What were the 9 causes that led to WW2?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2024
- What were the main causes of World War 2? This video explores the underlying (background) causes, as well as the immediate short-term triggers that caused the Second World War. The path to war with Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany.
From the Nazi rise to power in 1933 until the outbreak of war in 1939, Hitler led Germany into a series of aggressive military actions, including seizing the Rhineland, the Anschluss with Austria, taking the Sudentenland from Czechoslovakia, and finally his invasion of Poland. Why did nobody stand up to Hitler through these early years of Nazi expansion?
This is the first of our documentary-style learning videos. Our World War II history playlist will feature numerous videos covering all aspects of the war, its causes, events and resolution.
anyone here for history
Yeah
@@notsuoh7233 yep
yes
No
Thanks what a great video! History definitely repeats itself
Right--with Russia trying to take over Ukraine.
*What connects the topic of this video, as "compartmentalized history", with the bigger overall European "picture"?*
It is "divide and rule" as THE "systems/strategies" tier of things...
Exemplary: When everybody started talking about Versailles as a "peace conference" back in the days following WW1, it allowed for narratives to take shape. These "narratives" then floated to the top of discussions and debates, books and documentaries, and became the way people started thinking at the time, and...more importantly, still think*** today.
Historians should stop talking about The Treaty of Versailles as a "peace conference" (name branding), but to start calling it out for what it was in terms of geopolitics and grand strategy: it was divide and rule/conquer *of and over* continental Europe, by the outside world powers, all imperialistic in nature, with a geographical advantage (Washington DC/London), using Paris as a continental foothold, or an "extension" of their own power. Such language abounds in the strategy papers of the true powers.
These powers favored Paris for this specific reason, regardless of what ideologues desired (Idealism is an '-ism' or ideology).
*Favoratism is a core technique used in a divide and rule strategy.*
The Fourteen Points were largely written by a "think tank", the New York based "Inquiry" group. As for Wilson, was he really that naive to think that the large and prominent forces of isolationism would not prevail, and lead to the USA/Washington DC not joining any collectivised system of security for the entire planet?
Was there really no "Plan B" in Washington DC?
Divide and rule as a strategy is elaborated in more detail in the comments thread under the Kaiser Wilhelm video of the "History Room" educational channel. Go to the other channel, select "latest comments" first (three little bars at the top of every comments section), and read as far back as desired. The "oh so fine" British Lordships thought they could play divide and rule/conquer games with the world, and in the end British citizens lost bigtime, as their own Lordships "...ran off with all the f%cking money..." (quote = George Carlin/ reality = tax havens). *Note that in an exchange based on observations (realism) and definitions, that these cannot be "countered" by an opinion or a personal standpoint.*
The answer to any observed divide and rule strategy is eventually going to be brute force. On a micro level, it will be some form of uprising or revolution. On the macro level (states/empires) it will be crises and war. If words no longer achieve the desired effects to oppose the actions by the psychopaths who have infiltrated positions of power (incl. our so-called "western liberal democracies"), and become uncompromising and start using bully tactics, the answer will be brute force. No system is going to "turn the other cheek" indefinitely.
No, this is not a "yet another conspiracy theory," but elaborated and provided with sufficient evidence, and inductive/deductive reasoning on the other channel/video.
*Divide and rule/conquer is a strategy, not a conspiracy theory.*
***As a mixture of opinions, biases, emotions, analyses, assessments, etc. proclaimed in a multitude of books, documentaries, journals, essays, stories and...just about everything related to "compartmentalized history". In reality, how every individual "thinks" is not important: it is the *systems/strategies* tier of events which is the truly indicative tier.
GREAT VOICE.. PLZ UPLOAD VIDEO ABOUT CHINESE CIVIL WAR
It really help me in my history in school.
thx bro
Great depression and inflation ran out of control??
"The moment that [National Socialist] Germany revolted against the conception that production should be restricted in the interests of a few High Financiers, she created in the minds of all well-informed democrats the fear that Central Europe would break away together from the system of international finance." - William Joyce, "Twilight Over England", 1940
"The Force" to influence billions of minds is strategy. The most effective of these is the divide and rule/conquer technique. It is also the most misunderstood of all strategies, usually and falsely associated with Nazis, bullies and other evil regimes: WRONG.
