Sorry brown Greek trannies, the castrating will stop.
>turks and greeks when they realised they both enjoyed boyfucking
>>18525059The only practicing circumcision (castration) were Muslims and Jews
So, gay artists make gay art and the so called "historians" understand it as if ancient civilizations were gay? And dumb people believe it?This is so stupid... You know many artists are homosexuals.
>>18524493>booksArtists.>Socrates gayI don't think so. Socrates was beyond duality.
>>18524508Ancient texts are drenched in faggotry. You can't read a myth, poem, play, philosophical dialogue, or historical text without running into it.
>>18524478I wonder if doctors checked for hernias back then.My doctor looked about like this when I had to take a physical.>dude nuh this vase is gayyyymaybe, but considering all you have to go off of are the visuals, it might say something about the viewer
Homosexual pederasty is a constant across all (based and tradpilled) "ultra"-patriarchal societies lol.
>"Don't mind me, just pirating your son because of his beauty (in a completely heterosexual way)"
>tfw you truly understand Monism is true.
>>18521832>tfw you only understand it intellectually
>>18521832his legs are all fucked up
>>18522464thisyou need to feel it in your soul and your balls then all is one
https://youtube.com/shorts/sNwxA0XKpaE
>>18521832Do people realize it takes longer to generate a shitass image than the 2 seconds it takes to google image search something and choose something much better for their shitposts?It's just baffling how quickly people became useless because of AI
How do atheists and prots explain eucharistic miracles, which have been confirmed by scientists?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharistic_miracle_of_Lancianohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharistic_miracle#Scientific_analysis_of_flesh_and_blood_miracles
>>18524898In truth it understates it. Gives it sturdier grounds to sit on.
>>18524796>>18524813>>18524831I don't know about the cardiac tissue, but some Catholic scientists have actually called into question the results on blood samples. You can find the mention of these problems from the wikipedia article itself:>Kelly Kearse and Frank Ligaj highlighted possible problems surrounding the 1971 report and other subsequent claims about human blood. They mentioned Linoli actually documented the accumulation of fungus, spores and hypha of hyphomyces, as well as the blood substance being entirely composed of a uniformly hardened material that was difficult to detach without strong pressure. They state while the Lanciano investigation was commendable as being the first attempt, it's unfortunate that in later years it has been associated with fraudulent activity involving others.[6]This fraudulent activity is talking about the fact that there was a fraudulent WHO report, which actually Serafini (the guy who wrote the Catholic Exchange article as well as the "Cardiologist on Jesus" book) found out to be a hoax, which was the Linoli report plastered on to some article on Egyptian mummies. However, Serafini seems to think Linoli's findings were real on other fronts.In other words, the only thing we can conclude that there's possibly a human heart. However, I don't know of it's an impossible cut or not. Serafini believes so, but he's a believer and believes every single eucharist case to be real.What I do know is that Linoli mentions it lacking in both white and red cells, meaning that it very certainly isn't living anymore.
>>18524927I mean, if you think about it, in a complex way, it kinda does both. If every source is biased and bias is treated as sufficient reason for dismissal, then no evidence can establish anything. If you still proceed to attempt to move toward some idea or proof, what do you have to fall back on? Your own biases.
>>18524934That's not how it works, in the actual sciences, bias is to be taken into account but it is not grounds for dismissal out-right. The guy in this thread is just doing a bad job o stating his case. Really I think the bigger problem here is that there is no possibility of replicability or peer review along with the reliability of accounts being poor (not just because of any bias). The church is not going to let some some profane researchers poke and prod the flesh of god, and that's final. You are only allowed to look at it if the church allows you to look at it, Even parapsychology can sit on firmer grounds than that. And in that's a field where a believer and a skeptic conducted the exact same fucking experiment (as a team) and got different results (that aligned with their own beliefs about the subject) every time.http://www.richardwiseman.com/resources/staring1.pdf
>>18524971This. The only thing reading that article's report did was convince me that this was not a low-effort hoax, but a high-effort hoax. There are so many problems with the blood samples, as well as the lack of genetic studies, we can't say anything about being an actual miracle. Linoli and Serafina say that it can't be a hoax, because it would require experience and effort. But it's not like medieval people weren't smart. There were surgeons, etc., who did know about the human body, and relic-business was big. If anything, the fact that there were apparently so many of these Eucharistic miracle legends and relics floating around speaks towards it originally being a hoax. The person who made it might have been a surgeon, and he might have been involved in making these fake relics much before, and knew how to make them look good, and how to ensure their survival to look as authentic as possible. Sure, it maybe required an expert, and it was a difficult process, but as much as Linoli or Serafini try to paint it as disproving a hoax, it does not disprove that theory. They only presented that the cut would've been difficult, and see it as an argument against the idea. But a naturalistic explanation isn't disproven, as much as they try to say it would be, nor is the idea of it being a hoax either. The science Linoli tried to present only tells us that it's heart tissue, and nothing else.If anything, the biggest argument against it being a real miracle is historical, since the first time this conveniently appears is right after protestant reformation.
