• The above Banner is a Sponsored Banner.

    Upgrade to Premium Membership to remove this Banner & All Google Ads. For full list of Premium Member benefits Click HERE.

  • Join The Silver Forum

    The Silver Forum is one of the largest and best loved silver and gold precious metals forums in the world. Join today for FREE! Browse the sponsors topics (hidden to guests) for deals and offers, check out the bargains in the members trade section and join in with our community reacting and commenting on topic posts. If you have any questions whatsoever about precious metals collecting and investing please join and start a topic and we will be here to help with our knowledge :) happy stacking. 

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, KDave said:

The 5 Reichsmark has some quite revealing edge writing on the Nazi mintages, first appearing from 1934.

Gemeinnutz Geht Vor Eigennutz

Translates to (I think - correct if I am wrong please)

"Common good comes before self"

Nazi's were all about big government. You can see that this idea/slogan would not be out of place in the soviet union. The Nazi's were socialists, not really right wing, yet people see the nationalism first and assume right wing - people often don't see the most dangerous attribute. Nationalism is not dangerous on its own. If you look into the horrors of both movements, the millions murdered, the Nazi 'labour' camps and Bolshevik 'labour' camps (especially early in the revolution), you will not see any difference between the swastika on red background and the hammer and sickle on red background. Personally I don't know why the latter is allowed and the former is not. They both represent the exact same thing - collectivism, hell on earth. The government over the individual. 

By contrasts the Wiemar 5 Reichsmark coinage had edge writing that translates to;

'Unity, Justice and Freedom'

Interesting how quickly those ideals can be thrown aside and forgotten is it not! 

"Unity and Justice and Freedom" was the motto of the revolutions in the German States in 1848 (and before) in favour of a United Democratic Germany (opposed to hundreds of kingdoms, dukedoms etc.); this motto remained on the coinage of the Federal Republic of Germany until the present day. As a matter of fact the occupied Weimar Republic and the present FRG are similar in many aspects. 

 

Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz translates more into Commonwealth comes before self-interest [please correct me if this can be expressed more elegant]. 

2 hours ago, Pipers said:

The Nazis were right wing do not believe the propaganda, the far right have to rely on votes from the poor/working class same as in Italy at that time the far right new the only way it could achieve power was through the poor/working class hence the social policies when the real big policies was to Govern alongside big business!! Nationalism!  Hence small government because the business owns runs most of it!!! Hence far right!!

The Nazis created a welfare state with KdF – Kraft durch Freude (Stregth by Happyness), a state sponsored holiday program for the working class, housing projects and many other health and social benefit projects. I would class this as leftist policies. 

Big business profited from massive cash injections from the BoE and Wall Street and the ones that really profited might therefore actually have been outside Germany. 

edit: And these state driven and controlled infrastructure programs opposed to free markets are also a leftist approach even in our modern redefining of left and right (working class/upper class vs communism/nationalism)

Edited by augur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been trying to stay out of this but I'm just going to state for the record:

The Nazis were ****ing attricious!!!

And any attempt at rehabilitation, revisionism and "whatabout-ism" is shameful!

Collect whatever you want to collect, that's fine and a personal choice.

But don't try to pretend that the Nazis weren't all that bad.

Yes it's a touchy subject, because it turns out Nazis are still a thing. Whereas I thought the systematic slaughter of millions settled that question more than seven decades ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pans you are right sir, they were attrotious and so were the communists perhaps more so. They killed millions both. They were all left wing that should tell you all that is needed to see where collectivism leads.

They are both still a thing. Communism is more acceptable and doesn't suffer the same scrutiny because people are misled and blame nationalism instead of the real enemy of individual liberty and freedom which is collectivism. This stems from socialist ideas not national ones.

As augur kindly pointed out the values ascribed on the Weimar coinage derived from the nationalism that led to imperial Germany. This ended in war too, but not the horrors of the socialist regimes of the mid 20th century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Gordon said:

All wars are banker wars. Follow the money and see who is financing both sides and has the most to gain

And if you look at which banker, instead of an representative organisation, received the Balfour declaration we have gone full circle on this topic. 

Makes you wonder if one can even collect money at all since it is the source of all evil...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, augur said:

Makes you wonder if one can even collect money at all since it is the source of all evil...

An interesting point and I know you mean it tounge in cheek, but I need to say it - :D Money is a tool look to the wielder for the source of evil.

Edited by KDave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will be the last I will post on this,

IMO the Nazis were far right wing they were /are responsible for millions of deaths of there own plus invaded and enemy people. Nationalism is based around right wing views maybe not free market viewed as of today but we must remember the world is not just money!

In Europe today we are faced with the early seeds of Nationalism again, we have seen it in Germany who have gone around forcing Greece+Cyprus into submission now we have a starting of  situation  in Italy and Spain.  As Europe take sides right or left we in the UK are leaving. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pipers said:

IMO the Nazis were far right wing they were /are responsible for millions of deaths of there own.....

What millions of deaths of their own?
The National Socialists were Socialists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, sixgun said:

What millions of deaths of their own?
The National Socialists were Socialists.

Eugenics, Race purity 

The Disabled. The Jews, slavs, gypsies, anyone who disagreed with them in the end,  promote the Aryan master race. 

This may help some  

.org/wiki/Nazisen.wikipediam

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Pipers said:

Eugenics, Race purity 

The Disabled. The Jews, slavs, gypsies, anyone who disagreed with them in the end,  promote the Aryan master race. 

