Comments by "Kameraden" (@Alte.Kameraden) on "Analyzing Whoopi Goldberg's “The Holocaust isn’t about race”" video.

"Door was made out of wood, it just couldn't be used for mass murder. "
19
@Clutter.monkey oh god, I remember that one. I could easily point out the ballpoint pen already existed, just the cheap mass produced version we think of didn't get invented until post war. So it's easy to refute that argument even without looking whether she used one or not. They often claim the diary was written after the war because ballpoint pens didn't exist yet, which is wrong either way as they did exist, so regardless they're wrong.
3
If you go far enough back into CRT you will not be surprised why it's earliest founders allied themselves with people like George Rockwell.
2
Seems we have never learned from history.....
1
@nicobruin8618 I dunno, but his comment vanished. I didn't read it, I think he didn't notice you were being sarcastic.
1
He does. Look at his Hyper Inflation Part 2 with Rosa Luxemburg on the title card. He uses a modern socialist for much of the video. Also CRT is a Racial theory of history. It redefines history through race/racist goggles. It is no different than Marxsonian Class Theory or Hitler's Racial Theory of history. Just the groups who are the oppressed and oppressors have been swapped around in all three cases. TIK literally presents examples of what happens when you educate people with such lunacy.
1
@brien144 He doesn't just cite Marx. He cites most Socialist from the 19th and early 20th century. Heck he cites Orwell a lot. Issue is Modern Socialism is a shame, you can not just tweak something then proclaim everything that came before that doesn't align with the New and Improved Socialism as Not True Socialism... it's just stupid yet I see modern Socialist try. No one I've come across has been able to prove modern Socialism isn't old Socialism. Market Socialist they come off as International Corporatist, Corporatism as been around in a Socialist sense since the 19th century. Meanwhile democratic socialist have been around again since the 19th century and really haven't changed much. Libertarian Socialist again are from the 19th century and are just Socialist who actually think Socialism can work without a state which in itself is a joke.
1
@brien144 https://youtu.be/UJyN41f93QQ BTW this guy does a great job exposing CRT by looking at CRT Critically in the fashion CRT tries to look at everything else critically. His conclusion isn't surprising. As he pretty much proclaims it to be Racist. Best way to sum it up, he agrees with the premise of CRT, but, it doesn't take much digging to find out that those pushing it are not doing so for honest reasons, nor are they genuine followers of their own rhetoric. Going so far to even trying to redefine words we use every day to fit their narrative. ie they're disingenuous. Because of this people should be looking at them with skepticism not praise.
1
@brien144 All articles are opinion articles, including books written by academics. All that matters is the arguments. If I recall the words from my Composition II professor. When she told me that your professors are no smarter than you are, never let them make you think otherwise.
1
@brien144 And if your peers hold a collective bias? American history had that issue for years, I mean Lost Cause Revisionism used to be considered fact among many American Collages, with even Woodrow Wilson who was a collage Dean before becoming president endorsing it. just because popular consensus is one thing, that doesn't mean that one thing is actually right. I mean until there was absolutely irrefutable proof a majority of paleontologists considered the meteor strike to be fantasy. As a dino nut we still have many of them intentionally lying/bending the truth just because they like the idea of a fuzzy T-Rex. TIK has found many examples within the books he's used where authors have misquoted, omitted and in the case of one flat out fabricated or worse not even understanding what they were actually putting into print. Good example being The Vampire Economy, the communist who wrote it had no idea what he was talking about, but the book is a great source only because it shows how the German economy was actually working in real time ie a great first hand account, but... despite all the nationalization, he still considered it capitalism, despite capitalist crying/suffering under the NS bureaucracy he still called it capitalism. Which is just fundamentally wrong. TIK brings this subject up in his Section 8 of his Hitler's Socialism video, despite mountains of evidence that says otherwise, authors will still call the NS Economy Capitalist. Showing multiple quotes from Richard Evans that within a single paragraph he contradicts himself, while also getting Socialism and Marxism mixed up. Meaning Richard Evans doesn't understand what he is actually talking about or, he is intentionally coming to the wrong conclusion so his readers do. I mean how else does Gleichschaltung (Synchronization) get turned into Privatization? Which is the word that got translated into Privatization. Someone somewhere falsely translated it, and since spread throughout the English literary world falsely, and who knows what other language's translated theirs from English literature. Now somehow the NS are considered the inventors of the word? Seriously? That shouldn't happen. But it has.... I've come across it as well. Socialist calling Communism Totalitarianism and Communist calling Socialism Totalitarianism. Two socialist clicks accusing the other of being totalitarian while theirs is anti state. TIK's primary argument that Socialist do not know what Socialism is, because they've never come to a consensus on what Socialism is, seems to be very real. Which is why I run into so many people with wildly different views on socialism, including people who seems so confident in it. I've seen former Soviet Citizens getting banned from Socialist/Communist Reddit because their Soviet definition of Socialism doesn't match what modern socialist view socialism. Even modern Socialist views are mixed and not united. He posting tons of evidence that modern socialist collage kids have no idea what they're talking about and spends much of his time giving as accurate of a picture of the soviet union as possible. Ushanka Show, great channel by the way, he is now a Libertarian Socialist yet despite being a Socialist he gets attacked/banned by Socialist on Reddit, amazing, all because he tried to dispel their fantasy. In TIK's Weimar Hyperinflation Part 2, he literally finds the marxist author of the book he was citing much of the time omitting without citing part of one of Rosa Luxemburg's quotes. ie he removed part of her quote without citing he did so, so his readers wouldn't know he removed it. Be surprised how often that happens. Of course it's a dastardly part of her quote that makes her sound like a Loony as well. Because she literally said "Dictatorships of the Proletariat is a democracy in the socialist sense." He omitted that part. Which is ironic because it sounds a lot like the same rationale used by the NS and Fascist when calling their regimes Democracies. What I'm getting at. I don't think the Academic community actually knows what they're talking about. If they don't know what they're talking about how can peer review even work? Worse some most definitely falsify what they're writing, yet their peers mostly agree with them so don't care. They live in a fantasy land that isn't reality when it comes to the practical application of Socialism. Because of this, they see socialism in practical application that doesn't turn out the way they dreamed so utterly REJECT IT. Because their idea of Socialism just doesn't work and a practical application will never turn out the way they want it to. So their "Dream" of what it is isn't reality, because of this when they see socialism in practice they don't even know how to identify it. Which circles back to TIK's claim "Socialist do not know what real Socialism is, if they knew, and understand basic economics, they wouldn't be socialist." < Which I think he got from Thomas Sowell. Which is why I stopped being a Socialist myself, I grew up, saw it's falsehoods, and lost faith in the adult children who champion it who clearly do not live in the real world. Based on his "Leftist are not stupid" video He jumped ship about a year after I did. btw it's nice of him to actually defend Leftist, I know many and I do agree with him they're not stupid, just misinformed. I have an uncle/aunt who are collage professors, worked for one as an assistant in my collage years, and even helped one get elected in local office post retirement. Well you get to know these Academics personally, you know they're not really anything special. Most of them come right out of an academic setting and straight back into it, they never get real world experience prior to becoming members of the academic community. This leads to a feed back loop and if you have people getting misinformed, only to go right back into that loop, it creates generations of professors who do not know what they're talking about. hehe
1
Should watch TIK's videos Fascism Defined and Hitler's Socialism.
1
@halo3odst We it's a tidbit a lot miss. When I used to be pro Fascist ie Italian Fascism. I used to/still argue with Nazis all the time, mostly on that PARTICULAR stupid aspect of their belief system I just couldn't get past it as I never grew up viewing people like that. I still can not grasp it honestly, I mean for example if a J** wants to be a Nazi you reject them because of their blood? Just so dumb, as a Fascist I'd welcome someone with open arms but that isn't how a Nazi thinks. There is even an audio book version of George Rockwell's The Fable of the Ducks and the Hens still on youtube because this aspect of National Socialism is foreign to so many people that it flies over their heads. It shows how 1960s American Nazis viewed the world. It is not far off from Hitler's racist views.