Judaism and by-extension Christianity and Islam are complete nonsense. There is no evidence of a complete Torah existing prior to the 5th century AUC (after of the founding of the city [of Rome]).The Exodus myth was written as a polemic against Manetho, not the other way around (again, no complete Torah prior to the 5th century AUC).Manetho was citing earlier sources and he has been proven correct by history. He was writing about the Shasu and his ONLY mistake was confusing them with the Hyksos. The Shasu were a group of nomads from the southern Levant who worshipped Yahweh and would later contribute to the ethnogenesis of the Jews. They were considered a nuance due to their tendency to raid the Egyptian borders and at some point in the late Bronze Age, they nearly succeeded in plundering Egypt but got their asses kicked and expelled. Manetho wrote this in his Aegyptiaca and the Jews, being mad that people remember this, wrote the myth of Exodus in response.Only those with a mental illness and leprosy would deny any of this. Also, Egypt didn’t even have the type of chattel slavery depicted in Exodus.
>>18523405The Torah scribes were so out of world who thought that Joseph (who would have lived between 1900-1800 BC according to Traditional Chronology) was the vizier of Ramses II (1200 BC) and that Abraham (2100-1900 BC) was a contemporary of the Chaldeans (626-556 BC).>"Then Joseph settled his father and his brothers and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded." (Genesis 47:11)The true historical basis for the story of Joseph ending up a slave in Egypt likely happened during the government of the successor of Ramses II, Merenptah, who conquested Canaan and boasted on his stele: "Israel is made waste, his seed/grain is none."The basis of the Joseph and Potiphar's wife story comes from the Egyptian story Tale of Two Brothers, which was penned during the reign of Amenmesses amid the tensions between this usurper king and his brother Seti II.Joseph rising from prison and becoming Chancellor over Egypt under Pharaoh at a time of cultural tension and famine was based on the foreign man named Baya that Pharaoh Seti II placed into power as Chancellor during a time of unrest and famine. The rest of that Biblical character came from Imhotep among countless others from varying Egyptian periods. Israel and his family coming into the land, once again inspired by the events during the reign of Seti II.Pharaoh Siptah killed Baya. A time of chaos fell over Egypt, with foreigners called Hyksos destroying Egypt's traditional religion and values, running the land into chaos. Skip forward to Setnakhte. He rounded these Asiatic people up, put some to work, banished the rest, restored the throne, until his son and successor Ramesses III purged the land amidst the collapse of the Bronze age - a time of plague, pestilence and darkness perhaps due to Hekla-3. THAT right there is the historical basis for the Exodus story.(Cont)
>>18523405>>18523423The Merneptah Stele takes place post-Exodus, which would mean if the Torah was true then Moses already established Israel. There's no way around this. If you assume that it's talking about Hebrews, then it would mean that Moses was lying and the Torah is wrong- there was no ktisis style settlement of Israel. If you accept that the Torah was correct, then it could not possibly be talking about the nomads in the Merneptah stele were led by a guy named Israel.Baya is the most likely candidate for the Shashu Overlord Irsu (which could be an Egyptian way of saying Isra as in Israel) and his followers. This is most likely the same story told by Manetho about Osarseph (with the Osar part being a variation of Isru) and the lepers. The details are also similar, they stole gold and valuables to hire Canaanite reinforcements and left them behind while fleeing Egypt. Manetho said Osarseph was Moses and others think it could also mean Joseph. The reinforcements they meant to hire are the former Hyksos in Canaan in the Manetho version.Twere still a mysterious people listed as Apiru still in the land of Egypt, including today's Deir El-Medinia, holding worker's strikes until eventually the other Ramesside kings either kicked the Apiru out, or let them go. Either way, at some point the Apiru, the Shasu and the Asiatics Setnakhte and Ramesses III expelled were driven into Cana'an by an impatient Egyptian army, as Egypt was dying a slow death.(Cont)
