The following comment was written in December, 1998. However, the information is still valid today.

SOCIALISM MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO FESTER IN THIS COUNTRY!

During the past several months in the American press, the Democrats have frequently denounced the Republicans as Nazis due to their attempts to control runaway federal spending. How very ironic. I remember the Nazis. Let me share a little about them and recall some of their exploits.

First of all, "Nazi" was gutter slang for the verb "to nationalize." The Bider-Mienhoff gang gave themselves this moniker during their early struggles. The official title of the Nazi Party was "The National Socialist Workers Party of Germany." Hitler and the Brownshirts advocated the nationalization of education, health care, transportation, national resources, manufacturing, distribution and law enforcement.

Hitler came to power by turning the working class, unemployed, and academic elite against the conservative republic. After Der Fuhrer's election ceased being a political conspiracy and was transformed into a fashionable social phenomenon, party membership was especially popular with educators, bureaucrats, and the press.

Being a Nazi was "politically correct." They called themselves "The Children of the New Age of World Order" and looked down their noses at everyone else. As Hitler acquired more power, he referred to his critics as "The Dark Forces of Anarchy and Hatred." Anyone who questioned Nazi high-handedness in the German press was branded a "Conservative Reactionary." Joseph Goebbels, minister of communications, proclaimed a "New World Order."

The Nazi reign of terror began with false news reports on the Jews, Bohemians and Gypsies who were said to be arming themselves to overthrow the "New World Order" and Hitler demanded that all good people register their guns so that they wouldn't fall into the hands of "terrorists and madmen." Right-wing fanatics of the "Old Order" who protested firearms registration were arrested by the S.S. and put in jail for "fomenting hatred against the Government of the German people."

Then the Reichstag (government building) was blown up and Hitler ram- rodded an "Emergency Anti-Terrorist Act" through Parliament that gave the Gestapo extraordinary powers. The leader then declared that for the well-being of the German people, all private firearms were to be confiscated by the Gestapo and the Wermotten (federal law enforcement and military). German citizens who refused to surrender their guns when the "jack-boots" (Gestapo) came calling, were murdered in their homes. By the way, the Gestapo were the federal marshals' service of the Third Reich. The S.W.A.T. team was invented and perfected by the Gestapo to break into the homes of the enemies of the German people.

When the Policia Bewakken, or local police, refused to take away guns from townsfolk, they themselves were disarmed and dragged out into the street and shot to death by the S.A. and the S.S. Those were Nazi versions of the B.A.T.F. and the F.B.I. When several local ministers spoke out against these atrocities, they were imprisoned and never seen again.

The Gestapo began to confiscate and seize the homes, businesses, bank accounts, and personal belongings of wealthy conservative citizens who had prospered in the old Republic. Pamphleteers who urged revolt against the Nazis were shot on site by national law enforcement and the military. Gypsies and Jews were detained and sent to labor camps. Mountain roads throughout central Europe were closed to prevent the escape of fugitives into the wilderness, and to prevent the movement and concealment of partisan resistance fighters.

Public schools rewrote history and Hitler youth groups taught the children to report their parents to their teachers for anti-Nazi remarks. Such parents disappeared. Paganism became the state religion of the Third Reich and Christians were widely condemned as "right wing fanatics."

Millions of books were burned first and then people. Millions of them burned in huge ovens after they were first gassed to death. Unmarried women were paid large sums of money to have babies out of wedlock and then given medals for it. Evil was declared as being good, and good was condemned as being evil. World Order was coming and the German people were going to be the "peacekeepers."

Yes, indeed, I remember the Nazis and they weren't Republicans, or "right wing," or "patriots" or "militias." They were Socialist monsters.

Thomas Colton Ruthford Arlington, VA

From the Washington Times, Reader Comment June 7, 1998

Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational purposes of research and open discussion. (Just pass a few more laws and we can all become criminals)

-- FYI (points@to.ponder.com), October 06, 1999

Answers

Bravo!

-- TrustHim (ItComes@Soon.now), October 06, 1999.

FYI,

Great piece! Cuts to the quick! Any link?

-- TM (mercier7@pdnt.com), October 06, 1999.

yeah but that was just a test run,THIS time they'll "do it right"...?

-- matt (whome@somewhere.nz), October 06, 1999.

FYI,

Great post- doesn't get much better than this! I hope Pat Buchanan reads this.

