I suppose that when I started reading history, I took the view that it was all about stuff that had happened once, and sometimes a very long time ago, and that it was all done and dusted. It was all in the past. It was over.
But, over time, I’ve gradually come to realise that none of it was ever really over and done with. Because it’s all still happening. It’s an unfolding process, and we all just happen to be living in 2012 rather than 1942 or 1812 or 1066. There isn’t any “end of history”. We’re still in the middle of it all.
This couldn’t have been much clearer to me over the past few days, as I’ve spent many hours looking at one single day in 1942. It felt like I was there, watching the planes taking off from Gibraltar, and the armoured vehicles landing in Oran, and the convoys moving across the ocean. They were fighting Nazism back then. And we’re still fighting it now.
For I had the feeling that not very much had changed over the past 70 years. And that when we “won” the war, very little actually changed at all. Nobody changed their minds about anything. Communists carried on being communists. And Nazis carried on being nazis. None of it actually ever went away. None of it was ever finally consigned to the past, finally buried with a stake driven through its heart.
And because none of it ever really went away, all of it slowly came creeping back. And that’s something that has been greatly helped by lots of people (like me) thinking it was ancient history and could never happen again.
But the Nazis are back. Only this time they aren’t found in Germany. And they don’t wear black uniforms. And they don’t drive around in tanks. But apart from that, they’re exactly the same.
The great crime of the old Nazis was to assign greater or lesser value to entire peoples, and to set out to exterminate the unvalued peoples. And the new Nazis are on course to do exactly the same. For the old Nazis, the worthless, valueless people were Jews and Gypsies and Slavs. And for the new Nazis they’re smokers and drinkers and fat people. In both cases, the supposedly worthless people were insulted, demonised, and expelled from society. The new Nazis haven’t actually got round to exterminating smokers yet, but the logic of their reasoning is relentlessly leading them to the same conclusion it led their forebears.
It’s an eugenic view of life. It holds that it is possible to improve the world by getting rid of unfit people, and keeping the fit and healthy. And smokers and drinkers and fat people are all classed as ‘unfit’, and as ‘life that is unworthy of life’ – although they seldom put it quite that way these days.
I think it’s a nonsensical, upsidedown view of life. It’s one that attempts to take over a natural process of evolution, and direct it. And I don’t think it’s possible to do that. Because in a natural evolutionary process, what’s ‘fit’ is what survives, and what’s ‘unfit’ is what doesn’t survive, and prior to the event nobody knows what will survive, and what won’t. So it isn’t really possible for anyone to declare, a priori, that certain categories of persons are ‘fit’ or ‘unfit’, and promote the former, and expunge the latter. It’s a bit like promoting the Model T Ford as the best car of all time, prior to the appearance of Opals, Mercedes, and Toyotas and all the rest of them. People who think this way don’t understand evolution.
But clearly lots of people actually do think this way. They really think that they’re “making a better world” by getting rid of the ‘unfit’ and the ‘inferior’ or whatever adjective they currently employ to express their sense of evolutionary superiority and fitness. But if you were to ask any of them if they regarded themselves as Nazis, they’d all say, “Oh, no! Not me. I’m no Nazi.”
Yet Nazis is what they are, because they have exactly the same eugenic mentality as the historical Nazis that preceded them. They have the same categories of ‘fit’ and ‘unfit’ people. And they have the same obsession with physical ‘health’.
Yet it shouldn’t be any surprise that there are Nazis like these around, because this kind of eugenic thinking wasn’t ever restricted to Nazi Germany. In fact, it was an idea imported by Nazi Germany from Britain and America. And when Nazi Germany was defeated, this eugenic ideology survived and prospered in America and Britain. And it now shapes the ideology of the WHO and the EU and most of the governments of the Western world.
And it’s an ideology that needs now be finally eradicated in ways that it never was in 1945. And ideologies can’t be destroyed by guns or bombs. Ideologies can really only be defeated by other more powerful ideas.
I won’t say that ours will be a “better world” without all these Nazis. But it certainly won’t be a worse one.
And so we have another global war. Just like the last global war. We’re fighting Nazis all over again.
But, even though the new Nazis are behaving just like the old Nazis, smearing and excluding millions of people in the interests of ‘health’, hardly anyone actually sees them as Nazis.
