It seems that in our country, big tech/big media has chosen sides and largely decides what information is allowed. That is fine if/when they are right (if ever) but not so much when the are wrong (of course they can also prevent you from pointing that out as well). I would much prefer very light moderation (don't moderate ideas as the moderator is as likely to be biased as the participants). Imagine an internet chat in Nazi Germany with Himmler, Goebbels, and Göring moderating.

Imagine an Internet chat in any country in 1943. I haven't researched on the subject, but it seems that I have noticed and heard that every country did a lot of steering of the media to ensure that the populace felt/supported what the govt wanted.

I feel like that has changed. Seems like it had begun to change during the Vietnam conflict and these days, it's completely out the window. Seems the media directs the populace whatever direction they want regardless of what the govt would like.

The challenge/problem is when the media, big tech, and the government are all pushing the same false narrative. It would make Joseph Goebbels proud.

I have these war papers reissued.
it's very visible how the media was state controlled

Pre invasion during invation post invasion
news papers came out as normal
but the tone changed

suddenly you have flemish news papers reporting how the Brits get their asses kicked and deservedly so for they had done bombardments on innocent civilians in germany.

Meanwhile theater, soccer , cycling competiton info kept coming, regardless of the war.

That's one thing the internet clearly changed , access to information.
Now the problem is not that your media is biassed, or steered.
Now the problem is picking what media to form your opinion on.

Something that is obviously difficult even for clever people, leaving less clever people to just run with what they believe is convenient..
and then Hype, Sensation and OOOoooutrage!! runs strong with those folks
quick emotions, not critical thought.

That was true 10 years ago.
For most people, unfortunately that is not so true anymore.

Certainly! (No green font)

This must be a first for Pelican. The one thing we all agree on: "The Nazis were evil ****ers".

And I use the word "were" very deliberately. The Neo-Nazis are not relevant in our modern Western World.

not sure what you mean, unless you mean the thing I said exactly behind the bit you quoted?

Its a bit daunting keeping track of all the German acroyms . The book is mostly about the acreation of power..

first 1/4 th already confirms that very little of it had to do with orders.
even the Röhm murder was done without Hitlers real approval, and they just "did it" and then some legislation was passed after the facts.

Hitler was directly behind it..Rohm was the only real rival to Hitler and was a pita..so to appease the officer corp Hitler did it..

That is just how the USSR invadef Afghan they just did it without orders.Breznev didnt like that his guy in Afghan was assissinated in a coup so...

It says Hitler was hesitatant about taking care of the SA and the murder of his old Friend ernst Rohm
Heydrich . Goebbels and Goering pushed through with it.. went on a killing spree that ended when Hitler put a stop to it.

the murder spree was not on his orders.

Rohm still wasn't dead, and Hitler still wasn't ready to order him killed
They had to convince Hitler of the necessity and Hitler still didn't like it, and ordered them to give him a chance to off himself first.
page 126

The book clearly paints a picture of the SS wanting to push things further then Hitler wanted it.
That they were operating and were organized more like a criminal organisation then military or governement.

They were constantly looking to increase SS power and fighting against others to get power over certain departments.. SA, Goering, they all did it.. Nazi's weren't 1 chain of command, they were several groups and people all looking at Hitler with one eye, and to the others and their command with the other.

The night of the Long Knives was not singulary ordered by Hitler, it was a string of events where they manipulated the circumstances they lied to him and made him think the SA was going to overthrow Hitler, they waited till Hitler was difficult to reach, Rushed it before the SA went on vacation as expected(since that would prevent their argument of SA trying a putch) Goebbels had set it all in place to get rid of their competition and personal enemies.

It was Goebbels who ordred the secret go word : kolibri.. not Hitler.

And in part they pretended Hitler ordered things
Page 118
The execution list, they ordered men shot.. One of the victims tried to buy time, said :" the order isn't signed" So then they tried to find somebody in charge, Wagner, who then ordered it the men to be handed over "by command of the Fuhrer"

The Fuhrer had not issued any such order

The Legal Expert Hans Frank even tried to stop the murders, and they were later cleared up by legislation after the facts.


So Hitlers word may have been Law
Clearly they didn't need his word, and in many cases they scared him into certain beliefs and reactions..

You cannot state that this way of working is based on legal orders.
All those below Hitler were constantly scheming up ways to A look good to Hitler, B get more power C Screw over others.

And Hitler for a part liked the infighting, but for another part he knew he couldn't trust any of them, which i'm sure racked his nerves just as much as theirs. Add to that the plentiful amphetamine use to keep going, and i'm sure they were all more and more paranoid as the war progressed.

None of it constituted a legal way of operating, not even within their own shoddy framework.
For a country and culture so focussed on following proper procedures, they sure as hell did an amazing demonstration on bending and breaking them as they saw fit.

But ok, 400 more pages to go , it's an interesting book indeed.

I think his point was (and I agree)...that information is largely censored on the internet if it contradicts the narrative that big tech/the MSM is pushing. There are few sites where moderation does not severely limit speech to one political viewpoint and many sites have been shut down by service providers because their themes are politically unpopular or because they fail to censor as the provider would like. Sadly, they scheme with government officials to limit freedom of speech and decide what is allowed or not. We saw a lot of that prior to the last election and continue to see it with regard to failures of various government officials, corruption, etc. Even search engines like GOOGLE are major offender because they intentionally restrict/prevent normal search for ideas or news they disagree with.

well one would expect the reich supporters to say that second part
they can't just leave it at "The Nazis were evil ****ers".

they just do not believe they are the neo's

Don't you think it is a little out of line to call other posters here "reich supporters"???Especially since no one has indicated that was the case in this thread?

Actually. way, way out of line better describes doing so.