It is always a laugher when these leftwingers try to put an agenda to history.
And may I be the first to say:
I don't want any moral or political instruction from CBS or Hollywood. They have no insights of value.
If the presentation doesn't identify him as such a socialist, then it is not accurate.
Igra's primary value to us today is that he was an eyewitness to the changes that occurred in Germany; an eyewitness with a uniquely prophetic sense of the danger of "gay" influence in society. I consider it a great privilege to be able to review his work for the modern reader.
Igra's Thesis: Homosexuality Was at the Root of Nazi Evil
"I had finished the writing of [Germany's National Vice]," writes Samuel Igra, "when my attention was called to a British White Paper, 'Concerning the treatment of German Nationals (including the Jews) in Germany,' in which the following statement is made: 'The explanation for this outbreak of sadistic cruelty may be that sexual perversion, and, in particular, homosexuality, are very prevalent in Germany. It seems to me that mass sexual perversion may offer an explanation of this otherwise inexplicable outbreak.' [Page 20. His Majesty's Stationary Office, 1939].
"The author of that statement is Mr. R. T. Smallbones, who was British Consul-General at Frankfort-on-Main from 1932 until the outbreak of the war in 1939. Previous to 1932 he had been stationed in other German cities. His opinion therefore rests on firsthand experience of the German people for a long period of years. I am convinced that his explanation is the correct one. For, as a matter of fact, the widespread existence of sexual perversion in Germany, not only at the time the Hitler movement rose to power but also under the Kaiser's regime, is notorious... And authorities on criminal sociology are agreed that there is a causal connection between mass sexual perversion and the kind of mass atrocities committed by the Germans (ibid:7).
The Roehm Purge, then, was not a "moral cleansing" of the Nazi ranks, but a re-alignment of power behind the German government which was primarily forced upon Hitler by powerful political elements whose support he needed to maintain control. Igra goes on to point out that not only did the majority of the SA homosexuals survive the purge, but that the massacre was largely implemented by homosexuals.
There is no question that homosexuality figures prominently in the history of the Holocaust. As we have noted, the ideas for disposing of the Jews originated with Lanz von Leibenfels. The first years of terrorism against the Jews were carried out by the homosexuals of the SA. The first concentration camp, as well as the system for training its brutal guards, was the work of Ernst Roehm. The first pogrom, Kristallnacht, was orchestrated in 1938 by the homosexual Reinhard Heydrich. And it was the transvestite Goering who started the "evolution of the Final Solution...[with an] order to Heydrich (Jan. 24, 1939) concerning the solution of the Jewish question by 'emigration' and 'evacuation'" (Robinson:25).
Homosexuality and the Nazi PartyOne of the keys to understanding both the rise of Nazism and the later persecution of some homosexuals by the Nazis is found in this early history of the German "gay rights" movement. For it was the CS which created and shaped what would become the Nazi persona, and it was the loathing which these "Butches" held for effeminate homosexuals ("Femmes") which led to the internment of some of the latter in slave labor camps in the Third Reich.
More significantly, many of the guards and administrators responsible for the infamous concentration camp atrocities were homosexuals themselves, which negates the proposition that homosexuals in general were being persecuted and interned.
The enduring "Butch/Femme" conflict among German homosexuals clearly had a substantial bearing on the treatment of pink-triangle prisoners.
...While the neo-pagans were busy attacking from without, liberal theologians undermined Biblical authority from within the Christian church. The school of so-called "higher criticism," which began in Germany in the late 1800s, portrayed the miracles of God as myths; by implication making true believers (Jew and Christian alike) into fools. And since the Bible was no longer accepted as God's divine and inerrant guide, it could be ignored or reinterpreted. By the time the Nazis came to power, "Bible-believing" Christians, (the Confessing Church) were a small minority. As Grunberger asserts, Nazism itself was a "pseudo-religion" (ibid.:79) that competed, in a sense, with Christianity and Judaism.
From the early years, leading Nazis openly attacked Christianity. Joseph Goebbels declared that "Christianity has infused our erotic attitudes with dishonesty" (Taylor:20). It is in this campaign against Judeo- Christian morality that we find the reason for the German people's acceptance of Nazism's most extreme atrocities. Their religious foundations had been systematically eroded over a period of decades by powerful social forces. By the time the Nazis came to power, German culture was spiritually bankrupt. Too often, historians have largely ignored the spiritual element of Nazi history; but if we look closely at Hitler's campaign of extermination of the Jews, it becomes clear that his ostensive racial motive obscures a deeper and more primal hatred of the Jews as the "People of God."