And this is because all concerned think that Nazism is something that belongs to the past, to history, and is all done and dusted, and we’ve ‘moved on’ since then, and we’re living in a ‘modern era’. In their view a recurrence of Nazism simply isn’t possible. It’s no more possible for Nazism to re-appear than it is for brigades of armoured knights to come riding in on horseback. It’s past history. It’s over and done with. It can’t happen.
And this is the awful illusion of history: the sense that because something has been done, it can’t ever be done again. The illusion that because it happened a century or more ago, it can never happen again. Yet if any lesson is to be drawn from the past, it is surely that if something has happened once, it can happen again. And maybe it can even happen again and again and again.
The truth is that we are immersed in history. We are living it. We are not some cinema audience looking back on history unfolding on a screen before us, safe in our seats and munching popcorn. We are part of that history. And the knights in armour who come thundering on their horses towards us are quite likely to charge right out of the screen, and trample their way through the startled audience, chopping people’s heads off with their swords and axes.
(That might make quite a good movie, actually – if it hasn’t already been done).
Nothing has really changed at all. We’re not living in a ‘modern era’. We haven’t ‘progressed’ in the least bit. It’s the same as it ever was.
They were fighting Nazism back then. And we’re still fighting it now.
Frank Davis 
Indiana Eugenics
Project Overview
In 1907, a new law passed by the state legislature and signed by the Governor of Indiana provided for the involuntary sterilization of “confirmed criminals, idiots, imbeciles and rapists.” Although it was eventually found to be unconstitutional, this law is widely regarded as the first eugenics sterilization legislation passed in the world. In 1927, a revised law was implemented and before it was repealed in 1974, over 2,300 of the State’s most vulnerable citizens were involuntarily sterilized. In addition, Indiana established a state-funded Committee on Mental Defectives that carried out eugenic family studies in over twenty counties and was home to an active “better babies” movement that encouraged scientific motherhood and infant hygiene as routes to human improvement.
http://www.iupui.edu/~eugenics/
Eugenics: the California connection to Nazi policies
http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/03/11/10.php
Eugenics: the California connection to Nazi policies_SF Chronicle
Mon, 10 Nov 2003
On Sunday, Nov 9, the San Francisco Chronicle published an extraordinary, most informative article by Edwin Black, that sheds light on the role played by the American eugenics movement in the Nazi extermination policy. Eugenics is a pseudoscience whose purported aim is to “improve” the human race, while eliminating that portion of the race that eugenicists deem “undesirable.” The article is adapted from Black’s recently released book, “War Against the Weak,” published by Four Walls Eight Windows.
Black shows that American eugenics played a decisive role in the adoption of racist and even lethal public policies in the US and then in Germany. Black writes: “Eugenics would have been so much bizarre parlor talk had it not been for extensive financing by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America’s most respected scientists from such prestigious universities as Stanford, Yale, Harvard and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics’ racist aims.”
“Stanford President David Starr Jordan originated the notion of “race and blood” in his 1902 racial epistle “Blood of a Nation,” in which the university scholar declared that human qualities and conditions such as talent and poverty were passed through the blood.”
“The Harriman railroad fortune paid local charities, such as the New York Bureau of Industries and Immigration, to seek out Jewish, Italian and other immigrants in New York and other crowded cities and subject them to deportation, confinement or forced sterilization.”
The influence of American eugenicists was even more sinister. American eugenicists influenced the Nazi sterilization, experimentation, and extermination policies–including the medical atrocities first conducted on institutionalized disabled human beings–adults and children. What’s more, the scions of American philanthropy financed German eugenicists and actively supported their pseudoscientific research institutes.
