Skip to main content

Golly gee whiz, I've been writing about the pervasive reuse of Nazi propaganda themes for over five years, but I never got around to the theme of the persecution of Christians by Jews and their liberal henchmen.

But it's only recently I got around to checking out "The International Jew," first published by famous antisemite Henry Ford as a serial in his insanely antisemitic rag, the Dearborn Independent.  Ford was a personal hero of Hitler, who praised Ford in Mein Kampf. He hosted Ford in Germany, where Ford attended the antisemitic Oberammergau Passion Play.(photo of Ford in Germany). Hitler also awarded Ford the highest civilian version of the Iron Cross, and the photo of this event was public relations fiasco for the aging Ford.  Ford helped the Nazi industrialization effort, and his German factories used slave labor.  After America declared war on Germany and Ford began supplying the US military, Henry Ford seemed to be less than 100% committed to the Allied war effort.

Ford's newsletter was published in the early 1920s although he denied knowing its racist  contents (just like Ron Paul!).  A compilation of articles was translated into German in 1923 and published by the Nazi party as "The International Jew."  It is said that Hitler had a copy of "The International Jew" while writing "Mein Kampf" and plagiarized parts of it.

According to wikipedia:

At the Nuremberg Trials, Baldur von Schirach mentioned that The International Jew made a deep impression on him and his friends in their youth and influenced them in becoming antisemitic. He said: "... we saw in Henry Ford the representative of success, also the exponent of a progressive social policy. In the poverty-stricken and wretched Germany of the time, youth looked toward America, and apart from the great benefactor, Herbert Hoover, it was Henry Ford who to us represented America." In 1922, The New York Times reported that Adolf Hitler's office contained a large picture of Ford. A well-thumbed copy of the International Jew was found in his library.
I did not know what modern themes I'd find in "The International Jew," but I got a hint when I found it on the Australian white Christian nationalist anti-New-World-Order Bible Believers website, which has "The International Jew" and lots of other antisemitic material. Bible Believers is a notoriously eccentric pseudochristian antisemitic Holocaust denial  site. Feel free to take a minute to bang your head on the desk. Feel better?

It's important to remember that Nazism was above all a conspiracy theory, and that modern conspiracy subculture is never more than two mouse clicks away Fascist and holocaust denial web sites.  I'm not sure how Bible Believers would describe themselves, but it's a good place to look for "Christians" recycling Nazi themes.

OK, let's all goosestep over the apricot strudel.....

What I'm going to do here is reprint a section of "The International Jew," and I am going to substitute the word "liberal" for the word "Jew."  I am not abusing the source material to make my point - in fact, Hitler seemed to use the words "liberal" and "Jew" interchangeably in "Mein Kampf."  And when we do that, you will see that "The International Jew" sounds just like the firehose of current mainstream right wing talking points.  

Also notice the all too familiar trick of the right wing extremists accusing others of their sins, and that this tactic was solidly in use by the 1920s.  Here is it the Jews who were being accused of being the bigoted aggressors.  Hitler would expand this theme in Mein Kampf to accuse the Jews of planning a genocidal rampage to enslave the world with their liberal multicultural henchmen.

This is not to equate the plight of the Jews and any other group, liberal or conservative.  It is showing how propaganda written 90 years ago is still in constant use with only minor modifications, and these modifications are entirely consistent with the source material.  This is not an example of a gratuitous identification with the Jews, like the CEO of Home Depot did last week. Instead it is the synonymous use of the word "Jew" and "liberal" as Hitler himself did. This theme that still seems to resonate in conservatives modern obsession with George Soros (surely an "international Jew") and Saul Alinsky (dead 30 years!).  And when we substitute "liberal" for "Jew," we see how the antisemitic propaganda of the 1920s is still with us today.

Also, given the rich history of antisemitic poison, it would be a miracle if these themes had vanished.  This sort of aggression fills such an essential niche in the human psyche (and has so many wealthy supporters), that it simply can't go away, it can only mutate, adapt, and change with the times. It would be a mistake to think "Oh it just went away."  Instead, we have to ask "Where did it escape to?"

And so, courtesy of BibleBelievers.org.AU, here's an excerpt from "The International Jew"......

The International Jew
Chapter 3. VICTIMS, OR PERSECUTORS?

