#38 in Historical Germany biographies
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product

Reddit mentions of The "Hitler Myth": Image and Reality in the Third Reich

Sentiment score: 1
Reddit mentions: 2

We found 2 Reddit mentions of The "Hitler Myth": Image and Reality in the Third Reich. Here are the top ones.

The
Buying options
View on Amazon.com
or
    Features:
  • Oxford University Press, USA
Specs:
Height7.66 Inches
Length5.26 Inches
Number of items1
Weight0.59 Pounds
Width0.85 Inches

idea-bulb Interested in what Redditors like? Check out our Shuffle feature

Shuffle: random products popular on Reddit

Found 2 comments on The "Hitler Myth": Image and Reality in the Third Reich:

u/[deleted] ยท 1 pointr/DebateAltRight

the source was The "Hitler Myth": Image and Reality in the Third Reich by Ian Kershaw.

From my understanding, Hitler did in fact serve in the army of the Bavarian Socialist Republic. To what degree is the question. Some people say he defected immediately. Others say he was sympathetic and only left later once things devolved. Either way, my point was that many Germans sympathized with the Communists, only to switch later to the Nazi side. This was very common- Communists becoming nazis. So jumping to the conclusion that Jews were responsible for this seems like a cheap tactic to dilute one's own responsibility while effectively blaming an out-group.

as for your other examples, I truthfully don't know enough about them to say. I know that Boas was allies with Margaret Mead, a White woman whose fame far outlasted his. typically, you'll notice that upon closer inspection many 'suspicious' scenarios involving Jews actually include Whites too. the question is then whether it's the Jewish person in charge (with a duped White ally), or the White person in charge (with a duped Jewish ally). or perhaps they're both involved as co-equals? hard to say. all I know is that under Kevin MacDonald's narrative, the Jew is always to blame no matter how extensive the support of the White person. this is a criticism that Nathan Cofnas just pointed out in his refutation.

just to give a contemporary example-- when it comes to Donald Trump, who is really the person responsible for his hardline immigration stance? is it Donald Trump, the White businessman? or is it Stephen Miller, the Jewish advisor? is Trump the frontman for Miller's policy ideas? or is Miller just another mouthpiece for the president in a cadre of anti-immigration activists? it's impossible to know. but imagine Trump was a far Left president instead of a far Right one, and imagine how the altright would interpret his actions. everything would be seen through his Jewish advisors, and he'd just be a pawn