Wasn't the British Empire nearly actually out to take over the whole planet?
Wasn't the Soviet Union's ideology hanging on worldwide class struggle and subsequent Communism?
Is the claim that Nazis wanted to take over the whole world not only unsubstantiated, but also hypocritical?
Wasn't the British Empire nearly actually out to take over the whole planet?
Hudson Foster
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
twitter.com
Adrian Parker
the world conquering hegemonies of the time saw an opportunity and took it
John Williams
>Wasn't the British Empire nearly actually out to take over the whole planet?
Yes, and they got most of it before imperialism became taboo and Germany cock blocked them.
>Wasn't the Soviet Union's ideology hanging on worldwide class struggle and subsequent Communism?
the Communist International existed, but the USSR itself was more focused on internal development than conquest.
>Is the claim that Nazis wanted to take over the whole world not only unsubstantiated, but also hypocritical?
The Nazi's wanted to rule the world like Rome ruled Europe, with an iron first.
Only problem was Fascism
The British brought civilization with them when the colonized, bringing the enlightenment ideals to savage peoples.
The USSR might have been an oligarchy, but they believed in the power of the working class and wanted to unite the workers of the world.
The USA wanted international democratic capitalism and for countries to be at peace and trade with each other rather than fight over resources
The Nazi's wanted none of this. They wanted a German world with everyone being some form of slave on their hierarchy. The brought nothing but death and destruction to all ready civilized countries. They cared about racial purity, not the power of the working class. All blacks and inferiors would have been enslaved for life to whites, and even whites would be placed into their own brackets under the Germans as a form of neo-surfdom. A nazi world would have been paradise for Germans, and a nightmare for everyone else, there wa sno way they could win as the entire world would ally against them to fight the oppression.
Jace Murphy
>Nazis wanted to take over the whole world
What are you reading, a 4th grade history book?
Eli Morales
Were there non-British of their own Empire not treated second class?
Are the non-prols not now the enemy, either to be knocked down or killed off?
Did America not genocide nearly all of their own continent to make way for the Anglo-Saxon?
If it's really just a matter of "well I'm me, and they're them, and I'm pro-me and anti-them" that only makes sense.
But it seems like Germany really wanted to imitate America really, take over a continent and make themselves dominant. The Soviets by all rights were the ones planning global domination.
Jose Anderson
This is what I, and I assume many others, are taught before learning better.
Elijah Harris
Don't all the Abrahamic religions want to take over the whole planet? Why do they get a pass and nation-states don't?
Ian Morales
Why wouldn't they take over that thin strip in Western Argentina? That's just fucking autistic.
Liam Hall
I guess its supposed to be the same as the neutral area in North America? A buffer zone between the two great powers.
Eli Wood
>>soviets
>>wanting to take over the world after Trotsky's internationalist ideas failed
This is as close as I will ever come to defending Bolsheviks, but no, the Soviet Union in the 1940s and later most certainly did not want to take over the world.
Ayden Powell
>Wasn't the British Empire nearly actually out to take over the whole planet?
Why do people always assume Britain was just imperialist for the sake of it? The goals of the empire were purely financial, for economic gains hence why they didn't try to take over Europe unlike some failed 'empires'. Britain just grabbed stuff that would be fairly easy to take and would make them extremely rich.
The royal navy was primarily defensive
Isaac Adams
It's no man's land. If your plane goes down there, you're going to be devoured. Here be cannibal rugby players.
Dominic Rodriguez
>primarily defensive
In what world does having a navy larger than all the others put together constitute 'defensive'
Hunter Edwards
Did the Nazis not have friendly talks with several Arab countries? To the point where Hitler was a bit of a hero to some of them?
James Torres
It makes little sense. The Southern Andes are an amazing natural barrier, with the highest peaks outside of Nepal and Tibet.
Then again, the "North American neutral zone" makes little sense either. IRL they'd rather split that land than let it go to waste due to paranoia.
Fatherland is just a more realistic Axis alt-history scenario IMHO.
Gavin Hall
>they didn't try to take over Europe
Well, they tried but they were too weak.
Grayson Price
They mostly took over empty irrelevant shitholes tho
Leo Flores
All the accomplishments of the British lead to successful nations rising post-imperialism
There where second class citizens in the British Empire, but before the British even showed up those citizens where just stuck in tribal warfare. The British gave them better lives in return for labor, of course they peoples they colonized would not be equal to the colonialist themselves, but it was a hell of a lot better than starving to death or having your tribe wiped out in a raid.
The USSR came to light in a country that was 99% in poverty, so communism flourished there. The USSR did not want to rule the world, they just wanted to show that communism works and that other nations should fallow, but we all know how that story ended.
The USA needed to expand in order to compete with Europe. The natives where just savage people who didn't even believe in the concept of borders, and most of the time sold their territory for guns or horses. Hell they where so stupid they almost hunted the buffalo into extinction after getting western inventions. There was barely even any genocide of the Natives when the USA was established, most of them got the Spanish flue and died centuries ago
Germany wanted to expand, because it would make it more powerful, but did it in the worst way possible. They brought death and destruction when they entered Eastern Europe, not civilization, they even persecuted the Ukrainians who welcomed them to fight against the soviets. Germany did not try to avoid conflict, they encouraged it. They picked a fight with nations 4x their size and expected to win, they rejected diplomacy and wanted to take shit by force. If your trying to say they where some kind of underdog in the game of thrones, than your wrong as well, as i just said in my last post all their intentions where selfish.
Jason Kelly
are you comparing God to nationalism?
Are atheist really this stupid?
Levi Green
Sure Canada can be championed, but can Bangladesh, the poorest country in the whole world (and a former British colony)?
The Soviet Union aimed for world Communism, and actively aided the Marxist movements around the globe when permissable.
>native Americans were shitty and the US did far more with it than they ever could
And this same logic couldn't be applied to Eastern Europe overseen by Germans?
Disease respected, America made a concentrated effort to wipe out what natives remained, from Georgia, to the Dakotas, to California.
Joseph Peterson
What happened to Italy lol
Joshua Jones
For the same reasons Americans employed Indians during the Revolution, better with you than against you. You can always purge them later.
Brayden Myers
Charles Peterson
When?