The Lion of Munster

Sunday, February 14, AD 2016

The Lion of Munster

Neither praise nor threats will distance me from God.

Blessed Clemens von Galen

(I ran this series originally back in 2011.  I am rerunning it now, because the contemporary Church is greatly harmed by the unwillingness of so many clerics to confront evil forthrightly.  In this year of Mercy we must not forget the need to cry out for Justice, and that is precisely what the Lion of Munster did.)

The Nazis hated and feared Clemens August Graf von Galen in life and no doubt they still hate and fear him, at least those now enjoying the amenities of some of the less fashionable pits of Hell.  Going into Lent, I am strongly encouraged by the story of Blessed von Galen.  I guess one could come up with a worse situation than being a Roman Catholic bishop in Nazi Germany in 1941, and confronting a merciless anti-Christian dictatorship that was diametrically opposed to the Truth of Christ, but that would certainly do for enough of a challenge for one lifetime for anyone.  (Hitler privately denounced Christianity as a Jewish superstition and looked forward after the War to “settling accounts”, as he put it, with Christianity in general and Roman Catholicism in particular.)

Priests who spoke out against the Third Reich were being rounded up and shipped off to concentration camps.  What was a bishop to do in the face of such massive evil?  Well, for the Bishop of Munster, Clemens von Galen, there could be only one answer.

A German Count, von Galen was from one of the oldest aristocratic families in Westphalia.  Always a German patriot, the political views of von Galen would have made my own conservatism seem a pale shade of pink in comparison.  Prior to becoming a bishop, he was sometimes criticized for a haughty attitude and being unbending.  He was chosen Bishop of Munster in 1933 only after other candidates, no doubt recognizing what a dangerous position it would be with the Nazis now in power, had turned it down.  I am certain  it did not hurt that he was an old friend of Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII.

Von Galen immediately demonstrated that he had not agreed to become Bishop of Munster in order to avoid danger.  He successfully led a fight against the Nazi attempt to take over Catholic schools, citing article 21 of the Concordat between the Vatican and Nazi Germany.  He then began a campaign, often using humor and ridicule, against the Aryan racial doctrines proposed by Alfred Rosenberg, chief Nazi race theorist, and a man even some high level Nazis thought was little better than a crank.  Von Galen argued that Christianity totally rejected racial differences as determining how groups should be treated, and that all men and women were children of God and brothers and sisters in Christ.  The Bishop spoke out against Nazi attacks on the “Jewish Old Testament” stating that Holy Writ was Holy Writ and that the Bible could not be altered to suit current prejudices.

In early 1937 he was summoned by Pope Pius XI to confer with him on an encyclical in German, highly unusual for an encyclical not to be written in Latin as the primary language, that the Pope was in the process of drafting.  The encyclical was the blistering Mit Brennender Sorge (With Burning Heart) that the Pope ordered be read out in every parish in Germany on Palm Sunday 1937.  A head long assault on almost every aspect of National Socialism, it may be read here.

The language in the encyclical was blunt, direct and no doubt benefited from von Galen’s input and his experience from the battles he was waging with the Nazis.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to The Lion of Munster

  • This is a good history lesson.

  • Blessed von Galen shows an example far too many of us are unwilling to follow.

  • Agian, a timely piece of history from Mr. McClarey. Thanks.
    Number 42.
    A clarion call for all Catholics in America to engage in today’s conflict, the destruction of America through radical Socialist and Marxist ideologies which indoctrinate the young and silence the rationale of freedom of religion.

    The joy, triumph and hymn’s of gratitude must resound from coast to coast united in Truth.
    His Truth that all life is sacred. Perverse lifestyles are always going to be perverse. No amount of propaganda will change the Truth.
    He and His Word will never change.
    Our hearts must change. We must accept them, love them and pray with them, but never accept their concupiscence as a cherished choice of behavior.

    Our time is a critical time in history. The slope isn’t just slippery. It’s angle of decent is increasing dramatically and as it increases it will be extremely difficult to reclaim the pure air of the highlands. The stagnant repulsive air of the pit will become the new progressive National Socialist Amerika, an unrecognizable Nation of free people. A people serving and worshipping the State.

  • Gosh there are so many GREAT blessed of fairly recent history! I hope they will get the attention they apparently deserve. I also think of Cardinal Mindszenty.

  • Pingback: Von Galen Contra Gestapo – The American Catholic
  • Would that we had his like in some of our dioceses today.

Quotes Suitable for Framing: Adolph Hitler

Sunday, November 22, AD 2015

quote-we-are-socialists-we-are-enemies-of-today-s-capitalistic-economic-system-for-the-exploitation-adolf-hitler-55-12-18

 

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. In the future there must be no ranks or classes, and you must not let them begin to grow in you!

Adolph Hitler, May 1, 1927, Berlin May Day Speech

Continue reading...

25 Responses to Quotes Suitable for Framing: Adolph Hitler

  • This needs to be shoved in the face of every godless liberal progressive Democrat. They are no different than their Nazi forefathers.

  • Literally, I have blocked a Socialist that I deal with on a daily basis & her socialist friends on a social media site. All they know how to do is yell & scream & insult. 2 days later, I went to lunch with another Socialist–rode in her car to go through the drive through to get fast food, and the 2nd Sociaist yelled & screamed & insulted & threatened me over my experience with the first Socialist–to the point where I thought I might need to defend myself physically. The 2nd Socialist tried to drag me with her car when I tried to get out of the car–locked the child safety locks to keep me from being able to get out or yell for help to those whom we were passing–and told me that she was “going to tell everybody how crazy” I am. If there had been other witnesses and/or if I had my phone & cud have recorded the incident to law enforcement–I would have pressed charges. By the way, both of these Socialists are high school social studies teachers. One got a venereal disease while camping out with Occupy Wallatreet–the other states plainly that she agrees with Communists ideology. The Communist is teaching Civics to students–year after year after year.

  • The key part of that socialism rant by Herr Hitler, was the always default words: ‘in the future.”
    Call me when it works, though we are about to see it accelerated world-wide with this three-pronged “global-warming/new ice-age/climate change” agenda being birthed in the UN in a few weeks.
    This pope’s call for nations to (re)distribute the wealth defies this Catholic’s understanding of the clear violation of subsidiarity–which Pius XI call gravely wrong.

  • Are you positive the above quote wasn’t taken from the DNC platform? Both ideology’s have the diabolical as the author.

  • All liberals are fascists. And, they are all for big, controlling government. Regarding progressives’ enthusiasm for statist coercion. Walter Lippman wrote, “Their weapons are the coercive direction of the life and labor of mankind. Their doctrine is that disorder and misery can be overcome only by more and more compulsory organization. Their promise is that through the power of the state men can be made happy… Throughout the world, in the name of progress, men who call themselves communists, socialists, fascists, nationalists, progressives, and even liberals, are unanimous in holding that government with its instruments of coercion must by commanding the people how they shall live, direct the course of civilization and fix the shape of things to come. …the mark of a progressive is that he relies at last upon the increased power of officials to improve the condition of men… the only instrument of progress in which they have faith is the coercive agency of government.”

  • I think it’s rather de trop to try to stick post-war social democrats or post-1965 new age liberals with the bill for Hitler and Mussolini. The Nazi Party, the Fasci, the Ustase, and the Iron Guard were all rather dissimilar to the more conventional authoritarianisms of inter-war Europe and the only post-war movements which have much of an affinity for them would be certain varieties of Arab nationalism and a transient mob-macho strand of politics in Central America.

  • Art, the Sangh Parivar in India is also moving in that direction.

  • Art, Nazism is widely regarded as a right wing movement, and I view that as incorrect. Just as Mussolini started out as a socialist, Hitler was always authoritarian in his economic views. He always regarded former Communists as better Nazis than those converts from mainstream German parties, and one of his few recorded regrets from his bunker in 1945 is that he did not enact a more radical, socialist economic agenda. Hitler and Stalin had much in common, and the longer they ruled the more alike their states became. A true right wing dictator of the period by comparison is Franco, who privately never had any use for the Nazis, even though their help was quite useful to him during the Spanish Civil War.

  • “Hitler and Stalin had much in common, and the longer they ruled the more alike their states became.”

    Just like the end of sin is death (on a massive scale,) the end of Socialism is death (on a massive scale.) It may take a while to get there –but the end result is death.

    The rate of death by govt increases as the depth of Socialist/government control increases.

  • A very fine line people. Avery fine line. Barbara, you need new friends!

  • “The Communist is teaching Civics to students- year after year after year.” Barbara Gordon.

    And homeschooling is frowned upon.

    The shame must be shared with the parents of said students if they haven’t engaged their children via homework or meal time recaps of the days affairs.

    As Jeanne R. pointed out; time for some new friends indeed.

  • Nazi was short for National Socialist, wasn’t it? As Philip says – compare the contents of this speech to the DNC platform or for what your typical leftist agitates, and see how similar are the two. If the socialist shoe fits….

  • Art, Nazism is widely regarded as a right wing movement, and I view that as incorrect. Just as Mussolini started out as a socialist,

    I agree with you that the shorthand which lumps the Nazi Party etc in with a grab bag of dissimilar tendencies is inane and often vicious. Now look at what your commenters have done with that implicit observation.

    We’d be well advised to read Alvin Gouldner and Thomas Sowell if we want to understand the political pathologies of our age, not the political pathologies of my grandmother’s young adult years. The precedent for today’s pathologies may be found in the Spanish Republic, not Hitler’s Germany.

  • What’s in a name? A rose by any other name would smell the same, and so would a stink weed. They are all of the same species, Statists. Those who seek to establish a man-made heaven on earth though government coercion know no bounds. Any level of control achieved whets an appetite for more. Hitler, Lenin and others started out with violent and strident takeovers, while more timid Bolsheviks without bullets nibble away at our liberty.

  • “Barbara, you need new friends!”

    These 2 were work acquaintances, only. I was never “friends” with either of them. My contact with them has been through a work related organization–but I have ended that as well.

    I never brought up my disagreement with their political views–they were the agressors on that matter. Again, I have ended all in-person contact with either of them. I don’t have time for unnecessary drama.

  • “And homeschooling is frowned upon.”

    “The shame must be shared with the parents of said students if they haven’t engaged their children via homework or meal time recaps of the days affairs.”

    The Communist/Socialist yelled & screamed and said that the Nazis & the govt of the former Soviet Union never called themselves “Socialists.”. She told me that I didn’t know what I was talking about–that she was a “historian.” *rolls eyes* May God help the children under her in Civics & Economics.

  • I call them Totalitarian Types (or “Ti Ti’s” for short. ) I’ve a good friend, a very nice person, who is an admitted liberal Democrat. A socialist, I suppose, though we’ve never spoken in depth about politics or economics. We’ve avoided that issue. I note he has a craving for order and control. I cannot understand why, as I think it makes him miserable.

  • DJH,
    .
    I have a craving for order and control – my order and my control. My mentor in a 12 step program told me that was simply my alcohol-ISM (I, Self and Me) coming out. My priest-confessor (his 12 step mentor) had the audacity to agree.
    .
    😉

  • William P. Walsh.
    ” They are all of the same species, Statists.”
    Who do these people think they are?
    You nailed it!

    Barbara Gordon.
    Aquantice only! Thank goodness.
    Historian’s like her “hang the heroes and lament the scoundrel’s.” I’m guessing her brown shirts are clean and pressed.

  • Everything the left spews is deceit. To compare Americans seeking to preserve their unalienable rights to life, liberty and property with Nazis is complete calumny. Opposition to Bolshevism/world communism may be the only area of agreement among the US right-wing (no one counts as American the lunatic Bund) and Nazism may have agreed. That opposition is the worldwide, useless idiots’ gravest execration of Hitler.
    .

  • Iraqi Christian’s were sent back to Iraq per the Obama administration. No safe harbor.
    Obama pushes for Syrian refugees regardless of vetting issues, to take safe harbor in the US.
    Adolph Hitler laughing his arss off at the irony of it all.
    Nazis and Liberals might not be the same thing, but the Muslim brotherhood is loving all of it! All of it!
    You can’t write this stuff up.

