Leon Degrelle (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

barkman44 -> Leon Degrelle (4/2/2011 10:43:51 PM)

Has anyone read his book about the eastern front?I know he was an unrepentant nazi but like Rudel you can't discount his bravery and fighting elan.
My favorite excerpt is his story of when they had been in position for a fairly long length of time and the bucket of the well they were using came loose and fell into the well.
So the got a hook and instead of pulling up the bucket the pulled up a rotting russian corpse,his matter of fact statement"We'd been drinking him for weeks"brings into stark contrast what life was like back then.A good read have read it 3 times.
Interestingly Hitler stated that if he was to have a son he would like him to be like Degrelle!



barkman44 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 12:12:06 AM)

I have to ask,do's anyone know who he was???



Bamilus -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 12:14:07 AM)

Yes, he was a Walloon SS Officer and the founder of Rexism.

But why are you posting this....?



barkman44 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 12:25:51 AM)

Because he fought on the ef and have read of other comments about books written about combat on the ef on this forum so i mention one that i consider out of the mainstream apparently so "EXCUSE MEEEEEEEE" have you read his book that's what I asked??



Bamilus -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 12:31:58 AM)

No because his bias prevents it from approaching fact.



bdtj1815 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 12:31:59 AM)

I do know about him. A particularly nasty piece of work. I would not read his book if you paid me.



barkman44 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 1:00:18 AM)

So his acounts are nasty an to be ignored and neither of you have read his book INTERESTING I like a disscussuion with an ignorant person sorry but since you havt'nt read the aformentioned volume your lacking in source material.
and responce puzzlies me .



Lrfss -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 1:28:15 AM)

I have the book, read about only 50% but what I have read I found interesting. I know a few who read all of the book who thought it was worth reading just not a great book on the subject overall...



barkman44 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 1:49:28 AM)

I just find it interestinglly that some someone can critic it and not have'nt read it ?it puzzles me .



Lrfss -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 2:09:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: barkorn45

I just find it interestinglly that some someone can critic it and not have'nt read it ?it puzzles me .


I have found that due to the subject matter some can't seem to view it all in a historical perspective and get all caught up in the PC of it all... So sad...

Some of the best books I've ever read some would likely find the content offensive, however who cares as long as you enjoy it!

Some really good historical accounts on the various branch's of the SS out there, one was called IIRC "SS Intelligence" or something like that about the whole spy, counter spy stuff, was a great book and well documented.

Read on!

Lrfss



bdtj1815 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 2:26:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: barkorn45

I just find it interestinglly that some someone can critic it and not have'nt read it ?it puzzles me .


I am not criticising the book because I would not want to buy it in case by doing so I might enrich the estate of his family, or worse that of a dubious publisher enriching themselves by publishing books written by such dreadful people as Degrelle . I am criticising the man, which you can do by reading about him, not what he wrote.



Bamilus -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 3:36:16 AM)

I don't need to read Hitler's terrible prose in Mein Kampf to know what he believed. The same goes for Degrelle. I think their actions were sufficient.

@ LRFSS

I don't have problems with the book because it might contain "offensive" content (whatever that means). I question the actual truthfulness of the writing because it is apparent that Degrelle was a fanatical fascist and spent the rest of his post war life trying to deny the Holocaust and legitimize the Third Reich. Anyone who tries to deny the Holocaust loses instant credibility in my book and therefore I put his memoirs in the category of fiction, the fanciful stuff of legend.

Many officers and soldiers who fought for the Axis have written legitimate memoirs of their experiences. Leon Degrelle is not one of them.



Aurelian -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 4:07:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: barkorn45


Interestingly Hitler stated that if he was to have a son he would like him to be like Degrelle!


So Degrelle claimed he said.

Anyone who tells the Pope that Auschwitz's use as an extermination camp was a fraud, and;

Repeated negationist statements on the Holocaust.

His only regret about the war was that they lost.

Can't possibly write anything that could be considered unbiased or, to me, worth reading.

