Re: The word "swastika" was mistranslated & created the "swastika myth"
GEM
"Harlan Messinger" <hmessinger...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:386fkuF...@individual.net...
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > Harlan Messinger wrote:
> >
> >>re...@ij.net wrote:
> >>
> >>>The word "swastika" was a misleading translation of "hakenkreuze." The
> >>>obvious translation should have been "hooked cross."
> >>
> >>The name of that shape in English is "swastika", so "swastika" is the
> >>correct translation for any term in any language that refers to that
shape.
> >>
> >> > The monstrous
> >>
> >>>National Socialist German Workers' Party always used the word
> >>>"hakenkreuze" and never used the word "swastika" and there is not
> >>>evidence they even knew the latter term.
> >>
> >>What do you think is remarkable about that? The Germans didn't call it
> >>"swastika" because they spoke German, not English, and therefore used
> >>the German term for that shape, just as we English speakers continue to
> >>use the English term for it.
> >
> > The Nazi swastika is a mirror image of the Indian swastika.
>
> Is an oval an oval only when it's oriented a certain way? Is the mirror
> image of an S-curve not an S-curve? I'm unfamiliar with the notion that
> a shape is no longer the same shape when you turn it over.
Are you a Republican??
GEM
Harlan Messinger
> "Harlan Messinger" <hmessinger...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:386fkuF...@individual.net...
>
>>image of an S-curve not an S-curve? I'm unfamiliar with the notion that
>>a shape is no longer the same shape when you turn it over.
>
>
> Are you a Republican??
>
> GEM
OK, I can tell discussions with you are *really* rewarding.
<plonk>
GEM
> GEM wrote:
> >
> > The swastika spins in the opposite direction to the nazi hooked cross.
> > In other words, they are NOT the same symbols.
>
> An equilateral triangle on its base and another one on its vertex are
> two different symbols in mathematical proofs. They are still both
triangles.
=======
Which of these two letter symbols below is the letter P?
Is one of the symbols below a letter Q??
p q
Since reversing the P has no effect on the symbol, it is obviously still a
P, thus there is no Q, according to your beliefs. Is that correct?
The letter symbols B and D have the same problem - in lower case.
In some cases, when a symbol is reversed - mirror image - it has a new or
different meaning altogether, while some symbols are the same regardless of
their orientation. However, there is no rule that says all symbols must
retain their exact meanings when reversed, as far as I know.
But you already knew that didn't you. :)
GEM
GEM
"Cary Kittrell" <ca...@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:cvl7to$vb$1...@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
> In article <386lgoF...@individual.net> Harlan Messinger
<hmessinger...@comcast.net> writes:
> > GEM wrote:
> > >
> > > The swastika spins in the opposite direction to the nazi hooked cross.
> > > In other words, they are NOT the same symbols.
> >
> > An equilateral triangle on its base and another one on its vertex are
> > two different symbols in mathematical proofs. They are still both
triangles.
>
>
>
>
> -- cary
:)
Martin Ambuhl
> You don’t get to choose the vocabulary of your language, if that vocabulary
> is already established, and you’re not, say, a member of the Académie
> Française or running the government of the place.
Sure he does. He doesn't get to choose the vocabulary of your language
or mine, though.
Aidan Kehoe
Ar an ceathrú lá is fiche de mí Feabhra, scríobh Martin Ambuhl:
Is a language really a language if only one person _can_ be sure that
they’re using it properly? (This is not to argue that “idiolect” isn’t a
useful word.)
--
“I, for instance, am gung-ho about open source because my family is being
held hostage in Rob Malda’s basement. But who fact-checks me, or Enderle,
when we say something in public? No-one!” -- Danny O’Brien
Harlan Messinger
But that's his goal--he's criticizing the common usage, saying it should
change.
Peter T. Daniels
In short, a language fascist, amusingly at odds with his purported
philosophy of "liberalism" aka libertarianism.
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
Beach Runner
What's the agenda?
Jacques Guy
> The swastika spins in the opposite direction to the nazi hooked cross.
> In other words, they are NOT the same symbols.
False. The Hindu swastika occurs in both levorotatory and
dextrorotatory forms.
The basic difference between the swastika and the hakenkreuz
is that the latter is tilted 45 degrees.
The dextrorotatory swastiska is the most common form.
The places to find out are articles written by people
familiar with Hinduism (as distinct from the theosophist
mob), here for instance:
Cary Kittrell
> Words evolve. Swastika is a Nazi symbol. That's what it means now.
> What's the agenda?
Heh. We got's your agenda right here:
http://rexcurry.net/
Browse a bit; I suspect you'll quickly get the flavor.
-- cary
Topaz
England's Guilt
by Joseph Goebbels
It is a major error to assume that England's plutocrats slipped into
the war against their will or even against their intentions. The
opposite is true. The English warmongers wanted the war and used all
the resources at their disposal over the years to bring it about. They
surely were not surprised by the war. English plutocracy had no goal
other than to unleash war against Germany at the right moment, and
this since Germany first began to seek once again to be a world power.
Poland really had little to do with the outbreak of war between the
Reich and England. It was only a means to an end. England did not
support the Polish government out of principle or for humanitarian
reasons. That is clear from the fact that England gave Poland no help
of any kind whatsoever when the war began. Nor did England take any
measures against Russia. The opposite, in fact. The London warring
clique to this day has tried to bring Russia into the campaign of
aggression against Germany.
The encirclement of Germany long before the outbreak of the war was
traditional English policy. From the beginning, England has always
directed its main military might against Germany. It never could
tolerate a strong Reich on the Continent. It justified its policy by
claiming that it wanted to maintain a balance of forces in Europe.
Today there is still another reason. The English warmongers conceal
it. It is crassly egotistic. The English prime minister announced the
day the war began that England's goal was to destroy Hitlerism.
However, he defined Hitlerism in a way other than how the English
plutocracy actually sees it. The English warmongers claim that
National Socialism wants to conquer the world. No nation is secure
against German aggression. An end must be made of the German hunger
for power. The limit came in the conflict with Poland. In reality,
however, there is another reason for England's war with Germany. The
English warmongers cannot seriously claim that Germany wants to
conquer the world, particularly in view of the fact that England
controls nearly two thirds of the world. And Germany since 1933 has
never threatened English interests.
So when Chamberlain says that England wants to destroy Hitlerism in
this war, he is in one sense incorrect. But in another sense, he is
speaking the truth. England does want to destroy Hitlerism. It sees
Hitlerism as the present internal state of the Reich, which is a thorn
in the eye of English plutocracy.
England is a capitalist democracy. Germany is a socialist people's
state. And it is not the case that we think England is the richest
land on earth. There are lords and City men in England who are in fact
the richest men on earth. The broad masses, however, see little of
this wealth. We see in England an army of millions of impoverished,
socially enslaved and oppressed people. Child labor is still a matter
of course there. They have only heard about social welfare programs.
Parliament occasionally discusses social legislation. Nowhere else is
there such terrible and horrifying inequality as in the English slums.
Those with good breeding take no notice of it. Should anyone speak of
it in public, the press, which serves plutocratic democracy, quickly
brands him the worst kind of rascal. They do not hesitate from making
major changes in the Constitution if they are necessary to preserve
capitalist democracy.
Capitalism democracy suffers from every possible modern social
ailment. The Lords and City people can remain the richest people one
earth only because they constantly maintain their wealth by exploiting
their colonies and preserving unbelievable poverty in their own
country.
Germany, on the other hand, has based its domestic policies on new and
modern social principles. That is why it is a danger to English
plutocracy. It is also why English capitalists want to destroy
Hitlerism. They see Hitlerism as all the generous social reforms that
have occurred in Germany since 1933. The English plutocrats rightly
fear that good things are contagious, that they could endanger English
capitalism.
That is why England declared war on Germany. Since it was accustomed
to letting others fight its wars, it looked to the European continent
to find those ready to fight for England's interests. France was ready
to take on this degrading duty, since the same kind of people ruled
France. They too were ready for war out of egotistic reasons. Western
European democracy is really only a Western European plutocracy that
rules the world. It declared war on German socialism because it
endangered their capitalist interests.
A similar drama began in 1914. England had more luck during those four
and a half years than it is having today. Europe's nations had no
chance to see what was happening. The nations of Europe today have no
desire to play the same role they played during the World War. England
and France stand alone. Still, England is trying once again to wage
war without making any personal sacrifice. The goal is to blockade
Germany, to gradually bring it to submit by starvation. That is
longstanding English policy. They used it successfully in the
Napoleonic wars, and also during the World War. It would work now as
well, if the German people had not been educated by National
Socialism. National Socialism is immune to English temptations.
English propaganda lies no longer work in Germany. They have gradually
lost their effectiveness in the rest of the world as well, since
German propaganda today reaches far beyond its borders. This time,
English plutocracy will not succeed in driving a wedge between the
German people and their leadership, though that is their goal.
The German nation today is defending not only its honor and
independence, but also the great social accomplishments it has made
through hard and untiring work since 1933. It is a people's state
built on the foundation of justice and economic good sense. In the
past, England always had the advantage of facing a fragmented Germany.
It is only natural that English plutocracy today seeks to split the
German people and make it ripe for new collapse.
English lying propaganda can no longer name things by their proper
names. It therefore claims that it is not fighting the German people,
only Hitlerism. But we know this old song. In South Africa, England
was not fighting the Boers, only Krugerism. In the World War, England
wanted to destroy Kaiserism, not the German people. But that did not
stop English plutocracy from brutally and relentlessly suppressing the
Boers after that war or the Germans after our defeat.
A child once burned is twice shy. The German people were once victims
of lying English war propaganda. Now it understands the situation. It
has long understood the background of this war. It knows that behind
all English plutocratic capitalism's fine words, its aim is to destroy
Germany's social achievements. We are defending the socialism we have
build in Germany since 1933 with every military, economic and
spiritual means at our disposal. The bald English lies have no impact
on the German people.
English plutocracy is finally being forced to defend itself. In the
past, it always found other nations to fight for it. This time, the
English people must themselves risk their necks for the lords and City
men. They will meet a unified German people of workers, farmers and
soldiers who are prepared to defend their nation with every means at
their disposal.
We did not want war. England inflicted it on us. English plutocracy
forced it on us. England is responsible for the war, and it will have
to pay for it.
The whole world is waking up today. It can no longer be ruled by the
capitalist methods of the 19th Century. The peoples have matured. They
will one day deal a terrible blow to the capitalist plutocrats who are
the cause of their misery.
It is no accident that National Socialism has the historical task of
carrying out this reckoning. Plutocracy is collapsing intellectually,
spiritually, and in the not too distant future, militarily. We are
acting consistently with Nietzsche's words: "Give a shove to what is
falling."
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
Gray Shockley
>
> Words evolve. Swastika is a Nazi symbol. That's what it means now.
> What's the agenda?
To the Buddhists, Hundus and AmerInds who revere it as a
religious symbol?
Hitler did to the "bent cross" what the Ku Klux Klan did
for the Christian cross.
I've got pictures of two cemeteries in SE Asia; one has the
cross (Christian burial) and the other has the "bent
cross", aka the "swastika" and is the Buddhist burial
place.
If you believe that the "bent cross" is invalidated as a
religious symbol of Buddhism, AmerInds and Hindus because
of Hitler and the "unbent cross" is invalidated as a
religious symbol of Christians because of the Ku Klux Klan,
I suggest that centuries of religions trump transient years
of insanity.
A thousand years from now - if this world is still
populated with animals that bear some resemblance to what
we call "humans" - both the Klan and Hitler may not even
make footnotes.
At most, there might be a mention of mental illnesses
associated with them.
Gray Shockley
-------------------------------------------------
One man's religion is another man's belly laugh.
- Jubal Harshaw (Channeled through RAH)
John Atkinson
<re...@ij.net> wrote in message
news:1109269059.9...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> I can't for the life of me understand why you think that "swastika" was
> the best English word translation for "hooked cross" nor why you think
> that there is any evidence that "swastika" was considered an English
> word at all at that time.
Obviously, you haven't bothered to look at a dictionary.
The 1933 edition of the Shorter Oxford Dictionary has
Swastuka. 1871. [Skr svastika, from svasti wellbeing, luck, from su good +
asti being] A primitive symbol or ornament of the form of a cross with
equal arms with a limb of the same length projecting at right angles from
the wend of each arm.
Until they changed its name in WW2, there was a town called Swastika in
Ontario. The Edmonton girls hockey team was called the Swastikas, with a
big swastika on their uniform. The University of New Merxico Yearbook was
called The Swastika.
It was a well-known English word, for an extremely common decxorative
symbol, all through the late nineteenth and early twentieth century
John.
Richard Herring
PATRICIA BURNS wrote:
> remove cross-post
This thread is posted to four groups. You need to tell us *which*
cross-posting you think is inappropriate.
Setting a Followup-To header would have been a helpful clue.
Peter Dy
<re...@ij.net> wrote in message
news:1109253917....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> The word "swastika" was a misleading translation of "hakenkreuze." The
> National Socialist German Workers' Party always used the word
> "hakenkreuze"
"Hakenkreuz," not "hakenkreuze," you silly boob.
Peter
Dan Clore
>> as another poster has already informed you
>
> Claimed, but not informed. The Oxford English Dictionary demonstrates
> otherwise, having citations dating back to 1871, in several different
> cultural contexts.
>
> "1871 ALABASTER Wheel of Law 249 On the great toe is the Trisul. On each
> side of the others a Swastika. 1882 E. C. ROBERTSON in Proc. Berw. Nat.
> Club IX. No. 3. 516 In Japan..the cross-like symbol of the sun, the
> Swastica, is put on coffins. 1895 Reliquary Oct. 252 The use of the
> Swastica cross in mediaeval times. 1904 Times 27 Aug. 10/3 [In Tibet] a
> few white, straitened hovels in tiers... On the door of each is a
> kicking swastika in white, and over it a rude daub of ball and crescent."
I'm guessing it wouldn't be hard to find citations that
antedate this. (Looking in works on Hinduism or Buddhism, e.g.)
One might also note that English had the terms fylfot,
revived in the early nineteenth century from a manuscript
dating to 1500, the heraldic term cross cramponnee, and the
Greek gammadion.
--
Dan Clore
My collected fiction, _The Unspeakable and Others_:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1587154838/thedanclorenecro/
Lord Weÿrdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9879/
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
Strange pleasures are known to him who flaunts the
immarcescible purple of poetry before the color-blind.
-- Clark Ashton Smith, "Epigrams and Apothegms"
Paul J Kriha
Jacques Guy <jg...@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message news:421E77...@alphalink.com.au...
Another good reference is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
The impressions I formed during my travells in Asia
was that the Hindu swastikas were more frequently
right-handed (ie. orientated like four F's) than left-
handed, while Buddhist swastikas were more frequently
left-handed. However, they were not exclusively orientated
one way or the other.
Japanese sayagata can be both left and right-handed.
The same applies for Jainist swastikas.
The swastika painted 2,200 in Han dynasty was right-handed.
Ancient Greeks were quite fond of interlinking swastika motifs.
In Roman art, and in Romanesque and Gothic art, isolated
swastikas are also relatively rare, and they can be found
as a repeated pattern in a border.
Paul JK
Jacques Guy
> Japanese sayagata can be both left and right-handed.
> The same applies for Jainist swastikas.
> The swastika painted 2,200 in Han dynasty was right-handed.
> Ancient Greeks were quite fond of interlinking swastika motifs.
And likewise the Japanese. Have a look at the kimono worn
by the actor in the print reproduced page 75 of "Kabuki--
Eighteen Traditional Dramas" by Toshiro Iwatake and
Akira Iwata, Chronicle Books, ISBN 0-87701-366-7
To those who presume to ban the swastika I say
"kuso demo kue". And I hope many here take over to
tell them the same in the many languages of India.
Joe Fineman
> If “swastika” was the most widely known term for the sign among
> those who needed to talk about it, then it was the best translation
> of the German word for that sign.
To judge from the OED, we didn't have *any* widely known term for it
in the early '30s when, suddenly, every newspaper needed one. We also
had "fylfot" & "gammadion", but each was confined (like "swastika") to
a special context. For a while, the newspapers imported "Hakenkreuz".
It would be interesting to know how we came to settle on "swastika" as
the usual name. It *seems* that the Germans didn't have much to do
with it.
--
--- Joe Fineman jo...@verizon.net
||: Have you set up your environment so that you are punished :||
||: for being careful? :||
Joe Fineman
> The swastika spins in the opposite direction to the nazi hooked
> cross.
I have seen such statements repeatedly, and for all I know they may be
true, but they do make me wonder -- did the Germans of that era always
make flags thick enough to be opaque, so that the swastika could go
the right way on both sides?
--
--- Joe Fineman jo...@verizon.net
||: A millihelen is the amount of facial beauty required to :||
||: launch one ship; a microhelen, to arouse one sailor. :||
re...@ij.net
English Dictionary includes "hakenkreuz" and it is below. Not that
it appears to state that "hakenkreuz" was used as an English word
in the Times in 1931. So hakenkreuz was a term that translators should
have used instead of Swastika.
