Which Germany was the best?

[Spiritual Republic of Caryton]

Aaaaaand noooooooooow iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitssssssssss.... springtime, for Hitler, and Germany!

[Senkaku]

And no, the megalomania goes from before he started losing the war.
I think you are letting your personal feelings get in the way of admitting the truth.

Hitler was no “hero” of the German people or whatever. He was a megalomaniacal lunatic who believed he was some sort of messiah. And thought war would have to continue until all possible rivals were defeated and destroyed.

He arguably would've been upheld as a hero for Germany if Hitler pulled off a German victory or favorable position from World War II. I don't see this happening unless he cancelled his invasion of the Soviet Union and settled for keeping any gains from before June of 1941. But they didn't have the benefit of hindsight- did they?

I would say it would be perfectly logical for Hitler to conclude that he can't stop the war if neither the UK nor the Soviet Union were willing to agree to any armistice, even when Hitler was at peak leverage and territory after Dunkirk.

I found it, it turns out that it is from 1988. The only dialogue that can be attributed to the real Hitler is the part about wanting Germany to perish if the war was lost. But this was only in 1945 and not a sentiment he had before then. The actor doesn't hold a candle to Bruno Ganz's portrayal, but they were nevertheless entertaining in the 20 July Plot scene, where Hitler was almost assassinated in 1944.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7zBwwml2rs

To paraphrase a scene from the new BoJack episodes-

You play these games, "if he hadn't done this, if he wasn't so that", but he did, and he was, and here we are.

[The Huskar Social Union]

"If only Hitler wasnt a Nazi and didnt do that thing he went on about doing for years and that was so key to his ideology"

[Deamonopolis]

The one in the alternate universe thats located on the north pole, hehehehee

Serious answer: I like none of them.

[New Sukberia]

The one ruled by Charlemagne.

You know I'm right.

He's spitting straight facts right here and everyone knows it.

[Nimzonia]

Never mind the 94 edgelords giggling to themselves at how naughty they are for ticking the Nazi box, are there really 37 people here who honestly believe the Weimar Republic was the best incarnation of the German state?

[Novus America]

He arguably would've been upheld as a hero for Germany if Hitler pulled off a German victory or favorable position from World War II. I don't see this happening unless he cancelled his invasion of the Soviet Union and settled for keeping any gains from before June of 1941. But they didn't have the benefit of hindsight- did they?

I would say it would be perfectly logical for Hitler to conclude that he can't stop the war if neither the UK nor the Soviet Union were willing to agree to any armistice, even when Hitler was at peak leverage and territory after Dunkirk.

I found it, it turns out that it is from 1988. The only dialogue that can be attributed to the real Hitler is the part about wanting Germany to perish if the war was lost. But this was only in 1945 and not a sentiment he had before then. The actor doesn't hold a candle to Bruno Ganz's portrayal, but they were nevertheless entertaining in the 20 July Plot scene, where Hitler was almost assassinated in 1944.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7zBwwml2rs

To paraphrase a scene from the new BoJack episodes-

You play these games, "if he hadn't done this, if he wasn't so that", but he did, and he was, and here we are.

Exactly. What matters is what he actually was and what he actually did, not what people might prefer he was or what people might prefer he did.
The fact is he was a megalomaniacal and genocidal lunatic who did not no when to stop, devastating Germany and kill millions of Germans, along with the millions of other victims.

[North German Realm]

Never mind the 94 edgelords giggling to themselves at how naughty they are for ticking the Nazi box, are there really 37 people here who honestly believe the Weimar Republic was the best incarnation of the German state?

It had the largest potential, and really failed in large part due to things that were outside of its control. It wasn't the "greatest", but the best.

[Heloin]

Never mind the 94 edgelords giggling to themselves at how naughty they are for ticking the Nazi box, are there really 37 people here who honestly believe the Weimar Republic was the best incarnation of the German state?

It had the largest potential, and really failed in large part due to things that were outside of its control. It wasn't the "greatest", but the best.