 The fact is that while there is no "religious persecution" of the Jews (liberals), there is very much real religious persecution by the Jews (liberals). That is one of the outstanding characteristics of organized Jewish life(liberalism) in the United States, its active, unceasing, powerful and virulent attacks upon any and all forms of Christianity which may chance to come to public notice. Now and again we hear of outbreaks of sectarian bigotry between Catholics and Protestants, but these are not to be compared with the steady, relentless, alert, anti-Christian activity of the Jews (liberal) organizations. There are doctrinal disputes within the Christian Churches, but none that challenge the basis of Christianity itself; organized Judaism (liberalism), however, is not content with doctrinal disputation, but enlists its vast commercial and political power against everything that it regards as, (public displays of faith) in its own words, "Christological manifestations."

  No President of the United States has yet dared to take his inaugural oath on the open pages of the New Testament - the Jews (liberals) would denounce him. Various governors of American states, having used the word "Christian" in their Thanksgiving proclamations, have been obliged to teach Americanism in our cities because it held that Christianity and good citizenship were synonymous!

  No public man in America has ever given public evidence of his Christian faith without rebuke from the Jews (liberals). Not only do the Jews (liberals) disagree with Christian teaching - which is their right and no one questions it - but they excise it on demand of the Jews (liberals), Everything that would remind the child in school that he is living in the midst of a Christian civilization, in a nation declared by its Supreme Court to be founded on the Christian principles, has been ordered out of the public schools on Jewish (liberals) demand. In a nation and at a time when a minority of Jews (liberals) can print every year a record of the apologies they have extorted from public officials for "having inadvertently used the term 'Christian'," it is desirable that this charge of "religious persecution" should be placed where it belongs.

Didn't that sound something that today you can hear on Fox and right wing web sites as many times a day as you like?

Now check this out - it's the modern "reverse racism" card being used in classic antisemitic propaganda. Because only racists complain about racism, and daddy only drinks because you cry!

 The Jews (liberal) glories in religious persecution as the American glories in patriotism. Religious prejudice is the Jews (liberals') chief expression of their own patriotism. It is the only well-organized, active and successful form of religious prejudice in the country because they have succeeded in pulling off the gigantic trick of making not their own attitude, but any opposition to it, bear the stigma of "prejudice" and "persecution." That is why the Jews (liberal) uses these terms so frequently. He wants to label the other fellow first. That is why any investigation(investigator)  of the Jewish Question (racism) is so wickedly advertised as anti-Semitism (racist) - the Jew (liberal) knows the advantage of labeling the other man.

Originally posted to bernardpliers on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 03:05 PM PDT.

Also republished by Political Language and Messaging and Community Spotlight.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  An insult to victims of The Holocaust to co-op (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, nextstep, commonmass, Jay C, Cedwyn

    and compare the plight of Jews and liberals. This sounds like what that rich guy said about 1 percenters being persecuted.  

    If I comply with non-compliance am I complying? Sarcasm is the ability to insult stupid people without them realizing it.

    by thestructureguy on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 03:17:45 PM PDT

    •  I know what you're saying and addressed that point (34+ / 0-)

      And when the modern conservatives of today rail against "the international liberal elites" you know who they mean.

      Also, as I made the point above, we can either ask "Where did that stuff go, and what form is it taking today?" or we can say "Oh well, that's gone and done with."  I don't think it went anywhere, it's still kicking around.

      Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

      by bernardpliers on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 03:22:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And I'll Add A Disclaimer (7+ / 0-)

      Just to avoid confusion

      Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

      by bernardpliers on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 03:29:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I disagree. In this case I think it's important (31+ / 0-)

      to review history, to illuminate the present, and I don't think this is at all like the 1%-er's bullshit.
      The Christian Nationalists in this country are in fact trying to take us down a dark road, and we'd better be prepared.
      I do not think this diary is disrespectful of Holocaust survivors.

      You can't make this stuff up.

      by David54 on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 03:52:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  First Comment Thread Of All Fascism Diaries (13+ / 0-)

        ....must wander off and eventually get lost in the tall grass.

        These seems to be a general rule.  It does not matter who wrote the diary or who makes the first comment.  

        Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

        by bernardpliers on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 03:59:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, but remember the categories (0+ / 0-)

        If we're going to talk about the methods of propaganda, then fine. However, when we substitute a term, we're making an argument by analogy. That means we need to justify the analogy.

