Natsis, natsis, natsis, natsis!

Unrywbeth "gwleidyddol" sydd ddim yn ffitio unrhywle arall.
Rheolau’r seiat
Unrywbeth "gwleidyddol" sydd ddim yn ffitio unrhywle arall. Pwyswch yma i ddarllen canllawiau cyffredinol maes-e.

Postiogan Norman » Mer 22 Medi 2004 9:52 pm

Defnydd arall di-angen o Hitler ! . . .
[url=http://www.maes-e.com/viewtopic.php?t=8532]
"Give 'em a suit and they think they're Hitler!"[/url]

& hwn, sydd yn saesneg sori, ond wrach ei fod o ddiddordeb,

THE CULT OF HITLER


HITLER:
A Universal Symbol
The following article by Eugen Sorg appeared in the 29/04 issue
of the Swiss weekly Weltwoche. It describes the extra-historical
appeal of Adolf Hitler and was translated into English by
Constantin von Hoffmeister. The comments of renowned German
attorney and activist Horst Mahler are given at the bottom.
___________________________________________
HEIL HITLER!

Sixty years after his death, the mass-destroyer is more popular
than ever. In India he symbolizes resistance, in Egypt
prosperity,
in Peru discipline. The Senegalese celebrate him as a hero of
anti-colonialism and the Chinese in Hong Kong as a champion
of style.

Presumably, Hitler is the only European who, more than half a
century after his death, is still widely known around the world.
Other contemporary politicians, such as Churchill or de Gaulle,
are merely remembered in the respective linguistic or cultural
spheres; the same goes for intellectual heroes like Goethe,
Kant,
Cervantes, Shakespeare.

But only the mass-murderer Hitler is part of popular knowledge
in Korea, Japan, Namibia or Uruguay, even outside the academic
islands.

Hitler, the German, is not only the most well-known European,
but beside the religious founders Mohammed, Jesus, Buddha
or the slayers Genghis Khan or Stalin perhaps one of the most
well-known figures of all time.

These are the results of journalistic polls by five members of
our
newspaper in the Southern parts of the world. For Europeans,
who like to view their continent as the cradle of the
Enlightenment
and humanism, it is a rather embarrassing finding. And a
disconcerting if not downright shocking one. Because Hitler is
viewed in a positive light by millions of non-Europeans.

However, if one listens closely, this disconcertment slightly
wanes.
Most of the time, it is not the historical Hitler, the
politician
of hatred and extermination who is celebrated or even wished to
reappear, but a figure of fantasy with few real attributes.
Hitler
has a cathartic function, in which each culture projects its
specific experiences, preferences and problems.

In the corrupt and chaotic economies of South America, Hitler
is read as a code for order and national unity. Africans, on the
other hand, admire the strong man in him, the myth of power,
but also the enemy of the former colonialists France and
England.
Also in India, from whose history Hitler took his ideas of the
Aryans and the Swastika, even though the subcontinent does not
know any anti-Semitic traditions, Hitler is transfigured into an
aid in the national liberation struggle against the British
Crown.
However, in East Asia, Hitler is merely present as an aesthetic
influence in fashion collections, commercials and the restaurant
business, uncoupled from Nazi policies or World War II.

This is not the case in the Arabic and Iranian center of Islam.
Not only is Hitler celebrating a renaissance in the Middle East,
but the modern view of Hitler is closest to the historical one.
In
contrast to the West, the historical facts are evaluated
differently.
What is condemned as the most abominable deed of Hitler:
the attempted extermination of the Jews, is judged as honorable
politics by many in the Middle East. The only reproach:
Hitler did not finish the job.
_____________________________________________________
Horst Mahler comments:

The Jews have already lost—they just don't know it yet.
The publication of the article by Eugen Sorg in the Zürich
weekly is an important act of rebellion. Now it is important
to forge an ever-effective weapon from it.

What is so important about this article? It documents the
powerlessness of the historical perspective forced on us by
the Jews—even more: it freshens our insight into the nature
of Mephisto, which is explored in Goethe's Faust:

FAUST (to Mephisto): All right, who are you?

