Sorry, I was just thinking about the Roman Empire. What did you say?

OP is the same nigger spamming the christcuck hate too isnt he

>>18404475
For me, it's the 19th century

>zoomers
you mean every single normafaggot generation for the past 80 years?

>>18404475
My favourite historical niche is the Spanish Empire. Currently reading a book on it during breaks at work, though I love WW2 tanks too.

>>18404475
WW2 is the primary foundation yth of most modern Western States and the global order. Maybe stop using fascism as the boogeyman for everything evil and zoomies stop being obsessed with those

>>18404480
nah, needs more character action games to matter

>>18404530
CARLOS V, REY I EMPERADOR

>>18404828
I'm exactly at the chapter/book about him.

>>18404475
WW2 obsession is history channel era boomer thing. Zoomers are into Romans, Byzantines, steppe hunter vs farmer prehistory

>>18404726
The modern world is a product of the cold war. Nobody gives a shit about WW2.

File: itsworsethanyouthink.jpg (29 KB, 573x219)

29 KB JPG

This is like AI slop done by real people.
Actually most trad-adjacent content is, they just regurgitate the same shit over and over again.
I bet he name drops Tolkien in either video too.

>>18404475
It was the last time men were men

>>18404528
came here to post this, boomers fucking LOVE obsessing over WWII, it's why Russia and Israel try to frame everything they do though muh good guy Allies vs Axis bullshit narratives

>>18405136
I cringed to this, just so yk.

>>18405081
Did Communist or Soviet become a buzzword to defame your political opponent? How many video games about cold war conflicts are there? How criminalised is pro-communist behaviour? How many socialist (and by that I meanbolshevik, not the anarchist antifa larpers) and USSR lost causers groups exist?

>>18404475
Zoomer here. When I was little I used to be obsessed with WW1 & WW2 History, now as a young adult it's nothing new to me. Prefer to look at underrated history topics whether if it's modern or not. As to how we can stop them being obsessed? Don't know honestly, either we should let it continue & see who is smart enough to go past that or we should stop using buzzwords like "nazi" or "fascist" & educate them.

Probably because ww2 is so absurdly mythologized especially in the American mindset to legitimize the world today, and as things increasingly turns to shit and things increasingly reveals to not be as we were told in just about anything, then ww2 naturally also becomes both a topic of defence and a topic of scepticism for both sides in this ongoing culture war.

The fact that the word "nazi" and "fascist" is being used so liberally today against anyone who hold views that was normalized just 30 years ago is probably the most obvious factor. People are getting sick and tired of how a narrative is defended by referencing (abusing) history, especially when they find out that it's all bullshit. Fascism being 'far right' is one of the biggest lies of the 20th century but it's one of those mythologized aspects that the left entire existence rests upon so they will defend it tooth-and-nail.

>>18405636
I dunno the idea that imposing counterfactual history on present political concerns will solve some things but ruin other things. A truly perfect world cannot exist.

>>18405636
fascist being used as an insult started in mid 20's

>>18405651
It was adopted as an insult/accusation by Socialists and Anarchists.
But for Western Liberal Democracies it only started to become a thing in the 70's or 80's, depending on the country.

>>18404475
It's interesting

>>18405651
Not for someone who generally have conservative values that were normality even among liberals just 30 years ago.

Fascist today is applied to anyone you simply dont like, its so retarded it's unreal. They think USA is fascist, and then you ask them if Turkey is fascist and they say "lol no wtf why would it be", as if Turkey is not 10 times more authoritarian. The inconsistency is unreal and I refuse to believe any self-aware individual doesnt have the logic and reason see through their own biased obssession.

Again, fascism and ww2 is so heavily mytholigized that the left HAS to defend the narrative because it's vital for their own legitimacy.

>>18405081
We get barraged with “THE THREAT OF ISLAMO FASCISM” every night by our boomer parents listening to Levin.
It’s not “IslamoCommunism” it’s not “Leonid Fuentes” it’s Adolf Fuentes, ISLAMO-FASCISM, NAZIS HITLER FASCISM.
Hitler became apart of the Western myth, first as villain now as god. And you’re afraid.

>>18404475
I think the fact that it was so documented, filmed, recorded, and written about makes it the most interesting time we have a lot of source material for.

>>18404475
Just wait, in 30 years all the history books, movies, video games and music will be about the fall of Russia and China, and the solidification of the Middle East under the Western yoke. The last 80 years of relative peace have kept things largely focused on WW2 because, despite the unhinged seething of the local thirdies on the boards, literally none of the wars since have mattered much except to help solidify Western control of Asia and the Gulf States, they haven't really changed anything about civilized culture except perhaps to contribute CCR and War Pigs.

