Red Ideologies

How can we be sure that the alleged crimes against the German ethnic community that Poles are accused of committing are nothing more than Nazi propaganda that is spread by neo-Nazis over and over again?

1) Hitler makes no mention of massacres in any of his secret speeches; in fact, in his most well-known secret speech, which was delivered on August 22, 1939, he said nothing about massacres. It should be emphasized that multiple military commanders in attendance took notes during the address, resulting in various transcripts of the speech, none of which included references to the alleged crimes.

2) In his diaries, Goebbels—unquestionably a maestro of propaganda—writes the following instead of reporting any massacres.

"Poland is not important",

"Everything is quiet in Danzig",

"Hitler doesn't take the Poles seriously at all",

"The Poles have become noticeably more reserved"

Rosenberg admits at Nuremberg the plan for Ukraine and the East in general: acquisition of their land for German settlement/expansion and exploitation of their labor. He says that while in Germany top officials publicly declared their contempt of the "inferior" Eastern Slavs, it was unwise to publicly declare such things in the East to not agitate their subjects.

——

MR. DODD: All right, I accept your interpretation; we won't have any trouble about that. Now, will you please look at this document? This is a memorandum found in your files, for your information.

ROSENBERG: Yes.

MR. DODD: You set out there, in the second paragraph, what you call the aim of German politics, notably in the Ukraine, as having been laid down by the Fuehrer. They are, you say, exploitation and mobilization of raw materials, a German settlement in certain regions, no artificial education of the population towards intellectualism, but the preservation of their labor strength; apart from that, an extensive unconcern with the interior affairs.

Then, moving down a little bit-because I don't think it is necessary to read all of it, much of it has been referred to in another document-we come down to the 12th line from the bottom of that paragraph. Beginning at the 14th line:

"After continuous observation of the state of affairs in the Occupied Eastern Territories, I am convinced that German politics may have their own, possibly contemptuous opinion of the qualities of the conquered peoples, but that it is not the mission of German political representatives to proclaim measures and opinions which could eventually reduce the conquered peoples to dull despair instead of promoting the desired utilization of manpower to capacity."

Then, in the next paragraph, you say:

"If at home we had to announce our aims to the whole nation most openly and aggressively, in contrast to the others, the political leaders in the East must remain silent where German policy calls for necessary harshness. They must remain silent as to any derogatory opinions which they may form about the conquered peoples. Yes, a clever German policy may in certain circumstances do more in the German interest through alleviations which do not affect policy and certain humane concessions, than through open, inconsiderate brutality."

Were you honestly expressing your views when you wrote that memorandum on the 16th of March 1942?

ROSENBERG: This document is correct.

Follow @redideologies

Debunking ZH's "Hitler's Peace Offers 1933-1940"

At 2:23, ZH quotes Hitler's Reichstag address to demonstrate that Hitler was eager to disarm Germany. It is well known among historians that Hitler merely lied in public addresses; his true intentions are glaringly disclosed in his behind-closed-door remarks, such as the following, which occurred in the same year 1933, well before May.

“The future of Germany depends exclusively and only on the reconstruction of the Wehrmacht. All other tasks must cede precedence to the task of rearmament ... In any case, I [Hitler] take the view that in [the] future in case of conflict between the demands of the Wehrmacht and demands for other purposes, the interests of the Wehrmacht must in every case have priority.”
~ Adolf Hitler
Cabinet Meeting on 9 February 1933

«Curt Liebmann, noted Hitler's words [from the speech Hitler delivered on February 2, 1933] thus: ‘We might fight for new export markets; or we might – and this would be better – conquer new Lebensraum in the east, and Germanise it ruthlessly.’»
~ David Irving, Hitler's War and The War Path.

"Hitler told military leaders in early February 1933, it was pointless trying to boost exports; the only way to a long-term, secure recovery of the German economy was through the conquest of ‘living-space’ in the East, and preparations for this now had to take priority over everything else."
— The Third Reich in Power, Richard J. Evan

“The next 5 years in Germany must be devoted to the rearmament of the German people. Every publicly supported job creation scheme must be judged by the criterion of whether it is necessary from the point of view of the rearmament of the German people. This principle must always and everywhere stand in the foreground.”

— Hitler to his Ministers, 8 February 1933. ( Richard Evans, “The Third Reich in Power”, p 337)

“…rearmament was the overriding and determining force impelling economic policy from the earliest stage. Everything else was sacrificed to it. In the 6 years between January 1933 and the autumn of the Munich crisis, Hitler’s regime raised the share of national output going to the military from less than 1% to almost 20%. Never before had national production been redistributed on this scale or with such speed by a capitalist state in peacetime.”

— The Wages of Destruction,