Pro Hitler Museum

[PremierManiac]

A man about an hour and a half away from my house is opening a pro-Hitler museum. Here is the link for the news article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199414,00.html

Discuss

[Iskandar]

Well, he has every right to do that.

I wouldn't personally dismiss him as a "classic Holocaust" denier right off the bat. Perhaps he simply wants to clarify exactly what Hitler's role in it was.

[StrangeVision]

It's a "free" country.

[A Spoonful Supreme]

I would go to it.

[Ghostfire3]

He has the right to do it. I think he's stupid but he has the right to do it. He's just a brainwashed old man, that's all.

[Mr. Ron]

His property.

[Reaganista]

He should be sentenced to death

Well, he has every right to do that.

absolutely not

It's a free country.
no it's not

His property.
so he's a thief, too?

[I Am a Hat]

no i don't think we should be training people to become professional hitlers in a museum because theres alot of reverberation in them and it probably makes it hard for them to teach if you can barely understand what they're saying

[fullmetalhaallee]

I would personally kick that old dudes ***. Then I would step on him to hold him down while he squirms. Oh how Id love to do that.

[Jude]

He should be sentenced to death


absolutely not


no it's not


so he's a thief, too?
:lol:

[Ghostfire3]

He should be sentenced to death


absolutely not


no it's not


so he's a thief, too?

You're damn right America isn't a free country.

[Against Miik!]

Tway some clarification would really help with that.

In the meantime i'm gonna watch some Girls Gone Wild.

[WhoDidTheElf]

If any one has half a brain they'll just walk by.

[Reaganista]

You're damn right America isn't a free country.
they call it a free nation, but all it is in a NAZI NATION

[Kragen]

He has the right to do it. I think he's stupid but he has the right to do it. He's just a brainwashed old man, that's all.

Chances are I think he knows a little more about hitler than you do, yet you've already made your mind up based on what you've learnt at school.

Whose the brainwashed one?

[Light Fantas Stick]

*Who's


I think you got brainwashed by bad English. :(

[myassitches]

i think it's fine if the old guy wants to do it. the hitler museum commemorates the other side of the holocaust. so it's important too. i would probably go to it.

[DBoons Ghost]

It's no different than the fact a Kennedy museum exists in Cape Cod.

OH SNAP!

I was actually asked to leave. They didn't like my Ted Kennedy impression in regards to errrraaa.. Chappaqua!

[Damrod]

Well, you know he's kind of a fanatic by this line:

Junker, who was born in Germany and lived in Romania during Hitler's rise to power, said he volunteered to join the German Waffen-SS in 1940 and served in Russia.

The SS surely was the sickest branch that ran around in WWII, they were the most indoctrinated and brutal force that served Hitler.

I would really like to see pics of it, if it's really as lame as this one official from the article stated it is, and what's displayed there anyways.

[Matt?]

he's just an old confused and ashamed old man
he just needs some one to take care of him, like they did when kennedy was in severe back pain.

[Ghostfire3]

Chances are I think he knows a little more about hitler than you do, yet you've already made your mind up based on what you've learnt at school.

Whose the brainwashed one?

Ha ha ha. You're right, Hitler was a good person....

Also, you just assumed that I only know information about Hitler that I've learned in school but that's not true. I've spent time researching him online and I've read books about him so good call.

[Dannyboy15]

Chances are I think he knows a little more about hitler than you do, yet you've already made your mind up based on what you've learnt at school.

Whose the brainwashed one?

Go back to stormfront.org

[Ghostfire3]

Go back to stormfront.org

:lol: pwn

[Kragen]

Ha ha ha. You're right, Hitler was a good person....

Also, you just assumed that I only know information about Hitler that I've learned in school but that's not true. I've spent time researching him online and I've read books about him so good call.

I never said anything about hitler - I just pointed out that the majority of people base their oppinion on a large number of subjects purely on popular oppinion, or at the very best on material written by those who already "know" hitler is bad.

I dont really care, until people then refer to someone who was actualy there as being "brainwashed" just because he disagree's with their views.

[A Spoonful Supreme]

I wonder what the tway would do if he found a million dollars

[Mr. Ron]

I would personally kick that old dudes ***. Then I would step on him to hold him down while he squirms. Oh how Id love to do that.
Who's the fascist now?

[Ghostfire3]

I never said anything about hitler - I just pointed out that the majority of people base their oppinion on a large number of subjects purely on popular oppinion, or at the very best on material written by those who already "know" hitler is bad.

I dont really care, until people then refer to someone who was actualy there as being "brainwashed" just because he disagree's with their views.

Chances are I think he knows a little more about hitler than you do, yet you've already made your mind up based on what you've learnt at school.

Whose the brainwashed one?

What the hell are you talking about??? You clearly mentioned Hitler.

[Reaganista]

I wonder what the tway would do if he found a million dollars
start a worker-owned vegan restaurant

[Ghostfire3]

start a worker-owned vegan restaurant

That's what the socialist or communist Tway would do.

But what would the normal capitalism-loving Tway do?

[Iskandar]

start a worker-owned vegan restaurant
There was one downtown but it closed. :angry:

I blame capitalism; and by extension, you.

[A Spoonful Supreme]

start a worker-owned vegan restaurant

lmao I'm getting visions of a communist restaraunt distopia with Tway at the helm... while it's going down.

[Reaganista]

But what would the normal capitalism-loving Tway do?
I've killed him.

the sokialist revolution began in the tway's mind

[Matt?]

so kragen, your trying to say that everyone doesn't believe that hitler was bad because it's true, but because we've been brainwashed to think that

you are an idiot

[FunkMetalBass]

Well, there is certainly going to be quite a bit of debate over this subject, but the fact of the matter is, not too many people know about Hilter. His political strategies were far more intelligent than almost any other politician in existence.

As Americans and being raised as such, we have gotten into a certain frame of thought in which the name Hitler strikes fear into the hearts of many, and fueds can instantly evolve from speaking the name.

Problem is, nobody really knows the history of Hitler, not the masses anyway. If you say the word "Sudatenland" in a conversation involving Hitler, most will think it was his dog, or just a stupid name for one of his crazy political machines. Americans are so uneducated and lack so much knowledge of world history. I'll admit, I don't know nearly as much as I could, or should, so I'm a prime example.

Hitler served an extremely important role in history - Good? That's debatable. Important? Yes.

Museum a good idea? - Definitely.

I agree that it should be opened, assuming it is strictly about this History of Hitler and whatnot.

[Smokey D]

Well, there is certainly going to be quite a bit of debate over this subject, but the fact of the matter is, not too many people know about Hilter. His political strategies were far more intelligent than almost any other politician in existence.

Hitler's political strategies resulted in the most total defeat of the 20th Century, after which his country was stripped of its influence and split in half for nearly half a century. By any objective measure, Hitler's policies failed.

[Reaganista]

Yeah Hitler sucked.
even Jimmy Karter was better than him

[Samuel]

He's an important political and historical figure. Sounds like a good idea to me. Unfortunately, the implementation will probably nothing but propaganda. . .

[Black Ink]

Hitler's political strategies resulted in the most total defeat of the 20th Century, after which his country was stripped of its influence and split in half for nearly half a century. By any objective measure, Hitler's policies failed.
Wrong. His military strategies were the cause of his downfall, i.e invading Russia and opening a second front before England was subdued and invaded, and his switch from bombing military to civilian areas in England.

His political and economic strategies not only brought Germany out of the ruins, but brought the world out of the Great Depression.

[AA-12]

i realyl want to got ot thiks

[Reaganista]

Wrong. His military strategies were the cause of his downfall, i.e invading Russia and opening a second front before England was subdued and invaded, and his switch from bombing military to civilian areas in England.

His political and economic strategies not only brought Germany out of the ruins, but brought the world out of the Great Depression.
:stupid on the internet:

[Black Ink]

:stupid on the internet:
:neckbeard:

[Iskandar]

Good? That's debatable.
What could possibly be good about causing the most massive war the world has ever seen, and inspiring the systematic slaughter of several million people?

