How true is the "stab in the back" theory? Wikipedia says that it was all a myth and the German army really was resoundly defeated and the jews and communists that organised the strikes and revolutions had nothing to do with the defeat.
How much of it is true?
Jews served in the army at higher rates than the general population. And there was major civil unrest in all the major powers. You'll notice it was Russia that broke first, and they were on the opposite side.
It's all a myth. Communists and Jews didn't even start this revolution.
That Jew is lowkey stacked
>the jews and communists that organised the strikes
Stop trusting /pol/ memes.
Germany crapped out a few months before France would have. If France had lost, they'd have the same myth.
Heck, the war that the stab in the back myth is most applied to is the Vietnam war. It's just something bellicose powers say when they lose, especially when they couldn't really justify a war in the first place.
Other countries had collapsed from major civil unrest, most of Germany's other allies had already capitulated and the Spring Offensive, which was German High Commands last real attempt at actually trying to win the war, had been a failure.
>If France had lost, they'd have the same myth.
That actually happened during the Fall of France
It's a myth.
However, it's not surprising that soldiers - and even officers - bought into it, because at a tactical scale Germany was holding out reasonably well. If you had handed Germany resources, then they could have kept going for quite a while. Germany wasn't beaten at a tactical scale, Germany was beaten at a strategic scale. And that scale is too large to be perceptible to the individual soldier. Germany would have been tactically beaten too past that point, but the people in charge were smart enough to realise that and avoided further deaths and possibly suffering the same fate as the leadership in Russia due to domestic uprisings.
that's a necklace, not cleavage.
Socialists and Communists agitating the populace and leading work stoppages in a deliberate (and successful) attempt to sabotage the Imperial German war effort is historical fact.
Additionally it is also a matter of historical fact that the vast majority of the German Socialist leaders of the time were Jews.
I hold that Imperial Germany was 'stabbed in the back', but by Socialists that just happened to be Jews.
Rather then the more common anti-semitic view that it was 'stabbed in the back' by Jews that just happened to be Socialists.
yeah but what would have happened if versailles had not been signed? I doubt the western allies could have successfully mounted an invasion of Germany, not without many more years and losses, which I doubt they were willing to give. The new government was determined to sign a peace treaty with really shitty terms, if they had held out longer maybe they could have gotten a more neutral or favourable armistice. Germans had already agreed to Wilson's fourteen points, but the French wanted to be assholes towards Germany.
>French Jews forced France to surrender to Nazi Germany
how do people come up with this shit seriously?
Everything you said is wrong. Please name all those Jewish socialist leaders.
looks like tits to me.
The myth, or you think France was actually stabbed in the back?
It is true that right wing elements were interested in treating with the Germans.
people love passing the buck.
You don't understand anything. The treaty was signed six months after the armistice. There wasn't any war when it happened.
I meant a similar phenomenon happened after the defeat of France in 1940
This is from Julian Jackson's Fall of France, 2004:
"Within France the search for scapegoats began at once. The immediate aftermath of defeat saw the emergence of a whole literature of accusation and self-flagellation with titles such as The Gravediggers of France (by André
Géraud), J’Accuse! The Men Who Betrayed France (by André Simon), The Truth about France (by Louis Lévy). One book, published in 1941, was even entitled Dieu a-t-il puni la France? [Has God Punished France?]. The answer was, of course, yes. Depending on ideological preference, people blamed politicians or generals, Communist agitators or Fascist fifth columnists, school-teachers or industrialists, the middle classes or the working classes. They blamed individualism, materialism, feminism, alcoholism, dénatalité,
dechristianization, the break-up of the family, the decline of patriotism, treason, malthusianism, immoral literature"
Rebelling against a government that had thrown millions of your countrymen into the meatgrinder isnt "stabbing in the back" any more than the Tzar being disposed.
It is from the perspective of reactionaries and revanchists.
It's funny how they never mention Kiel mutiny - the event that started it all.
