Youtube hearted comments of Kameraden (@Alte.Kameraden).

  1. "If only Germany had more, used more, produced more." As if resources are limitless. This argument often used is historic fantasy.
    1000
  2. Glad you finally brought up the hostility between the Austrian Fascist and Nazi Parties.
    859
  3. If someone truly loved Russia, they would want their boys to come home, and not fight a pointless war that is only for the Ego of a madman.
    490
  4. Critics make 15-35 minute long videos often relying on a handful of sources and resort almost entirely on reciting often without context. TIK makes book long video essays of 30min-5 hour long videos with a welcomed amount of citations and a hefty sum of sources. Not just reciting but also explaining and discussing. Then they wonder why it isn't as effective.
    163
  5. I can only imagine the decades of research that went into gathering up all these small details over the years. Even with errors even books with errors provides vital information that make things like this possible. all brought together into such a wonderful video in a capacity that I imagine many of those involved could of only imagined so many years later.
    146
  6.  @thefrenchareharlequins2743  Did he just delete all his comments in this subthread?
    110
  7. A lot of times it isn't even the sources, it's how people perceive sources and their legitimacy in general, almost like holy relics. I find it very annoying when I here someone say "TIK is lying because the sources he uses contradict his arguments." It's baffling to me personally because, just because someone uses a specific source doesn't mean they agree with said source. TIKhistory can cite any source he wishes, even if he doesn't agree with the conclusions the author comes to in said source. How someone doesn't understand that, and believes if you're citing a source, that you have to agree with the author's conclusion and not doing so is some how manipulating history is beyond me. That isn't how it works. Did these people ever take Composition 1 and 2 in college? When I try to explain to them that the reason TIK doesn't agree with said author is because that author does a great job describing "Red" but then concludes it's "Blue." Since author concludes it's blue often the author's readers believe it's blue, as if they didn't understand what they were actually reading. The contradiction is already there, but since TIK doesn't say "Blue" he's the one who is some how the contradiction.
    104
  8. 18 episode intro. Talk about that exposition going into setting up this grand story. hehe
    97
  9. Those gaps in the lines reminds me of when i was reading It Never Snows in September and German soldiers were describing retreating through already occupied towns and stealing Allied food/equipment as they marched through at night. In the first Chapter. Reminds you how chaotic a fluid mobile war can be, with no established lines.
    96
  10. Honestly the first time I've seen that meme. It's brilliant. It's like the Spiderman pointing meme but evolved.
    95
  11. How relevant this is right now is truly remarkable.
    78
  12. Interestingly, this actually reminded me of something. Versailles responsible for WWII? So why wasn't the post WWII reparations the leading cause for WWIII? A lot of people forget that after WWII, Germany faced Reparations light years worse than even Versailles, and Germany is still paying those reparations today, yet is among the ten largest economies in the world.
    77
  13. Putin waited for the election to make an example of him toward his rivals. 😢
    77
  14. He cites this book a lot, coincidentally.
    76
  15. Simple answer is. Hitler didn't want war with the USA, you can argue "YET" that he would maybe one day. But Roosevelt most definitely wanted war with Germany, at the very least, for Germany to win the current war it was in. The USA was an economic, and industrial trade hub, and honestly if Germany become a dominate power in Europe, created a closed European economy with Germany at it's center imagine how much that would hurt American economic interest? Japan also wanted to create a Autarky with the Co-Prosperity Sphere they gloated about. This would of left the USA with only South America and the British Commonwealth nations as trade partners. USA at this time was always for open world trade, with half if not two thirds of the worlds stuck in closed economies imagine how much that would effect the world market?
    66
  16. TIK has proven quite well that context is almost everything when it comes to communication. I've never seen the phrase "Committed/Committing S-Word" replaced with other words so beautifully, and I swear TIK didn't use the same phrase twice, I had no issue understanding what he meant, and even started smiling after a while.
    66
  17. This sense of favoritism, and in fight is really depressing. Halder trying to sabotage Rommel in North Africa in the Crusader series, and the possibility that he also did the same to Paulus with the 6th Army. If so this in fighting crippled some campaigns.
    51
  18. Oh boy, a heavy heart subject. Really hope the idea of the "Money Changers" sticks with any Socialist who may watch this videos and where the origin of the very idea of a "Capitalist" came from.