        Jew/liberal: A group being targeted by the writer? Yes
        A group being targeted by attempting to reverse the charge of victimization? No. (Liberals don't make the claim. That's a stereotype of the right, where they think "liberal" is sensitivity training.)
        A group that is defined racially by the author, ethnically and culturally today? No.
        Author building on Nietzsche's daring nihilism and his "all victims are conquerors?" No, no.

        You see what I mean. The methodology is, I think, coincidentally similar, but I said more about that below.

        "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

        by The Geogre on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 06:23:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Liberals don't make the claim of victimization (9+ / 0-)

          but the right reverses it because they know that they are intent on victimization and they know the claim if not now will eventually be true.
          Not to the point of "genocide" necessarily, except for the fact that you have the "2nd amendment" whacks looking for someone to shoot.

          The John Birch/anticommunist crowd (and industry) that grew up in the face of the left has found itself without a "left" to tilt against, to the point that they have begun attacking conservative Republican Senators as being "too moderate". All they have to do is compromise on a small matter or even take a picture smiling with "that one" and they're toast.

          The method is not 'coincidentally similar', it's similar for a reason, and it is perpetrated by similar actors.
          You know, Hitler didn't start out by saying "elect me and I'll throw all the Jews in an oven". He started by seizing on existing bigotry and exacerbating it, and also by talking constantly about a "restoral " of Christianity to a central position in German culture.
          Glenn Beck for one has admitted his fascination and study of Hitler and the Nazis.

          You can't make this stuff up.

          by David54 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 07:08:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Coincident (0+ / 0-)

            Everything depends upon the writer's and audience's view of the group as a "race" or ethnic group. Henry Ford, and Adolf Hitler, not only picked on the Jews because they saw Jews as a very particular "race," but because there were historical resentments at play. Ford was never very good at anti-semitism, and he had the book in question cribbed, but he was building on the idea of The Jew as capitalist who demanded rent on money and had no allegiance to the nation. Hitler played exactly to that stereotype, too. He claimed that "the Jews" had sold out Germany in WW 1, that the Treaty of Versailles had been international money men (Jews) getting rich off of every nation, because they were the blood sucking a-national parasites.

            In short, everything depended on the idea that "Jews" did not belong to any nation, that they were therefore not loyal, and that they were synonymous with international finance.

            You simply cannot substitute "liberal" there.

            Hitler's theories depended upon Jews being unable to stop being Jews, too. He took the usual anti-semitism and married it with his own Darwinist version of Nietzsche to come up with the idea that this "race" had to be eliminated.

            Again, you can't just swap names.

            Sure, propaganda is propaganda. See Erich Fromm. Better yet, see Eric Hoffer.

            "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

            by The Geogre on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 09:43:17 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  True but incomplete (8+ / 0-)

              Fascism is notoriously inconsistent in its philosophy, indeed this is how Holocaust deniers make their claims of Hitler the lamb, Hitler the peacemaker forced into war by Churchill.  And the Germans kept contradictory streams of propaganda flowing to the east and west. Not to mention the internal divisions of the Nazis in northern and southern Germany.

              The Jews were widely considered to be an "Oriental race" incapable of assimilation, even in America. And Hitler was making the case against German Jews, who were the most assimilated and cosmopolitan  in Europe.

              But concepts of race and The Enemy Within usually goes hand in hand with "race traitors."  And Hitler identified Jews with the Bolshevism, trade unions, and the press.  The idea of liberal puppets of the Jews was central to nazism.

              As Adolph said in Mein Kampf

              The art of leadership. . . consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention. . . . The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category.(Mein Kampf, p118)
              A technique that we see today

              Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

              by bernardpliers on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 10:04:06 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Again, you're on methods; the analogy fails (0+ / 0-)

                You can't switch "liberal" and "Jew" because "Jew" was a term freighted historically in very different ways to the speakers and writers. Further, it had a pre-existing alarm due to various acts that unaffiliated nationalists already interpreted as disloyal.

                You're saying, "But the techniques are the same." Yes, propaganda is propaganda. I agree with that. I disagree with putting us in the place of pre-war Jewry. The switching of the terms does not just highlight propaganda: it suggests an equivalence of other sorts (including, most dishonestly, danger) between the groups. That's why I object.

                Showing how the current right stumbles over and consciously repeats state propaganda is well and good. We don't need to make ourselves out as victims and ourselves play the "and then they killed the Jews" game.

