Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Interesting to see people rush to judge a concept without even reading the link...
"He's not saying we're going to come out with a more positive view of Hitler," emphasized professor Peter Kuznick, the lead writer on the project. "But we're going to describe him as a historical phenomenon and not just somebody who appeared out of nowhere."
History. Scary. Wrong. It must be stopped.
Looks to me like Stone simply wants to take the tome "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" and make it so that the layperson can understand how it happened. Hitler WAS a phenomenon, but so is Satan.
That may be, and in itself it is a laudable goal. But Stone is not the man I would trust to do the job Stone is already being devious in his explanation. I have never seen an honest discussion of the man that didn't start from a discussion of context.
The notion of Hitler as a rightwinger is largely a late thirties fiction created by the American Stalinist left -a rather large crowd at the time all things considered - who wished to differentiate between Hitler and Uncle Joe which differentiation was required only because they took different sides in the Spanish Civil War. Prior to that they had as much Fulsome prasie for Adolph and Benito as they had for Joe.
What people such as BFRGN don't know about history would fill a book though they'd refuse to read it.
There is no de facto right wing party in Germany. Neo Nazis not being rightwingers in the sense of small government types. The right prefers smaller governments. Neo Nazis prefer larger governments the only real difference between them and anyother big government social engineers is in what they want big government to engineer.
The notion of Hitler as a rightwinger is largely a late thirties fiction created by the American Stalinist left -a rather large crowd at the time all things considered - who wished to differentiate between Hitler and Uncle Joe which differentiation was required only because they took different sides in the Spanish Civil War. Prior to that they had as much Fulsome prasie for Adolph and Benito as they had for Joe.
What people such as BFRGN don't know about history would fill a book though they'd refuse to read it.
Ironically, the rise of Hitler and Nazism began with the march across Europe to "conquer" other sovereign nations and bring them into the Third Reich during the 1930's. I don't know what you're trying to say here.
Sorry Soda read Jona Goldbergs excellent book on the subject you'll get chapter and verse of all the nit wit left of the thirties praising both Hitler and Moussolini. Hitler never considered himself a rightwinger nor did Moussolini. the reality is that the only difference between Stalins socialism and that of Moussolini and Hitler was that word national and when push came to shove even that disappeared -see the Great Patriotic War if you think other wise.
You need to read some historians that aren't themsleves left of center. granted this day and age they are hard to find especially in the halls of academe.
Ha! Hilarious stuff - honestly, where do you people come up with this garbage?
Please go ahead and check any serious political source - and I mean ANY SERIOUS political source, and come back when you are up to speed.
btw, I do have a Masters in Political Theory, and have published extensively on Fascist Theory - and am happy to prove it.
Appeals to authority don't work with me, especially given your history on this subject. I think you need to expand your library a great deal. Most of your proof so far seems to be little more than a great circle jerk of doubtful authorities.
And you believe conquest is a right wing prerogative precisely why? The former Soviet Union was the single most expanssionist minded regime since that of Ghengis Khan. So are you now claiming that they are right wing?
National socialism is with out question left wing politics, you have been badly mis-educated .Hence, if he is seeking to making a film about a right wing dictator
How is the National Socialist Party (Nazi) party suddenly Right Wing?
Why suddenly?
Nazism is now, and always has been, considered a right wing party.
Check any academic source (i.e. Marris, Kershaw) on this - it isn't a disputed point that I'm aware of.
.
Hence, if he is seeking to making a film about a right wing dictator
How is the National Socialist Party (Nazi) party suddenly Right Wing?
Sorry Soda read Jona Goldbergs excellent book on the subject you'll get chapter and verse of all the nit wit left of the thirties praising both Hitler and Moussolini. Hitler never considered himself a rightwinger nor did Moussolini. the reality is that the only difference between Stalins socialism and that of Moussolini and Hitler was that word national and when push came to shove even that disappeared -see the Great Patriotic War if you think other wise.
You need to read some historians that aren't themsleves left of center. granted this day and age they are hard to find especially in the halls of academe.
Then making hitler out to be a rightwinger is purely ludicorus.
National socialism is with out question left wing politics, you have been badly mis-educated .
Do you have a link to your blog?Sorry Soda read Jona Goldbergs excellent book on the subject you'll get chapter and verse of all the nit wit left of the thirties praising both Hitler and Moussolini. Hitler never considered himself a rightwinger nor did Moussolini. the reality is that the only difference between Stalins socialism and that of Moussolini and Hitler was that word national and when push came to shove even that disappeared -see the Great Patriotic War if you think other wise.
You need to read some historians that aren't themsleves left of center. granted this day and age they are hard to find especially in the halls of academe.
Ha! Hilarious stuff - honestly, where do you people come up with this garbage?
Please go ahead and check any serious political source - and I mean ANY SERIOUS political source, and come back when you are up to speed.
btw, I do have a Masters in Political Theory, and have published extensively on Fascist Theory - and am happy to prove it.
I have made my point as to why Hitler is a lefty at least three times in this thread. So who is the deaf one? In what possible conurbation could Hitler possibly be considered a righty?? Better tailoring? Was it because of his anti semitisim? Stalin was just as bad (read Khrushchev on that for example. And Khrushchev himself was no angel. He admitted to being part of a pogrom before the revolution.) Hitler's differences with communism seem to be less a dispute over principle than a matter of doctrine.Appeals to authority don't work with me, especially given your history on this subject. I think you need to expand your library a great deal. Most of your proof so far seems to be little more than a great circle jerk of doubtful authorities.
I am always so delighted to see posters who have not studied a subject, say things like "you need to expand your library a great deal" to people who have studied it. It really does make me laugh out loud.
The reasoning for Nazism being deemed right wing is fairly clear if you understand political terminology - which it is clear many posters on this thread do not. As I said before - this is not a contentious or hotly debated topic by any means. It's just a fact.
I am happy to explain WHY Nazism is right wing if you wish - but I sense you are not listening.
btw - There is no more reason for conservatives to feel anxious about Hitler being right wing than there is for liberals to feel anxious about Stalin - the extremes of either wing are always closer to each other than they are to the centre, which is why political positions are measured not on a line, but on a horseshoe.
By the end of Napolean's life. He was vilified throughout europe as an evil person.
But now in France he is hailed as a patriot and a hero.
As time goes by and generations pass.
Hitler will also be rehabilited. It's just the way things happen over time.
Firstly - you really haven't spent a lot of time in Germany recently, have you?
Hitler is vilified in Germany - he is remembered as the man who disgraced Germany, who destroyed the economy and the infrastructure, and stained the name of German people forever.
They did a poll where they asked Germans whether the family/family values was stronger and more respected under Hitler, or today.
They said "under Hitler."
The right in Germany does not "vilify" Hitler. They admire him.
Many Germans are sick and tired of being the "dog to kick" of the entire world, do not think Islamic immigration has been good for them, and are exhausted by continual bleating about "the Holocaust" and object to the continual payments to Israel.
Most Germans think they've paid for their "sins", many times over.
Think also about the fact that it's ILLEGAL to say nice things about Hitler in Germany, so your insistence that this is the natural attitude is obviously skewed. This is basically like saying "most Americans willingly pay their taxes; therefore, Americans love to pay taxes." Nope.
