this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
522 points (98.5% liked)

Greentext

4415 readers
1079 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 27 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

And that is why Nazis are the biggest losers in History.

Not only did they claim their army was the best, but their people were also the best. So losing after a single war proves their army wasn't the strongest and their people weren't the best.

They also got beaten by a combination of different countries who allow anyone to join.

Meaning, the Nazis were beaten by diversity and inclusivity.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The Confederates, for the non-Americans, take challenge to that.

They were the opposing force during the American Civil War, trying to keep slavery. Their reign was so short, even a can of beans last longer than they did.

And yet that doesn't stop chucklefucks in the American South proudly showing their Confederate flag, all because America is too chicken shit to call them losers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 minutes ago

But it at least outlasted a lettuce, I think.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 46 minutes ago (1 children)

The European World Wars only produced losers. WW1 signaled the beginning of the end of the British Empire, the escalated decline of the French Empire, and the total collapse of the Russian Empire. WW2 obliterated a century of industrial development and squandered a generation of young people on a pointless pissing contest, only to hand the continent to a pair of foreign superpowers.

The US came out ahead in both wars primarily because they were the last to join and the only ones to escape virtually unscathed.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

Then we felt left out and decided that we wanted to be destroyed by fascism, too.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 23 minutes ago

We exported fascism into Europe initially. America has a long and horrible history of fascism, straight back to the colonial era. By the early 20th century, guys like Henry Ford were quite literally churning out the textbook definition of antisemitism (The Protocols of the Elders of Zion) and shipping it all across the Old World, to stock the furnace of racial animus and ramp the continent up into a second world war.

Then we harvested the remnants of fascism back into our own country after German Nazism failed. The open-borders policy extended to German military and science officers was a shocking reversal relative to our naked hostility towards Jewish refugees and other European dissidents in the run up to the wars.

We weren't destroyed by fascism. We were its wellspring. We sent it out abroad, like the seeds of an evil dandelion, and then we reaped what we'd sown when those seeds blossomed.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 hours ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 43 minutes ago

The political inclinations of monarchist Germany weren't anything to brag about. The German Colonial Empire was just as racist, vulgar, and blood drenched as anything the rest of the continent produced.

Nazis brought the imperial tendencies home to Berlin. They didn't invent them from whole cloth.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 58 minutes ago

No, but they were the same country.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

What war had the nazi zombies?

[–] [email protected] 74 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Anon doubts WW2 Germany

Poor Franz

[–] [email protected] 71 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

Well, not to defend the nazis or anything, but they did manage to make considerable amounts of damage and it took multiple great powers working together to beat them back.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 hours ago

Yes, they were beaten by a group of different people who let anyone join.

Nazis were literally defeated by diversity and inclusivity.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

That's how Fascists work though. They pick fights with bigger and bigger opponents -- because they're invulnerable, you see -- until they lose. Their economy was absolutely insane, and required flat out pillaging their neighbours. Eventually your neighbours are too big to pillage.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Isn't that not just an imperialistic trait, not necessarily a fascistic one? Franco's Spain didn't collapse, while it was still very much fascistic.

All the while, this trait is very much applicable to the Roman, Ottoman, Soviet or US empires.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Historians debate just how fascist Franco was. Hell, Orwell wasn't even quite sure, and he was very open about the fact that he went to Spain to kill a fascist.

Edit: a choice passage out of Homage to Catalonia, emphasis added:

But there were several points that escaped general notice. To begin with, Franco was not strictly comparable with Hitler or Mussolini. His rising was a military mutiny backed up by the aristocracy and the Church, and in the main, especially at the beginning, it was an attempt not so much to impose Fascism as to restore feudalism. This meant that Franco had against him not only the working class but also various sections of the liberal bourgeoisie—the very people who are the supporters of Fascism when it appears in a more modern form. More important than this was the fact that the Spanish working class did not, as we might conceivably do in England, resist Franco in the name of 'democracy' and the status quo; their resistance was accompanied by—one might almost say it consisted of—a definite revolutionary outbreak. Land was seized by the peasants; many factories and most of the transport were seized by the trade unions; churches were wrecked and the priests driven out or killed. The Daily Mail, amid the cheers of the Catholic clergy, was able to represent Franco as a patriot delivering his country from hordes of fiendish 'Reds'.

And as a side note, the Daily Mail has been terrible for a long, long time.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 hours ago

Also, they successfully occupied most of the countries in western and central Europe. It's only when they tried to expand into Russia that the war started. If they didn't pick a fight with the russians, the Third Reich would have lasted much longer.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 hours ago

They won many wars in a row without losing. Then they just overdid it a lil bit at the end and got bonked. They couldve had a huge empire if they just stopped a bit earlier.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

I won’t say Finland or Thailand were great powers but Japan had a decent showing so it’s not like they were alone

Though it really only took USSR to beat Germany

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

The USSR was only in the fight thanks to lend lease and even Stalin admitted as much.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago

Bingo. American industry, British intelligence, and Russian Blood won the war in Europe. It was always a combined effort, and anyone claiming one power could have won alone is talking nonsense.

With American supplies, the USSR might have been able to defeat Germany without the Allies sending ground forces into Europe. However, there’s no way the Red Army could have defeated both Germany and Japan alone. The United States was the major force in the Pacific theater.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

I think a major part of getting "beat" is they fought the USSR in the east and simultaneously the USA and UK in the west. I mean the war against Stalin wasn't going super smoothy. But it went on since 1941 already. And it really went south for the nazis when the USA joined WW2.

[–] [email protected] 105 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Same with the confederacy:

  • lasted just 4 years
  • lost a war against the USA

Yet their flags are waived around with pride 250+ years later. How perfectly normal

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago

Yeah, certain people can only feel superior to others to cover up for inferiority within themselves.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 11 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 17 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

wasn't even the last one standing on the losing side either. Japanese people are better than the master race?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 hours ago

There's some Nazi "history" about how the Japanese were some long lost Aryan tribe. Being post-truth is flexible that way.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 11 hours ago

Well, how much hentai did the nazis produce? Smh

[–] [email protected] 14 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Also did you know Hitler was a tweaker?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

U mean a druggy?

Everyone used to consume inorbitant amounts of hard drugs! Thats the charm of the time!

Or like are you to implying the narrative of nazi generals? That the war would have been won tups if Hitler didn’t meddle? ‘Cause thats also not true! The war rememtos are complete lies meant to convince nato to hire them as advisers, which they would have anyways. If things were to shit the fan with the ussr then they wanted the german militia…

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Won the war? Nah. Been much more of a pain in the ass for the allies to win? Probably

[–] [email protected] 1 points 32 minutes ago

U don’t think that the US would have been willing to settle for peace if the germans literally won every single battlefield faster? They could have by giving [author of the book] all the resources and by giving none to the competing gens

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Alternatively, those generals saw how badly things were going by late 1943/early 1944 and would push for a negotiated surrender. While those generals definitely did put all the blame on Hitler in their post-war memoirs to cover their own failures, Hitler was certainly to blame for continuing to fight until the Reds were almost literally knocking on his bunker door.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Also very possible. At the end of the day it’s all speculation