Until Hitler fired Schaacht he was being funded by the Banksters
This is straight up false. You cannot be "funded" by someone when what you're being funded by are the Reichsmark revenues from taxation of the currency of which the state solely decides the terms of its issuance.
There was ZERO "funding" involved within the Third Reich's economic recovery. It quite literally was the same thing as a pioneering family on the frontier building their own homestead from scratch but at the national level.
I know that after watching the "Europa: The Last Battle" and other such documentaries, you come out believing Hitler and NSDAP was a purely organic movement that came to power purely by support of people, and they stabilized the crashing German Marks from the Weimar hyper inflation, purely by the labor of their own people.
I had the same reaction as well. So I decided to ensure what was depicted in those shows was actually accurate. What I found was that, these shows gives you the other end of the narrative spectrum: "Hitler and Nazis were wonderful" as opposed to the official narrative that they were evil.
When you dig into the truth, you will learn that the reality lies somewhere in between.
Here are some demonstably false assertions you make:
There was ZERO "funding" involved within the Third Reich's economic recovery. It quite literally was the same thing as a pioneering family on the frontier building their own homestead from scratch but at the national level.
Again, another blatant narrative pushed by these shows that Hitler fixed germany's crashing economy.
Look at it very carefully, and tell me when the Weimar crash happened, when the recovery started and when Hitler came to power.
1921 - 1922: Mark started sliding
1923: Peaked at 25 billion Marks per pound
Nov 12 1923: Hjalmaar Schaacht became currency commissioner at Reichsbank (German CB)
Nov 16 1923: New currency Rentenmark was introduced.
Nov 20 1923: Reichsbank president dies and Schaacht takes over
By 1925: New currency stabilized and is 20 Marks for a pound.
By 1933: New currency steadily increases in value to 14 Marks for a pound.
1933 -> Hitler comes to power.
If you want to live in a different set of delusions than the one pushed by MSM, feel free. You will end up in the exact same place in the end, because they are all part of the same Hagelian Dialectic.
However, if you want to know the truth, and build a better world view thats more closer to reality, you are in the right place. Put your analytic skills and digging abilities to work. Good luck fren!
When you dig into the truth, you will learn that the reality lies somewhere in between.
This is incorrect both objectively and philosophically. By standing on this kind of hill you are upholding trains of thought that are fundamentally similar to gnostic heresies of the “no objective correctness/good” type.
Hjalmar Schaacht source 1
Not a valid source, this is a slideshow of “trust me bro”, and it points to no sources of the period.
source 2
Using an abstract as a source is laughable.
source 3
Not only are there no citations of paper documents of the period on this page, but also the content is edited by a Jew, Levi Bookin, and the content is a part of “European History, Jewish Studies”. Furthermore, the logo at the bottom of the page, depicting a clownish and ugly man in the shape of a swastika is indicative of extreme anti-NSDAP bias.
Other industrialists who funded Hitler and pushed him to power: Fritz von Thyssen
The third citation within your link directly contradicts what you cite afterwards; that many industrialists funded Hitler. In this paragraph below, Thyssen says that only Himself, “...Herr Bruckmann, the well-known printer; and in Berlin there was Carl Bechstein, the world-renowned piano manufacturer, who also contributed large sums. Aside from this, Hitler did not receive many subsidies from individual industrialists…”
(3) Fritz Thyssen, I Paid Hitler (1941)
I have personally given altogether one million marks to the National Socialist Party. Not more. My contributions have been very much overestimated, because I have always been one of the richest men in Germany. But after all, what does it mean to own factories? It does not follow that a man has a lot of cash to spare. In any case, Hitler had other sources of money besides me. In Munich, for instance, there was Herr Bruckmann, the well-known printer; and in Berlin there was Carl Bechstein, the world-renowned piano manufacturer, who also contributed large sums. Aside from this, Hitler did not receive many subsidies from individual industrialists.
