• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The E.U. As A Continuation Of A Nazi State

Status
Not open for further replies.

caspergriswoldbacon

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
144
Apologies if this is somewhere else. it probably is, but i've stuck in countless variations of keywords and got nowhere. feel free to delete/move etc..

Now i know this is knocking around various anti-EU sites but there does seem to be a grain of truth in it. All comes down to a certain Walter Hallstein "president of the Commission of the European Economic Community and one of the founding fathers of the European Union"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_HallsteinEU

Now it seems while he was was Dean of Law and Economics at Rostock University he made a rather contentious speech in 1939 that doesn't really sit well with the "always anti-nazi" opinion of him we're led to believe. The scary bit is that if you take out the bits about Hitler and Austria and replace it with EU and member states and it sounds very much what we have now. Apart from the bits about keeping german blood pure and getting rid of political parties opposed to Hitler obviously:omg:. i was especially struck by the universal law parts that seem to be the sort of things they are trying to impose on poland now. Now i know post-war german politics was infested by old-nazi's and they really didn't try very hard to track any of them down but really?.

The translation of the speech is here which is an-anti Eu site

http://www.reject-the-eu.co.uk/info/hallstein-conquest-speech.html

which you could say its propaganda except the original turns up at a anti-holocaust site here

http://www.profit-over-life.org/books/books.php?book=54

now my questions are threefold to those who have done a bit more research than i.

1. is that a speech by Hallstein?
2. Is the translation right?
3. If yes to the first 2 questions, how did this rabid old nazi ever get to shape the current EU?
 
Last edited:
Well, the problem is that the physical structure of the European mainland is that it is likely to be dominated by a united Germany. Of course there was no united Germany before Bismark, so peripheral nations like France, Italy(Rome) etc . held the power.

Yes there is a Fourth Reich in construction, but it is important not to assume that it's philosophy is the same as the Third Reich.

However, it will be a continental power, which is why we as a maritime nation should never have had anything to do with it. That's quite apart from the fact that the more Celtic parts of our nation cannot forget slights from a thousand years ago, so are hardly likely to ever sit comfortably in a new federal state which denigrates old traditions.
 
Yeah your last paragraph are my thoughts really Cochise. I posted this because i used to be very pro-EU till around 2000 when i started looking a bit more into it. I have talked to people who know their stuff and are pro-EU and they know about this, but they don't really want to talk about it for some reason:rolleyes:. I'm just interested if it's totally legit.
 
Last edited:
Yes there is a Fourth Reich in construction, but it is important not to assume that it's philosophy is the same as the Third Reich.

Yep, I'd say that's about the size of it. There's an oft-repeated 'argument' that goes: if war is the continuation of politics by other means then the EU is by the same token the continuation of the Third Reich by other means.

I'm not a fan of the EU either, but this doesn't really make sense, does it? :) ...apart from the authoritarianism and expansionist ambitions.
 
Last edited:
Apart from the trading bloc aspect, not much about the EU makes sense.
It's definitely working to a long-set agenda - only some aspects of which have so far become apparent.
Some of the more sinister aspects of this 'long game' have only recently been revealed to us, and we are finding out just how unreasonable they can be in the achievement of their aims.
 
Apart from the trading bloc aspect

i.e. all that were were ostensibly signing up for the the early 70's *ahem*. Mustn't get political! ;)

Some of the more sinister aspects of this 'long game' have only recently been revealed to us, and we are finding out just how unreasonable they can be in the achievement of their aims.

You won't find me disagreeing with any of that. However I think the OP's question was: what to make of the Hallstein speech? Not that I've read it yet, but certainly will.
 
Some make a case for the EU being an attempt at a revival of Charlemagne's Carolingian State/Holy Roman Empire.
The EEC was founded by The Treaty of Rome.

Then there are the Caesar - Kaiser - Czar similarities and the use of eagles as an imperial logo.

I voted Brexit.
 
Some make a case for the EU being an attempt at a revival of Charlemagne's Carolingian State/Holy Roman Empire.
The EEC was founded by The Treaty of Rome.

Then there are the Caesar - Kaiser - Czar similarities and the use of eagles as an imperial logo.

I voted Brexit.

I would have voted Remain: I am The Rightful Heir To Charlemagne!
 
Yes there is a Fourth Reich in construction, but it is important not to assume that it's philosophy is the same as the Third Reich.
Doesn't matter though, if the goal is tyranny. It's still tyranny.

