Anti-Communism in Pop-Culture

That's the paradox: the kid who actually has a brain and understands what bullshit consumerism and excess drug use are is seen by others in the hood as "too good for us" and thus "alien", but all the brain-dead flexing is seen as normal.

For the record, I grew up in a black-majority area in the US, have worked with a lot of black activists in my city, am "fluent" in the culture despite not being black myself, so I know what I'm talking about.

It's just culture coopting. hard rock was coopted, it started as left leaning but the media picked more and more on the bands that were feel-goodish nonsense with bombastic sound and it became stupid, while the bands who carried on the legacy of protest or uneasy hard rock got obscured because they had no platform and the people just preferred Journey's last hit song in their car to feel cool with people. The same as punk rock; from protest music to teenage angst against stupid shit or raise-your-beer shit. Every commercially viable genre has this happening because capitalism looks in the genre at the characteristics that are most easy to commercialize and that are safe for himself, so the music industry puts the reins on the movements and shits out "cooler" music until it feels stupid and a new movement is born. And the cycle repeats.
The music industry knows their chickens and promotes both kendrick the idpoler and 50 cent the stupid rapper because they target different demographics. Rap music had that kind of special magic that made it very compatible with the american dream, the rags to riches by any means is just a serotonine shot for anyone who is not totally disgusted with capitalism. But for example kendrick is too "problematic" for middle classes and they prefer his black idpol message. While the ghetto people see the gangstas not only as more close to their reality, but as actually speaking out their dreams of taking over the world.
I think that for example Eminem's rise to fame was a genuine moment of music reinventing itself before being coopted by capitalism in the very same career of the artist. His stuff was like "life sucks so much I want to kill myself and overdose, jobs suck and gangsta ghetto life is more like a horror movie than GTA" but the problem is that he always mantained that lottery game attitude over rap music that porky just jacks off to. His partial rejuvination though was very brief and quicky rap returned to gangsta gloryfing just like punk didn't end hard rock macho bullshit. The paradigm can't change without systemic change

Not to mention most woke/lyrical/experimental rappers in no way came from the gutters like many people think. Jpeggy grew up a sheltered suburban kid, Curry is an art school dropout, etc.

The only authentically woke rappers are the ones who became radicalized while in prison.

First verse: Alienation
Second verse: We're waiting for the revolution
Third verse: The current system doesn't give a fuck about the youth
Fourth verse: We're coming for the bourgiousse

Yep, that's a capitalist anthem alright. Don't talk to me or my rock band ever again.

Attached: 1486593539718.gif (255x217, 25.84K)

Vince Staples

This. Hammer to Fall is a pretty blatantly anti communist (or at least anti establishment) song.

Meant anti capitalist.

Are you going to Clout-borough Fair?
Codeine, percs, dank molly, and xans
Tattoo my face and rainbow my hair
My name shall be based on one of your mans'

Tell them to get me a million of views
Codeine, percs, dank molly, and xans
No bot accounts or follows to lose
I will then be one of your mans

Tell them to buy me a shimmering chain
Codeine, percs, dank molly, and xans
Flex for the thots who fuck with my brain
I will then be be one of your mans

Tell them to sign me a label of major
Codeine, percs, dank molly, and xans
And shower me with that 360 favor
I will then be one of your mans

Are you going to Clout-borough Fair?
Codeine, percs, dank molly, and xans
Tattoo my face and rainbow my hair
My name shall be based on one of your mans'

Attached: shitcloud.jpg (720x960, 148.11K)

You're misunderstanding what the CIA are saying here.

WE MUST CRITICALLY SUPPORT CIA IN THEIR STRUGGLE AGAINST COMMUNIST IMPERIALIST CAPITALISM

The absolute state of hip hop today.

This lyric is out of time.

Sometimes anti-left propaganda runs so deep it doesn't even make sense, pic related.

Attached: mlaatr pest control.jpg (506x365, 127.85K)

Are you kidding me? Lyrics of "Soak up the Sun":

Soak up the sun is more ambiguous. Basically, she’s saying she’s too poor to even participate in some communist micro-sect party.

I haven't watched this embarrassing show since childhood, so just took a look at the episode
this is liberal morality in a nutshell, complete disregard for sentient beings on account of them being "Other."