  • My friend’s wife grew up in the Soviet Union and came here shortly after it went bust. She says that the Soviets were not communists, they were socialists. It is not what one calls oneself, it is what one is. Communist = Socialist, Nazi = Socialist, Liberal = Socialist, Progressive = Socialist, Democrat = Fill in the Blank.

  • said that the Nazis & the govt of the former Soviet Union never called themselves “Socialists.”

    Seriously?!? Whether or not they in fact fit some definition of “socialist,” they most certainly did call themselves such: National Socialists (Nazis) and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). I mean, it’s right there in the names!! Liberals/socialists were never really good at facts.

  • “Seriously?!? Whether or not they in fact fit some definition of “socialist,” they most certainly did call themselves such: National Socialists (Nazis) and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). I mean, it’s right there in the names!! Liberals/socialists were never really good at facts.”

    My thoughts, exactly. Ronald Reagan was quoted as saying that the problem with liberals is that they know so much–that simply isn’t so.

    This self identified daughter of a Cuban Communist, who also fully supports Communism, became incensed when I answered her questions, honestly. She said that social security and Medicare were Socialism –and demanded to know if I agreed with those policies. I am very libertarian minded on many issues (I want the govt to leave me & others alone as much as possible.) I am tired beyond words of the govt forcibly taking my money (just try not paying Medicare & social security taxes on your income in most states & watch what happens!) and misspending/misappropriating it–then demanding more of my money!! When I told this Communist that I did not agree with the govt being in the retirement & insurance business by forcibly taking money people have earned-it was more than she could deal with. She literally went beserk. It was at that point that she told me to get the “F” out of her car–and then refused to let me out when I refused to take such treatment. Liberals (in the modern pooitical sense of the term, i.e. Bernie Sabders) don’t have logical explantations of their political views–all they have is pure emotion & mantra to back up their views–and when liberals are challenged on those views–the cognitive dissonance is likely to make them behave in very strange ways. That is why I simply block them online. The Bible says that you are foolish to answer a fool in the foolish manner in which the fool addresses you (Book of Proverbs.)

    With my conservative/Constitutionalist/libertarian combination of political views and my religious faith/practice–I constantly hear & see viewpoints/actions, etc., with which I do not agree–but as I don’t see it as my purpose in life to force others to agree with me–I just go and do my job/live my life, etc., to the best of my ability. I had listened to these Socialist/Communists for almost 2 years & not said a word of my disagreement until directly asked. I guess this Communist has never had anyone disagree with her views before (maybe?).

    My biggest concern is these type folks’ reflexive response to listening to something with which they disagree–almost without fail–they act to shut down the free speech rights if those with whom they disagree. They simply will not allow speech with which they disagree. This type of reflexive behavior concerns me for the students who are under their authority in their classes. If they must shut down adult speech with which they do not agree by personal attacks & intimidation of the adults with whom they disagree—what do they do with their students?!?

  • “All liberals are fascists. And, they are all for big, controlling government. Regarding progressives’ enthusiasm for statist coercion. Walter Lippman wrote, ‘Their weapons are the coercive direction of the life and labor of mankind. Their doctrine is that disorder and misery can be overcome only by more and more compulsory organization. Their promise is that through the power of the state men can be made happy… Throughout the world, in the name of progress, men who call themselves communists, socialists, fascists, nationalists, progressives, and even liberals, are unanimous in holding that government with its instruments of coercion must by commanding the people how they shall live, direct the course of civilization and fix the shape of things to come. …the mark of a progressive is that he relies at last upon the increased power of officials to improve the condition of men… the only instrument of progress in which they have faith is the coercive agency of government.’”

    Exactly. Govt is god-a very uncompassionate god who does not care if your income is just $2 above the govt’s arbitrary limit set for the receipt of a given service–you won’t get the “help” if you don’t fit in the relatively, politically set, govt guidelines. You also won’t get the help you need from the govt if you don’t have he requisit gender and/or ethnicity.

    Re: govt’s coercive force: It consists of 1. Harrasment 2. Taking your privately owned property 3. Taking your ability to earn a living from you 4. Taking your freedom from you.

Laughing at Evil

Saturday, August 22, AD 2015

 

“They can’t make that (Blazing Saddles) movie today because everybody’s so politically correct. You know, the NAACP would stop a great movie that would do such a great service to black people because of the N-word,” says Brooks. “You’ve got to really examine these things and see what’s right and what’s wrong. Politically correct is absolutely wrong. Because it inhibits the freedom of thought. I’m so lucky that they weren’t so strong then and that the people that let things happen on the screen weren’t so powerful then. I was very lucky.”

Mel Brooks, 2014

To back up the words of Mr. Brooks:

Olney Theatre’s production of Mel Brooks’s 2001 musical The Producers only has three more performances, but it’s not going to close without a bit of manufactured controversy. Audience members at Montgomery County playhouse are going to have to walk past a small coterie protesting the show’s play-within-the-play, because, the demonstrators say, it makes light of Adolf Hitler and the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany.

“I understand the intent is satire,” says Jeffrey Imm, who is organizing the demonstration through his anti-discrimination group, Responsible for Equality And Liberty. “This is the point of morality: some things we have to recognize as absolute evil. When 6 million people are murdered, we don’t view it with knee-slapping, we view it with reverence.”

Go here to read the rest. Mr. Imm’s group is completely wrong-headed.  Too often Hitler, murderous little jumped up thug, is elevated into being some sort of grand demonic personification of evil.  This is precisely the wrong way to remember the psychopath and the movement he led.  Far better to make him into a clownish figure and condemn him throughout history with laughter and ridicule. 

Continue reading...

17 Responses to Laughing at Evil

  • Sometimes personalities that support or do evil make themselves into “clownish figures ” to laugh at. Witness the Hillary press conferences….

  • On the other hand, I do believe the Godless left has successfully used humor and ridicule (think TV)to institute evil into our culture. Dan Quayle was right about Murphy Brown and all the other leftist systematic ridiculing of all that was once good.

  • And don’t forget Chaplin’s “The Great Dictator” either Don!

  • The Second Psalm comes to mind: “The kings of the earth rise up and the princes conspire against the Lord and against His Christ “Let us break their bonds asunder and let us cast away their chains from us.” He who dwells in heaven laughs at them. The Lord derides them.” Those like Hitler, who make a parody of their personhood, deserve to be laughed at.

  • Mel Brooks was a comedic genius. Most of his movies were made decades ago and they are still funny. Blazing Saddles used the “n” word to make fun of racists. Definitely not for kids, but witty. Spaceballs is still funny.

    My favorite part of History of the World Part 1 was when Brooks, portraying Moses, comes down from the mount with 15 commandments – three tablets – and drops one, which is shattered. “The Lord God has given you these 15 (shattering sound of a tablet) 10 – 10 Commandments, for all to hear and obey!”

  • Did anyone catch the hilarious effeminate swing of the hips and expression on the Nazi soldier’s face as they sing “Sooper, Sooper, Sooper Men?” It is at about 1:07 into the cartoon. Prophetic? Ironic? I’ll bet a Christian baker could fill in the blank.

  • I think part of the problem is cultural– was it here that the article about the Daily Show was brought up?

    A lot of folks confuse mockery with actually making the mocked thing irrelevant. It’s not, really, but if you take it that way– the objection of the protesters makes sense.

    This does not work well with those who hold that mockery should be aimed at disrespectful things.

    And now I’m going to have “der freur’s face” stuck in my head all day. 😀

  • “–for him we make more shells.
    If one little shell
    should blow him straight to ***BANG***
    We’ll Heil! Heil!
    And wouldn’t that be swell!”

  • Too often Hitler, murderous little jumped up thug, is elevated into being some sort of grand demonic personification of evil.

    The proof is the fact that you will see more efforts out there making SATAN sympathetic, even positive, than any of Hitler. Indeed you’ll find on some boards folks more willing to defend Satan as a rebel against a tyrant God than say even the slightest positive of Hitler.

  • I dunno. It’s easy to laugh at evil when it is defeated. Can anyone imagine some funny videos on what Planned Parenthood is up to? I can’t.

  • Some of the best of the anti-Nazi propaganda during World War II was comedic, see the Donald Duck cartoon. In regard to Worse Than Murder, Inc, I can imagine some very funny videos highlighting the money they are making off killing, and their unwillingness to admit that abortion is the key to how they make money.

  • There was even humor in the concentrations camps. If the guard laughed at you it was mocking. If the prisoners laughed at their situation it was compassion.

  • The comments about the Donald Duck video on YouTube were amazing. There really are countless stupid people in the world.

  • A recent offering on the History Channel examined the widespread use of mind-altering drugs by the Nazis, from Hitler on down to the very troops in the field. The Ubermenschen derived their powers from pills. Then, as Cab Calloway sang it in Minnie the Moocher, “Bing, Bang, Boom, and the Dope Gave Out”.

  • However, ought we not have–I’m not sure what the correct word would be–reverence–for the memory of the horrors inflcted that we should never allow them to be perpetuated ever again? If you make a joke about something, it makes it less serious seemingly, but whatever danger it possesses is still there none the less. Maybe someone can help me articulate this better?

  • That’s a good reason not to make light of the evil they did– but neither of these are doing that. They’re mocking the people who did evil.

    (Well, enslaving someone is evil, but it was taken to ridiculous levels for the cartoon.)

    I think I see what you’re aiming at– that it’s not a good idea to make the evil action seem like a joke.

  • “The late Werner Klemperer, who portrayed Colonel Klink on the old sitcom Hogan’s Heroes, was a German Jewish refugee to America from the Third Reich, who served in the US Army during World War II. He was once asked how he could play a Nazi. He replied that he would go to his grave happy knowing that he helped make the Nazis look ridiculous.”

    Technically, Klemperer wasn’t a Jew, as his mother was Lutheran. His father, the famous conductor Otto Klemperer, was a Jewish revert (from Catholicism!) who fled Germany in 1935 when he could see where the country was heading with the Nazis in power. Werner Klemperer, having lived the first 15 years of his life in Germany, was of course fluent in German, and in postwar Hollywood that put him in great demand to play Nazi military officers in war movies. Every offer he got to that effect he turned down, saying that he wouldn’t take any role that made Nazis look even slightly respectable. That’s why he took the role of Colonel Klink in “Hogan’s Heroes”, because he could play him as an utter buffoon. He did play a couple of Nazis in movies (Adolf Eichmann in “Operation Eichmann” and a fictional Nazi judge in “Judgement at Nuremburg”) because he could depict them as the mean and stupid people that they were.

Hitler: Born Before His Time

Thursday, August 21, AD 2014

 Three Laws of Transhumanism:

1) A transhumanist must safeguard one’s own existence above all else.

2) A transhumanist must strive to achieve omnipotence as expediently as possible—so long as one’s actions do not conflict with the First Law.

3) A transhumanist must safeguard value in the universe—so long as one’s actions do not conflict with the First and Second Laws.

Zoltan Istvan

Truly, this earth is a trophy cup for the industrious man. And this rightly so, in the service of natural selection. He who does not possess the force to secure his Lebensraum in this world, and, if necessary, to enlarge it, does not deserve to possess the necessities of life. He must step aside and allow stronger peoples to pass him by.

Adolph Hitler, December 18, 1940

 

 

Surveying our contemporary world, it is easy to reach the assumption that Adolph Hitler was simply born a century too early.  Many of the ideas he embraced have become completely mainstream, especially in Europe.  His view of eugenics for example, which he summarized in his look at Sparta in the book he wrote after Mein Kampf and which remained unpublished during his life:

Sparta must be regarded as the first Völkisch State. The exposure of the sick, weak, deformed children, in short, their destruction, was more decent and in truth a thousand times more humane than the wretched insanity of our day which preserves the most pathological subject, and indeed at any price, and yet takes the life of a hundred thousand healthy children in consequence of birth control or through abortions, in order subsequently to breed a race of degenerates burdened with illnesses.