[Cain]

To be honest, this makes a lot of sense precisely because he was in the Waffen-SS.

After all, the Waffen-SS (while responsible for plenty of war crimes themselves) were distinct within the SS from both the Totenkopfverbände (concentration camp guards) and from the Einsatzgruppen that started the practice of murdering Jews rather than officially stealing from them or deporting them. They acted more and more like elite army soldiers rather than SS men as the war progressed, and often felt disconnected from the rest of the SS (which, we must remember, had expanded into a more heterogenous and diverse organization than either the Army or the Party by this point in the war).

This old guy is operating only from a limited perspective, and he probably committed no crimes (other than participation in a part of an enterprise started for immoral purposes by Hitler, of course). Old people get irrationally passionate about old difficulties or greviences. He probably is reacting to the perception of the SS as universally brutal animals who were to a man no better than an Auschwitz guard, which IS an inaccurate representation. So he's probably feeling the need to do this to correct a perception the nation has about the SS or maybe Nazi Germany in general, as an SS man who committed no war crimes. I really wouldn't take him so seriously. And frankly I'm rather disappointed in these Jewish organizations that are on call to sputter with rage at any depiction of Nazism that nuances it in any way beyond the perception of them as evil incarnate. It really doesn't help much in the way gaining understanding about why such unspeakable things happened to 20 million people at the hands of the Nazis to trivialize them.

Well, you know he's kind of a fanatic by this line:

Actually, it's probably because he was an ethnic German who had been living in a Balkan state. He probably felt like he would rather serve with German elites in an ethnic SS division (since he was a German by birth anyhow) rather than in a Rumanian army division using second-rate German equipment and led by substandard officers. Since the SS actively recruited ethnic SS divisions on the Eastern Front it probably seemed like a logical, high-quality choice.

I agree that the SS did plenty of unspeakable things, but the organization it grew into became SO big and SO manipulative of German life and politics that, ironically, a blanket statement about its terrorist nature and complicity of every member in its crimes is simply no longer feasible.

[Smokey D]

Wrong. His military strategies were the cause of his downfall, i.e invading Russia and opening a second front before England was subdued and invaded, and his switch from bombing military to civilian areas in England.

What exactly were the political strategies of the Nazi Party again? Oh yeah, that's right: uniting various ethnic German groups throughout Europe, expanding the borders of the German state in the East to include lebensraum for a revitalised nation, the elimination of so called racial impurities through systemic persecution and the establishment of German military and industrial hegemony through the defeat of France and Russia.

Which one of those did not bring about Germany's ultimate defeat?

His political and economic strategies not only brought Germany out of the ruins, but brought the world out of the Great Depression.

No, he didn't. Much work had already been done to bring Germany out of the Depression by 1932, and recovery took place elsewhere from a universal adoption of a Keyesian model which promoted defecit spending by the government to stimulate demand. Hitler wasn't unique in adopting this approach.

[Reaganista]

:neckbeard:
No I have a real beard right now

[davser]

So any interactive exhibits like mock up gas chambers etc?

[maniac0796]

Correction, study these two names, Himmler, and Hitler. Yup, notice the difference. Now read the following sentance

Heimrich Himmler signed the forms allowing the persecution of the jews.

He just used hitler as a role model for his hate.

I think that is right. My memory of year 9 history is weak at the moment.

I think it's a good idea. Hitler was actually very smart, but trying to attack two fronts at once was what brang him down. Alsso, with all attempts in history to invade russia, the winter slowed him down.

[PremierManiac]

Well, he has every right to do that.
absolutely not
Have you heard of the 1st amendment to the Constitution? You know, that thing about free speech.

[Reaganista]

I don't kare about the konstitution

He has no ethikal right to do it

[Mr. Ron]

I really don't see a problem with a place that shows the good sides of Hitler. You can't tell me that no person in politics would KILL to have his type of sway on a audience. Plus, he took a war-torn, crippled, defunked nation and rebuilt it into one of the most powerful (and exceeding the USA in some ways) nations on earth in what? a few years?

[Reaganista]

defunked
lolol

germany never had any funk

[FatherKeeL]

Plus, he took a war-torn, crippled, defunked nation and rebuilt it into one of the most powerful (and exceeding the USA in some ways) nations on earth in what? a few years?

WHAT? you should really go back and study history. you know who took a war-torn, crippled defunked nation and rebuilt itno one of the most powerful nations?

the USA did. and no one else. Ever heard of the "Marshall plan" (no idea what its called in english...)

the americans where so afraid, that evil communism would spread throught europe that they invested huge amounts of money into germany and austria so they would become stable capitalist countriest that would not fall for communism.

with out the help of the americans europe would never be as powerfull today as it is.

that is NOT hitlers doing.

(oh yeah. just for the record. if he would do this in austria. that would be sooo ****ing illigal)

[Smokey D]

He was referring to the Depression Era, some 16 years before the Marshall Plan. To an extent, he is correct -- Hitler certainly had some success in rebuilding the German economy and preparing the country for war (though he did miscalculate as to when European-wide war was to break out; evidence suggests he had anticipated conflict breaking out with France, and maybe Britain in the mid-1940s).

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

no no no

the marshall plan was after the Second World War

edit: beaten

[AA-12]

I really don't see a problem with a place that shows the good sides of Hitler. You can't tell me that no person in politics would KILL to have his type of sway on a audience. Plus, he took a war-torn, crippled, defunked nation and rebuilt it into one of the most powerful (and exceeding the USA in some ways) nations on earth in what? a few years?
Exactly. He was amazing, and a fantastic leader. Probably my favorite in history.

[Smokey D]

How's that? Everyone of his policies ultimately destroyed Nazi Germany, and had the added effect of systemically eliminating up to 10 million people and (at least partially) starting a war that killed upwards of 60 million.

[AA-12]

Ok, you're not going to affect me/change my opinion on anything, so i'm not discussing this any further.

[Smokey D]

Oh, I'm just confused as to why anyone would think a failed tyrant was a good leader. By all means, you're allowed to like him, but you're wrong in every conceivable way to do so.

[AA-12]

Not really, but whatever.

[matt_h]

i would have thought it was illegal to promote naziism, facisism etc. it depends on the content. if it is just historical then fine its a free country but if it is promoting those things then burn it down

[Smokey D]

Not really, but whatever.

No, you really are.

If you have a rational and valid reason for liking one of the most dispicable people in human history, you should be able to give an argument to defend it.

[Mr. Ron]

I love it how all of you say "evil" when Hilter is mentioned, but if mao, stalin or whoever else is mentioned you say nothing. Hypocrites. (not all of you, just a few of you).

Oh and Fatherkeel, yes, Germany was one of the most powerful nations at that time when Hitler was in power. In fact, their military was superior in almost every way to ours. The only reason we won was becuase of more mass production and more resources. Our Weapons paled in comparison to Germany's.

[matt_h]

germany were so powerful in the army department coz that was what hitler was interested in. he wanted to take over europe, so he put more money into the army and i think he brought in conscription (correct me if i'm wrong)

[Mr. Ron]

I don't see how it's all that relevant. :-/ With the exception of what, no-one here actually praises Stalin.

Could you either stop posting here or start backing up your arguments? Every post you make either seems to be agreeing with someone without adding anything, or else some statement that you then decline to actually attempt to back up.
It is relevant. Some of you praise communist leaders who in some cases were worse than hitler, but you always scream and shout if his name is mentioned. But there are only a few that actually do this.

[mullets suk]

i know i came in to this argument a little late, but i do think that old man has a right to make a Hitler Museum. I think things like that should be taught, and told about. these things make the world more unbiased. it lets people choose for them selves. like some people said most people only hear what is told to them from the TV or school. Which i don’t know if you noticed is almost always biased against the "evil" doers. But thats Just me. if he tries spreading anti-semetic(sp?) feelings in a very biased way then i think he should be stopped.