Therefore, no useful discussion about medical and behavioral research ethics can take place without an examination of the American eugenics movement. Yet, American bioethicists have studiously avoided a critical analysis of the eugenics movement, its lethal ideology, and its inevitably lethal “solutions.” By their silence, American bioethics seem to be attesting to the lingering, but covert influence of eugenics within the American healthcare and research community.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Long Island, was a eugenics center founded by the Carnegie Institution. Among its activities was the stockpiling of “millions of index cards on ordinary Americans, as researchers carefully plotted the removal of families, bloodlines and whole peoples. From Cold Spring Harbor, eugenics advocates agitated in the legislatures of America, as well as the nation’s social service agencies and associations.” See also: http://nucleus.cshl.org/CSHLlib/archives/ciwfiles.htm
Black notes: ” The superior species the eugenics movement sought was populated not merely by tall, strong, talented people. Eugenicists craved blond, blue-eyed Nordic types. This group alone, they believed, was fit to inherit the Earth. In the process, the movement intended to subtract emancipated Negroes, immigrant Asian laborers, Indians, Hispanics, East Europeans, Jews, dark- haired hill folk, poor people, the infirm and anyone classified outside the gentrified genetic lines drawn up by American raceologists. How?
By identifying so-called defective family trees and subjecting them to lifelong segregation and sterilization programs to kill their bloodlines. The grand plan was to literally wipe away the reproductive capability of those deemed weak and inferior — the so-called unfit. The eugenicists hoped to neutralize the viability of 10 percent of the population at a sweep, until none were left except themselves.”
Today’s covert eugenicists are similarly “screening” for undetected conditions. Children are especially screened for psychiatric and anti-social “conditions” for which no cures exist. Others are engaging in genetic manipulation experiments seeking to produce “perfect” babies. Much of the spiritual guidance and political agitation for the American eugenics movement came from California’s quasi-autonomous eugenic societies, such as Pasadena’s Human Betterment Foundation and the California branch of the American Eugenics Society, which coordinated much of their activity with the Eugenics Research Society in Long Island. These organizations — which functioned as part of a closely-knit network — published racist eugenic newsletters and pseudoscientific journals, such as Eugenical News and Eugenics, and propagandized for the Nazis. Black provides compelling evidence showing that the ideological roots and even the methods of extermination–including the gas chambers–were the brain child of American eugenicists living in California. He reveals that the Rockefeller Foundation financed the work of Josef Mengele, MD, Ph.D., before he went to Auschwitz where his unspeakable medical experiments on twins earned him the epithet “Angel of Death.” See: http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/history/mengele/research_5.html?sect=6
More than just providing the scientific roadmap, America funded Germany’s eugenic institutions.
By 1926, Rockefeller had donated some $410,000 — almost $4 million in today’s money — to hundreds of German researchers. In May 1926, Rockefeller awarded $250,000 toward creation of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry. Among the leading psychiatrists at the German Psychiatric Institute was Ernst Rüdin, who became director and eventually an architect of Hitler’s systematic medical repression.
Another in the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute’s complex of eugenics institutions was the Institute for Brain Research. Since 1915, it had operated out of a single room. Everything changed when Rockefeller money arrived in 1929. A grant of $317,000 allowed the institute to construct a major building and take center stage in German race biology. The institute received additional grants from the Rockefeller Foundation during the next several years. Leading the institute, once again, was Hitler’s medical henchman Ernst Rüdin. Rüdin’s organization became a prime director and recipient of the murderous experimentation and research conducted on Jews, Gypsies and others.
Perhaps the date of publication of Black’s article was chosen to coincide with Nov 9, 1938, Kristallnacht–the night the Nazi’s unleased a diabolical campaign of mass extermination. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Complete article See:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/11/09/ING9C2QSKB1.DTL&type=printable
Eugenics and the Nazis — the California connection Edwin Black Sunday, November 9, 2003 Page D – 1
EXCERPT: Hitler and his henchmen victimized an entire continent and exterminated millions in his quest for a so-called Master Race.
But the concept of a white, blond-haired, blue-eyed master Nordic race didn’t originate with Hitler. The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in California, decades before Hitler came to power. California eugenicists played an important, although little-known, role in the American eugenics movement’s campaign for ethnic cleansing.
Eugenics was the pseudoscience aimed at “improving” the human race. In its extreme, racist form, this meant wiping away all human beings deemed “unfit,” preserving only those who conformed to a Nordic stereotype. Elements of the philosophy were enshrined as national policy by forced sterilization and segregation laws, as well as marriage restrictions, enacted in 27 states. In 1909, California became the third state to adopt such laws. Ultimately, eugenics practitioners coercively sterilized some 60,000 Americans, barred the marriage of thousands, forcibly segregated thousands in “colonies,” and persecuted untold numbers in ways we are just learning. Before World War II, nearly half of coercive sterilizations were done in California, and even after the war, the state accounted for a third of all such surgeries.
