Posted on 11/13/2008 8:40:57 AM PST by fightinJAG
Economy in a freefall. Political rhetoric. An apathetic electorate dismayed by the slide of their country into irrelevence. Theological liberalism. Doctrinal indifference.
America, 2008?
No. Germany, just before electing Adolf Hitler to lead their country, with the apparent support of the majority of those who considered themselves Christians.
We're rereading a book []by Erwin Lutzer []. In it Lutzer looks at the holocaust and the rise of Hitler and asks the question: where was the Church? This book is a fascinating read, particularly in this time of economic upheaval and election year rhetoric.
[snip]
Did you know that Hitler was elected to power through a democratic process? He only became a dictator after he had risen to power through the voting process. And the people elected him in large part because they were convinced he would fix the deteriorating economy and restore Germany to the prominence and prosperity it had once enjoyed. Writes Lutzer:
...he would give the appearance of being one of the masses, but in reality he would be quite another...At times he could be charming and forgiving...Privately (and sometimes publicly) he prided himself in his honesty, yet often he reveled in his abilty to deceive. "The German people must be misled if the support of the masses is required," he mused.
And
Hitler holds a fascination for us because his dictatorship enjoyed such wide support of the people. Perhaps never in history was a dictator so well liked. He had the rare gift of motivating a nation to want to follow him. Communist leaders such as Lenin or Mao Tse-tung rose to power through revolutions that cost millions of lives; consequently they were hated by the masses. Hitler attracted not only the support of the middle class but also of university students and professors.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.worship.com ...
Anyone can slap on the "Christian" nametag. But electing someone like Hitler just because they wanted a fatter wallet shows that their fruit was rotten. (And those in the True Vine don't produce rotten fruit.)
Same goes for the "Christians" who voted for Obama because they wanted "change".
I agree!
I am pretty concerned about the similarities in the growth of govt and it's involvement in all aspects of our lives. The trump card is our military. If our govt becomes authoritarian I don't believe the military will view it's authority as constitutional.
This is a homosexual agenda article.
Actual christians were already a minority in Germany.
Hitler killed the real christians in germany.
Hitler himself was a total pagan
Every single message that Hitler preached from the early twenties until the mid-30s...was about blame and how he’d fix all the problems. Nationalist socialists means something...because they have to use national funds to repair and fix the entire state. The war was actually part of the repair to the nation in the end...which is the peak of Hitler’s entire dream.
I think the tern “National Socialist” was to differentiate themselves from “international socialists”; i.e. communists. They wanted to put a German face on socialism and say it was what was good for the German people. That is what Nationalism, as a movement, is about - exhortation of national spirit.
Hilter was elected with a small percentage. They were liberal Christians or as we say today, piss poor Christians.
That was a month after he was appointed Chancellor, however.
Strange but true the Illinois state lottery pick three numbers came up 666 the day after obama was so called elected.
read later
Also, 5 of the 7 ringleaders of the communist takeover of München in 1919 were Jews. That certainly gave credence to Hitler's assertions they were enemies of the country.
You’re absolutely right about the over-simplicity.
I’m currently reading Patrick J. Buchanan’s book HITLER, CHURCHILL, AND THE UNNECESSARY WAR. It’s a very good read and fully documented.
For a whole year after WW1 Churchill and England kept the food embargo against Germany starving the populace. The Allied Powers via the Versailles Treaty instilled enormous enmity (justifiably) among the Germans. Of all the villians in WW1 most historians hold Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm II the least culpable.
It was the folly of President Wilson’s “Self-Determination” policy that made such a mess of the Balkanized world we have today.
Good point because we must remember that Hitler was bad for everyone and not just the Jews.
We should be concerned about the direction of our country, but comparisons to Hitler will overexcite the alarms and then we’ll be glad that Obama is just a hard core leftist.
Hitler in Germany (and the German people) saw Stalin’s genocide of 7 million Ukrainians for no other reason than the Ukrainian farmers wanted to maintain private property rights. Stalin in the USSR was also a real threat. The USSR is so close to Germany in physical proximity it’s similar to NYC and Pittsburgh.
So, when the German people saw the wantan genocide of the Ukrainians and knew of the Stalin death camps in the USSR (Stalin, for the record, may have killed as many as 60 million of his own people)...
Hitler was a historical anomaly. Stalin was made into a hero by the U.S. movie industry of the WWII period...
Hollywood supported WWII because we were fighting alongside “Papa” Joe Stalin - even though we knew he was more genocidal than Hitler.
So, it’s an ugly business looking at history as it actually was and not how we’d like it to be.
The moral to my message? Don’t compare Obama to Hitler because when you find out he’s Stalin’s little brother you’ll breath a sigh of relief and say “At least he’s not Hitler.”
Thanks voters for electing Obama, we got our work cut out for us.
Thanks decrepit Republicans, you elected a despicable turncoat who hates conservatism even more than illegal immigration.
Well, FREEPS, lets get to work.
And at that point I hope we have the courage to use them as the The Founders foresaw.
Libs conveniently forget NAZI meant National Socialist German Workers’ Party.
You should read this on Atlas Shrugs
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/
Some comparisons between Hitler and Obama. Seems the writing is on the wall.
Si, y aqui se habla espanol.
The similarities are stunning, although anyone can find details that allow them to deny it.
Both of them manipulated the system, appealed to the public's base instincts, and demonized 'others'; and won.
Both had a plan that would transform the world, not only Germany or America, into what it 'should be'.
Both of them telegraphed what was coming. Both times the voters assumed either that it wouldn't really effect them, or that they'd be the beneficiaries.
Some here have commented that Hitler used intimidation after his party 'won' the plurality, granted. However, anyone who'd deny that the Obama campaign just as surely intimidated both an already compliant media and any mere citizens who might criticize the new order simply does not understand the differences of both time and place.
(I hope it is only coincidence that Axlerod looks so much like Hitler with a better mustache - I still imagine the happy face hitler on Golberg's book cover every time he appears.)
He only got 32% of the vote.
FDR got more than that.
I am stocking up but if we don’t have a fighting force of our own what good is it going to do? This is serious stuff.It would help if we had some of the military on our side.
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.