Here's a copy and paste from the 1933 article:

Rise in Stocks Reflects Confidence He Will Not Disrupt Nation's Affairs

Berlin is settling down to pass judgment on political developments. Politicians, economists and bankers declare there is usually wide discrepancy between the speeches of opposition politicians and the actions of the group when it gains power.

Consequently, it is not believed that Hitler will accomplish a change in the constitution or that [Reich Minister of Economics Alfred] Hugenberg will bring about a general reduction of interest rates. The government wants to obtain an adjournment of the Reichstag for several months, but it is questionable whether the Centre [Party] will approve of such action.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 157 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

If anyone asks how the Germans could elect a wannabe autocrat populist and how many people could ignore clear signs of genocide going on.

Now you know.

Edit

A lot of people commenting about either my observation not being astute enough, or misinterpreting history in one way or another.

My observation is solely about and how these things happen it's not very conspirational nor institutional, just weaponized anxiety, populism, polarity and apathy.

The particular brand of ideology, or the identity of the perpetrator does very little for the equation. People being selfish and wilfully ignorant as long as they are pandered to.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 61 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    We've been watching fascists pile into legislatures from Russia to the UK for decades. It's cute to make everything about Hitler, but this isn't an event unique to '33.

    • Fearmomgering over migrants
    • Secular violence encouraged by colonial powers
    • Stagnating global economies and bottlenecks in critical resources
    • Anti-colonialism in the third world
    • Those damned Marxists refusing to sit down, shut up, and back the liberal party

    You can find historical parallels in the collapse of Yugoslavia and the Irish Troubles, Modi's rise in India and the Nixon/Reagan reaction to the US civil rights movement, the military coups in Guatemala and El Salvador, the dictatorships of South Korea and South Vietnam...

    There's deeper historical roots to Trumpism than just "America made another oopsie cause we're dumb-dumbs"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Those damned Marxists refusing to sit down, shut up, and back the liberal party

    Well, they quite literally could have prevented Hitler's rise to power, but Stalin decided it was more beneficial to the USSR for the Communists to support the Nazis against the Liberals. Why? Hmmmm... Guess we'll never know?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Well, they quite literally could have prevented Hitler’s rise to power

    By all voting for Hindeburg, the guy who ordered the police to assassinate Rosa Luxembourg?

    Stalin decided it was more beneficial to the USSR for the Communists to support the Nazis

    Hindenburg thought it was more beneficial for the Conservatives to support the Nazis.

    Stalin was the Boogeyman Hindenburg used to justify a fascist government. Purging the Nazis in 1933 was as important to him as it was in 1919.

    Twice, Hindenburg sided with fascists to demolish any kind of civil socialist reform in his country. Twice "evil Russians" got the blame for a domestic slaughter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    The communists literally sided with the fascists to also prevent any kind of socialist/social-democratic/"liberal" reform in the country.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The communists literally sided with the fascists

    The fascists were barely sided with themselves, given all the backstabbing. It took the conservative party to elevate the Nazis to the Chancellorship.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, but the communists STILL sided with the fascists against the socialists/socdems.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    against the socialists/socdems

    The SDP purged its ranks of Communists to appease Hindenburg's State Police. You can't side with a party that's trying to rat you out to the cops and get you killed.

    Which, again, brings us to the conservatives who held power by playing sides off each other until they misplayed their hands.

    The path to fascism was paved back in 1919, when the original Communists were rounded up and executed by the conservatives.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Again, the Communists could have chosen NOT to side with the Fascists, but they did anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    the Communists could have chosen NOT to side with the Fascists

    Why do you keep deflecting blame from the Weimer president and head of the military police? I almost question whether you have a problem with the Fascists at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Because you are actually the one deflecting blame.

    Why did the communists side with the fascists against the liberals?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    First of all, fuck Israel, it’s a disgusting, genocidal, colonialist state. But with that said, unironically, your message comes across as quite anti-semitic, because you went to some deliberate effort to write “Israeli Jew”. Why? There are loads of jews in Israel who are our allies in opposing the Israeli state’s genocide.

    Israel is genocidal and is itself anti-semitic. Conflating Israel with judaism is anti-semitic, and more than anyone else, we should all know better than to do this right-wing dog whistle shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Turning up the controversy to 11: there is a double standard in people blaming other religions for everything but not allowing criticism of Judaism. Even on Lemmy people will gladly insult Islam and Christianity but criticism of Judaism is a taboo.

    This is a good recent video pointing out how far the double standard goes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taIyXzFx2oo

    I do agree that there is no real benefit to using the term Judaism for Israel. Zionism has created their own subsect which is a nation-state movement rather than a religion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    That’s interesting, I wonder if there’s some historical precedent that may make people slightly more concerned about anti-semitism rather than anti-christian sentiment.