I'll take ATLAS SHRUGGED any day over MEIN KEIMPF or DAS CAPITAL. We sometimes lose sight of the fact that every govt edict or legislation has the effect of abridging the freedom and rights of some citizens.

-- mike (maples@voy.net), October 06, 1999.

I'm glad someone is pointing out the close similarities of America today and Germany in the 30's.

It's called BACK TO THE FUTURE!!!!

And it's happening before our own eyes. This Y2K "glitch" will be used to TAKE CONTROL.

I hope everyone knows the LORD, because it's going to get interesting.

-- Eyes Wide Open (djwolf@lanset.com), October 06, 1999.

Been telling people that for years and usually get a blank stare from them. The propaganda machine works well to convince people that patriots, and others are the Nazis.

There are three "unclean spirits like unto frogs" mentioned in Revelations. These unclean spirits draw the whole world to war. WW1, WWll, WWlll? And they are Communism, Fascism, National Socialism or Nazism. In other words Socialism, Central Control and One World- ism. Freedom wins, We win!

-- Mark Hillyard (foster@inreach.com), October 06, 1999.

And here I thought you were going to ruin my day. Same old right- wing BS. Face it, Fascism is right-wing as communism is left wing. Pick a chapter

-- y2k dave (xsdaa111@hotmail.com), October 06, 1999.

Mr. Rutherford--

Please get a grip. Ranting about evil socialism is not just inaccurate, it's pathetic. Take a look around Europe. Most of Scandinavia has socialist governments; they're not run by Nazis. Sure their economies don't run good, but hey, even poor people have healthcare. Government--like life itsownself--is a series of trade-offs.

The French have a fairly socialist system--no Nazis there. Their economy doesn't work well either, but it's still a reasonably nice place to live.

I could continue, but you're probably already framing a return rant in your head. By all means, bring it on.

Tarring socialists with a Nazi brush is just dumb. The Nazis were led by an unscruplous little bastard with a good line of patter and an absolute will to power. You get those in democracies too.

And one last opinion which I feel compelled to offer. This forum sees a lot of Clinton bashing. Fine by me, the dunce has done a lot of stupid things. But I don't think we have to worry about a fascist/socialist/tyrannical takeover coming from him. The guy's a putz. He's a policy wonk who can't keep his zipper up. That doesn't equate with a Hitler or even a Huey Long.

Frankly, Mr. R, I'm a bit more worried about you and your friends than I am about Bill and HIS friends.

As always, best regards. You may now open fire.

-- William in Dallas (bcheek@onramp.net), October 06, 1999.

William - Shut your rat trap.

If you don't work, you don't eat.

If I work, you still don't eat.

What makes you think I, a hard working, industrious capitalist earning my gains by the sweat of my brow should feed your worthless shiftless socialist ass based on the fact that YOU want some of what I have?

Piss off, mate....

-- Ol' Scratch (Satan@hell.gov), October 06, 1999.

How charming.

More rational discourse from the right wing--or is it hell.gov?

For the record, my friend, I also work for a living. And I've never had a job where I was eligible for any kind of government assistance, including unemployment insurance. I'm out there on my own in that nasty, brutish Hobbesian world. And I like it that way.

But enough about me. Regarding my earlier post--I was just pointing out some more obvious errors of the original poster. Any refutation, based on fact or logic?

Not yet.

Just emotional commentary from the Scratch-ster.

Here's the ideological paradox of the American situation. About 70% of us, when polled, want government "off our backs."

And about 70% of us, when polled on specific government programs, really like unemployment insurance, social security, Medicare, agricultural price supports, and all the other spending programs the government thinks up.

We prefer to think of ourselves out there on our own, but most of us like it when the government cuts us or our businesses a check.

I've never gotten one of those checks from the govt, by the way. But enough about me.

Thinking "government is the problem," as President Reagan used to say, is the implicit argument behind this sort of anti-socialist rant. Government is not the problem, GOOD government is the problem. Thoughtfully designed and implemented public policy is the problem, and getting it is the solution.

We can argue about policy specifics, but the whole left-right idelogical approach appears rather useless to me. Just an opinion.

And by the way, I'm a Republican. But enough about me.

Regards,

-- William in Dallas (bcheek@onramp.net), October 06, 1999.

Tyranny can come from the "left" or "right." It doesn't matter.

Here in California, our govenor, Gray Davis, recently signed three bills regarding homosexuals rights which is making them "mainstream" and the heterosexual "extremist."

