Hitler's Regrets

In February 1945, Hitler discussed his regrets. The things he would have done differently, had he had a second shot.

Whatever you think of Hitler, I think it's worth reading, just to see how dramatically the course of the war changed his worldview.

Hitler regrets supporting the right-wing in Spain:

Hitler regrets allying with the French bourgeoisie:

Hitler regrets breaking the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact (who could have expected this?) and fantasizes about an alternative reality where he and Stalin were buddies:

If Hitler in 1945 "loaded" his 1933 "save".. How would history change? We would definitely see a more left-wing Hitler, although equally anti-semitic. He would have never killed Asser. I think the night of the long knives would have never happened. Would there have been an Operation Barbarossa? Would Hitler really be dumb enough to make the same catastrophic mistake twice?

Other urls found in this thread:


If Hitler didn't attack Russia, instead he fortifies France, Germany and what he conquered prior, he would have been unbeatable.

Stalin would not risk an open war with Hitler and neither does the Allies.

Source of these confessions?

Litterally everybody, because he opened up a 2 front war and the USSR basically did 80% of all the work.

Pic related, he hated leftism with a passion. He hated workers power. He hated every race apart from Germans. We wanted to litterally genocide all of humanity apart from his special group.

I think it would have ended worse try 2.
A longer surviving Germany but a more catastrophic fall.


I'd advise you to skip the introduction for your own sake.

I agree, but Hitler wasn't stupid. Bourgeois Germany's crushing defeat by the proletarian Soviet Union demonstrated to Hitler that the bourgeoisie is an obsolete class, as Hitler put it, "as devoid of soul as it is denuded of patriotism".

You don't think Hitler regretted everything in the final moments? I guarantee you he wished with all his heart that he could be back in Bavaria during the German revolution, join the Communists and reclaim Germany's honor through victory over the decadent West, made possible with an unbreakable alliance with the USSR.

No. Nazism can't be left-wing, in any sense. Asserism isn't left-wing, nor would any reverse history Hitlerism.

What the fuck am I reading? Why would hitler make the french bourg think that they were occupying their country in order to safeguard their bank balances, and then actually do it?

Is this what they call 4d chess?

Stop writing Hitler fanfiction, you pathetic worm.

Let's say we have 2 different timelines
1. IRL - Hitler helps Franco by terror bombing
2. Hitler's "second try" - Hitler doesn't help Franco ("had I known the real state of affairs, I would never have allowed our aircraft to bombard and destroy a starving population")

Are you saying Hitler in timeline 1 and Hitler in timeline 2 are the same thing? No difference at all between them?

The basis of Hitler's ideology predate his support for the Franco-Falange side of the civil war.

It's almost peak idealism to argue that Hitler could have been good if Hitler didn't do the things Hitler did. The Great Man version of history is fine if you're a whig, useless if you're a Communist.

Lol no of course he didnt.
He was a sociopathic murderer who wanted to genocide the entire world.

Good post, but I'm not sure how it addressed my question. Hitler who helps Franco and Hitler who doesn't help Franco are two different Hitlers. That doesn't mean they both aren't literally Hitler.

I don't get this. Why wouldn't Hitler regret losing the biggest war in history, ending with his humiliating suicide and the destruction of most of his country?

He doesnt regret all the things he did, he just regrets losing the war in the end. He doesnt regred the genocide of the jews, the gypsies and the murdering of the leftists, the gays and the disabled. He doesnt regret industrializing the country. He doesnt regret the masacres he ordered. He doesnt regret a lot of things. The only thing he regrets is making a few tactical mistakes.

Yeah, a lot of scholars and fascists dont consider spain to have been a true fascist state. The actual fascists were neutered. Franco was more like a totalitarian ultra conservative with a hard on for monarchism.

The biggest mistakes hitler made was attacking Russia, and not attacking the uk and consolidating his hold over western Europe

In one of his lectures Jordan Peterson said that destruction was a goal in itself for Hitler and I'm tempted to agree. Even when I still had sympathy for Hitler, I always found him insincere when he spoke of the poverty and despair in Germany, there was an undertone of glee in his voice, as if it was just a warming up for the fire and brimstone. That same insincerity can be read here, he didn't give a fuck about Spain, he was angry that Franco had gotten the measure of him, that Franco wasn't going down in flames with him. A minority of pillagers enriching themselves and calculating little profiteers were exactly the sort of people that Hitler enamored himself with and had his SS extensively cooperate with, underworld strongmen were employed in the camps, looted art was passed onto antiques dealers, prisoners were sold as slave labour to industry…

He ensured the destruction of Germany through colossal mistakes (for which he blamed the lack of zeal of the Germans) and as all lay in tatters, he reminisces about what a poor fool he was to let the treacherous Franco rid Spain of the well-intentioned leftists who surely couldn't have really been communists. Hitler was left-wing as much as that beloved tome here, The Ego and its Own, is left-wing.