>>18523405>>18523423>>18523427When they gathered in Canaan, these people got together, shared stories and memories, including the descendants of the Hyksos who had come out of Egypt in a grand Exodus five centuries beforehand. They all got together and formed the People of Israel, spinning their mish-mash of stories and faded memories into the narrative we have today.In other words, from the get go Israel has been a corporate fiction. They were never the people they claim to have been.>Israel Knohl recently proposed to identify Osarseph with Irsu, a Shasu who, according to Papyrus Harris I and the Elephantine Stele, took power in Egypt with the support of "Asiatics" (people from the Levant) after the death of Queen Twosret; after coming to power, Irsu and his supporters disrupted Egyptian rituals, "treating the gods like the people" and halting offerings to the Egyptian deities. They were eventually defeated and expelled by the new Pharaoh Setnakhte and, while fleeing, they abandoned large quantities of gold and silver they had stolen from the temples>Baya, also called Ramesse Khamenteru (died 1192 BC), was an important Asiatic official in ancient Egypt, who rose to prominence and high office under Seti II Userkheperure Setepenre and later became an influential powerbroker in the closing stages of the 19th Dynasty. He used to be possibly identified with Irsu (alt. Arsu, Iarsu, Yarsu) mentioned in the Great Harris Papyrus, although no contemporary source connects Baya with Irsu and the connection has since been disproven due to the differences in the years that they died>This name attributed to Moses, Osarseph, appears only in Manetho, and only in this text, in all ancient literature. Perhaps Osarseph is an Egyptian form of Joseph, in Hebrew Yosef, in which the letters Jo (of Jahweh) are substituted for Osar (Osiris/On), syncretized with Dionysus/Bacchus that the Greek-Romans called Yahweh
>>18523405No one ever mentions any Pentateuch characters prior to the Ptolemaic period.NotASingleReference
>>18523398The Jews are ontologically evil. They are responsible for much of the world's suffering. They are also infamous throughout all human history for being pathological liars. Nothing good and true can ever come from them.The ultimate source of Christianity and all other Abrahamic religions is the Jews. Therefore, Christianity is false, as are all other Abrahamic religions.
So who's to say that conflict wouldn't have risen between Britain and America against Germany even if they they had kept spreading their assholes for Hitler?
>>18524655>believed Britain and America was ruled by JewsWhy did he sue for peace with Britain then?
>>18525015England is a weak nation that always bends to the whims of either America or Europe. Still, if Hitler had won it's more likely England would remain an American satellite than become a German satellite
>>18524655Hitler didn't actually care about England one way or the other and just wanted them to fuck off. There's an argument that he might have fought in the colonial sphere against them in the distant future, but even this I doubt since the English would have destroyed their empire regardless, so there wouldn't have been much of a reason to vie against them
>>18525017For the same reason he put all those Jews into luxurious resort camps.
>>18525015How would he remove American influence from England without an invasion though? This only way this would change is if the English themselves rose up against Big Brother America, which obviously would never happen
1. Scripture can't take precedence over apostolic Tradition. The Biblical Canon was only compiled in the late 300s, and the decision of which books to include had to rely on 3 centuries of apostolic Tradition. Scripture also can't be the only source of Revelation because that would mean God has deprived His followers from access to His truth for centuries.2. Jesus Christ explicitly said that St. Peter would lead his Church and he would have the authority to bind and loose from earth to heaven (Matthew 16:18-19). St. Peter became the first bishop of Rome and the popes are his successors. This view was widely accepted on Christendom, even among the Orthodox churches although they claimed he was just "first among equals," what is obviously a cope to anyone from an outside perspective.3. The Protestant Bible is missing 7 books in the Old Testament because they have been rejected by Jews some 1 or 2 centuries after the ministry of Jesus Christ. There wasn't a consensus on the Jewish canon during the times of Jesus and those deuterocanonical books were present in the 3rd-2nd century BC Septuagint, the famous Greek translation of the Tanakh, used as source material by the writers of the New Testament and early Christians.4. The Bible-only doctrine naturally leads to the path of fundamentalist interpretation, but current scientific findings challenge a literalist understanding of the Bible. It's is known that the earth is not flat. It's in known that species evolve. It's is known that there are some historicity problems in some books of the Bible. The Catholic Church rejects fundamentalist interpretation, in favor of considering the context, genre, and limitations of human authors. The Scripture is divinely inspired but it was not divinely dictated word-for-word (The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church, Pope John Paul II, 1993: section I, F) (Catechism 109-119).