This may help some  

.org/wiki/Nazisen.wikipediam

Agreed Eugenics was practiced quite widely in the period in many countries. This is conveniently denied and swept under the carpet. The elite were more open about these activities in those days. No doubt they will start again given half a chance. The most avid proponents were the US where 32 states passed legislation on forced sterilisation. This carried on into the 1970's. There was The Oregon Board of Eugenics, (renamed the Board of Social Protection) in existence until 1983

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sterilization-united-states_us_568f35f2e4b0c8beacf68713

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization#United_States

i have spent several years looking into these topics as i have a keen interest in State and corporate propaganda. If you look at footage (no pun intended) of Goebbels, the German Minister of Propaganda, he was a cripple - he must have slipped through the net.

My research showed that 'The Official International Red Cross records reveal the actual Concentration Camp total death toll was 271,301. These records had been sealed and guarded since the end of WWII at Arolsen, Germany, '  http://monamontgomery.com/products/271304.htm

US Pathology Services did many autopsies in the camps they liberated and pretty much found the corpses had died of typhus. The British Army burnt Belsen down as a means of dealing with the typhus epidemic.

As the official independent Red Cross audit shows 271k died in all the camps from all causes i am at a loss as to where these figures of millions come from.

Edited by sixgun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The figure of 271k comes from a document that does not list the total death toll,but the number of surviving identifable death records,that is cases where the nazis actually wrote down the full details of the death,including the name of the person killed. This document is deliberately and fradulently misrepresented by holocaust deniers. Just to add will not be contributing to this thread again as people will chose to believe whatever suits their ideology. As is their right!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk of Third Reich memorabilia turns to holocaust denial. And that precisely why some prefer to censor the subject, because no good comes of it.  Which is a shame because the artefacts and history are just as valid as any other period. 

Edited by Martlet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jimmock said:

Just to add will not be contributing to this thread again as people will chose to believe whatever suits their ideology. As is their right!!

yes that's your right, but to get a balanced view we need all the facts from both sides.

A lot of these "facts" will be lies and propaganda but unless we get to hear of them, rational open-minded people like myself can't come to a reasonable conclusion. Not everyone will .....

7 minutes ago, Jimmock said:

chose to believe whatever suits their ideology

I do find it interesting how the Nazi era provokes such strong views and hatred, whereas equally guilty regimes escape scott free. I guess that is because WW2 is still within living memory (just) and many do have close family members who fought and often died during that time.

My own father is in his early nineties and caught the last few years of fighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jimmock said:

The figure of 271k comes from a document that does not list the total death toll, but the number of surviving identifable death records, that is cases where the nazis actually wrote down the full details of the death, including the name of the person killed. This document is deliberately and fradulently misrepresented by holocaust deniers. Just to add will not be contributing to this thread again as people will chose to believe whatever suits their ideology. As is their right!!

i have cited the evidence. This is independent evidence securely held and compiled by the International Red Cross. i simply cited it. Is this committing fraud? Who is being defrauded?

If people are allegedly misrepresenting this document, where is the evidence to contradict this audit? Who says the document is incomplete and how would they know?

It is easy to say it is being "deliberately and fraudulently misrepresented" but we still need solid evidence to contradict or let's say supplement the figures.  This is basic historical objective investigation. Deficits in this are not covered by name calling. 

The holocaust cannot be denied using the definition of a survivor. A survivor for compensation is any Jew who was in territory controlled by the Germans between 1933 - 1945 and survived. They could have been in Germany in 1933 and then gone to America. By the definition they are a survivor. Now there were lands controlled by Germany between 1933 - 45 and there were Jews there, so there has to have been a holocaust. There can be no denying that fact.

Edited by sixgun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question was a simple one: Would it be morally wrong to buy Nazi Silver. It has now degenerated into some arguing others were as bad, however, it would take a lot to beat that demonic outfit. Personally, I wouldn't touch anything associated with Nazism let alone buy it and have it in my home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do understand that the topic has gone a bit, but I am surprised by the emotional responses to the discussions here, it is quite sad that people are not able to openly discuss a subject without people calling for censure, or responding with how outraged and disgusted they 'feel' instead of joining the discussion and arguing the facts. We have had good respectful discussion on the forum in the past on a range of subjects some along similar 'touchy' lines, entertainment purposes and we learn, so what is so different about this? Perhaps we have found the forums limit; politics, religion and mass murder all together are the ultimate bane to polite internet conversation? ?

Early in the thread someone mentioned that there will be people reading that could contribute, but will not for fear of the reaction. I see what is meant now, but the reactions here I don't understand. Just because someone discusses a point of view about a subject doesn't mean that person must follow it, and by conclusion in this case - deny the holocaust for gods sake. You can entertain an idea without accepting it - it is the mark of an educated mind they say! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really am finished with this debate now. ? Main reason being that we could all find and post different links supporting every theory under the sun and what it comes down to is that as individuals,we are all entitled  to believe what we believe, and long may that continue. Mind you interest could be peaked again,if somebody could find a good link to the fact that Nazis were in fact alien spacemen. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hateful ideologies crave legitimacy. Those who spout them desperately want a seat at the table, to be granted attention and pretend for a moment that their beliefs are anything other than thinly veiled and violent hatred.

So no, I'm not ever going to debate whether the Holocaust happened, because that plays straight into the hands of the despicable minority.

This isn't small mindedness, cowardice or thought police, it's refusing to give time and attention to hateful nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freedom of speech isn't the same as requiring anybody actually listens to what one has to say or engages with it.

I'm not going to post here again because this has turned into a straw man argument and I have better things to do with my time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit surprised the thread has gone this far. Discussion and debate are all well and good, but there are some things i strongly feel people do not have any rights whatsoever to debate or question, no matter how educated, entitled, or enlightened we think we are.

So on a lighter tongue-in-cheek note - could someone maybe, out of the blue, find some reason to complain about Chards, and have the hammer finally brought down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now