Attached: Untitled.png (278x244, 34.78K)

...

youtu.be/STpRL3e_cPE

On topic, my reactionary guilty pleasure entertainment would be maybe the movie Sin City, or maybe Gran Torino.

that second one is fucking gulag worthy

Attached: 1401411217985.webm (640x360, 3.87M)

not sure if i should make a new thread or just ask here
gist of the question is: what do you do if you want to write enjoyable stories about cool stuff that lends itself to undesirable, often reactionary messages. (i.e. war or a lot of comedy.) even if those aren't the intent. it's not like i'm an author or anything, it's something i dwell on instead of writing walls of text like those things on deviantart nobody reads that clog up search results.

it seems like the aim of entertaining lends itself to allowing ideology to puppet you even when your own personal politics are sound, and i'm not sure whether to just accept that's what comes with the territory, or if there's some alternative way of doing it.
merely taping socialist aesthetics onto well-worn narratives isn't really likely to cut it, it just leads to the kind of incongruity you get where you have an anti-war story bolted on to a videogame about how insanely cool war machines are when they're blowing each other up and you forget they're full of people.

haven't really refined my question down properly but it's 5am.

youtube.com/watch?v=ndFysO2JunE

Everything is inherently political, there is no escape.

If you're scared your story is gonna hurt a certain group, take a look at your plot points and characteristics that group portrays in your story. Run whatever you think is in bad taste past some friends. If your heart is telling you no, just drop that part. After a certain point, there's not really a lot you can do to stop people from appropriating your message, so that's not really on you.
Just denounce reactionaries like all the good authors do.
Something Gundam does consistently right is demonstrating the attrocities of war. In pretty much every series, any time MC kills someone you get a close-up of their final moments. People still like the fantasy of giant robots, but they're not gonna push robo-fascism except for zeonfags. As long as the tone reflects your intent, you can put all the cool shit you want in.

I just came to this forum out of boredom, and it's quite funny that you people think communism works, or am I just unenlightened?

I noticed some of the Beatles songs are quite conservative and reactionary. Like revolution, taxman.
John was def a neoliberal globalist type. Imagine is basically the theme song to that garbage.
But he also came from an era with more class consciousness and wrote working class hero.

youtube.com/watch?v=iMewtlmkV6c

Guess

John Lennon was a communist. Maybe he just didn't like Mao's cultural revolution, doesn't make him an anti-communist or reactionary. I'm not a Mao fan either. Listen to some of Lennon's later songs, it's good stuff.

dude on the right in pic related is Che Guevara

Attached: lennon che.jpg (960x600, 65.68K)

I guess I'm right and you're just the opposite of Zig Forums for opposition sake.

That photo is fake. Lennon is a hippie, that regretted getting involved with "serious revolutionaries". Stop.

Attached: 1401411217983.webm (640x360, 3.95M)

are you dense?

>>>/liberalpol/

Precisely, you're goal is the defeat of the alt shite, what breed are you may I ask?

Ok i just checked the photo is fake. However you are beyond retarded if you think that "imagine" is a neoliberal anthem.

You already made up your mind, and no amount of sincere-posting will change that. What the fuck are you even doing here?

I said I was bored, I shatposted Zig Forums shit anonymously for about a year and I'm fed up with their side, so now I'm turncoating them, not just because it's the right thing to do, but to complete the perspectivist study I will finish writing down very soon.

He's still an icon to liberals.

You just said this board was a mirror of Zig Forums without explaining why. Im guessing you're about to pull le enlightened centrist card

Nope, I was expecting you (a fellow Zig Forums) user to explain to me why communism is a better alternative to Not Socialism, but it looks like all you're interested in is brain bashing political arguments topped off with memetic warefare. Which if you ask me, you need to read the 48 laws of power and understand the psychology of the enemy's perspectives and optics in order to truly understand them and perfect your memetic warefare against them, you could meme that they are fine with cuckholdry as long as they're being cucked by a member of their own race, simple things like that can be memed into their groups, drop into their groups leaving jpgs of said meme and let them look back upon their optics, they have no choice but to momentarily accept in some view that it would be preferable to be cucked by a member of their own race rather than a black man, the more the idea is repeated the more they subcome to the meme and suffer under the fact they cannot eliminate degenerecy within their own group.

If by communism you mean Marxism-Leninism, the explanation already happened in real life. USSR became a superpower and the Third Reich was left in ruins and completely destroyed.

