TIKhistory is a RU-vidr who creates detailed and accurate historical documentaries that aim to put TV documentaries to shame. With a focus on World War 2 and similar topics, TIK seeks to dispel the myths and distortions of the past so that we can learn from it and not make the same mistakes again.
Videos every Monday at 5pm GMT.
If you would like to support my channel, you can so via SubscribeStar or Patreon www.subscribestar.com/tikhistory www.patreon.com/TIKhistory
26/04/2023 - 300k!!! 07/07/2022 - 250k - unbelievable! 14/06/2021 - 200k 🚀 08/10/2019 - 100K and NOT ONE STEP BACK! 13/07/2018 - 40k WAAAAGH!!! 09/02/2018 - 10,000 subscribers!
FYI I neither support the far-left nor far-right, which is why some of my videos are getting plenty of dislikes, evil comments are being left on them, and why my email address is no longer available. If you have business inquiries, I'm afraid you're out of luck for the time being.
The luckiest German soldier was the one that got captured earlier in the war in North Africa and sent to a POW camp in the United States. Well, except the ones that got sent to a POW camp in Louisiana. Remember, this was before air conditioning was a thing.
Hi Til I listened to Ghost history recently. Could it simply be that a sponsor of Hitler paid him to invade Poland. And those patrons may have been United Bank or Britain herself. In other words war was wanted by all parties for profiteering
Yeah, thatswhy I told my friends tha Britain is the mortal enemy of Europe and as soon as they leave with Brexit, they will start a war in the continent to cause chaos as they always do. And very conveniently thats what happened with the war in Ukraine. Honestly there are three possible and logical outcomes of this Britain being Britain thing. Either Britain rejoin willingly, Britain will succeed in their plan and destroy Europe, or Europe wont have a choice but to partition or invade Britain. This is somewhat inevitable.
The British Establishment did not want to leave Europe, but the referendum forced them to. That's why the Establishment have been so punishing in the last few years against the people here in the UK, gaslighting them and calling them dirty, diseased, "white" racists, etc. If the Playdohs in Parliament could, they'd put themselves back under the thumb of the international socialist European Fascist Union, and so I'm not sure they're fighting to bring the EU down.
I’ve come to view Hitler and the Nazis as a crime cartel led by a corrupt televangelist. Nazism is a just a scam. National Socialism an incoherent mess. It’s gibberish used to manipulate the masses. The bottom line is the Nazis were simply thieves. Nazis dressed themselves up as modern day conquering Vikings. In truth they were just a sadistic meth gang with (occasionally) cool uniforms.
There is a fatal flaw in your socio-economic assessment: private ownership of the military trucks would cause just as many, if not more, problems than it solves - because individual profit motive is often at odds with the greater needs of the war. A free market dynamic implies not simply private ownership, but the freedom of choice to act as you please with said property. Soldiers could refuse to drive their trucks where they are needed because they deem the risk of their truck being destroyed or damaged is not worth the potential pay. In fact, they could decide this whole war business is too risky so they just take their truck home and deliver ice cream instead of munitions. You cannot force them to go where you want, when you want, but then also expect them to pay for the costs associated with your demands. That is getting the worst of both systems. The cost to deliver supplies would be exorbitant in order to entice enough people to join and stay involved. The truck drivers could engage in extortion and price gouging at critical times when the military can’t tell them no. Especially if they feely organize to collude on prices, as with a union or cartel. Soldiers could also game the system to maximize profit rather than the needs of the military, like haliburton in iraq running trucks back and forth in the desert with no purpose in order to overcharge the government for their services. Although an army based entirely on voluntary obedience might sound nice, in practice any such military would be swiftly destroyed by any military based on compulsory obedience. A voluntary system would either have too little participation or be too costly to operate. Think of how the USA had to pay private contractors six figure salaries just to get commitment. And even then they may quit realizing it’s not worth it. Ultimately the critical flaw in your understanding is that you do not recognize that these come down to moral issues and not systems issues. People choosing to be lazy in a state owned system rather than “do their work as unto the lord, and not just as man pleasers” is a personal moral failing and not simply a systems failure. Likewise, a business owner who would let workers die in order to increase his profit margin is a moral failing and not a systems failure. The system didn’t cause people to make these decisions - the individual’s immoral selfishness did. And no system is immune to being corrupted to do