What about Generalplan Ost?

At this point, in 2016, Poles have more of a right to Poland than Germans have a right to Germany.

The short term illusion of prosperity fueled by the long term burden of debt.

There's hardly anything to explain. No actual copy of Generalplan Ost was ever found, all they have are "reconstructions" that say whatever the Allied investigators want them to say, and signed "confessions" from the Nuremberg trials
Yes he does, but that doesn't immediately translate into genocide or even necessarily mean taking clay in East Europe in particular.

Basically that bigass list saying "we are going to exterminate X percent of X country" is a fake made primarily to justify Allied genocides. The reds genocided 25% of Estonia's population? Simple, claim that the Nazis wanted to genocide 50% of the population!

Even Wikipedia admits there is no evidence for it even existing.

Lebensraum was pretty much just a continuation of drang nach osten and Kulturkampf concepts of the 19th century.

Generalplan Ost was proposed by a single guy and was never close to being greenlighted by the leadership of the NSDAP, allied propaganda basically blew this out of proportion and there was only ever a single case of a German settlement in a border region of the Reich anyway. Not to mention they never even found the actual document and had to reconstruct it, then let defendants at the Nuremberg trials say it's all true and yes we really did want to kill 60 million Slavs or whatever. Basically, it's all just as nebulous as the Holocaust itself, and the only real evidence are testimonies from a fucking show trial.

Quoted from "Into the Darkness" by Lothrop Stoddard, an American journalist who traveled around Germany in 1940 and was the first foreign journalist to interview Hitler:

Germany‟s coldly efficient system of public health is strikingly
shown by the scientifically notable sanitary job it has done in Poland.
Although none of us foreign journalists were allowed to visit the Polish
zone, I was fortunate in having a long conversation with almost the
only foreigner who was permitted to go there. This man was Dr. Junod,
a Swiss and a high official of the International Red Cross. Dr. Junod is
an expert judge of sanitary conditions, with many years of service in
the Red Cross and long experience in the Ethiopian and Spanish Civil
wars. He visited Warsaw, Poland‟s shattered capital city, about midNovember.
He told me that what the German health authorities had done to
Warsaw since its capture in late September was a miracle of scientific
efficiency. Though the houses were still largely in ruins, the streets
were immaculate—he did not see even bits of waste paper blowing
about. The water and lighting systems had been restored and the
population generally inoculated against typhoid. The prostitutes had
been listed and were carefully examined at frequent intervals. Most
striking of all, the urban masses, habitually filthy and verminous, had
been deloused wholesale. The delousing stations parted a man from his
clothes, both going through different cleansing processes. These were
so nicely synchronized that the naked individual usually met his
garments at the other end—both clean and freed from local
inhabitants. The clothes were dry, since they had been subjected to a
blast of hot air which desiccated them almost immediately.
About the more important aspects of the lives of the people through
whose city those unlittered streets ran, I was able to gather little.Nevertheless, the result of this intensive health campaign was an
utter transformation of public hygiene in the short space of two
months. Thereby a great peril had been averted. Sanitary conditions
immediately following the German conquest were so bad that, unless
heroic measures had been speedily taken, mass epidemics would have
been inevitable.

See pic

It's not just the Holohoax, almost everything we are taught about NS Germany is Jewish propaganda.

1. There is absolutely no proof of Generalplan Ost ever existing.
2. Hitler would have been fine with a path through the Polish Corridor (pic 1). If Poland had agreed to the terms then there would have been no war.
3. Germany did not massively blob into Eastern Europe like wiki suggests, they had very clear borders(pic 2). The eventual goal was to set up puppet states, not wipe out the populace.
4. If the plan was to exterminate Slavs, then why were there no camps for that purpose? The deaths in Eastern Europe are from starvation and warfare, not extermination.
5. Plenty of Slavs fought alongside Germans in the Russian Liberation Army, SS Galician, and others.

Not to mention Croats backed ol'Adolf almost unanimously, and Czechs/Slovaks were more or less ok with being under Germany's wing.

"Hitler wanted to kill all Slavs" is garbage-tier yid propaganda, same as "Hitler wanted to kill everyone who was not blonde and blue-eyed".

Slavs did indeed fight for Hitler. Pic related.

Speaking of Ostlegionen, Azerbaijanis were particularly efficient. Lacked discipline, but were vicious as fuck. Perfect attack dogs.

I've heard a rumor that there is going to be a sequel to The Greatest Story Never Told. If that is true then hopefully this topic will be dealt with specifically.

I really wish Hitler did more to align the Slavs than he did to align the japs or chinks. He could have had so much more power if he had just encouraged anti-soviet sentiment among already anti-soviet people. If he had just relinquished his direct control of Slavic states for limited control and homefront NatSoc party equivalent. There is no telling how far he could have gone had he actually converted the spirit of Russians, Poles and Ukrainians to NatSoc. I hope that in the future, white race will stand together against the kikes rather than start infighting again.

...