Alfred Krupp
Not only does this particular page disclaim “Disclaimer: The translations are mostly done through AI translator and might not be 100% accurate”, but also there are zero paper documents of the period to be found, and there is a litany of advertisements on the page, so there is not any real reason to place confidence in this as the conflict of interest (incentivization of maximum publicity for advertisement revenue) is extremely clear.
and many other industrialists, including IG Farben.
The page linked here, clearly is an excerpt of a book, authored by David de Jong, which I do not have access to, and whatever citations of actual contemporary documents which he may (or may not) include, I cannot comment on, however I do find it interesting that David de Jong lives in Tel Aviv currently.
Source:
https://lithub.com/author/daviddejong/ “David de Jong is a journalist who previously covered European banking and finance from Amsterdam and hidden wealth and billionaire fortunes from New York for Bloomberg News. His work has also appeared in Bloomberg Businessweek, the Wall Street Journal, and the Dutch Financial Daily. A native of the Netherlands, de Jong currently lives in Tel Aviv. He spent four years researching and writing Nazi Billionaires from Berlin.”
Perhaps there is a cultural conflict of interest here? Or perhaps I am simply too cynical. Nonetheless it is my personal opinion that this excerpt reads, essentially, exactly as fiction.
He was also funded by Union Banking Corporation
This is a very interesting read, and I have not read it all but I do intend to. However when looking for the documentation acquired by Buchanan, sadly the images of the documents did not load, both using DuckDuckGo and Google Chrome. I will surely give the benefit of the doubt that this is not intentional by the hosts/adminstrators, but is unhelpful nonetheless and so does not sway me.
I will say, that this is a very interesting excerpt, especially considering the truth about the alleged “death camps”
In 1943, after press reports that the Polish mining interest was employing forced labor by using prisoners from the Auschwitz concentration camp, we are informed that “Prescott Bush distanced himself from UBC and had even engaged in the collection of funds for the victims of the war in his role as president of the National War Fund.” He had, in fact, taken over as head of the United Service Organizations soon after Pearl Harbor, raising “millions for the National War Fund,” according to Mickey Herskowitz, Prescott’s recent biographer. *The declassified papers confirm questionable transactions in violation of the Trading With the Enemies Act, but, as with all examinations of corporate malfeasance, more is needed to establish individual responsibility. * Buchanan himself, when pressed for more details about Auschwitz, was uncharacteristically hesitant.Consolidated Silesian was the only direct link to the notorious death camp. A file in the Library of Congress confirms the business part of the relationship, but does not give any financial details.
Very interesting that Buchanan was not, as he is usually described, being very enthusiastic about telling “the truth”.
which is how Prescott Bush fronted the US funding of Hitler.
This link has no citations of contemporary documents, and the nature of the content is really quite similar to a blog post. Further, surely you do not believe the BBC to be a trustworthy source? As we know, all legacy mass media today is chock-full of outright lies, half-truths and intentional deception.
Bushes are literal Nazis.
I sincerely wish they were.
The rest of your post is quite shallow and pedantic, as surely you do know that the simple exchange rate of a currency alone has essentially no indication of an economy's actual wellbeing. The economy WAS NOT “fixed” or “recovered” before Hitler came to power, as the German employment rate was one of the most abysmal of the period, and you should know these things. If you don't, respectfully you should not be talking on the subject.
Let's dive further and look at the employment rate during that time
Here, the University of Oregon shows with appropriate citation that the employment rate in Germany had skyrocketed to over 30% in 1933. Then, the data shows a very quick fall in the unemployment rate after 1933, due to NSDAP policies imposed under Hitlers leadership.
To imply that anything was “fixed” simply due to exchange rates is enormously ignorant at best, and totally disingenuous at worst. The implementation of a revalued German Mark under the Weimar Republic had absolutely negligible effects on the wider economy, and that is obvious. I find it hilarious that (((Dan P. Silverman))) does his damnedest to downplay the extreme success of these policies, as though even if they did cook the books to “employ” 600,000 people, it somehow ruins the other 9,400,000 jobs created by the NSDAP regime.