The upcoming wars will be worth writing about because it will represent another major fundamental change in the way the history books are written.

File: IMG_E9821.jpg (184 KB, 1125x1151)

184 KB JPG

>>18404475
>current western paradigm is one of massive racial and sexual identity politics which pits men and/or white people as the main boogeyman
>this naturally drives young men away and into the fringes of popular society
>this causes them to question the very foundation that this world order is founded on (the aftermath of WW2)
>they begin to make up stories and fall for neo-nazi propaganda slop because of this
>this alarms the lib-leftist
>the lib-leftist think the best way to correct this is to simply double down on their bullshit and try to make the case that WW2 was indeed about liberating brown folx of color from Hitler and the evil white people
>this only drives the young men further away as the lib-left rebuttal simply proves their initial point
The whole thing is stupid. Liberal/leftist have no way to counteract this because they present a false binary where one is either fully on board with them (tranny story time/open borders/socialism/anti-white agitation) and is anti nazi OR you are a nazi. They cant help themselves as they can easily give these young men the pathway of saying that you can be against the liberal left system, but the reality is that nazis did commit warcrimes/the holocaust ect. and were horrible.

>>18405812
>>the lib-leftist think the best way to correct this is to simply double down on their bullshit and try to make the case that WW2 was indeed about liberating brown folx of color from Hitler and the evil white people
I would further point out that this is the exact method Ken Burns used for his American Revolution documentary. Different issue, same "solution"

In this case, America is an evil racist, sexist, capitalist country founded by evil white slave holders so fuck the constitution, we need communism now. This is the momentum behind the left and there is nothing other than minor and tipid pushback from some democrats on it. Burns is an old school Democrat liberal who still has some remnants of Norman Rockwell like Patriotism to him which I believe is sincere and he is worried about this. His solution was to offer a sort of olive branch to these people and say that the American Revolution was good because it laid the groundwork for tranny story time and Black Lives Matter and feminist marching with pussy hats for abortion as a form of birth control. It obviously wont work, its retarded, and everyone knows its bullshit. It doesnt appeal to truly patriotic people at all and it wont work at all on the intended audience because nothing will.

>>18405803
>right wing is when you worship shitler

>>18405068
His bastard son, Don Juan, is also cool. Major figure at battle of Lepanto, plus the literary womanizing figure

>>18404475
Honestly its boomers and gen x that are obsessed with it, large demographic of people are obsessed with it but Zoomzooms benefit from having access to wider interests and access to more obscure topics

I lost some interest in WW2 once i studied it more deeply and realized that Axis had literally 0 chance of victory, it kinda takes away a lot of stakes
also the feeling of sadness once you realize that all the atrocities, holocaust, hunger plan etc were ultimately for nothing

>>18405979
>realized that Axis had literally 0 chance of victory
Meh, the theory can still exist, it's just that it has been greatly narrowed down because victory cannot be achieved by force.
It basically relies on Britain negotiate a peace in 1940, Germany finds a way to co-exist with the USSR, and this makes USA back off and stop being beligerent at least with Germany.

I still think Britain deciding to continue the war in 1940 is an interesting debate.
A lot of people simply conclude that it was the best/only option because they couldnt trust Hitler with another treaty, and that the debat just stops there.
But it's a bit intriguing that Britain did not at least even attempt to hear out the German offers and weight them against what continuing the war would mean, because Britain in 1940 has no way to defeat Germany, and they know this.
Their entire strategy is to basically prolong the war until USA and USSR gets involved, and build a bomber fleet that can bomb every man, woman and child on the continent, so a debate can be made on the morals and ethics of this. Yes it was within their interest to choose this path but it wasnt in the interest of the rest of humanity.
They basically want to expand the war, make it more destructive, more bloody, more bloody. By 1940 barely a million had died, barely any city had been destroyed, and the path they chose led to +40 million dead and virtually every city in Europe destroyed and the continent divided by two outsiders, all because it made sense 'for Britain' to not even at least listen to the German proposals.

"well it would have happened anyway because of Barbarossa"
A strong argument can be made against that. Because if Britain negotiate a peace in 1940, it might remove enough incentive for Barbarossa to even happen, since Barbarossa was highly motivated by the fact that Britain and Germany were at war. The economic incentive is gone, the war situation incentive is gone etc.