    Fuck all religions, criticise Judaism all you want. But if you start talking about jews (or Christians or Muslims) as if they’re some sort of monolithic group, you’re being an asshole.

    Edit: Holy shit, I watched the first 10 seconds of that video and the guest said “Jewish supremacy is the biggest threat to the world today”, which is one of the most overt, outrageously anti-semitic statements I’ve heard in the 21st century. Whoever that guy is, he should not be allowed on TV or YouTube, holy fuck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Okay now continue watching the rest of the video and do keep that outrage you had about Judaism in the back of your mind.

    See if you have that same outrage when guests on Piers say similar things about other religions as the presenter shows examples of.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    There’s no way I’m watching any more of that absolutely disgusting bile. I hate Piers Morgan, he’s a horrible, racist, piece of shit. I’m just as outraged about people being islamophobic. People being islamophobic doesn’t mean that we should accept anti-semitism, what kind of backwards argument is this?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    It is not the Piers podcast, this is a person covering the Piers' podcast engaging in the same level of Islamophobia as Dan Bilzerian engages in Antisemitism.

    Most mainstream media engages in the same level of Islamophobia as what Dan does for antisemitism. People are just so accustomed to it they do not notice how brainwashed they have become into accepting it.

    Only when the word Muslim is replaced with Jew everyone suddenly loses their mind.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    If it makes you feel any better, I do see your point. And now discussing this further requires nuance, and arguing either side will get you labeled anti-semetic or pro-exclusionism. The nuance will be lost and the label applied. You indeed turned the controversy to 11. Well done.

    My only statement is that there's clearly a power imbalance going on. Shining light on that isn't a bad thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    You know what really, really, really sucks?

    All of this. Take the titles and names of the religions away. Make up new words. Call them all whatever you want to and you know what they all have in common?

    Their humanity.

    Any of us would be animals under the right circumstances. All of history says exactly that.

    I wish we could find a way to do away with all of it.

    Even then though, atheist states have committed mass murder. It isn’t just religion, it’s humanity. Isn’t that sad?

    If we erased all of our history tomorrow and gave humans a damn Nintendo and a handful of cartridges, we’d be killing each other over Mario bros in 100 years.

    I really wish I was just sitting in a dirty house in West Virginia, breathing exclusively from my mouth, saliva dripping at my feet. I wish I didn’t see humanity for what it is.

    What really, really sucks is that we could drop this crap and get along if we were truly intelligent. We aren’t. We’re herds of bloodthirsty animals making things up so we can FEEL like we have meaning.

    Oh well.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    your message comes across as quite anti-semitic, because you went to some deliberate effort to write “Israeli Jew”. Why?

    It's a self-identified religious apartheid state. You say it for the same reason you'd talk about Irish Catholics versus Irish Protestants, or Hinduvistas, or Radical Islamic Terrorists.

    The Arabs aren't the ones bombing Gaza, blockading the ports to induce a famine, and systematically raping captives.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)
    1. The term Israeli Jews is used by the Israeli government. Because there are more than 2 million "Israeli Arabs" who live as third class citizens. Though they prefer to identify as Palestinians, their legal status is distinct from other Palestinians who are stateless and live under a military occupation in the West Bank or under siege in the Gaza Strip.
    2. Israeli polls show the majority of Israeli Jews support the genocide. In the US I think the support was 60% for the genocide among US Jews. This doesn’t deny that we have Jewish allies but they are clearly less than half the global Jewish population.
    3. I agree we shouldn’t conflate any nation state with a religion. Zionism itself started among Christians who wanted to bring back Jesus. Zionism then evolved to become a way for Europe to get rid of its Jews and colonize the Middle East.
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Why can’t you just say “genocide is being perpetuated by Israel”, why do you have to make it about jews?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    totally false, it is the state itself that is conducting the genocide. this is like saying that americans are responsible for the genocide because they voted for trump or harris

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    americans are responsible for the genocide because they voted for trump or harris

    Well, aren't they? If a whole populace democratically votes for genocidal maniacs, isn't that at least a little bit their fault? If Americans really didn't want a genocidal leader, surely they wouldn't go out of their way to vote one in?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    No, not really, because the US elections aren’t free. More americans didn’t vote for them than did vote for them. So by your own metric, they didn’t go out of their way to vote for genocide

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    US elections are free.

    They are however not compulsory and the majority decided to stay home.

    Now we get to enjoy the freedom that abstaining from voting provides.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago

    Older Americans remember an old Israel, struggling to just get by.

    Younger Americans... largely don't know anything about it. They know it's some country in the Middle East, but have no idea what's going on in gaza. TBH I did not growing up. It's not taught in school, it's not common knowledge unless your origins/family are from the region.

  • source
  • parent