General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

G. F. W.
Then & Now
comments

Comments by "G. F. W." (@g.f.w.6402) on "Why German History is Different" video.

Normalerweise erwartet man ja von Briten eher Hass und entmenschlichende Verleumdungen - und zwar nicht erst seit Versailles. Dieses Video ist okay.
32
@luringen947 First of all, it must be said that it was the British who started by far the most wars and committed the most war crimes. The two lists are almost endless. The two world wars themselves are not necessarily seen negatively in Germany. The first world war had many fathers, the cause of the second world war was Versailles. Wars are normal. That is the reality. What is really seen negatively is the Holocaust. The fact that 6 million people, almost all of whom spoke German/Yiddish and saw German culture as the crowning achievement of human evolution, were killed really hurts.
19
@JadeUnbound very nice
13
@payennicolas4018 Reading a single history book would help. Wars were normal in Europe even for HUNDREDS of years. A state already had the right to declare war on another state if it saw its own interests even remotely affected. The British also did not wage wars many centuries back, but into the 20th century. Most of them, however, took place outside Europe, which raises the question of whether life outside Europe is worth less to some people. You are right that with increasing time (and geographical distance) the objectivity increases. Otherwise, Frenchmen would probably still be burned alive in Europe today because of Napoleon. By the way, the cause of the Second World War was Versailles, which can be read in every history book worldwide. And there you have to give credit to many Americans and even Englishmen that they react until today with incomprehension to the French demands to damage Germany to the maximum, because with that the next war was pre-programmed. The British had already foreseen it at that time and admonished the French. I still remember well my history professor in Los Angeles, who declared the French negotiators in Versailles to be insane. Everything in life has cause and effect and there is no such thing as black and white.
12
@payennicolas4018 wars were so normal for Europeans that they were committed even AFTER (!) 1945. The French had still committed unimaginable war crimes and massacres in the Algeria war in the 1960s. Concentration camps were apparently not so bad for the British that they could not operate them in Kenya from 1952-1960. Countless other postwar crimes by the British are documented, e.g., in Nigeria. The Portuguese even imagined they had to wage war in Africa as late as the 1970s. And in the 1980s, the British were not above threatening the nuclear bombing of Buenos Aires. It's a good thing that there are Americans who all too often make it clear to the British that, as a relic of the 19th century, they have no say in the 21st.
11
@luringen947 It is no secret in Germany that the country fought for 5 years against almost the entire world with the exception of Japan, Italy, Spain and some smaller countries. It is also no secret that no other country in the history of mankind has managed this so far. But that doesn't count much, because Germany lost a lot of territory, contrary to international laws. Where the permission for the Soviets to occupy German territory in 1945 has led, can be seen in 2022 in Ukraine btw.
10
@StoutProper All wrong. As is well known, the first world war had many fathers. EVERY power involved bore responsibility and was extremely aggressive in its search for spoils. There are books on this subject by world-renowned historians. I am surprised that in the year 2022 someone still quotes allied war proganda. The Second World War was a consequence of Versailles. If, contrary to international law, integral territories are taken away from a state, the right of self-determination of the people is not respected, all colonies are taken away, the state is partially occupied and unimaginable reparations are imposed, how long does it take for this state to fight back? There is a reason why such things were never done again after 1919. The British would certainly not have waited until 1939 in a comparable situation. It must also be emphasized that Hitler's goals until 1939 were far below those of the democratic Weimar Republic. There are very good explanations of this by professors of international law. Whether I personally am patriotic or not I do not know. But I studied history and political science in Germany and the USA and, unlike you, I have the scientific tools to actually interpret and put into perspective what I read. History is a science like any other, and not everyone can simply join in.
8
@JadeUnbound Correct. The British operated concentration camps in Kenya from 1952-1960. So years after Auschwitz. It's amazing how the Anglo world always has double standards - including a dose of racism.