We are on the greased slope to destruction I'm afraid. People are afraid to speak "against" this view for fear of being accused of a "hate crime."

They have neutralized our military with womens rights and the last bastion standing is the church. It won't be long before the gov. takes away their tax status for taking a "loving biblical stand" by saying "It's wrong."

We're there folks. don't be fooled. Tyranny is around the corner and this Y2K bug will give the government the opportunity to take more of our liberties away.

A WILD RIDE IS COMING.

-- Eyes Wide Open (djwolf@lanset.com), October 06, 1999.

Two things:

1st, some definitions:

Totalitarianism - A form of government in which the state is prime. The state is prime whether the majority of the people agree with the policies of that state or not.

Democracy - a form of government, in which the will of the majority of the people is prime.

Socialism - an economic system that entails the redistribution of wealth. It does not imply either totalitarianism or democracy, in and of itself.

Facism/Naziism & Communism - two versions of blending socialism and totalitarianism together. There are fundamental differences between the two, as far as stated philosophies go, but in actual practice, they have tended to look very much alike.

It is disinformation at it's finest, to paint any government that has socialistic elements as totalitarian, as long as those socialistic elements are in line with the will of the majority of it's people. Those socialistic elements in the U.S. are things such as Social Security, farm price supports and public education. I have yet to see evidence that those things are in opposition to what the majority of Americans want.

Yes, you can argue that it is the will of the majority, only due to delusions. Fine. Then present evidence that these things are not in our best interest, to undo what you perceive as the delusions. Nazi-baiting, does not serve that end and threatens to subvert the will of the people thru emotionalism.

And secondly:

Everyone else is, of course, free to do as they please, but for myself, I have forever abandoned the use of analogies to the Nazi party, to describe anyones actions. That analogy has been worked over, spun, reshaped and twisted to the point that it no longer conveys any real political meaning and exists solely as an inflammatory tactic. Either side can use it, with equal effect (or lack thereof). By way of example, look at the book-burning point someone brought up, a few posts back. To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a book burning party, sponsored by a liberal organization, in this country. The whole concept is anathema to the heart of the liberal cause, which is that all things are equally available to everyone. This applies to art and information, as much as it applies to opportunities and resources. In the U.S., book burning has always been the pervue of the hard religious right and is, in fact, the majority of the basis for right-wingers being called Nazis, in the first place.

If the argument has lost meaning, then the sole purpose of Nazi-baiting, at this point, is to whip the party faithful into a frenzy and to bait the opposition into such an angered state that they become clumsy and emotional in their responses.

I have come to the opinion that there will never be any rational discourse on this board regarding politics, until both sides drop the Nazi-baiting.

-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), October 06, 1999.

Well said, Bokonon. The term "Nazi" is absolutely meaningless now.

However, the article from Sun Yung Moon's Washington Times does not lie. FACT: Nazi's came from people who touted socialist solutions to Germany's problems. Of course they turned out to be monsters who do not resemble most of today's European governments.

But the real issue with socialism boils down to this: part of you belongs to the State, not to yourself. This is where Hitler, Stalin, and even enlightened social democrats of Sweden (now voted out of power, as I recall) would all agree. You are a criminal unworthy of freedom unless you spend the mandatory 10-50% of your efforts working for the State. The State owns 10-50% of your day, financially speaking.

As repulsive as this ^^ sounds, at this juncture it would be very difficult to dismantle the role of the state without dire consequences. All of the pre-existing social institutions (now taken over by the state) no longer exist as independent social "safety nets" for people who fall on hard times. Sudden libertarianism means that we would all suffer greatly and ultimately incur less freedom on ourselves from the mess it would create.

But we can't fall sight of the most basic issue here: bottom line is freedom for the indivdual not happiness for the majority should be the role of government. The Majority has the potential to be just as tyrannical as a single Stalin.

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), October 06, 1999.

Bokonon,Coprolith

Very astute response...hats off to the both of you!

Coprolith , you said...

But we can't fall (lose?) sight of the most basic issue here: bottom line is freedom for the indivdual not happiness for the majority should be the role of government. The Majority has the potential to be just as tyrannical as a single Stalin.

This is exactly why the framers of the Constitution were overwhelmingly in favor of a representative democracy.

-- TM (mercier7@pdnt.com), October 06, 1999.

Bokomom,

Define Capitalism for me. Where does it fit in your politic definitions above. You are missing a very important part of the equation..

-- y2k dave (xsdaa111@hotmail.com), October 07, 1999.