California was considered an epicenter of the American eugenics movement. During the 20th century’s first decades, California’s eugenicists included potent but little-known race scientists, such as Army venereal disease specialist Dr. Paul Popenoe, citrus magnate Paul Gosney, Sacramento banker Charles Goethe, as well as members of the California state Board of Charities and Corrections and the University of California Board of Regents. …..cut… Eighteen solutions were explored in a Carnegie-supported 1911 “Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Eugenic Section of the American Breeder’s Association to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population.” Point No. 8 was euthanasia. The most commonly suggested method of eugenicide in the United States was a “lethal chamber” or public, locally operated gas chambers. In 1918, Popenoe, the Army venereal disease specialist during World War I, co-wrote the widely used textbook, “Applied Eugenics,” which argued, “From an historical point of view, the first method which presents itself is execution . . . Its value in keeping up the standard of the race should not be underestimated.” “Applied Eugenics” also devoted a chapter to “Lethal Selection,” which operated “through the destruction of the individual by some adverse feature of the environment, such as excessive cold, or bacteria, or by bodily deficiency.” Eugenic breeders believed American society was not ready to implement an organized lethal solution. But many mental institutions and doctors practiced improvised medical lethality and passive euthanasia on their own. One institution in Lincoln, Ill., fed its incoming patients milk from tubercular cows believing a eugenically strong individual would be immune. Thirty to 40 percent annual death rates resulted at Lincoln. Some doctors practiced passive eugenicide one newborn infant at a time. Others doctors at mental institutions engaged in lethal neglect. Nonetheless, with eugenicide marginalized, the main solution for eugenicists was the rapid expansion of forced segregation and sterilization, as well as more marriage restrictions. California led the nation, performing nearly all sterilization procedures with little or no due process. In its first 25 years of eugenics legislation, California sterilized 9,782 individuals, mostly women. Many were classified as “bad girls,” diagnosed as “passionate,” “oversexed” or “sexually wayward.” At the Sonoma State Home, some women were sterilized because of what was deemed an abnormally large clitoris or labia. In 1933 alone, at least 1,278 coercive sterilizations were performed, 700 on women. The state’s two leading sterilization mills in 1933 were Sonoma State Home with 388 operations and Patton State Hospital with 363 operations. Other sterilization centers included Agnews, Mendocino, Napa, Norwalk, Stockton and Pacific Colony state hospitals. ……cut…….
Eighteen solutions were explored in a Carnegie-supported 1911 “Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Eugenic Section of the American Breeder’s Association to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population.” Point No. 8 was euthanasia.
The most commonly suggested method of eugenicide in the United States was a “lethal chamber” or public, locally operated gas chambers. In 1918, Popenoe, the Army venereal disease specialist during World War I, co-wrote the widely used textbook, “Applied Eugenics,” which argued, “From an historical point of view, the first method which presents itself is execution . . . Its value in keeping up the standard of the race should not be underestimated.” “Applied Eugenics” also devoted a chapter to “Lethal Selection,” which operated “through the destruction of the individual by some adverse feature of the environment, such as excessive cold, or bacteria, or by bodily deficiency.”
Eugenic breeders believed American society was not ready to implement an organized lethal solution. But many mental institutions and doctors practiced improvised medical lethality and passive euthanasia on their own. One institution in Lincoln, Ill., fed its incoming patients milk from tubercular cows believing a eugenically strong individual would be immune. Thirty to 40 percent annual death rates resulted at Lincoln. Some doctors practiced passive eugenicide one newborn infant at a time. Others doctors at mental institutions engaged in lethal neglect.
Nonetheless, with eugenicide marginalized, the main solution for eugenicists was the rapid expansion of forced segregation and sterilization, as well as more marriage restrictions. California led the nation, performing nearly all sterilization procedures with little or no due process. In its first 25 years of eugenics legislation, California sterilized 9,782 individuals, mostly women. Many were classified as “bad girls,” diagnosed as “passionate,” “oversexed” or “sexually wayward.” At the Sonoma State Home, some women were sterilized because of what was deemed an abnormally large clitoris or labia. ……..cut……
Edwin Black is author of the award-winning “IBM and the Holocaust” and the recently released “War Against the Weak” (published by Four Walls Eight Windows), from which this article is adapted.
