Bush administration wrongfully taking US to war with Iraq, Hitler
wrongfully took the German people and the whole world to war on
September 1, 1939 when he invaded Poland.”
The Nazi Mudology
Posted January 17, 2004 thepeoplesvoice.org
By: Ted Lang
presidential campaign mudslinging splattered emotional mud not only upon
candidates, political parties, and their campaign-proclaimed objectives, but
upon the truth as well. Why is
it hateful to merely make comparisons to historical fact?
The events referred to involve an anti-Bush movement seeking to
unseat him from the presidency by comparing his administration to the
tactics of Germany’s pre-World War II Nazi Party.
relevant as to precisely what was said in order to disparage or denigrate
Bush and his new neoconservative Republican PNAC Party.
Neither is it relevant to evaluate what was offered as a defense by
the Bush administration. What
is relevant is true relevancy itself!
William L. Shirer,
the world-renowned author of that great, monumental and best-selling volume,
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, has amply demonstrated his
astonishing journalistic analytical and evaluative skills.
He gained his gifted insight and historical perspective while serving
as a correspondent in Germany, before, during and after World War II.
His superior assessment as to the rise and fall of the Reich are
extremely relevant to the socio-political environment in America today.
And our economic problems are quickly morphing into the economic
environment in Germany during the 1930’s as well.
Considering the great need to avoid the George Santyana nightmare of
reliving the past, wouldn’t it be prudent to examine some of these
comparable issues without the mud?
tired cliché of hindsight being twenty-twenty, nowhere is it more under
utilized than in posing the question: If Adolf Hitler was such an atrocious
monster that turned on his own people as well as on every nation in the
world, why didn’t the German people see this coming?
Why didn’t the German people recognize the evil and do something
Clearly, the most
obvious answer is that he appealed to their emotions.
He pointed out the obvious: Not a shot was fired in Germany, not a
bomb was dropped on German soil, and there was no havoc and destruction
throughout the land. Germany
lost World War I by “an arrangement,” an arrangement that involved
“Jewish” [Zionist] bankers, which brought America into the war that
Germany had just about almost won, and produced the Balfour Declaration by
which Britain guaranteed “Dear Lord Rothschild” the “establishment in
Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”
The rape of
Germany, the humiliation, the monumental “war reparations,” and the
recognition of “Jewish” [Zionist] involvement, provided the fodder
necessary to allow Hitler the advantage of rallying the German citizenry
behind him, as he led them against the Jews, the British, the French, and
that most-hated Versailles Treaty. Dictators
always rally their soon-to-be enslaved supporters by the raised double-edged
sword of righting injustices and invoking aggressive patriotism.
It is easy to understand why the German people not only failed to
recognize the threat of Hitler, but fully supported him as well.
Shirer points out
the dilemma of the German workingman, so long plagued by the injustices of
the Versailles Treaty, the crushing inflation, and the misery of
unemployment. He writes:
“Though it is perhaps unwise to generalize about such things, this
writer’s own impression of the workingman in Berlin and in the Ruhr was
that while he was somewhat cynical about the promises of the regime, he had
no more hankering for revolt than anyone else in the Third Reich.
Unorganized as he was and lacking leadership, what could he do?”
that follows is most telling. Shirer
continues, “But the greatest cause of his acceptance of his role in Nazi
Germany was, without any doubt at all, that he had a job again and the
assurance he would keep it. An
observer who had known something about his precarious predicament during the
Republic could understand why he did not seem to be desperately concerned
with the loss of political freedom and even of his trade unions as long as
he was employed full-time. In
the past, for so many, for as many as six million men and their families,
such rights of free men in Germany had been overshadowed, as he [the
workingman] said, by the freedom to starve.
In taking away that last freedom, Hitler assured himself of the
support of the working class, probably the most skillful and industrious and
disciplined in the Western world. It
was a backing given not to his half-baked ideology or to his evil
intentions, as such, but to what counted the most: the production of goods
for war.” It is often said
that during elections, “Americans vote with their wallets.”
So did the Germans.
What could be
more half-baked than a “war on terrorism?”
What could be more evil than 530 flag-draped caskets?
What could be more evil than killing ten thousand plus innocent
Iraqis and their families? What
could be more evil than blaming Saddam and Iraq for 9-11?
What could be more evil than the lies of a reserved foreign policy,
no nation-building, and compassionate conservatism replaced by the reality
of unilaterally abandoning nuclear proliferation treaties, appointing
oneself emperor and judge of international nuclear weaponry, and master race
over the entire world as its police force?
And where was the
German middle-class during the rise of Hitler and his Nazis?
Shirer explains: “No class or group or party in Germany could
escape its share of responsibility for the abandonment of the democratic
Republic and the advent of Adolf Hitler.
The cardinal error of the Germans who opposed Nazism was their
failure to unite against it. At
the crest of their popular strength, in July 1932, the National Socialists
had attained but 37 per cent of the vote.