                "Fascism" is indeed amorphous. The Italian party was very unlike Germany, and our notions of left and right may not make any sense in discussing it. The German party, though, did bring out the "one folk, one God, one fatherland" ideology that would fit seamlessly with today's American far right.

                Sure: let's talk about the propaganda and the ideological similarities. Let's just not say, "Liberals are the Jews," as that implies a future outcome and performs emotional blackmail on the reader.

                "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

                by The Geogre on Mon Mar 24, 2014 at 03:42:32 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Not An Analogy, Not Something I Made Up Either (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  WB Reeves
                  You can't switch "liberal" and "Jew" because "Jew" was a term freighted historically in very different ways to the speakers and writers.
                  Well Hitler did use "Jew" and "liberal" interchangeably in Mein Kampf, so I maintain that my method is  consistent with the use of these words by the Nazis.

                  And it's not an analogy, Hitler used these words synonymously,

                  Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

                  by bernardpliers on Mon Mar 24, 2014 at 11:08:12 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  But isn't this an example of the left doing the (0+ / 0-)

                same thing. Creating bogeymen.  Propaganda is something all sides do but labeled depending on which side is speaking.  It's the "other side" that is using propaganda but it's "our side" that speaks the truth.  Associating the right with Hitler or nazism is just to complicated and should not be a tactic for the left.  IMHO.  You get to bogged down with actions of Hitler and Nazi's that aren't really part of the argument.  Unless you believe millions upon millions of liberals are going to be rounded up and murdered.  I'm not disagreeing with your point as much as you may think.  The counter argument and one that will derail the whole point is "oh so conservatives are going to gas liberals now?"  I'm a big believer in arguing the issues. A problem with that is, low information people.  They rely on sound bites.  All sides do.  Easier to just say "you're a Nazi" or "you're a racist".  Then the conversation is hijacked.  

                If I comply with non-compliance am I complying? Sarcasm is the ability to insult stupid people without them realizing it.

                by thestructureguy on Mon Mar 24, 2014 at 07:45:53 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  So, your points which flesh out how then was not (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              The Geogre

              like now are part of the whole picture of history which includes how then was like now.
              That's as it should be, in my opinion. It's not a zero sum game. It's understanding.

              You can't make this stuff up.

              by David54 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 07:40:27 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Actually, "he" DID ... (5+ / 0-)

            Well, THE GODWIN REDACTION wasn't explicit about "ovens" or even "deportation" back in the mid-20s ...

            But on the other hand a banner proclaiming "War Hero REDACTED Speaks Tonight" didn't bring in the working class Germans into meetings nearly as well as "The Jews Are Our Misfortune."

            Before 1933, REDACTION was a pretty lukewarm, pro-forma anti-Semite ... prior to his military service, it would be hard to argue the man was anti-Semitic at all ( in the sense that  Nationalists like Julius Streicher ... and Richard Wagner were anti-Semitic).

            But in the beginning he had advisers and handlers.  He listened. He learned. And whenever resources were required ... a meeting hall, a newspaper, an automobile, a few hundred thousand brown shirts ... war surplus rifles, a few dozen troop carriers ... there were Sponsors in the Military, Banking and Industrial communities to make sure that Corporal REDACTION had what he needed to take the next step.

            Now as it turned out the anti-Semitism was probably the Reich's REAL "misfortune".  Had the people the NDSP persecuted and murdered instead been enlisted in the cause of Uber Alles the Battle of Stalingrad may have had a different outcome.  Had the resources squandered on mass murder been applied to the war effort ... the Normandy invasion might have turned out differently as well ...

            So the right wing corporatist string pullers HAD to learn important lessons from the German experience.

             First of all: no more "King Logs" with the potential to become "King Stork" .... No more bohemian vagabonds with charisma elevated to Supreme Autocrat without term limits.

            Then:  "patience" ... attempting to accomplish any radical agenda in the lifetime of one Leader is formula for overreach and disaster.  Slowly slowly catchee monkey

            I'm pretty sure KochCo has understood that  very well since the YAF and John Birch days.

            And here we are 50 years later.

            •  So, he didn't. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bernardpliers
              Well, THE GODWIN REDACTION wasn't explicit about "ovens" or even "deportation" back in the mid-20s ...
              I didn't say he wasn't an anti-semite. I said he wasn't explicit about ovens, concentration camps, etc. As he became more powerful, and his meme became more powerful, he became more explicit. There was still enough wiggle room for the German people to delude themselves about what was happening to those people who were being "deported".