On the other hand in the U.S., you can see from this data (appropriately sourced), that U.S. unemployment did not dip below 10% until 1941, which in comparison to Germany as a “recovery” is abysmally pathetic.
Ok, I gotta go get groceries now. I think you should spend some time analyzing just how large the jewish presence within "history" as a field of study actually is, and how unprecedented this ethnic over-representation is compared to the rest of human history. It's quite alarming, and sadly has forced me to begin scrutinizing the truthfullness of sources from a racial and ethnic standpoint. Obviously this answer to a problem is a problem in and of itself. I like to stick to God's saying of "You will know them by their fruits", so I try to dig into people's personal lives but thats fiarly hard to do.
This is incorrect both objectively and philosophically. By standing on this kind of hill you are upholding trains of thought that are fundamentally similar to gnostic heresies of the “no objective correctness/good” type.
I think you mistook my statement to be philosophical in nature, where as what I wrote was analytical and very specifically to Hitler and Nazis, not some generalization of the nature of knowledge.
Well it was both a critique of the statements and also the general philosophy of "both sides are grey" which i believe is in particular inextricably linked to the "both sides were funded" point of view. IMO, analagous to "as above so below" at the most fundamental level, strictly speaking.
There is no better source than Hjalmar Schaacht when understanding German economics, not because he was the president of the Reichsbank, but because he has that unique attribute that is very hard to find most of the times.
He has demonstrable connections to both Hitler, NSDAP and the London Banksters.
He wrote his entire book to prove he was not aligned with Hitler's ideology and yet the best he could come up with was "Yeah I funded Hitler but I did not know he was gonna kill people and I was fired when the war started".
I would dare you to find a better first hand source than this. And no, nice sounding documentaries are not "sources".
I do agree that a lot of other sources are tainted by the Jewish lens, but the depositions from Nuremberg trials were again people trying to prove they were not funding Hitler and yet the were obligated to accept they did indeed fund him.
As for Prescott Bush and Union Banking Corporation connection to Hitler, the original source are congressional testimony when they investigated them under "trading with the enemy act". I will try and find the actual congressional records, that is a very reasonable thing to do.
If you are still maintaining that Hitler came to power with no powerful funding and that NSDAP did not get subverted by the Satanists (and hence I have no qualms calling them Nazis) especially after watching the replay of the same unfold in Ukraine last 2 years, I sincerely wish you good luck as we approach the precipice.
If you are still maintaining that Hitler came to power with no powerful funding and that NSDAP did not get subverted by the Satanists (and hence I have no qualms calling them Nazis) especially after watching the replay of the same unfold in Ukraine last 2 years, I sincerely wish you good luck as we approach the precipice.
Would any of this matter when almost all nazis today are Christians? IMO, no. Also Ukraine and AZOV is run and funded by jews (satanists). But I would suppose that would be your point? Then to connect that meaningfully in any way, youd have to prove that those who allegedly funded Hitler and the NSDAP were jewish. Because thats really what it all comes down to.
People really find it hard to comprehend just how the NatSocs did it, even those who study economics and thats why it is still called to this day "The German Miracle". If there was ever a people who actual pulled themselves up form their bootstraps, it was the Germans. I don't blame them, because fiat currency (printing without restriction) is so destructive and terrible, and in their mind secret jewish gold is required for anything significant, which is true 99.5% of the time.
This is straight up false. You cannot be "funded" by someone when what you're being funded by are the Reichsmark revenues from taxation of the currency of which the state solely decides the terms of its issuance.
There was ZERO "funding" involved within the Third Reich's economic recovery. It quite literally was the same thing as a pioneering family on the frontier building their own homestead from scratch but at the national level.
Hitler WAS NOT FUNDED. Period.
The NSDAP WAS NOT FUNDED. Period.