DO IT

hehe yessss goyim you should follow the (((austrian school)))

bump

This is nothing but lol, coming from a person who ignores history and ignorantly follows another failed utopian project.

No one but Amerikikes care about slavs.

80 years ago. Not relevant.

Poles in Imperial Germany were actually pretty well off, they even had their own representatives in Parliament. It's easy to say that Europe would have been better off had the Poles been Germanized, but today Poles are making a pretty decent stand against globalization.

I'm aware of the Slavs who fought for the Third Reich, but most historians gloss over this and claim there was immense resistance from locals, not necessarily Soviet aligned locals either. Is there truth to these statements about local nationalist resistance? Any Slavs here with stories their families have told them about the war?

I feel like it could be easy enough to cover up Soviet war crimes by claiming it was the Germans, and of course all of this territory was under Soviet control after the war, so what sources do these historians even pull from?

The 'Lebensraum' idea was one of the many concept Hitler had written up. But it was both misinterpreted, and exaggerated by multiple people.
The actual meaning of Lebensraum is something that most people still argue about to some degree, and it varies from source to source.
Some Germans who lived in 1930's Germany claims it was the idea that the world should be opened for Germanysto experience and trade in.
It could mean the security of the German borders to provide living space so that Germans aren't threatened by outside forces, since living space can mean many things.
The most widespread definition is that it's the idea of gaining more land to provide more living space to a people.
There are a bunch of meaning to Lebensraum, and there isn't a completely accurate one, and not really any papers from 1930's Germany discussing it. Mein Kampf only talks about briefly as well, so it's hard to hold it as a viable source.
But if we take the most popular one, the third one, then its concept is really exaggerated.
Anyone who states Lebensraum was the sole reason to invade the Soviet Union properly doesn't have a real idea of the situation in WW2 at the time.
There were multiple reasons for the invasion of the Soviet Union, for example:
1.To gain the necessary resources to fuel a long time war, something that Germany was severely lacking.
2. To prevent the inevitable invasion of Europe by the Soviet Union. If you gonna start a war, it's best to have the first strike.
3. To disband the Bolshevik and Jewish regime in the Soviet Union, something Hitler knew would be a threat to Germany.
Lebensraum was one of them as well, but it was neither the main reason, nor what it is portrayed as today.
True, the Germans would've gained land from defeating the Soviets and would certainly have sent its citizens into this newfound land, just like the allies did to German clay they gained after WW2.
The Germans wouldn't have exterminated Russians. They would've built German cities on Russian clay, but they would let the Soviets mostly live for themselves, the difference is that Germans would govern them.
In fact, Hitler didn't consider Russians subhuman. He considered them inferior.
Because in terms of living, they were.
Seriously, look at the living style of the average Soviet, then compare them to a German in 1930, they were, by all accounts inferior.
He even talks about how some Russians of the old rich class were Germanic.

Look at the map of Europe and how the borders have shifted. People have also moved around, and lived in overlapping areas.

Only the Scandinavian nations have persisted for thousands of years. The concept that the people constitutes the nation have roots in the Germanic culture.

In other parts of the world the ruler decided where to draw the border, no people, no nation, just land.

The Slavs never had nations before the fall of USSR.

...

Nope, you fags got pozzed by Roman imperialism and later banded together because "muh HRE", "muh Deutsche" and "muh Martin Luther". Prior to that you were a bunch of tribes, like everyone else in Europe, and which is also the natural social organization of mankind in absence of pressure from outside influences. Fuck, even Holla Forums is tribalistic in nature. Nation-states are and have always been reactionary.

If nation-states are reactionary then being reactionary is good in that case. Those who stagnate, simply, deserve to die.

No one would say that a multicellular organism is unnatural because its ancestors were single celled. Socially, we are capable of organizing on much larger scales than we previously were. Natural selection, in many cases has favored strong central authority, and the nation emerged as the most effective vehicle for the will of a people. Nationalism is the new tribalism, and just because it's newer doesn't make it less authentic or anything.

...

You do deserve to die, then. That is simply natural law. Also . Go back to cuckchan with your anarkiddy/lolberg shite.

I do have some family lore from WWII as my grandmother and grandfather lived through it. They lived in a mid-size village in SE Poland where about 1/4 of the population was Jewish. Germans showed up and installed a small military force in the village, and they created a ghetto for the Jews as well. The points I remember the most from my grandmother's stories are these:
1. When they Germans first arrived, they took over the local police station. I didn't ask where the local police were moved, but if they had been shot, I think I would have been told. Germans, however, realized that one of the Polish homes was basically right next to the police station, to the point where you could easily see into the police station windows from the home. So, security would be a problem - even with drawn curtains you could see shadows etc. The German solution to this was very German - they walked into that one home, shot every Pole in it, and walked out. The other Poles in the village had to bury the bodies. Needless to say, no one moved into that house. I was shown the graves of that family.