    39
  19. I think one of the biggest issues people often have is they fail to understand what Nationalism even is. A Nation is an Identity, not lines on a map. It can mean almost anything under the sun when you break it down. Why do you think almost every Community thrives to make flags to represent themselves? Because they've created a Nation. They've not created the Nation State that they live under, they're often hostile toward the Nation State. But they've created their own nation within an already existing Larger Nation. The Nation State system has been confused with Nationalism, and many people actually think Nationalism is exclusively racist or Statist. Which isn't really true. A lot of Nations have no "State." But the Nation exist. Many Nations existed as slaves of other larger States, and throughout most of European history there were no Nation States, the Nation existed under the surface ruled by Monarchs and Lords who often had little in common with the people's they ruled. Why today is the era of the Nation State is because most of those Communities formed their own "States" often built around some kind of similar Identity, ie Nations, Nation States. But this happened after the fall of Monarchism, so their National Identity was the glue used and at times failed when forming their new "States" again hence Nation States. In this context, the Working Class is an Identity, it is a Nation. As TIK has explained many times, it actually makes Marxist Nationalist who mascaraed as Internationalist. Because Marxist don't understand what a Nation even is. You see this with a lot of Leftist today who are obsessed with Pride Flags, they literally created their own Nations, their own Identities, and proudly go around parading it in front of other people's faces. They're Nationalist even if they refuse to admit it. Nationalism in short is a very gray, murky word when you really break down what it means to be a "Nation." The American Nation for example wasn't built around Ethnic or Racial Lines. American Nationalism as little to do with Race, though some white supremacist, and black supremacist will argue otherwise from opposing camps. Nationalism doesn't = Racism in short, but Nationalism can equal Racism. Today many consider Nationalism and Racism to be the same thing which is just so blatantly wrong that it openly shows those who think that, literally fail to comprehend what a Nation even is.
    35
  20. Honestly it was 'less' deniable from the beginning. Even when I was a Fascist it was pretty blatantly obvious the Nazis and Fascist are Socialist. Literally just have to look at what they did, and even read their own literature on what they believed and it's pretty undeniable already. There are reasons Nazis and Fascist even in the 21st Century still consider themselves Socialist. It isn't because they're lying. TIK is pretty accurate in his assessments as a result, and most arguments often used to prove they're not Socialist normally only succeed at proving they're not "Marxist" which is a no brainer, no Nazi would disagree, no Fascist would disagree. But when it comes to proving they're not Socialist normally the evidence used is sketchy at best. Often requiring a historian to do a great job describing "Red" but then calling it "Blue." People ignore the description and just accept the conclusion that it's "Blue." Because comprehension is a hard skill I guess.
    33
  21. I think the best argument that I've seen toward against Worker's Rising up actually came from the Channel "Foundation for Economic Education" in their video called, Hollywood's Favorite Trope: "It's Just Business" they summed it up quite well when saying the Workers at Starbucks don't actually make the coffee, they don't farm the beans, they don't truck in the resources in nor are they involved at all in the over all process getting the coffee from a forest in South Africa to the kitchen, all the workers does at Starbucks is follow instructions taught to them by the owner or shift manager. Basically every single person ahead of the Worker at Starbucks has more rights to the claim "they make the coffee" than someone wearing a green apron who works there. People who say business owners do not work is a blatant lie, definitely those who built their business themselves. I know where I work I've seen the plant owner go up in utter rage, not at his workers but trying to deal with customers. People often forget that Business Owners have a job as well normally. In this case he is constantly on the phone with customers answering questions, when he isn't he is patrolling the factory floor waving good morning, good afternoon and trying to get a cheerful mood by hanging out with his employees, because well dealing with customers is a nightmare.
    29
  22. To be honest, what is the difference? A Commission is normally a body (Group/organization) put in charge of a specific state task. A Commissariat is pretty much the same thing. If you just look up the definitions for the term Commission a vast majority are administrative uses.
    24
  23.  @Sedgewise47  I recall TIK quoting that book before.
    22
  24. Wait it's been two weeks already? Man time flies. Welcome Back TIK. I fed my TIK itch with watching older videos. ^^
    20
  25. It's called Red Pilling. But at a Sociology and Economic level rather than say your trust in media/state. ie you learn you can not trust anyone of authority including your academics you taught you in school. I'm kind of glad that my Composition II professor, she said "Never view you professors as being smarter than yourself, most of them are no dumber than you." She was an ex US Marine so she had a sassy but welcoming attitude in my opinion towards her fellow staff.
    19
  26. I heard one of them calling him Teelk. I guess TIK is a member of SG-1.
    19
  27. A war I didn't hear of. Thank you for bring light to this none Dutchman. As an American I know of our own conflicts against colonial assets like the Filipino Insurrection. But I never heard of the Indonesian War of Independence.
    19
  28. Don't worry Socialist will just reject the definition of State, and claim Socialism has nothing to do with the State, or fall back on "Socialism is Worker Controlled!" Which is the issue I actually had the other day. Two days of back/forth discussion, and the guy's final defense really was "Definitions change over time rawr!" Which would mean no Socialist was ever a Socialist as Socialism's definition is always changing. He was so bankrupt in his defense that when I brought up Utopian Socialism, and later Ferdinand Lassalle when referring to Socialist who either always had or eventually rejected the Marxist Class view of the State. He used the word "Gay" and how the meaning of that word changed over time. Even though I can still use the word in proper context like "The man won the sweepstakes and gayfully ran down the street." And you and I would understand it completely. ie the Meaning hasn't changed, it just has alternate uses now, and it's old meaning just became less common. What is worse, he also admits that Socialism for one movement may not mean the same thing for the other. So it was easy to ask "Since when did Marxist have a monopoly on the Word Socialism?" Of course he didn't answer that question. The person basically rejected the idea that Socialism is anything but Worker Control of the Means of Production, even though there is so much evidence that proves otherwise. Even Social Democrats advocate for State Control, not "Worker Control" and guess which is the most popular socialist movement? Social Democracy. Then when resorted to mentioning he is only proving Ludwig Mises right by claiming the definition is ever changing. Of course by even mentioning the name Mises was like a sin and the guy used the fact I even said the name Mises as a Rebuttal in spite I mentioned him knowing Socialist consider him a hack and that he was only supporting Mises by holding his position. He used the fact I mentioned his name even in the slightest as a form of proof I had no idea what I was talking about. That I did a rebuttal to myself by even saying the name Mises. So I just gave up after that. The level of denialism is just nuts. I literally brought up many of the arguments you presented in this video. All this because the guy mentioned you and called you a Hack and I begged the differ.
