Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Discussions on the propaganda, architecture and culture in the Third Reich.
User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4553
Joined: 15 Jun 2004 15:19
Location: Finland

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by Topspeed » 30 Mar 2021 11:46

gebhk wrote:
30 Mar 2021 08:49
As a practitioner of the 'dark arts' of science, I find it bizarre how the term is abused. There was no 'progress of science in the second half of the 19th century' or any other. It makes as much sense to say 'the progress of boiling in the second half of the 19th century' when one means 'the progress of cuisine'. Science is a method of processing knowledge and information, nothing more - one of many. The proud announcement by some 'I am a scientist' is as bizarre as a chef announcing 'I am a boiler'. Yet others make a religion out of it (science, not boiling - though who knows?), ludicrously opposing it to other religions. You could with equal sense oppose sawing to cabinet making. Chemistry and physics are not 'sciences', they are subjects - studied and applied long before the scientific method was invented. Equally, the scientific method can be applied to history, just the same as it can be to biology or any other subject.

Of course there is progress in the techniques of scientific method, just as there has been progress in the techniques of steaming food. However, to blame ruddy Nouvelle Cuisine on the progress in steaming techniques, most folk would find nonsensical - so why do the same with science and political and/or social theory? As an aside, I would also say that just because you use some or even all the tools of scientific enquiry, it does not mean that you are using scientific method or make you a scientist. No more than using a cooker, water and a pot make what you do boiling food let alone make you a chef who is simmering soup.

Now that I've got that off my chest, I acknowledge we are straying off the topic. So - the only science I can see is that AH theorised that the Germans were superior to Slavic/Jewish Bolsheviks. He therefore hypothesized that his 'German' army would defeat the Soviet army and put it to the test. We know the result - which is not supportive of the theory. Pretty much where the science begins and ends in all of this.
Do you think the US help to USSR was negligible ?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11598
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by ljadw » 30 Mar 2021 12:09

In 1868 Ernst Haeckel wrote ''Natürliche Schöpfungsgeschichte where he represented the human species in a hierarchy,from lowest (Hottentot and Papuan ) to highest ( Caucasian ).
After WWI, Hitler said,grosso modo, the same .
Nazism was the illegitimate legitimate,child of the ideology of the second half of the 19th century .

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 9170
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 30 Mar 2021 12:12

Hi ljadw,

"illegitimate legitimate"?

Sid

gebhk
Member
Posts: 1594
Joined: 25 Feb 2013 20:23

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by gebhk » 30 Mar 2021 14:33

Do you think the US help to USSR was negligible ?
No. However I'm not sure what the connection is?

To be fair, had 'the whole rotten edifice' collapsed when the 'door was kicked in' as AH prophesied, then there would not have been much point in supplying aid to the USSR?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11598
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by ljadw » 30 Mar 2021 16:07

Sid Guttridge wrote:
30 Mar 2021 12:12
Hi ljadw,

"illegitimate legitimate"?

Sid
Some will say that it was the legitimate child, others will argue that it was the illegitimate child .
Whatever, what people as FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, Churchill, Keynes, Wilson, Harding, Hoover, Coolidge,Madison Grant, Henry Laughlin,Frederick Osborn, etc,.. said and did ( I forgot Oliver Holmes ) does not make them Nazis, but it proves that Nazism did not appear with Hitler, but that already long before Hitler, a lot of its ideas were living in and outside Germany , and that the theory of the German Sonderweg,propagated by American journalists,is totally wrong .
Euthanasia, eugenics,the search for a perfect society,where there was place only for perfect humans, racial superiority, all this dominated the Anglo-Saxon world already before 1914,and also the German world, but to a lesser extant .

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 9170
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 30 Mar 2021 16:33

Hi ljadw,

The NSDAP wasn't even founded by Hitler, so it is self evident that Nazism preceded him. He was only the 55th card carrying party member.

Cheers,

Sid.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11598
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by ljadw » 30 Mar 2021 18:38

Sid Guttridge wrote:
30 Mar 2021 16:33
Hi ljadw,

The NSDAP wasn't even founded by Hitler, so it is self evident that Nazism preceded him. He was only the 55th card carrying party member.

Cheers,

Sid.
He was the 55th card carrying member of the DAP,not of the NSDAP.
It was Hitler who proposed to change the name of the DAP in NSDAP.

User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4553
Joined: 15 Jun 2004 15:19
Location: Finland

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by Topspeed » 30 Mar 2021 19:14

gebhk wrote:
30 Mar 2021 14:33
Do you think the US help to USSR was negligible ?
No. However I'm not sure what the connection is?

