Saturday, 21 December 2013

One of the most irrational elements of the European Genocide, one which I am sure will greatly exercise future historians who look back on this era of madness, is how it is that the immigration issue came to be so tied up with the Hitler issue, even though immigration was not one of Hitler's major themes and, in the few remarks he made about the subject, the Führer appeared to take a favourable view of immigrants himself.

From the multicult propaganda apparatus we hear constantly that immigrants are the best and brightest, that they have more get-up-and-go and work ethic than the lazy indigenes who just hang around in the places where they happened to be born. This is exactly what Hitler thought, too. Here is an extract from Mein Kampf.

The country lad who migrates to the big city feels attracted by what has been described as easy work – which it may be in reality – and few working hours. He is especially entranced by the magic glimmer spread over the big cities. Accustomed in the country to earn a steady wage, he has been taught not to quit his former post until a new one is at least in sight. As there is a great scarcity of agricultural labour, the probability of long unemployment in the country has been very small. It is a mistake to presume that the lad who leaves the countryside for the town is not made of such sound material as those who remain at home to work on the land. On the contrary, experience shows that it is the more healthy and more vigorous that emigrate, and not the reverse. Among these emigrants I include not merely those who emigrate to America, but also the servant boy in the country who decides to leave his native village and migrate to the big city where he will be a stranger. He is ready to take the risk of an uncertain fate.
Source: Mein Kampf











12 comments:

Anonymous said...

So the Führer loved both immigrants (which makes logical sense) and Muslims, interesting paragraph. Those who believe things would be so much different if he had prevailed have not done proper research.

Roni said...

It was true as long as you had to deal with own people who had moved (still) to the big city to find there job etc.. In former days it was also true when Europeans or Chinese had moved to other country to build there a new future. Today many of the ‘healthy though immigrants’ are looking for a 'good job' in cracking ATN’s, robberies and the ‘drug industry’. No real benefit is coming from them.

Anonymous said...

Hey CZ, there is a guy named Dave Emory who runs a website called spitfirelist http://spitfirelist.com/ where he claims basically that the EU was founded largely by Nazi industrialists who wanted to create a Fouth Reich by making the whole of Europe into 'Greater Germany'.
He has documents from the Nazis talking about creating a 'monetary union' in Europe to cement their domination of Europe which very interestingly appears to be taking place with Germany having become an economic superpower today. I am a long time reader and admirer of your blog and If you would please, can I have your thoughts on this?

Anonymous said...

Here is some more information CZ on German EU domination:
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23010485
More on the documents about the Nazis planning a 'European Economic Community'. This is even more interesting yet.
http://www.eu-facts.org/en/background/dark_roots_europe_lecture.html

Anonymous said...

Hitler is talking about Germans migrating from the country to the city in search of jobs or to other countries like the USA. It has nothing to do with multiculturalism. He did not support a Muslim/African/Asian/Indian takeover of Europe like the multiculturalists do. As for the claims of his Muslim support there were also Muslims fighting in the Allied armed forces of Britain and France - Pakistanis and Egyptians for the former and Algerians, Tunisians and Moroccans for the latter. The national socialists did have an idea of a European type union but that was with Europeans in charge and Europeans working with each other not denizens of the third world. Those who claim the EU of today is some kind of Nazis in disguise are wrong. It is against the law to criticise Jews or Judaism in Germany, France and other EU countries. If you are a holocaust revisionist and even if you have evidence to back up your claims in the EU you will be jailed and/or heavily fined. How does this reconcile with the claim that Nazis are secretly in charge?
www.ihr.org/news/irving022006.html

CRUSADER said...

Hmm interesting.. I can not imagine immigrants who the nazi regime would consider "sub-human" being let into Germany during that period..

Anonymous said...