    18
  29. Oh boy... they're not going to like 2:03 wonder how they're going to explain that. Likely accuse him of being a infiltrator.
    16
  30. I thought Audie Murphy fought in Italy not Normandy?
    13
  31. Everyone is bias. It's whether what you're bias about being true or not.
    13
  32. Raced to sharing this over discord. 😃
    13
  33. Oh my something was wrong with the original? Guess I can wave hi to Manstein and Degrelle again. Btw read Degrelle's accounts of this battle, and you can tell the guy had PTSD from it.
    13
  34. 1:02:26 my god, I just told someone that the yesterday. That Marxism doesn't hold a Monopoly on the word Socialism. He accurately said Utopian Socialism and Marxist Socialism are not the same thing but then kept acting like Marxist Socialism was "Real" Socialism and kept describing Marxism and kept using the word Socialism instead. He couldn't get it through his skull that Socialism as a "Trunk" of the Tree, Marxism is just one branch of it, and rejected any other example of Socialism, so dismissed examples I presented. I told him Marxist do not hold a monopoly on the word, never have, and even at the time of Marx many Socialist were not Marxist Socialist, heck some Anarcho-Socialist even despised Marxist Socialism. I even an example of Oswald Spengler's Preussentum und Sozialismus and Ishay Landa's essay critique of Spengler. Every single example that Landa uses to claim Spengler wasn't a socialist only proved he wasn't a Marxist Socialist which Spengler would totally agree with Landa on. But being Landa seemed to think Marxism was Socialism itself, not that Marxism was just a form of Socialism Landa absolutely fails at proving Spengler wasn't a Socialist. I told the person in that in fact the Nazi's abolishment of Private Property Rights, the formation of the DAF among other examples are why Spengler even later called Hitler and the Nazis Bolsheviks in disguise.
    10
  35. Can not tell if this is serious or sarcastically making fun of Marxist as it sounds absolutely terrible. 😂
    9
  36. I found it funny that I remember commenting not long ago that almost all the major resistance within Germany came from Conservatives, Monarchist, Christians, and Aristocrats. ie, what is considered the right wing. Yet, the Nazis are almost always labeled right wing, yet the right wing in Germany hated the Nazis. Gotthard Heinrici being a good example recently from the Stalingrad Data channel which you work with, being a devout Christian because being a devout Christian he was actually semi sidelined by the Nazi regime throughout the war despite his performance as an officer, because he was Christian, and chose his Christian values above National Socialist values.
    9
  37. Honestly North Africa is a great idea. It isn't a subject that is covered nearly as much as the West and East Fronts of the war. The Mediterranean Theater really gets neglected a lot sadly. It also may work well, being Company of Heroes 3 came out earlier this year which is based in the Mediterranean. So you may even get some 'casual' interest in the video series. I mean there is a lot of stuff in North Africa which isn't covered very well. Battle of Sidi Bou Zid being a good example. It's a mess of a battle to explain and information on it isn't lets say great. Americans lost a few thousand men and quite a lot of tanks/vehicles, while supposedly the Germans suffered no loses. Even I doubt the "ZERO" loses claim and it would be an interesting nut to crack.
    8
  38. Don't worry comrades, we will just get on Twitter and change the definition by mob rage and rioting until Webster changes it so we can then say TIK is wrong...*sarcasm* < have to say that as idiots dunno what that is.
    8
  39. Definitely explains why Marxist are still antisemitic. Tim Pool reference a book that justifies Rioting and looting when the book stated the phrases Jewish and Asian Capital, ya Marxist hate Asians now days as well...
    8
  40.  @Gvjrapiro  Webster's Dictionary says State ownership. Google Dictionary says Communal Ownership. Webster's is much older, and more accurate. Google likely plays off more modern definitions based on Left Wing academics which don't like to admit what Socialism is. That being said Socialism, counting on the Version of Socialism the Society is the State. Communal Ownership is none private if it's none private who owns it? When the Communion is also the State it means the Communal Ownership = State ownership. So it's still the State. I can use the USSR as a good example. The USSR was controlled/run by the Trade Unions. The Trade Unions owned the factories. If the Trade Unions run the state, and own the factories, it means the Factories are owned by the STATE. China is another example today. By law it's required that foreign companies that open up offices, and factories in China require unions/partnerships with Local Chinese firms, most Chinese Firms and Corporations are owned by Members of the CCP. Which means the State has control of all the important business in China, and have direct influence whenever they wish over even foreign assets within China. Again, Socialism in a nutshell. Ironically, what the Chinese are doing isn't that much different than what the Nazis did to their Industries.