*It is simply a technique used to effect the highest own potential systemic gain with the least own imput, by dividing any potential opposition, mostly via the cheap trick of appealing to people's emotions and biases. Once systemic dependecies have been created, on multiple tiers, these must come to the "divider" for "a ruling".*
Every system which does not specifically forbid the divide and rule/conquer technique, will systematically enable it.
No human system is immune to it, and neither are democracies, or our revered capitalism, or any form of "meritocracy".
One of the core techniques of the divide and rule/conquer strategy is *favoratism:* it is really simple, but no system of power which ever made it to the top, will ever admit how simple it is.
Most power players who discover the simplicity of the technique, will try to disguise it and misuse it for own gain, rather than to expose it for what it is: a means of deception, which once exposed and widely-known, will unravel the power it holds over billions of minds. *Power players on all tiers of reciprocal human interaction with an intent of gain motive can never admit that they use the technique themselves, nor can they accuse others directly of employing it, because they all employ it, either directly, or indirectly via proxies.* Therefore *you* as a commoner will hardly ever hear it being discussed and repeated like the proverbial "mantra": it occupies a lowly existence in intellectual debates, even though it is the key to true power. Like the Nazis, all power players regardless of the "system of gain" in question, come up with all kinds of subterfuge to avoid being immediately exposed as playing the game of divide and rule themselves...
Enter any hierarchical system of power in any intent of gain model of reciprocal human interaction, and you'll enter a shark tank.
*The favorite = the proxy.*
Scale it up or down to whichever tier you wish.
*All that is needed is a position of superior power.*
The Big Lie is the power of the divide and rule/conquer technique, and even the Nazis hid their "Big Lie"-conspiracy theory, behind an even bigger lie: how they intended to play this game until they got into power after their failed coup d'etat.
The "Big Lie" is not a myth but a misrepresentation of the truth.
*It is the power of "divide and rule/conquer" which lurks behind every strategy they follow, in order to gain.*
No human being has ever come up with a means to overcome this age-old technique of ruling over billions of people, because it is predicated on human nature itself, which is enduring.
No power player wants to become associated with authoritarian, or "colonial" tactics and strategies, or Nazis, so they cannot use it as a political means to attack rivals: it will immediately result in blowback.
*The "Big Lie" conspiracy masked the divide and rule technique.*
No power player can ever accuse any other power player of using it, since it will immediately backfire: the accusation of using the technique themselves, which in most cases of intent of gain will even apply***. The disguise usually comes in the form of scapegoating or another form of appeal to the emotion of listeners, or addressing and fortifying their already existing biases.
*"Scapegoating" = an appeal to lower emotions of potential supporters.*
In our divided societies, appealing to these biases might always be that tiny little "weight" that tilts the scale in very tightly run political elections.
Most power players read books on strategy, with the intention of using these strategies for personal gain, not because they wish to benefit *you* (the individual). There is always the urge to defend own favored systems, when one reads perceived "attacks" on these favored systems or own heroes, and the beloved own "-isms", which also reveal standard procedures, meaning the "attacker" soon falls into predetermined pathways to deflect and obfuscate from the core theory...
Great Britain did not "win" from the "divide and rule/conquer" system they had set up in Europe, as a matter of an own London policy standpoint of making the strongest continental power their "default rival/enemy" system.
*Britons (average citizens) lost BIG TIME.*
If you wish to truly understand the "how" and "why", then go to the Kaiser Wilhelm video of the "History Room" educational channel. Divide and rule as a strategy is elaborated in more detail in the comments thread under this video. Go to the other channel, select "latest comments" first (three little bars at the top of every comments section), and read as far back as desired.
No, these essays are not a "conspiracy theory."
*Divide and rule/conquer is a strategy, not a conspiracy theory.*
Most of what we are fed by our systems, as "rote leaning" details, are "99% ancillary details": not saying these are untrue or wrong, but simply that they are not as important on the ranking or "tiers" of events as geopolitics and grand strategy.
For these geostrategists, divide and rule/conquer is their main strategy, regardless of what *you* as an individual believe.
Footnotes:
*** *only applies in competitive "intent of gain" systems, not benevolent forms of reciprocal human interaction which are 100% fair...*
Dinkleberg…
and yet people still blame others for pollitical game and no one makes connections to dictators
first comment