Hitler and Hillary

Worldnetdaily ^ | 08/18/03 | Vox Day

[Eva]

I am not sure where you think that Hitler was claiming a right wing connection.

I interpret this passage as claiming that the Jewish identity is a nation without borders, that their failure to assimilate into the various countries of their residence has created a nation within a nation whose loyalty is not to the German state.

This is where Nazism merged with Fascism in promoting the statism over the individual and used nationalism as a kind of thought control, like political correctness.

[DoctorMichael]

Uh.........

"I love-Hillary-Tree-Note"

Makes perfect sense to me.

NOT

[FortWorthPatriot]

Try running the properties of the JPEG - you'll see the answer in the source URL.

It took me a little while to figure it out as well...

[RightWingConspirator]

Hitler and the idol of the American Democratic Party, Joe Stalin, were buddies during the last part of the 1930's. Both the communists and the nazis were authoritarian regimes, but the major differentiator between the two was the fact that the communists had eliminated the concept of private property ownership--and the property owning class--while the nazis permitted private property ownership at the sufferance of the government.

The differentiation between Soviet communist socialism and nazi fascist socialism, the left and the right in the lingo of the liberals, likely occurred when Hitler double-crossed Joe stalin and turned his forces on Russia.

[Sachem]

People can volutarily cede their freedoms to fascist elite, which is what you see in the Democrat Party. -Eva

Hi Eva, I don't follow you here, so please explain. You won't be surprised to hear that I see this the other way 'round. The Patriot Act and its follow-ons are good examples, to me, of ceding individual freedoms to government and loosening the ties that have bound the government down in applying due process towards its individual citizens. Though supported by politicians of both parties, there is great unease, even consternation, among every Democrat I know about the Act. I might comment likewise that the conservative libertarian view of freedom bounded only by its not infringing the rights of others finds strong support in Democratic ranks, where people view the many such personally-controlling laws as the Texas sodomy statute not as legitimate acts of legislatures but as unconstitutional infringements of individual liberty, privacy and the individual's right to the equal application of the laws.

[Eva]

Fascist supporters can vote in the elitist control freaks. The Patriot does indeed cede some rights to the gov't. This is not the first time, nor will it be the last time that the country has enacted this type of alien and sedition type governance. We did it in the thirties, as well (the result was the HUAC). Sometimes it is unfortunately necessary to cede some of that freedom to protect it from a fifth column attack. The good thing is that if the limits get too broad we can elect a new administration that will restore the freedoms. So far I haven't seen too many innocent Americans being prosecuted under the Patriot Act. I wish they would use a little more racial profiling, not less.

[Sachem]

I am not sure where you think that Hitler was claiming a right wing connection.

I interpret this passage as claiming that the Jewish identity is a nation without borders, that their failure to assimilate into the various countries of their residence has created a nation within a nation whose loyalty is not to the German state. -Eva

No, sorry, I wasn't clear. Hitler isn't claiming any right-wing connection in this quote nor anywhere else in that speech. He did make comments belittling left, right and center, a couple of which I will quote below.

I agree entirely with your interpretation of the quoted passage.

Here is a little more from the Hitler speech:

...the Left is forced more and more to turn to Bolshevism. In Bolshevism they see today the sole, the last possibility of preserving the present state of affairs. ...

"So the Left neither can nor will help. On the contrary, their first lie compels them constantly to resort to new lies. There remains then the Right. And this party of the Right meant well, but it cannot do what it would because up to the present time it has failed to recognize a whole series of elementary principles.

"In the first place the Right still fails to recognize the danger. ... They have never yet understood that it is not necessary to be an enemy of the Jew for him to drag you one day on the Russian model to the scaffold.

And the Right has further completely forgotten that democracy is fundamentally no German: it is Jewish. It has completely forgotten that this Jewish democracy with its majority decisions has always been without exception only a means towards the destruction of any existing Aryan leadership.

"And finally it has been forgotten that the condition which must precede every act is the will and the courage to speak the truth - and that we do not see today either in the Right or in the Left.

Here I think Hitler continues to distance himself from the Left, Bolsheviks, soon to becom Stalinists, but now leans toward a re-invented Right.

"There are only two possibilities in Germany; do not imagine that the people will forever go with the middle party, the party of compromises; one day it will turn to those who have most consistently foretold the coming ruin and have sought to dissociate themselves from it. And that party is either the Left: and then God help us! for it will lead us to complete destruction - to Bolshevism, or else it is a party of the Right which at the last, when the people is in utter despair, when it has lost all its spirit and has no longer any faith in anything, is determined for its part ruthlessly to seize the reins of power...

Finally, Hitler betrays even at this early date where he is going, here:

"That the so-called enlightened absolutism of a Frederick the Great was possible depended solely on the fact that, though this man could undoubtedly have decided 'arbitrarily' the destiny - for good or ill - of his so-called 'subject,' he did not do so, but made his decisions influenced and supported by one thought alone, the welfare of his Prussian people. it was this fact only that led the people to tolerate willingly, nay joyfully, the dictatorship of the great king.

[Pagey]

I looked at that for at least 20 minutes myself. LOL

[Eva]

That's what early conservatism was all about, preservation of the monarchy and aristocracy. That's the problem with labels, they are meaningless when trying to use them to describe differing periods in history and can be easily used to attribute negative connotations to the wrong side of an issue, in other words to intentionally mislead.

[Sachem]

That's the problem with labels, they are meaningless when trying to use them to describe differing periods in history and can be easily used to attribute negative connotations to the wrong side of an issue, in other words to intentionally mislead.

Amen. Have you ever taken a look at this? The Political Compass

[DoctorMichael]

Wow, was THAT obscure.

[votelife]

bump