The Nazis were not racist (or they were racist against white Nordics)

You want me to show you racism proof in the papers...? Okay.British Newspaper, The People, 17th Oct, 1943Here is some on the racism against Gypsies (who originate from India, by the way) video:https://www.youtube.com......All this British newspaper talks about, according to the link I found, was an attempt to wipe the Jews out. No mention of Nordicism is found in this article. As the for the Gypsies, Hitler probably had a vandetta against them. That's hatred, but not racial contempt that the KKK and Nordics displayed. There's still no evidence in that video that point to Hitler's alleged love of the Nordic race. If you knew anything at all about Wikipedia, you would know it is an amalgamation of sources. If you want me to source my sources, then I will.Wikipedia is unreliable, since anyone can post content here without passing a test. “If any philosopher had an influence on him, it probably came from Schopenhauer (which he does briefly mention in Mein Kampf). Hans Frank, Hitler's personal lawyer, recalled that Hitler carried a copy of Schopenhauer's World as Will and Representation with him throughout World War I”http://www.nobeliefs.com......Schopenhauer was a staunch white supremacist and also, by the way, he was a hard core Catholic-supremacist.Again, and this nothing to do with Wikipedia, that is a source from the modern day, in this country. We've, as I said, dumbed down our education so much that we're allowing anyone to post anything. We're allowing anyone to have doctorates in anything. So sorry it doesn't work. “The highest civilization and culture, apart from the ancient Hindus and Egyptians, are found exclusively among the white races; and even with many dark peoples, the ruling caste or race is fairer in colour than the rest”-Schopenhauer in his book “Parerga and Paralipomena: Short Philosophical Essays, Volume Two”It still doesn't say anything about Nordicism. I know Hitler was inspired by the Hindus, not because he thought they were the best, because he was obsessed with Schopenhauer, and Schopenhauer was open to exception for them, although he probably would have leaned to white supremacy being a better option. His beliefs are quite shockingly racist, so that blows the first part of your argument out of the water, and you seem to agree; “I don't deny that Hitler, like most at the time, shared prejudices against blacks. That's obvious.”Let's see: Germans didn't go around enslaving blacks (like the Brits and Danes did), oppressing their land (during the Conference of Berlin), lyching them, and systemically disenfranchizing them. Is that the same? I don't think so.Being that he sterilized many of the blacks in Germany, (it’s 1940s Germany, there aren’t very many blacks in the first place) I would say that he didn’t picture them in his world-takeover scheme. Look up the Nuremburg laws that came out in 1935, more specifically, on Sept. 15. -http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org......For all we know this site is also corrupted by the dumbing down of society today in America. And as for you absolutely preposterous remark, “then how comes his allies were non-Germanic countries (Italy and Japan)”… This, of course, is where the rubber hit the road for Hitler. This alliance was, pure and simple, a military strategy. It allowed Germany to have an arm in the Pacific, on paper. Think logically about how many times the two “allies” fought together. Almost never. Hitler still thought he was superior, and the Japanese thought they were better. Just look at the atrocities they committed on their Jewish equivalent, the Chinese. Italy and Japan were both outcasts, along with Germany, having been shunned by the League of Nations. Italy, under Mussolini, was Fascist long before Hitler. It wasn’t like they were best friends, playing Frisbee together or something.http://www.ushmm.org......Are you sure about that? Last time I checked, your source is saying the complete opposite of what you're saying. The closest thing you might have to being right, though, and even then, it doesn't prove that Italy, as a society, was pro-Allied, was the part about Mussolini being deposed in 1943. Yes he was deposed, but by an elitist group, not the people. Mussolini was very popular in Italy. "He made the trains run on time" is commonly said in Italy. The elitists in Italy welcomed Mussolini's downfall. The people, though, were infuriated. In fact, the Allied countries committed rape, which many Italians hold against them to this day.He was Catholic to get votes, and even you agree that he got votes. Does Adolf Hitler look like a poster boy for Christians everywhere? Not really. I don’t think Jesus said “Love thy neighbour…except the Jews. Murder them all. Including me.” Don’t be silly. “The poorest areas were Catholic.” – Hitler’s prime audience.Here is a renowned atheist saying that Hitler was a hardcore Catholic. I think his speech here implies that they hated Protestants, but it's never directly states. This is Christopher Hitchens now. I challenge you to rebute that. And this is not an American of today's era. He's not even an American of the past era. This is an Englishman saying this. What does that tell you?It makes a lot of difference. They were the ones the Allies screwed around with the most, firebombing homes and towns. They didn't touch the more Lutheran parts of Germany, now, did they? So obviously Hitler was gonna identify with the Catholic parts more so. You even admit it yourself. As for your Denmark invasion…Who cares? It’s got nothing to do with the argument.It has everything to do with the argument. That invasion was revenge for Schwelig. I already posted evidence. Hitler warned Denmark to give it up or he would invade them in revenge. You still haven't rebutted KKK-certified source in which they say themselves that they believe in Nordic values, whereas the Nazis don't. This Carolyn Yeager has noting to do with Nazis of old and I don’t care what she has to say. It is irrelevant.Actually, it does matter. See she's not a neo-Nazi at all. She's a very intelligent Nazi with degrees in history (from the past, when education wasn't corrupted). Her insights are based on pure fact. It does matter very much. She's more in tuned with the original Nazis than the neo-Nazi idiots we see today. So yes it does matter greatly. Hans F. K. Günther was a race researcher and eugenicist for the Nazis. He pretty much created Nazi thought. He staunchly believed that Nordic race was the superior race. Check out “Short Ethnology of the German People” if you want to read all about Nordic races and supremacy.“We wish to keep the thought always before us that, if our race is not to perish, it is a question of not choosing a Nordic mate, but over and above this, of helping our race through our marriage to a victorious birth rate”Video:https://www.youtube.com......https://www.youtube.com......Here are a few problems with your videos:You haven't given me any books that point out to the allege quotes. And the video is not too convincing either. For all we know this video could be a charlatan being paid to speak nonsense. And for all I know the quote you're giving me was made up by the very same dumbed down generation of students we find in America, being given degrees for nothing. It's real evidence of a dumb down in this society.And the second video is even more full of baloney. The video itself is incriminating. So far all I've seen in the video is stuff that appears Roman in nature, not Viking. The ships looked Roman.I gave you a challenge to find me a video in which the Nazis said what they said, and you haven't. I also give you another challenge. Find me newspaper reels in which he talks about Nordicism. That's my challenge for you. I can't do Jesse Owens rebuttal because there isn't enough characters.