Was Hitler funded by big business?

[SaiGirl]

QUOTE
==============
Nazism is usually depicted as the outcome of political blunders and unique economic factors: we are told that it could not be prevented, and that it will never be repeated.
In this explosive book, Guido Giacomo Preparata shows that the truth is very different: using meticulous economic analysis, he demonstrates that Hitler's extraordinary rise to power was in fact facilitated -- and eventually financed -- by the British and American political classes during the decade following World War I.

Through a close analysis of events in the Third Reich, Preparata unveils a startling history of Anglo-American geopolitical interests in the early twentieth century.
He explains that Britain, still clinging to its empire, was terrified of an alliance forming between Germany and Russia.
He shows how the UK, through the Bank of England, came to exercise control over Weimar Germany and how Anglo-American financial support for Hitler enabled the Nazis to seize power.
This controversial study shows that Nazism was not regarded as an aberration: for the British and American establishment of the time, it was regarded as a convenient way of destabilising Europe and driving Germany into conflict with Stalinist Russia, thus preventing the formation of any rival continental power block.
Guido Giacomo Preparata lays bare the economic forces at play in the Third Reich, and identifies the key players in the British and American establishment who aided Hitler's meteoric rise.
==================
UNQUOTE

=======

=======

[SaiGirl]

The new regime had to kill off its radical / revolutionary elements.
To satisfy the conservative elites of the military and big business.
He turned on his longtime most loyal and devoted followers.
And wiped them out.

[SaiGirl]

Lifelong comrades in the Party.
People with whom Party members had bled and fought together, against the Communists.

But they had to go. Because the army, the banks and the industrialists demanded it.
And so did "foreign public opinion". Especially in Britain.

Rohm and his faction had to go.
For the good of the new Reich they were bringing into being.
And for the future of the German volk and Aryan race.
Some of their own had to be sacrificed and betrayed.

https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Hitler-kill-Ernst-Rohm

==================================================
All revolutions seem to culminate in the betrayal, isolation and liquidation of the most authentically revolutionary elements within the heart of the movement itself.
This seems to be a constant.

It's not enough to neutralize them, or try to buy them off.

If their true motives are ideological and emotional, they will refuse to "sell out" and compromise on basic principles (e.g. "breaking the shackles of interest", nationalization of industry and banking, land reform)

The real revolutionaries have to be utterly eradicated.
And the "history" rewritten.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Night- ... ong-Knives

In this respect, they were not much different than all other governments, democratic or autocratic.
The Third Reich could only marvel and admire the precedents established by Bolshevism and Stalin.

That's what made the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact ("Hitler / Stalin Pact") of 1939 so natural.

https://www.historynet.com/from-blurrin ... photoshop/

[SaiGirl]

The glory days of the Third Reich.

https://war-documentary.info/hitler-visits-rome-1938/

[pasterno]

Nazism is usually depicted as the outcome of political blunders and unique economic factors: we are told that it could not be prevented, and that it will never be repeated.
In this explosive book, Guido Giacomo Preparata shows that the truth is very different: using meticulous economic analysis, he demonstrates that Hitler's extraordinary rise to power was in fact facilitated -- and eventually financed -- by the British and American political classes during the decade following World War I.

Through a close analysis of events in the Third Reich, Preparata unveils a startling history of Anglo-American geopolitical interests in the early twentieth century.
He explains that Britain, still clinging to its empire, was terrified of an alliance forming between Germany and Russia.
He shows how the UK, through the Bank of England, came to exercise control over Weimar Germany and how Anglo-American financial support for Hitler enabled the Nazis to seize power.
This controversial study shows that Nazism was not regarded as an aberration: for the British and American establishment of the time, it was regarded as a convenient way of destabilising Europe and driving Germany into conflict with Stalinist Russia, thus preventing the formation of any rival continental power block.
Guido Giacomo Preparata lays bare the economic forces at play in the Third Reich, and identifies the key players in the British and American establishment who aided Hitler's meteoric rise.

The fact that it's on Amazon makes me suspect it's far from the truth.

But there is something off in Nazi Germany.

The more I look on it, the more ridiculous it becomes.

The narrative is something like: there was once a charismatic devil called Hitler who suddenly hypnotized millions of people to become fighting machines.

It makes me wonder:
- Where do this movements come from? (e.g. All political youth movement are heavily subsidized by rich people)
- Could it be that they betrayed their donors?
- Hitler as the front man for whom? Which rich donors?

From what I have seen from politics in "demoracy" there are always rich donors, rich sympatizers, crowd funding dinners, rich NGOs paying for it.

Luther was a vehicle for the German Aristocracy agains Rome. Lenin and Trotksy spent time in Switzerland and New York. Kim Yong Un had it's eduation in the UK. Why would you spend all that time abroad if there aren't rich donors?

I don't know exactly what here happened. But i'd like to investigate more the money view.

All these narratives around the Hitler man seem a bit weird, with beer hall rumbles and stolen elections.

I do't believe in a fight against communism as the communists were a proven sponsored western movement.

I suspect it's just the same as we see now in Ukraine.

Europe is being impoverished over a fake war with Ukraine. Europe was impoverished back in 1940.

The anglo americans always played divide and conquer.

[SaiGirl]

Germany's motives were the simple facts of geography versus demographics.

[SaiGirl]

A Third Reich perspective.

[napoleon]

https://www.allreligionsareone.org/book ... clarke.pdf

National Socialist ideology was also deeply imbued with ideas drawn from
radical religious imagination. The belief in a Jewish world conspiracy, ostensibly backed by the notorious invention The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, provided the image of a demonic enemy. Nazi anti-Semitism was rooted in this
apocalyptic demonology, which blamed the Jews for all ills, including liberalism, communism

https://www.allreligionsareone.org/book ... clarke.pdf

Heinrich Himmler and his SS research departments, Ariosophy provided a model case-study in Nazi religiosity. The continuity of such
beliefs through the Third Reich, with its eschatological vision of genocide, clearly demonstrated the irrelevance of a Marxist analysis based
on a critique of capitalism, economic factors and class interest. Only
religious beliefs and myth could explain the success of an ideology
concerned with special racial and esoteric knowledge, the belief in a
nefarious world-conspiracy of scheming Jews and other racial inferiors, and the apocalyptic promise of group salvation in a millenarian
apotheosis of the German nation.

[pasterno]

Germany's motives were the simple facts of geography versus demographics.

I don't buy this.

[SaiGirl]

His views changed over time.