dark humor.jpg
(29.1KB, 403x465) >>306
>(you mention taboo, and that's also part of it, but not the whole story - Stalin and Mao have mainstream reputations as mass killing autocratic dictators, and Mussolini as a fascist, but Nazism remains the edgy ideology because of its focus on racialism and other bigotry).
Or more importantly, of its focus on jews and the old racial war, elevated to a metaphysical level. Stalin is tolerated because if anyone were to dig deep enough, he would see an Asiatic man surrounded by jews, a good bunch he distrusted, but they got the better part of him in the end. He was the good goy who did the dirty work, cucked his own people (he wasn't ethnically white-Russian and sided with jews, so that makes him a traitor) and abandonned, nay, betrayed the international communist ideal for some more lowkey and old fashioned cultural imperialism. An interesting figure certainly, and one I am certainly bound to dislike very much too.
>However, I also don't think it's fair to completely disconnect these edgelords either, because there are mechanical reasons why neo-Nazism consistently attracts those kinds of people, despite them obviously contradicting the proclaimed values of NS.
The necessary obscurity imposed onto anything nazi related acts as an alluring umbrella for pseudo-social members. It's often very superficial too and done for the kicks. It's the most forbidden thing on Earth, so it's very exciting to pretend being part of this group as if it were a matter of wearing a shirt saying "look yo ima dark superedgy and say all the nastiest shit that's outlawed." Add the mysticism enmeshed with totenkopf-runic virile imagery that rebounds between medieval armor and futuristic Jin-Roh fictional regalia and you've got some addictive crack right there. Good for memes at best today.
>However, there are also blatant contradictions like Oskar Dirlewanger who was able to command within the Waffen-SS.
I guess that his martial efficiency compensated for the unsavory side of his character, assuming anything that's said about him is true. If I were to believe all the nonsense said about Hitler...
>It becomes clear the deeper one digs that fascism in general, but particularly NS, does not mind contradicting itself, as if there's a worldview that there's no reward for being ideologically consistent.
I think you might have over-focused on one case in opposition to the very high standards the SS were required to adhere to, but there's idealized perfection and there's praxis.
>But when we're talking about propaganda inflating numbers, oh you don't know how easy your side has it. The mainstream claim you get charged with is the 6 million jews (regretfully most people forget all the other targets of Nazi extermination).
The jews overshadow the others. I don't have pity for the others though.
I don't take Solzhenitsyn's numbers at face value, I cannot take them seriously. When it comes to Holodomor, knowing the real numbers is a murky affair but a few millions seems safe, with ten being the absolute extreme end of it. I don't think it was less than that, and even hundreds of thousands would already be a lot. The reasons behind it were complicated and probably why the Ukrainians themselves might not have dug into it too much and I read about the cumulative effects, including, with much irony, a scorched earth doctrine used against Soviet Russia. I also read about the relativing of the gulags. One way or another, real and open discussions about these based on facts, on science, will be preferable to any form of hearsay, which is the current yardstick used by jews as far as their chimney tales are concerned.
>is an odd position to take given the Lebensraum philosophy of the NSDAP and the ideological position of the party on the Slavs prior to launching Operation Barbarossa. The party was irredentist and expansionist, and had an openly militaristic attitude towards achieving these goals.
Hitler definitely wanted to avoid the war with Western Europe, and at some point tried avoiding going to fists with Poland. His opinion on Slavs never was very high (see his views of them in Vienna) and their overall failure to stand up against communism was to him a telling sign of weakness. He had more respect for Poland because of the Prussian influence. I don't know if you're aware of it but it's an old claim within our ranks that the Slavs are the niggers of the White race. It's often thrown provocatively and remains overall harsh. Take it as a litmus test to see if you're worthy of being part of the empire or deserve to be kicked out to make room for the better people. Perhaps the Asian invasions had something to do with this and how someone could be more or less appreciative of the Slavs. Last but not least, they proved to be so weak that very little of their pre-Christian faith is known. Meanwhile the inner German commandment was definitely reviving the ancient North European legacy. Go figure, but nature will always agree with might is right, no matter how cruel it is, as we're seeing in the Middle East right now. It does not mean you should not help the weak, but within limits and not making it a habit to the point of being blind about the inferiority of a given group.
>The NSN are literally an autist-grooming group all the way up to their leader, who brags about targeting autistic fifteen year olds for recruitment, and the group has been infiltrated by journalists let alone feds, so yeah it's possible.