It’s also the closest we got to having a Wiener Germany.

[Saiwania]

Never mind the 94 edgelords giggling to themselves at how naughty they are for ticking the Nazi box...

Or perhaps, these people are like I am or similar to myself. Which is that they score low in terms of empathy. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, because there are many millions of people out there that are more self absorbed or don't give a damn about other people as much, whom for their purposes are more like tools/objects to be manipulated for their benefit than to ever actually relate to. People who fit this category are rumored to be more attracted to authoritarian/highly conservative politics by default.

The solution in my mind is for these people to not suppress their true nature to become what I'd call a "bleeding heart" but rather- to embrace it, and find niches/roles in society where it is more accepted or tolerated. Supposedly, I most closely fit in with "zero-positive" where I value order, processes, rules, systems, over people.

[TURTLESHROOM II]

First Reich (HRE) = Best Reich

The unification of Germany was a mistake. Freaking Napoleon.

[The New California Republic]

The unification of Germany was a mistake.

Thatcher agrees.

[Kandorith]

Actually baffled by how many people for Nazi Germany...

Obviously Charlemagne Germany is best Germany.

Okay okay and Hasselhoff Germany.

[TURTLESHROOM II]

The solution in my mind is for these people to not suppress their true nature to become what I'd call a "bleeding heart" but rather- to embrace it, and find niches/roles in society where it is more accepted or tolerated. Supposedly, I most closely fit in with "zero-positive" where I value order, processes, rules, systems, over people.

There's nothing wrong with loving authoritarianism or prefering order and such over men. THe problem is that you don't need empathy to recognize that rounding up and exterminating thirty million souls on arbitrary demographics is wrong. Even if you don't care about the people being gassed, lashed, and worked to death, consider the economic, scientific, and cultural losses those people could have contributed to society.

Become a fascist, absolute monarchist (my reccomendation, as monarchism has the best capacity for a just ruler IMO, and it's beautiful), Junta advocate, stratocracy advocate, etc., and ditch the Nazis. Authoritarianism isn't inherently evil. National Socialism is.

Hating the Nazis is not a matter of empathy. It's a matter of being human. Even if you don't care about the Holocaust because you have no empathy or, worse, deny its existence, the fact remains were unmatched in their evil and literally allowed their regiments to scewer bayonets through the skulls of pre-school children and their teachers after they surrendered to them.

Even without the Holocaust, the Nazis cannot be defended. Fascism can. Fascism could even work for a while (before its economics kill it) if the ruler was a philosopher-generalissimo and not obsessed with conquering everything. National Socialism cannot ever work. If Hitler won, Nazi Germany would probably collapse by 1980 AD because the economic revival Hitler created was fake. He cannibalized everything and constantly had to conquer to get resources to support what was no less than a national pyramid scheme. Hitler's economic miracle is smoke and mirrors. Mussolini's was not.

[Novus America]

Never mind the 94 edgelords giggling to themselves at how naughty they are for ticking the Nazi box...

Or perhaps, these people are like I am or similar to myself. Which is that they score low in terms of empathy. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, because there are many millions of people out there that are more self absorbed or don't give a damn about other people as much, whom for their purposes are more like tools/objects to be manipulated for their benefit than to ever actually relate to. People who fit this category are rumored to be more attracted to authoritarian/highly conservative politics by default.

The solution in my mind is for these people to not suppress their true nature to become what I'd call a "bleeding heart" but rather- to embrace it, and find niches/roles in society where it is more accepted or tolerated. Supposedly, I most closely fit in with "zero-positive" where I value order, processes, rules, systems, over people.

This however does not even provide justification. Even if you think genocide is okay, and killing people without trial okay, Nazi Germany did NOT operate based on order, standardized processes, rules and systems.

Rather the government of Nazi Germany was a chaotic mess with no rule of law, and massive redundancy and infighting.
It was not an orderly government at all. One of the many reasons they failed in the war was their military procurement and logistics was such a mess.