I know that after watching the "Europa: The Last Battle" and other such documentaries, you come out believing Hitler and NSDAP was a purely organic movement that came to power purely by support of people, and they stabilized the crashing German Marks from the Weimar hyper inflation, purely by the labor of their own people.
I had the same reaction as well. So I decided to ensure what was depicted in those shows was actually accurate. What I found was that, these shows gives you the other end of the narrative spectrum: "Hitler and Nazis were wonderful" as opposed to the official narrative that they were evil.
When you dig into the truth, you will learn that the reality lies somewhere in between.
Here are some demonstably false assertions you make:
Hitler was funded by Hjalmar Schaacht source 1, source 2 =, source 3
Other industrialists who funded Hitler and pushed him to power: Fritz von Thyssen, Alfred Krupp, and many other industralists, including IG Farben.
He was also funded by Union Banking Corporation which is how Prescott Bush fronted the US funding of Hitler.
Bushes are literal Nazis.
Again, another blatant narrative pushed by these shows that Hitler fixed germany's crashing economy.
Here is the graph of he Deutshe Mark
Look at it very carefully, and tell me when the Weimar crash happened, when the recovery started and when Hitler came to power.
1921 - 1922: Mark started sliding
1923: Peaked at 25 billion Marks per pound
Nov 12 1923: Hjalmaar Schaacht became currency commissioner at Reichsbank (German CB)
Nov 16 1923: New currency Rentenmark was introduced.
Nov 20 1923: Reichsbank president dies and Schaacht takes over
By 1925: New currency stabilized and is 20 Marks for a pound.
By 1933: New currency steadily increases in value to 14 Marks for a pound.
1933 -> Hitler comes to power.
If you want to live in a different set of delusions than the one pushed by MSM, feel free. You will end up in the exact same place in the end, because they are all part of the same Hagelian Dialectic.
However, if you want to know the truth, and build a better world view thats more closer to reality, you are in the right place. Put your analytic skills and digging abilities to work. Good luck fren!
This is incorrect both objectively and philosophically. By standing on this kind of hill you are upholding trains of thought that are fundamentally similar to gnostic heresies of the “no objective correctness/good” type.
Not a valid source, this is a slideshow of “trust me bro”, and it points to no sources of the period.
Using an abstract as a source is laughable.
Not only are there no citations of paper documents of the period on this page, but also the content is edited by a Jew, Levi Bookin, and the content is a part of “European History, Jewish Studies”. Furthermore, the logo at the bottom of the page, depicting a clownish and ugly man in the shape of a swastika is indicative of extreme anti-NSDAP bias.
The third citation within your link directly contradicts what you cite afterwards; that many industrialists funded Hitler. In this paragraph below, Thyssen says that only Himself, “...Herr Bruckmann, the well-known printer; and in Berlin there was Carl Bechstein, the world-renowned piano manufacturer, who also contributed large sums. Aside from this, Hitler did not receive many subsidies from individual industrialists…”
Source:
Perhaps there is a cultural conflict of interest here? Or perhaps I am simply too cynical. Nonetheless it is my personal opinion that this excerpt reads, essentially, exactly as fiction.
This is a very interesting read, and I have not read it all but I do intend to. However when looking for the documentation acquired by Buchanan, sadly the images of the documents did not load, both using DuckDuckGo and Google Chrome. I will surely give the benefit of the doubt that this is not intentional by the hosts/adminstrators, but is unhelpful nonetheless and so does not sway me.
I will say, that this is a very interesting excerpt, especially considering the truth about the alleged “death camps”
Very interesting that Buchanan was not, as he is usually described, being very enthusiastic about telling “the truth”.
This link has no citations of contemporary documents, and the nature of the content is really quite similar to a blog post. Further, surely you do not believe the BBC to be a trustworthy source? As we know, all legacy mass media today is chock-full of outright lies, half-truths and intentional deception.
I sincerely wish they were.