It's a shame Belgium never got to carry out the death sentence they imposed.



Aditia -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 9:25:03 AM)

yeah.... How about we talk about gaming again



molchomor -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 10:02:06 AM)

Regarding the Rudel book, if you are into the airwar, I really recommend the excellent books by Pierre Clostermann and Heinz Knoke.

And nope, none of them were nazis ;)



Mehring -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 10:14:34 AM)

Problem is, there's not a single history book that isn't biased. Every book is written from one perspective or another and, irrespective of any outright invention, gives weight to some information at the expense of other information. History books are replete with "received wisdom" which goes unchallenged by authors because they find no reason to question it. Misinformation and lies are repeated until often they become the bedrock of society's understanding of history. "But everybody knows that's what happened," we are told. Our society differs from others by degree, and the degree changes with time.

Personally I'm heartened that people find Degrelle repugnant and agree it's a shame he wasn't executed. But that doesn't invalidate his book. Even if its primarily fiction- I don't know- it is an historical record of a way of thinking which was produced by historical interests and circumstances. Like Mein Kampf, Churchill's memoirs and every other book for that matter, it needs to be read critically.



warspite1 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 10:30:15 AM)

Always good to see Hitler's Mein Kampf and Churchill's memoirs in the same sentence - good grief [8|]



Mehring -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 12:09:26 PM)

There's not so much between them, really. One led an empire trying in vain to fight off challenges to its global hegemony, the other led an aspiring economy making its second challenge. Both were ruthless representatives of their respective nation's ruling class.

In the mid 1930s Churchill really couldn't tell whether Hitler was good for "Germany" or not. Doubtless, what this really meant, was he couldn't see whether Hitler's pursuit of German industry's interests would greatly cut across those of Britain's industries. He had doubtless read Mein Kampf, in which Hitler expressly ruled out building a navy and challenging Britain's colonial empire.

Written in November 1935, and published in "Great Contemporaries" he said "[History] is replete with examples of men who have risen to power by employing stern, grim, and even frightful methods but who, nevertheless, when their life is revealed as a whole, have been regarded as great figures whose lives have enriched the story of mankind. So may it be with Hitler."

Only someone who recognised a kindred spirit and who shared the same social aims, albeit for the benefit of a rival nation- the repression of the working class- could have written this of Hitler at the time. Compare Leon Trotsky's analysis of Hitler and National Socialism in "What is National Socialism", written exactly two years previously

"The more impotent the police regime of the Nazi is in the field of national economy, the more it is forced to transfer its efforts to the field of foreign policy. This corresponds fully to the inner dynamics of German capitalism, aggressive through and through. The sudden turn of the Nazi leaders to peaceful declarations could deceive only utter simpletons. What other method remains at Hitler’s disposal to transfer the responsibility for internal distresses to external enemies and to accumulate under the press of the dictatorship the explosive force of nationalism? This part of the program, outlined openly even prior to the Nazis” assumption of power, is now being fulfilled with iron logic before the eyes of the world. The date of the new European catastrophe will be determined by the time necessary for the arming of Germany. It is not a question of months, but neither is it a question of decades. It will be but a few years before Europe is again plunged into a war, unless Hitler is forestalled in time by the inner forces of Germany."



sillyflower -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 1:27:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

There's not so much between them, really. One led an empire trying in vain to fight off challenges to its global hegemony, the other led an aspiring economy making its second challenge. Both were ruthless representatives of their respective nation's ruling class.


I don't wish to fall out with my new opponent but this is bizarre and absurdly insulting to the man who, more than any other, means we can play this game in peace, and to the previous generation to mine.

Enough politics for 1 thread



warspite1 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 2:24:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

There's not so much between them, really.

Warspite1

How mind numbingly stupid, and spectacularly ungrateful too. Just to be clear you are saying there is not much difference between Adolf Hitler and Winston S Churchill?

Thanks to Churchill you are free to spout such nonsense, but I am also free to ignore. Green button for you.