>>18405888
It really is.
There are no rightwingers who arent pro-Hitler.
>kurwa im a polish right wing nationalist
no such thing.
to be against Hitler is to be liberal.

>>18406114
hitler whole idea was to conquer slavs for lebensraum, this is what nazism was about
if you are talking about hypethetical Weimar who would be okay with just conquering Poland then it could go different ways but once France fall it was over for Germany because USA decided to crush them, UK had literally 0 reason for surrendering because they had 80% of the globe on their side

>>18406114
>da evil churchill forced us into invading soviets and commiting genocides
nigger mentality

>>18406122
>hitler whole idea was to conquer slavs for lebensraum, this is what nazism was about
And historians have proven that ww2 and not even the holocaust was planned, they were all reactionary to how things unfolded.

>UK had literally 0 reason for surrendering because they had 80% of the globe on their side
Doesnt matter, UK had no way to actually defeat Germany because the UK army was relatively very small. They needed allies to return to the continent. The entire UK strategy from 1940 onwards was to build a bomber fleet and wait for USSR and USA to become involed.

>>18406126
War with Britain forced Germany east yes.

>>18406126
>literally unable to even talk to the other side
actual nigger mentality
Germans at the very least engaged in geopolitical realism.

>>18406128
>They needed allies to return to the continent
and they had them? they had their whole fucking empire and USA aka the strongest country in the world that could outproduce german economy five times over

>>18406129
>>18406131
i lost my job
if i shoot your mother and take her money it will be actually my boss fault who forced this onto me, not mine :)

>>18406132
USA had not yet become involved in the war.
The British strategy was to wait for that to happen.
And the USSR.

>>18406134
USA was pretty much at undeclared war with germany after fall of france, they were giving them weapons for almost free and protecting their convoys

>>18406133
Not the best analogy but yes that's largely my point.
And I think you misunderstand me, I dont remove agency from Germany, I am simply connecting causality and it's perfectly fine to do so, in fact it shows deeper understanding to turn of events.

>>18406122
>hitler whole idea was to conquer slavs for lebensraum, this is what nazism was about
neither of these are true, they are post-war revisions because the racial trauma of slavs and jews is so immense they have to treat the German side quest east as a sort of world-shaking final battle for existence.
The Germans went east on a whim, thinking that because the Kaiser defeated Slavs in a two front war, surely the Slavs would go down easily again, perhaps fracture (again), and be divvied up (again).
>UK had 0 reason for surrendering
???
The UK could have defeated the United States in the war of 1812. unquestionably, the British Empire could have wiped out America, completely.
They signed a peace treaty because it wasnt worth the trouble.
WWII wasnt worth the trouble and it was a mistake for Britian to not accept Germany's overwhelmingly generous peace offers in 1940-1.

>>18406133
I would hold your boss partially responsible for setting you off yes.

>>18406133
nazis are unironically like that
this thread made me see more cleary why Churchill and Roosvelt knew that there is no point in negotiating with evil
>>18406140
>neither of these are true,
they are, according to hitler and his party official program, since it's first 5 words and you already lied i will not bother reading the rest

>>18406135
>they were giving them weapons for almost free
No it wasnt. At that point it was still 'cash and carry' policy, and 'bases for destroyers'. Britain went bankrupt around 1941 because of this, and then USA shifted to lend-lease.

USA were breaching neutrality but the biggest breach of neutrality was the 'shoot on sight' order by Roosevelt in 1941.

None of this really matters tho because Britain cannot win (or lose) unless USA becomes directly involved, and by directly I mean standing armies committed to the fight.

>>18406144
>unless USA becomes directly involved
with they were planing to do
case closed

>>18406143
>they are according to Hitler and his official party program
The official policy of the NSDAP is found in Rein's Race and Culture of our Ancestors were Slavs are said to be an Aryan people, kindred to Germans.
>you already lied
You were educated in an eastern bloc school by 105 IQ midwits pushing a soft form of anti-German nationalism.
You never went to college, you never studied history beyond the orthodox narratives peddled in primary school and wikipedia.
You know nothing.

FYI, Lebensraum is absent from Germany's declaration of war.

>>18406145
lol you have no proof that USA were planning on declaring war on Germany before December 1941.
And if you have proof i'd like to see it or at least hear about it.

>>18406147
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_Program

>>18406145
>with they were planing to do
>case closed
FDR actually sent feelers to Hitler because he was partial to him when the war first broke out.
There was a lot of political scheming from within the president's inner circle that pushed him to side with Britain.
Again you dont know this because you dont actually do any research, you enter these threads to defend your national founding myth, not because youre interested in history.

