SNOPES

[middleview]

The US economy had everything to do with the global economy, which it dominated, even with "minuscule" levels of international trade. And the global economy had much to do with Hitler's agenda, after he took over as "Fuhrer." The idea that Hitler didn't continue to consolidate and, in fact, increase his power (both at home and internationally), after he (initially) came to power in 1933, is absurd.

The US did not dominate the world economy in 1929. The suggestion is bizarre.

Please show the post where I said Hitler did not continue to consolidate power after 1933.
I wrote that FDR's policies had nothing to do with the death of Hindenburg or the "Night of the Long Knives" when Hitler murdered Rohm and other potential rivals. You can continue to argue that the decline in unemployment in Germany didn't improve Hitler's popularity, but you look silly doing so.

 

[Queen Titania]

Perhaps you can explain the fact that the police and fire departments did nothing to interfere with the rioters or to put out the burning Jewish shops and synagogues. 100 Jews killed by the rioters and a fine of $400 million levied against Jewish businesses to pay for the cleanup... Then there is the small matter of 30,000 Jews rounded up and sent to Dachau, Buchenwald and Sachsenhausen.

There are explanations for that unprecedented and shameful, to the Germans, occurrence -

But I'm not rehashing it middleview - catch me next winter and I might.

 

[middleview]

There are explanations for that unprecedented and shameful, to the Germans, occurrence -

But I'm not rehashing it middleview - catch me next winter and I might.

Sure thing...."explanations"....as is your usual you seek to excuse, justify, or deny all of the historic facts of the 1933 to 1945 period. If all else fails you then go on the attack to claim the west was so much worse or was somehow to blame for even the worst of Hitler's actions.....

Look, if you don't want to defend your pro-Nazi bullshit, don't bring it here. I wasn't the one to start this argument.

 

[middleview]

FDR increased the national debt by over 1,000%.

Don't ever lecture me about being off topic or launching into tangents after this attempt to deflect and distract.

 

[Queen Titania]

Sure thing...."explanations"....as is your usual you seek to excuse, justify, or deny all of the historic facts of the 1933 to 1945 period. If all else fails you then go on the attack to claim the west was so much worse or was somehow to blame for even the worst of Hitler's actions.....

Look, if you don't want to defend your pro-Nazi bullshit, don't bring it here. I wasn't the one to start this argument.

Next winter middleview.

 

[middleview]

For the record...here is where YOU took the conversation into a defense of Hitler and the Nazi party.

 

[Queen Titania]

For the record...here is where YOU took the conversation into a defense of Hitler and the Nazi party.

Why WWII.

 

[middleview]

Provide the quote or STFU! I never said that and you know it. You are just trying to hide from the fact that you are losing the argument.

All Hitler did was start "re-arming" Germany, as it had been forced to disarm after WWII. So yea, you can characterize it as a "military build-up," but you can't definitively state that his aim in doing so was to eventually start invading his neighbors.

Since you seem to have forgotten what you wrote:

The German economy was already struggling under the weight of the WWI reparations during the "roaring 20s." Once the depression set in the strain on the Germans became immeasurable. And the UCLA professors are correct. If FDR hadn't put his anti-capitalist, big government, interventionist agenda smack dab in the way of the economy's natural tendency to recover, the Nazi movement would have either petered out, or at least have been marginalized (by a recovering economy).

When you refer to the Nazi movement as petering out...once in control of the government in 1933, how can you begin to make that case?

If Hitler was already in power by the time FDR became president, and if he had murdered his opposition in 1934 and had become the unrivaled fuhrer with the death of Hindenburg...and German unemployment was improving dramatically...at what point would a US based recovery have caused Hitler to lose the job?

You've attempted to make an indefensible and illogical argument in your continuing effort to slander all things related to the Democratic party and you've failed.

 

[Queen Titania]

Since you seem to have forgotten what you wrote:

The German economy was already struggling under the weight of the WWI reparations during the "roaring 20s." Once the depression set in the strain on the Germans became immeasurable. And the UCLA professors are correct. If FDR hadn't put his anti-capitalist, big government, interventionist agenda smack dab in the way of the economy's natural tendency to recover, the Nazi movement would have either petered out, or at least have been marginalized (by a recovering economy).

When you refer to the Nazi movement as petering out...once in control of the government in 1933, how can you begin to make that case?

If Hitler was already in power by the time FDR became president, and if he had murdered his opposition in 1934 and had become the unrivaled fuhrer with the death of Hindenburg...and German unemployment was improving dramatically...at what point would a US based recovery have caused Hitler to lose the job?