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

It is relevant. Some of you praise communist leaders who in some cases were worse than hitler, but you always scream and shout if his name is mentioned. But there are only a few that actually do this.nobody praises mao or stalin or pol pot

stop being an idiot

[Ghostfire3]

Exactly. He was amazing, and a fantastic leader. Probably my favorite in history.

I guess I can understand why you might like him for a couple of reasons. Like the fact that he was a great speaker and how pulled Germany out of a depression. But other than that, what about him appeals to you? In the end he just ended up failing miserably and embarassing Germany even more.

I love it how all of you say "evil" when Hilter is mentioned, but if mao, stalin or whoever else is mentioned you say nothing. Hypocrites. (not all of you, just a few of you).

No, I'm pretty sure we all recognize that those leaders were evil too.

[Iskandar]

Ok, you're not going to affect me/change my opinion on anything, so i'm not discussing this any further.
Those are the words of an ideologue.

[innerdark]

No, you really are.

If you have a rational and valid reason for liking one of the most dispicable people in human history, you should be able to give an argument to defend it.


There is generally, no proper "Good" or "Evil" the 2 of these are human perceptions created to rationalise behaviors which seem out of the ordinary.

However, i will agree that Hitler, while being "Evil", managed to haul the Germans out of the Depression.

He was a great speaker, However, considering the state Germany was in after the "Treaty of Versailles" (Sp?) which "held Germany solely responsible for all 'loss and damage' suffered by the Allies during the war (World War 1)"
(Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles)

This would have left Germany in economic ruin, so perhaps he was not as great a speaker as one may believe, but simply popped up at the right place, at the right time.
_

Anyway, onto the Museum. i think it is a great idea, someting my history teacher always told me was "remember, history books have to be taken with a pinch of salt." and in all honesty, she was right. you CANNOT learn enough about a war simply from a history book, as the "winning" forces will make out their ememies to have been the devil incarnate. While it is undeniable that Hitler's regime ultimately caused The Holocaust, it also done a few good things.

1. It created a Interstate Highway system that, to this day, can be said to be the best in the world

2.Made Cars available to all people with the Volkwagen, and in turn, sparked the mas prodution o the vehicles.

there are probably others, but as Friedrich Nietzsche's study on praise and blame (http://www.hitler.org/blame.html) illiustrates well; the Allied Force written history books make no mention of these.

i'll leave you with this ladies and gents:

A few years back, a UK newspaper (i believe it was the Scotman) produced an advertisment for TV which showed, from on angle, a man being grabbed and pulled aside, with no present danger. in said advert, it cuts to the exact same thing, but froma different angle, and shows the man who was grabbed was pulled away from danger. so powerful was this advert, that in one court hearing, the defendant requested the jury to see this to recognise that there are always 2 sides to every story.

[nowhesingsnowhesobs]

weasel worded nazi apologetics.

go away

also, vw hardly produced any commercial cars before the war

[Amit]

yeah seriously

[italic zero]

I love it how all of you (not all of you, just a few of you).
good job

[Cain]

In fact, their military was superior in almost every way to ours.

That's not true at all. :p Do you know how many more men and better weapons the French had than the Germans when they invaded? The Somua 35 cavalry tank was more than a match for the Panzer II and IIIs the Nazis invaded France with, and the French had more of that specific kind of tank than the Germans had of their best tank in total, I'm pretty sure. They also had a larger standing army and greater mechanized mobility than the Germans did. The Germans beat France because the French tactical doctrine wasn't equipped to deal with the blitzkrieg tactics, but not because the German army was in any way superior in material or technology or even manpower.

Something like 3/4ths of the German army was still horse-drawn when they invaded Russia, after all. They didn't exactly put the mechanized world to shame with their military.

The only reason we won was becuase of more mass production and more resources. Our Weapons paled in comparison to Germany's.

I'm pretty sure some extremely hefty mistakes on what weapons to give priority by the Germans contributed as well. Tactically, their focus on expending their limited resources on super heavy tanks and V-2s was pure idiocy.

Technically yes, the more limited-issue late weapons were more advanced. But it's difficult to say whether they could have won the war, even if the United States had less capacity for the mass production of high-quality weapons than it did. They could only have slowed the outcome down, but not reversed it.

EDIT: BTW, Hitler wasn't evil, guys. But if Mr. Ron is so concerned about why so many people hold up Hitler over Stalin and Mao, it's because Stalin and Mao were products of a Communist system which had overthrown a royal system of government, and decades of Cold-War and pre-World War II propaganda has imbedded the notion in Western society that Communism is a backwards government practiced by backwards Eastern peoples, and so any atrocities committed in those countries (which are purely authoritarian--that is, the purging of so-called political threats) makes more sense to the Western frame of mind than a racist tyrant who purges on both political and racial levels on a considerably more epic and open scale, who arose from and overthrew a democracy.

While Communism represents (capitalist) democracy's greatest antithesis, Hitler represented (ideological) democracy's most thorough corruption. Which is why the Holocaust and Hitler shock the Western world into hyperbole much better than Stalin or Mao.

[Bron-Yr-Aur]

Edit. God Damn slow computer.

[Bron-Yr-Aur]

Exactly. He was amazing, and a fantastic leader. Probably my favorite in history.

Right. Operation Barbossa made Napoleon look like Nixon. The only thing truly "fantastic" about Hitler was his speeches. Granted, he had some good plans and preperations at first, but as the war dragged on and as he started consuming more and more, shall we say, "medication", he kinda went nuts. Add onto this the fact that the Soviets were closing in from the East while the Americans and British were coming from the West, and it's very apparent just how "fantastic" of a leader he was.

[spitfirejunky]

Not really, but whatever.

What a cop-out.

[Cain]

Anyway, onto the Museum. i think it is a great idea, someting my history teacher always told me was "remember, history books have to be taken with a pinch of salt." and in all honesty, she was right. you CANNOT learn enough about a war simply from a history book, as the "winning" forces will make out their ememies to have been the devil incarnate. While it is undeniable that Hitler's regime ultimately caused The Holocaust, it also done a few good things.

1. It created a Interstate Highway system that, to this day, can be said to be the best in the world

2.Made Cars available to all people with the Volkwagen, and in turn, sparked the mas prodution o the vehicles.

They did those things to expedite easy mobility within the country for a time when the nation would have to go to war for living space, and the "providence" of vehicles to families (if it even existed, which I doubt) was an expression of the German völkisch ideology which lay at the root of National Socialism's socialist aspect, which was itself informed by a fraternal notion of the Aryan race and the racist anti-Jew/Slav ideology that went along with it. At the root of all of these "good things" lay Nazi racism and reprehensibility. And that goes for the public smoking ban that they enacted, too, which Nazi apologists love to point to.

there are probably others, but as Friedrich Nietzsche's study on praise and blame (http://www.hitler.org/blame.html) illiustrates well; the Allied Force written history books make no mention of these.

lol the nazis loved nietzsche

i'll leave you with this ladies and gents:

A few years back, a UK newspaper (i believe it was the Scotman) produced an advertisment for TV which showed, from on angle, a man being grabbed and pulled aside, with no present danger. in said advert, it cuts to the exact same thing, but froma different angle, and shows the man who was grabbed was pulled away from danger. so powerful was this advert, that in one court hearing, the defendant requested the jury to see this to recognise that there are always 2 sides to every story.

Of course there are, but one of those sides is usually wrong.

[AA-12]

What a cop-out.
Well, my views are too extreme for anyone here to argue with/accept.

[PerpetualBurn]

Maybe you're just an idiot and we'd all ruin you if you so much as tried to establish a point?

[AA-12]

Haha, no. I really don't want to get into it though, as we all seem to have firm beliefs here.

I should ban you from Saraswati too :p

/stops posting here

[Cain]

Well, my views are too extreme for anyone here to argue with/accept.

