I'm not sure if Germans are learning from other colonisers to be ruthless. They certainly don't need to learn from others as they have a lot of experience of that in dealings with their neighbours, for example Poles.
To be fair to Bismarck, the entrenchment of the army was a Prussian holdover that predated him significantly. The German Empire also having that feature was just a carryover of Prussianism. And regarding Darwinism, I think you're miscrediting it with Social Darwinism.
Antisemitism is omni present throughout history. The Roman's were antisemitic, ancient Chinese, Muslim empires (obviously.) Etc etc....120 something countries have booted the jews. It's not a Christian phenomenon
I think making that point is futile when yes in this case some of it is Lutheran in nature (but much more than that it was aethiestic scientific racism) but all streams of Christianity had virilent antisemitism; from the catholics in France to the orthodox in Russia. Prior to Luther, and prior to the holocaust the largest mass murder of the jews occurred along the Rhine by Christians; despite rebuke from the catholic authorities
Say what you like about Hitler's Mein Kampf but it is undoubtedly the most fascinating firsthand account of the war years. Good on you for digging into it. Great analysis!
I'm a Roman Catholic but I think if you want to tell the rest is history, you should tell more stories of the Jews who had to suffer and were lucky to survive. Even if they've passed, I'm sure their families are proud to tell the stories or have them discussed. .
You guys are just great, but you missed the most important hypothesis of all!! The Nietzschean hypothesis, that Hitlerism was caused by too much Christianity in the Germans (a religion poorly suited to them): "My main goal of this video is to put hitler in psychological/mythological historical context, and explain how eons of years of tension in the German spirit eventually erupted in the appearance of the third reich." ruclips.net/video/GBBcqtHA85g/видео.html
Why does a podcast need a break? It's not a big deal, but it's odd. Of course you can physically stop after 30 minutes to go to the toilet or freshen your coffee, but it's a simple post production edit to make it seem to the listener that there was no break at all. Confused.
The myth of the 20th century is collapsing by the year. AJP Taylor was brilliantly insightful, and was a pre-eminent historian until his brilliance led him to reach the "wrong" conclusions about WW2. Then, like all public figures who come to the "wrong" conclusions on this and related topics, he had his career destroyed for his troubles. His experience, and his qualities as an intellectual, pre-figured David Irving's later treatment.
How is it bs, I agree they're not always right but there's not a huge amount to disagree with this episode. Ofc this thread is dead its a year old and this is their smallest platform; they're huge on apple podcasts and Spotify
@@mukathompson7490 There's not a huge amount for YOU to disagree with. The British version of WW2 (I'm a Brit) is fiction -- most don't know why it was fought
You can’t tell me that the rise of hitler and nazism isn’t similar to the modern American Republican Party. I’m not saying there’s a literal comparison, but abstract in political tactics and use of propaganda
Of course the massive difference is that the propaganda of the American media is actually Anti Trump. If Trump gets in then he will have done so against a massive media campaign against him . Only Fox News is a supporter. Infact the whole Trump as dictator is utterly media led. I am not a Trump supporter by the way, but the way the general public are lead by the nose by the media is rather scary.
And not just limited to them either. Seems a downward spiral to the lowest common denominator "if you can't beat them join them" attitude can occur If one group ceases to play by the conventional rules and is "popular".
@@jimb9063 I think that’s a little more broad than the comparison I’m making. Like my example would be how republicans use far right politic beliefs culminating with someone like trump who not only says the most dangerous things a leader can say, but ultimately behaves in a destructive manner for everyone. To be honest I do think there a lot of similarities, again not saying they have the same goals at all or are equally problematic in any way, between how republicans are now and how Nazi flourished in a democracy
@@ryanhodgetts Yes, I suppose I was talking about broad methods only and not about ideology specifically. I probably share your contempt for the individual, and dislike for that wing of that party, although I personally wouldn't call them 'far right' necessarily, that means something a little different, at least to me. Just definitions. I'm also more concerned with the mechanism for how Mr T got where he did, rather than worry about him as an individual too much. A younger version would be worse, but they'd still be stuck within the same old framework of an established party operating in a strong two party system with around half the populace against you whatever you do. The Republicans can't hide in ambiguity like a new or unknown party can (by calling itself national socialist for instance!).
