You can order this documentary from Netflix or even watch it free online by doing a google search.
It is well worth watching. It presupposes, of course, the standard attitude toward the rise of “Nazism” that our rulers wish us to have. Yet even presented by the hands of such expert spinmeisters as the BBC, it does not require much practice in critical thinking to see through the spin and come to understand the attraction that National Socialism (hereafter: NS) exercised, and also to explode several still persistent memes of “totalitarianism” and so forth. At the end of the day, the subtitle could easily be changed to “Hope for our Day from History.”
The reasonableness of the rise of NS is seen by way of contrast with the preceding radicalization of Germany under the Weimar Republic.
In 1919, in several stages, communists — almost entirely jewish-led — took over Bavaria and Munich and declared a Bavarian Soviet Republic. It would undoubtedly have been amalgamated into the USSR. Fortunately, volunteer German militia took it back before that could happen. We have to ponder this. Imagine if Boston were literally taken over by armed communists who then separated Massachusetts from the country and attempted to attach it to a foreign, hostile empire. This is what it would be like.
Meanwhile, we learn that the Weimar Republic– which was itself a revolutionary creation, and never reflected the spirit of the German folk — was borrowing money from the US to pay their reparations to France and England. (How convenient for us, who just had to get into WW1 for the pure justice of it!)
The Weimar Republic created the hyper-inflation of the early 1920s. Then, insult was added to injury by the French marching into the Ruhr district, and “ruling with an iron hand.” Then, the jewish degradation of theatre and women in Berlin rose to prominence. Then, at the end of the decade, America called in its loans, and the house of cards collapsed into widespread unemployment and misery. “Germany became the worst-hit nation in the world… Just when things couldn’t get worse, they did.” The five most important banks and 20,000 businesses folded.
Meanwhile, throughout the land, communists recruited heavily, and public arguments with conservatives led repeatedly to street fighting with fists and clubs.
When Hitler was made Chancellor, explains communist Eugene Levine (son of the jew that led the Munich putsch 15 years earlier), the communists were not too upset, thinking Hitler’s incompetence would bring him down after which “it would be our turn.” In other words, they were not at all opposed to a power grab, as if that should even need to be pointed out.
The rise of Hitler seems inevitable, and even reasonable in view of the depredations.
Naturally, in any presentation of the rise of NS, the jewish question will be a prominent theme. Here, I am addressing the first DVD — not having yet seen the subsequent installments — and this takes us only through 1939; thus, the question of the “holocaust” need not detain us, since that narrative does not begin until 1942
You had, at a distance, the jewish bolshevik takeover of Russia in 1917. You had the jewish communist takeover of Munich, as already alluded to. When that failed, you had the jewish takeover of popular culture, with the demoralization that always attends that. Contemporaneous economist Johannes Zahn points out that 3600 out of 4800 lawyers in Berlin were jews. All of the theatre directors were as well.
Does any of this sound familiar?
As for Kristallnacht, the narrator reminds us that this was set in motion by the assassination of diplomat Ernst vom Rath by the jew Herschel Greenspan. It can always be asked whether the violence was an overreaction; yet it would be nice to see a documentary treat it with as much sympathy as urban riots are treated in our country in view of the context of frustration.
The “totalitarianism” meme gets a surprising treatment, and this topic alone justifies the effort of watching this film. “Everyone” agrees that Hitler was a “totalitarian” like Stalin. But this documentary, perhaps inadvertently, paints a quite different picture.
In 1933 the socialists and communists were rounded up and put in concentration camps — for about a year, after which most were released. This, at the same time that the Gulag of our future ally was in full swing, with 20 year sentences given out for the mere whiff of dissent, and the planned starvation of the Ukrainians having just wrapped up.
The records indicate that the Gestapo had a total of 28 agents in the Würtzburg district, containing one million people! That’s one for every 35,000 people. I wonder if we have so few snoop agents here in the “land of the free” — and remember that our gestapo is aided by supercomputers!
The narrator is also amazed at how little time Hitler spent in statecraft. Often, he watched two movies a day, took walks, was chronically late and disorganized. He gave jobs large and vague to underlings, and left it to them to figure out what to do and how to accomplish it. “He took the view that many things sorted themselves out on their own, if one did not interfere.” Hardly the typical picture of a totalitarian. Even the narrator sheepishly concludes, “it was not manipulation from the top, but from below.”
A type of movie Hitler especially enjoyed watching were movies depicting the seemingly effortless domination of places like India by the British. He saw this as proof of the superiority of the Aryan. Two things should be noted here. First, Führer obviously did not restrict the term “Aryan” to the specific branch of Caucasians that remained settled in central Europe. It was much broader than that. If there was any concept of a superior race, very clearly that entity included the British (and derivatively, of course, the Americans). Second, the fact that the sun never set on the British Empire of that time, and that Führer had no intention of interfering with that empire, gives the lie to the meme that “Hitler wanted to take over the world.” It would be more accurate to say that he simply thought Germany should also have a piece of the pie. Rather than thinking that the Germans “started WW2” because they wanted to take over the world, it would be more accurate to say that Britain started it in order to preserve their complete domination of it.
What I found most inspiring about the documentary were three things. (1) The majority of Germans interviewed are unapologetic, honest, and attractive figures. Most of the antagonists, on the other hand, do not come across so sympathetically. (2) The massed crowd scenes are thrilling. These are pictures of atomic people that are becoming a people once again, with all the sense of community, joy, and love that this entailed. (3) The music. It is varied, including both folk and high. In fact, I speculate that the SA defeated the communists in the early street fights above all because they had better songs. Compare the Horst Wessel song to “Links, links, links” shown being sung by the communists. The rise of NS brought about a new outbreak of song. Indeed, the theme of music in the dishonest movie “Sound of Music” gets it almost backwards. The NS movement put lively and interesting song back in the mouth of the Germans, while their opponents were tight-lipped and sullen.
It is not that there is absolutely nothing to criticize the NS for. Touched on briefly is perhaps the most troubling theme — the euthanasia of fellow Germans. Our rulers will probably never put a lot of weight on this matter, since they themselves believe in euthanasia and worse. Nevertheless, this aspect will need to be analyzed thoroughly. But not here. Properly, the place to discuss it would be in the immediately subsequent period to that covered by this DVD.