Yeah right. Anything you could mention about why Hitler was great, I could tell you why those things actually weren't great. That's really what's stopping you.

Because if you had any justification for your opinions in the first place, you would argue them.

[Cain]

Haha, no. I really don't want to get into it though, as we all seem to have firm beliefs here.

Hitler's despicableness isn't a belief.

[Bron-Yr-Aur]

Haha, no. I really don't want to get into it though, as we all seem to have firm beliefs here.

The only way you could possibly believe that he was a great leader is to ignore every single mis-step he took during the twelve-year lifespan of the Third Reich, and he made plenty of them.

[RockAndRoll]

Well, my views are too extreme for anyone here to argue with/accept.
try us

[Amit]

I'd like to hear your reasoning too, Josh.

[AA-12]

I support many current day NS and WN beliefs, but a good example of me not being a psycho/idiot is the fact that i'm good friends with you, Amit.

[Amit]

Haha, that's true. I know you aren't a racist or anything, but I'm wondering what kind of beliefs do you support? I can't really get anything good from Wiki.

[AA-12]

Well, I support many types of seperation, which has ties to White Nationalism. It's something I've always believed in and supported, and not really hate at all like most think. I believe that racial/cultural separation would make things better in the long run, even though it would hurt many people and be quite hard.

[Against Miik!]

Hitler's despicableness isn't a belief.

What if you are a nazi?

[PerpetualBurn]

I should ban you from Saraswati too :p


I'll behave.

[AA-12]

I'll behave.
Haha, I wouldn't do that.

[Amit]

Well, I support many types of seperation, which has ties to White Nationalism. It's something I've always believed in and supported, and not really hate at all like most think. I believe that racial/cultural separation would make things better in the long run, even though it would hurt many people and be quite hard.

Racial and cultural seperation has never led to anything good :-\

And you would never have blues, jazz, and all the classic rock music that sprung from it. Or Shakti!?!

The whole of humanity is destined to be brought together, not seperated apart. To divide by skin colour or "culture" is pure and simple identity politics.

[AA-12]

Racial and cultural seperation has never led to anything good :-\
It hasn't had enough time or mass effect to really be judged. I believe it would work though.

[RockAndRoll]

It hasn't had enough time or mass effect to really be judged. I believe it would work though.
why?

[Amit]

It hasn't had enough time or mass effect to really be judged. I believe it would work though.

See: African Americans before they had their civil rights.

Trust me, it's no fun being judged or defined by one tiny and immutable aspect of who you are.

[AA-12]

That wasn't really separation, just enslavement/hate. I see what you mean though.

[Amit]

Seperation is hate, no matter how you dress it up or spin it.

[AA-12]

I don't hate anyone at all because of race, I just want each race to breed in their own race and keep their own culture.

[PerpetualBurn]

I can't see why I'd want to separate myself from other cultures. They have so much to offer me, whether it be music, food, movies, plays, dancing, anything. There is nothing for me to gain from being culturally isolated.

[Amit]

I don't hate anyone at all because of race, I just want each race to breed in their own race and keep their own culture.

The first thing will cause inbreeding and genetic diseases.

The second thing: There is no such thing as one homogenized "own culture."

Your "own culture" is made up of millions of things that are all based on interactions between many different cultures based on thousands of years of human interaction. There's a reason why it's called Indo-European languages.

And it's not like you lose anything from not having the cultures seperated. This is a classic logical fallacy of giving a limit to an object which is inherently limitless.

[AA-12]

I know, but there are certain general cultures for races, which have been extremely spread out now.

[Amit]

I know, but there are certain general cultures for races, which have been extremely spread out now.

Like what?

This whole business so far has been just very one dimensional identity politics.

People are more than just their skin colour or birthplace.

[AA-12]

General heritage and style of living. Like I said though, it's so spread out now that it's hard to trace.

[Amit]

General heritage and style of living. Like I said though, it's so spread out now that it's hard to trace.

What's so spread out now?

[AA-12]

Cultures and race.

[Amit]

Cultures and race.

So you're saying it's hard to trace...

What exactly is the point of seperation, then?

[AA-12]

To prevent further mixing.

[Amit]

Everything is completely mixed and muddled up right now as it is...What's the point?

And what kind of benefits does it bring other than stagnation?

[AA-12]

Preservation of heritage and culture.

[Amit]

Preservation of heritage and culture.

Again, that's a pure logical fallacy.

You can't put a limit on something which is inherently limitless.

Culture and heritage have no boundaries and you won't lose any of your conceived heritage or culture just because you're exposed to other ones.

I haven't and will never lose the heritage of my ancestors just because I live tens of thousands of miles away from their birthplace (just like you do). And my culture isn't Indian and it isn't American. It's a mixture of both and many others...And I really really really wouldn't want to have it any other way.

This whole white seperation thing is operating under the flawed notion that heritage and culture are static aspects of life and not dynamic.

[RockAndRoll]

I don't hate anyone at all because of race, I just want each race to breed in their own race and keep their own culture.
yes but why do you want them to do that?

[italic zero]

So Irish people should only be allowed to eat potatoes and Mexicans should only be allowed to eat tacos?

[superpeer]

Preservation of heritage of culture is completely ridiculous, especially as an American, you should be aware of the mixing of cultures and nationalities.

/cameo appearance

[Cain]

Seperation and segregation breeds misunderstand and stereotyping, which hence begets civil strife which begets hatred which begets war which begets death. Over something as broad as skin color and facial characteristics I would suggest that the effort to segregate in this day and age would lead to catastrophe (and I'm not saying it wouldn't have in earlier times).

Besides, nothing would evolve if this were the way it was. Whole cultures would stagnate without new input from other cultures. Diversification is how we grow as people, and if cultural mixing isn't working out for you, Castle, the problem's frankly on your end, because all the strife and headaches associated with desegregation have been related to one group being held up over another by the roots of the ideas you're expounding in the first place.

[Against Miik!]

The majority of the population will always be for diversification. But you can't force it. Thats just as bad as segregation. It's been proven. I'm fine with small sects like neo-nazis or the KKK, but they will never again be the majority, at least not in civilized countries.

[DillingerEscp]

he has a right to do this, but he better be prepared to shell out some serious cash for a serious security system.

Oh, and bodyguards.

[(*The Noonward Race*)]

no i don't think we should be training people to become professional hitlers in a museum because theres alot of reverberation in them and it probably makes it hard for them to teach if you can barely understand what they're saying
Great great stuff man.

[Against Miik!]

he has a right to do this, but he better be prepared to shell out some serious cash for a serious security system.

Oh, and bodyguards.

Which is bull. Of course the only real way to take the moral high ground is to threaten people who you think are wrong with violence.

[(*The Noonward Race*)]

Okay, Josh is right. :rollingofapairofeyes:
I really should go back to my skin color's historical lifestyle and culture.

I can't live off the land closely as before.

.

There will be no racial segregation Josh.

[A Spoonful Supreme]

I think Mein Kampf would be a better target than this guy's museum.

[AA-12]

I'm back, but not for much. All i'm stating is this: I will always be proud of my race and heritage and will not mix with other races. That is all.

[black guy]

meh. you'll never breed with your own race either.

[Manticore Guy]

meh. you'll never breed with your own race either.

123. No one likes a jerk. I really like how MXer's get serious and logical in this part of the site. And Rev. John Donnelly is pretty funny in that article:lol:

[AA-12]

^What?

[Manticore Guy]

You can read. How do you think this nation would have evolved with separation?

[AA-12]

Much better.

[Manticore Guy]

Responses are always nice.

[StrangeVision]

I'm back, but not for much. All i'm stating is this: I will always be proud of my race and heritage and will not mix with other races. That is all.

So, you're a racist.

[Against Miik!]

Much better.

Not really. It would be better with complete mixture, as long as it wasn't forced.

[AA-12]

Racist in the fact that I believe races are different and should keep their own identity maybe, but not racism as in hating other races.

