Nazism vs Communism
rAD
a great deal of effort to stop Nazism, which works very well, but no amount
of effort can make Communism work, and boy have we (the Jews, mostly) tried.
Why not go with the flow and use what works?
--
rAD
"Whateva, I do what I wont"
Ken [NY)
>It seems the main difference between the two is that it has taken the world
>a great deal of effort to stop Nazism, which works very well, but no amount
>of effort can make Communism work, and boy have we (the Jews, mostly) tried.
>Why not go with the flow and use what works?
There is a big difference between Nazism and Communism.
The nazis were led by a mustachioed, loutish man who who
fancied himself a socialist, killed millions of their own people in
concentration camps, invaded much of Europe and finally collapsed when
faced down by civilized countries including the US.
The communists were led by a mustachioed, loutish man who
fancied himself a socialist, killed millions of their own people in
concentration camps, invaded much of Europe and finally collapsed when
faced down by the US president Ronald Reagan.
Huge difference.
Cordially,
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department
____________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm
"[Saddam Hussein]cannot be permitted to go
unobserved and unimpeded toward his horrific
objective of amassing a stockpile of weapons
of mass destruction..."
-Senator John Kerry, D-Mass 1997
Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.
neptune3
wrote:
>
> There is a big difference between Nazism and Communism.
> The nazis were led by a mustachioed, loutish man who who
>fancied himself a socialist, killed millions of their own people in
>concentration camps,
KAS: Welcome to American Dissident Voices, Mark Weber.
MW: Hello, Kevin.
KAS: What is the Institute for Historical Review, of which you are the
director?
MW: The Institute for Historical Review is more than twenty years old,
and what we try to do is, as we say, to "bring history into accord
with
the facts." That's quoting Harry Elmer Barnes, who is a kind of ideal,
or mentor, for the IHR. The IHR is most famous -- or, in some eyes,
infamous -- for what we've done with regard to the so-called
"holocaust"
-- the Jewish "holocaust" during World War II.
Over the years, the IHR has published quite a lot in its Journal, and
in
books, and at conferences to show that much of what the public has
been
led to believe about the fate of Europe's Jews during World War II is
wrong or exaggerated or distorted. And that has just enraged groups
like
the ADL [the Jewish "Anti-Defamation League" of B'nai Brith -- Ed.],
and
the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and so forth.
But that's not all the IHR does. We try to deal with a number of other
issues as well.
KAS: You call yourselves revisionists? Is that correct?
MW: That's right.
KAS: The word sounds odd to many listeners, I'm sure. It sounds you're
trying to revise history. Don't we already know what happened in
history? Why should it be revised?
MW: Right. It's a sorry thing that the word "revisionism" has taken on
the connotation it has. "Revisionism" just comes from the Latin "to
look
again at things"; and all good history is revisionist in the sense
that
always an effort is made -- and should be made -- to examine the past
in
the light of new information, of new research, and new insights. And
that's what the IHR does.
But the main point of revisionism is that it's skeptical history. It's
unofficial history. What people call, oftentimes, "standard" history
is
really just official history. And what revisionism tries to do -- and,
again, it is a term that many people, as you point out, have trouble
understanding -- revisionism means to take a skeptical new look at the
past based on what we know. But many people who are fearful of the
term
"revisionism" don't realize the extent to which they themselves are
victims of a kind of "official" history, that history can actually
change in our encyclopedias and our standard books and so forth. And
people think that whatever the "official" version is, is the "correct"
one. Hardly anyone who's studied history can fail to be surprised at
the
extent to which Americans are taught today a version of our own
history,
as Americans, that's very different from the version of history that
was
taught to our grandparents and great-grandparents fifty, sixty, or
seventy years ago, for example.
KAS: So you're saying that, over time, the "official" version changes.
And does it also change geographically, depending on where you are,
what
the "official" version actually is?
MW: Of course, yes. Just about everyone would be in favor, for
example,
of the kind of revisionism that took place in Eastern Europe and the
Soviet Union after the fall of Communism. The official history
presented
the Communist past in a way, of course, that was in keeping with the
Communist regime, and after the fall of the Communist regimes in
Eastern
Europe and the Soviet Union there was an enormous process of
revisionism
-- that is, of re-examining history on the basis of information that
had
been suppressed for many years. By the same token, in American history
for example, during World War II the Soviet Union was an ally of the
United States. And so the Soviet leader Stalin and the Soviet Union
were
presented in a positive way, in keeping with the wartime alliance.
After
the Cold War began and during the 1950s, the portrayal of the Soviet
Union and Stalin was a very different one. There are many, many
examples
of that. And revisionism is simply part and parcel of the natural and
important process of constantly re-examining our past based on new
insights and information.
KAS: If you're questioning the "official" version, doesn't that put
you
at odds with certain very powerful interests? Have these interests
tried
to retaliate in any way against you?
MW: The most obvious is that by calling into question this
almost-icon,
this mantra about the "holocaust," this endless emphasis about the
suffering or fate of Europe's Jews during World War II, the IHR has
enraged the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Anti-Defamation League, the
World Jewish Congress, and other powerful Jewish organizations -- and
the state of Israel -- and their helpers. But the IHR really doesn't
care very much what they think. We just assume that's the attitude
they'll take. At the same time, we try to do our work in a way that is
responsible and sober. The IHR has succeeded, for example, in getting
what's called 501c3 status with the federal government; that is, it's
recognized by the federal government as a legitimate public-interest
educational enterprise, and people can donate money to the IHR and
deduct the amount for income tax purposes. Now, when the IHR got that
status, Tom Lantos, a very prominent Jewish Zionist member of
Congress,
screamed and yelled about it. The ADL issued a news release denouncing
it. And, on the basis of that, they sent another IRS agent out here to
go through our books, but they were unable to find any pretext to deny
us that.
But the most dramatic opposition to our work has come from Jewish
terrorists. In the late 70s and early 80s, there was a whole series of
drive-by shootings, bomb attacks, harassment, and violence against
employees that culminated on July 4th, 1984 in an arson attack on the
IHR offices that destroyed the IHR office and warehouse and resulted
in
immense damage. But since that time, it's been relatively peaceful.
It's
been rather peaceful.
KAS: That did not stop you, did it?
MW: No, it didn't. And it was very gratifying to see the tremendous
rallying that took place by people in the aftermath of that 1984 arson
attack.
KAS: We've gotten a sketch of what you do, and the fact that you have
some powerful enemies who don't want the facts of history to be looked
into. Who are you? Who are the leading personalities of the Institute?
MW: I'm the director; I've been employed full time since 1991. The IHR
Journal has an Editorial Advisory Board that is made up of scholars
from
many different countries who are distinguished in one way or the
other.
But probably most high-profile has been the support which the IHR has
received at its conferences. Two years ago, one of the speakers was
former Congressman Pete McCloskey, who was noted, during the time he
was
in Congress, as quite a liberal. He was the first Republican
Congressman
to call for the impeachment, years ago, of Richard Nixon. But we've
had
other prominent supporters who have been, as it were, conservative. At
the recent IHR conference we held in June, Joe Sobran was the banquet
speaker, and he's noted for his conservative views. For years, he was
a
senior editor at National Review. Also Professor Tony Martin of
Wellesley College in Massachusetts, who was actually born in the West
Indies -- and he's Black, spoke at the same conference. So the IHR has
support from people who are recognized, sometimes prominent: writers,
scholars, and thinkers of different political backgrounds. And one of
the points of the IHR is to get support for the work that we do,
regardless of people's political, racial, and other background.
KAS: What are your qualifications for the work that you're doing, for
directing an institute such as the IHR?
MW: Well [amused], I don't know about my qualifications? I was born
and
raised in Portland, Oregon; I went to school at Portland State
University; I have a Bachelor's degree from Portland State, but I
studied at the University of Munich in Germany; I studied at the
University of Illinois in Chicago; and I went to graduate school at
Indiana University in Bloomington where I got a Master's degree.
That's
sort of my qualifications, but in one sense the qualifications are not
one's degrees. It's one's commitment to what I regard as this enormous
struggle for truth in history, because much of what we are told in our
society is a version of history that is not only wrong and skewed and
distorted, but dangerously so.
KAS: What do you mean? Why is it dangerous, and who's doing the
skewing?
MW: The most obvious expression of this, and one that the IHR and I
have
spoken about and we've written about quite a lot -- especially in the
last several years -- is Jewish, Zionist power. In the United States,
Jews wield immense, tremendous power and influence, way out of
proportion to the tiny percentage of the population that they make up.
And this affects not only our policy, especially in the Middle East,
but
how we look at history. And this is manifest, perhaps most obviously,
in
the enormous way that the so-called "holocaust" is presented and
emphasized in our schoolbooks, in our schools, in our television, in
our
motion pictures, and so forth. And this presents just a very skewed
version of history in which Jews are presented as innocent victims,
people who deserve and should be given great support and help, and
that
the "lesson," so-called, of the "holocaust" is never do anything that
Jewish groups object to.
KAS: I've often noted that Americans in general, and American students
in particular, can always give you the "six million" figure for Jewish
losses in World War II. But if you ask them how many Russians died, or
how many Americans died, or how many British people died, they just
give
you a blank stare.
MW: Yes, it's a point I've made many times: the "six million" figure
is
repeated incessantly. It's an inaccurate and it's a mythical figure.
But
it's repeated constantly. Americans have no corresponding
understanding,
or almost no Americans have any corresponding knowledge of the
suffering
of other people. It's all part and parcel of what I call a kind of
"victimization hierarchy" in America, in which Jews are sort of number
one, and then other groups, depending on their status in society, are
further down the list. It's a dangerous and skewed version of history
that clouds everything that we do.
KAS: So you would definitely state that Jewish groups have distorted
and/or exaggerated their losses during World War II?
MW: No question. At the conference, for example, two years ago, former
Congressman McCloskey went into great detail about how the
Anti-Defamation League in particular does everything that it can to
suppress, silence, and shut up anyone who speaks about history in a
way
that Jewish groups regard as contrary to their interests, particularly
on the Middle East. It's more and more obvious, I think, to people
around the world just how skewed America's policy -- but not only
policy, but its perception of the world -- is because of Jewish
Zionist
influence in our mass media, in our educational system, and in our
political system.
KAS: Are there any falsehoods about the "holocaust" which stand out as
particularly absurd or particularly worthy of correction for our
audience today?
MW: Well, it's almost like shooting fish in a barrel. One story that
is
still told sometimes is this fable that the Germans made bars of soap
from the corpses of murdered Jews during World War II. And this story
has been given tremendous life over the years. It's appeared in
textbooks; it's appeared in important speeches. It's given great
prominence. It's utterly untrue. It's very lurid, it's ghastly -- but
completely untrue. And it's admitted to be untrue now, even by Jewish
groups -- if you press them on the matter. But the fact that it took
on
this tremendous life for so long is just typical of the way in which
the
most defamatory, horrible stories can be told about Germans or about
any
other non-Jewish group that's in disfavor at the moment -- without
correction, without fear of contradiction.
In the years right after World War II, and at the Nuremburg Trials, it
was claimed that people were killed in gas chambers in camps all over
Europe, including Buchenwald, Dachau, Auschwitz, and so forth. Many of
these claims have just been quietly abandoned over the years: No one
seriously claims anymore that anyone was gassed at Dachau or
Buchenwald
or at camps in Germany proper. One of the interesting aspects of this
is
that the so-called "eyewitnesses" and testimony and evidence for these
claims is therefore obviously not true.
KAS: And yet people were punished for those alleged crimes.
MW: Right. People were punished for those alleged crimes. This is just
part and parcel of this distortion; there are numerous examples. For
years, at Auschwitz, it was officially claimed that four million
people
were killed there, and that was supposedly proven at the Nuremberg
Trials in 1945-1946. In recent years, the numbers have been
drastically
reduced. They're still dropping down. Oftentimes the response to that
is
to say "So what if it's one million or four million or 100,000 or even
two?" There's an argument to be made for that, but the essential point
isn't over quibbling about numbers or anything like that, although
that's what historians are supposed to do. The essential point really,
I
think, is the way in which there's this tremendous political capital
made out of one chapter of history, designed to gain sympathy and
support. And the result has been a massive shakedown, kind of a
blackmail that's resulted in billions of dollars extracted from
Switzerland, from Germany, from European corporations, and from
American
taxpayers.
KAS: It's a kind of moral blackmail, I think.
MW: And some Jewish writers have even used those very terms. One of
the
striking things -- and Americans, I think need to understand this --
is
that the views of history that we are very used to, and comfortable
with, are not universal. The view of Middle East history that comes
from
the movie Exodus or the insights on European history that come from
the
movie The Sound of Music are gross distortions. They're just
perversions
of the truth. They may be very comfortable for many Americans to
believe, but they're not only perversions of the truth: Around the
world, there's an increasing awareness that how America looks at the
world and the Middle East is just out of line. Unfortunately, many
Americans still haven't "gotten it." Fortunately, millions more
Americans, I think, are "getting it." It's obvious, I think, to anyone
who has spent much time living overseas, that how the Middle East
situation is presented in the daily press is very different than it is
here in the American press.
KAS: In a moment, I'd like to talk about the linkage between Holocaust
Revisionism and the present situation in the Middle East, but first
I'd
just like to say that when you talk about "the 'holocaust'" it seems
to
me that the objection that should be raised is not so much to the word
"holocaust" but to the word "the" -- the article that precedes it. As
if
it's the only suffering of any national group in history!
MW: Yes, that's right. You know, the word 'holocaust' when used to
apply
collectively to what happened to Europe's Jews in World War II, didn't
come into popular usage until the 1970s. Normally, with the passage of
time, particularly horrible or gruesome or dark chapters of history
tend
to recede into the past and recede in importance. But just the
opposite
has happened with regard to what's called "the holocaust." You're
right,
even the very use of this term in this way is to give a kind of label
to
what was really a lot of individual things that happened rather than
some overarching phenomenon.
KAS: It seems to me that the suffering of the Germans after World War
II
certainly exceeded in scope anything that happened to the Jews. And
also
what happened to the Ukrainians in the pre-war period was horrific.
MW: I think the evidence is clear that more Germans than Jews were
killed during World War II. One of the things that was an important
beginning experience in my life was, when I was living in Europe, to
learn for the first time about the tremendous suffering, killings, and
expulsions that took place -- the victimization of Germans and other
Eastern Europeans in what is now Poland, in Czechoslovakia, and so
forth
in 1945 to 1948. We hear almost nothing about that in America. And
again, that's just part of the tremendous distortion, perversion, and
skewing of history that we see.
KAS: Isn't it true that in some parts of the world -- many parts of
the
world, perhaps -- it's actually a crime now to question the Jewish
view
of events during World War II?
MW: This is a point that the IHR has publicized a lot. In some
countries
-- Germany, France, Holland -- it's a crime to, as they say, "deny the
holocaust." The amazing thing is that it's only one chapter of
history:
For the sake of argument, suppose for a moment that the so-called
"holocaust deniers," the revisionists, are wrong. Justice is not
justice
unless it's applied equally. To criminalize dissident views about just
one chapter of history, and not others, is a form of injustice. People
today in Europe have been, and are, fined, exiled, imprisoned, for
expressing skepticism or dissident views on this chapter of history.
It's an outrage. The very fact that it's hardly known in America is in
itself an expression of the tremendous power that put those laws into
effect in the first place.
KAS: It's a strange kind of "truth" that has to be protected by laws
and
guns and prisons.
MW: Indeed, yes.
KAS: There is something going in Australia now. The Adelaide Institute
Web site is being forced off?
MW: Just the other day, the Federal Court in Australia ordered
Frederick
Töben, who runs something called the Adelaide Institute -- it's a
Holocaust Revisionist Web site -- to shut down the site and to
eliminate
everything on his site and on any other site that questions whether
people were killed in gas chambers at Auschwitz, that questions
whether
the "holocaust" occurred -- I think I'm quoting from the language of
the
court ruling. It's outrageous. This was considered a violation of the
so-called "Racial Discrimination Act" in Australia. Töben tried to
argue
that the Act shouldn't apply because Jews constitute a religious
group.
But the Jewish organizations insisted that Jews should be regarded as
a
racial group. That alone is rather interesting because, when it is to
the advantage of Jewish groups, they will insist just the opposite.
And the law in Australia is similar to the laws in other countries: It
merely requires that one or two Jews claim to feel offended, and the
law
goes into effect. Well, a lot of things on the Internet are offensive
to
a lot of people. The fact that it's applied in this way, and that
Jewish
groups take advantage of it in this way, and that the courts uphold
their protests, is again an expression of the kind of special
treatment,
the privileged treatment, that Jewish groups receive in Australia and
everywhere in the Western world.
On our next program, we will continue our conversation with Mr. Weber
with a discussion of the impact of Jewish power -- and Jewish history
distortion -- on American Middle Eastern policy and on the looming war
in that region. Be sure to be listening one week from today.
If you'd like more information on the Institute for Historical Review,
you may write to IHR, PO Box 2739, Newport Beach, CA 92659, or visit
the
Institute's Web site at www.ihr.org <http://www.ihr.org>.
Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you to keep on
thinking free.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADV-list.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to:
adv-list...@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe
==> TO BE REMOVED send an e-mail message to:
adv-list...@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Unsubscribe
==> The National Alliance has a strict anti-spamming policy. This
information is intended for interested parties only and is not to be
indiscriminately distributed via mass e-mailing or newsgroup posting.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
To comment on this broadcast, please write to: nati...@natvan.com To
report typos and technical errors in ADV-list or our web site, please
write to: webm...@natvan.com
To contact us via "snail mail," write to:
National Vanguard Books
Attention: ADVlist
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946
The National Alliance: <http://www.natvan.com>
<http://www.natall.com>
> invaded much of Europe and finally collapsed when
The Germans lost some land to Poland after World War One. The
Germans said that their people living on this land were being severely
oppressed by the Polish goverment. This is why Germany fought Poland .
If Florida were taken away from America, Americans would fight to get
it back. Americans will go to war for far less reason than this.
Britain and the other liberal countries then went to war with
Germany even though the Communists also attacked Poland. After they
won the war, Poland was Communist, which shows what the liberals were
fighting for.
Here is a quote from The Nameless War, by Captain A. H. M. Ramsay:
"Can we doubt but that Poland was encouraged to ignore the German note
of March which set forth eminently reasonable suggestions for a
peaceful solution of the problem of the Corridor?
Month after month no reply was vouchsafed by Poland to the German
note. Meanwhile, insult and outrage occurred with suspicious frequency
all along the German frontier, similar to the technique to which the
Jews later introduced the British in Palestine. Day after day the
British public was deluged with war propaganda and misrepresentation
of the situation. Finally their minds were closed against any further
regard to the demands of justice and reason by a new slogan, "You
cannot trust Hitler's word." With this lie the British public was
finally stampeded into throwing all reason and judgement to the winds
and accepting at their face value the war propaganda in the press.
This slogan was founded upon a misrepresentation of Hitler's
assurance given on more than one occasion after a "putsch" such as
that in into Sudetenland, that he "intended to make no further
demands.". The misrepresentation lay in the fact that the press
steadily obscured the major fact, that the "demands" to which Hitler
referred were all along five-fold in character; and covered those five
areas taken from Germany by a dictated peace in which the population
was overwhelmingly German, i.e. Sudetenland, part of Czechoslovakia,
parts of Poland, the Corridor and Danzig.
As German troops occupied each successive section, it is, I
believe, accurate to say that Hitler declared, that he had no
additional demands to make. But here it must be clearly stated in the
interests of justice that he never said that this entailed reducing
the demands which he had originally very clearly delineated, and
repeated on many occasions, namely, the five areas in question.
"The British public was deluded by its press into supposing that
when Hitler said he had no further demands, that there had never been
any statement of his full demands, some of which were still
unfulfilled. They were led to believe that Hitler either never had had
other demands, or that he had abondoned the rest as soon as he had
obtained some of them. When, therefore, the next installment was
added, the press built on this misunderstanding the fallacy that
Hitler's word could not be trusted. Honest dealing needs no such
trickery and and deception. Such methods are only necessary to bolster
up bad or unjust causes. Fortunately we have the calm and
disspassionate judgement in this matter by no less a person than the
late Lord Lothian, recently British Ambassador to the U.S.A. In his
last speech at Chatham House on this subject he remarked: "If the
principle of self-determination had been applied in Germany's favour,
as it was applied agaisnt her, it would have meant the return of the
Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, parts of Poland, the Polish Corridor and
Danzig to the Reich."
Here is a very different presentment of the case to the one which
was foisted upon the British public in 1939: and it is the true one.
Small wonder that these facts had to be withheld from the ordinary
citizen.
Had the British public realized the truth, that each of these
demands of Hilter rested on a foundation of reasonable fairness, the
people of this island would have ruled out any question of war; and it
was war, not truth or justice, upon which international Jewry was
resolved."
Here is another quote from the book:
"The urgent alarm sounded in 1918 by Mr. Oudendyke in his letter
to Mr. Balfour (see page 25), denouncing bolshevism as a Jewish plan,
which if not checked by the combined action of the European powers,
would engulf Europe and the world, was no exaggeration. By the end of
that year the red flag was being hoisted in most of the great cities
of Europe. In Hungary the Jew Bela Kuhn organized and maintained for
some time a merciless and bloody tyranny similar to the one in Russia.
In Germany the Jews, Liebknecht, Barth, Scheidemann, Rosa Luxemburg,
etc., made a desperate bid for power. These and other similar
convulsions shook Europe; but each country in its own way just
frustated the onslaughts.
In most countries concerned a few voices were raised in the
endeavour to expose the true nature of these evils. Only in one,
however, did a political leader and group arise, who grasped to the
full the significance of these happenings, and perceived behind the
mobs of native hooligans the organisation and driving power of world
Jewry. This leader was Adolf Hitler, and his group the National
Socialist Party of Germany.
Never before in history had any country not only repulsed organized
revolution, but discerned Jewry behind it, and faced up to that fact.
We need not wonder that the sewers of Jewish vituperation were flooded
over these men and their leader; nor should we make the mistake of
supposing that Jewry would stick at any lie to deter honest men
everywhere from making a thorough investigation of the facts for
themselves. Nevertheless, if any value liberty, and set out to seek
truth and defend it, this duty of personal investigation is one which
they cannot shirk.
To accept unquestioningly the lies and misrepresentaions of a
Jew-controlled or influenced press, is to spurn truth by sheer
idleness, if for no worse reason."
>faced down by civilized countries including the US.
Here are some quotes published in 1946 by Dr. Austin J. App. He
was an American English professor that was drafted into the army:
"these beloved fellow-liberators of ours are doing well indeed,
They know why one wants Unconditional Surrender and why Americans
cried for a "harsh" peace against the Germans, and they understand the
spirit of the Morgenthau Plan: In Vienna alone they raped 100,000
women, not once but many times, including girls not yet in their
teens, and aged women! So reported the Most Rev. Bernard Griffin,
British Archbishop (now cardinal) after a more or less official tour
to study conditions in Europe (NC Report, Oct. 18, 1945)."
"'We Allies are no monsters,' said Churchill to the Germans in
January, 1945...Since that time the Allies who are no monsters have
raped more Christian women than have literally ever before been raped
in the history of the world. They have put Germany on a 1300-calory
starvation level; they have looted twelve million people of their
homes, goods, food and even clothes and driven them from their
homelands; they have kept or taken one-fourth of their farm land and
their ships and their factories and most of their farm implements and
then told them to live by farming; they have abused and starved to
death more German babies than their ever were Jews in Germany; and
finally they raped and debauched hundreds of thousands of German,
Austrian, and Hungarian girls and women from eight to eighty. They
brought to their death five times as many Germans in one year of peace
as died during five years of war! Yes, Yes, of course, 'We Allies are
no monsters!'"
"Time magazine (Oct. 2, 1945 p.27), describing the mass expulsion
'of at least nine million
Germans...it is a tale of horror, old men starving on the roads, yound
women raped in boxcars.'
And the holy crusaders who are doing this raping have the
shamelessness of trying whole classes of Germans as war criminals!"
" Sylvester C. Michelfelder, a Lutheran Pastor, just returned
from Germany describes in The Christian Century how 'Bands of
irresponsible bandits in Russian or American uniforms pillage and rob
trains. Women and girls are violoated in the sight of everyone. They
are stripped of their clothes.' Yes, the holy reeducators of Germany
are having a wonderful time!"
" In Stuttgart, troops under Eisenhower's command, with whom his
communications were not severed, raped more women in one week in one
city than troops under Hitler's command seem to have raped in four
years in all of France. For such literally seem to be the facts,
however discomforting to decent Americans."
" After four years of German occupation, Frederick C. Crawford,
President of Thompson Products, on January 4, 1945, in a 'Report from
the War Front,' where with others the War Department had taken him on
an inspection tour, said, 'the Germans tried to be careful in their
dealings with the people...We were told that if a citizen attended
strictly to business and took no political or underground action
against the occupying army, he was treated with correctness' (p.5) In
short, wherever Americans have been able to investigate for
themselves, they have found that however ruthless the Germans were
with resisters and saboteurs, they were uncommonly Christian and
decent towards the women of the conquered."
"'Americans look on the German women as loot, just like cameras
and Lugers' (N.Y. World Telegram, January 21, 1945)"
"Some of our own senators have declared this starvation
planned and deliberate. In fact, so determined are our policy makers
to starve the conquered that they have callously prohibited even
private charity. 'For the first time in the history of Christian
nations', writes Bishop Aloisius Muench of Fargo, North Dakota,
'powerful governments are making the exercise of Christian charity
impossible through official regulations' (One World in Charity, Lent,
1946, p.1)"
"Nevertheless, in spite of this deliberately planned or
encouraged, and certainly tolerated debauchery of German and Austrian
women by occupation troops under American command, the American and
the British occupation cannot be compared to the shocking beastliness
of the Russian occupation...we who screamed when the Germans executed
the British-sent murderers of a governor and their concealers at
Lidice, and don't raise a wimper when the Russians violate a million
women and hundreds of nuns!"
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.altermedia.info/ www.nowarforisrael.com
Len
>a great deal of effort to stop Nazism, which works very well, but no amount
>of effort can make Communism work, and boy have we (the Jews, mostly) tried.
>Why not go with the flow and use what works?
The main difference between them is that they are both after me, a
regular guy, to take away my stuff.
BTW, I didn't know you were Jewish. I must be anti-semetic, as I find
your stuff despicable.
neptune3
>
>The main difference between them is that they are both after me, a
>regular guy, to take away my stuff.
>BTW, I didn't know you were Jewish. I must be anti-semetic, as I find
>your stuff despicable.
Here is part of an essay by Dr. Robert Ley:
"Who concerned himself with creating good workplaces before? Today the
"Beauty in Labor Office" sees to it that productive people work in
worthy surroundings, not in dirty workplaces. The "Kraft durch Freude"
organization provides German workers with vacations and relaxation.
They travel to the mountains and the beach, and have the chance, often
for the first time, to explore their beautiful fatherland. They travel
in their own ships to the magical southern seas and countries, or to
the splendid beauty of the north. Each German citizen today enjoys the
wonderful achievements of German theater and German music, the best
German orchestras, the best German operas, theaters and films.
Citizens listen to the radio, and play any kind of sport they wish.
There new activities result not in dissipation, distraction and carnal
pleasure, rather in genuine pleasure in physical activity, nature and
culture. He who works hard should be able to enjoy life too so that he
better appreciates his people. The specter of unemployment no longer
haunts the nation. Millions have already found work again, and those
who still have not are cared for by the entire nation. Labor
representatives see to it that the rights of workers and their honor
are not violated, and the factory manager is as responsible for his
employees and they are responsible with him for the success of the
plant in which they together work...
Everyone knows that there is only one man to thank, Adolf Hitler, the
creator of National Socialism, who put the common good above the
individual good, who replaced class struggle of "above and below" and
"right and left" with a new message of the honor of labor and of
service to the people. The National Socialist Labor Service will see
to it that this teaching that makes the German worker the bearer of
the state never vanishes. It is seeing to it that every German
citizen, whatever his occupation may be, first works with his hands
for the good of the nation."
rAD
"Ken [NY)" <em...@below.the_text> wrote in message
news:opsdgvg52rq206i14...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 02:33:52 -0400, "rAD" <no...@all.org> ranted:
>
> >It seems the main difference between the two is that it has taken the
world
> >a great deal of effort to stop Nazism, which works very well, but no
amount
> >of effort can make Communism work, and boy have we (the Jews, mostly)
tried.
> >Why not go with the flow and use what works?
>
> There is a big difference between Nazism and Communism.
> The nazis were led by a mustachioed, loutish man
Mustache, eh?
who who
> fancied himself a socialist
He had to in order to win the elections.
, killed millions of their own people in
> concentration camps
His people? LOL. Besides, there were no gas chambers. There were work camps
for Communists and other criminals.
>, invaded much of Europe
Germany invaded itself?
LOL. It was the US, Canada, Oz, Britain and NZ who actually invaded Europe.
and finally collapsed when
> faced down by civilized countries including the US.
haha...US more civilized than Germany?
> The communists were led by a mustachioed, loutish man who
> fancied himself a socialist, killed millions of their own people in
> concentration camps, invaded much of Europe and finally collapsed when
> faced down by the US president Ronald Reagan.
> Huge difference.
Communist Russia was a Jewish experiment.
William David Thweatt
: It seems the main difference between the two is that it has taken the world
: a great deal of effort to stop Nazism, which works very well, but no amount
: of effort can make Communism work, and boy have we (the Jews, mostly) tried.
: Why not go with the flow and use what works?
In practice, there is little discernable difference between "Nazism" "Communism." They are
both forms of socialism. They are both insidiously evil means by which a few powerful
politicians brutalize their subjects and rob them of the friuts of their labor.
--
--
William "Dave" Thweatt
Robert E. Welsh Postdoctoral Fellow
Chemistry Department
Rice University
Houston, TX
thw...@ruf.rice.edu
dave.t...@us.army.mil
neptune3
David Thweatt) wrote:
>
>In practice, there is little discernable difference between "Nazism" "Communism." They are
>both forms of socialism.
In practice there is little discernable difference between
"Republicanism" and "Democratism". They are both forms of Judaism.
>They are both insidiously evil means by which a few powerful
"Even cremated bodies leave about 9 pounds of remains.
With millions dead, thousands of tons of ashes should be out there.
What about detailed plans, drawings, and operating manuals for those
specially designed killing chambers? Surely they can be found in the
tons of documents recovered after the war. Studying the Holocaust
should be like tracking a herd of elephants through deep snow; just
look at all those deep tracks and ruts left by those gigantic animals.
But there is no such visible trail left by the gigantic Holocaust.
Professional trackers must be used, and they are needed to point out
the subtle signs of the trail. The most popular are photographs. But
as it turns out, there are no photographs standing alone that prove
anything. All the photographs must be analyzed, properly captioned,
and explained by experts. Hundreds of pictures of dreadful looking
dead bodies are always boldly displayed; but they are usually from
places that were not considered killing centers. Even the Holocaust
experts grudgingly admit people shown in the photographs were not
murdered, but instead died of starvation and disease.
But what of all the other trail evidence? We still need the
professional Holocaust trackers. No building plan was ever found with
any kind of killing device included. Experts must be employed to point
out the places in the plans where gas chambers were located. What
about those written orders and detailed reports about gassings? Not a
single one has been found. In the tons of official documents, in the
thousands of official reports, in the hundreds of personal diaries,
there is not a single mention of gas chambers. In fact, there is very
little outright talk of killing. Again the specially trained
Holocaust experts must be brought in to find "code words" in the
documents which mean kill. What's more, the remains of millions of
bodies of the victims seem to have completely disappeared. The experts
just ignore that.
The very idea that the enormous massacre called the Holocaust
could have happened without leaving mountains of clear and
indisputable evidence is absurd."
Morghus
>politicians brutalize their subjects and rob them of the friuts of their labor.
>
Ken [NY)
>
>"Ken [NY)" <em...@below.the_text> wrote in message
>news:opsdgvg52rq206i14...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 02:33:52 -0400, "rAD" <no...@all.org> ranted:
>>
>> >It seems the main difference between the two is that it has taken the
>world
>> >a great deal of effort to stop Nazism, which works very well, but no
>amount
>> >of effort can make Communism work, and boy have we (the Jews, mostly)
>tried.
>> >Why not go with the flow and use what works?
>>
>> There is a big difference between Nazism and Communism.
>> The nazis were led by a mustachioed, loutish man
>
>Mustache, eh?
Yeah, the Charley Chaplin thing under Hitler's nose.
> who who
>> fancied himself a socialist
>
>He had to in order to win the elections.
He was not elected Furher.
>, killed millions of their own people in
>> concentration camps
>
>His people? LOL. Besides, there were no gas chambers. There were work camps
>for Communists and other criminals.
German Jews and Gypsies. And Germany certainly did have gas
chambers. Stalin didn't use gas but managed be responsible for the
murder of about 43,000,000 people, 1929-1953. Hitler was only able to
kill about 20,946,000 Victims in Nazi Germany,1933 To 1945.
>>, invaded much of Europe
>
>Germany invaded itself?
In 1939, these two socialist mass murderers - Stalin and
Hitler - began by signing a military pact with each other, then
invading Poland which is in Europe. Socialist Hitler then
goose-stepped over the rest of Europe before turning on his ally, the
socialist Soviet Union. Check into a history book some day for the
rest of the story.
> LOL. It was the US, Canada, Oz, Britain and NZ who actually invaded Europe.
Yes, to remove Hitler's National Socialist's military, then
allowing Hitler's former partner, socialist Stalin to invade much of
Europe. Stalin then got Poland as a gift from Franklin D. Roosevelt at
Yalta as advised to do so by a Soviet spy in Roosevelt's cabinet.
> and finally collapsed when
>> faced down by civilized countries including the US.
>
>
>haha...US more civilized than Germany?
That's right. National Socialist Germany had very
sophisticated and civilized gas chambers - I forgot.
>> The communists were led by a mustachioed, loutish man who
>> fancied himself a socialist, killed millions of their own people in
>> concentration camps, invaded much of Europe and finally collapsed when
>> faced down by the US president Ronald Reagan.
>> Huge difference.
>
>Communist Russia was a Jewish experiment.
Stalin was a Jew, huh? Wrong, he was an athiest like all mass
murderers. Again, you really need to stick your nose into some history
books so you can keep up.
Sincerely,
neptune3
wrote:
>
> He was not elected Furher.
The Gemans voted for Hitler to be the "dictator" of Germany.
After the death of Hindenburg on 2 August 1934, Hitler called a
referendum to approve his assumption of full power as Fuehrer and
Chancellor of Germany. 90% of the voters approved Hitler's increased
powers.
Rudolf Hess gave this speech on 14 August 1934, shortly before the 19
August referendum:
"National Socialists! Fellow German citizens!
I have rarely given a speech as difficult as this one. It is a
challenge to attempt to prove the good of something as obvious as
Hitler's assumption of Hindenburg's position. For fourteen years I
have been convinced that he is the only man able to master Germany's
fate. This conviction has grown over the years, as the original
emotional feeling found new support in endless ways that have
demonstrated Adolf Hitler's remarkable leadership abilities. It is
hard for me, now that I see the realization of fourteen years of
hopes, to gather the various reasons that explain how Adolf Hitler has
become the highest and only Fuehrer of the German people.
Whether through good luck or providence, I found in the summer of 1920
a small room in the Sterneckerbräu in which one Adolf Hitler, whom I
had never heard of, gave a speech to a few dozen people. His clear,
logical and persuasive speech laid out a new political program. This
man expressed my own vague feelings as a veteran of the war, making
clear what was necessary for the nation's salvation. He outlined a new
Germany from the heart of a front soldier, a Germany that I suddenly
realized was the one that had to become reality!
This man had driving passion, persuasive logic, and astonishing
knowledge. A powerful faith streamed from him - I had never
experienced its like. What was most remarkable was that I and the
other entirely rational members of the audience did not laugh as he in
all seriousness explained that the flag of the new movement for which
he and his movement fought would one day fly over the Reichstag, over
the Palace of Berlin, indeed over every German building. It would be
the victorious symbol of a new, honorable, nationalist and socialist
Germany.
At that moment in the Sterneckbräu there were really only two
possibilities. Either I would leave this fool immediately, or - as I
did - accept the conviction: This man will save Germany, if anyone
can!
I pledged my conviction to a friend, and on that very evening become
the most passionate admirer and loyal follower of this Fuehrer.
In the long years that followed, the rest of the world laughed and
mocked us, and the newspapers spread their poison and scorn about this
"madman," but nothing could shake my faith and readiness to give my
all for this man, so long as he did not lose faith in himself or his
mission.
I remember well even today a visit I made to Hitler in the small room
he sublet in Munich. He raged against a Munich newspaper that mocked
him and his idea. "I will show them whether I am to be taken seriously
or not," he exclaimed.
Still, his opponents did not take him seriously then, or for many
years after. Luckily so! For the most serious error his enemies made
was that they did not recognize early enough what a danger he was to
them. They missed the opportunity to destroy him and his small
following when it was still possible. The mighty tree of today, able
to withstand any storm, was then only a tender plant.
But like so many other things in the Führer's life, fate probably
determined that those around him were blind enough to lose valuable
time by fighting him only with ridicule. Providence, of which the
Fuehrer often speaks with such faith, preserved him and his movement
from destruction, preserving both for its purposes.
I knew Adolf Hitler as he walked through the streets of Munich in a
shabby gray coat, often hungry, accompanied only by a few friends,
posting flyers. He was armed only with a thick oak walking stick,
which he only too often had to use when his opponents from the then
USPD, or the Spartakus Bund, or some middle class party found the
primitive truths on these flyers unpleasant.
I can still remember how he, at the head of his "whole party" broke up
a meeting of Bavarian separatists, always putting himself in the way
of the greatest danger. Astonishingly, amidst all the daily tasks and
annoyances, he never lost sight of the larger goal. He always
presented his vision vividly to his followers.
In later years I saw this man during the triumphs and defeats of his
movement. At the moments of the worst defeats when his followers often
were near desperation, it was always he who restored the faith of the
doubters, gave them new enthusiasm, new faith. I was with him in the
Landsberg prison, when all seemed lost and his movement disintegrated
as his subordinates fought. I remember when there was the danger that
his parole would be canceled and he would have to stay behind bars for
another four or five years! The chances of realizing his ideas seemed
absolutely nonexistent then, but at that very moment he laid out the
methods he would use to rebuild the movement under the new
circumstances and by rejecting illegal methods. Then as always he
proved himself a master at adapting to new situations, in breaking
radically with methods he saw as outdated or ineffective.
With the certainty of a great leader, in the middle of what seemed to
be the total collapse of all his efforts, he explained to me that he
would need several years to rebuild the movement, and that it would be
seven years before he had the power to force his enemies to bend to
his will. That was in the winter of 1924/25. Seven years later it was
1932!
That was the year in which the forces of the past attempted in vain to
stop the final victory of National Socialism, the year in which every
attempt to stop Adolf Hitler and his movement failed, in which in fact
every shameless lying attack worked in the end to his advantage.
The Fuehrer said more often than in the past: "The others can do what
they want. When an idea is right, when it is fought for consistently,
when the movement that fights for it is well organized, and when the
leadership is determined to go its way regardless of the difficulties,
one day with mathematical certainty it will be victorious! The longer
they succeed in holding back our victory, the more powerful it will
be! It will fall into our laps like overripe fruit!"
These words from the decisive year 1932 explain the sudden and total
National Socialist seizure of power in 1933, which so surprised the
rest of the world.
Looking back I am convinced that our delayed victory, the fourteen
years that sometimes seemed to us as if they would never end, was
fate's way of preparing our people for the seizure of power. It was a
necessity of fate, just as the early death of the Fuehrer's parents
acquainted him with bitter poverty. That poverty forced him to become
a construction worker. He came to understand the poverty of his fellow
human beings and the lot of the "proletariat." The daily struggle for
survival in the primitive cultural conditions of the era gave the
Führer a deep understanding of his fellow working class citizens.
It was also a necessity of fate that he served at the Front during the
World War, for he learned a contempt of danger. He became hard. The
war brought him together with all levels of the German people and
showed him the destructiveness of class and rank. Most importantly, it
taught him to understand the people and to speak their language.
The revolutionary year 1918 was a necessity of fate for Adolf Hitler,
for despite its criminal leadership it cleared away relics of the past
that later would have created difficulties for the National Socialist
Revolution. And the revolt of 1918 brought signs of collapse and
revealed with naked clarity the international forces and their
destructive effects on Germany in a way that created the psychological
prerequisites that enabled the hard measures of the later National
Socialist government to succeed.
The attempt to seize power in November 1923 was ordained by fate, just
as was its bloody collapse. If the Fuehrer had not acted then, the
masses would later have lost faith in him as a Fuehrer when he
constantly called for patience and postponed the seizure of power.
Only his willingness to act resolutely when necessary, as demonstrated
in November 1923, provided the proof that he would when necessary take
the most forceful course. It proved that he chose to renounce force in
the years before 1933 not because he was a coward. And National
Socialism could not have taken power in 1923, since the people were
not yet ready for National Socialism, nor was National Socialism ready
to lead the people. What was obvious to everyone in Germany in 1933
would have seemed arrogance in 1923. The supporters of the parties of
that day had not yet had sufficient time to recognize the weaknesses
of their leaders.
The narrowest chance of fate prevented the Führer from entering the
government in 1932. He would have been joined with men who inwardly
were still his enemies and would have caused great damage as members
of the government.
And surely it was providence that preserved the life of the old Field
Marshall and Reich President to enable his good name and protecting
hand to guard the young National Socialist government until Adolf
Hitler's abilities as a leader had been proven to everyone at home and
abroad, until his reputation was sufficient to assume the full
leadership of the Reich.
Providence has clearly been at work in Adolf Hitler's life. Only so
can we understand how this man, the son of a minor official, withstood
hunger and privation and fought unaided powerful enemies in the press
and business, powerful parties at home and abroad, to become the
Führer of one of the great nations of the world, chancellor of the
German Reich, holder of the office of Reich President. This is a
miracle without precedent in the history of the world. In the midst of
bitter need, a people finds the man to rescue it. There is a force of
history at work here which we still do not understand.
The need of our people was great. A great man was required to meet it.
Providence gave him the gifts and the strength to move on both in good
times and bad, enabling him over the course of time to reach his goal:
the salvation of Germany!
Providence works through in a way both inexplicable yet clear to all
who have the good fortune to be near to him. How often has he said to
me: "I know that my decision or action is correct. I cannot explain at
the moment why, but I feel that it is right and the future will prove
it so." Invariably the course of events proved that the inexplicable
feelings of the Führer led him down a sure path.
The great historian Treitschke held the ability to see things
correctly as the decisive ability of a statesman, more important even
than talent. What leader has ever had this ability more than Adolf
Hitler? The proof is in his speeches, even those from 1920. Rarely
have political conditions and developments been predicted more
accurately, seldom have conclusions been drawn more clearly, thanks to
his ability to see the fundamental nature of the most difficult and
complicated things.
The "simple understanding" of the genius is able to see the essential
and the obvious.
The Fuehrer adds to the ability to see correctly, which the historian
sees as more critical than talent, not only talent, but also genius.
The ability to see correctly, along with genius, to which must be
added the workings of providence, gives us an explanation for the
miracle that has happened before our eyes in the past few years,
particularly since Hitler's assumption of power.
Is not the transformation of our people a miracle! It shows itself in
its return to its essence, to the sources of its strength, in its
reawakening pride and honor, in its will to self assertion in the
world, in its ability to free itself from international poisons and
from signs of corruption in all areas of life! Is it a miracle that
Adolf Hitler won the battle against unemployment in so short a time?
That he put people to work to meet daily needs as well as to advance
culture? The great highways, canals and buildings will proclaim to
coming generations the Hitler Era of the German people. Is it not a
miracle that a nation once divided by class and rank, divided by petty
state pride in Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony and elsewhere-now works
together with mutual understanding for the great common tasks and for
the preservation of the nation and its people?
As I said when I began, I cannot explain why Hitler, and only he, can
be the Fuehrer. Who could suggest someone worthier and more able to
fill the office of Reich President, the highest leader of the Reich?
Someone might say that it is not good to put all power in one hand.
Let me reply that in a difficult time the Romans gave full power to a
young and capable leader - and the Romans knew something about
governing! They knew that "men make history." They knew that in times
of crisis, strong personalities must guide the state, personalities
bound to the living essence of their people.
Someone may say that it is not good to put all power in one hand,
since Adolf Hitler might use his authority arbitrarily and
thoughtlessly!
To that I can only say: The conscience of a moral personality is a far
greater protection against the misuse of an office than is the
supervision of parliament or the separation of powers. I know no one
who has a stronger conscience, or is more true to his people, than
Adolf Hitler.
Over the years I have seem him struggle to make difficult decisions,
always checking again and again with the experts in the field until he
was certain that his decision was absolutely correct. I know how many
sleepless nights his decision to take Germany out of the League of
Nations cost him, how he listened to all who had objections. I know
that he was unable to rest until he had refuted them by clear logic.
Only then did he decide, and accepted the full responsibility.
The Führer's highest court is his conscience and his responsibility to
his people and to history.
He will also from time to time allow the people itself to pass
judgment on his general policy. This will regularly reaffirm his
leadership.
He knows that both his honor and his work are at risk. He cannot pass
the responsibility for his decisions to irresponsible parliamentary
majorities, as do the statesmen of all other nations. That also means
that his freedom of action is not restricted or watered down by
parliamentary bodies or other forces. This above all is why in
desperate times people and nations need an absolute leader - assuming
he possesses the necessary abilities - and why such a leader can be
necessary to the continued existence of the government and people.
Treitschke said that absolute leadership is either the best or the
worst form of government, depending on the personality of the leader.
We know that Adolf Hitler is both born and called to be a leader, and
that he has shown himself through all his actions to be a morally
upright person. As sole ruler he is the best possible form of
government for Germany - and Heaven knows that in its current crisis
Germany needs the best possible form of government!
A Fuehrer whose goal is to serve his people is in times of crisis a
better guarantee of peace to other nations than is a parliamentary
majority, which may lack the will at the critical moment to keep its
people from stumbling into misfortune, as Lloyd George suggested the
nations stumbled into the World War. In recent weeks, Adolf Hitler has
made rapid and firm decisions advancing the cause of peace in Europe
that demonstrate his statesmanship. Those states who today oppose us
may not be willing to admit it, but history will.
German citizens! Consider with all seriousness the international
significance of the referendum on 19 August. Talk with everyone in
your circle of acquaintances-family members, workmates, relatives,
with everyone you come in contact with. Remember that the world is
watching to see if a united German people will be loyal to its
Fuehrer.
Hundreds of thousands of journalists are waiting to announce the
expected collapse of National Socialism to their readers. They will do
this if even a few less Germans go to the polls than did on 12
November of last year. They hope for a collapse of National Socialism,
for they know this would mean the collapse of Germany.
By voting yes on 19 August, the German people will demonstrate to the
world that we see in Adolf Hitler the Fuehrer given to us by
providence. We Germans approve of what he has done at home and abroad
for Germany and trust his decisions for the future. Germany sees Adolf
Hitler as Hindenburg's proper successor. The entire German people now
gives Hitler the name of honor that the National Socialist movement
has long given him: the Fuehrer!
This word is more that a title, it is a confession and a certainty: My
Fuehrer!
Furthermore, the entire German people says to the world: Adolf Hitler
is and will remain our Fuehrer, because his policies are the policies
of the entire German nation. His rule guarantees Germany's stability.
Through him and his movement, Germany has become a unified Reich.
Since we want to remain a united German Reich, we want Adolf Hitler at
our head. Since we know that power struggles between individuals or
interest groups are unthinkable and impossible under his leadership,
we want him as Germany's leader.