8
@payennicolas4018 The monuments in Germany are practically all monuments to those who died in the First World War, which, as is well known, was caused by all the powers involved. For this reason, these monuments are everywhere in Germany and for this reason, streets are named after people of the German empire. German monuments to the Second World War honor all the dead of all nations, not just Germans. It is fair to say that NO other nation, anywhere in the world, has dealt with its own history as critically as Germany. The French, for whom a critical view of colonial history is de facto forbidden, and the British are still lacking a great deal. What is really offensive are the monuments to Napoleon in France. In fact, it is as if there were monuments to fallen Nazis in Germany.
8
@luringen947 Otherwise, the Germans are more proud of everything they have achieved than the world would like. Humility and modesty should not be confused with a lack of self-confidence.
5
@saba1030 The UK, Germany, Russia, France, Austria and the Ottoman Empire saw it differently since about 1900. Every single power wanted this war ("primal catastrophe of the 20th century") at any price.
4
@StoutProper this is the way you answer when you are asked about the extermination of the population of whole continents by the British or why the Spanish and Italians were also fascists? No more answer and just insults? Until this answer, I was very interested in your opinion. There were clear deficits and that you have not studied history, but certainly potential. You are just full of anti-German hate.
4
@marioescapeme According to this reasoning, there is also no Italian history, but only corruption and nepotism, until the Germans, within the framework of the EU, made the Italians real people.
3
@Anglo-Wasp I'm not sure what you're trying to say. I suppose you are Scottish and complain about English dominance over Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland? I think on the continent many corks would pop if these countries declared independence.
3
@payennicolas4018 The causes of the Holocaust were capitalism (greed for profit and competition) and industrialization. For the same reasons, the British built the worldwide first concentration camps in South Africa around 1900 and interned Boers who had previously ruled the country. For the same reasons, the British later put Kenyans in concentration camps and exterminated tens of thousands. And for the same reasons, the Spanish and British exterminated the populations of the Americas and Australia. The truth is that man has evolved very little in hundreds of thousands of years.
3
@StoutProper Thatcher threatened Argentina with a nuclear attack during the Falklands War... people actually know that by now. I don't know how many newspapers around the world wrote about this. I can really imagine the Americans freaking out and telling the British where they actually stand in the world.
3
@cortexavery1324 wikipedia says that in the Weimar Republic there was mass unemployment, hunger and wasting! nlike you, however, I have studied history and of course do not normally use wikipedia. You have not even finished the 8th grade but want to teach others.
3
@cortexavery1324 Do not write if you do not even have the knowledge of the first semester! You write only nonsense! The degree of industrialization has nothing to do with the causes of the war or the conditions from the end of the 20s. History does not proceed in individual, separate stages. There are always long and long-term causes for everything. And I will leave it at that, otherwise I would have to take money for tutoring.
3
@saba1030 das kann ich jetzt nicht alles durchscrollen. Ich bin ein arbeitender Mensch. Und eigentlich sollte ich ich gar nicht von YT ablenken lassen.
2
@onceamusician5408 Yes, but the 19th century and even further back is boring - just as the 20th century will be boring in 100 years. However, I think that the exploitation rights of certain parts of German history should in some way be reserved exclusively for Germans. World brands coined by them with corresponding commercial and cultural value. One of the most iconic empires in world history is one of these brands.
2
@payennicolas4018 I also don't see where exactly the French and British would have accepted the loss of their colonies. To call the murder of hundreds of thousands in colonial wars an acceptance of loss is cynical. Especially when you consider that some colonial conflicts went on for decades. The French and British tried desperately to hold on to land that was partly desert or jungle and populated with people over whom they had no right to rule. The Germans, on the other hand, wanted to assert the right of self-determination of their own people. A big problem in looking at history is often double standards of the British and the French. There is little evidence of self-criticism. Low scientific standards. But science requires relativization. French scientific history publications are often written in the French tradition of embellishment, but from the scientific point of view, unfortunately, often embarrassing in large parts.