To be fair, had 'the whole rotten edifice' collapsed when the 'door was kicked in' as AH prophesied, then there would not have been much point in supplying aid to the USSR?
Why do you think soviets shot all the intellectuals and officers of Poland in Katyn...and why did they attack Finland ?

gebhk
Member
Posts: 1594
Joined: 25 Feb 2013 20:23

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by gebhk » 30 Mar 2021 19:45

Why do you think soviets shot all the intellectuals and officers of Poland in Katyn...and why did they attack Finland ?
Sorry, but I totally fail to see the connection of this question to what I wrote.

User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4553
Joined: 15 Jun 2004 15:19
Location: Finland

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by Topspeed » 30 Mar 2021 20:00

gebhk wrote:
30 Mar 2021 19:45
Why do you think soviets shot all the intellectuals and officers of Poland in Katyn...and why did they attack Finland ?
Sorry, but I totally fail to see the connection of this question to what I wrote.
No I am trying to figure out where those 1942 leaflets started from.

Jerries and russkies were pals until 1940.

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 512
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by George L Gregory » 31 Mar 2021 01:45

Topspeed wrote:
30 Mar 2021 06:20
Was the coming USSR attack mantioned in Mein Kampf ?
Hitler did not write specifically about an attack, but how else was he going to achieve living space in Eastern Europe? He wrote:
And so, we National Socialists consciously draw a line beneath the foreign policy tendency of our pre–War period. We take up where we broke off six hundred years ago. We stop the endless German movement to the south and west, and turn our gaze toward the land in the East. At long last, we break off the colonial and commercial policy of the pre–War period and shift to the soil policy of the future.
Around the same time Heinrich Himmler wrote:
Increase [of] our peasant population is the only effective defense against the influx of the Slav working-class masses from the East. As six hundred years ago, the German peasant's destiny must be to preserve and increase the German people's patrimony in their holy mother earth battle against the Slav race.
In the late 1920s Hitler wrote a Second Book and chapter 12 is titled “Germany and Russia”. He argued that Russia owed its existence to a German element and argued that the Slavs were unable to govern themselves and that Bolshevik Russia had destroyed Russia.

Also, he wrote in the book:
The National Socialist Movement, on the contrary, will always let its foreign policy be determined by the necessity to secure the space necessary to the life of our Folk. It knows no Germanising or Teutonising, as in the case of the national bourgeoisie, but only the spread of its own Folk. It will never see in the subjugated, so called Germanised, Czechs or Poles a national, let alone Folkish, strengthening, but only the racial weakening of our Folk.
Last edited by George L Gregory on 31 Mar 2021 01:50, edited 2 times in total.

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 512
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by George L Gregory » 31 Mar 2021 01:49

gebhk wrote:
30 Mar 2021 08:49
So - the only science I can see is that AH theorised that the Germans were superior to Slavic/Jewish Bolsheviks. He therefore hypothesized that his 'German' army would defeat the Soviet army and put it to the test. We know the result - which is not supportive of the theory. Pretty much where the science begins and ends in all of this.
Can we really say that though? The war never only Germans versus Russians.

gebhk
Member
Posts: 1594
Joined: 25 Feb 2013 20:23

Re: Were nazi-germans really superhumans ?

Post by gebhk » 31 Mar 2021 23:45

Hi George

I'm not sure that makes any difference to the point. Fact is AH thought he could defeat the Soviet Union (he wasn't that bonkers to start a war he didn't think he could win) despite the unreality of this undertaking. I must try to find the paper by an Italian scholar which describes how, as tactfully as possible, the Italians (and I think Romanians) tried to persuade AH that invading the USSR was a really bad idea. His determination could not be shaken because he believed the racial superiority of the Germans (and his genius of course) would prevail against all odds. I am pretty sure he prophesied that the 'whole rotten structure would collapse' once the 'door was kicked in'. Clearly, it did not.

In an alternative universe we could retest the theory with different parameters, but I am very glad to say we can't in this one, so all we are left with is the fact that the experiment (regardless of its flaws) did not support the theory. That is the problem with the scientific method - it is by far the best method of answering simple questions but not so good with the complex ones. There is certainly some truth in the argument that, in many cases, you can, with the classical scientific method, examine details of the problem too small to be of value or examine the whole too poorly to be of value either.

Return to “Propaganda, Culture & Architecture”