The probable reason for Hitler's attack on Christianity was his perception that it alone had the moral authority to stop the Nazi movement. But Christians stumbled before the flood of evil. As Poliakov notes, "[W]hen moral barriers collapsed under the impact of Nazi preaching...the same anti-Semitic movement that led to the slaughter of the Jews gave scope and license to an obscene revolt against God and the moral law. An open and implacable war was declared on the Christian tradition...[which unleashed] a frenzied and unavowed hatred of Christ and the Ten Commandments" (Poliakov:300).
"The Nazi Master Plan: The Persecution Of The Christian Churches"
The Donovan Nuremberg Trials collection
Gay Nazis: the Role of Homosexuality in Nazism & Hitler's Rise to ... Thus butch hypermasculinity, visibility for homosexuals, and organization were the three necessary ingredients in the mix which allowed the SA leaders to make their unique and essential contribution to the rise of Nazism. Another important consideration is that visibility is enabled when homosexuality assumes a political voice. In this way, the politicization of homosexuality, which supported gays in the process of socially identifying themselves as such, was a necessary condition for Hitler's success.
Was Hitler's Homosexuality Nazism's Best-Kept Secret?
Sadomasochism That sadomasochism and homoeroticism often occur together with Nazism in the Holocaust film is a fact that has long been recognized and is frequently observed. Ilan Avisar, in Screening the Holocaust, traces what he calls the connection of Nazism and "sexual deviance" to Rossellini's Open City.[1] Gerd Gemünden suggests that in 1942, "the association of male homosexuality with sadism and perversion [as in the effeminate portrayal of Heydrich in Hangmen Also Die] ... anticipates postwar films such as The Damned (Visconti 1969) and Night Porter (Cavani 1974)."[2]
[1] Ilan Avisar, Screening the Holocaust: Cinema's Images of the Unimaginable (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1988), pp. 134-48
[2] Gerd Gemünden, "Brecht in Hollywood: Hangmen Also Die and the Anti-Nazi Film," TDR 43 (4) (Winter 1999): 65-7; The earliest book in English to conflate Nazism with sexual perversion was Samuel Igra's Germany's National Vice (London: Quality Press, Ltd., 1945).
Hermeneutical Issues In The Use Of The Bible To Justify The ... sin of the two groups of men in Sodom and Gibeah is, in both instances, the desire to engage in homosexual rape. This practice occurred in the Ancient Middle East when armies were defeated, and it occurs today in certain all-male settings, such as prisons.[11] The conclusion, more clearly for Sodom than for Gibeah[12], is that the goal of homosexual rape is the male inhabitants' desire to express their dominance over the strangers.
The Sexual Rage Behind Islamic Terror ALL SERIAL KILLERS, almost without exception, are severely sexually abused as children.
In this culture, males sexually penetrating males becomes a manifestation of male power, conferring a status of hyper-masculinity. An unmarried man who has sex with boys is simply doing what men do. As the scholar Bruce Dunne has demonstrated, sex in Islamic societies is not about mutuality between partners, but about the adult male's achievement of pleasure through violent domination.
...It is also the silence that forces victimized Arab boys into invisibility. Even though the society does not see their sexual exploitation as being humiliating, the psychological and emotional scars that result from their subordination, powerlessness and humiliation is a given. Traumatized by the violation of their dignity and manliness, they spend the rest of their lives trying to get it back.
Violating the masculinity of the enemy necessitates the dishing out of severe violence against him. In the recent terrorist strikes, therefore, violence against Americans served as a much-needed release of the terrorists' bottled-up sexual rage. Moreover, it served as a desperate and pathological testament of the re-masculinization of their emasculated selves.
Conclusion to the Psychological Effects of Combat - Dave Grossman, Author It is often said that "All's fair in love and war," and this expression provides a valuable insight into the human psyche, since these twin, taboo fields of sexuality and aggression represent the two realms in which most individuals will consistently deceive both themselves and others.
In the field of developmental psychology, a mature adult is sometimes defined as someone who has attained a degree of insight and self-control in the two areas of sexuality and aggression. This is also a useful definition of maturity in civilizations.
Hitler is shown in the temporary Reichstag, again using "terrorism" to justify gutting the German constitution...