MEPHISTOPHELES: A part of the force that always wants
evil but constantly creates good.
[Werke: Faust. Eine Tragödie, Goethe-HA Bd. 3, S. 47]

What is the aim of the Jews?

To make the nations believe that Adolf Hitler was the
greatest criminal of human history—the devil.

What do they achieve?

That Adolf Hitler appears to the nations—from all kinds
of perspectives—as the greatest hero that the 20th Century
has seen.

Is all of humanity crazy—except the Jews?

The Jews have overlooked a minor fact: We can prove,
through their own holy books, that they worship the
cruelest murderer as their most holy one—because of his
lust to kill. This lust makes the wheat of the Jews grow,
throughout the world. Yahweh is truly Satan, the destroyer
of worlds (John 8:44).

Therefore, how can the so-called Holocaust be a reason
for the nations, which suffer under the Jews, not to love
Adolf Hitler?

Judah has finally been revealed as the wolf who ate chalk,
rolled his paw in dough and powdered it with flour.
Finally one is allowed to laugh at him.


wedi ei gael o 'Final Conflict e-zine'
( gwefan )
allan o afal dy gyrraedd dychmygol
|
Chwyliwch amdanai ar Flickr, YouTube, Ebay, Facebook, MySpace, Fotopic & Strydoedd Caerdydd!
Rhithffurf defnyddiwr
Norman
Cymedrolwr
Cymedrolwr
 
Negeseuon: 1335
Ymunwyd: Mer 10 Medi 2003 6:44 pm
Lleoliad: Porthmadog/Caerdydd

Postiogan Chris Castle » Iau 23 Medi 2004 9:28 am

Felly mae pleidiau "neo natsi" (megis y BNP a'u ffrindie) yn ychwanegu at y pethau wnaeth y plaid natsi.

Sarhad yw galw nhw Natsi arnyn nhw ond sarhad awgrymol, llawn ystyron i ddangos bod yr un amcanion sydd 'da nhw.
Rhithffurf defnyddiwr
Chris Castle
Defnyddiwr Arian
Defnyddiwr Arian
 
Negeseuon: 837
Ymunwyd: Sul 29 Medi 2002 9:15 am

Postiogan Macsen » Llun 11 Hyd 2004 12:06 pm

Mae defnydd i'r hen natsis. Yli ar hwn:

Hermann Goering a ddywedodd:Why of course the people don't want war... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along, whether it is a democracy, or a facist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship... Voice or no voice, people can always be brought to he bidding of their leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.


Fi roddodd y pwyslais (anodd gwneud pam ti'n siarad). Beth bynnag, dwi'n credu bod Hermann wedi taro'r hoelen ar ei phen fan hyn, a hynny pum deg mlynedd cyn ein sefyllfa bresennol. Pwy all beidio meddwl am y rhyfel ar derfysgwyr tra'n darllen y geiriau yna?
Rhywun yn ymosod ar y Gymraeg? - Rhannwch Why Welsh.com!
Rhithffurf defnyddiwr
Macsen
Defnyddiwr Platinwm
Defnyddiwr Platinwm
 
Negeseuon: 6193
Ymunwyd: Maw 12 Awst 2003 8:01 pm
Lleoliad: Penrhiwllan/Waunfawr

Postiogan GT » Maw 12 Hyd 2004 8:03 pm

Ahhh! Macsen yn cytuno efo Goering. Natsi, Natsi, Natsi!
A great man. He could have been Pope!
Blog Menai
Gwasanaeth i'r Gymuned
Rhithffurf defnyddiwr
GT
Cymedrolwr
Cymedrolwr
 
Negeseuon: 2774
Ymunwyd: Maw 20 Ion 2004 11:35 pm
Lleoliad: Caernarfon

Postiogan Gwyddno » Maw 19 Hyd 2004 9:26 pm

Macsen a ddywedodd:Mae defnydd i'r hen natsis. Yli ar hwn:

Hermann Goering a ddywedodd:Why of course the people don't want war... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along, whether it is a democracy, or a facist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship... Voice or no voice, people can always be brought to he bidding of their leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.