>>18524607It wasn't a "habit", their cosmology was that of a flat earth with a solid dome above. There is nothing whatsoever that shows the firmament simply refers to the sky, as they would have called it that (the word Raqia does not mean sky, it means dome. The word Shamayim means sky or heaven, and is also used throughout the bible. The word "raqia" only means "solid hammered out metal", because they thought the earth had a solid dome above it).
>>18524517>thought about their own writings is a totally separate subjectI don't think so because that also reflects what ancient Christians believed just as well as Clement and Irenaeus. Mind explaining what point did I ignore in your own words?>>which uses https://biblehub.com/strongs/greek/2316.htm>That's agapeYou've linked to theos which I've explained is why Irenaeus quotes Genesis that way. Also compare from your website>φίλος phílos, fee'-los; properly, dear, i.e. a friend; actively, fond, i.e. friendly (still as a noun, an associate, neighbor, etc.):—friend. >The KJV translates Strong's G5384 in the following manner: friend (29x).as used by James with LXX Isaiah 41:8>ἀγαπάω agapáō, ag-ap-ah'-o; perhaps from ἄγαν ágan (much) (or compare H5689); to love (in a social or moral sense):—(be-)love(-ed). Compare G5368.>The KJV translates Strong's G25 in the following manner: love (135x), beloved (7x). and the Hebrew Isaiah 41:8>אָהַב ʼâhab, aw-hab'; or אָהֵב ʼâhêb ; a primitive root; to have affection for (sexually or otherwise):—(be-) love(-d, -ly, -r), like, friend.>The KJV translates Strong's H157 in the following manner: love (169x), lover(s) (19x), friend(s) (12x), beloved (5x), liketh (1x), lovely (1x), loving (1x).These are not the same thing even if there is an obvious minor overlap because the love is in a friendly way as I've mentioned previously. Even the Jubilees source you gave matches these latter 2 better than the first. Anyway Irenaeus knew Greek like the author of James not Hebrew so points like yours that rely on translations are extremely weak against a lexical argument even if they could have been justified to correspond to the exact same meaning. If he knew the Hebrew he wouldn't have been using the Greek translation of Matthew's gospel. He says it himself here "Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect" - https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103301.htm
>>18524602>Did Moses say what a bunch of Rabbis said...? And how exactly are these independent chains of Moses' teachings if they say opposite things?What point are you even trying to make here? It's as clear as possible that Jesus (who tells you to follow the Pharisees and they believe in an oral Torah) + Talmudic sources both refer to an external oral tradition and unless you want to claim that both got it via the same means it's obviously independently corroborated. Jesus himself for example partakes in celebrations that do not exist in the written law. One that is explicitly described like "In the talmudical academies, Hanukkah is celebrated as the festival of the Oral Torah, since this festival is not mentioned in the Scriptures. In Hasidic courts, Hanukkah commemorates the victory of the light of Judaism over the darkness of Hellenistic assimilation" - https://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/silent-lights-holy-lights-the-story-of-the-silence-of-the-rabbis-on-hanukkah-12-5-2016 Do you actually think they believe Rabbis just invented all of it on the spot or what? btw they say opposite things because humans make mistakes and/or lack information this is not unheard of. Same thing happens with canonical works too.>You can use and admire a work without thinking the work is itself divine scripture.I've been arguing for authority here and so that's not a rebuttal. He quoted it 4 times from what I have been seeing so incorporating its teachings into his works is more than just admiration. You refuse to engage on what "divine scripture" even meant to the earliest of Christians anyway. I don't believe when they cited works that are now found in the NT they were saying this is the word of God with the exception of maybe what Jesus taught as the gospel (not the 4) but they for sure respected them.>He directly says it was written by LukeThanks for letting me know but if you could point to an exact sentence in that wall of text it would be appreciated.
>>18524156>The Gospels mention a Roman census requiring everyone to travel to their ancestral hometowns. Historians note this is never happenedThat's not so, both the census and the star of Bethlehem are a historical fact: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/J3y4Qx_avbY
>>18523515oh, I forgot to address this one as well>the sun, moon, and stars are placed INSIDE the firmamentyeah the sun is IN the SKY, doofus. no dome needed.