We don't make the assumption that ridicule of the ideologically-inclined will serve any tangible good. Antagonizing a group is fitting, but if you mean to suggest that an idea can be eradicated simply in the suggestion or mention of its imbecility, I am not sure how best to say to you that I am not sure you've wholly thought this through. The "enemy" is psychologically invested in a system of total logical decoherence - mention of the incoherency of their positions matters little, as they've adopted an equally vitriolic philosophy to complement it. You can meme at someone till the sun rises, and they would still shoot you for it once they can see you.

This is dumb as fuck, USSR won the war, while the 3rd Reich lost.

This has jackshit to do with ideology.

You might as well say communism loses to capitalism, because USSR got dissolved and Germany becomes the master of the EU.

I highly doubt that Lennon is an icon to liberals. Even if this is true, should we disregard "working class hero" simply because libshits supposedly like it too? I was born in the GDR and we learned "Give peace a chance" by Lennon/Ono in music class, do you think Margot Honecker, who was minister of education back then, would appreciate liberal anthems? I don't think so.

So? Hippies were anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, anti-comsumerist and concerned about the environment. Yeah, maybe they were naive anarkiddies too, however i think the Hippie movement was an inherently leftist subculture even though it seemed to be not concerned with politics. It was certainly more leftist than anything that came after it, including punk, hip hop, metal and so on. The 1990s Techno scene then resembled the Hippie culture, but it eventually turned into shit too thanks to major record labels and consumerist facebook and instagram attention whores.

You are correct in the assumption that the analysis of each programme in a vacuum by the happenings of the war would be foolhardy. How can we expect to approach the careful theoretical intricacies of each respective system were we not to completely divorce them from their extant conditions? The answer is that you can't. The war was an eventuality borne of the actual existing conditions of the fascist Reich. One needn't consider even the oversaturation of military-economic infrastructure or the subsidization of domestic services in a constrained manner, the former of which suggested the inevitability of conflict and the latter which predicated it. The very recidivism that pockmarked the social landscape of the German Reich was one that wholly and totally committed itself to the universality of an idea which would require and necessitate conflict. In the waging of this essential and practical conflict of ideology against the supposed 'mortal and eschatological' foe, the ideology pressed the state into its service and abided the destruction of its corpus and its people.

You say a lot of word but end up saying nothing. Nazi Germany actually has lower military production than either the Soviet or even France/UK.

And no, there's no NEED for the germans to invade the USSR, that's the biggest mistake Hitler made, next to the invasion of Poland.

This inevitable war is sort of a meme founded by both the nazis and commies who want to be found as victims.

True, but you didn't destroy the Thule society and their fascist ideology, they left Germany and went on to spread their ideas to new hosts, the alt right is just one of their many host groups. To destroy them you must beat them at their own game, debunk their ideas and strip naked their ideology on every platform, explaining why they should be killed and their ideas rejected, I've known them long enough that I can tell you once they are given a properly excuted mirror effect upon their psyche, they crack and mask/justify it with memes or they play dumb and call you off as having liberal sensibilities instead of logical reasoning, just ask them if they would shoot a Jewish infant/child or woman, who have no ties to the so called satanic talmudist pedophiles, they all go on about how evil and parasitic Jews are, but when they are forced to reconnect to human empathy, faced with the question to kill an innocent minority, they will be left with two options, if they say yes to killing innocents then they are exposed as psychopaths, if they say no to killing innocents then they have proven their ideology wrong and that you shouldn't kill Jews for their fascist ideology, they will revert back to their ideology even to despite having been proven to not possess the moral high ground, but this is what will make them more hated across the internet.

The Reich having a lower ceiling of production does nothing when referring to the place of munitions and the relief of Versailles military cashiering in the arms buildup. It matters not but to say that they, by volume, did not produce as much.
You're absolutely correct, I don't make the practical assumption that war was going to happen regardless, just by the nature and conditions prevalent - though they would seem, coupled with the revanchist nature of the fascist ideology to suggest it to be so. Biggest mistakes or not, the theory, if I might be forgiven for my generosity in calling it that, behind the NSDAP would suggest that what they did was no mistake at all, not by their own standards.
Everyone can play their 'Well, they should have…! They could have…! They would have…!' but I simply see no value in dancing around hypotheticals when national """socialism""" imbibed too deeply of its own horseshit symbolic order and shit the bed. They were the architects of their own defeat.
Part is to make it clear what I'm saying, and say it in no mixed terms. The other is to make clear why I am saying it. I'm used to hearing 'muh words oppressing me', but that wasn't all that difficult

There was no need, but fascist ideology and aggression created the need.

