I was about to joke that the New York Times would've called the Nazi invasion of Poland a "bold reaction to an intractable border dispute," but then I remembered that the NYT actually wrote in 1922 that Hitler didn't really mean all the bad things he said about the Jews.
— Mark Jacob (@markjacob.bsky.social) June 27, 2025 at 2:09 PM
[image or embed]
A blog by a "sucker" and a "loser" who served her country in the Navy.
If you're one of the Covidiots who believe that COVID-19 is "just the flu",
that the 2020 election was stolen, or
especially if you supported the 1/6/21 insurrection,
leave now.
Slava Ukraini!
Friday, June 27, 2025
New York Times Has Been Getting It Wrong About Fascism for Over a Century.
1922: "Hitler's not so bad."
4 comments:
House Rules #1, #2 and #6 apply to all comments. Rule #3 also applies to political comments.
In short, don't be a jackass. THIS MEANS YOU!
If you never see your comments posted, see Rule #7.
All comments must be on point and address either the points raised in the blog post or points raised by commenters in response.
Any comments that drift off onto other topics are subject to deletion.
(Please don't feed the trolls.)
中國詞不評論，冒抹除的風險。僅英語。
COMMENT MODERATION IS IN EFFECT UFN. This means that if you are an insulting dick, nobody will ever see it.
> Since he came to the leadership in Germany—to go no farther back—Adolf Hitler has built up a record of mendacity and duplicity which made it all but impossible for the statesmen of other countries to know how it was possible to negotiate with him. ---NYT 9/3/39
ReplyDeleteSounds like a current someone who we know all too much about.
Not trying to defend Hitler's action's but he was probably at first just using the same hate meme that was rampant across Europe for so many years to gain supporters. For example, The Merchant of Venice by Shakespeare from years before.
ReplyDeleteJust like the present where Trump first lets out his bigotry a little at a time and when his little six-year-old mind sees it gets a reaction just has to keep increasing the poorly disguised vitriol to keep his base's attention.
But then again it's more likely it's just because they are just despicable haters with followers with same mindset.
The media, notably of the Reich Wing persuasion, only puts out what will sell and puts actual truth on the back shelf only to be used when it's profitable.
One must read up on that period to understand the whole picture.
ReplyDeleteThe times is at best a fragment and does sound bad without the
light of context (mostly trying to be isolationist).
Often forgotten is the Hitlers buddy Mussolini. Those wer primary players of the region but alone.
Eck!
Yep, the NYT loved themselves some dictators (heck they still do with Chavez and others). From Duranty writing glowingly about, and covering up the crimes of Lenin and Stalin, to as you note Hitler, they have quite the history of no international socialist or national socialist dictator being too bad to not get glowing praise.
ReplyDelete