Posted on 06/08/2007 9:02:50 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator
"Since the Iraq War, hostility to the G-8 and globalization has become a central theme of new Nazi ideology. According to the neo-Nazis, the “Judeo-American” West is locked in a struggle with so-called “autochthonous” peoples the world over. In neo-Nazi terminology — and in keeping with the “blood and soil” criteria of classical Nazism — “autochthonous” peoples could as well be the indigenous Amerindian populations of Bolivia or Peru as, say, the (supposedly equally “indigenous”) ethnic Germans of South Tyrol or Germany itself. In terms not unlike those of left-wing “anti-imperialists,” the neo-Nazis militate in favor of the “freedom of peoples” and against a globalization that they present as an expression of American imperialism."
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalmavens.com ...
None of this makes sense, but, what does? I will stick with the Global Civil Society interpretation even though other clueless groups are appearing near the razor wire barriers.
Implication: If you’re against One World Government you’re a Nazi.
Hogwash!
Yet liberals are ultimately Hegelian idealists, whether they ascribe historical evolution to a "world soul" or the class struggle, and Hegelianism teaches that human history is teleological, flowing in one direction from the alpha point of the past to the omega point at "the end of history," and the term "neanderthal" suggests that one is violating this flow by refusing to "keep up with the times."
Do I need a PhD. in European philosophy to get your point?
A lot of us are opposed to globalization but “us” don’t want to be seen with the geniuses wearing clown suits.
The Omega Point is Teilhard’s. Hegel never used Fichte’s thesis-antithesis synthesis terminology although he is given credit for laying the groundwork for every modern state from communist to fascist and is often mentioned as a sidebar to Nazis even though he knew nothing of Nazis. He was not teleological but process-oriented.
"from communist to fascist" is like saying from "East to South-East"
The communists sought (and still seek) oligarchic ownership of the means of production. The archetypcal fascists (Mussolini, Hitler) sought oligarchic control of the means of production. They are as different as chalk and ... chalk.
“Do I need a PhD. in European philosophy to get your point?”
lol
With the utmost delecation and self-abasement, I dare to posit that the ontological basis for the group “neo-Nazis” is subsumed within the category, “Hotsy-totsy a New Born Nazi” found in Nietzche’s “Beyond the Roller Dome” vis a vis the ubermenschen metaphor, an infintesimal paradigm shown largely in diverse specimens inter alia “Los Tres Amigos” assuming ipso facto a priori atha ouya rea aa bookisba eebdwa.
As a corollary, examine . . .
Point is . . . Hegel wasn’t interested in either communism or fascism. Not bothering with Nominalistic generalizing, he was on a different thread althgether; and most have not bothered to read his writings, hoping to pick up a stance from one of the History of Philosophy texts by someone who also doesn’t ‘get’ Hegel.
The best opposition demonstrators that money can buy. If you want power you must first control the actions of the opposition.
The best opposition demonstrators that money can buy. If you want power you must first control the actions of the opposition.
Hogwash!
You're misunderstanding my point completely.
Pagan nationalists, whether left or right, are basically polygenists (ie, they deny that the entire human race is the offspring of one original couple) and henotheists (ie, they deny there is One G-d for everyone and believe instead in as many different "gxds" as there are nations, each national "gxd" being supposedly equally valid. The basis of the Jewish (and ultimately the chr*stian) worldview is that the human race is a unit sprung from a single ancestor created by (and owing worship to) a single G-d. If this is what you call "one world government," then you must be a polytheist.
The first people I ever heard raising the warning against "one world government" and "one world religion" were Fundamentalist Protestants. Yet what they were warning against was a great false world order and false religion which they said must come before the triumph of the One G-d. After this there would still be a one world religion and a "one world government" (if that's what you want to call the Millenium), but these would be good because they would be from G-d. It was only the "counterfeits" that were evil, not the real thing.
Some people however have gone so far as to imply that there will never be an end to history at which the One G-d will be universally recognized and His laws obeyed. This is what I call "pagan nationalism," and it's the same whether it emanates from Nazis or Communists.
Ironically, the unity of the human race under G-d is instictively recognized by all to be somehow tied to Jewish separateness. This is why all those "nationalists" and opponents of "race-mixing" hate Jewish nationalism and want the Jewish nation destroyed by intermarriage. Without the distinct Jewish Nation to tie humanity to the Objective G-d all the nations would wander off on their own and create their own worldviews, with no connection whatsoever between them. These worldviews would be manmade and subjective, as opposed to Heavenly and objective.
Make no mistake--"world religion" and "world government" under any other authority than the One True G-d would be an evil that would dwarf all previous ones (and such a theing was presaged at the building of the Tower of Babel). However, eventually at the end of history mankind will be One under the One G-d. Please do not confuse this G-dly eschaton with the plots of humanists and occultists.
PS: Everyone who believes his religion is true and should be shared by all is theoretically an advocate of "one world religion!"
Well, as a Catholic, I disagree that a “distinct Jewish Nation” is needed to “tie humanity to the Objective G-d.” I believe that the Roman Catholic Church serves that function in the world in this era. But I don’t want to get into a religious debate with you. I just don’t think fringe groups like the ones you describe are really worth worrying about. While I concede such people exist, I fail to see any influence they have on the society at large. A far greater danger are the secular-modernist, humanist One Worlders. A benevolent world government, like you say, can only be founded by God, and that will only happen in His good time. But the secular-modernists want to create one under their own image and they have vastly more influence in the world today than some wild-eyed neo-Nazi wackjobs.