Through him, Fate realizes its purpose: Saving Germany from the hunger
of misery of Bolshevism. We firmly believe that saving Germany from
Bolshevism also rescued Europe from the danger of red annihilation. We
Germans see it as our duty to thank Fate by affirming this man as the
Fuehrer of Germany.
One more thing the German people want to say to the world on 19
August: We want the work begun in Hitler's name to continue: the
battle against unemployment, the freeing of our conscience, the moral
renewal of Germany's youth, the strengthening of our sense of honor.
We Germans know that Hitler wants what we all want: economic equality
with the other nations of the world, the political and military peace
with the other peoples of the world, a return to prosperity and
culture after decades of decline and decay.
This we say to our Fuehrer on 19 August: We are bound to you in an
indissoluble unity in the fight for Germany's future. With you, we
long for the preservation of peace and are prepared to follow your
command to defend our people's peace.
We are proud and happy to have one of history's greats, a son of our
people, among us during our life times. The yes that we give affirms
his leadership to the world, and thanks him at the same time.
German workers! I speak particularly to you. Be proud that you may on
19 August affirm as leader of Germany a man of the German working
class. Be proud that you may symbolically say to one of your own on 19
August: We want you, Adolf Hitler, as German Chancellor and German
Reich President, you, a German worker! Where once kings, Kaisers and
presidents ruled Germany, now by our will and the will of the German
people stands for the first time a German worker. He is a worker who
knows how hard the life of his former comrades still is, those who
must struggle daily for their basic needs, and whose goal is above all
to improve their lot as quickly as possible.
My fellow German citizens! You will vote yes for Adolf Hitler! And if
you are asked why you voted for him, you will be able to answer:
We voted for Adolf Hitler:
Because he is the man who from his experiences as a Front soldier
developed a world view that is the foundation for all that is
happening in Germany.
Because his fifteen year struggle against a hostile world is a model
of strength and courage.
Because he always acts at the right moment, thereby showing that he is
a heroic leader.
Because he does nothing for himself, but everything for Germany and
for the future of his people.
Because he has given all of us a new faith in Germany.
Because he has given our lives meaning once more by showing us why we
Germans are on the earth.
Because he is the instrument of the will of a higher power.
In sum, because he is a true Fuehrer!
With our yes votes, we Germans will say on 19 August:
To you, our Fuehrer, we pledge our loyalty - Adolf Hitler, we believe
in you!
>
> German Jews and Gypsies.
The word "jyp" means to steal and to cheat.
"Everyone had to work in Nazi Germany. Those who preferred to live by
begging or stealing were sent to a camp and put to work .The Gypsy men
were sent to the camps under the "work-shy" label at first. Later,
whole families were rounded up and
sent to Auschwitz just like the Jews."
"Maniac" man...@learn.org
>And Germany certainly did have gas
>chambers.
Auschwitz was occupied by the Communists on January 27,1945. They
made reports about what they claim to have found. These initial
reports had not yet been adapted to allied propaganda. The reports
were published on February 1 and 2, 1945 in the Soviet propaganda
organ Pravda. Here are some things it said:
"the Germans in Auschwitz began to remove the traces of their
crimes"
"They leveled the burial grounds."
"They removed and destroyed all traces of the electric conveyer
system, where hundreds of people at one time were electrocuted."
"The stationary gas chambers in the east side of the camp were
remodeled."
"This huge death mill was equipped with the latest style of fascist
technology..."
The Communists did not even claim to have seen any killing
machines or rooms. Supposedly it was all destroyed or remodelled. The
did not allow the other allies to enter the camp, and they did not
supply any pictures or blueprints or any physical evidence.
Nevertheless, the United Press correspondent, Henry Shapiro,
obediantly echoed the Soviets story.
The Soviets said that the Auschwitz complex was entirely a "murder
machine". There was not a single word to indicate that the camp was
part of the German armament industies, as we now know it clearly was.
Even if the Germans had "leveled" the alleged huge grave pits the
bodies would still be present. However anyone familiar with the matter
knows that in Auschwitz no large grave sites were ever found.
The Communists did not allow any inspection of the camps by foreign
observers for many months afterwards and their claims conflict with
what "holocaust experts" say today. Today the experts all talk of gas
chambers is Birkenau, a part of the camp far to the west. This is much
different from where the Communists initially claimed that they were.
The Communists said the gas chambers were "remodelled", while today
the experts say the gas chambers were completely destroyed. The
Communists said the gas chambers were made to look like "harmless
garages". But they did not supply a single photo of one.
The initial Communist reports also do not mention things that are
now claimed to have been there. There is no mention of a pile of
eyeglasses, or hair, or shoes. There is no mention of underground gas
chambers. There is no mention of "farmhouses" remodelled to be gas
chambers. There is no mention of the rivers clogged with human ashes.
Today the experts are forced to admit that there were no gas
chambers in Germany. We are now told that "gassing" and
"extermination" camps were located exclusively in what is
now Poland, in areas captured by the Soviet Red Army and made
off-limits to
western investigators.
Today tourists can go to Auschwitz and be shown a "gas chamber".
This is admitted by the experts not to be genuine.
Brian Harmon <har...@msg.ucsf.edu> wrote in article
<080620000051136373%har...@msg.ucsf.edu>...
"You're confusing Krema I with Kremas II-V. Krema I is a
reconstruction, this has never been a secret. Kremas II-V
are in their demolished state as they were left."
Charles Don Hall <cdhall...@erols.com> wrote in article
<8F4CB71B...@news.erols.com>...
"Certainly not! The word "fake" implies a deliberate attempt to
deceive.
"The staff of the Auschwitz museum will readily explain that the Nazis
tried to destroy the gas chambers in a futile attempt to conceal their
crimes. And they'll tell you that reconstruction was done later on. So
it
would be dishonest for me to call it a "fake". I'll cheerfully admit
that
it's a "reconstruction" if that makes you happy."
> Stalin didn't use gas but managed be responsible for the
>murder of about 43,000,000 people, 1929-1953. Hitler was only able to
>kill about 20,946,000 Victims in Nazi Germany,1933 To 1945.
"Even cremated bodies leave about 9 pounds of remains.
Morghus
>
>
> In 1939, these two socialist mass murderers - Stalin and
>Hitler - began by signing a military pact with each other, then
>invading Poland which is in Europe. Socialist Hitler then
>goose-stepped over the rest of Europe before turning on his ally, the
>socialist Soviet Union. Check into a history book some day for the
>rest of the story.
The Germans lost some land to Poland after World War One. The
> Yes, to remove Hitler's National Socialist's military, then
>allowing Hitler's former partner, socialist Stalin
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"the problem of how the future of the German nation can be secured is
the problem of how Marxism can be exterminated."
"The largest so-called bourgeois mass meetings were accustomed to
dissolve, and those in attendance would run away like rabbits when
frightened by a dog as soon as a dozen communists appeared on the
scene."
"We used to roar with laughter at these silly faint-hearted bourgeosie
and their efforts to puzzle out our origin, our intentions, and our
aims.
"We chose red for our posters after particular and careful
deliberation, our intention being to irritate the Left, so as to
arouse their attention and tempt them to come to our meetings--if only
to break them up--so that in this way we got a chance of talking to
the people."
"At meetings, particularly outside Munich, we had in those days from
five to eight hundred opponants against fifteen to sixteen National
Socialists; yet we brooked no interference, for we were ready to be
killed rather than capitulate. More than once a handful of party
colleagues offered a heroic resistance to a raging and violent mob of
Reds. Those fifteeen or twenty men would certainly have been
overwhelmed in the end had not the opponants known that three or four
times as many of themselves would first get their skulls cracked. And
that was a risk they were not willing to run."
When Hitler marched through the streets with his Storm Troops he
carried a walking stick. The Reds came to oppose them and throw stones
and things, but when it got very bad Hitler would raise the stick.
This was the signal to his men to clear the streets of the Reds. And
soon there was not a Red left to be found.
> to invade much of
>Europe. Stalin then got Poland as a gift from Franklin D. Roosevelt at
>Yalta as advised to do so by a Soviet spy in Roosevelt's cabinet.
>
>
> That's right. National Socialist Germany had very
>sophisticated and civilized gas chambers - I forgot.
"Toward the end of World War II I was a US Army captain on the staff
of
Ambassador Robert Murphy, political advisor to General Eisenhower. I
was at
Dachau about a month after it had been liberated, either the end of
May or
the beginning of June, 1945. *There was no gas chamber there, nor did
I see
one in the process of construction.* What did occur was that some
higher
authority in the American occupation government, whether a civilian or
military, I don't know, decreed that a gas chamber should be built,
which
was subsequently done.
I was also at the Buchenwald camp a few days after it was liberated on
April
11, 1945. *There was a crematory there but no gas chamber.*"
Homer G. Richey
Charlottesville, Virginia
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n2_Letters.html
>
> Stalin was a Jew, huh? Wrong, he was an athiest like all mass
>murderers. Again, you really need to stick your nose into some history
>books so you can keep up.
Lev Trotzky wrote a book called "Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man
and His Influence", Harper Bros., New York and London, 1941,
translated by Charles Malamuth.
In this book he told who the principle members of the October
Central Committee were. This group was the leadership of the Bolshevik
Party during the October Revolution. This is what he wrote:
"In view of the Party's semi-legality the names of persons
elected by secret ballot were not announced at the Congress, with the
exception of the four who had recieved the largest number of votes.
Lenin--133 out of a possible 134, Zinoviev--132, Kamenev--131,
Trotzky--131."
Of these four top leaders of the Bolshevik Party the last three
were known Jews. Lenin was thought to be a gentile but he was married
to a Jewess. It was later proven that he was one quarter Jewish,
London Jewish Chronicle April 21, 1995, Lenin: Life and Legacy.
The communists took over Hungary in 1919. Their leader was the
Jew, Bela Kun (Cohen).
In Hungary, IIRC, the head of their VERY bloody communist secret
police, Farkas (Wulf) was a Jew. In fact, nearly all the highest
ranking communist officials in post-war Hungary were Jews.
The leaders of communist Poland were the Jews Minc,
Skryeszewski, Modzelewski, and Berman.
The leader of communist Roumania was the Jewess Anna Pauker
The leader of communist Chechoslovakia was the Jew Rudolf
Slansky.
The leader of communist Yogoslavia was not a Jew. He was Tito,
however he was tutored by a Jewish mentor named Mosa Pljade.
Communism in America was also Jewish.
In 1945 the FBI arrested six individuals for stealing 1700 highly
confidential documents from State Department files. This was the
Amerasia case they were:
Philip Jaffe, a Russian Jew who came to the U.S. in 1905. He was at
one time the editor of the communist paper "Labor Defense" and the
ringleader of the group arrested.
Andrew Roth, a Jew.
Mark Gayn, a Jew, changed his name from Julius Ginsberg.
John Service, a gentile.
Emmanuel Larsen, nationality unknown
Kate Mitchel, nationality unknown.
In 1949 the Jewess Judith Coplin was caught passing classified
documents from Justice Department files to a Russian agent.
The highest ranking communist brought to trial in the U.S. was
Gerhart Eisler. He was a Jew. He was the secret boss of the Communist
Party in the U.S. and commuted regularly between the U.S. and Russia.
In 1950 there was the "Hollywood Ten" case. Ten leading film
writers of the Hollywood Film Colony were convicted for contempt of
Congress and sentanced to prison. Nine of the ten were Jews. Six of
the ten were communist party members and the other four were
flagrantly pro-communist.
One of the top new stories of 1949 was the trial of Eugene Dennis
and the Convicted Eleven. This group comprised the National
Secretariat of the American Communist Party. Six were Jews, two
gentiles, three nationality unknown.
Also in 1949 the German-born atomic scientist Klaus Fuchs was
convicted for passing atomic secrets to the Russians. Acting on
information obtained from Fuchs the FBI arrested nine other members of
the ring. All of them were convicted. Eight of the nine were Jews.
Here are some quotes from a very pro-Jewish book that was first
published in 1925. The book is "Stranger than Fiction" by Lewis
Browne.
"But save for such exceptions, the Jews who led or participated
in the heroic efforts to remold the world of the last century, were
neither Reform or Orthodox. Indeed, they were often not professing
Jews at all.
"For instance, there was Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Borne, both
unfaltering champions of freedom. And even more conspicuously, there
was Karl Marx, one of the great prophetic geniuses of modern times.
"Jewish historians rarely mention the name of this man, Karl
Marx, though in his life and spirit he was far truer to the mission of
Israel than most of those who were forever talking of it. He was born
in Germany in 1818, and belonged to an old rabbinic family. He was not
himself reared as a Jew, however, but while still a child was baptized
a Christian by his father. Yet the rebel soul of the Jew flamed in him
thoughout his days, for he was always a 'troubler' in Europe."
"Then, of course, there are Ludwig Borne and Heinrich Heine, two
men who by their merciless wit and sarcasm became leaders among the
revolutionary writers. Karl Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle, Johann Jacoby,
Gabriel Riesser, Adolphe Cremieux, Signora Nathan- all these of Jewish
lineage played important roles in the struggle that went thoughout
Europe in this period. Wherever the war for human liberty was being
waged, whether in France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, or Italy, there
the Jew was to be found. It was little wonder that the enemies of
social progress, the monarchists and the Churchmen, came to speak of
the whole liberal movement as nothing but a Jewish plot."
The following quotes are taken directly from documents available from
the
U.S. Archives:
State Department document 861.00/1757 sent May 2, 1918 by U.S. consul
general in Moscow, Summers: "Jews prominant in local Soviet
government, anti-Jewish feeling growing among population...."
State Department document 861.00/2205 was sent from Vladivostok on
July 5, 1918 by U.S. consul Caldwell: "Fifty percent of Soviet
government in each town consists of Jews of the worst type."
From the Headquarters of the American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia
on
March 1, 1919, comes this telegram from Omsk by Chief of Staff, Capt.
Montgomey Shuyler: "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the
United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since it's
beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest
type"
type."
A second Schuyler telegram, dated June 9, 1919 from Vladivostok,
reports on the make-up of the presiding Soviet government:
"...(T)here
were 384 `commissars' including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen,
22 Armenians, AND MORE THAN 300 JEWS. Of the latter number, 264 had
come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the
Imperial Government.
David R. Francis, United States ambassador in Russia, warned in a
January 1918 dispatch to Washington: "The Bolshevik leaders here,
most
of whom are Jews and 90 percent of whom are returned exiles, care
little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and
they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution."
The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, confirmed this:
"Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to
spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it
is
organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one
object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of
things."
"The Bolshevik revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of
Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a
new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in
Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish
dissatisfaction
and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental an
physical forces, become a reality all over the world." (The American
Hebrew, September 10, 1920
"In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the membership of the Soviet
communist party was Jewish, though Jews comprised only 1.8 percent of
the total population." (Stuart Kahan, The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81)
Interestingly, one of the first acts by the Bolsheviks was to make
so-called "anti-Semitism" a capital crime. This is confirmed by
Stalin
himself:
"National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic
customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism,
as
an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige
of
cannibalism...under USSR law active anti-Semites are liable to the
death penalty." (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. 13, p. 30).
Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"Making an effort to overcome my natural reluctance, I tried
to
read articles of this nature published in the Marxist Press; but in
doing
so my aversion increased all the more. And then I set about learning
something of the people who wrote and published this mischievous
stuff.
From the publisher downwards, all of them were Jews. I recalled to
mind the
names of the public leaders of Marxism, and then I realized that most
of
them belonged to the Chosen Race- the Social Democratic
representatives in
the Imperial Cabinet as well as the secretaries if the Trades Unions
and
the street agitators. Everywhere the same sinister picture presented
itself. I shall never forget the row of names- Austerlitz, David,
Adler,
Ellonbogen, and others. One fact became quite evident to me. It was
that
this alien race held in its hands the leadership of that Social
Democratic
Party with whose minor representatives I had been disputing for
months
past."
Solzhenitsyn named in his book the six top administrators of the
Soviet death camps. All six of them were Jews.
Aaron Hirshberg
> It seems the main difference between the two is that it has taken the world
> a great deal of effort to stop Nazism, which works very well, but no amount
> of effort can make Communism work, and boy have we (the Jews, mostly) tried.
> Why not go with the flow and use what works?
Communists: athiests
Nazis: pagans, occult worshipers
Communists: "no private property" used as leverage to remove personal
freedom from citizens and create facist dictatorship
Nazis: "private sector monopoly" used as leverage to remove
personal freedom and create facist dictatorship
Communists: dysfunctional economy and failed imperialist ambitions
destroyed country
Nazis: failed attempt to conquer world destroyed country
Communists: psychotic with moustache murdered millions of civilians,
and his incompetent leadership in war resulted in millions of his own
soldiers' unecessary deaths
Nazis: psychotic with moustache murdered millions of civilians,
and his incompetent leadership in war resulted in millions of his own
soldiers' unecessary deaths
Communists: cult following in the USA in the 1930s
Nazis: cult following in the USA NOW
Aaron Hirshberg
Dwain Goforth
aaronhi...@yahoo.com says...
Insightful. See below for quotes...
> Communists: athiests
> Nazis: pagans, occult worshipers
Some fascists pretend to be Christians, but they usually ignore Jesus and
concentrate on the Old Testament wrath of God, and on Armageddon in which
they pervert Jesus' mysticism into atom bombs.
> Communists: "no private property" used as leverage to remove personal
> freedom from citizens and create facist dictatorship
> Nazis: "private sector monopoly" used as leverage to remove
> personal freedom and create facist dictatorship
Communists don't create a "facist dictatorship", they create a "communist
dictatorship" :) (BTW, it's fascist, not facist.)
> Communists: dysfunctional economy and failed imperialist ambitions
> destroyed country
> Nazis: failed attempt to conquer world destroyed country
Don't forget the fascist's dysfunctional economy (i.e., spending
$billions on war that is supposed to be "good" for the economy. That is
just as much a dead-end street as any communist economy.)
> Communists: psychotic with moustache murdered millions of civilians,
> and his incompetent leadership in war resulted in millions of his own
> soldiers' unecessary deaths
> Nazis: psychotic with moustache murdered millions of civilians,
> and his incompetent leadership in war resulted in millions of his own
> soldiers' unecessary deaths
Well, that's two from WWII. They don't always have a mustache!
> Communists: cult following in the USA in the 1930s
> Nazis: cult following in the USA NOW
This I like!
"The struggle today is not one between communism and fascism; it is the
struggle between tolerance and bigotry--bigotry preached equally by
communism and fascism. Here in this country the worst fascists are those
who, disowning fascism, preach enslavement to capitalism under the cloak
of liberty and the Constitution. They steal not only wages but honor."
- John Lewis
"It would be easy for us, if we do not learn to understand the world and
appreciate the rights, privileges and duties of other countries and
peoples, to represent in our power the same danger to the world that
Fascism did." - Ernest Hemingway
"The road to fascism is paved with socialist pretensions." - Grant
Singleton
"The fascists cannot argue, so they kill." - Victor Margueritte
"Fascism is a lie told by bullies." - Ernest Hemingway
"Fascism is capitalism in decay." - V.I. Lenin
"Fascism is capitalism plus murder." - Upton Sinclair
"We warn the North that every one of the leading abolitionists is
agitating the negro slavery question merely as a means to attain their
ulterior ends...a surrender to Socialism and Communism--to no private
property, no church, no law; to free love, free lands, free women and
free children." -- George Fitzhugh (before the Civil War)
William David Thweatt
: On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 16:32:33 +0000 (UTC), thw...@rice.edu (William
: David Thweatt) wrote:
: >
: >In practice, there is little discernable difference between "Nazism" "Communism." They are
: >both forms of socialism.
: In practice there is little discernable difference between
: "Republicanism" and "Democratism". They are both forms of Judaism.
Take your Jihad elsewhere.
Dwain Goforth
> neptune3 (np...@hotmail.com) wrote:
> : >
> : >In practice, there is little discernable difference between "Nazism" "Communism." They are
> : >both forms of socialism.
Actually, they are both forms of totalitarianism. Socialism includes the
post office, national parks, roads and highways, social security and a
host of other government programs that are not necessarily evil.
Socialism is about working together within a government for the common
good.
> : In practice there is little discernable difference between
> : "Republicanism" and "Democratism". They are both forms of Judaism.
>
> Take your Jihad elsewhere.
>
That I agree with. Little does "neptune3" know that democracy (as
understood by us) was Greek in origin. Greece is hardly a hotbed of
Judaism.
Here's the man who coined both the words "democracy" and "oligarchy"...
"The real difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and
wealth. Wherever men rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be few
or many, that is an oligarchy, and where the poor rule, that is a
democracy." - Aristotle, circa 300 B.C.
bSirius
nazism. they equal bad, bad, bad. we have a crazy bastard in the white
house. does that make democracy bad? you and your arguments can't hold
water.
it's like saying that because most priests are pederasts that jesus is
gay....i guess that makes religion screwed too. look at their nonstop
bloodbath throught the ages.
"Ken [NY)" <em...@below.the_text> wrote in message
news:aiongv09ior4h9osc...@4ax.com...
William David Thweatt
: In article <behgkl$dv3$1...@joe.rice.edu>, thw...@rice.edu says...
: > neptune3 (np...@hotmail.com) wrote:
: > : >
: > : >In practice, there is little discernable difference between "Nazism" "Communism." They are
: > : >both forms of socialism.
: Actually, they are both forms of totalitarianism. Socialism includes the
: post office, national parks, roads and highways, social security and a
: host of other government programs that are not necessarily evil.
: Socialism is about working together within a government for the common
: good.
The problem with socialism is that it requires a totalitarian state in
order to impose it on people who would rather work for themselves and be
able to keep their earnings rather than give up a rediculous percentage of
the fruits of their own labor to a government who will redistribute the
money to people who did nothing to earn it.
:
: > : In practice there is little discernable difference between
: > : "Republicanism" and "Democratism". They are both forms of Judaism.
: >
: > Take your Jihad elsewhere.
: >
: That I agree with. Little does "neptune3" know that democracy (as
: understood by us) was Greek in origin. Greece is hardly a hotbed of
: Judaism.
: Here's the man who coined both the words "democracy" and "oligarchy"...
: "The real difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and
: wealth. Wherever men rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be few
: or many, that is an oligarchy, and where the poor rule, that is a
: democracy." - Aristotle, circa 300 B.C.
That's nice.
Thomas J Wheat
> Dwain Goforth (dw...@humboldtone.com) wrote:
> : In article <behgkl$dv3$1...@joe.rice.edu>, thw...@rice.edu says...
> : > neptune3 (np...@hotmail.com) wrote:
> : > : >
> : > : >In practice, there is little discernable difference between "Nazism" "Communism." They are
> : > : >both forms of socialism.
>
> : Actually, they are both forms of totalitarianism. Socialism includes the
> : post office, national parks, roads and highways, social security and a
> : host of other government programs that are not necessarily evil.
> : Socialism is about working together within a government for the common
> : good.
>
> <<The problem with socialism is that it requires a totalitarian state in
> order to impose it on people who would rather work for themselves and be
> able to keep their earnings rather than give up a rediculous percentage of
> the fruits of their own labor to a government who will redistribute the
> money to people who did nothing to earn it.>>
>
totalitarian state. They have one of the highest standards of living
in the world. Canada has nationalized health care, and england has
free college as does france as well.
Dwain Goforth
thoma...@hotmail.com says...
Actually, the majority of European countries have socialist governments.
Most European citizens don't have to "give up a rediculous percentage of
the fruits of their labor" to corporate welfare and the
military/industrial complex. Their taxes go to schools, roads and public
transportation, health care, retirement and benefits to THEM instead of a
capitalistic government that spends money on war and death.
If you compare the socialist countries tax payments (and include the
value of services they get) with the cost of U.S. taxes PLUS paying for
their own services, you will find that our cost of living is usually
higher.
It looks like William David Thweatt is quite willing to pay through the
nose in taxes for the military/industrial complex and then come up with
his own health care and retirement money. He pays high taxes and gets
nothing back and then thinks he doesn't live in a totalitarian state.
The USA is just as socialist as the Soviet Union ever was, only our taxes
go to the already rich and powerful who are willing to shed the blood of
young Americans in order to protect their profits.
Get a clue, William!
William David Thweatt
: thw...@rice.edu (William David Thweatt) wrote in message news:<bejr8m$90c$1...@joe.rice.edu>...
As of 1980, Sweden's standard of living exceeded the US by nearly 20%.
Today, the US standard of living is greater than Sweden's by nearly 100%.
Swedes enjoy a standard of living lower than that of US African Americans.
In Sweden they have confiscatory taxes and government controls on all
businesses (totalitarianism). They are simply "nice" about it.
Sweden's standard of living from 1940 through 1980 can be traced to their
stance in WWII. They declared hemselves "neutral" while siding with the
Nazis. They profiteered BIG TIME during WWII, making massive amounts of
money from the war. They even took money from Hitler to use Sweden as a
staging ground to invade Norway. To add insult to injury, they allowed
the unhindered flow of German supplies and troops to Norway across Sweden.
The money started to run out in the 1980's. Now they're having a hard
time of it.
neptune3
wrote:
>so you take two crazy bastards for examples and call that communism and
>nazism. they equal bad, bad, bad.
On April 10, 1938 the Germans voted for or against Hitler. 99% of
them voted for Hitler. Here are some quotes from a pamphet urging them
to vote for Hitler:
Do you remember the state of Germany and the German people in the days
before the aged Reich President von Hindenburg chose Adolf Hitler and
his party as the last hope of saving Germany from certain political,
social and economic collapse that would lead to chaos? Tens of
thousands of factories had closed their gates. Millions of workers and
employees lost their jobs and were thrown ruthlessly into the gray
misery of mass unemployment. There seemed no way out...
By the end of 1933, 2 million citizens had jobs again. By September
1936, the number of unemployed had fallen beneath a million. By 1937
unemployment had vanished...
One of the foundations of National Socialism is the knowledge that
only work creates value and prosperity...
But not only the dreadful misery before 1933 reduced the desire of
countless Germans to have children. Crass egotism and materialism also
played a role. The System Era saw having children as foolish and
backward. The transformation that has occurred is clear in the rising
German birth rate...
The National Socialist state gives major tax reductions to fathers for
each child. Families with three or more children receive payments of
10 and 20 marks monthly. By the end of 1937, 510,000 children were
receiving such support...
By the end of 1937, 252,000 mothers had received free vacations...
The Winterhilfswerk is the most beautiful expression of the new German
people's community. It is not the work of a small group of rich
people. No, each German, all of us, rich and poor, manual laborers,
farmers and city-dwellers cooperate in fulfilling the Führer's will:
No German may be hungry or cold!
One does not know whom to admire more: the cheerful willingness of
those who collect, or the rising amount of the gifts, to which even
the poorest contribute their share. The success of the
Winterhilfswerk, written permanently into the law of 1 December 1936,
demonstrates the efforts of the entire German nation. Gifts of money
alone totaled over 920 million marks during the four winters from
1933/34 to 1936/37. An additional 570 million marks of goods were
contributed. 50,000 freight cars alone would have been needed for the
potatoes contributed in the past years. The three million meters of
clothing given out by the WHW would stretch from Berlin to the Middle
East. The two million kilograms of coal would form a wall ten meters
high around all of Germany. These few examples, and more could be
given, prove the strength of the German people's will to be active
socialists..
Another sign of this socialism is the entirely different status of the
German worker in factories. The social honor of each working German is
guaranteed by law. The state's representatives ensure that exploiting
workers is impossible. The legal working conditions correspond to
National Socialism's high opinion of work. Workers have a right to a
vacation and for paid holidays, even hourly and temporary workers.
There is nothing like this elsewhere in the world.
The dignity of labor is evidenced by improvements in the appearance of
the work place. Wherever one looks in Germany, ugly dark buildings are
vanishing. The "Beauty of Labor" movement in today's Germany is not
empty talk or an impossible demand, but living reality. Large sums
that formerly would have been wasted in strikes and lockouts have been
used since 1933 to improve work places. 23,000 places have been
transformed form soulless drudgery to pleasant places to work. 6,000
factory courtyards now offer space for real relaxation, which was not
true in the past. 17,000 canteens and lounges, 13,000 shower and
changing rooms have been transformed. The dirtier the work, the
cleaner the workers. More than 800 community buildings and 1200 sport
facilities , including over 200 swimming pools, have been established.
The crew quarters in over 3500 ships have also been improved.
The NS Society Kraft durch Freude brings cheer and pleasure to
workplaces through concerts and art exhibits. The art exhibits alone
introduced more than 2,5 million workers to the creations of true
German art. Just five years ago, it was obvious that the great works
of German culture belonged to a small group of the upper class.
Besides the factory concerns and art exhibitions, the NS Society Kraft
durch Freude uses theatrical performances, other concerts, singing and
musical groups to introduce the creations of German art to every
working German. 22 million citizens have attended theatrical
performances..
Of no less importance is the KdF's vacation program. Earlier, German
workers did not know what to do with their, at best, five days of
annual vacation. They could not visit the beauties of the German
landscape, much less travel abroad. The NS Society Kraft durch Freude
gave German workers the possibility of vacationing at the beach or in
the mountains, or to explore the homeland. Over 20 million have
participated in KdF trips since 1934. That is more than a quarter of
Germany's population. 19 million citizens participated in 60,000
vacation trips at home. Hand to hand, they would stretch from Berlin
to Tokyo. KdF trains have traveled 2,160,000 kilometers, or 54 times
around the world. The nine large KdF cruise ships have covered a
distance equal to twice the distance from the earth to the moon. They
have carried German workers to Madeira, Italy and Norway, broadening
their horizons and giving them unforgettable experiences. Three
additional ships will be added the KdF's own fleet of four. A KdF
resort is being built on the island of Rügen. It will not be the only
one. A series of other vacation and spa resorts will be built. They
will fulfill the Führer's wishes at the start of the NS Society Kraft
durch Freude: to lead a cheerful, creative and strong people to
success in the world.
The goal of bringing German culture to the entire German people,
regardless of their income, is especially clear with the German radio.
Thanks to the People's Radio Set, a solid, inexpensive and capable
receiver, the number of radio listeners has risen from around 4
million in 1932 to 9.1 million today. The un-German programming of the
System Era has been transformed by National Socialism. Now radio
acquaints the German people with the work of their great masters of
music and literature. Alongside these artistic programs, the
entertaining programming provides for the relaxation of hard-working
people.
Clear proof for the rising prosperity of the German people is provided
by the growing consumption of foodstuffs and luxury items of every
variety. During the prewar year 1913, only a little more than 2.9
million tons of meat were consumed. In 1937, that figure had risen to
3.7 million, up about 5% from 1932. Thanks to the elimination of
unemployment, bread consumption increased by about 10%, sugar by 15%.
Butter consumption rose from 420,000 to 519,000 tons. Milk production,
both for drinking and for making butter and cheese, rose from 23.5 to
25.4 billion liters from 1932 to 1937. Coffee consumption rose from
104,000 to 140,000 tons. Beer consumption has risen from 3.3 to 4.4
billion liters. That is an increase of about 3 billion glasses of
beer...
The growing prosperity and rising consumption of foodstuffs and luxury
items required hard work. A people can only consume what it produces.
In the face of this obvious truth, which however only became clear to
us after 1933, all the parliamentary resolutions, all the decisions of
international conferences and the demands of the international unions
become silly talk. The German people have proved that by our own work.
Germany has worked untiringly since 1933, producing itself the goods
it needs to improve its standard of living.
The rising production in all areas, which has never before been seen,
is the fruit of our work. The foundation of our life is agriculture,
whose task is to guarantee that the nation is fed. When the Führer
took power, agriculture was in a ruinous state. Officers of the court
were regular visitors at German farms. The animals and the harvest
were seized ruthlessly because taxes and interests had risen to
impossible levels that German soil could not meet. Forced auctions
drove tens of thousands of German farmers from their land. Desperation
prevailed in the villages. As a result of the desperate situation,
agriculture could not ensure the feeding of the German nation. The
ghost of hunger threatened.
Here too the Führer set to work immediately. Interest and taxes were
lowered, and the German soil was freed from usurious capital. Between
1927 and 1931, German agricultural debt rose by 2,9 billion marks.
From 1933 to 1936, it fell by 800 million marks. The interest burden,
which was over a billion marks in 1931/32, was reduced by National
Socialist actions to 630 million marks. The crowning achievement was
the creation of the Reich Inherited Farm Law, which guaranteed that
the German family farm will always remain the wellspring of the
nation...
Just as for farmers and agricultural workers, the urban population is
also being cared for. Although more than enough willing and able
workers were available in 1932, and although the housing need was
certainly great, the government put workers on the dole and built only
141,265 dwellings. This was an area in which the need for new jobs was
particularly clear. Even in 1933, the number of new dwellings rose to
178,000, with particular attention being given to small and mid-sized
units for those with limited incomes. This number grew year by year,
reaching 340,000 dwellings in 1937, double the number of 1932. In all,
National Socialist has built more than 1.4 million new, and above all
healthy and affordable, dwellings for the German people since 1933.
This is enough to house the entire population of Berlin...
Growing prosperity and production led to a growth in traffic. The
entirely neglected German highway system had to be repaired and
expanded. 40,000 kilometers of highway have been repaired since 1933.
That is enough to go all the way around the world! Then there are the
Reich Autobahns, the most splendid construction project in the world.
2,000 kilometers were open to traffic by the end of 1937. 1,000
kilometers more will be added yearly, until Germany has a highway
network unique in all the world.
Automobile production has reached a level that no one would have
thought possible a few years ago.
The number of motor vehicles in Germany has doubled, exceeding the 3
million mark in 1937. Thanks to the growing prosperity, broad circles
of our nation can now afford a car. 137,141 of the new vehicles in
1937, well over half, were purchased by workers and employees. 30,015
workers and employees were able to buy a car the previous year. Cars
are becoming both better and cheaper. The increase in cars will be
even more striking when the Volkswagen comes on the market. Enormous
factories are even now being built. The best proof for the quality and
good pricing of German cars is the fact that automobile exports have
increased by a factor of eight since 1932!..
The great improvements in the German transportation system have
resulted in a growing stream of foreign visitors. The pulsing life in
Germany is drawing more and more visitors to the Third Reich. The
number of overnights by foreigners has risen from 2.7 million in 1932
is far above 7 million in 1937. These foreigners, who often come to
Germany with false ideas, see with their own eyes the work of the
Führer and the remarkable efforts of the German people. They return
home as the best witnesses of the greatness and strength of the German
Reich...
The Führer has repeatedly reminded the German people that strong
policies are the absolute prerequisite to our economic, social and
cultural health. Only intentional hostility and stupidity can still
deny that the Führer was right in every respect...
>we have a crazy bastard in the white
>house. does that make democracy bad?
"Jewry rules from behind the mask of democracy. What one calls
democracy today is concealed Jewish domination. Jews determine what
happens in the democratic states"
Julius Streicher, Der Stürmer, #34/1939.
"A couple of weeks ago I quoted a few sentences from a book published
in
1928 titled Propaganda, by ... Edward Bernays. Today I'll read to
you an expanded set of excerpts from Bernays' book to give you a
little
more of the gist of his message. I quote:
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits
and
opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.
Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an
invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
"We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes are formed, our
ideas
suggested largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical
result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast
numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to
live together as a smoothly functioning society. . . .
"Whatever attitude one chooses to take toward this condition, it
remains
a fact that in almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the
sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical
thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons .
.
. who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the
masses.
It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind, who
harness
old social forces and contrive new ways to bind and guide the world. .
.
"No serious sociologist believes any longer that the voice of the
people
expresses any divine or especially wise and lofty idea. The voice of
the
people expresses the mind of the people, and that mind is made up for
it
by the group leaders in whom it believes and by those persons who
understand the manipulation of public opinion. . . .
"Whether in the problem of getting elected to office or in the problem
of interpreting and popularizing new issues, or in the problem of
making
the day-to-day administration of public affairs a vital part of the
community life, the use of propaganda, carefully adjusted to the
mentality of the masses, is an essential adjunct of political life."
--
end of quote --
I should mention that Bernays' book is not profound or especially
valuable in itself. It merely states a few self-evident facts about
the
way in which a modern society works. For the person interested in
propaganda, far more useful books are available. The fact that Bernays
was a Jew is not even especially relevant here except to emphasize
that
propaganda, the mass media, psychology, and the manipulation of others
always have been subjects of special interest to the Jews. It is not
for
nothing that they are as thick in these fields today as they were in
the
time of Bernays and Freud. The reason I chose Bernays' book to quote
is
that it provides a more concise and clear summary, in a few quotable
paragraphs, of the role of propaganda in modern life than most other
books on the subject.
If I were you I wouldn't even waste time trying to hunt down a copy of
Bernays' book. Although it is available in larger libraries, it's long
been out of print, and all it does is state the obvious: namely, that
the whole concept of democracy is meaningless in an age where a few
people have in their hands the mechanism for controlling the attitudes
and opinions of a majority of the electorate. And Bernays also takes
the
disingenuous position that not only is this control a fact of life,
but
it is a good thing; it is necessary to control and regiment the
thinking
of the public in order to avoid chaos, and it can only lead us to
greater progress and prosperity. He simply glosses over the question
of
who should exercise this control and what their motives should be.
If you really want to study the subject of propaganda, a good place to
start is with the 1962 book, also titled Propaganda, by the Frenchman
Jacques Ellul. That book is still in print and is available from the
sponsor of this program, National Vanguard Books. Professor Ellul
deals
with the subject in much greater depth and with much greater honesty
than Bernays does, but he agrees with Bernays on the most obvious and
fundamental conclusions: on the irrelevance of the idea of democracy,
for example. I quote from Professor Ellul's book:
"If I am in favor of democracy, I can only regret that propaganda
renders the true exercise of it almost impossible. But I think that it
would be even worse to entertain any illusions about a coexistence of
true democracy and propaganda." -- end of quote --
To me it is frustrating that a conclusion that seems so obvious is
nevertheless resisted by so many otherwise intelligent people.
Democracy
has become almost a sacred concept to them, this idea that the
policies
guiding our nation should be decided by counting the votes of every
featherless biped who has reached the age of 18. It's like motherhood:
they're almost afraid to question it.
This seems to be as true of intellectuals in our society as it is of
Joe
Sixpacks. The fact is that intellectuals are no more likely to be
independent-minded than people who work with their hands; most
intellectuals, just like most Joe Sixpacks, are lemmings. In fact, as
Ellul points out, it is precisely the intellectuals who are most
strongly controlled by propaganda, because they are more open to every
medium of propaganda.
And I must admit that it took me a long time to overcome the ideas
drummed into me when I was in school that under a democracy people are
more free than under any other political system, that under a
democracy
we are all free to think and say whatever we want, and that we have a
greater responsibility as citizens of a democracy to make up our own
minds about things independently, and so on. Actually, we still have
some degree of individual freedom in the United States today because
more than 200 years ago men whose temperament was far more
aristocratic
than democratic in the modern sense of the word were willing to go to
war against their legitimate government in order to secure that
freedom
for us, and people with a truly democratic temperament, who have been
gnawing away at that freedom ever since, haven't yet succeeded in
suppressing it completely.
Well, it should not be surprising to us that although books such as
Professor Ellul's Propaganda - and many others - are readily
available, almost no one has heard of them. Keeping the public
believing
in the myth of democracy is an important element in maintaining
control
over the thinking and behavior of the public. It is simply immoral and
scandalous to question the reality of democracy. It's like questioning
the truth of the "Holocaust" story. And for that reason we're not
likely
to be taught in our social studies classes in school or to read in the
New York Times or the Wall Street Journal even the most obvious and
self-evident conclusions presented by Bernays or Ellul. We're still
taught how democracy safeguards our freedom, even while those who
control the mechanism of propaganda in our democratic society are
working day and night to eliminate that freedom."
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of ADV-list.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to:
adv-list...@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe
To contact us via "snail mail," write to:
National Vanguard Books
Attention: ADVlist
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946
The National Alliance: http://www.natvan.com
http://www.natall.com
neptune3
David Thweatt) wrote:
The booklet "Everybody's Hitler" is mostly pictures, but here is some
of the text:
Everybody's Hitler:
How They Presented the Führer to You, and How He Really Is
ADOLF HITLER! This name has been at the center of world events for
many years. The unknown corporal of the World War became the leader of
the German Reich. In a few years he led it from one success to
another, raising it to a world power. The newspapers of the entire
world first mocked him, then found ever new ways to libel him.
According to his enemies, Adolf Hitler must be a true devil, the
embodiment of all evil.
Those who lived outside the borders of the Reich could learn the truth
only with difficulty. Very few had the opportunity to meet the Führer
personally...
This is how they presented Hitler's relation to faith and religion.
(A sick cartoon)
And the Truth
Hitler listening to the words of the hymn "Now Thank We All our God"
at the celeration in Vienna following the incorporation of his
Austrian homeland into the Reich: "We pray to the just God."
(A real picture of Hitler)
Hitler himself said on 19 July 1940: "My intention was never to wage
war, but to build a new social state with the highest level of
culture. Each year of war keeps me from this work."
The smallest children open their hearts to him. - The growing children
listen to him. - The entire German youth is a Hitler Youth. - The
future belongs to him whom the youth listens to!
Adolf Hitler honors and promotes artists and scientists as no other
statesman in the world. This picture shows him at a cultural
conference with the architect Dr. Troost and his wife, along with the
world-famous doctors and researchers Professor Dr. Bier and Professor
Dr. Sauerbruch.
The Führer and Reich Marshall Göring visit an exhibition of the work
of Prof. Peiner and Bereskine at the Academy of Art in Berlin.
Hitler celebrates Christmas with his soldiers, next to a decorated
Christmas tree.
Because Hitler loves his people, he had to free it from the shackles
of Versailles to guarantee it work and prosperity.
He wanted to accomplish this through peaceful agreement with England
and France. These pictures show the Führer in conversation with
Chamberlain, attempting to preserve peace. But England and France
wanted war.
The Führer therefore had to set aside all the things that were dearest
to him: the peaceful building of his social state and the wonderful
and grand buildings he had begun. He had to take on the war others
forced on him to guarantee his nation of 80,000,000 freedom and peace.
Hitler wanted to free his nation from Versailles through peaceful
means, by negotiating and agreeing with Allied statesmen. He succeeded
in freeing the Sudetan Germans from Czech slavery. The war began over
the ancient German Hanseatic city of Danzig. Poland wanted to remove
the Germanic element from this German cultural landmark and win it for
itself...
In the midst of his gigantic struggle with the enemy world, the Führer
never forgets his larger goal: the building of a better world order.
He has done it first in his own country, building an advanced level of
social services and raising the level of all of German life. He makes
no empty promises to workers, but has established the foundation for
comprehensive old age care, for new housing developments, and social
laws benefiting all those who work. These are all measures serving his
goal of building a strong German people's community for the future.
Breaking the chains of Versailles had more than only domestic
consequences. The terrible burden of tribute was removed from the
German people. Far more important, however, was that Germans removed
from the Reich by the treaty were able to return to the German
homeland.
neptune3
<dw...@humboldtone.com> wrote:
>
>Actually, they are both forms of totalitarianism. Socialism includes the
>post office, national parks, roads and highways, social security and a
>host of other government programs that are not necessarily evil.
>Socialism is about working together within a government for the common
>good.
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"Human progress and human cultures are not founded by the
multitude. They are exclusively the work of personal genius and
personal efficiency."
"Does anybody honestly believe that human progress originates in
the composite brain of the majority and not in the brain of the
individual personality?"
"The devastating influence of the parliamentary institution might
not easily be recognized by those who read the Jewish Press, unless
the reader has learned how to think independently and examine the
facts for himself. This institution is primarily responsible for the
crowded inrush of mediocre people into the field of politics.
Confronted with such a phenomenon, a man who is endowed with real
qualities of leadership will be tempted to refrain from taking part in
political life; because under these circumstances the situation does
not call for a man who has a capacity for constructive statesmanship
but rather for a man who is capable of bargaining for the favour of
the majority. Thus the situation will appeal to small minds and will
attract them accordingly."
"One truth which must always be borne in mind is that the majority
can never replace the man. The majority represents not only ignorance
but also cowardice. And just as a hundred blockheads do not equal one
man of wisdom, so a hundred poltroons are incapable of any political
line of action that requires moral strength and fortitude."
"It is not the aim of our modern democratic parliamentary system
to bring together an assembly of intelligent and well-informed
deputies. Not at all. The aim rather is to bring together a group of
nonentities who are dependant on others for their views and who can
be all the more easily led, the narrower the mental outlook of each
individual is. That is the only way in which a party policy, according
the the evil meaning it has to-day, can be put into effect. And by
this method alone is it possible for the wirepuller, who exercises the
real control, to remain in the dark, so that personally he can never
be brought to account for his actions."
"Such people would raise an outcry, if, for instance, anyone
should attempt to set up a dictatorship, even though the man
responsible for it were Frederick the Great and even though the
politicians for the time being, who constituted the parlimentary
majority, were small and incompetent men or maybe even on a lower
grade of inferiority; because to such sticklers for abstract
principles the law of democracy is more sacred than the welfare of the
nation."
"the best form of government is that which makes it quite natural for
the best brains to reach a position of dominant importance and
influence in the community."
>
>That I agree with. Little does "neptune3" know that democracy (as
>understood by us) was Greek in origin. Greece is hardly a hotbed of
>Judaism.
"Jewry rules from behind the mask of democracy. What one calls
>
>Here's the man who coined both the words "democracy" and "oligarchy"...
>
>"The real difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and
>wealth. Wherever men rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be few
>or many, that is an oligarchy, and where the poor rule, that is a
>democracy." - Aristotle, circa 300 B.C.
>
He was wrong. An oligarchy would want a democracy as long as they
control the media and therefore the majority opinion.
Here is a quote from "The Zionist Factor" by Ivor Benson:
"Money had become progressively the measure of all things, with a
ruling elite drawn less and less from the land and more and more from
the factory and counting house. The nations had, in fact, become
plutocracies, capable of maintaing themselves in power with a public
opinion not sought and consulted as before but -created- as required
by newspapers, patronage and other "rewards in the business world."
Such a conversion of money into public opinion and support
was acccomplished in Britain by Rhodes and Milner and their "gold bug"
partners, with a total disregard for all moral considerations. Money
had shown what money could do."
neptune3
David Thweatt) wrote:
>The problem with socialism is that it requires a totalitarian state in
>order to impose it on people who would rather work for themselves and be
>able to keep their earnings rather than give up a rediculous percentage of
>the fruits of their own labor to a government who will redistribute the
>money to people who did nothing to earn it.
In a great nation everyone has to work.
Today the people who get rich on the stock market are the
parasites who aquire the fruits of other peoples labor while doing
nothing to earn it.
Capitalism and Communism are both evil. The problem with
capitalism is that it is materialistic and puts no special value on
people. Capitalism is based on supply and demand. A capitalist company
that made potato chips for example would need--X number of potatoes, Y
amount of salt, and Z number of human beings for labor. The human
beings have no more value than the potatoes or the salt. And they
consider it good to pay they humans as little as they possibly can to
increase their profits.
According to capitalist theory people must compete to see who
will work for the least pennies per hour. They say everyone must
compete with the people in Mexico and China to see who will work for
the fewest pennies. If a company makes billions in profit while paying
its employees starvation wages that is perfectly fine. At least the
sacred laws of supply and demand are not violated. If the people die
of starvation that is fine too. You can always get more people. If
there is not enough work for everyone to do then they think people
need to die off. Ebenezer Scrooge did everything right according to
the capitalists and followed the beliefs and values of capitalism.
The apologists for the Scrooges correctly point out that
people only start business for a profit. Of course that is true.
Anyone can see that communism is a big mistake. But wouldn't people
start the business for only millions in profits rather than billions?
