All of these nazi sock puppet threads read like bad orientstion videos for car salesman to me
Some fucking jerkoff govt official got paid to structure this technique hahahaha
Exactly dude...youre tryong to use their patriarchal and oppressive women's health policy (their words) as a gotcha when in fact it is along the lines that critics expect of Nazi women's health
You might not know:
"The USA was a pioneer in the field of eugenics. The great political autonomy of the individual states of the USA promoted the regionally limited implementation of eugenics. In 1897, the parliament of a U.S. state in Michigan debated a bill on eugenically motivated sterilization for the first time, but it was rejected at the time. A breakthrough was achieved by eugenics activists in the state of Indiana, where the first sterilization law in the USA was passed in 1907. This made forced sterilization a legal option for bureaucratic and medical experts against the "insane" who were institutionalized, but also against people in poorhouses and prisons. After Indiana's sensational decision, similar bills made their way to other state legislatures across the United States. In some, they were rejected, but in others the triumph of sterilization laws continued apace; for example, in populous California (1909), where most of all U.S. sterilizations have taken place since then. - By 1917, 15 U.S. states had such laws, and over the next 15 years, that number doubled.
There was initial reluctance among responsible officials to apply the new sterilization laws. The vast majority of Catholics in the U.S. strongly opposed such interventions. The Protestant ruling elites, however, saw things differently: in 1913, former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt publicly expressed solidarity with the negative-eugenics goal of preventing "inferior" offspring, and in the same year Thomas Woodrow Wilson, a politician who had signed one of the new sterilization laws as governor of New Jersey in 1911, was elected the new president of the United States.
By 1933, legal marriage bans for the "mentally ill" existed in 41 (of 48 at the time) U.S. states, and eugenic sterilization laws existed in 30 states. U.S. sterilization legislation also radiated to some provincial legislatures in neighboring Canada and Mexico around 1930.
Between 1907 and 1933, 16,000 people were rendered infertile in the United States; by 1939, this number had doubled to about 31,000 (and by the end of 1940, to not quite 36,000 people). By 1964, the total had grown to at least 64,000 people.
Beginning in 1933, U.S. eugenicists such as Charles Davenport felt vindicated by Germany's Nazi racial hygiene. They appreciated the assertiveness of the Nazi dictatorship in rapidly implementing a coercive law that within a very short time left behind the sterilization rates achieved in decades in the United States. They were particularly impressed by the German Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring, which was passed in July 1933 and came into force at the beginning of 1934, and its rigorous implementation in the years that followed. This resulted - in addition to racist affinities - in the "Nazi connection" of many American eugenicists, which, however, was resented in the USA since 1941.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)"
Yes I'm very familiar with the history of eugenics. The problem is that most assume the Nazis only sterilized Jews, which is far from the truth. We can debate if what they did was moral by today's standards, but as you've also shown with your info, the Nazis only adopted and advanced a policy that was popular all over the civilized world at the time. It's hard for people to look at history without using a modern lens, and I think this is what makes it so easy for most to dismiss anything from Nazi Germany as evil. The truth is, many of the things they did would be considered acceptable by today's standards, yet those things rarely get taught in the classroom. Can we not separate the good from the bad and look at things objectively?
Many are also confused on the idea of a pure Aryan race. This had nothing to do with blonde-haired, blue-eyed Germans, but rather an ancient race of people that you learn about in any entry-level world history course. That's right, Hitler knew there was a mysterious people called the Aryans that showed up in India and taught them the foundations of what would later become Hinduism. They also taught them agriculture, mathematics, and many other skills that would serve to advance any race. Hitler tried his best to prove a link between Aryans and Germans in the 1930's but failed to do so. You didn't think he sent his SS to Tibet and other regions to study anthropology for fun did you? After all, he even hired the top Grail hunter of the day to seek out the famed Holy Grail. Yes, the Indiana Jones movies actually got it quite right.
Can you really blame him? He consulted the top science and experts of the day, which actually supported many of the things Hitler was trying to accomplish. In fact, the oldest human remains were found in Germany in the 19th century and weren't refuted until the 1950's, so it seems they had every reason to believe that they were part of some advanced, ancient race. After many years of studying history, I've come to the conclusion that many would agree with Hitler's motives for the most part, but likely disagree with the means used to achieve them.