              You can't make this stuff up.

              by David54 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 07:38:00 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You Are Both Right (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sfbob, David54

                Hitler chased out a whole generation of scientists and engineers (Einstein among them), and he corrupted the education system with political flunkies.  The German people "knew" and did not know.  All mass movements contain a large dose selective belief and denial.  They are all a sort of collective  "make believe."

                Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

                by bernardpliers on Mon Mar 24, 2014 at 07:49:56 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  The Holocaust was a horror, one that good (20+ / 0-)

      people hope never ever happens again.

      However, to cry "holocaust" whenever Hitler, Nazis, fascism or such topics arise is to ignore history and show an unwillingness to separate policy from what actually happened. We MUST and I emphasize MUST learn from the past to make sure another holocaust does not happen.

      It is of no benefit to most people to hide our heads in the sand because of the horror of the holocaust, except those who are enamored of the final solution - and there are many. They don't want the scrutiny.

      From the white supremecists to the christianists, we are bombarded daily with those working to make another group worthy of death - whether black, brown, gay or some other "hated" group, we need to learn how to 1) recognize such hatred is growing and 2) how to stop it before it gets to the final solution.

      Crying "Holocaust" when someone brings up Hitler et al and shutting down further discussion is only beneficial to those who refuse to acknowledge that there are groups who think the final solution never happened or it happened to a group that didn't affect them. It also benefits those leading the next group's anti-human scenario.

      I reject your reality and substitute my own - Adam Savage

      by woolibaar on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 04:34:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And had there been no Holocaust ... how would (5+ / 0-)

        the average American know that NAZIism was actually "bad." ?

        After all this time, wouldn't it seem that the desire to get out from under the Treaty of Versailles, to end the Worker/Capitalist Class War ... to Fight Communism ... to promote Private Proptery and Religion .... and to  advocate for physical fitness  and martial valor among the Youth all seem like GOOD things -- once one gets over their Anglophone prejudices ?

        My point here is that even WITHOUT the Holocaust, the Corporatist agenda of that time lead inevitably to a World War  (to overcome the Communist menace, and to contain the rising Japanese Imperial ambitions) and the  virtual enslavement of the German people to a military industrial complex, overseen by its banking and finance elites.

        And it's not as if there were not variants on Nationalism and Corporatism in what we now think of as "The Allies, except for Russia".

        They said "Patriotism"   (as did WE at the time.)
        We now say "Liberty" ...

        It still comes down to a "lifetime of anxious obedience" for soldiers and working people ... a wage barely adequate for daily needs --  and no pension or security at the  end of it.

        Different flags.  Different prejudices.  Same overall agenda.

        •  I agree. The topic needs to be discussed, (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Calamity Jean, blueoasis

          but too many want to shut down such discussion because of the Holocaust, like it was the only bad part of the whole thing.

          We need to compare what happened to Germany and Europe in political terms, not just the Holocaust (which happened to Jews, homosexuals and mentally deficient people). We need to open our eyes to make sure the war, the dictatorship and yes, the Holocaust, never happen again, especially to the US.

          I reject your reality and substitute my own - Adam Savage

          by woolibaar on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 03:42:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The immediate problem "here" is not so much (5+ / 0-)

            "Genocide" .

            GODWIN REDACTION put such a stink on Racism as a political ideology, that a mere thirty (or 40) years after the Nuremberg Trials even the Cross and Flag types have had to learn double-speak and misdirect-talk.

            But ... the progress toward the true and underlying goal of "The Men Who Financed Hitler"   ( and not all of them were German or Swiss) ... continues to accelerate.

            That goal:  a reliable surplus of  habitually obedient, high-skill non-union politically neutered workers -- and a major  transfer of wealth from those who earned it , to those who know best how to enjoy it.

            And forget  the Cult of Personality "Furher" nonsense ... it's fun for a while -- but eventually, that only gets you hung upside down from a lamp post.

            The Koch brothers really HATE to be mentioned by name ... and most Democrats accommodate them.  "Good manners among gentlefolk", I suppose.

