Talk:Nazi Germany/Archive 2

message: this article does not say who coined the term Third Reich. was it Hitler? was it an English speaking historian? please give details. Kingturtle 10:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first Reich was that of Friedrich der Grosse. The second Reich was that of Bismark. The Nazis coined the phrase "third Reich" on this basis.--Anthony.bradbury 19:47, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually the "first Reich" was the the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, the second was German Empire 1871–1918  under Wilhelm I and II as Emperors (and indeed Bismarck as Chancellor). Friedrich der Grosse was King of Prussia and actually fought wars against Habsburg, the House of the last "Holy Roman" Emperors.--84.155.53.234 13:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, the First Reich wasn't Frederick the Great, it was the Holy Roman Empire of Charlemagne and his successors. The Second Reich was the German Empire of 1871-1918. Aaрон Кинни (t) 06:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third Reich 

message: This is a map of German state in 1941.Could it be translated:
Another map with certain areas incorporated after  German agression against Soviet Union:
--Molobo 19:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Full size of German state during WW2

message: May I suggest replacing the current, cartoon-looking map with one, say, made from the blank world map? Also, one that details Germany's zenith of power (eg. 1942-3) after Barbarossa would greatly benefit the article. Please, someone create one, if you are willing. Эйрон Кинни (t) 06:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map suggestion 

message: I think its awful, just awful that there is nothing on the holocaust, oh, those poor poor innocent jewish victims
Did you see the link to the article called Holocaust? This one is already big as it is. (The Lake Effect 18:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  HOLOCAUST PLEASE! 

message: The caption states it's after annexation of Austria and Che..., but that's wrong, because most of Che... is shown as a seperate country. It's post annexation of the westernmost portion of Che. Jon 20:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it. Thank you for bringing that error to my attention, many thanks. Эйрон Кинни (t) 00:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Slovakia was a protectorate. And I wish I could replace the map but I don't have the appropriate skills necessary, I wish some more graphically-experienced editors could introduce me to that, as I am very curious. Second, Memel if I'm correct, wasn't annexed from Lithuania until the early-1940s, if not 1940 itself, so the map caption, etc., is correct on that tenet. But the map needs to show Nazi Germany at its extent (around 1941) instead of in the preliminary stages of the war. Aaрон Кинни (t) 04:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Error in map caption text

message: Someone needs to check their history a little deeper, and use sources outside of the ones available to americans, as american textbooks are as close to progaganda as anything handed out by the National Socialists.
The Second World War may have began when poland was invaded, but this article makes it appear one-sided...
Yes, the germans invaded Poland...but what did they find when they had taken over about half of Poland?
The Soviets...
The USSR invaded Poland at roughly the same time, with roughly the same intent to take it over, that little tidbit is left out of a majority of history books because here in the USA we like to make Germany look like the absolute source of all things evil...
Just something that may wish to be considered in the next update to this.
:I'm a young American and I know that the Soviet Union invaded Poland. It's not very difficult to use the Internet as a very good source in determining that, and there are some fantastic, if not definitive English-language resources available in print and on the 'net. While I don't think it's American "propaganda" as you put it, I haven't looked at this article particularly well and I'm not sure what it says about the invasion of Poland but I'll look into it, if I can. Thanks for your concerns, they are much appreciated. Aaрон Кинни (t) 04:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beginning of the war. 

message: It's well known Nazi Germany gave a hefty percentage of its funding toward science, moreso than other nations, i'm appaled there's squat diddly about it in the article.
:You are welcome to add a science section if you have enough to write about it. Also, it would be nice if you signed your comments. BigBen212 01:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where the heck's the science section? 

message: Hitler is mentioned far too much in this article.  I'm taking a number of references out, and there will still be plenty.  The article on the UK doesn't mention the Queen over and over.  With the removals I am making, there are still many, many Hitler references, but now in the more appropriate places.  If Hitler had died in 1942, I don't think history would have changed all that much.  This article seems to accept some Nazi principles in its Hitler obsession, the "Fuehrerprinzip" more precisely.  Ruy Lopez 23:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you really think that Hitler's importance to Nazi Germany is comparable to the Queen's importance to the present-day UK?  That's ridiculous.  And if Hitler had died in 1942, it seems highly unlikely to me that Himmler would have succeeded him.  More likely he'd have been purged, which probably means significantly less Jew-murdering.  It seems likely that a non-Hitler Germany would have surrendered considerably earlier, as well. john k 14:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree on Goering as most likely successor.  He was reasonably popular within the party, and not hated by the army in the way that Himmler and some of the other main Nazis were.  A Goering-led regime would have been considerably more pluralistic than Hitler's regime was, more comparable to Fascist Italy, or even to Vichy France, with various distinct right wing groups vying for power.  But this is all speculation.  Basic point is, it's absurd to say that we are talking too much about Hitler in an article about Nazi Germany. john k 17:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nazi Germany article or Hitler bio? 

message: The caption suggests that the map should depict "Germany at its fullest extent prior to World War II.". Surely then Austria and Czechoslovakia should also be red as they had been annexed by Germany? 203.114.140.222 23:26, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, although the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia seems fair to show as more or less part of Germany on a simple map. john k 13:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map Error 

message: I want the words "capitalism" and "plan economy" in that section. --Merat 23:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economic Policy 

message: Here is a news story I saw that should probably be incorporated somewhere, but I'm not sure where.  It is a recent development in which historians have discovered that Nazis were able to relay messages past Allied censors in code through advertisements and drawings. AdamBiswanger1 02:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Update

message: In recent Holocaust scholarship the figure of six million is seldom used. I realize this is a sensitive issue and a magnet for antisemites, but the range generally is under six million. If someone want to find a specific work and cite the estimate, that would be OK, but there is still a controversy within Holocaust scholarship as to the actual numbers.--Cberlet 13:41, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Holocaust scholarship

message: my version would be:
viele Völker, ein Land, drei Führer.
which translates to:
mmany peoples, one country, three leaders. (which are the president, vice president, and congress.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.3.197.129 (talk) 13:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: what would america's motto be if it had to be in german?

message: This is a little gem from the "Social Policy" section. Outpacing the U.S in both unemployment and employment! My, my! I would be impressed if I could figure out what this means.Writtenright 23:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "...Germany outpaced the United States in...unemployment and employment". 

message: When one looks at Nazi treaties, laws, propaganda etc translated from German into English, the word "Reich" is never translated into "Empire" as it is in this article. In English, the formal term "Empire" connotes a monarchy, which Nazi Germany clearly was not. There is no word in English that is analogous to "Reich" which is probably why in the Nazi era English translations just left the word in German.
-----
Adolf Hitler's style of rule is best described as despotic. Tyrannical is excessively POV (remember John Wilkes Booth's words upon shooting Abraham Lincoln), as is any word derived from gangster. There was no meaningful legislative activity aside from a rubberstamp Reichstag and no court empowered to judge the constitutionality of any law or decree. A rigid and brutal police state squelched any known opposition; abve all, Hitler could give any military order that he wished and could even order murders (including the Holocaust) at will.   
Nazi Germany clearly rejected the word republic in describing itself, and it promptly outlawed all display of the flag of the German Republic. But it had no hereditary monarch, so it wasn't quite a monarchy in the sense that Great Britain is.
An Empire need not have an emperor, and the colonial reach of a republic can itself be considered an empire. The word imperialistic can be applied to the United States of America, to France, or the former Soviet Union. We have occasionally spoken of an 'imperial' Presidency in the USA, referring not so much for the Presidency to become hereditary as to the tendency of some Presidents to expand their powers beyond what others like.
Nazi Germany was unabashedly imperialistic, and Hitler exercized an imperial executive far beyond the efforts of any President of the United States.
The German word Reich might as well mean nation. For example, neighboring France is known as Frankreich and Austria as Österreich long after both countries have abandoned any trace of monarchy -- much as the literal name of China in Chinese translates as "Middle Kingdom" even if China has had no hereditory ruler since 1912. --Paul from Michigan 21:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reich = Empire?