2. The Jewish ghetto was not built, nor was it walled. The Germans simply decided that one part of the village was now the ghetto. All non-Jews had to leave their homes, if they happened to live in that area. My grandmother was one of those people. A Jewish family was moved in there instead. I wasn't told about any resistance to this, but I thought that after the Germans murdered that one family on their first day of "residence" in the village, the tone of the occupation was set and no one would resist.

3. As to resistance - Poles are pretty resistant to outsiders. At the same time, open warfare would have been suicidal. There was some hiding of weapons in the forest (my grandfather participated in that), there were some guerillas in the nearby mountains etc. and overall Germans could never feel that the area was wholly secure - but again, any action taken against the Germans resulted in immediate reprisals on the local population. So, say, if a German outpost gets attacked by partisans, and the partisans win, capture weapons etc. the Germans' next move may be to go to the nearest village and murder 100 people. With that sort of calculus, random "resistance" becomes suicidal.

It's not the novelty that's the issue, it's the simple fact that humans are incapable of functioning on the scale of nations, while they are optimized for tribal life. There has never existed a German who could recognize every other German; the scale of nation states allows for infiltration by other opposing groups. The jew cannot function in closely-knit communities for this reason. There is nothing wrong with tribal confederations to protect sovereignty from direct threat, but these should never be allowed to overcome one's ties to their community, and thus the permanency of these confederations in the form of a nation-state is undesirable.

Yes, he talks about RECLAIMING THE LAND STOLEN FROM GERMANY IN WWI. That’s it.

Explains why there were so many partisans even in commie occupied shitholes like Ukraine. Not sure how Germany failed to present itself as a better alternative to commies, but here we are.

Weird, I was just about to make a thread about this but I decided to scroll a bit and here I am.

Generalplan Ost seems credible, and more so because of the stark differences in how the Germans treated Soviet POWs compared to Western. About 5% of Western POWs were killed, compared to 55% of Soviets. Even the impoverished Soviet POW camps had much lower mortality rates for captured Germans. This was deliberate by all accounts. The Nazis were also indiscriminate and unnecessarily cruel towards the civilian population on the Eastern front, again, in stark contrast to the western front where they displayed restraint.

This doesn't prove anything, but it does support the idea that they saw Slavs as below the Aryans and Anglos, perhaps even on par with the Jews.

I can definitely tell you that Generalplan Ost is a thing in Poland (or was, when I was getting educated there). Only after I looked it up myself did I learn that the actual evidence for it is threadbare. Poles are taught that Hitler's plan was to immediately kill off the Polish elite (which did happen to a large extent), to be followed by a process of destroying Polish culture and language - so no higher education available to Poles, German becoming the official language, Poles taught only some trades, mechanical craft etc., with the ultimate objective of creating a history-less and culture-less body of serfs who would be incapable of any resistance. As always, in real life this was hard to actually accomplish, but the Germans did try. Whether they were following a Generalplan Ost or something else - that I don't know.

Funny thing is, the Polish resistance (now I'm speaking not of family lore, but just the book-knowledge I acquired) was deeply divided along political lines that existed even before the war. About the only thing that managed to unite them was opposition to German occupation. That means that the Germans really failed to offer any viable alternative to the Poles.

I don't know if you're Ukrainian, but the enmity between Poles and Ukrainians, much of which can be traced to events that took place during WWII, is one of the biggest tragedies for that part of Europe. There is no reason for Poles and Ukrainians to not cooperate. Except history - it's a shared history but it only ends up dividing people.

fuck off Jew.

What? You thought that was the first time.

Remember the lands of modern Germany were occupied long ago by degenerate Celts once upon a time. The Germans conquered that land because of the weakness of their enemy. So to did they go on to carve up on the rest of Europe and bend its entire culture to their will.

Fun fact it was originally the Goths who first took the fight to the Jews, who decreed they convert or be killed.

Even now in all languages which are primarily Germanic in origin the word "God" which is the ancient deity Gautr and not the Greek Dios/Theus/Deus which romance languages say.

The Northern Crusades into the Baltic states were just reason for the Teutonic tribes to wipe out all the Slavs, and repopulate their lands, and they did pretty well until the Slavs converted and thus their master said they must let them go. sometimes they still didn't

The Realm (Reich) Hitler galvanized the German people for was one built upon the foundations of the Teutonic Knights, look at all the parades. As ancient Gautr had made manifest that the Realm will be constructed and then will fall but the memories found within it will live on through time.

How many people who think they are Slavs now are really just descendants of Germanics? Look at the Rus? We are winning, slowly.

Thank you for sharing. That seems to coincide with things I've heard historians say regarding partisan resistance and how the Germans handled it. I can't imagine collective punishment being an effective method of fostering loyalty.

Germans had almost no chance of getting Poles to be loyal, though. They did want our land. About the only thing we could have done is agree that the Soviet Union was a common enemy - but once it is defeated, Germany would play first fiddle, and Poland would be screwed anyway. When the Soviet Union eventually occupied Poland, there was none of the resistance that was there against the Germans. There are many reasons for this, but one of them is that Poles could accept being a "younger brother" in one big Slavic family (which is what the Warsaw Pact was, if you think about it). With the Germans - there is a divide there, it makes it almost impossible to cooperate as equals, or as unequals in a mutually-accepted hierarchy.