    7
  41. I might have an idea on whom you're talking about 4:05. I came across someone a few months ago, though didn't subscribe so I would have to do some digging to find them again. I'm not going to state exactly how I stumbled upon them either as it would make it too easy for people to find/flock to them. Sadly such channels get wiped from Youtube like a cancer and I find it tragic because it makes it very difficult to find such perspectives. For example there was once a Nazi channel which advocated abandoning all Nazi symbolism and even abandoning Racism just to gain mass support. ie they were not abandoning Racism, just removing it from public view so to speak or masking it in short. Sadly that channel is gone, when it was a great way of finding out how and what Nazis thought/and were doing at said time, and even some of their general plans.
    7
  42. Ukrainian Army starts walking across the Kakhovka Reservoir when?
    6
  43. TIK is a Closeted Nazi, look at the Swastika behind him in the background! Proof! Confirmation!!!!!! Sarcasm
    6
  44. You're fundamentally wrong. Marxism didn't really start taking roots in the Socialist movement until the mid 19th Century. Socialism has been around since the 18th Century. The first generation of Socialism, dubbed later by Socialist as "Utopian Socialist" didn't even mention Class, or the Working Class in their ideology. Being Utopian Socialist is considered the Foundation of all modern Socialism, it heavily implies Socialism isn't about the Working Class. However, Marxism is. Marxism is a branch of Socialism that rejects Utopian Socialism for a Class Theory of History, and a Socialist system built around Worker Control of the means of production. So your definition of Socialism is literally Marxism not Socialism. There are also other versions of Socialism that pre-dates Marxism as well, Conservative Socialism also came before Marxism, Marx himself called it Bourgeois Socialism. However this was also not built on Class or the Workers. So we have two forms of Socialism alone which pre-dates Marxism which isn't about Worker's Control. So you're literally as blatantly wrong as you could possibly be. Socialism didn't start with Marx, nor do Marxist hold a Monopoly on the term Socialist. So Socialism MUST BE more than just Worker's Control, being Worker's Control doesn't apply to earlier forms of Socialism. I think the reason why you think it's so similar to Feudalism is because Socialism technically is even in a "Worker's Paradise." I'd suggest watching videos on Ushanka Show about life in the Soviet Union from a person who grew up in the Soviet Union. Basically saying Socialism is Worker Control is literally a fallacy and proves ignorance to the evolution and history of Socialism itself.
    6
  45.  @Gvjrapiro  Wait? Monarchism? Seriously? Do you realize how much Hitler and the Kaiser hated eachother yes? Hitler even kicked the Kaiser's family members out of the military after he came to power. Mussolini's case in particular he took power by force/threats to the King. Either he give him control of Italy or he would forcefully depose him, which is hardly the attitude of a Monarchist. ie Mussolini took over forcefully. If Fascist were monarchist their wouldn't of been a pro Monarchist Coup in Japan in 1936 which ended horrible for the Righteous Army which was defeated by the Japanese Imperial Army.
    5
  46. Technically the T-34 wasn't a superior tank to the Panzer III. Technologically anyways. On paper the T-34 and KV-1 are terrifying. M4 Sherman was also superior to most every tank the Germans and Soviets ever produced during the war. Just because something is bigger/more terrifying doesn't mean it's technologically superior. Kinda like Adolf Gallant said. If the Me262 had British Engines it would of been an amazing aircraft, as the British Meteor itself was crap but it's engines were superior to the ones in the Me262. Same thing with the M4 Sherman, I bet German crews would of been tickled to death if the Panther had a M4 Sherman's gear box. You can look at images of the Gear Box/Transmission used on a M4 Sherman and there is absolutely no way the Panther has superior technology when it comes to individual components put into it.
    5
  47. Gotta give him credit. He had the cuts to change the title of the book to one more fitting to the case he is arguing.
    5
  48. time to watch the video again =D
    5
  49. Which is an Oxymoron. You're saying State-None State. By default if it's Totalitarianism it has nothing to do with Capitalism. By calling it capitalism you're saying the economy is being run by the private sector. But by calling it the State you're implying it's being run by the Public Sector. Basically it's a True False logic Fallacy. Either it's one or the other it can not magically be both. To emphasis how much of one it is. Many Socialist are still arguing right now whether the modern CCP's China is either Market Socialism, or State Capitalism. Which heavily implies that the only real difference between the two is which regime socialist like or not and want to associate it with Socialism or not. Basically Socialist who like the CCP/China call it a Market Socialist system, while those who hate it call it a State Capitalist system. The fact Market Socialism and State Capitalism are that easily interchangeable implies they mean the same thing, relatively. Like when someone says Public instead of State. They mean the same thing but use two different words to describe it. In turn State Capitalism is just Socialism that Socialist dont like to admit is Socialism.