And given the EU state's past actions with regard to democracy, when the democratic result was not that which was desired, I'm quite certain tyranny is the goal.
 
i.e. all that were were ostensibly signing up for the the early 70's *ahem*. Mustn't get political! ;)

I was still at school when the UK joined the EEC. At the time of the referendum in 1975, I was fully in favour of it because it seemed like a good idea. In the years since, I have seen things take a nasty turn. No wonder so many people voted Brexit - they also felt the same.

You won't find me disagreeing with any of that. However I think the OP's question was: what to make of the Hallstein speech? Not that I've read it yet, but certainly will.

I haven't read it yet either, so can't express an opinion.
 
To even consider the European Union as some kind of Nazi Sleeper Project is just so utterly moronic, it doesn't bear any serious thinking about. It's the fantasy of Daily Mail Readers and the excuse of tax dodgers. But nothing more.

There are so many myths about the the specter of the EU, painted by UK newspapers and right wing commentators, each with their own very definite agenda for telling them. And perhaps the more disturbingly ironic part of that is that the immigration horror stories which form the backbone of these arguments have far more in common with fascism. The rhetoric used, the terminology, the means of vilifying and scapegoating minority groups.

Not to mention the accusing of anybody who disagrees with that as as being a 'traitor' or 'saboteur'. It's all stolen right out of the 1940s Nazi playbook.

I don't think that any of us would ever be as daft as to claim that the EU is a perfect entity, of course. It's evolved into something it was never intended to be. It badly needs reform at this stage, and my Countrymen's natural distrust of 'foreigners' has meant that we have always failed to truly get the best out of being part of it. But I think that it's that notion held by so many nutters over here that 'the EU IS JUST THE NAZIS AND WE MUST END THIS WAR' which is not only so far into fantasy that they may as well throw a genuine belief in Elves, Orcs and Faeries into the equation for good measure, but which has also played a far greater role in British misfortunes than many would ever dare admit.
 
To even consider the European Union as some kind of Nazi Sleeper Project is just so utterly moronic, it doesn't bear any serious thinking about. It's the fantasy of Daily Mail Readers and the excuse of tax dodgers. But nothing more.

There are so many myths about the the specter of the EU, painted by UK newspapers and right wing commentators, each with their own very definite agenda for telling them. And perhaps the more disturbingly ironic part of that is that the immigration horror stories which form the backbone of these arguments have far more in common with fascism. The rhetoric used, the terminology, the means of vilifying and scapegoating minority groups.

Not to mention the accusing of anybody who disagrees with that as as being a 'traitor' or 'saboteur'. It's all stolen right out of the Nazi playbook.

I don't think that any of us would ever be as daft as to claim that the EU is a perfect entity, of course. It's evolved into something it was never intended to be. It badly needs reform at this stage, and my Countrymen's natural distrust of 'foreigners' has meant that we have always failed to truly get the best out of being part of it. But I think that it's that notion held by so many nutters over here that 'the EU IS JUST THE NAZIS AND WE MUST END THIS WAR' is not only so far into fantasy that they may as well throw a genuine belief in Elves, Orcs and Faeries into the equation for good measure, but it has also played a far greater role in British misfortunes than many would ever dare admit.
I'm not sure you understand how the EU actually works and what democracy's role is in preventing excesses and abuses of power.
 
To even consider the European Union as some kind of Nazi Sleeper Project is just so utterly moronic, it doesn't bear any serious thinking about.
Why? There are still Nazis about. They just don't use that name anymore, and don't use their old methods.
 
Why? There are still Nazis about. They just don't use that name anymore, and don't use their old methods.

There certainly are. I don't think any nazis support the EU though.

What you have in the EU is a small coterie of politicians and bureaucrats who are ever pushing for more centralised powers. They have been stymied to a large extent though. It is their rhetoric which still gets a lot of media attention.

I mean you get a German/French politician calling for a closer union and the MSM report it as if it is about to take place.

I think we should be careful about throwing the term nazi about too loosely.

On the anti-EU side Farage, Berlusconi etc are regularly called fascists, they're not. They're just people to the right of me who have some policies I disagree with.
 
Thanks for the replies. Whether the EU is some nazi some sleeper state isn't really the question, but if a nazi designed it, then surely alarm bells should be going off? My own view is Hallstein took the idea, took out the bits about killing jews and banning political opponents and used it as a draft for the EU after the war - to what ends, well that's up to the individual to decide. I consider myself far-left so i have no time for UKIP really and i don't think the majority of the UK electorate do either judging by their showing in the last election but if someone like Farage had the background of Hallstein there's not a hope in hell he'd be allowed in mainstream politics let alone organising european intigration

The speech i link to is mainly about integrating german law into being able to cope with Austria and the Sudetenland coming under Nazi control. I defy anyone reading that and not see parallels to the EU today in their attempts to control the legal systems of the member state, Now if the speech is correctly translated, then the best that could be said for the guy is he was a typical nazi beaurocrat, not too bothered about having fascists in control and perfectly willing to impliment their plans as long as he doesn't get his hands dirty.

On his wiki page there's some interesting detals especially his clashes with De Gaulle who was never a friend of the UK joining but he knew German imperialism when he saw it....

""De Gaulle recognized Hallstein's service to the European idea, but attributed it to German patriotism, serving the interests of Germany, enabling Germany to re-attain a respect and status in Europe that it had lost because of Hitler. De Gaulle resented the status that Hallstein, for him a mere technocrat, was accorded by foreign states. [104][105] Hallstein, for his part, was watchful that, as representative of the Commission, he was accorded the status normally accorded to a head of state.[106][105] De Gaulle complained of the Commission usurping a political role reserved for governments and of Hallstein usurping a role reserved for heads of government or heads of state; he attacked Hallstein personally saying that Hallstein was trying to turn the EEC into a superstate, with Brussels as its capital; he talked of defending French democracy against an unaccountable and stateless technocracy, "a technocratic Areopagus, stateless and unaccountable" [De Gaulle at a press conference at the Elysée Palace on 9 September 1965.[l]]

In his memoirs, De Gaulle wrote of Hallstein

He was ardently wedded to the thesis of the super-State, and bent all his skilful efforts towards giving the Community the character and appearance of one. He had made Brussels, where he resided, into a sort of capital. There he sat, surrounded with all the trappings of sovereignty, directing his colleagues, allocating jobs among them, controlling several thousand officials who were appointed, promoted and remunerated at his discretion, receiving the credentials of foreign ambassadors, laying claim to high honors on the occasion of his official visits, concerned above all to further the amalgamation of the Six, believing that the pressure of events would bring about what he envisaged.

— De Gaulle, Memoirs of Hope[105]
According to Der Spiegel, De Gaulle's complaints included[108]

  • Hallstein's being frequently received by US presidents, although the Commission had no foreign relations mandate;
  • Hallstein's claim to be a sort of European prime minister;
  • the rank of ambassador held by the representatives of the 65 states accredited with the European Commission;
  • foreign ambassadors' presentation of their credentials to Hallstein (ambassadors normally present their credentials, signed by the countries head of state to the head of state of the host country);
  • the participation of Commission staff in the Kennedy Round negotiations in Geneva, in negotiations with EFTA, and in negotiations with non-European states, in particular South American states.""


Whatever you think of De Gaulle, i think he had Hallsteins number and all those accusations could certainly be aimed at the likes of Juncker now.
 
Yes, the EU are overreaching and want to be a United States of Europe. However I see no reason to invoke nazism as the cause of that.
 
Yep, seeing as that erosion of borders, free movement and lack of self-determination rather goes against their ideas.
 
Yep, seeing as that erosion of borders, free movement and lack of self-determination rather goes against their ideas.

The erosion of borders goes against their ideals? I'd say the "Greater Reich" has all the signs of the erosion of borders. Only difference is one was done by military force, the other politically. You can't really get a better example of intigration than the way Austria was assimilated.
 
The erosion of borders goes against their ideals? I'd say the "Greater Reich" has all the signs of the erosion of borders. Only difference is one was done by military force, the other politically. You can't really get a better example of intigration than the way Austria was assimilated.

But the existing EU is opposed by the real fascist parties throughout Europe. They want to keep their National borders secure.
 
I would have voted Remain: I am The Rightful Heir To Charlemagne!

I'm allegedly descended from Charlotte Stuart (Bonnie Prince Charlie's daughter.) Don't think they are going to make me king of Scotland any time soon though :)

My surname, according to some interpretations, is a pseudonym for bastard in some language or other, a bit like John Snow in Game of Thrones.
 
Yep, seeing as that erosion of borders, free movement and lack of self-determination rather goes against their ideas.

Well, not really. Lebensraum and all that. There will be a border round the Greater Germany, of course. Somewhere in the Ukraine, probably.

I don't see any harm in countries that want to joining together in a federal state - it is very clear this country doesn't want to and never has wanted to. Whether or not we want to be in a common trading agreement should be a quite separate issue.
 
I'm not sure you understand how the EU actually works and what democracy's role is in preventing excesses and abuses of power.


I probably do understand more than you were aware, Coal. It is all quite boring, but barring the EU Commission it actually is democratic. It even uses proportional representation. But the non-elected state of the Commission is largely what I mean about a need for reform. All three Houses should be democratically elected. 2/3 isn't really good enough at this point.

You could of course argue that here in the UK it's mostly the same. Actual laws and policies are created by faceless bureaucrats - civil servants - through panels made up of lawyers, business moguls and other experts of the field. Getting onto those panels truly is open to money and corruption, and always has been.

A lot of people accuse the EU of being nondemocratic for doing exactly the same as the UK does. But when the UK does it? British Logic decides it's okay. Because it's Us. Not Them.

I can't remember the exact statistics now. But the main complaint before the Referendum seemed to be that 40,000+ Civil Servants (or "faceless bureaucrats" to use the popular press term) for the entire EU was unacceptably high. How dare they?

And that might sound high in big letters on a tabloid front page. Well, until you realise there are over half a million civil servants employed by the United Kingdom.

It's all very silly in my book. There's no genuine or credible Nazi agenda in the EU. Even with coordinated fascists on the rise in some central European countries.

Probably also worth noting that every Member State has opted out of *something* which the EU has sought to bring in law. We like to play the Saint here in the UK, playing up the notion of the EU's rules and regulations having interfered so tremendously in our lives. But the reality is that a) That's a vast and overreaching exaggeration at best, b) the UK has forced the EU to accommodate more things for Britain than the other way around, and c) We *can* always chose not to do what they suggest, anyway. God knows everybody else does.

How many EU countries flaunt EU Health and Safety rules, without ever getting punished? And while so many people hark on about the high number of EU citizens coming to UK to 'SIT ON THE DOLE' the EU itself passed a ruling that any EU Citizen who moved to another member state nation and didn't find work with 6 months would be returned to their Country of origin.

The rest of the EU adopted that. Theresa May opted the United Kingdom OUT of that.

The UK government even had to admit in print in its first Brexit white paper that as an EU member they had never renounced Sovereignty, were always able to make our own laws, and that 'at times it just felt like we didn't'.

All such a nonsense.

I honestly don't see the EU as a monster. Or unreasonable for the most part. It does need some reform, but the notion of it being run by fascists is utterly baseless. It doesn't extend further than the thinly stretched logic that: "There are some Germans in the EU. We must assume all Germans are Nazis. Therefore the EU is a SUPER NAZI".

It's clearly bollocks.


Why? There are still Nazis about. They just don't use that name anymore, and don't use their old methods.


There are Nazis. There are Fascists. I don't think anybody is denying that. Extremist groups exist within in almost every country in the world.

But, thankfully, to date, they have largely been kept out of office in the majority of European nations. They also have very little say in the running of the European Union.

There has never been any quantitative proof of extremist involvement in any part of the EU's structure. Barring Bloke-in-the-Pub rumours and tabloid fibs.

As Xantic points out:


Yes, the EU are overreaching and want to be a United States of Europe. However I see no reason to invoke nazism as the cause of that.


And I'm in agreement on that.

A United States of Europe was a pipedream of Winston Churchill - to avoid the rise of fascism ever resurging. Post WW2 the notion of a united and cooperative Europe was absolutely necessary. But the EU as it is today has evolved far beyond its original remit. Largely however, it has only done so by the direct input and drive of all Countries involved with it.
 
Last edited:
It should be pointed out that although Churchill was in favour of a United State of Europe, he didn't want us in it.
 
I first heard this five years ago from a bona-fide gun nut building his prepper stronghold in the hills of North Carolina. He overheard my accent in a bar and asked me: 'so you're from Europe, huh?'. I said yes, of course. 'Did you know,' he said, 'that the EU is a plot set up by fascists?!'

He also said a lot of the 'oh, I bet you get a lot of knife crime in the UK' that I heard so much of from U.S. gun enthusiasts. Yeah, sure, dude. We get people running into schools and cinemas and knifing dozens of people all the time.
 
It should be pointed out that although Churchill was in favour of a United State of Europe, he didn't want us in it.


It's a very difficult notion though. If there truly was a United States of Europe Britain *not* being in it would be a distinct disadvantage for the Country. Another large entity to deal with from the outside. To rely on the favour and goodwill of.

That said, it's probably also worth remembering that Churchill's Britain was an possessed of an Empire. Near infinite resources from the four corners of the World. Modern Britain imports far more than it exports.
 
It's a very difficult notion though. If there truly was a United States of Europe Britain *not* being in it would be a distinct disadvantage for the Country. Another large entity to deal with from the outside. To rely on the favour and goodwill of.

That said, it's probably also worth remembering that Churchill's Britain was an possessed of an Empire. Near infinite resources from the four corners of the World. Modern Britain imports far more than it exports.

Well, this was post war. We still had a Commonwealth, and I believe still the largest Mercantile Marine in the world when we joined the Common Market. Had people been told the truth at the time regarding a) the eventual intention to create a superstate and b) that it would mean weakening our ties with the Commonwealth - where of course many of us have relations, even close family - we would never have even joined the EEC, let alone the EU.

The Commonwealth is apparently prepared to forgive us and have us back. But that gets us into the argument of should we / shouldn't we leave, and that's going to go political :)
 
This kind of fits in here - and it is completely bat shit insane:

Angela Merkel Is The Daughter of Hitler And Hitler Was a Rothschild

She is said to be one of the most powerful human beings on Earth since she is also the President of the European Union (EU) and head of the powerful Western Economic Block known as the G-8. More concerning is that Hitler’s dream of uniting Europe under German/Vatican control is now within his daughter’s reach.

Hitler’s father, who took the name Hitler, was the illegitimate son of Solomon Rothschild’s mistress Anna Maria Schicklgruber. Upon receipt of the Nazi files on artificial insemination, along with Hitler’s frozen sperm, the Soviet Politicheskoye Buro (Politburo) authorized the experiments to ‘resurrect’, ‘if possible’, a child bearing the ‘genetic markers’ of Adolph Hitler. It was ‘reasoned’ that the combining of the genes between Hitler’s sperm and Eva Braun’s closest family would produce for the Soviets a ‘near match’ of what a child of Hitler and Eva Braun would have been, should one have been born.

Soon after the birth of Hitler’s baby girl, an agreement between the Soviets, the Americans and the Vatican was arranged. Hitler’s baby was placed under the ‘control’ of the Catholic Church through its ‘connections’ with the GDR Lutheran Church which took custody of the baby.

She was given a false date of birth, July 17, and the name Angela Dorothea Kasner, daughter of Horst Kasner, a Lutheran pastor, and his wife, Herlind – an English and Latin teacher. There in the countryside at Templin in East Germany, Merkel was raised about 50 miles north of Berlin, the capital of the socialist German Democratic Republic (GDR).

The central theme of the “agreement” of the Western Allied Powers, the Vatican, and the Soviets was that Hitler’s daughter would be elevated to international power…but her ascendancy to power would not come until “the Vatican also brought to power a German Pope”.


This is as far as I got. So - the Vatican, the Lutherans, the Communists, the Nazis, the Jews and the Americans all colluded to make Hitler's vision come true. In the unlikely case that you want to read the whole thing, here's the link:

https://50shadesofpissedoff.com/201...hter-of-hitler-and-hitler-was-a-rothschild-2/
 
...Not to mention the accusing of anybody who disagrees with that as as being a 'traitor' or 'saboteur'. It's all stolen right out of the 1940s Nazi playbook...

Or straight from a Donald Trump speech.

All Trump's speeches have two things in common. They are all about how great he is. But also they are what was once called 'Rabble Rousing' I'm not calling his supporters rabble, but I think you get the picture. Very Mussolini.

Far more dangerous that what any EU leader is coming out with.

INT21
 
I think to suggest that there is some sort of Nazi doctrine behind the EU, is frankly, naive.

Just look at the recent works by the likes of the European Court of Human Rights, and the whole General Data Protection Regulation — they are all focused on the rights of the individual in the face of the might of corporations and governments.

The EU has had at its core since its inception, the promotion of rights, the preservation of freedoms and the assurance of certain standards for all.

It has failed miserably in achieving them in certain instances, but it has demonstrably worked to promote such ideals in how it has worked.

To say that these are all ruses in the face of some deep Nazi state plan, is a bit daft.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs - and I'm not seeing anything here that even borders on reasonable, let alone sufficient.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top