[...]

Pwy all beidio meddwl am y rhyfel ar derfysgwyr tra'n darllen y geiriau yna?


Pwy yn wir? Sicr alla' i ddim. A dyma ni ar drothwy etholiad yn America a'r Archleidr wedi gwneud union hynny.

Gyda llaw, a welodd rhywun yr erthygl yn y Guardian heddiw am Operation Cooke County (rwy'n meddwl mai dyna'r enw), sef eu hymgais i effeithio ar ganlyniad yr etholiadau trwy gael pobl o'r wlad hon i sgwennu at etholwyr mewn taleithiau ymylol yn America a trio'u darbwyllo i bleidleiso o blaid Kerry? Roedd rhai o'r atebion ddaeth nol yn ddiddorol iawn a dweud y lleiaf. Rwy'n meddwl bod modd i chi ddarllen yr holl beth ar http://www.guardian.co.uk/
Rhithffurf defnyddiwr
Gwyddno
Defnyddiwr
Defnyddiwr
 
Negeseuon: 55
Ymunwyd: Gwe 23 Ebr 2004 10:02 pm
Lleoliad: Ty ar y Mynydd

Postiogan GT » Iau 21 Hyd 2004 10:40 pm

Macsen a ddywedodd:Mae defnydd i'r hen natsis. Yli ar hwn:

Hermann Goering a ddywedodd:Why of course the people don't want war... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag people along, whether it is a democracy, or a facist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship... Voice or no voice, people can always be brought to he bidding of their leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.


Fi roddodd y pwyslais (anodd gwneud pam ti'n siarad). Beth bynnag, dwi'n credu bod Hermann wedi taro'r hoelen ar ei phen fan hyn, a hynny pum deg mlynedd cyn ein sefyllfa bresennol. Pwy all beidio meddwl am y rhyfel ar derfysgwyr tra'n darllen y geiriau yna?


Hwyrach bod hyn yn cymryd llwyth o amser i lwytho, ond mae'n cefnogi pwynt Macsen i'r dim.
A great man. He could have been Pope!
Blog Menai
Gwasanaeth i'r Gymuned
Rhithffurf defnyddiwr
GT
Cymedrolwr
Cymedrolwr
 
Negeseuon: 2774
Ymunwyd: Maw 20 Ion 2004 11:35 pm
Lleoliad: Caernarfon

Postiogan Macsen » Iau 21 Hyd 2004 11:46 pm

Mae'r propaganda gorau yn ail adrodd, drosodd a drosodd. WMD, WMD, WMD, ail lwpio yr awyren yn taro'r tyrau drosodd a drosodd (mi ydan ni i gyd wedi ei weld o ryw 500 gwaith erbyn hyn (mi welais i o ddwy waith heddiw) ), rhyfel, rhyfel, rhyfel.

Mi wnes i wneud cyflwyniad ar propaganda a'r natsis dydd mawrth (gesi 80%, diolchamofyn). Ac roedden nhw'n lot gwell am bropaganda na'r Ty Gwyn. Dyma'r nodiadau bras roeddwn i'n ceisio ei cofio wrth wneud y cyflwyniad:

Nodiadau Cyflwyniad Ifan a ddywedodd: “It is in the nature of things that propaganda cannot be a substitute for military success, but it can prepare, accompany and exploit it. The propaganda can support military campaigns by whipping up an aggressive and self-confident spirit and by heaping deliberate abuse on the enemy nation, or its leaders, to be challenged in a major combat. In any state involved in war, propaganda has to readjust itself constantly to the changing military situation. This is, to some extent, easier in a society under totalitarian control, as there the volume and intensity of propaganda can be switched on and off with unrivalled facility. Nothing succeeds like success.”
E.K.Bramsted, 1965.

→ The propaganda system in German had been preparing for the war 18 months before it began in September 1939. At this point Goebbels was not actively in support of a war, as he thought it would affect his position.

