EU was Hitler's idea

[mapuc]

(To the moderators-if this should have been posted in another thread, please be free to move it to the right thread and close this one.)

What do you say about this ?

Are the authors wrong claiming these things or does the authors have more or less right in their statements

'The EU: The Truth About The Fourth Reich - How Hitler Won The Second World War' argues the single currency, the free market and even the phrase "United States of Europe" were all dreamt up by high ranking Nazis, including the Fuhrer himself.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/470967/The-EU-was-HITLER-S-idea-and-it-proves-Germany-WON-the-Second-World-War-claims-new-book

1. If you dislike/hate EU I guess you would take this to be true
2. If you like/love EU I guess you would take this as an insult on EU and those who works there

Markus

[Skybird]

http://94.136.40.103/%7Eclaythorpewatermill.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Crane_stare1.jpg

And the secret Nazi moon base? They did not mention the secret Nazi moon base?

I certainly "dislike/hate the EU". But I am nevertheless not tempted to take this serious. ;)

There have been so many Italian, Polish, Greek claims that Germany is the fourth Reich and Merkel carries a Hitler mustache, in the wake of the fincial meltdown 2008 and the credit crisis in Greece and during demands that Germany should paypaypay. Did you believe that, too?

[mapuc]

I should have mentioned in my first thread, ´cause I'm like you, I dislike EU and I also have problems believing these "facts"

Markus

[Catfish]

I do not dislike the Eu maybe simply because i obviously do not know the facts about why it is the second bad thing after the devil.

But I have to agree, it was all Hitler's idea.
Only that the "EU" would have been called "German Reich", and would have had its eastern borders somewhere near Stalingrad. Had England not intervened only against Germany after the soviet-german attack against Poland, Germany probably would neither have attacked France, nor Norway, nor Greece. The plan was to go for Russia right from the start.
Astonishingly enough, when Russia attacked Bulgaria, despite England's treaty with Bulgaria there was no declaration of war towards Russia. You will not find that in Wikipedia.

And then, after the war, it was Churchill's idea of a unified Europe, he said he himself could imagine to become the chancellor of Europe.
http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html
"The structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by their contribution to the common cause."
The biggest problem for England today and for Farage's hate seems to be that England is not leading the coming United States of Europe.

Somehow it all did not work out, but because or neither of that happening, the Eu must now be destroyed. Ask Trump, or Putin.
Then, this: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37867591
And then ask yourself who would most benefit from a EU's downfall, apart from the US/Trump's explicit plan to do just this :03:

[ValoWay]

I don't think the nazis were ever interested in 'friendship' with other nations.. They made allies out of necessity, not because of an interest in peaceful coexistence..

I also think that the brits or the french are smart enough to sniff out any german schemes.. They probably would have noticed by now if there was anything within the EU which would secretly favor germany..

I generally think that the EU is a good idea. To work together to achieve a common goal becomes more and more important the farther we move forward into the future. Hiding behind your dandy little border barriers will only slow progress down like a class of schoolchildren which all work on the same test individually instead of together..

I think dismantling the EU would do more harm than good but there also has to be the will to improve. They have to seriously think about the reasons why britain left, why citizens are upset.. If they remain, however, stagnant instead I fear that we won't see anything even close to an EU in our lifetime ever again.

I believe the farther we go into the future the more difficult become humanity's problems. Britain alone won't be able to stop global warming, fixing poverty, cure cancer or finance a space program, for example. Such challenges are easier to overcome when we work together instead of every man for himself..

[Jimbuna]

http://94.136.40.103/%7Eclaythorpewatermill.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Crane_stare1.jpg

And the secret Nazi moon base? They did not mention the secret Nazi moon base?

I certainly "dislike/hate the EU". But I am nevertheless not tempted to take this serious. ;)

There have been so many Italian, Polish, Greek claims that Germany is the fourth Reich and Merkel carries a Hitler mustache, in the wake of the fincial meltdown 2008 and the credit crisis in Greece and during demands that Germany should paypaypay. Did you believe that, too?