2
@payennicolas4018 Wrong. Fake facts. In 1919, Alsace-Lorraine had almost 100% German-speaking population and had already belonged to Germany for almost 50 years. However, Alsace-Lorraine passed to France with the Treaty of Versailles in 1920, contrary to the right of self-determination of the people. Not even Hitler was as crazy as the French in 1919. And again: colonies and territories in Europe, in which Germans lived for centuries, but which were then separated from Germany, cannot be compared with colonies! these were not German colonies, but integral parts of Germany with German-speaking population. You are taking the same point of view as the French in 1919, which, as we know, led to the Second World War. I don't want to be polemical, but your purely French point of view is annoying. You cherry-pick without putting things into perspective.
2
@payennicolas4018 I actually like the French. Because, in contrast to the British, they have a much more reflective view of themselves and their history. I think many Germans think that the French have learned from their history (unlike the British). But when French propaganada from 1919 in relation to Alsace-Lorraine comes along and you don't want to put things into perspective, I'm out of the woods. With something like that, even left-wing Germans think they're not reading properly. By the way, maybe you should visit "Theory and Methods of History" again. You can learn something there. I'm really happy that I founded several companies immediately after my history degree, which is actually not usual for historians. I wouldn't want to deal full-time with the insufficient knowledge of others.
2
@StoutProper You said that Germany had fascism and that represented a kind of deviation. I wrote how you then explain that Spain and Italy also had fascism. I had also asked how you explain that the British exterminated the population of entire continents. I see that certain nations often place certain events in isolation and without context. In other words, they misuse and instrumentalize history. This also applies to the Holocaust. For Germans, the Holocaust is really tragic. It was mainly people with German or Yiddish (German dialect) mother tongues who saw German culture as the pinnacle of human evolution, who became victims. Most Jews lived outside Germany and still spoke German. However, the British and Americans in particular, who never had the welfare of the German population at heart (Churchill wanted to "roast" a lot of German civilians), misuse the Holocaust to divert attention from their own crimes. I would even go so far as to say that non-Germans instrumentalize the Holocaust per se and have no sympathy for the predominantly German/Yiddish-speaking Jews. There are many ways to kill a human being and just as many ways to name it. Btw: Germany lost twice, because the USA won the wars. The UK could not have won the two wars on their own, as you surely know. You can't win a war with broken bottle necks, and that's all the British had left after Dunkirk.
2
@cortexavery1324 Every history book in the world says that the First World War/Versailles is the "original catastrophe of the 20th century" (Kennan), which led directly to the Second World War. Moreover, one must not look at history with the eyes of the present, but must put oneself into the respective time in a detective-like manner. This is all at the 9th grade to first semester level. If you have NO idea, then don't comment.
2
@cortexavery1324 "largest rate of industrialisation, very low unemployment even compared to pre WW1 germany.". From here on I stopped reading. You obviously don't know that there was unimaginable mass unemployment and hyperinflation in the Weimar Republic because the reparation payments demanded in Versailles had overburdened the German economy.
2
@cortexavery1324 "The weimar republic began poorly but ended up great" - What unbelievable bu*******. You can even learn something from wikipedia.
2
The world was not that simple back then. The emerging German empire had problems selling its products in the first place. And the British and French were not eager to give the Germans access to their markets. The USA had EXACTLY the same problem. If the Germans and Americans had been smart, they would have declared war on the UK and France in 1899.
1
@saba1030 Moreover, it is wrong that war is bad per se. War is part of humanity and is an accelerator of technical, social and other developments.
1
@saba1030 The reality is that the second world war, for example, brought many technical revolutions. The Germans drove amazing technical revolutions, such as the construction of the world's first jet airplane or the V2, which was ultimately the cornerstone for the flight to the moon. War is necessary for the evolution of mankind.
1
@saba1030 ich nehme an du meinst den H. und nicht 3 Mio. tote Zivilisten plus 3 Mio. Gefallene. Der H. war in erster Linie eine Folge von Kapitalismus und Industrialisierung... Der Krieg selbst war wiederum eine direkte Folge von Versailles und Adolfs legitime außenpolitische Ziele (bis 1939) lagen WEIT hinter denen der demokratischen Weimarer Republik zurück.
1
@edwardlsanders das hätten Sie Ihren Landsleuten 1914 sagen sollen, als alle europäischen Mächte in extrem aggressivem Nationalismus nach Beute suchten - mit den bekannten Folgen.
