Rise Of The Fourth Reich

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd

Originally posted by Hannagan
reply to post by HeywoodFloyd

 

The Nazi Party were right wingers, this is a well established fact.

No, it is not established at all.
On the opposite, it is a deception. (sorry...)

Infact, the original denomination of the Party, even before Hitler was "hired" and optioned there, was: "Deutsche Arbeiter Partei" - which translates into: "German Workers' Party".
And it was a vehemently anti-capitalist party.

The founder and head of the party was Anton Drexler, who thereafter "hired" Adolf Hitler.

The "National-Sozialistische" denomination was added later, to make it become:
"National-Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei"
which translates into: "National Socialist German Workers' Party".

A very good and objective source on this topic
is the great book by Jim Marrs: "Rule By Secrecy".
A masterpiece.

Then, we could discuss for years on what means "left" or "right"
(in my opinion they are meaningless words, anyway),
but is not by chance, I think, that Stalin and Hitler regimes were so similar in their behaviour.

Hmm, selective rewrite of history, with citation of a novel.It has not undergone any academic review. Its only a deception on maybe Fox News or other right wing media sources.

Academia, the history books and facts say otherwise:

assets.cambridge.org...
"Fascism referred
exclusively to right-radical, ultranationalist movements and states."

books.google.com.au... nM#v=onepage&q=right&f=false

books.google.com.au... JcU#v=onepage&q&f=false



See 0:45 sec of this film World War 2 in colour.
3:15 Mins

www.youtube.com...

read the book a few years ago. Didnʻt agree with everything, but it still had some good insight

They forgot to mention that our current president is cutting down the military. It also forgot to mention that we are by far the most armed country in the world, as in there is a gun for every single civilian. We dont have a scapegoat either. I just dont see the similarities. And that picture is just unbelievably stupid in its use.

reply to post by Fichorka


S&F

my eyes were 1st opened to this at age 12 ['79]

to those in denial, especially re concentration camps

what do you think abu gharib, gitmo, and the rest of the secret black prison complex are?
who can say experiments aren't being performed in those places?

OP hope you don't mind but your thread has a sort of companion/complementary thread [no, i'm not saying already posted] here: US MUST WATCH: Let Your Life Be Friction To Stop The Machine! www.abovetopsecret.com...

For two hundred years Americans have been indoctrinated with a mythology created, imposed and sustained by a manipulating cabal: the financial elite that built its absolute control on the muscle and blood, ignorance and credulity, of its citizenry.

It has now metastasized into the corporate tyranny that owns and controls America. America began with the invasion of a populated continent and the genocide of its people. Once entrenched, it embraced enslavement of another race.

With those pillars of state in place, it declared itself an independent nation in a testament that proclaimed the equality of all mankind. In that monumental act of hypocrisy, America’s myth had its genesis.

have you read arthur silber's blog? Once Upon a Time... powerofnarrative.blogspot.com...

pretty strong stuff but i know you can handle it

They see themselves as the heroic Americans depicted by Western Movies, the descendants of the fierce patriot warriors who had tamed the frontier and defeated the might of the British Empire.

Yep, seems a common-held misconception by many...

Well, there's no arguing all this. No one will listen. So...

I'm gonna make sure I'm on the winning side. Good thing I already know how to speak passable German. While you guys are living in your paranoia and fear, I'm just gonna make sure I follow orders and throw my morals out the window.

America the 4th Reich...yeah.

reply to post by Echo3Foxtrot


Well, it's what Ford, IBM, GM and others did. Heck, Ford even got reparations for the destruction of its German plant by the Allies during WWII. IBM gave the Germans punch card technology that made the census taking of Jews go much more smoothly. They really helped the Holocaust along. Most of our historical big name capitalists in America were very much admirers and outright supporters of fascism. They played both sides, and so long as they weren't supporting Communism they didn't see a problem with it. They equated FDR's bringing America into the war as siding with Communists and bringing a Red influence into America (even though FDR's own policies were somewhat fascist in nature). They weren't really American companies, they were international companies for profit.

reply to post by Fichorka


There is one problem with your article that you ripped off(as you added nothing to this topic but stole someone else's work).