Lrfss -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 2:52:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: molchomor

Regarding the Rudel book, if you are into the airwar, I really recommend the excellent books by Pierre Clostermann and Heinz Knoke.

And nope, none of them were nazis ;)



Rudels own book I thought was cool and the best version, course I'm somewhat biased as I met him in the early '70's and though I didn't get his book signed at the time I got his autograph when he visted DC on a stamped cover...



Lrfss -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 2:56:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

Problem is, there's not a single history book that isn't biased. Every book is written from one perspective or another and, irrespective of any outright invention, gives weight to some information at the expense of other information. History books are replete with "received wisdom" which goes unchallenged by authors because they find no reason to question it. Misinformation and lies are repeated until often they become the bedrock of society's understanding of history. "But everybody knows that's what happened," we are told. Our society differs from others by degree, and the degree changes with time.

Personally I'm heartened that people find Degrelle repugnant and agree it's a shame he wasn't executed. But that doesn't invalidate his book. Even if its primarily fiction- I don't know- it is an historical record of a way of thinking which was produced by historical interests and circumstances. Like Mein Kampf, Churchill's memoirs and every other book for that matter, it needs to be read critically.


True enough...



ComradeP -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 3:03:40 PM)

I would agree that Churchill in many ways was not the great man pre-war as people would've wanted you to believe after the war, but he certainly can't be compared to Hitler. They were both products of a time and age, but Hitler was also a deranged madman on top of that. At his worst, Churchill just took credit for things he didn't really do or influenced and tried to brush away his not necessarily anti-German pre-war views by writing somewhat revisionist memoirs, but that was par for the course. After the war, everybody tried to prove that he was right, from the worst men of the Nazi and Soviet regimes to the heroes of democratic countries.



Lrfss -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 3:08:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bamilus

I don't need to read Hitler's terrible prose in Mein Kampf to know what he believed. The same goes for Degrelle. I think their actions were sufficient.

@ LRFSS

I don't have problems with the book because it might contain "offensive" content (whatever that means). I question the actual truthfulness of the writing because it is apparent that Degrelle was a fanatical fascist and spent the rest of his post war life trying to deny the Holocaust and legitimize the Third Reich. Anyone who tries to deny the Holocaust loses instant credibility in my book and therefore I put his memoirs in the category of fiction, the fanciful stuff of legend.

Many officers and soldiers who fought for the Axis have written legitimate memoirs of their experiences. Leon Degrelle is not one of them.


No worries, read and believe as you see fit[X(]

I have read many books and articles by so called fanatical Fascists as well as by the opposites who are not really so differant in many ways strangely and have enjoyed/enlightened both sides accounts actually[;)]

I have'nt looked into the so called issue of "Degrelle's" claims made in his book and only have read about 50% of it BTW, so can't really say much beyond that the first half is not so surprising.



Lrfss -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 3:10:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

I would agree that Churchill in many ways was not the great man pre-war as people would've wanted you to believe after the war, but he certainly can't be compared to Hitler. They were both products of a time and age, but Hitler was also a deranged madman on top of that. At his worst, Churchill just took credit for things he didn't really do or influenced and tried to brush away his not necessarily anti-German pre-war views by writing somewhat revisionist memoirs, but that was par for the course. After the war, everybody tried to prove that he was right, from the worst men of the Nazi and Soviet regimes to the heroes of democratic countries.


+1 Agreed[:)]



Steelers708 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 3:16:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

There's not so much between them, really.

Warspite1

How mind numbingly stupid, and spectacularly ungrateful too. Just to be clear you are saying there is not much difference between Adolf Hitler and Winston S Churchill?

Thanks to Churchill you are free to spout such nonsense, but I am also free to ignore. Green button for you.


Whilst I wouldn't want to go anywhere near saying that there wasn't much between Hitler and Churchill, I would say that Churchill is not the whiter than white glorious hero he is often made out to be. He had a darker side to him, look up the 1943 Bengal Famine and his recommendations regarding what would become the 1913 Mental Deficiency Act.