Not all secular humanists are one worlders.
Theoretically any religion (whichever happens to be the true one) could serve this purpose, but in actual fact multi-ethnic religions like chr*stianity and islam always fall apart over ethnic bickering. Look at Pat Buchanan and the Mexicans--theoretically they are co-religionists, but in practice they are represent rival tribes with rival tribal deities. This is why G-d chose not a multi-ethnic religion, philosophy, or organization as His witness in the world but rather a specific people. You can read this argument in more detail here.
But I don’t want to get into a religious debate with you. I just don’t think fringe groups like the ones you describe are really worth worrying about. While I concede such people exist, I fail to see any influence they have on the society at large. A far greater danger are the secular-modernist, humanist One Worlders. A benevolent world government, like you say, can only be founded by God, and that will only happen in His good time. But the secular-modernists want to create one under their own image and they have vastly more influence in the world today than some wild-eyed neo-Nazi wackjobs.
As time has passed Leftism has become more and more anti-universalist and ever more nationalist. It started with the Communist "wars of national liberation" the Russians used to support but it's gone way beyond that now. Leftism is now all about indigenous people who supposedly grow organically out of their native soil (unlike big bad white people who are "foreign devils"). The entire Mexican recidivist claim against the US is based on a mystical nationalism not that different from the ideology of WWII-era Japan. I believe I linked my definitive vanity on this topic in my first post to this thread. Did you take a look at that? The whole thing is about the difference between universalistic/hippie "first world" Leftism and near-fascist "third world" Leftism.
Now it may be that there are elitists who believe that Third World nationalism can be manipulated to serve a certain purpose and then cast aside, but I think the genie is out of the bottle. The "oppressed" (which includes not only non-white nations but many white ones, as well as women and homosexuals) have been stuffed so full of "pride" that they are never going to surrender it. Any forces that think they have merely raised the self-esteem of the oppressed to par level so they can be merged with the "oppressors" in a single entity are very naive.
As an example of how much into nationalism the Left has gotten lately, take a look at the various white nationalisms they support. The most obvious example are the Irish, but there are also "left wing" nationalist movements for the other Celtic nations, for the Basques, and even for the French Canadians of Quebec. The contemporary Left tears down American patriotism and nationalism, but it builds up the patriotism and nationalism of all these other groups. The United States of America has become the "Jews" to the current crop of Leftist Nazis, and why? Because the United States is an "artificial" nation rather than an "organic" one. The Left seems to actually believe that every other people in the world literally crawled out of the soil of their "sacred motherlands!" The fact is that the only human being to ever "spring from the soil" is Adam, and everyone else is an immigrant, no matter how long they have been settled.
I am sick and tired of fanatical nationalists for Mexico, Africa, Ireland, China, and Quebec tearing down the United States because of their false pagan concept of "autochthony." That is why I expose the fanatical chauvinism that calls itself "leftwing" simply because it isn't American. (Karl Marx, ironically, has been transformed into nothing but a mystical nationalist icon for "oppressed nations.")
Have you ever heard of the Scottish National Liberation Army? It is an avowedly Maoist organization that advocates Scottish independence (independence being irreconcilable with one-worldism). Not only that, they have stated their intention to literally run every "English" person out of the country. Now that is a chauvinism worthy of any Nazi, considering that the Scots are white. Furthermore, when one considers that the Angles were in Scotland a hundred years before the arrival of the Scots from Ireland, they are exposed as ignorant as well as chauvinistic.
I hope you will see why I have long insisted on exposing the hypocritical fascism of leftist movements. And unfortunately, conservative attacks on the "one-worldism" of the Left do nothing but give their hypocritical fascism cover.
I apologize for the disjointed nature of this post. As a PS, I must say that in my experience Catholics are late-comers to the war against "one world religion," this being primarily the creation of Fundamentalist Protestants. As a matter of fact, I doubt if any Catholic living under Constantine or Theodosius would have seen anything wrong with a "one world government and one world religion." He would have probably advocated it!
Again, I absolutely will not get wrapped up in an endless religious debate here. I strongly think that the end result of the secular and liberal ideologies prevalent today is secular one-world government. This is how it’s trending. Liberals aren’t really nationalists; they’re
“multiculturalists.” The big elitist liberals I mean. The rank-and-file and the folks in the movements you describe who call themselves left-wing radicals may very well feel otherwise, but they aren’t the movers and shakers of the international elites. The liberal elite support cultural movements and nationalisms with the potential to damage or undermine western civilization. It’s about a conscious or unconscious dislike of western civilization more than anything else. And what do they hope to replace western civilization with. A world ruled by the UN or something like it, which would be ruled by themselves.
This is simply demonization and ridicule of those who won’t drink the koolaid.
It's a demonization of Nazis, Communists, and anarchists.
And again, for the record, the only "world government" I advocate is the Kingdom of G-d.
Besides, Mexico, being Catholic, could reasonably be labelled part of "western civilization" (certainly Quebec and Scotland are), yet the Left promotes hypernationalism for them anyway.
As I said on the other thread, Third World Leftism (miltiantly self-assertive) and First World Leftism (self-hating) have become so different from one another than one must wonder if they are even the same ideology any more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.