        •  I Think That's The Point Of Holocaust Denial (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Calamity Jean

          If there had been no Holocaust, there would be an active Nazi Party holding elected offices in the US.  Anything Hitler had botched would be blamed on his personal eccentricities ("no true Scotsman").  

          Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

          by bernardpliers on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 04:37:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh ... I think we have one of those, right now (0+ / 0-)

            "Carrying a Cross and wrapped in the Flag" ... as predicted by Sinclaire Lewis.

            Of course ... without the torchlight parades, swastikas and Ooom-pah Bands, how would anyone raised on The Myth of Awful Adolph, Pied Piper of Vienna be able to recognize them?

    •  The diarist was not comparing Holocaust Jews to (19+ / 0-)

      liberals. He was comparing the propaganda aimed at both.
      Within my lifetime, the folks who were upset with the civil rights movement were blaming it on "Jew-liberals" as though the two terms were equivalent.
         As the diarist noted, Hitler railed against liberals, as did the infamous anti-semitic tract "Protocols of the Elders of Zion."
         Liberals and Jews have historically been despised by the same people.
         The hate mongering propaganda against liberals, which, since the Reagan era, has  effectively made "liberal" an epithet in American political discourse, is borrowed from the anti-semitic tracts of the late 19th and early 20th Century.
         That such propaganda led to acceptance of the Holocaust is well known. Several conservative pundits and politicians have made it clear that they wouldn't mind seeing the same thing happen to liberals.

    •  Which victims of the Holocaust? (6+ / 0-)

      Yes, Jews where the most prominent group, but they were not the only demo in the death camps.

      Martin Niemöller  (1892-1984) was an ardent nationalist and prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last 7 years of Nazi rule in concentration camps.

      First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out --
      Because I was not a Socialist.

      Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out --
      Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

      Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out --
      Because I was not a Jew.

      Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me.

      All of those groups were targeted, persecuted, executed and starved.

      Jews were just the most popular and numerous Whipping-boys of the mindset. What the diarist is pointing out is the path taken to the final solution he is not invalidated by the fact that these new-age Supremacists just haven't gotten to their end state yet. Or maybe the new end state won't be as horrifically focused as an all-out genocide (Stand Your Ground, voter suppression, SNAP defunding, Anti-gay agenda, etc. come to mind).

      21st Century America: The distracted, superficial perception of a virtual reality. Gettov Milawn

      by geez53 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 10:04:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And "Political Correctness" Conflates Jews/Liberal (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dirtandiron, blueoasis, travelerxxx

      The whole right wing conspiracy theory about "political correctness" is that it's an international Jewish conspiracy.  So movement conservatives like Pat Buchanan are quite explicit about casting liberals as the pawns of cosmically powerful Jew wizardry.  I've rewritten that diary a few times, but not posted it, mostly because there is so much material.

      Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

      by bernardpliers on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 11:35:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This was a good essay (19+ / 0-)

    Though when thinking about right-wing Christian complaints about being "oppressed," I'm reminded more of Southern slave owners bitching about abolitionists trying to "steal our unique institutions" than I am of Nazis.

    I did watch Lincoln again last night, so that might have something to do with it.

    Join Essa in a revolt against the gods. Continue the fight, Causality.

    by rbird on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 05:21:50 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for using that other "N" word. (13+ / 0-)

    I am not Jewish, but I have been accusing the Republicans of Naziness since early in the Bush Admin.  Of course I had just had two terms of Duhbya as Gov. so I was well versed on the attitudes of the Bush Mafia and the NeoCons.

    If there were no other similarities, and there are, the intolerance and hatred by the far right of so many different demographic groups, and the eagerness which which they are willing to use government and to misuse laws against their targets of hate to cause harm to the point of death, quacks and waddles a lot like Germany in the 1930's.  And a lot like the treatment of Blacks, Asians, Indians, women etc  in this country now.

  •  It is important to understand what led (21+ / 0-)

    to the actual Holocaust.  Without question, it was relentless lies like those spouted in Mein Kampf or on Faux nooze.  THEY ARE THE SAME!  They are offered in the same way, because Ailes and his evil allies have studied the period of pernicious propaganda and done their best to better it.  Instead of state radio & TV, we have sheeple who lock the station on faux or limpballs or that other bloviator, beck, so they can have their fears justified and enforced.
    When st. raygoon threw out the fairness doctrine, it doomed any hope of intelligent discourse.
    As odious as it seems, I would guess the only way to combat this crap is to do the same to them, since they never seem to listen to fact or reason.  
    The question, of course is, how?
    I hope there are some people out there who might have an idea or two.
    Isn't it clear enough that the rhetoric has turned into action by denying voting rights, invasive procedures for women, drug tests for "the poor?" The list does go on.
    Let's not become the frogs in the slowly heating pot.