→ At the beginning of the war propaganda system shared between Goebbels, OKW (Supreme Command of the Armed Forces) and the Wehrmacht.

→ At this point the German people were not pro-war – Goebbels had to combat negative opinions.

→ Main themes of the Blitzkrieg propaganda (lightening victories: Poland, Scandinavia, Low Countries & France) were intimidation and fear – believed propaganda must not only be supported by force but should incite violent action: accent on terror.

→ In charge of this particular form of propaganda was Albert Speer, who became General Architectural Inspector of the Reich in 1937.


→ As with other aspects of the nazi’s preferred culture, architecture rejected the modern style and harkened back to the classical age. Like the party itself they were cold, inhuman and remote.

→ Hitler said: “Our enemies and our followers must realise that these buildings strengthen our authority.”

→ The architectural designs of the Second World War were drawn up for the in the assumption that Germany would win the conflict.

→ Plans for Nuremberg, Munich and Berlin were made, the latter of which would become the new capital of the world, Germania.

→ The plans were ambitious and vast; for example, the proposed archway in Berlin (see cover) would dwarf the Eiffel Tower.

→ But as the war effort waned Albert Speer turned his attentions from architecture and towards the war economy as Minister of Armaments and War Production.

→ So important was architecture as a propaganda tool that Hitler continued construction even during the pressure for rearmament and consumer goods took hold, and was planning the rebuilding of Linz as the Russians approached the devastated Berlin in 1945.

→ First German invasion in Poland Sep. 1939. German population remained to be convinced about war so propaganda campaign sought to recognise lack of widespread enthusiasm and desire for peace.

→ Early newsreels used to express a need to fight for peace – Germany once again being surrounded by her old enemies.

→ Continuous use of newsreels/feature-length war documentaries popularised Germany’s military preparedness – reinforced feeling of security/offered reassurance to reluctant German population.

→ Documentaries highlighted military prowess of German forces and their superiority over others.

→ Propaganda left German people feeling secure about war effort. Success led to more support which climaxed in 1940 with the signing of the armistice in France. In the same year Hitler tried unsuccessfully to invade Britain.

→ After failing to invade Britain the accent of Nazi propaganda changed from immediate conquest of Britain to the false hopes of the British people.

→ When Hitler spoke to the German people in 1941 about his invasion of the Soviet Union, he described the war as a great ideological struggle.

→ The Russian campaign brought about the concept of TOTAL WAR.

→ In 1943 Germany lost Stalingrad. This came as a big blow because the Nazi party had placed so much emphasis on the vital nature of capturing Stalingrad. Hitler needed to changed angle so that Stalingrad was not so pivotal to Nazi victory.

“The real objective of our offensive from its very beginning was to gain this point (Stalingrad); to have gained it – for it has been gained- crowned the operations of this summer and autumn.”
→ Goebbels changed the focus of Stalingrad to the ‘heroic sacrifice’ of the 300,000 soldiers who died there.

→ Two American analysts at the time described this as Goebbels’ ability to “organize Germany’s mourning of the defeat at Stalingrad into Wagnerian celebration, comparable only to the victory celebrations of June 1940, hoping in this way to evade a realistic appraisal of the defeat”.

→ By 1943 Goebbels realised he could not convince the country that Germany was winning the war, so instead he decided to show the country defiantly and patriotically pulling together. As part of this strategy, in 1944, in one final effort “Kolberg” was released.

→ Message that there could be victory even in death.

→ Parallels between Nazi war propaganda and war on terror.

→ Repetition of ideas, such as WMD, and the image of the plane hitting the WTC.

→ Us and ‘them’ – as with the Jews, Muslims are portrayed as suspicious and untrustworthy.

→ The architecture of the building that will replace the world trade centre is symbolic, serving a propaganda purpose.

→ Orwellian naming of the ‘Patriot Act’. Invoking of patriotism to gain people’s support.

→ As with the Iraq coalition, Hitler constantly stressed that they were under threat by an enemy which surrounded them.