And after the war, they started mythicizing the resistance as a huge thing, while hysterically scapegoating "collaborators".
The French have one hell of an inferiority complex.
This sort of phenomenon follows abject defeat anywhere (you should see some of the Japanese post-war literature, try Takeuchi Yoshimi's What is Modernity?, it's a riot) but only the ones blaming Communist agitators and Fifth Columnists really qualify as stab-in-the-back theories.
>Anti-semetic army officials insist on a jewish census to prove jewish draft dodging
>Cencus actually proves a high level of enlistment
>Never publish the findings to the public
en.m.wikipedia.org
The "Stab in the back" narrative was complete bullshit scapegoating. The German population was starving, their armies had been defeated, and their last gasp of an offensive to try and end the war before the Americans could arrive in force failed. They had already been pushed back behind the Hindenburg Line, and the Entente had largely stopped any major offensives to prepare in force for the Summer 1919 Offensives, which would have been spearheaded by the fresh American Army in force. Germany had no hope to win the war by 1918, and they had no way to stop the Entente in the coming year, to say nothing of the Italian Army about to send ITS millions through Austria into Bavaria. In the face of all that, and a Bushido-esque plan to have the HSF sally to go "Die with honor", the German Navy mutinied and kicked off the whole revolution.
In short, anyone who tries to say that Germany could have won WW1 but for perfidious Jewry is either incredibly ignorant about the situation in Germany in 1918 or intentionally dishonest.
Partially true. Germany had lost the war in 1918. France and Britain had successfully withstood the Spring offensive, which was Germany's last real hope for victory. German resistance had near collapsed during the hundred days offensive. However, they still held a sizeable chunk of French territory, and the allies had failed to pursue them quickly enough to break them entirely, meaning that they still had armies capable of operating effectively on the western front. With the arrival of ever more American troops on the continent, Germany's defeat was a foregone conclusion.
However, it still would have taken many more months of fighting if Germany hadn't agreed to the armistice and accepted the peace treaty.
The eventual peace treaty had worse terms than Germany had been expecting when they agreed to the armistice, but they accepted it because social unrest was becoming increasingly bad in Germany, and the spectre of the Russian revolution loomed over the German government. Maybe the Germans wouldn't have tried to renegotiate on the threat of calling of the armistice, risking sacrificing more of their soldiers in order to wring a few concessions out of the allies, but then again they'd hardly baulked at shedding German blood so far. What really scared them was the prospect of a revolution - which communists were definitely working to bring about - which would see them ending up in front of a firing squad like the Tsar and his family.
So maybe if the situation back home had been more stable, the German negotiators at Versailles would have felt more comfortable trying to leverage what few advantages they had left (their continuing occupation of French land, for example) to achieve something better than the abject humiliation they received. But that's as much truth as the stab in the back theory has.
>the war that the stab in the back myth is most applied to is the Vietnam war
>implying it's a myth that the liberal media lost the war for the US.
>start losing war badly
>your people rise up because you've completely fucked everything
>finalize the peace treaty while your people are still rebelling
>your successors blame them for rebelling against you instead of you for fucking everything up
Willy played everyone
Pushers of the myth on here, or at least the """"info""""graphics they spam, tend to firstly overstate the influence of Jews; not only deliberately conflating the Spartacist uprising and the Novemberrevolution in order to increase the pool of important Jews, but also downplaying the influence of key non-Jewish participants or simply fabricating a Jewish ancestry for them, for example Karl Liebknecht. Secondly, they vastly understate the significance of the naval mutinies, both in themselves and also the key role that the naval mutinies had in fomenting widespread civil unrest.
I have posted previously in one of the many re-runs of this thread concerning the timeline of the end of the war from late September, when the OHL impressed upon the civilian government the desperate need to surrender, to the forced abdication of Wilhelm and surrender. With the further reading I have done I would be much more damning towards the OHL, Hindenburg and Ludendorff, who seemed to great lengths to distance themselves from the peace process, seemingly in order to survive the war with dignity and reputations intact.