What if there were laws that made sure working people got a reasonable
share of the profit? Would that be so terrible?
We have many laws that make things better for people. There are
laws that give people extra pay if they work over forty hours. There
are laws that ensure people will have retirement. Capitalism is for
doing away with the laws so businesses can be free to be as greedy as
possible.
Capitalists oppose welfare and say that orphans and other needy
people should be helped by charity. How much charity would there be
when capitalists openly say that selfishness is a great virtue? If
there was no welfare then the charitable people would have to pay for
everything while most people would not pay one thin dime. We have
welfare so people all pay their fair share. It is part of having
civilization.
We need to reject both Capitalism and Communism. They are both
materialistic and they are both evil.
neptune3
<dw...@humboldtone.com> wrote:
>Actually, the majority of European countries have socialist governments.
>
>Most European citizens don't have to "give up a rediculous percentage of
>the fruits of their labor" to corporate welfare and the
>military/industrial complex. Their taxes go to schools, roads and public
>transportation, health care, retirement and benefits to THEM instead of a
>capitalistic government that spends money on war and death.
>
>If you compare the socialist countries tax payments (and include the
>value of services they get) with the cost of U.S. taxes PLUS paying for
>their own services, you will find that our cost of living is usually
>higher.
>
>It looks like William David Thweatt is quite willing to pay through the
>nose in taxes for the military/industrial complex and then come up with
>his own health care and retirement money. He pays high taxes and gets
>nothing back and then thinks he doesn't live in a totalitarian state.
>
>The USA is just as socialist as the Soviet Union ever was, only our taxes
>go to the already rich and powerful who are willing to shed the blood of
>young Americans in order to protect their profits.
>
>Get a clue, William!
Capitalists in America gripe about giving welfare to American
homeless etc. But they don't mind giving billions of dollars to the
Jews country, Israel, and the Jews there are not even poor.
neptune3
David Thweatt) wrote:
>
>As of 1980, Sweden's standard of living exceeded the US by nearly 20%.
>Today, the US standard of living is greater than Sweden's by nearly 100%.
>Swedes enjoy a standard of living lower than that of US African Americans.
>
>In Sweden they have confiscatory taxes and government controls on all
>businesses (totalitarianism). They are simply "nice" about it.
>
>Sweden's standard of living from 1940 through 1980 can be traced to their
>stance in WWII. They declared hemselves "neutral" while siding with the
>Nazis. They profiteered BIG TIME during WWII, making massive amounts of
>money from the war. They even took money from Hitler to use Sweden as a
>staging ground to invade Norway. To add insult to injury, they allowed
>the unhindered flow of German supplies and troops to Norway across Sweden.
>
>The money started to run out in the 1980's. Now they're having a hard
>time of it.
>
I've never been to Sweden but as a guess maybe they give a lot of
welfare to people who don't work. That would end in a bad way.
Hitler did a lot of things to help people but everyone had to work.
neptune3
Hirshberg) wrote:
>
>Communists: athiests
>Nazis: pagans, occult worshipers
One of the points on the National Socialist party platform was that
the party was for positive Christianity. This is what it said:
"The party as such, stands for positive Christianity but does not
bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession."
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
" But all that I heard had the effect of arousing the strongest
antagonism in me. Everything was disparaged-the nation, because it
was held to be an invention of the 'capitalist' class (how often I had
heard that phrase!); the Fatherland, because it was held to be an
instrument in the hands of the bourgeosie for the exploitation of the
working masses; the authority of the law, because that was a means of
holding down the proletariat; religion, as a means of doping the
people, so as to exploit them afterward; morality, as a badge of
stupid and sheepish docility. There was nothing that they did not drag
in the mud.
"At first I remained silent; but that could not last very long."
"And so I believe to-day that my conduct is in accordance with
the will of the Almighty Creator. In standing guard against the Jew I
am defending the handiwork of the Lord."
"Was not the Press instrumental in bringing in a state of moral
degradation among our people? Were not morals and public decency made
to look ridiculous and classed as out-of-date and banal, until finally
our people also became modernized?"
"It must be noted too that the attack on the dogmatic
principles underlying ecclesiastical teaching increased steadily in
violence. And yet this human world of ours would be inconceivable
without the practical existance of a religious belief. The great
masses of a nation are not composed of philosophers. For the masses of
the people especially, faith is absolutely the only basis of a moral
outlook on life."
"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of His
estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary He drove
those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God"
"Thus another weapon beside that of freemasonry would have to be
secured. This was the press. The Jew exercised all his skill and
tenacity in getting hold of it. By means of the Press he began
gradually to control public life in its entirety."
Of religion he (the Jew) makes a mockery. Morality and decency
are described as anti-quated prejudices"
"Anyhow, the Jew has attained the ends he desired. Catholics and
Protestants are fighting with one another to their hearts content,
while the enemy of Aryan humanity and all Christendom is laughing up
his sleeve."
"the Jew trafficked in the freedom of the nation and sold our
country to the masters of international high finance. So in our day he
has succeeded again, this time by raising ructions between the two
German religious denominations while the foundations on which both
rest are being eaten away and destroyed through the poison injected by
the international and cosmopolitan Jew."
"The most devoted Protestant could stand side by side with the
most devoted Catholic in our ranks"
"The National Socialist Movement must see to it that at least in
our own country the mortal enemy is recognized and that the fight
against him may be a beacon light pointing to a new and better period
for other nations as well as showing the way of salvation for Aryan
humanity in the struggle for its existance."
Here is part of a speech by Dr. Joseph Goebbels, delivered in
Nuernberg on September 13th, 1935 at the Seventh National-Socialist
Party Congress:
"Almost without exception, the intellectual leaders of Marxist atheism
in Germany were Jews, among them being Erich Weinert, Felix Abraham,
Dr. Levy-Lenz and others. At regular meetings, held in the presence of
a notary public, members were requested to register their declaration
of withdrawal from their church for a fee of 2 Marks. And this the
fight for atheism was carried on. Between 1918 and 1933 the
withdrawals from the German Evangelical Churches alone amounted to
two-and-a-half million persons in Germany. The programme which these
atheistic societies laid down in regard to sexual matters is amply
charcterized in the following demands publicly expressed at meetings
and distributed in leaflet form:
1) The complete abrogation of the paragraphs of the law dealing with
the crime of abortion, and the right to have abortion procured free of
charge in State Hospitals.
2) Non-interference with prostitution.
3) The abrogation of all bourgeois-capitalistic regulations in regard
to marriage and divorce.
4) Official registration to be optional and the children to be
educated by the community.
5) Abrogation of all penalties for sexual perversities and amnesty to
be granted to all persons condemned as 'sexual criminals'.
"Truly a case of methodical insanity, which has for its aim the
wilful destruction of the nations and their civilization and the
substitute of barbarism as a fundamental principle of public life.
"Where are the men behind the scenes of this virulent world
movement? Who are the inventors of all this madness? Who transplanted
this ensemble into Russia and is today making the attempt to have it
prevail in other countries? The answer to these question discloses the
actual secret of our anti-Jewish policy and our uncomromising fight
against Jewry; for the Bolshevic International is in reality nothing
less than a Jewish International."
Adolf Hitler, 22 July 1933, writing to the Nazi Party (quoted from
John Cornwell's "Hitler's Pope"
"The fact that the Vatican is concluding a treaty with the new Germany
means the acknowledgement of the National Socialist state by the
Catholic Church. This treaty shows the whole world clearly and
unequivocally that the assertion that National Socialism [Nazism] is
hostile to religion is a lie."
Adolf Hitler, speaking in the Reichstag on 30 Jan. 1934
" Imbued with the desire to secure for the German people the great
religious, moral, and cultural values rooted in the two Christian
Confessions, we have abolished the political organizations but
strengthened the religious institutions."
Adolf Hitler, in his speech at Koblenz, to the Germans of the Saar, 26
Aug. 1934
"National Socialism neither opposes the Church nor is it
anti-religious, but on the contrary it stands on the ground of a real
Christianity.... For their interests cannot fail to coincide with ours
alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of
to-day, in our fight against a Bolshevist culture, against atheistic
movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for a consciousness
of a community in our national life... These are not anti-Christian,
these are Christian principles! And I believe that if we should fail
to follow these principles then we should to be able to point to our
successes, for the result of our political battle is surely not
unblest by God."
Adolf Hitler, to Nazi leaders on 2 June 1937, as reported by a
correspondent of the "Daily Telegraph"
"We National Socialists, too, have deep in our hearts our own faith.
We cannot do otherwise. No man can mould the history of peoples or of
the world unless he has upon his will and his capacities the blessing
of Providence."
Adolf Hitler, speaking of the Winter Help Campaign on 5 Oct. 1937
This Winter Help Work is also in the deepest sense a Christian work.
When I see, as I so often do, poorly clad girls collecting with such
infinite patience in order to care for those who are suffering from
the cold while they themselves are shivering with cold, then I have
the feeling that they are all apostles of a Christianity-- and in
truth of a Christianity which can say with greater right than any
other: This is the Christianity of an honest confession, for behind it
stand not words but deeds.
Adolf Hitler, in Nuremberg on 6 Sept. 1938.
National Socialism is not a cult-movement-- a movement for worship; it
is exclusively a 'volkic' political doctrine based upon racial
principles. In its purpose there is no mystic cult, only the care and
leadership of a people defined by a common blood-relationship....
We will not allow mystically-minded occult folk with a passion for
exploring the secrets of the world beyond to steal into our Movement.
Such folk are not National Socialists, but something else-- in any
case something which has nothing to do with us. At the head of our
programme there stand no secret surmisings but clear-cut perception
and straightforward profession of belief. But since we set as the
central point of this perception and of this profession of belief the
maintenance and hence the security for the future of a being formed by
God, we thus serve the maintenance of a divine work and fulfill a
divine will-- not in the secret twilight of a new house of worship,
but openly before the face of the Lord....
Our worship is exclusively the cultivation of the natural, and for
that reason, because natural, therefore God-willed. Our humility is
the unconditional submission before the divine laws of existence so
far as they are known to us men.
Adolf Hitler, in his speech to the "Old Guard" at Munich on 24 Feb.
1939
If positive Christianity means love of one's neighbour, i.e. the
tending of the sick, the clothing of the poor, the feeding of the
hungry, the giving of drink to those who are thirsty, then it is we
who are the more positive Christians. For in these spheres the
community of the people of National Socialist Germany has accomplished
a prodigious work.
VOELKISCHER BEOBACHTER, 24 March 1933, Page 1
[Hitler's Speech at second meeting of the Reichstag of 1933, on
23 March 1933, asking for the adoption of the Enabling Act.]
"While the Government is determined to carry through the political and
moral purging of our public life, it is creating and insuring
prerequisites for a truly religious life. The Government sees in both
Christian confessions the most important factors for the maintenance
of our
folkdom. It will respect agreements concluded between them and the
States.
However, it respects that its work will meet with a similar
appreciation.
The Government will treat all other denominations with equal
objective justice.
It can never condone, though, that belonging to a certain
denomination
or to a certain race might be regarded as a license to commit or
tolerate
crimes. The Government will devote its care to the sincere living
together
of Church and State."
Hitler said in a speech in Berlin on March 23, 1933 "The Reich
government sees in Christianity the unshakable foundation of the
ethics and morality of the folk."
In a speech delivered April 12, 1922, published in "My New Order,"
and quoted in "Freethought Today" (April 1990), Hitler said:
"For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people. And when I
look on my people I see them work and work and toil and labor, and at
the end of the week they have only for their wages wretchedness and
misery. "When I go out in the morning and see these men
standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I
believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil, if I felt no pity
for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn
against those by whom today this poor people are plundered and
exploited."
But to be utterly honest I should include something like this:
Much of the following speech is about religion. After this speech
I will add my comments.
Here are parts of a speech by Dr. Robert Ley on March 31, 1939. He
was Reichsorganisationsleiter (Reich Organization Leader) in National
Socialist Germany. He was also head of the German Labor Front (DAF).
"What we often saw in our meetings before the seizure of power is
repeated here. Then we would enter the hall with a small group of
supporters. Once, in fact, I was alone: speaker, treasurer, meeting
chair and protection all in one person. We naturally could not hope to
win everyone in the hall to National Socialism. We were happy when the
mass in the room was moved, when there was lively response and
exchange of opinions. We knew that the Swastika never released those
it came in contact with, not even the most bitter opponent. They
complained and fought us, but they had been reached. That is how we
move people today.
Roosevelt speaks about us more than anything else, and his men and
ministers speak only about us. England always held its reserve, but
cannot do so any longer. France is in the same situation. Even the
election of the pope stood in the shadow of the Swastika, whether the
gentlemen liked it or not. I am sure they spoke of nothing else than
how to find a candidate for the chair of St. Peter who was more or
less up to dealing with Adolf Hitler.
National Socialism concerns the leaders of the world, it moves the
peoples. Germany is at the center of the world, and the world asks:
"What is Adolf Hitler doing?" That is their nervous question. My party
comrades, today the Swastika forces the world to take a position for
or against us. The world must decide, it has no choice. There can be
no compromise. The Jew leads the other world. It is all or nothing.
There is no going back..."
"They may say the world is crazy. Well, it is a crazy world, but that
is not the decisive thing. The important thing during the decisive
battles of the coming months and years is whether or not we can make
our people immune to such hocus pocus so that the enemy can no longer
reach them. Our people must simply laugh at their doctrines and magic
words. Just as we did not overcome Marxism only through negation, so
too we will not overcome these enemies only through struggle and
explanations. The Fuehrer once said: "If you take an idol from people,
you must replace it with a true god." Our god is the wonderful law of
creation, whose amazing unity of all things shows itself in wonderful
flowers, in growing trees, in new born children, in the secrets of a
mother, in the growth of our people, in work and accomplishment and
creation, in life itself. It is the joy we have in everything. How
beautiful everything is. Do you feel the same way? I am so happy to be
alive.
A priest recently asked me: "But what about eternity...?"
I replied: "A day in National Socialist Germany is better for me than
all of your Heaven."
This life is where we build the eternity of the nation. What happens
to me when I die? I do not know. One thing I do know. I will return to
the earth and will belong again to the wonderful Mother Earth. Isn't
that enough? If only a blade of grass of a flower grows from my grave,
that is enough for me. I am happy with what I have done so far. It was
both hard and beautiful, and I am thankful for these 48 years. And if
I remain alive long enough to finish my work, I can die in peace.
Death will hold no terrors for me. I have seen many people for whom it
was hard to die. I am sure that we will die in a worthy manner. I hope
to have the strength not to die like a weakling, rather to die with
the satisfaction of knowing I have done something. Eternity? I do not
want to live forever, but I want my people to live on eternally. I
want my people to be eternal, and to live forever so that in 2,000,
3,000 and 100,000 years it will look just as it does today. I do not
want it to be bastardized or corrupted, rather that the same sound
race, the same manliness, and the same men are present, that the same
battalions of men march through Germany.
When Romulus founded Rome he killed the priests, saying: "I do not
want the Romans to fear God."
The priests then seem to have had the same weapons as their
counterparts today: they count on human weakness and cowardice. We,
however, build on human courage and manliness. That is the difference.
We want to tell the people the truth, not console them with hopes of a
better tomorrow. We want to make the world beautiful, to hold high the
concept of work. We want to say that one can't take problems away from
people, that life is struggle.
No one has greater reverence for god and creation than we do. The
priests do not hate us because we are "godless," since they get along
nicely with the godless in Russia and Spain. They hate us because we
are the only ones who believe in god. We are finding god, indeed we
have already found him. Where does the desire for god come from, where
does faith come from, or true piety, if not from god? I know only one
way to tell: If a person quietly and contemplatively faces events. One
must be confident and self-assured, not afraid and nervous. Then I can
say: "You have a god. You are not worried, you do not run around like
chicken with its head cut off, rather you stay calm."
Look at our people today, and remember how they were ten or twenty
years ago. If that is the measure of whether one believes in god or
not, if one faces everything that fate brings, if faces war or peace
calmly, if one faces life calmly and lives it the same way, then one
has god. To have god means to have a fixed point in life, to have god
means to have faith. I do not know what the future will bring, since I
am only a man, but I am not concerned. English newspapers write:
"Germany will gain no advantage from Bohemia and Moravia." One doesn't
know which is more astonishing: the Fuehrer's pace or the peace with
which 80 million Germans accept what happens. That means we have god:
we are calm, we have faith and confidence-just like the priests always
say. Yes, the Führer gave confidence to every German, and therefore
peace and faith. We have found god.
We have become a people that believes in god. This is what our idea of
life and of affirming life has accomplished, becoming the idea of
Germany. We will be able to do everything if that grows from its small
beginning into a religion, to something holy to the German people. It
will not be a false religious mysticism, rather it will be frank,
honorable, military, manly, disciplined and tough. The Church founded
two realms: the sacred and the secular. They claimed that they ruled
the sacred, the devil the secular. They ruled counts and kings for two
thousand years that way, destroying worlds and building states as they
wished. They brought Negroes and Whites together because it suited
them and their desire to rule. We are building our new state on the
basis of race and community, our race, the German people. We believe
that god gave us our blood not to ruin it, but to keep it pure and
pass it on to our children and our children's children. That is
eternity. That is our defense against the dark powers of Marxism,
Bolshevism, liberalism, Free Masonry and a belief in the Messiah, the
Jewish doctrine of salvation. That is a teaching that affirms life. It
is the idea of race, blood and soil, the idea of this life and the
beauties of the earth, Mother Earth, that is our Fatherland. The world
makes sense, nothing is arbitrary. Everything has its meaning, and is
related to other things. Everything goes according to plan, each star
is in its place, each man has his place, each people has its tasks. We
will overcome the doctrines of our enemies. The Jews must know
that....
"And even if they succeed in eliminating unemployment, something we
have succeeded in doing but they have not, we have rescued the German
worker from his weakness as a proletarian creature. That had nothing
to do with making him a contented slave, rather with freeing him from
slavery and stupidity. I hope we will continue to care for workers in
this way. On the one hand we have to speed up labor, demand more work,
since nothing will be given to us. We cannot get by with an 8 hour
day, for the cannons have to be built, the coal must be mined, the
gasoline and the vehicles have to be produced if we want to prevent
war.
On the other hand, we must do everything we can to care for people.
The people must have the feeling that the leading men are paying
attention to everything, that their lives are not a comfortable, but
that they are driving and flying across the country to care for
people. Of course they won't be able to solve every problem. The
nation is like a child, and a child does not ask if its mother is rich
or poor, but it demands that it be cared for. The people do not serve
Adolf Hitler because they understand his brilliance, rather because
they feel safe..."
My Comments:
Why did men become Christians in the first place? Was it not
because we were against the homosexual perverts and the feminists? We
knew there must be others who see things as we do and we wanted to
join them. It was obvious at the time that Christianity was fighting
homosexual perversion and feminism and the anti-Christ enemies were
all liberals.
Actually we might have joined with Islam or National Socialism,
since they were also against the homosexual perverts and the
feminists.
Anyway the situation today is more complicated. The media is
promoting homosexual perversion and feminism and we know that the
media is Jewish. And most of the Christians today serve these Jews who
are in power. Look at any film of the Jew country and see how
many female policemen they have. The Jews draft their girls into the
military to carry rifles. Yet most Christians today worship that Jew
country. Yes, we know they are corrupted by Scofield's teachings. We
know that Communist Jews murdered millions of Christians and how
enemies have entered the churches deliberately to corrupt it and
Judaize it. These things are only the tip of the iceburg, but still,
siding with Christainity today does not seem to be helping us. Mr.
Rogers "it's a wonderfull day in the neigborhood" was and ordained
Christian minister. The speech above says more about "manliness".
Which side should we be on?
What do you think of people who, after losing an arguement, go on
repeating later the same beliefs, pretending the arguement never
happened? I got in an arguement over Christ saying he would retrurn
before the present generation had passed away. Matthew 24:34 "This
generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." Well,
the generation did pass without all the things being fulfilled. I
tried to explain it, but my opponant won that arguement. Of course I
could have explained it away by using a lot of hot air. But my words
are real and true and I never use hot air or BS.
There are contraditions in the New Testament:
"Christ's genealogies of Matthew and Luke do not agree, give a
different number of generations, and both trace his lineage through
Joseph although Christ was not supposed to be Joseph's flesh and
blood. In Matthew, Jesus is born in a house before the death of Herod,
wise men visited him, and the family fled to Egypt. In Luke, Jesus is
born in a stable during the governorship of Cyrenius, was visited by
shepherds and there is no journey to Egypt. After the crucifixion, the
Matthew account is of two women, Mary Magdalene and another Mary,
discovering the empty tomb, Jesus meets them on their way to tell the
disciples and orders that the disciples go to Galilee, and the
ascension is from a mountain in Galilee. In Mark, three women, the two
Marys and Salome, find a young man in the tomb who commands them to
tell the disciples to go to Galilee, and the ascension is from a room.
According to Luke, two women see two men at the tomb who inform them
of the resurrection, Jesus appears to the disciples at a meeting and
tells them to wait in Jerusalem, and the ascension is from Gethany. In
John it is Mary Magdalene alone who discovers the empty tomb, Jesus
speaks to her outside the tomb, and the ascension is from the Sea of
Galilee."
http://www.dynasophy.org/manifesto_ch2.html
The reason there are contradictions is because the Muslims are
right. Jesus was a great prophet but Allah has no wife or son.
The National Socialists outlawed abortion. They outlawed
homosexual perversion and feminism. They outlawed pornagraphy and
prostitution. They removed the race of anti-Christs from controlling
the media. They rejected both the madness of Communism and the greed
of Capitalism. Hitler said in a speech in Berlin on March 23, 1933
"The Reich government sees in Christianity the unshakable foundation
of the ethics and morality of the folk."
The speech above mentions Whites not mixing with Blacks, which would
result in inter-marriages and the eventual end of the White race.
People don't ask the right question about Blacks. They only ask "Do
you like Blacks?". And I would say yes. Most people work with Blacks
today and we can all see they are nice people. But the right question
is, "Would you want to live in a Black neighborhood?" And I would say
no. I want to live in a White neighborhood. And we must preserve the
White race if there is going to be White neighborhoods in the future.
So what should we support and fight for today? Should we fight for
our religious beliefs? We can't even prove that there is a God. And
our opponant can't prove that there is no God. How can any side ever
win? I say we should support and fight for Nationalism and Socialism.
We want to have a nation based on our beliefs, which are Christian
principles and lifestyles. And if our beliefs can be summed up in one
word it would be "others". We are against selfishness and are for
caring about others. The example in the New Testament which shows what
the book is mainly about could be the story of the good Samaritan.
That is what we are for. We are Nationalists and also Socialists.
>
>Communists: "no private property" used as leverage to remove personal
>freedom from citizens and create facist dictatorship
>Nazis: "private sector monopoly" used as leverage to remove
>personal freedom and create facist dictatorship
Here are parts of a post about Mussolini written by a very
anti-Mussolini person. He has done his homework though and cites many
book which are also anti-Mussolini and anti-Fascist. These are some
things they admit:
>http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=4087
>Left-wing Fascism: An Intellectual Disorder
>By John J. Ray
(Quotes from Mussolini)
"Fascism has taken up an attitude of complete opposition to the
doctrines of
Liberalism, both in the political field and in the field of
economics".
"Fascism now and always believes in holiness and in heroism; that is
to say
in actions influenced by no economic motive"
"Laissez faire is out of date"
"Our programme is simple. We want to rule Italy".
"He had a profound contempt for those whose overriding ambition was to
be
rich. It was a mania, he thought, a kind of disease, and he comforted
himself with the reflection that the rich were rarely happy"
Here Hibbert (1962, p. 47) is describing a lifelong attitude of
Mussolini
that continued right into his time as Italy's Prime Minister - when he
refused to take his official salary.
"There was much truth in the comment of a Rome newspaper that the new
fasci
did not aim at the defence of the ruling class or the existing State
but
wanted to lead the revolutionary forces into the Nationalist camp so
as to
prevent a victory of Bolshevism.
even after coming
to power, to take drives in the country with his wife and stop at
various
farmhouses on the way for a chat with the family there. He would enjoy
discussing the crops, the weather and all the usual rural topics and
obviously just liked the feeling of being one of the people. His claim
to
represent the people was not just theory but heartfelt. And he never
gave up
his "anti-bourgeois" rhetoric.
His policies were basically protectionist. He
controlled the exchange-rate of the Italian currency and promoted that
old
favourite of the economically illiterate - autarky - meaning that he
tried
to get Italy to become wholly self-sufficient rather than rely on
foreign
trade. He wanted to protect Italian products from competing foreign
products.
By 1939 he had doubled Italy's grain
production from its traditional level, enabling Italy to cut wheat
imports
by 75% (Smith, 1967, p. 92).
He made Capri a bird sanctuary (Smith, 1967, p. 84) and
in 1926 he issued a decree reducing the size of newspapers to save
wood
pulp. And, believe it or not, he even mandated gasohol - i.e. mixing
industrial alcohol with petroleum products to make fuel for cars
(Smith,
1967, p. 87). Mussolini also disliked the population drift from rural
areas
into the big cities and in 1930 passed a law to put a stop to it
unless
official permission was granted
he advocated private enterprise within
a strict set of State controls designed, among other things, to
prevent
abuse of monopoly power (Gregor, 1979, Ch. 5).
Some other clearly Leftist initiatives that Mussolini took were a big
expansion of public works and a great improvement in social insurance
measures. He also set up the "Dopolavoro" (after work) organization to
give
workers cheap recreations of various kinds (cf. the Nazi Kraft durch
Freude
movement). His public health measures (such as the attack on
tuberculosis
and the setting up of a huge maternal and child welfare organization)
were
particularly notable for their rationality and efficiency and, as
such, were
rewarded with great success. For instance, the incidence of
tuberculosis
dropped dramatically and infant mortality declined by more than 20%
(Gregor,
p. 259). Together with big improvements in education and public
infrastructure, such measures gave Fascist Italy what was arguably the
most
advanced welfare State in the world at the time.
And if influential American "liberal" economists such as Galbraith
(1969)
can bemoan the low level of spending on public works as "private
affluence
and public squalor", Mussolini was well ahead on that. As Hibbert
(1962, p.
56) says, Mussolini
"instituted a programme of public works hitherto unrivalled in modern
Europe. Bridges, canals and roads were built, hospitals and schools,
railway
stations and orphanages, swamps were drained and land reclaimed,
forest were
planted and universities were endowed."
In 1929 Mussolini and Pope Pius
12th signed the Lateran treaty - which is still the legal basis for
the
existence of the Vatican State to this day - and Pius in fact at one
stage
called Mussolini "the man sent by Providence". The treaty recognized
Roman
Catholicism as the Italian State religion as well as recognizing the
Vatican
as a sovereign state. What Mussolini got in exchange was acceptance by
the
church - something that was enormously important in the Italy of that
time.
the great hatred that existed in prewar
Germany between the Nazis and the "Reds". And the early Fascists
battled the
"Reds" too, of course.
The 1919 election
manifesto, for instance, contained policies of worker control of
industry,
confiscation of war profits, abolition of the Stock exchange, land for
the
peasants and abolition of the Monarchy and nobility. Further,
Mussolini
never ceased to inveigh against "plutocrats".
He wanted a harmonious and united
Italy for all Italians of all classes and was sure that achieving just
treatment for the workers needed neither revolution nor any kind of
artificially enforced equality.
This made Italian Fascism a much more popular creed than Stalin's
Communism. This
is perhaps most clearly seen by the always persuasive "voting with
your
feet" criterion. Mussolini made no effort to prevent Italians from
emigrating and although some anti-Fascists did, net emigration
actually FELL
under Mussolini. Compare this with Stalin and the Berlin wall.
Mussolini gained
power through political rather than revolutionary means. His famous
march on
Rome was only superficially revolutionary. The King of Italy and the
army
approved of him because of his pragmatic policies so did not oppose
the
march. So this collusion ensured that Mussolini's "revolution" was
essentially bloodless.
His considerable popularity for many years among a wide
range of Italians shows how effective his recipe for achieving that
was.
In his "corporate state", Mussolini was the first to create that very
modern
phenomenon constantly now being advocated by Leftists everywhere - a
system
of capitalism under tight government control. And his corporate state
was
one where the workers had (at least in theory) equal rights with
management.
REFERENCES Amis, M. (2002) Koba the Dread : laughter and the twenty
million.
N.Y.: Talk Miramax
Carsten, F.L. (1967) The rise of Fascism. London: Methuen.
Funk & Wagnall's New Encyclopedia (1983) Funk & Wagnall's
Galbraith, J.K. (1969) The affluent society. 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Gilmour, I.H.J.L. (1978) Inside right. London: Quartet.
Greene, N. (1968) Fascism: An anthology. N.Y.: Crowell.
Gregor, A.J. (1979) Italian Fascism and developmental dictatorship
Princeton, N.J.: Univ. Press.
Hagan, J. (1966) Modern History and its themes. Croydon, Victoria,
Australia: Longmans.
Hibbert, C. (1962) Benito Mussolini Geneva: Heron Books. Herzer, I.
(1989)
The Italian refuge: Rescue of Jews during the holocaust. Washington,
D.C.:
Catholic University of America Press
Horowitz, D. (1998) Up from multiculturalism. Heterodoxy, January.
See:
http://www.cspc.org/het/multicul.htm
Lenin, V.I. (1952) "Left-Wing" Communism, an Infantile Disorder. In:
Selected Works, Vol. II, Part 2. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing
House.
Martino, A. (1998) The modern mask of socialism. 15th John Bonython
lecture,
Centre for Independent Studies, Sydney. See
http://www.cis.org.au/Events/JBL/JBL98.htm
Muravchik, J. (2002) Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism
San
Francisco: Encounter Books.
Smith, D.M. (1967) The theory and practice of Fascism. In: Greene, N.
Fascism: An anthology N.Y.: Crowell.
Steinberg, J. (1990) All or nothing: The Axis and the holocaust
London:
Routledge.
>
>Communists: dysfunctional economy and failed imperialist ambitions
>destroyed country
>Nazis: failed attempt to conquer world destroyed country
The Germans lost some land to Poland after World War One. The
>
>Communists: psychotic with moustache murdered millions of civilians,
>and his incompetent leadership in war resulted in millions of his own
>soldiers' unecessary deaths
>Nazis: psychotic with moustache murdered millions of civilians,
>and his incompetent leadership in war resulted in millions of his own
>soldiers' unecessary deaths
"Even cremated bodies leave about 9 pounds of remains.
Morghus
>
>Communists: cult following in the USA in the 1930s
>Nazis: cult following in the USA NOW
>
America is ruled by the Jews.
"Bush stated that we must "ensure that anti-Semitism" - that is,
any writings that Jews don't like - "is excluded from school
text books, official statements, official television programming
and official publications...." Thanks, G.W. It's good to know
what your priorities are. Can you imagine Bush or Powell or
Giuliani, as much as they hate free speech, ever calling for laws
to suppress criticism of White people or even of America? It's
not going to happen. Forget it. Yet, in the hushed tones usually
reserved for sacred words spoken in church, they piously intone
that words critical of Jews be eliminated or made illegal. They
intone these words at international conferences, paid for by you
the taxpayers, called into session specifically for the purpose
of ending criticism of Jews. How much more obvious does it have
to be, dear listeners? Powell and Bush and Giuliani have given us
such a crystal clear example of Jewish power over our "leaders"
that even the most dense should be able to 'get it.'
Do you think that the OSCE delegates were mainly concerned with
stopping physical attacks on Jews and not on suppressing freedom
of speech? Think again. The Dutch delegate to the conference,
Daan Everts, specifically cited "[racist] music [and] racist
slogans" -- slogans! -- as 'problems' to be addressed by new
laws.
And Israel's chief representative at the conference, Avraham
Toledo, specifically called on member governments to make
'anti-Semitism' a criminal offense. That's where they are going
with this. It can't possibly be any more obvious. A more chilling
nightmare scenario could not have been penned by a science
fiction author characterizing the Jews as a parasitic alien
species who have invaded us and taken over the ruling class in
our societies, and who are slowly programming us to kill or
imprison any 'rebels' who question the new ruling class, worship
of which is gradually being introduced in our schools and
churches as a pseudo-religion to cement their power over us.
[ <http://tinyurl.com/etzr> ]
It's interesting that the Bush administration withdrew its
delegates from the UN-sponsored 'World Conference Against Racism'
held in South Africa in 2001 when it was discovered that Jews
would be criticized for their treatment of Palestinians there.
But they enthusiastically endorse -- with the participation of
Powell, Giuliani, and even Bush himself -- this conference in
Vienna in which the entire focus is criminalizing criticism of
Jews and Jews alone. Clearly, our captured rulers have no problem
with the concept of conferences on racism. But conferences that
criticize Jews, however mildly, are verboten. And conferences
that denounce critics of Jews and Israel are national and
international priorities. It's Jewish interests that are their
driving force at all places and at all times. Jewish interests.
Not American interests. Not White interests. Any people so
betrayed by its own alleged leaders will not long survive on
Earth.
On June 18th, Giuliani stated that when people characterize Jews
"in inhumane ways, and make salacious statements in parliaments
or the press" about Jews, they are "attacking the defining values
of our societies and our international institutions."
Just as he did in the United States a few years ago, Giuliani
went on to call for special punishment for anyone in Europe found
to have violated his proposed 'hate crime' laws, punishment far
more severe than for similar offenses when the motivation was not
found to be dislike of Jews. He specifically justified this
unequal punishment of those who criticize Jews on the basis that
crimes against Jews are "particularly heinous." Crimes against
Englishmen, crimes against Italians, crimes against Frenchmen,
crimes against Americans -- well, they're just crimes. Crimes
against Jews require special punishment. They're "particularly
heinous." Conferences must be held and new laws must be passed.
Giuliani ...continues
as he tells us what the real function of law should be in a
'good' society of obedient goyim: "Yes, some will argue that hate
crimes need not be punished more harshly than similar crimes
committed for different reasons. But the fact is that extra
penalties are used throughout civilized legal systems - in Europe
as well as America - as a way to distinguish acts that are
particularly heinous. One of the functions of the law is to
teach, to draw lines between what's permissible and what's
forbidden."
[ <http://tinyurl.com/f7j3> ]
More chills for your spine, ladies and gentlemen. "...what's
permissible and what's forbidden" as defined by Rudy Giuliani and
his Jewish masters. We don't need Alfred Hitchcock or Stephen
King anymore, now that we've got Rudy and the Jews. Yes,
"...what's permissible and what's forbidden" -- truth about the
Jewish criminal conspiracy that is destroying our race and
nations is forbidden. Freedom is forbidden. A free press is
forbidden. Jewish ascendancy in a society often ends this way...
Giuliani continues his sermon, letting us know that there can
only be one point of view and one sacred victim group in World
War II history: "Making sure their citizens have an honest
understanding of the Holocaust is vital, as revisionist
viewpoints put us at risk of a repetition of race-based genocide.
Schools must look at how they educate children regarding
tolerance and fairness. Universities, public officials,
advertisers and the news media should publicize the tremendous
contributions that Jews have made to European societies through
the years."
Giuliani states that his purpose with regard to the rising
awareness of Jewish power and Jewish crimes in Europe is to see
that this increased consciousness is 'turned around.' I quote
from his June 13 address at the State department after accepting
the OSCE 'commission': "Coming from New York City and having had
the experience of being mayor of the world's most diverse city,
you learn... the value of having a focus on hate crimes and hate
incidents.... And then focusing your attention on those places in
which you have to educate people or you have to deal with people
who are wrongdoers. And the fact that this organization is giving
attention to this at this level, I think is a very positive sign
that we will be able to deal with it at this stage and start to
turn it in the right direction."
[ <http://tinyurl.com/f7lu> ]
It's clear that Rudy Giuliani's political ambitions are far from
over. His brown-nosing of the Jews has reached a fever pitch. We
can expect the same from ambitious politicians like Hilary
Clinton and many others as 2004 approaches. Elections in the
United States have become more and more contests between cynical
lying hacks who compete for favorable media coverage by trying to
be more subservient to the Jews and to Israel than the next
cynical lying hack. This guarantees them good coverage and more
votes from the unthinking victims of media manipulation. The
Semitically Sycophantic rhetoric will be more heated than ever in
future elections, as it takes extreme statements to compete for
the Jews' favor with George W., who was willing to slaughter
Arabs and Americans by the thousands for them.
But, as the ambitions and the actions of the Jews become more
extreme, the awareness they are trying to suppress will start to
bloom all over Europe, all over North America, and everywhere
where they have set up their criminal conspiracy to harness our
people for their evil ends and to eventually eradicate our race
from the face of the Earth. That's the historical pattern. Jews
gain power in a society, abuse that power through arrogance and
hate, and eventually the oppressed people expel their oppressors.
But this time, the process is not limited to one country like
20th century Germany or 15th century Spain. The process is now
global. And, as we and the other peoples of the Earth realize
that our mutual needs for self-determination and for freedom from
Jewish domination coincide, the days of the Jewish cryptocracy
will be numbered.
Instead of a government that serves Jewish interests above all,
and serves other minority interests as long as they don't
conflict with Jewish interests, we must have a government that
serves White interests. Under such a government, our labor and
our tax dollars and our blood would be expended only when they
served future generations of Whites, not squandered on the
megalomaniac dreams of the self-Chosen or on breeding the biomass
that threatens to engulf us. The conferences we will convene will
hold lying White politicians like Rudy Giuliani to account, and
will focus on such issues as the genocides against Whites
committed by Jews in Europe during the last century, and on
righting wrongs like the sexual slavery of young White women and
girls being practiced now by Jewish criminal gangs in Israel and
elsewhere.
When we have a government which pursues White interests instead
of Jewish interests, we will be incomparably richer, incomparably
more secure, incomparably more technically advanced and powerful
-- and, in terms of Nature's highest commandment, the protection
of our children and our posterity, incomparably more moral than
we are today.
That is the task of the National Alliance. Join us today; write
to PO Box 90, Hillsboro WV 24946 USA, or apply online at"
<http://www.natvan.com> .
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of
ADV-list.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to:
adv-list...@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe
neptune3
<dw...@humboldtone.com> wrote:
>
>Some fascists pretend to be Christians, but they usually ignore Jesus and
>concentrate on the Old Testament wrath of God, and on Armageddon in which
>they pervert Jesus' mysticism into atom bombs.
Here is an article from Frauen Warte magazine, the National Socialist
Party's magazine for
women:
The Educational Principles of the New Germany:
What Schools and Parents Need to Know About the Goals of National
Socialist Education
German people, German parents! The new Germany created by our people's
chancellor Adolf Hitler places special demands on the German youth.
The German youth are a foundation of the rebuilding of the German
people and the German fatherland. The people and the fatherland place
their hands on the shoulders of the youth and determine what
educational and cultural values and goals are necessary for this youth
to meet the needs of people and fatherland. This requires a truly
national and social education for the German youth, and all involved
in education has to serve these educational and cultural goals with
their full energy. Parents and teachers above all!
All those involved in education must have a clear and unified idea of
the educational tasks before them. The four iron pillars of the
national school and educational system are: race, military training,
leadership, and religion!
Race
National Socialist education is an education in the thinking of the
German people, in understanding German traditions, in awakening the
pure, uncorrupted and honest people's consciousness, their sense of
belonging to the people. Only a pure member of the German race can
have such an understanding of his people, crowning it with the
willingness to sacrifice all for the people. He must know that without
his people he is a miserable nothing, and that it is better if he
himself die than that his people and fatherland perish! He who thinks
that National Socialist education has as its goal a kind of
hyperpatriotism has not understood it. Something entirely different is
intended. Something should be awakened in the soul of young Germans
that will fill their hearts and whole being until their souls can no
longer restrain the overflowing, until a powerful and jubilant "Hail
Germany" springs from their lips! That call itself is not the first or
most significant goal: rather it is its foundation in the soul, a
foundation that jubilantly, freely, confidently, cheerfully and
passionately expresses itself. It is the holy sense of people and
fatherland! Awakening this in the German youth requires that they have
a clear understanding of the value of people and fatherland. They must
realize that the German people has a right to independence and
freedom, honor and power. They must learn that it has a right to its
own fate among the peoples of the earth, and it must gain with the
other peoples the place in the sun that belongs to it. It must do this
not through force, rather because the German people is a noble nation
that has created values for the entire world that no other people was
capable of. We want to awaken in the German youth this free, righteous
and noble national pride so that at the thought of Germany's past,
present and future their hearts will pound and their eyes will gleam.
That is the first foundation of National Socialist education.
Military Training
It is clear that the German youth must be resolved to defend their
fatherland with their lives. Despite all the nonsense about promises
and disarmament, Germany is surrounded by weapons. The German youth
must learn military virtues. Their bodies must be steeled, made hard
and strong, so that the youth may become capable soldiers who are
healthy, strong, trained, energetic and able to bear hardships.
Gymnastics, games, sports, hiking, swimming, and military exercises
must all be learned by the youth. Our youth should not sit in stuffy
rooms and develop crooked backs and weak eyes. Alongside the basic and
truly important education of the mind, they should develop healthy
bodies by being outdoors. The idea of the healthy and strong German
should not be mere empty talk. Parents can help here. They will train
our youth in simplicity and cleanliness. They will train them, even
when they are older, not to waste their spare time by dubious or even
harmful activities such as card playing, drinking alcohol and bad
music, rather to prepare their bodies for their future tasks.
Leadership
A youth being trained for such important national duties must accept
the idea of following the Führer absolutely and without question,
without unhealthy carping criticism, without selfishness or
opposition. They must learn to obey so that they, having themselves,
having learned to obey, can believe in and trust their own leadership
and can grow to be leaders themselves. Only he who has learned to obey
can lead. Germany no longer believes that the masses can lead
themselves by majority rule! The masses themselves are nothing! We
need not a people ruled by majority votes, but a people with the will
to leadership. The German youth must learn that and act accordingly!
Thus the German youth belongs in organizations where they will learn
the nature of leadership in its most noble form, where they can learn
to obey and-if they are called to it-also learn to lead. They will not
bend to an empty mass will expressed through useless votes, rather
look with enthusiasm to the nation's strong and noble Führer. They
must learn that once again. We parents want to exhibit such authority
to our youth by strengthening family authority and establishing in our
homes a healthy and natural obedience on the part of our children.
This will not suppress the youth, rather provide them the controlled
freedom and authority they need to develop their abilities.
Religion
Life comes from God and returns to God. All life and all races follow
God's ordinances. No people and no race can ignore them. We want the
German youth to again recognize the religious nature of life. They
must realize that God wants the individual as well as the whole
people, and that they lose contact with life when they lose contact
with God! God and nation are the two foundations of the life of the
individual and the community. We want no shallow and superficial
piety, rather a deep faith that God guides the world, that he controls
it, and a consciousness of the relationship between God and each
individual, and between God and the live of the people and the
fatherland. The National Socialist state will promote such a deeply
religious educational system. We want parents to support and
strengthen this by honesty and by good example.
Race, military training, leadership, religion! These are the four
unshakable foundations of the new German National Socialist education!
>
>Communists don't create a "facist dictatorship", they create a "communist
>dictatorship" :) (BTW, it's fascist, not facist.)
>
>
>Don't forget the fascist's dysfunctional economy (i.e., spending
>$billions on war that is supposed to be "good" for the economy. That is
>just as much a dead-end street as any communist economy.)
The system in the USA is jewocracy, rule by the Jews. That is why it
is always involved in the Middle East.
Here is a quote from an article by Julius Streicher in 1944:
Der Stürmer, #23/1944, What is Americanism
"The family ties between hundreds of thousands of German families and
their American relatives led many to think that America would never
join a second war against Germany. Now that that has happened, many
Germans still believe that America will never allow Bolshevism to
conquer and destroy Germany. Recent events have proven how false and
dangerous this idea is. One has to be be foolish or irredeemably
stupid to believe that anything good can come to Europe from the land
of presumed opportunity. That that did not happen after the First
World War, and will not happen after the second. The Jews have made
America what it is today: a nation raped by the Jews , a nation whose
130,000,000 people of many colors and races have been forced into
helping the Jews achieve world domination!"
>
>Well, that's two from WWII. They don't always have a mustache!
>
>
>This I like!
>
>
>"The struggle today is not one between communism and fascism; it is the
>struggle between tolerance and bigotry--bigotry preached equally by
>communism and fascism. Here in this country the worst fascists are those
>who, disowning fascism, preach enslavement to capitalism under the cloak
>of liberty and the Constitution. They steal not only wages but honor."
>- John Lewis
Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"The fight which Fascist Italy waged against Jewry's three
principal weapons, the profound reasons for which may not of been
consciously understood (though I do not believe this myself) furnishes
the best proof that the poison fangs of that Power which transcends
all State boundaries are being drawn, even though in an indirect way.
The prohibition of Freemasonry and secret societies, the supression of
the supernational Press and the definate abolition of Marxism,
together with the steadily increasing consolidation of the Fascist
concept of the State--all this will enable the Italian Government, in
the course of some years, to advance more and more the interests of
the Italian people without paying any attention to the hissing of the
Jewish world-hydra.
"The English situation is not so favourable. In that country
which has 'the freest democracy' the Jew dictates his will, almost
unrestrained but indirectly, through his influence on public opinion."
>
>"It would be easy for us, if we do not learn to understand the world and
>appreciate the rights, privileges and duties of other countries and
>peoples, to represent in our power the same danger to the world that
>Fascism did." - Ernest Hemingway
>
>"The road to fascism is paved with socialist pretensions." - Grant
>Singleton
>
>"The fascists cannot argue, so they kill." - Victor Margueritte
>
>"Fascism is a lie told by bullies." - Ernest Hemingway
>
>"Fascism is capitalism in decay." - V.I. Lenin
>
>"Fascism is capitalism plus murder." - Upton Sinclair
Here are parts of a post about Mussolini written by a very
(Quotes from Mussolini)
>
>"We warn the North that every one of the leading abolitionists is
>agitating the negro slavery question merely as a means to attain their
>ulterior ends...a surrender to Socialism and Communism--to no private
>property, no church, no law; to free love, free lands, free women and
>free children." -- George Fitzhugh (before the Civil War)
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.altermedia.info/ www.nowarforisrael.com
Fredrik Nikala
> I've never been to Sweden but as a guess maybe they give a lot of
> welfare to people who don't work. That would end in a bad way.
>
Well, actually, the thing that costs so much money, is that so very many
people are employed by state and local authorities.
And that it is rather expensive, and personel intensive, to give those
who are worst of a decent life. For example, in my "komun" (local
authority) about ten percent of the budget is allocated to help for
"challenged" people, with mental or physical disabilities.
Then about the "who don't work"... well, that is expensive too,
unfortunately :-)
And, as always, if someone is interested, I can dig up some numbers (I
read in a.p.e.m)
/Fredrik
Steve Hayes
> I've never been to Sweden but as a guess maybe they give a lot of
>welfare to people who don't work. That would end in a bad way.
I guess millions of Americans die because they can't pay the fees charged by
greedy money-mad US doctors. And Americans like it that way because they
believe that only the rich deserve to live.
Guessing is a very accurate way of determining the weay of life of different
countries.
Steve Hayes
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
Steve Hayes
>On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 13:55:34 +0000 (UTC), thw...@rice.edu (William
>David Thweatt) wrote:
>
>
>>The problem with socialism is that it requires a totalitarian state in
>>order to impose it on people who would rather work for themselves and be
>>able to keep their earnings rather than give up a rediculous percentage of
>>the fruits of their own labor to a government who will redistribute the
>>money to people who did nothing to earn it.
>
> In a great nation everyone has to work.
Good socialist principle that.
Socialist nations must be grest nations.
Much greater thant the USA, where I guess only the slaves work, while the
slave ownwers sit on the porch sipping mint juleps.