Your opinion doesn't matter, a whole generation of baby boomers were raised worshiping the guy.

Yes, there are dozens of far better musicians who were genuinely pro-worker.

But this kind of 'politic of exception' is made across the political board. Every extant force has made exceptions for the enemy, no one needs to tell anyone that the nazi caricature of the jew is an ideological fantasy that helps them maintain power and control over their constituency. They do what they do, in spite of some knowledge that you think would suggest to them they're wrong - that's the power of ideology. It's not that they're simply misguided and don't know what they're doing when they do it - they know exactly what it is they're doing and they do it. Because, based on their relation to the world and their philosophy on how it functions, there is no other way but to indulge in the 'inhuman'.

Which, again, everybody is doing at the time, with the Soviet having the most, actually.
Agreed, but this has jackshit to do with ideology, which is the point.

That's on Hitler's ball. It was Hitler who wanted to attack, it has nothing to do with ideology, no ideology forced Hitler to attack, just like nobody forced Napoleon to attack Russia. There were choices, and they chose the wrong decision.

Right wingers aren’t very creative, most artists are liberals if not leftists.

With the caveat that the whole of the German economy, which was disproportionately vacant at the time due to a certain punitive treaty signed to end another Great war. The point was the German economy could not sustain capital and factor endowments into an economy that was dominating by military production, while the Soviet Union could - in large part due to its degree of separation from the general market economy. We can't compare these things ceteris paribus.
See, this is where I don't get you. We're discussing concrete developments of military assets and you decide to take a right turn into la-la land and start talking as though the Oberkommando, Abwehr, Nomenklatura and highest echelons of power simply made a collective mistake. It's helpful I imagine to paint the face of Hitler atop the caricature we're working with, but it simply falls flat. I get the cruel kind of cynicism you're working where this was simply the mistake of individuals, but in that way an ideology never steps from the parapet of idealism and makes practical steps into the world. No, the decision for war was manifestly an ideological one - it is the one that halted any and all debate of pursuing eastward expansion, and convinced the professionals of a 'Prussian'-oriented Wehrmacht to align with the paramilitary SS and the collaborationist forces. They all, from general to footsoldier, marched east against """Bolshevist Evil""". This was not the mistake of the highest order perpetrated on the honorable and dutiful, it was a general project - and it failed spectacularly. And now, these many years later, we needn't dilly dally on attempting to relativize and prevaricate on tiny details of this colossal and manifestly ideological failure

That's an interesting take on them, but by the end of the day when they've spent more time arguing than focusing, they've wasted time, when they spend more time writing on Zig Forums than writing diet alt shite to slowly convert their peers into voting for fascists, again, they waste time, a picture says a thousand words, and a well crafted meme can say a billion more, more than they can keep up with, a well executed and strategized plan of attack with large covert raids posting the same effective memes over and over again during happenings and breaking news can help you win a meme war, and thus the culture war. Like I said before, if they can be made to show their stubborn devotion to their violent and disgusting views, then they will become hated, no one will join them if their cause is stripped of nobility.

Huh what? It certainly can, but the strongest German economy was still relying on agriculture and heavy industry, not military industry.
Hitler's generals disagreed with him, and he disagreed with his generals. Just like Zhukov vs Stalin, except Stalin actually conceded and left Zhukov to handle war matter, while Hitler had doubt, this is another problem of Hitler's own war command.
How is this any different than the ideology of worldwide communism through armed revolution and funding revolutionary? You might as well say that the invasion of Poland in the 20s and the aggression of the USSR against its neighbor provide a casus belli for Germany to attack the USSR.

But again, casus belli does not create a NEED for actual war, and that one Hitler failed at. He misjudged the strength of an union much bigger than him.

Ah, I see what you mean now. A considerate and consistent application of pressure in media forums to disrupt. I apologize, I was misunderstanding you.

Push the blonde haired bastards to suicide via doxxing or kill them irl, idc what you have to do to beat them, our grandfathers slaughtered them like dogs for a reason.

USSR didn't invade Poland, on the contrary it repelled an invasion by it.