But the 63 per cent of the German people who expressed their
opposition to Hitler were much too divided and shortsighted to combine
against a common danger, which they must have known would overwhelm them
unless they united, however temporarily, to stamp it out.
The Communists, at the behest of Moscow, were committed to the last
to the silly idea of first destroying the Social Democrats, the Socialist
trade unions and what middle-class democratic forces there were, on the
dubious theory that although this would lead to a Nazi regime it would be
only temporary and would bring inevitably the collapse of capitalism, after
which the Communists would take over and establish the dictatorship of the
proletariat. Fascism, in the
Bolshevik Marxist view, represented the last stage of a dying capitalism;
after that, the Communist deluge!”
And to ensure he
made the necessary point, later in Shirer’s book, he again points out:
“After five and a half years of National Socialism it was evident to the
few Germans who opposed Hitler that only the Army possessed the physical
strength to overthrow him. To
workers, the middle and upper classes, even if they had wanted to, had no
means of doing it. They had no
organization outside of the Nazi party groups and they were, of course,
there is an organized opposition to Bush, that opposition belongs to the
same secret “Skull and Bones” society.
And Democrats and Republicans seem to be on similar tracks and have
similar agendas. So where is
the real opposition? And when
will the real issues surface in this presidential campaign?
Just as was the
case with the Bush administration wrongfully taking US to war with Iraq,
Hitler wrongfully took the German people and the whole world to war on
September 1, 1939 when he invaded Poland.
Why did Germany invade Poland? Hitler
wanted “a corridor” allowing free access through Poland and the Polish
city of Danzig. Hitler placed
claims upon Poland citing “captive” German citizens in residence in that
city. Hitler cited Polish
aggression. That was the
politically correct term at the time; today, it’s “weapons of mass
his outrage at the German corporate media of the day: “In Berlin too a
foreign observer could watch the way the press, under Goebbels’ expert
direction, was swindling the gullible German people.
For six years, since the Nazi ‘co-ordination’ of the daily
newspapers, which had meant the destruction of the free press, the citizens
had been cut off from the truth of what was going on in the world.
For a time the Swiss German-language newspapers from Zurich and Basel
could be purchased at the leading newsstands in Germany and these presented
objective news. But in recent
years their sale in the Reich had been either prohibited or limited to a few
copies. For Germans who could
read English or French, there were occasionally a few copies of the London
and Paris journals available, though not enough to reach more than a handful
“‘How completely isolated a world the German people live in,’ I noted
in my diary on August 10, 1939. ‘A
glance at the newspapers yesterday and today reminds you of it.’
I had returned to Germany from a brief leave in Washington, New York
and Paris, and coming up in the train from my home in Switzerland two days
before I had bought a batch of Berlin and Rhineland newspapers.
They quickly propelled one back to the cockeyed world of Nazism,
which was unlike the world I had just left as if it had been on another
planet. I noted further on
August 10, after I had arrived in Berlin:
the rest of the world considers that the peace is about to be broken by
Germany, that it is Germany that is threatening to attack Poland…here in
Germany, in the world the local newspapers create, the very reverse is
maintained… What the Nazi papers are proclaiming is this: that it is
Poland, which is disturbing the peace of Europe; Poland which is threatening
Germany with armed invasion….”
All that is
needed to bring the above entry in Shirer’s diary from 1939 forward to the
present is to simply substitute the United States for Germany, and Iraq for
Poland. All we need to do to
bring Shirer’s observation concerning the government controlled press to
the present is to consider how today’s corporate media is assisting the
Bush administration to shift public focus from lies and deceit to initiate
an unjust war to “intelligence failings.”
All we need to do is to reflect upon all the worthless panels,
investigations and commissions, gobbling up millions of taxpayer dollars and
accomplishing nothing but one cover-up after another.
Using Nazism to
disparage a presidential candidate is indeed a new and uncharacteristic low.
But making legitimate comparisons and presenting relevant analogies
is not only warranted, but is now taking on also a matter of urgency as to
the survivability of our nation. The
USA Patriot Act I and II, congressional modification of which, Washington
insider and attorney general John Ashcroft continues to block, is a very
real threat to our freedoms and our entire Bill of Rights.
The Patriot Act cuts a wide swath in all our basic freedoms, blocking
the freedom of speech and the press that allows dissent, that allows
assembly and allows organized protest.
And this lends itself precisely to Shirer’s frequently repeated
lament: The people weren’t organized, and had no power to protest.
It’s time for
challenger John Kerry, as well as our media, to start holding the Bush
administration accountable for its unbelievably numerous transgressions.
We the people don’t care about the operations and philosophy of the
CIA. We don’t care about
George Bush’s National Guard pay stubs.
We don’t care about John Kerry’s possible sex misadventures and
escapades. And we don’t care
about a boob hanging out at the Super Bowl.
We care about the boob hanging out at the White House, the guy that
swore to preserve and protect our rights and freedoms, and who should have
acted to prevent 9-11.
THEODORE E. LANG 2/15/04 All rights reserved. Ted Lang is a political
analyst and a freelance writer.