No, you have to figure in the role of a bureaucratic establishment in collusion with media to help hide its practical failures. Populism, yes. But the reaction here is not race-based or even culturally defined. It's a reaction against the total failure of the state to do its job for generations.
To hear these British historians talk about the origins of Nazism, you might think it absolutely inconceivable that Nazism was not the entire sum of the world's problems in AD1933, or that its true origins lay as much outside of interbella Germany as within her. Indeed, reasonable people must assume that closing such lines of historical inquiry forever by making them inconceivable, is the entire point of such historians. ruclips.net/video/tGxAYeeyoIc/видео.html
There's a lot of liberal bias in this conversation. The Weimar republic is apparently "civilized" but the Third Reich isn't? Since when does "civilized" mean liberalism? We regard ancient Greece and Rome to be "civilized" but they were far from liberal. If anything they had far more in common with fascism than pretty much any other modern ideology.
What a very eccentric opinion. Name one piece of worthwhile art, writing or architecture that the Nazis produced. The Weimar Republic, like ancient Greece and Rome, was full of it.
@@andrewwatson6913 Almost too many to name. Literally all of the architecture the Nazis produced was amazing. The Reichskanzlei, the former Ministry of Aviation, the Lower Silesian Province Office, the Haus der Kunst, etc. The Nazis also had excellent intellectuals like Carl Schmitt, who's probably the greatest political theorist of the 20th century. Not to mention Martin Heidegger. His name alone towers over all pro-Weimar "thinkers" combined. However, when it comes to literary figures Italian Fascists had the better ones. Gabriele D'Annunzio and Curzio Malaparte come to mind. And when it comes to art Arno Breker blows everything Weimar had out of the water. By the way, the irony of your comment is that when you look at Fascist and Nazi art, architecture, and ideas they had far more in common with ancient Greece and Rome than Weimar. It's not even close. Tom Holland would agree with me. Maybe you should read a book about it?
@@aristocraticrebel also there's that fact that after the end of WWII there's an unwashable stigma associated with anything nazi-related, which is why there's barely any mention of their art, architecture, music etc. Their representative art alone is absolutely stunning, but because in, like, 90% of cases it was created for the purposes of propaganda it is almost never shown. Not to mention the fact that we live an the age of contemporary art crap like "one and three chairs" and the like, so anything beautifully crafted is considered low brow. "The works at Fort Belvoir are so vacant of nuance and irony that they can approach kitsch" - quote from the New Yorker article about the nazi art warehouse in US (somehow no irony=bad art for the modern super far-left art establishment). Oh and what about their design? It is so unbelievably iconic that it entered the collective psyche, so to speak: their uniforms (by Hugo Boss, let's not forget about that), red banners, runic symbols etc. You'd be hard pressed to fing anything more visually striking amongst any of the world cultures. And that was not something that just came out of thin air, that was created by the designers of third reich.
Listen to y’all every night here on the east coast on Apple Podcast, Would love to see y’all do some of your podcasts on camera!
Re😢ikkkk😢😢😢ikkk😢😢kkkkk😮😢kk😢😢kkk😢😢😢😢Kür😢😢k😮😮iuiiuk😢znzzzzzzpnnzzznzzzn
Nmnnnnzzzzpzzzzzzz amazing
Sun
Zznon😊😊😊😊😊
😊
Great lads!
I'm not sure if Germans are learning from other colonisers to be ruthless. They certainly don't need to learn from others as they have a lot of experience of that in dealings with their neighbours, for example Poles.
Could you do an episode on the history of eugenics?
To be fair to Bismarck, the entrenchment of the army was a Prussian holdover that predated him significantly. The German Empire also having that feature was just a carryover of Prussianism.
And regarding Darwinism, I think you're miscrediting it with Social Darwinism.