©2003 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback
Eugenics: the California connection to Nazi policies
http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/03/11/10.php
Eugenics: the California connection to Nazi policies_SF Chronicle
Mon, 10 Nov 2003
On Sunday, Nov 9, the San Francisco Chronicle published an extraordinary, most informative article by Edwin Black, that sheds light on the role played by the American eugenics movement in the Nazi extermination policy. Eugenics is a pseudoscience whose purported aim is to “improve” the human race, while eliminating that portion of the race that eugenicists deem “undesirable.” The article is adapted from Black’s recently released book, “War Against the Weak,” published by Four Walls Eight Windows.
Black shows that American eugenics played a decisive role in the adoption of racist and even lethal public policies in the US and then in Germany. Black writes: “Eugenics would have been so much bizarre parlor talk had it not been for extensive financing by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America’s most respected scientists from such prestigious universities as Stanford, Yale, Harvard and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics’ racist aims.”
“Stanford President David Starr Jordan originated the notion of “race and blood” in his 1902 racial epistle “Blood of a Nation,” in which the university scholar declared that human qualities and conditions such as talent and poverty were passed through the blood.”
Eugenics and the Nazis — the California connection
Edwin Black
Published 4:00 a.m., Sunday, November 9, 2003
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Eugenics-and-the-Nazis-the-California-2549771.php
Frank this eugenics movement changed its name to The Society for Biodemography and Social Biology http://www.biodemog.org/index.html
Population Control, Nazis, and the U.N!
by Anton Chaitkin
ROCKEFELLER AND MASS MURDER
The Rockefeller Foundation is the prime sponsor of public relations for the United Nations’ drastic depopulation program. Evidence in the possession of a growing number of researchers in America, England, and Germany demonstrates that the Foundation and its corporate, medical, and political associates organized the racial mass murder program of Nazi Germany.
These globalists, who function as a conduit for British Empire geopolitics, were not stopped after World War II. This United Nations alliance of the old Nazi right, with the new left, poses an even graver danger to the world today than it did in 1941.
Oil monopolist John D. Rockefeller created the family-run Rockefeller Foundation in 1909. By 1929 he had placed $300 million worth of the family’s controlling interest in the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey (now called “Exxon”) to the account of the Foundation.
The Foundation’s money created the medical specialty known as Psychiatric Genetics. For the new experimental field, the Foundation reorganized medical teaching in Germany, creating and thenceforth continuously directing the “Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry” and the “Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Eugenics and Human Heredity.” The Rockefellers’ chief executive of these institutions was the fascist Swiss psychiatrist Ernst Rudin, assisted by his proteges Otmar Verschuer and Franz J. Kallmann.
In 1932, the British-led “Eugenics” movement designated the Rockefellers’ Dr. Rudin as the president of the worldwide Eugenics Federation. The movement called for the killing or sterilization of people whose heredity made them a public burden.
http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/UN_Rockefeller_Genocide.html
There was a guy named Simon Wiesenthal who went after Nazis after the war. These Eugenics scientists deserved to have been hunted down in the same fashion for their crimes against humanity.
In light of the obvious truth that today’s Healthist Movement is actually nothing short of softcore, Eugenics Lite with a yellow smiley face targeting smokers, the overweight and the tipplers of the world, someone should go after them in like fashion.
Quite. It is not the end result that makes a Nazi, but the thought pattern that GOT them there.
It repeats because it’s human nature: tribalism. Under our 21st c western clothes, we’re all just Hutus and Tutsis at heart. That, plus Alpha and Beta pack animals.
As for history, it swings like a pendulum (do). Or these lines from Auden:
“They were right, my dear,
All those voices were right, and still are.
This land is not the sweet home that it looks
Nor its peace the historical calm of a site
Where something was settled once and for all.”
Damn. Should’ve been “calm of a site” Feel like fixing it?
The academic, white smocked, smoker-hatin’ klan from Californ-i-yay are so proud of their converted, Nicorette chewin’ prez that they sent him a million dollar thank you card.
