Sergei Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Originally posted by Schoerner: Too bad, that you don't prefer that over the present nature hostile system.Ah yes, I know how you seem to think that a human hostile system would be far superior. It would probably take some nerve, I suppose, to seriously step forward and try to persuade people to accept a system where they would be discriminated against, or even murdered, because of their creed, political and labour movement activity, race, sexuality, disability, racial background (I suppose you have made sure that YOU have no Jew ancestors, Mr. Schörner?) or just a mere opinion. Like mine here. Yes, it would take nerve, or then just idiocy, madness and a propensity for trolling around. As far ago as March Steve posted this: "Schoerner, I think I speak for EVERYBODY on this Forum when I say that your thinly (VERY THINLY) held neo-Nazi, apologist views are not welcome here. You can whine and complain all you want about being persecuted for "speaking the truth", but anybody with half a brain knows otherwise. In short, I am going to do something for you that your heros, like the real Schoerner, would never do... give you a warning and let you determine your fate. If you want to retain your posting priveledges here, pretend you are someone else. You know, someone who isn't a brainwashed, right wing, hate mongor apologist who has as much understanding of what went on with the Third Reich as my 7 year old cat Klaus. And also unlike your namesake, if you should choose to disregard my warning I can't hang you from a treelimb with a sign around your neck. All I can do is ban you. Steve"So I might envision you having to go spread your Nazi agitprop to somewhere else. Since you obviously have a liking for racist dictatorships kept in power by gangs of thugs, may I recommend Zimbabwe? Flights there sell cheap I hear, cheaper than the flights out of Zimbabwe (why does this remind me of Nazi Germany?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schoerner Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Wrong, Zimbabwe is the product of nature hostile western politics. In Zimbabwe you can see the benefits of another multiethnical society and how it ends. You could also see, that blacks have different behaviour than white people (we don't eat our enemys, do we? ). Maybe you should learn history and find out, who mixed them up and was (like always) neglecting cultural and ethnic borders? You should also take a closer look at Zimbabwe, because of the following reason: it gives you a taste, how in a few decades the USA will end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schoerner Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by MikeyD: WWII wasn't a conflict between systems, it was all ego driven. Germany, France, Britain, Italy, the U.S., Japan all had basically a modified market economy and merrily traded with each other before the war. Ofcourse each one traded with each other. Why not? The USA also traded with the CCCP and had not the same system. Germany also had some kind of market economy, if you define market economy as not planned economy. If you take a look at the capitalistic monetary theories (all mainstream theories, all, without any single exception are built on economical growth!). Stagnation already means, the losing of jobs and all the theories are just caring how they could keep the economical growth as high as possible. It's hard to imagine, but every singe economist you see on western-TV or University, is only learning and teaching theories how the economical growth can become secured! How totally absurd, ill, crazy this system is, shows the 'Josephspenny' example: if Joseph lent only a single penny 2000 years ago with an interest rate of only 5%, what do you guess, how much would Joseph own today without moving only a single finger? Can you say: 23900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Pennies? This is out of imagination. Another example: Assuming an economical growth during only the last 50 years of only 2% each year, results in an 269% expanded economy. In each and every single year 2.7 times more cars, more clothes, more beef, more milk, more resources, more energy consumption than 50 years ago... If this would continue 50 years further, the economy in the year 2050 would need in only one single year 724% or 7.24 times more recources than 100 years ago. But a hairdresser can't cut more peoples hairs from year to year. The mason can't build from year to year more houses. The whole bill for productivity gain has to pay mother nature; it is pressed out of nature without any scruples and some strange politicians are always talking about peace, freedom and democracy and even more strange people are really believing the lies of such a system? Everybody can see, that such a system can only lead to total destruction. If this system is globalized, it has to lead to global destruction with thousands of millions of starving and suffering people. The western system doesn't have errors. It is the error itself. The Volume of money has to grow from year to year in such a system, because its economy is built on lent money and the capital plus interests must be payed back. This produces on one side the productivity gain, which is good. On the other hand, almost the complete production gain is eaten up by the interests of the money lenders instead of resulting in higher income or less working time. The worker's real income doesn't grow. Although a modern worker in i.e. a car-production facility, has several hundreds percent higher productivity than decades ago, he still has almost the same income and has to work almost the same time. Every year he has to produce more and more cars within the same time, while his children are already ill from the smog the cars are producing. If the interests wouldn't had robbed the productivity gain, he could produce within 10 hours, what decades ago needed 40 hours. If he would work 40 hours, he could earn 4 