Steve Hayes
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
neptune3
wrote:
>
>Well, actually, the thing that costs so much money, is that so very many
>people are employed by state and local authorities.
>And that it is rather expensive, and personel intensive, to give those
>who are worst of a decent life. For example, in my "komun" (local
>authority) about ten percent of the budget is allocated to help for
>"challenged" people, with mental or physical disabilities.
They should be helped but also sterilized. This is what the Germans
did:
This speech delivered by Dr. Walter Grob, the head of the Nazi Party's
Office of Racial Policy. He was speaking to a women's meeting at the
Gau Party Rally in Cologne on 13 October 1934. After this speech I
will make my comment on it.
My Dear German Women and Girls!
When Germans come together today to discuss the things that concern us
both as individuals and as a nation, it is a solemn occasion, whether
we wish it to be or not. During the political struggles of the past,
we could speak of party programs or of civilization without any
involvement of our soul.
Now we have forgotten how to approach an issue merely with our
understanding, merely with our mouth, merely with our heart. We have
become whole people once again. When we speak with others, we do so
with our full being.
That is what made the movement strong, and great, and powerful from
its first days. It is also that which the enemy on this side of the
border and the other cannot understand, and which it hates with deadly
strength. As this great and beautiful people's movement began, so too
began a hard and bitter struggle between enemy and German forces,
between an old world that is really long dead and buried, and the new
world that is struggling to reach the light through us. This struggle
has been going on in people's hearts and souls for years, and is
nowhere near its end. The world finds it difficult to understand that
which is at the center of our endeavors:
the value of blood and race.
Our enemies first laughed in pity, then in hatred as we spoke of it.
Let us speak of what we National Socialists mean by that so that it
will become clear why the German woman may be even more concerned
about these matters than the man, his state, and his fighting
organization can be.
There was a time in the past when we were untrue, untrue in the
deepest sense. We were untrue not to other people, or parties, or
states, or kings, but untrue to something far greater, untrue to the
laws of life. As long as the world exists, as long as life grows,
flourishes and perishes, so long will this life have the urge to live
on into the future and win new territory. Whether plant or animal or
man-as we, or I, or you:
wherever there is life, it has the longing to bring forth new life.
It should be unnecessary to speak of such things. We speak of them
only because for a few decades a crazy era ignored, blasphemed and
mocked these greatest, most beautiful and purest dreams of life. This
was an age that made the idol of money supreme and said: "The world
should be governed not be what serves life, rather by what some fool
of an accountant decides is best." We know the results. The great laws
of life were evaluated according to money sacks and checkbooks. When
we think back on our parents, grandparents and great grandparents,
there were many children in the house. It may have been crowded and
hard financially, but we were happy, perhaps because there were so
many of us in so large a family. But the time came when people said:
"As man or woman, as parents or teachers of leaders, you have the duty
to show the people the way to a better future." That better future,
people thought, could only be a richer future, a future in which the
individual had more money. And when they were asked where this money
would come from, a false teaching arose in the last century: "The
fewer people there are, the more an individual child can inherit from
his parents." He who loves his children and wishes a prosperous future
for his nation should therefore see to it that Germany's population is
small, and that only a few children continue the family after he is
gone. That was the terrible teaching of birth control, which Marxism
preached and the bourgeois followed. No one dared stand against it.
That was the doctrine that made us what we are today:
a dying people,
in which fewer children are born each year, in which today more people
die each year than are born. This all was supposed to lead to a happy
future. It understood happiness only in terms of possessions. It was
therefore inherently false. But even in its own terms it was false,
for it forgot something:
When a people begins to die, when a people no longer obeys the laws of
life, when a people values money more than its existence and
posterity, this people is on the path to disaster, both historically
and politically. Within a few decades it will be dead, oppressed by
other peoples who are stronger, closer to life, and who follow life's
laws better than we.
If present trends continue, by the end of the century Germany will be
a nation with only 40-50 million inhabitants,
and we know that on our borders other peoples are growing quickly and
strongly. Sooner or later, these other peoples will come in conflict
with a shrinking and dying German people, and the result of the
supposed doctrine of happiness will be a hard and bitter
national death for our children.
Those who believed that they can give their children a happy and
peaceful future by reducing the number of children err deeply. They
give the children only the promise of a hard and bitter struggle for
Germany's existence as a state and as an idea.
Today when we work to show people that the ideas of yesterday are
false, that the state and nation cannot do without the family, that
the family cannot exist without children, and when we not only provide
economic support to make it easier to begin families and have
children, but also tell people again and again of the sanctity of life
and the necessity of continuing our people into the future, our
enemies on both sides of the border suddenly have insults and hateful
things to say about us. They wish to disturb our work. Suddenly there
are voices saying: "National Socialism's doctrines are inhumane and
barbaric. National Socialism's views on children turn people into
breeding animals. When it says
that it is the duty of men and women to continue the eternal chain of
life, a chain that begins in the distant past and continues into the
future, a chain of which we are only a link leading into the distant
future,
our enemies on both sides of the border claim: "You reject the dignity
and value of humanity. National Socialism holds that men and women
have no value other than that of breeding cattle." It is a shame that
we have to respond to such words, but it is necessary because our
enemies have always tried to persuade women to oppose us, even though
what we say is rooted in the souls of the men and women we speak to.
This is our response: "You are mistaken in accusing us of thinking
that the only purpose of humanity is to continue the species by
passing on our blood to future generations. We know the other values.
We support them and find wherever we can those values that the
individual shows in his work and selfless service. We know well enough
that
each person lives a double life. The first is the one he lives between
birth and death. We are to do as much as we can to make this life
rich, to accomplish that which is good and beautiful, to use our
strengths and gifts for others. That is the duty of the individual.
But as a person you are something more:
You are a member of the chain of life, a drop in the great bloodstream
of your people.
There too you have duties and obligations before the eternity of the
nation. You have the duty to pass on what you received from your
parents and ancestors. I do not believe that such behavior, which
obeys both the laws of reason and of life, is barbaric, hateful or
inhumane. I believe instead that the barbarism is to be found in the
years we have left behind us, when any dirty lout could besmirch the
most valuable, holy life of a man or women in their families, or drag
children through the filth, without anyone defending their culture
against such an attack.
I believe that when we tell people once more of the great value of
blood, and remind them that they have duties not only for the 60-year
span in which they work and serve, but also to the millennia of the
past from which we come and to the millennia of the future to which we
are heading, then we are giving them higher values than those of
yesterday. Let me say also, however, that it is wrong if someone
thinks that only those who found families and bear children are
valuable to our state. We know that is not so. We know there are
reasons why some people leave their people's flow of blood. We know
that some are denied what the nation places great value on. We do not
ignore them or think ourselves their betters. We only say this: "My
friend, you and I must do our duty to our people, and when we cannot
fulfill it in one way, then we must do what we can with even greater
energy and devotion.
When you do your duty, you are one of us,
we extend our hand to you, we honor your humanity and your service for
Germany. Let us work together so that in the future, as many people as
possible will be able to serve the nation in both ways.
That is a piece of the thinking of blood and race that National
Socialism has taught us. And there is another aspect. When we see
people today, we can recognize that we are not all alike. There are
differences in value;
each person does not have the same value as everyone else.
In the past, people believed that these differences were superficial,
the result of the environment in which one grew up. People believed
that what became of a person depended primarily on the house he grew
up in or in his social environment, or the class he came from. They
believed that a person born in a slum, surrounded by shadows, troubles
and poverty, a child lacking in love and affection, could only become
a second-class human being, a physically and psychologically ill
member of the society, someone failed by the society and the state.
One thought that a child growing up in such slum inevitably became
sick, or even criminal. It was because he grew up in such a poor
environment. The Marxists claimed that if every child in Germany grew
up in an environment that gave him all he needed, he would inevitably
become a useful, decent, upright, proud and honest adult. After a few
years or decades, the entire German people would consist of such
decent and useful people. In the past people believed the environment
was responsible even when a person failed miserably.
We recall the days of delirium, when millions of unemployed had been
thrown on the street by a sick political and economic system, made
superfluous. A single person pried the tracks apart and derailed a
train in the middle of the night. Within a minute he murdered 30
innocent people who had never done anything to him, and stole their
money. And what did the world of yesterday say? "He can't help
himself. He is a victim of circumstances. He has Beethoven's hands and
an artistic temperament. We need not put him on the gallows or in
prison to protect us and our children. No, this poor Schlesinger is
only sick because of his environment. Put him in a modern sanitarium,
give him what he needs: radio, a library, a smoking salon, a language
teacher, a pastor, a newspaper room, give him everything he needs to
put him in touch with better things. In a few years, this mass
murderer of 30 people will leave as an ideal human being, so pure and
innocent that one can put him in charge of a kindergarten." That's
what people thought in the past.
Today that seems a bad joke to us, a crazy fantasy, but a few years
ago it was government policy in Germany. Those who did well under such
policies and have joined to fight us think that they can accuse our
doctrines of blood and race as barbaric.
Why do we see things differently? Because we have learned something:
In the end, you are not as important and significant as you thought
yesterday;
your strength and abilities are not as great as you believed during
the liberal era. Oh yes, it was a lovely dream to say: "I will do with
my life what I want, and if I happen to be a teacher, I will teach
what I want, and do what I enjoy, and what I think right." Well, that
was your idea of the environment.
We are a bit more modest, a bit more humble before the laws of fate.
We have learned that what I can do for myself or what you can do for
yourself, or what we can all do to each other, is not as important, or
as deep, as that which a greater power has already done to us. It is
that power that even before our birth gave us a part of our nature,
and laid out our path for us in the world. Here are joined two things:
the knowledge of modern science and the sensitivity and understanding
of a humble person. Suddenly we see that:
What you are, what I am and what I can be in my life is in part
predetermined by that which I have inherited.
If my inheritance is good and strong, and if I am true to it and
develop what is within me, my life will be successful, and perhaps of
benefit and joy to others. If such an inheritance is denied me, or if
for some inexplicable reason fate has given me other, perhaps weak,
perhaps even bad traits, I can struggle against them for my entire
life, and will still not be able to rid myself of that which slumbers
in me because of the actions of a higher power.
We see then that a good part of a people's history is determined by
what it has inherited. If we ask what sorts of physical or
intellectual traits these may be, or what groups there are, we will
see that each people has three groups. The first is a large group of
people with average gifts, the most of us who are able to deal with
the normal problems life presents us with. Next there is a very small
group. This group has received a better inheritance than most of us,
not because of any particular virtue on its part, but simply because
of fate. The leaders of humanity, those who build states, lead people,
or touch the soul, come from this group. And there is a third small
group with particular traits, also not their fault: those who are sick
or genetically defective. They are not up to the challenges of life,
and need outside help to survive.
As humanity of a nation go through the centuries, the decisive fact is
which of these three groups is the strongest. One might say: "That is
not a question at all. The strongest will win, the group from which
the leaders come. This superior group has to be the strongest in the
end, it must gradually have its way." Well, that is how things would
be without people, if people with their little brains did not believe
that they could change the laws of life given to the world by heaven.
Man has interfered in these matters. He has tried to change the laws
of struggle and existence and selection. Those were ancient laws of
life, to which men too were subject:
That which cannot meet the challenges dies.
That is hard, perhaps, but it is also the way that nature makes life
stronger and better. Man has tried more and more to abolish these
laws. He has kept life going by using artificial means in cases where,
left to itself, it would have ended. He used all his understanding,
love and sympathy to keep a person alive, even when it is no joy, but
only a burden and misery. We now keep thousands, even tens of
thousands of unhappy creatures alive through artificial means, those
to whom life itself has denied the right to life. But keeping them
alive was not itself the problem. What is worse is that they were
given the opportunity to pass on their unfortunate physical and mental
characteristics. That was the worst that happened: we took the
physically weak, the mentally ill, the genetically defective criminals
and not only kept them alive and cared for them-that is our duty as
human beings, which we certainly do not want to ignore in the future
either-and gave them the ability to have children with the same
deficiencies, thus doubling or multiplying their misery. The German
people do not know the extent of this misery, it does not know the
depressing spirit of the homes where thousands of cripples live their
lives only by being fed and cared for, poor creatures who are worse
than any animal. The animal at least is as it should be. These poor
creatures are distortions of life, no joy either to themselves or
others. They are a burden throughout their miserable existences, but
thanks to the selfless care and devotion of those who care for them
may live 60, 70 or 80 years. The German people do not realize the
enormous sums that have been spent for decades, money that is taken
from those who are healthy, who could do something useful, but cannot
because the money is lacking.
There was a winter in which children in Bavaria did not even have
wooden shoes to wear as they walked through the snow on their way to
school. They had to walk for hours bare-footed. At the same time, the
government made sure that those unfortunate souls in a large
institution had fresh bananas twice a week so that they got the
necessary vitamins. But these vitamins could not give them joy or
strength or health. But they were thus denied to those somewhere in
the Bavarian forest, or in the Ruhr, or in a poor fishing village on
the Frisian coast, where they could have reduced the poverty and need
in some worker's house. At the same time there was a case where
a single mentally ill Negro of English citizenship lived for 16 years
in an institution in Berlin, costing 26,000 Marks.
26,000 Marks were thrown away on a life that had no meaning. 26,000
Marks that could have been used to prepare a dozen strong, healthy and
gifted children for life and a job.
But I am not speaking of this as a kind of theft. Money is not an end
in itself. Rather, we have here committed a theft of spirit and soul,
because we tried to persuade the nation and humanity that our own
greatness could come from sacrificing for the worst and most helpless.
In the end, we went so far as
to put the sick and the dying before the young, strong, healthy and
promising.
That is against nature and life. A nation going this way is heading
for the abyss. We went so far as to preach year after year to healthy
families that they should have no children, or at most one, else they
sinned against the nation and the spirit of this enlightened age. But
if some imbecile of a whore and a genetically ill criminal had
children, they were not only a financial burden for their entire
lives, but also took the labor of people who our society gave nothing
better to do than to change these poor creatures three times a day and
feed them. That is a perversion of everything great and healthy, and
is a sin against life and the spirit of creation.
With full knowledge of our duties as human beings and the requirements
of pity, we made the decision not to allow such miserable creatures to
pass on their misery to the next generation, multiplied perhaps two or
three or more times. That is a major accomplishment, for which our
children and their children will one day thank us.
I know that there are those who will say: "You are meddling in matters
that are not your concern. You are interfering in an area outside
human control. Life and death are not in the hands of man, but in
those of a higher power. If God wants sick and genetically ill people
to be born, you may not interfere through laws, operations, or any
other measures with God's will. And if you do so-and you have with
your Law to Prevent Inherited Illness-then you are acting against the
will of God, and you are heretics."
This is our answer: "My friend, you are wrong. It is true that we are
subject to a higher power. We humans may never interfere with the
great laws of the Creator. But you are wrong. See the laws the Creator
has established for his world and your life. The great law is that
life must be able to preserve itself, and that if it cannot, it will
collapse. It is the hard, brutal law of the struggle for existence and
of selection and extinction. It was the law we saw day by day, hour by
hour, under all the clouds of heaven and all the stars of the sky, in
which life seemed to find a senseless death, whether plant or animal
or person, whether in distant Africa or near us.
That which cannot meet the challenges of life dies, no matter how much
pain it causes,
and even if your small understanding or mind cannot comprehend it,
these are the great laws of life and the world that God himself gave
us. These are the laws, my German friend, that in our crazy fantasies
we broke in the past."
With overweening human pride and false pity, we broke the great law
and kept those alive who under the laws of God would long since have
perished.
Today we are once more following these old laws, using humane methods,
for they follow a more hard and brutal course in nature according to
God's will. We are doing nothing more than reestablishing the laws of
creation, and bowing to the heavenly order. We are thus showing piety
and true humility-you are the heretics.
This applies as well to the third and last principle of our racial
thinking. This third and last principle is that the people on this
world, in America, Africa or China, are different both in body and
soul. They are not equal, as yesterday's lie had it.
People are different.
They not only speak different languages and look different: no, they
are different in the depths of their hearts and natures, and in their
abilities for good and evil. In the past people believed that these
differences were accidental, the result of climate or civilization,
and that one could overcome these differences and create a unified man
in a unified state in which all would be equally happy. We have
learned that such ideas are false. We have learned that the
differences between the major blood groups of the world, between the
major races, are not the result of human action, but of the laws of
Creation. We have learned that the lines between blood and blood, race
and race, are also the lines between soul and soul and spirit and
spirit. We have learned that the opposite of the old phrase "What God
has brought together, let no man put asunder" is also true. We have
learned:
What God has separated, man should not bring together.
Heaven thought it good not to have only one type of people on the
earth, but different kinds, various racially-bound peoples. That is a
part of Creation. We bow before this truth and respect the borders.
That means that the foundation of our separation of the races is not a
matter of politics or economics, rather it rests on a higher level, to
which we in the end are responsible.
In our Reich, we are separating that which belongs to us, because it
is blood of our blood, from that which does not belong to us, because
it is foreign. We are doing that which is right not only for the
moment, but for eternity.
Believe me, my dear German fellow citizens, it is not true, as some
say, that this doctrine is a sign of arrogance or superiority or
boasting. We do not think ourselves better than the other races on the
earth. No, we do not think ourselves better, nor do we believe that
others are worse than we are. We insist only on one thing-a law
established by the Creator himself:
Man differs from man and race from race in this world.
The others may not be better or worse, but they are different than we
are, and because they are different than we are, there is a kind of
wall between us that is part of the laws of life. That is the core of
National Socialism's racial thinking. Our goal is not to insult
others, to say: "What a great guy I am!" Rather, we hold to the humble
recognition that each healthy piece of life has its corner of the
world, and its special tasks. This is just as true of humans as it is
of plants and animals in all their multiplicity. We know that one type
is no more valuable than another. But we also know that each variety
of life has a right to existence only as long as it keeps itself pure
and strong. Only when a tree bears the proper fruit does it have a
right to live. Otherwise it will be cut down and destroyed. We do not
know why things are the way they are, and it would be foolish to ask
the reason. That is how things are. Our task is to humbly accept the
laws that govern our human existence, and to accept the fact that we
are born Germans in Germany, not as Chinese or Eskimos. That is not
because of our virtues, nor it is our fault, nor was it our will. It
was fate that came from above. We have no choice but to accept this
fate and to develop the abilities that fate has given us according to
necessity and law.
Others may develop in their own way, in their own land. We must listen
to the depths of our own people, to draw from blood and inheritance
the strength we need to build our homeland. A higher power will take
care of the life beyond.
I believe, my dear German fellow citizens, that everyone who is of our
spirit will grant the correctness of our thinking about blood and
race, and will say: "I see now that you are not only on the right
path, but are honest and in the deepest sense true to demands that are
greater than the laws of man."
Let us then together follow the path to a new worldview. Let us go the
path of blood and race, which does not ignore faith and knowledge and
a sense of higher powers. Let us go this path, not a path of matter,
superstition and heresy, rather a path of deep humility and piety
before the laws of God. Let us go along this path together and listen
to the deepest depths where blood and soul rule. Let us draw from
there the strength to build the state, and even more important the
Reich. It will be a Reich not only of politics, a Reich of
organization, or the economy, but a Reich of people. Germany today has
the fortune to find a new way, led by a great Fuehrer. German women
today have the good fortune to see a strong and loyal woman at their
head. Let us together go forward, hand in hand, as befits comrades
building the future, and let us join the strength of men and women,
rooted deep in their blood, to build what the world has never before
seen:
The holy Reich of the German soul.Heil!
My comment:
The part about the unfit dying may make some people uneasy. It makes
me uneasy also. But he did say:
"we took the physically weak, the mentally ill, the genetically
defective criminals and not only kept them alive and cared for
them-that is our duty as human beings, which we certainly do not want
to ignore in the future either"
We should certainly take care of them. That will not be a problem.
We will save billions of dollars when we stop sending this money to
the Jews country every year.
We should also sterilize them. We will care for them and many work
hours will be done to provide for them, and all we ask in return is
for them not to pass their misfortune onto more generations. We are
not asking to much at all.
It was a great speech. It has policies that would make a nation
unimaginably great. The future would be a heaven on earth. Heil
Hitler.
>
>Then about the "who don't work"... well, that is expensive too,
>unfortunately :-)
>
>And, as always, if someone is interested, I can dig up some numbers (I
>read in a.p.e.m)
>
>/Fredrik
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.altermedia.info/ www.nowarforisrael.com
neptune3
wrote:
>Good socialist principle that.
>
>Socialist nations must be grest nations.
>
>Much greater thant the USA, where I guess only the slaves work, while the
>slave ownwers sit on the porch sipping mint juleps.
>
The USA has a minimum wage, welfare, and other programs. It has
some socialism. One of the problems is that there is no law against
companies hiring people in Mexico and China where they don't have to
pay any minimum wage or anything.
Fredrik Nikala
>
>>Well, actually, the thing that costs so much money, is that so very many
>>people are employed by state and local authorities.
>>And that it is rather expensive, and personel intensive, to give those
>>who are worst of a decent life. For example, in my "komun" (local
>>authority) about ten percent of the budget is allocated to help for
>>"challenged" people, with mental or physical disabilities.
>
>
> They should be helped but also sterilized. This is what the Germans
> did:
>
I disagree.
1) Serious genome damage will render the carrier infertile.
2) Human genetical diversity is too low anyway.
/Fredrik
TomAldrich
neptune3 wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 18:17:24 GMT, haye...@yahoo.com (Steve Hayes)
> wrote:
>
> >Good socialist principle that.
> >
> >Socialist nations must be grest nations.
> >
> >Much greater thant the USA, where I guess only the slaves work, while the
> >slave ownwers sit on the porch sipping mint juleps.
> >
> The USA has a minimum wage, welfare, and other programs. It has
> some socialism. One of the problems is that there is no law against
> companies hiring people in Mexico and China where they don't have to
> pay any minimum wage or anything.
Nor did Hitlers regime acknowledge any laws againest using slave labor
Len
>>regular guy, to take away my stuff.
>>BTW, I didn't know you were Jewish. I must be anti-semetic, as I find
>>your stuff despicable.
>Here is part of an essay by Dr. Robert Ley:
>"Who concerned himself with creating good workplaces before? Today the
>"Beauty in Labor Office" sees to it that productive people work in
>worthy surroundings, not in dirty workplaces. The "Kraft durch Freude"
>organization provides German workers with vacations and relaxation.
>They travel to the mountains and the beach, and have the chance, often
>for the first time, to explore their beautiful fatherland. They travel
>in their own ships to the magical southern seas and countries, or to
>the splendid beauty of the north. Each German citizen today enjoys the
>wonderful achievements of German theater and German music, the best
>German orchestras, the best German operas, theaters and films.
So you cut and paste from other writings Big whoop.
As the German people after the fall of their Kaiser were unable to
think for themselves, and were devastated by a war that left them with
such a great loss that they were looking for another father figure to
take care of them. So are you.
Their mentality, as most Europeans, is that the gov't is their
"friend". A real American knows all gov't is the necessary evil and
an enemy of freedom. Keep that before our people, keep the real
American historical reason for the birth of our country before
Americans of all ages, and you losers will maintain your status.
Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only
an intellectual could ignore or evade it. -- Thomas Sowell
Len
>>welfare to people who don't work. That would end in a bad way.
>I guess millions of Americans die because they can't pay the fees charged by
>greedy money-mad US doctors. And Americans like it that way because they
>believe that only the rich deserve to live.
>Guessing is a very accurate way of determining the weay of life of different
>countries.
Your guess is wrong. You could have guessed that the whole of the
medical economy would be poured into the very next person that goes to
an emergency room, and that would have as much accuracy as your first
guess.
No American is denied medical treatment. Of course it is not free for
having your face lifted, tummy tucked, etc, but medical necessities
are treated.
Dwain Goforth
says...
> Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only
> an intellectual could ignore or evade it. -- Thomas Sowell
So if you are an especially stupid anti-intellectual fascist you can see
the record of failure?
Or to translate...
The more stupid you are, the better fascism looks.
Now I see your line of "reasoning."
Len
>>order to impose it on people who would rather work for themselves and be
>>able to keep their earnings rather than give up a rediculous percentage of
>>the fruits of their own labor to a government who will redistribute the
>>money to people who did nothing to earn it.
> In a great nation everyone has to work.
Hey, same thing a terrible nation. Called slavery.
So your writing using words that have meaning so broad that anything
may be used for anything else?
Do your leaders know you are trying to think or write like that?
Did you get permission?
Go to your room. Or better yet, get out of your room and be free.
But take your meds first.
neptune3
<lu...@olduvaigorge.net> wrote:
>Thanks again for posting all these fine articles. You are a walking
>encyclopedia. I hope a lot of people would be educated by your posting.
>
Thanks!
>I want to comment that although every country brags about its democracy,
>socialism, communism, etc., we just cannot take them for granted. We really
>have to understand exactly what each country mean by its form of government
>or economic system. A lot of people have been confused that Hitler's idea
>of socialism is totally different from what we have been taught about what
>socialism is. Again, you have to study further to notice such a different.
>Most of the time, it is drastic.
>
Good point. I don't know who said it was but this is how someone
put it:
"Men make symbols of reality, ignore
reality and treat the words as if they were
real."
>
>"neptune3" <np...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ap3sgv45firf35qui...@4ax.com...
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.altermedia.info/ www.nowarforisrael.com
neptune3
>
>So you cut and paste from other writings Big whoop.
>As the German people after the fall of their Kaiser were unable to
>think for themselves, and were devastated by a war that left them with
>such a great loss that they were looking for another father figure to
>take care of them. So are you.
>Their mentality, as most Europeans, is that the gov't is their
>"friend". A real American knows all gov't is the necessary evil and
>an enemy of freedom.
Government can be a freind or an enemy depending on which people
are running it. In America if you say the government is evil you are
right. The problem is that you are simply against government instead
of for replacing an evil goverment with a government that is good,
which is what happened in Germany.
The meaning of "right" and "left" has changed. I stay with the
original meaning for the same reason I refuse to call homosexual
perverts "gay". The word "gay" was originally a good thing.
The right is for outlawing homosexual perversion,
prostitution, abortions, heroin, and other bad things. It puts the
good of the nation first and ahead of the freedom of individuals to
corrupt the culture of the nation.
Leftists believe in the Rede of Witchcraft which states-- If it
harm none, do what will you will. This sounds nice, but like the apple
that the witch gave to Snow White it has poison within. The Rede of
Witchcraft is the Bible of liberalism. It would legalize homosexual
perversion, prostitution, drugs, etc.
The right is for building a great nation. Leftists care only
about individual freedom and are opposed to any laws that would make
the nation better. There are beaches where normal families will not go
because homosexual perverts practice their perversion on the beach.
This is example of the freedom liberals want They are like children
who only care about their individual selves and are oblivious to what
should be done to make the nation great. Their philosophy, taken to
its logical conclusion, would not allow the law that drivers have to
stop at the red lights. Their philosophy would allow heroin to be sold
on grocery store shelves and allow ads promoting heroin on TV. Their
philosophy would result in chaos and degeneracy.
Libertarians are liberals who want freedom for the Ebenezer
Scrooges to be as greedy as they want. They have the same philosophy
as other leftist who want to legalize heroin and prostitution, namely
that the state can't tell them what they can't do. People don't like
laws stopping them from doing things, and we should sympathise with
that, but sometimes that is not the most important thing. Capitalists
want freedom for greed, other liberals want freedom for degeneracy,
but good laws would make a nation good.
The Communist were leftist and they said they were fighting for
freedom. In Spain they sided with the anarchists. The Communists and
the anarchists were the same people or the same type of people. The
Communists were for having government but only temporarily. They said
that their government was necessary only until the whole world was
Communist. After the world was Communist they wanted to disolve the
government and have an anarchy.
The right wing cares about the future. Leftists only care about the
present. If their philosophy results in a nightmare future like in
Soylent Green or some other futuristic nightmare they are not
interested and insist that nothing could be more important than the
freedom of individuals to be as decadant as they want. They are like
the children in the old black and white movie "Lord of the Flies".
> Keep that before our people, keep the real
>American historical reason for the birth of our country before
>Americans of all ages, and you losers will maintain your status.
>Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only
>an intellectual could ignore or evade it. -- Thomas Sowell
neptune3
wrote:
>neptune3 wrote:
>
>>>authority) about ten percent of the budget is allocated to help for
>>>"challenged" people, with mental or physical disabilities.
>>
>>
>> They should be helped but also sterilized. This is what the Germans
>> did:
>>
>
>I disagree.
>
>1) Serious genome damage will render the carrier infertile.
>2) Human genetical diversity is too low anyway.
>
>/Fredrik
If the problems with the "challenged" people are hereditary they
should be sterilized. Maybe your goal is diversity. My goal is to have
a great and prosperous nation.
neptune3
>
>Your guess is wrong. You could have guessed that the whole of the
>medical economy would be poured into the very next person that goes to
>an emergency room, and that would have as much accuracy as your first
>guess.
>No American is denied medical treatment. Of course it is not free for
>having your face lifted, tummy tucked, etc, but medical necessities
>are treated.
>Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only
>an intellectual could ignore or evade it. -- Thomas Sowell
But people with no money getting medical necessities treated -is-
socialism.
neptune3
Fascists are for education and intelligence. It's just that we know
that colleges and schools today are nothing but enemy brainwashing
camps.
"Anything good in Western civilization is said to have been stolen
from
Black Africa including the English language. Professors claim that
Egyptians
were blacks and that Aristotle stole his ideas from the Egyptian
library in
Alexandria. The "distinguished scholars" who make these claims are not
sufficiently learned to know that the library was built after the
death of
Aristotle. One know-nothing, Martin Bernal, at Cornell (of course)
ignores
the Mycenaen, Achaean, Dorian and Ionian wells of ancient Greek
culture in
order to attribute the origins of Greek culture to Africa.
The white kids who attend Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cornell,
Stanford,
Michigan, University of California, Duke, wherever, are enculturated
into a
pathology of guilt over evils allegedly perpetrated by their
forebears. They
are brainwashed into accepting unequal rights and limitations on their
speech as atonements for the sins of their fathers. Those who resist
are
sentenced to "sensitivity training," accused of various harassment
crimes,
and expelled.
Propaganda, not the interplay of ideas, rules the universities. It
is
routine for speakers who challenge the lies to be driven from the
podium, as
was Ann Coulter recently at that "great" university, Cornell....
"Academics have buried Western civilization under a mountain of
lies.
The great books are not burned, but they are discredited with the
charge
that the great thinkers in the past were apologists for a "white
hegemonic
order."
The erasing of our culture progresses rapidly. Several years ago
it
came to light that students in an Illinois public school were being
taught
that the ancient Egyptians were blacks who flew among the pyramids
until
whites arrived and killed the blacks who could fly. The reasons given
for
teaching this nonsense was to improve the self-esteem of black
children and
to explain to them why they don´t live in the big houses."
Paul Craig Roberts is a columnist for The Washington Times and is
nationally syndicated.
neptune3
<Aldri...@hormelqwest.net> wrote:
>
>Nor did Hitlers regime acknowledge any laws againest using slave labor
>
Hitler made sure the Germans got good wages. There were Communists
and other enemies who were not in the greatest position. Their
situation was totally deserved. This is what they were doing before
Hitler came to power:
Here is a quote from "The Battle for Berlin" by Joseph Goebbels:
We had no idea of the danger that threatened us then. I myself did not
yet know Marxism well enough to foresee the possible consequences. I
shrugged my shoulders as I read the dark prose of the red press and
awaited expectantly the decisive evening.
Around 8 p.m. we drove in an old rusty car from the city center to
Wedding. A cold gray mist hung under a starless sky. Our hearts were
bursting with impatience and expectation.
As we drove down Müllerstraße it was already clear that the evening
did not bode well. Groups of dark figures stood on every street
corner. They apparently planned to teach our party members a bloody
lesson before they even got to the meeting.
Dark masses of people stood outside the Pharus Hall, expressing their
rage and hate with loud and impudent threats.
The leader of the protective forces cleared a way for us and reported
briefly that the hall had been packed since 7:15 p.m. and had been
closed by police. About two-thirds of the audience were Red Front
Fighters. That was what we wanted. There would be a decision. We were
ready to give it all we had.
Entering the hall, we encountered a warm, stiffling aroma of beer and
tobacco. The hall was hot. A lively roar of voices filled the hall.
People were packed in tightly. We reached the podium only with
difficulty.
No sooner was I recognized than hundreds of voices filled with rage
and revenge thundered in my ears: "Bloodhound! Murder of Workers!"
Those were the mildest words they shouted. But a welcoming group of
some party members and S.A. Men answered with passion. Excited battle
cries sounded from the platform. I saw immediately that we were a
minority, but a minority determined to fight, and therefore win.
It was still our custom then for an S.A. leader to chair all of the
party's public meetings. Here too. Tall as a tree he stood up front
and asked for silence with his upraised arm. That was easier said than
done. Mocking laughter was the answer. Insults flew toward the
platform from every corner of the room. People growled and screamed
and raged. There were world revolutionaries scattered about who
apparently had gained the courage they needed by drinking. It was
impossible to quiet the hall. The class-conscious proletariat had not
come to discuss but to fight, to break things up, to put an end to the
Fascist specter with callused workers' fists.
We were not uncertain, even for a moment. We also knew that if the
enemy did not succeed this time in what he had threatened, the future
success of the movement in Berlin was assured.
Fifteen or twenty S.A. and S.S. men stood before the platform in
uniforms and arm bands, an impudent and direct provocation to the Red
Front Fighters. Behind me was a select group of reliable people ready
at any moment to risk their lives to defend me from the onrushing red
mob with brutal force
The Communists made an obvious mistake in their tactics. They had
scattered small groups throughout the hall, but clumped most of the
rest in the right rear of the hall. I recognized immediately that
there was the center of unrest, and if anything was to be done, we
first had to deal ruthlessly with them. Whenever the chair tried to
open the meeting, a dark chap stood up on a stool and shouted "Point
of Order!" Hundreds of others yelled the same after him.
If one takes from the mass their leader or also their seducer, they
are leaderless and easily controlled. Our tactic therefore was to
silence this cowardly troublemaker at any cost. He felt secure back
there, surrounded by his comrades. We tried to do this peacefully a
few times. The chair shouted over the uproar: "There will be
discussion afterward! But we determine the rules of order!"
That was an ineffective attempt at an unsuitable object. The screamer
wanted to throw the meeting into confusion by his endless shouts and
bring things to the boiling point. Then a general melee would result.
As our efforts to bring the meeting to order peacefully proved
unsuccessful, I took the head of the defensive forces to the side, and
immediately after groups of his men slipped through the thundering
Communist masses. Before the astonished and surprised Red Front troops
realized what was happening, our comrades had hauled the troublemaker
down from his stool and brought him through the raging crowd to the
podium. That was unexpected, but what followed was no surprise. A beer
glass flew through the air and crashed to the floor. That was the
signal for the first major meeting hall battle. Chairs were broken and
legs ripped from tables. Glasses and bottles suddenly appeared and all
hell broke loose. The battle raged for ten minutes. Glasses, bottles,
table and chair legs flew randomly through the air. A deafening roar
rose; the red beast was set free and wanted its victims.
At first it looked as if we were lost. The Communist attack was sudden
and explosive, completely unexpected. But soon the S.A. and S.S. men
distributed throughout the hall and in front of the platform recovered
from their surprise and counterattacked with bold courage. It quickly
became clear that although the Communist Party had masses behind it,
these masses became cowards when faced with a firmly disciplined and
determined opponent. They ran. In short order the red mob that had
come to break up our meeting had been driven from the hall. The order
that could not be secured by good will was gained by brute force.
Usually one is not aware of the stages of a meeting hall battle. Only
later does one recall them. I still remember a scene that I will never
forget; on the podium stood a young S.A. man whom I did not know. He
was hurling his missiles into the on-coming red mob. Suddenly a beer
glass thrown from the distance hit him on the head. A wide stream of
blood ran down his face. He sank with a cry. After a few seconds he
stood up again, grabbed water bottle from the table and threw it into
the hall, where it clattered against the head of an opponent.
The face of this young man is engraved in my memory. This
lightening-fast moment is unforgettable. This gravely-wounded S.A. man
would soon, and indeed for all times, become my most reliable and
loyal comrade.
Only after the red mob had been driven howling, growling and cursing
from the field could one tell how serious and costly the battle had
been. Ten lay in their blood on the platform, most with head injuries,
two with severe concussions. The table and stairs to the platform were
covered in blood. The whole hall resembled a field of ruins.
In the midst of this bloody and ruined wasteland, our tree-high S.A.
leader resumed his place and declared with iron calm: "The meeting
will continue. The speaker has the floor."
Never before or since have I spoken under such dramatic conditions.
Behind me, groaning in pain and bleeding, were seriously injured S.A.
comrades. Around me were broken chair legs, shattered beer glasses and
blood. The whole meeting was icily silent.
We lacked then a medical corps. Since we were in a proletarian
district, we had to have our seriously wounded carried out by
so-called worker volunteers. There were scenes outdoors of
unimaginable inhumanity. The bestial people who were supposedly
fighting for universal brotherhood insulted our poor and defenseless
injured with phases like: "Isn't that pig dead yet?"
Under such conditions it was impossible to give a coherent speech.
Scarcely had I begun to speak when another group of volunteers entered
the hall to carry off a seriously wounded S.A. man on a stretcher. One
of them, encountering the brutal apostles of humanity outside the door
and their unflattering and crude language, shouted for me in
desperation. His voice could be heard loudly and unmistakably on the
platorm I interrupted my speech and went through the hall, where there
were still scattered Communist commando groups. Still surprised by
what had happened, they stood quietly and shyly to the side. I bade
farewell to the seriously wounded S.A. comrades.
neptune3
>
>> In a great nation everyone has to work.
>
>Hey, same thing a terrible nation. Called slavery.
At least in that terrible nation people would not starve, if
enough of the work was farming. But in Germany the government was for
making things as good as possible for people.
Here are some parts of the book, "A German Primer, Words to
Comrades" by F. H. Wowereis, who held several top positions in
National Socialist Germany.
"The fruit of our victory will be that which other peoples have not
succeeded in doing over a hundred generations: bringing down the dark
forces that stand behind governments, the forces that always make
money from each bloody war. The larger the sacrifice in blood, the
more money they make. Military reports mean little to them, stock
exchange news everything. Not service to humanity, rather earning from
humanity was their goal, these carriers of a blood whose greed is
nourished only by what working people have created in selfless
devotion to the health and prosperity of the community. We fight this
war in service of our most precious possessions and traits of
character, the best values of the community, for the freedom of
creative labor. Labor and blood gave the rulers of the stock exchange
and the speculators easy profits. Building the power of the
plutocrats. It is time to put an end to it.
As soldiers of Greater Germany, we bear the weapons that the Führer
has entrusted to us, which we daily keep clean and ready. This is no
careless adventure! We are fighting for everything that makes life
worth living for a free man on this earth...
Man for man, we feel that in bearing arms we are carrying out a
mission given by God to Germany’s great Führer, the greatest man of
our time..
The head of England’s government, who began this war but did not
survive it, was a big stockholder in a British armaments factory. This
is only one of many examples. Stock in poison gas is typical of the
morals of enemy statesmen. A man who gets big dividends from poison
gas stocks and does not see the path leading into the abyss is
everything but a statesman, even less a leader..
The leading people of the new era will be those who organize the
common good such that community rights and duties have the central
role in a people, a Reich and a continent.
We are becoming the leading people that can build from the new
people’s community a new and better order of the peoples in Europe..
Each year millions in profits flow to the family of former Prime
Minister Balfour from the Vickers armaments industry. Its profits rose
from 530,000 pounds in 1932 to 1,500,000 pounds in 1938.
That is plutocracy.
It fears our socialist example. No leader of the new Germany owns
stocks! No German Reichstag representative is a member of a board of
directors, even in an unpaid capacity. Payment in any form is
prohibited. 181 Conservative members of the British parliament alone
have 775 highly-paid positions on boards of directors! The program of
the NSDAP says clearly and concisely: "Because of the great sacrifice
in property and blood that any war demands from the people, personal
enrichment through war is a crime against the people." This spirit
makes the new German order a model for all decent people..
Stock exchange dictatorship by the Jews or the common good of the
workers, that is what this struggle is about...
Whenever we cross a border in this war, Jews and exploiters flee..
Where we win, so too the good fortune of workers wins. The recognition
of labor as the measure of honor wins its final recognition. We are
fighting so that labor, not theft or exploitation is the foundation of
the honor of a person and a people. We want people to exchange what
they produce, not be subject to capitalist interest.
>So your writing using words that have meaning so broad that anything
>may be used for anything else?
I often define any words I use and endeavor to be as clear as
possible.
>Do your leaders know you are trying to think or write like that?
>Did you get permission?
>Go to your room. Or better yet, get out of your room and be free.
>But take your meds first.
>
>Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only
>an intellectual could ignore or evade it. -- Thomas Sowell
Fredrik Nikala
>>I disagree.
>>
>>1) Serious genome damage will render the carrier infertile.
>>2) Human genetical diversity is too low anyway.
>>
>>/Fredrik
>
>
> If the problems with the "challenged" people are hereditary they
> should be sterilized. Maybe your goal is diversity. My goal is to have
> a great and prosperous nation.
How do you know that traits that is bad in some cases, in other
combinations isn't good?
It may be, that some combinations in some environments give rise to
criminal behavior, but in other times and places makes bold individuals
who go "where no man has gone before".
Maybe schizophrenia in mild variants makes amazing artists and writers?
And if a sprinkle of autism is what it takes to write a bug free space
shuttle engine control system, would it be a good idea to eradicate it?
And so on and so forth. Simply put, no one knows enough today to make
decisions about who should breed and who should not.
If there is decisions made anyway, it should be for the presumtive
parents to choose.
/Fredrik
TomAldrich
neptune3 wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 07:22:09 GMT, TomAldrich
> <Aldri...@hormelqwest.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Nor did Hitlers regime acknowledge any laws againest using slave labor
> >
> Hitler made sure the Germans got good wages. There were Communists
> and other enemies who were not in the greatest position. Their
> situation was totally deserved. This is what they were doing before
> Hitler came to power:
>
>
So we had some cute story about the S.A. ,now after all was said and done
what hppened to this wonderful S.A. that Gobbels spoke so highly of.
Thomas J Wheat
> In article <57cf3dba.0307...@posting.google.com>,
> thoma...@hotmail.com says...
> > thw...@rice.edu (William David Thweatt) wrote in message news:<bejr8m$90c$1...@joe.rice.edu>...
> > > Dwain Goforth (dw...@humboldtone.com) wrote:
> > > : In article <behgkl$dv3$1...@joe.rice.edu>, thw...@rice.edu says...
> > > : > neptune3 (np...@hotmail.com) wrote:
> > > : > : >
> > > : > : >In practice, there is little discernable difference between "Nazism" "Communism." They are
> > > : > : >both forms of socialism.
>
> > > : Actually, they are both forms of totalitarianism. Socialism includes the
> > > : post office, national parks, roads and highways, social security and a
> > > : host of other government programs that are not necessarily evil.
> > > : Socialism is about working together within a government for the common
> > > : good.
> > >
> > > <<The problem with socialism is that it requires a totalitarian state in
> > > order to impose it on people who would rather work for themselves and be
> > > able to keep their earnings rather than give up a rediculous percentage of
> > > the fruits of their own labor to a government who will redistribute the
> > > money to people who did nothing to earn it.>>
> > >
> > totalitarian state. They have one of the highest standards of living
> > in the world. Canada has nationalized health care, and england has
> > free college as does france as well.
> >
>
> Actually, the majority of European countries have socialist governments.
>
> Most European citizens don't have to "give up a rediculous percentage of
> the fruits of their labor" to corporate welfare and the
> military/industrial complex. Their taxes go to schools, roads and public
> transportation, health care, retirement and benefits to THEM instead of a
> capitalistic government that spends money on war and death.
>
> If you compare the socialist countries tax payments (and include the
> value of services they get) with the cost of U.S. taxes PLUS paying for
> their own services, you will find that our cost of living is usually
> higher.
>
> It looks like William David Thweatt is quite willing to pay through the
> nose in taxes for the military/industrial complex and then come up with
> his own health care and retirement money. He pays high taxes and gets
> nothing back and then thinks he doesn't live in a totalitarian state.
>
> The USA is just as socialist as the Soviet Union ever was, only our taxes
> go to the already rich and powerful who are willing to shed the blood of
> young Americans in order to protect their profits.
>
> Get a clue, William!
Please see Lester Thurow
the majority of europe has a higher standard of living than the US.
http://csf.colorado.edu/gimenez/courses/thurow.html
See US rollback plan:
The GOP's "contract with America", is very Spencerian in tone and
offers a return to "survival of the fittest" capitalism. Many of its
advocates are, of course, less honest than Spencer, denying that
anyone will starve to death. In their view, no social safety net is
necessary, because if the social welfare system is taken away, no one
will fall off the economic trapeze. If individuals are forced to face
the reality of starvation, everyone will knuckle down to work. Fear
will make them work so hard, hold on so tight, that they won't fall
off.
also see this link:
excerpt: http://www.europeanaffairs.org/current_issue/2003_winter/2003_winter_10.php4
"Foreign direct investment in the United States has fallen from $124
billion in 2001 to only $21.9 billion in the first nine months of
2002. The dollar has begun to decline against the euro. This, the
argument goes, may be part of a global counteraction to the United
States that could ultimately - although, hopefully, not too quickly -
reduce American power to the point at which the United States becomes
something more like a "normal" nation. Some argue that such an outcome
would even be suitable for the American people."
neptune3
>
>Hm.... Lets see how my country fits in. Homosexuals have the same
>rights as heterosexuals, including the right to marry (and thus
>inherite, adopt each others kids, etc.). Prostitution is legal, as
>long as the prostitute pays income taxes and has a working permit. The
>prostitute trade union gives bookkeeping courses ;-)
>Drugs; hash and marihuana can be sold freely in special shops,
>cigarettes and alcohol too, as long as the customers are older than
>16.
>
>What were your other points? Socialism... one of the three biggest
>parties, definately part of the government 8 of the last 10 years.
>Beaches; topless is allowed, total nudity in special parts of the
>beach, slightly further away from the entrance point.
>
>Wauw.... we must be in total chaos compared with the rest of the world
>and especially with rightwing America. Lets see.... How do we do
>economically, how well do the people live by comparison:
>
>-----------------
>Human development Index;
>Netherlands 5
>USA 7
>
>NL: Life expectancy at birth (years), 2001 78.2
>USA: Life expectancy at birth (years), 2001 76.9
>
>NL: People lacking functional literacy skills (% age 16-65), 1994-98
>10.5
>USA: People lacking functional literacy skills (% age 16-65), 1994-98
>20.7
>
>NL: Population living below 50% of median income (%), 1990-2000
>8.1
>USA: Population living below 50% of median income (%), 1990-2000
>17.0
>
>NL GDP per capita annual growth rate (%), 1990-2001 2.3
>USA GDP per capita annual growth rate (%), 1990-2001 2.1
>
>NL: Average annual unemployment rate (% of labour force), 1991-2001
>2.7 (OECD figures)
>USA: Average annual unemployment rate (% of labour force), 1991-2001
>5.8 (OECD figures)
>
>Economid aid donor (given to development countries):
>4. Netherlands $217.83 per person
>20. United States $24.59 per person
>------------------
>
>Well, The USA has a higher GPD per capita, but we seem to make better
>use of ours. Less poor people, better educated people, longer live,
>and almost nine times as generous per person.
>
>Since we seem to have a "less good community", maybe we have more
>crime? Lets see....
