8-12-9 Blog News- Daily Tweet Report- us productivity up- zogby sez we want green- more #blog #news

Editorial:

Some people have focused on the fact that protestors at Town Hall revolts have, in a few cases, referred to the Democrats or President Obama as Nazis and, indeed, I have even heard it said that doing such things makes you a “fascist.”

Let’s try and clear about the issue, and shed some light both on the reason people might make such comparisons, based on superficial similarities with the National Socialist agenda, and just what the National Socialists believed, said, and DID. It should then be clear that the National Socialists were many things, but they were not Christians or Conservatives and they were not Liberals or Democrats.

The primary characteristic of Nazism was not its left or right ideology, its ideology was leftist in economics and to the right on social issues. The primary characteristic of Nazism was that its leaders believed in a centralized state as the supreme authority over all of human life. To REPEAT, for clarity, regardless of their economic leftism or their seeming social conservatism, what made the Nazis what they were was their belief in the supremacy of a centralized state authority as the sole or primary means by which they might pursue their policies.

It may be impolitic to call somebody a Nazi, something the American Left does every day against their opponents and which is ignored by their media, and which certain Jewish groups pass overall the time in silence, only protesting when they see a conservastive calling a liberal a Nazi, but this does not make you a fascist.

(NOTE: the Jewish Groups who are attacking conservatives along these lines whole defending liberals and supporting Democrats primarily are beginning to look more and more collaborationist with a Party that is more pro-Arab than Pro-Israel. These groups are revealing that their leftist ideology matters more than the welfare of the Jewish State and they run the risk of alienating conservatives, who are FAR MORE pro-Israel than the Left who are in bed with the Arabs and Muslim organizations.)

People are outraged, they have been trying to be heard, to be civil, to speak their mind, and they are being ignored and vilified.

I am not saying the Democrats are Nazis, but those who feel that such comparisons are justified have some ground for saying so, although I would propose that while there are superficial similarities the difference between the two is one of degrees: the Nazis took ideas that we may say are similar to what the Democrats are proposing to their extreme and were willing to slaughter millions, which, to my mind, is enough to say the Democrats and Obama are NOT “Nazis”.

I think in the future when people are behaving badly in politics the epithet will be “you, sir, are worse than the Democrats.”

There is nothing wrong with pointing out that a policy or plan has similarities with any other system, including Nazism, so long as you are clear that when we speak of the Democrats we are talking about, at worse, a superficial similarity, but it is not, generally, a way to de-escalate things, and I think we should prefer de-escalation to escalation.

None the less, here are some of the superficial similarities between National Socialism and the Democratic Agenda as some might see it:

1. anti-semitism (President Obama’s present policies towards Israel are seen by some as anti-Semitic and his “pastor”, along with many of his friends and associates, have spoken in very Anti-Semitic terms)

2.  their own version of environmentalism that focused on a back-to-nature approach and an aversion to technology

3. managed health care based on a system strikingly like Holdren’s views and Emanuel’s views, the science czar and health care cars respectively: indeed the first euthanasia program (the T-4 Program) used the term “life unworthy of life” and Emanual proposes to ration health care based on the value of life TO SOCIETY (I.e. the State)

4. ideas of a right to a good job with job security, housing, health care and etc. with a de-emphasis on personal rights or the right of free speech

5. a process of socializing the economy via indirect state control over business as opposed to outright ownership by the state

6. modifying Christianity so as to mold it to the Party platform and agenda and suppressing and marginalizing traditional or more conservative Christians beliefs as an unofficial State Policy

Of course, the present Democratic Congress and Administration do not share the Nazis foreign policy agenda, based on lebensraum, however they do advocate for a land-use policy on a global scale in which saving the environment, even at the expense of the interest of nations or human welfare, is the objective. Like the Nazis, on a superficial level, the Obama Administration has called for the creation of a “civilian army” which would answer to the party and be outside the control of the military establishment, which would make Obama’s “civilian army” superficially akin to the “Sturm Abteilung” (SA) which was a civilian defense force that sought to be just as “well funded” as the regular army.

To be fair, the Nazis were called “the right”, albeit in Europe at the time what was “the right” was very different in their minds. The primary difference between the “right” and the “left” in Germany in the 1920’s to 1930’s was in the area of foreign policy and in the area of governance- the right was less trusting of democracy and said so, the left was divided between those who wanted democracy and those whose version of democracy was that of the Soviet system.

Even today, Americans would not consider the groups that Europeans call “the right”  to be such.

The Nazis were officially opposed to homosexuality, however almost the entire SA leadership whose masses of storm troopers propelled the Nazis to power were notorious homosexuals and many were pedophiles even as many of the leading Nazis were part Jewish. It is just as illogical to equate the genuine opposition of many to homosexuality to the Nazis as it would be to say that because the SA leaders were mostly homosexual then homosexuals are “Nazis”.

The Nazis were opposed to Abortion for Germans because they wanted to increase their numbers, but Abortion or sterilization was mandatory for “inferior” genetic stock or for Germans who were not “racially pure”: they were neither pro-abortion not pro-life but were, rather, for population control.

On social issues the Nazis publicly came off as being more or less “conservative”, hence their being lumped in with the right, but their “conservatism” on these issues was extreme and arbitrary- Hitler often said of his associates, almost all of whom were extremely immoral, that he did not care about their morals but their use to him. He said that one had to use “the human material that lies to hand” and to use it “as you find it” rather than trying to “change” it. Quite simply, Nazis USED a conservative social agenda because almost 80% of the population was socially conservative, but in their policies and in the people they promoted to leadership, little more than lip service was paid to these issues.

Take, for instance, marriage and sex outside of marriage- the Nazis notoriously created a “Strength Through Joy” program designed to encourage pregnancy, even outside of marriage, and while this was opposed even by SS Officers, who feared that their wives at home would cheat on them, it is hardly comparable with anything a “conservative” would propose.

Our present “left” and “right” terminology does not apply to the Nazis. I prefer to speak in terms of people who are more trusting of centralized authority, be it government or corporations or both, as opposed to people who are for a more distributed authority structure that favors individuals, private entities, and local communities. The first group, call them what you will, is CLOSER to the National Socialists than they are to America’s Founders and the second group is right in line with our Founders.

No, Vera, having a sign that shows a swastika with a line going through it (like the “do not enter” sings) does not make you a fascist and while there may be superficial similarities between a specific policy or platform and the National Socialist Platform, which did not mention ONE “socially conservative” idea but is filled with leftist rhetoric, this does not mean the Democrats are Nazis

If the worse thing we can say about the protesters is that they waved a sign showing that they did not want us to enter a path that might lead to some form of National Socialism, as opposed to SEIU thugs beating people up, then I am fine with that: I save my OUTRAGE for a government that seems to increasingly have all the symptoms of the British Crown, which our Founders said “evinces a design of tyranny”. Well, perhaps not outright tyranny, perhaps just a dose of “Neototalitarianism.”

Buzz this!