After becoming dictator of Germany, Hitler implemented his beliefs in his T4 program which killed the mentally ill and all others who, through mental or physical defect, failed to measure up to Hitler’s master race dreams.  “Life unworthy of life”, the German phrase is “Lebensunwertes Leben”, was the verbiage that substituted for the simple term, murder, which accurately described the brutal reality.  Realizing that this policy would be controversial, Hitler did it as much in secret as possible, although critics, especially Bishop Von Galen, the aptly nicknamed Lion of Munster, did speak out.  Go here to read Von Galen’s take down of this murder of the innocents.

Now, Hitler’s policy is being given a trendy new repackaging in the erst-while Libertarian UK branch of Wired magazine, by “transhumanist”, and atheist, writer Zoltan Istvan:

 

 

The philosophical conundrum of controlling human procreation rests mostly on whether all human beings are actually responsible enough to be good parents and can provide properly for their offspring. Clearly, untold numbers of children — for example, those millions that are slaves in the illegal human trafficking industry — are born to unfit parents.

In an attempt to solve this problem and give hundreds of millions of future kids a better life, I cautiously endorse the idea of licensing parents, a process that would be little different than getting a driver’s licence. Parents who pass a series of basic tests qualify and get the green light to get pregnant and raise children. Those applicants who are deemed unworthy — perhaps because they are homeless, or have drug problems, or are violent criminals, or have no resources to raise a child properly and keep it from going hungry — would not be allowed until they could demonstrate they were suitable parents.

Continue reading...

33 Responses to Hitler: Born Before His Time

  • I recommend the licensing of pundits who call for the destruction of life–regardless of how thinly veiled is the process they recommend.
    With the Godless, goodness is always the disguise for their evil.

  • Zoltan Istvan is in the LinkedIn job search database. He writes for the Huffington Post and Psychology Today. His views are quite mainstream in today’s modernist society of genital titillation without personal responsibility. 🙁

  • The notion of “Lebensunwertes Leben” was adopted by the Nazis from a book of that name by the jurist Karl Binding and the psychiatrist Alfred Hoche, published in 1920.

    Binding is remembered today for his work on Burgundian-Roman law in the 5th and 6th centuries. He is the author of “Das burgundisch-romanische Königreich (von 443–532)” which remains the last word on the subject, so far as the manuscript evidence goes. What he did get from his reading of the Barbarian laws was a notion of retributive justice and of crime as an offence against the victim or his kindred, rather than the Roman notion of an offence against the public order of the state.

    As for Hoche, his wife was Jewish and he lost his professorship at Freiburg, when the Nazis came to power.

    Their views on suicide and euthanasia were quite in keeping with the intellectual and moral tone of Weimar Germany. Alfred Jost had started the discussion in his monograph “Das Recht auf den Tod” published in 1895, arguing for a “scientific ethics,” rather than one based on “outmoded theological ideas.”

  • Pingback: Government To Issue Baby Licenses | William M. Briggs
  • Michael Paterson-Seymour: “As for Hoche, his wife was Jewish and he lost his professorship at Freiburg, when the Nazis came to power.”
    .
    For the Nazis, teaching could only come from someone who was not a Jew. Nuclear fission was discovered by Lisa Mitner, a Jewess. Lisa Mitner fled Germany for her life. Her nephew helped the United States develop the atom bomb, which was scheduled to be dropped on Hitler if he did not surrender. too bad adolph.
    .
    Infestations of ignorance, like the Emperor’s New Clothes, are being promoted by communists and “transhumanist”, and atheist, writer Zoltan Istvan. Demonic infestations put forth as our destiny without God must be exorcised. Thank you The American Catholic.

  • Thank you, Mary De Voe, for remembering: “Nuclear fission was discovered by Lisa Mitner, a Jewess.”
    .
    Because of a Jewish woman (and of course her successors in science and engineering), nuclear energy provides 20% of the electricity you receive and 64% of emission-free generation in the United States.
    .
    http://www.nei.org/Knowledge-Center/Nuclear-Statistics/Environment-Emissions-Prevented
    .
    What have atheists done to contribute to the human race as from murdering tens if not hundreds of millions under Stalin, Mao and other atheist leaders in the 20th century? Were it not for Jews and Christians, we would be living in poverty and slavery exactly as Muslim jihadists wish us to live, generating our energy from biomass burning (i.e., burning wood, straw and hay) whose pollution kills 2 million annually around the world (and that may be a conservative estimate).
    .
    http://theenergycollective.com/nnadir/267356/world-health-organization-underestimating-annual-deaths-renewable-energy-much-two-mill
    .
    A Jewess discovered how to reproduce the fires of creation. Imagine that! And we refuse to take advantage in providing safe, clean, economically power because the greenie-weenie, eco-wacko, liberal, progressive leftists – the overwhelming majority of whom are pagan or atheists – are afraid.

  • There is nothing new under the sun. Evil men (and women) will always seek to promulgate their hideous ideas in the most humane of terms.

    I reblogged this article on http://wearethenewbarbarians.blogspot.com/

  • Pingback: Death Threats, Freedom, Transhumanism, and the Future | Cesar Vela
  • Pingback: Death Threats, Freedom, Transhumanism, and the Future | Omaha Sun Times
  • Pingback: 전세계의 최신 영어뉴스 듣기 - 보이스뉴스 잉글리쉬
  • Pingback: Today in Technology August 25, 2014 | Tech Fann.com
  • Pingback: Dangerous Influence of Transgender Ideology - BigPulpit.com
  • “Surveying our contemporary world, it is easy to reach the assumption that Adolph Hitler was simply born a century too early. Many of the ideas he embraced have become completely mainstream, especially in Europe.”

    Of course they were by no means far from the mainstream in his day, too, both in Europe and the USA. Even in Lord of the Rings, the decline of Gondor was caused by the Numenoreans intermarrying with “lesser breeds of men”.

  • Let us pray that not even Hitler is in hell. Supernatural charity, the minimum of love for neighbor, requires us to wish no one to go to hell. If we wish mercy for ourselves, we must wish it for all sinners.

  • jeromeleo: Let us pray no soul goes to eternal damnation simply because Our Lord died for him. God the Father created him and his soul and therefore, he belongs to God in ownership and in the freedom into which he is created.
    .
    We do not know and cannot say about A. Hitler’s whereabouts. Hitler may have made an act of contrition before death took him. “There are many rooms in my Father’s house.”

  • Howard: Hitler got his “Lebensunwertes Leben” from Margaret Sanger and Sanger’s “useless eaters” and “human weeds”. Sanger’s love of neighbor makes her qualify for “Good Samaritan of the Week.”
    .
    Planned Parenthood has not budged from Sanger’s hatred of any person she does not approve. Planned Parenthood, the behemoth spawned by Sanger has encirlced the world through the United Nations. Abraham Lincoln said that “one person cannot own another person.” So, Planned Parenthood denied personhood, sovereign personhood, to the newly begotten. Since sovereignty and personhood come from God, Planned Parenthood, now, owns God and is telling God how to be God.

  • I am taken aback that you would use this article as a context to postulate the “virtues of Nuclear Fission” and decry the efforts of people working to restore the natural order,
    The greatest catastrophes of human history have all come from this arrogant abuse of science for dominion over god.
    It is the apple from the serpent if anything qualifies.
    There is no greater force to bring hell to earth for all mankind to suffer indefinitely under.

  • Dear Mighty Atom,
    .
    There is no resource capable of bringing greater prosperity and wealth to mankind than heavy metal fission, and it is for that very reason that liberal progressive Democrats by and large oppose it, for to enable the common man to prosper would remove power from would be tyrants like Andy Cuomo and Barack Hussein Obama. Of course, the alternative is dumping 39 million tons of toxic coal plant refuse to the Cape Fear River – a release that contains MORE radioactivity in the form of uranium, radium and thorium that occurs naturally in coal, the burning of which supplies 50% of the electricity that you use to type your little obnoxious anti-nuclear nonsense on the internet. I have zero tolerance for liberals, progressives, Democrats, secularists, atheists or anti-nuclear zealots. We supply safe, clean, pollution free electricity 24 / 7 at a capacity factor 90 plus percent which no other form of energy can possibly equal. For that reasons today’s little Hitlers oppose it. You obviously advocate for their ascendency.

  • One other thing, Mighty Atom: even including TMI (which neither killed nor injured anyone), Chernobyl and Fukushima (which killed < a dozen people outright and none from radiation), nuclear is the SAFEST form of energy. Read here:
    .
    http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
    .
    Your statement "There is no greater force to bring hell to earth for all mankind to suffer indefinitely under" is typical ignorant sensationalist hysteria mongering.
    .
    Get the FACTS.

  • I am no Zealot.

    Brought about by hubris and an act of god; the disasters at Fukishima can’t be claimed to be over.

    No one will be able to summarise the effect of this ongoing and still unfolding event for a period longer than the dawn of civilization until now.

    Nor are the cancers from all manner of nuclear testing and manipulation in previous decades abating.

    Im sure you have much more to say; however, your haughty bloviation can’t cover the obvious.

    I don’t need to look any further than your stated “zero tolerance” to see who you advocate for.

  • Emission free indeed

  • Mighty Atom,
    .
    No one is building the BWR 4 reactors with Mark I containments any longer that were used at Fukushima units 1 through 4. Furthermore, the disaster was caused by placing the emergency diesel generators below the tsunami flood line. TEPCO was informed back in the 1980s about this possibility and chose to ignore what the rest of the industry in the West did not ignore. So when the earthquake happened, the plants were shutdown with electrical power to the governors of the Reactor Core Isolation Cooling turbine-pumps being supplied by emergency diesel generators. When the tsunami hit, the diesel intakes were flooded and the diesels trip off line. The governors of the RCIC turbine-pumps went on backup batteries which lasted only 7 hours. When they were lost, the governors to the turbines of the RCIC pumps shut. That stopped core cooling. The cores overheated and a chemical reaction between the zirconium on the fuel rods and the water occurred at 2200 F. This resulted in the release of hydrogen which detonated. In spite of ALL of this, less than a dozen people died, and these died from construction accidents during attempted recovery operations and NOT from radiation. No one in the public was affected by radiation release. Additionally, the radioactivity that was leaked decayed away or was diluted to insignificance in the ocean. (On a side note, nearby dam collapses killed 1800 people and the explosions of petrochemical tanks in the Chiba Prefecture released carcinogenic toxins that will never ever decay away, but you ignore all that because it doesn’t fit your carefully crafted script of nuclear hysteria mongering.)
    .
    All this said, the newer reactor designs – Westinghouse AP-1000, GE-Hitachi’s ESBWR, B&W mPower, NuScale, Areva’s EPR, etc – completely obviate the very possibility of this type of accident. And existing nuclear power plants in the United States and Canada have had to implement a whole series of extra safety precautions because of hysteria mongering by people like you:
    .
    http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/japan-dashboard.html
    .
    http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/resources/fukushima/
    .
    And even given this accident, as can be seen from the web links I provided above, the mortality rate of nuclear energy is less than solar and wind, much less than oil and gas, and very much less than that of coal. These are indisputable facts and not bloviation, a tactic always and everywhere used by anti-nuclear zealots. But guess what? Except for Enoch, Elijah and the Blessed Virgin Mary, NO ONE gets off the planet alive.
    .
    I have gone out of my way to give you the facts in science and engineering whereas you provide vague sensationalist rhetoric. I have worked in nuclear energy for 38 years. In my youth I spent years in a 365 foot long metal tube some 33 feet in diameter at hundreds of feet beneath the water in close proximity to 156 MWth of nuclear energy. I have stood over spent fuel pools, worked on transducers attached to steam generators and reactor coolant piping, stood atop a reactor pressure vessel performing control rod drive mechanism maintenance, entered areas containing radioactive material, and performed worked in radioactive atmospheres. I still live, breathe, walk and work for a living. I help provide the electricity that anti-nukes use to bloviate. What use do they perform?

  • Hi, Mighty Atom!
    .
    Here are the people who use the mighty atom to protect you from little Hitlers:
    ;
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8T5jMWTpJo
    .
    Having seen in what I once participated (assuming you bother to watch this short video), you may now comprehend my absolute disdain and contempt for anti-nuclearism.
    .
    Have a nuclear day (from which comes 20% of the electricity you use to energize your computer to read this message and respond)!