I'd say the lean necessities laid out in the four-year plan and the GNP commitment by the state towards re-armament, as well as the plan for seizure of foreign material holds shows more than just a Chancellors interest in the pursuit of conflict. This is the burdensome reliance on military spending, as well as the intertwining of civilian and military infrastructure expenditures since the country was to be made 'ready for war'. This was a long haul commitment, pursued in the west and the east. Aggression towards Poland over Danzig was a common feeling, and the Nazis had been reliant as well on Soviet imports which had to be relieved by material seizure (the same military policy pursued in the taking of other European material assets in the occupation) to prevent Germany becoming subject to the restriction of oil, grain, and metallic alloys which would cripple the war against Britain Especially since Imperial Japan chose not to pursue territorial aggrandizement after their defeat at Khalkin Gol

That's exactly the reason for the USSR invasion by Germany, to repel an invasion from the USSR.

Which again, everybody is doing at the time. Including the France/UK, who quickly rearms when Germany rearms.
Every major countries at the time were ready for war, except maybe the USA (which catches up DURING the war).

I feel as though I am talking in a circle. The point was that there was a state-sponsored policy for the rearmament that went far beyond the financial commitment made by the other nations. Germany, alone, by virtue of its uniquely mobilized and unitary political body was able to convert the privatization of financial and manufactory processes into civilian participation in war readiness. This simply was not possible at a similar degree in Britain and in France, I am not stipulating that they, too, did not see the writing on the wall based on the annexations occupation in Central Europe. We can't use the Soviets as a comparison by the sheer discrepancy in economic sizes, the Union actually contributed a massive amount in raw resources in exports to German civilian firms. Its military readiness was heavily undermined by the purges, but that is a cursory point to this. These aren't situations you can just throw next to one another and compare, each had a unique position and set of circumstances owed to the prevailing conditions of the time and their historical background. It's an absolutely pointless exercise to just flagrantly play the 'whatabout how everyone was doing this whatabout how UK did that whatabout blah blah blah' game. IT DOESN'T WORK here. Germany, alone, was subject to these specific conditions that made them predisposed to a war economy (even before the war).
This wasn't to me, but what? Are you saying it was JUST a pre-emptive invasion to counteract a suspected Soviet aggression?

Were you not referring to the Soviet Poliish war? What I said is what happened literally.

Attached: c2f.png (500x376, 150.27K)

As a Brit, thank you for updating our hymn.

Neither does your's.

Doubt you're qualified to critisize Lennon's ability as songwriter and composer.
You lack proof that Lennon wasn't genuinely pro-worker ,but i don't want to discuss with you anymore anyway since you spout porky

memes while being arrogant and ignorant.

Wrong. Those who join Zig Forums don't care about "nobility", they enjoy not being noble. They are the very definition of Lumpenproletariat.
Nazi Germany after 1933 was a different thing, because all civilians were forced into the fascist cause by threat of getting tortured or executed.

Nope this is wrong, end of. Germany doesn't militarize anymore than the Soviet or France or UK does.
Which is a necessary trade in order to get german technology.
But that doesn't mean it doesn't hone its own military and ready for combat, in fact, it hasn't finished readying, but to say it hasn't armed itself is dishonest, and no, this re-arming alone far surpasses Germany.
Yes, per Sun Tzu, when the enemy prepares to attack, it is better to attack first and confuse them when they are not ready. A legit military tactics.

The first battle happened in 1919, in Belarus in a hotly contest area of Belarus. It was NOT an attempt of Soviet trying to repel the Polish in their own homeland.

This is the biggest bullshit ever, how can they literally force everyone to go fight? The desertion rate would be humonguous.

inb4 muh german sabotage

German sabotages were in fact very minimal and all hardcore communists.

We can safely that the Nazi regime got POPULAR support with troops fighting to the death.

Well it wasn't really forced, it was more a transfer of responsibility, read up on Milgram's Experiment on obedience.

you are aware what they did to even mildest protest and opposition? you're not actually this retarded, right?

In 1938 the OKW established the Kriegssonderstrafrechtsverordnung (KSSVO). Refusing to join the Wehrmacht, openly disagreeing with authorities and voicing or spreading defeatist or fatalist opinions in public would get you executed. Many people (including my working class grand dad who wasn't politically active but always voted kpd/uspd) were left to choose between getting executed or joining the Wehrmacht. The latter offered a slight chance of further being able to support wive and children in the future, while the former would definitely rid the family of the father, the family's main income and put the whole family on the GESTAPO's list of suspects.

It proved that burgers are just as prone to obedient behaviour as anyone else. The Nazis did not need to employ psycho tricks, they used raw force to achieve their goals from the moment they seized power in 1933.

This pic related is how they see themselves, when in reality they're monsters.