True that :yep:

:O:

:03:

[Nippelspanner]

Have you actually ever bothered to listen to any of Hitler's speeches, for example those about Czechoslovakia?

No? Cause your observations would be entirely different then.
I see your point, but using a speech of Hitler is hardly some sort of proof, as he said many things - and then did the opposite, for example him assuring Germany's neighboring countries neutrality/that they will not be attacked.
Weeeell... about that... :doh:

[ikalugin]

EU is the yet unborn 4th Reich, not Germany within the EU. If you are very negative about EU and do not like the 4th Reich analogy you can try EUSSR, in which case Germany is the equivalent to the RSFSR (ie biggest member and one of the core donors).

[Nippelspanner]

EU is the yet unborn 4th Reich, not Germany within the EU. If you are very negative about EU and do not like the 4th Reich analogy you can try EUSSR, in which case Germany is the equivalent to the RSFSR (ie biggest member and one of the core donors).
What?

Explain to me what the EU has in common with the third Reich?
A fourth Reich would mean a reincarnation of the national-socialistic third Reich. Do we really need to even start trying to find similarities, or can we agree right away that calling Europe the fourth Reich 'unborn' is simply wrong?
You can say about European power-plays what you want, but implying it is, or will be, even can be something like a "Reich" (in the national-socialistic and/or imperialistic sense) is flat out off-target and sounds like a typical RT headline to me.

[Sophia]

I should have mentioned in my first thread, ´cause I'm like you, I dislike EU and I also have problems believing these "facts"

Markus
Hahaha this sought of clarifies a lot. Hahaha very brilliantly put!:salute:

[STEED]

Not this old nut shell again. :rolleyes:

[August]

I thought Napoleon was the first to think of creating a EU, or perhaps it was Charlemagne or Caesar?

[Rockstar]

The main difference between the E.U. and Hitler is, Hitler had vision the E.U. doesnt.

[Skybird]

The main difference between the E.U. and Hitler is, Hitler had vision the E.U. doesnt.
Oh, the EU has vision - way too much of it, as always with Europeans.

What it lacks is sense of realism, and awareness for the difference between what is ideological, cultural-sociological ballast created in a laboratory, and what is pragmatically desirable. And that is NATO as the primary tool of security-creating, and economic cooperation in the meaning of free trade. Such a union has my support. But no, it wants to be so uch more than "just" this. Its too profance to focus on material realities...

You see this inability to differ between vision and pragmatism in so many areas, last but not least foreing poltics. Both in the Ukraine and Syria the EU acts on the ground sof moral maximum demands. Now compare to the Russians: their imperative is different, they focus on what actually is possible to achieve. I doubt that Putin likes Assad, but he knows that beside Assad no other faction there is that could provide any form of state structure and stability again, once this war may have ended. The terror grouops the West declares as his wanted "allies" - should these be the future of Syria? The wEst fools itself there, like it fooled itself over the Arab Spring, the Egyptians voting for the Muslim Brotherhood, and so forth. - In the Ukraine, the West again started to act on the ground of maximum moral demands, which to support or to enforce it was totally imptent at the same time. Meanwhile w ehave learned once againw hat a corrupt, criminal thug we have embraced ther ein the person of Victor Poroshenko, not to mention the earlier potliians that popped after the Maidan revolution, nd meanwhile have dissapred again. Boy, what a shady crew of ganster and oligarchs! But "Morals!" shouts the West, fingerpointing at Moscow. The Russian may not hjave played nice, but they played according to doctrines we should have known since the cold war, and they have some very valid hisotrical and more important: strategic interests that one can easily see if only what would just care to think oneself into their heads. But did the West do that? No - "Morals" was the parole, and basta.

See where it got us. We are loosing, and geostrategically we have suffered severla defeats from Russia now. Our reaction? "Morals!" Or, as you put it - "Visions!"

No, that does not cut it, that just is not good enough.