[sunshineplaysbass]

123. No one likes a jerk. I really like how MXer's get serious and logical in this part of the site. And Rev. John Donnelly is pretty funny in that article:lol:


I love how the "Reverend" is like "thats BS"

ahha

[Manticore Guy]

I love how the "Reverend" is like "thats BS"

ahha

YES!

[Mr. Ron]

good job
A typo, calm down.

[Mr. Ron]

That's not true at all. :p Do you know how many more men and better weapons the French had than the Germans when they invaded? The Somua 35 cavalry tank was more than a match for the Panzer II and IIIs the Nazis invaded France with, and the French had more of that specific kind of tank than the Germans had of their best tank in total, I'm pretty sure. They also had a larger standing army and greater mechanized mobility than the Germans did. The Germans beat France because the French tactical doctrine wasn't equipped to deal with the blitzkrieg tactics, but not because the German army was in any way superior in material or technology or even manpower.

Something like 3/4ths of the German army was still horse-drawn when they invaded Russia, after all. They didn't exactly put the mechanized world to shame with their military.



I'm pretty sure some extremely hefty mistakes on what weapons to give priority by the Germans contributed as well. Tactically, their focus on expending their limited resources on super heavy tanks and V-2s was pure idiocy.

Technically yes, the more limited-issue late weapons were more advanced. But it's difficult to say whether they could have won the war, even if the United States had less capacity for the mass production of high-quality weapons than it did. They could only have slowed the outcome down, but not reversed it.

EDIT: BTW, Hitler wasn't evil, guys. But if Mr. Ron is so concerned about why so many people hold up Hitler over Stalin and Mao, it's because Stalin and Mao were products of a Communist system which had overthrown a royal system of government, and decades of Cold-War and pre-World War II propaganda has imbedded the notion in Western society that Communism is a backwards government practiced by backwards Eastern peoples, and so any atrocities committed in those countries (which are purely authoritarian--that is, the purging of so-called political threats) makes more sense to the Western frame of mind than a racist tyrant who purges on both political and racial levels on a considerably more epic and open scale, who arose from and overthrew a democracy.

While Communism represents (capitalist) democracy's greatest antithesis, Hitler represented (ideological) democracy's most thorough corruption. Which is why the Holocaust and Hitler shock the Western world into hyperbole much better than Stalin or Mao.

Just becuase france had a slightly better tank at the time of the Panzer Mk II's and III's means nothing. In fact, the panzer MK 3's were used all the way up to the end of the war, and even knocked out Russian T-34's, which were Russia's answer to the Panther and Tiger tanks. Not bad for an outdated tank, eh?

Anyways, the panther and the tiger tank were the best tanks of WW2 hands down. The US sherman was terrible. The only thing it had going for it was it was fast and slightly more manuverable. But that means nothing when the Sherman's gun had no chance at knocking out a panther or a Tiger. The only way they would be able to knock out one panther or Tiger was to swarm it with about 6 tanks and somehow get a backside shot, but by then the tiger or panther would have knocked out most of them. For ever German tank knocked out, there was about 4-5 allied ones knocked out.

[Cain]

and even knocked out Russian T-34's, which were Russia's answer to the Panther and Tiger tanks.

Actually, you have the timeline reversed. The Panther was the German answer to the T-34. And you're thinking of the Panzer Mk. IV, not III, I think. It's true that they took IIIs into Russia, but the Mk. IV was the only one that could hold its own against the T-34.

In any case, the Germans tried to avoid tank-to-tank combat wherever possible because its doctrine called for tanks to be highly mobile, which means the production of the Tiger was that much stupider.

Anyways, the panther and the tiger tank were the best tanks of WW2 hands down. The US sherman was terrible. The only thing it had going for it was it was fast and slightly more manuverable.

The Panther was the best tank, true, because it was inexpensive, heavily armored and armed, and still maneuverable. The Tiger, on the other hand was too heavily armored, very very slow, and vulnerable in the same places as other tanks, particularly the tracks. The King Tiger was even worse. They were expensive, resource-costly, and ineffective as weapons of war. The Germans would have been better off never producing them.

But that means nothing when the Sherman's gun had no chance at knocking out a panther or a Tiger.

By late 1944 most American Shermans and British Cromwells had been fitted with the 75mm gun the Panthers had (and were therefore fully able to kill Panthers), and were easily capable of outmaneuvering Tigers and killing it in the tracks or the fuel tanks. And in any case, the Germans had no fuel to move the tanks with anyway. So actually, the fact that it had a better gun and better armor is a marginal consideration when gauging its actual effect as a weapon, which was minimal to the point of pointlessness.

[StrangeVision]

He is disrciminating against pepole of different races. It may not be hatred but is racism nonetheless.

[Mr. Ron]

The Panther was the best tank. The Tiger was too heavily armored, very very slow, and vulnerable in the same places as other tanks, particularly the tracks.



By late 1944 most American Shermans and British Cromwells had been fitted with the 75mm gun the Panthers had (and were therefore fully able to kill Panthers), and were easily capable of outmaneuvering Tigers and killing it in the tracks or the fuel tanks. And in any case, the Germans had no fuel to move the tanks with anyway. So actually, the fact that it had a better gun and better armor is a marginal consideration when gauging its actual effect as a weapon, which was minimal to the point of pointlessness.
The tracks were a bit wide on the tiger, but it could knock out anything we had at 2,000 yards away. It was a terror to our men no matter how you look at it.

The 75mm main gum was still largely uneffective against german tanks. The only hope was to either hit it in the tracks or the backside. The sherman was a horrible tank, period. I know many veterans that would attest to that, too.

[Mr. Ron]

He is disrciminating against pepole of different races. It may not be hatred but is racism nonetheless.
Not wanting to breed with other races hardly counts as racism.

[Cain]

Racist in the fact that I believe races are different and should keep their own identity maybe, but not racism as in hating other races.

Clearly you see difference as harmful or undesirable (otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with "mixing," as you call it), which is discrimination. And since your discrimination is based along racial lines, you are a racist. Plain and simple. Quit being so wishy-washy about the fact that you are what you are. I thought you believed in this.

[Cain]

The tracks were a bit wide on the tiger, but it could knock out anything we had at 2,000 yards away. It was a terror to our men no matter how you look at it.

The 75mm main gum was still largely uneffective against german tanks. The only hope was to either hit it in the tracks or the backside. The sherman was a horrible tank, period. I know many veterans that would attest to that, too.

Oh, I believe that, but the Tiger wasn't a good tank either. It was completely out of line with good military doctrine, was ineffective as an offensive weapon, ate up valuable gasoline and even more valuable resources, and was only good for blowing up other tanks, which is not the purpose of tanks. I think the Tiger, too, was a terrible tank.

Not wanting to breed with other races hardly counts as racism.

:rolleyes:

[Mr. Ron]

Oh, I believe that, but the Tiger wasn't a good tank either. It was completely out of line with good military doctrine, was ineffective as an offensive weapon, ate up valuable gasoline and even more valuable resources, and was only good for blowing up other tanks, which is not the purpose of tanks. I think the Tiger, too, was a terrible tank.
Well, tell that to the men that were at the receiving end of it.

[Cain]

Well, tell that to the men that were at the receiving end of it.

Tell that to the Germans who built the tank but lost the war anyway.

[Mr. Ron]

Tell that to the Germans who built the tank but lost the war anyway.
The Tiger was hardly the reason why they lost. :p




Really though. How is choosing to want white children with a white partner racism? Would you force people to breed with other races just because we would be all nice and comfy with each other?

[italic zero]

A typo, calm down.
i see no exclamation points or capitals

[Cain]

The Tiger was hardly the reason why they lost. :p

It clearly didn't help them win.

Why does the Western World mythologize German weapon prowess and military prowess? Too often, Nazi ethics get simplified to "bigger is better" and Allied ones to "less is more." Not everything can be reduced to superiority of resources.

Really though. How is choosing to want white children with a white partner racism? Would you force people to breed with other races just because we would be all nice and comfy with each other?