Moreover getting your country destroyed in a massive war that YOU STARTED is not contributing to any of the above.

The problem is you apply a rose tinted view, and like Nazi Germany as you imagined it was, not as it actually was.

[TURTLESHROOM II]

The unification of Germany was a mistake.

Thatcher agrees.

No no, I was referring to Otto von Bismarck, not East and West Germany!

[Agend]

Or perhaps, these people are like I am or similar to myself. Which is that they score low in terms of empathy. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, because there are many millions of people out there that are more self absorbed or don't give a damn about other people as much, whom for their purposes are more like tools/objects to be manipulated for their benefit than to ever actually relate to. People who fit this category are rumored to be more attracted to authoritarian/highly conservative politics by default.

The solution in my mind is for these people to not suppress their true nature to become what I'd call a "bleeding heart" but rather- to embrace it, and find niches/roles in society where it is more accepted or tolerated. Supposedly, I most closely fit in with "zero-positive" where I value order, processes, rules, systems, over people.

This however does not even provide justification. Even if you think genocide is okay, and killing people without trial okay, Nazi Germany did NOT operate based on order, standardized processes, rules and systems.

Rather the government of Nazi Germany was a chaotic mess with no rule of law, and massive redundancy and infighting.
It was not an orderly government at all. One of the many reasons they failed in the war was their military procurement and logistics was such a mess.

Moreover getting your country destroyed in a massive war that YOU STARTED is not contributing to any of the above.

The problem is you apply a rose tinted view, and like Nazi Germany as you imagined it was, not as it actually was.

If it was a chaotic mess as you say it is, then it would have failed the moment it set foot on the battlefield. Logistics for any country in war is a mess, in fact, you have to be suspicious if they are on time.

[Saiwania]

The problem is you apply a rose tinted view, and like Nazi Germany as you imagined it was, not as it actually was.

I don't know for certain if that is the case. But I'd think that with a different leader that Nazism could've been more of a success. If we're to recognize that Hitler's vision was a failure and can't be salvaged enough with minor or major tweaks, there is still one other major variant that hasn't been tried that is perhaps worth pursuing.

Gregor Strasser had a separate faction/vision within the NSDAP that lost out because of the Night of the Long Knives. If they got control instead, we don't know if it'd still fail or not.

[Derika]

Never mind the 94 edgelords giggling to themselves at how naughty they are for ticking the Nazi box,

Perhaps they were focused on more of the military perspective. The Third Reich had the biggest/more equipped army then the rest of the other options.

[Novus America]

This however does not even provide justification. Even if you think genocide is okay, and killing people without trial okay, Nazi Germany did NOT operate based on order, standardized processes, rules and systems.

Rather the government of Nazi Germany was a chaotic mess with no rule of law, and massive redundancy and infighting.
It was not an orderly government at all. One of the many reasons they failed in the war was their military procurement and logistics was such a mess.

Moreover getting your country destroyed in a massive war that YOU STARTED is not contributing to any of the above.

The problem is you apply a rose tinted view, and like Nazi Germany as you imagined it was, not as it actually was.

If it was a chaotic mess as you say it is, then it would have failed the moment it set foot on the battlefield. Logistics for any country in war is a mess, in fact, you have to be suspicious if they are on time.

Not necessarily. Its early successful wars were quick, and in nearby countries thus not requiring as extensive logistics.

Once it got involved in a prolonged war of attrition or involved further away it lost.

That it actually succeeded in those early wars were in spite of its problems, and due more to luck and the weakness of its enemies rather than its own strength, and due to the success of many of its military leaders (its military was much more orderly and organized than the rest of the government although it still had problems).

[Novus America]

The problem is you apply a rose tinted view, and like Nazi Germany as you imagined it was, not as it actually was.

I don't know for certain if that is the case. But I'd think that with a different leader that Nazism could've been more of a success. If we're to recognize that Hitler's vision was a failure and can't be salvaged enough with minor or major tweaks, there is still one other major variant that hasn't been tried that is perhaps worth pursuing.