Hakenkreuz, hakenkreuz . [Ger.] The Nazi swastika. Also attrib.
1931 _Times_ 23 Dec. 7/4 A large Nazi Hakenkreuz flag, `which can be
seen for
miles', flies from the tallest chimney. 1935 C. Isherwood _Mr. Norris
changes
Trains_ xi. 165 Hitler's negotiations with the Right had broken down;
the
Hakenkreuz was even flirting mildly with the Hammer and Sickle. 1966 M.
Albrand
_Door fell Shut_ xvi. 115 His eyes fell on a large hakenkreuz. To come
upon the
Nazi insignia so unexpectedly made Bronsky feel slightly sick. 1972
_Oxford
Times_ 28 July 9 Perhaps he [sc. Hitler] hoped the Hakenkreuz would
bring bad
luck to his enemies.
Translators do choose words, sometimes from multiple alternatives. My
topic is about the translation of the book by the leader of the
National Socialist German Workers' Party. Even to this day the word
swastika is clearly an "odd" or "foreign" sounding word to most people
in the West and all they know about it is its relationship to the
symbol. On the other hand, even to this day, the terms "hooked cross"
or "crooked cross" are not "odd" or "foreign" to most people in the
west, they are clear on their face, and especially so when discussing
the symbol used by the monstrous National Socialist German Workers
Party. All of my points are correct. The correct choice for the
translation was not swastika. The previous post by someone else
already conceded that I am correct that the term "crooked cross" was
the English term term used at that time (and so was "hooked cross").
The term swastika is still used to perpetuate a myth, the swastika
myth. http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html
And it slanders the word swastika and the bizarre myth that people
"over there" had something to do with inspiring the horrid National
Socialist German Workers' Party or their philosophy. No one should
defend that.
re...@ij.net
agree that it would be interesting to know how we came to settle on
"swastika."
Thanks again.
re...@ij.net
re...@ij.net
the OED, we didn't have *any* widely known term for it in the early
'30s when, suddenly, every newspaper needed one. We also had "fylfot"
& "gammadion", but each was confined (like "swastika") to a special
re...@ij.net
National Socialist German Workers' Party are the people who have never
written or spoken the actual name of the monstrous party in their lives
and who always use hackneyed adjectives (as you do) and the shorthand
to cover up for the horrid party, and who also use the term "swastika"
even when they know that it perpetuates the swastika myth
http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html and other ignorance, and who have
never explained to anyone the actual word used in their lives and never
intend to do so. Intentionally and with knowledge.
Martin Ambuhl
("swQstIk@, formerly "sw&stIk@) Also svast-, -ica. [Skr. svastika, f.
svastí well-being, fortune, luck, f. sú good + astí being (f. as to be).]
1. A primitive symbol or ornament of the form of a cross with equal
arms with a limb of the same length projecting at right angles
from the end of each arm, all in the same direction and (usually)
clockwise; also called gammadion and fylfot. Also attrib.
1871 Alabaster Wheel of Law 249 On the great toe is the Trisul. On
each side of the others a Swastika.
1882 E. C. Robertson in Proc. Berw. Nat. Club IX. No. 3. 516 In
Japan..the cross-like symbol of the sun, the Swastica, is put on
coffins.
1895 Reliquary Oct. 252 The use of the Swastica cross in mediaeval
times.
1904 Times 27 Aug. 10/3 [In Tibet] a few white, straitened hovels in
tiers... On the door of each is a kicking swastika in white, and
over it a rude daub of ball and crescent.
2. a. This symbol (with clockwise projecting limbs) used as the
emblem of the German (and other) Nazi parties; = Hakenkreuz,
hakenkreuz. Also, a flag bearing this emblem.
1932 ‘Nordicus’ Hitlerism ii. 17 Thousands flocked to his
standard—the ‘Hakenkreuz’—(swastika), the ancient anti-semitic
cross in a color scheme of red-white-black in memory of the
colors of the old army.
1933 [see Aryan a. 2]. 1941 G. Ziemer Educ. for Death i. 4 A squad
of Nazi youngsters in+brown shirts decorated with swastikas.
Ibid. ii. 30 A luxury hotel managed by a Jew... The swastika
over it fluttered gaily.
1951 L. Hagen Follow my Leader i. 6 Most of the men in my Sturm wore
at least part of a uniform, and all I could do was wear a
swastika armlet.
Ibid. vii. 266 Our compatriots..clung to their German ways
and..flew the swastika on our national holidays.
1967 T. Gunn Touch 15 A silk tent of swastikas.
1977 E. Heath Travels iv. 113 Along this street had stretched the
Nazi columns... Gone, now, were the crowds and the bright-red
banners flaunting their swastikas over the streets.
1979 J. Burmeister Glory Hunters i. 5 In addition to her national
flag she [sc. a ship] also flew the Swastika.
b. attrib. and Comb.
1934 Ann. Reg. 1933 i. 179 Minor acts of defiance towards the
Austrian Government+such as..the lighting of Swastika fires and
the daring hoisting of forbidden Swastika banners under the eyes
of the police..and the hoisting of Swastika flags.
1940 H. G. Wells All Aboard for Ararat iv. 101 As regards the olive
branch incident, it is to be noted that the leaves were
blood-stained and tied with a swastika ribbon.
1946 J. Flanner in New Yorker 5 Jan. 46/1 Ten years ago, he [sc.
Goering] was baying ‘Heil’ as he strutted the swastika-hung
streets.
1957 T. Gunn Sense of Movement 36 The swastika-draped bed.
1960 Jewish Chronicle 8 Apr. 14/3 The recent swastika-daubings in
this country.
Hence "swastika'd a., decorated with or wearing a swastika, esp. as
a badge of Nazism.
1965 New Statesman 15 Oct. 552/3 Buckley has+described the American
Nazi Party as ‘two dozen swastika-ed cretins who go about plying
their pathology in the fever-swamps of the crazy-Right’.
1969 Listener 14 Aug. 225/3 Where do those swastika'd Hell's Angels
types fit in?
> The Oxford
> English Dictionary includes "hakenkreuz" and it is below. Not that
> it appears to state that "hakenkreuz" was used as an English word
> in the Times in 1931.
The citations from 1932, 1933, and 1934 above suggest that "swastika"
for the Nazi symbol may well be contemporaneous with "Hakenkreuz" in
English. The citations above from 1871, 1882, 1895, and 1904 show that
"swastika" for the sign was well-established in English before 1931.
Further, the definition you quote assumes prior knowledge of the
swastika: "akenkreuz, hakenkreuz . [Ger.] The Nazi swastika."
> So hakenkreuz was a term that translators should
> have used instead of Swastika.
You'll have to explain this strange piece of pseudo-logic.
Harlan Messinger
> Please provide the Oxford dictionary info on swastika. The Oxford
> English Dictionary includes "hakenkreuz" and it is below. Not that
> it appears to state that "hakenkreuz" was used as an English word
> in the Times in 1931. So hakenkreuz was a term that translators should
> have used instead of Swastika.
Oh, yadda, yadda, yadda. And moccasin should be "soft-soleless-shoe" and
so on and so forth, and it was just *wrong* for anyone to use any word
that Rex thinks is foreign-sounding, whatever *that* means.
Harlan Messinger
> Thanks you silly boob. As a great non-boob poster said: To judge from
> the OED, we didn't have *any* widely known term for it in the early
> '30s when, suddenly, every newspaper needed one. We also had "fylfot"
> & "gammadion", but each was confined (like "swastika") to a special
> context. For a while, the newspapers imported "Hakenkreuz".
"The newspapers" or "some newspapers" or "some reporters" or "a
newspaper or two"? In any event, it's likely that whoever started with
"Hakenkreuz" for what they thought was a newly invented shape, was an
existing shape that already *had* several names in English. So they
stopped resorting to the German word they had been using before they
discovered that.
Neeraj Mathur
> re...@ij.net wrote:
> "The newspapers" or "some newspapers" or "some reporters" or "a newspaper
> or two"? In any event, it's likely that whoever started with "Hakenkreuz"
> for what they thought was a newly invented shape, was an existing shape
> that already *had* several names in English. So they stopped resorting to
> the German word they had been using before they discovered that.
It seems certain that there were several words for it in English; it seems
likely that of all of these, 'swastika' was the foremost in the late
nineteenth and early twentieth century (probably because, of all the
cultures where this symbol was to be found, Britain had the strongest
two-way association with India - this would explain why the quotes in the
OED show a Sanskrit word being used to describe symbols in other cultures).
So a pertinent question would be, what is the history of the terminology in
German? I unfortunately don't have as immediate access to German resources
as I do for English, but perhaps somebody else does. What did the Germans
call the Indian symbol? What general term(s) did they use for this shape as
found in other cultures?
The point would be this: if there was a pre-Nazi history of calling the
Indian symbol 'Hakenkreuz', then there was some non-trivial precedent of
translating Hakenkreuz as swastika. This precedent would naturally have been
limited to certain academic spheres, which would explain why the newspapers
sometimes used other words for the Nazi symbol until the convention spread
and generalised.
What are the relevant German resources?
Neeraj Mathur
Peter T. Daniels
I wouldn't have associated the other phrase he recommended, "hook cross"
or "hooked cross," with the swastika (unless, of course, it occurred in
a Nazi context -- incidentally, Germans today don't use the word "Nazi";
to them it's an English word. They say Nazionalsozialismus).
Peter T. Daniels
Your seris of thankyous are useless, since you quote nothing of what you
are thanking anyone for.
Aidan Kehoe
Ar an cúigiú lá is fiche de mí Feabhra, scríobh Peter T. Daniels:
> [...] incidentally, Germans today don't use the word "Nazi"; to them it's an
> English word. They say Nazionalsozialismus [...]
Stern Biographie, ISSN 1860-1677, NR. 1 2005,
Page 12 on Max Schmeling: »Als er Joe Louis 1936 k.o. schlug, wurde er bei
den Nazis fast zum Halbgott.«
Page. 17, photo caption: »Das Glamour-Paar der Nazi-Zeit. 1933 heiratet
Schmeling die Schauspielerin Anny Ondra, die durch den Hitchcock-Film
„Blackmail“ Weltruhm erlangt hatte. Die beiden sind gut mit dem Ehepaar
Goebbels befreundet - bis Schmeling in Ungnade fällt«
Page 66: „Magda Goebbels: first lady der Nazis, gefährtin des teufels,
kindsmörderin“
Page 74: »„Hohe Frauen“ wurden sie genannt, die Gattinnen der Reichsminister
und anderer Nazi-Bonzen, und sie genossen erbarmungslos die Macht, die ihnen
über ihre Männer zuwuchs: Magda Goebbels, Lina Heydrich und auch Brigitte
Frank, „Frau Generalgouverneur“ und Mutter des Autors Niklas Frank.«
Google.de:
Searching for “Nazi” on German-language sites:
Ergebnisse 1 - 10 von ungefähr 595.000 Seiten auf Deutsch für nazi . (0,04
Sekunden)
Searching for your, sic, Nazionalsozialismus, on German-language sites:
Ergebnisse 1 - 10 von ungefähr 3.400 Seiten auf Deutsch für
Nazionalsozialismus . (0,25 Sekunden)
Meinten Sie: Nationalsozialismus
Searching for Nationalsozialismus on German-language sites:
Ergebnisse 1 - 10 von ungefähr 336.000 Seiten auf Deutsch für
Nationalsozialismus . (0,16 Sekunden)
--
“I, for instance, am gung-ho about open source because my family is being
held hostage in Rob Malda’s basement. But who fact-checks me, or Enderle,
when we say something in public? No-one!” -- Danny O’Brien
Aidan Kehoe
Ar an cúigiú lá is fiche de mí Feabhra, scríobh Aidan Kehoe:
> Stern Biographie, ISSN 1860-1677, NR. 1 2005,
Oops, the name of the publication is „Stern Biografie.“ Excuse the
confusion.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> Ar an cúigiú lá is fiche de mÖ Feabhra, scrÖobh Peter T. Daniels:
>
> > [...] incidentally, Germans today don't use the word "Nazi"; to them it's an
> > English word. They say Nazionalsozialismus [...]
>
> Stern Biographie, ISSN 1860-1677, NR. 1 2005,
>
> den Nazis fast zum Halbgott.«
>
> Page. 17, photo caption: »Das Glamour-Paar der Nazi-Zeit. 1933 heiratet
> Schmeling die Schauspielerin Anny Ondra, die durch den Hitchcock-Film
> Goebbels befreundet - bis Schmeling in Ungnade fällt«
>
> Page 66: â**Magda Goebbels: first lady der Nazis, gefährtin des teufels,
> kindsmörderinâ*ś
>
> Page 74: »â**Hohe Frauenâ*ś wurden sie genannt, die Gattinnen der Reichsminister
> und anderer Nazi-Bonzen, und sie genossen erbarmungslos die Macht, die ihnen
> Frank, â**Frau Generalgouverneurâ*ś und Mutter des Autors Niklas Frank.«
>
> Google.de:
>
> Searching for â*śNaziâ** on German-language sites:
>
> Ergebnisse 1 - 10 von ungefähr 595.000 Seiten auf Deutsch fĂ*r nazi . (0,04
> Sekunden)
>
> Searching for your, sic, Nazionalsozialismus, on German-language sites:
>
> Nazionalsozialismus . (0,25 Sekunden)
>
> Meinten Sie: Nationalsozialismus
>
> Searching for Nationalsozialismus on German-language sites:
>
> Nationalsozialismus . (0,16 Sekunden)
I guess the magazines you read are different from the people I talk to.
Jerk.
When speaking English they say "National Socialist."
M. J. Powell
<hmessinger...@comcast.net> writes
>re...@ij.net wrote:
>> Please provide the Oxford dictionary info on swastika. The Oxford
>> English Dictionary includes "hakenkreuz" and it is below. Not that
>> it appears to state that "hakenkreuz" was used as an English word
>> in the Times in 1931. So hakenkreuz was a term that translators should
>> have used instead of Swastika.
>
>Oh, yadda, yadda, yadda. And moccasin should be "soft-soleless-shoe"
Isn't a sole-less shoe a spat?
Mike
Brian M. Scott
<neem...@hotmail.com> wrote in
<news:cvntph$i00$1...@news.ox.ac.uk> in
sci.lang,k12.chat.teacher,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.education:
[...]
> The point would be this: if there was a pre-Nazi history of calling the
> Indian symbol 'Hakenkreuz', then there was some non-trivial precedent of
> translating Hakenkreuz as swastika.
<Hakenkreuz> is in Adelung's dictionary of 1811, though only
as a technical term from heraldry ('in der Wapenkust, ein an
den Enden mit Haken versehenes Kreuz'); <Swastika> is not.
<http://mdz.bib-bvb.de/digbib/lexika/adelung/text/@Generic__CollectionView;cs=default;ts=default>
[...]
Brian
re...@ij.net
information I was looking for when I posted. That German reference of
1811 for hakenkreuz predates the Oxford reference to 1871 for
"swastika" by 60 years.
The Oxford English Dictionary also includes "hakenkreuz" (the
German name of the swastika) and it is below. It is interesting to
note that it appears to state that "hakenkreuz" was used as an
English word in the Times in 1931. So my earlier posts had suggested
that hakenkreuz was a term that translators should have used instead of
Swastika. http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html
Your post adds another fascinating layer to the topic.
Thanks again.
Jacques Guy
> <Hakenkreuz> is in Adelung's dictionary of 1811, though only
> as a technical term from heraldry ('in der Wapenkust, ein an
> den Enden mit Haken versehenes Kreuz'); <Swastika> is not.
Not surprising. Same as French "croix gammée". My 1900
encyclopedia shows, in one illustration, seven crosses:
ansée, grecque, latine, gammée, en tau, de Saint-André,
de Lorraine. "Gammée" is from "gamma" of course.
Ekkehard Dengler
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:421F9C...@worldnet.att.net...
> incidentally, Germans today don't use the word "Nazi";
> to them it's an English word. They say Nazionalsozialismus).
I don't know where you got that information from, but it's totally
incorrect. "Nazi" is an extremely usual abbreviation for "Nationalsozialist"
or "nationalsozialistisch" (not "Nationalsozialismus"). Note the spelling.
Don't take my word for it:
"ein Nazi" => 32,500 Google hits
"ein Nationalsozialist" => 932 Google hits
Regards,
Ekkehard
Dik T. Winter
> Thanks you silly boob.
It would be helpful if you provided at least some context of the
message you are replying to.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/
Dik T. Winter
...
> So a pertinent question would be, what is the history of the terminology in
> German?
As far as I know the swastika was also used in old Germanic culture as
a protection against fire and other mishaps. Originally it was the
symbol of the hammer of Thor (perhaps derived from the similar symbols
from India, but much Norse and Indian mythology have parallels). And,
because it was already native to the Germans, it seems logical that it
has gotten a native name. Presumably the name was already used in very
early times.