evil by the immoral selfishness of those who make up the system. Both systems can experience catastrophic failure if the people involved have no moral constraint upon their actions. That is why John Adams said the US constitution was designed only for a religiously moral people and wont work otherwise. The system outlined in the constitution falls apart if the leaders and people are too morally corrupt to constrain each other to it’s boundries. It just becomes a useless scrap of paper at that point. Although an argument can be made that some systems lend themselves to less corruption and waste, all systems become a hellscape when dominated by immoral people. So your chief error is in assuming that a free market system can automatically right all wrongs, and not recognizing that free market dynamics are not, by themselves, capable of giving us a better society - that still requires individuals who make a choice to do what is morally right and to put the greater good above their own selfish desires. This need for morality applies to both the leaders and the followers. A “free market” by definition requires moral boundaries that apply the laws equally and fairly to protect property rights and enforce contracts - but doing this depends on having a moral society that wont be corrupted by the wealth of the rich to make the laws no longer apply to them. That is why there is no system that magically constrains evil behavior. A good system is quickly overturned or ignored if society is too immoral to put the greater good over their selfish greed for bribe money. The necessary role morality plays in the success of an economy and society is almost always ignored. This is a reason why alexis tocqueville essentially concluded that America was successful because America was morally good, and does not ascribe America’s success to it’s economic or even governmental systems.
The fact that the following has been suppressed identifies the Satanist co-option of our institutions, and identifies Marx as a Satanist waging war against God, due to his Lutheran belief that his libertine behavior had consigned him to Hell*... PART I of II In Capital, Marx begins his analysis with an already existing capitalist economy. Marx can't explain how the capitalist economy came into existence because such an economy couldn't come into existence according to Marx's peculiar analysis of the capitalist economy where surplus-value created capital must first exist, but since surplus-value doesn't exist yet, there can be no capital to begin the capitalist economy. To overcome this inherent contradiction in Marx's "investigation", he begins Capital where we find an already existing capitalist economy: “The wealth of those societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails, presents itself as “an immense accumulation of commodities," its unit being a single commodity. Our investigation must therefore begin with the analysis of a commodity.” The "investigation" needs to begin with how the commodities came into existence, that is how the capitalist economy came into existence, an oversight necessitated by a fraud. Let's see if we can commence the Capitalist economy using the following Marxist tautology, "Hitherto we have investigated how surplus-value emanates from capital; we have now to see how capital arises from surplus-value.":** (1) What do we need to initiate the Capitalist economy? Capital, of course. (2) So let's get some capital...where is this capital, according to Marx? (3) We get capital from surplus value, Marx tells us, "capital arises from surplus-value." (4) Okay, so let's get some surplus value to get capital. Where can we find surplus value, according to Marx? (5) "Surplus value emanates from capital", Marx's tautologically informs us! PART II of II Marxists and their Satanist puppet masters, when caught in a lie their responses has nothing to do with the opponent's observation. We see this with Marx concerning his embarrassing non-reply reply to fellow socialist, Pierre Joseph Proudhon, regarding the latter's devastating critique of Marx's [whole] Materialist philosophy: Marx posits this Materialist philosophy with the following, "The hand mill gives you feudal society, the steam mill industrial capitalism." - Karl Marx, The Poverty of Philosophy (1847), p. 100. When corrected by fellow socialist Pierre Joseph Proudhon that the particular institution needed for this new capitalist society - the new division of labor - already existed to create the tools/machines necessary for the capitalist system, Marx balked, with a non-reply reply (because there is no reply that can alter a self-evident fact): Machines are "a productive force," not a "social production relation," not an "economic category." -- Ibid, p. 115. Marx simply restates three of his axioms, neglecting to say which must come first. Obviously, the new capitalistic institution division of labor must come first to create the [materialist] tools/machines, not vice versa as Marx's materialist philosophy [mis]informs us. ------------------------- * "Thus Heaven I've forfeited, I know it full well, My soul, once true to God, Is chosen for hell." ...and... "With disdain I will throw my gauntlet Full in the face of the world, And see the collapse of this pygmy giant Whose fall will not stifle my ardour. Then will I wander godlike and victorious Through the ruins of the world And, giving my words an active force, I will feel equal to the Creator." So, Marx directed his followers to implement his 1843 directive for the "abolition of religion", and the destruction of those civilizations "whose spiritual aroma is religion"... Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, Karl Marx (1843) "The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion." ...and... "The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." ...and... "It is, therefore, the task of history, once the other-world of truth has vanished, to establish the truth of this world." Now you know what Marxists are referring to when they utter the phrase, "The Struggle"... "The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion." ** Capital, Chapter 24, first sentence (1867)
TIK was formerly a Socialist because he was won over by the reasoning in good faith; it was an error of knowledge, not method or principle. Most Socialists aren't like this. They accept the code out of faith; subservience to a higher authority that tells them what to think. TIK was never actually like them. "Accept that an error made on your own is safer than ten truths accepted on faith, because the first leaves you the means to correct it, while the second destroys your capacity to distinguish truth from error." -Atlas Shrugged
It’s honestly refreshing to see such an uncensored comment section. More sanitized channels would lead the average viewer to believe most people are sane.
If that's the case it would be called the 2nd war of whatever the first one would get of its new name like the 1st and 2nd silesian wars if they were to try to combined the first and second world war this is just a joke but it could be called the first and second war of Slavic aggression
While Pienaar is absolutely the one to blame for his disobeying orders, surely some of his senior officers at least should have twigged as to what he was doing and should have done something? Or where they just as gutless?
Listen very carefully: investment banks and investment bankers chase profits and their incentives are based on those profits. If they could see a profit to be had from doing business with the Devil they would find kind words about him to their own governments via their lobbyists (or at the country club). This was not a shock at the time and was entirely predictable that bankers were excited about the prospect of investment returns from Hitler's re-industrialization of Germany (military build up) and the fees that would charge on loans and/or bonds. The same goes for the USSR: if there were returns to be made, capitalists would do business with the USSR, funding their purchase of equipment and raw materials to industrialize. But what about the long term threat of communism to their business / existence? When have investment bankers EVER given much thought to the long term consequences of their actions beyond the next quarter's targets and bonuses? Just look at recent examples from housing in the UK (1988-1992, 1998-2008), or the Great Recession they brought about with their craptastic 'financial innovations' like Mortgage Back Securities, Credit Default Swaps, and so on (and on and on). Hit target, collect bonus, rinse and repeat. Trebles all round!
After the Neuremberg fiasco Field marshel, had a flat alloted to him by the authorities in east Germany.He was being watched by the police to prevent him escaping to the west.In the mean time he was ignored and hated by the general public,cut a sorry figure.😢.He passed away at a comparatively young age.An unfortunate one.
... Just a friendly reminder to everyone out there that the Germans are And forever will be losers not losers, but two times losers unconditional surrender to the allies twice... Despite the snappy uniforms and fake advanced technology, they're losers and always will be objectively losers🤣
What the actual fuck Chamberlain effectively and likely KNOWINGLY prevented a coup against Hitler in 1938? It's moments like this that are so absurd that make you think some things are simply predetermined to happen. That reality will shapeshift to make it happen.
I was in charge of most of the nonfiction in a bookstore for four years. Included in that was psychology and self help. I looked at books on the Peter Pan syndrome. It is not about dictators at all. 100% not about dictators. I’m sure if you read other psychologists you could find a more valid description of how socialism is related to the Great Goddess. Until monotheism, all societies honored the mother goddess and a father goddess. Monotheism is stupid enough to try to eliminate the mother goddess and especially Venus, sexual attraction and fertility. Go ahead and have Saturn run everything. It is ridiculous. Where is sexual fertility in the Bible? We are part of nature. The main problem with our society is by trying to abolish Venus to hell. Anyways, the Peter Pan syndrome describes a guy who does not want responsibility. Dictators generally suffer from a different syndrome. What is it? Absolute power, nobody can disagree, extreme anger. That is not Peter Pan.
@TheImperatorKnight You are for the abolishment of government because government is socialism. 22:00 Here, you argue against socialism saying that you cannot do work and progress without qualifications and schedules - in a world without a government, a.k.a. AnCapistan, who would be there to check whether one has a certain qualification? Without any authority, how can you make sure people have the qualifications they say they have? I agree with AdamSomething that true anarcho-capitalism and true communism are more or less the same thing.
Disingenuous people always start the clock when it's convenient for their arguements. Look at the climate change/global warming/ global cooling attempt to monetize and leverage weather.If they respond to logical questions with attacks, you are interacting with an unthinking Zealot.
08:24 Watching this again and a question just occurred to me as I'm seeing coffee mentioned a lot. Where were the Germans getting coffee from at this point?
To get the message across you need to draw people in with some short media. Just pick one aspect of Hitler’s socialism and make a TikTok about it. I'm serious. Few people will argue that they don’t have time for a one or two minute video. Build up a library of them.
Idle bourgeois losers who have never had a job or engaged in real life producing bullshit theories which kills tens of millions.....well done the Left - you utter fucking oxygen thieves...
I can say the very same thing about you. Oh hey, I'm a blue collar worker who has been working over 20 years and I almost took a permanent sleep from the over work with nothing much to show for it. Eventually in 2018 I realized that this economy we live in needs a total overhaul. Folk like yourself stand in the way of that kind of progress, so I totally and absolutely ditto your whole statement right back atcha.
It was expected in England and America due to the obvious rise in tensions in the working class versus the rich factory owners. The ones who broke first were the nations in Eastern Europe, which then made the rich in the west pull the reigns on the greed much more and make life better. This is why we saw the tax on the rich after the Soviets at around 90%, work days reduced to 8 hours, weekend breaks, better wages, etc.
Marx was Jewish. In the Jewish religion there is no heaven and bell. That was made up by Christianity. The Old Testament tells you to follow the rules, lest ye die. The Christian view is follow the rules or you are punished forever. The materialism of Marx at least does not follow you into the afterlife where the sinners toil away in horrifying factories for twelve hours a day while during the other twelve hours, the blessed socialists look down over a balcony and laugh at all the capitalist sinners.
What? As far as i am informed by my students uniom and adverts and activities held around campus with palestinian flags this man was a hero! A true visionary! Infallible ln every regard!
Read about matrilineal societies. Anthropology shows pre-industrial societies that were on a completely independent track than the Eurasian/North Africa authoritarian track. Not being particularly militaristic they stood no chance against actual armies. Many of them are still around. They were not matriarchal. They were matrilineal. There was a balance of power. The Iroquois Indians spent five centuries developing a society based on cooperation. Nothing to do with Marx or any European ideas, obviously. They stood no chance against the amazingly violent murderous barbarism of Europeans. The one thing that Marx got right that could be applied to him: materialism. Ideology is irrelevant. It’s how you act on a material level. Ideology is delusional. It’s how you act on the material level. He need to apply his own theory to himself.
How about hatred of the strict hierarchical systems whenever they invented. 10,000 bc? Now, that you are branching into psychology I would assume you are on a quest to read all of Freud and Jung. You’re getting a bit carried away and you were talking so calmly and reasonably.
I saw a book decades ago on the levelers but alas, a leprechaun told me it to buy it. I looked around for a sprite to contradict the leprechaun but there was no sprite so I did not buy the book.
Karl Marx: The beavers build the damns and yet they need nobody to order them around. The beavers are naturally busy. A feeble argument Marx could have tried to use.
Hence, why the communists hate liberals more than fascists or other authoritarians. Unfettered capitalism that cares nothing for the poor will lead to socialism. Wilhelm Reich, in his book “The mass psychology of Fascism,” spends some time analyzing why this theory does not work.
Marxists don't care about the poor. It's all a farce. If they cared about the poor, they'd let them get on with economic activity without sending commissars to steal their wealth and murder their families.