    "Takes more than guns to kill a man" Joe Hill

    by sajiocity on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 07:25:30 PM PDT

    •  Is The Koch PR Department Behind This? (16+ / 0-)

      Notice the coordinated use of the "envy" theme?

      It's hardly crazy talk to suggest that some crazy Fascist billionaire is pulling the strings, because Ford already did that. Like maybe the Kochs, who seem determined to seize control of the US?

      Moreover, the Koch's dad founded the John Birch Society. Born in the Netherlands, he also worked for a time in Germany, so presumably he spoke German.

      Daddy Koch was  brilliant young chemical engineer, as he got older he went down the rabbit hole a racist wingnuttery.  As he came believe there were communist infiltrators everywhere in America, did he turn to the Fascist ideas of Henry Ford?

      Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

      by bernardpliers on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 08:56:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Alot has to do with emotional manipulation (14+ / 0-)

      (Excerpted from a recent diary)

      Some time ago I read The Political Brain by Drew Westen that examines how political opinions are formed, taking into account the whole person -- neurology and physiology.

      The problem is this.  Some people -- many people -- make up their minds based on how certain messages make them feel.  It doesn't have to be a positive feeling -- and often it is not.  But the republican messages are well-tuned to engender powerful emotional (and the related physical) responses.  Those responses become automatic and short-circuit higher thinking.  The responses are so powerful that people want more.  Yes, these things are often based on lies, hate, bigotry and other base human qualities -- but those are powerful emotions and people will continue to accept lies, hate, and bigotry if they keep getting an emotional charge from it.  It can even become addictive -- consider how many people listen to faux news or rush limbaugh for hours on end.

      I highly recommend Westen to all Kossacks.  In brief, Westen recommends the following principles.

      1. If you don't feel it, don't use it.

      2. Frame messages for emotional impact.

      3. Pitch your message at the right level.

      4. Appeal to the whole brain.

      These all come down to winning hearts and minds, in some sense.  It could also seem like "fighting fire with fire."  In some sense it is, but Westen also makes the case that it is possible to appeal to hearts and minds while maintaining one's integrity.  It is only emotional manipulation if you are trying to get someone to accept a lie.  If you are appealing to hearts and minds in a principled way, you are just making your communication more effective -- speaking the language of the listener.

    •  sajiocity, you wrote.... (0+ / 0-)
      "I would guess the only way to combat this crap is to do the same to them, since they never seem to listen to fact or reason."

      Fighting fire with fire will just burn the whole house down.

      I hear your frustration and I share it. I often wonder how we can be tolerant of intolerance and not become the thing we hate...

      “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.”

      ― Friedrich Nietzsche  

      "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." ~ Edward Abbey

      by SaraBeth on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 05:26:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There is considerable evidence that the neo-con (7+ / 0-)

      intellectuals were influenced by fascist/Nazi philosopher Carl Schmitt, who despised democracy and described how to divert a democracy into a dictatorship.
         Among his suggestions: That a particular ethnic or political group (the enemy) be placed outside the normal protection of the law.
         That the real power in a democracy is in the hands of whoever is authorized to declared a state of emergency, because only when a democratic state is operating under a leader with emergency, extra-legal powers can it work effectively.
         So a state of emergency (or exception) is actually the normal condition for a nation.
         Schmidt was, for a while, the ranking judicial officer under Hitler, until he was displaced for (supposedly) being insufficiently anti-semitic. Ironically, his ideas were circulated in America by political philosopher Leo Strauss, a Jew who fled the Reich to avoid the Holocaust.
         Compare Schmitt's "On Dictatorship" to the actions and spoken ideology of the G.W. Bush administration.
         Not only is some conservative propaganda similar in style to Nazi propaganda, but the neo-cons, at least, are influenced by a Nazi philosopher's concept of the state.
         

      •  Funny that you should mention Schmitt... (6+ / 0-)

        I went to UVM in the 1980's and took Raul Hilberg's class on the Holocaust.