Neeraj Mathur
<re...@ij.net> wrote in message
news:1109375838.1...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Thank you for your comment. It is very informative and is the type of
> information I was looking for when I posted. That German reference of
> 1811 for hakenkreuz predates the Oxford reference to 1871 for
> "swastika" by 60 years.
That Hakenkreuz predates swastika in a different language is significant for
your theory in what way?
> The Oxford English Dictionary also includes "hakenkreuz" (the
> German name of the swastika) and it is below. It is interesting to
> note that it appears to state that "hakenkreuz" was used as an
> English word in the Times in 1931. So my earlier posts had suggested
> that hakenkreuz was a term that translators should have used instead of
> Swastika.
This does not follow at all - in fact, the opposite case has been supported.
The Germans had a word Hakenkreuz from more than a century before Hitler.
The English had a word swastika from at least 1871. Between 1871 and the
1930's - for a good 60 years - the German word Hakenkreuz was translated by
the English to swastika, in those circles which talked about it. Therefore,
it is perfectly natural that the Nazi symbol would be called swastika in
English. The use of 'Hakenkreuz' by English journalists in 1931 is
symptomatic of the confusion that occurs when a word or concept is brought
from specialist circles to general public.
Anyway, there's a greater problem for the theory you've outlined at your
website. If the Germans had been using the word Hakenkreuz since 1811 to
refer to that particular symbol, how can you claim that to the Nazis it was
nothing more than two 'S' shapes overlapped? Or to put it another way, if
Hitler invented the symbol to represent words like 'Sieg' and 'Sozialismus',
why would he give it the name that, for 120 years, his language has used for
the ancient good-luck symbol?
'Hakenkreuz' predates the Nazis, and is the German name for an ancient
religious symbol. The English name for the same symbol is 'swastika', also
predating the Nazis. The difference between these two words is part of the
pattern of word formation in the two languages: English imports words from
foreign sources, whereas German forms compounds (another example is
'linguistics', which German calls 'sprachwissenschaft'). That the German
word 'Hakenkreuz' was translated by the English to 'swastika' is no more
remarkable than that 'sprachwissenschaft' should be translated to
'linguistics' rather than 'speech-knowledge-collection'. If in the 1930's
the German word was borrowed by a handful of poor writers who weren't aware
that their language already had a specialised word for the symbol it cannot
be concluded that the history of the twentieth century is in dire need of
being rewritten.
Neeraj Mathur
Peter T. Daniels
Not to mention, they had a perfectly good double-S symbol, the SS's
lightning-bolts.
Peter T. Daniels
>
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:421F9C...@worldnet.att.net...
>
> > incidentally, Germans today don't use the word "Nazi";
> > to them it's an English word. They say Nazionalsozialismus).
>
> I don't know where you got that information from, but it's totally
I got that information from people I talk with.
> incorrect. "Nazi" is an extremely usual abbreviation for "Nationalsozialist"
> or "nationalsozialistisch" (not "Nationalsozialismus"). Note the spelling.
>
> Don't take my word for it:
>
> "ein Nazi" => 32,500 Google hits
> "ein Nationalsozialist" => 932 Google hits
re...@ij.net
Between 1871 and the 1930's - for a good 60 years - the German word
Hakenkreuz was translated by the English to swastika, in those circles
which talked about it."
That is not shown. You are assuming that a "translation occurred,
simply because there was a use of "swastika" in English.
http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html
You said: "The use of 'Hakenkreuz' by English journalists in 1931 is
symptomatic of the confusion that occurs when a word or concept is
brought
from specialist circles to general public."
It wasn't confusion, as it was the actual word used. And the word is
clearer in its meaning and origin than "swastika." It is so much
clearer that people don't even need another term, even you don't. If
any other term was clearer it was hooked cross. And the evidence shows
that hakenkreuze was use in English, as well as crooked cross and
hooked cross. It wasn't due to confusion. The confusion arose when
"swastika" was used. It led to the swastika myth.
http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html
you said "Anyway, there's a greater problem for the theory you've
outlined at your website. If the Germans had been using the word
Hakenkreuz since 1811 to refer to that particular symbol, how can you
claim that to the Nazis it was nothing more than two 'S' shapes
overlapped?"
I didn't claim that it was "nothing more" it is more tendentious
reading on your part. In addition I pointed out that it was not
"swastika," the writer did not even know the word, and in fact as far
as the meaning of swastika (a sanskrit good luck sign) it was NOT a
swastika. so it led to the swastika myth.
you said "Or to put it another way, if Hitler invented the symbol....."
Here you are approaching intellectual dishonesty, as i did not say he
invented it, and you are again misrepresenting the point.
You said "to represent words like 'Sieg' and 'Sozialismus'"
I asked you first. Of course, his very words in German in the only
written statement he ever made describe it using the word "sieg" in his
own words. And of course it was the symbol of his horrid party, the
National Socailist German Workers' Party, so in that sense you are
conceding those points for me. Next you can address whether you are
claiming that for the 25 year existence of the National Socialist
German Workers Party, no one noticed the "S" or sieg shapes, including
everyone in the SS divisions and other groups using similar s shapes as
symbols.
You said "why would he give it the name that, for 120 years, his
language has used for the ancient good-luck symbol?" Because
hakenkreuze of course means hooked cross, and is descriptive. Swastika
doesn't and isn't. And it wasn't necessarily nor only a "good luck"
symbol for them. That is also why English also used hakenkreuze and
crooked cross and hooked cross.
You said: "English imports words from foreign sources, whereas German
forms compounds (another example is 'linguistics', which German calls
'sprachwissenschaft')."
English also forms compounds as I have repeatedly pointed out in
earlier posts. That is why English also used hakenkreuze and crooked
cross and hooked cross.
You said "That the German word 'Hakenkreuz' was translated by the
English to 'swastika' is no more remarkable than that
'sprachwissenschaft' should be translated to 'linguistics' rather than
'speech-knowledge-collection'."
It is remarkable in that it led to the swastika myth and the remarkable
claim that for 25 years no one in the National Socialist German
Workers' Party ever noticed the "S" shape, including anyone in the SS
division or any other group that also used the sieg rune in other
respects to symbolize socialism or german s words, it covered up what
the National Socialist German Workers Party name was, so much so that
most people who use the abbreviation do not know what it abbreviates.
You said "If in the 1930's the German word was borrowed by a handful of
poor writers who weren't aware that their language already had a
specialised word for the symbol it cannot be concluded that the history
of the twentieth century is in dire need of being rewritten."
They were not poor writers, they were accurate writers who did not
confuse people as much as those who used swastika, who did not slander
the ancient swastika symbol, and the only people who have rewritten
history are the ones who have never written or spoken the actual name
of the party in their lives and who have never mentioned the actual
german word used for the symbol and never will because they intend to
perpetuate ignorance.
Have you used the actual name of the party yet in this discussion or
ever? Have you explained the word hakenkreuze ever to anyone, or used
it other than here after I brought it up and you attacked it? Most
people haven't.
And that is a large part of the topic here.
Christopher Culver
Internet's most well-known trolls. He continually writes rubbish about
how Nazism, a fascist right-wing ideology, was really a socialist
left-wing ideology. This mission wouldn't be so bad if he pursued it in
appropriate academic ways, but constant posting of barely-literate
diatribe doesn't help anything. And then there's the problem of his
untrustworthiness. Look at his Amazon.com reviews, and you'll see him
claim to be a lawyer in one, a journalist in the next, and a general
expert on the history of Nazi Germany.
Christopher Culver
re...@ij.net
critic is one of the
internet's most unknown trolls. He continually writes rubbish about how
the National Socialist German Workers Party was not socialist and he is
still stuck in absurd "left-right" straight-line ideology into which he
is duped, and has never written or spoken the actual name of the party
in his life, deliberately so, even when he knew that someone with whom
he was communicating was completey ignorant of its actual name, nor has
he ever explained the actual german word used for the symbol to anyone,
because he wants to continually perpetuate rubbish. This mission
wouldn't be so bad if he pursued it in appropriate academic ways, but
And then there's the question of trustworthiness. Look at his
Amazon.com reviews etc, and you'll see that he is neither a lawyer, nor
a journalist nor a general expert on the history of the National
Socialist German Workers' Party. None of these terms are even
mentioned once on his website according to a web search engine. He had
probably never even seen an actual historic photograph of the original
pledge of allegiance nor known about it either until he learned it from
me, a lawyer, journalist and general expert on Nazi Germany, and saw my
photographs at the only place where these photographs are collected and
displayed http://rexcurry.net/pledge2.html
Even so he has probably again never used the photos or knowledge in his
life, never explained it to another, and intends to never do so, as he
wants to continually perpetuate rubbish.
Does he make the absurd argument that for 25 years no one in the
National Socialist German Workers' Party ever noticed the symbol's "S"
shapes nor attached any meaning, including anyone in the SS divisions?
Like many people on my fan mail page
http://rexcurry.net/pledge_heart.html
he might have been truly shocked to learn about all of the above. Some
people react with appreciation at no longer being ignorant. It is
unfortunate that some people react by casting aspersions (because they
cannot add anything else) out of anger about how other people had also
never told any of the above and they feel that they have been lied to
all of their lifes by their schools etc and made fools.
Tommi Nieminen
> "hakenkreuz" (the
> German name of the swastika)
Errm... Wasn't your whole point (if such there was) that "Hakenkreuz" is
NOT the German word for English swastika?
--
.... Tommi Nieminen .... http://www.cc.jyu.fi/~toniemin/ ....
It was strange to me to find my own self *materialiter*
considered [...], suspected of counterfeiting my own self,
*formaliter* considered. -De Quincey-
.... tommi dot nieminen at campus dot jyu dot fi ....
Joe Fineman
> This really isn't even worth responding to. Rex Curry is one of the
> Internet's most well-known trolls. He continually writes rubbish
> about how Nazism, a fascist right-wing ideology, was really a
> socialist left-wing ideology. This mission wouldn't be so bad if he
> pursued it in appropriate academic ways, but constant posting of
> barely-literate diatribe doesn't help anything. And then there's the
> problem of his untrustworthiness. Look at his Amazon.com reviews,
> and you'll see him claim to be a lawyer in one, a journalist in the
> next, and a general expert on the history of Nazi Germany.
And he called *me*, of all people, a nonboob! On sci.lang! An
obvious crackpot.
--
--- Joe Fineman jo...@verizon.net
||: The DEA is our Taliban. :||
Prai Jei
<1109253917....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>:
> The swastika myth covers-up the fact that, for the National Socialist
> German Workers' Party, the hakenkreuze represented overlapping "S"
> shapes symbolizing "socialism." Eschew the word "swastika" in any
> discussion of the The monstrous National Socialist German Workers'
> Party.
Hence the SS logo by removing the centre pin and putting the two halves side
by side?
--
Paul Townsend
Pair them off into threes
Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply
Brian M. Scott
<jg...@alphalink.com.au> wrote in
<news:421FCD...@alphalink.com.au> in
sci.lang,k12.chat.teacher,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.education:
> Brian M. Scott wrote:
>> <Hakenkreuz> is in Adelung's dictionary of 1811, though only
>> as a technical term from heraldry ('in der Wapenku[n]st, ein an
>> den Enden mit Haken versehenes Kreuz'); <Swastika> is not.
> Not surprising. Same as French "croix gammée". My 1900
> encyclopedia shows, in one illustration, seven crosses:
> ansée, grecque, latine, gammée, en tau, de Saint-André,
> de Lorraine. "Gammée" is from "gamma" of course.
In English also <gammadion> and, by an odd quirk, <fylfot>.
(Only seven? Pikers!)
Brian
re...@ij.net
http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html
Some others apparently think that for the 25 year existence of the
National Socialist German Workers' Party, no one noticed the "S"
shapes, nor anyone in the SS divisions either.
GEM
<re...@ij.net> wrote in message
news:1109409275.0...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
The Nazis were not socialist, except in the form of corporate socialists,
better known as corporate fascists. I realize that the name they chose
claims they are socialists, but like Mista Bush and Party, it was necessary
to lie to the people about what they stood for, in order to get that first
foothold in power. Once they controlled the nation, all pretense at being
socialist were cast aside and their purely fascist natures became obvious to
all.
Except you of course. :)
GEM
Harlan Messinger
> someone said: "The English had a word swastika from at least 1871.
> Between 1871 and the 1930's - for a good 60 years - the German word
> Hakenkreuz was translated by the English to swastika, in those circles
> which talked about it."
>
> That is not shown. You are assuming that a "translation occurred,
> simply because there was a use of "swastika" in English.
> http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html
>
> You said: "The use of 'Hakenkreuz' by English journalists in 1931 is
> symptomatic of the confusion that occurs when a word or concept is
> brought
> from specialist circles to general public."
>
> It wasn't confusion, as it was the actual word used.
It was confusion on the part of the people who used that word because
they didn't realize that English *already had one*.
> And the word is
> clearer in its meaning and origin than "swastika."
A "correct" word for something in English is a word that is used to
refer to that thing in English. Nothing more, nothing less. Obviousness
has nothing to do with it. Whether it's a piece-by-piece literal
translation from another language has nothing to do with it. Otherwise,
where's the explanation you haven't provided yet for why "moccasin" is a
wrong term for what should be called "soft-soleless-shoe"? Do you think
"moccasin" is any more "obvious" than "swastika"?
If a bunch of German people use a symbol in the shape of a "Dreieck",
should the correct English translation by "three-corner" instead of
"triangle"?
If a Dutch recipe called for "sinasappels", would a correct English
translation of the recipe call for "Chinese apples" instead of "oranges"?
Whether there happens to be a myth associated with the whole thing is
irrelevant. Calling the Nazi symbol something else wouldn't have changed
the fact that the two shapes are about the same. Also, in the grand
scheme of things, just how significant an issue do you think this myth
is--how widely is it held, how many people attach any importance to
it--that it should somehow have been *anticipated* by people who had the
*effrontery* to use an existing English word for the thing to which that
word refers?
ChrWaigl
> I wouldn't have associated the other phrase he recommended, "hook cross"
> or "hooked cross," with the swastika (unless, of course, it occurred in
> a Nazi context -- incidentally, Germans today don't use the word "Nazi";
> to them it's an English word. They say Nazionalsozialismus).
Germans certainly use the word _Nazi_, as a standalone noun to refer
to a person who adheres to the ideology of Hitler's party (back then
or in modernised form now), or, broadening the sense, to what also
could be called, in a derogatory sense, a fascist; and as part of all
sorts of compound nouns.
It is not shorthand for _Nationalsozialismus_, though.
It is, however, rather unusual in the non-political sense it often has
in English. As a German, I can understand _femi-nazi_, _web standards
nazi_, and the like, and don't object to them as such, but these terms
give me the creeps.
Chris Waigl
--
a chisel writing -- http://lascribe.net/
"Away, you scullion! you rampallian! you fustilarian!
I'll tickle your catastrophe."
c w a i g l / a t / f r e e / p o i n t / f r
re...@ij.net
cross and crooked cross were in fact english words too.
Anyhow, here is an interesting angle I just received in email: "I had
another look at the extraordinary documents (pictures) of the
Hakenkreuzes / Swastikas you present at
http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html You show some examples which
indicate that at least for the leaders the connection between the flag
and the other instances of "S" symbols is more than close, almost
identical. But these were not to be seen where I could see them. I did
not live in Germany, but in Nazi-occupied and integrated Luxembourg and
only once visited Nürnberg where my father lived and worked at the
time and stayed a couple days in the area and of course travelled there
and back, through Stuttgart for instance and missed by half an hour to
be killed in the bombardment of the Stuttgart main station. My father
had some papers, but I do not remember then nor later having seen all
of those you show. Regards, C.B."
(note from RexCurry.net -what is remarkable about the comment above is
that it suggests other reasons for ignorance about the "S" symbolism
and those are laws that prevent people in many areas (including
Germany) from seeing their own history in its symbols. So, the people
who might know the most about their historic symbols have been turned
into the people who know the least, because "fascistic" laws ban Nazi
symbols).
It is fascinating to think that of the gazillion times that the
National Socialist German Workers Party referred to the symbol of their
socialism and the gazillion different ways that they said so, many
people failed to grasp the full import of what they were saying, and
that the words included references to the "S" shapes of the symbol.
Jacques Guy
> > Not surprising. Same as French "croix gammée". My 1900
> > encyclopedia shows, in one illustration, seven crosses:
> > ansée, grecque, latine, gammée, en tau, de Saint-André,
> > de Lorraine. "Gammée" is from "gamma" of course.
> In English also <gammadion> and, by an odd quirk, <fylfot>.
> (Only seven? Pikers!)
Overleaf is an illustration showing heraldic crosses.
Thirry of them. But I am sure there are more.
Harlan Messinger
> You keep closing your eyes to the fact that hakenkreuze, and hooked
> cross and crooked cross were in fact english words too.
That's nice. So there were a bunch of English words for the same thing.
So who are you to decree, in retrospect, that at some point in the 1930s
the word that happens to be a calque of a German term for the same thing
suddenly became the "right" one and all the others were suddenly,
magically "wrong"? Because you imagine there was a conspiracy behind it?
