how come people romanticize WW2 vets for killing nazis but then claim the 50s was an era of evil repression even tho said era was founded by WW2 vets
>>17996186How should it have happened? What would be different today?
>>17996189well for one thing dont demonize the era founded by nazi killers as being nazi
>>17996192America broke its own rules to help win those wars. After WW2 they expected every generation to go fight a major war against gommunism. Just Vietnam was such a crazy time. And the government. did do some really crazy bad things. There's so many other factors though. How many men actually fought in WW2 vs. Stayed home? How many leftist refugees were brought here? How many Americans were already the socialist loving kind leaning towards gommunism?Eisenhower was made head of Columbia University after the war and the Faculty hated him with a passion. Have you ever seen anyone express thankfulness for ending the holocaust? I say these things because I am already damned. They aren't really things people will talk about honestly.
>>17996186They don't. Leftists are hellbent on destroying the legacy of American contribution in WW2.
>>17996203What the fuck are you even talking about
>>17996213Are you O.P.? You'll have to be more specific. This is a really complex issue concerning all of american history specifically from 1939-present day. I'm attempting to use my knowledge and worldview to answer O.P's vauge bait. Excuse me for not posting the whole chapter (in my mind).
>>17996213To put it simply the U.S. was not a bunch of crew cut boys eager to man the factory all day and live in mass housing and have 1.2 kids. The wife did not dream of slurping up state adjacent magazines all day while home alone listening to the new fancy dishwasher.Life was not a 1950's tv ad. That's not what America was before the wars. The new immigrants were not old blood patriotic Americans. They were people who only really liked socialism.Leftists see 1950's ads and I'm sure they think Nazi.Something about a happy anglo german family where the boys look like football players irks them. Th e 1950's spawned so much bitterness somehow it's unreal.
>>17996234The sterile happy hardworking 1950's life. This part is important. That was not the culture previously. Though it some seem nice in many ways. Within 10 years frumpy people with nappy unkempt hair were dropping acid and writhing on the ground in a dirty concert field. They were looking for something they didnt have. America won W.W.2, but then had to go fight fanatic Asians in Korea right after this hard won victory. Like W.T.F. government? Since when do we go around dying for just anyone's country? Is that the way shit is now? America was not about that shit before. Plus Truman was in charge right before the fifties and I just know he had to have done some bad shit.
>>17996254>Like W.T.F. government? Since when do we go around dying for just anyone's country? What a bizarre statement to make as if dying for France or the Netherlands in WW2 was any different
>>17996262Being tricked into it over many years is different than just treating citizens like army ants. People must have had war fatigue as well. Most importantly, there was no Pearl Harbor to get everyone fired up. Americans were always against foreign war involvement, always. Ever since W.W.2 we've been pawns of the Gov. They run the world and profit from the deals while Americans go die for them.The 1950's was sort of thier attempt to normalize that new ant bug American ideal. I say this even though I think it was probably a really good time overall. Then you had people who wanted to take America super left and hated it for that reason.
>>17996280What was the substantive difference between bleeding out in a Dutch wheat field because "if we don't stop them there the nazis will be shooting their way through New York City" and bleeding out in a Korean rice paddy because "if we don't stop them there the communists will be shooting their way through Washington DC"?
>>17996288I already said Pearl Harbor. By the time of Vietnam people were fed up with this shit. There's so many other things that happened as well. It wasn't as simple as you make it seem. America's leadership was hell bent on the wars. Not the people.
>>17996303What did Pearl Harbor have to do with Europe, other than a hamfisted alliance by Hitler that no one seriously believed would have any impact on the Pacific Front?>By the time of Vietnam people were fed up with this shitNo they weren't, practically every (early) veteran of the Vietnam War concedes that they volunteered out of the misplaced belief encouraged by the stories of their fathers, uncles, teachers, etc that it was more or less a replay of WW2 where the evil commies were invading South Vietnam just like the evil nazis invaded (France/the Netherlands/etc)
>>17996309You're cherry picking examples and acting like it represented the majority opinion. There was lots of manipulation and gaslighting. None of which I will mention here.Americans did not fight WW2 because they were overly concerned with Nationalist squabbling of other continents.
