Still, not a peep of protest from my readership about the Hitler Speeches excerpts! I do declare I am amazed!
More telling yet, WorldNetDaily, a popular Internet news service - broadly perceived as being "on the right" and "politically incorrect" in a somewhat fuzzy, mainstream way - suddenly came out with an article I strongly urge you to read.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_nyquist/20000518_xcjny_who_was_be.shtml
And guess who are the "villains" for the Bolshevik Revolution, according to its author? The Germans! This piece of blatant disinformation sounds as though the ADL wrote it for WorldNetDaily with political doozies in mind!
No matter!
Again I am prefacing today's segments of some pre-war Hitler speeches against Communism/Bolshevism with various excerpts from a book review addressing the title "The Black Book of Communism." This book review can itself best be described as a diversion tactic and as a means to save face and atone - or at least slough off some of the responsibility these people obviously bear for Communist actions and crimes, be it through the Resistance in France during the war or in destructively influencing politics and education since the end of the war.
Suddenly these former Communists begin to see the light and try to do damage control:
Columnist Diana West, writing in the Washington Times, November 19, 199, congratulated Cortois and other authors [of The Black Book] on breaking "a political taboo" by showing the moral equivalence between Communism and Nazism rather than writing about a nonexistent moral equivalence between Communism and Capitalism "so long in vogue among intellectuals."
(W)riting in Canada's National Post on January 6, 2000, Terrence Corcoran wrote that after reading The Black Book "it is impossible to contemplate the past 100 years without acknowledging the rise and fall of the institutionalized totalitarianism that was Communism as perhaps the most important development of the century." Corcoran went on to warn "Canada's loyal band of Castro backers" that they wouldn't like The Black Book's section on Castro, which shows him for the tyrant he is.
But West and Corcoran were exceptions among a horde of reviewers who found themselves intensely uncomfortable with the notion that Communism might be called evil and ranked along Nazism as one of the great wrongs of the very bloody 20th century.
More characteristic were three reviews that appeared in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Times of London. Each acknowledged that The Black Book has good qualities, but then refuted any compliments concerning the book by claiming the authors (and Cortois, most particularly) as terribly off base.
Ohio University history professor Jeffry Herf, reviewing for the Washington Post on Jan 23, 2000, for example, could write: "Courtois has a point: In Western academia, scholars who chose to focus on the crimes of Communism were and remain a minority and face the career-blocking danger of being labeled right-wingers." But then Herf turns the tables by charging that it's not fair to compare those dead from Nazism with the number dead from Communism because Communism lasted eight decades while Nazism existed only for 12 years, and if Adolf Hitler had endured longer, he would have killed perhaps 30 million more.
It's almost as though Herf exonerates the Communists because they killed over a longer period of time and weren't as efficient as the Nazis. But what's oddest about the otherwise liberal Herf's claim is that it could be used as an argument that the West should have stepped in sooner to stop Communist slaughter, just as it stepped in to bring an end to the Nazi menace. If World War II prevented Hitler from killing tens of millions more, just think how many lives would have been saved if Lenin, Stalin, Mao Tse-tung or Pol Pot had been stopped sooner.
You have just seen some Talmudic contortions. The bare bones reason for the Hitler rise was that he had a face-down with the Communists, the likes of which the world has never seen and likely never will again - the likes of which still makes the originators and political-ethnic benefactors of that evil system quaking in their boots.
Just remember that what Hitler saw as though he had a magnifying glass was precisely the danger now mildly known as the "New World Order" - an ever so politely sanitized phrase in order not to offend today's sensibilities.
Read excerpts of the Hitler speeches against that frame of reference.
* In his closing speech delivered at the Nuremberg Parteitag of 1937, Hitler said:
"(I)t is the democracy which first creates the conditions favourable to the organization of those terroristic bodies which we know as Social Democracy, the Communist Party, or the Bolshevist International.
"But while through democracy the will to a vigorous self-defense is gradually stifled - partly by means of a thousand formalities, partly thanks to the conscious training of representatives of the State with the view of making them as weak as possible - there develops in the radical revolutionary movements the advance-guard of the Jewish World Revolution. Weaknesses in the social and economic life of the people contribute to facilitate the disintegrating attack of this Bolshevist International. . . (...)
"While a part of the 'Jewish fellow citizens' demobilizes democracy through the influence of the Press or even infects it with its poison through linking it up with revolutionary associations in the form of 'Popular Fronts". . . (t)he ultimate goal is then the final Bolshevist revolution, that is, not the setting up of the leadership of the proletariat by the proletariat, but the subjection of the proletariat under the leadership of its new alien master.
"(I)n every attempt to spread Bolshevism more widely in Europe we see on principle a disturbance of the European balance. (...)
"We must categorically decline to receive instructions concerning the essential character of such a Bolshevist disturbance of the balance of power from statesmen who do not possess in this field the knowledge which we possess, and who were not in the position to collect those practical experiences which we unfortunately were bound so to collect. (...)
"(T)he first obvious result of every Bolshevist revolution is immediately no increase in production but a total destruction of the present economic values and further of all economic functions in the countries affected thereby. But the world does not live by Economic Conferences held in one place or another from time to time - as indeed experience has proved - but the world lives from the exchange of goods and therefore primarily from the production of goods. (...)
"(But for us Germans, who have not the possibility of spreading our trade communications over a world empire of our own, Europe - and Europe precisely as it is to-day - is one of the conditions of our own existence. A Bolshevist Europe would render any trade policy impossible for our State, and that not because we do not wish to trade, but because we should have then not have anyone to trade with.
"It is therefore for us no matter of purely theoretical considerations or moral anxieties, it is not a problem giving rise to international complaints - for we have not so much respect for international institutions as to believe for a second that we should ever receive any practical help from them, we can look for nothing but empty platitudes - for us this is one of the most vital questions. (...)
"I am only stating facts. We have a very real interest in seeing to it that this Bolshevist plague shall not spread over Europe. With a Nationalist France, for instance, we have in the course of history naturally had many disagreements. But somehow or other we both belong together in the great European family of peoples, and especially is that true when all of us look most deeply into our own selves. Then I believe that we should not be willing to do without any of the really civilized nations of Europe, we would not even wish them away. Each of us has to thank the other for much exasperation and suffering; but also for a vast mutual inspiration. We have given each other models, examples, many a lesson; much joy, much beauty we owe to each other. If we are just, then we have every reason for mutual admiration, much less for mutual hatred!
"We have neither the desire nor the intention to be political or economic hermits! Germany has not isolated herself, neither in political nor in economic life. Not politically: on the contrary, she is anxious to cooperate with all those who keep in view the goal of a true European community. Only we categorically refuse to allow ourselves to be united with those whose programme is the destruction of Europe and who make no secret of that fact.
"(T)he claim of an uncivilized . . . Bolshevist international gang of criminals to rule from Moscow over Germany, an ancient land of European civilization, is simply insolence. Moscow remains Moscow - and Soviet Russia, so far as we are concerned, Soviet Russia. (...)
"We have no intention of forcing upon anyone else our conception of ideals; we would ask that none should seek to impose their views upon us."
=====
Tomorrow: Conclusion of "Hitler versus Communism"
=====
Thought for the Day:
""The coming world war will cause not only reactionary classes and dynasties, but entire reactionary peoples to disappear from the face of the Earth. And that will be Progress. "
(Quoting Karl Marx in "The New World Order", by William T. Still. Copyright 1990)