Hacker News Reader

Comment by brenden2 | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

The military didn’t take over nazi Germany.

In effect it did. From Wikipedia:

> the German state between 1933 and 1945, when Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party (NSDAP) controlled the country which they transformed into a dictatorship. Under Hitler's rule, Germany became a totalitarian state where nearly all aspects of life were controlled by the government

In this context, the "government" means the military. Hitler used military force to enforce their rein. There's no way Nazi Germany could have done what they did without absolute control exerted by the military.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Germany

Maybe you could say the nazis took over the military and be more accurate. Most oppression came from the SA which was a military like organization that the nazis had built up. This wasn’t a military coup like in other countries.

You could think about it that way, but you should also know that Himmler created the SS which swore allegiance to Hitler. The SS also existed before Hitler became the chancellor of Germany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS#Origins_(1929%E2%80%...

> you should also know that Himmler created the SS

I don't understand what point you are trying to make. The SS was an organization within the nazi party, not Germany's armed forces. Your example refutes your previous assertion that "having a military take over like Nazi Germany" because your quote clearly points out that nothing of the sort happened ever.

I don't think the distinction matters. The SS was an armed military force, with 900,000 soldiers.

Wrong. The SS was a paramilitary organization within the nazi party. It started as a small group of loyalist bodyguards.

Their name literally meant "hall security".

And when Himmler took over the organization, the SS featured less than 3k members.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schutzstaffel

You're either a poor troll or extremely uninformed.

I am not sure what point you are trying to prove. All this stuff came from outside the regular military. So in the present you should be more worried about militias taking over than the regular military.

My point is simple: be skeptical and suspicious of humans with lots of power over other people.

I don’t think you are doing yourself a favor by bending history in a shape that supports your (very valid) point.

> Himmler created the SS

Not that it matters to your argument but as a point of trivia, Himmler did not create the SS. While SS member #1 was Adolf Hitler, SS member #2 was Emil Maurice, Hitler's Jewish friend and driver since the early days of the party.

I guess I'm conflating Waffen-SS with the SS itself (which is a superset). Waffen-SS is the military branch, and it says this on Wikipedia:

> Originally, it was under the control of the SS Führungshauptamt (SS operational command office) beneath Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler.

Which I interpreted ("originally") as being Himmler's creation.

OK, but Nazi Germany if you'll read some history was not ever a military takeover.

The transition was "democratic" yes, but it became a fascist state operated by the military.

What, no "sheeple"?

You're making a joke, but I find it strange that people in the US aren't more skeptical of the government, especially the military and militarized police forces. To think the US is somehow unable to become a totalitarian state is naive. In Germany people didn't think it was going to happen either, many Germans didn't believe the atrocities were even happening and some remain in denial about them today.

If you take nazi Germany as an example you should be very worried about armed militias , not the official military.

> To think the US is somehow unable to become a totalitarian state is naive.

As is thinking that "it is unlikely" is somehow the same as "unable". There's broad-brush painting going on here, but I don't think it's necessarily only where you think it is.

Part of the issue here is that the military establishment and its peripheral industries in the US are so enormous, that most people who aren’t in the military are close to someone who is, or who does business with it. We’re all already in the Army, basically.

> I find it strange that people in the US aren't more skeptical of the government....military and militarized police forces. To think the US is somehow unable to become a totalitarian state is naive.

2nd amendment supporters and small government libertarians are both examples of groups who are suspicious of large governments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com