>
>----------------------
>Burglaries per capita:
>15. United States 7.48 per 1000 people
>20. Netherlands 5.67 per 1000 people
>
>Robberies per capita:
>10. United States 1.46 per 1000 people
>16. Netherlands 1.16 per 1000 people
>
>Rapes per capita
>9.United States 0.32 per 1000 people
>22. Netherlands 0.1 per 1000 people
>
>Murders per capita:
>23.United States 0.05 per 1000 people
>52.Netherlands 0.01 per 1000 people
>----------------------
>
>Nope, obviously that is not the area were socialist states with
>morally disapprovable individual rights are performing bad. Well, with
>all those loose morals it must be noticable in the figures about
>teenagers and sex; ours must be a lot wilder than those in the USA.
>Let's look at the figures again....
>-----------------
>
>The UNICEF league table ranks countries according to their birth rates
>for teenagers aged between 15 and 19 years old. Korea, Japan,
>Switzerland, the Netherlands and Sweden occupy the top five places -
>all with teen birth rates of fewer than seven per 1,000. At the bottom
>of the league is the United States with 52.1 per 1,000 and the UK,
>where the rate of teen births is over 30 per 1,000.
>
>Estimated HIV prevalence rate in young men ages 15 to 24
>USA: 0.75%
>NL: 0.27%
>
>estimated HIV prevalence rate in young men ages 15 to 24
>USA: 0.30%
>NL: 0.11%
>
>Syphilus in young teenagers ages 15 to 19
>USA: 6.4 per 100.000
>NL: 1.0 per 100.000
>Gonnorhea in young teenagers ages 15 to 19
>USA: 571.8 per 100.000
>NL: 7.7 per 100.000
>
>Age of first sexual intercourse:
>USA 17.4
>NL 17.7
>--------------------
>
>Darn, it seems that the free liberal attitude actually doesn't have a
>bad influence there either. Rather the contrary it seems. That leaves
>us with the last area; drugs. The Dutch are much more liberal about
>drugs and cannabis is freely available. What do the figures say:
>
>Drug_Use_PERCENTAGES._____________________________
>>Drug_use_in_the_population_of_12_years_and________
>>older_in_the_U.S._and_the_Netherlands._1997.______
>>__________________________________________________
>>__________Used__________Used__________Used________
>>__________ever._________past_year.____past_month._
>>__________USA__Holland__USA__Holland__USA__Holland
>>__________________________________________________
>>tobacco___70.5*_67.9____32.7*_38.1____29.6*_34.3__
>>cannabis__32.9__15.6_____9_____4.5_____5.1___2.5__
>>cocaine___10.5___2.1_____1.9___0.6_____0.7___0.2__
>>inhalants__5.7___0.5_____1.1___0.1_____0.4____NM__
>>alcohol___81.9__90.2____64.1__82.5____51.4__73.3__
>>heroin_____0.9___0.3_____0.3___0.1______NM____NM__
>>NM_=_not_measurable.____*cigarettes_only_________
>
>Marjolein
By Dr. William Pierce
http://www.natvan.com
"The Jews were very influential in Germany after the First World
War. They were strongly entrenched in the legal profession, in
banking,
in advertising and merchandising, in show business, in organized vice,
in publishing and other media. They were trying hard to change the
spirit of Germany. They were pushing modernism in art, music, and
literature. They were pushing for "diversity" and "tolerance." They
were
ridiculing German tradition and culture and morality and the German
sense of personal honor, trying hard to make young Germans believe
that
it was "cool" to be rootless and cosmopolitan. They were promoting the
same culture of lies that they have been promoting here.
That was the so-called "Weimar" period, because right after the First
World War some important government business, including the
ratification
of a new German constitution, took place in the city of Weimar. The
Jews
loved the Weimar period, but it was, in fact, the most degenerate
period
in Germany's history. The Jews, of course, didn't think of it as
degenerate. They thought of it as "modern" and "progressive" and
"cool."
Really, it was a very Jewish period, where lying was considered a
virtue. The Jews were riding high. Many books have been written by
Jews
in America about Weimar Germany, all praising it to the skies and
looking back on it with nostalgia. Even without the so-called
"Holocaust," they never have forgiven the Nazis for bringing an end to
the Weimar period.
There was a Hollywood film made 30 years ago, in 1972, about Weimar
Germany. The film was called Cabaret, and it starred Liza Minelli. It
depicted Berlin night life, with all its degeneracy, including the
flourishing of homosexuality, and also depicted the fight between the
communists and the Jews and the other proponents of modernism on the
one
hand and the Nazis on the other hand. The Hollywood filmmakers, of
course, were solidly on the side of the degenerates and portrayed the
Nazis as the bad guys, but this film is another example of the Jews
outsmarting themselves. The Jews who made the film saw everything from
their viewpoint, through their own eyes, and the degenerate Gentiles
under their spell also saw things from the Jewish viewpoint, but the
Jews apparently didn't stop to think -- or didn't care -- that a
normal,
healthy White person would view things differently. Check it out for
yourself. Cabaret is still available in video stores.
The point I am making is this: In the 1920s, after the First World
War,
the Jews were trying to do to Germany what they began doing to America
after the Second World War, in the 1960s. Many Germans, the healthiest
elements in Germany, resisted the Jews' efforts, just as many
Americans
have resisted the Jews' efforts in America. In Germany the Jews were a
bit premature. Although they had much of the media under their
control,
they didn't control all of the media. They tried to move too fast. The
healthiest Germans resisted and beat them.
In America, in the 1960s, the Jews had almost total media control
before
they began their big push, and they proceeded more carefully. In
America
they are winning. The culture of lies has prevailed in America. It's
still possible for Americans to win, but it's going to be a lot
tougher
this time. We'd better get started. The first step is to regain at
least
partial control of our media, so that we can begin contradicting the
lies. This American Dissident Voices broadcast is a part of that first
step."
Len
>encyclopedia. I hope a lot of people would be educated by your posting.
>socialism, communism, etc., we just cannot take them for granted. We really
>have to understand exactly what each country mean by its form of government
>or economic system. A lot of people have been confused that Hitler's idea
>of socialism is totally different from what we have been taught about what
>socialism is. Again, you have to study further to notice such a different.
>Most of the time, it is drastic.
I agree and when finished studying, when begun correctly, one will
conclude that all socialism, whether national or international, is
evil and only desires to take away freedoms that are given to me
outside the government. Both are after a regular guy's liberty.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak.
neptune3
wrote:
>
>How do you know that traits that is bad in some cases, in other
>combinations isn't good?
Blindness, retardation, and other problems are not good. We should
help these people but they should not reproduce if the problems are
hereditary.
>
>It may be, that some combinations in some environments give rise to
>criminal behavior, but in other times and places makes bold individuals
>who go "where no man has gone before".
>
>Maybe schizophrenia in mild variants makes amazing artists and writers?
>
>And if a sprinkle of autism is what it takes to write a bug free space
>shuttle engine control system, would it be a good idea to eradicate it?
>
>And so on and so forth. Simply put, no one knows enough today to make
>decisions about who should breed and who should not.
>
>If there is decisions made anyway, it should be for the presumtive
>parents to choose.
>
If people are suffering from problems they should not want to bring
more suffering into the world by reproducing. If people can't support
themselves and need lifelong help from the State then they do owe us
something. All we ask is that they not reproduce so we don't have to
support more people with the same problems in the future.
neptune3
<Aldri...@hormelqwest.net> wrote:
>
>So we had some cute story about the S.A. ,now after all was said and done
>what hppened to this wonderful S.A. that Gobbels spoke so highly of.
>
The purpose of the S.A. was to protect National Socialism from
violent enemies before it came to power. After they were in power they
weren't that necessary. After that they were something along the lines
of the boy scouts. A club for keeping fit and believing in their
ideals.
Len
>>As the German people after the fall of their Kaiser were unable to
>>think for themselves, and were devastated by a war that left them with
>>such a great loss that they were looking for another father figure to
>>take care of them. So are you.
>>Their mentality, as most Europeans, is that the gov't is their
>>"friend". A real American knows all gov't is the necessary evil and
>>an enemy of freedom.
> Government can be a freind or an enemy depending on which people
>are running it. In America if you say the government is evil you are
>right. The problem is that you are simply against government instead
>of for replacing an evil goverment with a government that is good,
>which is what happened in Germany.
The Europeans were ALWAYS subjugated, or at least since around
Tacitus' time when the women did all the work and the men stayed drunk
and killed for sport. So their very culture comes from being kept
under the gov't. Such they yield to gov't authority and control of
their lives.
America broke that chain. You only wish it mattered who runs the
gov't, but in fact, no matter who runs it the very existence of such
an entity mandates that human nature mess it up.
Gov't is simply an evil necessary to keep even more evil men from
dominating it over me. We are simply regular people not wishing to be
subject to.............wait...........did you ever see the movie
"Magnificent Seven"? It was lifted from a samurai movie by that famous
Japanese director, what-his-name, around 1954. Oh, the vagaries of
age. Any way that speaks more to role of gov't than I can, and it is
only 90 minutes long. In terms of that, gov't protects citizens from
bullies like Adolph, Mao, Joe, and heroes of yours.
> The meaning of "right" and "left" has changed. I stay with the
>original meaning for the same reason I refuse to call homosexual
>perverts "gay". The word "gay" was originally a good thing.
OK, Constitutionalist, and not left or right. As for "gay" my OED
indicates you probably mean the 13th century "joy and mirthful"
personality, however around 1820s enters the word "promiscuous" to be
synonymical. So we only had it for about 500 years, then the turn
wormed.
> The right is for outlawing homosexual perversion,
>prostitution, abortions, heroin, and other bad things. It puts the
>good of the nation first and ahead of the freedom of individuals to
>corrupt the culture of the nation.
I am sorry your presentation is so narrow. You paint a false picture
and use some true colors, thus tricking the viewer into actually
thinking you make sense.
> Leftists believe in the Rede of Witchcraft which states-- If it
>harm none, do what will you will. This sounds nice, but like the apple
>that the witch gave to Snow White it has poison within. The Rede of
>Witchcraft is the Bible of liberalism. It would legalize homosexual
>perversion, prostitution, drugs, etc.
> The right is for building a great nation. Leftists care only
>about individual freedom and are opposed to any laws that would make
>the nation better. There are beaches where normal families will not go
>because homosexual perverts practice their perversion on the beach.
>This is example of the freedom liberals want They are like children
>who only care about their individual selves and are oblivious to what
>should be done to make the nation great. Their philosophy, taken to
>its logical conclusion, would not allow the law that drivers have to
>stop at the red lights. Their philosophy would allow heroin to be sold
>on grocery store shelves and allow ads promoting heroin on TV. Their
>philosophy would result in chaos and degeneracy.
I can imagine a left thinking person, by many standards, would find
that they too wish to build a great nation, so once again, your broad
brush tars and feathers far to many for an intelligent exchange, but
do go on.....
> Libertarians are liberals who want freedom for the Ebenezer
>Scrooges to be as greedy as they want. They have the same philosophy
>as other leftist who want to legalize heroin and prostitution, namely
>that the state can't tell them what they can't do. People don't like
>laws stopping them from doing things, and we should sympathise with
>that, but sometimes that is not the most important thing. Capitalists
>want freedom for greed, other liberals want freedom for degeneracy,
>but good laws would make a nation good.
I find capitalists USE the human nature of greed and betterment for
one's self as an engine to create wealth.
> The Communist were leftist and they said they were fighting for
>freedom. In Spain they sided with the anarchists. The Communists and
>the anarchists were the same people or the same type of people. The
>Communists were for having government but only temporarily. They said
>that their government was necessary only until the whole world was
>Communist. After the world was Communist they wanted to disolve the
>government and have an anarchy.
The "anarchists" and communists of Spain are the same, and mostly it
holds true at this time in all nations and states. They may call
themselves "Christian" but we will know them by their deeds.
Don't be suckered by what they label themselves, but test them and see
for yourself.
> The right wing cares about the future. Leftists only care about the
>present. If their philosophy results in a nightmare future like in
>Soylent Green or some other futuristic nightmare they are not
>interested and insist that nothing could be more important than the
>freedom of individuals to be as decadant as they want. They are like
>the children in the old black and white movie "Lord of the Flies".
> Capitalism and Communism are both evil. The problem with
>capitalism is that it is materialistic and puts no special value on
>people. Capitalism is based on supply and demand. A capitalist company
>that made potato chips for example would need--X number of potatoes, Y
>amount of salt, and Z number of human beings for labor. The human
>beings have no more value than the potatoes or the salt. And they
>consider it good to pay they humans as little as they possibly can to
>increase their profits.
No, you almost have it.
At one time a capitalist had morals, values, ethics, or at least there
were men who were successful capitalists that brought wealth to many
and made the wood pile higher after they left, but they are way out of
favor at this time.
Today's capitalism is really state sponsored and not true capital in
work.
When Henry Ford paid his workers 5$/day it was an outrage, as the same
guy was making $5/week. Some gov't-industrialists wanted to lynch him,
but in the end he raised the whole economy of all workers, and made
cars about 10 times cheaper. He also initiated social plans for caring
for mothers, unemployed, crazy folks,etc. And without gov't help, and
still made zillions. Read up.
> According to capitalist theory people must compete to see who
>will work for the least pennies per hour. They say everyone must
>compete with the people in Mexico and China to see who will work for
>the fewest pennies. If a company makes billions in profit while paying
>its employees starvation wages that is perfectly fine. At least the
>sacred laws of supply and demand are not violated. If the people die
>of starvation that is fine too. You can always get more people. If
>there is not enough work for everyone to do then they think people
>need to die off. Ebenezer Scrooge did everything right according to
>the capitalists and followed the beliefs and values of capitalism.
If I understand you, and as the facts reveal, all above is based on
gov't intervention of business. As a matter of fact it is gov't
mandated that creates the problems you described.
> The apologists for the Scrooges correctly point out that
>people only start business for a profit. Of course that is true.
>Anyone can see that communism is a big mistake. But wouldn't people
>start the business for only millions in profits rather than billions?
>What if there were laws that made sure working people got a reasonable
>share of the profit? Would that be so terrible?
There already are gov't laws mandating pay. Your definitions are
screwy. And your questions are meaningless using your language.
"Mandating profits" is a form of theft. So you want the workers to get
a share of the profits, which is tantamount to theft, and all this
because gov't passes a law? Well, it probably will be done, but we
are further down the road to hell when it happens. The workers could
by shares of the company and make profits that-a-way, no?
> We have many laws that make things better for people. There are
>laws that give people extra pay if they work over forty hours. There
>are laws that ensure people will have retirement. Capitalism is for
>doing away with the laws so businesses can be free to be as greedy as
>possible.
Read what you wrote above. Please.
Capitalism, as you write it, really translates to fascism. When gov't
and business get into cahoots, then that is what it is called, not
capitalism.
> Capitalists oppose welfare and say that orphans and other needy
>people should be helped by charity. How much charity would there be
>when capitalists openly say that selfishness is a great virtue? If
>there was no welfare then the charitable people would have to pay for
>everything while most people would not pay one thin dime. We have
>welfare so people all pay their fair share. It is part of having
>civilization.
Now you are going off into left field. Charity comes from the heart,
and has nothing to do with gov't. Are you going to talk business and
politics, or ethics and morals? Please try to keep them separate. And
once again, you have missed on the definitions.
> We need to reject both Capitalism and Communism. They are both
>materialistic and they are both evil.
No, we need to reject you and set up an environment were "capitalism"
can be allowed to work an open and free market.
Len
I am sure you live in a great country. I trust it will remain great,
what with all that you have going for it.
And now tell others so they quit risking their lives and limb to come
to US.
BTW, the definitions are great, and made by whom?
Your stats are great but the methodology was done for what purpose?
And I understand the history is a bit different than ours?
The social fabric is a bit different than ours?
Our racial diversity is a bit broader than yours?
BTW, how ARE those Molacans or Indonesians taking to your way of life
in your country? And so few in number!
So if you wish to torture the numbers until they confess to ANYTHING,
please, feel free.
And thanks for your time.
>> It would legalize homosexual
>>perversion, prostitution, drugs, etc.
>
Len
>> an intellectual could ignore or evade it. -- Thomas Sowell
>So if you are an especially stupid anti-intellectual fascist you can see
>the record of failure?
>Or to translate...
>The more stupid you are, the better fascism looks.
>Now I see your line of "reasoning."
I was under the impression that fascism and communism were both
socialists in nature. Both wish to expand gov't, and gov't trait is to
limit my freedoms, so................or are you an intellectual?
The word game is so difficult to play. Do you know how?
Len
What was Goebbels job title?
And you often use his material!
Len
>>Hey, same thing a terrible nation. Called slavery.
> At least in that terrible nation people would not starve, if
>enough of the work was farming.
No, even in slave nations people can starve. It can be more slowly
than other places, or they may not starve until there at least 40
years old! Wow. Hey thanks for pointing such things out to US.
> But in Germany the government was for
>making things as good as possible for people.
Wow. Hey thanks, again!
So where is the nation that tells its people "we are doing as much bad
as possible for you"?
You have exchange rhetoric for your limited experiences in this world.
To bad.
> Here are some parts of the book, "A German Primer, Words to
>Comrades" by F. H. Wowereis, who held several top positions in
>National Socialist Germany.
No. Try reading the Federalist Papers, Numbers 1 through 10.
TomAldrich
neptune3 wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 21:16:49 GMT, TomAldrich
> <Aldri...@hormelqwest.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >So we had some cute story about the S.A. ,now after all was said and done
> >what hppened to this wonderful S.A. that Gobbels spoke so highly of.
> >
> The purpose of the S.A. was to protect National Socialism from
> violent enemies before it came to power. After they were in power they
> weren't that necessary. After that they were something along the lines
> of the boy scouts. A club for keeping fit and believing in their
> ideals.
This has got to be one of the most looney tunes answer I've seen, I'm not even
going to bother with the correct answer. I'll let you live in your dillussion.
Len
>I hate that, it makes discussions very incoherent. How do you know
>what specifically one is responding to if there is just one mass of
>answers above the original post? Not to mention the length some of
>those posts get. I prefer to respond after the relevant paragraphs and
>cut the irrelevant ones.
I cannot help what you hate or don't. I find Top Posts, sometimes get
the point out, across, and done without having to go through crap on a
running thread. If a lurker, or recipient of a top post does not know
the below issue, then to bad. If a disinterested party wishes know
more, my Top Post will give my summary in an instant then the reader
can piece together their own story. Useful, at times. But in this
instance we move on....
>>I am sure you live in a great country. I trust it will remain great,
>>what with all that you have going for it.
>Thank you. Though of course we are not perfect either.
No, heaven is not here, and never will be, so..........
>>And now tell others so they quit risking their lives and limb to come
>>to US.
>Is that an emphasized US, or is that the abbreviation for United
>States? In any case, you may have noticed that there are a lot of
>places in the world where live is a lot worse (or prospects are a lot
>worse) than the Netherlands, Europe or the United States. Being part
>of the richest group of countries in the world means that people will
>try to get in, even at considerable risk.
It is by design and freedom of economic development that the above
countries are wealthy. And the disparity so great that rectification
is beyond all know. Especially with the mad men that run the world
now, I fear. The US (yes, it is an abbreviation) was blessed with
abundant natural resources while Europe just went out and conquered
the rich countries with no fire power. The Europeans did subjugate
almost all the natives, including this country, and killed them or
rounded them up and concentrated their population in camps called
reservations. So now all those other populations wish to come and be
part of the wealth. Can't blame them, eh?
>The best way to stop that is
>not to try to send them to neighbouring rich countries, but to create
>an environment in which people can develop their full potential and
>lead productive, creative lives in accord with their needs and
>interests.
Is that all? I do not even understand what the above means, let alone
how one would do that! It is a tremendous undertaking so close to
impossible. But, hey, sounds good.
>>BTW, the definitions are great, and made by whom?
>>Your stats are great but the methodology was done for what purpose?
>Most came from the (independent) 2003 Human Development Report. It is
>commissioned by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and is
>the product of a selected team of leading scholars, development
>practitioners and members of the Human Development Report Office of
>UNDP. http://hdr.undp.org/hd/default.cfm
I am sorry. We are separated by more than geography. My post was a
poor attempt at subtlety in humor. Please, allow this gross point:
Statistically the numbers were tortured until the results yielded what
the originators of the steady wanted to prove. Their agenda was to
conclude what they wanted, so a method of gathering the information,
data, interpretation, interpolation, was such that the yield would be
what they wanted in the beginning.
It is my belief, or position, that the UN has a group of folks that
agree on how the world SHOULD run, and to that end all else shall
support it.
>Others came from specified research, sometimes in Dutch. If you want
>to question a few I am glad to give you the relevant URL's.
>Quite a lot of facts can be found at the website of our Ministry of
>Foreign Affairs: http://www.minbuza.nl/default.asp?CMS_ITEM=MBZ311185
Fellow named Buckminster Fuller also "proved" that all the food in the
world could be grown in California. The planet could easily support 30
billion people and twice that. Resources could be used properly to
create a condition for life to be lived in a healthy manner, in all
climates of the planet and under the sea. Of course towards the end of
his life the "UN types" finally got to him and he succumbed to their
propaganda of "overpopulation". So for "facts" I suppose which devil
you wish to light a candle too, no?
>>And I understand the history is a bit different than ours?
>Since you ( I assume you mean the USA) are relatively young as a
>nation we have a longer history than you yes.
>>The social fabric is a bit different than ours?
>Of course the social fabric is different. That was the whole point;
>original poster assumed that freedoms that we take for granted here
>(homosexuals, socialists, drugs, prostitution) are bad because they
>lead to bad communities or bad states.
So, in your country, the housing costs in those areas of drugs and
prostitution remain high? You have wealthy folks there along with
hookers and dope fiends?
I am parochial and do not know, so please, tell me: I gather you are
Dutch? Has your family been in Holland for, say 10 generations? Are
you White, European and have been for, say, 1,000 years? If so, then I
have a question after an observation. One or two Dutch, here, tell me
that those folks who I've described above, do not participate, on the
whole, with the druggies, prostitutes, nor utilize their services, and
except for the occasional folks there is not a lot of homosexuality,
though more than here with US. Seems the religion and culture have
pounded into the very fabric of Dutch life that such things are
regarded as unnecessary and most of those services are utilized by
foreigners. Is there any element of truth to that? Just wondering.
>>Our racial diversity is a bit broader than yours?
>Racial differences are difficult to compare. We don't register race as
>such and I don't know how your figures ought to be interpreted. Seeing
>talkshows about people who are in shock because they always thought
>they were white but suddenly find that they are black are totally
>incomprehensible here, and make me wonder what excactly is measured.
>Relatively few people in the Netherlands are of purely Dutch
>extraction, and at present, more than five per cent of the population
>do not have Dutch nationality. Those who have Dutch nationality
>include people from one of our former colonies, or recent immigrants.
>Maybe cultural diversity is a better term; and I don't think you have
>more cultural diversity than we do.
I see you have answered part of my question prior to the above
paragraph, but wait......have you ever been to America?
We have garbage dumps larger than the lowlands, and the diversity here
is not as concentrated across this broad expanse, but the multiplicity
is not to be believed. I dare say, without seeming too chauvinistic
that US has a greater diversity. Partly due to the fact we take all
comers, not just former colonies. Until this generation we had few
colonies and they were obtained by the spoils of war, not for the need
of raw materials, as your ancestors
.
>>BTW, how ARE those Molacans or Indonesians taking to your way of life
>>in your country? And so few in number!
>Yu are mixing up different groups. There are Indonesians, Dutch
>Indonesians and Moluccans. Currently all are doing fine. We had
>problems with the Moluccans, even leading to terroristic attacks in
>the '70s (hijacking trains and schools, killing hostages) but managed
>to overcome that with social plans aiming for better education, jobs,
>integration, etc.
>If you are truly interested, you can read an overview of the moluccan
>case at http://www.fkm-europa.nl/?page=2352.
>Indonesians and Dutch indonesians had a short period of being
>discriminated against in the sixties, but that didn't last long.
>Currently they are not perceived as being allochthones.
I recall the train high jack. We had to laugh, as at the time planes
were the mainstay as they may go anywhere. So when they took the
trains it was a giggle, until we saw how damn serious they were.
Fierce folks. Glad to know you guys absorbed their issues and there
are no further repercussions. I've only met a couple of Indonesians
and they seem like very patient people.
>>So if you wish to torture the numbers until they confess to ANYTHING,
>>please, feel free.
>Torture is for barbarians. If you want to change things in a more
>civilized manner you switch to manipulation. The figures I used are
>genuine though, and can be found in multiple sources. We are doing
>fine economically on the whole (though current dip in worldeconomy hit
>us too of course), we are in good health, well educated, use less
>drugs than the USA (except alcohol), have for most crimes a lower
>crime rate, and our teenagers seem to be more in control of their
>sexual behaviour. If I search a bit I am sure I can find a few area's
>where the USA performs better than we, but it would still be hard to
>proof that socialism and the other factors mentioned earlier had a
>devestating effect on our economy, morale, or overall community.
Well, to put it another way, a good Dutch friend told me that the
Dutch are simply "uptight" what with Calvinism and the social
structure. So, fewer drugs, less sexual behavior, lower crime rate,
etc.
I have no desire to have you find areas for competition to see whose
country is "better". No point for adults, especially when each is
happy with their own.
As for your economy, gadz, too complicated for me to discern. I know
that your industrial people have worked hard to conquer the world and
now can live off the resources of other peoples, especially with the
business practices you almost invented. Stereotypically a
characteristic of the Dutch is their business practices and thrift, as
well as their hard work, so I can see how your place can ride the wave
of your previous endeavors, and socialism is a panacea that can carry
you for a while. But then I would imagine that if fully developed it
would run your country into the ground, as those former colonies work
hard in the sun to grow the coffee and tobacco and all the metals
mined, if the wealth were dispensed across the board you would all be
poor simultaneously.
>>And thanks for your time.
>Oh, you are welcome. I am mother of three boys, and sometimes when I
>crawl behind the computer I am still in "upbringing mode".
Such a full time job. I read recently that a stay at home mother with
two children under the age of five has more stress in her life than
any top executive officer of any major company.
You are blessed, but get some rest and "down time" from the kids.
I've watched my wife over the years, and discovered all it takes is
time and almost infinite patience, and at least two ears per each
child.
Thanks.
Len
What you fail to understand is high school biology.
There is coming a time, in your generation if you are a young man,
that such diversity may be needed, as a tool. You DO understand using
people as tools now, don't you.
You sick twisted puppy.
Len
>> >what hppened to this wonderful S.A. that Gobbels spoke so highly of.
>> >
>> The purpose of the S.A. was to protect National Socialism from
>> violent enemies before it came to power. After they were in power they
>> weren't that necessary. After that they were something along the lines
>> of the boy scouts. A club for keeping fit and believing in their
>> ideals.
>
>This has got to be one of the most looney tunes answer I've seen, I'm not even
>going to bother with the correct answer. I'll let you live in your dillussion.
But there are times when one finds a moral imperative to slap the snot
out of the boy in hopes of waking him up to a real world, and to look
for real world solutions, not just to stew in his own fecal matter
thinking that is all there is to life, no?
neptune3
>On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 10:33:56 -0500, wrote neptune3 <np...@hotmail.com>
>:
>
>>"The Jews were very influential in Germany after the First World
>>War.
>
>I see absolutely NO relation between your reply and my post. I
>mentioned that the Netherlands was performing better than the USA in
>almost every area except GPD per capita. Such despite the devastating
>effects you subscribed to socialism & equal rights for homosexuals &
>legal prostitution & availability of cannabis & nudity on the beaches
>& whatever other point you were making.
>
>I did NOT mention Germany, I did NOT mention Jews.
>
>Marjolein
This is what you posted:
The main thing I disagreed with in your post is legalized drugs,
homosexual perversion and prostitution. The movie "Cabaret" shows why
we should be against these things even though the movie was made by
people on your side.
Your post was comparing your country to the USA. Do you think I am
pro-USA? Read the subject line of these posts.
neptune3
>
>The Europeans were ALWAYS subjugated, or at least since around
>Tacitus' time when the women did all the work and the men stayed drunk
>and killed for sport. So their very culture comes from being kept
>under the gov't. Such they yield to gov't authority and control of
>their lives.
I don't agree with your feminist version of history, but yes they
had governments, that is necessary.
>America broke that chain. You only wish it mattered who runs the
>gov't, but in fact, no matter who runs it the very existence of such
>an entity mandates that human nature mess it up.
Well it is bad that America is ruled by the Jews. For one thing it
wouldn't have such problems with Arabs otherwise.
>Gov't is simply an evil necessary to keep even more evil men from
>dominating it over me. We are simply regular people not wishing to be
>subject to.............wait...........did you ever see the movie
>"Magnificent Seven"?
Yes. I noticed it was made by Jews and it mainly was
anti-Christian propaganda. Christians were wimps in the movie. I am
not saying whether or not Christians are wimps today in real life, But
certainly in that movie no man in his right mind would want to be a
Christian.
> It was lifted from a samurai movie by that famous
>Japanese director, what-his-name, around 1954. Oh, the vagaries of
>age. Any way that speaks more to role of gov't than I can, and it is
>only 90 minutes long. In terms of that, gov't protects citizens from
>bullies like Adolph, Mao, Joe, and heroes of yours.
Unfortunately I forget what the movie said about that. But Adolf
rooted out all the bad people and made a government that was great.
>
>OK, Constitutionalist, and not left or right. As for "gay" my OED
>indicates you probably mean the 13th century "joy and mirthful"
>personality, however around 1820s enters the word "promiscuous" to be
>synonymical. So we only had it for about 500 years, then the turn
>wormed.
>
>> The right is for outlawing homosexual perversion,
>>prostitution, abortions, heroin, and other bad things. It puts the
>>good of the nation first and ahead of the freedom of individuals to
>>corrupt the culture of the nation.
>
>I am sorry your presentation is so narrow. You paint a false picture
>and use some true colors, thus tricking the viewer into actually
>thinking you make sense.
Narrow? I am not saying everything is wrong with America. It has
good hospitals and roads. There could be improvements economically but
it is wealthier than other countries.
What is wrong with America is that it is for race-mixing, feminism
and homosexual perversion. In other words it is for liberalism.
>I can imagine a left thinking person, by many standards, would find
>that they too wish to build a great nation, so once again, your broad
>brush tars and feathers far to many for an intelligent exchange, but
>do go on.....
Leftists think in terms of the individual. They don't think about
creating beautiful cities or about the greatness of the nation as a
whole.
>
>I find capitalists USE the human nature of greed and betterment for
>one's self as an engine to create wealth.
Greed is obviously a bad thing.
>
>The "anarchists" and communists of Spain are the same, and mostly it
>holds true at this time in all nations and states. They may call
>themselves "Christian" but we will know them by their deeds.
>Don't be suckered by what they label themselves, but test them and see
>for yourself.
>
>
>No, you almost have it.
>At one time a capitalist had morals, values, ethics, or at least there
>were men who were successful capitalists that brought wealth to many
>and made the wood pile higher after they left, but they are way out of
>favor at this time.
>Today's capitalism is really state sponsored and not true capital in
>work.
>When Henry Ford paid his workers 5$/day it was an outrage, as the same
>guy was making $5/week. Some gov't-industrialists wanted to lynch him,
>but in the end he raised the whole economy of all workers, and made
>cars about 10 times cheaper. He also initiated social plans for caring
>for mothers, unemployed, crazy folks,etc. And without gov't help, and
>still made zillions. Read up.
Read up you say. I am totally for Ford. I say he was not a
capitalist because he was deliberately generous. Of course I am for
business leaders.
>
>> According to capitalist theory people must compete to see who
>>will work for the least pennies per hour. They say everyone must
>>compete with the people in Mexico and China to see who will work for
>>the fewest pennies. If a company makes billions in profit while paying
>>its employees starvation wages that is perfectly fine. At least the
>>sacred laws of supply and demand are not violated. If the people die
>>of starvation that is fine too. You can always get more people. If
>>there is not enough work for everyone to do then they think people
>>need to die off. Ebenezer Scrooge did everything right according to
>>the capitalists and followed the beliefs and values of capitalism.
>
>If I understand you, and as the facts reveal, all above is based on
>gov't intervention of business. As a matter of fact it is gov't
>mandated that creates the problems you described.
Not at all. The lack of govenment is the problem. There is no law
against hiring people in Mexico and China, where there is no minimum
wage or anything.
>
>
>There already are gov't laws mandating pay. Your definitions are
>screwy. And your questions are meaningless using your language.
>"Mandating profits" is a form of theft. So you want the workers to get
>a share of the profits, which is tantamount to theft, and all this
>because gov't passes a law? Well, it probably will be done, but we
>are further down the road to hell when it happens. The workers could
>by shares of the company and make profits that-a-way, no?
Stocks are theft. That is people trying to get rich without
working. We should make sure working people get a fair share of the
profits in wages. You call that theft. I call it getting their just
rewards.
>
>Read what you wrote above. Please.
>Capitalism, as you write it, really translates to fascism.
Absolute nonsense.
Here are parts of a post about Mussolini written by a very
anti-Mussolini person. He has done his homework though and cites many
book which are also anti-Mussolini and anti-Fascist. These are some
things they admit:
>http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=4087
>Left-wing Fascism: An Intellectual Disorder
>By John J. Ray
(Quotes from Mussolini)
"Fascism has taken up an attitude of complete opposition to the
doctrines of
Liberalism, both in the political field and in the field of
economics".
"Fascism now and always believes in holiness and in heroism; that is
to say
in actions influenced by no economic motive"
"Laissez faire is out of date"
"Our programme is simple. We want to rule Italy".
"He had a profound contempt for those whose overriding ambition was to
be
rich. It was a mania, he thought, a kind of disease, and he comforted
himself with the reflection that the rich were rarely happy"
Here Hibbert (1962, p. 47) is describing a lifelong attitude of
Mussolini
that continued right into his time as Italy's Prime Minister - when he
refused to take his official salary.
"There was much truth in the comment of a Rome newspaper that the new
fasci
did not aim at the defence of the ruling class or the existing State
but
wanted to lead the revolutionary forces into the Nationalist camp so
as to
prevent a victory of Bolshevism.
even after coming
to power, to take drives in the country with his wife and stop at
various
farmhouses on the way for a chat with the family there. He would enjoy
discussing the crops, the weather and all the usual rural topics and
obviously just liked the feeling of being one of the people. His claim
to
represent the people was not just theory but heartfelt. And he never
gave up
his "anti-bourgeois" rhetoric.
His policies were basically protectionist. He
controlled the exchange-rate of the Italian currency and promoted that
old
favourite of the economically illiterate - autarky - meaning that he
tried
to get Italy to become wholly self-sufficient rather than rely on
foreign
trade. He wanted to protect Italian products from competing foreign
products.
By 1939 he had doubled Italy's grain
production from its traditional level, enabling Italy to cut wheat
imports
by 75% (Smith, 1967, p. 92).
He made Capri a bird sanctuary (Smith, 1967, p. 84) and
in 1926 he issued a decree reducing the size of newspapers to save
wood
pulp. And, believe it or not, he even mandated gasohol - i.e. mixing
industrial alcohol with petroleum products to make fuel for cars
(Smith,
1967, p. 87). Mussolini also disliked the population drift from rural
areas
into the big cities and in 1930 passed a law to put a stop to it
unless
official permission was granted
he advocated private enterprise within
a strict set of State controls designed, among other things, to
prevent
abuse of monopoly power (Gregor, 1979, Ch. 5).
Some other clearly Leftist initiatives that Mussolini took were a big
expansion of public works and a great improvement in social insurance
measures. He also set up the "Dopolavoro" (after work) organization to
give
workers cheap recreations of various kinds (cf. the Nazi Kraft durch
Freude
movement). His public health measures (such as the attack on
tuberculosis
and the setting up of a huge maternal and child welfare organization)
were
particularly notable for their rationality and efficiency and, as
such, were
rewarded with great success. For instance, the incidence of
tuberculosis
dropped dramatically and infant mortality declined by more than 20%
(Gregor,
p. 259). Together with big improvements in education and public
infrastructure, such measures gave Fascist Italy what was arguably the
most
advanced welfare State in the world at the time.
And if influential American "liberal" economists such as Galbraith
(1969)
can bemoan the low level of spending on public works as "private
affluence
and public squalor", Mussolini was well ahead on that. As Hibbert
(1962, p.
56) says, Mussolini
"instituted a programme of public works hitherto unrivalled in modern
Europe. Bridges, canals and roads were built, hospitals and schools,
railway
stations and orphanages, swamps were drained and land reclaimed,
forest were
planted and universities were endowed."
In 1929 Mussolini and Pope Pius
12th signed the Lateran treaty - which is still the legal basis for
the
existence of the Vatican State to this day - and Pius in fact at one
stage
called Mussolini "the man sent by Providence". The treaty recognized
Roman
Catholicism as the Italian State religion as well as recognizing the
Vatican
as a sovereign state. What Mussolini got in exchange was acceptance by
the
church - something that was enormously important in the Italy of that
time.
the great hatred that existed in prewar
Germany between the Nazis and the "Reds". And the early Fascists
battled the
"Reds" too, of course.
The 1919 election
manifesto, for instance, contained policies of worker control of
industry,
confiscation of war profits, abolition of the Stock exchange, land for
the
peasants and abolition of the Monarchy and nobility. Further,
Mussolini
never ceased to inveigh against "plutocrats".
He wanted a harmonious and united
Italy for all Italians of all classes and was sure that achieving just
treatment for the workers needed neither revolution nor any kind of
artificially enforced equality.
This made Italian Fascism a much more popular creed than Stalin's
Communism. This
is perhaps most clearly seen by the always persuasive "voting with
your
feet" criterion. Mussolini made no effort to prevent Italians from
emigrating and although some anti-Fascists did, net emigration
actually FELL
under Mussolini. Compare this with Stalin and the Berlin wall.
Mussolini gained
power through political rather than revolutionary means. His famous
march on
Rome was only superficially revolutionary. The King of Italy and the
army
approved of him because of his pragmatic policies so did not oppose
the
march. So this collusion ensured that Mussolini's "revolution" was
essentially bloodless.
His considerable popularity for many years among a wide
range of Italians shows how effective his recipe for achieving that
was.
In his "corporate state", Mussolini was the first to create that very
modern
phenomenon constantly now being advocated by Leftists everywhere - a
system
of capitalism under tight government control. And his corporate state
was
one where the workers had (at least in theory) equal rights with
management.
REFERENCES Amis, M. (2002) Koba the Dread : laughter and the twenty
million.
N.Y.: Talk Miramax
Carsten, F.L. (1967) The rise of Fascism. London: Methuen.
Funk & Wagnall's New Encyclopedia (1983) Funk & Wagnall's
Galbraith, J.K. (1969) The affluent society. 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Gilmour, I.H.J.L. (1978) Inside right. London: Quartet.
Greene, N. (1968) Fascism: An anthology. N.Y.: Crowell.
Gregor, A.J. (1979) Italian Fascism and developmental dictatorship
Princeton, N.J.: Univ. Press.
Hagan, J. (1966) Modern History and its themes. Croydon, Victoria,
Australia: Longmans.
Hibbert, C. (1962) Benito Mussolini Geneva: Heron Books. Herzer, I.
(1989)
The Italian refuge: Rescue of Jews during the holocaust. Washington,
D.C.:
Catholic University of America Press
Horowitz, D. (1998) Up from multiculturalism. Heterodoxy, January.
See:
http://www.cspc.org/het/multicul.htm
Lenin, V.I. (1952) "Left-Wing" Communism, an Infantile Disorder. In:
Selected Works, Vol. II, Part 2. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing
House.
Martino, A. (1998) The modern mask of socialism. 15th John Bonython
lecture,
Centre for Independent Studies, Sydney. See
http://www.cis.org.au/Events/JBL/JBL98.htm
Muravchik, J. (2002) Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism
San
Francisco: Encounter Books.
Smith, D.M. (1967) The theory and practice of Fascism. In: Greene, N.
Fascism: An anthology N.Y.: Crowell.
Steinberg, J. (1990) All or nothing: The Axis and the holocaust
London:
Routledge.
>When gov't
>and business get into cahoots, then that is what it is called, not
>capitalism.
Capitalism is having no laws.
Fascism is having laws against Greed. It sounds more like the
government is in cahoots with the workers. But not really. It is for
business too. It is for fairness for both.
>
>Now you are going off into left field. Charity comes from the heart,
>and has nothing to do with gov't. Are you going to talk business and
>politics, or ethics and morals? Please try to keep them separate. And
>once again, you have missed on the definitions.
We should all pay our fair share for the needy in taxes.
>
>No, we need to reject you and set up an environment were "capitalism"
>can be allowed to work an open and free market.
That would result in the few very rich and the many very poor.
neptune3
>
>I agree and when finished studying, when begun correctly, one will
>conclude that all socialism, whether national or international, is
>evil and only desires to take away freedoms that are given to me
>outside the government. Both are after a regular guy's liberty.
>
Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
on December 10, 1940:
"In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which
means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must
possess some means of giving expression to their thoughts or their
wishes. Examining this problem more closely, we see that the people
themselves have originally no convictions of their own. Their
convictions are formed, of course, just as everywhere else. The
decisive question is who enlightens the people, who educates them? In
those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing
more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and,
as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are
more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.'
By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an
uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to
make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national
control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital
and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak
of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of
the 'freedom of the press.'
In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every
case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the
editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor
tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next
day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless
slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus
mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties.
The difference between these parties is as small as it formerly was in
Germany. You know them, of course - the old parties. They were always
one and the same. In Britain matters are usually so arranged that
families are divided up, one member being a conservative, another a
liberal, and a third belonging to the labor party. Actually, all three
sit together as members of the family, decide upon their common
attitude and determine it. A further point is that the 'elected
people' actually form a community which operates and controls all
these organizations. For this reason, the opposition in England is
really always the same, for on all essential matters in which the
opposition has to make itself felt, the parties are always in
agreement. They have one and the same conviction and through the
medium of the press mold public opinion along corresponding lines. One
might well believe that in these countries of liberty and riches, the
people must possess an unlimited degree of prosperity. But no! On the
contrary, it is precisely in these countries that the distress of the
masses is greater than anywhere else. Such is the case in 'rich
Britain.'
She controls sixteen million square miles. In India, for example, a
hundred million colonial workers with a wretched standard of living
must labor for her. One might think, perhaps, that at least in England
itself every person must have his share of these riches. By no means!
In that country class distinction is the crassest imaginable. There is
poverty - incredible poverty - on the one side, and equally incredible
wealth on the other. They have not solved a single problem. The
workmen of that country which possesses more than one-sixth of the
globe and of the world's natural resources dwell in misery, and the
masses of the people are poorly clad.. In a country which ought to
have more than enough bread and every sort of fruit, we find millions
of the lower classes who have not even enough to fill their stomachs,
and go about hungry. A nation which could provide work for the whole
world must acknowledge the fact that it cannot even abolish
unemployment at home. For decades this rich Britain has had two and a
half million unemployed; rich America, ten to thirteen millions, year
after year; France, six, seven, and eight hundred thousand. Well, my
fellow-countrymen - what then are we to say about ourselves?
It is self-evident that where this democracy rules, the people as such
are not taken into consideration at all. The only thing that matters
is the existence of a few hundred gigantic capitalists who own all the
factories and their stock and, through them, control the people. The
masses of the people do not interest them in the least. They are
interested in them just as were our bourgeois parties in former times
- only when elections are being held, when they need votes. Otherwise,
the life of the masses is a matter of complete indifference to them.
To this must be added the difference in education. Is it not ludicrous
to hear a member of the British Labor Party - who, of course, as a
member of the Opposition is officially paid by the government - say:
'When the war is over, we will do something in social respects'?
It is the members of Parliament who are the directors of the business
concerns - just as used to be the case with us. But we have abolished
all that. A member of the Reichstag cannot belong to a Board of
Directors, except as a purely honorary member. He is prohibited from
accepting any emolument, financial or otherwise. This is not the case
in other countries.
They reply: 'That is why our form of government is sacred to us.' I
can well believe it, for that form of government certainly pays very
well.. But whether it is sacred to the mass of the people as well is
another matter.
The people as a whole definitely suffer. I do not consider it possible
in the long run for one man to work and toil for a whole year in
return for ridiculous wages, while another jumps into an express train
once a year and pockets enormous sums. Such conditions are a disgrace.
On the other hand, we National Socialists equally oppose the theory
that all men are equals. Today, when a man of genius makes some
astounding invention and enormously benefits his country by his
brains, we pay him his due, for he has really accomplished something
and been of use to his country. However, we hope to make it impossible
for idle drones to inhabit this country.
I could continue to cite examples indefinitely. The fact remains that
two worlds are face to face with one another. Our opponents are quite
right when they say: 'Nothing can reconcile us to the National
Socialist world.' How could a narrow-minded capitalist ever agree to
my principles? It would be easier for the Devil to go to church and
cross himself with holy water than for these people to comprehend the
ideas which are accepted facts to us today. But we have solved our
problems.
To take another instance where we are condemned: They claim to be
fighting for the maintenance of the gold standard as the currency
basis. That I can well believe, for the gold is in their hands. We,
too, once had gold, but it was stolen and extorted from us. When I
came to power, it was not malice which made me abandon the gold
standard. Germany simply had no gold left. Consequently, quitting the
gold standard presented no difficulties, for it is always easy to part
with what one does not have. We had no gold. We had no foreign
exchange. They had all been stolen and extorted from us during the
previous fifteen years. But, my fellow countrymen, I did not regret
it, for we have constructed our economic system on a wholly different
basis. In our eyes, gold is not of value in itself. It is only an
agent by which nations can be suppressed and dominated.
When I took over the government, I had only one hope on which to
build, namely, the efficiency and ability of the German nation and the
German workingman; the intelligence of our inventors, engineers,
technicians, chemists, and so forth. I built on the strength which
animates our economic system. One simple question faced me: Are we to
perish because we have no gold; am I to believe in a phantom which
spells our destruction? I championed the opposite opinion: Even though
we have no gold, we have capacity for work.
The German capacity for work is our gold and our capital, and with
this gold I can compete successfully with any power in the world. We
want to live in houses which have to be built. Hence, the workers must
build them, and the raw materials required must be procured by work.
My whole economic system has been built up on the conception of work.
We have solved our problems while, amazingly enough, the capitalist
countries and their currencies have suffered bankruptcy.
Sterling can find no market today. Throw it at any one and he will
step aside to avoid being hit. But our Reichsmark, which is backed by
no gold, has remained stable. Why? It has no gold cover; it is backed
by you and by your work. You have helped me to keep the mark stable.
German currency, with no gold coverage, is worth more today than gold
itself. It signifies unceasing production. This we owe to the German
farmer, who has worked from daybreak till nightfall. This we owe to
the German worker, who has given us his whole strength. The whole
problem has been solved in one instant, as if by magic.
My dear friends, if I had stated publicly eight or nine years ago: 'In
seven or eight years the problem of how to provide work for the
unemployed will be solved, and the problem then will be where to find
workers,' I should have harmed my cause. Every one would have
declared: 'The man is mad. It is useless to talk to him, much less to
support him. Nobody should vote for him. He is a fantastic creature.'
Today, however, all this has come true. Today, the only question for
us is where to find workers. That, my fellow countrymen, is the
blessing which work brings.
Work alone can create new work; money cannot create work. Work alone
can create values, values with which to reward those who work. The
work of one man makes it possible for another to live and continue to
work. And when we have mobilized the working capacity of our people to
its utmost, each individual worker will receive more and more of the
world's goods.
We have incorporated seven million unemployed into our economic
system; we have transformed another six millions from part-time into
full-time workers; we are even working overtime. And all this is paid
for in cash in Reichsmarks which maintained their value in peacetime.