Where did the impression that Hitler is charismatic come from?I have tried watching some of his rallies, listened to some of his speeches with subtitles. He says deutschland a lot, and says a lot of milktoast nationalist stuff you would expect any self respecting politician to say.What am I missing?
>>18521670>What am I missing?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2R2Xeo8HX8&list=PLTc48O2OY_m1fDpqBQnb3lX8P2P9p6TXU
>>18522112If you read Hitler’s speeches they usually aren’t well written they ramble on , he repeats himself and is very pedantic at least the later ones
>>18521855>mostly just a way for germans to get away with what they had done after losing WW2 much like the "I was just following muh orders" meme, it's just bullshit meant to shift the blame from a large amount of people who openly collaborated with nazism but were too scared to man up and face punishment for itThat’s interesting, people don’t often make that point.
It's just populist crap. Modern rightoids also fall for this. Shit, they fall for AI memes, lol.
>>18525013>they fall for AI memes,What?
It disturbs me how little truth matters in the world. All that matters is class, power, and wealth.All your favorite celebrities were born elites. For some it is obvious and for others it is more obscure. Jesus did not create a big religion by being poor and homeless and doing miracles. His mother was rich and friends with the centurion who cried out "this was a good man." The network of Christians deceived politicians using their wealth and power to take control of the cattle. Muhammad came from a powerful family. The guy who raised him Abu Talib owned the military of the strongest clan in the region, and his wife Khadija was one of the richest and most influential people in Arabia. He inherited all her wealth when she died and he became rich. All your favorite celebs use power, violence, and intimidation and deceive their slaves to worship them. Billie Eilish used to have famous friends before she was famous. She got astroturfed by Apple. None of these people are honest. 100% of the time it is elites abusing their luck. You are property. Human sheep. Lol.
>>18524750we're on to you Jew. we're waking up.
>>18524636>Jesus did not create a big religion by being poor and homeless and doing miracles. His mother was rich and friends with the centurion who cried out "this was a good man.????
when the goyfish wake up and see the ashes the elites have left behind, it will be too late
>>18524636Blasphemous schizo
>>18524636>It disturbs me how little truth matters in the world.What even is 'truth'?Anything that can't be shown as factual with an experiment in a controlled environment is at best plausible
The Third Reich was the most authentically socialist state to ever exist. True Socialism is not Marxism. Discuss.
>>18524553And what about non-jewish marxism? You keep making that distinction so it should exist.
>>18524761He's obviously saying that marxism is jewish not implying that there exists non-jewish marxism. Non-jewish socialism is Fascism.
>>18520848> Not to add that modern neo-nazis reiterate constantly their hatred for socialism and their opposition to class struggle.The biggest Neonazi group today is Azov battalion and they are in complete support of Western European liberal style capitalism and everything that comes with it. Pic related is a random street in Lvov, the hometown of Stepan Bandera and heart of Azov Neonazi militias. Here is your “totally REAL SOCIALISTS” guys, a McDonald’s on every street
>>18524948Most "neo-nazis" are just libertarians who hate a specific group, ethnic, religious, etc. There is a complete absence of Gleichschaltung (sychronisation), arguably the primary component of national socialism
>>18524995Fair enough. I give you that Azov just seem like western liberals almost who just hate Russian race/ religion/ culture along racial lines
Why did Hong Kong think it was a good idea to trade British rule for Chinese rule? Did they honestly think China would treat them better?
>>18524559What the fuck do you mean by that, it was a 99 year lease. There wasn't a choice. It always was colonized Chinese land and it was returned.
>>18524559The British only straight up owned Hong Kong island, all the rest of the colony's territory was a 99 year lease and once the lease was up, China would take it back and without the rest of the land, Hong Kong island would no longer be viable, as there's barely any water on the island and with a bazillion people living there, no where to grow food not to mention needing the mainland for apartments, factories, warehouses, etc.Now the Brits could have made a deal with Taiwan to keep all the colony, saying they were the real government of China but by then, everybody knew this was nonsense and China could have relentlessly fucked with Hong Kong (without actually invading) to the point the colony again wouldn't have been viable.tl;dr the Bongs fucked up in 1897 by not making the entire colony British forever.
>>18524559Hong Kong doesn't have an army ergo it doesnt have a choice
>>18524991Nothing would have changed. China would still want it back and the UK would find another way to quietly cede it back to China. Losing it was humiliation enough without devolving into Goa 2.0 happen.