Regarding realism, Putin has outplayed the West in the past couple of years. And I think he is running a very strong offensive to erode the EU from within. It simply is in his way.

The only question is whether he can soldifiy his victory before the economy of Russia crumbles once again. He does too little to modenrise the Russian industry, all investments seem to go into the military. Thats is where Russia's sense of realism may lack. Just waging the monetarian war by buying gold as much as he can, is not enough.

[Skybird]

you can try EUSSR, In fact I have compared the patterns and structures of power aggrevation and institutional power projection compared to the USSR repeatedly over the years, thats why I have spoken of the EUSSR repeatedly over the years. Tha parallels of said structures, are stunning, and scaring.

The function of "empire" dictates the format, i suppose.
Same desired functions lead to same formats. Including the sideeffects like corruption, nepotism, oligarchy, etc.

[Catfish]

^ Hmm, who is Stalin, who acts as the Tcheka, and who militarily "incorporates" other free nations in the EUSSR?
This is ridiculous.

[Skybird]

Not when you compare the administrative level, the structure of the state organs at the decision-making and planning level.

I am not the first guy in history realising the parallels, btw. Intitially my attention was brought to this by some British historian from Cambridge or Oxford, forgot his name, don'T know whether he is famous or not. Saw him some years ago in some special on tV by the BBC World channel. From there I dived deeper into it and gave it some thought, and found him to be correct. Others have come to comparable conclusions. The names for the different political bodies vary - their functions and schemes of power projection often match.

If you however take the claims by the EU bodies (and how they want to see themselves and want to be seen by others) literally, then of course both things are lightyears apart. But I see no excuses for taking the EU self-perception as serious any longer.

Same function lead to same form.

[mapuc]

A scientist, mostly get the chance to show other scholars their stuff and thereby get an accept of their "invention"(It's not invention I was looking for, but I can't remember the word I was thinking of using)

The author or authors of this book shall have the same chance to "convinced" other Historian.

To be honest I think it will be very hard to convinced other historians.

I guess the book will be a top sale among the believes or conspiracy

Markus

[Skybird]

Any newspaper that has the word "Express" in its title, already gives me the creeps! :D

[ikalugin]

What?

Explain to me what the EU has in common with the third Reich?
A fourth Reich would mean a reincarnation of the national-socialistic third Reich. Do we really need to even start trying to find similarities, or can we agree right away that calling Europe the fourth Reich 'unborn' is simply wrong?
You can say about European power-plays what you want, but implying it is, or will be, even can be something like a "Reich" (in the national-socialistic and/or imperialistic sense) is flat out off-target and sounds like a typical RT headline to me.
You misunderstood. As I would say again - 4th Reich to the 3rd Reich is what 3rd Reich was to the 2nd Reich and as such is a new imperial regime, not a new 3rd Reich because if it was, why would we call it the 4th?

My core criticism of the current EU is it's undemocratic nature where top officials are not accountable to the people.

The reason why I use the term "unborn" is because EU is not a consolidated centralised undemocratic empire at this moment.

The reason why I mention it at all is to state that 4th Reich (if it does exist in any form) is not a German state but a superstate containing a German state meaning that it may work against German interests.

[Catfish]

You misunderstood. As I would say again - 4th Reich to the 3rd Reich is what 3rd Reich was to the 2nd Reich and as such is a new imperial regime, not a new 3rd Reich because if it was, why would we call it the 4th?

Definitions matter.
The "Reich" is a german description of one country, and of one nation. So the term "Reich" cannot apply to Europe. There was the "Roman Reich of German Nation" back then, but this was an exception in more than one ways.
The "second" Reich was monarchistic, a "real" Reich or "Empire" if you so want, if a small one.
The "third" Reich was merely an invention or fantasy of Hitler, to get the old monarchistic military and Navy on his side. It had nothing to to with the initial coined description of a monarchistic Empire called "Reich". Hitler had no entitlement to call himself Caesar, Kaiser, or whatever.