Here is a short example of his thinking, the whole article can be found here:


http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support/the-churchill-centre/publications/finest-hour-online/594-churchill-and-eugenics

He wrote to the Prime Minister, H.H. Asquith, in December 1910, about the "multiplication of the unfit" that constituted "a very terrible danger to the race." Until the public accepted the need for sterilisation, Churchill argued, the "feeble-minded" would have to be kept in custodial care, segregated both from the world and the opposite sex.

In his letter, Churchill told Asquith: "The unnatural and increasingly rapid growth of the Feeble-Minded and Insane classes, coupled as it is with a steady restriction among all the thrifty, energetic and superior stocks, constitutes a national and race danger which it is impossible to exaggerate. I am convinced that the multiplication of the Feeble-Minded, which is proceeding now at an artificial rate, unchecked by any of the old restraints of nature, and actually fostered by civilised conditions, is a terrible danger to the race." Concerned by the high cost of forced segregation, Churchill preferred compulsory sterilisation to confinement, describing sterilisation as a "simple surgical operation so the inferior could be permitted freely in the world without causing much inconvenience to others."

Churchill's letter to Asquith showed how much he regarded British racial health as a serious and an urgent issue. As he wrote to the Prime Minister: ‘I feel that the source from which the stream of madness is fed should be cut off and sealed up before another year has passed.'[8].

To reinforce his sense of urgency, Churchill circulated to his Cabinet colleagues the text of a lecture by Dr A.F. Treadgold, one of the expert advisers to the Royal Commission. It was entitled "The Feeble-Minded-A Social Danger." Written in 1909, the lecture gave, in the words of Churchill's covering note, "a concise, and, I am afraid not exaggerated statement of the serious problems to be faced." Churchill added: "The Government is pledged to legislation, and a Bill is being drafted to carry out the recommendations of the Royal Commission."[9]

In February 1911, Churchill spoke in the House of Commons about the need to introduce compulsory labour camps for "mental defectives." As for "tramps and wastrels," he said, "there ought to be proper Labour Colonies where they could be sent for considerable periods and made to realize their duty to the State."[10] Convicted criminals would be sent to these labour colonies if they were judged "feeble-minded" on medical grounds. It was estimated that some 20,000 convicted criminals would be included in this plan. To his Home Office advisers, with whom he was then drafting what would later become the Mental Deficiency Bill, Churchill proposed that anyone who was convicted of any second criminal offence could, on the direction of the Home Secretary, be officially declared criminally "feeble-minded," and made to undergo a medical enquiry. If the enquiry endorsed the declaration of "feeble-mindedness," the person could then be detained in a labour colony for as long as was considered a suitable period.


What's the English translation of Arbeit Macht Frei, oh yes, Work Makes one Free as Churchill may have thought.








PeeDeeAitch -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 3:20:41 PM)

One problem with the "all history is biased" take is that it often assumes some sort of equality in level of bias, intent, goals, and impact. While I do agree that one should read all history critically, to assume that since all history is biased one must treat them the same way is naive. In a way, to get way off topic here, this is the problem of recent themese in social sciences, taking a good idea "all history must be read critically" and then running with it to an illogical extreme "since it is all biased, we can pick and choose our own versions of what is right."

Memoirs from an unrepentant facsist, supporter of Hitler, etc. will be biased. A Western Allied wartime leader's memoirs will be biased. I do think that to equate a level of bias, or to say they can somehow be treated the same way is rather shallow.



Lrfss -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 3:22:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Steelers708


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mehring

There's not so much between them, really.

Warspite1

How mind numbingly stupid, and spectacularly ungrateful too. Just to be clear you are saying there is not much difference between Adolf Hitler and Winston S Churchill?

Thanks to Churchill you are free to spout such nonsense, but I am also free to ignore. Green button for you.