1
@marioescapeme I have studied history and do not need tutoring. My answer was a reaction to your strange comment about Germany. Otherwise, Italy is for most inhabitants of the western world synonymous with mafia and corruption and what was 2000 years ago does not interest the average citizen, if he estimates certain southern european countries in 2022. Welcome to reality.
1
@Anglo-Wasp Yes, at some point in life everything always strikes back.
1
@StoutProper It has been a worldwide consensus for many decades that the sole guilt of the germans in the first world war is a war lie of the allies. Hitler's foreign policy: I wrote until 1939! I would be interested in how you explain that Italians and Spaniards were also fascists. In Spain, in 1942, the time was even specially changed so that Madrid had the same time as Rome and Berlin. Nationalism was normal at that time. Even today, the British and Russians still display a nationalism that leaves one speechless. I would also be interested to know how you judge the violent occupation and oppression of half the world and the extermination of entire continents by the British.
1
@benkr man kann Völker charakterisieren (Gegenstand der Ethnologie) und man MUSS Geschichte vergleichend betrachten, im Kontext verorten und relativieren (Voraussetzung von Wissenschaftlichkeit). Wenn du der Konversation intellektuell nicht folgen kannst, dann kommentiere auch nicht.
1
@payennicolas4018 British and French have admitted the loss of colonies. The Germans had already done so directly after Versailles. But this is fundamentally different from the territories that were separated from Germany at the behest of France as a consequence of Versailles. Suddenly, 2 million Germans were living outside German borders, which was an extreme violation of the right of nations to self-determination. In 1914 (after about 50 years), the French even wanted Alsace-Lorraine back, a piece of land where Germans with German as their mother tongue lived and not even French. You can see the striking difference. Practically everything Hitler did in foreign policy until 1939 was correct and comprehensible. There are good explanations of this by professors of international law. By the way, it was a scandal that Hitler did not want Alsace-Lorraine and South Tyrol back. This was hardly communicable both to the German population and at the level of the right of nations to self-determination. Instead, there was an inhumane deal with fascist Italy for South Tyrol.
1
@payennicolas4018 You don't want to relativize? Then you shouldn't talk about history either. If you want to be scientific, you have to relativize. History, first semester. By the way, history is a science and not a political subject. At least in Germany. In France, due to the current legal situation, history is not a pure science.
1
@payennicolas4018 I think you also have a problem of understanding. If one were to tear out a piece of France with French-speaking people and annex it to another state. Could this piece of France then be equated 1:1 with a colony? No, of course not. But things like that happened to Germany after WWI many times at many borders. And that at the behest of the french. Even the British had their toenails curled in 1919, and that is saying something. Wikipedia on the consequences to the Treaty of Versailles can help for now. There you can (unfortunately) still learn something. Unfortunately, your current understanding is not even on wikipedia level at the moment. I also don't want to hear why it was correct in 1919 that Alsace-Lorraine went to France. How presumptuous do you have to be to bend facts into shape like that?
1
@payennicolas4018 i'm not talking about whether the british or the french have colonial claims these days. Of course not, otherwise London or Paris would have disappeared from the map. The Americans were already threatening war during the Suez Canal crisis. In retrospect, we talk about ongoing processes in history. Today, France and the UK no longer have any ambitions in former colonies - at least not formally (but that's another topic). The conflicts over colonies went on for decades. It's not like a colony wanted to declare itself independent and was immediately released. Instead, attempts were made for decades to use force to suppress the desire for freedom. The Germans, on the other hand, had tried 20 years after Versailles to liberate their own people, after the people's right to self-determination was not respected, and minority rights were practically never observed. The situation in Czechoslovakia was so bad that a British commission recommended that the area be immediately separated and annexed to Germany as an emergency - which then happened (Munich Agreement). Unfortunately, there were many other "Sutetenländer" that were created at Versailles.