Poland wont stop existing if you accept the fact Hitler was right btw. stop being afraid of reality.

>>18406149
This isnt proof because it's not even related to the situation of 1940 of which Britain made the decision to continue the war.

>>18406146
>denying official nazi program released on 24 february 1920
off to camp you go!

>>18406150
>please just make a peace with crazy meth addicit killer who whiped his ass with all previous treaties
no
bombs away!

>>18406153
so when USA was sinking german ships on Atlantic then those were just some pranks or something?

File: TGD.jpg (473 KB, 2048x1536)

473 KB JPG

>>18405979
germans never had chance against the might of Poland

>>18406157
Didnt start happening until 1941.
Again, the burden of proof relies on showing that USA were committed to join the war, to actually join the war, existed in the early summer of 1940.

So far you only bring up what is happening in 1941. Is it before USA officially joins the war? yes. Is it before Britain weights its committment to continue the war? No. Thus irrelevant to the point I was making.

>>18406161
their acitons shown they were committed to join the war
unless you think that they just randomly started hating germans in 1941

>>18406154
>official nazi program released on 24 february 1920
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program#English_Translation
>Lebensraum "Living Space"
>0 results
"uhm uhhh they said Germans abroad need colonies"
yes, Germany once had colonies and those Germans were ousted and would like to return to their homes.
On this point I will allow you a pass for being stupid.
On your second point about exterminating, Slavs that isnt anywhere in the party platform.
So are you stupid are you lying?
>>18406155
>wiped his ass with previous treaties
such as?

>meth addict killer
Stalin, a drug addict killer, and Churchill, a degenerate gambler, perpetually soaked in alcohol who killed 50,000 men at Gallipoli.
Hitler should have been the ideal man for negotiating with given the company of the times, so its weird there was this weird bizarre refusal to even talk to Germany.

hmmm, where do we see this today, bad faith negotiations, in explicable radio silence, hmmmm. 2026.... Iran-Israel-America.... the jewish lobby???
Why am I noticing a pattern here?


Make a post on /int/ showing your flag pls.

>>18406158
>loses in 35 days
reminder, Trump a week ago said Poland would no longer receive assistance from NATO against Russia LOL

>>18406164
But the actions you list are ones taken in 1941.
Do you not see the failure of logic here?
You need to point towards actions taken in early 1940 and before to make a point.

File: naziACK.png (1.29 MB, 1620x907)

1.29 MB PNG

>>18406167
do you think fagtler shat himself when he pulled the trigger

File: HDyRTE3XsAEjeqn.jpg (111 KB, 674x663)

111 KB JPG

>>18406168
>wins in 6 years

File: Germans in Poland.jpg (53 KB, 442x297)

53 KB JPG

>>18406170
and there it is, the mask slips.
lost in 35 days, enslaved by PUCCIA, begging Germany for gibs, about to be enslaved to PUCCIA again
shit country
shit people
shit posts

>>18406172
>loses less land than Poland
based German superhumans winning even when they lose.

>>18406169
how it's illogical that anti-german USA actions escalated from 1940 to 1941? or are you saying that Roosevelt was fan of hitler but suddenly turn on him in 1941

>>18406178
>Roosevelt was fan of hitler but suddenly turn on him in 1941
this is actually what happened and you can even see it in real time with the Kennedy recall and the shuffling around of Baruch.

>winning is when you lose 1/3 of your country

>>18406179
you don't believe this delusion yourself

File: HD1TTx_boAYGw_r.jpg (414 KB, 1680x1850)

414 KB JPG

>>18406175
>Communism liberating Poland from BOTH germans and Polish inter-war fascists
based

>>18406178
Have you lost track on what your original point was?
UK cant defeat Germany without American standing armies committed to the fight. There is no incentive in early 1940 and before that this would eventually happen. Where is the proof?
You only list things that happen in 1941 to make a point about the situation in 1940.

You said in >>18406145 that USA was PLANNING on joining the war. Where are those plans, where is even a hint of such plans. And again, timeline is important, because Britain made the decision to continue the war in mid-1940, so that's your frame of proof. Not after.

>>18406184
look, i don't know how i can explain it any simpler
USA was on UK side since the fall of France
UK could outproduce germans by denying them trade with the rest of the world
Roosevelt didn't suddenly throw a random fit in late 1941 and become anti-germany, politics don't work like that

>>18406187
>look, i don't know how i can explain it any simpler
By providing concrete proof that USA was going to officially join the war against Germany.
And that you respect timeline when providing this proof.