Utter nonsense. Herr Hitler was acting completely in compliance with the specific written terms of the Weimar constitution. As Leonard Peikoff noted in The Ominous Parallels:
“...Article 48 [of the Weimar constitution]... was invoked by the German government in 1930 to justify the establishment of a Presidential dictatorship. ‘If public order and security are seriously disturbed or endangered...,’ the article says, without further definition, the President ‘may take all necessary steps... he may suspend for the time being, either wholly or in part, the fundamental rights’ recognized elsewhere.
“The Founding Fathers of the United States accepted the concept of inalienable rights. The public power, they said in essence, shall make no law abridging the freedom of the individual. The Founding Fathers of the Weimar Republic rejected this approach...”
Under the terms of the Constitution of the United States, the president may not even suspend the writ of habeas corpus, let alone “’the fundamental rights’ recognized elsewhere...“ The Germans who composed and ratified the Weimar constitution were fools - they trusted their government to do 'the right thing.' Our Founding Fathers were not, and did not...
;>)
The principal distinctive between Nazism/fascism and Communism/socialism was that the former was ethnically centered and nationalistic while the latter was universalist and internationalist. This distinctive reflects the roots of the political philosophies. Naziism drew in part from the 19th Century Romantic reaction against the rationalism and individualism of the 18th Century. As opposed to the notions of the autonomous individual, Naziism sought the meaning of existence in the national or racial collective. It also drew from the concepts of the Superman and the will to power of the German philosopher Freidrich Nietzsche. These notions, remarkably similar in effect to the Leninist theory of the vanguard of the proletariat, called for a strong leader to defy conventional morality and individual rights for an overarching goal, which in the case of the Nazis was the greater glory of Germany and the supremacy of the Nordic or Aryan "race." It also led to the glorification of a god-like Fuhrer or Duce who was above the law or even conventional morality. The Nazis called it the Fuhrerprinzip.
Unlike Naziism, Marxism-Leninism did not reject the rationalist viewpoint, at least in its materialism. Rather, it utlized the concepts of evolution popularized by Darwin in biology to promote the concept of a social evolution of the human race from barbarism through feudalism and capitalism to the ultimate end of that evolution, communism, defined as the universal ownership of all goods by all people and the end of class distinctives and of civil government. Marx conceived of this evolution occuring in class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. He also rejected certain aspects of rationalism, accepting the critiques of German philosophers Kant and Hegel. From Hegel, Marx adopted the theory of the dialectic (thesis plus antithesis leading to a third position, synthesis) as the main mechanism of change in the universe. Lenin refined Marxian class struggle theory to propose the need for a revolutionary vanguard, the Communist Party, that would lead the proletarians in violent revolution. This elite, like its Nazi/fascist counterpart, could justifiably violate ethical rules and individual rights, but to accomplish the historical process of evolution to communism and not to glorify a nation, race, or supreme leader.
Naziism and other fascist or authoritarian governments condemned the extremes of total state ownership, as in the USSR, and laissez faire capitalism, as in America before Franklin Roosevelt. Nazi economics were dirigist, that is, maintainance of private ownership, but under strong state supervision, as well as state monopolies over education, utilities, and transport. In essence, it was a earlier version of Third Way economics advocated by the present day European social democratic parties. The New Deal was a modified version of the corporate state concepts of Mussolini, especially the National Recovery Administration, with its committees of labor, management, and government closely resembling Italian Fascist models. Many of the criticisms of both free market economics and state socialism can be found in Papal encyclicals, such as Rerum Novarum in the 1890s and in the writings of British traditionalist Catholic philosophers such as Hilaire Belloc and G. K. Chesterton. American populists like Tom Watson and William Jennings Bryan also favored a sort of "Third Way" via large scale government intervention, as did Progressives like Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.
In America, our "throne and altar" are the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. American tradition is one that exalts individual rights as being God-given and inalienable. Religion, the press, and commerce are to be left alone. If the "Right" is, in the American context, support for our traditions of limited government, personal freedoms, and private property, Naziism/fascism, Communism/socialism, and modern liberalism are all on the "Left." In the American context, not only are John Reed, Abbie Hoffman, and Norman Thomas men of the Left, but so are David Duke, Huey Long, and Charles Coughlin, as well as Bill Clinton, Franklin Roosevelt, and (yes) Richard Nixon.
Unfreakinbelievable!
Leftists really do think they are smarter than everyone else.
The jig is up and we're onto them.
Their days are numbered.