In wartime we had to ration its purchasing capacity, not in order to
devalue it, but simply to earmark a portion of our industry for war
production to guide us to victory in the struggle for the future of
Germany...
One thing is certain, my fellow-countrymen: All in all, we have today
a state with a different economic and political orientation from that
of the Western democracies.
Well, it must now be made possible for the British worker to travel.
It is remarkable that they should at last hit upon the idea that
traveling should be something not for millionaires alone, but for the
people too. In this country, the problem was solved some time ago. In
the other countries - as is shown by their whole economic structure -
the selfishness of a relatively small stratum rules under the mask of
democracy. This stratum is neither checked nor controlled by anyone.
It is therefore understandable if an Englishman says: 'We do not want
our world to be subject to any sort of collapse.' Quite so. The
English know full well that their Empire is not menaced by us. But
they say quite truthfully: 'If the ideas that are popular in Germany
are not completely eliminated, they might become popular among our own
people, and that is the danger. We do not want this.' It would do no
harm if they did become popular there, but these people are just as
narrow-minded as many once were in Germany. In this respect they
prefer to remain bound to their conservative methods. They do not wish
to depart from them, and do not conceal the fact.
They say, 'The German methods do not suit us at all.'
And what are these methods? You know, my comrades, that I have
destroyed nothing in Germany. I have always proceeded very carefully,
because I believe - as I have already said - that we cannot afford to
wreck anything. I am proud that the Revolution of 1933 was brought to
pass without breaking a single windowpane. Nevertheless, we have
wrought enormous changes.
I wish to put before you a few basic facts: The first is that in the
capitalistic democratic world the most important principle of economy
is that the people exist for trade and industry, and that these in
turn exist for capital. We have reversed this principle by making
capital exist for trade and industry, and trade and industry exist for
the people. In other words, the people come first. Everything else is
but a means to this end. When an economic system is not capable of
feeding and clothing a people, then it is bad, regardless of whether a
few hundred people say: 'As far as I am concerned it is good,
excellent; my dividends are splendid.'
However, the dividends do not interest me at all. Here we have drawn
the line. They may then retort: 'Well, look here, that is just what we
mean. You jeopardize liberty.'
Yes, certainly, we jeopardize the liberty to profiteer at the expense
of the community, and, if necessary, we even abolish it. British
capitalists, to mention only one instance, can pocket dividends of 76,
80, 95, 140, and even 160 per cent from their armament industry.
Naturally they say: 'If the German methods grow apace and should prove
victorious, this sort of thing will stop.'
They are perfectly right. I should never tolerate such a state of
affairs. In my eyes, a 6 per cent dividend is sufficient. Even from
this 6 per cent we deduct one-half and, as for the rest, we must have
definite proof that it is invested in the interest of the country as a
whole. In other words, no individual has the right to dispose
arbitrarily of money which ought to be invested for the good of the
country. If he disposes of it sensibly, well and good; if not, the
National Socialist state will intervene.
To take another instance, besides dividends there are the so-called
directors' fees. You probably have no idea how appallingly active a
board of directors is. Once a year its members have to make a journey.
They have to go to the station, get into a first-class compartment and
travel to some place or other. They arrive at an appointed office at
about 10 or 11 A.M. There they must listen to a report. When the
report has been read, they must listen to a few comments on it. They
may be kept in their seats until 1 P.M. or even 2. Shortly after 2
o'clock they rise from their chairs and set out on their homeward
journey, again, of course, traveling first class. It is hardly
surprising that they claim 3,000, 4,000, or even 5,000 as compensation
for this: Our directors formerly did the same - for what a lot of time
it costs them! Such effort had to be made worth while! Of course, we
have got rid of all this nonsense, which was merely veiled
profiteering and even bribery.
In Germany, the people, without any doubt, decide their existence.
They determine the principles of their government. In fact it has been
possible in this country to incorporate many of the broad masses into
the National Socialist party, that gigantic organization embracing
millions and having millions of officials drawn from the people
themselves. This principle is extended to the highest ranks.
For the first time in German history, we have a state which has
absolutely abolished all social prejudices in regard to political
appointments as well as in private life. I myself am the best proof of
this. Just imagine: I am not even a lawyer, and yet I am your Leader!
It is not only in ordinary life that we have succeeded in appointing
the best among the people for every position. We have
Reichsstatthalters who were formerly agricultural laborers or
locksmiths. Yes, we have even succeeded in breaking down prejudice in
a place where it was most deep-seated -in the fighting forces.
Thousands of officers are being promoted from the ranks today. We have
done away with prejudice. We have generals who were ordinary soldiers
and noncommissioned officers twenty-two and twenty-three years ago. In
this instance, too, we have overcome all social obstacles. Thus, we
are building up our life for the future.
As you know we have countless schools, national political educational
establishments, Adolf Hitler schools, and so on. To these schools we
send gifted children of the broad masses, children of working men,
farmers' sons whose parents could never have afforded a higher
education for their children. We take them in gradually. They are
educated here, sent to the Ordensburgen, to the Party, later to take
their place in the State where they will some day fill the highest
posts....
Opposed to this there stands a completely different world. In the
world the highest ideal is the struggle for wealth, for capital, for
family possessions, for personal egoism; everything else is merely a
means to such ends. Two worlds confront each other today. We know
perfectly well that if we are defeated in this war it would not only
be the end of our National Socialist work of reconstruction, but the
end of the German people as a whole. For without its powers of
coordination, the German people would starve. Today the masses
dependent on us number 120 or 130 millions, of which 85 millions alone
are our own people. We remain ever aware of this fact.
On the other hand, that other world says: 'If we lose, our world-wide
capitalistic system will collapse. For it is we who save hoarded gold.
It is lying in our cellars and will lose its value. If the idea that
work is the decisive factor spreads abroad, what will happen to us? We
shall have bought our gold in vain. Our whole claim to world dominion
can then no longer be maintained. The people will do away with their
dynasties of high finance. They will present their social claims, and
the whole world system will be overthrown.'
I can well understand that they declare: 'Let us prevent this at all
costs; it must be prevented.' They can see exactly how our nation has
been reconstructed. You see it clearly. For instance, there we see a
state ruled by a numerically small upper class. They send their sons
to their own schools, to Eton. We have Adolf Hitler schools or
national political educational establishments. On the one hand, the
sons of plutocrats, financial magnates; on the other, the children of
the people. Etonians and Harrovians exclusively in leading positions
over there; in this country, men of the people in charge of the State.
These are the two worlds. I grant that one of the two must succumb.
Yes, one or the other. But if we were to succumb, the German people
would succumb with us. If the other were to succumb, I am convinced
that the nations will become free for the first time. We are not
fighting individual Englishmen or Frenchmen. We have nothing against
them. For years I proclaimed this as the aim of my foreign policy. We
demanded nothing of them, nothing at all. When they started the war
they could not say: 'We are doing so because the Germans asked this or
that of us.' They said, on the contrary: 'We are declaring war on you
because the German system of Government does not suit us; because we
fear it might spread to our own people.' For that reason they are
carrying on this war. They wanted to blast the German nation back to
the time of Versailles, to the indescribable misery of those days. But
they have made a great mistake.
If in this war everything points to the fact that gold is fighting
against work, capitalism against peoples, and reaction against the
progress of humanity, then work, the peoples, and progress will be
victorious. Even the support of the Jewish race will not avail the
others.
I have seen all this coming for years. What did I ask of the other
world? Nothing but the right for Germans to reunite and the
restoration of all that had been taken from them - nothing which would
have meant a loss to the other nations. How often have I stretched out
my hand to them? Ever since I came into power. I had not the slightest
wish to rearm.
For what do armaments mean? They absorb so much labor. It was I who
regarded work as being of decisive importance, who wished to employ
the working capacity of Germany for other plans. I think the news is
already out that, after all, I have some fairly important plans in my
mind, vast and splendid plans for my people. It is my ambition to make
the German people rich and to make the German homeland beautiful. I
want the standard of living of the individual raised. I want us to
have the most beautiful and the finest civilization. I should like the
theater - in fact, the whole of German civilization - to benefit all
the people and not to exist only for the upper ten thousand, as is the
case in England.
The plans which we had in mind were tremendous, and I needed workers
in order to realize them. Armament only deprives me of workers. I made
proposals to limit armaments. I was ridiculed. The only answer I
received was 'No.' I proposed the limitation of certain types of
armament. That was refused. I proposed that airplanes should be
altogether eliminated from warfare. That also was refused. I suggested
that bombers should be limited. That was refused. They said: 'That is
just how we wish to force our regime upon you.' ...
neptune3
Berlin-Lankwitz,
Dürkheimerstrasse 14,
GERMANY.
August 7th, 1933.
Dear Ken:
Dont think that I am going to be taken to an insane asylum nor that
the world is coming to an end. This is not so, and I must object very
sincerely if the fact of my sitting down again after only several
months write a letter to you gives you such impressions. The reason
for this outstanding event is much rather the hotheaded criticism
about Hitler and his Government which you gave us in your recent
letter to Ruth, and which indeed surprised me very much. However,
before giving you my point of view on the new turn that has taken
place in Germany I should like to ask you to in the first place do me
the favour of keeping your shirt on, otherwise it is you who is making
"an ass of himself". One should never speak the language of a
truckdriver, no matter how much one likes it. Now, don't be mad, but
calm down. You did not hurt Ruths or my feelings at all, but there are
two reasons why I feel I should answer you. The first reason is that
your remarks are very unfair to Hitler and his new Government, and the
other is that I intend to do my share in preventing the American
generation to which you belong to be equally as ignorant as the
generation of the whole world was which tumbled into the last war.
What makes you believe and in such a definite way state that we are
unable to see the things as they are, since, as you write, we are
hypnotized by Hitler. It is not true, that you and all those of your
friends who you claim take the same viewpoint as you are taking are
basing your opinion upon reports and comments of American newspapers
and perhaps upon interviews of American visitors who recently have
been in Germany, and while you are willing to disregard certain
exaggerations you readily accept the rest as the truth? Is it not
possible that thus you are receiving but one side of the story? You
know that the American Press endeavouring to please the so called
taste for sensational news of the American Public is working according
to the countrywide newspaper principal: All the news thats fit to
print, and be it even lies. I do not belong to those who claim that it
is the American people who have such taste, but instead it is the
American Press which in order to obtain the attention of the reader
considers any means good enough to beat competition. You will never
find such crookedness among decent business. Such business spirit is
identified all over the world with the jewish business spirit. You
must not misunderstand me. Such spirit can be found among Christian
Jews as well as among Jewish Christians, if you get what I mean.
Nevertheless it is all over the world condemned as the jewish spirit.
You will not doubt this, I suppose? Perhaps in this connection you
will find it interesting to recall that the inventor of the most
unchivalrous means to fight the enemy, namely the father of all
newspaper liars, Lord Northcliffe was a Jew. When comparing the basis
of your knowledge about present day Germany with the basis of our
knowledge, dont you think that ours at least is a broader basis? Don't
you think that the possibility of witnessing present developments in
Germany combined with the ability of reading and understanding
American newspapers can represent an ideal basis of knowledge for such
person who - and this is the important thing - is free of all feelings
of hatred against either one of the two countries? The Berlin
Correspondents of the American newspapers are not such persons. Many
of them are jews and many have taken a hostile attitude towards
Germany long before Hitler ever appeared on the stage of German Public
Life. This includes also Mr. Mowrer of the Chicago Herald Tribune who,
as I saw from the New York Times received this years Putlitzer Prise
of Journalism for his "excellent" articles on the German development.
A year ago a German Democrat, mind you, not a Nazi, expressed
astonishment that I should like to call upon Mr. Mowrer, since this
"excellent" American reporter has long enjoyed the reputation even
among German Democrats of being a German hater. This hostility towards
Germany on the part of American Correspondents in Berlin indeed could
much more entitle me to claim that it is you who is hypnotized namely
by the American Press in general.
Dear Kenneth, not until today in August 23rd could I find time to
continue this letter. When rereading what I so far have said above I
doubt if it is of any use to speak to you the way I did. I know you
are not anti-German, and yet while having received your school
education at a time of outright hostility towards Germany your mind is
only to readily inclined to accept any piece of news about Germany as
true and the correct version as long as this piece of news is
presented in such form which is free from obvious sensational
exaggeration. Since, however no piece of news published in the
American papers is reporting favourably on the German National
Socialistic Revolution your mind is systematically kept from turning
pro-German. This is the work of jewish influence in the American
Press. In face of such mental attitude of yours you naturally hesitate
to accept as the correct version anything which is told you by someone
who on one hand is not even a 100% American Citizen and on the other
hand is, as you know pro-German. For this reason I doubt if I can
change anything of your attitude towards Hitlerite Germany and of the
attitude of those of our friends who, as you claim take the same
viewpoint as you are taking. When, however, after reconsideration I
continue this letter it is, because even if I should not convince you
I wish to do my share in trying to destroy this hostile spirit of the
American People towards Germany and especially to contribute to making
the young Americans a more broadminded generation.
In the following I am going to copy part of my last letter to Mr.
Houston. The article I sent him months ago intersted him very much.
Unfortunately he told me it was not written in good enough English. I
naturally am rather disappointed that my English still is too poor.
But even if my English had been correct there would have been no
possibility to place my article, Mr. Houston wrote, not saying of
course that any favourable viewpoint is prevented from publication in
the American Press. Here is what I answered him.
" --- Wheras the American papers beyond doubt are carrying a
tremendous amount of material about Germany from their regular
correspondents, and no number of interviews from all kinds of people
who recently have been in Germany, all this material, and be it even
just a report, is skillfully presented in such form which seemingly
intentially aims at being equally offensive for Hitler and his new
Government through ridiculing his deads as giving nourishment to
anti-German sentiment. Most of the recent American visitors in Germany
seem to be of the type of jews whose hatred towards Hitlerite Germany
is a fanatical one. They of course are not in a position to give a
true picture to their countrymen of what they have seen or heard. Mr.
Michael Williams, editor of The Commonweal, president of the Calvert
Association, and a member of the Committee appointed by the American
Committee on Religious Reports and Minorities to go to Germany and
investigate conditions published a report (New York Times of June
14th) of his own private visit, since the committees visit was
postponed. He claimed to have spent "nearly" two weeks in Berlin
interviewing members of the Hitler Government, leading business and
professional men, both German and American, as well as Protestant,
Catholic, and Jewish leaders. Not one single name is mentioned in his
report. "One of the most prominent German political leaders"(?) told
him that the outlawing of the Jews was a mistake comparable only to
the invasion of Belgium at the outbreak of the World War. It is plain
that such a remark, if it really was made, could be made only by a
person equally hostile towards Germany as Mr. Williams himself. Maybe
this interview took place at a concentration camp. When returning to
America these people cry: Democracy is at an end in Germany. But they
are anxiously concealing the truth that before Hitler came jewish
democratic corruption has brought Germany on the verge of Communism.
Such "Democracy" indeed is at an end now in Germany. All this
excitement about democracy being at an end and about "persecutions"
and outlawing of the German Jews who amount to but 1% of the total
German population seems very strange indeed when compared with the
calmness with which the world took the cruelty and terrorism of the
Russian Revolution which, as everyone knows, was prepared and created
by Jews and by jewish money. Too bad that Mr. James G. McDonald,
chairman of the Foreign Policy Association, can find nothing better
for him to do than to call upon all American Christians to step into
line with Rabbi Jonah B. Wise, as I see from the New York Times of
June 15th and July 11th. He too has recently been in Germany, and on
July 11th the New York Times published his address in Chautauqua, N.Y.
dealing with his visit in Germany and with the situation there as it
existed more than three months ago, namely on April 1st, at the time
of the (24 hours) anti-Jews boycott. The report in the paper was
headed by the remark: Statements that Jews are not being cruelly
treated in Germany were termed "an insult to the intelligence" by
James G. McDonald. Thus the American Public is made to believe that
Mr. McDonald is furnishing an up-to-date denial for all new reports
about improving conditions in Germany. Such is the way matters about
Germany are twisted in the American Press. Senator Wagner too has
stepped into line with Rabbi Wise as I have noticed. I regret it, but
I am convinced that many people have done so because of absolute
misinformation about present day Germany. People trying to argue in
favour of Hitlerite Germany, as Mr. Bernard Ridder tried to do, are
quickly being ridiculed as one may see from the New York Times comment
of June 14th, and I doubt if the well known Radio announcer Douglas
Brinkley who during his visit in Germany in Berlin Talkies expressed
his admiration for Hitler and this new Germany ever again will be
allowed to broadcast in America. The Berlin correspondents of the
American Press fall in line with the above mentioned general attitude
towards Germany. I suppose they have to in order to keep their jobs.
This might be easy for them, since many of them are Jews and some are
known to be hostile towards Germany long before Hitler ever appeared
in front of German Public Life. Under such circumstances it seems
plain to me that any viewpoint favourable for Germany would today not
be considered by the big American papers, since jewish influence in
the American Press is much too strong.
Dear Mr. Houston, when in the above I have given you my opinion about
American Public Opinion it was done, because I feel confident that you
will not misunderstand me. When I am arguing for Hitler and in favour
of present day Germany it is not only because of the many great deeds
of Hitler (uniting the German people, crushing Communism, successfully
fighting unemployment) but also because I positively know that the
only way to serve the purpose of German American friendship is to
bring about mutual respect between the people of the two countries. To
accomplish this one must fight for mutual respect between Opinion in
America and in Germany. German Public Opinion and the German People
are showing this respect for America. Everyone here is speaking of the
courage and leadership of Franklin D. Roosevelt in terms of
admiration. It is up to American Public Opinion to give honour where
honour is due.
So much about my letter to Mr. Houston. Now I shall give you part of
my article which I sent to Mr. Houston and which he showed to Dr.
Wilbur Thomas, the Director of the Carl Schurz Foundation, and to Dr.
Carl Ackerman, the Dean of the School of Journalism at Columbia
University. Although, as I said above it is not written in good
English, Mr. Houston as well as the two other gentlemen found the
article very interesting. Here is what I said back in May 1933.
After a short introduction I wrote: "The world war was won not with
the sword but with the pen. This is a German opinion which is shared
also by a good many Americans. Apart from now one might think on this
subject nobody today would deny the fact that the pen, if used as a
weapon, can proove to be a mightly deadly sword. If now we wish to
liquidate the world war, if we seriously endeavour to promote world
peace, to promote good relationship between the nations of the world
it seems to be absolutely essential that we should stop using war
weapons and stop tolerating warlike propaganda. In other words, we
should do all we can to prevent endangering good relationship between
countries. Claiming to be well acquainted with German political
troubles of past years as well as with the mentality of the German
People I feel that the American newspaper reader is not at all put in
a position to get a clear and true conception about Germany. Above all
it is to my mind equally silly as it is preventing the education of
the American people if the American newspaper reader is left to
believe that the Germans are a barbaric nation. The absurdity of such
statements does not make them less dangerous to good relationship
between the American and the German people. If in the following I am
dealing with the fundamental achievement and the fundamental aim of
the German national socialistic revolution I am doing it for the
benefit of a better understanding between the American and the German
people. This better understanding is the more necessary the more we
wish to prevent that a few years of animosity between the two
countries should be permitted to destroy a century old friendship
between the American and the German people. Contrary to political
custom Hitler said in his address to the masses on the Tempelhof field
on May 1st that he is not going to tell the workman how important for
the Nation the labourman and his work are, and turn around and speak
to the intelligent class of people as if to the cream of the Nation,
and turn around again and speak to the peasant telling him how
valuable he is. On the contrary he is going to demonstrate to one
class of people the importance and the value of the other. This
attitude is not only wise, but it also reveals the mystery of this
sudden sense of unity that has come over the German people. When I am
going to apply the same methods while writing to America about
Germany, it is because making one people understand and respect
another people might equally well proove to be the best method to
bring about the much longed for mutual understanding between the
nations of the world.
The German national socialistic revolution beginning on January 30th,
still in full swing today, and going to be carried out furthermore for
an indefinite time to come is a revolution of mind. It is a revolution
of the national mind as well as of the social mind of the people. Only
a short time ago American Correspondents and travelling newspapermen
used to report from Germany that the growing of the Hitlerite Party
was the outcome of general dissatisfaction and hardship. If this had
been the case, if Hitler had gained support merely on the ground of
promising the same bread and work with all of his
(page missing)
possibility of such development before taking place in Germany, Hitler
succeeded in changing the minds of his followers from the Communist
rank and file. They no more are Communists, but Nationalsocialists.
They have killed in themselves that hatred they felt towards the rich
and towards the white-collar-man, in general to an equal extent as
this white-collar-man and this rich man have been made to no more look
down upon the workman or anybody doing manual labour. It is true, not
all of Germany has turned to nationalsocialism. However while for this
very reason Hitlers revolution still is in full swing, and will be
carried out furthermore until such time when this final aim is
reached, a new election, if held today, might well show an increase of
the nationalsocialsit vote from 17.5 million on March 5th to close to
30 million out of a total electorate of about 44 million votes.
Hitlers revolution of mind, as I have tried to explain it, in no way
is representing a danger to world peace, and again it seems strange
that Hitlers assurances to keep peace frequently are ignored in
reports printed in the foreign Press. As impressive as this German
revolution of mind might be to the foreign observer who knows Germany
and the German people it is only reasonable that it cannot be equally
impressive to those Americans who not yet have had a chance to visit
and get acquainted with Germany. After all, this new German spirit is
nothing new to us in America. Republicans and Democrats, both call it
the true democratic spirit. The workman in America always has been as
much respected as the white-collar-man, and our boys have long been
working their way through College through manual labour. However, for
this very reason it seems to me that no people is better equipped
mentally to understand this new Germany and its leader than the
American people.
If when writing about the Germany nationalsocialistic revolution I
would fail to touch the jewish problem in Germany the reader indeed
would miss an important explanation to a new German attitude which has
created worldwide interest and partly even new animosity. Endeavouring
to from and impartial point of view seek an explanation for this
change in Germany one must realize two outstanding facts. One is that
the percentage of Jews in Germany indeed is exceptionally small and
the other is that this small percentage in postwar years has enjoyed
an undue large share of public influence. While moreover a great many
Jewish names are connected with all kinds of affairs of administrative
corruption of postwar Germany thus making it all the easier for Hitler
and his followers to gain countrywide support when calling for a
radical reduction of the Jewish influence, it is wrong to regard this
attitude as an affront to the Jewish religion. This it is not. Instead
this attitude is directed against a postwar political system which has
discredited the marxistic parties in Germany and the Jews, since many
of them have played such prominent part in cooperation with those
parties and the many cases of illoyalty and dishonesty they have been
connected with. When I said above that the small percentage of Jews in
Germany in postwar years so far have enjoyed an undue large share of
public influence, this was possible because of their close cooperation
with the marxistic parties. In other words it was not superior ability
which entitled them to such share but political pull. Until recently
conditions in Germany indeed were of such kind that many a Christian
student would cease studying, since he had to realize that his road of
future was blocked by political interests, whereas the jewish student
would keep on studying knowing perfectly well that his father,
although perhaps a businessman and not a politician, nevertheless had
sufficient political pull to pave his way. In such development the new
Germany sees a controlling increase of the Jewish element in the field
of education which the Jewish population percentage in Germany does
not justify. Hand in hand with this development the possibility of
marrying has thus been made so much easier for the young Jewish
generation, which fact in turning no doubt is contributing to
increasing the population percentage of the German Jews to the
disadvantage of the other confessions. Such developments are of no
little importance for Germany, and while today under the Hitler
Government a radical change is being made this radicalism is not
directed against each single Jewish citizen. On the contrary the form
in which the new laws are being applied show a liberal spirit and
reveal the truth that the attitude of Hitler Germany towards this
Jewish problem ought to correctly be regarded as directed against a
political system of corruption with which the German Jews
unfortunately so impressively have identified themselves."
So much from my article. I hope I have put it clear enough to realize
that the Jewish problem in Germany is a question of life or death of
the German race. If such development as was tolerated before Hitler
came should be permitted to continue it should be obvious for everyone
that in the course of time the face of the German population would
change considerably. Germany, as you know, has a population of 66
million people. Among these 66 million are but about 600,000 Jewish
citizen. Under those circumstances as described above this small
percentage in the course of time could increase rapidly because of
conditions of life being more protected against all hardship,
marriages being made easier because of professional and business
protection which safeguard in turn enables the Jewish woman to give
birth to children. Moreover it should be easy to realize that
favouring the Jewish element to such an extent as was done before
Hitler came necessarily leads to giving away the top positions in
Government, industry, and education to Jews, while on the other hand
the German race of Protestant and Catholic confession is being pushed
back into positions of no influence which in turn in the course of
time will make them unable to lead their own country because of being
deprived the necessary educational training in matters of
administration, big business, and education. At the same time their
population percentage of now 99% is rapidly decreasing because of the
German woman through hardship of life and uncertainty because of the
German woman through hardship of life and uncertainty of the husbands
future being unable to give birth to children.
Dear Kenneth, my English might be very poor, but I hope you get what I
am trying to explain. I hope you see that Hitlers anti-Semitism is not
directed against the Jewish religion nor against each single Jew. No
Jewish citizen here is being molested. News to the contrary are lies
and nonsense. Such news naturally are being spread by Jews, since the
Jews realize very well, as the newspaper "Jewish Chronicle" published
in South Afrika recently admitted, that the Jewish fight for world
control through the Hitler Revolution in Germany has received a
setback of 100 years of strenuous work. The Jewish citizen in Germany
shall continue to enjoy a peaceful living as he did before Hitler came
with the only exception that he shall enjoy no influence beyond the
frame of his own population percentage. In the interest of the German
race I do not hesitate to call such attitude, as queer as it might
seem to you, a "democratic persecution" and I regard it as very sound.
The Jewish citizen who does not like such democratic persecution might
leave the country and immigrate somewhere else. And when I say
immigrate somewhere else you perhaps will realize how harmful it was
and still is that the USA for such a long time had kept its doors open
especially at times of business prosperity. In America the Jew saw a
vast country with tremendous resources and no end of business
possibilities. But he had no intention to go out and work. You will
find no Jew being busy as farmer. No, such common work is good enough
for the children and grandchildren of the Christian pilgrims of
German, French and English birth who alone have built up the country
which is called the United States. The Jew was doing the business of
his own race, namely lending out money and waiting in his armchair for
the return. Thus he gradually got hold of this and that business
undertaking, thus he gradually got hold of the entire country. There
is today no country in the whole world with a more powerful influence
of the Jewish element except perhaps England, than the USA. The fact
that such a powerful Christian businessman as Henry Fold is flatly
denying everything he said in his book against the Jews speaks for
itself. The German element among the American population used to have
a great influence in the country. And when I recall the name of
Steuben do you doubt that such influence was for the benefit of the
country? Where are the Steubens of today? Dont tell me there are none.
That is not correct. But it is true that in the course of time the
German American element has been degraded to the influence of a
butcher and grooceryshopowner. Where there are exceptions you will
possibly find that the exception is a Jew. The USA was not governed by
Washington but by Wall Street. Franklin D. Roosevelt is the first
President to challenge this. It remains to be seen if the power he has
been given is sufficient for the success. You may be absolutely sure
that Washington and Berlin are in perfect accord although this
sometimes does not seem so. Washington is not fighting against Hitler,
but instead is watching Hitlers experiment with the Jewish problem
with very keen interest knowing perfectly well that this experiment
might lead the whole world. Watch Ireland, watch the increase of
fashism in England, watch the change in France that will come,
remember the American Postmaster Generals order forbidding anti-German
boycottstamps on the back of envelopes.
October 2nd 1933.
Dear Kenneth: Not until today could I find time to continue this
letter, and I must admit that since your last letter arrived which
again was full of insulting remarks about Adolf Hitler I feel little
inclined to do so. I must state that you have changed greatly. You
were much more grown-up when in May 1932 you left us. I dont know
whose influence it is and I dont care. I only know that while you were
with us you grew accustomed to argue in a serious way seeking effect
only through the sincerety of your arguement and not through a strong
language. The letter method is used only by children and hysteric
women and men. If I wanted to argue with you on the basis of your last
letter I indeed could easily come back and picture a great many
Americans who have been making an ass of themselves and still are
making an ass of themselves, and I could speak much more convincing,
since I know America, whereas you in your highhatted ignorance are
adopting nothing but what jewish reporters publish and you fall for
any line of talk as long as the lies are presented in a somewhat
plausible form. You need not boast about not having Nationalsozialism
in America. It is quite doubtful if such is an advantage, and the fact
that the American Democratic system given to the country by men who
justfully can be called great Americans has grown into a system of
rotten corruption might bring about American Nationalsozialism quicker
than you think. Any system of government stands and falls with its
leaders. Are the leaders rotten the system will turn to be rotten too.
Such was the case in Germany, and such might be the case in America
too. Moreover America some day might be happy to turn to
Nationalsozialism instead of turning to Communism. However as long as
there are many of young Americans thinking the way you do, namely from
one mooving picture to another I see great trouble ahead for the
country, trouble which will be far more serious than the Russian
revolution was. When in face of your calling us being hypnotized I
answer you that I am a great admirer of Adolf Hitler I am doing so in
order to warn you to remain as narrowminded as you now are. You never
will hear the truth about present day Germany, for America at present
is a jewish country. Jewish influence is dominating, and sooner or
later the American aryans will realize what they shall have to fight
for. Nationalsozialism would never come to America from Germany but
from the aryan population in America and such will bring about a
rebirth of Washingtons United States. Why cry about the poor little
children who are called upon to join Hitlers junior leagues, when they
themselves are crazy to do so. Little Jobi has joined and he is
tickeled to death about it. Why throw out your chest and condemn
militarism when there is no country on the face of the earth more
militaristic than the United States? Or do you deny that American boys
in their small years even are receiving military training? Is such a
sign that America intends to go to war? You say: No. Well, I answer
you, Germany wont either. A picture of Hindenburg and Hitler published
in an American paper was called: A business conference between H. and
H., whereas truly it was a picture of the celebration of the battle of
Tannenberg. Such shows how much even in matters of minor importance
American newspapers are making an ass of themselves. Even if you dont
like it, Adolf Hitler is one of the greatest and at the same time one
of the most modest men Germany has ever had. Future will show that I
am right. Goodbye now, and dont think that I am sore, I am just a
little disappointed in you.
Hearty greetings,
neptune3
>
>I was under the impression that fascism and communism were both
>socialists in nature. Both wish to expand gov't, and gov't trait is to
>limit my freedoms, so................or are you an intellectual?
>The word game is so difficult to play. Do you know how?
Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"There were millions and millions of workmen who began by being
hostile to the Social Democratic Party; but their defences were
repeatedly stormed and finally had to surrender. Yet this defeat was
due to the stupidity of the bourgeois parties, who had opposed every
demand put forward by the working class. The short-sighted refusal to
making an effort towards improving labour conditions, the refusal to
adopt measures which would insure the workmen in case of accidents in
the factories, the refusal to forbid child labour, the refusal to
consider protective measures for female workers, especially expectant
mothers--all this was of assistance to the Social Democratic leaders,
who were thankful for every opportunity which they could exploit for
forcing the masses into their net. Our bourgeois parties can never
repair the damage that resulted from the mistake that was made. For
they sowed the seeds of hatred when they opposed all efforts at social
reform. And thus they gave, at least, apparent grounds to justify the
claim put forward by the Social Democrats--namely that they alone
stand up for the interest of the working class.
"And this became the principle ground for the moral
justification of the actual existance of the Trades Unions, so that
the labour organizations became from that time onwards the chief
political recruiting ground to swell the ranks of the Social
Democratic Party."
"the Jew seized upon the manifold possiblities which the
situation offered him for the future. While on the one hand he
organized capitalistic methods of exploitation to their ultimate
degree of efficiency, he curried favour with the victims of his policy
and his power and in a short while became the leader of their struggle
against himself. 'Against himself' is here only a figurative way of
speaking; for this 'Great Master of Lies' knows how to appear in the
guise of the innocent and throw the guilt on others. Since he had the
impudence to take a personal lead among the masses, they never for a
moment suspected that they were falling prey to one of the most
infamous deceits ever practiced. And yet that is what it actually
was."
neptune3
<Aldri...@hormelqwest.net> wrote:
>
>
>neptune3 wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 21:16:49 GMT, TomAldrich
>> <Aldri...@hormelqwest.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >So we had some cute story about the S.A. ,now after all was said and done
>> >what hppened to this wonderful S.A. that Gobbels spoke so highly of.
>> >
>> The purpose of the S.A. was to protect National Socialism from
>> violent enemies before it came to power. After they were in power they
>> weren't that necessary. After that they were something along the lines
>> of the boy scouts. A club for keeping fit and believing in their
>> ideals.
>
>This has got to be one of the most looney tunes answer I've seen, I'm not even
>going to bother with the correct answer. I'll let you live in your dillussion.
>
It was absolutely correct. Maybe the poster was referring to Roehm
but that is not what he asked.
Heinrich Himmler, Reichsfuhrer SS and head
of the Gestapo said in a speech in 1936 on the
subect of homosexuality and execution of Ernst Rohm (which he had
engineered): "Two years ago...when it became necessary, we
did not scruple to strike this plague with death, even within our own
ranks." Himmler closed with these words: "Just as we today have gone
back to
the ancient Germanic view on the question of marriage mixing different
races, so too in our judgement of homosexuality, a symptom of
degeneracy
which could destroy our race, we must return to the guiding Nordic
principle: extermination of degenerates"
neptune3
buy a meal in a restaurant in Angouleme. We did buy some canned goods,
bread and wine. We sit by the roadside and eat our bread and sardines
and drink a light red wine. As we sit and eat, a young man comes along
in a gray suit with no hat and a large bundle over his shoulder.
Seeing us sitting next to our car and eating so comfortably, he sits
down in the grass on the other side of the road and stares at us.
After a while I call over to him in French: "Are you hungry?" He
eagerly says yes, and comes on over. I look at him in some surprise as
my companion slices some bread and opens a can of sardines and I open
a small bottle of wine for him. He is of average height and slender,
somewhat ragged, but wearing a good pair of shoes. He is tanned by the
sun and has dark black, wavy hair. But that is not all that strikes
me-the shape of his face is unusual. His eyebrows, his lips, his nose
make me wonder where this refugee comes from. At first I say nothing,
and he speaks vaguely. He is going to a farmer to look for work, he
has no money any longer and comes from Paris. He fled from the
Germans. He sits and looks toward the sun. I quietly say to my
companion in German: "Is the boy from the colonies? Look at his face."
His mouth drops and he runs his hand over his eyes as if he were
trying to wipe away some ghostly phenomenon. "You are German?", he
asks in German.
Now we are surprised. I answer cautiously: "Yes, we are German," but
say no more. After a while my comrade asks: "Where are you from?" The
lad answers with an unmistakable accent that proves the truth of his
words: "Dresden." He continues immediately: "You still have a car?
Didn't they seize it? Didn't they lock you up?" We both look at him in
astonishment. We suddenly realize that he is an émigré German Jew, and
that he thinks we too are émigré German Jews. We give each other a
quick glance and are instantly agreed. We will not tell him who we
are. We will take advantage of the fact that we are in civilian
clothing and are driving a French car. I say hesitantly: "No, they did
not catch us." The young man fishes a sardine out of the can and puts
it on a slice of bread. He drinks some wine and, with his mouth full
says: "You are clever boys." We both nod. We are willing to admit that
we are clever boys.
We have a lively conversation with the young man, at the beginning of
which we have to dodge his questions. He wants to know what sort of
passports we have, how we got out of Paris, why we had not been
arrested by the Paris police, why the French army had not seized our
car, whether we are going to Spain, whether we believe the Germans
would let us through, whether we think the Spaniards will let us cross
the border. All this he asks quickly and curiously.
I put an end to his chatter by saying that clever boys have to keep
silent, or else they would not be clever. That enlightens him somewhat
and we cautiously begin asking questions. How are things going for
him? Ah, not well at all. Then he begins a long self-history, full of
complaints and self-pity.
He left Germany with his parents in 1934. His father had an antique
shop in Dresden and moved it to Paris. The antique business did not go
well in Paris. Why not? First, there were too many antique shops in
Paris, and second the people in Paris understood too much about
antiques. He looked at us to let us know that it was to his father's
advantage that people in Dresden knew less about antiques than people
in Paris. After learning this, his parents moved the business to
London, but he, the son, stayed in Paris.
What did you learn to do?
Learn to do? Nothing. I worked for a printing firm.
Next he shows us his passport, his German passport, probably in the
hope that we would do the same. The passport was issued in 1934 and
has expired. I ask him: Couldn't you become a French citizen? He nods,
still chewing away, and says that he had several chances to become a
French citizen. Why didn't he do it? He smiles at us and says: "Then I
would have had to serve in the army. I might be dead by now, since one
can't always shirk." My comrade says: "I don't completely understand
you. You would have had a new fatherland, after all. Or did they want
to send you to the Foreign Legion?"
He makes a contemptuous gesture. "No, I could join the regular army,
If I volunteered, I would immediately become a French citizen. I could
have joined the Foreign Legion at any time. But you know, a soldier is
a soldier. It made no sense." "Well," I say, "things apparently did
not go well for you in Paris. Why didn't you move with your parents to
London?"
"You don't seem to know very much," he answers. "Our friends in London
told me that if I went to England, I would have to serve in the army
there too. I would have had to be a soldier, and didn't want to do
that."
"Hold on, though," I say, and look for a way to speak cautiously so as
not to make the young lad suspicious. "If you live in France or
England and want to stay there, if you enjoy all the benefits of the
country, when you want to have all the advantages, you have to
understand that these countries may want you to help defend their
borders."
He replies in an annoyed tone: "What do you think about me? I have no
borders to defend. I am not French, I am not English, I am not German,
I am a Jew."
My comrade says: "OK, but what was the trouble in Paris? You said that
things had not gone well."
The young lad picks up a stone and tosses it across the road. "You
seem to have had things good. Or weren't you in Paris when things fell
apart?"
We shake our heads to indicate that we had not been in Paris.
"You probably were hiding in the countryside. Well, I'll stop asking
questions. You can take me along for a while. Maybe you can help me
out a bit, since you seem to have a lot of money. I could live a good
life for a while after the miseries of Paris."
Now he speaks softly, as if the wheat and the grass around us had
ears. "These French are nasty. Things were OK when we got to Paris.
But it got worse, and the other workers in the printing firm were
unfriendly from the start. I always said that 'France is the land of
human rights,' and they laughed and said 'France is the land of the
French. You are taking someone else's job. You are here only because
the owner is a Jew.' People in Germany always told me that there was
no anti-Semitism in France. But they always pestered me and the
bureaucrats were always after me when they found out that I did not
want to be a soldier. I lived like a dog. And when the Germans
attacked they hauled me out of bed early in the morning and locked me
up. There were thousands and thousands of our people and it was all
over with jobs and freedom, and only those who volunteered for the
Foreign Legion were released. I said I would join the regular army,
but had to be trained first. I couldn't join the war before that. I
told myself that by that time the war would be over and the French
would be in Berlin. But they probably saw through me and said: 'No,
little Jew, we can no longer use you in the regular French army.' I
could not sleep at night with everyone around me howling that they
wanted to talk with Minister Mandel. And the guards spit and said
tough luck.
I no longer knew if it was Thursday or Monday, or how long we had been
there. We did not know much about what was happening outside, only
that the Germans were coming closer. Many of us negotiated and begged
and cried to the guards that they should let us out, but they were
tough chaps, these guards. They always ran their finger across the
neck to show us that the Germans would hang us all. We heard the
guards calling every two hours during the night and I woke up every
time.
One night I wake up. The guards aren't shouting, and it is quiet. All
of our people are sleeping, but I stand up. I can see everything,
since there are a few lights. The rest are laying on their stomachs or
backs or sides and snoring. I go to the door and open it a bit. I can
do that, since the bathroom is just outside. But when I open the door,
I see that there are no more guards, and that the gate is open. I go
back quietly, get my sack and tie it shut and leave the camp and the
city. I do not talk with anyone, or they might catch us all again.
I keep going, and ride a stretch on a truck with some soldiers. I said
I was a recruit and was ordered to go to Bordeaux. Later they figure
out it was untrue and kick me off. I laugh and kept going. And now you
will take me along for a while, yes? Tell me where you were hiding
when all of us were arrested in Paris. You will take me along, yes?"
Now he goes over to clean his knife in the grass. He see the car's
radiator, asks what kind of car it is, and steps back. I know that he
has seen the small WH on the car. He closes his knife, looks past and
speaks into the air: "Thanks" and then softly, "So that's why." He
picks up his sack, crosses the road and slowly puts one foot in front
of the other, leaving a small dust cloud behind him that drifts over a
path."
neptune3
>Top Post Only:
>What was Goebbels job title?
>And you often use his material!
>
Here are parts of a speech by Dr. Joseph Goebbels, delivered in
Nuernberg in 1934. The ending of this speech is in the film Triumph of
the Will.
"It is difficult to define the concept of propaganda thoroughly and
precisely. This is especially true since in past decades it was
subject to unfavorable definitions, particularly as the enemy defined
it with regards to us Germans. First, then, we must defend it. Those
abroad sometimes claim that in the past we Germans were particularly
good in this area, but that unfortunately is not consistent with the
facts. We learned this all too clearly during the World War. While the
enemy states produced unprecedented atrocity propaganda aimed at
Germany throughout the whole world, we did nothing and were completely
defenseless against it. Only when enemy foreign propaganda had nearly
won over the greater part of the neutral states did the German
government begin to sense the enormous power of propaganda. It was too
late. Just as we were militarily and economically unprepared for the
war, so too with propaganda. We lost the
war in this area more than in any other.
The cleverest trick used in propaganda against Germany during the war
was to accuse Germany of what our enemies themselves were doing. Even
today large parts of world opinion are convinced that the typical
characteristics of German propaganda are lying, crudeness, reversing
the facts and the like. One needs only to remember the stories that
were spread throughout the world at the beginning of the war about
German soldiers chopping off children's hands and crucifying women to
realize that Germany then was a defenseless victim of this campaign of
calumny. It neither had nor used any means of defense.
The concept of propaganda has undergone a fundamental transformation,
particularly as the result of political practice in Germany.
Throughout the world today, people are beginning to see that a modern
state, whether democratic or authoritarian, cannot withstand the
subterranean forces of anarchy and chaos without propaganda. It is not
only a matter of doing the right thing; the people must understand
that the right thing is the right thing. Propaganda includes
everything that helps the people to realize this.
Political propaganda in principle is active and revolutionary. It is
aimed at the broad masses. It speaks the language of the people
because it wants to be understood by the people. Its task is the
highest creative art of putting sometimes complicated events and facts
in a way simple enough to be understood by the man on the street. Its
foundation is that there is nothing the people cannot understand,
rather things must be put in a way that they can understand. It is a
question of making it clear to him by using the proper approach,
evidence and language.
Propaganda is a means to an end. Its purpose is to lead the people to
an understanding that will allow them to willingly and without
internal resistance devote themselves to the tasks and goals of a
superior leadership. If propaganda is to succeed, it must know what it
wants. It must keep a clear and firm goal in mind, and seek the
appropriate means and methods to reach that goal. Propaganda as such
is neither good nor evil. Its moral value is determined by the the
goals it seeks."
"Each propaganda had a direction. The quality of this direction
determines whether propaganda has a positive or negative effect. Good
propaganda does not need to lie, indeed it may not lie. It has no
reason to fear the truth. It is a mistake to believe that people
cannot take the truth. They can. It is only a matter of presenting the
truth to people in a way that they will be able to understand. A
propaganda that lies proves that it has a bad cause. It cannot be
successful in the long run. A good propaganda will always come along
that serves a good cause. But propaganda is still necessary if a good
cause is to succeed. A good idea does not win simply because it is
good. It must be presented properly if it is to win. But a good idea
is itself the best propaganda. Such propaganda is successful without
being obnoxious. It depends on its nature, not its methods. It works
without being noticed. Its goals are inherent in its nature. Since it
is almost invisible, it is effective and powerful. A good cause will
lose to a bad one if it depends only on its rightness, while the other
side uses the methods of influencing the masses. We are for example
convinced that we fought the war for a good cause, but that was not
enough. The world should also have known that our cause was good.
However, we lacked the effective means of mass propaganda to make that
clear to the world. Marxism certainly did not fight for great ideals.
Despite that, in November 1918 it overcame Kaiser, Reich and the army
because it was superior in the art of mass propaganda.
National Socialism learned from these two examples. It drew the
correct practical conclusions from that knowledges. The ideal of a
socialist national community did not remain mere theory with us, but
became living reality in the thoughts and feelings of 67 million
Germans. Our propaganda of word and deed created the conditions for
that. Mastering them kept National Socialism from the danger of
remaining the dream and longing of a few thousand. Through propaganda,
it became hard, steely everyday reality."
"Marxism could not be eliminated by a government decision. Its
elimination was the end result of a process that began in the people.
But that was only possible because our propaganda had shown people
that Marxism was a danger to both the state and society. The positive
national discipline of the German press would never have been possible
without the compete elimination of the influence of the liberal-Jewish
press. That happened only because of the years-long work of our
propaganda. Today particularism in Germany is something of the past.
The fact that it was eliminated by a strong central idea of the Reich
is no accident, rather depended on psychological foundations that were
established by our propaganda.
Or consider economic policy. Does anyone believe that the idea of
class struggle could have been eliminated only by a law? Is it not
rather the fact that the seeds we sowed in a hundred thousand meetings
resulted in a new socialist structure of labor? Today employers and
workers stand together in the Labor Front. The Law on National Labor
is the foundation of our economic thinking, realizing itself more and
more. Are not these social achievements the result of the long and
tireless labor of thousands of speakers?"
"We could eliminate the Jewish danger in our culture because the
people had recognized it as the result of our propaganda. Major
cultural achievements such as the unique "Kraft durch Freude" are
possible only with the powerful support of the people. The
prerequisite was and is propaganda, which here too creates and
maintains the connection to the people.
The Winter Relief last year raised about 350 million Marks. This was
not the result of taxation, rather many gifts of every amount.
Everyone gave freely and gladly, many of whom in the past had done
nothing in the face of similar need. Why? Because a broad propaganda
using every modern means presented the whole nation with the need of
this program of social assistance.
45 million Reich Marks of goods and services were provided. 85 million
Reich Marks worth of fuel were distributed. 130 million Reich Marks
worth of food were given out. Ten million Reich Marks worth of meals
were provided, and 70 million Reich Marks worth of clothing.
Some of these achievements were the result of donations in kind,
others the result of cash donations. Street collections, donations of
a part of paychecks, contributions from companies, and gifts
subtracted from bank accounts resulted in cash totaling 184 million
Reich Marks. 24 million marks alone were the result of "One Dish
Sundays." The Reich itself added 15 million marks to the
contributions of the people. The railway system provided reduced or
free shipping with a value of 14 million Marks.
Of our population of 65,595,000, 16,511,00 were assisted by the Winter
Relief. There were 150,000 volunteers. There were only 4,474 paid
workers, of whom 4,144 were in the 34 Gaue and 330 in the Reich
headquarters.
Propaganda and education prepared the way for the largest social
assistance program in history. They were the foundation. Their success
was that, over a long winter, no one in Germany went hungry or was
cold.
Over 40 million people approved of the Führer's decision to leave the
League of Nations on 12 November 1933. That gave him the ability to
speak to the world in the name of the nation, defending honor, peace
and equality as the national ideals of the German people. The issues
of disarmament were put on firm and clear foundations. Once again,
propaganda was the foundation for the nation's unity on 12 November,
and therefore of the freedom of action that the Führer had.
Each situation brings new challenges. And each task requires the
support of the people, which can only be gained by untiring propaganda
that brings the broad masses knowledge and clarity. No area of public
life can do without it. It is the never resting force behind public
opinion. It must maintain an unbroken relationship between leadership
and people. Every means of technology must be put in its service; the
goal is to form the mass will and to give it meaning, purpose and
goals that will enable us to learn from past failures and mistakes and
ensure that the lead National Socialist strength has given us over
other nations will never again be lost.