My core criticism of the current EU is it's undemocratic nature where top officials are not accountable to the people.The "current EU" is not undemocratic, i really do not know why so much people claim it were! Just because most are too lazy to just read about it does not make it undemocratic (too boring i guess, much more fun to just claim nonsense and troll).

http://www.democraticaudit.com/2016/06/23/is-the-eu-really-run-by-unelected-bureaucrats/

http://www.businessinsider.de/is-the-eu-undemocratic-2016-3?r=UK&IR=T

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/13/is-the-eu-undemocratic-referendum-reality-check

and so on, endlessly! You will probably not find this in Breitbart, Fox News or RT, for obvious reasons.

For all this hubbub about the EU commission (!!!), in this case it is not directly elected by the people, but is a representational democracy, just like we have it everywhere. And it can only propose, it has not much power, because all their proposals have to be agreed upon by all other national boards.
There are not any unelected bureaucrats in charge in the EU.

The reason why I use the term "unborn" is because EU is not a consolidated centralised undemocratic empire at this moment.Now that'a twist, suddenly it's democratic again, but... on a way to an empire or even a dictatorship? Where do you see that? Because Juncker is an unsympathetic donkeyhole does not make him a dictator. He is just unpopular. But a lot of political decisions are. Especially when someone feels disadvantaged, for whatever (nationalistic? chauvinistic? xenophobic?) reason. But just because Mr Farage or LePen or Wiilders cry wolf does not mean it really is so. They are populists, their "job" is desinformation and agitation for their undemocratic goals.

The reason why I mention it at all is to state that 4th Reich (if it does exist in any form) is not a German state but a superstate containing a German state meaning that it may work against German interests.

Frankly, i see no reason of yours why to post such !"§$ ... if it were so Germany would be the first to try change that. But it indeed profits a lot from the single market and international say of almost 30 countries with one voice towards the world, just like all other members of the EU.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2017/feb/23/germanys-gdp-shows-19-rise-over-last-year
All are shouting how much they have to give to the EU without ever mentioning the net gross advantage they have, from money coming back with interest to EU-sponsored national projects of all kinds like infrastructure, science (historical research and archeology being a major part), business, trade support across borders, a unified packaging system for effective transport at least within Europe, and so on. A lot of this stuff cannot be planned, be financed or enforced by one nation alone.

And (it is a big and) directly coming from the experiences of WW2, the distribution of help and money to parts of the EU that need it, is much more efficient, rightly and fair than if one national government did that alone. From wages, to social institutions, to health care. The people in England will experience that, but also those in Scotland and Ireland.

There are a lot of romantic ideas in England of a lost Empire that e.g. Farage (ab)uses, and unfortunately despite all the experience, information and education he has a lot of people hooked.

All this does not make the EU the fourth Reich :doh:

[Skybird]

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.SUGOQ1KEefiyz__P1nVKIAEsDI&pid=15.1&P=0&w=269&h=180

It is Zweckoptimismus like this that often leads me to an attitude of "let it burn in high flames then".

[Jimbuna]

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.SUGOQ1KEefiyz__P1nVKIAEsDI&pid=15.1&P=0&w=269&h=180

It is Zweckoptimismus like this that often leads me to an attitude of "let it burn in high flames then".

Oh I'm not totally sure about that. I found his post quite insightful and informative.

I'm not saying it changed my viewpoint or overall opinion but it certainly taught me a few details I was unaware of.

Nice one Kai :cool:

[Nippelspanner]

All this does not make the EU the fourth Reich :doh:Shut up and hail our Führerin! :salute:

[Skybird]

Oh I'm not totally sure about that. I found his post quite insightful and informative.

I'm not saying it changed my viewpoint or overall opinion but it certainly taught me a few details I was unaware of.