>>18525023Losing it was humiliation enough without devolving into Goa 2.0.*
Was it inevitable or could it have been prevented given that European Protestants don’t bootlick Israel much?
>>18522769Forgot pic
>>18517169Was it inevitable? I guess not, not in the way it exists now. But it would be impossible to remove the latent philosemitic elements from protestantism as a whole; barring a scenario where the Jews just disappear, something like this would have manifested anyway, even if not exactly as it is now.>European Protestants don’t bootlick Israel much?That's because they don't matter anymore, when they did, roughly a century ago, they were also somewhat zionist. The english ones I mean, obviously the Germans were doing something else at that time. >>18519637The current roots of Christian Zionism can more or less be traced to the English dissenters and the english reformation.>>18522769That booklet was basically forgotten before it was recovered by the German Völkisch movement in the late 19th century, though. It's dishonest to sell it as a foundational element of protestantism. Before that Luther tried to convert the Jews but got pisy they told him to fuck off.
>>18517169Stupid babyboomers, idk if the alternatives are any better
>>18517169jews
>>18517169Why is Christ separated from Christianity in that pyramid?
>richest man in the world >had no access to markets, luxuries or tech
>>18523125I hate that they don't paint these.
>>18519853Why did he threaten to kill the town?
>>18523125That was built in colonial times.
>>18519849The blingiest nigger is still a nigger.
>tfw Mansa Musa was the ancient equivalent of rappers flaunting their dollar bills
I cannot think of anything more cucked than being a European Christian.Imagine accepting a foreign religion from the middle east that demands the erasure of actual native European pagan religions. To be a European Christian is to be spiritually colonized.
>>18522809They're from a common ancestral religion.
>>18522703>wanting Truth is cuckedantichrists ngmi
>>18524165>You JewsAgain, not a Jew, how much does that need to be said?>>18524482Christianity is not the truth, but a perversion of the truth based on nothing but lies and deceitful nonsense.
>>18522703>Worshipping a dead jew as creator of the universe and all realityHoly cucked
>>18522805Especially the bugs from Klendathu. And they'll kneel to Him and to us as His image-bearers.
If they won what would their society look like? Would it just liberalize over time like Francoist Spain?
>>18524849The US was extremely committed to Japan's defeat after Pearl Harbor. The only thing that could produce a favorable outcome for Japan would be sustained major victories in the Pacific for 2-3 years, which would be unlikely, and otherwise, the US could outproduce Japan in most every way at such a rate that Japanese leaders knew a long war was impossible to win. One of the reasons it took longer to defeat Japan is because the US attacks were being staged thousands of miles away -- Germany and her troops were a couple hundred miles away from England. Another very important reason was the Japanese determination not to surrender. They wouldn't surrender after a few decisive battles, but Germans would by the tens of thousands in 45. Given America's will after Pearl harborAlso, US leadership formed a Germany First policy, prioritizing their defeat first. All told, if the US weren't fighting Germany directly and focused all its war effort on Japan, it wouldn't be as long to defeat them, and directly comparing the theaters to establish that beating japan was more difficult and would make the public less willing doesn't work.
>>18523141Absolute best case scenario they get about a decade of riding high on the money they looted from conquered nations and the slave labour they could squeeze out of conquered populations (at increasing cost to their security apparatus and fucking over ordinary Germans compared to the party elites) before the inevitable results of Nazi party 'corruption and vibes' based economic policy came home to roost and the entire political/social structure just rotted away from within very rapidly - with any attempt at reform from within resulting in a Gestapo death squad kicking down your front door in the small hours of the morning.
>>18524951You're ignoring the political ramifications of a defeat in Europe. It's hard to even guess how things would go since the US has never faced anything like that. It's entirely possible that the American public would completely turn on the idea of continuing any war or that there could be major political unrest undermining the war effort. Or everyone could double down desperate to at least get a win in Japan. It's definitely not as straightforward as simply shifting resources and attention to a different front.
>>18524944Actually the recruitment program in the Netherlands was relatively succesful, and for his part quisling did also recruit a small cohort of norwegians who were never sent east because the soviets retook the area they were supposed to colonize. The germans weren't thrilled to find that the dutchmen weren't doing it for the reasons they wanted, in fact they came into conflict with german settlers in the region until they were evacuated after a while.
>>18524953German would mostly eat stew for a few decades. American Magazines would call it omething flashy like Fantanomics.
