Was World War 2 necessary? (Like Americans joining the war?)

@End_Game_Flame said ^

Absolutely not! Germany and Russia were pounding each other to dust in East Europe. At the battle of Stalingrad for example, casualties were at over 1 million. Why interfere? A Nazi government fighting a Communist Government. Perfect.

Although I am very critical of the British, you are even more idiotic than them, you are literally saying that the US wantedthe holocaust to go on, the USA would be decimated, as the land of the free which would have been destroyed earlier, as the geopolitical Police us role did not do anything.

Ok, first of all, this post doesn't even make sense. Now, you say that the US wanted the holocaust to go on, well, technically, the US knew all about the holocaust for years and never did anything. You also say that the US would be decimated, what are you talking about!? The US was (and still is) the most powerful nation in the world. Please make your sentences a little more understandable.

Would have been decimated due to the holocaust yes. The image of the USA would be destroyed., which would make the USA collapse, on its own weight, of lies, and its own atrocities.

It is, but may not be for long.

But I guess, according to the allies supporters ignorance is bliss

Hmmm, your username is starting to make sense now.

@Rage698

Okay, I’m tired of seeing the same anti-American propaganda everywhere so let’s set the record straight.

I) You are very much using this as a shield right now and it’s pretty plainly obvious. I keep on seeing this pattern across other forum posts as well and while I'm not trying to be mean here, you can’t keep saying “but America, but Europe did this xyz bad thing” to grant yourself immunity from debating the actual topic at hand. Yes, America had a lot of atrocities, and so did all the Allied powers. That doesn’t change anything about the Holocaust and despite the horrors of the atomic bombs and the famines in the colonies they do not remotely compare with Nazi concentration camps. It also makes no sense to blame capitalism for imperialism since the connection is loose at best, hence why I originally wrote a rebuttal to that.

II) Despite the stereotypes, America is very much the second best when it comes to being transparent about our ugly history right behind Germany. We block the least amount of information (no, that random village in Alabama where all the cousins marry each other doesn’t count as censorship evidence) and this would be very apparent if you read any part of the AP History curriculums. With AP World History being one of the top five most popular classes nationwide, we are very well informed about our treatments of native people in the past as well as the present. When it comes to WWII, we study extensively both the horrors from the Axis such as Unit 731, comfort women, Rape of Nanking, Auschwitz, etc. but also our own contributions; such as the atomic bomb, interment camps for Italian, German, and Japanese Americans, and more. We also go extensively into the treatment of colonies, both during the old colonization period and the new imperialism periods. We are well aware of the Bengal famine, French treatment of Algeria, the Congo horrors, etc. and assuming that because someone is American they are somehow inherently uneducated is just asinine. In other words, you can rest assured that when I talk to you about history I am just as educated as you are about the subject.

III) The screenshots of “stupid Americans not knowing history” go viral for the same reason that any other offensive meme goes viral. I’m tired of people assuming that because Americans tend to take criticism in stride and laugh at our own memes, it’s somehow okay to bash us endlessly. Your flag says you’re Indian; surely you would be aware of this in your own country as well? Does it not frustrate you when people make endless memes about India that are very much racist, yet your own countrymen are filled with so much self-hatred that they just let it slide time and time again? If so, why do you create such a double standard when it comes to America? I hate to agree with any white conservative nationalist but if there’s one thing they’ve gotten right from all the trash they spew it’s that America has been put to a very odd double standard. We are expected to solve problems with our superpower might, which in World War II meant dropping the atomic bombs despite the risks, knowing that if we didn’t do so, we would lose so many more lives on the islands; and criticized for not doing it fast enough (cough Soviets yelling at America for “conserving energy just to come out on top after the war” cough). Yet, when America actually goes in and does something, they are endlessly criticized for doing too much. It’s a line so fine it’s impossible to tread on it. I agree just as much as the next person that racism and many other issues are still a huge problem in our country and they need reform. However, I’m exhausted with the fact that no other country is yelled at on the Internet to the degree that America is, and that other countries are even given praise for the same things America is screamed at for. Point of this whole rant is – your statements that America would have “deserved its downfall” would have been considered extremely problematic if we changed the country name. Let’s not pretend blind hate instead of actually researching what needs to be reformed is something virtuous.

IV) The extent of the Holocaust was actually largely unknown until about 1943 or so when escaped victims finally managed to get their story out more. Suggesting that the Allies were “inefficient" instead of focusing on the horrors of the war crimes of the other side is just victim blaming at its best.

There’s a lot more I could say, but I won’t turn this into a thesis. I just hope you’re willing to change this strange obsession you have with treating anything related to decolonization as angelic and anything related to colonization as demonic. Yes, there is nuance to the subject. No history is black and white. But that doesn't mean we get to paint it all the same shade of grey.

@tpr said ^

"the NDSAP/Nazi party had nothing to do with either Socialism or the workers"

• It had everything to do with the workers and with socialism, and with nationalism as well.
  For example the idea of a Volkswagen, a car each worker could buy is a socialist idea.
  Also the idea to give all unemployed a job is socialist.

He misappropriated socialist ideas that could be aligned with his nationalist views. This was appropriation, not genuine adherence.

The Ford Model T was also intended to be the car for the masses, but that doesn't mean Ford was a socialist.

Note that n*zism drew inspiration from ideas also stemming from imperialism and colonialism —particularly the racist and anti-Semitic theories that were hugely relayed by newspapers or books in Victorian England and France during the Dreyfus Affair, theories that had already been widely disseminated in the newspapers of the time and were already strongly established.

Post-WWI German socialists were a potentially easily manipulated electorate : the absence of strong leaders and the lack of thinkers and intellectuals following the failed Spartacist coup of 1918, coupled with popular disillusionment and anger that had already cut the bond for many workers from socialist ideas, even if they were convinced otherwise. We can also note the international marginalization of real German socialist groups and thinkers in the 20s as a result of the consequences of WWI, and that it wasn't helpful for these rare groups, since their members did not have a lot to compare and exchange ideas with.

Forgot to mention this earlier.

Anybody who thinks the Axis were fine is welcome to read Japan's version of WWII.

@Rage698 stop being a jerk! I’m American, and you will be in a crapload of trouble if u say one more thing that’s Anti-American!

@tpr could you kindly stop lying about history?

• fascism did not result from socialism
• Hitler did not win the election "from" the socialists and communists. Socialists and communists voted against him (which is not the case of many conservatives).
• Hindenburg did not have to nominate Hitler. Granted, the Nazi party arrived first in the election, but they did not have an absolute majority.

@clousems said ^

Blaming colonialism on capitalism makes about as much sense as claiming that socialism is a failure because of the USSR.

That's not really a good analogy. Socialism and communism are doctrines that pre-existed the USSR. The USSR was the first large-scale attempt to implement these doctrines, and it failed.

Capitalism on the other hand is a de facto economical system, which arose in the course of history, and was only theorized by many thinkers after the fact.

Communism and socialism are ideologies, capitalism is a socio-economic historical phenomenon.