“Four of the top ten organizations whose staff donated to President Obama’s reelection campaign were universities, data released by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) reveals.
The University of California (UC) represented the single largest employee group to donate to President Obama’s campaign in 2012, funneling $1,092,906 to assist the President in his bid to gain reelection. That number includes the university’s PACs, individual members or employees, and employee’s immediate families.
In comparison, Microsoft’s (Billy ‘Smokefree China’ Gates) employees placed a distant second on the list, donating $761,343.
Three other universities also earned spots on the top ten list, with their faculty and staff giving large sums of money to the Obama campaign.
Harvard was number five in donations overall, giving $602,992 to the President’s campaign. Stanford (Home to Robert Proctor) donated $473,372 putting them at seventh on the list and Columbia donated $411,894 leaving the Ivy League university ninth in contributions.”
It’s a wonder they didn’t have the Nicorette King come out and make an appearance on behalf of Proposition 29. The tax proceeds were slated to go to UC San Francisco, Berkeley and Santa Cruz and their grateful employees would have then recycled part of the bonanza back to ex-smokin’ President Barry.
How’s that for a mutual back scratching society.
Put out the cigarette and pass that gravy, comrade O’Blimey.
Very interesting thoughts, Frank. Wasn’t it A.J.P. Taylor, the historian, who said something like, ‘The one lesson we learn from history is that we never learn from history’?
The Antis hate it when they’re called Fascists or Nazis (as they have been often and for decades now), and they repeatedly brush it off as a ridiculous comparison, but of course that’s just what they are. People in general tend to think critics are being hyperbolic when they call Antis Nazis. They seem to think the critics are suggesting that Antis want to attack Poland or exterminate Jews. That’s not it. It’s that Antis want to propagate their fanatical ideology across the globe and they want to exterminate the people who do not adopt the ideology.
To an Anti, or a Nazi, anything but blind and absolute acceptance of their dogma is wrong, impure, idiotic, and necessarily evilly inspired. If you are a smoker, or drinker, or are fat, or do not want to exterminate those nauseating people, you are incomprehensible to Antis. They have one-track minds. They’re monomaniacs. Their way is The Way. It’s the New Order. Nothing and nobody can stand in the way of The Way. Decency, reason, intellectual perspective, personal dignity, freedom and rights, all the things necessary to creating a society worth living in, are likewise perfectly incomprehensible to them.
The Antis have nothing but contempt for criticism and for critics. They think of themselves as a Master Race of superior thinkers. They are the elite and infallible ones. All others must fall before them. The Antis think just as the Nazis did. That’s the point of the comparison. And the Nazis, and the Antis, and the Puritans, and Islamic Fundamentalists, and all sorts of zealots going back from today to the dawn of mankind, see themselves as great progressive purifiers, with a mission to make all of us great progressive purifiers, who exterminate the impure, utterly valueless, and infinitely dangerous “others”.
The label “Nazi” fits very well on Antis. No, it doesn’t mean they want to take the Sudetenland. It means they’re arrogant, vicious, cruel, dictatorial crazy bastards. Frank is right. We want to think that German Nazism was an anomaly, that Nazis were a single isolated and mutant generation of monsters, and that such things as Nazism can’t happen again. But if we think that way we’re wrong.
The trouble is, Nazis were people, and people can be Nazis, or can follow Nazis, anytime. People can be monstrous. It’s always been so and always will be so. Antism has to be crushed with force, and then, we’ll have to go after the next manifestation of Nazi/Eugenics/Puritan (pick your favorite label) fanaticism and hatefulness. Call them what you will, the hateful bastards never let up on us, so we can never let up on them.
Steve I think history has already answered our dilema here. The Progressives under President Wilson were pushing the same one world order before,during and especially after the war in 1918. The league of nations was the first attempt at whats going on today and it failed. WW2 brought the same tactics again with the creation of the UN. Facism never left it just changed suits. We will win as we always do in the end,lets just hope it doesnt take 2 world wars to end it.
Likewise, Steve Kelly, people say that the Nazi comparison is a hyperbole and obscene because the the tobacco control industry has not murdered 6,000,000 people. However, that’s missing the point completely because you don’t have to kill anyone at all to be a Nazi. To be a Nazi, all you have to do is think like them!