You've attempted to make an indefensible and illogical argument in your continuing effort to slander all things related to the Democratic party and you've failed.

Modal verbs?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

You praised him for his "successful" economic policies (which marks you as a fan, for good or ill); and which, as I pointed out, weren't as "successful" as the economic statistics you cited would indicate. We get the exact same sort of praise for FDR from the left regarding the economy's performance under his failed economic agenda. But the statistics don't tell the whole story. Government spending, and jobs programs (including military conscription), will have the appearance of a beneficial effect on the economy. But people aren't stupid. And they aren't fooled by the "official" economic statistics, when they and their neighbors and their relatives are clinging to a meager existence only through these kinds of unsustainable government interventions in the economy. Which is why the 30s is referred to as the "great Depression" and most Americans still believe that there has been no recovery after the 2008 downturn, despite the economic statistics indicating growth and increased employment levels during both periods.

As for Hitler's power, did he or didn't he continue to gain power after he took over as Chancellor? I'll answer for you because the facts are clear - yes he did. And he used the German people's economic angst in order to do so, including through their support for his (later) aggressive moves on neighboring countries. You don't get to a megalomaniacal level of power overnight. You want us to believe his power was static after he became Chancellor, which is absurd. He continued to consolidate and grow his power after taking over as Chancellor, and didn't become "The Fuher" until late 1934 - and had not yet as of then made any effort to begin putting militarization into overdrive, start conscripting men to serve in the armed forces, or make any aggressive moves on neighboring countries. The fact is that people who are economically secure (and happy) don't support warmongers. It's THAT part of Hitler's rise that I'm blaming on the bad 1930s global economy, which is what ultimately caused WWII, and arguably resulted from FDR's failed economic agenda. It is what it is.

It Wasn't Appeasement, It Was Applause

The Depression was caused by the predatory plutocacy's rape of the economy. The vicious snakes kept the money they had extorted, leaving suckers who were out of the loop holding the bag. Next the guillotine-fodder financed the Germans' rape of the Jews' money and that of other nations, which the goosestepping beasts took as war booty to pay off the loans made by the whole world's ruling classes.

 

[EatTheRich]

As the German army marched into Austria - the Austrian army marched into Germany - and flowers were thrown on all soldiers from either side in welcome.

Czechoslovakia was a made up land and the part reunited with Germany was German.

Poland! Again, through Versaille Germany was cut off from its port because the UN had given a swathe of Germany to the fu'cking Poles ( the most troublesome peoples of Europe) - the Poles refused the Germans access to their port, using their own railway, insisting on a huge tariff which Germany could not pay. The Poles were also mistreating all ethnic minorities ( Jews, Ukrainians, Germans) horrendously.

The Germans pleaded with the UN - pleas where thrown in the draws unread - to do something about the monstrous mistreatment of non Poles under their protection - multiple times the Germans pleaded, multiple times they went unheaded. Germany tried to make terms with the Poles - FDR told the Poles to ignore them - so FDR became the go between - the last deal the Germans proposed the Poles never received - Plus FDR promised that the French would save them if Germany really attacked - ( how he sold them that one is anybodies guess) - situation worsened - Hitler said if you don't, to the UN, we must- he did ------------- the rest is history ( mostly falsely told) -

The Germans pleaded with the UN, huh? And here I thought the UN wasn't created until 1945.

 

[Queen Titania]

The Germans pleaded with the UN, huh? And here I thought the UN wasn't created until 1945.

The United Nations is the League of Nations, renamed. I was being poetic.

 

[EatTheRich]

The United Nations is the League of Nations, renamed. I was being poetic.

Nah, you were showing the same amount of understanding of the facts you employed in the rest of your post.

 

[Queen Titania]

Nah, you were showing the same amount of understanding of the facts you employed in the rest of your post.

I was being poetic - and the victors propaganda are never facts nor are their history books possessed of the facts.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

In the days before modern media, when government could easily control the information people were able to access....the German people saw that unemployment was improving. People had jobs again. They didn't argue about the national debt...they didn't know what it was or that it was growing. They saw western governments back down, repeatedly, in the face of a very aggressive and nationalistic leader. Yes, they saw Hitler and the Nazis as a success. Hitler's military buildup had reached the point where he sent troops, tanks and planes to Spain in 1936 to get practice for war.

You want to argue economic theory....but that is pretty far from your original attempt to blame FDR for WWII. Mein Kampf centered around the idea that Germany could expel the Jews and conquer the lesser peoples of Europe. He implemented the very program that was the core of that book.