    5
  50. It's a Hunter and Support vehicle, not a breakthrough vehicle. The fact Ukraine used it like a Breakthrough vehicle in one offensive is why it looked so poorly in Ukraine. It's a vehicle that is meant to stop the breakthrough tanks when they breakthrough and are vulnerable.
    4
  51.  @CANNNIBALIX  The banks become Socialist when they're controlled by the State. From the 1848 Communist Manifesto "Centralization of Credit in the Hands of the State, by Means of a National Bank with State Capital and an Exclusive Monopoly."
    4
  52.  @TheImperatorKnight  Well the most recent one I went back to watch again was "Did the Soviet Union Ever Recover from WWII?" I mostly go back to videos I enjoyed and watch them again, or in many cases listen to them again, like an audio book, like for example when house work. But I've gone back to videos as old as Operation Crusader and a few minor ones. But I've watched roughly 7 to 8 out of 10 videos which are uploaded the past two years. I've watched the Interceptor and Keelhaul ones recently repeatedly. Though I really like going back to the Public vs Private one, and listen to it whenever possible, often when mowing and doing outdoor work.
    4
  53. You know what... I think the Woozle Effect is the reason that this myth among many others myths about the Nazis their politics and economics is so misunderstood. Distorians created the first waves of secondary sources, and other historians since cited those sources, and people then cited those sources, and you end up having historians walking in a circle, never actually finding the truth.
    4
  54. Youtube failed me again as I never got a notification of that last poll even though I have the bell icon ticked. This video actually informed me that the poll even existed.
    4
  55. Hegel was a critic of Smith because it wasn't spiritual. Influenced yes but only in a way to warp Smith's ideas to his own pseudo religious nonsense. 😂
    4
  56. I'm starting to think the burnout isn't caused by the 'editing' but perhaps the research itself. Since you mentioned you still felt burned out in spite of exporting the editing animation process to another individual. Sadly your entire channel relies on the research/writing elements, which requires you as it's your soul in that research that makes your channel.
    4
  57. After watching it in parts over the last three days, well the writing is on the wall really. Regardless what you call the Nazis, the were a form of Socialism. At the least from the same cloth, born of the same mother. It was already self evident to many prior but saying nay now is denial or belief plain and simple. For me it was self evident even when I was a socialist back in school decades ago. For me it was self evident because I grew up in an environment in which Socialist praised Nazi social programs, yet aways said they were not Socialist. Even Star Trek had an episode which praised the Nazi's economic recovery as a great example of the benefits of Socialism. A TV show created by a Socialist which turned the Federation into a Socialist Utopia by the 1980s Sequel series. It is one if infinite examples. Even Bernie Sanders earlier this year praised them for their Social programs, yet he will likely claim they were not Socialist. How can someone have such a backwards view? Ask any Nazi today and I bet they will say they are. I know so, I've talked to plenty during debates with them. PS sorry for any typos this was typed on my phone.
    3
  58.  @slaterslater5944  they do a great job. I love decades of inflation.
    3
  59.  @slaterslater5944  Not when years of your labor get thrown in the trash as all your savings become worth less year after year, interest rates forced by Central State banks being no were near inflation rates forcing you to either buy land or invest creating artificial growth that eventually tanks annually. None of this is Capitalism eother but state manipulation of the economy and finances. Even then Capitalism isn't failing, Capitalism requires capital and the very fact your currency is inflating implies that it is not capital as it holds no real value which is why it can inflate. Even Marx said capital is anything that is useful beyond just money, gold can be made into things, paper money I guess can be used as toilet paper, which emphasize how not valuable it is beyond barter. So ironically right out of Marx himself making money by todays standards isn't even Capitalism.
    3
  60.  @slaterslater5944  Oh boy, you should go watch TIK's video on recessions, or his recent Videos on Inflation. Gold had nonthing to do with the crash of 29 or the hyper Inflation of the Weimar Republic. No major country on earth was on the gold standard, even before WWI many including the German Empire were on an exchange rate standard. Which meant they were not even backing their currency with gold or any hard capital. It's also why FDR confiscated gold, paper money is worthless. The gold confiscations were for state use not to irradiate the gold standard. If it was they'd have no need to confiscate gold to begin with. Also I spoke nonthing about bringing back to a gold standard. It's just an example how modern currency does not even count as capital. Today even a rock = capital more than banknotes. It's also the reason it's illegal to destroy metal coins because they do not want people melting them down into something more valuable, USA goes farther by introducing alloy mixes into it's coinage as an example. All to make it hard to extract value from valueless currency.
    3
  61. Youtube auto removes comments all the time. When talking about the Nazis you have to be very selective of your use of words, tragically. Also, TIK counters that argument in his video, heck he countered it in an earlier video.