Oh sorry, Furor Teutonicus, you already made this point above. I suppose I just put brass knobs on it…
No problem. As far as I know, I have not copyrighted it….yet. :-)
In UK, Twitter, Facebook rants land some in jail
Read more: http://www.myfoxny.com/story/20104567/in-uk-twitter-facebook-rants-land-some-in-jail#ixzz2CIrgFzH2
Frank Davis: Yes, you say this about the authoritarian of the health Nazis, but don’t worry – the old-style Nazis are still alive and well. Look at Hungary and Greece for just two examples.
You all forget one point. “Nazis” were “socialists”, read “Commy shite”, and commys were NEVER defeated hand to hand.
THAT is the problem. 1939-45 only cut an arm off. The rest of the body was left healthy, alive and kicking.
This raises the question that Margo was asking a few days back. Was Hitler right wing or left wing?
For most of my left wing life, I regarded Hitler as right wing. And for the left, “right wing” really just means “evil”. Now that I’m more right wing, I regard Hitler and the Nazis as left wing, because they were collectivists, and their particular collective was the German people.
I’ve also read that in pre-war Germany it was quite easy to convert Communists into Nazis, and vice versa. And this was probably because they believed more or less the same thing, except that the Communist collective was the Workers of the World. Although, with the USSR opting for “socialism in one country”, Soviet Communism was almost the mirror image of German Nazism.
In both cases, the aim was top-down control of whatever collective they thought they were running. And that would appear to be the principal hallmark of socialist states.
Yes, Frank, and the top down authoritarianism of socialism is also clearly manifest in the thinking of the more benign Fabian socialism which is what we have in this country and which triumphed in the Labour Party over the Russian style socialists on its “left” wing. It’s hardly surprising then, that Ed Balls, yet another Fabian, although I usually think of him as a commie in sheep’s clothing, is a member of the Bilderberg Group which seeks global control of the world’s resources and money.
Supremely irritating for me, is the great socialist trick. This trick is to entice people’s minds by confronting them with images of impoverished humanity in order to elicit their compassion. In itself, the capacity to show compassion is an important moral virtue, but whilst we generate our salt tears instigated by the presentations of socialism and whist we are hypnotised by them, those who present them set in place those systems to
control us on the basis that we must sacrifice our freedom to produce a better world.
I remember being taught in Politics classes at college that although most people think of politics as being a straight line, with extreme left-wing ideologies at one end and extreme right-wing ideologies at the other, the effect upon the people living under those ideologies is virtually identical. So that, essentially, politics in all of its varying shades of blue or red, far from being a scale starting at one end and finishing at another, is more akin to a circle, with the extreme right and the extreme left, instead of being at the most distant points possible from each other in terms of their effects, as one might imagine, meet at precisely the same point on that circle. The only difference are the excuses that the people at the top make for maintaining their own positions, but the effect upon their citizens is indistinguishable.
Maybe you will find some interesting comparisons here:
http://www.relay-of-life.org/speech/speech.html
Funny thing about History; depending upon who is doing the telling, there can be many different versions.
Some might say the UK smoking ban was widely perceived as necessary, is hugely popular, and has brought about immediate and significant health benefits.
Others might dis-agree with that version of History.
That refers mostly to ‘Social History’.
‘Natural History’ usually has more rigorous methods and is more reliable.
A comment on DP
COP….. there’s another nice little “5-star” get away for this self-installed clique of miscreants. The sanctimonious, self-absorbed, greedy bureaucrats of the World Hygiene Organization are bad enough. But there are the like-deranged-minded that infest, that have infected, government health bureaucracies. And it’s these halfwits in government bureaucracies – who have also not been elected – that have allowed the nations they misrepresent to be hogtied to the WHO FCTC. It doesn’t matter of what persuasion politicians are. Once a newly elected health minister is “briefed” by their health bureaucracy, they are spat out as a rabid antismoker, able to parrot all the standard slogans.
Countries around the world are being “standardized”, “uniformized”, assaulted, looted, according to a demonstrably perverse physicalist/materialist ideology. And the conduit of this criminal control from the WHO to the nations is medically-dominated Public Health. We can be sure that many of those attending the ego-massaging get-away have undergone shallow training in a Public Health course delivering them a Masters or PhD in how to shove dangerous ideology down everyone’s throat all the while masqueraded as “science”.