Then why didn't the American people feel great about the economy under FDR, when employment and GDP improved? The people aren't stupid - they see that the government is propping the whole thing up and they know it is unsustainable. This is the underlying fact that you lefties could never understand about why the American people could never "get" that Obama had raised the economy from the dead. You know when your neighbors and friends are telling you they can't get a job that isn't a handout from the government, that the economy isn't really as good as the government says. Regardless of what the media says.

So the Nazis, like the Americans, saw their leader as a "success" because they thought that without the handouts they'd all be starving. But they didn't think they were living in high clover. And these leaders knew it, which is why they needed something (anything) to keep from having to admit that what there were doing wasn't going to work. Which is why they whipped them into a war fever. It wasn't their fault the economy wouldn't respond to their big government interventions, it was the fault of those "other" people, the "bad" ones who needed taught a lesson.

So Hitler may have written that he wanted to do all that, but he'd have never been able to do it if not for the depression. You want us all to believe Hitler gained absolute power in 1933 and that was that, but he gained power over the Germans in 1033. When did he gain power over the Axis Alliance?

 

[Raoul_Luke]

The US did not dominate the world economy in 1929. The suggestion is bizarre.

Please show the post where I said Hitler did not continue to consolidate power after 1933.
I wrote that FDR's policies had nothing to do with the death of Hindenburg or the "Night of the Long Knives" when Hitler murdered Rohm and other potential rivals. You can continue to argue that the decline in unemployment in Germany didn't improve Hitler's popularity, but you look silly doing so.

That's not what I'm arguing. I am arguing that they saw Hitler as the source of that employment, not the (international) free market economy. THAT is what "improved Hitler's popularity."

As for the power argument, when did Hitler gain power over "the axis alliance?" Got a year for that?

 

[middleview]

That's not what I'm arguing. I am arguing that they saw Hitler as the source of that employment, not the (international) free market economy. THAT is what "improved Hitler's popularity."

As for the power argument, when did Hitler gain power over "the axis alliance?" Got a year for that?

When did Hitler ever have power over Japan? He gained power over Italy as Italy was getting it's ass handed to it in North Africa....

You are really getting desperate. Why does it matter why people gave Hitler credit? The point is he gained power and it was absolute. He murdered his potential opponents. That had nothing at all to do with FDR.

 

[middleview]

Then why didn't the American people feel great about the economy under FDR, when employment and GDP improved? The people aren't stupid - they see that the government is propping the whole thing up and they know it is unsustainable. This is the underlying fact that you lefties could never understand about why the American people could never "get" that Obama had raised the economy from the dead. You know when your neighbors and friends are telling you they can't get a job that isn't a handout from the government, that the economy isn't really as good as the government says. Regardless of what the media says.

So the Nazis, like the Americans, saw their leader as a "success" because they thought that without the handouts they'd all be starving. But they didn't think they were living in high clover. And these leaders knew it, which is why they needed something (anything) to keep from having to admit that what there were doing wasn't going to work. Which is why they whipped them into a war fever. It wasn't their fault the economy wouldn't respond to their big government interventions, it was the fault of those "other" people, the "bad" ones who needed taught a lesson.

So Hitler may have written that he wanted to do all that, but he'd have never been able to do it if not for the depression. You want us all to believe Hitler gained absolute power in 1933 and that was that, but he gained power over the Germans in 1033. When did he gain power over the Axis Alliance?

Just keep running around in circles....it is very entertaining. Your silly arguments not withstanding....

FDRs economic policies did not help Hitler gain power.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

When did Hitler ever have power over Japan? He gained power over Italy as Italy was getting it's ass handed to it in North Africa....

You are really getting desperate. Why does it matter why people gave Hitler credit? The point is he gained power and it was absolute. He murdered his potential opponents. That had nothing at all to do with FDR.

The Depression did, and that is what led to WWII. And it wasn't just Hitler, it was all the despots, like Mussolini and Hirohito. So it really doesn't matter if Hitler had "power over" or just partnered with them. It was all an outgrowth of the depression. Isolationism and nationalism were direct outgrowths of the Great Depression and that was what led to WWII.

Just because this doesn't comport with the liberal progressive version of history you subscribe to doesn't mean the idea is "desperate." Just not "conventional wisdom." And, as we've seen again and again and again, the liberal progressive "conventional wisdom" is, quite simply, propaganda.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Just keep running around in circles....it is very entertaining. Your silly arguments not withstanding....

FDRs economic policies did not help Hitler gain power.

The Great Depression did, and his policies are what caused (or at least extended) the Great Depression. QED.