It helped that the Soviet Union had no intention of resettling poles, or keeping them around as second class citizens, or imposing Russian culture or language. All were equal slaves to the party.

I'm writing two answers to you in a row, but whatever. Here's another story of resistance, from books, but any Pole reading this thread should be able to verify it with some research.

In the SE area of Poland there was a guerilla band led by one Jan Piwnik "Ponury". He was somewhat of a maverick. For some reason, Germans in his area went into a Polish village, captured whomever they could, and executed them. Then they did something relatively unprecedented. They waited until the survivors went back to the village to assess the damage, then they surrounded the village, captured the survivors, and murdered them as well. This pissed off Ponury. He decided that the next German train that traveled on the local railroad would be destroyed and all Germans killed. Railroad attacks were a pretty standard form of resistance, because trains were high-value targets that were fairly easy to attack. In any case, as fucking worst luck would have it, the next German train was a hospital train carrying wounded soldiers from the Eastern Front. But, the Germans did slaughter that one village. So, payback was all those wounded German soldiers getting slaughtered as well. They weren't responsible for that slaughtered village, and they were actually fighting against Communists (who later fucked over Poland), but well - war is fucking war, and in the east of Europe it was incomparably more brutal than in the west. And I do think Germans are to blame for it.

My takeaway from all this - if there ever again is a war among Europeans, it should be the last war we ever fight.

The Soviet Union did resettle Poles. SU occupied parts of Poland in 1939 (Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact) and about 1,400,000 Poles were ethnically cleansed from Poland by means of moving them well into the Soviet Union. If you hear Polish spoken in Kazakhstan it's not because we chose to move there.

But during the second occupation, in 1944 and afterward, it was different. No more deportations, more cooperation, more respect, if grudging.

It's true that regardless of the Third Reich's actual intentions, that would be the perception the Poles had of the German invaders, and that's what matters.

Every thing I've read and heard has indicated that the Germans went into the East knowing that it would be brutal and that they would be brutal themselves. Not just the brass, but even the grunts were told this. I want to believe had Germany won, and crushed Communism, that Poles and other Slavs would have gained some level of self determination, albeit under a national socialist system. We may never know.

It is because Soviets did not acknowledge the Geneva convention. This is why Germans felt no obligation to treat their prisoners well, since there was not formal agreement as the Soviets did not accept them.

of course you were taught that generalplan ost was real and of course you grandma said the gnatzis were demons

WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU FALLING FOR THAT SHITTY "LE EXTERMINATION OF ALL SLAVS MEME?!!

Look lad I'm a genetic slav, yet my family lived for hundreds of years in germany fought for it and died for it.
Especially in WW2

The only thing that might have been 'exterminated' would have been the actual nation culture in those parts that actually belonged to germany and were cut off after WW2 by the good old british way of drawing a boarder to infict conflicts. Has been done in other parts of the world for centuries.

The Poles threw US out they didn't even deport us, they just said leave your home till morning or we murder you.

If Hitler would have wanted to exterminate the Poles from there it could have been done in a few days, like the Poles did with us during the end of the war.

But he didn't.

So theres no reason to assume he actually wanted to do it I believe

My Grandmother once told me that the Czechs for example weren't even really mad at the germans, but then the holocaust movies and reports dropped. Go figure.

I love how they actually denounce themselves for lying by telling bullshit like this and everyone else being unable to explain them why it's bullshit because muh muh holocaust, resulting is things that are so dumb that it'll slowly crush the lie completly under its own weight.

...

bump

My grandfather just worked on a farm in Germany. The war was pretty uneventful for him.

There was no Generalplan, but there was "Walking the Teutonic path" in personal references from Hitler, which is essentially the same thing (see Hitler's War by Irving).

"To the victor belong the spoils" is the general sentiment here.

But in reference to Slavs specifically Hitler had no problem allying with Croats (although he had different picture about them, which has some grounding in reality) and also quite appreciated the Serbs even though the political situation there was very different. Granted, those groups are perhaps different than mongolized Russians.

But then again, we have the "Devil's Deed" in Poland and the creation of Generalgovernment with somewhat oppressive treatment (extermination of inteligensia, terrible conditions etc.). Ukrainians were occupied and treated almost as slave labour which was a missed opportunity to establish a government (as suggested by Alfred Rosenberg) to form a natural resistence against Soviets (Hitler was willing to do that, in case he ever got another push-through). The immediate fate of Russians were to be used for labour with as little education as possible (just enough to read road signs so they don't get driven over at autobahn). So, not much different from communism.

In short, eastern Slavs were not extermination material, but certainly a lower caste, while southern Slavs were OK.