  • Paul: Great Video! Were I fifty years younger, I’d want to join up. Now Mighty Atom: Beware falling into the errors of the Luddites. One might validly include the Luddites into the general category of Utopians, including Hitler, Marx, Lenin, and the majority of progressive democrats who seek to control and to stifle mankind’s enjoyment of the Good Earth into which we are invited to “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it’. Utopians seek to ban, control, curtail, license and limit our access to, enjoyment of, and unfettered use of the wonderful products of our God-given intelligence.

  • Thank you, William. God has given us enough thorium and uranium to sustain an individual energy consumption level at that of the average American for the 7 billion people who inhabit this planet for millennia on end. We do NOT have an energy crisis. We have a crisis of greed for money and addiction to dirty polluting fossil fuel because of that greed for money. Here is an article by Nathan Myhrvold at MIT Technology Review. The Mighty Atom should read it and come to realize that God has provided in the smallest of things – the atom – the greatest of power. But that is just like God. What is small is great and what is large and impressive is nothing.
    .
    Irrational Fears by Nathan Myhrvold at MIT Technology Review
    http://www.technologyreview.com/view/526426/irrational-fears/

  • Paul, are you sure that nuclear is only 20%. Count the sun’s core (fusion) for solar, wind, and most hydro, and the earth’s core (decay) causing plate tectonics for a sizable fraction of coal, petroleum, and natural gas, and the number might be closer to 90%. Most of the remaining 10% is lunar tidal friction’s likely addition to plate tectonics, if that.

  • You are welcome, Paul. Thank you also for your observation -– “the atom – the greatest of power. But that is just like God. What is small is great and what is large and impressive is nothing.”
    It reminds us that God has a sense of humor. He gives the greatest things in the smallest packages. Even our sexuality, the means of propagation and the joy of marital union, He efficiently designs with the dual purpose of plumbing.

  • Tom D is correct – darn, I hate it when I am wrong!!! 😉
    .
    Nuclear Fission Confirmed as Source of More than Half of Earth’s Heat
    http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2011/07/18/nuclear-fission-confirmed-as-source-of-more-than-half-of-earths-heat/
    .
    Okla Natural Reactor 1.7 Billion Years Ago
    http://geology.about.com/od/geophysics/a/aaoklo.htm
    .
    Assuming that all the elements heavier than helium were produced in super novae, the atoms of our bodies are literally made from star dust produced in the most intense nuclear furnaces imaginable. “From dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return.”
    .
    While I have often said, “A little nukie never hurt anyone,” it appears that in God’s view of things a whole lot of nukie is good for everyone!

  • Ha ha ha!! Paul, best laugh I’ve had all day. That betters the old engineering joke about couples and moments. One of the side benefits of a conservative outlook is the many opportunities for humor and a good laugh.

  • Paul, I have a question about Fukushima that I have yet to get an answer on. Perhaps you know.

    As I understand it, one of the supposed pluses in the Fukushima design was the placement of the spent fuel rod pools inside the reactor containment structure, basically above the reactors themselves. Most other reactor sites have been criticized for having large pools outside the containment buildings.
    However, the geometry of the pools at Fukushima may have been a problem. The pools were, as I recall, rather tall and narrow, but widening toward the top. It would seem that the chance of spent rods being jarred loose and falling on top of each other during an earthquake would have been greater in such a pool than in the larger acreage, flatter, and more criticized pools we have.
    I recall reports that one problem at Fukushima was that the coolant in the pools was boiling off. Do you know if the rods shifted in the quake? Was there a criticality incident in the pools? As I wrote, I’ve seen little to suggest this, but it is an intriguing line of thought. Do you know?

  • Hi, Tom D.,
    .
    BWR 4 Mark I containments are NOT like the Westinghouse PWR containments. The spent fuel pools in Mark I containments are elevated in a Reactor Building and primary containment encases only the Reactor Pressure Vessel and associated components.
    .
    The reason for this design is to facilitate refueling. The below grade design of PWRs is superior. Additionally, the location of BWR pools does nothing to enhance their integrity above that which is used for PWRs.
    .
    That said, no criticality incident in the spent fuel pools at Fukushima occurred. From the US Nuclear Energy Institute:
    .
    http://www.nei.org/Master-Document-Folder/Backgrounders/Fact-Sheets/Used-Fuel-Storage-Pools-at-Nuclear-Energy-Faciliti
    .
    In the early days of the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi accident, there was speculation that used fuel storage pools at the site had been seriously damaged or that the water had drained out of some of them. Later observations and data showed the speculation to be incorrect. Still, the misperception led to discussion in Congress of accelerating the transfer of used fuel rods at U.S. nuclear energy facilities from pools to storage containers.
    .
    The independent NRC says that pools and containers are equally safe methods for storing used fuel and that both protect public health and the environment. The agency says “there is no pressing safety or security reason to mandate earlier transfer of fuel from pool to [storage containers].”
    .
    I now have to go to mid-week Mass. I am on the left coast working for a neutrons ‘R us employer. We are designing a passively safe system that is completely impervious to TMI, Chernobyl and Fukushima type accidents. Gotta go. Hail Mary, full of grace…….

  • Paul: Thank you!

    William, you wrote: “It reminds us that God has a sense of humor. He gives the greatest things in the smallest packages. Even our sexuality, the means of propagation and the joy of marital union, He efficiently designs with the dual purpose of plumbing.”
    I dunno, I look at how things can go wrong with the prostate and I have to conclude that we could have done with a little less humor in that department., although there is one exception: http://www.snopes.com/humor/mediagoofs/prostate.asp

December 11, 1941: Germany and Italy Declare War on the US

Wednesday, December 11, AD 2013

Franklin_Roosevelt_signing_declaration_of_war_against_Germany

 

 

In a marathon speech before the German Reichstag on December 11, 1941, Chancellor Adolf Hitler declared war on America.  The tone of the speech is indicated in its closing paragraphs:

Ever since my last peace proposal of July 1940 was rejected, we have realized that this struggle has to be fought out to its last implications. That the Anglo-Saxon-Jewish-Capitalist World finds itself now in one and the same Front with Bolshevism does not surprise us National Socialists: we have always found them in company. We have concluded the struggle successfully inside Germany and have destroyed our adversaries after 16 years struggle for power. When, 23 years ago, I decided to enter political life and to lift this nation out of its decline, I was a nameless, unknown soldier. Many among you know how difficult were the first few years of this struggle. From the time when the Movement consisted of seven men, until we took over power in January 1933, the path was so miraculous that only Providence itself with its blessing could have made this possible.

 

Today I am at the head of the strongest Army in the world, the most gigantic Air Force and of a proud Navy. Behind and around me stands the Party with which I became great and which has become great through me. The enemies I see before me are the same enemies as 20 years ago, but the path along which I look forward cannot be compared with that on which I look back. The German people recognizes the decisive hour of its existence millions of soldiers do their duty, millions of German peasants and workers, women and girls, produce bread for the home country and arms for the Front. We are allied with strong peoples, who in the same need are faced with the same enemies. The American President and his Plutocratic clique have mocked us as the Have-nots-that is true, but the Have-nots will see to it that they are not robbed of the little they have.

 

You, my fellow party members, know my unalterable determination to carry a fight once begun to its successful conclusion. You know my determination in such a struggle to be deterred by nothing, to break every resistance which must be broken. In September 1939 I assured you that neither force nor arms nor time would overcome Germany. I will assure my enemies that neither force of arms nor time nor any internal doubts, can make us waver in the performance of our duty. When we think of the sacrifices of our soldiers, any sacrifice made by the Home Front is completely unimportant. When we think of those who in past centuries have fallen for the Reich, then we realize the greatness of our duty. But anybody who tries to evade this duty has no claim to be regarded in our midst as a fellow German. Just as we were unmercifully hard in our struggle for power we shall be unmercifully hard in the struggle to maintain our nation. At a time when thousands of our best men are dying nobody must expect to live who tries to depreciate the sacrifices made at the Front. Immaterial under what camouflage he tries to disturb this German Front, to undermine the resistance of our people, to weaken the authority of the regime, to sabotage the achievements of the Home Front, he shall die for it! But with the difference that this sacrifice brings the highest honour to the soldier at the Front, whereas the other dies dishonoured and disgraced. Our enemies must not deceive themselves-in the 2,000 years of German history known to us, our people have never been more united than today. The Lord of the Universe has treated us so well in the past years that we bow in gratitude to a providence which has allowed us to be members of such a great nation. We thank Him that we also can be entered with honour into the ever-lasting book of German history!

FDR might have been able to convince Congress to declare War on Germany eventually, but Hitler acting first relieved him of the necessity.  Congress declared War on Germany within hours after the news reached the US of the German Declaration of war:

Joint Resolution Declaring That a State of War Exists Between The Government of Germany and the Government and the People of the United States and Making Provisions To Prosecute The Same

Whereas the Government of Germany has formally declared war against the Government and the people of the United States of America:

Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Government of Germany; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.

(Signed) Sam Rayburn, Speaker of the House of Representatives

(Signed) H. A. Wallace, Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate

Approved December 11, 1941 3:05 PM E.S.T.

(Signed) Franklin D. Roosevelt

Continue reading...

24 Responses to December 11, 1941: Germany and Italy Declare War on the US

  • Yes Churchill was probably thankful; he Embroiled GB in a war with Germany that should have never been and now he was rescued, not by Japan but by FDR who had declared an unofficial war on Germany years before. FDR used lies and propaganda to whip up the American people into fearing Germany, when fear was not justified.
    List the wars that USA presidents have unnecessarily involved the USA in and it is sickening. From Lincoln to Bush it is a constant parade of wars, all for nothing.
    The USA would have been much better off if GB had never entered the war and Germany was allowed to defeat Russia, if it was able. Germany would have been much easier to deal with than the USSR.
    We were drawn into the war because GB could not accept Germany being more powerful than GB. Of course now GB is a basket case and Germany is the most powerful country in Western Europe.

  • “he Embroiled GB in a war with Germany that should have never been”

    Complete rubbish, unless you think that Great Britain should have stood by idle as the Nazis dominated Europe. Additionally Churchill was not in the Chamberlain government when it declared war on Germany.

    “who had declared an unofficial war on Germany years before”

    Every step that FDR took against Nazi Germany was supported by a majority of the American people who recognized the threat posed to the world by the Third Reich.

    “FDR used lies and propaganda to whip up the American people into fearing Germany,”

    Rubbish. No lies or propaganda were needed as the truth about the Third Reich was nightmarish enough.

    “From Lincoln to Bush it is a constant parade of wars, all for nothing.”
    Preserving the Union and ending slavery was nothing? Pursuing justice against the perpetrators of 9-11 was nothing? What a truly warped view of American history you possess.

    “Germany would have been much easier to deal with than the USSR.”

    Yes, I can imagine how reasonable Hilter would have been with nuclear armed ICBMs at his disposal.

  • Yet another disciple of Thomas Woods, I’m afraid.

  • To: Donald R. McClarey
    A book that helped me understand Germany and the 500 years of history preceding WWII is Christopher Clark’s “Iron Kingdom”; which is about the history of Prussia (and Germany). The book helped understand what was happening in Germany in WWI and WWII.
    Another book that helped me understand what was going on in the USA before WWI and WWII and the part that FDR played in getting us into WWII is “The Jewish Threat; Anti-Semitic Politics of the U. S. Army” by Joseph W. Bendersky.
    To: Mike
    I have never heard of Thomas Woods.

  • Randy you could have read a million books and the points you were trying to make would still be without historical validity. Nazi Germany was an extremely aggressive state with a horrific agenda for the world. It had to be stopped and thanks to men like Churchill, FDR and tens of millions of others it was.

  • Donald, actually I was recommending the books for you to read.

  • Sure, FDR manipulated the press to get what he wanted. That was just the way things were done back then. Had FDR decided that the US should sit the war out, it’s unlikely that the machinations he would have used with regard to the press would have been any more honest. So I am not sure why that point is particularly relevant.