    3
  62. 1941 Operation Barbarossa saw that near absolute destruction of the Red Army. The USSR called in a few million reservist which caught the German's off guard that it threw them off their time tables. That and the Southern Front in Ukraine actually put up a good resistance but was eventually also destroyed. That being said the German Army was low on supplies and fuel even before the reached the outskirts of Moscow. During 1942 they shot for the Caucasus trying to get to Russian Oil because the German Army by this point in the war was starving for Fuel. People think of 1944/45 but the fuel crisis for the Reich had already hit even before the invasion of the USSR. In fact the entire reason the Germans invaded the USSR was to get to their oil and wheat, as a prolonged war was inevitable, as the UK didn't drop out of the conflict. Being they believed after the absolute terrible Russian invasion of Finland that the Red Army could easily be destroyed and they could occupy the USSR within a few months. So to be blunt. It wasn't that the German Army run out of bullets, they actually ran out of fuel. Among other things, but this was back in 1942 already. Plus the Red Army did inflict loses as well to the Germans. Most of their most crack units were exhausted by the summer of 1942 as well. This is why entirely new divisions including tank divisions were formed throughout the Spring/summer of 1943 before the battle of Kursk, as much of their old crack units were either exhausted or so full of replacements that they might as well be called "Green." That being said however. So was the Red Army. It is very reasonable to assume that the Soviet Union was inches away from total collapse by 1942. If it wasn't for the resource shortages the Germans were already suffering from before they invaded the Caucasus it's within reason to assume the USSR wouldn't of existed anymore. By 1945 the Red Army wasn't comparable to the German Army of 1941, and in my opinion the Red Army wasn't even in the same ballpark as the western Allies. You have to remember that the German lose ratios were actually terrible in the west. So the west were far more capable than the German Army was in 1943/44/45. Meanwhile the Red Army was losing 2-3x the men even during the later years of the war. So in 1944/45 the Western Allies had the strongest militaries currently in the world, when it came to material, and men. The Red Army really wasn't comparable. Sadly as a result of allowing German generals to dictate much of the history of the Eastern Front, they heavily inflated the capabilities and size of the Russian War machine to as an excuse for the German defeat in the East. Rather than admitting the German Army wasn't as GREAT as they held themselves up to be. Because of this many western Officers and Politicians in the US/UK got a false representation of the Strength of the not so Glorious Soviet Union. ie the Soviet Union's Strength was it's Illusion of Strength. When in actuality the USSR was likely never even during the height of the Cold War anything remotely near as powerful as the West believed the USSR to be. A threat? Yes.. but not this superpower which could of possibly steamrolled Europe like so many films/books/video games painted.
    3
  63. 1. He never said national socialism was a good thing, nor did he hint at it. I have no idea where you picked that out of this video. 2. Luxembourg and Liebknecht were calling for an armed revolution, which would result in nothing more than the deaths of many people. If the Russian revolution is something to compare, Lenin murdered thousands of socialist who were not radical enough, let alone hundreds of thousands of none socialist. When you arm a mob, and resort to violence, you are just as responsible for said deaths. Even if you don't pull the trigger. Luxembourg/Liebknecht in turn were inciting and calling for that revolution, every death caused is on their hands, not the Freikorp or the SPD. You shouldn't' have sympathy for their deaths. Conclusion being, they signed their own death warrants.
    3
  64. Time to feel depressed about every single penny in savings.
    3
  65.  @Syn_1  Germans also ruthlessly bombed Polish cities on day one of the war. Before a single British pilot got off their tea break.
    3
  66. Okay... what I find interesting about this is.. don't Socialist argue that you can not take Hitler's words for it and that his books are nothing but propaganda... YET... they're using Hitler's excuse for being in Munich at the time as truth? So .. seriously, contradictions literally going through the roof on this one. I've run into people on other history channels on youtube who say TIK can not be trusted, he uses Nazi sources, Nazi propaganda, he spreads Nazi propaganda... but from what I've noticed it seems Socialist are the ones doing that at this point, only the Nazi propaganda that is convenient to their world view however.
    3
  67. This is sadly the most popular misconception about the Nazis. To a point that I literally have to explain to people that a POLITICAL PARTY is not PRIVATE. Even if headed by a Dictator calling a Political Party Private is dubious at best. I then have to list out all the organizations/surrogates the Nazi Party created to replace the Functions of the German State, basically sidelining the old German State with the New Nazi Party (ie State).
    3
  68. I think the issue with the left, is they push charity away from personal responsibility, over to the state. Making Charity no longer an individual's responsibility but... a requirement by force. This in turn takes the personal aspect out of charity, and people hired by the state to watch/help people a "Job" and not something they do voluntarily out of their own kind heart. How in any way can that provide a superior service?
    3
  69. Question is, why wasn't this questioned earlier, when it seems so blatant now. Surely more Historians digging into this would of noticed, and it would of been caught far earlier. Yet it still used. Are specific people just sweeping it under the rug because it makes their stereotypical version of Stalingrad make sense?