Rhyfedd sut mae edefyn am beidio siarad am y natsis wedi troi'n edefyn sy'n siarad am y natsis, eh?
Rhywun yn ymosod ar y Gymraeg? - Rhannwch Why Welsh.com!
Rhithffurf defnyddiwr
Macsen
Defnyddiwr Platinwm
Defnyddiwr Platinwm
 
Negeseuon: 6193
Ymunwyd: Maw 12 Awst 2003 8:01 pm
Lleoliad: Penrhiwllan/Waunfawr

Postiogan GT » Sad 27 Tach 2004 11:04 pm

Cododd hyn drachefn tros y dyddiau diwethaf - gan pogon a Realydd.

'Rwan cyn mynd ymlaen hoffwn wneud y sylw bod Natsiaeth yn ddefnyddiol i ddadleuwr diog. Daeth Natsiaeth i fod yn yn rhyw air llaw fer am ddrygioni llwyr a chyfangwbl, felly mae cysylltu gelynion gwleidyddol efo Natsiaeth yn ddull hwylus ond diog o'u pardduo.

Cododd pogon y mater wrth ddadlau yn erbyn heddychiaeth Cardi Bach. 'Dwi'n meddwl bod codi Natsiaeth yn y cyd destun yma yn ddigon teg. Mae o hefyd yn ddigon teg codi'r mater wrth ddadlau tros fynd i ryfel yn erbyn llywodraethau unbeniaethol ac ati (er na fyddwn i yn cytuno efo'r casgliadau y byddai pogon yn dod iddynt yma).

Cododd Realydd y mater mewn cyd destun arall:

Realydd a ddywedodd:Hoffet ti ddweud wrthym pwy oedd pobl Plaid Cymru yn ei gefnogi yn WW2 GT?


Dyma esiampl o ddefnyddio Natsiaeth i bardduo.

Un neu ddau o ffeithiau hanesyddol cyn cychwyn.

(1) Roedd trwch y Blaid Geidwadol yn erbyn ymyrryd a thwf milwrol yr Almaen yn ystod y 30au. Roedd y llywodraeth Geidwadol hefyd yn erbyn ymyrryd yn filwrol
(2) Roedd y sefydliad Prydeinig at ei gilydd yn cytuno efo nhw.
(3) Un o brif hanfodion ymgyrch arlywyddol Wendell Lewis Willkie o Blaid Wereniaethol yr UDA yn 1940 oedd ei wrthwynebiad i fynd a'r UDA i ryfel yn erbyn yr Almaen.
(4) 'Roedd elfennau (llai o lawer na rhai'r Dde) o'r Chwith yn erbyn rhyfel hefyd - heddychwyr, Peace Pledge ac ati.
(5) Roedd arweinyddiaeth Plaid Cymru yn erbyn rhyfel yn y tri degau.

'Rwan o'r holl wrthwynebwyr uchod i'r rhyfel, mae Realydd yn dewis Plaid Cymru fel y prif bechaduriaid, ac hyd yn oed yn awgrymu bod PC am i'r Almaen ennill y rhyfel.

Mae hyn yn chwerthinllyd. Prin bod y Blaid yn bodoli fel plaid wleidyddol go iawn cyn y rhyfel. Etholiad 35 oedd yr olaf cyn y rhyfel. Cafodd y Blaid 2,534 neu 0.3% o'r bleidlais. Ar y llaw arall roedd y Ceidwadwyr mewn llywodraeth trwy'r 30au. Pe baent wedi ymosod ar Hitler cyn iddo adeiladu byddin fyddai Rhyfel Byd 2 erioed wedi digwydd. Roedd eu hagwedd nhw yn bwysig. Doedd yna ddim didli di o ots beth oedd agwedd yr ychydig Bleidwyr oedd o gwmpas ar y pryd.