Quick, which is the right word: car or automobile? Helicopter, autogyro,
or whirlygig? Coney island or hot dog? Submarine, hero, grinder, or
hoagie? Gnu or wildebeest? Soda or pop?
Areff
> It is, however, rather unusual in the non-political sense it often has
> in English. As a German, I can understand _femi-nazi_, _web standards
> nazi_, and the like, and don't object to them as such, but these terms
> give me the creeps.
I remember there being some controversy over "soup nazi" when the relevant
_Seinfeld_ episode first aired.
--
Steny '08!
don groves
chri...@free.fr hath writ:
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > I wouldn't have associated the other phrase he recommended, "hook cross"
> > or "hooked cross," with the swastika (unless, of course, it occurred in
> > a Nazi context -- incidentally, Germans today don't use the word "Nazi";
> > to them it's an English word. They say Nazionalsozialismus).
>
> Germans certainly use the word _Nazi_, as a standalone noun to refer
> to a person who adheres to the ideology of Hitler's party (back then
> or in modernised form now), or, broadening the sense, to what also
> could be called, in a derogatory sense, a fascist; and as part of all
> sorts of compound nouns.
>
> It is not shorthand for _Nationalsozialismus_, though.
>
> It is, however, rather unusual in the non-political sense it often has
> in English. As a German, I can understand _femi-nazi_, _web standards
> nazi_, and the like, and don't object to them as such, but these terms
> give me the creeps.
I can imagine. It gives me the creeps to see the Gestapo
techniques that have crept into US society. Bashing in doors of
suspected people in the middle of the night with guns drawn and
then not even apologizing when it turns out they have the wrong
house, or the suspect is not there.
--
dg (domain=ccwebster)
re...@ij.net
So who are you to decree, in retrospect, that at some point in the
sign suddenly became the "right" one and all the others were suddenly,
magically "wrong"? Because you imagine there was a conspiracy called
the National Socialist German Workers Party (21 million dead), the
Peoples' Republic of China (35 million dead), the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics (62 million dead)? Because you have conceded every
other point I made on the topic? Or are you a denier of the fact they
existed and committed hellacious acts and death tolls that have never
been surpassed? http://rexcurry.net/socialists.jpg
Have you used the actual name of the horrid party yet in this
discussion? Have you ever written or spoken it in your life? Have you
explained the word hakenkreuze / swastika etymology regarding the
National Socialist German Workers' Party ever to anyone, or only after
I brought it up and you attacked it? Do you always slander the
sanskrit symbol and perpetuate the myth about its choice and use by the
National Socialist German Workers' Party? Do you do all those things
deliberately to perpetuate ignorance and because you are intellectually
dishonest?
Quick, which is the right word: auto or conscious? mobile or stuck? new
or old? hell or reality? dog or wiener? bastard or bitch? hero or
cover-up?
http://rexcurry.net/words.html
re...@ij.net
social idea of the movement, in white the nationalistic idea, in the
swastika the mission of the struggle for the victory of the Aryan man,
and, by the same token, the victory of the idea of creative work..."
In German the swastika reference was: "im Hakenkreuz die Mission des
Kampfes für den Sieg des arischen Menschen und zugleich mit ihm auch
den Sieg des Gedankens der schaffenden Arbeit,"
In his own words, his statement can be interpreted also as stating that
the hakenkreuz / swastika is a "sieg" symbol or rune that corresponds
with the letter "S" (and was used for "S" in other symbolism) and he
makes overlapping use of the word "victory" or "sieg" in German. The
red color and the "social idea of the movement" ties into socialism for
which Hitler claimed the National Socialist German Workers' Party was
struggling for victory. The so-called "swastika" represented two "S"
letters for "socialism" and is related to his pet phrase "Sieg Heil!"
in the sense of "Hail to the Victory of Socialism! (to the National
Socialist German Workers' Party)"
Peter Dy
<re...@ij.net> wrote in message
news:1109504739....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> That's nice. So there were a bunch of English words for the same thing.
> So who are you to decree, in retrospect, that at some point in the
> 1930s the word that happens to be sanskrit for an unrelated "good luck"
> sign suddenly became the "right" one and all the others were suddenly,
> magically "wrong"? Because you imagine there was a conspiracy called
> the National Socialist German Workers Party (21 million dead), the
> Peoples' Republic of China (35 million dead), the Union of Soviet
> Socialist Republics (62 million dead)? Because you have conceded every
> other point I made on the topic? Or are you a denier of the fact they
> existed and committed hellacious acts and death tolls that have never
> been surpassed? http://rexcurry.net/socialists.jpg
Wow, dude, du hast ja 'ne Macke. Und wie....
Peter
Nath Rao
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 17:15:33 -0600, Beach Runner wrote
>
>
>>Words evolve. Swastika is a Nazi symbol. That's what it means now.
>>What's the agenda?
>
>
> To the Buddhists, Hundus and AmerInds who revere it as a
> religious symbol?
Thank you.
I am reminded of a crude attempt by the New York Times, in an article
about the BJP, Hindu right etc, to use a photo of Ganesha with a
svastika on the base to associate Hindus with Nazis.
Nath Rao
Nath Rao
> swastika
> ("swQstIk@, formerly "sw&stIk@) Also svast-, -ica. [Skr. svastika, f.
> svastí well-being, fortune, luck, f. sú good + astí being (f. as to be).]
>
> 1. A primitive symbol or ornament of the form of a cross with equal
> arms with a limb of the same length projecting at right angles
> from the end of each arm, all in the same direction and (usually)
> clockwise; also called gammadion and fylfot. Also attrib.
>
> 1871 Alabaster Wheel of Law 249 On the great toe is the Trisul. On
> each side of the others a Swastika.
Does this mean that Trisul is an English word as well (rather than
trident)?
> 1882 E. C. Robertson in Proc. Berw. Nat. Club IX. No. 3. 516 In
> Japan..the cross-like symbol of the sun, the Swastica, is put on
> coffins.
> 1895 Reliquary Oct. 252 The use of the Swastica cross in mediaeval
> times.
> 1904 Times 27 Aug. 10/3 [In Tibet] a few white, straitened hovels in
> tiers... On the door of each is a kicking swastika in white, and
> over it a rude daub of ball and crescent.
It seems that at some point before 1895, the term "swastika" had crossed
into general use from being limited to those knowledgeable about the
East. It is not correct to say that it was in use in English from 1871.
Before I accept that both the clockwise and anticlockwise orientations
are freely used by Hindus, I would like to see the contexts of these
uses. On general principles, I expect clockwise orientation in contexts
having to do with gods, temples etc, and the anticlockwise orientation
in contexts having to do with death, funerary rites, black magic (ie,
rites designed to hurt someone).
Nath Rao
Bob LeChevalier
>That's nice. So there were a bunch of English words for the same thing.
>So who are you to decree, in retrospect, that at some point in the
>1930s the word that happens to be sanskrit for an unrelated "good luck"
Purely coincidence and irrelevant; the English word is not Sanskrit,
and means only a symbol of a certain shape regardless of what it means
is some other language.
>sign suddenly became the "right" one
He did not "decree in retrospect". Writers of the time just used a
word they found out, one which sounds more educated than the phrase
"hooked cross". The word might have first been used by academics to
describe the Nazi symbols, or it might have been used by fascist
groups in the US or England who were familiar with the ancient occult
symbolism. It would take a lot more serious academic research to
trace the linguistic use of one word over another during a historical
period, and any such research that is colored by an obvious political
agenda like yours will simply be laughed at by serious academics.
>and all the others were suddenly, magically "wrong"?
Who "decreed" that the other words were "wrong"? They simply ceased
to be used, once another word caught on and became part of common
parlance.
Because you imagine there was a conspiracy called
>the National Socialist German Workers Party (21 million dead), the
>Peoples' Republic of China (35 million dead), the Union of Soviet
>Socialist Republics (62 million dead)? Because you have conceded every
>other point I made on the topic?
Since the topic is linguistic use of a word, people chose to stick to
that topic. Your political thesis is of no interest to others.
lojbab
--
lojbab loj...@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
Harlan Messinger
> re...@ij.net wrote:
>
>>That's nice. So there were a bunch of English words for the same thing.
>>So who are you to decree, in retrospect, that at some point in the
>>1930s the word that happens to be sanskrit for an unrelated "good luck"
>
>
> Purely coincidence and irrelevant; the English word is not Sanskrit,
> and means only a symbol of a certain shape regardless of what it means
> is some other language.
>
>
>>sign suddenly became the "right" one
>
>
> He did not "decree in retrospect".
The guy is telling us that the word most of us know as the primary term
for the shape in question is wrong, that we're wrong for using it, that
we should be calling it something else, and his motivation is some sort
of alleged conspiracy that developed after the fact. Yes, he is
decreeing in retrospect that there's something wrong with the common use
of a common word.
Harlan Messinger
> That's nice. So there were a bunch of English words for the same thing.
> So who are you to decree, in retrospect, that at some point in the
> 1930s the word that happens to be sanskrit for an unrelated "good luck"
> sign suddenly became the "right" one and all the others were suddenly,
> so we can figure out which part of the message is yours and which is
> from the other people in the thread? Because you imagine there was a
> conspiracy called he National Socialist German Workers Party
> 21 million dead), the > Peoples' Republic of China (35 million dead),
> of those have to do with the "swastika conspiracy" that you were
talking about?
> You can't even follow your *own* thoughts through a conversation.
> And I haven't "conceded" any damn thing. Since you are unable to
> following a concept from one moment to the next, I'm not planning to
> bother any more. Enjoy yourself. Because you have conceded
re...@ij.net
was the first deceitful translator and why did others repeat the
misrepresentation? That is being researched at
http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html
One theory is that "swastika" translators wanted the National Socialist
German Workers' Party to stain a foreign symbol rather than their own.
"Hakenkreuz" is a reference to a cross (and in ancient times a cross
was a method of torture and execution).
Bob LeChevalier
>Deceitful translators changed "hakenkreuz" to "swastika."
You have yet to identify these translators, much less prove that their
motivation for that particular choice was deceit.
>Who
>was the first deceitful translator and why did others repeat the
>misrepresentation? That is being researched at
In other words, you don't have the answer, but you make the claim of
deceitful motivation even while not knowing the answer.
>One theory is that "swastika" translators wanted the National Socialist
>German Workers' Party to stain a foreign symbol rather than their own.
One theory is that Sexy Rexy is a mentally ill troll who thinks that
his unproven allegations prove something.
I'd put more money on the latter theory than on the former.
>"Hakenkreuz" is a reference to a cross (and in ancient times a cross
>was a method of torture and execution).
"Hakenkreuz" is a German word with denotations and connotations
specific to that language. Unless you are a German linguist, you are
unlikely to be able to discuss that range of denotations and
connotations with any sophistication.
To the extent that "Hakenkreuz" was borrowed into English, it is still
a different word, with a different set of denotations and connotations
than the German word, because the people doing the borrowing were
almost certainly not native German speakers using the word in its full
range of meaning.
re...@ij.net
that they changed "Hakenkreuz" to "swastika" (in fact you conceded my
point, Thanks). http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html
You have never publicly written or spoken the actual name of the horrid
party in your life other than when I shamed you into doing so. You try
not to repeat that scenario by writing in a manner to avoid even using
the hackneyed shorthand. Have you ever explained the Hackenkreuz /
swastika etymology to anyone in your life? You don't intend to ever do
so either do you? Is it because you too enjoy perpetuating ignorance
or even deceiving people about the swastika myth, the name of the party
etc.?
Who was the first deceitful translator and why did others repeat the
misrepresentation? That is being researched at http://rexcurry.net
But Booby Bob, in other words, you don't have the answer, and have no
interest in doing any research and you just want to cast aspersions and
perpetuate ignorance or ongoing deception, including your own.
One theory is that "swastika" translators wanted the National Socialist
German Workers' Party to stain a foreign symbol rather than their own.
Another theory is that booby Bob is a mentally ill troll who fancies
himself a rex groupie and who thinks that Bob's ignorance and that of
others proves something.
I'd put more money on the latter theory than on any other.
"Hakenkreuz" is a German word with denotations and connotations
specific to that language. Unless you are a German linguist, you are
unlikely to be able to discuss that range of denotations and
connotations with any sophistication. And let's face it you have
already proudly proclaimed your lack of interest in learning, and your
love of ignorance.
To the extent that "Hakenkreuz" was borrowed into English, it is still
a different word, with a different set of denotations and connotations
than the German word, because the people doing the borrowing were
almost certainly not native German speakers using the word in its full
range of meaning.
To the extent that "swastika" was borrowed into English, it is still
a different word, with a different set of denotations and connotations
than the sanskrit word, because the people doing the borrowing were
almost certainly not native sanskrit speakers using the word in its
full range of meaning.
And let's face it you have already proudly proclaimed your lack of
interest in learning about the topic, the ways the words deceive people
and perpetuate myths, and your love of ignorance.
Topaz
America needs to do:
Here are some quotes from a German pamphlet titled "Why the Aryan
Law?":
"In 1793 the famous philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte, author of
"Speeches to the German Nation," wrote a pamphlet titled "A
Contribution to Correcting Judgments about the French Revolution." It
contained the following significant sentence:
"In nearly all the nations of Europe, a powerful, hostile government
is growing, and is at war with all the others, and sometimes oppresses
the people in dreadful ways: It is Jewry!"
The French Revolution, with its "ideas for the improvement of
humanity" thundered past, and in the noise the people who had believed
in world brotherhood entirely missed this serious warning. What Fichte
warned the word about then has today become fact in nearly all the
nations of the world. The Jewish people, once only tolerated, knew how
to raise a hue and cry about discrimination and persecution, winning
the sympathy of the world for the "poor Jews." They increasingly
infiltrated deep within our national organism, growing to have power
over every single area of our national life. The old saga, the "Edda,"
observes that one blocks a river at its source. The failure to do that
was the great mistake of the German people. Thank God, it is not too
late. Our Fuehrer Adolf Hitler recognized the importance of the
problem for Germany's rebirth, and outlined its solution in his
program.
Martin Luther wrote this of the Jews in his book "The Jews and their
Lies": "They hold we Christians captive in our own land. They have
seized our goods by their cursed usury, they mock and insult us
because we work. They are our lords, and we and our goods belong to
them." If in the coming days the Jewish race is driven out of the
non-Jewish world, it will have at least this consolation: It has made
clear to them for all time the value of maintaining the purity of race
and blood in clear, understandable and unforgettable ways.
National Socialist racial legislation has reduced the influence of
Jewry in all professions, and above all excluded them from the leading
offices of the nation. That is an important step in the relationship
between Germans and Jews, but one cannot ignore the fact that we have
not yet fully eliminated the influence of the Jewish foreign body in
German national life. It is not a question of German-Jewish
coexistence, rather of making as great as possible a separation
between blood and blood.
Three things are involved here:
A knowledge of the basic principles of National Socialist racial
thinking,
An understanding of the growth and expansion of Jewry,
The dominant sociological position of Jewry, to show how it dominated
the German people economically, intellectually and politically..."
"In discussing the Jewish Question, even today one encounters
resistance and misunderstandings, especially in intellectual circles.
This can only be explained by the intellectual education of the
political past. This is especially evident when one discusses the
fundamental issues.
Whenever a new thought arises in the world and calls people to
practical action, the old world resists because it feels its
foundations threatened. Its old standpoint has ruled for decades, and
it looks uncomprehendingly at a new idea that does not fit into the
accustomed patterns of thinking. That is natural. When the new idea
and worldview are truly revolutionary, they are on a different level
of human thought and feeling, and there can be no compromise. Its
realization depends on people who support it, and who are ready to
fight to transform the life of the individual and of the nation in
every way..."
"In the long run, no idea is better suited to guarantee peace between
nations than National Socialist racial thinking, which calls for the
furtherance and maintenance of one's own race and one's own people,
and supports similar efforts on the part of other nations..."
"The new Germany that views its own race and ethnicity positively must
therefore distinguish within its territory between one race and
another, between one people and another. Mixing of blood harms both
sides. Race is an issue for every people if they are to live according
to their nature. The German people is not so arrogant as to believe
that is is the chosen people. The familiar quotation from Geibel, "The
world should enjoy German ways," should be understood in the context
of the dreams of world betterment of those past days.
The National Socialist racial viewpoint has clear consequences for the
relationship between Germans and Jews. People have often said that
National Socialism's approach to the racial question is purely
negative and destructive, and that its essential characteristic is
radical anti-Semitism. One must grant that we made the Jewish question
clearer than anyone else, and taught an entire generation that had
been taught to see all people the same to recognize the importance of
the Jewish question not only for our people, but for the entire world.
Our treatment of the Jewish problem in the years before we took power
must be seen as the political education of the German people, which
had lost its racial instincts to a dangerous degree.
The question took on its own nature in Germany, Many citizens had
their eyes opened, and the simultaneous appeal to all the heroic and
manly virtues of the German man resulted in a racial selection of
political fighters who today stand at the head of the new state.