We American's aren't obsessed with the fine details of science and society. When it comes to science we like the booms and the bangs, similar as well with society,lol. We Americans, are a people obsessed with anarchism, death and destruction. We are a terrible beast only sated by all the shiny lights we are given. If they shut down the internet, it would be an instant civil war. Heck even they outlawed internet adult materials, and shut it all down, I would not want to be around the next day when people react.

It permeates all aspects of our society. Most people know 9/11 is BS, that something happened other than what the government is suggesting. But, it does give a convenient excuse to bomb muslim countries into oblivion. You see, an interesting thing about socio-dynamics is, if you take group B(muslims) and send a whole bunch to group A(Americans), against group A's wishes... Well group A sees group B as less than human.


Also the article is ignorant of German History. In the mid to late 1800's as Germany was forming, millions of Germans made the choice between freedom or a comfortable cell. The ones that chose a comfortable cell under Bismark stayed in Europe. And the Europeans(it wasn't just the Germans who bowed to Hitler, and most of the people who died in the Holocaust, died to the over-zealousness of the newly conquered peoples) didn't lie to themselves, they reveled in the blood shed and carnage.

The atrocities of the Nazi's was a giant macabre dance of psychopaths. The kind of dance that happens whenever psychopaths instil a kind of witch-hunt hysteria in a society.

This is nothing new. Lots of Americans are aware we are slowing turning into a to totalitarian country.

reply to post by FraternitasSaturni


It's called MAD.... Mutually Assured Destruction.... It's to ensure that anyone with the means to attack the US is made aware that they will be destroyed as well. As soon as launched are detected, a retaliatory strike would be initiated and the target would be annihilated, hence the term MAD....

Jaden

reply to post by vkey08


Don't be a fool. Once you start hearing about it, it is far TOO LATE.... Wake up. You have to stop it before it happens. Allowing them to pass NDAA is all you should need to know that it is their intention. That should be enough to cause freedom loving Americans to say "ENOUGH, NO MORE". But no, instead we say "they wouldn't do that to us..." I swear, it confounds me that people can look around and not see that we have to stand up to this NOW!!!!!

Jaden

Being a masters student focusing on WW2 history, I thought i'd just add my 2 cents. Firstly, the article was decent, however, it is based on quite a few misconceptions. Firstly, historians have generally concluded that the Reichstag fire was not lit by the nazi's, and was in fact, merely lit by the single crazy guy they caught doing it. What the nazi's did do though, was take advantage of that to then blame the communists for it, and use it for a crackdown (so it doesn't mute the point, however, it does show that the government can just be taking advantage of situations, not necessarily engineering them).

Also with their support for Hitler, you have to remember, the German people had gone through nearly 2 decades of bad times before he came to power. You had WW1, with the flow on treaty of Versailles destroying their national moral, ruining the economy causing hyper inflation, and then worsening the effects of the great depression. Also the German people didn't really fully have a concept of democracy, the president of the time, President Hindenburg, was openly anti democracy, and desired a return to the old imperial system (which while having a parliament, still gave power to the monarch/Kaiser, and was largely dominated by industrialists and the landed gentry). In reality democracy wasn't that popular among the people, as its introduction at the end of WW1 was seen to be associated with the decline of germanys power, and the living standard of the german people. Hitler was merely seen as a strong man, who could take control in a time of uncertainty. You could compare the economic situation to that of today, but remember to german situation lasted almost 2 decades before Hitler got into power.

Preposterous drivel. Shame on you. I'll be waiting for the "4th Reich" when and if Santurum gets elected. Ha ha. or maybe Romney ha ha, Triple haha,ain't gonna happen. The tired old scare tactics (textbook Rove),. Only works on the infirm, impressionable and foolish.And thankfully the infirm are dying fast. And I don't even like Obama but compared to the unconscionable war whoring murderous Bush, he's a breath of fresh air

I would like to share just two thoughts.

• 1) There are two different arguments that I notice people on different sides of these discussions making. One of the biggest sources of confusion and - in my opinion - delusion when it comes to this issue, is the misconception that these two arguments are one in the same.
  