He judges it by its paperform, by its written self-description and how it wants to be seen. I judge it by its actual habits, practices and results. And I never forget that the real decision making is completely outside any countercontrol, but is done behind locked doors by the heads of states - who all too often have demonstrated that they break their own self-made laws and ignore their own written rules if it pleases their intentions. They violate their self-made international laws and ignore the will of the people if the people give referendum results that the elite does not want. They refuse to accept a No as a No. The strings get pulled in the background by levels of adminstration and by personnel that is completely beyond any public countercontrol, cannot be voted in or out. Backroom deals.

And, unforgettable, this evergreen: "We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back." - Juncker, 1999.

[Catfish]

Shut up and hail our Führerin! :salute:

Quail Merkel !

And Attila the hen (May) :03:

[Catfish]

He judges it by its paperform, by its written self-description and how it wants to be seen. I judge it by its actual habits, practices and results.

I have already proved you wrong. I do hate this tennis-like posting.
It is really quite transparent, if only people would just look themselves instead of spreading tales of hearsay.
But it is so much easier to claim something, because you well know that all hear the big-mouthed claim, but no one listens to the boring fact that answers it.

[...] the real decision making is completely outside any countercontrol, but is done behind locked doors by the heads of states - [...] They violate their self-made international laws and ignore the will of the people [...] They refuse to accept a No as a No. [...]The strings get pulled in the background [..] beyond any public countercontrol, cannot be voted in or out. Backroom deals. Ah yes, all those conspiracies. Bovine scatology.

http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.de/2016/09/inside-european-parliaments-closed.html

"Closed reading rooms are an exception to generally open meetings and discussions of the European Parliament. This practice emerged with the introduction of rules on EU official secrets and specifically the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2002 between the European Parliament and the Council (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32002Q1130%2801%29) concerning European Parliament’s access to sensitive information in the field of security and defence policy" a.s.o., and all members agreed to that.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32002Q1130(01)

Yes i know, no one will read those boring facts. It's all fake news anyway as long it's not from Breitbart, or the Sun.


And, unforgettable, this evergreen: "We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back." - Juncker, 1999.Out of context and 18 years old, but I give you that. Juncker is an !"§$%&%!!! and needs replacement. ASAP.

[Skybird]

I have already proved you wrong. I do hate this tennis-like posting.
It is really quite transparent, if only people would just look themselves instead of spreading tales of hearsay.
But it is so much easier to claim something, because you well know that all hear the big-mouthed claim, but no one listens to the boring fact that answers it.
Do not hold me responsible if you just beleive official propaganda and paper whilwe ignoring the many historic acts where the EU just broke, violated, bent, ignored what it has written in these papers. I just give the two most obvious exmaples: the many violations of Euro-related policies and the prohibition of direct or indirect debt financing between states; and the backroom deal that bypassed the legally binding referendum results over the EU constitution in two natiosn, and send a third rejecting nation voting again. But there are so many everyday laws beign proposed and made by lobbying that should have no access inBrussel that I do not make a complete list: it would be so long that it never could be considered to be complete. Brussel longtime observers and insiders say the relation between lobbyists and members of the EU "parliament" is in the range of 40:1 to 60:1.

But go ahead, dream your dream of a better world. Because it is written.

Ah yes, all those conspiracies. Bovine scatology.

Du bist zu leichtgläubig, nur weil etwas offiziell verlautbart wurde. Right the kind of servile and believing citizen that the EU, and the national governments as well, want. Rest assured, attepts to make "unjustified criticism of the EU" a punishable crime, are already under way since years, and slowly advance, every year a bit more. With the EU of course defining what is unjustified, and what not.

It as like this in the GDR as well. And since everybody knew that the party was always right, there was no criticsm needed. Problem solved.

Seen that way it is no surprise that especially Germans feel so very much at home in the EU.