Gregor Strasser had a separate faction/vision within the NSDAP that lost out because of the Night of the Long Knives. If they got control instead, we don't know if it'd still fail or not.

www.newsweek.com/hitler-incompetent-laz ... 36%3famp=1

It was the case. The main question was whether or not it was intentional (to prevent anyone else from becoming a threat and keep Hitler as the unifying force, a regime with a good governing structure does not need a one man rule, and can replace the one man) or unintentional, or a mix of the two.

Sure it is possible that had Hitler died or been eliminated earlier it would have survived. If Hitler died before the invasion of Poland for example) but that does not change the fact that the Nazi regime as it was was not near and orderly and despite earlier successes still failed in the medium term (it only survived a mere 12 years).

But you cannot asses Nazi Germany as it was as something separate from Hitler as it was based on personal rule.

[Novus America]

Never mind the 94 edgelords giggling to themselves at how naughty they are for ticking the Nazi box,

Perhaps they were focused on more of the military perspective. The Third Reich had the biggest/more equipped army then the rest of the other options.

Well West Germany has a very powerful military that was not as large, (although still quite large) but more technologically advanced. And it did not lose any wars.

And at least the German Empire lasted longer than 12 years.

Sure some people like to wank to Tiger tanks and the Nazi uniforms (I do admit they had a cool aesthetic although this forgives absolutely zero of their other crimes) but the simple fact is despite some spectacular (and lucky) early successes in the medium term they failed militarily and lead their country into the most devastating military loss it ever suffered.

[Derika]

Perhaps they were focused on more of the military perspective. The Third Reich had the biggest/more equipped army then the rest of the other options.

Well West Germany has a very powerful military that was not as large, (although still quite large) but more technologically advanced. And it did not lose any wars.

And at least the German Empire lasted longer than 12 years.

Sure some people like to wank to Tiger tanks and the Nazi uniforms (I do admit they had a cool aesthetic although this forgives absolutely zero of their other crimes) but the simple fact is despite some spectacular (and lucky) early successes in the medium term they failed militarily and lead their country into the most devastating military loss it ever suffered.

West Germany wasn't in any conflicts if I remember correctly.

I also wasn't trying to defend the German military during WW2. I was just saying that some people may be focused on the military aspect of these choices.

[Novus America]

Well West Germany has a very powerful military that was not as large, (although still quite large) but more technologically advanced. And it did not lose any wars.

And at least the German Empire lasted longer than 12 years.

Sure some people like to wank to Tiger tanks and the Nazi uniforms (I do admit they had a cool aesthetic although this forgives absolutely zero of their other crimes) but the simple fact is despite some spectacular (and lucky) early successes in the medium term they failed militarily and lead their country into the most devastating military loss it ever suffered.

West Germany wasn't in any conflicts if I remember correctly.

I also wasn't trying to defend the German military during WW2. I was just saying that some people may be focused on the military aspect of these choices.

West Germany was the lynchpin of the defense against the Soviets in the European theater of the Cold War. Not a shooting war but sometimes the best military is the one who never has to shoot because deterrence is often better than getting in shooting wars.

But I agree. There are a lot of Wehraboo‘s who love the look of the Nazi era military and romanticize it, while overlooking the critical flaws and the fact the regime self destructed in 12 years.

[Saiwania]

But I agree. There are a lot of Wehraboo‘s who love the look of the Nazi era military and romanticize it, while overlooking the critical flaws and the fact the regime self destructed in 12 years.

Technically, the party existed in 1919, so before the Nazis even took power; there was at least some time for their merchandise to proliferate and for various designs/aesthetics to be developed. There are actually 25 years where the Nazi party could produce items for various purposes. It exploded in prominence and popularity only after 1933, that is true. But they did indeed use uniforms they could source from whatever was easiest- such as the surplus uniforms from when Germany had African colonies. Before having the backing of any state apparatus and wealthy industrialists and businessmen like Hugo Boss.