First of all, that's not all he's saying. He says all races should be segregated entirely, meaning no contact between them whatsoever. He says that he should retain his pure white cultural heritage at all costs. What he's saying goes way beyond "I don't want to marry a black person," which is not in itself racist or wrong.

Second of all, what the devil do you mean by the last sentence? Who on earth is forcing anybody to breed with other races, "just because," or who in this thread has advocated it? You want to talk to anybody about "forcing people" to do something, talk to Castle.

His views are clearly racist. I don't see how this is so difficult to understand. It's not like he fantasizes about being an Auschwitz guard, but he's a racist nonetheless.

[Mr. Ron]

It clearly didn't help them win.

Why does the Western World mythologize German weapon prowess and military prowess? Too often, Nazi ethics get simplified to "bigger is better" and Allied ones to "less is more." Not everything can be reduced to superiority of resources.
I don't think it's that way. The Allies had great weapons and tactics. Germany's huge fault was micromanaging EVERYTHING. I mean, if Hitler left the work up to his commanders in the field, I truely believe that we would have been pushed back into the ocean at D-day. Scary thought.

[Cain]

I don't think it's that way. The Allies had great weapons and tactics. Germany's huge fault was micromanaging EVERYTHING. I mean, if Hitler left the work up to his commanders in the field, I truely believe that we would have been pushed back into the ocean at D-day. Scary thought.

Yeah, I agree with this. But on the other hand, I don't neccesarily think that the German military would have fared better if it had been allowed to operate on its own accord. The German military was actually highly democratized anyway, due to the sweeping away of the aristocratic elements that Hitler despised. I think that a general inefficiency of the highest order within the general German Party and military bureaucracy was more at fault for the German loss than simple military interference by Hitler (until the later days of the war, that is).

[Mr. Ron]

Yeah, I agree with this. But on the other hand, I don't neccesarily think that the German military would have fared better if it had been allowed to operate on its own accord. The German military was actually highly democratized anyway, due to the sweeping away of the aristocratic elements that Hitler despised. I think that a general inefficiency of the highest order within the general German Party and military bureaucracy was more at fault for the German loss than simple military interference by Hitler (until the later days of the war, that is).
Yeah, I'd agree.

[Reaganista]

omg omg omg omg you guys are debating wwII tactics again I ****ing hate you

[Reaganista]

The only reason we won was becuase of more mass production and more resources
wait wait wait
the only reason we won is because we were better at the only thing that has any relevance to modern warfare?
oh ok.

[Ghostfire3]

Well, I support many types of seperation, which has ties to White Nationalism. It's something I've always believed in and supported, and not really hate at all like most think. I believe that racial/cultural separation would make things better in the long run, even though it would hurt many people and be quite hard.

So basically you believe in that whole "separate but equal" bullshit?

Right.... Didn't we prove that didn't really work back in like the 60s? Yeah, it was called Brown v. Board of Education. "Separate but equal" is inherently unequal.

[Reaganista]

the supreme kkkourt deciding something doesn't mean it doesn't work

we proved that that **** didn't work in south africa

[Ghostfire3]

the supreme kkkourt deciding something doesn't mean it doesn't work

we proved that that **** didn't work in south africa

I didn't mean the supreme court deciding something meant it was right. I meant the '60s proved it didn't work.

[Reaganista]

what about all the time before that

[TojesDolan]

There was no such thing as a credence of... "hey, maybe I'm, not supposed to be opressed" among "lower-class races".

[PerpetualBurn]

Not wanting to breed with other races hardly counts as racism.

Feeling that women of other races aren't fit to be the mother of your child is pretty racist.

[23-inch dude]

Feeling that women of other races aren't fit to be the mother of your child is pretty racist.


No that 'could' be a natural reaction, since you are looking for the right genes in a person to get children that are strong and able to survive.
Women of other races could have other aspects/genes that you don't need for your children to survive. (is feeling you don't want children with a blond racist?)

[Mr. Ron]

Feeling that women of other races aren't fit to be the mother of your child is pretty racist.
Still, there is nothing wrong with wanting white children.

[23-inch dude]

well no, there are a lot of reasons, totally normal reasons, why you would want to have a white child rather then a black or some mix between...(mullatin)

[Mr. Ron]

well no, there are a lot of reasons, totally normal reasons, why you would want to have a white child rather then a black or some mix between...(mullatin)
Because I want a white family.



/waits for flames.

[Amit]

Racist in the fact that I believe races are different and should keep their own identity maybe, but not racism as in hating other races.

As I have said time and time again, there is no such thing as "racial identity."

[The_Passenger]

Because I want a white family.



/waits for flames.

Not going to flame you, but why? I don't see how it matters that much myself is all.

[23-inch dude]

oh but there is I think
why shouldn't there be one?
and what would be wrong about it?

[Amit]

Not going to flame you, but why? I don't see how it matters that much myself is all.

Can't blame a guy if he wants his kids to have an increased chance of all kinds of melanoma and sun-related diseases.

[Mr. Ron]

Not going to flame you, but why? I don't see how it matters that much myself is all.
Becuase in my family, heritage is very important. I know, you're going to say "Oh well that doesn't matter" but it DOES. Heritage is largely lost among people these days. If you don't know where you came from, you don't know where you are going. Thats just my stance on it.


But, if somehow a member of my family was to have a non-white child, I'd see it as my own, I don't hate other races.

[Amit]

Becuase in my family, heritage is very important. I know, you're going to say "Oh well that doesn't matter" but it DOES. Heritage is largely lost among people these days. If you don't know where you came from, you don't know where you are going. Thats just my stance on it.


But, if somehow a member of my family was to have a non-white child, I'd see it as my own, I don't hate other races.

Heritage still remains incredibly strong with Indians, Middle Easterners, Jews, and Asians who live in America.

Really it's only the white Christian Americans who suffer from this heritage insecurity complex :-P

[Mr. Ron]

Can't blame a guy if he wants his kids to have an increased chance of all kinds of melanoma and sun-related diseases.
Yes, us white folk burst into flame on sunny days. :upset:

[Amit]

There is not one culture which is a direct corollary to a skin colour. And there never will be.

[The_Passenger]

Becuase in my family, heritage is very important. I know, you're going to say "Oh well that doesn't matter" but it DOES. Heritage is largely lost among people these days. If you don't know where you came from, you don't know where you are going. Thats just my stance on it.


But, if somehow a member of my family was to have a non-white child, I'd see it as my own, I don't hate other races.

Well, you could have kids with a different skin colour and still teach them about the culture you want them to know of. Of course the would proably also be learning from a different culture if the mother was of a different race, but I don't really see what is wrong with that. I can see where you're coming from though.

And Atman, you have a good point. If my kids end up as pale as me they'll be spending a lot of money on sunscreen. :(

[PerpetualBurn]

No that 'could' be a natural reaction, since you are looking for the right genes in a person to get children that are strong and able to survive.
Women of other races could have other aspects/genes that you don't need for your children to survive. (is feeling you don't want children with a blond racist?)

It's not natural selection. You should be ashamed to use such a scientific term so wrongly and so completely out of context.

[Mr. Ron]

Well, you could have kids with a different skin colour and still teach them about the culture you want them to know of. Of course the would proably also be learning from a different culture if the mother was of a different race, but I don't really see what is wrong with that. I can see where you're coming from though.

And Atman, you have a good point. If my kids end up as pale as me they'll be spending a lot of money on sunscreen. :(
Meh, it wouldn't be the same.

[PerpetualBurn]

Becuase in my family, heritage is very important. I know, you're going to say "Oh well that doesn't matter" but it DOES. Heritage is largely lost among people these days. If you don't know where you came from, you don't know where you are going. Thats just my stance on it.

I can't see how it could possibly hurt my future children to immerse them in two cultures. I'm very familiar with my own, and I enjoy the culture of others. I can only imagine that diversity would make them better people.

[Mr. Ron]

I can't see how it could possibly hurt my future children to immerse them in two cultures. I'm very familiar with my own, and I enjoy the culture of others. I can only imagine that diversity would make them better people.
I like other cultures as well. I love Japanese culture. But, for the sake of my own family and children, I think they should learn about where they came from.

[Amit]

Meh, it wouldn't be the same.

Why wouldn't it?

Over 800 years ago, when the Muslim Arabs invaded and conquered Zoroastrian Iran, the Persians who did not want to convert or die fled to India and set up shop there, if you will.

In India, this incredibly unique group are called Parsis. My last girlfriend was one and man, they still retain their heritage and "culture" centuries after living thousands of miles away from "home."

I like other cultures as well. I love Japanese culture. But, for the sake of my own family and children, I think they should learn about where they came from.

Oh, so only your culture is the important one. Since we're only talking about different cultures mixing, what about your wife?

[Mr. Ron]

Why wouldn't it?

Over 800 years ago, when the Muslim Arabs invaded and conquered Zoroastrian Iran, the Persians who did not want to convert or die fled to India and set up shop there, if you will.

In India, this incredibly unique group are called Parsis. My last girlfriend was one and man, they still retain their heritage and "culture" centuries after living thousands of miles away from "home."
That is good to hear that they can retain their heritage.

But, teaching something to a person who does not have any connection to it, doesn't seem worth while since they might not really be emotionally into it as a person who came from that heritage might be.

[Mr. Ron]

Why wouldn't it?

Over 800 years ago, when the Muslim Arabs invaded and conquered Zoroastrian Iran, the Persians who did not want to convert or die fled to India and set up shop there, if you will.

In India, this incredibly unique group are called Parsis. My last girlfriend was one and man, they still retain their heritage and "culture" centuries after living thousands of miles away from "home."



Oh, so only your culture is the important one. Since we're only talking about different cultures mixing, what about your wife?
I never said my culture was the important one. Haha.

But, it is my heritage and I see it as an important thing to teach.

[Amit]

That is good to hear that they can retain their heritage.

But, teaching something to a person who does not have any connection to it, doesn't seem worth while since they might not really be emotionally into it as a person who came from that heritage might be.

What do you mean? Too many pronouns!

I never said my culture was the important one. Haha.

But, it is my heritage and I see it as an important thing to teach.

What about your wife's heritage?

And what exactly of your heritage would you be teaching about?

[PerpetualBurn]

I like other cultures as well. I love Japanese culture. But, for the sake of my own family and children, I think they should learn about where they came from.

Yeah. A mix of Japan and England. Asian women are hot.

Thinking about this, I'm more and more tempted by the prospect of a girlfriend of a different race. I don't see cultural diversity as anything but good.

You seem to have this impression that you must preserve your current line. It won't be lost by embracing other lines.

[The_Passenger]

That is good to hear that they can retain their heritage.

But, teaching something to a person who does not have any connection to it, doesn't seem worth while since they might not really be emotionally into it as a person who came from that heritage might be.

They would have a connection to it through one of the parents though, wouldn't they?

One of my old friends (I haven't seen him in a while though) had one Indian parent and one Welsh parent, and he seemed to be very into both cultures. I don't see why this should be different for any case.

[Mr. Ron]

What do you mean? Too many pronouns!



What about your wife's heritage?

And what exactly of your heritage would you be teaching about?
It will mean more to a person who has the same heritage to learn about it rather than someone who isn't.



I love the women I am with right now, and she has a large european background.

[Amit]

You seem to have this impression that you must preserve your current line. It won't be lost by embracing other lines.

Exactly!

Anyway, almost all white Americans are "mutts" if you will. And considering how much Old World intermixing there has been, it makes nearly everyone's points about cultural seperation moot.

It will mean more to a person who has the same heritage to learn about it rather than someone who isn't.

I am not black yet I am so into jazz, hip hop, and everything behind it. John McLaughlin is whiter than snow yet he loves Indian music and culture. Explain please.

I love the women I am with right now, and she has a large european background.

Just the fact that you use the term "european background" automatically nullifies any point you're going to make.

[Mr. Ron]

Exactly!

Anyway, almost all white Americans are "mutts" if you will. And considering how much Old World intermixing there has been, it makes nearly everyone's points about cultural seperation moot.



I am not black yet I am so into jazz, hip hop, and everything behind it. John McLaughlin is whiter than snow yet he loves Indian music and culture. Explain please.



Just the fact that you use the term "european background" automatically nullifies any point you're going to make.

Some aspects of a persons heritage will seem more special to them, since it is their own. I'm sure black people are proud to a certain extent that they had a large impact on music.

[PerpetualBurn]

I love the women I am with right now, and she has a large european background.

Freudian slip?

And I still don't see why my offspring would care less about my heritage because their mother was Japanese. They'd have twice the heritage! I hear all about stuff like this, and I can't help but think how much I love cultural diversity.

There's something that I find so amazing about the Indian family that runs the local take-away of their traditional food (albeit toned down, yes) for my cultural relations. Why would I not want to mix with these good people!?

[Mr. Ron]

Freudian slip?

And I still don't see why my offspring would care less about my heritage because their mother was Japanese. They'd have twice the heritage! I hear all about stuff like this, and I can't help but think how much I love cultural diversity.

There's something that I find so amazing about the Indian family that runs the local take-away of their traditional food (albeit toned down, yes) for my cultural relations. Why would I not want to mix with these good people!?
Typo. :p

[Amit]

Some aspects of a persons heritage will seem more special to them, since it is their own. I'm sure black people are proud to a certain extent that they had a large impact on music.

One's interest in aspects of culture/heritage seems to me to be more like an "on" or "off" quality instead of this gradient scale you're proposing. Either you dig it or you don't.

I am very proud of Bengali Hindus like Ravi Shankar, Rabindranath Tagore, Kishore Kumar, or Amartya Sen, but on the same token, I am also just as proud of non-Hindu Bengalis such as Ali Akbar Khan. Yet, I am also proud of other Indians like Salman Rushdie, Hariprasad Chaurasia, Zakir Hussain, A.R. Rahman, and U Srinivas. And even Pakistanis like Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan. I'm also proud of Philadelphians like Benjamin Franklin and John Coltrane.

It goes on and on and on.

You aren't just part of one identity group (unless you are a very boring and boorish person!).

[23-inch dude]

perpetualburn, I said REACTION, not SELECTION!!!

[PerpetualBurn]

Oops! I sort of saw genes and natural and beneficial traits as I skimmed through the page and jumped to a conclusion.

[AA-12]

Clearly you see difference as harmful or undesirable (otherwise you wouldn't have a problem with "mixing," as you call it), which is discrimination. And since your discrimination is based along racial lines, you are a racist. Plain and simple. Quit being so wishy-washy about the fact that you are what you are. I thought you believed in this.
Okay, fine. I guess i'm a racist then. All i'm saying is that i've always wanted a white wife and white children, and hope other whites/races would do the same. I'd never force it on anyone though.

[PerpetualBurn]

If you had a French wife, then you'd still have an entirely different culture, but she'd be white. Would this be unacceptable to you?

[Amit]

And what about Persians? Some are paler than most Irish people I know :-P

[AA-12]

Color doesn't bother me, it's general heritage. Mainly european is what i'm talking about.

By the way, Wotan =/= will of the aryan nation (before anyone comments again :p)

[23-inch dude]

I forgive thee perpetualburn, heheheh, 'cos I think you are a good guy,hehehehe

well, that french wife would differ, but not as much as euh, a black or an asian woman, because she shares an european identity/culture/... with you

[23-inch dude]

but hey, asian women are hot! so I see no reason not to want one!!!

[AA-12]

Becuase in my family, heritage is very important. I know, you're going to say "Oh well that doesn't matter" but it DOES. Heritage is largely lost among people these days. If you don't know where you came from, you don't know where you are going. Thats just my stance on it.

VERY well said. I missed this post earlier.

