Ukraine just edits old ww2 nat soc posters now 😂
(media.scored.co)
the original was such a banger
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
15 comments:
11
1 year ago
11 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+11Score on mirror
)
1 child
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
7
1 year ago
7 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+7Score on mirror
)
The new one would be a banger too if it didn't represent a state that is literally ran by a jew. It's well designed, but at the end of the day it's not much more than a half hearted appeal to banderists, who are already half retarded.
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
The dragon represents satan, who is the jews' father. Whoever put this together wasn't thinking.
Also it should be mentioned that Imperial Russia, represented by the double eagle, was sympathetic to National Socialism. Putting that symbol on this ripoff of a SS poster makes no sense at all.
Also it should be mentioned that Imperial Russia, represented by the double eagle, was sympathetic to National Socialism. Putting that symbol on this ripoff of a SS poster makes no sense at all.
>Imperial Russia, represented by the double eagle, was sympathetic to National Socialism.
They didn't exist at the same time and national socialists did not get along well with monarchists in germany, at least, by any stretch of the imagination. I don't understand. National socialism favored the russian monarchy over the ussr, and prior russian whites supported and were supported by them, but only because they had a common enemy. They were, politically, very far apart. And a minority of the whites the germans gave aid to were monarchists anyways, most of them were some variant of fascist, or just mainstream conservative.
We don't have any idea what hitlers view on it would be if it continued to exist. Because it didnt. But as a German ww1 vet and ostensibly revolutionary and anti reactionary politician, his view of it would probably be overwhelmingly negative if it had survived. Likewise, the russian monarchy might like him actually, but only for the sake of not being kaiser Wilhelm, that cordiality probably wouldn't last for long. Basically a reversal of Wilhelm's own view of Lenin.
They didn't exist at the same time and national socialists did not get along well with monarchists in germany, at least, by any stretch of the imagination. I don't understand. National socialism favored the russian monarchy over the ussr, and prior russian whites supported and were supported by them, but only because they had a common enemy. They were, politically, very far apart. And a minority of the whites the germans gave aid to were monarchists anyways, most of them were some variant of fascist, or just mainstream conservative.
We don't have any idea what hitlers view on it would be if it continued to exist. Because it didnt. But as a German ww1 vet and ostensibly revolutionary and anti reactionary politician, his view of it would probably be overwhelmingly negative if it had survived. Likewise, the russian monarchy might like him actually, but only for the sake of not being kaiser Wilhelm, that cordiality probably wouldn't last for long. Basically a reversal of Wilhelm's own view of Lenin.
It's true they didn't exist at the same time and this is a dumb oversight on my part. I said that because the remaining Whites were supporters of anyone who was against the Reds, including NS Germany. Germany and Imperial Russia were different politically and may well have been foes had they existed at the same time, although probably not to the degree either was to the communists.
>although probably not to the degree either was to the communists
I don't think they would be either. But, you'd be surprised with some examples. Namely Italian fascists vs monarchists. They hated each other extremely bitterly, much more than either hated even communists or anarchists. Although this is within the same country. 3rd positionism has a surprising history of mixing with monarchism and reaction like oil and water. Sometimes even worse than it gets along with communism. Even in germany the biggest political enemies for the nsdap were german conservative parties, not even the KPD. The beer hall putsch was shot down by Bavarian state police, and Bavaria was under the control of a very right wing and very conservative government. Hence "kameraden die rotfront und *reaktion* erschossen"
I don't think they would be either. But, you'd be surprised with some examples. Namely Italian fascists vs monarchists. They hated each other extremely bitterly, much more than either hated even communists or anarchists. Although this is within the same country. 3rd positionism has a surprising history of mixing with monarchism and reaction like oil and water. Sometimes even worse than it gets along with communism. Even in germany the biggest political enemies for the nsdap were german conservative parties, not even the KPD. The beer hall putsch was shot down by Bavarian state police, and Bavaria was under the control of a very right wing and very conservative government. Hence "kameraden die rotfront und *reaktion* erschossen"
It seems like conservatives always run interference for the left, even when they pretend to be foes. There really is nothing new under the sun.
Conservatives keep the status quo. That's all it means. It's in the name, "conserve". This can be good or bad, and it depends on where it is. In the late ussr, hardline communists were ostensibly conservative.
Reactionaries like to sit around and bitch and moan about how great things used to be, how absolutely horrible everything is, and how horrible it will be in the future. They never think of how much better things can really be. Their ideology is impossible to accomplish without an apocalypse. Even their biggest ideologue, Julius Evola, has said that it's impossible in the modern world for his ideals to come into being without a widespread collapse.
Revolutionaries are the people that want to change the world into something new and better (or worse). Fascism is revolutionary. National socialism is revolutionary. Communism is revolutionary. Fascism and national socialism may take some ideals from things in the past, but it looks forward to a better future, and we should not be tolerant of fence sitters or people who will sabatoge us at the drop of a hat because they're afraid of change.
Reactionaries like to sit around and bitch and moan about how great things used to be, how absolutely horrible everything is, and how horrible it will be in the future. They never think of how much better things can really be. Their ideology is impossible to accomplish without an apocalypse. Even their biggest ideologue, Julius Evola, has said that it's impossible in the modern world for his ideals to come into being without a widespread collapse.
Revolutionaries are the people that want to change the world into something new and better (or worse). Fascism is revolutionary. National socialism is revolutionary. Communism is revolutionary. Fascism and national socialism may take some ideals from things in the past, but it looks forward to a better future, and we should not be tolerant of fence sitters or people who will sabatoge us at the drop of a hat because they're afraid of change.
Toast message