Brilliant analysis.
But they forgot the Nietzschean hypothesis, which is far more compelling: ruclips.net/video/GBBcqtHA85g/видео.html
Mostly fiction but you wouldn't know it seems
Instead of "Christian antisemitism", I'd say specifically "Lutheran antisemitism".
How so? The French were Catholic and the Dreyfus affair and lots of antisemitic literature came from France.
Antisemitism is omni present throughout history. The Roman's were antisemitic, ancient Chinese, Muslim empires (obviously.) Etc etc....120 something countries have booted the jews.
It's not a Christian phenomenon
I think making that point is futile when yes in this case some of it is Lutheran in nature (but much more than that it was aethiestic scientific racism) but all streams of Christianity had virilent antisemitism; from the catholics in France to the orthodox in Russia. Prior to Luther, and prior to the holocaust the largest mass murder of the jews occurred along the Rhine by Christians; despite rebuke from the catholic authorities
Say what you like about Hitler's Mein Kampf but it is undoubtedly the most fascinating firsthand account of the war years. Good on you for digging into it. Great analysis!
Mein Kampf was written in the interwar years, circa 1925, while Hitler was imprisoned.
Congratulations for being responsible for one of the dumbest comments I have seen on social media which is no mean feat!
Fumb Duck
Hey, all those podcasts you posted a few days back have vanished!
The problem with the way we look at nazism is that we think it can’t happen to us.
I'm a Roman Catholic but I think if you want to tell the rest is history, you should tell more stories of the Jews who had to suffer and were lucky to survive. Even if they've passed, I'm sure their families are proud to tell the stories or have them discussed. .
You guys are just great, but you missed the most important hypothesis of all!! The Nietzschean hypothesis, that Hitlerism was caused by too much Christianity in the Germans (a religion poorly suited to them):
"My main goal of this video is to put hitler in psychological/mythological historical context, and explain how eons of years of tension in the German spirit eventually erupted in the appearance of the third reich."
ruclips.net/video/GBBcqtHA85g/видео.html
An antisemite named Rosenberg?!?!?
Forward ninety years and you have the UK awaiting a saviour.
Why does a podcast need a break? It's not a big deal, but it's odd. Of course you can physically stop after 30 minutes to go to the toilet or freshen your coffee, but it's a simple post production edit to make it seem to the listener that there was no break at all. Confused.
It's for ads on the normal podcast channels
Steady on mate. Smelling salts?
The myth of the 20th century is collapsing by the year. AJP Taylor was brilliantly insightful, and was a pre-eminent historian until his brilliance led him to reach the "wrong" conclusions about WW2. Then, like all public figures who come to the "wrong" conclusions on this and related topics, he had his career destroyed for his troubles. His experience, and his qualities as an intellectual, pre-figured David Irving's later treatment.
Eloquently stated bee ess but it seems that this thread is dead anyway
How is it bs, I agree they're not always right but there's not a huge amount to disagree with this episode. Ofc this thread is dead its a year old and this is their smallest platform; they're huge on apple podcasts and Spotify
@@mukathompson7490 There's not a huge amount for YOU to disagree with.
The British version of WW2 (I'm a Brit) is fiction -- most don't know why it was fought
What a vile and shamefully ignorant interpretation of Dawin!
Sceptical of science?! Study some science then!!
When will we get to The Rise of the Woke?
Mathew 27:25.
Another shallow analysis beautifully perpetrated and delivered to the mobile ADD world
You can’t tell me that the rise of hitler and nazism isn’t similar to the modern American Republican Party. I’m not saying there’s a literal comparison, but abstract in political tactics and use of propaganda
Of course the massive difference is that the propaganda of the American media is actually Anti Trump. If Trump gets in then he will have done so against a massive media campaign against him .
Only Fox News is a supporter.
Infact the whole Trump as dictator is utterly media led.
I am not a Trump supporter by the way, but the way the general public are lead by the nose by the media is rather scary.
And not just limited to them either. Seems a downward spiral to the lowest common denominator "if you can't beat them join them" attitude can occur If one group ceases to play by the conventional rules and is "popular".