1
@halo3odst That sense of the National Community, everyone working for the betterment of those who belonged to our nation. The nation and community above one's own self interest. Etc, etc. Fell into the idea of it being a middle ground between Marxist Socialism and Captialism. I grew up just after the cold war. Few had positive opinions of Communism and Marxism at least were I grew up, yet no one seemed cheerful about Captialism either, to me it was the better alternative. Though I've grown up. I wouldn't even call myself a Nationalist anymore, let alone Socialist.
1
@halo3odst To be honest, it's a complicated thing to answer. I would say Fascism is between the middle and far left. Far left being more extreme forms of Marxism. So to me Fascism is to the right of National Socialism, and National Socialism is to the Right of say Communism, or Marxist Socialism. Yet all of them are to the left of Economic Liberalism, Classic Liberalism and well Capitalism, which is basically Economic Liberalism, ie Classic Liberalism practiced at an economic level, ie practical application of Classic Liberalism. Social Democracy being roughly in the middle. I would argue Fascism/National Socialism and Marxism are all to the left of Social Democracy because at least in a Social Democracy individuals still get a choice, but in Fascism National Socialism, and Marxism it's the Dictatorships of the ruling Party, and individualism doesn't really matter in spite of what Gentile or Hitler say.
1
So to be blunt about it, the VERY IDEA of a modern CAPITALIST, is itself built on the foundation of ANTISEMITISM. Marx is the reason for that. He literally defined his version of The Capitalist off antisemitic stereotypes. Everyone's opinion of the Evil Capitalist today is built on a foundation of antisemistism. Most modern socialism is built on the foundation of Marxism. So all modern socialism is built on a foundation of antisemitism. The man literally had to write an entire article on the subject called On the J*ish Question just so he could take people's focus off his antisemitism and so he could claim it's as just a COINCIDENCE. But in doing so he literally said the "The Emancipation of the J* is the emancipation of society from J***aism." Which he pretty much spelled it out, though he wasn't calling for their well heads, he was saying all J**s need to abandon their faith in money, their greedy capitalistic ways and by doing so freeing society itself from capitalism. Because again, he used stereotypes of J**s for his idea of Capitalism. Ironically that quote is one that many Marxist use as proof Marx was trying to save them, but by doing so admitting they believe J**s are money hoarders. lol So despite trying to paint it as a coincidence the article just made him look even worse.
1
@christophertheriault3308 Honestly don't find the sob stories relevant. Failing of the employees for staying with a bad employer is a good example of how a bad business stays afloat longer than it should. Employers are only as bad as their employees, and vice versa. Good employers who do not remove bad employees because they're too kind and good employees who stick with a bad employer out of a misguided since of loyalty are prime examples of a business that deserves to go under. Either way the business was being poorly run, regardless whether the owner was a good person or bad. If the situation was reversed and say your father was the shit employee and the employer was too kind to remove bad employees the business would of still suffered. Not saying your father was a shit employee, sounds to be the opposite. But you may get the point. ie being exploited has nothing to do with who is at the top in short. A Business can be exploited by employees as much as the employers. I mean my employer is one of the kind hearted ones, he literally waited one day the whole day watching a coworker's station, the person snuck out without clocking out, wasn't the first time. I chitchatted with him and he told me "If he doesn't show up by 1:30PM, he is regrettably fired." Be it this wasn't the first time the guy snuck out without clocking out. He doesn't like laying people off, and even has a self supervised view on his employees, ie he has a hands off attitude if you get the job done that is all he cares about. As he said "I learned long ago, stay out of people's way, they know what they're doing more than I do." Issue is does he deserve to get his business taken from him because by the socialist view all business owners are capitalist, regardless... so...
1
CRT = Black Aryanism. It's why Black Nationalist are obsessive about how much melanin is in your skin. CRT is tragically a new form of Hitler's Racial Theory of history. It has it's origins to the Black Nationalist movement of the 1960/70s. It's why some black churches even praise Hitler.
1
Because people don't want people to understand National Socialism. They don't want you to understand National Syndicalism (Fascism) either.
1