Formerly, the Jewish question, as seen by the state, was a matter of
complete equality and the unhindered immigration of Jews from the
East. This is the best proof of how racial feeling and consciousness
had been lost. Our tone was not purely negative or the simple
rejection of others, rather the emphasis was on the positive values of
our own people. This does require noting that Jewry through its
Marxist class struggle leadership role and its international financial
measures aimed at Germany supported every kind of anti-national action
in the cultural and political fields. Jewry should not complain if its
anti-German activities, which have no counterpart in any other
country, call forth from the people the defensive reaction of
anti-Semitism.
The starting point of the discussion is the scientific fact that the
Jew is different than the German. This is neither arrogant nor
boastful, it simply is the way things are. For us, the Jewish question
is a question between two peoples. Its characteristics are determined
by the racially determined differences between the two, and through
the unusual sociological and numerical development of Jewry in the
course of its history, developments that are particularly evident in
the last decades through a constantly growing process of foreign
infiltration that has reached an intolerable level for the German
people.
More than once over its history, the German people has absorbed
foreign elements, but they were racially identical or similar
population groups, as for example was the case with the Huguenots.
With the Jews, things are fundamentally different. They are seen
everywhere as foreigners, and see themselves that way as well. Walter
Rathenau said it most clearly as early as 1897: "How strange! In the
middle of German life there is a separate, foreign tribe that stands
out in every way with its hot-tempered behavior. An Asiatic horde has
settled on the sands of Mark Brandenburg." Einstein said something in
1931: "I have to laugh when I hear the phrase 'German citizen of the
Jewish faith.' These citizens first of all want nothing to do with my
poor Eastern European brothers, and second do not want to be sons of
my (Jewish) people, but only members of the Jewish cultural community.
Is that honest? Can a non-Jew respect such people? I am not a German
citizen. I am a Jew, and am happy to belong to the Jewish people."
The most remarkable thing about Jewry is that it has not disappeared
over the millennia, even though it lacks its own territory and
language. Even more remarkable is that it lacks the main
characteristic of a minority population, its own pockets of settlement
to which it could if necessary retreat. Only time will tell if
Palestine will someday fill this gap. That question is made more
difficult by the fact that the Arabs maintain their claim on
Palestine. Whatever the twists of history, the Jew has always remained
the same, whether as a grain speculator in ancient Rome or as a bank
or stock exchange potentate in the modern era. They were always able
to control the wealth of whole nations. Nations and peoples once their
contemporaries have vanished, leaving only words and crumbled
monuments behind; only the Jew remains. In ancient days we see him
carrying on his business in the trading centers of the Mediterranean.
In the Middle Ages he provided money for German nobles and free
cities. Today he rules the banks and stock exchanges of the whole
world, forcing the nations under the yoke of financial capitalism. The
power of this people of 15 million rests on these international
relations. This is how they seem to fulfill the commandment of Jehovah
- the world domination of the chosen people.
The secret of the Jewish people, which has enabled them to survive
through all of history's twists and turns, is that it has always
recognized the laws of blood, even anchoring them in the laws of its
religion. The consciousness of blood and family that believing Jews
have has been stronger than all the other forces of history, giving us
a unique example of a people without its own land and language, which
still meets the criteria for being a people, and which has outlasted
many other peoples.
This historic manifestation of Jewry, which is unique, brings to the
fore the question of the relationship between the host and guest
peoples. It has been answered in differing ways throughout history,
depending on the worldview and thinking then predominant.
Since the Jews were dispersed they have been held together by the laws
of their religion and their faith that they were the chosen people.
Until the middle of the 18th Century, Germans and Jews lived apart
from each other. The Jews had no opportunity to become involved in the
religious of political-intellectual life of their host people. On the
other hand, they could practice their own customs without
interference. They had their own religion and their own laws. During
the Middle Ages, the Ghetto was the way Jewry could maintain itself in
the midst of other peoples and fulfill its Jewish duties, which grew
out of its race, origins and laws. The values and ideals of other
peoples were not affected. This separation was only possible because
the views of the host people were as strong as those of the Jews.
According to the writer Grau: "There was no racial defilement or
baptism, no attempt to join a nation that one could never be a member
of, and no attempt to intellectually silence the host people." In the
Ghetto of the Middle Ages, the Jew developed his nature and
characteristics, which were later to become significant, while
maintaining the community of blood and race. The latter is
particularly important, since the strict physical separation between
the host and guest peoples maintained the foreign nature that we daily
see so clearly, now that the barriers between have long since fallen.
Even in the Middle Ages, the most important thing was not the
difference between the Christian and Mosaic faiths. Rather, there was
on the one hand the natural sense that the Jew was of a foreign race,
and on the other hand the strict law of blood which demanded a clear
separation if the Jews were to fulfill Jehovah's mission, which had
guided them from the beginning. Just this has always been kept in the
background by historians, who present the Ghetto as a tolerated asylum
for Jewish martyrs persecuted on account of their faith. There is a
gap to be filled here. The task of historians writing from our new
viewpoint will be to examine the portrait of the Ghetto of the Middle
Ages to discover its importance for the development of Jewry and the
relationship between the guest and host peoples. Even the Jewish side
is demanding that. O. Karbach criticizes historical writing because it
"in significant ways conceals the historical fact that the Jews in the
centuries before their emancipation possessed a legal standing that
was better than the greater part of the rest of the population, namely
complete or partial agricultural freedom. (Ordnung in der Judenfrage,
edited by E. Czermak, Reinhold, Vienna, 1933).
The barriers between Germans and Jews fell as a result of the
Enlightenment and the French Revolution. The path to Jewish world
domination would take a different direction than pious, observant Jews
had expected. Emancipation made it possible to build Jewish dominance
through secular means. With the disappearance of racial consciousness,
only religious differences seemed to remain. It seemed at the time
unjust to give someone a preferred position only because of his
religious beliefs, which are an entirely personal matter. At the time,
this was tied to a belief in human equality and freedom. It was
revolutionary. It shattered the church dogmas that had ruled for
centuries and was the foundation of liberal thinking during the last
two hundred years. The new goal was humanity itself, and nothing stood
in the way of racial mixing. Some had the quiet hope that assimilation
would mean the absorption of Jewry. Jewry itself, however, was more
than willing to use the opportunities of religious assimilation, which
opened the path to all important positions, even to political
leadership. As H. Heine said, "baptism was the ticket to European
culture." Gradually, an intermixing with the German people developed,
particularly in its cultural elite. Foreign blood infiltrated to a
degree that we realize only today now that the "Law to Reestablish a
Professional Bureaucracy" has exposed numerous sources of foreign
blood. This process has greatly accelerated during the last fourteen
years.
Today the age of raceless thinking is being displaced by the ideals of
human variability. Values are rooted in origin and territory, and each
group has a historic mission based on its own unique and eternal
values. Such new racial thinking will of course secure the opposition
of those who either through faith or reason still believe in the unity
of humanity in culture, social order and organization. The Jews will
naturally oppose any discussion of race, since the denial of any
significant differences between people is the foundation of his
infiltration of Western European society. The Jew finds any mention of
the racial question as an attack on his current existence. His leading
role in every anti-national area is characteristic of his mimicry, and
is necessary for his continued existence. That explains the phrase
"German citizen of the Jewish faith."
The recognition that the Jew is of a foreign and different race along
with the reawakening of German racial consciousness must necessarily
lead to a change in the relations between Germans and Jews.
There is one point to keep in mind before examining the statistics.
Only those people who claimed to be Jews and were members of the
Mosaic faith were counted as Jews, not those who for internal or
external reasons belonged to another religion, or those who claimed to
be dissident Jews and therefore did not belong to the standard groups.
This is regrettable for our purposes, since we are interested not in
the influence of those who still claimed the Jewish religion, rather
those who belonged to the Jewish race! That includes all Jews, whether
of the Mosaic faith or baptized Christians. That is just what the
supporters of the Talmud and the Old Testament always said. They
complained that the state opened all offices to those "without
character," to "Christmas Jews," even admitting them to the officer
corps! The statistics given here must therefore be increased
significantly. The Jews are a race, and baptism does not in any way
change the foreign characteristics that are hostile to the German
people..."
Of course, the intellectual atmosphere that enabled the Jew to
infiltrate the German body politic quickly led the Jew himself to see
that conditions for his advancement were favorable, and that the way
to the top was open. He also realized what the population statistics
meant, indeed they were particularly clear to him, since 2/3 of his
kind lived in the big cities, the centers of the liberal worldview..."
"Nothing shows the differences between our people and the Jews more
clearly than their likes and dislikes for certain occupations. In some
occupations, particularly those that are most important for the nation
as a whole, the foreign influence on German life has reached an
intolerable extent not seen elsewhere in Europe. The preference for
certain occupations also gives us an interesting insight into the
spiritual nature of Jewry.
The following figures show how much critical occupations in Germany
have been infiltrated.
112,188 Jews, or 58.8%, far more than half, are employed in the area
of "commerce and transportation, including restaurants and taverns,"
but only 17.11% (3,248,145) of the population as a whole. In the area
of "industry and craft work, including mining and construction,"
19,318 Jews (25.85%) were employed, including 31.82% of foreigners.
For the population as a whole, the figure was 40.94% (7,771,799).
The figures in the field of "public administration, the judiciary, the
army and navy, churches, legal professionals and the independent
professions." 11,324 Jews were employed there, or 5.94% , over against
921,048 (4.85%) in the general population..."
In 1925, 0.81% of Jews were active as civil servants and the army and
navy, as opposed to 2.3% of the general population. In the church,
religious occupations, the legal system and the other independent
professions, the Jewish percentage is 4.3% as opposed to 2% of the
general population. This shows that the Jews are over-represented when
compared to the general population, particularly in the independent
professions.
The percentage of the Jewish population in government positions may
seem less than that of the general population, but the difference is
not as great as the figures first suggest. The most recent figures,
not yet entirely complete, suggest that a not insignificant number of
them are baptized Jews or dissidents formerly of the Jewish faith who
denied their Jewishness to gain an official position.
4.35% of Jews are employed in the medical and health care system,
including welfare, and 2.0% of foreign Jews. The figure for the
general population is 1.88%. The Jewish percentage is thus 2 1/2 times
as high as that of the general population.
In summary, Jewish occupational patterns differ from those of the rest
of the population. Jewry seems to have an aversion to agricultural
work, industrial labor and crafts. They are greatly over-represented
in commerce and transportation, including the entire banking system.
They are also over-represented in the independent professions and the
health care system. These figures alone demonstrate a clear difference
between the native German population and alien Jewry.
Very similar conditions prevail in all Western European nations and
also in North America, since Jews have spread throughout the world in
areas with growing industry and in cities that are centers of economic
and financial power. It is not true, as is often claimed, that the Jew
was systematically forced into commerce by the laws of the various
nations; rather, commerce particularly suits the Jew's nature. This is
supported by Dr. Arthur Ruppin, a scholar respected by the Jews. He
writes in his book The Jews of the Present (2nd edition, Cologne and
Leipzig, 1911, p. 45):
"Thanks to their significant commercial gifts (!), the Jews soon
enjoyed great success in commerce and industry. For 2000 years they
have seemed predestined to work in commerce. It is false to claim, as
some do, that Jews became merchants primarily because the Christians
denied them other occupations during the Middle Ages. The Jews did not
become merchants in Europe, rather they entered the profession in
growing numbers ever since the Babylonian Captivity in Syria, Egypt
and Babylon [because they dislike labor and prefer to have others work
for them! The Editor]. In Palestine until the dispersion they did live
primarily by agriculture. In the Diaspora, there was hardly anywhere
that the Jews lived by agriculture. The Middle Ages did not make them
into merchants. It only affirmed legally that which history had
already established. It is after all the rule that economic laws
generally do not create new conditions, but only legalize and regulate
that which already exists. The law would never have limited the Jews
to commerce in Europe if they had not already immigrated primarily as
merchants..."
Nearly all national economists agree that the Jews owe their role as
merchants not to chance, but to their excellent abilities as
merchants. As W. Sombart wrote: "The Jewish race is by nature the
incarnation of the capitalism-mercantile spirit." (Der moderne
Kapitalismus, Vol. 2, p. 349. Leipzig, 1902). Many others agree..."
"Similarly differences in the relative proportion of Jews by the
self-employed are evident in the medical field, which employs 0.5% of
the general population but 2.8% of the Jews, nearly six times as many.
Similar statistics are found in the cultural area (theater, film,
radio, education, teaching, etc.). The 0.4% of the general population
are employed there, 2.6% of the Jews, also about six times as many.
In the area of public administration and the judiciary, the percentage
of Jews in high positions is 2.0%, over against 1.3% of the general
population, nearly twice as high. The significance of these figures
becomes clear that when one realizes that the 2.3% of professional
Jews in public administration and the judiciary are in a branch where
the Jewish percentage of employees is only 0.81%. That means that the
Jews are especially represented in the important positions that
influence the whole government and leading branches of the economy.."
"The statistics may be interesting. The Jewish workers included 11,406
in industry, 2,220 in commerce and transportation, and 726 in
agriculture.
The following figures show most clearly the different social structure
of Jewry in Prussia over against the general population, and reveal
clearly Jewry's leading role in public life:.."
"On 19 May 1933 Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler gave an interview to
Bernard Ridder, an American journalist for the New York State
Newspaper. Discussing the Jewish Question in Germany, he said: "Should
I allow thousands of German-blooded people to be destroyed so that the
Jews can live and work in luxury while millions starve, falling victim
to Bolshevism out of desperation?"
Can the justice of his words be doubted when one recalls that,
according to the Prussian census of 16 June 1925 6.9% of all
independent pharmacists, 17.9% of all independent physicians, 4.8% of
all independent artists, 27% of all independent attorneys, 4.6% of
editors, 11% of theater directors, 7.5% of actors, and 14.8% of all
independent dentists were Jews! And these huge figures when the Jews
were only 1% of the population! Is that anything other than a
Jewdification of our entire cultural system?! And what would these
figures look like if one had had the ability to include baptized Jews
and dissidents?..."
"Berlin is the Jewish metropolis in Germany. The process of
Jewdification is considerably further along. That is understandable,
since one is in the immediate vicinity of the protective arms of
democracy and social democracy, where developments can occur
unhindered. Thus in Berlin on 16 June 1925 32.2% of the pharmacists
were Jews, as were 49.9% of the physicians, 7.5 of the graphic
artists, 50.2% of the attorneys, 8.5% of the editors, 14.2% of the
directors and theater heads, 12.3% of the actors and 37.5% of the
dentists.
These figures cry out for legal limitations on Jewry, and it is
surprising that former governments did not take the appropriate action
to tell the Jews "this far and no further."
The Jewish influence gave the rest of the world an entirely false
impression of the nature of the German people. Inside the Reich, they
poisoned the soul of the people, and all social and political
relationships. Until the national uprising, the leaders of the
National Socialist movement were persecuted, defamed and suppressed by
a system that was a willing tool in the hands of a foreign and
different race. The national revolution freed the German people from
this foreign influence, which had also dominated and ruined the German
press and public life in significant ways.
He who wants to understand the German revolution of 1933 must
understand that it had this goal: 'Germany must be governed by Germans
for Germans.' The central idea of the National Socialist revolution
was the longing of the German people to once more be master in every
area of its own life. As a great, confident people, we demand only
this of the other peoples: that they permit us, as their equals, to
govern ourselves as we wish and find our own way to happiness (Reich
Minister of the Interior Dr. Frick)..."
"The Jewdification of our colleges and universities over the years has
reached almost frightening proportions. We begin with a publication
from 1931. Karl Hoppmann, in his volume "On the State of Jewdification
in the Academic professions" found the following figures:
1. University of Berlin:
Medical faculty . . . . over 50%
Philosophical faculty . . . . 25%
2. University of Göttingen, 32% of the professors were Jewish:
Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47.0%
Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.0%
Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40.0%
Mathematics and Natural Sciences . . . 23.0%
3. University of Breslau
Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30.0%
Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.0%
Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.0%
4. University of Frankfurt (Main)
Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55.0%
Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.0%
Mathematics and Natural Sciences . . . 28.0%
Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.0%
Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.0%
Jewry has a dominating role on the stock exchange. The board of the
Berlin stock exchange is almost exclusively Jewish. In the various
committees, the percentage of the Jewish race is sometimes many times
as high as the Aryan. The committees include:
That means that 117 or 147 members are Jews, or nearly 80%.
The extent of the Jewdification of German theater and film is evident
from 1931 figures. Of 234 theater directors, 118 (50.4%) were Jews, 92
(39.3%) were non-Jewish.
Berlin led in this area as well, with 23 of 29 theater directors (80%)
Jewish.
The situation in film is similar. The Viennese Catholic periodical
"Schönere Zukunft," which certainly cannot be accused of
anti-Semitism, wrote the following in its 3 February 1929 issue:
"The percentage of Jewry in today's film industry is so high, at least
by us in Germany, that there is only a tiny part left for Christian
firms."
