Hitler did the right thing.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's put it this way: I think that Hitler pretty much acted honest upon his own value system, just like Sharon.
 
That is the most ridiculous

synopsis of the trajedy that was hitler.


He was not crazy. He was doing the elites bidding. Some of the wealtiest of the time funded him.

He was being a fascist dictator, what he was paid to do.
 
Genocide sometimes is necessary.
Click to expand...

This is the most retarded oxymoranic thing Ive ever had the pleasure of hearing.

But thanks for the chuckle.

Oh and another thing - Hitler was a fucking psycho. Period. Who gives a shit about his value ie moral codes? I bet Bundy thought he was doing "the right thing" also. Or that bastard down in South America that has killed 200+ children. Excuse my lack of class in this post, but I just cant believe the odacity that certain members display around here.

Get a clue people:rolleyes:
 
Re: That is the most ridiculous

Originally posted by jandt
synopsis of the trajedy that was hitler.


He was not crazy. He was doing the elites bidding. Some of the wealtiest of the time funded him.

He was being a fascist dictator, what he was paid to do.
Click to expand...

Sorry Jandt, I usually dont put people down around here, but WTF are you snorting? Seriously, look at ALL the shit you said about Bush, yet your defending Hitler? Isnt Bush doing "what he is paid to do?"

Hitler was not crazy? Oh of course not, why the hell would we think that!!
 
Hitler was not a psyco

ANYONE can become used to ANYTHING, that is why we were able to leave the trees in the first place.

The facts of hitler and what was for a time nazi germany have been altered to place all the blame on an insane hitler to deflect the ECONOMIC realities of fascism.

Again, I plead with you to investigate the FINANCIAL facts of history, fascism, and the elite of the world.

www.theyrule.net

http://www.brasscheck.com/heartfield/rise.html
 
You are right, Bush is no more or less a nut than hitler. Both answer to those that own them, those that put them there.

I am not defending hitler.

I am drawing parallels between the two.

Those that desire and profit from a fascist state have not changed their tactics much in the last fifty years. It is an attempt at more friendly fascism, at least at home, but it is fascism none the less.

Fascism is and always has been a false revolution. One of the main components is a manufactured scapegoat. For hitler it was the jews, for bush it is muslim.
 
Last edited:
It didnt have to be. Its what that fascist group decided to do.

I do agree that Hitler did not act alone. It was just as much as his fault as it was his administration. He is more of a symbol of that era - and he was a psycho.
 
No, you are not seeing it. Such atrocities are a fundemental part of the fascist state.

Left to its own devices, i.e. big business has no complaints under a fascist ruler, a fascist dictatorship cannot help but be consumed by its own lust for power and examples to exercise same.

Genocide and like atrocities are the undoing of any fascist state.
 
Selling Black cars is another side effect of fascism, go ask Henry Ford:p
 
Sorry GB-GIL, but I don't see the point of your post.
You begin by saying that something is good if compatible with our own moral system, but then you tranfer it to a shared moral system ("IT is good", you use the third person).

Don't you think that you should have said 'We -personaly- think something is good if compatible with our moral system', but then you just tell us the definition of a moral system.

Am I missing something or you just want to say that moral, good, evil is a relative notion and that Hitler (for ex) was coherent with himself ?
 
I like to think in terms of the world population.

Its hard for me to admit, but I cannot lie to myself for that would be wrong. I truly believe that if AIDS would spread more throughout India and the middle east, the future would be much more prosperous.

I know this is really sick, but you have to realize that in the year 2050 there will be NINE BILLION people.

http://www.npg.org/facts/world_pop_year.htm

Europe's population will be the only population to decrease. India has the most people now and will grow the most.

I'm sorry to offend anyone, but be truthful in this matter.

What does everyone else propose that we do about population control? Many religions do not believe in using preventive techniques... so I am baffled.
 
At least you recognize that you are really sick. Admitting it is the first step.

I hope AIDS spreads through your immediate DNA pool. No offense, just I think in terms of intelligent populations.
 
This one is very easy. Hehe, you're playing with words though and some people aren't following apparently. Genocide is definately a good thing if you are so freakin jacked up that you think genocide is a good thing. How can that be debated? It is retarded to debate it.

However, if someone comes to that conclusion I believe it's indicative of a serious problem. If they were to even remotely attempt to hurt someone in the name of their grandios conclusion then they should be exterminated. :)

I think a much more interesting thread would be: "Should someone be exterminated for coming to the conclusion that they think genocide is good?". Hehe, now that's a debate.
 
Could Hitler have thought that what he was doing was right? Yes.

Is it possible that most reasonable humans would disagree with him? Yes.

You start to lose your right to free expression when it infringes on other's right to life.
 
Moral Relativism

God, this argument fatigues me. GB-GIL, yeah, most people aren't or didn't get what you were saying at first. I've read your posts in this thread (all of them) and i understand and vehemently disagree.


You support moral relativism which states, essentially, that my subjective truth equates to a moral objectivity. Nonsense, hogwash, egomania. Sorry, but while you might have a point concerning someone's personal convictions: "I thought I was doing the right thing!" or even, "God dammit! I WAS doing the right thing!!!" This merely means that they didn't go against their own personal convictions. It does not mean that they have followed what is "right."

We say, what is right if different for every man and every culture. The semantic twists in such statement parallel the complexities of human nature. We DON'T know objectively what is right. We might be positively sure in our minds that grass is green. Hell, chlorophyl is green!!! But our eyes aren't sensitive to the red in the color-spectrum. (look up Earthshine on the internet).

anyway, my point is this. We are not God. We disagree on what is right.


Allow me to quote a Zen koan to round off my point here:

"To be uncertain is to be uncomforable; to be certain is to be ridiculous."
 
jandt,

just I think in terms of intelligent populations.
Click to expand...

Well, im guessing that you are attacking my intelligence, and i can take that, but you must realise that we are going to fester in a human cess pool very soon. I am guessing that you live in a Western country where population is not a problem, but very soon Middle Eastern countries are going to overflow with people who are going to come into your country... after this, more and more people will procreate... think about that for a while...

Oh yeah, and thinking intelligently...
India (the country with the largest population)
http://www.ilpnet.org/about/

Those are just the people that CAN read, many of them do not have many other life skills. Think about how that will effect the earth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top