*eye roll

Anyways. WW2 was started because the germans and hitler felt they had been humiliated after ww1. also jews.


Shitler was a leftist. Which begs the question, how are Holla Forums and Holla Forums, both socialist leftist boards, supposed to be diametrically opposed?

this shit is pure fucking boomer garbage.
too much fox news for you peepaw

Any of the actual socialists were killed on the night of the long knives.

Franco was no totalitarian, totalitarianism is as the name implies, a state of ideological totality, it doesn't mean that power is concentrated in one person or party.
To be fair, the kriegsmarine stood no chance against the royal navy.

He was a totalitarian gun grabbing statist who seized private property (nationalized industries) and sent people to gulags (concentration camps) for wrongthink. National or international, socialism is socialism.

He thought the french bourgeoisie were an obsolete class because they didn't care for his interests and were opportunistic, Hitler still loved the german bourgeoisie and despised the german workers. He cared about German industrial-finance capitalism and that alone. He regretted allying himself with the french bourgoisie because they weren't loyal to his interests.

so what.
Doesnt make him a communist.
In fact. the people he killed on the night of the long knives said he only did a half of a revolution by killing the jews.

From what I've read, it seems that the "national syndicalist" Falange was interested in a more egalitarian distribution of wealth in society. They had some kind of vision for a new society, even though it was flawed and fundamentally capitalist.

This was too much for Franco and the ossified feudal landlords that stood behind him, so the Falange was sidelined and turned into a show prop.

The word privitisation was literally invented to describe nazi economic policy. Weimar germany was a socdem state with many nationalised industries which the nazis speedily privatised on a massive scale.

Wrong. Hitler privatized formerly government owned industries.


Was Operation Seelöwe ever a viable alternative? Göring made huge mistakes in building the Luftwaffe, it lacked long-range bombers which would be necessary to have a stance against the RAF and not to run out of fuel all the time. My grandpa was a pilot at that time and he said the biggest problem they had was that they were constantly out of fuel, unlike their British counterparts, despite them having lower quality planes.

Also, an invasion of England has not been successful since 1066. The topography is extremly treacherous, and you still have to overcome the Royal Navy, also remember that England has pretty much unlimited supply of resources from the burgers and their colonial empire. Germany would have a better chance if they didn't invade Russia but rather invade the Middle East/India - basically the same long-term strategy they had in World War I - cutting Britain off its unlimited supply. Of course, once you actually manage to hold the ground on the British isles themselves, the Brits are fucked with their shitty incompetent army.

Do you think that was his primary motivation?

I think he saw his mission as "restoring Germany's honor", "revitalizing the German state", etc. Because the state under capitalism is a bourgeois state, revitalizing the state necessarily means empowering capitalists.

You don't think the course of the war could have opened Hitler's mind to other methods of restoring Germany's "greatness" - ones that did not involve an alliance with an obsolete class, "as devoid of soul as it is denuded of patriotism"?

If I was Hitler in 1945, I would imagine how things would have turned out if I relied on the German proletariat instead of the German bourgeoisie. You don't think he ever imagined something similar?

If this board wasn't so fixated on SJW sensibilities and a genealogy in which marxism left no traces whatsoever on SJW's, I imagine you would quite like him, it is exactly the pol/r9k narcissistic self-pity which he brutally criticizes.
WW2 wasn't a near inevitability of power-bloc tensions, Hitler deliberately started it.

he said this about the french bourgeoisie faggot. In Hitler's mind foreign bourgeoisie = bad, german bourgeoisie = good because german. He just regretted allying himself with foreign bourgeois elements because they were committed to their own interests. Nothing indicates he wanted to do things differently in regards to getting all his support from german industrial-finance capital. Not that he could get his support from anywhere else. The Nazi program was always a corporate program.

another thing is they should have kept america out of the war as long as possible. but japan fucked their shit up

not an argument.
You sound like a boomer moron when you say stupid shit like communism and fascism are the same thing. fucking centrist liberal scum

Look, you want it simple. fascism is Nazi masturbation fantasy. Communism is class war.

the word filters on here really stifle conversations



please go back to reddit.