    3
  70.  @kingorange7739  he didn't as both his comments are already addressed in the video. If he did he would of made a different argument or a counter to TIK's counter on said argument. Instead just repeats the same dead horse rhetoric.
    3
  71. People say Fascism is a system in which the State enslaves the people, and I know it's actually far more complicated than that I've just seen so many Socialist/Yay! Marxism people excuse the Soviet system because it was for the People (When it's not, it's for the Party Elite who run the Communist Party), while Fascism wasn't, clearly showing they know nothing about Fascism, and nothing about the Soviet system and those who want to emulate it. Yet what did you get with the Soviet system? The people were enslaved by the State and I'd argue it was literally just as Nationalistic being all a Nation is is an Group Identity that has become Conscious of itself. So what do you get when the Working Class become Class Conscious and Politically organize as one community? A Nation, all Marxism is in turn Nationalism in spite calling themselves Internationalist. Ironically being most Communist parties in Europe wanted to emulate the Soviet system as well throughout most of the 20th Century. Yet somehow by the 1980s that started to shift likely as the reality started to set in that it wasn't sunshine/rainbows. Tragically, not everyone has still realized that, and I think the cloak of the USSR is starting to shroud reality once again. Being there was no Market as well, the Soviet people has zero say, you got the products the State Allowed, and being the USSR was flat out broke by the 1970/80s the Soviet people got the absolute scraps, and suffering from horrific inflation masked by State Price Fixing of Consumer goods/food, ya.. it was pretty bad. The fact it's made so cheap you can see where they cut plastic away around the buttons just so the buttons would function.. it's very crude. I've seen some cheap electronics in my life but I've never seen them made so crudely, to where you see visible cut marks all over the product where they cut away bits of plastic to make things fit, there was no precision in it's manufacturing at all. Just by looking at it, it's likely also a soft plastic to boot. TOYS are made better than this let alone electronics. In fact the terrible build quality reminds me of some cheap toys you'd find in a dollar store in the 90s. The similar wavy looking plastic and lack of polish reminds me of cheap toys.
    2
  72.  @ChernobylFamily  I wish I wrote it better.
    2
  73. The fact I read a comment on TIK's Don't be Daft Union video in which someone said his points didn't matter because "Material Reality" just rings home how people are still part of this religion til this day.
    2
  74. If the State Controls the Private Companies they're no longer private. Seems that flew entirely over year head. If the Private Owner must obey the State they no longer have private control of their business and are now only running it on the State's behalf. Go against the state and see what happens to your business, Junkers found out. In short it's not privately owned, not anymore. Hence why TIK is right, that it is an oxymoronic term. TIK's definition of Socialism is also the textbook definition. Same one I was taught in school. If it's overwhelmingly considered Worker Control that only means the Socialist who overwhelmingly agree are Marxist. Even then I know you're wrong by that statement because most Socialist including many Marxist on YouTube including one TIK cited in his Public vs Private video openly say Common or Social Control not worker control, including a former Soviet Citizen who host the Ushanka Show Channel who said Socialism is when the State Owns all the business and factories and he was given a USSR education on the subject. Only some Socialist mostly Communist still say Worker Control. Btw the Ushanka Show tuber was banned from Communist forums on Reddit because he gave them honest answers about the Soviet Union. He even did a wonderful video on it, he is openly anti capitalist so he wasn't banned for being hateful toward Socialism. Just many Socialist have unrealistic romanticized ideas on what Socialism is. Which is why TIK is also right when he says many Socialist have no idea what Socialism is.
    2
  75.  @TheImperatorKnight  He also waged war against the traditional family as well. Using the Hitler youth to completely undermined the family structure within Germany. Even when many parents resisted, by keeping their children out of the public educational system which the regime had absolute control over, the regime reacted by making youth service mandatory. By controlling the children, you control the parents in short. The parents no longer had control of their children, or their family, but the state.
    2
  76.  @jamesmackenzie1536  " literally the Nazis took control of the German Evangelical Church and killed a handful of specific priests that were against them," all part of the state, and nothing outside of it, those who do not become part of the State, are removed. So in short, you just undermined your own argument.
    2
  77. I do not upload videos myself, the only ones I ever did was when I was into playing The Sims 2, since removed them all. Would be nice to see how much time a viewer spent actually watching the video though that might be asking too much of youtube. Just a time next to a commenter's comment. Could you imagine the bliss that would cause discussion vs complainers.
    2
  78. I know critics do not understand what Totalitarianism is. By admitting the Fascist and Nazis are Totalitarian is literally admitting they're Socialistic. Often resorting to the argument that Socialism is "Worker Control" as a fallback point. Which isn't true when you look at the history of Socialism and find the very concept of Worker Control is Marxism and Marxist do not hold a Monopoly on the Word Socialism. Even in Marxist regimes, it was never worker controlled anyways. So even within Marxist ideology when in practice, always ends up turning into Totalitarian where the State or Party which is the State. While the workers have little if any power whatsoever and were just slaves of the Marxist Socialist State. So in practice there is little difference between Fascism/Nazism and Marxism when they actually are put into practice. Only ideological differences.