>USA was on UK side since the fall of France
At that point USA were merely selling and bartering with the UK. There is a huge difference between that and having armies advancing through the continent.

>UK could outproduce germans by denying them trade with the rest of the world
It still wont make UK win, because the UK army was relatively small and mostly confined to the 8th Army in Egypt. They didnt have a way to actually return to the continent and take the fight to Berlin on their own.

Again, I make my point; UK strategy when they opted to continue the war in mid-1940, was to wait for USA and USSR to become involved, and their primary strategy to wage war against Germany was to build a bomber fleet.

>Roosevelt didn't suddenly throw a random fit in late 1941 and become anti-germany, politics don't work like that
This isnt proof. This is you arguing in hindsight and then completely fail to contextualize your argument. It's just a "trust me bro they knew because look how things turned out".

>>18406194
you don't believe yourself that USA was just giving shitloads of support to UK just for money and for no other reason
Outproduce germans with your 500m big empire and USA help, starve them, force them to demoblize, force them to talks (normal talks, not giving shitler everything he wants for free)

>>18406198
>you don't believe yourself that USA was just giving shitloads of support to UK just for money and for no other reason
Okay lets put it this way.
I have more incentive to argue that the USSR would join the war on the side of Germany, based on your logic that favorable trade equals full on committment to join the war.
Of course I cant argue this because we know with hindsight that this doesnt happen, but it proves how your own argument completely relies on hindsight as well to make a point.
The British nor the Germans had no way of knowing early in the war, that by 1942 USA would be at war.

>Outproduce germans with your 500m big empire and USA help, starve them, force them to demoblize, force them to talks (normal talks, not giving shitler everything he wants for free)
Are you aware of the Dodecanese campaign? It was basically an effort by Britain to 'go their own way' without the US military, and it completely failed.
You make the point that Britain cannot lose the war which is true. But Britain also cannot win the war. They cannot push a British army on its own back into the continent and into Germany, they never even considered it. They needed the USSR and USA to soak up the Wehrmacht.

>>18406203
USSR trade with Germany was never that big, it's a popular myth. Shortly after fall of France, Roosevelt handed over over 50 destroyers to UK for almost free and this trend where USA just pours weapons and other supplies to UK only continuted
USA was an ally of UK, and enemy of Germany, this is a fact, given the enormous UK advantage (their whole empire and USA support) they weren't in the need to capitulate to Germany at all, time was on their side. Hell, even if they did made a peace with Germany, it would not last

>>18406120
>There are no rightwingers who arent pro-Hitler.
What spending your formative years in online echo chambers does to a mf

>>18406205
>USSR trade with Germany was never that big, it's a popular myth.
Not that big?
2 million tons of food, 1 million ton of oil, half a million tons of rubber and industrial metal?
Basically everything Germany needed to wage war.
Not that big?
Now I know you're either an idiot or just trolling.

>Roosevelt handed over over 50 destroyers to UK for almost free
They werent for free. The deal is literally called bases for destroyers and it was a huge deal for Britain because the deal was very one-sided for the benefit of USA (undermining the sovreignty of the British empire in exchange for outdated ships).
Nevertheless this deals comes in September 1940 which is also after Britains decision to continue the war. Again, timeline is an issue for you.

>and this trend where USA just pours weapons and other supplies to UK only continuted
They werent pouring weapons by mid-1940, they were selling them. Cash-and-Carry wasnt for free, stop using propagandicized grammar to make a point, be more objective and I will take you more seriously.

>USA was an ally of UK, and enemy of Germany, this is a fact
This is not proof, this is word salad because you dont have any actual concrete proof of actual things that points towards US committment to join the war in mid-1940 and earlier. You are trying to sugarcoat the fact that you are arguing in hindsight.

> given the enormous UK advantage (their whole empire and USA support) they weren't in the need to capitulate to Germany at all
Never made this point in fact in the previous post I made I literally said Germany has no way of defeating England BUT this is also vice versa. UK cannot defeat Germany entirely on her own. This does not mean UK will capitluate but in order to actually defeat Germany they need allies, and their entire strategy was to wait for USSR and USA to become involved, thereby expanding the war into a total world war of epic destruction.

>>18406209
>2 million tons of food, 1 million ton of oil, half a million tons of rubber and industrial metal?
yeah, not even a fraction of what Germany needed, contex is as important as numbers
>their entire strategy was to wait for USSR and USA to become involved
something wrong with that?