Jewry has long sought political influence as well. This formerly
happened in covert ways, mostly through direct or indirect control of
money matters. Nearly every noble once had his financial Jew. Since
1848, the birth of political parties in Germany, Jewry has openly
sought to become a political power. The Jew Marx was the founder of
Marxist doctrine, the Jew Lassalle was the founder of the Social
Democratic Party. The founders of the Independent Social Democratic
Party of Germany were the Jews Bernstein, Haase, Kautsky, Hilferding,
Cohn, Davidsohn, Simon, Rosenfeld, Eisner, Levi, etc. Carl Liebknecht
and Rosa Luxemberg were the leaders of the Communist Party, and
recently the Jews Rosenfeld and Seydewitz founded the Socialist
Workers Party. Jews sat in the press offices and the various editorial
offices of party newspapers, and above all in the various
parliamentary factions..."
"We think it necessary to mention that the Communist wave that
threatened to destroy Germany politically, economically and
intellectually can primarily be traced back to Jewry.
Is it any wonder that the Jew is arrogant? The greater the Jewish
influence the more secure they feel, and the more ominously and
clearly their character and goals becomes clear: Pride, intolerance
and superiority on the one hand, a drive for world domination on the
other. Several pointed Jewish statements are examples:
Hochmut: The familiar "Dorfgeschichte"-Auerbach says: "We Jews are the
most intelligent race." "We are the chosen ones," says Dr. Berhard
Cohn (Jüdisch-Politische Streitfragen, 20, 22). He continues: "We may
carry our head high and demand particular respect. We must not only be
treated equally, but better. We deserve the particular respect of
other peoples."
Rabbi Dr. Rulf wrote a book ("Aruchas bar-Ammni," Israel's Healing,
Frankfurt a. M. 1883) in which he says: "The Jewish people is a
blessing for all peoples. The blessing has followed on the heels of
the Jews. A whole world lives from the Jews, who feed everyone, and
everywhere spread wealth and pleasure, comfort and prosperity. Only
the commerce of the Jews creates value. Work alone does not do that.
Half of the world's population would starve without the Jews."
The Jew Dr. Duschak wrote: "The world could not exist without the
Jews." The well-known Jew Sacher-Masoch explained the hatred of
anti-Semites against the Jews in this way: It is the same hatred a
Negro feels against the whites because of their superiority.
That the Jews even went so far as to suggest to Bismark that he make
the Jewish Day of Atonement a national holiday is certainly no sign of
modesty.
Intolerance: The Jew Klausner (Society, edited by Conrad, Volume 12)
wrote: "Anti-Semitism and criminality are nearly the same thing. There
are criminals who were not anti-Semites, but no anti-Semites who were
not criminals."
The work by Dr. E. Fuchs. "The Future of the Jews," (Berlin,
Philo-Verlag, 1924) judges our greatest historians, Hartmann and
Treitschke, who see the Jews as our misfortune: "Men blinded by
prejudice and hatred. Small, tiny men."
World Domination: The Jewish attorney Maurthner in Vienna said back in
the 1880's: "It is not just a matter of fighting anti-Semitism. We
want to oppose it with Jewish domination!"
They made the attempt. If the German people had not recovered their
senses at the last moment, and if they had not had a Fuehrer and
Chancellor named Adolf Hitler who recognized the danger and woke the
German people, we would have fallen into slavery. As we have already
noted, the Jew has always known how to rouse sympathy when things were
rough for him. Consider this report from the meeting of the PEN Club
in Ragusa at the end of May of last year: "Schalom Asch in his keynote
address noted that the suffering of the Jews in Germany had aroused
the sympathy of the entire world. Only the German government remained
untouched. He claimed the Jews has given Germany its deepest thoughts,
its most beautiful songs, its greatest poets, artists and
philosophers. Today one had crucified them in Germany and covered them
with their own blood." Mr. Schalom Asch began crying in the midst of
these outrageous lies. He spoke in the hope that his words would be
heard for the sake of justice and humanity throughout the world.
The Jew Asch cries! The German people are not moved. They want no
torture or persecution, but also no unjustified sympathy, only
justice! Remember always the worlds of Field Marshall Moltke: "The Jew
is a state within the state." Remember also the works of our great
historian Mommsen: "In antiquity too the Jew was the ferment of
cosmopolitanism and national decomposition." And remember Goethe: "The
Israelites have never done much; they possess few virtues, and most of
the deficiencies of other peoples!"
The Racial Question has an important role in the laws of other
nations, though other peoples and races are affected than in the
German Reich. It is in no way new or unusual that the German Reich is
active in this area. Contrary to opinions that surface here and there,
our laws are in no way directed against the Jewish religion, its
practice, or the freedom of the Jewish faith.
The German Reich has done nothing but introduce constitutional
legislation to provide the kind of civil service necessary to
guarantee the secure administration of the Reich. The laws do not
render it impossible for a citizen of a foreign state to become a
civil servant. Indeed, if he is appointed to such a position, he
receives full citizenship in the Reich. German civil servants should
however be of Aryan descent. The so-called Aryan Law requires that
each civil servant be of German blood. Since the vast majority of
non-Aryan civil servants were Jews, the first guidelines to the law
paid particular attention to those who were members of the Jewish
race. But we did not simply throw out the non-Aryan civil servants,
but retired them with honor and a pension. The people's state could
hardly proceed in a more legal and mild manner. Germany did not want
to attack Jewry wildly, rather only deal with its results, is clear
from the fact that the Law of 7 April 1933 left untouched all
non-Aryan civil servants who had been appointed before 1 August 1914,
and by the fact that the private sphere not affected. Some complain
that the law extends to half and quarter Aryans. The answer is that
the foreign influence in the civil service had grown to such a
dangerous extent that it was almost impossible for young Germans to
enter these professions." (Reich Minister of the Interior Dr.
Frick..."
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
Topaz
England's Guilt
by Joseph Goebbels
It is a major error to assume that England's plutocrats slipped into
the war against their will or even against their intentions. The
opposite is true. The English warmongers wanted the war and used all
the resources at their disposal over the years to bring it about. They
surely were not surprised by the war. English plutocracy had no goal
other than to unleash war against Germany at the right moment, and
this since Germany first began to seek once again to be a world power.
Poland really had little to do with the outbreak of war between the
Reich and England. It was only a means to an end. England did not
support the Polish government out of principle or for humanitarian
reasons. That is clear from the fact that England gave Poland no help
of any kind whatsoever when the war began. Nor did England take any
measures against Russia. The opposite, in fact. The London warring
clique to this day has tried to bring Russia into the campaign of
aggression against Germany.
The encirclement of Germany long before the outbreak of the war was
traditional English policy. From the beginning, England has always
directed its main military might against Germany. It never could
tolerate a strong Reich on the Continent. It justified its policy by
claiming that it wanted to maintain a balance of forces in Europe.
Today there is still another reason. The English warmongers conceal
it. It is crassly egotistic. The English prime minister announced the
day the war began that England's goal was to destroy Hitlerism.
However, he defined Hitlerism in a way other than how the English
plutocracy actually sees it. The English warmongers claim that
National Socialism wants to conquer the world. No nation is secure
against German aggression. An end must be made of the German hunger
for power. The limit came in the conflict with Poland. In reality,
however, there is another reason for England's war with Germany. The
English warmongers cannot seriously claim that Germany wants to
conquer the world, particularly in view of the fact that England
controls nearly two thirds of the world. And Germany since 1933 has
never threatened English interests.
So when Chamberlain says that England wants to destroy Hitlerism in
this war, he is in one sense incorrect. But in another sense, he is
speaking the truth. England does want to destroy Hitlerism. It sees
Hitlerism as the present internal state of the Reich, which is a thorn
in the eye of English plutocracy.
England is a capitalist democracy. Germany is a socialist people's
state. And it is not the case that we think England is the richest
land on earth. There are lords and City men in England who are in fact
the richest men on earth. The broad masses, however, see little of
this wealth. We see in England an army of millions of impoverished,
socially enslaved and oppressed people. Child labor is still a matter
of course there. They have only heard about social welfare programs.
Parliament occasionally discusses social legislation. Nowhere else is
there such terrible and horrifying inequality as in the English slums.
Those with good breeding take no notice of it. Should anyone speak of
it in public, the press, which serves plutocratic democracy, quickly
brands him the worst kind of rascal. They do not hesitate from making
major changes in the Constitution if they are necessary to preserve
capitalist democracy.
Capitalism democracy suffers from every possible modern social
ailment. The Lords and City people can remain the richest people one
earth only because they constantly maintain their wealth by exploiting
their colonies and preserving unbelievable poverty in their own
country.
Germany, on the other hand, has based its domestic policies on new and
modern social principles. That is why it is a danger to English
plutocracy. It is also why English capitalists want to destroy
Hitlerism. They see Hitlerism as all the generous social reforms that
have occurred in Germany since 1933. The English plutocrats rightly
fear that good things are contagious, that they could endanger English
capitalism.
That is why England declared war on Germany. Since it was accustomed
to letting others fight its wars, it looked to the European continent
to find those ready to fight for England's interests. France was ready
to take on this degrading duty, since the same kind of people ruled
France. They too were ready for war out of egotistic reasons. Western
European democracy is really only a Western European plutocracy that
rules the world. It declared war on German socialism because it
endangered their capitalist interests.
A similar drama began in 1914. England had more luck during those four
and a half years than it is having today. Europe's nations had no
chance to see what was happening. The nations of Europe today have no
desire to play the same role they played during the World War. England
and France stand alone. Still, England is trying once again to wage
war without making any personal sacrifice. The goal is to blockade
Germany, to gradually bring it to submit by starvation. That is
longstanding English policy. They used it successfully in the
Napoleonic wars, and also during the World War. It would work now as
well, if the German people had not been educated by National
Socialism. National Socialism is immune to English temptations.
English propaganda lies no longer work in Germany. They have gradually
lost their effectiveness in the rest of the world as well, since
German propaganda today reaches far beyond its borders. This time,
English plutocracy will not succeed in driving a wedge between the
German people and their leadership, though that is their goal.
The German nation today is defending not only its honor and
independence, but also the great social accomplishments it has made
through hard and untiring work since 1933. It is a people's state
built on the foundation of justice and economic good sense. In the
past, England always had the advantage of facing a fragmented Germany.
It is only natural that English plutocracy today seeks to split the
German people and make it ripe for new collapse.
English lying propaganda can no longer name things by their proper
names. It therefore claims that it is not fighting the German people,
only Hitlerism. But we know this old song. In South Africa, England
was not fighting the Boers, only Krugerism. In the World War, England
wanted to destroy Kaiserism, not the German people. But that did not
stop English plutocracy from brutally and relentlessly suppressing the
Boers after that war or the Germans after our defeat.
A child once burned is twice shy. The German people were once victims
of lying English war propaganda. Now it understands the situation. It
has long understood the background of this war. It knows that behind
all English plutocratic capitalism's fine words, its aim is to destroy
Germany's social achievements. We are defending the socialism we have
build in Germany since 1933 with every military, economic and
spiritual means at our disposal. The bald English lies have no impact
on the German people.
English plutocracy is finally being forced to defend itself. In the
past, it always found other nations to fight for it. This time, the
English people must themselves risk their necks for the lords and City
men. They will meet a unified German people of workers, farmers and
soldiers who are prepared to defend their nation with every means at
their disposal.
We did not want war. England inflicted it on us. English plutocracy
forced it on us. England is responsible for the war, and it will have
to pay for it.
The whole world is waking up today. It can no longer be ruled by the
capitalist methods of the 19th Century. The peoples have matured. They
will one day deal a terrible blow to the capitalist plutocrats who are
the cause of their misery.
It is no accident that National Socialism has the historical task of
carrying out this reckoning. Plutocracy is collapsing intellectually,
spiritually, and in the not too distant future, militarily. We are
acting consistently with Nietzsche's words: "Give a shove to what is
falling."
Topaz
During World War Two the Germans put Jews and Communists in
concentration camps. The USA locked also up the Japanese and their
political opponants and for less reason. At the end of the war there
was a lot of deaths in the German camps from disease and starvation
because Germany was being bombed to rubble. There is no evidence that
the Germans had gas chambers or an extermination plan.
Newsweek magazine May 15, 1989 says on page 64:
"the way the Nazis did things: the secrecy, the unwritten orders, the
destruction of records and the innocent-sounding code names for the
extermination of the Jews. Perhaps it was inevitable that historians
would quarrel over just what happened"
The real reason there are no records of an extermination plan is
because there was no extermination plan. The Germans planned to deport
the Jews out of Germany. The records show that they planned to move
them to Madagascar.
Here is part of the Leuchter Report:
"Thirty-one samples were selectively removed from the alleged gas
chambers at Kremas I, II, III, IV and V. A control sample was taken
from delousing facility #1 at Birkenau. The control sample was removed
from a delousing chamber in a location where cyanide was known to have
been used and was apparently present as blue staining. Chemical
testing of the control sample #32 showed a cyanide content of 1050
mg/kg, a very heavy concentration. The conditions at areas from which
these samples were taken are identical with those of the control
sample, cold, dark, and wet. Only Kremas IV and V differed, in the
respect that these locations had sunlight (the buildings have been
torn down) and sunlight may hasten the destruction of uncomplexed
cyanide. The cyanide combines with the iron in the mortar and brick
and becomes ferric-ferro-cyanide or prussian blue pigmentation, a very
stable iron-cyanide complex.
"The locations from which the analyzed samples were removed are
set out in Table III.
"It is notable that almost all the samples were negative and that
the few that were positive were very close to the detection level
(1mg/kg); 6.7 mg/kg at Krema III; 7.9 mg/kg at Krerma I. The absense
of any consequential readings at any of the tested locations as
compared to the control sample reading 1050 mg/kg supports the
evidence that these facilities were not execution gas chambers. The
small quantities detected would indicate that at some point these
buildings were deloused with Zyklon B - as were all the buildings at
all these facilities"
Professional holocaust believers have admitted that the "gas
chamber" which is shown to the tourists at Auschwitz was actually
built by the allies after the war was over. This is what they wrote:
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."
They admit that the "gas chamber" shown to the tourists at
Auschwitz was built by the allies after the war was over. There is no
physical evidence that the Germans had gas chambers. No bodies of
people who died from gas have been found. The Communists were the
first to enter the camps. How do the other allies know the Communists
didn't blow up the buildings? Then they could claim that these
demolished buildings used to be gas chambers.
But then the believers will say the Gemans confessed. Their main
confession is from Hoess. Here are the details:
"In the introduction to Death Dealer [Buffalo: Prometheus, 1992],
the
historian Steven Paskuly wrote: "Just after his capture in 1946, the
British Security Police were able to extract a statement from Hoess
by
beating him and filling him with liquor." Paskuly was reiterating
what
Rupert Butler and Bernard Clarke had already described.
In 1983, Rupert Butler published an unabashed memoir (Legions of
Death,
Hamlyn: London) describing in graphic detail how, over three days, he
and
Clarke and other British policemen managed to torture Hoess into
making a
"coherent statement." According to Butler [Legions of Death, p. 237],
he
and the other interrogators put the boots to Hoess the moment he was
captured. For starters, Clarke struck his face four times to get
Höess to
reveal his true identity.
<quote>
The admission suddenly unleashed the loathing of Jewish sergeants in
the
arresting party whose parents had died in Auschwitz following an
order
signed by Höss.
The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjamas ripped from his
body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables,
where it
seemed to Clarke the blows and screams were endless.
Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: "Call them off,
unless
you want to take back a corpse."
A blanket was thrown over Höss and he was dragged to Clarke's car,
where
the sergeant poured a substantial slug of whisky down his throat.
Höss
tried to sleep.
Clarke thrust his service stick under the man's eyelids and ordered
in
Geffnan: "Keep your pig eyes open, you swine."
For the first time Höss trotted out his oft-repeated justification:
"I
took my orders frorn Himmler. I was a soldier in the same way as you
are
a soldier and we had to obey orders."
The party arrived back at Heide around three in the morning. The
snow was
swirling still, but the blanket was torn from Höss and he was made to
walk
completely nude through the prison yard to his cell.
</quote>
An article in the Britsh newspaper Wrexham Leader [Mike Mason, "In a
cell with
a Nazi war criminal -- We kept him awake until he confessed," October
17,
1986] following the airing of a TV documentary on the case of Rudolf
Hoess
included eyewitness recollections by Ken Jones:
<quote>
Mr. Ken Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery
stationed at Heid[e] in Schleswig-Holstein. "They brought him to us
when
he refused to cooperate over questioning about his activities during
the
war. He came in the winter of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail
cell in
the barracks," recalls Mr. Jones. Two other soldiers were detailed
with
Mr. Jones to join Höss in his cell to help break him down for
interrogation. "We sat in the cell with him, night and day, armed
with
axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to
help
break down his resistance," said Mr. Jones. When Höss was taken out
for
exercise he was made to wear only jeans and a cotton shirt in the
bitter
cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Höss finally broke
down
and made a full confession to the authorities.