[Cain]

Color doesn't bother me, it's general heritage. Mainly european is what i'm talking about.

By the way, Wotan =/= will of the aryan nation (before anyone comments again :p)

Wotan = a character in Der Ring des Nibelungen by Richard Wagner

He was pretty concerned about cultural heritage as well, of course. And I'm sure we all know who he inspired. :p

I like the music though, so meh.

[AA-12]

Wotan = German God, it translates to Odin basically.

As do I.

[23-inch dude]

wagner rules with his music(sorry it is off topic, but it's wagner!)

[Reaganista]

interracial marriage should be mandatory

[Cain]

Wotan = German God, it translates to Odin basically.

As do I.

lawl.

those Norse gods wore funny hats.

[Mr. Ron]

Wotan = a character in Der Ring des Nibelungen by Richard Wagner

He was pretty concerned about cultural heritage as well, of course. And I'm sure we all know who he inspired. :p

I like the music though, so meh.
Wotan is the german name for Odin.


Wagner rawks. But then again, classical music as a whole rawks hard. \m/

[AA-12]

trolltrolltroll
orly?

[Mr. Ron]

interracial marriage should be mandatory
Hmmmmmm.

[Reaganista]

orly?
yes.

racism is an important weapon that has long been used against the proletarian

the best way to get rid of it is to get rid of races.

[Mr. Ron]

Old tway, where art thou?

[Amit]

It's true though :-\

[Smokey D]

I love the women I am with right now, and she has a large european background.

Do you like her because she's European or because she's a likeable person? And if you happened to meet a Japanese-American girl whose family had been in the America for several generations, and so she was fully culturally assimilated, would skin colour still pose an issue to you?

And let's not pretend making decisions based on race or 'heritage' erroneously linked to skin colour/place of origin is anything other than racist.

[Amit]

hey can we take it to my thread plz

[Cain]

hey can we take it to my thread plz

Why? None of the people we're disagreeing with has posted in there.

[Amit]

yeah i know that sucks

[pppoe]

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/3850/internetpolice9ap.jpg

[pppoe]

If it's built, I am going to gather up a bunch of my friends and trash the **** out of it.

[AA-12]

Go away dei.

[peon]

controvserial, yet acceptable

[deathscreamingsheep]

the USA did. and no one else.

This sounds like an old Tway comment.

[sunshineplaysbass]

Did you know, in WWII, during the Battle of Stalingrad, it took (correct me if i'm wrong) 30 days for the Germans to advance across a street when facing Russia's opposition.

However, in 30 days, Germany conquered all of France (facing the allmighty French Army)
just a little tidbit. i found it amusing

[peon]

great.. they faced a stronger opposition, people became more prepared..

[pppoe]

Go away dei.
Let's not argue in this thread.

[Danger Bird]

I would personally kick that old dudes ***. Then I would step on him to hold him down while he squirms. Oh how Id love to do that.
You are a piece of ****.

[Mr. Ron]

Did you know, in WWII, during the Battle of Stalingrad, it took (correct me if i'm wrong) 30 days for the Germans to advance across a street when facing Russia's opposition.

However, in 30 days, Germany conquered all of France (facing the allmighty French Army)
just a little tidbit. i found it amusing
Check out how many Russian casualties there were to German ones on the eastern front.

[Bron-Yr-Aur]

Germany lost, but not before obliterating countless Russkies.

[Paranoid Android1990]

I would love to go to this memorial, as i am interested to see the war from both angles(although would be impossible for me as i live in England), as goverments only seem to tell you what they want you to hear. not that im supporting hitler or anything i just think that this man has as much right as any, to spread his own personnal experiances/believes after all he probably fought just as hard as British or American troops.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

I think that as long as this guy makes it clear he's not condoning the Holocaust or the Nazi side of WWII, he can say whatever else he wants. One-on-one, by all accounts, Hitler was a charmingly classy mofo.

[PepsiMetal]

Hitler, or germany during WWII in general, has made advancements to many technologies. So museum would be interesting to showcase those inventions.

[Give me Beer]

Did you know, in WWII, during the Battle of Stalingrad, it took (correct me if i'm wrong) 30 days for the Germans to advance across a street when facing Russia's opposition.

However, in 30 days, Germany conquered all of France (facing the allmighty French Army)
just a little tidbit. i found it amusing

Half of France and the French Army wasn't defeated, they passed them by... and then the politicians gave up (spineless bastards). Incidentally the French did kick the *** of Italians who tried to cross into France.

Furthermore, check how many French died during WWI resisting German aggression, a mere 20 years earlier.

[YouGottaBeCrazy]

I think that as long as this guy makes it clear he's not condoning the Holocaust or the Nazi side of WWII, he can say whatever else he wants. One-on-one, by all accounts, Hitler was a charmingly classy mofo.

He can say what he wants even if it's pro-holocaust and/or pro-Nazi.

[Bron-Yr-Aur]

So sayeth that accursed Bill of Rights.

[iceman3019]

das ist furchtbar!

[Foreskin Fondler]

heres something that will probably make you guys laugh:

go to google.com and search "french military victories"

[AA-12]

Your search - french military victories - did not match any documents.

ahahahahahahaha

[Give me Beer]

Your search - french military victories - did not match any d0cuments.

ahahahahahahaha

That's way old and not really that funny at all.

[bleep_bloop]

He should be sentenced to death


absolutely not


no it's not


so he's a thief, too?

you should be sentenced to death. foo.

[Foreskin Fondler]

That's way old and not really that funny at all.
you're old and not that funny at all

........just kidding. no need to get crazy with the insults

[PremierManiac]

heres something that will probably make you guys laugh:

go to google.com and search "french military victories"
It has about 3.38 million pages.

[PerpetualBurn]

You have to hit "I'm feeling lucky".

[Reaganista]

Half of France and the French Army wasn't defeated, they passed them by... and then the politicians gave up (spineless bastards). Incidentally the French did kick the *** of Italians who tried to cross into France.

Furthermore, check how many French died during WWI resisting German aggression, a mere 20 years earlier.
yeah so it was cool that they collaborated

you should be sentenced to death. foo.
hahahaha

[Smokey D]

All countries in occupied Europe had collaboraters. What's your point?

[Cain]

All countries in occupied Europe had collaboraters. What's your point?

The Channel Islands didn't. Although they did sell the Germans ice cream.

[shaqadelic]

Chances are I think he knows a little more about hitler than you do, yet you've already made your mind up based on what you've learnt at school.

Whose the brainwashed one?

Pwnage content here.

BTW, how bout reserving comments till you actually saw the content of the museum?

[matt_h]

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-frenchmilitaryvictories.htm

but it is actually 51,000 if you quote it, else you get victories over the french

[Activista anti-MTV]

A man about an hour and a half away from my house is opening a pro-Hitler museum. Here is the link for the news article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199414,00.html

Discuss

MURDER HIM!!! Seriously that is disgusting in this day and age

[Reaganista]

All countries in occupied Europe had collaboraters. What's your point?
point would be france had more

[Give me Beer]

point would be france had more

They also had the biggest resistance movement.

[Reaganista]

oh so that makes it ok

[Enlighten Me]

Hitler had a really ugly mustache :/

[Antifa]

A man about an hour and a half away from my house is opening a pro-Hitler museum. Here is the link for the news article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199414,00.html

Discuss

B
u
r
n

i
t

d
o
w
n
.

[Smokey D]

point would be france had more

I'm not sure I would agree.

[Auberge le Mouton Noir]

MURDER HIM!!! Seriously that is disgusting in this day and age

Murder this guy! It is disgusting in this day and age that there should be a call to murder someone just because of their opinions.

[Reaganista]

I'm not sure I would agree.
well austria hardly counts

[Antifa]

Murder this guy! It is disgusting in this day and age that there should be a call to murder someone just because of their opinions.

Completely free speech is a bourgeois right.

[Reaganista]

being a stupid cunt is a communist imperative