times more real-income, or could earn enough to life after 10 hours and spend the time better with his children and family. In the great system we have and are so proud of, a small percentage of mankind has a higher living standard, and this is mainly not because our income has grown. No. The production gain is mainly eaten up by the interests. The money-lenders earn the billions of Dollars,where every Cent was created by productive work, but ends in the wrong pockets. Our higher living standard is paid by mother nature and other exploited nations. Does the homo sapiens use his brain and get rid of those, who are praying the interest-slavery? No, he invents cars, that produce less smog, just to be able to produce even more cars. And who is elected by the democratic, clarified and mature citizens, thinking that they are much more intelligent than the people 50 years, 100, 200 or 500 years ago? They are even electing those criminals, who are promising, that the economical growth will rise much more, if they become elected. And the people in this strange time really believe, that former times were dark and evil... Therefore the only correct name: interest-slavery. And therefore it is the biggest legalized deceit in history. And one of the first actions of Adolf Hitler was to immediately leave the old, on gold and interests built, monetary system. From one day of the other, the german money had no worth per se anymore, unlike in the other economies. Money wasn't multiplying itself anymore without productive labour ('from now on our money is built on labour and sweat and nothing else'). A lot of other actions were taken and it's not really that hard to find useful info on the net, although there exists not an authentic written down theory, i.e. by Halmar Schacht. But one point, why the new economic-system of the first nationalsocialistic state became that dangerous for the capitalistic system, was because the trade was made over index-points, which was very attractive for countries, with 'weak' currencies, compared to those currencies, that were built on gold, like the Dollar. Suddenly many 'poor' countries, forced into the capitalistic monetary system (in the 1930s over 30% of all money reserves of the world in gold were stored in Fort Knox; what an enourmous power to make pressure on governments with gold-based currencies), had an alternative for free trade but with the benefits, to receive a fair 'price', meant mostly machines, for their products, instead of being forced to give their products away almost for free, because of being debtor with a weak currency. Since WWII exists no alternative; whenever we hear in TV, that WorldBank or IWF, are 'helping' a 'poor' country by giving it generously a new credit, we should remember, that they will never ever be able to pay even the interests back; this is the best deal: a 'poor' country, which is rich of resources and cannot pay back the credit; an endless flow of interests, if they cannot pay, they have to give our companies the rights for oil, for gold, for coffee,...; a war without soldiers, but an endless war with even more suffering and dying people; and before such a country collapses, again very generously, the system cancels the credit; the 'lost' money will be payed by the own citizens anyway, while the companies already had filled their bags over decades and the business continues with the next credit. Whoever with some lections in economics takes a critical look at the economies before WWII, will see, that the capitalistic systems were caught in their interest trap, while Germany over eight years had - reduced unemployment rate without increasing inflation (not possible in mainstream economy theories) to almost zero - almost no inflation (measured as buying-power) - greatly increased income of the workers and families - multiplied social welfare - reduction of foreign-depts - exploding foreign trade with countries with 'weaker' currencies (esp. South America) The capitalistic systems also had no theoretical economical explanations, how to deal with that situation. The german economical wonder is not explainable within the mainstream theories fundamentally built on interests. Ofcourse it easily is understandable, when the ominous curtain that is placed over money, economics and interests, like over a kabbalistic secret, is lifted and if money is seen again as what it really is and should be: the proportional share, how much an economical subject anticipated on the productive economy of a nation (not really good times, for money lenders and speculants), but the money has no worth per se and therefore doesn't multiply itself over time. The western system stands and falls with interest-slavery. In the past and youngest history, there have been much worse reasons for wars. If Axis would have won the war, mankind would be liberated from that most devious and deadly deceit already. [ June 06, 2003, 09:34 PM: Message edited by: Schoerner ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 If Axis would have won the war, mankind would be liberated from that most devious and deadly deceit already. Well, if you can see past that whole "Exterminating over 1/2 of the world's population" thing, then yeah, the Axis winning WWII would have some good points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volker Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Interesting topic. Hmmm, I think if the Nazi's won, the Jewish people would have been hunted all across the world. But I think many would be protected, hidden, and this would cause Germany to invade more nations. All in all, I think Nazi Germany would have lasted until Hitler died of old age. After that, I think the whole thing would have fallen apart due to power struggles, and rebellions. Praise God the Allies won. And may he hold the men and women who died in that war in his eternal hands. [ June 06, 2003, 09:56 PM: Message edited by: Volker ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakovski Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Volker: All in all, I think Nazi Germany would have lasted until Hitler died of old age. After that, I think the whole thing would have fallen apart due to power struggles, and rebellions. The interesting question is, indeed, what happens after AH dies? I don't think the Reich would have disintegrated, but rather suspect what Spengler predicted as the destiny of the West--"A New Age of the Caesars." I can very easily see succession after the Roman model, sometimes peaceful, sometime violent...who knows, they might have even had some good "emperors" eventually. If nothing else, they would run out of people to kill and have had to move on to other things besides misguided race theories and searching for Atlantis... Hmmm..."have had"...is it correct to use a past tense refering to hypothetical future events? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bellator Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 I'm sorry, but after the bannings and warnings I've seen to various inoffensive posters this year, how and why the f**k is Schorner continually allowed to post his twisted Nazi trash? I know this forum has been getting right wing, but surely that utter sh*t is too much even for here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 I really don't see why we even let half-wits post, but I see we do. HI SCHOERNER. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florian Gross Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 I don't think that Schoerner is a Nazi. He's just talking about economical issues here not about prosecuting jews and the like. He has some good points about the economical system that we have right now! And I can only agree with him. Our economy is false and not really positive towards nature. And what USA and Russia did in the past, like selling weapons to numerous countries for either economical gain or warmongering, did is not right either. But another question related to this topic: In the American War of Independence, after they got independent, they had a vote about their national language and, correct me if I'm wrong, this vote was very closely won by English, german coming in second. What if german would have been USA's "native" language? Would the Americans have reacted any different than they did in WWII? What do you think? I've been thinkink about this question ever since I finished my Abitur(highschool graduation) I'm thinking about starting a post about this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakovski Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Florian Gross: I don't think that Schoerner is a Nazi. He's just talking about economical issues... True...the strangest mix of fascist nostalgia, Green politics, and WTO riot incitement. Not a Nazi, just pissed off, and of course I don't blame him for being pissed off...the most you can say about WWII is that the least of three evils came out on top, but looking at what the western democracies are today, I am reminded that the three contenders were just that, especially as the Cold War ends and we see what little idealism there was dissolve into pragmatic power politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schoerner Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Rex Bellator: ... how and why the f**k is Schorner continually allowed to post his twisted Nazi trash? Trash? I tried my best to be as clear and factual as possible. Did you discover a mistake in my argumentation? If so, i would be wondering, but feel free and let me know. Otherwise i think, you just want me to become shut up, because i have a different opinion. Great attitude, Rex Inquisitor. How can you accuse anyone else, if you obviously can't respect the opinions of others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florian Gross Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 BTW about Schoerners quote of President Bush: "The Evil does Exist" Has anyone of You seen Matrix Reloaded? In the scene in which Neo is with the architect in the end of the movie? The architect is talking about evil persons in the matrix, programs gone haywire as he puts it, the screens in the background are showing scences of WW2, Hitler and G.W.BUSH. Just to remind you of things that the americans didn't do right either! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave H Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Florian Gross: ... But another question related to this topic: In the American War of Independence, after they got independent, they had a vote about their national language and, correct me if I'm wrong, this vote was very closely won by English, german coming in second. What if german would have been USA's "native" language? Florian, I don't know where you came across this piece of information. All I can tell you with certainty is that it is 100 percent wrong. The 13 original colonies were all under British rule before independence. All official documents were in English. There has never been a vote on a national language for the US. German immigration really didn't start until decades after independence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florian Gross Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 I think I heard this in my history course in school. I was quite sure about it, because there were german colonies in the US, but my school time is 7 years ago so I might be wrong. Thx for the reply. I'll go into more research tomorrow, off to bed with me it's, omg it's already 5.30 in the morning, i love this game. cu tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave H Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Florian Gross: I think I heard this in my history course in school. I was quite sure about it, because there were german colonies in the US, but my school time is 7 years ago so I might be wrong. Thx for the reply. I'll go into more research tomorrow, off to bed with me it's, omg it's already 5.30 in the morning, i love this game. cu tomorrow Actually