WW2 the Germans weren't just going around like the communists did, annexing foreign cultures for the sake of imperialism, they were actually just fulfilling Hitler's campaign promises, which was to be an avocate for Germans at home and abroad, and Hitler did not demand any place which Germans did not have a majority population. Hitler was also diplomatic enough not to demand, say, Alsace-Loraine, which also had a German majority, because he knew that it would escalate to war with France. He also never bothered Italy about South Tyrol.
Perhaps Britain/France and the US should have allowed Nazi Germany free reign over Eastern Europe, but they didn't, and this had nothing to do with Jews but basic geopolitics, balance of power, shit Britain had been doing for centuries
It probably involves multiple factors, but I generally agree. Though Britain had alway been primarily an empire based on control over commerce, so capitalism (and capitalists) are always a major motivator for their historical actions.
I have some sympathy for fascism because I view it as a response and reaction to the liberal order which I'm no friend of. The world has problems yeah, and the Jews since they are part of the world, are also problematic. But responsible for liberalism and the problems that come with it? Hah. It's probably comforting for people to believe in a simple explanation for why things are shitty.
I generally agree. I don't think it's fair to lay all the problems of the world at jews' feet. Whites are just as involved in capitalism and communism as jews are. But when jews involved in these things have a very prominent voice or position of power, it sticks out like a sore thumb and people take notice, because people begin to question "why is someone who doesn't think of himself as one of us, now ruling over us? And is he acting in our interests, or in jewish interests?" So it is not so much that jews are more immoral than whites, only that they are far more conspicuous.
"