Facebook Twitter Gplus RSS

On Hitler’s birthday: He proves to be the world’s most famous man

[CONTENT REDACTED BY REQUEST OF THE AUTHOR]

 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Share on LinkedIn
23 Comments  comments 

23 Responses

  1. Markus

    Amazing statistics!

    Adolf Hitler is really the only person of the top ten in contemporary history, and undoubtably a real person of whom hours of actual film and audio exist.

    Carolyn,
    why do you think Hitler did not address the nation considering the defeat, but rather killed himself before ever signing the surrender?
    The Germans were lost and in emotional trauma, imo because of this. Or could it also be that he was actually captured by the Russians and the two versions of his whereabouts of either committing suicide or escaping to Argentina were both false?

    When you watch the speech of Japan’s Emperor regarding Japan’s surrender, you see the people bowing to the loudspeakers by the 1,000′s. It was hard to accept for them, but they could prepare themselves to what was coming and keep their national solidarity and integrity.

    Maybe this struggle really has a 1,000 year timeline of the entire millenia, as Hitler said. Who knows? As you said, Britain did not win the “eternal war”, but only the battle of WW2, but is in a weaker position than Germany today. (at least economically).

    There is certainly a shift of perception on the entire 20th century going on right now. At least, what I see around me.

    Anyways, I really liked this show today. You hosted a nice birthday memorial party that was very uplifting.

    P.S. Your German is getting better. Congratulations. Many words were correctly pronounced. Others, almost.
    (As a rule for the German V, if a word starts with a V in German that was imported from Latin or French, like Virus or Vandalismus, it sounds like the English V. If the word is Germanic in origin, it sounds like an F, Vater, von (Hindenburg etc), Vogel.

  2. Apart from saying WWII when I meant WWI at the 35 min. mark, the general whose name I couldn’t come up with was Franz Halder. He’s the one that Hitler finally relieved of his duties as OKH’s chief of staff. To read about one of the strategy disagreements between Hitler and his generals, go to http://carolynyeager.net/strategy-leningrad-moscow-or-kiev, by Wilhelm Mann (Kriessmann).

    Another example is a short piece that clears up the confusion about who was the “author” of what’s called the Campaign in the West (the battle for France and the Lowlands): http://carolynyeager.net/controversy-keitel-vs-halder

    Another word I couldn’t remember was Lage - what they called the twice daily military meetings/briefings in the map room.

  3. Edgardus de la Vega

    Regarding Markus’ statement above: ‘There is certainly a shift of perception on the entire 20th century going on right now. At least, what I see around me‘.

    In lieu of capitalism’s unatural existence & manifestation, the growing perception upon the 20th century seems to be changing in our favour. Not surprisingly, capitalism’s other artificial partner – multiculturalism – is also taking a grand tumble; it can be easily felt in the streets & metro subway travel that our deviation from the natural order was a mistake.

    We have no choice, but to evolve into a preservationist spiritual & economic chapter for our pan-European peoples. Such was Hitler’s (I believe) core German message to the rest of us.

  4. I really liked this show today. You hosted a nice birthday memorial party that was very uplifting.

    Thanks Markus, it’s a pleasure to hear that.

    why do you think Hitler did not address the nation considering the defeat, but rather killed himself before ever signing the surrender?

    I started looking things up in order to answer this and have decided to feature this topic on my Heretics’ Hour program tomorrow night. This question and the other things you brought up. I’ll be taking phone calls so if you want to call in, feel free.

  5. Burt

    Thank you for this delightful commemoration. I added a bit of Danish to the mix. I agree with your analysis about religious figures of whatever stature or veracity not really being in the same camp. (Actually a more reasonable comparison would be the founder of Bahai, which is fairly recent religion-wise.) Although maybe, if religion is about who we are, and if national socialism is about who we are, it’s a remarkable comparison nonetheless. As for Mein Kampf, I’m glad it circulates on the Internet so freely. Whatever game they play in Bavaria, it’ll be hard to put MK under wraps.

  6. From a listener at my website who wrote to me via the contact form. Since I have never enabled comments on the posts there, I’m copying his message here:

    One of your best shows. i agree especially when you say that Hitler cared the most for his own German people. I think the reason that he used the socio-Darwinistic viewpoint so much is because he knew that the white-Germanic people were superior to everyone else and he wanted to restore pride back to his country. So many historians have vilified him for this but to me he used it to give his people more pride and confidence. I’m not saying he was wrong in his viewpoint, but he was so right in telling his people that they were the cream of the crop of human kind. Great show Carolyn, keep it up! -James