The rest of your post is quite shallow and pedantic, as surely you do know that the simple exchange rate of a currency alone has essentially no indication of an economy's actual wellbeing. The economy WAS NOT “fixed” or “recovered” before Hitler came to power, as the German employment rate was one of the most abysmal of the period, and you should know these things. If you don't, respectfully you should not be talking on the subject.
Let's dive further and look at the employment rate during that time
Here, the University of Oregon shows with appropriate citation that the employment rate in Germany had skyrocketed to over 30% in 1933. Then, the data shows a very quick fall in the unemployment rate after 1933, due to NSDAP policies imposed under Hitlers leadership.
To imply that anything was “fixed” simply due to exchange rates is enormously ignorant at best, and totally disingenuous at worst. The implementation of a revalued German Mark under the Weimar Republic had absolutely negligible effects on the wider economy, and that is obvious. I find it hilarious that (((Dan P. Silverman))) does his damnedest to downplay the extreme success of these policies, as though even if they did cook the books to “employ” 600,000 people, it somehow ruins the other 9,400,000 jobs created by the NSDAP regime.
On the other hand in the U.S., you can see from this data (appropriately sourced), that U.S. unemployment did not dip below 10% until 1941, which in comparison to Germany as a “recovery” is abysmally pathetic.
Ok, I gotta go get groceries now. I think you should spend some time analyzing just how large the jewish presence within "history" as a field of study actually is, and how unprecedented this ethnic over-representation is compared to the rest of human history. It's quite alarming, and sadly has forced me to begin scrutinizing the truthfullness of sources from a racial and ethnic standpoint. Obviously this answer to a problem is a problem in and of itself. I like to stick to God's saying of "You will know them by their fruits", so I try to dig into people's personal lives but thats fiarly hard to do.
Good luck in your quest of knowledge.
I think you mistook my statement to be philosophical in nature, where as what I wrote was analytical and very specifically to Hitler and Nazis, not some generalization of the nature of knowledge.
Well it was both a critique of the statements and also the general philosophy of "both sides are grey" which i believe is in particular inextricably linked to the "both sides were funded" point of view. IMO, analagous to "as above so below" at the most fundamental level, strictly speaking.
There is no better source than Hjalmar Schaacht when understanding German economics, not because he was the president of the Reichsbank, but because he has that unique attribute that is very hard to find most of the times.
He has demonstrable connections to both Hitler, NSDAP and the London Banksters.
He wrote his entire book to prove he was not aligned with Hitler's ideology and yet the best he could come up with was "Yeah I funded Hitler but I did not know he was gonna kill people and I was fired when the war started".
I would dare you to find a better first hand source than this. And no, nice sounding documentaries are not "sources".
I do agree that a lot of other sources are tainted by the Jewish lens, but the depositions from Nuremberg trials were again people trying to prove they were not funding Hitler and yet the were obligated to accept they did indeed fund him.
As for Prescott Bush and Union Banking Corporation connection to Hitler, the original source are congressional testimony when they investigated them under "trading with the enemy act". I will try and find the actual congressional records, that is a very reasonable thing to do.
If you are still maintaining that Hitler came to power with no powerful funding and that NSDAP did not get subverted by the Satanists (and hence I have no qualms calling them Nazis) especially after watching the replay of the same unfold in Ukraine last 2 years, I sincerely wish you good luck as we approach the precipice.
Would any of this matter when almost all nazis today are Christians? IMO, no. Also Ukraine and AZOV is run and funded by jews (satanists). But I would suppose that would be your point? Then to connect that meaningfully in any way, youd have to prove that those who allegedly funded Hitler and the NSDAP were jewish. Because thats really what it all comes down to.
No problem.
People really find it hard to comprehend just how the NatSocs did it, even those who study economics and thats why it is still called to this day "The German Miracle". If there was ever a people who actual pulled themselves up form their bootstraps, it was the Germans. I don't blame them, because fiat currency (printing without restriction) is so destructive and terrible, and in their mind secret jewish gold is required for anything significant, which is true 99.5% of the time.