  Argument 1: Legal. I see this argument all the time. The legal argument is that so long as there are sufficient Acts of Congress, constitutional amendments, signing statements, legal precedents, and oversight committees, then these measures are not over-reaching, tyrannical, or depriving anyone of their rights and constitutional protections. Because amendments or Acts of Congress change the boundaries and definition of our rights and protections, they can (successfully I might add) argue that no rights are being violated or curtailed. I see this again and again. "Point to where it says in the constitution as written today that you have (insert right here) and explain why you feel you've lost it." We can't do that, because the very definition, boundaries, and legal definition of those rights and privileges have in some cases been fundamentally changed. And in others, the original intent of those rights and protections are now no longer interpreted the same way, or are argued to no longer be applicable in our modern society. Therefore, no rights are being violated... technically. And therefore, "liberty" remains intact.
  
  Argument 2: True Liberty. This is the argument I'm probably closest to agreeing with personally. The letter of the law and the spirit of the law are not always congruent. Laws, as written, are ultimately just words. The meanings behind those words, the intent behind them, are the "essence" of our laws and constitutional protections. It strikes me personally as ludicrous to suggest that the original intent behind our fourth amendment rights - to give just one example - was for us to not be free to travel (for those who say there are alternatives to air travel, keep in mind that TSA and DHS are currently conducting regional tests of road and rail checkpoints, and apart from walking cross-country, air travel and road and rail travel are all there is) without first being subject to pat downs and body scans by agents of official U.S. government agencies, without a warrant, so long as there were potential threats (asserted with varying degrees of amorphousness) associated with them, and provided the facilitating termini of travel are privately owned, even when that mode (or those modes) of transportation have become ubiquitous and universally standard for a majority of citizens. That just sounds completely contrary to the original intent of the fourth amendment to me personally. Therefore, liberty does not remain intact in my view, even if it appears to by virtue purely of the letter of the law as written.
  
  Many people think that these two arguments are one and the same. The problem however is that if they are one and the same, then the law can literally change and morph into something not at all consistent with the spirit and the intent of the law, and yet people can still claim that everything going on is perfectly legal. And by all technical merit, it will be. Everything Hitler and the Third Reich did was "legal," too. I submit that the two arguments are not one and the same, and that legality does not automatically confer liberty.
  
  
• 2) Many seem to think that in order for a totalitarian regime to rise, there must be a singular leader or power base (party, etc.) This is not necessarily true, especially when we're talking about the transformation of a democratic society into a totalitarian society.
  
  There need not be a suspension of term limits, or a perpetual leader in order for the United States to become a tyrannical regime. When there exists collusion between the power structures of corporatism (which some would even say is simply frank fascism in many respects ultimately) and political parties, that power is increasingly concentrated and non-transparent, and a population ardently believes that it is successfully exercising "freedom" by voting for those within that concentrated power structure time and time again, does there really have to be a "new Hitler" for that society to already be totalitarian in all but name?
  
  It's at least conceivable to me that any future tyrant or group of tyrants the likes of which history would put in the same category as Hitler and his Reich, will have learned well the lessons of perception and historical association. Are they likely to be foolish enough to appear outwardly as what they are? Or are they more likely to persist in allowing their subjects to believe that they are free, and part of a great, glorious society? Happy subjects don't make for restive subjects.

Just my two cents. Peace.

reply to post by AceWombat04


I agree. Sometimes our "liberty" is based on a law that is not enforced as it could be. Like driving 5mph over the speed limit.

reply to post by AceWombat04


Excellent post I must say.

reply to post by AceWombat04


Well written post. As germanys scientists came to america after the war, we revised their tactics to make them more efficient and much less noticeable. We took their best ideas about control and manipulation of human behavior while learning from their mistakes to make a much more efficient fascist empire. Implementing their indoctrinating school system helped a great deal in the process along with propaganda campaigns like no other society has seen before.

As you explained, bogus laws are passed to legalize the control of the state while slowly stripping away basic rights of the citizens, usually in the name of public safety. Just because there are laws on the books condemning certain actions doesnt mean that they have any merit. America is doing what nazi germany did without being so obvious about it and going a little slower, which has this "frog in the slowly boiling water" effect. All the while people are stuck in this "we will never become like that in america" mentality. Unfortunately, history tells us a different story.