1
@payennicolas4018 with 1919 I referred to Alsace-Lorraine and Versailles. It's about the First World War and NOT about the Second world war here. And with Versailles, the French laid the foundation for the second world war. You can also keep the exploitation and abuse of the holocaust to yourself. It's outrageous to hear something like that from someone whose people were still waging a war of annihilation in Algeria in the 1960s - mind you, decades after Auschwitz. For my part, I don't feel like arguing with someone who makes and reads statements as they suit him or who can't read properly.
1
@payennicolas4018 I would also like to remind you that France declared war on Germany and not the other way around. Only Germany, mind you, after Germany AND the SU attacked Poland.
1
@payennicolas4018 Anyone who equates a national perspective, i.e. the perspective of a government at a certain time, e.g. in relation to Versailles, with racism has no place in a history course. I also didn't know that French and Germans are of different races. I actually thought we are all Europeans, so one and the same race.
1
@StoutProper During the Falklands War, the British threatened to bomb Buenos Aires with nuclear bombs. The French then gave the British the codes for the weapon systems they had supplied. A country that even threatened to bomb Buenos Aires with nuclear bombs in the 1980s has no place in international politics. Study the d** history!
1
@StoutProper "the french are still at war in Africa today, although like the U.S. bombing of Somalia it doesn’t get reported". A true statement. I'm excited. It's getting slow.
1
@StoutProper Look, you don't even know essential facts of the last decades. And i don't want to disappoint you, but germany is not completely, totally alone responsible for everything bad in the world. Everything in the story has to be placed in context and the europeans, who all hate each other, didn't take anything. Everyone got what they deserve. The Brits deserved the bombs just as well as the Germans, French, Russians and everyone else... Maybe you should spend some time on other continents, sometimes people are much more objective there. Even in the US; although they were involved.
1
@StoutProper I hate to disappoint you again, but the allies didn't go to war because of Poland let alone the Jews. As if the British or the French really cared if Germans killed some of their own people. Certain countries' motives in relation to the holocaust or human life are not entirely honest and honorable. And I don't want to disappoint you again, but that's (unfortunately) normal and is called diplomacy.
1
@cortexavery1324 also recommend that you look at eyewitness accounts. When educated people who were against the Nazis still desperately say into the camera decades later that there was simply no alternative to Hitler. The conditions that the Allies, especially France, created in Germany after 1918 and the futile efforts of the government of the Weimar Republic to reach an agreement with the Allies failed. And millions of Germans were not stupid even then. The Weimar Republic had tried to extend the right of self-determination of nations to all Germans, etc etc.... The French and British had not moved an inch until Hitler threatened war. "The Weimar Republic was a stillborn, we know that. And Hitler was the logical consequence" said my history professor in the USA and she is right. We are now slowly entering a stage of looking at this period less emotionally and more and more scientifically.
1
@cortexavery1324 "It has been 100 years since the Great War, as it was called at the time, scorched the earth and psyches of the West, transforming our lives and world forever. As George Kennan remarked, the First World War was “the great seminal catastrophe” of the twentieth century. The war destroyed empires and it led to political and social upheavals across Europe, the emergence of new national states, and a redrawing of the map of the Continent. It set the stage for the rise of Hitler and the Second World War and, indirectly, for the Cold War." (Cambridge University Press). That's a 7th grade level. Don't write about things you don't know anything about.
1
@cortexavery1324 Hyperinflation, economy at rock bottom due to illusory French reparation demands, from the end of the 1920s the economy of the Weimar Republic is completely at rock bottom. Impoverishment of the masses, poverty, hunger. Those who can read are at an advantage. Wikipedia helps you!
1
@nunyabiz6532 "WWII was a direct consequence of Versailles" -- schön, dass du weltweit wissenschaftlichen Konsens (G.F. Kennan) als das dümmste betrachtest, was du jemals gelesen hast. Diese Erkenntnis ist übrigens so selbstverständlich, dass in jedem wissenschaftlichen Text vorsichtshalber schon drin steht, dass es schon fast nerven möge aber man es sicherheitshalber dennoch zitiert. Weißt du, ungebildet kann man sein, aber dann darf man nicht andere (die Geschichte studiert haben) noch belehren wollen.
1