  7. Netzband

    Thank You, I enjoyed your talk on the occasion of Adolf Hitler’s birthday. For many years we have forgotten this date, but as you do, it’s an occasion again to consider, to try to understand his personality by ourselves. Of course he wasn’t cynical, except towards Roosevelt’s demands.- and how right he was in that case, considering the NWO regime today.
    But also I’m glad you brought to attention his attitude towards will, resolve, discipline, providence and the Volk (people). The opera, you mentioned from last year’s 20st of april in Berlin, Rienzi by Richard Wagner, is mentioned in the a very good book: The Young Hitler I Knew — August Kubizek in chapter 10: the day it all began – it can be downloaded as Pdf
    http://archive.org/details/TheYoungHitlerIKnew
    –it was a mystical experience in his early years also for Kubizek.
    We all know how desolate our people and many others are in these modern times now by the tyranny of media and finance and so we are obliged to think about alternatives in history.
    best and regards

  8. Netzband

    P.S. Have to add, that the book by Kubizek is really good, exceptc for the introduction by Trevor Roper. So I wonder, if the famous table-talks, edited by Trevor Roper, if I remember, are a reliable source, maybe though?

  9. HalKW

    “why do you think Hitler did not address the nation considering the defeat, but rather killed himself before ever signing the surrender?”

    ————————-

    Simple; he had nothing more to say. The goal has been achieved.
    The zionist were free to create the criminal state of Israel.

    And Hitler enjoyed the rest of his life in Argentina
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O91fk5ERMMM

    And Europe left in ruin and despair.

  10. HalKW

    Carolyn
    April 21, 2013 at 9:03 pm

    “From a listener at my website who wrote to me via the contact form. Since I have never enabled comments on the posts there, I’m copying his message here:

    One of your best shows. i agree especially when you say that Hitler cared the most for his own German people. I think the reason that he used the socio-Darwinistic viewpoint so much is because he knew that the white-Germanic people were superior to everyone else and he wanted to restore pride back to his country. So many historians have vilified him for this but to me he used it to give his people more pride and confidence. I’m not saying he was wrong in his viewpoint, but he was so right in telling his people that they were the cream of the crop of human kind. Great show Carolyn, keep it up! -James”
    —————————–

    “….the cream of the crop of human kind”

    as

    the God’s chosen people…

    So, who is better? LOL

    Geez! No wonder some nations resent you for your ARROGANCE!

    What about the Danes, Swiss, Fins, Swedish, French….?

    Well, just have another good look at Hitler.

    APPALLING!

  11. Carolyn, I remember a short conversation you had with Andrew Anglin a few months ago on one of your shows, when he mentioned that he regarded the Führer as being a spiritual figure. You took the more rational viewpoint that Hitler was just a man.

    I think Mr. Anglin was right to a certain extent as the name of Adolf Hitler unites more White nationalists around the world than any other.

    Of the Führer

    That is the greatest thing about him, that he
    is not just our Führer and hero to many,
    rather he himself: straight, firm and simple.

    That in him rest the roots of our world.
    And his soul touches the stars,
    But he still remains a man, just like you and me.

    Baldur von Schirach

  12. Edward

    This word “Weltanschauung” what is the correct pronunciation in German, I pronounce the word: Velt un shu oo gin.

  13. Look it up – http://www.forvo.com/word/weltanschauung
    (click on the little blue arrow to hear it)

  14. Netzband

    what – HalKW April 22, 2013 at 8:46 pm -
    wrote there is not true.
    After enough time to learn the attitude, the way the “old” Germans thought and felt towards the other european peoples, and other races, they were modest, even humble through thousand years of Christian history of Europe.. and there is not much, even almost nothing to support the propaganda that in the NS-time it had been much different. The direction in that time had been to restore self-confidence, to trust the creativity of our people again after the defeat in WW-1, Wilsons betrayal with his 14-points, the British starvation going on until the dictate of Versailles was signed. – with the unjust accusation of the war- guilt, having started the war, to dominate Europe and the world, and now having to pay for that.
    Doesn’t that remind someone of the propaganda during and after the second worldwar??
    If the Bolshevics have been called “Untermenschen” it was for their behavior in the slaughterhouse of the Soviets, in the starvation of the Ukraine e.g., the Gulags, and not against the Russians as a people, who were often relatives of germanic peoples.
    Germany’s culture has given to the world valuable contributions and that one can be proud of. One will hardly find much arrogance in all of that, and not in the thinking of the time 33-45.

  15. Netzband

    P.S. if A.Hitler said or wrote, as quoted by HalKW – copying an e-mail: “but he was so right in telling his people that they were the cream of the crop of human kind…” — then this can be understood that every people can say something like that, assuming they have the good will to contribute to the technical, spiritual culture of humanity. It is like saying that we are daughters and sons of God and isn’t it so, that we strive for the higher. This is something other than race-mixing and equalization to a communist level of the lowest common denominator (the mass-media).
    It is good that humans and cultures are different as in nature all the diversity is astounding and mysterious.