I care about all Europeans

Well my grandfather lived in a small village in Latvia and he had only good things to say about the germans, he would always tell the story how at first when they arrived he threw rocks at them so they slapped and scolded him so he started crying and to make him stop they gave him a bunch of chocolate. And my great-grandfather who was Estonian was in the forest brothers who all pretty much joined the wehrmacht including him since everyone pretty much agreed that no matter what that being under russian rule would be worse. And looking back on it, Soviet rule was generally pretty terrible for baltics, they had a similar program to the "generalplan ost" where they shipped a bunch of people to siberia or forced them to other cities and replaced them with russians.

Teutonics wouldn't have gotten too far if Kaupo hadn't fucking betrayed us. But estonia and especially Osilians sure kept the teutonics busy. every time we lost we surrendered and after a while when things cooled down we gathered all the german christian preists in evey village slaughtered them and then the teutonics fought us again and this pretty much went on the entire time they were there

Same here. Can confirm.

Lebensraum= Eurasia.
Hitler and Stalin had the same plan,and exactly like WW1 they got played against each-other resulting in the fuck up of both.
Killing off all the population of the entire fucking continent and then substitute germans would have been useless, wasteful, and practically impossible.

No. Back to 4cuck

No

The Nazis hated slavs and treated them like shit, that's the truth. They committed terrible atrocities against white Polish, Russian etc civilians and invaded and raped their ancestral homelands. The actions of the Nazis lead to the deaths of millions of good white people and tore Europe apart. Fascism/Nazism is basically the same as communism - nationalism, socialism, statism, totalitarianism, militarism, propaganda, military rule, execution of political opponents etc. Even fascist and communist art are almost identical.

Fascism/Nazisim and communism are both cancerous modernist left wing ideologies that need to be consigned to the past. Fuck the Nazis, we need to return to a traditionalist ethnic monarchism.

...

...

...

Nope. He was a racial nationalist.

nah, get back in your ditch

Another burger who doesn't understand Europe. I'm getting sick of you lot.

Newfag.

You just opened my eyes to a new possibility, user. Thanks.

Both Louis Degrelle and Oswald Mosely recognised the existence of a white race.

I question those figures, user. The sound Holocaust-tier.

As he says, pro-German racialism. Keep your pan-white nationalism out of Europe.

And? I happen to disagree with them here. Mosley isn't great on this topic either, he was actually in favour of a fascist EU. Fuck that. Ethnic nationalism or nothing.

Burgers need to understand that we don't want to see our culture and genes destroyed by race mixing with other white skinned peoples.

Really dude?
Did you even READ the shit you linked, or do you just lack critical thinking skills?
Let's take a look…

> It was a strictly confidential document, and its contents were known only to those at the topmost level of the Nazi hierarchy.
Oh, well, then how do we know about it?

> According to the testimony of SS-Standartenführer Dr. Hans Ehlich (one of the witnesses in Case VIII before the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials), the final version of the plan was drafted in 1940.
Ah, so, the Nuremberg Trials used as a source… Bit of a problem there, dontcha think?
Let's kee going…

Proof of this?
> This was mentioned by SS-Obergruppenführer Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski during his evidence as a prosecution witness in the trial of officials of the SS-Rasse- und Siedlungshauptamt (RuSHA) (SS Office of Race and Settlement).
SEEMS LEGIT FAM.

SEEMS SUPER FUCKING LEGIT FAM!

OH WHAT A SURPRISE!
:^|

SEEMS SUPER TOTALLY LEGIT FAM

Know how hard it was to forge Nazi documentation in the 1940's?
You get a type-writer, German in make.
You get someone who speaks German.
You get some Nazi stationary.
You type up whatever you want.
You present it at the Nuremberg Trials.
???
Dead people and Allied pride.

According to whom?
> books.google.com/books?id=QXRyTRavzK4C&pg=PA52&dq=Generalplan Ost armenian&hl=el&sa=X&ei=D1cOU5OAOOiAywOpjIGYBg&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Generalplan Ost armenian&f=false
> books.google.com/books?id=0QWQRG0xJjQC&pg=PA181&dq="who, after all, speaks today ofthe annihilation ofthe Armenians?"&hl=el&sa=X&ei=mVcOU4DzAaSEyAPEjYGoAg&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q="who, after all, speaks today ofthe annihilation ofthe Armenians?"&f=false
If someone has access to those tomes, by all means, demonstrate for us what sources cited as regard this quote.
I'm sure its super legit tbh fam.

No.
Humans have no rights of any kind.

But your culture and genes are the product of race-mixing with other White-skinned (ie European) peoples.

You are a D&C scab.

Your job here is to promote divisions between us, for the sake of pushing ethnic nationalism, which is the equivalent of arguing you don't want the Air Force and Marines intermingling in their efforts while the enemy is invading the homeland.

The European people are exactly that - a people.
Every European nation exhibits significant cultural and genetic admixture from nearby European clades - that's what has created the European race, with other races exhibiting too little admixtural influx (due to geographic and cultural barriers) to be considered part of that racial clade.

