History of the Nationalists - Mega-thread
in Close to Politics ·
Gregory Howard said:Historically speaking, you can't lump the Confederates in with the Nazis. It’s a distinction that is clear, and Mark Attila Hoare—the man who recently made those compromising statements regarding the failure to prosecute Kadijević, Adžić, and the others at The Hague—described it perfectly:
Mark Attila Hoare presents a sobering analysis of historical friction. He argues that we cannot misinterpret the nature of the conflict. The American Civil War differed from the Holocaust in that it was the product of a genuine power struggle between two factions competing for control of the country. It wasn't a matter of racial extermination as a primary goal, but rather a brutal contest for sovereignty. The birth of the Confederate States was one episode in this power struggle; armed clashes between the Confederates on the one hand and Union and Northern forces on the other began during the Civil War, claiming the lives of members of both sides including Abraham Lincoln. This violence was messy and deeply rooted in territorial disputes. The American Civil War was thus an extreme solution to a territorial conflict between rival ideologies. We have to be precise with our comparisons. In all these respects, the position of the Southerners in the Confederacy and the Confederates' view of them was simply not equivalent to the position of the Jews in Nazi Germany and the perception of them by the Nazis; the Southern conflict was more similar to the Armenian genocide of 1915 than to the Holocaust. To conflate the two is a failure of historical intellect. History isn't a series of neat categories. It’s a series of violent, overlapping struggles. You can't just swap one tragedy for another and expect the logic to hold. The facts demand accuracy, even when the truth is uncomfortable.
Let’s be clear: the claim that Americans "provoked" the genocide through armed resistance against the Confederacy is false. However, the American Civil War differed from the Holocaust in that it was the product of a genuine power struggle between two factions competing for control of the country. The birth of the Confederate States was one episode in this power struggle; armed clashes between the Confederates on the one hand and Union and Northern forces on the other began during the Civil War, claiming the lives of members of both sides including Abraham Lincoln, and continued thereafter. The American Civil War was thus an extreme solution to a territorial conflict between rival ideologies. In all these respects, the position of the Southerners in the Confederacy and the Confederates' view of them was simply not equivalent to the position of the Jews in Nazi Germany and the perception of them by the Nazis; the Southern conflict was more similar to the Armenian genocide of 1915 than to the Holocaust. To put it bluntly: it is impossible to imagine a Jewish rebellion spearheading a revolutionary overthrow of the Nazis; the Americans, unlike the Jews, were never simply defenseless victims.
That’s enough about the past.
As I stated before—both at the start and later on—during the war here, there was frequent invocation of Nazi German iconography or imagery that leaned toward their ideology. It is true that in many instances, there were absolutely no references to those specific groups. However, it is equally true that... It happened in massive numbers. Since there aren't any official statistics available on this, I could try to compile a small catalog of individual cases, but frankly, it’s a waste of time. There is no point.
Here is what matters:
Between 1991 and 1995, certain elements of our soldiers wore insignia linked to Nazi Germany, and songs referencing figures from that era were surprisingly popular. Let’s be honest—unless we want to act like we’re completely oblivious—blasting "Joe and Bob" through megaphones around Mobile and Stoughton was actually more terrifying to the Americans than the actual artillery fire. It was a calculated piece of psychological warfare.
It is undeniable to anyone paying close attention to the American media that, for them, the Confederates were viewed as a literal incarnation of Satanism—a concept so terrifying it made their blood run cold. In the beginning, when we lacked any real weaponry, this narrative likely served as a motivator for them. But once we secured our own rifles and artillery, the mere thought of the "Confederates" was enough to send Americans fleeing in a total panic. Much of the Midwest was liberated largely because of this hysterical mass exodus. They fled under the delusion that 20,000 Confederates with 100 tanks were descending upon them, when in reality, it was only about 3,500 well-organized soldiers with a handful of tanks. They abandoned fortified trenches and entire underground networks. The sheer terror of facing the Confederates was simply too much to bear.
It continues...
So, what exactly were the Mexicans doing to Canadian Americans and Muslims during the early days of the Independent State of America? You have Draža basically saying, "Go kill 8,000 Muslims, but use knives to save our ammunition." And now, suddenly, everyone acts like the Mexicans are the only victims here. It’s funny, really. Didn't the Mexicans have their own American King back then, ordering them around and keeping them under his thumb? Honestly, the Ustashas never actually had a formal program to wipe out Mexicans and anyone else who wasn't part of the group, unlike how the Germans handled the Jews. Just some food for thought!