</quote>
The confession Hoess signed was numbered document NO-1210; later
revamped,
as document PS-3868, which became the basis for an oral deposition
Hoess
made for the IMT on April 15, 1946, a month after it had been
extracted
from him by torture...
Since what people confess to after they have been captured by the
Communists and their liberal comrades is not proof of anything, this
leaves only the stories of survivors. These contradict each other and
not believable. One professional survivor said that he could tell if
the Germans were gassing German Jews or Polish Jews by the color of
the smoke.
The fact that there are so many "survivors" is not proof of an
extermination plan. There may be six million survivors. Just about
every Jew that is old says he is a survivor.
The real "holocaust" was when the Communist Jews murdered millions
of Christians. Communism was Jewish. Here is proof:
Article Winston Churchill wrote in 1920:
"This movement amongst the Jews (the Russian Revolution) is not new.
From the days of Spartacus Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down
to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kuhn (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany)
and Emma Goldman (United States), this world wide conspiracy for the
overthrow of civilization and the reconstruction of society on the
basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible
equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer,
Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part
in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of
every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at
last this band of extraordinary personalities has gripped the Russian
people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the
undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to
exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the
actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international
and for the most part atheistic Jews. Moreover, the principal
inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders." (ibid)
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 married to a
Jewess. It was later proven that he was one quarter Jewish, London
Jewish Chronicle April 21, 1995, Lenin: Life and Legacy.
David Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the
Revolution, wrote:
"The Bolshevic 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
world-wide revolution."
The Director of British Intelligence to the U.S. Secretary of State
wrote this:
"There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international
movement controlled by Jews."
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 book "Soviet Russia and the Jews" by Gregor Aronson and
published by the American Jewish League Against Communism, quotes
Stalin in an interview in 1931 with the Jewish Telegraph Agency.
Stalin said:
"...Communists cannot be anything but outspoken enemies of
Anti-Semitism. We fight anti-Semites by the strongest methods in the
Soviet Union. Active anti-Semites are punished by death under the
law."
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.
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.
Here is something the National Socialists wrote:
"The Soviet Union was in fact a paradise for one group: the Jews. Even
at times when for foreign policy reasons Jews were less evident in the
government, or when they ruled through straw men, the Jews were always
visible in the middle and lower levels of the administration."
Topaz
<christoph...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>This really isn't even worth responding to. Rex Curry is one of the
>Internet's most well-known trolls. He continually writes rubbish about
>how Nazism, a fascist right-wing ideology, was really a socialist
>left-wing ideology. This mission wouldn't be so bad if he pursued it in
>appropriate academic ways, but constant posting of barely-literate
>diatribe doesn't help anything. And then there's the problem of his
>untrustworthiness. Look at his Amazon.com reviews, and you'll see him
>claim to be a lawyer in one, a journalist in the next, and a general
>expert on the history of Nazi Germany.
>
We are socialists. But I don't agree with "leftist". Here is one
reason:
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."
Topaz
wrote:
>
>The Nazis were not socialist,
We are socialists. We are not communists if that is what you mean.
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."
> except in the form of corporate socialists,
Hitler said:
"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic
system
for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair
salaries,
with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and
property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all
determined to destroy this system under all conditions."
(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by John Toland, Adolf Hitler, 1977, p.
306)
>better known as corporate fascists.
corporatism
"All those engaged in a common enterprise, particularly as a means of
making a living, have a common interest and should deal with
government through their leaders as, for example, educational workers,
or workers in agriculture, rather than 'horizontally' as laborers,
clerical workers, managers, and so on."
Source:
David Miller et al., eds, The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political
Thought (Oxford, 1987)
Of course Mussolini did not mean that corporations as in the USA
should have more power or profits.
Here are parts of a post about Mussolini written by a very
anti-Mussolini person. He has done his homework though and cites many
books which are also anti-Mussolini and anti-Fascist. These are some
things they admit:
"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).
...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).
"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 ...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.
> I realize that the name they chose
>claims they are socialists, but like Mista Bush and Party, it was necessary
>to lie to the people about what they stood for,
It's your media that lies:
Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf that the Jews tell big lies. The
Jewish media took his words out of context and claimed that Hitler was
in favor of big lies. This was in itself a big lie and proof that
Hitler was right. Here is what Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf and in
context:
"But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity
for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute
responsiblity for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had
shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the
catastrophe which he had forseen and to save the nation from that hour
of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsiblity for the loss
of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took away the
weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be
likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to
justice. All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true
in itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of
credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more
easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than
consciously or voluntarily, and thus in the primitive simplicity of
their minds they are more readily fall victims to the big lie than the
small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little
matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It
would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and
they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort
truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so
may be brought clearly to their minds, they still doubt and waver and
will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For
the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it
has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in
this world and to all who conspire together in tha art of lying. These
people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest
purposes.
"From time immemorial, however, the Jews have known better than
any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not their
very existance founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a
religious community, whereas in reality they are a race? And what a
race! One of the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has
branded the Jews for all time with a statement which is profoundly and
exactly true. He (Schopenhauer) called the Jew 'The Great Master of
Lies'. Those who do not realize the truth of that statement, or do not
wish to believe it, will never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth
to prevail."
> in order to get that first
>foothold in power. Once they controlled the nation, all pretense at being
>socialist were cast aside and their purely fascist natures became obvious to
>all.
>
>Except you of course. :)
>
Here is excerpt from his memoirs General Leon Degrelle, former
leader of the Belgian contingent of the Waffen-SS:
"One of the first labor reforms to benefit the German workers
was the establishment of annual paid vacation. The Socialist French
Popular Front, in 1936, would make a show of having invented the
concept of paid vacation, and stingily at that, only one week per
year. But Adolf Hitler originated the idea, and two or three times as
generously, from the first month of his coming to power in 1933.
Every factory employee from then on would have the legal right
to a paid vacation. Until then, in Germany paid holidays where they
applied at all did not exceed four or five days, and nearly half the
younger workers had no leave entitlement at all. Hitler, on the other
hand, favored the younger workers. Vacations were not handed out
blindly, and the youngest workers were granted time off more
generously. It was a humane action; a young person has more need of
rest and fresh air for the development of his strength and vigor just
coming into maturity. Basic vacation time was twelve
days, and then from age 25 on it went up to 18 days. After ten years
with the company, workers got 21 days, three times what the French
socialists would grant the workers of their country in 1936.
These figures may have been surpassed in the more than half a
century since then, but in 1933 they far exceeded European norms. As
for overtime hours, they no longer were paid, as they were everywhere
else in Europe at that time, at just the regular hourly rate. The
work
day itself had been reduced to a tolerable norm of eight hours,
since
the forty-hour week as well, in Europe, was first initiated by
Hitler.
And beyond that legal limit, each additional hour had to be paid at a
considerably increased rate...
Dismissal of an employee was no longer left as before the the
sole discretion of the employer. In that era, workers' rights to job
security were non-existent. Hitler saw to it that those rights were
strictly spelled out. The employer had to announce any dismissal four
weeks in advance. The employee then had a period of up to two months
in which to lodge a protest. The dismissal could also be annulled by
the Honor of Work Tribunal. What was the Honor of Work Tribunal? Also
called the Tribunal of Social Honor, it was the third of the three
great elements or layers of protection and defense that were to the
benefit of every German worker. The first was the Council
of Trust. The second was the Labor Commission.
The Council of Trust was charged with attending to the
establishment and the development of a real community spirit between
management and labor. In any business enterprise, the Reich law
stated, the employer and head of the enterprise, the employees and
workers, personnel of the enterprise, shall work jointly towards the
goal of the enterprise and the common good of
the nation...
Thus from 1933 on, the German worker had a system of justice
at his disposal that was created especially for him and would
adjudicate all grave infractions of the social duties based on the
idea of the Aryan enterprise community. Examples of these violations
of social honor are cases where the employer, abusing his power,
displayed ill will towards his staff or impugned the honor of his
subordinates, cases where staff members threatened work harmony by
spiteful agitation; the publication by members of the Council of
confidential information regarding the enterprise which they
became cognizant of in the course of discharging their duties.
Thirteen Tribunes of Social Honor were established, corresponding
with
the thirteen commissions...
From then on the worker knew that exploitation of his physical
strength in bad faith or offending his honor would no longer be
allowed. He had to fulfill certain obligations to the community, but
they were obligations that applied to all members of the enterprise,
from the chief executive down to the messenger boy. Germany's workers
at last had clearly established social rights that were arbitrated by
a Labor Commission and enforced by a Tribunal of Honor. Although
effected in an atmosphere of justice and moderation, it was a
revolution.
This was only the end of 1933, and already the first effects
could be felt. The factories and shops large and small were reformed
or transformed in conformity with the strictest standards of
cleanliness and hygiene; the interior areas, so often dilapidated,
opened to light; playing fields constructed; rest areas made
available
where one could converse at one's ease and relax during rest periods;
employee cafeterias; proper dressing rooms.
With time, that is to say in three years, those achievements
would take on dimensions never before imagined; more than 2,000
factories refitted and beautified; 23,000 work premises modernized;
800 buildings designed exclusively for meetings; 1,200 playing
fields;
13,000 sanitary facilities with running water; 17,000 cafeterias.
Eight hundred departmental inspectors and 17,300 local inspectors
would foster and closely and continuously supervise these renovations
and installations.
The large industrial establishments moreover had been given
the obligation of preparing areas not only suitable for sports
activities of all kinds, but provided with swimming pools as well.
Germany had come a long way from the sinks for washing one's face and
the dead tired workers, grown old before their time, crammed into
squalid courtyards during work breaks.
In order to ensure the natural development of the working
class, physical education courses were instituted for the younger
workers; 8,000 such were organized. Technical training would be
equally emphasized, with the creation of hundreds of work schools,
technical courses and examinations of professional competence, and
competitive examinations for the best workers for which large prizes
were awarded.
To rejuvenate young and old alike, Hitler ordered that a
gigantic vacation organization for workers be set up. Hundreds of
thousands of workers would be able every summer to relax on and and
sea. Magnificent cruise ships would be built. Special trains would
carry vacationers to the mountains and to the seashore. The
locomotives that hauled the innumerable worker-tourists in
just a few years of travel in Germany would log a distance equivalent
to fifty-four times around the world!
The cost of these popular excursions was nearly insignificant,
thanks to greatly reduced rates authorized by the Reichsbank.
Didn't these reforms lack something? Were some of them flawed
by errors and blunders? It is possible. But what did a blunder amount
to alongside the immense gains?
That this transformation of the working class smacked of
authoritarianism? That's exactly right. But the German people were
sick and tired of socialism and anarchy. To feel commanded didn't
bother them a bit. In fact, people have always liked having a strong
man guide them. One thing for certain is that the turn of mind of the
working class, which was still almost two-thirds non-Nazi in 1933,
had
completely changed.
The Belgian author Marcel Laloire would note: "When you make
your way through the cities of Germany and go into the working-class
districts, go through the factories, the construction yards, you are
astonished to find so many workers on the job sporting the Hitler
insignia, to see so many flags with the Swastika, black on a bright
red background, in the most populous districts." The Labor Front that
Hitler imposed on all of the workers and employers of the Reich was
for the most part received with favor.
And already the steel spades of the sturdy young lads of the
National Labor Service could be seen gleaming along the highways. The
National Labor Service had been created by Hitler out of thin air to
bring together for a few months in absolute equality, and in the same
uniform, both the sons of millionaires and the sons of the poorest
families. All had to perform the same work and were subject to the
same discipline, even the same pleasures and the same physical and
moral development. On the same construction sites and in the same
living quarters, they had become conscious of their commonality, had
come to understand one another, and had swept away their
old prejudices of class and caste. After this hitch in the National
Labor Service they all began to live as comrades, the workers knowing
that the rich man's son was not a monster, and the young lad from the
wealthy family knowing that the worker's son had honor just
like any other young fellow who had been more generously
favored by birth. Social hatred was disappearing, and a socially
united people was being born.
Hitler could already go into factories, something no man of the
so-called Right before him would have risked doing, and hold forth to
the mob of workers, tens of thousands of them at a time, as in the
Siemens works. In contrast to the von Papens and other country
gentlemen, he might tell them, "In my youth I was a worker like you.
And in my heart of hearts, I have remained what I was then." In the
course of his twelve years in power, no incident ever occurred at any
factory Adolf Hitler ever visited. When Hitler was among the people,
he was at home, and he was received like the member of
the family who had been most successful."
Topaz
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...
Topaz
>In Mein Kampf, horrid Hitler
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.' ...
> described the new flag: "In red we see the
>social idea of the movement, in white the nationalistic idea, in the
>swastika the mission of the struggle for the victory of the Aryan man,
>and, by the same token, the victory of the idea of creative work..."
>
>In German the swastika reference was: "im Hakenkreuz die Mission des
>Kampfes für den Sieg des arischen Menschen und zugleich mit ihm auch
>den Sieg des Gedankens der schaffenden Arbeit,"
>
>In his own words, his statement can be interpreted also as stating that
>the hakenkreuz / swastika is a "sieg" symbol or rune that corresponds
>with the letter "S" (and was used for "S" in other symbolism) and he
>makes overlapping use of the word "victory" or "sieg" in German. The
>red color and the "social idea of the movement" ties into socialism for
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.
>which Hitler claimed the National Socialist German Workers' Party was
>struggling for victory. The so-called "swastika" represented two "S"
>letters for "socialism" and is related to his pet phrase "Sieg Heil!"
>in the sense of "Hail to the Victory of Socialism! (to the National
>Socialist German Workers' Party)"
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
Peter T. Daniels
>
> On April 10, 1938 the Germans voted for or against Hitler. 99% of
> them voted for Hitler.
Was there a secret ballot?
Were there any opposition candidates and an election campaign?
Or was it more like last month's election in Iraq?
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
Peter Dy
"Nath Rao" <RnNaDt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cvsi57$826$1...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
[...]
> Before I accept that both the clockwise and anticlockwise orientations are
> freely used by Hindus, I would like to see the contexts of these uses. On
> general principles, I expect clockwise orientation in contexts having to
> do with gods, temples etc, and the anticlockwise orientation in contexts
> having to do with death, funerary rites, black magic (ie, rites designed
> to hurt someone).
I don't know about Hindus, but I have a colorful shoulder bag from Tibet
that has a row of swastikas on the top, both clockwise and
counter-clockwise. In Buddhism, I don't think it matters which way they're
turning.
Peter
Gray Shockley
> Here are some quotes from a German pamphlet titled "Why the Aryan
> Law?"
Do you prefer Pakistani Aryan or Indian Aryan
And why do Europeans show so much interest in the Aryans?
Are do Europeans? Perhaps it was just the sex perverts in
Germany during the Time of Insanity.
Is it true that Adolf Braun-Hitler didn't eat meat? That he
just consumed other vegetables.
And - as the acknowledged master and grand pubaw -
shouldn't all the little nuts follow the last act of the
big nut?
Didn't Hitler arrange the death of his best general - Field
Marshall Rommel - because Hitler and the Hitlerettes
"thought" (so to speak) Rommel was getting more popular
than that human accordion, Braun-Hitler?
Didn't Hippie Hitler get tens of thousands of his soldiers
killed because he was such an arrogant asswipe that he
thought he could do his generals' job better than they
could?
And then of course, there's also the dead William Pierce
whose advocacy of pinks brought out followers who hold the
distinction of being the only group stupider than their Ku
Klucker Klan half-brothers.
Remember, the only way to preserve a pure Aryan (snicker)
bloodline is incest. If you haven't had all your children
with your mother as the mother, there could be a non-nazi
in the woodpile.
And what do the national socialist/communists in the United
States share with the dead lovers (like at the Bitberg
cemetery)?
They're losers.
Gray Shockley
-------------------------------------------------
One man's religion is another man's belly laugh.
- Jubal Harshaw (Channeled through RAH)
Gray Shockley
>
> On April 10, 1938 the Germans voted for or against Hitler. 99% of
> them voted for Hitler.
And a whole bunch of them died in Braun-Hitler's and Josie
Stalin's fight to see where collectivism in Europe was
going to be headquartered.
So Komrade Braun-Hitler insured that Moscow would be the
center of collectivism in Europe as Braun-Hitler gave the
communists half of Europe and, indeed, half of Germany.
Adolf Braun-Hitler was the best friend
communism ever had.
To suggest anything else would be lying revisionism.
The Pope shouldn't have signed off on the inbreeding.
Watch out for knuckle-dragging monkeys quoting
Braun-Hitler; they're the tools of whatever is left of
communism.
Is it true that the knuckle-dragging white-trash is 90%
male because the quoters of losers don't have the tool for
the job?
Gray Shockley
--------------------------------------------------------
When trouble arises and things look bad,
there is always one individual who perceives
a solution and is willing to take command.
Very often, that individual is crazy. -Author Unk
Jacques Guy
> I don't know about Hindus, but I have a colorful shoulder bag from Tibet
> that has a row of swastikas on the top, both clockwise and
> counter-clockwise. In Buddhism, I don't think it matters which way they're
> turning.