Once our RACE is safe and secure, you can start going into turbo-autistic mode about your ethnic peculiarities - none of which will have been significantly degraded, if degraded at all, as a result of intermingling with other Europeans.

Euros need to understand that if you don't put aside these minor differences, you are going to be LEGITIMATLEY destroyed by clades which exhibit far, far more extreme divergence.

For example: An influx of European-Americans into ANY European nation would not be anywhere even vaguely close to as harmful (if harmful at all in the contexts you note) relative to even half the influx of Africans, Middle Easterners or Asiatics.
Why?
Because we share most of the same blood (genes) and much of the same ideology (culture).
Why?
Well, genetically its obvious, while culturally its because our behaviors are very similar… And culture derives from behavior… Which derives from psychology…. Which derives from physiology… Which derives from genetics.

Face it loser: You're trying to sow dissent in the ranks of a much greater conflict, for the sake of implied harm which there is little-to-nothing to suggest will or does exist.

Oh,this is interesting… I started wondering about that Bach-Zelewski cited as

So, who is Bach-Zelewski?

How (((convenient))) for him.

and

> After the war he claimed under interrogation that this had ruined his reputation in the army, forcing him to leave the Reichswehr.
INTERESTING.

WELL HOW ABOUT THAT!

……….. SEEMS. LEGIT. FAM.

Then you're an idiot, because a white race is not an idea, it's a fact. just because you want to posture yourself as a super special unique snowflake and justify needless wars with fellow Europeans doesn't mean our race ceases to exist.
What's the matter with a community of nationalist European states all working together for the betterment of our whole race? You seem to really hate the idea of European racial unity. Hmm. Is it maybe because you're a disgusting semite?
Dumb euroshit idiots such as yourself need to understand that no America on this board is advocating you to be destroyed. Gas yourself for being deliberately dishonest.

Hitler would vehemently disagree with you.

You are as bad as the Jews - you promote the mixing and mingling of the individual European peoples and thus endanger our own individual ethnicities and cultures. I realise that the white races of the world are under attack, and I wish for an alliance, but I am sick of burgers telling me to be fine with Poles and other Eastern Europeans invading our country and diluting our gene pool. We're British, not mutts like the Americans, and I want to keep it that way.

I went to Wroclaw in Poland. It's a nice old city, filled with old medieval buildings. 600k people live there and it used to be about 80% German. Then WWII happened and every German got expelled and only Poles live there now. Things used to be a lot different in Eastern Europe, there was a German minority present in every corner, then they were all deported after the war, some back to Germany and some to some far flung lands like Kazakhstan, where there still are some today. It's mind blowing how different it used to be.

It seems fine though, I couldn't see any blacks or arabs, no non polish language heard anywhere through that whole city. It felt comfortable.

These

There's not a shred of legitimate evidence for it and they haven't even bothered fabricating any, it's just written by historians that Generalplan Ost existed without anything backing it up.
Seriously, try finding what it's actually based on, it's impossible.

False. There is no singular white race. The white races are closer together than non-whites, but we are not one people. We are similar, and I would like to see an alliance, but we are not the same. Come to Europe and you'll see this.

Because Mosley advocate for a single state, not a loose community. I am not opposed to an alliance, as I said, but not a single state.

But you are. By telling us to accept pan-white nationalism, you are in effect telling us to accept our own destruction. Fuck you.

you gotta understand the American point of view

live next to niggers for 400 years and the racial difference between a Mediterranean and an Anglo-Saxon seem laughably microscopic

Yes, I know, and I appreciate that. I'm just asking the Americans to keep it in America.

Kek blesses those who know the truth

true, but the whole point is that places like America have demonstrated that selective, inter-white subgroup mixing does not have the same degrading effect on the ethnicity/identity/traditions of a nation, i.e. Italians/Irish/Greeks/Russians are racially compatible and therefore have no issue fully assimilating to American values and traditions unlike Mexicans/Blacks

Except it does. America lacks the cultural heritage of European nations. It is a country founded on ideals, not a racial nation like those in Europe.

True, but this is down to similarities among those races. This does not mean they are all the same race.

Okay, come on. That's a line out of Shlomo's playbook. The proposition nation melting pot garbage is a postmodern propaganda line literally invented by a Jew, and is entirely contrary to the actual literal history of America. If you're not a shill, please realize you've bought into a Jewish lie. America has always had a distinct cultural identity.

I'm not denying that America has a culture (and it's not a bad one - it gave you the 1st Amendment, which we Euros envy). It's just not as deep or enriched as European heritage, which is to be expected, given the age difference. But there is the deeper issue - that Europe remains the home, while America still fundamentally a country (not a nation) founded on ideas, not because of tribal necessity.

Also, I disagree the Italians/Irish/Germans aren't the same race, the white race is the broad encompassing term for the people descended from the neolithic settlers in Europe, Meditterranean/Nordic/Celtic/Slavic/etc. I would argue are subgroups within the White race, not separate races entirely, likewise Greeks and Italians are subgroups of the Mediterranean subgroup and so on so forth, but all of these groups fall under the "White Race" category.