>>17996309Oh yhea, Pearl Harbor passed of basically all Americans. The economy really sucked too which always makes men want to go test thier fortune.
>>17996321>Americans did not fight WW2 because they were overly concerned with Nationalist squabbling of other continentsTell that to the ones that ended up fighting in Europe>>17996323See the above.
>>17996186WW2 vets weren't the only people around in the 50s, anon? The generations before them were still alive and many of them held political power, just like how boomers block everything good these daysFor instance, J. Edgar Hoover, who led the FBI through the 50s and used it to illegally harass dissidents, had been running it since the mid-30s and was too old to fight in WW2
>>17996342Im sure plenty of people supported men in dresses back then
>>17996368why are (you) so obsessed with trannies?
>>17996404im not tho but most people 20 years ago, let alone, almost 70, wouldnt have been for it, as well as gay right, DEI, and mass immagrationbut if one were to express the same very opinion of WW2 vets you would be accused of being a nazithats the irony im trying to get at
WWII vets defeated the NazisBut then they opposed CommunismTherefore they were the new NazisMcCarthyism was the holocaust for commiesThis is how I imagine a leftist would think
>>17996441The communist definition of a fascist is someone who opposes bolshevism
>>17996457honestly the communists wonIm fucking convinced of thathow can you explain people describing anything that is marginally right wing as being the same as goose-stepping nazis?the American empire, the most liberal and tolerant empire in history trying to destroy their own roots and peopleits so over for us
>>17996562We should’ve allowed the Germans to erase the Bolsheviks.
>>17996186Leftists are shifting away "US/UK were good in WWII".
>>17996186Because ultimately killing nazis doesn't stop you from being a racist git. Just means that you're probably not an actively genocidal psycho.
>>17996586ok then why should I care about nazis?
>>17996569>Leftists are shifting away "US/UK were good in WWII"What is the founding myth of Western civilization in 2025?
>>17996204Correct. Alliedtards legacies will fade into nothingness. Just like they fought for.
>>17996186What? People romanticize the second world war because it is liberalism triumphing over authoritarianism. Which is a noble thing but also idealistic which means the people who fought this war weren't entirely perfect themselves. Progressives are progressives its in the name. These people want society to progress socially so while the 50s were a step in the right direction compared to the totalitarianism of the Nazis and the total repression of numerous groups in the 1800s, the 50s still left a lot to be desired. Another example of this is the civil war. You can romanticize the civil war due to the social progress it made BUT you can also admit that the reconstruction years left a lot to be desired in terms of black liberation.
>>17996677I still refuse this narrative it was all left v right a little. I think a third position has been left out of this narrative. That is patriotic Americans who did not want to be so involved in other Nations wars. Are there any examples of FDR signing off on Sarin gas attacks to disperse protesters like them? I've always heard this as right v. left, but people angry that we somehow morphed in to a globalist minute man empire with fewer rights and a new fake money system must have played a part.
>>17996186*Killing Nazis* was a clear moral good against an obvious evil. But the 50s repression [racism, sexism, and McCarthyism] was the dark side of that same generation's values. Winning the war didn't automatically make them progressive at home. Many fought for an America that was still very traditional and exclusive. They were heroes abroad, but some upheld flawed systems back home.
>>17997329Killed the Nazis, becames the new Nazis to the kind of people the Nazis hated. Oh bitter irony.
>>17997352>noo you can't fight the genocidal warmongering criminals who want to loot your couuntry because 80 years later some retard will call you the nazi!!
Because they criticize cultural oppression, like segregation.
>>17997356Would that really have happened? Even Nazis would get tired of war eventually. Anyway all that could have been prevented if America just let WW1 run it's course. The allies would have been forced to come to terms with Germany and Austria and suffered a blow to thier empirical pride.Meanwhile The U.K. would now be a bustling place with none of the problems it has now.America would be independent and strong with virtually no haters and no commie-soc influx. Nazis never become a thing.In other words, America had to be the meddling bitch at the party that made the bitter losers redouble thier efforts.