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/giulio-meotti/why-did-so-many-wanted-nazis-convert-to-islam/
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/islamic_fascism_the_nazi_connection.html
http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/nazi_arab.htm

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

I listened to a lot of Dave Emory's programs years ago before I was really aware of the islamisation or European Genocide issues. In general, I don't really find him persuasive. He conjures up a giant conspiracy theory that is a sort of mirror image of anti-semitic conspiracy theories. According to this, Nazis are behind everything, including jihad terrorism. Apparently the Nazis, lurking in their secret base somewhere in South America, put the Muslims up to it. In one episode, I recall, he even claimed, or rather strongly hinted, that the Nazis had caused an earthquake somewhere using an earthquake machine.

He seems to specialise in an artfully ambiguous use of language that suggests connections between people and things without ever making definitive claims about them. That's one reason why he confines himself to the radio format instead of the written word, I think. The written word would force him to be concrete. The claims would have to be expressed in a more definitive form and could therefore be more easily refuted.

I don't recall anything specifically about what he said about the origins of the European Union. In general, he strikes me as unreliable. Something I read on Alex Constantine's blog about him once also made me doubt his mental stability.

The Kalergi Plan offers an interesting perspective on the pre-war origins of the European Union. I'll probably post about it sometime.

Anonymous said...

" I can not imagine immigrants who the nazi regime would consider "sub-human" being let into Germany during that period.."

US propaganda during the war regularly portrayed "the Japs" as subhuman. Large numbers of Slavs were brought to Germany as laborers during the war. Large numbers of Slavs fought in the German and other Axis armed forces. Also-famously- quite a few men of partial Jewish ancestry served in the German military during WW2. Not that NS German didn't have a racial ideology-but it wasn't consistent and it wasn't cast in stone.

Anonymous said...

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/03/racial-studies-of-jews-in-national-socialist-germany/
(...)
"The recently published book Race and the Third Reich by the Britisher Christo­pher M. Hutton...Hutton distinguishes between early ideologically-driven (1930–35) racial tracts when the NSDAP was seeking power and not yet firmly entrenched, and the later (1936-44) racial studies in Germany after the Party had secured its power. Aside from the Germans’ politi cally mandated application of their theories to the Jews, the tech niques used in their racial studies were quite similar to those employed outside Germany.

Hutton notes that official publications on race in the later years of Nazi rule actually emphasized that the term “Aryan” belonged to linguistics and was not a racial category at all. Influenced by Mendelian genetics, German racial anthropologists recognized that there was no neces sary link between ideal physical appearance and ideal character. Eventually, Hutton states, when World War II threatened and Germany needed allies, terms such as “Nordi cism,” “Germanism,” and “Aryanism” that suggested exclusivity and elitism were discarded as a political liability. Indeed, near the end of the war many SS units were made up of Slavs, French, Belgians, Scandinavians, and even Arabs."
(...)

Anonymous said...

"Eventually, Hutton states, when World War II threatened and Germany needed allies, terms such as “Nordi cism,” “Germanism,” and “Aryanism” that suggested exclusivity and elitism were discarded as a political liability. Indeed, near the end of the war many SS units were made up of Slavs, French, Belgians, Scandinavians, and even Arabs."
(...)"

This statement sounds some what confused. The belgians and scandinavians and even the majority of the french would have been considered germanic by the original criteria of "gemanism".
The Scandinavians were even considered to have the largest fraction of pure nordics and were for all practical purposes considered as germanic model societies.

Only the arab contingent would have been considered a foreign racial element, while the relationsship with the slavic populations was more ambigious . Since several slavic nations were close allies with NS germany, while soviet russia was the main military enemy.

Seems like Hutton is confusing the labels in order to suppport his thesis.

Anonymous said...

You seem to be misunderstanding the difference between migrants, emigration and immigrants. Please look these words up in a dictionary as your commentary doesn't make sense. Hitler was staunchly against immigrants. He spoke of not only closing the borders but also of the expulsion of immigrants currently in Germany. You can read about this in his Nuremberg speeches and Mein Kampf.

Search

Loading...

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews