Glad this came up in my feed. She is so engaging and informative. Thanks for doing this interview and posting
@MrGchiasson4 ай бұрын
This woman is brilliant and interesting at the same time. I could sit and listen to her for hours.
@psycho89274 ай бұрын
Nope
@experience59884 ай бұрын
She talks a lot of lies and shit.
@iuliuslovin374 ай бұрын
@@experience5988 like what? lol
@ragnarok2834 ай бұрын
Cuck
@genericscout54084 ай бұрын
@@iuliuslovin37 if I recall she perpetuates myths, and hides major statistics, glossing over events like the massive loss of life of Natives during colonialsm, or glossing over black oppression. At least those were what I saw in the youtube short comments. Despite all of that I'm not educated enough to know if she's lying, misinformed, or if the comments were wrong. After all the shorts aren't in context so she could have spoken at length on the topics but just not in the clip.
@georges.76835 ай бұрын
Germany's economic philosophy of autarky was not sustainable. Autarky demanded that the Germans conquest the Slavic lands to the east to maintain self-sufficiency. Stopping with the annexation of adjacent German-speaking lands would have led to the collapse of the German economy.
@casimirgroeck5 ай бұрын
Horace Greeley Hjalmar Schacht would agree.
@turplexx2335 ай бұрын
They should have chosen technocrats and corporatist solidarists then😂
@texasqzacharymiller6265 ай бұрын
You’re outta your mind. You obviously took the main stream narrative without looking into it yourself. The economy was back by the German worker (aka cars, technology, etc….). It was the strongest economy in the world and did so during the Great Depression. And if you take that “war manufacturing” narrative is what got them out of it, then you’ve been caught in their trap twice. Hell the American economy is built on the 3rd Reich model. What we produce determines our dollars value. Exports…….
@stoneruler4 ай бұрын
They would have changed to a different policy if the economy stagnates. Every country does this. No one is foolish enough to just follow the same path until the end.
@terminalimpact27714 ай бұрын
It could be replaced with national capitalism as one they either lose war and receive mounting losses or run out of countries to conquer, and have to rely on a market economy to sustain itself. Similar to Maoist and Post-Maoist China throughout the early 60s to mid 80s.
@hunflovescandid4 ай бұрын
General Patton: "We defeated the wrong enemy."
@Squash1014 ай бұрын
Did you not listen to the clip? The Germans were competent with their destruction. Russians, not as much.
@machovalkarie78964 ай бұрын
He is right. We should have fought the flies instead of the ussr and nazi germany
@gary65764 ай бұрын
Same general who didn't give a damn about his men and was extremely egotistical.
@Spillers724 ай бұрын
We could have just let the Nazis and Soviets weaken each other down. My fear is though, millions more would have died in the Holocaust.
@SpectacularDisaster4 ай бұрын
Patton was wrong, the Nazis had to be erraticed.
@chadwhitman18114 ай бұрын
She had a good point about Britain being a maritime power rather than a Continental power. In many of Continental wars including the Napoleonic Wars her role in the land battles was secondary to her maritime roles ,even in the Peninsular wars she had the somewhat ineffectual Spanish allies both regular army and Guerrilla forces tying down many French troops and winning some battles. In the seven years wars her main contribution was monetary to the hard pressed Prussia but she reaped huge rewards in India and America by virtue of her naval strength. The First world War changed all that.
@RidleyScottOwnsFailedDictators4 ай бұрын
Don't forget that Napoleon invaded Spain with a JUGGERNAUT military. The most powerful army in the world, by far, that Napoleon used and abused. So it was not so much that the Spanish were ineffectual, especially since they won the Peninsular War together with Britain, they were facing vast military resources which Napoleon was willing to us up all of it. So give the Spanish a little more credit in victory.
@stxfdt12404 ай бұрын
You didn't do anything
@chadwhitman18114 ай бұрын
@@stxfdt1240( ?)
@RidleyScottOwnsFailedDictators4 ай бұрын
@@stxfdt1240 Talk about being "ineffective", who was the one who ran a once juggernaut French military into the ground in total defeat? Who left a generation's worth of French boys in mass graves as enemy troops marched down the streets of Paris, leaving France under military occupation? If you want to talk about "ineffective", no one beats the incompetent wasteful Napoleon and how he wasted away the juggernaut military that he seized from a lost and confused France. But of course that is not the way 19th Century European history framed it. So to the speaker's point, the British were so delusional in thinking that they had fought so great on the Continent during the Napoleonic Wars and won it for Europe, when it was Napoleon's massive blunders and lack of foresight in military incompetence that led to Napoleon's defeat, way before Waterloo. That is why the British thought they were such a great continental army, but got punished in both WW1 and WW2 continental campaigns, delusional and dishonest storytelling to themselves about how they won the Napoleonic Wars.
@stxfdt12404 ай бұрын
@RidleyScottOwnsFailedDictators britain is nothing but just another fraud power whose days disappeared just like that....Roman Empire is the real deal and perhaps the ottomans a 2nd....
@williamherbert79384 ай бұрын
WW1 accelerated fascism and communism; it also accelerated anti-semitism, particularly in Germany.
@sturmman1004 ай бұрын
Boomer?
@williamherbert79384 ай бұрын
@@sturmman100 what?
@user-cg3xk9jv3w4 ай бұрын
The time difference was about 21 years ? ! The worldly Universe changed countless times between those two non connected events ? World War One should never have happened .
@user-cg3xk9jv3w4 ай бұрын
Is it possible to be an Israelite & not a Jew ? No I am not suggesting Arabs either.
@williamherbert79384 ай бұрын
@@user-cg3xk9jv3w what’s your point?
@thedailywin5374 ай бұрын
These interviews would be perfect if Patel's rambling, stream-of-consciousness inquiries were ruthlessly edited down into single questions that didn't require more than 5-7 seconds each. Better yet, just have him read from a prepared script...off camera, if necessary. We know he means well, and his interest in the subject is admirable, but...just put him on a verbal diet. Please. Prof. Paine's replies, on the other hand, shouldn't be touched. Every sentence, every thought, every suggestion...they can all stand on their own.
@fikretpajalic12244 ай бұрын
Patel is absolutely terrible; he struggles to fully pronounce words and often swallows them as he rushes to speak, cramming too much into just a few seconds. As a result, his questions are frequently unintelligible.
@224dot0dot0dot104 ай бұрын
@@fikretpajalic1224Patel's questions are better than her replies. Sarah Paine might be ignorant of the actual details of World War 2 history : How does Sarah Paine explain the fact that the commander of Hitler's SS bodyguard unit, Erich Kempka is a Slavic ethnic Polish person with 4 Slavic grandparents from Poland? What does Sarah Paine say about Bandera and the Banderites or Konstantin Voskoboinik or Vlasov or Pyotr Krasnov or Bronislav Kaminski? There are more than a hundred thousand Polish and Czechoslovakian soldiers in the German Wehrmacht in World War 2 and there are more than a million Soviet Union citizens (including Russians and Ukrainians) who collaborated with Germany in WW2 (as Hiwis or soldiers) and yet Sarah Paine believes that Hitler wanted to murder all Slavic people, when in reality Hitler was an anti-Jewish anti-Semite and not an anti-Czech or anti-Poleite or anti-Ukrainian
@craiggillett59854 ай бұрын
Completely agree, but doesn’t she manage his verbosity well! She even defines his questions for him.
@JM-ct9mx3 ай бұрын
He does those long ramblings, because these "debates" are scripted to spread a false narrative that supports the US endless wars. The thing is that the level of idiocy is beyond imagination.
@billwatkins82273 ай бұрын
I enjoyed her response
@user-it5zt5vw8f4 ай бұрын
General Patton said we fought wrong people
@kurtvonfricken68294 ай бұрын
He loved war.
@michaelarmstrong50654 ай бұрын
And Patton was the first casualty of the cold war for saying that
@randycampbell63074 ай бұрын
Patton was wrong in that in WWII in Europe we were fighting an ideology not a people. Patton was even more wrong about the ideology he wanted to fight next since he saw Communism as a future threat but he didn't see the bigger picture of what an attack on a now prepared and united USSR that had grown from the German invasion. As she says in another clip, prior to the German invasion Russia and the USSR itself were not really a united or coherent "nation". After the invasion and occupation they were much more united and ready for a war. Nobody really wanted to start that "next" war and hence we got the Cold War.
@dreamawake26704 ай бұрын
We sure did. Look at the west today.
@zivaradlovacki26664 ай бұрын
Oh you did, and also made sure fascism and nazism live on. Nothing changed to this day.
@johnfoster25844 ай бұрын
Bankers won
@stevencooper44224 ай бұрын
The Focus got what they wanted from Churchill.
@johnfoster25843 ай бұрын
@theimistocles.. thanks for the intelligent response
@jacquesshellac20993 ай бұрын
@@johnfoster2584 I second the motion.
@Notlilithsbitch3 ай бұрын
Capitalist’s and fascists won* look at which industries reign in Europe and East Asia (Germany and Japan)
@Mike-kc5ew2 ай бұрын
Except for bankers in Germany or Russia, right? 😉 That said, I'd say that the US won the most from the world wars. You look at the US prior to 1914, and then post 1945, and it's like an entirely different country. Now would the US production capabilities have eventually transformed the US into what it is now? It may have, but nowhere near as the accelerated time span that the world wars helped to foster.
@anthonygerace89264 ай бұрын
Brilliant woman. A family anecdote that supports her point about the cultural differences between Germans and Russians: A branch of my extended family are Jews whose ancestors were in Poland until World War Two. In 1939, Poland, of course, was JOINTLY invaded by Germans from the west and Soviets from the east. The family members who were in western Poland were mostly wiped out by the Nazis, with only a few surviving. The family members who were in eastern Poland were deported to Soviet forced-labor camps in Russia. Plenty of hardships, but most of them survived. At least for them, Stalin was the lesser of two evils.
@TheTimdoyle4 ай бұрын
If you think the Soviets were inefficient then you need to read “the gulag archipelago”.
@jody68514 ай бұрын
Don't forget that other Jews who were in the Soviet-occupied part of Poland joined the Soviet Red Army, as well. I have a friend whose father -- a Polish Jew -- made it to the Soviet lines and eventually became a tank commander in the Red Army. He immigrated to the US after the war. Many Polish and Russian Jews served with distinction in the Red Army, many highly decorated, many even reaching high rank. In Netanya, Israel, just north of Tel Aviv, a war memorial was erected honoring the Red Army for its role in defeating Nazi Germany during WWII. It is the only war memorial to the Red Army to be erected in any country not either a present or former Soviet bloc/Russian aligned country. Putin even traveled to Israel to attend the unveiling in 2012. A number of surviving Jewish Israeli Red Army veterans were there to attend, as well, some wearing their old uniforms and medals.
@MarekDohojda4 ай бұрын
@@TheTimdoyle I have read it, great book, should be on everyone shelf. However, if you think about it, it really showed in Spade just how truly inefficient Russians were. Yeah not caring, and millions died, but at the same time, zero care about function.
@TheTimdoyle4 ай бұрын
@@MarekDohojda Whilst the war effort at the start of the conflict was extremely inefficient and ineffective (probably the same for most countries) the Soviets did rally and out produced the Germans. It was known that they captured German tanks and copied elements of them. However whilst the Germans were manufacturing their armaments to precise measurements in underground factories the Soviets understood (as they always fought) that this is another war of attrition and their armaments were crude but effective. The war in Ukraine is another war of attrition. The Russians are not suffering. They have prepared for this war for over a decade. The west is now ill prepared and suffering because of it. Now with a new front in Israel the majority of munitions are leaving the US for Ukraine and Israel. The US are leaving themselves at serious disadvantage.
@MarekDohojda4 ай бұрын
@@TheTimdoyle Not quite sure your response in terms of OP. That said, it's all good. Russians are exceptionally inefficient and horrible at producing things. Back in the old country Russian made products were always a joke, and today is no different. Russia did outproduce Germany but it is important to note that they had Land Lease which was incredibly useful, especially because it allowed them to focus on weapons; and Germans were bombed, and attacked on all sides; while having inefficient economy themselves. Bottom line is that Ukraine showed just how bad Russia is, and how bad it's manufacture process is; the corruption, the failure , the great deal of waste, is all visible and in spotlight. That said, Ukraine was a corrupt nation before hand, was hardly a nation before hand, primarily due to what Soviet's have done to it. It is also far smaller nation in terms of people, with very weak manufacturing base. Therefore it is possible that Russia may pull this off, as Russians never cared about their own losses. Their people die? OK, So? They sure don't care. SO while it's possible that Russia may win the war of attrition they will loose the war, and will not get back their Empire, that much is certain.
@M1tjakaramazov5 ай бұрын
This is also the fundamental reason why the British insistence on actively blaming the Germans for WW1 is erroneous. The problem with WW1 was not that it happened, but HOW it happened; and all sides have equal fault in that. WW2 had a far greater death toll, but it didn't murder an entire generation of young men as senselessly as WW1. The fact that eminent historians like Max Hasings have gone back to aggressively calling for re-blaming the Germans is quite shocking.
@johnpederson58734 ай бұрын
Nah your just incorrect, germany had multiple opportunities to stop the intensifying of ww1. 1) they gave the Austrians full support when the triple alliance pact didn’t force them to do so. 2) they invaded a neutral country in belgium which calls for others to enter the war. 3) it kept going and invaded france. A small scale conflict could of carried out between serbia and austria but german aggression prevented that.
@karlvnshwp64074 ай бұрын
@@johnpederson5873what about french aggression? The french, after getting humiliated in a war they started in 1871, went on a 40 year smear campaign on Germany ensuring that they’ll be diplomatically isolated except for Austria, how is Germany standing up for his only ally any different from today’s US and Israel? What about russian aggression? They were the first to escalate the conflict by mobilizing their army and threatening war with Austria, if anything they turn the regional conflict between Austria and Serbia into a major european conflict. And also Belgium was only neutral on paper, they operated in tandem with Britain and France since the beginning violating the spirit of their permanent neutrality (unlike the Netherlands or Spain who were genuinely neutral), and Britain also had the opportunity to mediate the conflict but Lloyd George (a known germaphobe) wanted an excuse to get into the war. Now although in my opinion Austria is the real culprit of this horrific conflict, Germany had plenty to do with it’s escalation, however trying to blame the germans for the whole thing is both ludicrous and bias towards the entente
@jordizee4 ай бұрын
Everyone knows that ww1 started because of a duke killing an ostrich.
@karlvnshwp64074 ай бұрын
@@jordizee because he was hungry
@renaatsenechal4 ай бұрын
There was plenty of senseless generation killing on the eastern front
@oliverstianhugaas74934 ай бұрын
"Not a happy ending" That's reality.
@samuelspiel88554 ай бұрын
This chick is just wrong. If Germany had stopped after Czechoslovakia, like this guy's question implies, it absolutely would have been better than the war exploding like it did IRL. In fact, we have a bunch of examples of more moderate ring-wing dictators during the actual historical war that turned out great. Franco led Spain to the "Spanish economic Miracle" and had a peaceful transition to democracy after his death. This chick is clueless and shouldn't be teaching this subject.
@christopherkalble43734 ай бұрын
The German's tried to negotiate with Great Britain the placement of the Jews in British Palestine. Then in Madagascar and even allowed the Jews to leave Germany and go to America on a steam ship. All were rebuffed by the "Allies". Resulting in Hitler's promise of riding the Jews from Germany and Europe. No matter what the cost to the Jew. Churchill didn't want them. Roosevelt didn't want them.
@leonardstadler93994 ай бұрын
@@samuelspiel8855 As a historian, I concur with what you say in part, I'm not sure where this woman is getting her answers from.... but I disagree with her full assessment.
@sadsadasdsadasdsadas4 ай бұрын
Europa the last battle. Learn history.
@ragnarok2834 ай бұрын
@@samuelspiel8855 Germany didn’t start the war. The Jews did.
@weirdshibainu4 ай бұрын
While WW1 undoubtedly held a catalyst for WW2, the prime directive for Britain's policy toward the Continent has always been living in fear of a continental superpower, no matter the nation, nor the ideology. Britain has played the role of agitator on the continent for centuries in order to keep the various nations in check. They simply cannot afford to live in the shadow of unified continent, no matter how tenuous.
@TheTimdoyle4 ай бұрын
Something many people miss entirely. It is not in the interest of Britain to have a United Europe.
@nonono91944 ай бұрын
Britain didn't want to get involved in a war with Germany, chamberlain repeated fought against that. It was only because Churchill and various other politicians were bribed by the usual suspects to push for a war with Germany at all costs
@andrijapfc9 күн бұрын
Funny thing that's exactly what they got know with Brexit (living in the shadow of a unified continent)
@weirdshibainu9 күн бұрын
@@andrijapfc Not really. The E.U. doesn't have military designs on England.
@andrijapfc9 күн бұрын
@@weirdshibainu Military designs are not the only threat
@abelnicolaebaritone6 күн бұрын
Get this woman and Jordan Peterson in the same room, please.
@DannyPoet5 ай бұрын
Really interesting point on WW1 being the cause of what happened after.. makes u kind of wonder what world wed be living in if WW1 never started ..
@planderlinde19695 ай бұрын
If WW1 never started the world would be radically different from the one we know today. However given the situation Europe found itself in by the 1910s a major global conflict was inevitable.
@M1tjakaramazov5 ай бұрын
Literally every educated European, at least outside the UK, knows this. What's really interesting is that it was African colonialism that largely caused WW1. The European rush to divide the continent led to military treaties to assure peace between the competing nations. These treaties were then instrumental in drawing every country into war once some of them started fighting in Europe. So in a way everything from African colonisation to the end of the cold war is just one continuous link of events in European history. WW1 was the first time the white man's hubris really bit him in the ass, leading to the systematic death of his own kind; but the seeds were laid 30 years earlier, and the devastation only ended 75 years later.
@iche93735 ай бұрын
Pax Europea would occur based on multilateralism
@PolishBehemoth4 ай бұрын
but WW1 was a accumulation of napoleon wars, war of 1870, even the american revolution had a part of it. So many different things led up to and built up to WW1 and 2. You cant put it all on one event as history ignorant people tend to do.
@PolishBehemoth4 ай бұрын
@@planderlinde1969 if WW1 never started a majority of the world would have been stuck in dictatorships for a very long time. WW1 and 2 got rid of european dictatorships once and for all.
@OrnumCR4 ай бұрын
I agree entirely with her viewpoint. WW1 was the absolute catalyst for the consequences of what followed. In essence, a part one, then a pause, then a part two to really finalise things….awful.
@Jstebb974 ай бұрын
We fought the wrong enemy - George Patton.
@netaosofakenews4 ай бұрын
Fascist above
@zivaradlovacki26664 ай бұрын
Well, you made sure fascism and nazism live on.
@shkodranalbi4 ай бұрын
You quote someone word for word and they blame you for what that person said. That is how it works now
@user-rq4ey6tt2t4 ай бұрын
No we didn’t. Patton was anti-Semitic douche bag! Any cheated on his wife all the time which means he lacks character. I lost a lot of respect for him when I found that out. I also read his personal diaries. He was blaming the Jews for the concentration camps like it was their fault for letting it happen so yeah yeah that’s the type of “great” man that Patton was
@raybar73604 ай бұрын
@@shkodranalbi well, ...whats the context?.....1.help the Germans and continue the "right" path .......2. "Patton said this, he was wrong in thinking this"....these types of comments are just titillating to those who have fascist , dictatorial tendencies or dreams....your "dumb" comment at least is honest ans direct. ...
@markvoelker66204 ай бұрын
We’d have some guy like Klaus Schwab ruling the world, telling us to eat bugs and be happy.
@garyorourke45244 ай бұрын
Wrong, he's one of the people ze Germans wanted rid of. Best do some digging, they pop up quite often in over reaching government control. Not quite the victims you've been told!
@johnfoster25844 ай бұрын
You're living under corporate marxism so bankers won.
@danzwku11 ай бұрын
Looking forward to the full episode!
@LCCWPresents4 ай бұрын
I took a class in college in ww1 history and this reason alone was enough to ruin the central powers. With the except of u boat raids and a couple small successes in Indian Ocean piracy, Germany never could level with the uk in ww1 when they had a navy and even less so in ww2. Also (more so in ww2), Germany had less resources and poor mismanagement of the stuff they had (which was almost nothing). Even if Germany won ww2, Germany would’ve run fry on supplies because their policies were isolating comparatively to the countries they were fighting.
@flammenjc4 ай бұрын
Very true that WW1 is the pivot point and not WW2. Further more WW2 showcased how to actually fire with firearms effectively. WW1 only showed how little we actually understood about the tactical use of firearms in modern warfare.
@MaloPiloto3 ай бұрын
True!
@MrJpc1234Ай бұрын
The thing I find interesting/sad about WW1 is that no great generals arose to take advantage of the new forms of warfare like had happend with previous tech revolutions in war
@roadent21718 күн бұрын
@@MrJpc1234 _What_ new forms of warfare? Deep Trench networks? Super-heavy artillery? Machine Guns? Trucks? Tanks? Chemical agents? SMGs? Airplanes? Strategic bombers? Radio? All of those forms of warfare were used - none of them could break the trench stalemate. It's not about generals - it's about the very technology itself. It led to fundamentally static warfare. There was nothing anyone could have done.
@roadent21718 күн бұрын
"WW1 only showed how little we actually understood about the tactical use of firearms in modern warfare." Firearms? You mean small arms? Rifles? SMGs? They're all trivial - useful additions that increase soldier efficiency, to be sure, but they pale in weight to the role of artillery in warfare. Firearms could _never_ solve the trench warfare.
@MrJpc123418 күн бұрын
@roadent217 Well those are technologies which obviously affect but are not in and of themselves forms of warfare......what I am criticising was the lack of Generals that managed to adapt to how these technologies should be used quick enough.....if the technology meant that defensive operations had an advantage so be it don't waste the number of lives they had on failed offensive operations.....this wasn't the first or last time warfare went through a technological revolution the interesting part about this one was the lack of Strategists that managed to successfully adapt to the new tech leading to levels of waste unheard of
@tijluilenspiegel60294 ай бұрын
Lol not gonna risk my account saying how Europe would have looked 😅
@MrLeovdmeer4 ай бұрын
I jusy did. LOL
@MrGchiasson4 ай бұрын
If all those soldiers of WWI & WWII could have gotten a glimpse of this "Twilight Zone" insane betrayal we have today...they would have pointed their guns at their leaders..to protect a common Europa brotherhood.
@sevatar57624 ай бұрын
Heaven is how it would have looked
@NB_Strikers4 ай бұрын
@@MrLeovdmeerwhat did you say?
@NB_Strikers4 ай бұрын
@@sevatar5762 because everyone would be dead or because everyone would look like an inbred family from “The Hills Have Eyes”- but with more blonde hair?
@AliAbdullah04211 ай бұрын
Where to get full video?
@tygressblade4 ай бұрын
Got the creator page.
@A_friend_of_Aristotle4 ай бұрын
It's kind of a silly question, my respect to her for her patience. "What if" questions are typically implausible, and this one is not unique in that respect. The survival of Nazism would have meant the total destruction of the Soviet Union, the surrender or annihilation of the English. Much of Europe would have been exterminated, too...including the Spanish and Italians. Ten's of millions more would have died. Entire nations would have been...liquidated. Nazi Germany was *_doomed to fail_* because it was a totalitarian dictatorship led by a genocidal maniac. Believe it or not, at any given time, there are more people who *_love_* than *_hate._* This fact dooms the "them-or-us" ideas - like Nazism - to failure. The Soviet Union was doomed to failure because it was a totalitarian dictatorship led by homicidal and suicidal maniacs. Believe it or not, at any given time, there are more people who respect *_reason_* than those who respect *_irrationality._* This fact dooms the "do-gooder" Socialists from convincing enough young people to accept their logical absurdities. It prevents a lot of really, really dumb things from happening.
@kevingrem13644 ай бұрын
the Germans requested a peace treaty over 15 x with the British (and other European powers), before the war, during the war, when they were winning the war and when they were losing the war, their objective was never to destroy England. also Spain and Italy were German allies. not sure where you are getting your perceptive from? BTW most European countries were allies with germany!
@balazsszekely21323 ай бұрын
People hate to read these days just reading all your bs about ww2 and the toothbrush moustache having austrian man
@mikehallrealestate3 ай бұрын
Ww1 strategy really was pure insanity
@Brandon-fz9xk4 ай бұрын
Man In the high castle
@jadeolin85143 ай бұрын
That damn show had such promise... Ended up being a huge disappointment unfortunately.
@claydogg2344 ай бұрын
The interviewer was missing the inherent full on genocidal nature of Nazism vs Soviet Communism. Yes stalinism mirrored many aspects of the Nazi regime but it didn't have the grand visions and well thought out doctrine of racialized scientific antisemitism, racialized socities, and genocidal imperialism like with Nazism. Keep in mind the USSR wasn't just Stalin. The post-Stalin Soviet leaders, while corrupt and dictatorial, were not totalitarian like Stalin as communism, unlike Nazism, is not inherently totalitarian and genocidal. Communism can be genocidal ie Pol Pot (although many of Pol Pot's racial ideas went well beyond Communism) but it doesn't have the same automatic disposition towards racial conquest and genocide like Nazism. This is why I'm always a little cautious when I see Communism and Nazism brought up in the same breath and especially so when discussing WWII. I find Eastern Europeans given their harsh experiences with Communism understandably have a difficult time grasping this and often lend themselves to clumsy historical equivocations between Nazism and Communism. It's also absurd to imagine defeating Hitler and Stalin at the same time when Hitler had been primary enemy of the allies for years by that point and had now made himself an enemy of a mighty country like the USSR. What attack the enemy of your enemy as opposed to teaming up with them? That's ridiculous. They didn't even have the means for that. Besides Nazism's longterm plans were so horrific they went well beyond any evil dictator like Stalin.
@Jake-gw9cj4 ай бұрын
killing tens of millions of their own people isn't genocidal 😅 no way these people actually exist
@DominicMazoch4 күн бұрын
The UK, and the US, should have stayed out of WW1, and then help put the pieces back together.
@David-ns4ym4 ай бұрын
They did survive ww2. Many escaped to Brazil and Argentina and other places. There is a town of twins in Brazil that are more than anywhere in the world. A certain doctor rumored to live there for a while
@ooonyxxx4 ай бұрын
They no longer govern Germany, they explicitly said the REICH not members of the NSDAP. Your "gotcha" comment is useless
@224dot0dot0dot104 ай бұрын
There were Russian and Ukrainian Hiwi soldiers who worked as Trawniki concentration camp guards living in the USA after World War 2 was over : en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiwi_(volunteer)
@thebitcher013 ай бұрын
Thye went massively to the US with the American governments help under false identities
@Ifoldforweed3 ай бұрын
you missed the U.S.A.
@brandont26903 ай бұрын
And the bolsheviks came to America
@shredblue85364 ай бұрын
World would be a better place that’s why more people are turning to fascism each year
@dreamawake26704 ай бұрын
Yes. For European man and his spirit/soul not capital or consumerism- degeneration.
@DominionSorcerer4 ай бұрын
It probably wouldn't have been better for you, or this Dream Awake fellow.
@brandont26903 ай бұрын
Mustache man was right
@jdee84073 ай бұрын
They were both Socialists.
@johngalt39404 ай бұрын
If they didn’t invade Russia, and called it quits, they could have negotiated trade with Soviet Union and built defences in east Poland and Romania instead of taking on the largest country on earth.
@kevingrem13644 ай бұрын
it was kill or be killed. Soviets plan to invade at some point! plus part of the German objective was to reunify all German speaking people of which Soviet union had 4 mil!
@tomfrombrunswick75714 ай бұрын
it was originally thought that the Soviet Union grew at 4-5% in the 30s. This has now been downgraded to 3.5% a year. However it appears that the real issues for the Soviet Union started to occur in the early sixties. If we look at Germany in the 30s it's growth rate was similar to the Soviets but it's rearmament program distorted the economy causing a foreign exchange crisis. This is one of the main reasons they started the war.
@JL-XrtaMayoNoCheese3 ай бұрын
They war was started to prevent Germany from destroying Bolshevism
@anthonygerace89264 ай бұрын
There are two important points about the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany: 1) If Stalin had not chosen to be a de-facto ally of Nazi Germany from August of 1939 to June of of 1941, Germany would not have been able to initiate World War Two. 2) Once Germany invaded the Soviet Union in Operation Barbarossa in June of 1941, it was the Soviet Union that suffered the most from Nazi Germany and that inflicted most of the damage on Nazi Germany. Without the Soviet Union inflicting massive destruction on the German military, D Day would never have succeeded and might never have been attempted. So, in effect, Stalin caused the Second World War but then insured Germany's defeat in that war. By the way -- it is the opinion of some historians that it was the August, 1945 Soviet invasion of Manchuria -- more than the atomic bombs-- that convinced Japan to surrender.
@CultureCrossed644 ай бұрын
The soviets couldn't even put boots on their soldiers feet. They provided bodies. A necessary thing, but not the deciding factor. And no intelligent historian believes that the Soviet invasion of a Japanese puppet caused them to surrender. Japan was preparing for a literal fight to the death. Look up "the glorious death of the 100 million"
@jonathancummings38074 ай бұрын
Yes. The USSR is the most important country regarding WW2, they also benefitted the most. With that huge, incredibly powerful army they dominated all of Eastern Europe, and along with the USA replaced the British Empire in "Superpower" role. In 1938, the British Empire is huge and literally "SUPERPOWERFUL", in 1946, permanently weakened, unable to maintain control over the vast lands and peoples of the Empire, as the USA and USSR aren't going to help and instead increase their influence and hegemony over the entire World. Here's a truth no one seems to put forth, there was a moment when Humanity could have been united, but instead, the USSR on one side, and USA/Britain on the other chose to be adversaries. Together, just as they overpowered the Axis, they could have overpowered and united the world as the Axis had desired. Literally they had the forces mobilized, no one could have stood against the same troops that had just pulverized Germany and intimidated Japan into surrender. Not Civil War China, not any South America, nor any other places not still under colonial rule. Nope, they wanted enemies so became each other's enemy, since their enemies were crushed.
@Ozzy45555 ай бұрын
How does this only have 207 likes? These videos should be viewed by ALL!
@Melvorgazh4 ай бұрын
The NASA had a Sturmbann-führer as chief engineer. His name was Werner
@MrGchiasson4 ай бұрын
NASA buried the fact that Werner had been an SS officer.
@Melvorgazh4 ай бұрын
@@MrGchiasson I am not surprised at all
@kreb124 ай бұрын
Better than letting the Soviets have him.
@JorgeRodriguez-my6ej4 ай бұрын
I think things would be cleaner
@cwalenta6564 ай бұрын
I could theoretically envision a scenario where Hitler sticks it to Stalin and the Allies develop the bomb and then win with that. In that scenario both would lose, but conventionally? Yeah, 2/3 of Wehrmacht faces the Red Army so Normandy would be pretty tough if Germans not busy on Eastern Front.
@weirdshibainu4 ай бұрын
Without the bomb and Germany not facing the Russians, I think Normandy would have ended at the waters edge for the Allies.
@DominionSorcerer4 ай бұрын
@@weirdshibainu no, not really. Without Germany facing the Russians they might frankly lose even quicker than they did historically because they were utterly reliant on conquering Soviet territory to fuel their war effort.
@weirdshibainu4 ай бұрын
@@DominionSorcerer That's my point. Stalin detested the West..to the point he trusted Hitler and was legitimately shocked (reports of him locking himself in his room for days after the invasion) and would have supplied Hitler with everything he needed, in fact, Germany and Russia had robust trade under the Trade and Credit agreement in August of 1939
@gdcapra3 ай бұрын
This woman really is brilliant
@Spillers724 ай бұрын
Fascism did survive till 1970 in Spain but it was more like Italian fascism without the overtly racial component. Yes, i do believe nazism would have crumbled. Likely by first weakening and watering it down first.
@JL-XrtaMayoNoCheese4 ай бұрын
Franco was a papist royalist, not a fascist
@langelle14 ай бұрын
Those freaky German men would have been getting down with African women by 1960.
@icemanire54674 ай бұрын
I don't think fascist is the right term for Franco. I know many refer him as such he differed quite a bit from the rest.
@mazs11234 ай бұрын
Surprised to see so many Fascist apologists in the comments.
@DelGTAGrndrs3 ай бұрын
It the same way with communist videos. “That wasn’t real communism” apologists.
@Oliver94024 ай бұрын
Don't forget that the wall street crash and the depression of the 30s really opened the door to these ideologies.
@JimLahey_and_Blulian4 ай бұрын
I'd be alive. Can't say Israel would be...
@allananderson9494 ай бұрын
Wouldn't be an Israel to begin with
@CoIdHeat4 ай бұрын
I guess everyone can understand how the populaces of countries being at their lowest low can turn to radical ideologies such as communism and fascism. What I really wonder though is how fascism could rise to its success in a country that actually won in WW1 - Italy.
@thomasjames96784 ай бұрын
The Great War was so influential to today's geopolitics and economic powerhouses. The gunshot that killed Franz Ferdinand began a chain reaction that we still see today.
@davidfulton1794 ай бұрын
The Spanish American War, the Russo-Japanese War, and WW1 - everything in the 20th century emanated from those three conflicts.
@waichui29884 ай бұрын
Suppose you have another fantasy. Suppose you fantasize that you win the lottery ten times in a row.
@sickboi71764 ай бұрын
You can understand that she even rooted for the tsar and his incredibly corrupt regime with unimaginably cruel treatment but she doesn’t talk about Ottoman Empire. The irony is, the Ottoman Empire was the only peaceful country among all of them.
@jameshiler78305 ай бұрын
chad beard.
@guillemedina79084 ай бұрын
looks like the czech president
@nicholasgodleman75204 ай бұрын
@@guillemedina7908 Oh yes, he definitely looks like a typical Czech.
@jayr78904 ай бұрын
To hide his weak chin lol
@kalekkakmdkekjaakwkmdb85064 ай бұрын
@@nicholasgodleman7520just like how the scottish prime minister looks scottish, or how the british prime minister looks british.
@kreb124 ай бұрын
Little boy questions. "What if Hitler won though?" is something you'd hear in high school social studies.
@gregor-samsa4 ай бұрын
Greetings from Germany. She is right.
@aleshandsome37054 ай бұрын
After 45 secs of phrasing the question...... So what's the question?
@thedailywin5374 ай бұрын
Agreed. The interviewer, while meaning well, does struggle with verbal overrun when attempting to ask whatever it is he actually intends to ask.
@fikretpajalic12244 ай бұрын
Patel is absolutely terrible; he struggles to fully pronounce words and often swallows them as he rushes to speak, cramming too much into just a few seconds. As a result, his questions are frequently unintelligible.
@hotmic50514 ай бұрын
What I find ironic is both the parties she mentioned run rampant undetected currently.... And essentially, id say, this is the actual reality of what happened without it having to happen.
@AlexLee-dc2vb4 ай бұрын
based on the title and "uploaded 7 months ago" I was CERTAIN that this had been in the context of discussions about a ceasefire to allow Hamas to survive... but then I saw that it came out before October 7th
@notapplicable-zn9us4 ай бұрын
Time 1:40; No, there is no scenario where both Stalin and Hitler could've been killed. It was because of Stalin leadership, the industrious Soviet economy during the Great Depression and the strength of the Soviet Army that the allies were able to defeat the Nazi Army in WW 2. The French capitulated, the British were on their knees and the Americans also had their hands full in the Pacific for any one Allied Army to defeat the Nazi Army.
@robertdickson93194 ай бұрын
I would argue that the amount of Lend-Lease material sent to Russia is what allowed your other 3 points to "work". Those Russian offensives of '43-'45 don't work as well without US trucks, foodstuffs, gear, oil and train engines. Russia doesn't win without the 18K+ airplanes the US sent over to them. Russia built a lot of their own tanks but the 12K+ tanks the US & the UK sent them sure helped. Those factories that were built during the Great Depression - many of those were built with American assistance (like Ford Motors). Lend Lease was so important that Stalin helped invade Iran to keep a secure Lend-Lease pipeline going. Zhukov is quoted as saying "Today [1963] some say the Allies didn't really help us ... But listen, one cannot deny that the Americans shipped over to us material without which we could not have equipped our armies held in reserve or been able to continue the war." Russians like to pretend that they could (and did) beat Germany all by themselves, but if not for the US - economically & militarily - entering the war, Russia does not survive it, let alone win it.
@MikeMyers-th1rk4 ай бұрын
Ur Russians r getting they’re ass beat in Ukraine so I guess they ARENT tuff loooooool
@frasersgrove48384 ай бұрын
Whatever comrade, if it wasn't for Lend Lease the Soviet Union would of fallen, as it should of...
@BowHunter874 ай бұрын
Germany saw what was coming. They lost. That’s why the status quo is shit.
@Epichistorychannel4634 ай бұрын
Biggest what if in history
@matthewreus40743 ай бұрын
They kinda did in a small way the Nazi party still exist as a political party in Germany
@christopherfritz38404 ай бұрын
No wonder AH☠️ blamed 'his Generals' for defeat..
@kalekkakmdkekjaakwkmdb85064 ай бұрын
AH blamed his generals because they acted against him. Especially franz halder acting against him during operation barbarossa, prioritising moscow over the caucuses and its oil fields
@kommando55624 ай бұрын
Did he? Those claiming so probably were in one way or another. They made up the clean whermacht myth to cope with this. And also cause they kinda solidified this myth at Nuremberg when they deemed the waffen SS a “criminal organization” Even though the Whermacht did more crimes and around the same or more percent adjusted for size. So they leaned into it despite being die hard NS themselves. It should be interesting to see how this is all viewed once the political propaganda is gone.
@tritium19982 ай бұрын
@@kommando5562 The new allies of German military officials also needed that myth to quickly separate the blame when working together after the war, but the German military officials were still under the command of the supreme leader.
@olddog-fv2ox7 күн бұрын
Geez we're a horrible Gibbon
@sdot1243 ай бұрын
Germany for Germans
@fikretpajalic12244 ай бұрын
If Third Reich survived Patel wouldn't be asking this question. Patel is absolutely terrible; he struggles to fully pronounce words and often swallows them as he rushes to speak, cramming too much into just a few seconds. As a result, his questions are frequently unintelligible.
@dontcomply39763 ай бұрын
He'd be a slave at best
@RobertRobinson-dy3rj4 ай бұрын
Germany had a high standard of living
@johnhoney6574 ай бұрын
It was lower than Britain, and massively predicated on a government spending binge and debt.
@NB_Strikers4 ай бұрын
They were on borrowed time and borrowed money. The amount of financial shenanigans the Nazi’s accountants worked up to hide the massive unserviceable debt in order to deflate the interest forced the Germans to look beyond their borders.
@NB_Strikers4 ай бұрын
@@johnhoney657 and it’s a bit easier when they confiscate all businesses, money, and houses from their own citizens just bc they happen to be a Jew, a Gypsy, gay, from an opposition political party, or writing truth to power.
@Blitzkrieg13244 ай бұрын
Its more complicated than that, you consider how the world has transcended into the chaos we live in today, The Reich committed atrocities as many governments did but the German people under the Reich especially pre WW2 lived lives of high morality and plentifulness, Versailles was the problem as Germany was eviscerated and humiliated
@DominionSorcerer4 ай бұрын
They didn't really live lives of high morality and that plentifulness was reliant on first the possessions of Jewish people and later on foreign conquests. Versailles, for the record, wasn't even that harsh. The idea that it was is Nazi propaganda.
@Ochiras23 ай бұрын
They did... they just moved to America
@Leto2ndAtreides4 ай бұрын
Wonder how the culture changed due to there being comparatively fewer guys.
@AckzaTV4 ай бұрын
Imagine the west without ww1 woah
@Veterans_for_Harris4 ай бұрын
Today we call it maga.
@bemon31416Ай бұрын
power vacuum is a good time for anarchy and anarchy is a good time for evil
@Musique9863 ай бұрын
Can you please show me a quote of AH talking about “annihilating whole peoples.”
@AP-ui7oi3 ай бұрын
Talk is cheap. Look what he did. Are you crazy?
@Musique9863 ай бұрын
@@AP-ui7oi history is written by the victors, apparently the Germans kept impeccable records of everything other than that one thing. Show me the quote or shut up.
@DelGTAGrndrs3 ай бұрын
@@Musique986W
@mikejones97023 ай бұрын
No they can’t, it doesn’t exist
@yougeay3 ай бұрын
@@AP-ui7oiin wartime every side did crazy things. Look at the years between 33-38 Germany did a great job in those years
@chrisahead4 ай бұрын
Well would be interesting to see different outcome scenarios... Because in our time line human civilization has completely doomed itself and ti's too late now to escape collapse
@casimirgroeck5 ай бұрын
wait what is her point here? The Brits shouldn’t have sent soldier to fight on the continent? The key to British grand strategy is to never let one power dominate the continent. How does she square that?
@sovelissskirata81054 ай бұрын
She's saying they didn't commit to a large army until Much later and struggled to do it as a result of their policies. Their policy was to be a small force that tipped the scales, when they flat didn't have the numbers in WWI
@johncullen91154 ай бұрын
I think she is pointing to Fishers "Baltic Strategy" to cut off the Germans from Swedish Iron Ore. Very little of this was ever implemented, but the few submarines that were sent in the Baltic were very successful. Despite Churchill's criticism of it in retrospect post WW1, his whole Norway campaign in 1940 looks like a poorly executed similar approach.
@hurleysheat57843 ай бұрын
the world would be rid of degeneracy and we would live healthy together. no chemicals in our food and water. the list goes on and on of how better things would be.
@MiniUsyk3 ай бұрын
We are still paying the price for WW1 today.
@SeamHead334 ай бұрын
WW2 was Man vs. Evil and Man lost
@marklowe80874 ай бұрын
Field marshal Haig,or"butcher Haig" as my grandparents called him took much of the blame for the slaughter of the British and imperial forces.Fair call.Haig kept his opinions to himself after the war,as a soldier should.The politicians could have replaced him but hadn't the guts.Lloyd George the pm who could have done that trashed haigs reputation after haigs de ath to salve his own legacy. That's politicians for you
@t_miltorres31643 ай бұрын
I wonder, what she thinks about General Patton that have said "we fought the wrong enemy"
@DustOnCloud94 ай бұрын
Begining of end of the British Empire was the "Horrific" Happy Ending of World War I
@SamLukie3 ай бұрын
They did'nt. No point in this discussion.
@matterhorne894 ай бұрын
Seems like the USA needs to practise some grand strategy themselves…
@lafayettemoreira44234 ай бұрын
In Rwanda? We know they could have tried. In Paraguay, Chile, Argentina? Well if you speak of the fuehrer, he could have survived there (argentina) protected by the german house of Lippenburg (berhard zu lippe, german king of holland).
@Ashphinchtersayswhat4 ай бұрын
It did, obviously you don’t know the Bush Family or the Schwab family
@joe61424 ай бұрын
Very knowledgeable about history .
@michaellynes35404 ай бұрын
The Third Reich did continue a little on after the May 8 surrendered. They continued until they were dissolved on May 23 de facto and then on June 5 de jure.
@MrGchiasson4 ай бұрын
I wonder how many nazis with faked passports & documents later infiltrated corporations, banks and companies..everywhere.. Remember the movie, 'The Odessa File'. Fiction with some truth?
@rejean27443 ай бұрын
Thank you Winston, thank you Franklin.
@TerryDaniels-h9y4 ай бұрын
They did. They're called Jew Haters.
@richiewalker01143 ай бұрын
Dude. Shorten up and condense your question’s and get right to point. Watch Larry Kong, don’t get Howard Stone with preachy questions.
@dcb173 ай бұрын
Jimmy G with a beard
@ethanmcfarland82404 ай бұрын
TNO players: 🗿
@hagiaiit4 ай бұрын
what do you mean What IF?!?!??? THEY DID.... they are called the WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM today..... lololololol and they are about far away from ruling the ENTIRE planet..... :P
@randomobserver81684 ай бұрын
The usual assumption for decades was a trajectory much like that of the USSR. I still tend to that, though I can entertain arguments for why it would decline slower, or much, much faster, than that. The strategic picture of the ensuing Cold War would of course have been much, much worse for the US and UK, with no continental allies to speak of.
@rafaelw.b.13244 ай бұрын
I think is cute that Europeans forget that Nazism is basically the application of European colonialism into Europe itself.
@darbyheavey4063 ай бұрын
It looks like China….
@simonfraser20312 ай бұрын
Earthly evaluation on the epic period of WW1&2, Death, Destruction, Displacement, are still with us today in 2024, if we are to declare that WW3 is upon us globally , their is no capacity to absorb its impact.
@-Some-Guy-4 ай бұрын
“The good ending”
@PhilipHood-du1wk3 ай бұрын
Man in the Hightower
@s.k.66164 ай бұрын
Grand strategy for who? The elite class? Shouldn’t a nation have the right to determine their own future?
@allancheesman43544 ай бұрын
😮 the Catholic Church hierarchy would have benefited as fascist ideology is merely the extension of the far right of the Catholic Church
@jkbrown54964 ай бұрын
Read Ludwig von Mises, 'Liberalism' (1927) to get a view into Europe before Nazism (race-based socialism) revealed its true nature. At the time Fascism (nationality based socialism) was seen as the savior of nations from the Marxist/Soviet (class-based socialism) because classical liberalism wouldn't stand up to the communists. What became Nazism had been taught by the German professors for more than 70 years, but once the tactics of the communists were taken up by the college-educated Germans we got what we see from this side of the period.
@localfatty43643 ай бұрын
Wdym? It survived and is thriving well today! Its just advanced
@derekireland14603 ай бұрын
If you think these vile people with all the money and power simply went away... You are a special kind of nieve.
@maxmurphy73063 ай бұрын
Well the whole euro 🗑 would be speaking German by now.
@RebelPatriot13 ай бұрын
Better than being replaced by migrants
@HappySlapperKid11 ай бұрын
This isnt round 2?
@Tjalve704 ай бұрын
No. It's round 3.
@brandont26903 ай бұрын
@@Tjalve70 the mistakes made by our grandfathers will not be made again