     

    That being said, I am sympathetic to the question of what it was all for, ultimately. For example, if Hitler had been allowed to prevail, and had succeeded in his early designs to exile all the Reich’s Jews to Madagascar, or someplace like that, we would consider it today a horrific act of injustice, and there would be no end to the hand-wringing over how we could have allowed such an atrocity to be perpetrated. But how much better that would have been, in hindsight, than the 6 million Jewish corpses (not to mention the tens of millions of Gentiles, as if their deaths were any less of a loss) we were left with instead.

     

    In any case, it was the Axis that attacked the US at Pearl Harbor, the previous Sunday. Any president who would have let an attack on American soil go unanswered is a work of libertarian fiction. Griping about FDR and what he did to pull the nation into war, without once mentioning Tojo — really, what kind of an argument is that?

  • “Donald, actually I was recommending the books for you to read.”

    I guess I could add them to my list of the dozens of history I have read of Germany and Prussia and the thirty or so studies of anti-Semitism in America I have read, but the books as described do not advance the argument you were making.

  • “if Hitler had been allowed to prevail, and had succeeded in his early designs to exile all the Reich’s Jews to Madagascar,”

    Never would have happened HA. Hitler viewed Jews as a plague bacillus quite literally, and he wanted them all dead. During the War of course the term “resettlement” was used as a euphemism for Jews marked for transport to death camps. The Holocaust involved huge transport at a time when the Reich needed every ounce of transport for military use and to keep civilian industries supplied. The Holocaust hurt the German war effort, but it occurred because killing Jews quite simply was Hitler’s highest priority. The War gave Hitler an excuse to carry out his heart’s desire.

    In Hitler’s last testament he obliquely referred to what he had accomplished:

    “Three days before the outbreak of the German-Polish war I again proposed to the British ambassador in Berlin a solution to the German-Polish problem — similar to that in the case of the Saar district, under international control. This offer also cannot be denied. It was only rejected because the leading circles in English politics wanted the war, partly on account of the business hoped for and partly under influence of propaganda organized by international Jewry.

    I have also made it quite plain that, if the nations of Europe are again to be regarded as mere shares to be bought and sold by these international conspirators in money and finance, then that race, Jewry, which is the real criminal of this murderous struggle, will be saddled with the responsibility. I further left no one in doubt that this time not only would millions of children of Europe’s Aryan peoples die of hunger, not only would millions of grown men suffer death, and not only hundreds of thousands of women and children be burnt and bombed to death in the towns, without the real criminal having to atone for this guilt, even if by more humane means.”

  • However vile and lethal Hitler’s plans for German Jewry, I suspect most historians would agree that they became progressively more murderous and pressing as time went on. You are free to speculate as to how little the Final Solution would have been altered, had Hitler decided to focus on other matters first, or to start with exile. I am speculating as well. But to pretend any inevitability on that matter amidst all that chaos is as unconvincing as Randy’s selective omissions. Obviously, there is no realistic scenario in which the Jews would have fared well, but even if they had endured the war with, say, a million dead, what a perversely happy atrocity that would have been in comparison with what actually transpired. Then again, there were 12 million other Jews in Europe that Hitler did not reach, but possibly might have done in some alternate scenario, and that, too, should be taken into account.

  • I find two kinds of people on the internet very annoying. One kind are internet atheists. Internet atheists have a peculiar quality in making themselves obnoxious. They blame all of the world’s problems and faults on religion. Atheist regimes liquidated over 100 million people but they are oblivious to it.

    The other group I find very annoying are those that blame Jews for everything. In that group is a subset of libertarian isolationists who blame Churchill, FDR and Poland for WWII and blame everybody but Germany for WWI. Buchananites and devotees of Lew Rockwell frequent that subset. The world would be a better place if that bunch kept their opinions to themselves.

    Hitler was a madman who wanted Jews dead and hated Poland for 1) throwing Germans out of Greater Poland in 1918-19, 2) Poland had use of Gdansk (Danzig) as an international city and 3) Poland wasn’t about to give Hitler a corridor to Prussia, which was Polish territory in centuries past.

  • FDR used lies and propaganda to whip up the American people into fearing Germany, when fear was not justified.

    …Right, the guys killing their own people and making lady’s gloves of their skin were totally nothing to worry about. (One of the risks of letting a 13 year old run around the library at will is that she might actually read some of the books, especially if there are a lot of odd, old pictures.)

    Right.

    And the Japanese were just misunderstood, I suppose?

    ****************

    However vile and lethal Hitler’s plans for German Jewry, I suspect most historians would agree that they became progressively more murderous and pressing as time went on.

    I seem to remember that the killing of the disabled started as quickly as they could manage; does that account for ramping up time?

  • I seem to remember that the killing of the disabled started as quickly as they could manage; does that account for ramping up time?

     

    Pretty much. We (i.e. “civilized never-again West”) has had legalized abortion for several decades, and have since moved on to killing certain sick people. That did not happen overnight. People generally have to be conditioned into murdering their countrymen, and the transformation is not instantaneous. If tomorrow, or in 50 years, we move on to killing unwanted minority groups, or with even more certainty, newborns who are officially stamped as ‘flawed’, there will no doubt be people yelling “Called it!” and claiming that was the plan along, but the world is simply not that predictable or inevitable, no matter what the conspiracy theorists and the truthers claim. Moreover, the specific trajectory towards that Armageddon will matter, and will be worth fighting over.

     

    The was a fairly detailed operation. Those who claim that it was always just a euphemism or way-station to the Holocaust are gifted with nothing as much as 20/20 hindsight. Was it always in the back of Hitler’s mind if plan A did not pan out? Quite possibly. But then, was Hitler somehow destined to survive Stauffenberg’s bomb? Was Operation Barbarossa’s bull’s eye trajectory into the Russian winter an inevitability? History does not work that way. The fact is, the outcome of a world war – especially one instigated by the minds of madmen – is a chaotic affair, and sorting out what happened is hard enough. Sorting out what might have happened is harder still.

  • I have been reading all the good comments and I will add one more comment, based on the comments I have read. This is a good site, as the comments are a little different than the Breitbart comments.
    I have been reading this site every day for over a year and have enjoyed it very much.
    I believe the WWII generation and the next generation are still in the afterglow of beliefs popular during WWII. With the passage of time, Germany from 1900-1945 can be assessed in a colder light. I believe this is important for one reason; if we make Germany the “other” there is a danger that we in the USA will not recognize the similarities between Germany and the USA. If Germans and Hitler were “crazy”, then we are not obliged to look at our behavior that is similar or even worse.
    The movie “Expelled” has a saying from a Jew Professor; “it always starts the same way”. The road to the dark side always starts the same way, I think was his meaning.
    We live in a country that has murdered over fifty million of our unborn children. Hitler never did anything close to that. Which country is worse?
    Nazi Germany was evil in many ways, but not in ways that were markedly different from previous wars in the history of Mankind. Germany had been fighting for survival since the sixteenth century; it was attacked by its neighbors repeatedly for four-hundred years. It was fearful of Russia, was concurred by Napoleon, fearful of a more powerful Austria, etc. Read the book “The Iron Kingdom” for a good history review of Prussia. Prussia was the heart of Germany, with Berlin, as the most important city of the Kingdom. Much of our modern world ideas came from Prussia; Prussia was not warlike or backwards, but advanced and modern.
    Germany was defeated in WWI and laid in ruin, the people were starving. Hitler offered a way forward. Hitler made many mistakes and did evil things, but no more evil than what the allies did during the war.
    The war was not about right and wrong, but about who would end up with the power. In this the USA was complicit. Just as Lincoln did during his war, FDR excited the USA citizens and raised the fears of the USA by painting the Germans as the bad guys; just as every president has done in the USA, in time of war.
    My point is that we should look at our actions and not backwards at Nazi Germany, twisting the actions of Nazi Germany to make ourselves look better, in our own eyes.

  • “We live in a country that has murdered over fifty million of our unborn children. Hitler never did anything close to that. Which country is worse?”

    Actually Hitler was in favor of abortion for non-Aryans.

    Here is what he said about abortion in the conquered Eastern territories:

    “They may use contraceptives or practice abortion–the more the better. In view of the large families of the native population, it could only suit us if girls and women there had as many abortions as possible. Active trade in contraceptives ought to be actually encouraged in the Eastern territories, as we could not possibly have the slightest interest in increasing the non-Germanic population.”

    In the concentration camps pregnant women were often forcibly aborted. Women arriving with infants were always sent to the gas chambers. Of course Hitler was in favor of euthanasia for the “unfit”, Aryan and non-Aryan. Bishop Von Galen, the Lion of Munster, spoke out about this:

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2011/03/27/von-galen-contra-euthanasia/

  • “Nazi Germany was evil in many ways, but not in ways that were markedly different from previous wars in the history of Mankind”

    Wrong, the industrial genocide in cold blood of Nazi Germany was something new to human history, especially perpetrated by a nation that held itself to be the most civilized and cultured in Europe. The Nazis were not barbarians off the steppe, but the products of an advanced society that decided to adopt mass murder against helpless individuals as a strategic policy. Hitler viewed race as the fulcrum of civilization and he was determined to eradicate those he deemed to be inferior or threatening.

  • “Hitler made many mistakes and did evil things, but no more evil than what the allies did during the war.”
    The Western Allies ran no death camps and after the War put West Germany on the road to democracy and prosperity. We know from his musings what Hitler intended if he had won the war: a nightmare without end for the vanquished except in mass death.

  • “by painting the Germans as the bad guys;”

    The Nazis were the “bad guys”, and if you do not understand that, you need to take a very long look in the mirror. Any more comments attempting to argue that Hitler and the Nazis were not so bad will be deleted by me, and you will be banned from this site. First and last warning.

  • Good on you, Don. Sure the US is imperfect and the scourge of abortion is scandalous, but I’ve heard and read about all I can stand of the old and sophomoric moral equivalency excuse.

  • Hitler made many mistakes and did evil things, but no more evil than what the allies did during the war.

     

    Yeah, I was set to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you lost me there. Mistakes were made and evil things were done? Is that really the best you can do?

     

    For what it’s worth, I do understand the need to second-guess the past. I think it takes a psychotic amount of smugness and self-satisfaction to reflect on the tens of millions who died in WII and not wonder, “was there no other way to come through this?” But as noted previously, the path-not-taken approach to WWII has been corrupted by that treacherous and deceitful race of people who have for centuries stirred up dissension and enmity among any who were unfortunate enough to be in their presence. I am speaking, of course, about anti-Semites. You have apparently lost sight of that. In any case, I know a fair bit about the rapes and massacres of Germans and their collaborators by the victors, and the fact that a number of survivors of the Nazi camps committed suicide only when they learned they would be sent to the Soviet Union’s gulags, which makes you wonder which camps were worse. If you want to argue that Stalin (or the revenge-berserking Allied vets or partisans raping pillaging their way through Alsace and Germany) were just as bad as Hitler, I think you could make a compelling case. But you should also remember it was Hitler that turned the Soviets into Allies, just as it was Tojo that brought the US into the war. More importantly, that moral equivalence net only stretches so far.

  • The fact is that by 1900 or so, governments were experimenting and progressive measures were being implemented in all those countries. But Hitler stands out for his murderous rage and sectarian monstrosities. In terms of numbers, I think we can safely say a couple of other leaders exceeded him in their number of killings. But history is not taught in a vacuum. Westerners teach a value-laden history that leans in the direction they see as ‘the wave of the future’. Hitler’s version seemed the most barbaric and reactionary, and I think that’s why he remains the most hated. He wasn’t the only heartless ‘engineer’ of the twentieth century, however.

  • I survived the horrible change of teaching History in school to Social Studies. I was decieved on a ton of information. Including the understanding of NAZI Germany being a Socialist Party. I left school believing they were a pro-capitalist movement. How is that? I received more education as time wnet on and had the ability to read on my own… Consequently I came back to the Church and needed a new lesson in my religion as well. – still learning thanks for the information above.

  • To Robert’s point: yes, isn’t it funny how people overlook the glaring “Socialist” right smack dab in the middle of the NAZI party’s title.