    2
  79. Need to make it Illegal to drop support for an OS that holds such a large market share.
    2
  80. First half of this video is literally one of the greatest works by TIK in his career in my opinion. 😂
    2
  81. He didn't say conservatives are fascist/nazis. He was expressing the Leftist point of view of the Right and Conservatives. I mean I literally recently not even 40 minutes ago just got bombarded by someone on one of TIK's videos posted repeatedly copy/pasted quotes from Richard Evans, and Kellner trying to prove the Christian Church was in league with the Nazis, in spite of the fact you can literally go to the Holo** Museum's website, and it literally tells you why, and how much the Church resisted and eventually resorted to collaborating and keeping their heads down because doing otherwise was well dangerous, and the Church decided to protect it's people, ie members of the clergy vs resisting. Which means the Church didn't willingly side with the NS, unwillingly collaborated. Despite being an atheist I'm willing trying to defend the Church's actions and why being conservative didn't have anything to do with it. Yet trying to convince people of such things, when they're already imbedded deep in their minds that the NS Persecuted just about everyone regardless whether left/right conservative or liberal is hard for some to grasp because they've been conditioned one way or the other. He even posted a list of Political Parties he called Right Wing, even though one of them wasn't, that supported Hitler's Enabling Act. I literally had to show him how every single one of those parties was forcefully dissolved within months after the Enabling Act. Literally being bullied/harassed/pressured into closing their doors by the NS who promised they'd be a Collations. Of course he dismissed it and spammed more copy/paste comments. One of the parties leadership even became parts of the anti Nazi resistance, but of course..... that doesn't matter to someone that nuts.
    2
  82.  @Gilmaris  Maybe you should watch the video in full. He does address the points you made, including Night of the Long Knives, even if you dislike me and what I wrote. Being you only addressed the intro of the video I'm under the assumption you didn't watch it. Being everything is timestamped and most, properly cited, you should have no serious issues refuting what he is saying.
    2
  83. Implying you didn't watch the video. His premise is a premise, but the details on why he made that premise is deeper in the video. So trying to counter his "Premise" without knowing why he made that premise isn't a good way of counter arguing his video. Also your example of "Oh they said they would never invade the USSR but invaded the USSR anyways." Implying you can not take their word for it is nuts. There are a lot of reasons why they made that None Aggression Pact, and never had any plans of honoring it, and that in itself has absolutely nothing to do with whether Nazi Germany was Socialist or not anyways, in turn, your example is irrelevant to the debate. From your link. TIK address and completely debunks this in Section 6 of his video, with a sludge hammer at that, it's hard to find your source even remotely convincing, definitely when your source was published from a Academic back in the USA in 1944, who had no direct access to information and it was all 3rd hand information. v this below is from your source and it's just laughable... it's an economics who does not seem to understand how Nazi Germany's economy operates hence why he describes it in a "Puzzling" manner ie he is having a hard time trying to find a way of how to define it. " It was not capitalism in the traditional sense: the autonomous market mechanism so characteristic of capitalism during the last two centuries had all but disappeared. It was not State capitalism: the government disclaimed any desire to own the means of production, and in fact took steps to denationalize them. It was not socialism or communism: private property and private profit still existed. The Nazi system was, rather, a combination of some of the characteristics of capitalism and a highly planned economy" PS this part from above "the government disclaimed any desire to own the means of production, and in fact took steps to denationalize them" He is literally taking the Nazis Word for "Privatization" seriously. So even you're own attempt to say you can not take the Nazi's word for it, well this man is taking their word for it. So your source is by an economist from outside Germany, taking Nazi Propaganda, seriously.
    2
  84.  @logicsconscience  Again, if you do not watch Section 6 you will not understand how your point 4 is actually incorrect. Property wasn't private, and income was what the state allowed according to his Section 6 with a simple explanation. ie the State controlled how much they made irregardless how much the company made, the Party which was the state could suck as much money out of any company's profits it wanted, whenever it wanted. Also again, you still presented a 'weak' source as a counter to his premise. So in the end you're argument against his premise still doesn't hold water. You have to watch the video....
    2
  85.  @personaa422  Well aren't you a blast from the past. If they're easily disproven timestamp the moments he is wrong in the video and disprove them.
    2
  86.  @personaa422  Looks around Where? You've not posted one comment in this subthread, that refutes anything.
    2
  87.  @personaa422  Yet you deleted your comments. You have no integrity by doing so. If you had faith in what you were saying you wouldn't of deleted your comments. Why should anyone argue and debate with someone who can not even standby their own comments? " And just as I thought. The reason any of TIKs viewers are here... is the same reason you are. Entertainment. " Now after that opening, I'm picturing you as the boy's Teacher from The Incredibles when he goes "See you see that!!! He is Guilty!" You wouldn't be here if you didn't find some kind of entertainment either. We love history, we love politics, we all enjoy the debate. So you already defiled your own argument with your opening statement as there is no other reason you'd be here either.
    2