Is it Really the Germans’ Fault? A Response to Colin Liddell’s Anglo Arrogance

Below I am posting an expanded version of a comment I left over at Affirmative Right in response to Colin Liddell’s tiresome and now all-too-familiar rant against Hitler, Germany, and so-called “1488ers”.

Hitler as an Expression of German “Bad Form”
by Colin Liddell

Today we enter “The Twelve Days of Hitler,” the period between the anniversary of the birth of the Adolf Hitler (20th April) and the anniversary of the announcement of his death (1st May). It’s a bit like Black History Month for 1488ers, but many other people also take an interest. . .

Hitler’s extremism, his lack of proportion, and his inability to find balance are sometimes explained – or justified – by referring to the “brutal” peace of Versailles that involved heavy financial reparations and the loss of colonies and much territory. The English economist John Maynard Keynes famously described this as a “Carthaginian Peace,” comparing it to the extremely harsh terms the Romans imposed on their defeated Punic rivals:

“Two rival schemes for the future polity of the world took the field,—the Fourteen Points of the President, and the Carthaginian Peace of M. Clemenceau. Yet only one of these was entitled to take the field; for the enemy had not surrendered unconditionally, but on agreed terms as to the general character of the Peace.”

In this view, Hitler’s reckless and doomed career of revenge, geopolitical over-ambition, and military overstretch were all forced on him by this supposedly unjustified national humiliation. But, actually, Germany had been defeated militarily – relatively fairly and squarely – and was hardly the first beaten country to be subjected to onerous peace terms, which, in effect, were imposed rather laxly, as proved by Hitler’s subsequent career.

My response: The biggest scandal of the First World War was the successful Jewish lobbying of America to enter the war on Britain’s behalf as quid pro quo for the Balfour Declaration in which Britain illegally signed over Palestinian land to the Jews. This source of Germany’s defeat was anything but the result of “fair and square” dealing.

More interestingly, Germany’s path to war in WWI has similar characteristics to its path to war in WWII, and even to post-war German history – the same sweaty mania and tendency to overdo things – suggesting that something inherent in the nature of Germans was the cause of WWII, rather than merely the petty vindictiveness of Monsieur Clemenceau at Versailles. Just as Hitler was pushing too fast and too far in the 1930s, so too was Kaiser Wilhelm in the years leading up to 1914. There too we see the same indelicate haste, arrogance, and insensitivity, something that is also mirrored in the present age with Angela Merkel and her über-signalling on migrants. . .

Just as Kaiser Wilhelm’s shrill, overwrought Germanism was the driving force behind the horrors of WWI, so Hitler’s unhinged revanchism was the factor leading to WWII. 

Many 1488ers like to share the meme about the “Jewish declaration of war on Germany” in 1933. This is a story from the Daily Express newspaper reporting on a Jewish campaign to boycott Germany. Obviously that didn’t work out, as the German economy was doing better than ever several years later. . .

My response: This is correct, but it glosses over the fact that the Jewish campaign to boycott Germany was merely the first shot in their campaign to bring Germany to its knees, as Germany’s subsequent rape and dismemberment shows.

Also, the Jews were in a poor position to persuade other “Goys” to fight Germany. In the wake of WWI, pacifism was strong, with powerful supporters across the West. It was only Hitler’s excessive exploitation of this anti-war feeling that finally rekindled the will of Europeans to resist further German expansion, and an all-out invasion of Poland in conjunction with the Soviet Union that forced the reluctant hand of the Western allies. In short, Hitler had plenty of options and was making great progress, when his “inner German” got the better of him and madness ensued. 

My response: The Western Allies had nothing to gain and everything to lose by going to war with Germany a second time. Hitler had no designs on the West and simply demanded a free hand in the east. If England and France genuinely cared about the violation of Poland’s sovereignty, why did they declare war on Germany but not the Soviet Union? Oh, and by the way, how did that Anglo-French “war guarantee” to Poland actually turn out for the Polish people?

The Second World War was the greatest catastrophe in Western history (as the subsequent events up to this day show all too clearly). The Western Allies should never have interfered with Germany’s freedom of action in the east. We would be immeasurably better off today had the West never declared war upon Germany a second time — or, given that it did — had the Germans won the war.

See the following William Pierce classics:

What Really Started World War Two (https://nationalvanguard.or…

Media Myths (http://williamlutherpierce….


Below is the debate between me and Liddell that continued in the comments section of Liddell’s article “Hitler as an Expression of German Bad Form”. My replies are in bold.