Whilst I wouldn't want to go anywhere near saying that there wasn't much between Hitler and Churchill, I would say that Churchill is not the whiter than white glorious hero he is often made out to be. He had a darker side to him, look up the 1943 Bengal Famine and his recommendations regarding what would become the 1913 Mental Deficiency Act.

Here is a short example of his thinking, the whole article can be found here:


http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support/the-churchill-centre/publications/finest-hour-online/594-churchill-and-eugenics

He wrote to the Prime Minister, H.H. Asquith, in December 1910, about the "multiplication of the unfit" that constituted "a very terrible danger to the race." Until the public accepted the need for sterilisation, Churchill argued, the "feeble-minded" would have to be kept in custodial care, segregated both from the world and the opposite sex.

In his letter, Churchill told Asquith: "The unnatural and increasingly rapid growth of the Feeble-Minded and Insane classes, coupled as it is with a steady restriction among all the thrifty, energetic and superior stocks, constitutes a national and race danger which it is impossible to exaggerate. I am convinced that the multiplication of the Feeble-Minded, which is proceeding now at an artificial rate, unchecked by any of the old restraints of nature, and actually fostered by civilised conditions, is a terrible danger to the race." Concerned by the high cost of forced segregation, Churchill preferred compulsory sterilisation to confinement, describing sterilisation as a "simple surgical operation so the inferior could be permitted freely in the world without causing much inconvenience to others."

Churchill's letter to Asquith showed how much he regarded British racial health as a serious and an urgent issue. As he wrote to the Prime Minister: ‘I feel that the source from which the stream of madness is fed should be cut off and sealed up before another year has passed.'[8].

To reinforce his sense of urgency, Churchill circulated to his Cabinet colleagues the text of a lecture by Dr A.F. Treadgold, one of the expert advisers to the Royal Commission. It was entitled "The Feeble-Minded-A Social Danger." Written in 1909, the lecture gave, in the words of Churchill's covering note, "a concise, and, I am afraid not exaggerated statement of the serious problems to be faced." Churchill added: "The Government is pledged to legislation, and a Bill is being drafted to carry out the recommendations of the Royal Commission."[9]

In February 1911, Churchill spoke in the House of Commons about the need to introduce compulsory labour camps for "mental defectives." As for "tramps and wastrels," he said, "there ought to be proper Labour Colonies where they could be sent for considerable periods and made to realize their duty to the State."[10] Convicted criminals would be sent to these labour colonies if they were judged "feeble-minded" on medical grounds. It was estimated that some 20,000 convicted criminals would be included in this plan. To his Home Office advisers, with whom he was then drafting what would later become the Mental Deficiency Bill, Churchill proposed that anyone who was convicted of any second criminal offence could, on the direction of the Home Secretary, be officially declared criminally "feeble-minded," and made to undergo a medical enquiry. If the enquiry endorsed the declaration of "feeble-mindedness," the person could then be detained in a labour colony for as long as was considered a suitable period.


What's the English translation of Arbeit Macht Frei, oh yes, Work Makes one Free as Churchill may have thought.







Someone stole that sign like IIRC a year ago? Wonder if it ever was found???



Steelers708 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 3:33:16 PM)

They did find it, cut into 3 pieces. They also arrested 5 people, but I haven't heard anything about a trial etc.



barkman44 -> RE: Leon Degrelle (4/3/2011 4:03:27 PM)

Interesting I read the book for it's historical content not political content I don't recall him praising hitler in it?Can someone legitemetly show evidence of falsities in his recollections?If so I need facts not accusasions with out empirical evidence to support it.
Someone once said"the victor writes the history"interesting.I've read julius Caesars commentarias at least a dozen times I guess i shoud'nt have since he brought about the eventual collapse of the roman empire which lead to the so-called dark ages and the rise of islam"excuse meeee"I read degrelle's book as a "war"book not a political testiment.I found it interesting to read of a non-german joining the"pan european crusade against bolshevism".
I guess i should'nt read about the 33 charlamange div. or 5th ss pz div. either or all the other histories that run counter to the current pc atmosphere that exists now



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.28125