AJP Taylor: The Origins of the Second World War

[truthlover72]

Just one example of 'hidden history' is that on AUG. 29, 1939, Polish officials PRE-RECORDED the public announcement that Hitler had attacked Poland SEPT. 1 between 4:-5: a.m. On Sept. 1, Hitler publically announced that Poland had attacked Germany through the night and at 5:45 a.m. he issued the order to Germany's soldiers to "RETURN fire" and ANSWER 'bomb for bomb'. How is it that Polish officials recorded an announcement of an 'attack' TWO DAYS BEFORE the 'attack', to the very HOUR of it???

[truthlover72]

The 'official version' of WWII comes with built-in clubs of shame & ridicule, weilded by the propagandized mob to ensure no challenge of it ever reaches the public mind. Michael Walsh has done a fantastic work gathering and compiling a history of the WWII era composed almost entirely of actual quotes of statesmen, journalists, etc. of the time, in his book, "Witness to History". Let the fearless dare to read accounts other than the 'approved' version & come to his own conclusion.

[truthlover72]

The volatile reaction to Taylor's book is itself evidence of the same attempts at censorship we are hammered with today where it is considered a cardinal sin to question the 'official version'. Like trusting fools we've accepted the training to parrot the 'official version' & have become volunteer censors to silence anyone who expresses an independent thought or question. It is frightening to consider how many 'believers' insist they already 'know' all there is to 'know' & are now 'authorities'.

[randy95023]

So many people, including myself, have studied WW2 in depth. My home library has several hundred books about military and political matters of the 19th and 20th century. I consider myself as a very well informed layman/historian. We KNOW the reasons of WW1 and WW2 but all have our own concepts of cause. It depends on where you emphasize the pieces of the puzzle, and what weight you assign to all the inputs. 50 Historians may give 50 "causes" for WW2 and none would be technically "wrong".

[MultiStessi]

i don't know what to think when it comes to Hitler. In consideration of his foreign policies, most of it, with consideration of A.J.P Taylor, seems to be that Hitler didn't predict other countries would go to war. However, when looking at such events like, the Rhineland, Hitler was right about other countries and how they were not going to get involved. However personally, i'm edging more to the idea that Hitler planned the war. This can be assumed from his autobiography Mein Kampf.

[maosef]

@germanysjim Back to /b/ with you.

[PYATES13]

@germanysjim yeah that's a real credible line of thought, absolute bollocks.

[MTSCMIH]

Had Taylor not produced this, would any other historians have done so? It took someone with Taylors credibility to have this sort of revionist argument taken seriously. Had a lesser historian put their neck on the line and done so, they would have been mauled. AJP Taylor, father of the revionist approach to Hitler and Nazism, and to a large extent responsible for a large part of the heterogenous views on this topic we have today. Which has led to a better understanding of the topic area overall.

[WLCJasper]

this is a great video! thank you so much for posting it! :)

[RubberJack]

this video is

GREATTTTT

[danieleatsbabies21]

im sure if the germans won the war there would be a german historian being criticised for say that churchill wasn't all that bad as well.

[JimmySmers]

How is the Holocaust relevant to Hitler's territorial aims? That lady brought in a complete nonsensical detour.

[Ace4Tree1]

Why do people who go against official history get mistreated.It just shows how pitiful the debating arena is.After all,if history is written real well then idiots with strange unfunded stories can be easily shown for what they are.I basically welcome a new point of view if it's a honest try to shed light upon dark historical subjects.And I do abhor forgery of history,which is abundant unfortunately.Hitler was backed by wall street bankers,who backed the Bolsheviks as well according to A.Sutton.

[JimmySmers]

@Ace4Tree1

There is a consensus history because it keeps the masses brainwashed, the State can't allow them to form their own opinions or look at the facts themselves since they just might come up with conclusions that damage the interests of the State.

[DAandFrank]

@JimmySmers You know absolutely nothing about historical investigation. States in the modern west have no control over the direction or conclusions of historical research, and now more than ever historians disagree violently over major issues in countless areas of research. True, there is usually consensus about broad outlines, but this is because the evidence tends to point towards a single general conclusion, and when it comes to specifics debate thrives.

[GreatGrumbledook]

He does not sound like a tough grizzled old soldier but some kind of dandified nancy boy, who is afraid of wars and he is indubitably no sea-dog but the sort of pasty landlubber I have always despised. I'll warrant, the most exciting thing that has happened to this limpid prawn in a whole year, was the day when he forgot to put sugar in his porridge!

[funkyalfonso]

@GreatGrumbledook Why repeat this nonsense on each video?

[GreatGrumbledook]

@funkyalfonso: Because I tried the method of Shakespeare, taken form his play Julius Caesar:

"Though now we must appear bloody and cruel, As, by our hands and this our present act You see we do; yet see you but our hands And this the bleeding business they have done: Our hearts you see not; they are pitiful; And pity to the general wrong of Rome— As fire drives out fire, so pity pity— Hath done this deed on Caesar."

So I tried to fight his awful nonsense with mine.

[ryko26]

Nazi apologism. AJP was the pioneer of what is now a common strain of historian - take ONLY points of view at odds with all other historians, sit back and lap up the controversy.

I'm sure he was brilliant but if you NEVER concur with others then it just detracts from the persuasiveness of your valid arguments.

[AmNotHere911]

@ryko26

Historians are there observe history not be judgemental moralists. Structuralists - a respected methodology - took their que from Taylor, even Ian Kershaw (a brillian world renown expert on Nazi Germany) recognises the validity of the structuralist approach which focused on the mechanics of power politics in Nazi Germany.

[Shnufkin]

You idiot! AJP Taylor is one of the most Germanophobic historians ever! He thought the establishment of a West German state was the beginning of a Fourth Reich.

[ryko26]

Well he was fucking wrong about that as well then, wasn't he?

[Shnufkin]

Evidently, you fucking douche.

I'm not saying everything AJP Taylor said or wrote was right. He was a rabid Germanophobe but then again most historians were considering Hitler incinerated 6 million people. All I'm saying is that Taylor inspired debate. And debate creates good historical analysis. You go and follow your ten-a-penny polytechnic historians, I'll stick with Taylor, Carr, Thomas, et al., thankyou very much.

[ryko26]

...and all the other historians on your A-Level list. Fuck off you hilariously dumb squirt.

"most historians were considering Hitler incinerated 6 million people. "

You might want to put a comma in that sentence (typical semi-illiterate 19-yr-old).

[Shnufkin]

Ooh! Touched a nerve? Fuck off you sad cunt.

[ryko26]

er...yes! I think I probably DID touch a nerve. Diddums, did you really think A-Level history gave you the right to spout off as if you held some sagely wisdom to impart? What a silly little boy. Run along now!

[Shnufkin]

Nah mate I did IB History higher level, and got a 7. I didn't do A levels.

You have a degree in modern history I presume?

[ryko26]

woo hoo! (claps hands in delight) how impressive!

what a twat

[Shnufkin]

woo hoo!

what a faggot

[bigpotplant]

Thanks for posting,listend to a program on radio 4 last night about ajp found his views very refreshing.