Liddell: As a typical Jew obsessive, all you see are Jews as factors. The fact is that Germany’s vacillating submarine warfare policy had more to do with America’s entry into the war than anything else.

In 1917 the Germans, in a desperate bid to break the British, who were pushing them hard in the West and pushing them into starvation by blockading their ports, resumed unrestricted submarine warfare, a red line that they were pretty sure would trigger the Americans into war. They decided that the chance of breaking Britain was worth the risk. Bad decision, Germans!

Also, let’s assume that the Jews were as powerful and influential as you claim, why then did the Germans not use them as a weapon of war, like you claim the British did? After all they, through their Turkish ally, actually controlled Palestine and could dangle it as a tasty carrot to “International Jewry.” The Brits didn’t get their hands on that valuable piece of real estate until 8 months after the Yanks entered the war. Are you literally trying to say the Germans were as big an idiot as you?

Then there’s this: apart from those Jews with specific business interests in a British victory, Jews in America would largely side with the Kaiser and the Austrian Emperor whose empires had ten times as many of their fellow Jews as the relatively Jew-free British Empire, which was also allied with the one major Empire that was still actively discriminating against Jews, namely the Russian Empire.

Now, calmly put down the Jew and step away from it before you harm your ability to think any more.

My response: Accusing someone of being a “Jew-obsessive” is just facile name-calling. While the Jews certainly deserve blame for the part they played in the Second World War, the bigger and more important question is who is to blame amongst the non-Jewish participants in the conflict, and on this front, your analysis is sorely lacking.

Liddell: It’s not facile calling you a “Jew obsessive.” You’re from National Vanguard, one of the most Jew-obsessed websites ever. Jew obsession influences your every waking moment.

This is the precise reason your analysis of WWI and WWII is so shitty. Because you have to thread everything through your Jew-obsession lace hole.

As for the non-Jewish participants in the conflict, yes, it is shocking how Poland forced itself under the feet of the German army in September 1939. I hope those poor German soldiers were not too traumatised by the experience.

My response: Re-read my last comment about who is to blame amongst the non-Jewish participants in the war and then tell me who’s obsessing about Jews. My contention is that blame for the Second World War and the subsequent implosion of the West lies squarely with England, France, and the United States, not with Germany.

Now re-read my comment before that referring to the disastrous Anglo-French “war guarantee” to Poland. I don’t blame the Poles for getting run over by the Germans before being handed over to the Soviets; I blame England and France for that nightmare, and I’m dumbfounded as to why this needed to be explained a second time.

Liddell: The war guarantee to Poland came out of Hitler fucking with the map of Europe for the previous few years. The problem was not British and French assertiveness as you wrongly think, but the lack of it.

A zero tolerance response to Germany breaking its first treaty obligation would have made Hitler back down and have avoided WWII and the mess we are in now.

Merkel’s madness reminds us that the final solution to the German problem is something like the Morgenthau Plan. It is good to see that a separate East German consciousness still survives. Maybe that, along with Bavaria’s strong regional character, could be the basis of a final solution to the German Problem.

My response: Endorsing a Morgenthau Plan as a “final solution to the German Problem” is perhaps the most unhinged and self-discrediting statement a putative White advocate has ever made. It does lend credence to the notion, however, that the blame for the Second World War and the subsequent implosion of the West does not lie solely or perhaps even principally with the Jews.

Liddell: What’s wrong with Germany being divided into a few smaller states? You just sound hysterical.

My Response: I can only assume you’re merely pretending to be dense at this point. Regardless, I believe that about concludes this exchange and I appreciate you showing your hand.

* * *

Source: Affirmative Right

Previous post

Homeless Jack on the Sacred Swastika

Next post

Contemptible White People


  1. Les
    26 April, 2019 at 7:44 am — Reply

    Britain itself broke the Versailles Treaty. There was a general disarmament clause whereby all signatories were supposed to reduce their armed forces. The UK didn’t comply – https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7937

    • 27 April, 2019 at 10:24 am — Reply

      Among the victorious powers of World War I, only Britain and Japan ratified the Treaty of Versailles. The French parliament rejected the treaty, with some members calling it vengeful. The fact that Germany was expected to abide by the terms of the treaty while France was not, and Britain did not, created an untenable situation. On 23 March 1933 Hitler stated before the German pariliament: “Germany has been waiting years for other nations to fulfill their promises to reduce armaments. We would gladly refrain from increasing our own if the others would agree to radical reduction of theirs.”