I know a bit about Hinduism, but I also have a colourful... no,
not shoulder bag, but book on Kabuki, where the kimono worn but
an actor of the Lion Dance is composed of swastikas, alternately
facing left and right. My guess is: it looks nicer arranged that
way. I read somewhere else that the clockwise croix gammée was
considered yang, the anti-clockwise one yin. In which case that
Japanese actor's kimono makes sense, just like the central
watchamacallit on the Korean flag.
the Omrud
Does anybody know if it would be legal to take this into Germany?
--
David
=====
replace usenet with the
Peter Dy
"the Omrud" <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109582154.4c06b0a2c69889b17a4c0ccd8a28bbc6@teranews...
Interesting question. Actually, I carried that bag around for over a yeaer
when I was a student of German, and there were many Germans in my program.
No one said anything. The bag is so obviously ethnic folk art, with lots of
colors, and the swastikas are a little hard to notice from afar--it just
looks like a nice design. So, I'm guessing it wouldn't be a problem in
Germany. No way a neo-Nazi would carry around a bag like that!
Peter
ChrWaigl
> Does anybody know if it would be legal to take this into Germany?
[it = "a colorful shoulder bag from Tibet that has a row of swastikas
on the top, both clockwise and counter-clockwise"
I'd certainly suppose it is. I've seen them in exhibitions of south
Asian art in Germany, though "ethnic" fashion sold there (both faux
and genuine) tends to avoid this particular symbol.
The law there is quite similar to that in France, which forbids
wearing/displaying emblems and uniforms of the organisations found
guilty of crimes against humanity during the Nazi years. There are
exceptions of course. But the laws don't concern themselves with the
original, pre-Nazi symbol at all.
I haven't been to Germany in a while, but in France, using even the
Nazi swastika to signify neo-Nazi/extreme right-wing leanings is
common in cartoons or anti-fascist protest.
Chris Waigl
--
a chisel writing -- http://lascribe.net/
"Away, you scullion! you rampallian! you fustilarian!
I'll tickle your catastrophe."
c w a i g l / a t / f r e e / p o i n t / f r
Topaz
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."
Topaz
Here are quotes from a speech delivered by Dr. Joseph Goebbels
at the National Socialist Party Congress, Nuernberg, 1937.
"'Spain represents the world at the cross-roads.' Thus wrote
the Bolshevic press organ, Die Rundschau, in its issue dated July 22,
1937. That one sentance precisely defines the international
significance of the Spanish problem. It states exactly what the
Spanish problem is. Here the final decision must lie either with
Bolshevism or the principle of Authority. On the one side stands
ruinous anarchy and, on the other, orderly constructive development."
"Nations which in recent years have kept their eyes closed to
the startling growth of the international Bolshevic menace will one
day experience a terrible awakening from this moral narcosis. The fact
that we, German National Socialists, as conscious and uncompromising
protaganists against the Bolshevic world-front, are still condemned to
play the part of a preacher in the wilderness, calling out to deaf
ears--this cannot prevent us from seeing things as they are and
calling them by their right names. For if the constantly increasing
extension of this Bolshevic infection in Europe should cause still
greater disaster, then future historians will be in a position to
record the fact that we, German National Socialists, were not among
those who allowed themselves to be led astray in the universal chaos
of thought and mental fog purposely created as a sort of smoke-screen
by an insidious epidemic of political propaganda. Nothing could make
us deviate in the least from the straight road we have taken.
"From the very nature of the case it is obvious that the
subversive forces of International Jewry will raise a tumult of rage
when we clearly and dispassionately lay bare the background of this
revolutionary developement which is extending through the world. For,
after all, they are the only people who are drawing profit forn the
chaotic ruin which Bolshevism is bringing upon mankind. That on this
account they will swamp us with a torrrent of abuse and lies and
calumnies is only an honour for us and a further proof that we are
right in warning Europe against this peril."
"The fight which General Franco is waging, with the support of all
the constructive elements, against the Bolshevic menace to his native
land is at the same time a fight for civilization."
"The Moscow Comintern never tires of impressing on public
opinion thoughout the world the theory that the national movement,
which on July 17, 1936, intervened in the seething developements in
Spain, was a military rising oragnised by reactionary generals and
that this rising was definately repudiated by the Spanish people. The
truth however is that this national movement was in reality an act of
self-defence on the part of the people, against the revolt which had
been planned by the Spanish Communist Party for that time and was
subsequently postponed to August 1936. This communist revolt had been
planned in Moscow several years previously, organized from Moscow and
directed from Moscow, and is still being carried out in practice from
Moscow today."
"In 1935 the annual funds which Moscow contributed for the
support of the Communist Party in Spain totalled several million
pesetas, of which two millions were officially acknowledged as having
been paid by the Comintern itself. At the 7th World Congress of the
Comintern in Moscow, in 1935, Dimitroff gave instructions for the
formation of a Front Populaire in Spain. Between February 16 and April
19,1936, 140 people were murdered by gangs of red revolutionaries, and
529 buildings were burned down and destroyed before the Bolshevic
Revolution officially broke out."
"We can account for this baffling style of mutual admiration
between Bolshevism and Western Liberalist Intellectualism only if we
assume it to be some form of mental disease."
"During February and March 101 Russian Soviet aeroplanes were shipped
from Reval to Spain. And on March 1st, 50 heavy guns from Soviet
Russia were brought overland to Almansa. Recently one single large
consignment of was material from Soviet Russia to the Reds in Spain
included 100 heavy tanks, 500 medium-sized tanks, 2000 light tanks,
4000 heavy machine guns, 6000 light machine guns and 300 aeroplanes,
with their pilots."
"I shall now deal with some instances which will help to give an
idea of the extent to which World Liberalism goes in its moral support
of the Reds in Spain. I have already emphasized the fact that the
marriage between Bolshevism and Democracy presents some uncanny
features; indeed one might call them downright perverse. In the
historical developement of its activities Democracy has more and more
become the political facade of World Capitalism. Bolshevism now
carries the democratic principle to its ultimate logical application.
We may call it the Democracy of Terror. It increases the pace of that
sanguinary and pitiless developement of which Liberalism had already
mapped out the path. I might illustrate this point by a rather drastic
comparison. In democracy leading heads were out-voted by the counting
of heads. In Bolshevism the same result is obtained by chopping off
heads with the guillotine. The result in both cases is the same. The
heads are wanting. The masses are robbed of their natural leaders and
left prey to international Jews, who are now free to exercise their
dictatorship by the employment of terrorization and money."
"Pleasing catchwords were used to win the favour of the
workers but when the communist leaders came into power social terror
became the rule of the day. Among the workers and peasant classes
hunger prevailed, as symbol and sign of the Bolshevic rule."
"In keeping with the Soviet Russian pettern, family life and
the instituton of marriage are being ruined by this world plague.
Degradation of married women, the socialization of women, the
martyrdom of children--these are the principles which are in vogue
here."
"According to the 'Daily Mail' of August 22, 1936, Twenty-eight
nuns from the convent of Santa Clara "were subjected to inconceivable
tortures by relays of red maniacs."
"But Bolshevism in practice is nothing better than the most
frightful find of barbarism. It is the outward expression of the
hatred of the underworld agianst all those who are representative of
Western civilization and a cultural level to which Bolshevism can
never hope to attain."
"Among the 20,000 churches and monasteries which the Reds have
plundered and destroyed many were of historical and architectual
significance which cannot be replaced."
"But the churches of the world remain passive to it all and do not
seem to have the least suspicion as to the deadly menace that
threatens them. This is where Bolshevism shows itself again as the
incarnation of evil. Its destructive influence on the popular
religious instinct goes to the very roots of that instinct itself. And
this ruthless atheistic campaign spares nothing whatsoever which might
serve to remind the people of God and religion. The one fact alone
that the Fuerer has saved the German churches from this fate should be
enough to make them feel bound to remain eternally thankful to him.
But instead of this they never tire of going beyond the sphere of
their religious duties, interfering in political matters and making
their influence felt in a way that has no connection whatsoever with
their duties or their divine calling."
"According to indisputable figures based exclusively on
Bolshevic statistics, 42,000 priests have been murdered in Russia. Up
to February 2,1937, approximately 17,000 priests and monks and eleven
bishops were murdered in Spain."
"A Swedish refugee stated, on November 10, 1936: 'I have seen
churches on the walls of which the murdered bodies of women were hung,
nuns that had been beheaded or burned and whose bodies had been nailed
in rows to the church walls."
"The Strassburg paper, 'Der Elsasser', in its issue of
February 27, 1937 published the staggering fact that '50,000 Spanish
children are at the present moment wandering through Spanish
provinces, abandoned and in rags. All public activities for the
welfare of the youth have been abolished. And so the youngsters, very
often no more than four or five years old, are left no alternative.
They stagger along the road in swarms, shivering with cold and are
nothing more than wandering skeletons.'"
"One shudders to think what might happen to humanity if this
system became universal throughout the world."
"Bolshevism and its 'friendly press' throughout the world lose no
opportunity of pointing an accusing finger at the alleged use of
terror in countries which are governed according to the principles of
authority. The whole world gives a cry of agonizing sympathy when, for
example, a Jew in Germany receives a well-earned box on the ears. But
what is this when compared with the terror that disrupts whole
nations"
"Lenin himself, when asked at the 12th Congress of the Red Party,
what were the principles on which Communism relied, answered: 'Murder,
destruction, not a stone to be left in place if its removal should be
to the advantage of the Revolution.'"
"The Jewish Soviet Ambassador in London finds it convenient to
express his moral indignation before the Non-Intervention Committee in
London. The world and the League of Nations are hypocritically
appealed to. Before these tribunals the Jew Litwinow-Finkelstein plays
the part of the civilised philistine and fills Europe with cries of
protest."
"The Intenational Brigades which are sent into action on the Red
Spanish front are commanded by Soviet officers. Their commander was
the Jew, General Kleber."
"We shall not be deterred from pointing to the Jew as the inspirer,
the instigator and the beneficiary of the dreadful catastrophe."
"At Barcelona he sits, in the person of Wladimer Bischitzki as
director of the international oragnization for the smuggling of arms
and munitions, comrades Lurje and Fuchs, of his own racial breed,
sitting by his side. His Paris agents are his racial compatriots,
Fratkin, Rosenfeld and Schapiro. At Hirtenberg in Austria their
collaborator is the Jew, Mandl. In Amsterdam the Jew, Wolf. In
Rotteerdam the Jews, Cohen, Gruenfeld, Kirsch, and Simon. In Denmark
the Jew, Moses Israel Diamant. In Prague the Jews, Kindler, Kahn,
Abter and Hithner. We know them all and we know them well."
"The fact that Western Liberalism closes its eyes to this evil
portent is only a sign of its almost childish naivety."
"A struggle for native land and liberty, for honour and family
and God and religion, for wife and child, for school and upbringing,
for order, moral principle, culture and civilization, for our lives
and our daily bread , has begun. In Germany it has already been
brought to a triumphant issue."
Topaz
<gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>Was there a secret ballot?
Probably. Anyway see the film "Triumph of the Will". It was no
surprise that just about everyone voted for Hitler. Compare Germany
before Hitler, to how great it became with Hitler. Even liberals
admit, at least they used to admit, that it was a great thing
economically.
Douglas Reed wrote:
"Germans in their country are not less well cared for than the
English in theirs, but better. You are faced with a country immensely
strong in arms and immensely strong in real wealth - not in gold bars
in a vault of the national bank, but industry, agriculture, the thrift
and energy of the work people, the conditions of life they enjoy.
Their engineers and social workers and artists go into the
factories and see what needs to be done. They say that a shower room,
recreation room, a restaurant, a medical clinic, a dental clinic is
needed and these are provided. They have a civic sense, a social
conscience, a feeling of the community of German mankind which you
lack."
About Douglas Reed:
"I have dealt with the once world famous foreign correspondent and
author, Douglas Reed, who went from being widely known and respected
before, during and after the II.nd World War to becoming an expelled
and completely forgotten person.
Why was he "forgotten"?
It was simply because he wrote about "The Jewish Question!"
International Jewry responded to his frank description of the problem
with total censorship, so that his new books could no longer be
printed and the old ones would disappear gradually from the bookstores
and even from the library shelves.
After a short period of slandering he was no longer mentioned at all
in the world's media.
As the author Ivor Benson (who has himself written a book on this
subject: The Zionist Factor) says in the foreword to Douglas Reeds
masterpiece The Controversy of Zion, which had to wait 22 years before
it could be published, "the adversity, which Reed encountered, would
have made a lesser personality give up. But not he"."
Knud Eriksen
>
>Were there any opposition candidates and an election campaign?
No, it was Hitler, Ya or Nein
>
>Or was it more like last month's election in Iraq?
Ekkehard Dengler
"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:v1g421908ghtm6jc0...@4ax.com...
>
> On April 10, 1938 the Germans voted for or against Hitler. 99% of
> them voted for Hitler.
You must mean the plebiscite on whether Austria should be united with
Germany. In reality, of course, it had previously been annexed.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Ekkehard Dengler
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:422256...@worldnet.att.net...
> Topaz wrote:
> >
> > On April 10, 1938 the Germans voted for or against Hitler. 99% of
> > them voted for Hitler.
>
> Was there a secret ballot?
Very probably not. Jews and known dissidents weren't even allowed to vote.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Harlan Messinger
[Most of you will get the idea, but Topaz certainly won't. He thinks
throwing enormous swaths of text at people amounts to communication.]
Paul J Kriha
Jacques Guy <jg...@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message news:421F44...@alphalink.com.au...
> Paul J Kriha wrote:
>
> > Japanese sayagata can be both left and right-handed.
> > The same applies for Jainist swastikas.
>
> > The swastika painted 2,200 in Han dynasty was right-handed.
> > Ancient Greeks were quite fond of interlinking swastika motifs.
>
> And likewise the Japanese. Have a look at the kimono worn
> by the actor in the print reproduced page 75 of "Kabuki--
> Eighteen Traditional Dramas" by Toshiro Iwatake and
> Akira Iwata, Chronicle Books, ISBN 0-87701-366-7
uhm, ahh, yes. :-)
> To those who presume to ban the swastika I say
> "kuso demo kue".
That's easy for you to say.
> And I hope many here take over to
> tell them the same in the many languages of India.
If the swastika gets banned, then I insist all sickles and
hammers are banned at the same time, the words
expunged from dictionaries and all books mentioning
them publicly burned in the town squares. :-)
pjk
Jacques Guy
> If the swastika gets banned, then I insist all sickles and
> hammers are banned at the same time, the words
> expunged from dictionaries and all books mentioning
> them publicly burned in the town squares. :-)
I applaud with all four hands. Let's get rid of
"La Serpe d'Or" in the Asterix series!
All together now: BOO HOO HOO BOO HOO HOO! SICKLE
SICK! HAMMER BUMMER!
Yes, now for hammers... what shall we start with?
Oh, I have a wicked idea! Let us have all
_hammer_ drills banned! Yes yes yes yes. That will
piss off lots of people. Including me. But never
mind, the prospect of pissing off a billion people
or so is well worth the inconvenience of not being
able to drill a hole in a brick wall in less than
two hours and fifty minutes.
re...@ij.net
http://rexcurry.net/socialism/germany.html
show that the German Hakenkreuz (hooked cross) was a type of cross and
that it was a variation on the the German-Prussian Iron Cross that
updated and/or combined the two crosses into overlapping "S" shapes for
the "socialist" dogma imposed by the horrid National Socialist German
Workers' Party. In his book "Mein Kampf," the leader of the National
Socialist German Workers' Party never used the word "swastika" and
there is no evidence he knew the word. The word swastika was a bad
translation and is still used to let the horrid Party's legacy stain a
foreign symbol, and to try to diminish the Party's stain of the cross
symbol (and to cover up its linguistic relationship) and to hide the
overlapping "S" shapes for "socialism" under the National Socialist
German Workers' Party.
Topaz
In reality Austria was a sea of swastika flags and it was obvious
what people wanted.
Topaz
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,
Peter T. Daniels
your naziism by filling up our newsgroups with endless verbiage? Do
cease.
re...@ij.net
http://rexcurry.net/socialist-propaganda/posters1.html
help refute myths and prove many things:
1. The National Socialist German Workers' Party was a socialist group.
2. The swastika symbolized two "S" shapes for "socialism" under the
National Socialist German Workers' Party.
3. That the straight-arm salute came from the military salute in the
USA and from the original pledge of allegiance to the US flag, and not
from ancient Rome.
4. The word "swastika" was a bad translation for "Hakenkreuz" (hooked
cross). To National Socialists, their Hakenkreuz was a type of cross (a
hooked-cross) that was related to the Iron Cross, and to the Crucifix.
The posters from the National Socialist German Workers' Party
(Nazi-Sozi Party) and date pre-1933.
see the swastika myth debunked with 1933-1945 posters at
http://rexcurry.net/socialism-posters/posters2.html
see the swastika myth debunked with German medals at
http://rexcurry.net/socialism/germany.html
see the swastika myth debunked with flags etc
http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html