As I said a couple pages ago, what a great topic!

If you really want to get past the speculation and argumentative positions of absolutes and denials...you need to first go back and look at human tendencies and philosophies.

Sigmend Freud, leading up to the start of WW2 had been studying human tendencies and was basically upset and distraught at what he was discovering. After years of studies, he actually came to the conclusion that human beings are too irrational and violent to truly be "free and self governing" and that "democracy can never be real but it must be perceived as real". This was to...put it bluntly...have crowd control. Freud believed that we are our absolute worst in large groups and once the "mob mentality" had taken control, it was easy for a charismatic leader or even an "ideal" to steer and manipulate that mob to do whatever the leaders or elite wanted them to do by controlled media and propaganda.

Move forward to his nephew, Edward Bernays, who took much of his uncle's work and turned it tinto a tool of manipulating post depression era people into letting go of their money to buy things they did not need. Bernays was the father of modern marketing...but he was much-much more than that at a whole other level. Bernays really mastered manipulation of our "unseen motivations" and to be blunt...he could sell anything to anyone...product or idea...he could..."sell ice cubes to Eskimos"

Fast forward to today. Mass marketing not only uses Bernays proven theories, they have been refined to precision. Couple that with "sugar coating" of history and diminishing availability of "old history books" where the truth is there in painful black and white...it is easy to first sell a mythologized past and make people forget what "really" happened 80 years ago and then create a "new", romanticized history that is the foundation of steering groups in a desired direction.

If you think that the constant "distraction" of the population is an accident...well I am afraid you are incorrect. We have been put into a pasture with real fences but the roaming area seems big...so we don't see the fences and we believe we are free to roam...when are actually not. They tell us the fences are there for our protection from the "wolves" of the world...but in truth the fences are there to control the "herd".

Here are 4 links...even if you don't think we are heading toward a new Reich...aka...an authoritarian or totalitarian scenario...this is good stuff to consider and have in your processing banks when "breaking news and revelations" are shoved down your throat.

The first one is an article...don't hate the source...Some people find this source questionable but I took it with a grain of salt as the content is very enlightening.

rense.com...

The second is an extremely long video...4 hours...(you will prob need to watch it on youtube and re-bookmark it as you progress through it. it gives the story of Freud and Bernays and the manipulation of our need to "express ourselves" turned into a marketing and propaganda machine.

www.youtube.com...

The last two are a couple of music videos with very powerful messages I think anyone considerign this scenario should see and enjoy at the same time.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

You read and watch these things and then consider how easily and willingly we have been manipulated to sacrifice our liberties in the name of security...it begins to make sense.

I wrote an analogy a while back...comparing us and our liberties to a frog in a pan of water. If you drop the frog into boiling water, it will squeal and jump out. If you slowly raise the temperature, it will sit there until it cooks. That is how we have lost our liberties...slowly over time. If you were to take someone from say...the late 70's or early 80's and drop them into today's political and legal situation...they would be convinced that either Nazi Germany won the war or the Soviet Union had invaded us and won. Seriously.

"Those that would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither and will lose both" (paraphrased T. Jefferson/ B.Franklin quote)

I wanted to resurrect this thread before it becomes buried and forgotten. There is an underlying current within the party that says they are for small, unobtrusive government...which is hogwash. Their fear tactics and war mongering is almost a perfect snapshot of the Reichstag fire and the invasion of Poland...

I do think we need to discuss this more and look at what our representatives and the new GOP candidates are trying to do with freedom, choices and the right to "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

The attack on women's rights to healthcare, birth control and the right to choose is unacceptable. We are supposed to be an evolved, civilized society that respects an individuals freedoms and choices. This recall to the "dark ages" is a sad statement of the apathy in our country that allows such narrowminded, uneducated views to prosper and flourish.

Just my opinion though.

Originally posted by LeLeu

Originally posted by Swizzy
reply to post by LeLeu

 

Operation Paperclip!

It goes much, much deeper than paperclip I think

whats deeper is where will the bedouin zionist money go after it leaves America