In the eugenics domination early last century in a number of countries (e.g., America, Germany), “hygiene” was a buzz word. In context, hygiene was synonymous with the term “health”: Public Hygiene meant Public Health. There were all sorts of subdivisions such as Racial Hygiene, Industrial Hygiene, Reproductive Hygiene, and “behavioral” hygiene (e.g., anti-tobacco, anti-alcohol, dietary prescriptions, physical exercise). The perversity of this approach was the reducing of health to an entirely physical/biological phenomenon. This ideological bent was obviously dominated by physicians, biologists, zoologists, statisticians. These fools view humans as no more than a human “herd”, and where they can “engineer” a “better” herd through their statistical comparisons of groups for particular markers. Bear in mind, too, that “prevention” is the cornerstone of the eugenics framework.
The eugenics mentality, which is physicalist and with social-engineering intent, was never resolved in America post-WWII. It took only a few decades post-WWII for physicalism/materialism and its obsession with only physical health to come to the fore again, specifically in America. The term “healthism” was coined to describe this emerging “movement” in the 1970s. And it’s a reasonable term although it does not do immediate justice to its profound connection to “hygienism” (healthism) of eugenics.
This time we don’t see the Racial Hygiene that eugenics was notorious for early last century (it’s still too hot an issue). The emphasis has specifically been on the behavioral dimension, with tobacco-use being the first target. But make no mistake. The reducing of health to only a biological phenomenon and the targeting of the behavioral dimension is very much the product of the eugenics mentality. And we can also see that its one-sided communication mainstay is propaganda masqueraded as “science”.
So let’s look carefully. The WHO is not a “health” organization; it’s a medical organization. It has no monopoly on health. It and government health bureaucracies around the world are dominated by physicalism, the medical model, and statistics. The mentality is to “educate”, coerce, force (social engineering) the public into the “right” behaviors. That’s eugenics. It’s not the full scope of the eugenics framework, but eugenics, nevertheless.
Eugenics is statist in orientation – a self-installed, medically-aligned clique dictates how all should live on the basis of statistical odds. It has an utter contempt for the idea of individual freedom or personal autonomy.
So, this latest WHO venture should come as no surprise. The WHO, unelected and with no jurisdiction to make such proposals, is raising the prospect of a global tobacco tax. It can do this because it knows that government health bureaucracies consist mostly of similarly shallow minds, and that the media and public still haven’t a clue of what’s actually occurring. More pathetic still are the “in camera” sessions……. just more contempt for the public.
Motion to ban smoking on Leinster House grounds goes up in smoke
A motion put forward by Senator John Crown to ban smoking on the Leinster House campus failed to ignite today.
By Declan Whooley
http://www.joe.ie/news-politics/current-affairs/motion-to-ban-smoking-on-leinster-house-grounds-goes-up-in-smoke-0030530-1
Senator Crown stated that if the HSE was able ban on hospital campuses, than the same should apply to the grounds of Leinster House.
“If it is good enough for poor sick patients who are stuck in hospital beds and the staff who work in hospitals, it should be good enough for our parliamentarians,” he said in The Irish Times.
Crown, who is also a consultant oncologist, said that the only person who supported the proposal was Peter Fitzpatrick, Fine Gael TD for Louth.
Fianna Fáil spokesman on health Billy Kelleher defended the opposition to the motion stating that it could be unhealthy, ironically, to implement the ban for the politicians.
“It could be dangerous to some member’s health to go outside the gates and have a cigarette because they’d have people outside there waiting for them at particular times when governments inevitably get unpopular,” he said with a straight face.
Finian McGrath is delighted that the motion has been opposed and has called on Crown to drop the issue.
“I would now ask for Professor Crown to cop on and show a bit more respect to the 30 per cent of the Irish population who smoke.”
You will not be surprised to know that Dublin North Central TD McGrath is one of the 30 members of the Dail who is a smoker.
Pingback: Your Questions About Free Make Your Own Survey | Free Survey Maker
Pingback: Your Questions About Free Make Your Own Survey | Free Survey Maker