@@jimb9063 I think that’s a little more broad than the comparison I’m making. Like my example would be how republicans use far right politic beliefs culminating with someone like trump who not only says the most dangerous things a leader can say, but ultimately behaves in a destructive manner for everyone.
To be honest I do think there a lot of similarities, again not saying they have the same goals at all or are equally problematic in any way, between how republicans are now and how Nazi flourished in a democracy
@@ryanhodgetts Yes, I suppose I was talking about broad methods only and not about ideology specifically.
I probably share your contempt for the individual, and dislike for that wing of that party, although I personally wouldn't call them 'far right' necessarily, that means something a little different, at least to me. Just definitions.
I'm also more concerned with the mechanism for how Mr T got where he did, rather than worry about him as an individual too much.
A younger version would be worse, but they'd still be stuck within the same old framework of an established party operating in a strong two party system with around half the populace against you whatever you do. The Republicans can't hide in ambiguity like a new or unknown party can (by calling itself national socialist for instance!).
No, you have to figure in the role of a bureaucratic establishment in collusion with media to help hide its practical failures. Populism, yes. But the reaction here is not race-based or even culturally defined. It's a reaction against the total failure of the state to do its job for generations.
To hear these British historians talk about the origins of Nazism, you might think it absolutely inconceivable that Nazism was not the entire sum of the world's problems in AD1933, or that its true origins lay as much outside of interbella Germany as within her. Indeed, reasonable people must assume that closing such lines of historical inquiry forever by making them inconceivable, is the entire point of such historians.
ruclips.net/video/tGxAYeeyoIc/видео.html
There's a lot of liberal bias in this conversation. The Weimar republic is apparently "civilized" but the Third Reich isn't? Since when does "civilized" mean liberalism? We regard ancient Greece and Rome to be "civilized" but they were far from liberal. If anything they had far more in common with fascism than pretty much any other modern ideology.
What a very eccentric opinion. Name one piece of worthwhile art, writing or architecture that the Nazis produced. The Weimar Republic, like ancient Greece and Rome, was full of it.
@@andrewwatson6913 Almost too many to name. Literally all of the architecture the Nazis produced was amazing. The Reichskanzlei, the former Ministry of Aviation, the Lower Silesian Province Office, the Haus der Kunst, etc. The Nazis also had excellent intellectuals like Carl Schmitt, who's probably the greatest political theorist of the 20th century. Not to mention Martin Heidegger. His name alone towers over all pro-Weimar "thinkers" combined. However, when it comes to literary figures Italian Fascists had the better ones. Gabriele D'Annunzio and Curzio Malaparte come to mind. And when it comes to art Arno Breker blows everything Weimar had out of the water.
By the way, the irony of your comment is that when you look at Fascist and Nazi art, architecture, and ideas they had far more in common with ancient Greece and Rome than Weimar. It's not even close. Tom Holland would agree with me. Maybe you should read a book about it?
Mf is really defending the fucking nazis
@@aristocraticrebel also there's that fact that after the end of WWII there's an unwashable stigma associated with anything nazi-related, which is why there's barely any mention of their art, architecture, music etc. Their representative art alone is absolutely stunning, but because in, like, 90% of cases it was created for the purposes of propaganda it is almost never shown. Not to mention the fact that we live an the age of contemporary art crap like "one and three chairs" and the like, so anything beautifully crafted is considered low brow. "The works at Fort Belvoir are so vacant of nuance and irony that they can approach kitsch" - quote from the New Yorker article about the nazi art warehouse in US (somehow no irony=bad art for the modern super far-left art establishment). Oh and what about their design? It is so unbelievably iconic that it entered the collective psyche, so to speak: their uniforms (by Hugo Boss, let's not forget about that), red banners, runic symbols etc. You'd be hard pressed to fing anything more visually striking amongst any of the world cultures. And that was not something that just came out of thin air, that was created by the designers of third reich.
@@Tranzisto All art is propaganda, but yes, you're right.