No, there is no single 'white race', except for in the colonies. The European peoples may look similar, but culturally we're very different. It's just that our differences with non-whites are greater. And looks are deceptive - Hungarians are from the Steppes, while Austrians are Germanic, and Slovaks are Slavic. There is huge racial variance in Europe, don't be fooled into thinking we're all the same race just because the colour of our skin is the same. That's what the Jews want us to believe anyway - to equate race with skin colour.

You're a fucking idiot. There is a single white race with multiple sup-groups. The existence of smaller components does not negate the whole.
Of course not all white ethnicities are exactly the same, but that doesn't mean we are not part of the same race.
I used to live in England and have traveled throughout Europe from Russia to Italy to Greece to France to Spain and I can say with absolute certainty that there exists a white race. Are there differences? Of course there are. But these differences don't negate the existence of a larger race of people.
Fair enough. I can agree with this
But I'm not
Not at all, You just want to think this way to justify your victim complex. Recognisng that you belong to a larger racial community has nothing to do with wanting to destroy the unique characteristics that define your ethnicity. You can have both a white identity and a more specific German/English/Italian/Greek/Russian/etc. identity. The two are not mutually exclusive.

"In Mein Kampf, Hitler had clearly set out his objective: "to eliminate the world threat of Communism," and incidentally claim some land in Eastern Europe! […] Personally, I have always vigorously defended the Russians, and I finally did succeed in convincing Hitler that Germans had to live with Russians as partners not as conquerors. Before achieving this partnership, there was first the matter of wiping out Communism. […] European unity was to be achieved through harmony, not domination of one over the others. I discussed these issues at length with both Hitler and Himmler. Hitler like all men of genius had outgrown the national stage. Napoleon was first a Corsican, then a Frenchman, then a European and then a singularly universal man. Likewise Hitler had been an Austrian, then a German, then a greater German, then Germanic, then he had seen and grasped the magnitude of building Europe. After the defeat of Communism the Waffen SS had a solemn duty to gather all their efforts and strength to build a united Europe, and there was no question that non-German Europe should be dominated by Germany." - Leon Degrelle, "Epic: The Story of the Waffen SS".

"Nous ne voulions pas d'une Europe allemande, nous voulions une Europe ou les Allemands, oui, pourraient jouer un rôle essentiel - parce que leur peuple est un grand peuple, sérieux, travailleur, organisé et qu'il est situé au centre même du Continent -, mais une Europe où tous nous serions égaux parce que, de la Vistule à la Gironde, nous sommes des peuples pétris par la même civilisation et nous avons des mérites identiques. Cette reconnaissance-là, je l'ai obtenue chez Hitler. Pendant ces débats, tout s'est réglé avec ampleur. Et non seulement notre sort à nous, Occidentaux. Je me suis acharné à défendre, avec la même insistance, les peuples de Russie, nos futurs co-équipiers de l'Est." - "Léon Degrelle: persiste et signe", p. 346.

Got any proof for that? The slovaks I can believe, but the czechs treated their german (and others) minority very badly

You're falling for Jewish lies. Don't equate race with skin colour. Yes we are similar, but we are not one race.

^^^Stop equating race with skin colour like the Jews want you to. We are not a single unified race just because our skin happens to be pale.

You can't ascertain genetics from a trip. I was talking about culture here. And you clearly didn't stay long enough. There are vast differences between, say the Swedes and Italians.

This is more reassuring but it still doesn't address the fact that there is no single white race. In any case, it is easier to safeguard against dilution of our culture and genes if we make more clear the boundary between different European peoples. The Americans define things a little too closely for my liking. And besides, who are you, the Americans, to tell us what we, the Europeans, are? We have a better handle on our racial characteristics than you, I would think.

I'm not, you stupid nigger. If I equated race with skin colour, then I would be including Northern Asians as well, which I'm not.
Yes we are one race. We are a single race with multiple regional supgroups. Goddamn, why is it so hard for you to understand this?
Again, i'm not doing this retard.
But I thought you just told me to visit Europe to "see" for myself. Try to stay consistent, dumbass.
There are visible differences, but there is a very obvious common racial element between the two.
But there is. Accepting the existence of a white race doesn't negate the existence of each ethnicity. Quit thinking in black and white like some autist.

Juden RAUS!

But Asians would be 'yellow'. You know what I mean, don't be pedantic.

Where's your proof? You make this claim without any proof. And don't look at me, I can't prove a negative. Provide any proof of a white race for me to consider or debunk. But the whole pretense of a white race is retarded. Why do having a similar skin colour make us one race? Slavs, for example, may be more closely related to Anglos than Arabs, but that doesn't make them the same race as us. I don't feel part of a wider white race, and why should I? I'm all for alliances, but I don't want to be subsumed into this great big blob of whites where the different ethnic identities will gradually be erased. You can try saying this won't happen, but rejecting the white race theory is the only safe way to maintain our individual races.