>>18406213
He thinks that both USA and USSR were peace loving hippies and Anglos are villains for tricking Hitler into invading them
basically schizophrenia

>>18406208
>denies Lebesruam (one of the most important thing in nazism)
>thinks nazis were right wing
it's true that most neonazis would end in concentration camps

>>18406213
>yeah, not even a fraction of what Germany needed, contex is as important as numbers
Without it Germany wouldnt have stood a chance.
Germany entered starvation-mode in 1916, just 1.5 years after war had been declared.
In mid-1941 they were still doing fine, and the occupied territory which they were obligated to feed were also not starving.
This is specifically due to the extensive trade with the USSR.
You're just being a clown right now, of course the trade was significant. 1 million tons of oil made every difference.

>something wrong with that?
It can become problematic yes.
By 1940 barely a million had died yet, and most European cities were spared.
The strategy to defeat Germany by expanding the war and through bombing campaigns means the death toll rises to +40 million and most cities in ruins with the outcome of two outside powers claiming victory.
The alternative being of at least open some sort of talks with Germany to at least hear out the proposals made.
Did it make sense for Britain to continue the war? Of course it did, they had every reason to distrust Hitler with another treaty.
But did it make sense for humanity? For Europe? That can be discussed. The decision was purely out of Britains own self-interest and they didnt really care if it means total war and total destruction and huge loss of life.
As my point was made earlier, both Barbarossa and the Holocaust was deeply motivated by the fact that the war was expanding and becoming more chaotic. We should at least have a debate on whether it was better than the alternative.

>>18406215
Not even remotely the point I am making.
I just wanted actual proof that USA were planning to join the war, and you're just seething about that fact.

>>18406220
man, idk how to tell you but 2 million tons of food is literally nothing when you have to feed 120m people
>It can become problematic yes
yeah, hitler wanting to conquer eastern europe would lead to to that, he was pretty evil

>>18406223
>man, idk how to tell you
It really sums it up because you really dont.

>yeah, hitler wanting to conquer eastern europe would lead to to that, he was pretty evil
Yeah, as opposed to those who had already conquered half of the globe and held it with an authoritarian grip. Not saying Hitler wasnt evil but the narrative is pretty problematic if you dont see this for the geopolitical war that it was between two established empires wanting to prevent a rival empire from manifestating.

>>18404475
I'm a zoomer and I have almost zero interest in WWII. The stuff surrounding it, sure, I'm interested in the interwar political history of the powers involved, but the actual war I just don't care about, really. It always annoys me when I walk into a bookstore and 90% of their history section is just WWII

>>18406226
yeah im sorry but you can't feed 120m people with 2 million tons of food
>conquered half of the globe
i say declaring some random africian villages to be your colony bring less suffering that declaring war on 170m country armed to teeth so you can murder them all and replace it with germans

>>18405464
>Did Communist or Soviet become a buzzword to defame your political opponent
Yes you stupid shitskin. Throughout the 50s-90s it was more common to accuse political opponents of being closeted communist sympathizers than it was to call them National Socialists.
The only reason you don't know this is because shitlerites like yourself stop reading history books after 1945 because it conflicts with your bullshit narrative about being some sort of ideological underdog.

>>18406229
>yeah im sorry but you can't feed 120m people with 2 million tons of food
Far more than without, and it was the reason why Germany starved in ww1 but not in ww2.
I'm getting fatigued because I give you actual examples to my position while you do the opposite. Do you never think of this yourself that it's not as convincing?

>i say declaring some random africian villages to be your colony
Nice way of framing colonialism, that it absolutely wasnt achieved by mowing down people with machine guns and then enforce it by burtalizing people under your whim.

>declaring war on 170m country armed to teeth so you can murder them all and replace it with germans
Again, I am prepared to argue and make a strong case for the fact that Barbarossa was highly motivated by the fact that Britain remained at war with Germany. The livingspace argument is real but it was only secondary to the necessity to subjugate the USSR in order to win the war.
Historians have proven that neither the war nor the holocaust was planned. They were reactionary because of unfolding events.

>>18406237
USSR was not reason why germans didn't "starve" it helped but it was nothing pivotal
Barbarossa was motivated by hitler and his nazi ideology, Churchill didn't trick the poor gullible painter into doing genocidies, you are insane or very insincere

>>18406244
k im getting tired cause its been a few hours now, we can continue this tomorrow if you're actually sincere.

