Anon Accuses Adorable Fitler

[-]

SKRyanrr@reddit

This is 100% an Indian saar. Just look at the jeet language recommendation on the screenshot

[-]

r3ddit_is_cancer@reddit

Actually her name was Eva Hitler at that time

[-]

Martijnbmt@reddit

If he was a white supremacist, why did he kill so many white people hmm?

[-]

Hitler wasn’t a White supremacist. None of the Nazis were. Anyone who actually understood what they are talking about would know that, but unfortunately, most of the world is so imbecilic they only understand the Nazis as whatever they stereotype them to be from their superficial ”understanding” of history.

[-]

ThirdXavier@reddit

Oh I would LOVE to hear why you think they werent. Please continue.

[-]

mischling2543@reddit

They objectively weren't. They were German supremacists who hated Slavs and Ashkenazi Jews more than actual brown people.

[-]

ThirdXavier@reddit

Germans are whire therefore they are white supremacists by definition. Slavs and jews are caucasian but the definiton of "white" changes constantly and at the time those groups were not considered white. The same thing happened to the Irish and Italians in gilded age America.

[-]

mischling2543@reddit

That is just not true. Redditors like to repeat it but that was only reality in certain parts of the US northeast for a very short period of time. Europeans never considered Slavs or Jews to be non-white or even non-caucasoid, which was the larger umbrella term accepted by racial scientists since at least the 1880s (from which was get the modern "Caucasian" as a synonym for white, another term used almost exclusively in America). The Nazis did however consider them non-Germanic and non-Aryan, another umbrella term encompassing Persians and Indians but excluding white Slavs, Jews, and various Mediterranean peoples.

How you can claim an ideology that placed Indians above Poles on their racial hierarchy is a level of mental gymnastics that is completely beyond me.

[-]

BigTimeTimmyTime@reddit

This conversation makes me miss the old Internet.

[-]

ImSomeRandomHuman@reddit

>Germans are whire therefore they are white supremacists by definition

This is egregious logic and it is clear this isn't what actually led you to your claim; rather, you half-assed this to justify your preconceived notion. If I think a Golden Retriever is the best pet, but am ambivalent to or even hate anything else, whether a Pitbull or a Persian cat, do I think dogs are the best pets, or that a type of dog is the best pet? This isn't that difficult.

>but the definiton of "white" changes constantly and at the time those groups were not considered white. The same thing happened to the Irish and Italians in gilded age America.

The Nazis very seldomly, if not never, used the term "White". At most their references to a Caucasoid category were contextual, but never part of their racial hierarchy. If you want to get into the idea that the Slavs were not considered Aryan, neither were many Southern Europeans, but they were still part of an Aryan grouping. The term "White" in Europe was mainly a categorical or kin term for familiar peoples, oftentimes not even racial. Nationalism was far more prevalent as a differentiator.

[-]

ImSomeRandomHuman@reddit

More specifically Aryan supremacists. The Nazis acknowledged there were Peoples who had greater Nordic DNA, or more cultural qualities, and the like, such as the Scandinavians, and even the English who they deemed to be greater Seafarers and colonialists, or the Mediterranean Aryans who predicated European culture; the movement was just focused in Germany and had an immense German nationalist appeal, but the idea wasn't necessarily that the German people as a whole were at the top, but among the top.

[-]

pojohnny@reddit

good points

[-]

trowaway639@reddit

Long story short northern Europe used to be populated mostly by white people and finer lines were needed in order to draw an us versus them rethoric.

If a Nazi speaker says we the whites they are including as their own people a lot of cultures marked for subjugation or execution as an equal instead of the desired subhuman label decreed by the party.

Putting it simply a man at a modern KKK rally should see a redhead as one of their own while a man at a Nazi rally should see a redhead as an inferior human.

Just call em racist, it ain't wrong to do so.

[-]

live22morrow@reddit

White is a specific classification mainly used and pushed by Americans. White supremacism is therefore the belief that this group of people is superior to others.
Hitler's beliefs would categorize large portions of that group as subhuman, thus he was not a White supremacist. It would be more accurate to call him an "Aryan supremacist" (based on Hitler's very specific interpretation of what Aryan meant).

[-]

ImSomeRandomHuman@reddit

Do you want to argue why they were? I don't care how terrible your logic is, and I could argue the first point, but people who make the claim need to reason their argument first.

[-]

666Drachenlord666@reddit

Because the nazi parties colour was brown

[-]

TombolaOfCincinnatus@reddit

The party colours were red, white and black. Brown was associated with the Sturmabteilung (SA), because they used readily available colonial uniforms that were superfluous after Germany lost her African colonies in the treaty of Versailles.

[-]

regimentIV@reddit

That's wrong. Red, white and black were the colours of the German Empire long before the Nazis and the NSDAP's party colours (not just the SA) have been brown since the early twenties (in the beginning the movement was associated with red but switched to brown because of the red communists/SPD).

[-]

anonymouswan1@reddit

leddit response

[-]

NM_Requete@reddit

WYTE historians don't want you to see this actual picture of Eva Braun.

I don't care what they tell you in school, Eva Braun was black.

[-]

CreamNPeaches@reddit

That's not Eva Braun, that's Eva Brown.

[-]

Ilovethrowawaysngl@reddit

<EU flag <jeet language reccomendation on the overview

Nice try rajesh

[-]