Devils’ Bargain

Friday, August 23, AD 2013

Polite Devils

The 74th anniversary of the Nazi-Soviet agreement.  Two of the three great mass murderers of the last century, Mao would complete the trio, the marriage of convenience of Hitler and Stalin signaled the onset of World War II.  Communists who had been calling for a common front with democrats to oppose Hitler immediately turned on a dime and denounced any involvement in an “imperialist war” against Hitler.  When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in June of 1941, communists around the globe turned on a dime again and called for all out war of all free peoples against the Hitlerian  threat.

Orwell had the Nazi-Soviet Pact, and the quick double flips that Communists did in response to it, and the later invasion by Germany of the Soviet Union, when he wrote this passage in 1984:

At this moment, for example, in 1984 (if it was 1984), Oceania was at war with Eurasia and in alliance with Eastasia. In no public or private utterance was it ever admitted that the three powers had at any time been grouped along different lines. Actually, as Winston well knew, it was only four years since Oceania had been at war with Eastasia and in alliance with Eurasia. But that was merely a piece of furtive knowledge which he happened to possess because his memory was not satisfactorily under control. Officially the change of partners had never happened. Oceania was at war with Eurasia: therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil, and it followed that any past or future agreement with him was impossible.

The frightening thing, he reflected for the ten thousandth time as he forced his shoulders painfully backward (with hands on hips, they were gyrating their bodies from the waist, an exercise that was supposed to be good for the back muscles) — the frightening thing was that it might all be true. If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say of this or that event, it never happened — that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death?

The Party said that Oceania had never been in alliance with Eurasia. He, Winston Smith, knew that Oceania had been in alliance with Eurasia as short a time as four years ago. But where did that knowledge exist? Only in his own consciousness, which in any case must soon be annihilated. And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed -if all records told the same tale — then the lie passed into history and became truth. ‘Who controls the past,’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.’ And yet the past, though of its nature alterable, never had been altered. Whatever was true now was true from everlasting to everlasting. It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. ‘Reality control’, they called it: in Newspeak, ‘doublethink’.

Continue reading...

7 Responses to Devils’ Bargain

  • Reality control.
    Perfect.

    The evil of our day will be crushed.
    The liar does not win the final battle.
    Those Spin Doctors of the past, present and future will be enjoying themselves in everlasting torment, a world they created. A hell on Earth they forged, yet eternal hell is their reward.

    Yes. Rant 101 and counting.

  • Compared to Uncle Joe, Hitler was an amateur. Koba had been in business far longer from 1905 or thereabouts and outlasted Hitler by nearly a decade. By every measure he can claim to be the mightiest dictator the world has ever seen, whose crimes are as monumental as they are unbelievable. Hitler was as Gen Manstein – who served the devil faithfully – wrote merely a gifted amateur, someone who is good when everything works well. Hitler could rant about world conquest as he had the best Army, and the technical genius of the Germans behind him. Short of that he would have been only another rabble-rouser. Stalin on the other hand had to contend with an army that largely hated him, which he kept under ruthless control with SMERSH. In the depths of defeat he could still direct Mao an overall strategy. It is now very clear, contrary to the Lattimores and Edgar Snows that Mao was effectively directed from Moscow (as the book Mao the Untold Story, based on Soviet archives affirms). What the anticommunists in the US had always suspected – that agents of influence continued to undermine Chiang Kai-Shek and thereby lose China, is more or less confirmed. But we’ll have to wait for hell to freeze over before we get any kind of apology from the fellow-travelers. If anyone answers the description of the Devil’s lieutenant, one Joseph D. may well be the genuine article.

  • “What the anticommunists in the US had always suspected – that agents of influence continued to undermine Chiang Kai-Shek and thereby lose China, is more or less confirmed.”

    There were Communists in the State Department and they had zero to do with Chiang losing. He lost because of his own gross incompetence and the corruption of the Kuomintang which often operated as a gigantic, and incompetent, criminal conspiracy. Chiang and his party received immense aid from the US during the War and it all went down an immense rat hole. By the end of the War, as demonstrated by their huge Operation Ichi-Go offensive of April to December 1944, the Japanese could still advance at will against Chiang’s armies that usually specialized in retreating in terror.

    As for Mao and Stalin they hated each other, and Stalin would not have wept a tear if Chiang had destroyed Mao.

  • Stalin may have hated Mao and used one faction against the other, as that was his default position with anyone. Mao on the other hand worshipped the Vodzh. He sent off a few millions to fight the Americans in Korea at the behest of Stalin and against the advice of many. The story of Chiang Kai-Shek’s incompetence and corruption has been seriously exaggerated by those who had to cover their tails. This is the same man who had to fight against Japanese collaborators, warlords and Communists for well on twenty years. True, the Nationalist could have given a better account in their fight against the Japanese, but they did fight. As opposed to the communists, who followed the Stalin line of letting the imperialists duke it out. The bad conscience of the communists stinks to this day. Whenever the Chicoms need to whip a little distraction by picking on the Japanese, they are caught in dilemma as all the newsreels from that era show fighting only between the Nationalists and Imperial Japan.

    We all know about the advanced weaponry the Americans supplied Chiang through the Tigers, little of which could match what the Japanese had. But what about the great transfer of weapons to Stalin for his firework display against the Kwangtung Army, (needless after the atom bombs), all of which found their way to Mao.

    It was the same story when South Vietnam fell, then it was all about their corruption and incompetence, nothing at all to do with the duplicity of the American left who did all they could to freeze out the ARVN of much needed supplies and air and moral support. No doubt the massive transfer of T-72s and Mig-23s by the Soviets to the NVA had no impact on the outcome. The bare-footed North won only by their grit and the genius of Giap.

  • Mao and Stalin never got along. Whatever cooperation they engaged in was a marriage of convenience only:

    http://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/10/world/stalin-mao-alliance-was-uneasy-newly-released-papers-show.html

    “He sent off a few millions to fight the Americans in Korea at the behest of Stalin and against the advice of many.”
    Most of Mao’s Generals would eventually come to view the Korean War as a mistake, but Mao did not get involved because of Stalin but rather because he feared an American controlled Korea on his doorstep. He assumed that the US, sooner or later, would back Chiang on an attempted return to the mainland. A mistake on his part, but that was why he went into Korea and not because Stalin asked him.

    “The story of Chiang Kai-Shek’s incompetence and corruption has been seriously exaggerated by those who had to cover their tails.”

    Nope, the corruption was absolutely stunning without any exaggeration. When General Wedemeyer was sent out to replace General Stillwell in later 44 he initially did not believe that the corruption was as bad as painted by Vinegar Joe. Within a few months he was sounding just like Stillwell on the issue of corruption.

    “This is the same man who had to fight against Japanese collaborators, warlords and Communists for well on twenty years.”

    And doing a miserable job at it. Against the Communists he held all the aces and he blew it. The Japanese were always a secondary consideration for Chiang since they got him immense supplies from America and they posed no threat to his rule. In regard to the warlords, he “solved” that problem by bribing them so they would pay lip service to his government.

    “but they did fight.”

    Barely. The war was always low on Chiang’s list of priorities. After Pearl Harbor he knew the Japanese were doomed, and his policy was to use American aid to solidify his reign.

    “Weall know about the advanced weaponry the Americans supplied Chiang through the Tigers, little of which could match what the Japanese had. But what about the great transfer of weapons to Stalin for his firework display against the Kwangtung Army, (needless after the atom bombs), all of which found their way to Mao.”

    The Flying Tigers and the American air effort in China was merely the tip of a huge iceberg of aid given to Chiang, all of it wasted. Most of Mao’s advance weaponry came from the US, courtesy of what he seized after Nationalist units surrendered which they did with appalling regularity during the Chinese Civil War. Thus was lost the 4.43 billion in aid, most of it military, supplied by the US to Chiang after World War II. The only way that the US could have saved Chiang would have been with five million US troops in China, a price which the US people were not going to pay.

  • Donald, Mao’s deference to Stalin is obvious in all the pictures. He went into a snit over Khrushchev’s Secret Speech as he had worshipped Stalin. The book I mentioned, based on newly available archives makes this clear. The overall impression is one of subservience to Moscow. This is no surprise to me as I usually put the worst constructions on the actions of communists. The positions long maintained by the anticommunists (of the 40s and 50s) to the ridicule of the Left, are substantiated when checked against the archives. I have to defer to you on Chiang’s military ineptitude, as I do not know much about it.

  • Mao hated Stalin at least from the time of the Chinese Civil War when Stalin attempted to oversee a peace which would leave Chiang in control of China. Mao’s disastrous trip to Moscow in 1949 underlined his hatred for Stalin and the Soviet Union.

    http://faroutliers.blogspot.com/2008/11/maos-humiliation-in-moscow-1949.html
    In public he still would mouth friendly platitudes, but when he was strong enough he seized upon the de-Stalinization policy of Khrushchev as a pretext to break with the Soviet Union.

Kitler Kitties

Sunday, May 29, AD 2011

 

Hattip to commenter Stephen E. Dalton who brought my attention to the phenomenon of cats that look like Hitler.  I love this!  Too often Hitler, murderous little jumped up thug, is elevated into being some sort of grand demonic personification of evil.  This is precisely the wrong way to remember the psychopath and the movement he led.  Far better to make him into a clownish figure and condemn him throughout history with laughter and ridicule. 

Continue reading...

13 Responses to Kitler Kitties

  • First time I really realized that Nazis had been humans was when some uncles started talking about my grandfather’s job in the military– he’d been a prison guard after WWII. One of the prisoners was an amazing artist is how it came up, I think. (I get the impression that the Nazis he’d been set to guard were the lowbies that had been forced in, and were just waiting for it to be proven; who knows how much that was cleaned up for young ears.)

    Before that, they were The Big Major Villains. The only live action thing I saw that made fun of them was Indiana Jones. Everything else, they were POWERFUL. Not a really good thing to emphasize when they also had some very impressive uniforms, you know? Mockery is much better; I remember one book made fun of their stupid looking marching style.

    The Downfall parodies are the shrieking Hitler with subtitles that people use for “Hitler hears about the new video game patch” stuff, yes?

  • Don, I’m glad I brought some heilarity into your life with Der Kitlers! The Producers is one of my favorite movies too. I also get a bang out of all those Downfall parodies. My favorite is the Bin Laden one.

  • I and the furhairs thank you Stephen! 🙂

  • In the “did-you-know-department,” Werner’s father, Otto, the famous German conductor, was born Jewish, converted to Catholicism and then back to Judaism toward the end of his life. Don, this belies your notion “once a Catholic always a Catholic.”

  • Bad example Joe. Poor Otto suffered two near miss assassination attempts during the rise of the Nazis and was mentally unbalanced thereafer. RIP to his tormented soul.

  • OK, Don, try these on for size”

    Tim Pawlenty — Raised Catholic, now evangelical.
    Sarah Palin — converted as young child to non-denominational Protestant.
    Steve Allen, George Carlin, Omar Sharif, Joyce Carol Oates — all become agnostic or atheist after raised as Catholics.
    And, many, many more…perhaps the most famous being, of course:
    MARTIN LUTHER.

    Well?

  • …why are you letting this guy derail the comments?

  • Sorry, didn’t mean to threadjack if you were referring to me. Don opened the door a crack on Klemperer. Mea culpa, fox.

  • Martin Luther was obsessed with Catholicism all of his life Joe, as any one can attest who has read his ravings, er, writings. He never left the Church he went to war with it, which is two separate things. Ditto as to the late unfunny sad man George Carlin.

    Pawlenty, Shariff and Oates aren’t done with their lives yet. Let’s see how things develop by the end.

    Sarah Palin-I don’t believe she was ever truly a Catholic Joe due to the negligence of her parents and therefore I would not count her as a fallen away Catholic. In any case her life is not done yet.

    As to Steve Allen he was a work in progress at the time of his death. Born a Catholic, he became a secular humanist after divorce ended his first marriage. Later in life he described himself as an involved Presbyterian. In his last interview before his life came to a sudden end from an auto accident he said the following:

    “I assume there’s a God because I can’t figure out how anything, much less the whole universe, could have gotten here with no cause at all.”