>>18406246
there is nothing to continue, you are under some weird impression that hitler goal was to conquer Poland and France and thats it

File: 20260216_180907.jpg (42 KB, 599x362)

42 KB JPG

>>18406172
I find it quite amusing how Polish nationalists try to spin WW2 as a victory when they were just as raped as the other axis nations despite kot even being on their side

>>18406198
The UK fought a fraction of the German military (and Japanese for that matter) for the majority of the time and yet ended up economically worse than occupied Germany and lost most of their empire, but apparantly they are able to outproduce the entirety of the Axis.

>>18406232
And the McCarthy is remembered so fondly. Tell me, how long exactly did his campaign last? What were the long lasting consequences?
>shitskin
I'm white. And even if I am not, I fail to see why it my ethnicity would be relevant to this conversation, you fucking imbecile.
>shitlerites
I'm not a Nazi either.

>>18406716
>nazism is criminalized in some countries because it calls for a violent takeover, totalitarism and preforming genocides/ethnic cleansings

Just like communism.
And yes, communism is criminalized in some countries for this reason.

>>18406702
And yet they still sent bankrupt and ended up worse than Japan and Germany, who were bombed into the stone age.

File: Screenshot_20260328_00235(...).jpg (125 KB, 1080x1264)

125 KB JPG

>>18407454
Also

>>18404475
>How do we get zoomers to stop being obsessed with WW2
What are you talking about, Zoomers of all kinds are the ones that think all American WWII movies are propaganda for Boomers and routinely shit on the tunnel vision postwar historiography places on WWII

>>18405079
>Zoomers are into Romans, Byzantines, steppe hunter vs farmer prehistory
WWI, the Cold War, and colonial history is also very popular

What's the most reddit conflict/war? Don't just say wwii because it established the current world order.

WWII is near endlessly interesting, and important to understand thoroughly, not just because it did establish the modern geopolitical framework. There are also lots of things you can glean about human nature, peoples, economic forces, modern politics, human's poor ability to make good public policy, military tactics and strategy etc. etc.

>>18407470
>What's the most reddit conflict/war
American Civil War, easily.
Dixiefags and Union shitlibs are everything negative people accuse Balkans posters of being.

>>18405079
>>18407466
I'd argue that people are more interested in "niche" parts of history more than ever, understandably because the internet made academic resources easily accessible. OP is just kvetching about Hitler rehabilitation among zoomers and alphies.

>>18407472
>just kvetching about Hitler rehabilitation among zoomers and alphies.
What I find so bizarre is how Boomers are completely incapable of attempting to understand how this came to be and what to do about it, so they just whine endlessly in impotent rage at everyone under the age of 35 being a commie or a nazi because it breaks their brains.

>>18407487
>Boomers are completely incapable of attempting to understand how this came to be and what to do about it, so they just whine endlessly in impotent rage at everyone under the age of 35
There's going to be last gasps of Holocaust, pro-America content, in your face Nazis bad content etc. in the next few years, and then maybe millennials will attempt to get in on it too. Should be super awkward and cringey, milliennals' take trying to extend the boomer worldview indefinitely.

>>18407487
they grew up thinking liberalism is inevitable and it's evil to take rights away from antisocial subhumans. ever since 2016, it's as though le chuds are dragging them away from some utopian future every boomer/gen x-er/millennial has been promised since childhood

>>18407472
This.
The internet has allowed people to access different perspectives on otherwise 'forbidden' topics, narratives that has been mythologized by boomers is being openly challenged by zoomers.
In terms of ww2, zoomers are tired of the 'nazies bad' narrative even if all those war crimes and genocides did happen, there is a thirst for content that sparks debate and contrarian to what you're 'supposed' to believe.
Boomers underestimate just how chronically online the zoomer generation is, and the amount of information the average Gen Z faggot consumes on a daily basis, and how the traditional gate-keeping wall of the internet has been gradually torn down, both on Youtube, twitter, facebook, instagram etc.

>>18407499
It's not about becoming full-blown nazi, it's more about zoomers being more receptible to become contrarians than the boomer gens.

File: alternatehistory.png (453 KB, 512x680)

453 KB PNG

>>18407490
>There's going to be last gasps of Holocaust, pro-America content, in your face Nazis bad content etc. in the next few years
There's already been a massive wave of it since COVID (a lot of it also seems to focus way more on Jews, Israel, and antisemitism than actual WWII, i.e picrel), it's just that Zoomers see right through it and can't even afford to go to the theater in the first place.
>Should be super awkward and cringey, milliennals' take trying to extend the boomer worldview indefinitely
You're already seeing it happen in video games and tv. And again, it's just comical at this point because it reads to us like picrel.