May the bright flame of our enthusiasm never fade. It alone gives
light and warmth to the creative art of modern political propaganda.
Its roots are in the people. The movement gives it direction and
drive. The state can only provide it with the new, wide-ranging
technical means. Only a living relationship between people, movement
and state can guarantee that the creative art of propaganda, which he
have made ourselves the world's master, will never sink into
bureaucracy and official narrow-mindedness.
Creative people made it and put it in the service of our movement. We
must have creative people who can use the means of the state in its
service.
It is also a function of the modern state. Its reach is the firm
ground on which it must stand. It rises from the depths of the people,
and must always return to the people to find its roots and strength.
It may be good to have power based on weapons. It is better and longer
lasting, however, to win and hold the heart of a nation."
neptune3
>
>No, even in slave nations people can starve. It can be more slowly
>than other places, or they may not starve until there at least 40
>years old! Wow. Hey thanks for pointing such things out to US.
Of course people could also starve with Capitalism. No matter how
bad any other system is, what could be worse than having pure
Capitalism and not having a job?
>
>Wow. Hey thanks, again!
>So where is the nation that tells its people "we are doing as much bad
>as possible for you"?
All nations say that. In Germany that is what they did.
On April 10, 1938 the Germans voted for or against Hitler. 99% of
them voted for Hitler. Here are some quotes from a pamphet urging them
to vote for Hitler:
Do you remember the state of Germany and the German people in the days
before the aged Reich President von Hindenburg chose Adolf Hitler and
his party as the last hope of saving Germany from certain political,
social and economic collapse that would lead to chaos? Tens of
thousands of factories had closed their gates. Millions of workers and
employees lost their jobs and were thrown ruthlessly into the gray
misery of mass unemployment. There seemed no way out...
By the end of 1933, 2 million citizens had jobs again. By September
1936, the number of unemployed had fallen beneath a million. By 1937
unemployment had vanished...
One of the foundations of National Socialism is the knowledge that
only work creates value and prosperity...
But not only the dreadful misery before 1933 reduced the desire of
countless Germans to have children. Crass egotism and materialism also
played a role. The System Era saw having children as foolish and
backward. The transformation that has occurred is clear in the rising
German birth rate...
The National Socialist state gives major tax reductions to fathers for
each child. Families with three or more children receive payments of
10 and 20 marks monthly. By the end of 1937, 510,000 children were
receiving such support...
By the end of 1937, 252,000 mothers had received free vacations...
The Winterhilfswerk is the most beautiful expression of the new German
people's community. It is not the work of a small group of rich
people. No, each German, all of us, rich and poor, manual laborers,
farmers and city-dwellers cooperate in fulfilling the Führer's will:
No German may be hungry or cold!
One does not know whom to admire more: the cheerful willingness of
those who collect, or the rising amount of the gifts, to which even
the poorest contribute their share. The success of the
Winterhilfswerk, written permanently into the law of 1 December 1936,
demonstrates the efforts of the entire German nation. Gifts of money
alone totaled over 920 million marks during the four winters from
1933/34 to 1936/37. An additional 570 million marks of goods were
contributed. 50,000 freight cars alone would have been needed for the
potatoes contributed in the past years. The three million meters of
clothing given out by the WHW would stretch from Berlin to the Middle
East. The two million kilograms of coal would form a wall ten meters
high around all of Germany. These few examples, and more could be
given, prove the strength of the German people's will to be active
socialists..
Another sign of this socialism is the entirely different status of the
German worker in factories. The social honor of each working German is
guaranteed by law. The state's representatives ensure that exploiting
workers is impossible. The legal working conditions correspond to
National Socialism's high opinion of work. Workers have a right to a
vacation and for paid holidays, even hourly and temporary workers.
There is nothing like this elsewhere in the world.
The dignity of labor is evidenced by improvements in the appearance of
the work place. Wherever one looks in Germany, ugly dark buildings are
vanishing. The "Beauty of Labor" movement in today's Germany is not
empty talk or an impossible demand, but living reality. Large sums
that formerly would have been wasted in strikes and lockouts have been
used since 1933 to improve work places. 23,000 places have been
transformed form soulless drudgery to pleasant places to work. 6,000
factory courtyards now offer space for real relaxation, which was not
true in the past. 17,000 canteens and lounges, 13,000 shower and
changing rooms have been transformed. The dirtier the work, the
cleaner the workers. More than 800 community buildings and 1200 sport
facilities , including over 200 swimming pools, have been established.
The crew quarters in over 3500 ships have also been improved.
The NS Society Kraft durch Freude brings cheer and pleasure to
workplaces through concerts and art exhibits. The art exhibits alone
introduced more than 2,5 million workers to the creations of true
German art. Just five years ago, it was obvious that the great works
of German culture belonged to a small group of the upper class.
Besides the factory concerns and art exhibitions, the NS Society Kraft
durch Freude uses theatrical performances, other concerts, singing and
musical groups to introduce the creations of German art to every
working German. 22 million citizens have attended theatrical
performances..
Of no less importance is the KdF's vacation program. Earlier, German
workers did not know what to do with their, at best, five days of
annual vacation. They could not visit the beauties of the German
landscape, much less travel abroad. The NS Society Kraft durch Freude
gave German workers the possibility of vacationing at the beach or in
the mountains, or to explore the homeland. Over 20 million have
participated in KdF trips since 1934. That is more than a quarter of
Germany's population. 19 million citizens participated in 60,000
vacation trips at home. Hand to hand, they would stretch from Berlin
to Tokyo. KdF trains have traveled 2,160,000 kilometers, or 54 times
around the world. The nine large KdF cruise ships have covered a
distance equal to twice the distance from the earth to the moon. They
have carried German workers to Madeira, Italy and Norway, broadening
their horizons and giving them unforgettable experiences. Three
additional ships will be added the KdF's own fleet of four. A KdF
resort is being built on the island of Rügen. It will not be the only
one. A series of other vacation and spa resorts will be built. They
will fulfill the Führer's wishes at the start of the NS Society Kraft
durch Freude: to lead a cheerful, creative and strong people to
success in the world.
The goal of bringing German culture to the entire German people,
regardless of their income, is especially clear with the German radio.
Thanks to the People's Radio Set, a solid, inexpensive and capable
receiver, the number of radio listeners has risen from around 4
million in 1932 to 9.1 million today. The un-German programming of the
System Era has been transformed by National Socialism. Now radio
acquaints the German people with the work of their great masters of
music and literature. Alongside these artistic programs, the
entertaining programming provides for the relaxation of hard-working
people.
Clear proof for the rising prosperity of the German people is provided
by the growing consumption of foodstuffs and luxury items of every
variety. During the prewar year 1913, only a little more than 2.9
million tons of meat were consumed. In 1937, that figure had risen to
3.7 million, up about 5% from 1932. Thanks to the elimination of
unemployment, bread consumption increased by about 10%, sugar by 15%.
Butter consumption rose from 420,000 to 519,000 tons. Milk production,
both for drinking and for making butter and cheese, rose from 23.5 to
25.4 billion liters from 1932 to 1937. Coffee consumption rose from
104,000 to 140,000 tons. Beer consumption has risen from 3.3 to 4.4
billion liters. That is an increase of about 3 billion glasses of
beer...
The growing prosperity and rising consumption of foodstuffs and luxury
items required hard work. A people can only consume what it produces.
In the face of this obvious truth, which however only became clear to
us after 1933, all the parliamentary resolutions, all the decisions of
international conferences and the demands of the international unions
become silly talk. The German people have proved that by our own work.
Germany has worked untiringly since 1933, producing itself the goods
it needs to improve its standard of living.
The rising production in all areas, which has never before been seen,
is the fruit of our work. The foundation of our life is agriculture,
whose task is to guarantee that the nation is fed. When the Führer
took power, agriculture was in a ruinous state. Officers of the court
were regular visitors at German farms. The animals and the harvest
were seized ruthlessly because taxes and interests had risen to
impossible levels that German soil could not meet. Forced auctions
drove tens of thousands of German farmers from their land. Desperation
prevailed in the villages. As a result of the desperate situation,
agriculture could not ensure the feeding of the German nation. The
ghost of hunger threatened.
Here too the Führer set to work immediately. Interest and taxes were
lowered, and the German soil was freed from usurious capital. Between
1927 and 1931, German agricultural debt rose by 2,9 billion marks.
From 1933 to 1936, it fell by 800 million marks. The interest burden,
which was over a billion marks in 1931/32, was reduced by National
Socialist actions to 630 million marks. The crowning achievement was
the creation of the Reich Inherited Farm Law, which guaranteed that
the German family farm will always remain the wellspring of the
nation...
Just as for farmers and agricultural workers, the urban population is
also being cared for. Although more than enough willing and able
workers were available in 1932, and although the housing need was
certainly great, the government put workers on the dole and built only
141,265 dwellings. This was an area in which the need for new jobs was
particularly clear. Even in 1933, the number of new dwellings rose to
178,000, with particular attention being given to small and mid-sized
units for those with limited incomes. This number grew year by year,
reaching 340,000 dwellings in 1937, double the number of 1932. In all,
National Socialist has built more than 1.4 million new, and above all
healthy and affordable, dwellings for the German people since 1933.
This is enough to house the entire population of Berlin...
Growing prosperity and production led to a growth in traffic. The
entirely neglected German highway system had to be repaired and
expanded. 40,000 kilometers of highway have been repaired since 1933.
That is enough to go all the way around the world! Then there are the
Reich Autobahns, the most splendid construction project in the world.
2,000 kilometers were open to traffic by the end of 1937. 1,000
kilometers more will be added yearly, until Germany has a highway
network unique in all the world.
Automobile production has reached a level that no one would have
thought possible a few years ago.
The number of motor vehicles in Germany has doubled, exceeding the 3
million mark in 1937. Thanks to the growing prosperity, broad circles
of our nation can now afford a car. 137,141 of the new vehicles in
1937, well over half, were purchased by workers and employees. 30,015
workers and employees were able to buy a car the previous year. Cars
are becoming both better and cheaper. The increase in cars will be
even more striking when the Volkswagen comes on the market. Enormous
factories are even now being built. The best proof for the quality and
good pricing of German cars is the fact that automobile exports have
increased by a factor of eight since 1932!..
The great improvements in the German transportation system have
resulted in a growing stream of foreign visitors. The pulsing life in
Germany is drawing more and more visitors to the Third Reich. The
number of overnights by foreigners has risen from 2.7 million in 1932
is far above 7 million in 1937. These foreigners, who often come to
Germany with false ideas, see with their own eyes the work of the
Führer and the remarkable efforts of the German people. They return
home as the best witnesses of the greatness and strength of the German
Reich...
The Führer has repeatedly reminded the German people that strong
policies are the absolute prerequisite to our economic, social and
cultural health. Only intentional hostility and stupidity can still
deny that the Führer was right in every respect...
>
>You have exchange rhetoric for your limited experiences in this world.
>To bad.
>
>
>No. Try reading the Federalist Papers, Numbers 1 through 10.
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.altermedia.info/ www.nowarforisrael.com
TomAldrich
neptune3 wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 17:18:43 GMT, Len <l...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >I was under the impression that fascism and communism were both
> >socialists in nature. Both wish to expand gov't, and gov't trait is to
> >limit my freedoms, so................or are you an intellectual?
> >The word game is so difficult to play. Do you know how?
>
> Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
Snip
You seem to be so handy at quoting from something prior to Hitlers rule,
well all said and done it matters not what these madmen were saying prior
to getting in to office, what matters are the results of their getting into
office.
The millions of dead german soldiers
The milions of dead german mothers
The millions of dead german children
The millions of destoyed terrain acreage
The millions of marks spent on this effort.
And the above only are the effects brought on by those this party said they
were supposely helping.
It does'nt matter what glory wa written by these Nazis, the only thing that
matters is the outcome.
Then if you want to go into personal freedoms and what ever, the record is
worse.
TomAldrich
neptune3 wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 15:42:17 GMT, Len <l...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >I agree and when finished studying, when begun correctly, one will
> >conclude that all socialism, whether national or international, is
> >evil and only desires to take away freedoms that are given to me
> >outside the government. Both are after a regular guy's liberty.
> >
> Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
> on December 10, 1940:
>
> "In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which
> means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must
> possess some means of giving expression to their thoughts or their
> wishes. Examining this problem more closely, we see that the people
> themselves have originally no convictions of their own. Their
> convictions are formed, of course, just as everywhere else. The
> decisive question is who enlightens the people, who educates them?
In Nazis Germany only one party made up of thugs
> In
> those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing
> more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and,
> as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are
> more or less independent and free.
More bullcrap, what in hell do you call the Nazi ruling elite, seems to
fit the above pretty well
> They say: 'Here we have liberty.'
> By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an
> uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to
> make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national
> control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital
> and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak
> of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of
> the 'freedom of the press.'
Any comment from Hitler discussing freedom of the press is a joke at best
>
> In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every
> case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the
> editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor
> tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next
> day.
So the editor is ousted, in Hitlers Germany the editor is sent to a
concertration camp.
More bullshit
> This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless
> slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus
> mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties.
So how did the nazi press differ
Rest of bullshit snipped
neptune3
<Aldri...@hormelqwest.net> wrote:
>
>In Nazis Germany only one party made up of thugs
If they were thugs they were not the kind that bothered good people.
They were the kind who faught Communists.
Here are some quotes from the book "Kampfzeit", (period of
struggle), by Hans Hinkel:
"Faster than lightening a lie about us spread throughout the country,
spread in every attic room where poor people lived by newspapers owned
or obedient to the opponent. It took a week of work by us National
Socialists to deal with a three-line lie in an opposing newspaper. As
soon as one lie was dealt with, a hundred more sprang up. Like a
hydra, the opponent's horror stories about National Socialism and its
supporters spread. There was not a speech by the Führer or his
associates that was not immediately twisted and tastefully served up
to the gullible Michael at breakfast or dinner. Adolf Hitler had "spat
out the communion wafer." Hermann Göring was smuggling opium or
morphine. Robert Ley has "lost a 'v'" in his name Pastor Münchmeyer
was guilty of "moral crimes" in Borkum. We often would have laughed
had we not hourly learned the amazing gullibility of millions of
German citizens who were trapped in the enemy's web of lies. The only
answer was for everyone to set to work with the people, going
everywhere to fight, speak and educate. Sooner or later the opponent
would have to face us and be revealed as a liar to the public."
"The city was like an upset anthill on that cold winter night. Roland
Freisler ran out from the chattering council meeting and went with us
to the nearby Friedrich Square where we spoke with the starving
masses. We forgot the middle class niceties! We had to stop Moscow
from winning over these citizens driven crazy by hunger, making them
wiling subjects of the insane ideas of Bolshevism"
"Only a few weeks later, I needed an escort to leave or return to my
apartment. Several loyal S.A. men had to be with me all the time,
since Communist unemployed men, unscrupulously incited against us
National Socialists, wanted to attack me now that they knew who I was.
Every day I joined the unemployed who demonstrated in the large
courtyard of the labor office on Giesberg Street. More than once I had
to be met by party members at the Kassel train station to protect me
from lurking Communist terror troops. It was the same or worse for all
of our prominent Kassel party members and S.A. men, just as for the
storm troops of our movement who risked their lives every day and
every hour in every city and every village of Germany. The enemy
naturally was particularly after us speakers. According to the law, we
had to be unarmed. We would have been in deep trouble if a body search
had found a weapon! A nail file was thought to be a weapon. Later even
a party badge, since it had a long needle!"
"The attempts of our party comrades to hold a National Socialist
meeting failed a half dozen times or more. Most meetings were made
impossible by the thousand-fold numerical superiority of the opponent,
or else broken up before they could finish. Our protective service
-every party member in each local group belongs - is still too weak in
most areas to stand up against the red avalanche, driven more and more
by the Communists. One National Socialist against five hundred or even
a thousand citizens, that is how it always is there!"
"After I had spoken about twenty minutes, a worker jumped up on a
table and called upon the "comrades" to leave the meeting of the
"Fascist band." Several dozen start singing the "Internationale" and
we have no choice but to overpower the growling of the comrades with
"Deutschland, Deutschland über alles." Another several hundred leave
the hall. The singing quieted down and peace was slowly restored. I
spoke to several hundred people at the end, all that were left of the
more than a thousand who were there to start."
"For years now we speakers have been traveling through every Gau in
Germany. I speak primarily in Saxony, Brandenburg, Hessen-Nassau and
in the West. We see that even red Saxony is streaming more and more to
National Socialism. The meetings are difficult, but always
successful."
"For how long? When would this hard battle end? When would more
Germans wake up? When would hundreds of thousands finally be ready to
march into battle behind the banner of National Socialism?! - None of
us thinks about the "when." Forward! - Only forward! Each heart won
over is a victory! The day will come...!"
>
>More bullcrap, what in hell do you call the Nazi ruling elite,
Heroes.
> seems to
>fit the above pretty well
They Jews control your media.
There was a book in ordinary bookstores called "An Empire of
Their Own". It was a pro-Jewish book but it showed that the Jews ran
Hollywood.
Here are some quotes from a magazine for Jews called "Moment".
It is subtitled "The Jewish magazine for the 90's" These quotes are
from the Aug 1996 edition after the Headline "Jews Run Hollywood - So
What?":
"It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish
power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most
influential pruduction executives at each of the major movie studios
will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."
"the famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt
Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harbored anti-Semetic
attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most
powerful positions."
The head of Walt Disney studios is now the Jew Michael Eisner.
On studios that were bought out by the Japanese the magazine says:
"When Mitsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to
undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal's legendary - and
all Jewish - management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg, and
Tom Pollack."
Here are some quotes from the paper "Jews Control the Media
and Rule America"
It may be rather out of date but it still explains why things are the
way they are.
"American Broadcasting Companies (ABC), Coumbia Broadcasting
System (CBS), and National Broadcasting Company (NBC). Each of these
three has been under the absolute control of a single man over a long
enough period of time--ranging from 32 to 55 years--for him to staff
the corporation at every level with officers of his choosing and then
to place his imprint indelibly upon it. In each case that man has been
a Jew.
"Until 1985, when ABC merged with Capital Cities
Communications, Inc...the chairman of the board of directors and chief
executive officer (CEO) of the network was Leonard Harry Goldenson, a
Jew...In an interview in the April 1, 1985 issue of Newsweek,
Goldenson boasted 'I built this company (ABC) from scratch.'"
"CBS was under the domination of William S. Paley for more than
half a century. The son of immigrant Jews from Russia..."
"There has been no move by top G-E management to change the
Jewish "profile" of NBC or to replace key Jewish personel. To the
contrary, new Jewish executives have been added: an example is Steve
Friedman..."
"The man in charge of the television entertainment division at
CBS is Jeff Sagansky. At ABC the entertainment division is run by two
men....nearly all of the men who shape young Amercians' concept of
reality, of good and evil, of permissible and impermissible behavior
are Jews. In particular, Sagansky and Bloomberg arre Jews. So is
Tartikoff. Littlefield is the only Gentile who has had a significant
role in TV entertainment programming in recent years."
"American Film magazine listed the top 10...entertainment
companies and their CEOs...Time Warner Communications (Steven J Ross,
Jew) Walt Disney Co. (Michael D. Eisner, Jew)...Of the 10 top
entertainment CEOs listed above, eight are Jews."
"The Newhouse media empire provides an example of more than a
lack of real competition among America's daily newspapers; it also
illustrates the insatiable appetite Jews have shown for all organs of
opinion... The Newhouse's own 31 daily newspapers, including several
large and important ones, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the
Newark Star-Ledger, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune; the nation's
largest trade book publishing conglomerate, Random House, with all
its subsideries; Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of 12 television
broadcasting stations and 87 cable-TV systems, including some of the
countries largest cable networks- the Sunday supplement Parade, with a
circulation of more than 22 million copies per week; some two dozen
major magazines, including the New Yorker, Vogue, Madamoiselle,
Glamour, Vanity Fair, HQ, Bride's, Gentlemen's Quarterly, Self,
Home&Garden...."
"Furthermore, even those newspapers still under Gentile ownership
and management are so thoroughly dependent upon Jewish advertising..."
"the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington
Post. These three...are the newspapers which set trends and guidlines
for nearly all others. They are the ones which decide what is news and
what isn't, at national and international levels. They originate the
news; the others merely copy it. And all three newspapers are in
Jewish hands...The Suzberger family also owns, through the New York
Times Co. 36 other newspapers; twelve magazines, including McCall's
and Family Circle..."
"New York's other newspapers are in no better hands than the
Daily News. The New York Post is owned by billionare Jewish
real-estate developer Peter Kalikow. The Village Voice is the personal
property of Leonard Stern, the billionaire Jewish owner of..."
"There are only three newsmagazines of any note published in the
United States: Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report....The CEO
of Time Warner Communications is Steven J. Ross, and he is a Jew.
"Newsweek, as mentioned above, is published by the Washington
Post Co., under the Jewess Katherine Meyer Graham..."
"U.S. News & World Report... owned and published by Jewish real
estate developer Mortimer B. Zucherman..."
" The three largest book publishers...Random House... Simon &
Schuster , and Time Inc. Book Co....All three are owned or controlled
by Jews...The CEO of Simon & Schuster if Richard Snyder, and the
president is Jeremy Kaplan; both are Jews too."
"Western Publishing...ranks first among publishers of childrens
books, with more than 50 per cent of the market. Its chairman and CEO
is Richard Bernstein, a Jew."
"Jewish spokesmen customarily will use evasive tactics. "Ted
Turner isn't a Jew!" they will announce..."
"We are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence
on our political system and virtual control of our government; we also
are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children..."
>
>Any comment from Hitler discussing freedom of the press is a joke at best
National Socialist Germany was not different from other countries
in regard to free speach laws. The only difference was the right was
in power instead of the left. Before Hitler was in power he had a lot
of his papers banned, and when he was in power he also banned things.
Even today most countries do not have free speech. In leftist Germany
today people get arrested for doubting the holo story and other
things. People in Britain get arrested for politically incorrect
speech or writting. Saying that the races are not all equal in
intelligence is against the law there.
The United States has the most free speech but even here it has
banned things. At one time the play "Merchant of Venice" was banned in
New York because it offended the Jews. People in America were arrested
for their beliefs during WWII. All countries did that.
But the United States does have the most free speech and this was a
great idea. Hitler also had a great idea of removing the Jews from
controlling the media. If we could combine these two ideas we could
have a winning combination. Allowing free speech is not the same as
allowing one unelected group to virtually control all of the media.
The media is the real power, and a minor post such as President of the
United States is like nothing by comparison. Why are we voting for
President and not voting for who will control the media? When it comes
to owning TV stations it is only money that talks, not morality or
virtue.
In the Jews country, which Americans are giving billions of
dollars to, they don't allow non-Jews to own certain media.
National Socialism was mainly about things like making Germany for
the Germans, and rejecting both Communism and Capitalism. But Free
Speech is also a great idea. National Socialists today should make it
clear that Free Speech is sacred and that no party should be allowed
to change that.
>
>So the editor is ousted, in Hitlers Germany the editor is sent to a
>concertration camp.
>More bullshit
>
>> This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless
>> slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus
>> mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties.
>
>So how did the nazi press differ
It told the truth.
neptune3
<Aldri...@hormelqwest.net> wrote:
>
>You seem to be so handy at quoting from something prior to Hitlers rule,
>well all said and done it matters not what these madmen were saying prior
>to getting in to office, what matters are the results of their getting into
>office.
>The millions of dead german soldiers
>The milions of dead german mothers
>The millions of dead german children
>The millions of destoyed terrain acreage
>The millions of marks spent on this effort.
>And the above only are the effects brought on by those this party said they
>were supposely helping.
>It does'nt matter what glory wa written by these Nazis, the only thing that
>matters is the outcome.
The Nazis removed the Jews from controlling Germany and had a
nation without Jewish supervisors. It was inevitable that there would
be war with the countries that were controlled by Jews.
>Then if you want to go into personal freedoms and what ever, the record is
>worse.
They outlawed things such as homosexual perversion if that is what
you mean.
Len
>>Tacitus' time when the women did all the work and the men stayed drunk
>>and killed for sport. So their very culture comes from being kept
>>under the gov't. Such they yield to gov't authority and control of
>>their lives.
> I don't agree with your feminist version of history, but yes they
>had governments, that is necessary.
I've no clue what you mean about "feminist view". Those are the words
of Tacitus. For a guy who is out there, you need to get out there. Try
reading books by old dead white guys that don't have a stake in this
culture. Try reading books that were published between 500 BC and 1000
AD. After a hundred of those books you will be what the Renaissance
men use to consider a Doctor. Or, keep picking your nose.
>>America broke that chain. You only wish it mattered who runs the
>>gov't, but in fact, no matter who runs it the very existence of such
>>an entity mandates that human nature mess it up.
> Well it is bad that America is ruled by the Jews. For one thing it
>wouldn't have such problems with Arabs otherwise.
Ya know, that "Jew" thing gets old quickly. Are you a one trick pony
or is there anything else in your pantheon?
>>Gov't is simply an evil necessary to keep even more evil men from
>>dominating it over me. We are simply regular people not wishing to be
>>subject to.............wait...........did you ever see the movie
>>"Magnificent Seven"?
> Yes. I noticed it was made by Jews and it mainly was
>anti-Christian propaganda. Christians were wimps in the movie. I am
>not saying whether or not Christians are wimps today in real life, But
>certainly in that movie no man in his right mind would want to be a
>Christian.
The movie had little, if any, religious issues, unless you want it to.
You really do miss points. Is half your brain tied up some how?
>> It was lifted from a samurai movie by that famous
>>Japanese director, what-his-name, around 1954. Oh, the vagaries of
>>age. Any way that speaks more to role of gov't than I can, and it is
>>only 90 minutes long. In terms of that, gov't protects citizens from
>>bullies like Adolph, Mao, Joe, and heroes of yours.
> Unfortunately I forget what the movie said about that. But Adolf
>rooted out all the bad people and made a government that was great.
The best part of Adolph's gov't was smoldering on a fine spring April
day, 1945.
<merciful deletion>
> What is wrong with America is that it is for race-mixing, feminism
>and homosexual perversion. In other words it is for liberalism.
If people want to mix it up, why should you, or gov't, want to control
what they do?
If you don't then you want to control people and not let them be free.
If that is your case then you are a dictator, king and have an
attitude that you know more, as an individual and collectively, than
anyone else. As that is the case there is no point in me communicating
with you, as there is nothing I can let you know, as you already know
everything. As that is the case I suppose I should bow down, and/or
send you money, as you have deemed worth writing a response! I could
go on, but I am not worthy.
>>I can imagine a left thinking person, by many standards, would find
>>that they too wish to build a great nation, so once again, your broad
>>brush tars and feathers far to many for an intelligent exchange, but
>>do go on.....
> Leftists think in terms of the individual. They don't think about
>creating beautiful cities or about the greatness of the nation as a
>whole.
Well, you see. I am WRONG AGAIN. I thought there might be a liberal or
leftist person that may love the country but you have told me The Way
It Is for "them". They are not city builders (a noble endeavor,
truly) or even nationalists. Well, you may have a point there, to many
of them are internationalists and they are not clear thinking on how
that would bring down our great nation. But I diverge, except not for
you, as you know it all!
>>I find capitalists USE the human nature of greed and betterment for
>>one's self as an engine to create wealth.
>
> Greed is obviously a bad thing.
Actually, it is humans that are actually a 'bad thing', and greed is
just part of human nature. We were not always bad, but created good.
But you know us, we just want to be selfish gods.
Or maybe YOU don't. Sorry, I am wrong again. You ARE a god, as the
ontological nature of you is that you know everything. No, wait, I am
wrong, that is the Christian point of view. And you definitely are not
Christian, and I gather you are not Jewish, so that could mean you
have the same characteristics as Allah. He is characterized as
capricious, and they don't know IF he knows all, but he is unknowable,
as they write, but then maybe because he DOESN'T know it all. No,
wait. You DO KNOW IT ALL, so you can't be Allah.
Mere mortal as I am, I get confused in your face.
<merciful deletion>
>>> According to capitalist theory people must compete to see who
>>>will work for the least pennies per hour. They say everyone must
>>>compete with the people in Mexico and China to see who will work for
>>>the fewest pennies. If a company makes billions in profit while paying
>>>its employees starvation wages that is perfectly fine. At least the
>>>sacred laws of supply and demand are not violated. If the people die
>>>of starvation that is fine too. You can always get more people. If
>>>there is not enough work for everyone to do then they think people
>>>need to die off. Ebenezer Scrooge did everything right according to
>>>the capitalists and followed the beliefs and values of capitalism.
>>
>>If I understand you, and as the facts reveal, all above is based on
>>gov't intervention of business. As a matter of fact it is gov't
>>mandated that creates the problems you described.
> Not at all. The lack of govenment is the problem. There is no law
>against hiring people in Mexico and China, where there is no minimum
>wage or anything.
Knowing all, I gather I am wrong AGAIN. I saw it as this gov't
allowing our biz to go over there and start up using slave wages, as
we would call them. Our gov't not creating an atmosphere for biz to
prosper here, at home, with US. But rather Nixon opening China not
just for market purposes, but to undersell home base and destabilize
our economy. But that is too sophisticated for me to understand,
truly. I am sure any lurker bored enough to get this far in this
stupid thread (made stupid by ME, obviously, as you Know It All) that
they would know even less about world economics.
>>There already are gov't laws mandating pay. Your definitions are
>>screwy. And your questions are meaningless using your language.
>>"Mandating profits" is a form of theft. So you want the workers to get
>>a share of the profits, which is tantamount to theft, and all this
>>because gov't passes a law? Well, it probably will be done, but we
>>are further down the road to hell when it happens. The workers could
>>by shares of the company and make profits that-a-way, no?
> Stocks are theft. That is people trying to get rich without
>working. We should make sure working people get a fair share of the
>profits in wages. You call that theft. I call it getting their just
>rewards.
I find people wanting money without working to be about the state of
human nature forever. And now you declare stocks are theft? And you
claim, factually, that wages are profit? Or you want the company's
"profit" in the form of wages? Oh, that must be it. Sorry, must have
dyslexia! So you want to take the profits from the companies and
redistribute them, eh? Wow.
I won't even ASK how you come to that, as I don't have enough life
left to fathom such a far reaching statement. It is so off the mark,
for my feebleness to comprehend) that you should not bother.
>>Read what you wrote above. Please.
>>Capitalism, as you write it, really translates to fascism.
> Absolute nonsense.
Oh. Thanks. Clears that up.
> Here are parts of a post about Mussolini written by a very
>anti-Mussolini person. He has done his homework though and cites many
>book which are also anti-Mussolini and anti-Fascist. These are some
>things they admit:
>
>>http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=4087
>>Left-wing Fascism: An Intellectual Disorder
>>By John J. Ray
>
> (Quotes from Mussolini)
>
>"Fascism has taken up an attitude of complete opposition to the
>doctrines of
>Liberalism, both in the political field and in the field of
>economics".
>"Fascism now and always believes in holiness and in heroism; that is
>to say
>in actions influenced by no economic motive"
>"Laissez faire is out of date"
>"Our programme is simple. We want to rule Italy".
<merciful deletion>
I trust I lost much in the translation. That is why Time Magazine
voted him Man of The Year a while back, before WWII.
I know how he died.
I know that I would die in a similar manner if you and your friends
and like minded pin-heads tried what he did.
Pop, goes the melon.
I gotta go.
neptune3
>>>The Europeans were ALWAYS subjugated, or at least since around
>>>Tacitus' time when the women did all the work and the men stayed drunk
>>>and killed for sport. So their very culture comes from being kept
>>>under the gov't. Such they yield to gov't authority and control of
>>>their lives.
>
>> I don't agree with your feminist version of history, but yes they
>>had governments, that is necessary.
>
>I've no clue what you mean about "feminist view". Those are the words
>of Tacitus. For a guy who is out there, you need to get out there. Try
>reading books by old dead white guys that don't have a stake in this
>culture. Try reading books that were published between 500 BC and 1000
>AD. After a hundred of those books you will be what the Renaissance
>men use to consider a Doctor. Or, keep picking your nose.
It's politically correct to knock white guys. I didn't read the
books but did the other races even have books? Whites are the cause of
civlization on the earth.
>Ya know, that "Jew" thing gets old quickly. Are you a one trick pony
>or is there anything else in your pantheon?
No matter how old it is there is still little that is more important
than the fact that the Jews control the media and America.
>
>The movie had little, if any, religious issues, unless you want it to.
>You really do miss points. Is half your brain tied up some how?
I saw it a long time ago. The anti-Christian propaganda was most
obvioius, though no doubt it had other propaganda also.
>
>The best part of Adolph's gov't was smoldering on a fine spring April
>day, 1945.
"I know you expect no deep expression of feelings, for feelings cannot
be clothed in words. But please imagine this: jobless, without any
money. For two years! For four years! For six years! A desperate
woman, broken in body and soul, with three young children.
How often did I see their hungry eyes looking toward me with vain
expectation. Nothing is more tortuous than such looks from children.
My faith in him, the fanatical fighter, was what kept me and mine from
what lured us - and anyone else in our situation - Suicide!
And today?
A happy mother who is always singing with her children. No one can see
in her the miserable, desperate woman she once was. Instead of three
unhappy hollow-cheeked children, four little devils making noise far
and wide.
Look at them! There may be families with better behaved children, but
none with children as cheerful and happy! That is what the Führer
means to me and mine.
I turned my back very early to a foreign worldview because it left my
whole life meaningless. The Führer gave me his worldview a firm place
to stand, for it is nothing but a knowledge of the eternal laws that
are behind the universe.
His deeds are a joyful fulfillment of these laws. His successes do not
seem to me, as one hears all too often, the result of good luck,
rather as the natural consequences of his nature. This faith, no, this
certainty, enables me to understand the Führer when his actions would
otherwise require blind confidence.
Such obvious confidence is the most wonderful feeling that I can
imagine. Admiration? Recognition? Thanks? They are nothing when
compared to the full understanding of a people of 80 million for the
mission of its Führer. That alone would be crowning of his sacrificial
struggle.
This fulfillment of this wish is my prayer for the Führer."
Fred. Ch., Poppelau
"The Führer is everything to us, he is our faith, secirity and hope.
As a bearer of the blood medal, I have always believed in this man,
who guided and inspired us, who led us in the fight for Germany’s
greatness. We, me, my wife and our seven children, believe only in
him, Adolf Hitler. Is there a belief more understandable, more real,
more natural than this?
Has the Führer not done everything for us that one could do for the
good of a family? Did he not give me a job and the ability to decently
feed and clothe my family? Has he not given my children a future that
no other country could so easily give?
The Führer is with us in every situation! Look, sometimes the world is
hard on a family. There are difficult situations that cannot be
overcome. In just such hours I go to my living room, and there is a
picture of my Führer.
I look Adolf Hitler in the face and remember his great struggle, his
great will and accomplishments, and my miserable mood is gone and
thinking of the Führer gives me new strength.
How can I fail when I see the greatness in and around Adolf Hitler?
My children know the Führer as the man who rules all, arranges all,
who built their world. The Führer is the embodiment of what people had
such difficulty describing to us children before. But this is the
enormous difference: The Führer moves among the people so that one can
celebrate him, so that our love for him is rewarded through his ever
new deeds.
The Führer is hope for us in every situation. Look, my dear comrade,
according to the Führer’s own words, raising seven children is a great
responsibility to the state and a holy duty.
To form these young souls, to raise them to be decent adults, is such
a wonderful task only because the Führer has given us the sure
foundations that are necessary. He is our hope, for only through his
generous measures are we with many children also able to "lead an
decent life," as anyone should be able to do. He protects our strength
through the NSV, through subventions for children, through the support
the state gives women and children, through the high status he gave
children.
Once people mocked those with many children. Today people honor them.
Now my wife and I have become respected members of the state. That is
why we have such hope for the future of our children, for the Führer
has provided all that is necessary for them so that they too will be
able to establish families and contribute to the security and
protection of the great Fatherland.
Is it not wonderful to know what a wonderful future awaits our
children. One cannot but remember our own youth during the postwar
period, during the inflation, the days of hunger and so much that had
terrible effects on our youth and development.
Our children have no fears of such things, for they know that our
Führer plans everything, foresees everything, and prepares the best
for us.
Is is not obvious why the Führer means everything to us?"
Toni Dominik Sch., Unterammergau
"I can still remember the first time I saw and heard the Führer in
1920 in the Zirkus Krone in Munich. This was the introduction: "Adolf
Hitler will speak!" A somewhat slight young man stood before me, with
a short coat, soft collar and crumpled tie, poorly clothed. I was
curious to hear what this man had to say to me.
As I heard his voice, the passion of his words (something unheard of
at the time), the growing tension of his words, it became clear to me:
This man or no one! To this day, this inner feeling has not left me.
The greatness of this man, his deeds, his historic successes seem
enormous to me. But yet I always see him as a man of the people, one
of us in my mind’s eye. It fills me with pride that Providence choice
one of our brothers to fulfill German history.
I honor the great figures of German history, but my feelings for the
Führer are different. I believe that love is the best word to describe
them.
One of us, who came from the people, has done amazing deeds, yet
remained the same from the first day I saw him until today.
I admire this man so much that I would defend him even if he were in
the wrong, but he cannot be wrong since he is truth and justice
themselves."
Gr. F., Munich
>> What is wrong with America is that it is for race-mixing, feminism
>>and homosexual perversion. In other words it is for liberalism.
>
>If people want to mix it up, why should you, or gov't, want to control
>what they do?
Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
country. What happened? Race-mixing is what happened. They let a lot
of Black people in and of course the result was racial inter-marriage.
Now the Portuguese people are not as White as they were. We need to
preserve the White race. Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
"All that we admire in the world to-day, its science, its art, its
technical developements and discoveries, are the products of the
creative activities of a few peoples, and it may be true that their
first beginnings must be attributed to one race. The maintenance of
civilization is wholly dependant on such peoples. Should they perish,
all that makes this earth beautiful will descend with them into the
grave."
"All the great civilizations of the past became decadent because the
originally creative race died out, as a result of the contamination on
the blood."
"Every manifestation of human culture, every product of art, science
and technical skill, which we see before our eyes to-day, is almost
exclusively the product of the Aryan creative power. This very fact
fully justifies the conclusion that it was the Aryan alone who founded
a superior type of humanity"
"The foundations of actual life in Japan to-day are not those of the
native Japanese culture., although this characterizes the exterenal
features of the country, which features strike the eye of European
observers on account of their fundamental difference from us; but the
real foundations of contemporary Japanese life are the enormous
scientific and technical achievements of Europe and America, that is
to say, of Aryan peoples."
"A people that fails to preserve the purity of its racial blood
thereby destroys the unity of the soul of the nation in all its
manifestations. A disintegrated national character is the inevitable
consequence of the process of disintegration in the blood. And the
change which takes place in the spiritual and creative faculties of a
people is only an effect of the change that had modified its racial
substance."
"For in a world which would be composed of mongrels and negroids all
ideals of human beauty and nobility and all hopes of an idealized
future for our humanity would be lost forever."
"It is especially the cultural creativeness which disappears when a
superior race inter-mixes with an inferior one."
"There may be hundreds of excellent States in this earth, and yet if
the Aryan, who is the creator and custodian of civilization, should
disappear, all culture that is on an adequate level with the spiritual
needs of the superior nations to-day would also disappear."
"We National Socialists know that in holding these views we take up a
revolutionary stand in the world to-day and that we are branded as
revolutionaries. But our views and our conduct will not be determined
by the approbation or disapprobation of our contemporaries, but only
by our duty to follow a truth which we have acknowledged. In doing
this we have reason to believe that posterity will have a clearer
insight"
"Thus for the first time a high inner purpose is accredited to the
State. In face of the ridiculous phrase that the State should do no
more than act as the guardian of public order and tranquillity, so
that everybody can peacefully dupe everybody else, it is given a very
high mission indeed to preserve and encourage the highest type of
humanity which a beneficent Creator has bestowed on this earth."
>If you don't then you want to control people and not let them be free.
>If that is your case then you are a dictator, king and have an
>attitude that you know more, as an individual and collectively, than
>anyone else. As that is the case there is no point in me communicating
>with you, as there is nothing I can let you know, as you already know
>everything. As that is the case I suppose I should bow down, and/or
>send you money, as you have deemed worth writing a response! I could
>go on, but I am not worthy.
>
>
>Well, you see. I am WRONG AGAIN. I thought there might be a liberal or
>leftist person that may love the country but you have told me The Way
>It Is for "them". They are not city builders (a noble endeavor,
>truly) or even nationalists. Well, you may have a point there, to many
>of them are internationalists and they are not clear thinking on how
>that would bring down our great nation. But I diverge, except not for
>you, as you know it all!
>>
>> Greed is obviously a bad thing.
>
>Actually, it is humans that are actually a 'bad thing', and greed is
>just part of human nature.
Not everyone is like that and it is the job of parents to teach
children not to be selfish. Movies might also be a good influence. The
movie "It Could Happen to You" may have some minor negative parts but
the main point is right. Goof people are not greedy.
>We were not always bad, but created good.
>But you know us, we just want to be selfish gods.
>Or maybe YOU don't. Sorry, I am wrong again. You ARE a god, as the
>ontological nature of you is that you know everything. No, wait, I am
>wrong, that is the Christian point of view. And you definitely are not
>Christian, and I gather you are not Jewish, so that could mean you
>have the same characteristics as Allah. He is characterized as
>capricious, and they don't know IF he knows all, but he is unknowable,
>as they write, but then maybe because he DOESN'T know it all. No,
>wait. You DO KNOW IT ALL, so you can't be Allah.
>Mere mortal as I am, I get confused in your face.
>
>Knowing all, I gather I am wrong AGAIN. I saw it as this gov't
>allowing our biz to go over there and start up using slave wages, as
>we would call them.
"Allowing" is when a govenment does nothing. If there were no
government at all everything would be "allowed". It is the lack of
government that allows the biz to go there for slave wages.
>Our gov't not creating an atmosphere for biz to
>prosper here, at home, with US. But rather Nixon opening China not
>just for market purposes, but to undersell home base and destabilize
>our economy. But that is too sophisticated for me to understand,
>truly. I am sure any lurker bored enough to get this far in this
>stupid thread (made stupid by ME, obviously, as you Know It All) that
>they would know even less about world economics.
>
>
>I find people wanting money without working to be about the state of
>human nature forever. And now you declare stocks are theft?
Loans for houses and cars and business should be from the
government and at zero interest. This would initially add to the money
in circulation but when the loan is repaid the money would be removed
circulation, so there is no net increase and no inflation.
The entire debt-money system needs to be replaced.
The money system we have today is called the debt-money
system. It is evil and needs to be replaced. The only way money comes
into existance today is when it is borrowed. There is no freely
existing money supply, but only borrowed money that needs to be paid
back to bankers with interest. If all the money that was owed to
bankers was ever paid back there would be no money left in circulation
and this would be a great depression. What makes matters even worse is
that when money is created only the principle of the loan is created.
The money needed to pay the interest is never created. For this reason
it is impossible to pay back the principle plus the interest on all of
the loans that make up our money supply. The extra amount of money
needed to pay the interest was never created and does not exist.
The United States government borrows money from the Federal
Reserve Bank. This bank is not federal but owned by private
stockholders. Other banks also create the money in our money supply.
They are allowed to loan out much more money then they actually have.
Thus they create new money. No one else is allowed to create money,
only bankers have this privilege. All of our money is debt-money and
it is all owed back to bankers, plus the interest.
In the U.S.A. money is created by the Bureau of Engraving and
Printing which is a unit of the treasury, but the orders to print come
from the Federal Reserve Banks. The money is created for and owned by
the banks. And the Federal Reserve Banks are not Federal, in spite of
the name. Privately owned commercial banks own the stock of the
Federal Reserve Banks. The Federal Reserve Banks give the newly
created money to the government in exchange for government bonds. To
simplify: The United States does not make its own money. Bankers
create the money and loan it to the United States with an interest
charge.
The book War Cycles Peace Cycles puts it this way:
"If there is only $10 in existance, and you lend it to someone
under the condition that he repay $11, and if he agrees to this, he
has agreed to the impossible."
The book The Struggle forWorld Power put it this way:
"The Bank of England... was the first payment institution which
was legally empowered to issue state-authorized paper currency and ,
therefore, the Government itself became its debtor. Thus the State not
only renounced its monopoly on monetary emission, but also agreed to
borrow the privately-created money from the bankers...Not only the
thing being done, but even the very name was a deliberate fraud and
deception to conceal the essence of the deed. To create money out of
nothing is to make valid and effective claim on all goods and services
for no return, which is fraud and theft, made worse by the
circumstances that the money is lent out at interest...it follows that
those who have the power to 'create' out of nothing all the money in
each country and the whole world and lend it as stated, have total
power over all states, parties, firms, radio, press, individuals and
so on. Therefore the power of Parliment in general, and especially
with regard to money, is non-existant, and all the true sovereignty is
in the hands of those private individuals who issue all money"
> And you
>claim, factually, that wages are profit? Or you want the company's
>"profit" in the form of wages? Oh, that must be it. Sorry, must have
>dyslexia! So you want to take the profits from the companies and
>redistribute them, eh? Wow.
>I won't even ASK how you come to that, as I don't have enough life
>left to fathom such a far reaching statement. It is so off the mark,
>for my feebleness to comprehend) that you should not bother.
No business leader should make more in profit than ten times the
amount he pays his lowest paid employee. It's good that he makes a
profit but he needs to share it more with employees by having higher
wages.
>
>Oh. Thanks. Clears that up.
>
>I trust I lost much in the translation. That is why Time Magazine
>voted him Man of The Year a while back, before WWII.
>
>I know how he died.
>I know that I would die in a similar manner if you and your friends
>and like minded pin-heads tried what he did.
>Pop, goes the melon.
>I gotta go.
Len
>>>>Tacitus' time when the women did all the work and the men stayed drunk
>>>>and killed for sport. So their very culture comes from being kept
>>>>under the gov't. Such they yield to gov't authority and control of
>>>>their lives.
>>> I don't agree with your feminist version of history, but yes they
>>>had governments, that is necessary.
>>I've no clue what you mean about "feminist view". Those are the words
>>of Tacitus. For a guy who is out there, you need to get out there. Try
>>reading books by old dead white guys that don't have a stake in this
>>culture. Try reading books that were published between 500 BC and 1000
>>AD. After a hundred of those books you will be what the Renaissance
>>men use to consider a Doctor. Or, keep picking your nose.
> It's politically correct to knock white guys. I didn't read the
>books but did the other races even have books? Whites are the cause of
>civlization on the earth.
Well, Tacitus was a white guy. But then he wrote about other white
guys that didn't read at the time. His writing called GERMANICA is
about a bunch of red-headed barbarians that hung around outside of the
Roman Empire. Brutish lot. Try it. You'll like it!
>>Ya know, that "Jew" thing gets old quickly. Are you a one trick pony
>>or is there anything else in your pantheon?
>
> No matter how old it is there is still little that is more important
>than the fact that the Jews control the media and America.
Well, I guess having a good life, loving others, and working to your
satisfaction can count for something, no? In the public arena your
position is difficult to hold as it turns folks like an inny belly
button. Kind of disappears, ya know? Goes SOMEWHERE, but then we lose
it. And in your case where it comes out is full of hatred. We don't
work well under hatred. But it is even more insidious than that. But
then both hatred and anti-people-no-matter-what-flavor gets to the
individual in the end. Sorry way to go. We cannot argue the truth
element of your statements. That is not the issue, really. Blacks CAN
dance well, Jews are disproportional influential in that area relative
to the population, and the Brits couldn't cook a meal to save their
Queen. And with ALL that, folks on the whole, are rather screwed up.