I´m 69 always interested in history. The following four books by Antony C. Sutton (among many others) opened my eyes:
Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution
Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler
Wall Street and FDR
National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union
.
Sutton was a rising star historian, but after these books...
Why does everyone get triggered when they see the word NAZI, as if everything attached to it is inherently evil? The point of this thread is to show another example of how a narrative can be controlled for 75 years without many challenging it. Why would a Nazi law from 1933 remain on the books until today? The answer is because Germany has had a huge Christian/Catholic population that objects to abortion, plain and simple. You don't have to support the entire Nazi agenda because you happen to support something else they practiced. Who here supports a strong military? Well, you must be a communist since China and North Korea both fit that bill right? If you're one of the ones that likes to jump to conclusions about a user that posts anything related to Nazi Germany, please grow up and learn to look at things objectively.
Seems to me that, making sure areas that have a high population of one "race" like oh, lets say, Black communities have a planned parent hood on every corner and at the same time promoting abortions as a good thing.. is kinda a Nazi thing if you want to get rid of one portion of society.
As I recall, Nazi wanted "perfect people" and yes, put in place abortion laws to make it hard for white people and or people they considered "good for society" to get one as they were at the same time persecuting/killing/starving the people that they felt were "bad for society", working on eliminating them.
Well, to be fair, the persecution/killing/starving didn't happen at the same time. This law was passed in 1933 when Hitler came to power. The bad stuff didn't start for at least 5 years. Even then, it was mostly deportations to other countries or work camps. The killing didn't happen until 1943-1945 after Germany was clearly losing the war and had their supply lines decimated. I think too many generalize about what happened during the Nazi reign. There are huge differences between Nazi Germany 1933-1938 and the one from 1939-1945. We shouldn't ignore the good or the bad, but we must distinguish between the two.
All of these nazi sock puppet threads read like bad orientstion videos for car salesman to me Some fucking jerkoff govt official got paid to structure this technique hahahaha
No one has ever said "the Nazis are bad because of their progressive women's health policies." What logic did you employ in wording the thread title?
I'm not sure I understand how discouraging abortion is a progressive women's health policy...? It's quite the opposite. The logic I used is simple.
Exactly dude...youre tryong to use their patriarchal and oppressive women's health policy (their words) as a gotcha when in fact it is along the lines that critics expect of Nazi women's health
The Nazis wanted children of pure aryan race.
You might not know: "The USA was a pioneer in the field of eugenics. The great political autonomy of the individual states of the USA promoted the regionally limited implementation of eugenics. In 1897, the parliament of a U.S. state in Michigan debated a bill on eugenically motivated sterilization for the first time, but it was rejected at the time. A breakthrough was achieved by eugenics activists in the state of Indiana, where the first sterilization law in the USA was passed in 1907. This made forced sterilization a legal option for bureaucratic and medical experts against the "insane" who were institutionalized, but also against people in poorhouses and prisons. After Indiana's sensational decision, similar bills made their way to other state legislatures across the United States. In some, they were rejected, but in others the triumph of sterilization laws continued apace; for example, in populous California (1909), where most of all U.S. sterilizations have taken place since then. - By 1917, 15 U.S. states had such laws, and over the next 15 years, that number doubled.
There was initial reluctance among responsible officials to apply the new sterilization laws. The vast majority of Catholics in the U.S. strongly opposed such interventions. The Protestant ruling elites, however, saw things differently: in 1913, former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt publicly expressed solidarity with the negative-eugenics goal of preventing "inferior" offspring, and in the same year Thomas Woodrow Wilson, a politician who had signed one of the new sterilization laws as governor of New Jersey in 1911, was elected the new president of the United States.
By 1933, legal marriage bans for the "mentally ill" existed in 41 (of 48 at the time) U.S. states, and eugenic sterilization laws existed in 30 states. U.S. sterilization legislation also radiated to some provincial legislatures in neighboring Canada and Mexico around 1930.
Between 1907 and 1933, 16,000 people were rendered infertile in the United States; by 1939, this number had doubled to about 31,000 (and by the end of 1940, to not quite 36,000 people). By 1964, the total had grown to at least 64,000 people.