>>18407499
>im yet to see normal people marching with swastika flags
How old are you retard, just mention Jews or WWII on even normie websites and you'll notice a trend with how Zoomers react vs. Millennials and older

File: September_5_Tim_Fehlbaum.jpg (89 KB, 265x376)

89 KB JPG

>picrel
Shit, forgot.
Anyway, this thing is one of the most egregious examples I can think of when it comes to that type of shallow, idiotic propaganda. It's a movie about the Munich kidnappings and massacre that deliberately leaves out all of the historical context for why they happened and what motivated Black September.

>>18407511
Yes and again, it's called being a contrarian.
They take the position simply because it goes against the enforced narrative.

>>18407499
if you can't acknowledge that younger people have less reverence for the 20th century's sacred cows than older people, there's nothing to be said. just keep watching seinfeld reruns or whatever

>>18407511
>find me one "neonazi zoomer" who wants his country to heavy remilitarize and invade someone
Gee retard it's almost like "Nazi" has become an umbrella term thrown around by our political establishment to tar anyone it doesn't like and that most people, even radicals aren't literal Nazis.
>i don't post on /pol/
I'm talking reddit, youtube, Xitter, instagram, etc.
>>18407513
>being anti-izrael or even anti-semitic is not nazism, sorry
Yeah but that's how Western governments interpret it.

File: IMG_1097.gif (74 KB, 640x420)

74 KB GIF

>>18404475
GenXer here and WWII is the most interesting historical period for me, as my parents lived thru it and it directly affected me.

>>18407511
in 21st century vernacular, nazi = white person doing idpol. people got tired of calling out leftists for misusing the label and just embraced it

>>18407522
>i'm really yet to see someone be like "yeah i'm nazi!"
Literally spend ten seconds on instagram or Xitter

>>18407532
>the place where terminaly online neonazis reside
>the front pages of the most widely used internet platforms in the world which weren't like this even 4 years ago

File: german election results 2025.png (875 KB, 1024x1659)

875 KB PNG

>>18407525
what? "nazi" is just a synonym for "far right" in the vernacular. by that measure, there are more "nazis" today than 20 years ago. what stupid pilpul are you even trying to make, that people haven't moved significantly to the right because they aren't larping as actual nsdap members?

>>18407540
>me? i'm the one who made a point that nobody really cares about nazis, you are literally agreeing with me, nazi is a slur and that's all what's left from the national socialism
oh, well ok then :^)

>>18407506
What's picrel trying to show? Hitler's a superhero and?? lol

>>18407540
>do you know algorithm goes
Good morning saars
>>18407562
>What's picrel trying to show
I accidentally posted two different things in a single post lol. It's a deliberately absurd illustration of Hitler attacking an ICE agent.

>>18404475
I'm a zoomie and I prefer the Cold War. Much more relevant to current times.

>>18408317
It's also a much longer period whose effects were deeply felt in every single country, even more than WWII given it was when all the most interesting postcolonial conflicts happened be it the Congo, Nigeria, Indochina, Arab-Israeli, or Iran-Iraq.
Places like Africa and Southeast Asia that hadn't been relevant or interesting in decades suddenly became center stage to these massive conflicts and political struggles that went on to define not just the histories of the countries involved, but also the entire region and at times the entire world.
There hasn't ever been a time in history where something like this has happened and two powers called the shots around the globe. Even today similar conflicts like Ukraine, the Sahel, and Middle East are nowhere near as clean-cut and motivated.

>>18404475
What does that mean? I wasn't really paying attention, I was thinking about the three kingdoms

>>18406175
At least they're not shitskinned like you, turkroach.

>>18405651
1920s or 2020s?

File: outoftouch.png (460 KB, 983x483)

460 KB PNG

>>18407536
>east wants to shake off the poverty and cultural decadence of communistic legacy
>deluded west wants more liberalism to sink the whole country
i didn't know that, of course

File: CAF2 Jacob is a warrior.jpg (325 KB, 1920x1080)

325 KB JPG

>>18404475
WW2 was my gateway to everything from accent Egypt, Victorian literature, to the Korean War.

It took me years of only WWII interest before I was ever interested in these other areas/topics of history. Who cares, it will do the same to a lot of people, and it leads to a more historically literate generation.

File: the-trench-by-otto-dix-1923.jpg (150 KB, 727x738)

150 KB JPG

>>18404475
Im a zoomer and ive been far more autistically obsessed with WW1 since I read Storm of Steel 10 years ago, also 19th century European military history in general. WW2 is cool and all but I just dont find it as interesting, if anything i like the interwar period more