Members of the German Spartakusbund:
Karl Liebknecht German(?)
Rosa Luxemburg JEW
Clara Zetkin JEW
Leo Jogiches JEW
Paul Levi JEW
Ernst Toller JEW
Eugene Levine JEW
Kurt Eisner JEW
Gustav Landauer JEW
Erich Muehsam JEW
>Spartakusbund
Ah, the old "Spartacists were responsible for the whole German Revolution" meme. You do know that the Sparacists weren't rebelling against the Kaiser, but against the republican revolutionary government that had just disposed the Kaiser, right?
Why did you remove the Ben Garrisson watermark?
Don't have to always be the kikes
The 1940 French stab in the back myth is about commies (since they loved the Nazis until 1942 due to the German-Soviet pact)
They were rebelling against the social democrats under the influence of the Judeobolsheviks. Your point is irrelevant
>Communists didn't started the communist revolution
Come on, I know we can't blame the Jews for everything, but you take it way too far.
>Judeobolsheviks
pic related
>rest of the post
So...they weren't affecting the war effort at all, then? Since the war was over?
Not Jews but commies.
You see, back then the USSR was an ally of the Nazi Germany, so the French Communist Party told the communists to sabotage the war effort.
It's true, though. The German Revolution was started spontaneously by the High Seas Fleet in Kiel as a reaction to finding out their admirals were going to willingly go off and get the navy sunk to preserve their honor.
Nice fake image
>Five of the seven members of the first Soviet politburo were Jewish
Vladimir Lenin - jew
Leon Trotsky (Lev Davidovich Bronstein) - jew
Grigory Zinoviev - jew
Lev Kamenev - jew
Joseph Stalin - sandnigger
Grigori Sokolnikov - jew
Andrei Bubnov - Russian
The point is that there was massive jewish socialist agitation against the war effort.
The fuck there was, the Jews actually had a voluntary enlistment rate of like 80%. The Jews had backed the Great War en masse.
You're a deluded Germanboo
By November 11, the Germans had basically been expelled from pre-war French territory
The only part of French soil they still controlled was Alsace Lorraine and they'd have lost it in the negociation anyway
>Jews served in the army at higher rates than the general population
No. But they volunteered more than regular germans.
>Lenin - ONE Jewish GRANDMOTHER
>Rabidly atheist
>Trotsky
>Renounced Faith publicly
>Assisted in the creation of the League of the Militant Godless.
Wil /pol/tards please fuck off.
They can't. Rmemeber, they actually subscribe to the Nazi ideas. Judaism is a race, a bloodline, that somehow gives you instinctive traits. You can't "renounce" judaism. Having a Jew ancestor means you're a Jew.
>Jewishness is an ethnicity not just a religion :^)
just going to save the time and post that for them because you know they're going to argue it in full seriousness.
Good goyim
These aren't the leaders of revolution.
Here are the real leaders:
Friedrich Ebert
Philipp Scheidemann
Gustav Noske
They are also responsible for putting down the spartacist revolt.
>implying it's a myth that the liberal media lost the war for the US
alright user, convince me that the US could have won the Vietnam war if not for "the liberal media"
While you're at it explain to me what winning actually means, because the US government never did.
what even is the myth in the first place? How did they believe jews stabbed Germany in the back?
The usual incarnation is that the German army was never defeated, and were still sitting in parts of France and Belgium, not pre-war territory. It was only the loss on the homefront, fomented by Jews, that cost Germany the war.
rykov, tomsky and bukharin were non-jews on the politburo. Solonikov was only on the politburo for two years. You're either misleading or deluded
>Depending on ideological preference, people blamed politicians or generals, Communist agitators or Fascist fifth columnists, school-teachers or industrialists, the middle classes or the working classes. They blamed individualism, materialism, feminism, alcoholism, dénatalité,
>dechristianization, the break-up of the family, the decline of patriotism, treason, malthusianism, immoral literature"
Sounds like a certain Veeky Forums board
Lenin wasnt jewish. Why do faggots keep saying this?