Attached: 2189547899_867edf5803.jpg (426x480, 118.13K)

Their capacity for self-delusion amazes me. I guarantee you I’ll only have to go through a few threads on 4/pol/ to read “burn all Jews” “kill all niggers” etc.

I know there are those who will say that that’s just JIDF trying to strawman the movement but those people who claim that seem entirely tone-death when sincere believers show up and say stuff like that

It’s interesting too that symbols like the black sun, the deaths head etc. don’t seem to phase them. Like they are literally the closest a political movement has come to choosing symbols most normal people view as evil but it doesn’t seem to bother them.

I know that “evil” as such is a spook but it’s an important part of the Zig Forumstard worldview.

Jesus fucking christ, how are most of the people in that image still alive?

I think fascists are mistaken that politics is downstream from culture. They believe this because they believe Jews control culture and therefore politics, but it is not so. It is actually the case that culture is downstream from politics. There are limits to memes.

You'll get some kids get wrapped up in it but the real core are gangsters, essentially and often quite literally. Like others have said: lumpen. A good way to look at the fascist mindset would be something like The Sopranos, because they are the same kind of people, and everything they say are lies.

Hammer to Fall was written by Brian May, who can be all over the place politically. He's supported Tories and Blairites in the past but currently supports Corbyn exclusively because he's against fox hunting and the Tories are for it. He wrote White Man, a great song about a Native American genocide (it seems everyone has a song about it), but he also wrote Put Out the Fire, a shitty, liberal anti-gun song. Brian May is a somewhat socially c.onservative and economically liberal, but his staunch pacifism and environmentalism overrides both of them. Most of the other Queen members seem apolitical but don't write as many political songs as May.

I think it's a bit ambiguously anti-commie because she is kind of posing herself in distinction to the communist guy.

I don't know why I spent time looking this up, but the songwriter behind it basically said it was originally supposed to be a really edgy song with these kind of upbeat lyrics about "soaking up the sun" with beach boy chord changes even though some of the lyrics would be references to columbine (the final lyric of something like "I got my 45 so I can rock on" was supposed to be about a gun). The original concept was that Sheryl Crowe was reminiscing on the confusion and angst of being a teenager, and not being able to understand how you felt about people or how you fit into the world. So the invocation of Columbine with happy lyrics (the intent of which seem largely intact) was like her adult self talking to her younger self about "lightening up". So the communist is a stand-in for what otherwise would have been something like the Columbine kids.

Proof?

Also, if this did happen, why wasn't there any open revolt?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wehrkraftzersetzung
Because it was a tool used to blunt political activism and open manifestation of opposition parties, which (in their absence) left only the policy and work of the NSDAP and their fellow travelers as potential outlets

That article is a literal citation needed.

Nigger, if you are getting killed for voicing DOUBT at the party, that would be a shitload of people, provided what you say is right.
That or the majority of germans have no doubt in the first place.

Or it was a state that didn't operate on the rule of law, and instead on a politic of exception whereby opposition could be entertained in private without public manifestation. It isn't a blank 'you broke the law, guess you just GOTTA DIE ', it's a pragmatic law. The article used the Oxford Companion to WWII as the citation, but feel free to look it up in the office concerning the archival of reich affaires. Just saying, it was a law - exactly as the other user said, and your objection to it being that it was a blanket law that would have killed a whole lot more people is retarded

I cast the power of doubt to the entire thing, considering all the proven that got executed are either white rose or anti-nazi resistance or some with serious beef with the regime.

Which fits snugly with what the fuck I just said

What more proof than the fucking
itself do you want?
Not doubting the NSDAP itself was the crime establishment by the KSSVO, but generally spreading "defeatism" and "fatalism", which would according to the law potentially limit the morals of the troops and state. It was called "Wehrkraftzersetzung", which is in english "defense force decomposition".
Note that this law was established in august 1938, one year before Hitler mobilized the Wehrmacht. Incidentally, at that time the MEFO bubble was about to burst as well, which basically rendered the Nazi bubble economy bancrupt, leaving Hitler no other option than going full imperialist attack mode soon, proofing both Marx and Lenin right about the inherently destructive nature of crapitalism.

It's the kind of meaningless feel-good drivel that only capitalism could produce

There was no such thing, planned or otherwise. The Germans planned to invade with no pretext of "defending themselves" other than the bullshit propaganda about "getting rid of Jew-Bolsheviks"