Hitler's mission was the eternal glory of Hitler and the destruction of all that denied him this. Other than that, he had support in all layers of German society.

In a way, America's entry into the war was somewhat inevitable. They backed up the British with so much war loans, they wouldn't let Britain fall. Japan simply ran out of targets to conquer, but still, Japan was retarded to strike the US. I guess their plan was to beat them into submission before the American war economy really took off, but they know the Americans would outlast them in the long run.

In one of the "Stalin did nothing wrong" books, I think Ludo Martens' "Another View of Stalin" (I could be mistaken) there is a quote by either Hitler or one of his cronies, blaming the German elite for the defeat. They were accused of being self-interested and unpatriotic, in comparison to the German working class. It sounds like bullshit but I'm literally going to re-read the whole book just to find that quote.

What should be added to this is that the Nazi economy was full-blown accelerationism and monopoly capital, which would eventually unleash itself into a war just as Lenin predicted. The Nazi economy ran on a ponzi scheme (Mefo-Wechsel) which would eventually devalue the Reichsmark unless - well, unless you start a genocidal war where you use entire nations for slave labor just to keep your currency from inflating.

Maybe not. But what if the USSR entered into a full alliance with Germany? Stalin had a laughable navy, but the airforce was no joke. Could they have defeated Britain together?

In the long run, not because of the Soviet military but because of the Soviet resources. The Red Army wasn't that mobile, and not laid out for an amphibic operation. At least not in 1939. The because problem for the Soviets was not the amount of T-34 which could be pretty much spammed but the difficulty to get the tanks to the front. The USSR would not have attacked Britain, but they would have attacked India, which would fuck the British over for good and solved the geopolitical interest that Russia had since 1815 (ice-free port and access to India).

What significance could such a statement have? Hitler blamed anyone and everything for the defeat, he most likely made that comment because of disagreements with his generals.

I don't see any reason to believe Hitler started the war to keep inflation under control, the war was envisioned well before they ran into inflation.

main problem*

Half true. Hitler did plan a war, but he was compelled to attack earlier than what the original plan was suggesting - Göring laid out a plan to attack in 1942 or even 1944. In 1939, the Wehrmacht was in an absolute shitty state, it had zero heavy tanks which could match any of the tanks the French had, the army wasn't even that mobilized. The Wehrmacht in 1939 was an army on horseback.

If Hitler didn't attack Russia, there would still be a 3rd reich today.

Such humongous miscalculation.

He nationalized the railway and made the autobahn.

It's dishonest to say he privatized everything.

How do you think India would look like after being liberated from the British? Would it be split half to Germany, half to the USSR?

One shot sufficed, there was no need for a second discharge.

How would you imagine India to look after being liberated from the British? Hard to imagine that Hitler would tolerate a Communist India.

Wasn't japan being strangled by the US in terms of oil supply before pearl harbor?


This guy was obsessed with "muh evil reds" from day 1. He wasn't fooled by the situation in Spain, he knew perfectly what he was supporting.

If you actually knew that Holla Forums and Holla Forums were like you could see why there is a divide. Literally no one on Holla Forums considers themselves a leftist.

Hell, Deleuze says something similar.

Spain actually sent some soldiers to fight for Germany during the war. They just never actually fully declared themselves part of the axis. There was some bitter resentment after ww2 and Spain was isolated for a time till america was all "wtf i love Spain, plz kill commies for us"


Hitler referred to the division as "equal to the best German ones". During his table talks, he also said:

To troops, the Spaniards are a crew of ragamuffins. They regard a rifle as an instrument that should not be cleaned under any pretext. Their sentries exist only in principle. They don't take up their posts, or, if they do take them up, they do so in their sleep. When the Russians arrive, the natives have to wake them up. But the Spaniards have never yielded an inch of ground. One can't imagine more fearless fellows. They scarcely take cover. They flout death. I know, in any case, that our men are always glad to have Spaniards as neighbours in their sector.[9]

Later when Hitler considered an invasion of Spain to remove Franco and replace him with Agustín Muñoz Grandes, he decided against it, saying "The Spaniards are the only tough Latins. I would have a guerrilla war in my rear."[10]

Many of the generals who perpetrated the attempted coup d'état against the Spanish government on February 23, 1981 had served in the Blue Division during World War II. Amongst them were generals Alfonso Armada and Jaime Milans del Bosch. Other Blue Division veterans, including Director of the Guardia Civil José Luis Aramburu Topete and José Gabeiras, remained loyal to the legal democratic government under the young King Juan Carlos I of Spain.