Rosa Luxemburg was actually against the revolution and the only person who actually wanted it was Liebbknecht, a goy.
you should try reading the wikipedia article instead of just look at the little breakdown of the event in the upper right hand corner
i realize you say first politburo, in which case you're right
being a jew is an ethnicity
Clara Zetkin wasn't Jewish, and most of those people you listed were irrelevant literally whos? Liebknecht and Luxembourg were the main leaders. Also leaves out important non-Jewish leaders like Wilhelm Pieck, August Thalheimer, and Franz Mehring.
Not to mention that without Lenin, Germany's WW1 position would have been way worse than it was; the October Revolution and the rumbles leading up to it really did a number on Russia, the defeat of whom gave the Germans a new chance.
Yeah, he only had one Jewish grandparent. Even under the Nuremberg laws that would not make him Jewish
At least the germans got their wish in the next world war
like pottery posting that straight after my post here
Jews controlled all of the governments involved through the central banking and international finance systems as well as their infiltration of bureaucracies and political parties. Jews started the war. Jews profiteered off the war by selling materiel to both sides. Jews determined the winners and losers. The Marxist terrorist groups were Jewish-founded, funded, and led. Jews controlled the media and academia to spread their lies to manipulate the masses and cover up their crimes. Most countries in the world have been largely under the control of Jewish cabals for centuries. If a country steps out of line they start a war and annihilate it. They often start wars just to make money financing them.
Oh my god
Is that supposed to be Rosa Luxemburg?
>muh vague and unfounded illumainati conspiracy theories
if you think any one group has that much power, you are retarded
Doesn't hold up. The German Revolution was almost entirely led by soldiers and sailors who wanted to end the war.
The communist uprising was a small part of the revolution after the German Empire had been dissolved.
German revolution =/= Sparticist Uprising. The revolution was well underway when communists took up arms in Berlin and Munich.
The war was over as well.
The fact the fucking Jews and commies tried to take over the nation after the war, instead of helping to rebuild the nation, pretty much fits the definition of being "stabbed in the back" in my book.
Much in the same way that Nigbama and the Marxist dems mandated open faggotry, trannies, and females in combat units in the U.S. military after YEARS of fighting in A-stan and Iraq.
Fuck off, Jews.
The German army was falling apart in 1918, they were getting overrun in the Hundreds Day Offensive, soldiers were deserting from regiments to try to scavenge for foods, etc. etc.
I very much doubt that it can be said that they weren't loosing at the tactical level, given that how badly they were being beaten in the Hundeds Day offensive.
>mfw the Krauts decide to fight on into 1919.
>mfw Bavaria becomes the 49th state.
>spread retarded stormfag propaganda
>get called for it
>y-y-you're a jew!
>spread Jew propaganda
>get called out for it
>y-y-you're a stormfronter!
Are you sure you are on the right board? This is not the one with cuckporn and ebin Jew-memes.
Germany went to war against the whole world and lost.This is obviously the jewish people's fault.
t. Adolf Hitler
>saying that the german revolution started by sailors is "jew propaganda"
I guess any minimal historical knowledge is jewish propaganda to a /pol/tard, since it is enough to refute their retarded conspiracies.
Then what are you doing here?
Guess so, since you can't seem to accept the fact that the Jews were responsible for corrupting Russia, exterminating MILLIONS, and trying to do the same in Germany.
>Guess so, since you can't seem to accept the fact that the Jews were responsible for corrupting Russia, exterminating MILLIONS, and trying to do the same in Germany.
That's some pretty flamboyant goal shifting, but indulging you for a moment the Germans were responsible for shipping dissidents like Lenin back into Russia. I feel I need to remind you though this thread is about the stab in the back myth.
