2,002
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 239:
Line 239: + + + + + + + +
→contemporaneous corroboration
:Then your argument, that somehow everybody involved in his ascention was illigitimate; this really itself sounds like Nazi rhetoric. Cause the root of this arguement is that Hitler was unnapporved by the Jewish-Masonic conspiracy that controls and decides who is legitimate. And this is the very argument you are putting forward. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 01:23, 27 August 2007 (EDT)
:Then your argument, that somehow everybody involved in his ascention was illigitimate; this really itself sounds like Nazi rhetoric. Cause the root of this arguement is that Hitler was unnapporved by the Jewish-Masonic conspiracy that controls and decides who is legitimate. And this is the very argument you are putting forward. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 01:23, 27 August 2007 (EDT)
* Where do I say that the Nazis seizure of power overcame the German people? Where did I say that it was an illegitimate action? And most important where did I use Nazi rhetoric? Don't make stuff up stuff that I didn't say. Or show me where.
* As a German myself I can tell you that few Germans comfort themselves with the myth that it was an illegal power grab. The failure of Weimar is taught and discussed in great detail, including the decline of liberal democracy, the failure of democrats to work together, the anti-democratic forces on both sides of the spectrum, and also the role (and call it naivety) of von Papen and the likes when it came to Hitler. Don't make up stuff about how the end of Weimar is discussed in Germany.
* It was about political and moral responsibility all the time. You went on all kind of tangents, like the war tribunal, and whether von Papen was a war criminal. The question wasn't if von Papen was a War Criminal, but if he together shares political and also moral responsibility for Hitler's rise to power.
* You bring up the in the Illuminatit stuff without reason. If your best bet is to bring up weird conspiracies that I didn't mention, your arguments must be poor. And then on top of it you claim that I use Nazi rhetoric.
* Hitler came to power through legitimate means because he got help from others. And these other were conservative Politians like von Papen and Hugenberg. Von Papen was Vice-chancellor, and Hugenberg Minister in Hitler first administration.
You are unable to admit that the rise of Hitler was not just a socialist venture, but also caused by conservative politicians who helped Hitler into power. Maybe you can answer the following question. Who bears a greater political and moral responsibility for Hitler rise to power: Carl von Ossietsky, a very controversial socialist in the Weimar Republic? Who was sentenced for treason in the 1930? Or von Papen who convinced Hindenburg to give Hitler a try? And who helped Hitler to consolidate his power, and who was Vice-Chancellor, when his government put von Ossiesky in a labor camp? The guy who got the Nobel peace price in 1935, or the guy who was sentenced to 8 years imprisonment after the war. The guy who died in 1938 from tuberculosis he got while he was forced to drain swamps, or the guy who died in 1969 of old age in his mansion. The socialist pacifist with a questionable ideology, or the conservative politician with a questionable role during the Third Reich. Not an easy question, but spare us long tangents please, just who bears more responsibility, von Ossietsky or von Papen for Hitler rise to power? [[User:Order|Order]] 08:29, 27 August 2007 (EDT)
==new img==
==new img==