  16. HalKW

    @ Netzband

    Please read Carolyn’s comment 9:03 pm :)

  17. Carolyn’s comment? It was James’ comment, sent through my website contact form, that I posted here. The lack of accuracy is one of the biggest problems we have in communicating. So what is the point you are trying to make, HalKW? Will you please describe the accomplishments of the Danes, Swiss, Finns, Swedes, French as compared to the Germans. Don’t go too far back in history to hunt for them. :-)

    I’m not speaking specifically about military achievements but, except for the Finns, they all remained neutral against the communists during the war. If you’re referring to the Waffen SS, please give accurate numbers of those who actually fought.

    Submitted on 2013/04/22 at 8:46 pm by HalKW

    Carolyn
    April 21, 2013 at 9:03 pm

    “From a listener at my website who wrote to me via the contact form. Since I have never enabled comments on the posts there, I’m copying his message here:

    One of your best shows. i agree especially when you say that Hitler cared the most for his own German people. I think the reason that he used the socio-Darwinistic viewpoint so much is because he knew that the white-Germanic people were superior to everyone else and he wanted to restore pride back to his country. So many historians have vilified him for this but to me he used it to give his people more pride and confidence. I’m not saying he was wrong in his viewpoint, but he was so right in telling his people that they were the cream of the crop of human kind. Great show Carolyn, keep it up! -James”
    —————————–

    “….the cream of the crop of human kind”

    as

    the God’s chosen people…

    So, who is better? LOL

    Geez! No wonder some nations resent you for your ARROGANCE!

    What about the Danes, Swiss, Fins, Swedish, French….?

    Well, just have another good look at Hitler.

    APPALLING!

  18. Netzband

    HalKW, The expression, you used “appalling” is for me negative, and as far as I understand those times, “arrogance” cannot describe the NS ideology. It was much centered on the own people, as James wrote. If you hint at comparing it to the Jews with their idea of beeing the “chosen people”, they, dominating the media and propaganda, typically blame their own (of the Pharisees) aims on other people, e.g.: wanting to rule the world, regarding others as animals, using the big lie.. and so on. About that “chosen” already Martin Luther wrote 500 years ago.
    It is worth the efford to read about, what the real ideology of the NS was. Once it was recomended to me to read Lothrop Stoddard’s account, it is objective though a little bit painted dark, but then the war had begun – he had very rare interviews at that time:

    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n2p69_Stoddard.html
    and the whole book can also be found in the internet
    http://www.colchestercollection.com/authors/S/lothrop-stoddard.html
    “Into the Darkness
    An Uncensored Report from Inside the Third Reich at War
    by Lothrop Stoddard
    Journalist Lothrop Stoddard’s even-handed account of his travels through war-time Germany (and surrounding countries) from 1939-1940. His is a truthful report of the Third Reich, its leaders, political positions, and culture.

    Stoddard was a renowned and well-respected journalist when he made this trip and subsequent report, because it recounts accurately (and not politically correctly), the events of the time, his name – not to mention his report – has all but disappeared from today’s “official” history concerning that period.”

  19. HalKW

    Thank you Carolyn for the clarification.

    As it wasn’t James himself commenting on this forum, I couldn’t address him.
    One only need to understand the deeper meaning of its contents, so I leave it up to the above-mentioned nationals defending their intellect if anyone reads this.

    There are good and bad, wise and stupid people in every nation.
    But I respect every White European nation equally.

    To avoid future conflicts between Whites, it would be wise ( in my opinion) to apply smart diplomatic solutions where mutual respect is present.

    Therefore I have no further comments ;)

  20. It’s just great that this book is available on the Internet. It is one of my favorites and everyone should read it. Thanks for giving the link.

    The review of the book was written by Ted O’Keefe a long time ago, when there were still talented revisionists employed at the IHR. Before Mark Weber destroyed it.

  21. One only need to understand the deeper meaning of its contents, so I leave it up to the above-mentioned nationals defending their intellect if anyone reads this.

    It was never about “intellect” in the first place. It is about who did what and who made the greatest sacrifices. You do not want to get into that, do you?

    But I respect every White European nation equally.

    That is like saying, “I respect every White European person equally.” What does that say about you? That you’re not even thinking.

    You are coming from a very different place with your “Hitler was a Zionist agent who purposely left Europe in ruins” nonsense. So it’s a good thing that you will have no further comments.

  22. Netzband

    Yes not so much intellectual theory it was, but a revitalisation of the people, the Volk, as all witnesses tell, that one was there for the others, with idealism, what goes under the term od N-socialism. Anyone can read Hitlers speeches to Winterhilfswerk, and the real descriptions of the contemorary witnesses are what counts. It didn’t revolve around the relation to Jews or to the other peoples of Europe mainly. One can watch that all at the times of the Olympics in 36. Or even how Lloyd George described it and so many visitors from abroad.
    That war then begun in 39 was, what all, who had experienced WW-1, did definitly not wish, and A, Hitler was only known as Chancellor for peace. His diplomacy was modest and started with proposals for disarmament (in Geneva? in 33- as demanded by the treaty of Versailles). He made treaties with Poland, Britain and so on.

© the White network