>Guess so, since (...)
Moving the goalpost. You've been proven wrong regarding the german revolution, stormfag. But just for fun, let's see your other lies.
>Jews were responsible for corrupting Russia
False. First because the majority of the bolsheviks weren't jews (en.wikipedia.org
>exterminating MILLIONS
Sure, and both jews and communists were particularly targeted in stalin's purges. Jews must be pretty retarded to put an antisemite as leader of their conspiracy.
>and trying to do the same in Germany
German communists weren't leninists (especially Rosa). Of course, communists did want a revolution, since it's inherent to the ideology, but that's not a conspiracy.
>the stab in the back myth.
Who do you think "stabbed them in the back"?
The Jews, and those idiots in the German nation that supported and defended them.
Same thing is going today. Jews are trying to flood Europe, and the U.S., with non-whites in order to destroy their culture and way of life.
And thus the infopics start. You /pol/tards are so fucking retarded.
You haven't proved anything "wrong".
Jews aren't the majority in ANY nation they infect, and they know that, which is why they use divide and conquer tactics, and degeneracy, to gain allies from within....all the while trying to remain an innocent bystander on the sidelines.
>Who do you think "stabbed them in the back"?
Nobody "stabbed them in the back". Germany lost the war because it lost the war, and their army was crumbling, their people starving in the streets, and the social unrest wasn't some Jewish plot, it was the fact that people had been living on short rations for years and the news from the front was all bad.
Go away, leftypol fag.
Nobody buys your bullshit here.
>You haven't proved anything "wrong".
I have though. It is a historical fact that sailors started the german revolution.
>Jews aren't the majority in ANY nation they infect, and they know that, which is why they use divide and conquer tactics, and degeneracy, to gain allies from within....all the while trying to remain an innocent bystander on the sidelines.
>if jews are the majority in a political movement, the conspiracy is proven, if they aren't, the conspiracy is also proven
Nice unfalsifiable conspiracy, retard.
No, you haven't.
Go back to your leftypol circlejerk.
Cool retort. Try an argument next time.
Can you disprove the idea that the first group to rebel was the German Navy? Failing that, can you prove the navy was spurred to rebel by Jewish and/or Communist agents?
>And thus the infopics start.
>Attempting a banwagon fallacy in a place where nobody will jump on your wagon
wew
>using high school debate club terms
Your teacher would be so proud!
4spoopy8me xd!
Nobody stabbed the military in the back. German army morale collapsed during the hundred days. In the last days of September the OHL moved to impress upon the civilian government the importance of a peace declaration, fully a month before the naval mutinies that kicked off the unrest at the end of October which happened in response to the naval command's plans for a suicide cruise.
If anything Ludendorff and Hindenburg seem to have, during October, attempted to backpedal and extricate themselves and the OHL from the peace process. It would not be unreasonable to think, given the timeline, that they were trying to absolve themselves of potential blame post-war, but they likely caused delays to the peace process while morale was plummeting.
See
I think it's pretty clear what winning means: stopping North Vietnam from invading the South. Same as in the Korean war.
One of the biggest fallacies in the narrative surrounding the Vietnam war was that the US was fighting an entrenched insurgency from the rural population of South Vietnam, which could never be defeated short of killing every peasant in south Vietnam. In reality, almost all communist operations were directed by the North, and as the war drew on they were increasingly forced to use North Vietnamese soldiers rather than South Vietnamese insurgents. They were a regular army (even if they used guerrilla tactics a lot), equipped with modern weaponry thanks to the USSR. The South Vietnamese peasants mostly hated the communists - the only reason the Vietcong was able to operate freely in the South Vietnamese countryside was because they ruthlessly terrorised the rural South Vietnamese, slaughtering entire villages on the suspicion that they were aiding the South Vietnamese government (of course, this doesn't mean that the South Vietnamese peasants particularly liked their government, or the Americans. Mostly they just wanted everyone to fuck off and leave them alone to grow their crops).