'Roedd nifer o resymau am agwedd y Toriaid at y rhyfel. Un, yn ddi amau, oedd bod rhai ohonynt yn cytuno efo Hitler. Un arall oedd y reddf hollol ddealladwy i osgoi cyflafan debyg i un y Rhyfel Byd Cyntaf. Rheswm y llywodraeth oedd eu bod nhw'n ystyried Comiwnyddiaeth yn fwy o fygythiad, ac 'roeddynt am weld Almaen gref i wrthsefyll y bygythiad o'r Dwyrain.

'Rwan, roeddynt yn anghywir ar y tri mater, ond 'dydi o ddim yn deg i'w beirniadu fel petaent yn gwybod pob dim yr ydym ni'n ei wybod heddiw. 'Doedd gwir fwriadau ac uchelgais Hitler ddim yn amlwg yn y tri degau - yn arbennig ar gychwyn y tri degau, cymharol ychydig o dywallt gwaed oedd wedi bod, roedd cred ar y pryd y gallai'r sefydliad Almaeneg ddelio efo Hitler ac ati. Ac wrth gwrs pan ddaeth rhyfel ymladdodd miliynau o Doriaid, a phob plaid arall yn erbyn yr Almaen.

Ceisiodd elfennau o'r Chwith wneud cysylltiadau'r Ceidwadwyr efo'r Natsiaid yn fater gwleidyddol yn niwedd y 40au a'r 50au - ond nid oedd yn fater etholiadol, ac ni wnaeth Atlee ddefnydd o'r mater i gael ei ethol yn 45. Ni wnaeth y Democratiaid y peth yn fater etholiadol yn yr UDA chwaith.

Ond wedyn mae gennym ni Realydd yng Nghymru 2004. Mae o'n dal i feddwl bod agweddau llond dwrn o genedlaetholwyr di ddylanwad 70 o flynyddoedd yn ol yn fater cyn bwysiced nes ei fod gwerth ei godi mewn dadleuon hollol anghysylltiedig a'r mater.
A great man. He could have been Pope!
Blog Menai
Gwasanaeth i'r Gymuned
Rhithffurf defnyddiwr
GT
Cymedrolwr
Cymedrolwr
 
Negeseuon: 2774
Ymunwyd: Maw 20 Ion 2004 11:35 pm
Lleoliad: Caernarfon

Postiogan sanddef » Llun 29 Tach 2004 1:14 pm

Garnet Bowen a ddywedodd:
GT a ddywedodd:'Rwyt ti, yn ddigon teg, wedi tynnu sylw at debygrwydd rhwng ffasgaeth a chomiwnyddiaeth. Serch hynny byddwn yn dadlau bod dweud bod Comiwnyddiaeth yn ffurf ar ffasgaeth yn gwthio pethau yn rhy bell, ac yn ddefnydd anghysact o iaith. Wedi'r cwbl roedd pymtheg blynedd go dda o'r ganrif diwethaf yn cael eu nodweddu gan gystadleuaeth rhwng Ffasgaeth a Chomiwnyddiaeth. Mae ceisio ymdebygu'r ddau i'r graddau yr wyt ti'n gwneud yn baeddu'r dyfroedd a dweud y lleiaf.


Nid dadlau dros debygrwydd 'comiwnyddiaeth' a ffasgaeth ydw i. Dadlau ydw i fod 'na elfennau ffasgaidd cryf i lywodraeth Stalin. Dwn i ddim os ydi hi'n deg trafod Staliniaeth fel math o gomiwnyddiaeth, i ddeud y gwir.


Nazionalsozialismus=Sosialyddiaeth Genedlaethol.Fel Staliniaeth cafodd ei geni o wleidyddiaeth y chwith.what a world!
Meh
Rhithffurf defnyddiwr
sanddef
Defnyddiwr Aur
Defnyddiwr Aur
 
Negeseuon: 1608
Ymunwyd: Llun 04 Hyd 2004 9:27 am

Nôl

Dychwelyd i Cell Gymysg Wleidyddol

Pwy sydd ar-lein

Defnyddwyr sy’n pori’r seiat hon: Dim defnyddwyr cofrestredig ac 1 gwestai

cron