[Eichhörnchen]

http://i.imgur.com/y77HKb2.jpg "Da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da... da-da-da-da-da-dada"

[Vatis1982]

Do you want my opinion as a Greek?
Well most of EU citizens believe that Greece took all their money just to spend them like a sailor of a sub after 6 months patrol.:haha:
We(citizens) believe that our governments the last 30 years took all the money that EU gave to Greece just for themselves.(half true)
Our current government tries to pay all that but without struggling all of us(citizens).
EU(Now German rule) and IMF tries to take everything now without thinking of the people.
That's why most of us believe Angela Merkel's government (especially Soible) is a heartless and cruel .....bleep.
Everybody says pay pay pay without leaving us to breathe a bit.
My opinion is that the world is again in turmoil.
When governments start to think only for money and political power a World War is imminent.Let's hope that will not happen to us too like those people 70 years ago.
We people of all the world must change the way we vote.(thinking)
First we must think what kind of world do we want to live in.
Sometimes i feel that human kind never learns the lessons of the past.:(

[ValoWay]

Do you want my opinion as a Greek?
Well most of EU citizens believe that Greece took all their money just to spend them like a sailor of a sub after 6 months patrol.:haha:
We(citizens) believe that our governments the last 30 years took all the money that EU gave to Greece just for themselves.(half true)
Our current government tries to pay all that but without struggling all of us(citizens).
EU(Now German rule) and IMF tries to take everything now without thinking of the people.
That's why most of us believe Angela Merkel's government (especially Soible) is a heartless and cruel .....bleep.
Everybody says pay pay pay without leaving us to breathe a bit.
My opinion is that the world is again in turmoil.
When governments start to think only for money and political power a World War is imminent.Let's hope that will not happen to us too like those people 70 years ago.
We people of all the world must change the way we vote.(thinking)
First we must think what kind of world do we want to live in.
Sometimes i feel that human kind never learns the lessons of the past.:(

Agreed. CDU (Merkel+Schaeuble) squeeze greece dry. And yea, with faces like erdogan+trump and all that right wing riff raff talk within the eu it does seem like turmoil.

[Sophia]

Its sought of nice to read such a thread because i always thought that it was Winston Churchill who passionately promoted the idea of a kind of 'United States of Europe', which Britain would take a leading role to help create. I thought thats why there was a building named after him at the European Parliament in Strasbourg. But then again..this was just my idea after reading some few books about the Euro formation.

[August]

My money is still on Napoleon as the original EU visionary.

[Jimbuna]

My money is still on Napoleon as the original EU visionary.

Yeah, before he got the boot off Wellington :):03:

[August]

Yeah, before he got the boot off Wellington :):03:

England, giving continental tyrants the boot since 1067. :D

[Jimbuna]

England, giving continental tyrants the boot since 1067. :D

Right now we can't afford sufficient boots for the handful of soldiers remaining in our army :doh:

[Catfish]

"I have taken England with both my hands"
"Plots were hatched and rebellions, and all the duchy was ablaze with fire"
William the Conqueror was also a 'continental tyrant'
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/timelines/zp88wmn)
Since then things have been more or less stable in England, if not in the rest of the world under England's.. influence.
Of couse, from 1714 to 1837, there was a german king on the british throne, Georg Ludwig, called King George the 1st, then Elector of Hannover, was crowned King of Great Britain. The Kingdom of Hannover was then governed by the personal union for 123 years. The Welfs or Guelphs were then replaced by Queen Victoria of the House of Saxe-Coburg Gotha.. and the rest is history.

[ikalugin]

Right now we can't afford sufficient boots for the handful of soldiers remaining in our army :doh:
You mean in your British Division?

(b/c British Armed Forces could not deploy an Army type formation)

[August]

"I have taken England with both my hands"
"Plots were hatched and rebellions, and all the duchy was ablaze with fire"
William the Conqueror was also a 'continental tyrant'

I'd disagree. William was not a continental tyrant, at least in the class of Napoleon or hitler. He did not attempt to bring the entire content under a single economic and political system. I guess he might have tried given the ability but if we're going to count every strong man and potentate in European history who dreamt of having such power we'd probably have to name some caveman chief as the original EU visionary.

I just think Napoleon was the first to have a serious shot at pulling it off.