As for whether America could have achieved a cessation of hostilities by North Vietnam, and the liberal media's role in events, I think the most important moment in the war to look at is the Tet offensive.
The Tet offensive was a devastating failure for the Communist forces. It ripped the guts out of the Vietcong, the actual insurgency. The Tet offensive had been intended to be the start of a general uprising in the south. Instead, it totally failed to gain control of the cities, and what ground they gained in the countryside was lost over the next few months with heavy casualties. The morale of the North Vietnamese leadership took a heavy blow after they realised that instead of the expected knockout blow, their military objectives had completely failed and their forces in the south had suffered massive casualties. The Vietcong was basically destroyed as an effective fighting force (from that point on, almost all combat operations by the communists were conducted by North Vietnamese regular troops).
But the US media presented Tet as the turning point AGAINST the America forces. Most of the conversation on this seems to focus on the negative effect the US media had on American morale and by extension the willingness of congress to continue funding the war, which is true, but it leaves out the far more important effect it had on the North Vietnamese leadership. Just at the point where they were coming to grips with the fact that they had suffered a major military defeat, and in the broader sense that their forces were totally outclassed by the Americans, they realised that they had scored a major propaganda victory.
The US media TOLD the North Vietnamese government that they had a path to victory after all. For example, in February '68 Walter Cronkite went on air and said the following:
"We are mired in a stalemate that could only be ended by negotiation, not victory."
That's just feels-over-reals goalpost shifting bullshit. The Dolchstoßlegende, the stab-in-the-back myth, is a defined term. You can't stab the army on the frontline in the back if there is no frontline because the war already ended two fucking months ago.
Which basically amounts to 'it's time to give up.' He said this, on air, in a broadcast that he knew would be available to the communist world. The narrative of the war falsely portrays the communists as fanatics who would have thrown as many men as necessary against the Americans to drive them out of Vietnam. But the North Vietnamese leadership, although highly committed, weren't irrational. They weren't fighting against a vastly larger enemy in the vague hope that after thirty years of slaughter they might force the Americans out. The US media fucking told them that all they had to do was hang in for a little while longer and America would withdraw.
Nixon began withdrawing troops in '69, only a year after Tet, and the writing was on the wall long before that thanks to the US media's negative coverage of the war. The North Vietnamese knew that all they had to do was keep the pressure up. Costly in terms of lives for North Vietnam, yes, but a cost with a visible reward in sight.
Of course, we only found out the exact casualty figures for the Vietcong and the internal workings of the North Vietnamese leadership decades afterwards, when the cold war ended and relations between Vietnam and America began to normalise. But by the time historians started to go over the North Vietnamese records and interview the surviving North Vietnamese leaders, the narrative of the brave independent media standing up to the lying government had already been the established orthodoxy for a long time.
Would the US have won if the media had backed the Vietnam war? Who knows - history is never certain. But if Walter Cronkite had gone on air in February '68 and said something along the lines of "We have not been given the easy victory that was promised by our government, but we should remember that no war was ever won without blood, nor without the full commitment of the nation' they would certainly have had a very good shot at it.
>You're a deluded Germanboo
>Germanaboo
Germany was completely responsible for starting the war btw.
It's just a fact that almost all of the German line at the time of the armistice was still on French (or belgian soil) - and that's if we count Alsace Lorraine as German soil. Granted, Germany didn't have much French territory left, but it still controlled Sedan for example, and the important point was that their armies were still fighting on French land rather than German. Not to mention the fact that Germany still controlled more than half of Belgium.
*since you can't seem to accept my delusional conspiracy theory
Fixed it.
>
>Go away, leftypol fag.
>Nobody buys your bullshit here.
Lol, nobody here is buying the bullshit you are peddling, just how delusional are you?