      It was right after a decision to enlarge the French armed forces that Hitler decided that Germany should ignore the treaty too. http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com/2010/11/did-hitler-violate-treaty-of-versailles.html

  2. 27 April, 2019 at 10:17 am — Reply

    Hitler was not motivated by “unhinged revanchism.” His actions in 1939 had no direct relationship with the Treaty of Versailles. He was not pursuing any agenda of revenge.

    Colin Liddell notes that Hitler’s actions don’t seem rational. Well, that’s a good indication that Colin Liddell doesn’t have enough information to understand why Hitler would do what he did.

    Adolf Hitler in 1939 was reacting to provocations and dangers that presented themselves at that time.

    The Treaty of Versailles affected Hitler’s actions indirectly, insofar as Germany had been given an indefensible border with Poland. Thus it was a matter of vital importance for Germany if Poland was friendly or hostile.

    While Pilsudski ruled Poland, there was no problem, but his successors allowed themselves to be influenced through American diplomacy to take a hostile posture toward Germany, and at the end of August 1939 that Polish government conducted cross-border raids for the purpose of sparking a war, whereby the Poles hoped to gain territory from Germany with assistance from Britain and France.

    The Germans captured the Polish documents relating to the American meddling in the situation, and published them in early 1940. There is also an entry in the Forrestal Diaries that refers to this U.S. attempt to gin up another European war. http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-jew-who-caused-second-world-war.html

    Also in early 1940, Hitler made a peace-offer to Britain and France. He would restore a reduced Polish state if Germany’s African colonies were returned. This would have satisfied Germany’s need for farmland and mineral resources. It would have been a substitute for Lebensraum in Europe.

    Remember, it was not Hitler who declared war on Britain and France, but vice versa, and it was Poland that had attacked Germany.

    It was not Hitler at that point who chose to continue the war.

    Britain and France both ruined themselves by that choice.

    Colin Liddell is a stupid ass.

  3. Storm Warning
    27 April, 2019 at 11:05 am — Reply

    I am not a Hitlerphile. That said, Colin Liddell runs a dishonest website whereby he verbally abuses those who disagree with his faultily-researched assessments on any variety of subjects. Cogent responses (backed up with references) are routinely deleted from his Disqus comments within minutes if they expose him to any kind of embarrassment – which happens often with his slapdash articles.

    In regard to the current article, he drew upon 1910 UK census data that a commenter countered with more relevant Census data from 1933, the year Hitler took power. Instead of acknowledging this, Liddell outright lied when he responded to this commenter by stating his 1910 census data “actually” referred to 1940’s data – when no such time period was ever referenced in his article. Then, when the commenter responded to this effect, his entire comment, along with links, were swiftly erased from Disqus, so as not to embarrass Colin Liddell with inconvenient facts.

    This kind of heavy-handed censorship by Colin Liddell is routinely seen on his shoddy website and marks him as a rank amateur in the pro-white movement. Why is he this way? For those who visit his site enough (very few do) they’ll notice a certain leitmotif that might explain why: a burning jealously for Dr. Greg Johnson and Richard Spencer, two individuals who in the past worked with Colin Liddell but later dumped him by the side of the road as they drove on to further success. Ever since, Liddell has attacked both men on a vicious personal level time and again, almost like a jilted lover.

    Now, I’m not an admirer of either Johnson or Spencer, but Colin Liddell’s repeated personal attacks against them clearly marks him as someone the rest of the pro-white movement would do well to avoid, since his attacks are of a highly personal nature, presented under a thin veneer of pseudo-intellectual rationalizing.

  4. Les
    27 April, 2019 at 9:57 pm — Reply

    In both world wars the British establishment accused Germany of trying to “take over the world”. They also accused the Germans of being “warmongers”. This is a classic case of projection because the largest empire on earth was that of the British. And the country that has been involved in more wars than any other is Britain.
    Even a UK newspaper admits this.

    • Truthweed
      9 May, 2019 at 4:41 pm — Reply

      The British Empire was sixty-six times larger than the German Empire at the commencement of WW2.

      During the previous thousand years the German states were involved in 8% of wars in Europe. Britain was involved in 28%.

  5. Pierrerodin
    27 April, 2019 at 11:38 pm — Reply

    This is what happened to Germany. More German civilians and POWs died in the 2 years after WW2 ( During allied occupation) than civilians and soldiers died during 5 years of fighting.The British and American troops were as bad as the Communist Marxists.



  6. Walt Hampton
    28 April, 2019 at 4:54 pm — Reply

    This was taken from the August 2000 NA BULLETIN:

    Revisionist history has may aspects besides going back
    to check the “official” version of events presented by
    the victors in a war to see if they are accurate.
    Another form of revisionist history is counterfactual
    historical analysis: what would have happened if such
    and such had been the case instead? This is not simply
    Monday-morning Quarterbacking; it is analysis to help
    us understand what was at stake in the past and the
    significance of the actual outcome, and to offer
    guidance for present action and future outcomes.

    In this context it is useful and instructive to ask
    the counterfactual historical question: What would have
    happened if the United States had stayed out of the
    Second World War instead of participating on the side
    of the Soviet Union, Britain, and China? Quite
    simply, Hitler would have won. Britain would have
    comes to terms with a National Socialist Europe; the
    Soviet Union would have been dismantled, and Russia
    would have joined the National Socialist alliance;
    Japan would have conquered China; and there would
    have been no Red China. Not only that, all of the
    European empires, including England’s would still
    be intact, and there would not be any Third World
    immigration fouling up Europe today.

    And what about the good, old USA? We would have
    been attacked neither by National Socialist
    Europe nor by Japan, and with the National Socialist
    influence from Europe instead of the influence of
    Communists and Jews, Whites would still rule,
    segregation still would be the law, and there
    would not be a Mexican invasion going on. These
    would have been the most obvious benefits to the
    White race of a National Socialist victory.

    Instead, they lost, and with them we all lost…

    — C.S.

    • Truthweed
      9 May, 2019 at 4:46 pm — Reply

      If the Kaiser’s most generous peace offer in history on 12 December 1916 had been accepted then WW1 would have ceased and most of the wars since then would not have occurred. It depended on one last signature.

      Instead British Zionists had the war restarted after receiving Britain’s promise that they would receive Palestine.

  7. Konrad
    8 May, 2019 at 7:54 pm — Reply

    Perfidious albion raises its ugly head yet again. Lidell’s incessant and infantile German polemic is reminiscent of the judeo-masonic clique that were responsible for the bloody “revolutions” and wars from the 18th to the 20th centuries. This would-be charlatan echoes the same bigoted and blinkered attitudes that created the synthetic war psychosis around 1939, where England can do no wrong and everything German is bad. Lidell’s sanctimonious tirade has all the hallmarks of complicit baiting, designed to emphasise the differences between northern Europeans instead of finding a common set of causes from which we would (and should) be working in unison. This person is clearly a pretender and does not have the best interests of any Europeans within his narrow pretense. He propagates the mainstream narrative while throwing a few curve balls to bring in the daily stormer types. Anyone who has done their research, and by this I mean read the right books and gained an insight into our past, present and future, will immediately determine this person is a lightweight who masquerades as a white advocate.
    Mr Lidell doesn’t even understand his own history or, like most bad liars, chooses not to acknowledge the magnitude of destruction caused by the nihilistic oligarchy who took control of the British Isles in the 1600’s. Ever since, England had no chance at existing in its organic state and countless millions have suffered as a result. Lidell has obviously swallowed every chimera from his (not so) hidden masters in an obsequious display of servile grovelling that would embarrass even the most determined Tory sycophant.
    The “little Englander” mindset is strong in this one. Never could England hold a candle to Germany regarding achievements and what the Germans have given to this world. England’s jealousy knows no bounds and is only tempered slightly by those few characters who stayed true to their Anglo-Saxon roots across the centuries despite the hermetic destruction of the true nobility in its formative years.
    It seems like many are waking up to the true deceivers who were wholly responsible for fratricidal wars 1 and II. Mr Lidell has aligned himself with a string of liars, murderers and assorted criminals of the highest order who were and are responsible for the ongoing destruction of the natural order. Perhaps Lidell can seek solace from his brethren at the next lodge meeting regarding his pathetic failure to drive a wedge between the natural allies from the north of Europe. True Anglo-Saxons recognise the German people as our closest allies and relatives. The hatred for this great people arises from the semitic mindset and infects those of a certain personality type, namely narcissists and sociopaths who cannot see past their own ego’s.

    9 May, 2019 at 4:00 am — Reply






    • Powell
      14 June, 2019 at 3:40 pm — Reply

      Don’t forget the mass slaughters done to whites through history, perpetrated by Mongols, Huns, Turks, and Moors/Arabs.

    9 May, 2019 at 4:02 am — Reply


  10. Yima
    13 May, 2019 at 11:37 pm — Reply

    At Valley Forge, it was the Baron von Steuben who showed the Redcoats what “Good Form” really means, literally.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.