It doesn't matter how many tries, fascism is an inherently conquest-oriented pathology and such a mindset can end in nothing but destruction every time.

tfw Hitler could have created a Nazbol world order in 1945 instead of this liberal world order we have now

No, more likely what would have happened would be a full scale blockade of England after France was annexed. The UK would have been starved into submission, while Hitler spent all his war loot on building a proper navy (or just replacing U-boats). Regardless Japan still commits to Pearl Harbor and Germany declares war on America soon thereafter, shoving America into the conflict.

At this point it's likely the US would opt for a pacific strategy first (as opposed to a European one) because of concerns over Soviet influence in asia, due to the USSR not being preoccupied with it's survival. Japan would have been knocked out the same way it did in real life, but perhaps a bit faster. The only difference is that Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have been carpet bombed using regular explosives, not atomic weaponry.

Which brings us to Germany: by 1945 America has both jet bombers and jet fighters capable of defeating most of the German air force, itself in roughly the same position it was in real life because the surplus money would be going to the German navy. As America still gets atomic weaponry first, western europe is simply annihilated from the air. Germany's naval fleets and U-boat pens would have been quickly destroyed, followed by the total destruction of Europe. At this point the winner is determined by the amount of nukes they have and America clearly wins this argument as by 1949 the US even has supersonic bombers.

WW2 started because of the conflict between the national bourgeoisie, the same as WW1. Without vast colonial empires, states like Germany, Italy, and Japan were left at the mercy of massive economic blocs in the form of the British and French empires.

The major innovation after WW2 was the international capitalist model that by and large made national bourgeois a thing of the past. Due to the complexity and variety of materials needed for modern manufactory, without a huge territory replete with its own resources–like the US or Soviet Union, and guaranteed access to consumer markets, it's either 1. empire 2. incorporation 3. submission.

Hitler, being stuck in the past, chose option 1, leading to the most destructive conflict in history. After WW2, the US chose option 2, and the CCCP chose option 1.

The Falange were betrayed just as the the SA and Iron Guard were. Fascists do this literally every time they take power.

Last time was in 1688 (Glorious Revolution).

yes this is fanfiction fuck off

after every successful revolution you need to purge rivals and morons that dont know when to turn it off and govern.
Lots of those SA guys were morons who kept attacking people even after hitler had won.

These types of people live for struggle. They are good to have with you when fighting. But they are self destructive and cant handle actually winning.

First off, being appointed by conservatives behind closed doors isn't a revolution. Secondly, the reason why the SA was purged was because they scared the hell out of porky. Hitler was more concerned to appease German bourgeoisie and corporations, because they held the keys to power, and Hitler didn't plan on expropriating them at any time.

Good point, but that obviously was only possible with massive internal help.


By 1943, USSR would have fully reorganized and relearned Deep Battle Doctrine, and tens of thousands of tanks and aircraft, instead of being lost to Barabarossa, would pour all over Europe and China.

It would a world where all of the "Old World" belongs to communists, and the most ubiquitous rifle isn't the Mosin, but the SVT.

It is left wing though.

Still privatized A FUCK TON

It shouldn't be humanly possible to be this erect.

maybe nutsacs would be closer to actual socialists

looks like hitler realized that his enemy was not his schizo fantasies about "teh jews", but instead the objective workings of capital, and the Communist where right about it all along. All Fascism ever was, was the contradictions of capital expressed to their full extent. If he was really about saving Krautland, he would have skipped all the dumb mysticism bullshit, read Marx, and helped Liebknecht curb stomp the local bourgeois industrialists to pieces (with the possible addition of deepthroating Lenin to show his gratitude).

Even more evidence that the Materialism pill isn't something you take, it takes you. It's only a shame that escapades left so many dead for no reason (and arguably saved global capitalism) before he realized this fact.


"It would have been okay for the Nazis to exterminate 6 million Jews if it turned out that these Jews actually were representatives of finance capital."
- Muke

Suvorov pls.

I fail to see what's wrong with that reasoning.

funny thing is hitler didn't kill communism, he arguably did more to kill nationalism in the west