  • Foxfier, I have a soft spot in my heart and head for Joe the Agnostic, but you are correct that the thread needs to get back on the track. Back to Kitler Kitties for all further comments!

  • Don, your ability to thrust and parry is unrivaled. Joe the Agnostic; nice ring, almost as good as Joe the Plumber ; )

Von Galen Contra the Swastika

Sunday, March 20, AD 2011

In my first post on Blessed Clemens August Graf von Galen, which may be read here, we examined the life of this remarkable German bishop who heroically stood up to the Third Reich.  Today we examine the second of three sermons that he preached in 1941 which made him famous around the globe.  One week after his first breathtaking sermon against the Gestapo, my examination of which may be read here, he preached on July 20, 1941 a blistering sermon against the Nazis and their war on Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular.

Today the collection which I ordered for the inhabitants of the city of Münster is held in all the parishes in the diocese of Münster which have not themselves suffered war damage. I hope that through the efforts of the state and municipal authorities responsible and the brotherly help of the Catholics of this diocese, whose contributions will be administered and distributed by the offices of the Caritas, much need will be alleviated.

Charity, always a prime duty of Catholics.

Thanks be to God, for several days our city has not suffered any new enemy attacks from without. But I am distressed to have to inform you that the attacks by our opponents within the country, of the beginning of which I spoke last Sunday in St. Lambert’s, that these attacks have continued, regardless of our protests, regardless of the anguish this causes to the victims of the attacks and those connected with them. Last Sunday I lamented, and branded as an injustice crying out to heaven, the action of the Gestapo in closing the convent in Wilkinghege and the Jesuit residences in Munster, confiscating their property and possessions, putting the occupants into the street and expelling them from their home area. The convent of Our Lady of Lourdes in Frauen­strasse was also seized by the Gau authorities. I did not then know that on the same day, Sunday 13th July, the Gestapo had occupied the Kamilluskolleg in Sudmühle and the Benedictine abbey of Gerleve near Coesfeld and expelled the fathers and lay brothers. They were forced to leave Westphalia that very day.

The Nazi war on the Church is becoming more brazen in the midst of the War.

Continue reading...

7 Responses to Von Galen Contra the Swastika

Fighting the Evil Empire

Tuesday, February 16, AD 2010

Whether as a sign of intellectual curiosity or general aimlessness, I often find myself reading about random subjects late at night. The other night, I found myself reading about Finland in World War II.

It’s an interesting subject. Finland was invaded by the USSR in 1939, at pretty much the same time they occupied the Baltic states and split Poland with Germany.

In the Winter War of 1939-1940, the Finns successfully slowed the Soviet advance, and eventually the USSR agreed to a peace treaty. Finland was forced to cede the parts of her territory she had not yet won back from the Soviets, but 90% of the country’s territory remained intact. This itself was an amazing military feat for such a small country. It’s also interesting in that they essentially out-Russianed the Russians. Just as Napoleon’s and Hitler’s armies bogged down and froze while trying to invade Russia, the Soviets bogged down and froze while trying to attack Finland, which was even better versed in winter warfare than Russia.

Continue reading...

51 Responses to Fighting the Evil Empire

  • Finland was fighting a just war from beginning to end.

  • For Finland, it was either ally with Germany, or revert to being another Russian province.

    I applaud what the Finns did in beating back an atheist regime.

    I’m curious as to how Finland resolved their “war” with Britain?

  • There are also parallels here with Franco’s Spain.

  • I see absolutely no parallels whatsoever.

  • There are if you consider that Franco received assistance in his war efforts from Germany and Italy. Much to the chagrin of the Axis powers Franco didn’t return the favor. The parallel being that Franco fought a just a war while having bad allies who waged an unjust war.

  • That would be the *only* parallel.

    Franco was fighting for the freedoms of the Spanish people against atheist enemies that were determined to “transform” Spain.

    /begin sarcasm of Henry K. connecting Finland’s war with Soviet Russia to Franco’s war against the atheistic “Republican” regime.

    Just like Obama and Rahm Emmanuel want to “transform” America into another European socialist state.

    /end sarcasm;

  • Franco was fighting for the freedoms of the Spanish people against atheist enemies that were determined to “transform” Spain.

    Describing Franco as fighting for the freedoms of the Spanish people is a bit much, I think.

  • Franco was fighting for the freedoms of the Spanish people against atheist enemies that were determined to “transform” Spain.

    Not much unlike Finland was, right? Granted it was civil war rather than war against an invading army, but invading army in Finland was also knee deep in supporting one or more of the SCW factions.

  • Wars do make strange friends but I am not sure the lines are ever clear. the USSR was allied with Nazi Germany until it was decided that Leninist Communism was less masculine that National Socialist Communism. Then the evil special interests within our borders who financed both the Nazis and the Soviets decided that German Communism should be painted as right-wing fascism and the Soviet Communism should be painted as Democratic Socialism so that the USA would become the ally of the Soviets against the Nazis who were destined to lose and then the USA and the USSR could divide Europe and eventually the USA/USSR European alliance would become the USSA. Of course all this happened before Obama was born otherwise they just might have tried him from the beginning. 🙂

    Nothing new under the sun.
    Wasn’t Finland ruled by Catholic Sweden before and after the Protestant Heresy? I also think Sweden ruled Finland until she was conquered by the Russians, Orthodox Czars not atheist Leninists.

    Sadly, it is unlikely that nation would be able to mount a successful, just war against such fierce foes today. For that matter I don’t know if we have what it takes to liberate the world from the Axis powers either.

    Rome died due to diminishing warrior capacity which was preceded by the moral debasement of her young men by effete Greeks – sounds like a typical college campus today, especially where ROTC is not welcome. I wonder if that is why the president wants his own ‘civilian corpsmen’ (pronounced CORPSE-MEN).

  • RL,

    I don’t know what SCW is.

    BA,

    That or be executed for practicing Catholicism. Religious freedom.

  • “Franco was fighting for the freedoms of the Spanish people against atheist enemies that were determined to ‘transform’ Spain.”

    Franco’s rebellion was an effort to preserve “traditional” Spain, which was rather loosely defined inasmuch as his coalition included both the agri-traditionalist Carlists and the more revolutionary Falange, with a broad swath of rightist elements in between. As far as the Falange goes, he pretty well neutered it before the end of the war, and it was a mere adjunct to his government. It was to his great fortune that the Republic was even more fractious than the Nationalist coalition.

    If you had told Franco that he was fighting for “freedom,” he probably would have blinked in utter incomprehension. I guess to the extent good Spaniards were free of the Reds and anarchists, yes, he was fighting for that kind of freedom–freedom *from*. He was fighting for a Spain rooted in its traditional past, including the Church, the monarchy and what was left of her overseas possessions. Which is why Hitler’s adventures interested him not at all, even when Nazi Germany looked to be victorious.

  • Say all you want about Franco and some of it may even be true but he supported the Church and killed Communists. At the time, in that context he was the choice to make. It is sad when we have to choose between the lesser of two or more evils but fallen man is likely to put us in that position often.

    Sort of like picking progressive Republicans who want to kill babies despite what the platform says against progressive Democrats who want to kill babies because that is what their platform says.

  • AK,

    Yes, Finland was under Swedish rule and then under Russian rule.

    Through Russian efforts to engender friendly relations with their new Finnish lands, the Russians allowed greater autonomy and widespread use of Finnish (to undermine Swedish).

    This eventually backfired since the Finns actualized a greater sense of nationhood that resulted in independence around 1907, with permanent independence after WWII.

    Rome also died due to abortion. Since many Roman couples saw it as an inconvenience, infanticide rose. Also, male Romans didn’t want to have sons since Patricide began to rise as well. So throw that in with no desire for baby girls and their moral debasement of those children that did “survive” and there you have it, Blue state New York and California, I mean, Rome.

  • Dale,

    We are in agreement then. Franco was fighting for freedom from his atheistic adversaries.

    Franco was also clever enough to sideline the Carlists to the point of making them part of the furniture instead of the process.

  • Here’s to eliminating Communism in all of its manifestations! (raising a bottle of Shiner brew)

  • Within the last week or two, I assured someone (who claimed that conservatives were using rhetoric that suggested they were likely to start a coup) that I’d never heard a conservative compare Obama to the Spanish communists and anarchists in the ’30s. I guess I need to be more careful what I say…

    Two thinks I think it’s important to keep in mind:

    – While I have no doubt in my mind that Franco was preferable to the socialist/communist/anarchist forces on the Republican side of the Spanish Civil War, that’s hardly a ringing endorsement, nor should we make it so. Sure, he defended the Church rather than persecuting it, but to list the Christ Rock line, “You’re supposed to do that.”

    – While Obama’s inside clique would doubtless like to see the US looking much more like modern European social democracies (and I think that would be a bad thing), those social democracies are nothing like as despicable and oppressive the Spanish Republicans. Sure, I think they’re too government heavy, but I think they fall within the range of things which one might in good conscience advocate, while the Republican cause clearly didn’t.

  • Say all you want about Franco and some of it may even be true but he supported the Church and killed Communists.

    He also killed a lot of Catholics.

    I’m having visions, however, of another 100+ comment thread that has nothing to do with the original post, so I’ll leave it there.

  • Tito,

    You bring up a great point re: Roman abortions. It is amazing that the Republic that razed Carthage for her child-sacrifice and salted the land to ensure that the abominable practice did not spread.

    Imagine that the great liberator, honest-broker and moral backbone of the world would raze an entire civilization to prevent the sacrifice of children only to turn around and begin the same practice albeit for convenience and not direct sacrifice to devils. It is a good thing no one else would be so stupid to do that. Wait. Where am I?

  • Darwin,

    To make you feel better I was mocking Henry K. for connecting Finland’s war with Soviet Russia to Franco’s war against the atheistic “Republican” regime.

    I was being sarcastic.

    In no way does Obama’s administration resemble that of the God-hating Spanish Republicans.

  • BA,

    And leave all the fun of dissecting Finnish Nationalism contra Soviet Expansionism!

    Or how about the only time in history that a democracy declared war on another democracy, ie, Britain declaring war on Finland!

    Gerald Naus may even make a guest comment appearance.

    😉

  • SCW – Spanish Civil War.

    Why was Franco’s betrayal of the Carlists seen as a good thing? In my mind, it was one his greater faults.

  • BA,

    Franco killing Catholics is like shooting fish in the barrel to get to the crabs.

    By default 99% of Spaniards were *Catholic* by baptism alone in Civil War Spain.

  • RL,

    I didn’t say it was a good thing.

    I was just “showing off” my Spanish Civil War knowledge.

    I myself think it of a very bad thing indeed.

    Imagine how Spain would have turned out if the Carlists had any influence at all by the end of the war, *sigh*.

  • Tito,

    To make you feel better I was mocking Henry K. for connecting Finland’s war with Soviet Russia to Franco’s war against the atheistic “Republican” regime.

    Henry’s comment wasn’t out of line. I thought I demonstrated that. Parallel doesn’t indicate same. Finland was fighting an atheistic republic too. ironically enough, that athiestic republic had the most influence on Spain’s atheistic republic. There’s another parallel.

  • DC,

    I suspect that modern social democracies in Europe are considerably less oppressive than those envisioned by the perpetrators at the end of WWII. I suspect that Commies intended more Soviet-style governments than the namby-pamby nanny-state welfare of Europe today. It is a ruse, the nice social democracies like the UK, Sweden and the USA are designed to get us used to servitude so we will be happy in a global feudal order. You know those nice scientific dictatorships that medicate and indoctrinate you into being a happy slave.

    Makes you wonder why the Finnish and the Spanish bothered fighting for liberation at all.

  • RL,

    You have to admire the Finns though.

    A small republic of barely 3-4 million fought to a standstill the then 70 million strong (or more) Soviet Empire.

    Put it in the context that the USSR was also able to absorb Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia, in addition to half of Poland and a sliver of Romania.

    Contrast that to what Finland did and it is utterly amazing.