I think King George III would have been very put out if he had known there were German colonies in North America. At the time of the Revolutionary War, most of the Germans on this side of the Atlantic were troops hired by the British. Please check your history about this, because someone has told you something that's just not true. :eek: Not that it has anything to do with the subject of the thread. You people haven't thought this question all the way through. If the Axis won the war we would all be playing the CDV version of this game, but it would have the SS included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florian Gross Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 ok I'm still up and I think I fell victim to the mühlenberg legend. Yah I was wrong ok. thx for your time though. http://www.serve.com/shea/germusa/dtinusa.htm This explains it all. regards flo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 You people haven't thought this question all the way through. If the Axis won the war we would all be playing the CDV version of this game, but it would have the SS included. Yeah, but the trade off is that in this alternate universe the Luftwhiners and Panzer-O-Philes would have gotten their way: MadMattenhinmer: "Due to popular request, and death threats from the GESTAPO, we fixed the bug that allowed German tanks and Half-Tracks to die. Also, Soviet tanks now randomly explode whenever the Axis play hits the "GO" button Sorry for zee mixup." *Shudder* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florian Gross Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 But I was very close because George I of Hannover (Germany) was still speaking german not caring what the english did, although he was their monarch. almost the same with George II. George III was the first to adopt the English language and pay heed to the british interests. regards flo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Florian Gross: ...there were german colonies in the US...Sorry, Florian, but there were never any German colonies in the US. Some states (Pennsylvania comes to mind) had large populations of German immigrants later on, but those are not properly thought of as colonies. Germany did develop colonies in some parts of the world in the nineteenth century, primarily in Africa and the Pacific, but none in the Americas. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knaust Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 This forum would have been held in German language ....and that would have been a major disaster ....you know....English is far simpler than German Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlow Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Rex Bellator: I know this forum has been getting right wing, but surely that utter sh*t is too much even for here? Nice cheap shot, but if anything, Herr Schorner would be more comfortable on the Left side of American politics. Ultra-environmentalist, pro-animal rights, anti-Christian, almost certainly pro abortion (from his stance on eugenic,), probably pro gun control (Hitler certainly was), anti-free market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlow Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Schoerner: You could also see, that blacks have different behaviour than white people (we don't eat our enemys, do we? ). Maybe you should learn history and find out, who mixed them up and was (like always) neglecting cultural and ethnic borders? You should also take a closer look at Zimbabwe, because of the following reason: it gives you a taste, how in a few decades the USA will end. It is rare that we get someone who is quite so open about their racist views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soddball Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Marlow: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Rex Bellator: I know this forum has been getting right wing, but surely that utter sh*t is too much even for here? Nice cheap shot, but if anything, Herr Schorner would be more comfortable on the Left side of American politics. Ultra-environmentalist, pro-animal rights, anti-Christian, almost certainly pro abortion (from his stance on eugenic,), probably pro gun control (Hitler certainly was), anti-free market. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlow Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Soddball: Well Marlow, since you're on the right wing of the forum, you probably don't see it the same way that Rex and I (and many others) do. You also attribute alot of opinions to Schoerner that he hasn't even mentioned - abortion and gun control, for example - which happen to fit into your definition of 'left wing'. Point was that his (Rex's)attribution of these views as being on the right was a cheap shot. I'm sure you agree. Re: abortion. I'll let him speak for himself, but anyone who favors eugenics (which he said he did) will almost certainly also favor abortion. On gun control, do some research on the Third Reich's gun control policy. Actually, you do raise an interesting point. Which of Schoerner's misguided views would you think fit confortably on the right side of the (American) political spectrum? I've found very little. [ June 07, 2003, 08:33 AM: Message edited by: Marlow ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Axe_ Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Originally posted by Marlow: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Schoerner: You could also see, that blacks have different behaviour than white people (we don't eat our enemys, do we? ). Maybe you should learn history and find out, who mixed them up and was (like always) neglecting cultural and ethnic borders? You should also take a closer look at Zimbabwe, because of the following reason: it gives you a taste, how in a few decades the USA will end. It is rare that we get someone who is quite so open about their racist views. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts