Generational Dynamics World View

[Cynic Hero '86]

(08-01-2019, 12:02 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(07-31-2019, 12:39 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: >   I think there was a recognition that the terms of the Treaty of
>   Versailles had been unwise and unjust. The strategy of Appeasement
>   was about returning territory to Germany that had been unjustly
>   taken from them.

>   The reoccupation of the Ruhr came first; it involved Germany
>   reoccupying land that was clearly German.  The annexation of
>   Austria was welcomed by the Austrian people, so it was difficult
>   to object to.  The Sudetenland likewise preferred to be part of
>   Germany, which is why Chamberlain was willing to sign it away.

>   It wasn't until the invasion of Czechoslovakia that it became
>   clear that Germany wanted more than just German lands, at which
>   point Appeasement ended.

So you're defending and excusing Hitler -- always a good ploy in
an online discussion.  However, what you've written is completely
irrelevant to my point that Neville Chamberlain was vilified and
hated for decades.  The reason that Chamberlain was hated
and vilified was because of this:

• Neville Chamberlain, returning from a 1938 meeting withHitler, promising "Peace in our time," holding up a signedagreement

I remember reading years ago, probably in one of Churchill's books,
that after Churchill became prime minister he had to defend and
praise Chamberlain for being unfairly vilified.

John you are an obvious globalist pro-Versailles/descendant. So there was nothing wrong with the Treaty of Versailles? So Germany's society was inherently evil and just happened to go insane with the rest of the world believing in world peace and embracing free trade and potential golden age when evil Germany just decided to invade its neighbors for no reason? Yeah right what a butchering of factual history; you Globalist scum. Never Mind that from 1919 to 1925 France and Poland blatantly bullied Germany dooming any Chance the Weimar government had of entrenching itself. Your political biases and extreme globalism are obvious John; Face it Americans are not embracing "world human rights" and "interfering against foreign government atrocities even though it is taking place within foreign borders".

Macron and even Trump (in recent months) by pivoting toward Israel instead of the alt-right have embraced blatant tyranny. Millennials will never embrace "Human rights" values, we call those values and the imposition of such by one word; tyranny. Practically no one born after 1950 likes globalism and the present dominant persona/currently exhibited "normal society dynamics" of the west. The Pre-1950 cohorts have a choice: cede power and allow the Crisis to develop according to actions and objectives/desires of the post-1950 Cohorts with the west abandoning human rights but nationalist/populist regimes building up actual national economies and militaries and mending fences and relations with the authoritarian east by removing its nose from the eastern world's business and borders, or the pre-1950 tyrannically retain power; in which case "western civilization" would exist during the 4T but in any subsequent era there would be no such creature, because the "western world" would no longer exist/not be an existing entity.