Debate

He almost won.

What he should have done was told Franco: "Either you let my troops through to Gibraltar or I invade" which is what Mussolini wanted. Hitler somehow didn't see the importance of the Mediterranean and the weakness of Italy.

And Mussolini should have fucking concentrated on fucking up the British in North Africa instead of his "parallel war" bullshit in Greece.

Yeah but no elite hates you as much as the jewish elites.

What makes you say that? They want to bring in foreigners to European lands? Everything they do is practical for them and their own kind. I doubt they hate us in the slightest. They are ultra utilitarian maybe at best. Unless all the baby rape and shit like that is true. Then they are trying to make themselves look like another zebra in the herd to avoid detection.

As a Polak all I can say is fuck him. Calling yourself a Nazi and sieg hailing on the internet is an edgy way of triggering lefties. Come on, we are better than that. Let's be the opposite of what we are fighting.

Wrong they are very emotional and vindictive, they want to kill off whites because they see them as a threat. It's a level of psychosis few other ethnic groups posses.

Like I said ideally Hitler wouldn't have attacked any Slavs just the Anglo-Zionist empire.

The game was (((rigged))) from the start.

Attached: netanyahu-hitter.jpg (1272x533, 72K)

National Socialism is a legitimate political ideology. I don't think "we", whatever the fuck that means, shouldn't be the opposite to "progressives", just different with fresh ideas for the modern world from the past which has been forcefully forgotten. Starting with things like the definition of the term Nation.
nation (n.)
c. 1300, nacioun, "a race of people, large group of people with common ancestry and language," from Old French nacion "birth, rank; descendants, relatives; country, homeland" (12c.) and directly from Latin nationem (nominative natio) "birth, origin; breed, stock, kind, species; race of people, tribe," literally "that which has been born," from natus, past participle of nasci "be born" (Old Latin gnasci), from PIE root *gene- "give birth, beget," with derivatives referring to procreation and familial and tribal groups.
This is the true definition of a nation that has been changed in the past 100 years into an economic zone defended by an army.
I don't think the plan is to kill whites, but that is the outcome of what they are doing. They are attempting to solidify their own power and people and do see whites as a threat to it, and justifiably so. We are their greatest threat on the face of the Earth. We have similar IQs and our Nations have been the most desirable to inhabit since the middle ages. I don't think that realized that mass immigration will be horrible for them until recently. Browns won't have the same empathy or apprehension of destroying a nation if they feel they have been cheated.

Attached: Beserk.png (323x318, 48K)

should* not shouldn't

But there still would have been Slavs though.

>the plan isn't to kill off whites its just the result of their policies

Not very convincing

>National Socialism is a legitimate political ideology

Hitler ruined it by going after Slavs. Ironically killing off the remaining Slavs is exactly what the jews are trying to do today by pushing mass immigration on them and the rest of Eastern Europe.

Think about it this way, do you hate a business rival? Or do you attempt to destroy them without feeling?

Read the Old Testament about how jews both hated and genocided their rivals the Canaanites.

Attached: DKaaDT4WAAMXucp.jpg (640x406, 117K)

He didn't try to genocide the Slavs. That was the Bolsheviks, who then blamed it on the Germans, and with the help of the Allies, covered this up for decades.

cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/winter99-00/art6.html

A people’s values reflect its soul. If we go back to a time when our people were living purely by their own values, we’re going to be talking about religion.

My dictionary defines religion as the expression of man’s belief in, and reverence for, a superhuman power recognized as the creator and governor of the universe. This definition really doesn’t apply to the religious beliefs of our ancestors.

Wherever we look — from Aryan India, to Iran, to the Slavs, Germans, Celts, Greeks, and Romans — we find a common religious tendency of a unique and essentially heroic nature. Man was never seen as a slave to some Menachem Begin of outer space. There was no cringing before the gods. To the Teuton his god was his “full true” in whom he could trust. Plato speaks of a mutual community of gods and men. Men and the gods were thought to be akin to one another and bound by the same values. The gods weren’t our creators and we weren’t their creatures. We were all part of a timeless order in which creation and destruction alternated in an endless cycle.

Fear of death or punishment by the gods played no part in this religion. One honored the gods by standing up to the slings and arrows of an outrageous fortune like a man. There was no concern with sin, redemption, shame, or damnation. What was there to be redeemed from? Life wasn’t evil. It was hard, but how else should it be? A man had his strong right arm, his weapons, and his comrades. Have courage, live dangerously.

National Socialism is the way the country was run, not the actions of the Reich. Sure it is ruined in the eyes of population but it doesn't mean you can't take the good ideas from National Socialism and incorporate into them a newer one. For instance, i am not ok with the government taking over the means of production but at the same time i am not ok with multinational corporations and the multinational central banks. I believe there is a middle ground there that can be taken but doesn't have a defined name yet. I don't like the idea of a fascist state, but i'm also not ok with an anarchist society. There is a middle ground there as well involving a representative democracy with banned political parties. Now combine the two points i just made into one and you have what i call Republicanism. Not the perverted form of modern republicanism but more Roman in nature. Keep in mind it would also have some sort of ethno-nationalist component but not as radical as what the Reich had in place. The best part is a system like this would have a majority of support from the populace. Nobody likes these corporations or banks, even the far left, footsoldier not their masters, would be fine with this.

Really? Dostoyevskiy said that? Jesus, i need to read some of his books.

>genocide the Slavs

You’re beyond hope. Just eat your onions and wait for the rope.