Beginning in 1933, U.S. eugenicists such as Charles Davenport felt vindicated by Germany's Nazi racial hygiene. They appreciated the assertiveness of the Nazi dictatorship in rapidly implementing a coercive law that within a very short time left behind the sterilization rates achieved in decades in the United States. They were particularly impressed by the German Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring, which was passed in July 1933 and came into force at the beginning of 1934, and its rigorous implementation in the years that followed. This resulted - in addition to racist affinities - in the "Nazi connection" of many American eugenicists, which, however, was resented in the USA since 1941.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)"
Source: wikipedia.de
Yes I'm very familiar with the history of eugenics. The problem is that most assume the Nazis only sterilized Jews, which is far from the truth. We can debate if what they did was moral by today's standards, but as you've also shown with your info, the Nazis only adopted and advanced a policy that was popular all over the civilized world at the time. It's hard for people to look at history without using a modern lens, and I think this is what makes it so easy for most to dismiss anything from Nazi Germany as evil. The truth is, many of the things they did would be considered acceptable by today's standards, yet those things rarely get taught in the classroom. Can we not separate the good from the bad and look at things objectively?
Many are also confused on the idea of a pure Aryan race. This had nothing to do with blonde-haired, blue-eyed Germans, but rather an ancient race of people that you learn about in any entry-level world history course. That's right, Hitler knew there was a mysterious people called the Aryans that showed up in India and taught them the foundations of what would later become Hinduism. They also taught them agriculture, mathematics, and many other skills that would serve to advance any race. Hitler tried his best to prove a link between Aryans and Germans in the 1930's but failed to do so. You didn't think he sent his SS to Tibet and other regions to study anthropology for fun did you? After all, he even hired the top Grail hunter of the day to seek out the famed Holy Grail. Yes, the Indiana Jones movies actually got it quite right.
Can you really blame him? He consulted the top science and experts of the day, which actually supported many of the things Hitler was trying to accomplish. In fact, the oldest human remains were found in Germany in the 19th century and weren't refuted until the 1950's, so it seems they had every reason to believe that they were part of some advanced, ancient race. After many years of studying history, I've come to the conclusion that many would agree with Hitler's motives for the most part, but likely disagree with the means used to achieve them.
Here's what a Rabbi had to say about Hitler:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/DQfnUHIjPN4K/
I´m 69 always interested in history. The following four books by Antony C. Sutton (among many others) opened my eyes:
Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler Wall Street and FDR National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union . Sutton was a rising star historian, but after these books...
Yoshikawa at t minus online dot de
Why does everyone get triggered when they see the word NAZI, as if everything attached to it is inherently evil? The point of this thread is to show another example of how a narrative can be controlled for 75 years without many challenging it. Why would a Nazi law from 1933 remain on the books until today? The answer is because Germany has had a huge Christian/Catholic population that objects to abortion, plain and simple. You don't have to support the entire Nazi agenda because you happen to support something else they practiced. Who here supports a strong military? Well, you must be a communist since China and North Korea both fit that bill right? If you're one of the ones that likes to jump to conclusions about a user that posts anything related to Nazi Germany, please grow up and learn to look at things objectively.
You hit the nail on the head.
Seems to me that, making sure areas that have a high population of one "race" like oh, lets say, Black communities have a planned parent hood on every corner and at the same time promoting abortions as a good thing.. is kinda a Nazi thing if you want to get rid of one portion of society.
As I recall, Nazi wanted "perfect people" and yes, put in place abortion laws to make it hard for white people and or people they considered "good for society" to get one as they were at the same time persecuting/killing/starving the people that they felt were "bad for society", working on eliminating them.
Well, to be fair, the persecution/killing/starving didn't happen at the same time. This law was passed in 1933 when Hitler came to power. The bad stuff didn't start for at least 5 years. Even then, it was mostly deportations to other countries or work camps. The killing didn't happen until 1943-1945 after Germany was clearly losing the war and had their supply lines decimated. I think too many generalize about what happened during the Nazi reign. There are huge differences between Nazi Germany 1933-1938 and the one from 1939-1945. We shouldn't ignore the good or the bad, but we must distinguish between the two.
Ty!
In too many ways, current governments are exceeding these monsters.