  • At the risk of starting another bizarre tangent:

    You bring up a great point re: Roman abortions. It is amazing that the Republic that razed Carthage for her child-sacrifice and salted the land to ensure that the abominable practice did not spread. Imagine that the great liberator, honest-broker and moral backbone of the world would raze an entire civilization to prevent the sacrifice of children only to turn around and begin the same practice albeit for convenience and not direct sacrifice to devils.

    I seem to be bad at guaging when people are being arch in this thread, but if this is meant seriously, I’m aware of no evidence that the Roman Republic razed Carthage because of its tendency towards infant sacrifice. The impetus behind Carthago delenda est was more driven by the first two Punic wars, and in particular the lingering memory of Hannibal’s invasion of Italy. Further, exposure of infants was an accepted practice in the Roman Republic back to the earliest days.

    I’m certainly an admirer of the Roman Republic as seen in sources like Polybius, but at a moral level, they were distinctly pagan in their outlook and practices.

  • The little I know about the razing of Carthage is that both Darwin and AK are correct. That or I’ve watched one too many skewed PBS specials on the subject.

    Yes, the Romans practiced infanticide for quite a while, though it may have increased towards the end of its epoch.

    If not, it definitely contributed to Romes decline combined with other factors.

  • I’ll take responsibility for the bizarre tangents, thank you very much.

    I have no source to site for what I wrote above. I think I heard it on radio from the mouth of a priest who was also an historian. But I have no facts to back it up.

    It does make some sense though. Romans were certainly pagans but they seemed to have a deeper insight into the natural law than the barbarian pagans and event he middle-eastern fertility cults. After all, God had Joshua raze the people of Palestine before Israel entered the promised land and yet he allowed the Macabbes to call on Rome to come to the aid of Israel.

    Additionally exposure of infants may have been tolerated and even accepted but that is a more practical discarding of a life rather than a willful sacrifice to demons. I am not excusing child exposure, yet for a non-Christianized pagan society it is understandable and I can see how they would be horrified by sacrificing children to ‘gods’.

    Then again, I may not know what I am talking about.

    To try to bring this back I am fairly confident that modern Finland has gone the way of Carthage and Rome. Abortions are provided ‘free’ in their nationalized ‘health care’ system. Maybe they will be razed soon.

  • I thought the Spanish always had the same liberties as we did? 😉

  • I’m aware of no evidence that the Roman Republic razed Carthage because of its tendency towards infant sacrifice.

    Your the student of the classics. I think he is referring to a thesis advanced by G.K. Chesterton. I cannot remember in which work.

  • BA,

    As of this post we’re about 67 comments short of a 100.

    See you guys later, I have a class to attend to.

  • Both sides in the Spanish Civil War engaged in sickening atrocities during the war. Both sides were none too choosy in regard to who they accepted aid from. Both sides aimed to establish authoritarian regimes, outside of the Basque Republicans on the side of the Republic, and some of the Catholic groups on the side of the Nationalists. The big difference between the two sides was the massive persecution that Catholics suffered in the Republic, outside of the Basque controlled areas.

  • So you’re saying that war is hell and total war is totally hellish.

  • Spanish civil wars certainly tend to be hellish AK. They make our Civil War look like a very well behaved military exercise by comparison. Having said that, I have always found the Spanish Civil War of the last century endlessly fascinating. All that was best and worst in Spain was on full display. Jose Maria Gironella’s magnificent trilogy of novels on the War are an excellent starting point for anyone wishing to understand the war and why Spaniards fought each other so savagely: Cypresses Believe in God, One Million Dead and Peace After War. They are the best novels I have ever read and left me with a much deeper understanding of the War and of Spain.

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1586170465/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=999741120X&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=171T10TQDJRJMH3NJZHR

  • Chesterton made that argument about child sacrifice in Carthage in The Everlasting Man. As usual, Chesterton was a good writer and a poor historian. Horror over Carthaginian child sacrifice played absolutely no role in Rome’s desire to obliterage Carthage.

  • Thanks for clearing that up. OK, so Rome simply razed Carthage because Rome did not want to have to go back and fight them again and again and again. It seems as if North Africa has a war resiliency. I suppose if Jefferson had finished the Barbary Pirates once and for all we would not be dealing with piracy in the same seas today.

    The war in North America of the 1860s (I have yet to be convinced that it was a civil war) was fairly brutal. Many consider it the first war of the pre-nuclear modern age. I am not as familiar with the Spanish Civil War (I am convinced that it was a civil war), but I understand it was extremely brutal. It makes sense that atrocities would occur during a mutli-faction civil conflict then a conflict between the organized armies of two countries (if’n y’all don’t recognize the CSA as a separate country, then at least concede that there were only two sides to the conflict).

  • AK, the organized armies on both sides committed the bulk of the atrocities in the Spanish Civil War. Mass executions, with only the quickest of drum head military trials, if that, was the rule for both sides. Most Spaniards on all sides were convinced that the only way to bring peace was to physically eliminate their adversaries. The Spanish Civil War is an object lesson of what unchecked political hatreds can lead to.

  • I wouldn’t go so far as saying that both sides committed equal amounts of atrocities. The Republicans by far committed more heinous acts in depth and volume with an exceeding amount of enthusiasm.

    According to argueably the best Christian historian alive, Warren H. Carroll, comparing the atrocities of the Nationalists on par with those of the Republicans is a gross error when conveyed against the reputed facts.

    Remember that the overwhelming amount of history written on the Spanish Civil War were written by the Republicans. Which is ironic since it generally known that the victors are the ones who write history.

    So when Donald says that “both” sides committed atrocities, I hope that he was saying it rhetorically and not of equal number and depth.

  • Tito

    While I support the Franco side of the civil war, and indeed, own coins of Franco and books written by people who were involved with the war on his side, obviously both sides did commit grave evils. Moreover, Warren Carroll is not arguably the best Christian historian alive; he is far from the best, in fact. He often gets history wrong — look to his discussion on SAINT Photius (yes, he is a Saint in the Catholic Church) and look to any relevant modern historical treatise on the Photian Schism — he shows his rather shallow approach quite well when you compare the two.

    Give me Christopher Dawson any day (alas he is not alive). And if you want a living historian, check out Eamon Duffy!

  • Christopher Dawson is the Ratzinger of Christian history. I need to put the book down and digest what I just read. He is very good and is prominent in my miniature library.

    Eamon Duffy is on my Amazon list of books to buy and I look forward reading his works!

  • In regard to the Spanish Civil War Tito, if you take into account the post war executions, which were massive, by the Nationalists, the body count of the Nationalists was higher. I am sympathetic to the Nationalist cause due to the demonic anti-Catholicism of most of their opponents and the fact that most of the leaders who wielded power within the Republic were intent on setting up a totalitarian state of one sort or another. However, the Nationalist leadership were not saints. They set up a fairly squalid dictatorship, engaged in massive atrocities and showed almost no mercy to their defeated adversaries.

  • The best, and I think most objective, historian of the Spanish Civil War and the Franco regime is Stanley Payne.

    https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=stanley+g.+payne

    Warren Carroll’s The Last Crusade is not a bad book on the first year of the Spanish Civil War. He is obviously completely in sympathy with the Nationalists, but his work is a useful corrective to many other historians of the War who are completely in sympathy with the forces of the Left.

    http://www.amazon.com/Last-Crusade-Warren-H-Carroll/dp/0931888670/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1266418125&sr=8-1

  • What Donald said about the post-war executions. Franco was not merciful. That his enemies would have been no more merciful had they triumphed is no absolution.

    Alas, it is highly likely that the executions were popular with the Nationalist population at large. A grandson of Spanish Nationalists was an exchange student at my high school, and was delighted to give me the Nationalist perspective on the Civil War. He mentioned that the Republicans had brutally murdered his great uncle and, IIRC, some other members of his family. The exchange student still hated the Republicans, flipping a picture of “La Pasionaria” the bird.

  • “The exchange student still hated the Republicans, flipping a picture of “La Pasionaria” the bird.”

    I would have joined him in that Dale! “La Pasionaria” was a real piece of work. By the end of the Civil War almost all families in Spain, including Franco’s, had a member of the family who had been murdered by the other side. Most of the victims executed by the Nationalists probably had committed hideous crimes. The true injustice of course is that no such justice was ever visited on the Nationalist victors in this world.

  • Excellent links.

    I like reading objective history. Especially when it is on a favorite subject of mine like the Spanish Civil War.

  • My wife is going to be upset with y’all because I won’t take responsibility for all the books that I just put in my Amazon cart that y’all referenced.

  • Pingback: Finlandia Hymn « The American Catholic

Vista Users Rejoice!

Tuesday, October 20, AD 2009

With the release of Windows 7, we PC users can only hope that Gates & Co got it right this time and that we can kick Vista, the worst computer operating system devised by fallen man, to the gutter.  Here is a good article setting forth some of the more annoying features of Vista, and here is an article which explains why Vista never was accepted by many PC owners.  Windows 7 seems to be getting good reviews from the testers, but we will all be able to find out on our own soon enough.

Continue reading...

9 Responses to Vista Users Rejoice!

  • That’s why I’m a Mac gal… Apple recently released a new OS called Snow Leopard; anyone out there tried it?

  • love the line “even Hitler had problems with Vista”

  • Hitler was also a eugenicist and the Gates family is a very pro “population control” family. Makes you think. Unfortunately Apple supports so-called “gay marriage”. It is becoming increasingly difficult to purchase from companies that are not engaged in political agendas that are against Church teaching.

    On the bright side – I never got Vista and heard nothing good about it. I’m glad that MS responded to consumers and ‘fixed the glitch’. I wonder if anyone is amazed at how in a (relatively)free market the consumer is the ultimate arbiter of what gets produced. Sadly the American consumer isn’t so concerned with products being made here in the USA and by companies that are not if favor of killing babies or endorsing same-sex families.

  • “Sadly the American consumer isn’t so concerned with products being made here in the USA and by companies that are not in favor of killing babies or endorsing same-sex families.”

    So what are we supposed to do Knight… toss out our computers and shut down this blog until a new Bill Gates- or Steve Jobs-like computer genius who also happens to be a devout Catholic and 100 percent pro-life comes along to start a new company? Good luck with that.

  • I’m going to have to agree with Elaine on this one… what can you do?

    I never had this operating system issue. I keep the one I have on the computer I buy until I buy I a new computer. I’ve never once upgraded operating systems. I have Vista on my laptop and it’s worked out for me fairly well.

  • Haven’t tried Snow Leopard yet. No rush, since it was more of a streamlining update.

    I’ve had two great ‘conversions’ in my life. The first was to a Mac. 🙂

  • I wasn’t suggesting a boycott of computers. I was merely lamenting the situation. We would not be engaged in this discourse if I wasn’t running Windows XP on my Gateway PC. I am also not suggesting that we are cooperating with evil by purchasing products made by companies that have intentions contradictory to our faith. Of course, if there was a viable alternative it would be incumbent on us to use it. I don’t think there is and that is what makes me sad.

    Were we as a people more faithful then we would have a better option. I hope I didn’t intimate that I expected someone to do soemthing about computer operating systems. We have to pick our battles. I think our battle is to ensure that our government stops sanctioning and these days promoting the evil of child murder through pregnancy abortion. When we succeed in that and also convincing our American culture to become a culture of life then it goes to follow that creative human beings will develop PC operating systems that are not only superior to what we have now but also companies that do not promote the horror of abortion or the destruction of the traditional family.

    Joe, I too do not upgrade my OS; however, I have refrained from purchasing a new machine in order to avoid Vista or paying for the downgrade to Windows XP. Perhaps when 7 is released and the reports are favorable then I may purchase a new machine with the new OS and while I know that I am supporting the profits of a man who is opposed to my beleifs I will still make the purchase because the benefits of a computer enable me to do more good (God willing) then my contribution to Gates’ evil actions in ratio.

    Please forgive me if my post was poorly worded.

  • Speaking of Hitler’s problems with Vista, there is now a You Tube channel devoted entirely to parodies of this scene from “Downfall”… most of them depict Hitler either 1) ranting about the shortcomings of some video or online gaming system, or 2) as a current political figure ranting about a recent defeat or setback.

2 Responses to It's Only A Game!