Learn to read. As I said, I was talking about culture in this instance.

From your American perspective, the differences seem minimal. I don't think you realise how big these differences actually are. And therein lies the problem - the inability of Americans to differentiate between Europeans adequately. I don't blame you, it's to be expected, but please try to understand this.

See earlier in my post.

You can say that all you like, but it's a retarded theory in any case, and drawing more definite boundaries may be the only thing that saves our races. I'm not seeing things in black and white - on the contrary, I'm aware of the complex relationships the races share (as opposed to believing in one white race with some subgroups and somehow taking pride in the fact that I'm not seeing things in black and white).

That poster is clearly a shill or a retard, but monarchy is the best way.

I reject republicanism. At the head of races, above the elite, there is Monarchy. Not all monarchs have been good. Monarchy, however, has always been good. The individual monarch must not be confused with the institution of Monarchy, the conclusions drawn from this would be false. There can be bad priests, but this does not mean that we can draw the conclusion that the Church must be ended and God stoned to death. There are certainly weak or bad monarchs, but we cannot renounce Monarchy. The race has a line of life. A monarch is great and good, when he stays on this line ; he is petty and bad, to the extent that he moves away from this racial line of life or he opposes it. There are many lines by which a monarch can be tempted. He must set them all aside and follow the line of the race. Here is the law of Monarchy.
- Corneliu Zelea Codreanu

That might not necessarily be true. Non-British admixture may have diluted America's love of liberty.

Literally no country (not nation) in Europe older than World War I is a "racial nation."

No European ethnicity is distinct enough to call it a race. That's not even mentioning the fact that you're talking about cultural groups rather than anything genetic (other than in the most loose sense). You think Russia is one nation? France? The Netherlands? Switzerland? Italy? Britain? None of them are. They are multi-ethnic products of monarchy. Don't pretend there's anything more authentic or organic about them than the US. They're all political products whose only claim to more homogeneity than the US is a quirk of geography and US immigration policies.

There is little to no evidence for this being the case. The fact that you use nationalities as your "races" makes it even more laughable. You could at least have the courtesy to create sensible European racial groups, rather than just being lazy.

You've got to be kidding me. Culture is your proof for different European races? By that brilliant logic races change by the fucking decade.

You're an autist.

Thanks for the feedback so far guys. I hope this "Generalplan Ost" issue is something that is thoroughly addressed and debunked in future documentaries.

Spain here, I truly laugh at the anons flinging shit at one another about the differences inherent in the White race,
son una pila de idiotas

Our enemy, El Judio, laughs at our shortsightedness. We need to unite and defend the whole of Europe TOGETHER or risk having our individual nations become an extension of the African continent. If the consequence of this unity is the collapse of individual European countries or cultures, personally that's not so bad of a price to pay when compared to the literal genocide of our "'WHOLE'" race.

Escoge o' morirías
Choose or die

...

...

pic related your typical "brown Iberians"

bump

Originally, the Nazis aimed to gain back the former German imperial colonies.

My man are you aware of the Baltic crusades? They basically flooded Prussia with Germans and other Christians while they established a ruling class of Germans in Livonia, they didn't move naturally nor were they invited, were they invited no one would rise against them as they did under Herkus Mantas, several other revolts and general opposition to German rule within Prussia.
At the very least German migrations to the land were as natural as Polish, that is to say they were largely encouraged to flood that land to secure firmer control over it.
To be honest nobody ever liked Germans that much here, even more so in Poland I'd think, nobody ever wanted them here either and I'm pretty sure everyone's still salty over the three way we had between Austria, HRE and Rus'.

Benancio, like it or not, Andalucia + Granada and Canarias are moorish as fuck

pic related, seems odd, considering how Hitler idolized Pilsudski and made such generous offers to Beck

Sauce on the quote?

bump

I won't pretend to be an expert on Polish-German politics pre-WWII, so I can't tell you why there was such intense diplomatic activity between Germany and Poland. I do think that if Germany wanted lebensraum, they were more likely to find it by expanding east (into Slavic lands) than by expanding west (and kicking out the French). So Polish-German war was probably inevitable. But the date of that quote is 1944. That's after Germans had faced 5 years of organized Polish resistance to the German occupation. The strength of the resistance changed depending on circumstances I alluded to above, but just to give one example - German commander of Warsaw, one Kutschera, was killed in an ambush by the Polish resistance shortly before the date of that quote. He wasn't just murdered willy-nilly - the Polish resistance passed a death sentence on him beforehand, for his crimes against Polish civilians. I don't have the history books in front of me, but wiki says 100 Polish civilians were murdered as a reprisal, and that sounds believable. For a high-ranking SS-man. Good trade? Bad trade? Did it make at least one German think before killing a Pole?

I hope I made clear above, though, that the last thing Europe needs right now is another European vs. European war. There are plenty of other enemies out there. If Germany were to do again what it did in 1939, Poles would have no choice but to fight them. If the two nations instead focused on their common enemies…