So?
>>> What is wrong with America is that it is for race-mixing, feminism
>>>and homosexual perversion. In other words it is for liberalism.
>>If people want to mix it up, why should you, or gov't, want to control
>>what they do?
>Portugal was once a great nation. It might have been the greatest
>nation on earth at one time. But now it is almost like a third world
>country. What happened? Race-mixing is what happened. They let a lot
>of Black people in and of course the result was racial inter-marriage.
>Now the Portuguese people are not as White as they were. We need to
>preserve the White race. Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf:
Spare me what the loser wrote. BTW, it was in the papers. He lost and
the whole tribe as well. He was not perfect picture of The Aryan, and
he lead them down the path to hell, as a nation and populace, but I've
read his works and need not re-read again on a monitor. Thanks though.
BTW, you are mixing race with identity. Arguments could be made that
solidarity and identity as a people make a great nation. In the past
it was a tribalism you called race. Since then we have found it to be
other dynamics as well. Besides, those that think they are on top
write the "on-top" stories of themselves and guess who wins and loses?
"We" win and the "barbarians" lose! Not a great insight, but factual.
>>If you don't then you want to control people and not let them be free.
>>If that is your case then you are a dictator, king and have an
>>attitude that you know more, as an individual and collectively, than
>>anyone else. As that is the case there is no point in me communicating
>>with you, as there is nothing I can let you know, as you already know
>>everything. As that is the case I suppose I should bow down, and/or
>>send you money, as you have deemed worth writing a response! I could
>>go on, but I am not worthy.
>>Well, you see. I am WRONG AGAIN. I thought there might be a liberal or
>>leftist person that may love the country but you have told me The Way
>>It Is for "them". They are not city builders (a noble endeavor,
>>truly) or even nationalists. Well, you may have a point there, to many
>>of them are internationalists and they are not clear thinking on how
>>that would bring down our great nation. But I diverge, except not for
>>you, as you know it all!
>>> Greed is obviously a bad thing.
>>
>>Actually, it is humans that are actually a 'bad thing', and greed is
>>just part of human nature.
> Not everyone is like that and it is the job of parents to teach
>children not to be selfish. Movies might also be a good influence. The
>movie "It Could Happen to You" may have some minor negative parts but
>the main point is right. Goof people are not greedy.
Well, as I enjoy movies I will check that one out. BTW, "good people"
are a rarity. For the norm, on the whole, etc. folks want more, no
matter what their station in life.
>>We were not always bad, but created good.
>>But you know us, we just want to be selfish gods.
>>Or maybe YOU don't. Sorry, I am wrong again. You ARE a god, as the
>>ontological nature of you is that you know everything. No, wait, I am
>>wrong, that is the Christian point of view. And you definitely are not
>>Christian, and I gather you are not Jewish, so that could mean you
>>have the same characteristics as Allah. He is characterized as
>>capricious, and they don't know IF he knows all, but he is unknowable,
>>as they write, but then maybe because he DOESN'T know it all. No,
>>wait. You DO KNOW IT ALL, so you can't be Allah.
>>Mere mortal as I am, I get confused in your face.
>>Knowing all, I gather I am wrong AGAIN. I saw it as this gov't
>>allowing our biz to go over there and start up using slave wages, as
>>we would call them.
> "Allowing" is when a govenment does nothing. If there were no
>government at all everything would be "allowed". It is the lack of
>government that allows the biz to go there for slave wages.
I recall this part was about China. Our gov't refused to acknowledge
China's existence until 1972 or so. So we were not allowed per gov't
mandate. Now, thanks to gov't and worse yet NGOs like NAFTA and GATT
and the World Bank, big biz gets tax credits for going over their.
The US gov't is no longer laissez fare.
>>Our gov't not creating an atmosphere for biz to
>>prosper here, at home, with US. But rather Nixon opening China not
>>just for market purposes, but to undersell home base and destabilize
>>our economy. But that is too sophisticated for me to understand,
>>truly. I am sure any lurker bored enough to get this far in this
>>stupid thread (made stupid by ME, obviously, as you Know It All) that
>>they would know even less about world economics.
>>I find people wanting money without working to be about the state of
>>human nature forever. And now you declare stocks are theft?
> Loans for houses and cars and business should be from the
>government and at zero interest. This would initially add to the money
>in circulation but when the loan is repaid the money would be removed
>circulation, so there is no net increase and no inflation.
> The entire debt-money system needs to be replaced.
You are some kind of commie freak. What kind of crap are you smoking?
Here I thought you MIGHT have a brain in your head, but now you are
just a waste of time! And have absolutely no clue of what you are
writing about. Where do you think wealth comes from? The gov't? They
only suck the wealth out of me. I work. I don't know what you do to
pay bills, but ........................now you are just pissing me
off.
So no wealth is created in this scenario. But Bill Gates has enough
money to buy the State of California out of bankruptcy. He did not get
that money from the feds. He got it from a market ready to buy what he
"created" (sorry, but on second thought no Linux user has read this
far. Matter of fact NOBODY has) by a demand for his stuff. Your book
puts it in a static way. The market is NOT static, as people create
ideas and products that others will seek out in exchange for a medium
equivalent to their labor.
You have about half the picture and I don't have the time or patience
to draw the other half.
We, US, are living way beyond our means due to the credit structuring
and financial obligations to our progeny. We, US, need to deconstruct
on such a scheme, but it may be to way out for US to figure out a way
to withdraw. The cycle of God called Jubilee, the Kondrakian Cycle, or
just sheer weight of too much debt, will collapse and change the
system. I am truly ambivalent on the issue. I long for and fear it at
the same time.
> The book The Struggle forWorld Power put it this way:
> "The Bank of England... was the first payment institution which
>was legally empowered to issue state-authorized paper currency and ,
>therefore, the Government itself became its debtor. Thus the State not
>only renounced its monopoly on monetary emission, but also agreed to
>borrow the privately-created money from the bankers...Not only the
>thing being done, but even the very name was a deliberate fraud and
>deception to conceal the essence of the deed. To create money out of
>nothing is to make valid and effective claim on all goods and services
>for no return, which is fraud and theft, made worse by the
>circumstances that the money is lent out at interest...it follows that
>those who have the power to 'create' out of nothing all the money in
>each country and the whole world and lend it as stated, have total
>power over all states, parties, firms, radio, press, individuals and
>so on. Therefore the power of Parliment in general, and especially
>with regard to money, is non-existant, and all the true sovereignty is
>in the hands of those private individuals who issue all money"
I have seen your stuff, above, and it is always the same: burn down
Jews as they control. They may be. A simple guy as myself cannot
discern that far above my station, truthfully, as I do not go to those
meetings of 12. When in the silver market I did derivative the fact
that five guys a day met in England to set silver prices for the
world. I couldn't imagine that but after doing homework it came to be
so! Amazing!
Of course I also "know" enough to realize that the guys that write
those books that blame the Jews are grinding their own ax and wish to
inspire others towards their agenda of hatred. Myself, I have
discovered that my life is too enjoyable and short to give into such.
I've seen others that did and the were consumed by the fire of hatred,
much to my, judgmental, surprise.
>> And you
>>claim, factually, that wages are profit? Or you want the company's
>>"profit" in the form of wages? Oh, that must be it. Sorry, must have
>>dyslexia! So you want to take the profits from the companies and
>>redistribute them, eh? Wow.
>>I won't even ASK how you come to that, as I don't have enough life
>>left to fathom such a far reaching statement. It is so off the mark,
>>for my feebleness to comprehend) that you should not bother.
> No business leader should make more in profit than ten times the
>amount he pays his lowest paid employee. It's good that he makes a
>profit but he needs to share it more with employees by having higher
>wages.
Well, you got me there. That is the greed of men who have no
principle. They have abandon, or never had, the quality of character
that makes one a great man, not just a lowly greedy man. I've read
enough of Jefferson (is there enough?) to know that he had the same
problem with such. How to keep the wealth moving so that in a
generation or two it is not accumulated by families or monopolies of
conspirators.
The problem I see is that the truth is half mixed, and the better the
mix, the easier it is to sway those that are not paying strict
attention.
That and Lord Acton's issue: For evil to triumph all that is needed is
for good men to do nothing.
We war, you and I.
neptune3
>
>Well, Tacitus was a white guy. But then he wrote about other white
>guys that didn't read at the time. His writing called GERMANICA is
>about a bunch of red-headed barbarians that hung around outside of the
>Roman Empire. Brutish lot. Try it. You'll like it!
It's a Wonderful Race
by James Bronson
There once was a college freshman named George who thought he knew it
all.
One night over dinner, George got into an argument with his father.
The
argument began when the young student tried to explain to his father
that as
White people, they should be held accountable for all the evils that
they
had inflicted upon non-Whites througout history. George explained:
"Because
of European racism, we stole the Indians' land, we held blacks in
slavery,
we persecuted the Jews, and we plundered the environment. We've been
oppressive racists for thousands of years so it's only fair that we
pay
economic reparations for all the harm we've done to the world. I'm
pleased
to see that we are ending our political and economic domination of the
oppressed peoples."
George's dad was shocked to hear such talk. "Who put such commie-pinko
nonsense into your head, boy? Did one of your sandal-wearing hippie
college
professors teach you that?" the father asked.
To which the son replied: "That's the truth dad. My anthropology
professor,
Dr.Irving Silverstein, says so. He ought to know. Dr. Silverstein is a
well-respected Ph.D. People of your generation just don't understand
because
you were raised in a White supremacist racist society. That's why I've
come
to admire Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King as the greatest man in American
history. He stood up to the racists of your generation. Because of
him, my
generation of White kids is completely colorblind."
The father angrily replied: "That's bullshit! I've always been
fair-minded
and tolerant of people from all backgrounds and races. I haven't
'oppressed'
anybody, and furthermore there's nothing wrong with being proud of
one's own
people, including the European race of people. Your race is in your
blood.
It's like an extension of your biological family and you ought to be
proud
of your European heritage and identity, just like every other racial
group
in America is proud of its. Why is it OK for them to have a strong
sense of
racial identity but it's evil for us Europeans to feel that way?"
The young "intellectual" laughed at his father. "Come on dad, that's
the
kind of crap Hitler tried to peddle. Those racist attitudes were
discredited
years ago. There's only one race and that's the human race. Diversity
is our
greatest strength. Differences in so-called "race" are as
insignificant as
differences in belly buttons. And besides, UN statistics now show that
low
White birth rates, along with the fact that we live in an
multicultural
society, will mean that Europeans and their ethnocentrist and racist
culture
will have died out by the end of the century," young George said.
Turning red with anger, the father yelled: "You are a walking cliché
you
know that boy? And you think it's a good thing that the European
peoples of
the world will have faded out and ceased to exist?" Young George
replied; "I
think it's great! It will mean the end of racism and the end of hate.
The
oppressed peoples of the world would have been better off if us racist
Europeans had never existed to begin with."
Suddenly there was a blast of cold wind, an explosion, and a huge
smoke
cloud. When the smoke had settled, George found himself alone and lost
in a
cold open field. An angel named Clarence then appeared to him and said
"Well
George, you've got your wish."
George asked: "Where am I? What's going on here? And who are you?"
The angel answered, "George, I'm Clarence the Angel. I was sent here
to show
you what the world would have been like if Europeans, or Whites, had
never
existed. You now live in a world where Europeans never existed."
"Oh. That's cool. I'll have no problem adapting because there's not a
racist
bone in my body. And when I get back to my world, I'll be able to tell
my
professor and my friends how great this non-racist world was. Say, I'm
freezing my ass off out here. Where's the nearest motel?"
"Motel?" replied the angel. "There are no motels here in what was once
called North America. But there are some caves up in those mountains
where
you can find shelter."
"Caves? No way man. I want a nice warm bed to sleep in."
"I don't think you understand George. There are no buildings here in
non-white America because the evil Europeans never came here to build
them.
Whites never existed, remember? The natives live in tents. Would you
like to
go meet some local Indians? Perhaps they'll let you stay in a tent."
"A tent? But it's 10 degrees outside?...Oh well. It's better than a
cave I
suppose. Let's go talk to these Indians...... Wait a second, are these
Indians friendly or hostile?"
"Why, George, that's a racist question to ask. Just because some
Indians
were brutal savages who scalped their victims alive, it doesn't mean
they
all were" said the angel sarcastically.
"I know that Clarence. And I'm not a racist. I hate racism.
Nonetheless, I'd
feel safer if I could have a gun to defend myself if they turn out to
be
violent."
"Gun?" replied the angel. "There are no guns for you to defend
yourself
with. Firearms were invented by evil Europeans. Though we could make a
spear
with those twigs over there."
"That's too much work. Give me a telephone then. I'll call the Indians
to
ask if it's OK."
"Telephone"? replied the angel. There are no telephones here.
Alexander
Graham Bell was another evil white man, so he never existed. No
Europeans
remember?" "Forget it then" replied George. "I'll sleep in the damn
cave."
Upon arriving at the cave, a shivering George asked the angel for a
lighter
so that he could light a fire. "A lighter?" replied Clarence. "There
are no
lighters here, and no matches. Those are European gadgets and evil
Europeans
never existed remember? If you want to get warm, you need to do like
the
locals do and start rubbing twigs together."
"Oh come on man! You mean to tell me these people still rub sticks
together
for fire?"
"That's right George. The Indians live exactly as they did before the
evil
pilgrims arrived from Europe just a few centuries ago." said the angel
sarcastically.
"I refuse to stay in this cold cave and I damn sure ain't gonna light
a fire
with twigs, and I refuse to sleep in a teepee. I'll go to South
America. I
can make it in a warmer climate and I'll adapt quickly to the great
Incan
civilization I learned about at college. Since European racists like
Columbus, Cortez and Pizzaro never existed, the Incans will still be
there.
... I need a car"
"Car?" replied the angel. "There are no cars here. Daimler and Benz,
the
evil German inventors of the internal combustion engine, were never
born..nor was Henry Ford. There are no paved roads either. This is a
world
without evil Europeans remember?"
"No cars! Oh. I'll just have to take a train."
"There are no trains in this world either George. Evil Europeans
weren't
here to build locomotive engines or to discover the many uses of coal,
oil
and gas, or to build trains or lay tracks. But I'll allow you to cheat
just
a bit. Grab hold of my magic robe and we'll fly south."
George touched the angel's robe and they flew south until they arrived
in an
abandoned mud hut in the midst of Incan territory. George was grateful
for
the warm weather but it wasn't long until he began to complain about
the
heat and humidity.
"Clarence, this hut is a little shithole and I'm sweating up a storm
here.
Get me an air-conditioner please."
"Air-conditioner?" replied the angel. "There are no air-conditioners
here.
Air conditioning and refrigeration were inventions created by evil
White
men." "What?!! You mean to tell me that in the year 2002 these people
still
haven't figured out a way to keep themselves or their food cool? a
frustrated George asked.
"No George, they haven't. And they never will."
"This is ridiculous. Let's go to the main city to see the Emperor. I
can't
live like like this. Where's a car...oh I forget...no cars! Dammit
I'll
walk. let's go."
After walking through the jungle for about an hour or so, it began to
get
dark. George then asked Clarence to give him a flashlight so that he
could
see. "Flashlight? Sorry George, but Thomas Edison was an evil White
man
too...and he was never born. There are some branches over there if you
want
to make a torch."
"Never mind that!" George shouted back.
By morning time, Clarence and George had arrived at the temple of the
Incans. A bloody human sacrifice was in progress. George turned to
Clarence
and cried, "They're going to butcher that poor soul! Somebody has got
to
stop this. What horrible murdering beasts! Can't anyone stop them?"
The angel replied "I'm afraid not. Ritual killings are common place
here."Those evil European racists like Columbus, Cortez and Pizzaro
never
existed so the Incans just continued their brutal ways. In fact, it
was the
oppressed peoples themselves who made up the bulk of the Spanish armed
forces. The people saw the Spaniards as liberators who would rid them
of the
oppressive Incan and Mayan rulers and give them a better life."
"I can't blame them for helping the Spaniards then. This is a horrible
place. Get me out of this shithole now!" said George.
'Where would you like to go?" Clarence replied.
George said: "Take me to Africa, maybe there's a more advanced and
humane
civilization there that I can fit into. Where the nearest airport?"
"Oh, I forgot...no Wright Brothers." George said. "How about a boat?"
"Boats?" replied the angel. "I'm afraid the most seaworthy rafts
available
to you won't be of much help in crossing the vast Atlantic Ocean. The
great
Viking sailors and European navigators never existed. No Phoenicians,
no
Leif Erikson, no Henry the Navigator, no Columbus, no Magellan, no
Hudson
and no Robert Fulton. Even if you could build your own ship, there
would be
no compass for you to navigate with and no sextant either. I'm afraid
you're
stuck here George."
"Can I touch your robe and fly to Africa then" asked George.
"You're cheating again George, but all right. Touch my robe and we'll
fly to
Africa."
When they arrived in Africa, George saw thousands of half-naked
African
tribesmen being herded along a dirt path. They were guarded by other
Africans with spears. "What are they doing to those poor men?" George
asked
Clarence.
"They are being enslaved by another tribe. Slavery was common in
Africa long
before the whites arrived." Clarence said."In fact, most of the slaves
who
were shipped to the Americas were sold to the slave traders by African
tribal leaders."
"That's so sad.' George said. "I want to meet Martin Luther King.
Since his
White assassin never existed, this great man should still be alive.
He's
probably a great tribal chief somewhere and leader of an advanced
civilization. He will free these slaves from their African masters.
Take me
to him Clarence."
Clarence led George to a little hut deep in the heart of Africa. The
naked
women and children looked at George in wonder. The young men were out
on a
hunt but the older men stayed behind. George was led to the dingy
little hut
of the tribal witchdocter and spiritual leader. There he saw a
wild-looking
man with a necklace of teeth around his neck and a huge ring pierced
through
his nose. "What the hell is that? George asked.
"Meet Witch-doctor Matunbo Lutamba Kinga" Clarence said. He never
became
Reverend Martin Luther King because there were no universities or
seminaries
built to educate him. Europeans weren't there to create such
opportunities.
But he did become the tribe's spiritual leader. He specilaizes in
casting
evil spells. Perhaps he can help you?"
The witch doctor gazed in wonder at George. Then he motioned to his
henchmen
to seize young George. The tribesmen grabbed hold of George and tied
him to
a nearby tree.
"Stop it! Let me go. What are they going to do to me?" cried George
hysterically.
"They're going to perform a ritual killing on you George. The good
doctor
King...I mean Kinga -- believes that by cutting your heart out while
you are
still alive, it will bring good fortune and fertility to his tribe,"
laughed
Clarence.
"Clarence! Clarence! Help me Clarence! Help me!
"But George, you told me that you wanted to go to Africa and to meet
your
hero Reverend King."
George said: "This part of Africa has not developed yet. I can see
that now.
Take me to North Africa where Egypt and Carthage established great
civilizations. Just get me out of here, please."
Just as the witch doctor's spear was about to carve out George's
heart,
George vanished into thin air. He then found himself on the banks of
the
river Nile in Egypt.
"Thank you Clarence. Thank you," George said. "I don't understand it
Clarence. Why does so much of the world remain so brutal and
primitive? I
learned during Black History Month about many talented black inventors
and
scientists. Garrett Morgan, George Washington Carver, Benjamin
Banneker,
Granville Woods. Then there's Dr. Carson, the preeminent brain surgeon
in
all of America. Where are these men?"
Clarense replied: "Don't you understand yet? America, and Africa,
exist
exactly as they did before the Europeans discovered them. Civilization
as
you had known it had only been introduced to these people just a few
centuries ago by the Europeans. There are no universities, no
hospitals, no
means of transportation other than animals, no science, no medicine,
no
machines. In fact, the wheel hasn't even been discovered in
Sub-Saharan
Africa! Those black scientists, inventors, doctors, athletes, and
entertainers you speak of were never given the opportunity to realize
their
full human potential because Europeans weren't around to introduce
higher
civilization and learning to them. There are no George Washington
Carvers in
this non-European world, no Dr. Carsons, no Booker T. Washingtons, no
Benjamin Bannekers, no Michael Jordans, no Oprah Winfreys, no Bill
Cosbys,
no..."
"Stop it! That can't be!" cried George. "Let's walk over to the great
pyramids of Egypt right now and I'll show you one of the great wonders
of
the world .....built by non-Whites"
They walked a few miles before George stopped and asked where the
nearest
toilet was. "Toilets?" replied the angel. There are no toilets or
urinals in
this world. Plumbing was developed by evil Europeans. The people in
this
non-White world still relieve themselves in open fields."
Clarence turned around so George could do his business. "I need some
toilet
paper." George said.
"Toilet paper?" replied the angel. "There..."
"I know. I know. Toilet paper hasn't been invented yet. Just hand me a
rag
then".
Clarence obliged and the two of them went on their way.
"I don't understand. According to my recollections from Geography
class, the
great pyramids should be near this very spot. We ought to be able to
see
them from miles away," said George.
"Well, George, I'm sure your professors at the college never told you
this,
but the ancient Egyptians were not black or brown. They were
Caucasians. The
anthropologists who examined the Egyptian mummies confirmed this fact.
There
are no pyramids and no Sphinx either. And the Carthaginians were White
too."
George became depressed, but he was determined to prove his beliefs.
"What's
in Europe?" he asked.
"Europe became populated by Huns and other Asiatic tribes. They've
settled
down a bit but life is much the same as it is in North America. A
nomadic
existence based on hunting and food gathering. No great cities, no
science,
no buildings, no culture, no fine art - just a hard daily struggle
against
life and the elements of nature. In a Europe without evil Whites, the
Roman
Empire never existed nor did the Greeks. There was no Renaisance
either."
"Take me to Asia then. Surely the great civilizations of Persia,
India,
China, and Japan will suit me" George said. "Clarence, to the Taj
Mahal
please." "The Taj Mahal?" replied the angel. "Don't you know that the
ancient Persian and Indian civilizations were established by ancient
Indo-European tribes who crossed the Himalayas? They are the ones who
civilized India and built the Taj Mahal. Those are the great
civilizations
that Marco Polo, Columbus, and others were searching for.Did you know
that
Iran is Persian for "land of the Aryan?"
George said: "Don't tell me that the Indians were White men! That
can't be.
In the world I came from, I knew many Indians and they were not
White!"
Clarence explained: "As the centuries passed, the Indo-Europeans who
created
Indian civilization intermarried with the native majorities who
populated
the Indian subcontinent. Gradually there were less and less evil White
people until they faded out completely, along with the advanced
civilization
they had built. You will notice that there are still a few
white-skinned and
fair-haired Indians and Pakistanis around today -- in the world you
came
from that is.
George became worried. He knew he could never fit into the harsh
primitive
world he had been thrust into. Suddenly he thought of Japan. "Japan!
I'll
show you now Clarence. Take me to Japan. If the Japanese can make TVs
and
cameras then I'm sure I'll find a decent civilization that I can live
in."
Clarence transported George to Japan. George observed that Japanese
society
was the most orderly, advanced and civil that he had seen, but it
seemed as
if almost everyone was either a rice farmer, a fisherman, or a
soldier.
There were no cars, no skyscapers, no lights, no stereos, no sciences,
no
technologies, no universities. It was a stagnant agricultural society
that
seemed to have reached its high water mark and was incapable of moving
forward. George knew he could not live here either.
Clarence explained to Geeorge: "Even the industrious Japanese and
Chinese
peoples had to rely on the evil Europeans to build the modern Asia
that you
had in mind. In this world, Japan exists exactly as it did before
Commodore
Perry's American naval ships arrived in Japan in the 1850s. There's no
industry, no technology, no Fuji film, no Sony, no Hitachi, no
Panasonic, no
Toyota, no Sushi bars, no baseball...none of the trappings or comforts
of
modern life. These things don't exist in Japan or anywhere else
because
Europeans weren't there to create them and share them with the rest of
the
world. Would you care for a bowl of rice George?"
George began to feel sick in both his body and his mind. Not only was
he
depressed, but exposure to the harsh elements of nature had left him
physically ill. "Clarence, I seem to have contracted some type of
sickness.
I must have some anti-biotics."
"Anti-biotics? There's no...
"Oh Shut up already! Then just take me back to the world as it was!"
"Sorry George. I'm not authorized to do that. Only my boss can make
that
call." Clarence said to him: "You see George. Your father was right.
You
really had a wonderful race. Don't you see what a foolish mistake it
is to
be ashamed and guilty about your own people, and to let them die out?
This
is what the world would be like without the creative spark of Edison
and
Ford and Pasteur and Marconi. No great scientists, or mathematicians,
or
inventors or fine artists. No Archimedes, no Aristotle, no Socrates,
no
Alexander, no Renaissance, no Newton, no Kepler, no Goddard, no
Mendel, no
Tesla, no Faraday, no Guttenberg, no Shakespeare, no Dickens, no
Twain, no
Mozart, no Beethoven, no Da Vinci, no Michelangelo, no Galileo, no
Copernicus. No Venice, no Paris, no Lisbon, no Madrid, no Zurich, no
Berlin,
no St. Petersburg, no Budapest, no Rome, no Milan, no Vienna, no
London, no
New York, no Rio, no Sydney. No orchestras, no museums, no
universities, no
hospitals, no libraries, no theaters, no radio, no books, no
television, no
electricity, no refrigeration, no heating, no plumbing, no houses, no
steel,
no stadiums, no vaccines, no cars, no planes, no trains, no ships, no
dentists, no surgeons, no computers, no telephones, and most important
-
there's no creative genius to be found that could create and sustain
such a
high level of civilization. There's nothing for the people of this
world to
build upon. It's just a daily struggle for subsistence. A brutal
planet
where the few people who aren't mired in eternal ignorance and
darkness have
reached their peak of civilization and are advancing no further."
Clarence went on to lecture the broken and depressed young man for
seven
days straight. He covered everything. History, science, economics,
philosophy, art, literature, fine music, architecture, medicine,
politics,
agriculture, religion, and all the creations and contributions that
the
European peoples had made in every conceivable field of human
endeavor.
George listened closely to every word. He felt like a man who had been
reborn.
After his lecture, Clarence the Angel floated away towards heaven. "I
hope
you have found all this to be educational, and I hope you have learned
an
important lesson. Enjoy your world George!" mocked the departing
angel.
George began to sob like a baby. It was the year 2002 and he was alone
and
hungry in a backwards world where Europeans had never existed. He
cried out
to the stars: "Please God. I see what a fool I've been. I understand
now
what my father was trying to tell me. I want to go back to the world
that I
came from. A world where Europeans not only existed, but blessed the
rest of
humanity world with their unique creative ability. I want to live in a
civilized world. Please God!...take me back!...take me back!...Oh
God....please."
Suddenly George was transported back to his college dormitory. Drunk
with
joy, George jumped into the showers before he could even take his
clothes
off!.
"Warm water! and soap! Life is beautiful!" he screamed.
George's floormates looked at him as if he was crazy. "George! Have
you gone
crazy?" asked a bewildered schoolmate.
"No my friend. I haven't taken leave of my senses. I've come to them!"
George replied. George then began to sing classic European folk songs
in the
shower. Miraculously, he was able to sing in many different languages.
He
sang O Sole Mio in Italian, Amazing Grace in English, Gloire
Immortelle in
French, Das Ist Der Tag in German, and also Belgian, Spanish and
French
ballads and waltzes. Tears of sheer joy began to stream down his
cheeks. The
degenerate music of Hip-Hop and Rap lost all of its appeal to young
George.
After his shower, George drove to a nearby restaurant and ordered two
whole
entrees. One was Lasagna and the other was a delicious Veal Marsala.
With
his Italian food he had a Greek salad with Spanish olives and Russian
dressing, drank a whole bottle of French wine, followed by a German
pastry
for dessert. He finished his meal off with a hot cup of English tea
and a
Cuban cigar.
George said out loud: "Oh those European peoples and their delicious
cuisine. Clarence was right after all. What a wonderful race!"
George was happy, but at the same time he realized there was much work
to be
done. He thought of all those poor whites in Rhodesia and South Africa
who
were being murdered and raped ever since they gave up control of those
once-European nations. He thought of the many thousands of qualified
Whites
who were passed up for good jobs and college entrance because of
racial
quotas that discriminate against Europeans. He thought about the
decling
birthrates among all the European nations of the world. He remembered
that
Europeans everywhere were dwindling in numbers every year even as
their own
nations were being flooded with third world immigration. He recalled
the
O.J. Simpson verdict and how millions of blacks in America cheered
when that
brutal double murderer was set free by a black jury after he stabbed
two
Whites to death. He remembered the Los Angeles riots of 1992, where
dozens
of Whites were dragged out of their vehicles and killed like dogs in
the
streets by packs of White-hating monsters who were never even
punished! He
remembered the time when Jesse Jackson led a cheer at Stanford
University:
"Hey Hey Ho Ho, Western Civ. has got to go!" His European blood began
to
boil in righteous indignation when he recalled how Jesse Jackson once
said
he had spit in White people's food when he was a young restaurant
worker.
George now understood that that his people were on a collision course
with
worldwide disaster and genocide. George realized that this great
people must
not perish from the face of the earth.
George could not wait to see his father. He longed to embrace him and
apologize for all of the foolish and disrespectful things he had said
to
him. But first, George had a score to settle with a certain college
professor. He walked into Dr. Silverstein's auditorium and quietly
took a
seat in the back row. The nasal voiced Silverstein was lecturing on
and on
about racial and gender inequalities in European-centered
civilizations. It
was vintage Silverstein. George's impressionable White schoolmates,
with
their baggy pants, hip-hop clothes and backwards baseball caps, were
swallowing Silverstein's poison pills hook, line and sinker. After
letting
Silverstein spew his cultural poison for about 15 minutes or so,
George
raised his hand so that he could give the profesor a piece of his
newly
educated mind.
"George? Is that you? I remember you from last semester. I wasn't
aware that
you were here today. I failed to recognize you in that shirt and tie,
and
without your earrings. You must have enjoyed my course so much that
you
signed up again eh? Class, I'd like for you to meet George. He was one
of my
brightest students last semester. He truly has a thorough grasp of the
ideas
presented in this course. George, would you be so kind as to tell my
class
about that brilliant term paper you wrote about European racism,
imperialism, and the need for monetary reparations?"
That's when young George let loose on the unsuspecting Professor.
"ENOUGH! You scheming devil! You mendacious fabricator of falsehoods!
You
pusillanimous purveyor of pinko propaganda! How dare you try to
corrupt and
manipulate our young minds when your filthy lies. We Europeans have
nothing
to be ashamed of, nothing to apologize for, and everything to be proud
of.
And most of all, we don't owe anybody jack-shit - not one thin dime!
To the
contrary, it is the rest of humanity that owes us a debt which can
never be
repaid! We are the rightful heirs and protectors of a rich cultural
heritage. You vile manipulator! We are the sons of the Romans, the
sons of
the Greeks, the Celtics, the Vikings, the Normans, the Saxons. Why do
you
inflict shame and guilt upon us? We Europeans didn't just contribute
to
civilization...WE ARE CIVILIZATION! And I decare that I will no longer
tolerate you shithead "intellectuals" trying to tear our people down.
Never
again will we walk on eggshells when we speak, always fearing that we
might
be called "racist." I no longer care what people think. All that
matters is
the truth which you have sought to pervert!"
"What are you up to anyway? Why do you to corrupt my young peers by
shoving
false heroes down their throats. Enough of your Marxist games of
divide and
conquer, you commie pinko subversive! I don't want to learn anymore
about
Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or Black History Month.
They
would not have amounted to anything without the institutions of high
civilization created by the European peoples. I'm going to set this
class
straight about who the truly great men of history are - the European
statesmen, scientists, explorers, monarchs, navigators, conquerors,
inventors, artists, writers, philosophers - the innovative giants of
history
that you and your ilk have erased from our collective memories. You
speak of
a world liberated from European influence? Permit me tell your
students
about such a world, Silverstein, because I can speak from personal
experience, you wretched little conspiring monster!"
Silverstein turned white as a ghost. He was shellshocked and rendered
speechless for the first time in his career! Never in all of his years
at
the University had a student dared to so boldly challenge his
falsehoods.
Speaking from the heart as well as the mind, and with an eloquence he
never
thought he could muster, George broke out into a 60-minute monologue
on
history, science, philosophy, culture, and all the other attributes
that
constitute high civilization. The young students were captivated by
George's
brilliant oratory. Many were moved to tears. By the end of his tirade,
George's reawakened classmates were thundering their approval of his
speech.
The class gave George a standing ovation and they thanked him for
helping
them rediscover and reclaim their own sense of pride and lost
identity. The
unstoppable power of truth had melted away years of Marxist guilt
tripping,
self hate, wimpishness and cultural brainwashing in just one
unforgettable
hour. The inspired students proceeded to storm out of Silverstein's
class,
throwing their hip-hop baseball caps and nose earings at him as they
stampeded out and vowed never to return. They lifted George up upon
their
shoulders and carried him out of the auditorium like a conquering
hero. With
a glint in his eye, George glanced up towards the sky, winked and said
"Thank you, Clarence."
Dr. Silverstein was left humiliated and visibly shaken. He knew that
these
reawakened European kids could never again be brainwashed with
"political
correctness" and White guilt. Silverstein's greatest fear was that
more of
these proud European youths would one day reawaken and take their
country
and civilization back from the Silversteins of the world.
Silverstein was worried, but he remained confident that most young men
and
women would never learn the truth about their glorious past and unique
creative abilties. After all, the mass media, Hollywood, the music
industry,
the colleges, and the public schools are all controlled by "liberals"
like
Dr. Silverstein. With the power of political correctness in their
hands,
they can continue to tear down our European ancesters, destroy our
institutions and traditions, instigate blacks and other races against
the
whites, flood America with third-world immigration, and push "hip-hop"
music, homosexuality, and other garbage onto a weak, confused and
morally
degenerate youth. After reflecting upon these facts, Silverstein
smiled a
devilish grin and muttered to himself: "A few of these European sheep
may
wake up to what's being done to them, but the majority of these idiots
never
will." And he smiled again....and laughed with diabolical Marxist
glee. Then
he repeated to himself "No...they will never figure it all out until
it's
too late."
Or will they?
>
>Well, I guess having a good life, loving others, and working to your
>satisfaction can count for something, no? In the public arena your
>position is difficult to hold as it turns folks like an inny belly
>button. Kind of disappears, ya know? Goes SOMEWHERE, but then we lose
>it. And in your case where it comes out is full of hatred. We don't
>work well under hatred. But it is even more insidious than that. But
>then both hatred and anti-people-no-matter-what-flavor gets to the
>individual in the end. Sorry way to go. We cannot argue the truth
>element of your statements. That is not the issue, really. Blacks CAN
>dance well, Jews are disproportional influential in that area relative
>to the population, and the Brits couldn't cook a meal to save their
>Queen. And with ALL that, folks on the whole, are rather screwed up.
> So?
Jews are enemies. For one thing Jews were behind Political
Correctness:
The Origins of Political Correctness
An Accuracy in Academia Address by Bill Lind
Variations of this speech have been delivered to various AIA
conferences including the 2000 Consevative University at American
University
Where does all this stuff that you've heard about this morning - the
victim feminism, the gay rights movement, the invented statistics, the
rewritten history, the lies, the demands, all the rest of it - where
does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have
to be fearful of what they say, of what they write, and of what they
think. They have to be afraid of using the wrong word, a word
denounced as offensive or insensitive, or racist, sexist, or
homophobic.
We have seen other countries, particularly in this century, where this
has been the case. And we have always regarded them with a mixture of
pity, and to be truthful, some amusement, because it has struck us as
so strange that people would allow a situation to develop where they
would be afraid of what words they used. But we now have this
situation in this country. We have it primarily on college campuses,
but it is spreading throughout the whole society. Were does it come
from? What is it?
We call it "Political Correctness." The name originated as something
of a joke, literally in a comic strip, and we tend still to think of
it as only half-serious. In fact, it's deadly serious. It is the great
disease of our century, the disease that has left tens of millions of
people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, indeed around the world.
It is the disease of ideology. PC is not funny. PC is deadly serious.
If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we
quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural
Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms.
It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and
the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic
tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels
are very obvious.
First of all, both are totalitarian ideologies. The totalitarian
nature of Political Correctness is revealed nowhere more clearly than
on college campuses, many of which at this point are small ivy covered
North Koreas, where the student or faculty member who dares to cross
any of the lines set up by the gender feminist or the homosexual-
rights activists, or the local black or Hispanic group, or any of the
other sainted "victims" groups that PC revolves around, quickly find
themselves in judicial trouble. Within the small legal system of the
college, they face formal charges - some star-chamber proceeding - and
punishment. That is a little look into the future that Political
Correctness intends for the nation as a whole.
Indeed, all ideologies are totalitarian because the essence of an
ideology (I would note that conservatism correctly understood is not
an ideology) is to take some philosophy and say on the basis of this
philosophy certain things must be true - such as the whole of the
history of our culture is the history of the oppression of women.
Since reality contradicts that, reality must be forbidden. It must
become forbidden to acknowledge the reality of our history. People
must be forced to live a lie, and since people are naturally reluctant
to live a lie, they naturally use their ears and eyes to look out and
say, "Wait a minute. This isn't true. I can see it isn't true," the
power of the state must be put behind the demand to live a lie. That
is why ideology invariably creates a totalitarian state.
Second, the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness, like economic
Marxism, has a single factor explanation of history. Economic Marxism
says that all of history is determined by ownership of means of
production. Cultural Marxism, or Political Correctness, says that all
history is determined by power, by which groups defined in terms of
race, sex, etc., have power over which other groups. Nothing else
matters. All literature, indeed, is about that. Everything in the past
is about that one thing.
Third, just as in classical economic Marxism certain groups, i.e.
workers and peasants, are a priori good, and other groups, i.e., the
bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil. In the cultural Marxism of
Political Correctness certain groups are good - feminist women, (only
feminist women, non-feminist women are deemed not to exist) blacks,
Hispanics, homosexuals. These groups are determined to be "victims,"
and therefore automatically good regardless of what any of them do.
Similarly, white males are determined automatically to be evil,
thereby becoming the equivalent of the bourgeoisie in economic
Marxism.
Fourth, both economic and cultural Marxism rely on expropriation. When
the classical Marxists, the communists, took over a country like
Russia, they expropriated the bourgeoisie, they took away their
property. Similarly, when the cultural Marxists take over a university
campus, they expropriate through things like quotas for admissions.
When a white student with superior qualifications is denied admittance
to a college in favor of a black or Hispanic who isn't as well
qualified, the white student is expropriated. And indeed, affirmative
action, in our whole society today, is a system of expropriation.
White owned companies don't get a contract because the contract is
reserved for a company owned by, say, Hispanics or women. So
expropriation is a principle tool for both forms of Marxism....
In 1923 in Germany, a think-tank is established that takes on the role
of translating Marxism from economic into cultural terms, that creates
Political Correctness as we know it today, and essentially it has
created the basis for it by the end of the 1930s. This comes about
because the very wealthy young son of a millionaire German trader by
the name of Felix Weil has become a Marxist and has lots of money to
spend. He is disturbed by the divisions among the Marxists, so he
sponsors something called the First Marxist Work Week, where he brings
Lukacs and many of the key German thinkers together for a week,
working on the differences of Marxism.
And he says, "What we need is a think-tank." Washington is full of
think tanks and we think of them as very modern. In fact they go back
quite a ways. He endows an institute, associated with Frankfurt
University, established in 1923, that was originally supposed to be
known as the Institute for Marxism. But the people behind it decided
at the beginning that it was not to their advantage to be openly
identified as Marxist. The last thing Political Correctness wants is
for people to figure out it's a form of Marxism. So instead they
decide to name it the Institute for Social Research.
Weil is very clear about his goals. In 1971, he wrote to Martin Jay
the author of a principle book on the Frankfurt School, as the
Institute for Social Research soon becomes known informally, and he
said, "I wanted the institute to become known, perhaps famous, due to
its contributions to Marxism." Well, he was successful. The first
director of the Institute, Carl Grunberg, an Austrian economist,
concluded his opening address, according to Martin Jay, "by clearly
stating his personal allegiance to Marxism as a scientific
methodology." Marxism, he said, would be the ruling principle at the
Institute, and that never changed...
The stuff we've been hearing about this morning - the radical
feminism, the women's studies departments, the gay studies
departments, the black studies departments - all these things are
branches of Critical Theory. What the Frankfurt School essentially
does is draw on both Marx and Freud in the 1930s to create this theory
called Critical Theory. The term is ingenious because you're tempted
to ask, "What is the theory?" The theory is to criticize. The theory
is that the way to bring down Western culture and the capitalist order
is not to lay down an alternative. They explicitly refuse to do that.
They say it can't be done, that we can't imagine what a free society
would look like (their definition of a free society). As long as we're
living under repression - the repression of a capitalistic economic
order which creates (in their theory) the Freudian condition, the
conditions that Freud describes in individuals of repression - we
can't even imagine it. What Critical Theory is about is simply
criticizing. It calls for the most destructive criticism possible, in
every possible way, designed to bring the current order down. And, of
course, when we hear from the feminists that the whole of society is
just out to get women and so on, that kind of criticism is a
derivative of Critical Theory. It is all coming from the 1930s, not
the 1960s.
Other key members who join up around this time are Theodore Adorno,
and, most importantly, Erich Fromm and Herbert Marcuse. Fromm and
Marcuse introduce an element which is central to Political
Correctness, and that's the sexual element. And particularly Marcuse,
who in his own writings calls for a society of "polymorphous
perversity," that is his definition of the future of the world that
they want to create. Marcuse in particular by the 1930s is writing
some very extreme stuff on the need for sexual liberation, but this
runs through the whole Institute. So do most of the themes we see in
Political Correctness, again in the early 30s. In Fromm's view,
masculinity and femininity were not reflections of `essential' sexual
differences, as the Romantics had thought. They were derived instead
from differences in life functions, which were in part socially
determined." Sex is a construct; sexual differences are a construct...
How does all of this stuff flood in here? How does it flood into our
universities, and indeed into our lives today? The members of the
Frankfurt School are Marxist, they are also, to a man, Jewish. In 1933
the Nazis came to power in Germany, and not surprisingly they shut
down the Institute for Social Research. And its members fled. They
fled to New York City, and the Institute was reestablished there in
1933 with help from Columbia University. And the members of the
Institute, gradually through the 1930s, though many of them remained
writing in German, shift their focus from Critical Theory about German
society, destructive criticism about every aspect of that society, to
Critical Theory directed toward American society. There is another
very important transition when the war comes. Some of them go to work
for the government, including Herbert Marcuse, who became a key figure
in the OSS (the predecessor to the CIA), and some, including
Horkheimer and Adorno, move to Hollywood.
These origins of Political Correctness would probably not mean too
much to us today except for two subsequent events. The first was the
student rebellion in the mid-1960s, which was driven largely by
resistance to the draft and the Vietnam War. But the student rebels
needed theory of some sort. They couldn't just get out there and say,
"Hell no we won't go," they had to have some theoretical explanation
behind it. Very few of them were interested in wading through Das
Kapital. Classical, economic Marxism is not light, and most of the
radicals of the 60s were not deep. Fortunately for them, and
unfortunately for our country today, and not just in the university,
Herbert Marcuse remained in America when the Frankfurt School
relocated back to Frankfurt after the war. And whereas Mr. Adorno in
Germany is appalled by the student rebellion when it breaks out there
- when the student rebels come into Adorno's classroom, he calls the
police and has them arrested - Herbert Marcuse, who remained here, saw
the 60s student rebellion as the great chance. He saw the opportunity
to take the work of the Frankfurt School and make it the theory of the
New Left in the United States.
One of Marcuse's books was the key book. It virtually became the bible
of the SDS and the student rebels of the 60s. That book was Eros and
Civilization. Marcuse argues that under a capitalistic order (he
downplays the Marxism very strongly here, it is subtitled, A
Philosophical Inquiry into Freud, but the framework is Marxist),
repression is the essence of that order and that gives us the person
Freud describes - the person with all the hang-ups, the neuroses,
because his sexual instincts are repressed. We can envision a future,
if we can only destroy this existing oppressive order, in which we
liberate eros, we liberate libido, in which we have a world of
"polymorphous perversity," in which you can "do you own thing." And by
the way, in that world there will no longer be work, only play. What a
wonderful message for the radicals of the mid-60s! They're students,
they're baby-boomers, and they've grown up never having to worry about
anything except eventually having to get a job. And here is a guy
writing in a way they can easily follow. He doesn't require them to
read a lot of heavy Marxism and tells them everything they want to
hear which is essentially, "Do your own thing," "If it feels good do
it," and "You never have to go to work." By the way, Marcuse is also
the man who creates the phrase, "Make love, not war." Coming back to
the situation people face on campus, Marcuse defines "liberating
tolerance" as intolerance for anything coming from the Right and
tolerance for anything coming from the Left. Marcuse joined the
Frankfurt School, in 1932 (if I remember right). So, all of this goes
back to the 1930s.
In conclusion, America today is in the throes of the greatest and
direst transformation in its history. We are becoming an ideological
state, a country with an official state ideology enforced by the power
of the state. In "hate crimes" we now have people serving jail
sentences for political thoughts. And the Congress is now moving to
expand that category ever further. Affirmative action is part of it.
The terror against anyone who dissents from Political Correctness on
campus is part of it. It's exactly what we have seen happen in Russia,
in Germany, in Italy, in China, and now it's coming here. And we don't
recognize it because we call it Political Correctness and laugh it
off. My message today is that it's not funny, it's here, it's growing
and it will eventually destroy, as it seeks to destroy, everything
that we have ever defined as our freedom and our culture.
<http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-PC-Origins-Tony.htm>
>
>Spare me what the loser wrote. BTW, it was in the papers. He lost and
>the whole tribe as well. He was not perfect picture of The Aryan, and
>he lead them down the path to hell, as a nation and populace,
He made a nation without Jewish supervisors. It was inevitable that
there would be war with the Jewish controlled countries.
> but I've
>read his works and need not re-read again on a monitor. Thanks though.
>BTW, you are mixing race with identity. Arguments could be made that
>solidarity and identity as a people make a great nation. In the past
>it was a tribalism you called race. Since then we have found it to be
>other dynamics as well. Besides, those that think they are on top
>write the "on-top" stories of themselves and guess who wins and loses?
>"We" win and the "barbarians" lose! Not a great insight, but factual.
>
>
>Well, as I enjoy movies I will check that one out. BTW, "good people"
>are a rarity. For the norm, on the whole, etc. folks want more, no
>matter what their station in life.
>
>I recall this part was about China. Our gov't refused to acknowledge
>China's existence until 1972 or so. So we were not allowed per gov't
>mandate. Now, thanks to gov't and worse yet NGOs like NAFTA and GATT
>and the World Bank, big biz gets tax credits for going over their.
>The US gov't is no longer laissez fare.
>
>You are some kind of commie freak. What kind of crap are you smoking?
>Here I thought you MIGHT have a brain in your head,
You have your beliefs because your only source of information is
the Jewish controlled media.
Len
You have learned Control+A, Control+ C, and Control+V.
You are giving white guys a bad name and this is not a good time to do
it, so knock it off. Try typing whole words in structured and coherent
sentences from your own hand. This cut and paste stuff went out in the
seventh grade. Oh!
Never mind.
Just stop it.
>>Well, Tacitus was a white guy. But then he wrote about other white
>>guys that didn't read at the time. His writing called GERMANICA is
>>about a bunch of red-headed barbarians that hung around outside of the
>>Roman Empire. Brutish lot. Try it. You'll like it!
>
>It's a Wonderful Race