        So one class he starts off saying that Nazism had no philosophers unlike fascism, marxism, or capitalism. Then he said, the other day, I saw an obituary in the NY Times. Maybe 10 other people had read it...A certain Herr Schmitt had died. And then he screamed — and this was a large lecture hall — "have you ever heard of Schmitt?", stunning every single person in the hall. And then he paused for emphasis, almost whispering, "Schmitt was a Nazi philosopher."

        •  "Hitler's Philosopher" (0+ / 0-)

          http://online.wsj.com/...

          Heidegger gets a bad rap in that book.  

          As Karl Popper pointed out, 19th century monarchs were quite eager to sponsor philosophers that would provide intellectual justifications for kings, since the public was becoming indifferent to claims of Divine privilege.   Keep in mind that Hitler was a monarchist and one of his favorite possessions was an oil painting of Frederick the Great.

          Hitler built on the tradition of "Continental philosophy" where everyone tried to establish their own brand of dialectics.  This was quite foreign to the American or English styles of Pragmatism, Humanism, and Logical Positivism. Dialectics is a wonderful basis for the topsy-turvy carnival ride of Fascist propaganda, where Jews miraculously become the genocidal racists, a debate technique that Popper described. Other writers have analyzed Mein Kampf to see where Hitler departed from Hegel.

          Hitler himself was quite devoted to the idea of having a "philosophical" basis for Nazism, because philosophy can function as a declaration of war against the existing order.  The Project Gutenberg version of Mein Kampf is good for this. Hitler craved a philosophical justification for his actions, but he also poo-pooed formal German philosophy (as would most Americans).

          Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

          by bernardpliers on Mon Mar 24, 2014 at 06:14:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Glenn Beck for one has admitted a fascination (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      geez53, Dirtandiron, Calamity Jean

      with Hitler and his methods.

      You can't make this stuff up.

      by David54 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 07:16:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The way to deal with this is to use the legitimate (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sajiocity, travelerxxx

      wedge issues of the right on them more effectively.

      Even the most germane fact to this discussion.

      This country was founded as a secular nation, (yes, by mostly Christians).

      Secular governance has been very, very good to Christianity in all its multitude of forms.

      Now this authoritarian political cult (Christian Nationalism) wants to hijack the religion for authoritarian/totalitarian state purposes.

      So they are manipulating wedge issues and social discourse in such a way to attempt to enlist all Christians into their front against "the liberals/blacks/gays/feminists/Muslims/atheists/them" , the "other" ...the "out" group.

      Actually, should this come about, it would actually deprive even the right wingers of their religious freedom, because what would exist would be a state religion only serving the authoritarian worldly power of whoever controls the state rather than serving the individual souls.
      Even a moderately intelligent and wise person can understand this if the shouting stops and they're given a chance to think about it.

      Not to mention the fact that it would definitely deprive the non-privileged sects of Christianity of their religious liberty along with Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, atheists and everyone else.

      So atheists and Christians have common cause to oppose this movement.

      We could go through and look at all the other forces at work holding us together and pulling us apart in this country and construct a similar strategy.

      We must make common cause with many people we do not otherwise recognize as "one of us".
      We can't afford the simplistic "us v them" identity battle that so many lazy progressives like to apply to other groups. It works against us.

      You can't make this stuff up.

      by David54 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 07:37:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Of course what you propose makes sense (0+ / 0-)

        which is why today's RWNJs won't consider it.  They seem to have a propensity for shooting themselves in the foot and accusing someone else of distracting them while they pointed and pulled the trigger.
        What "works against us" (progressive thinkers) is the lack of any real thought given to the consequences of the asinine nonsense they continue to adhere to.  That and the fact that they cannot ever be seen trying to compromise with someone who holds opposing views.  They're not to be considered, even if it means they will further speak out and vote against their own best  interests.  
        Us & Them has been created not by "us" who do want to see an inclusive society - it was progressives after all who have helped make these strides in pushing for equality for all those who have been marginalized. It is "them" who scream and throw tantrums and drag their feet as the world progresses.
        The only common cause with "them" is we all have the same DNA (which really makes them howl).  
        Still open to practical solutions.

        "Takes more than guns to kill a man" Joe Hill

        by sajiocity on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 02:07:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, the world is not evenly divided into (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sajiocity

          progressives and rwnj's. There are in fact people who are driven into their camp who could be in ours. We don't want the rwnj's. We want to marginalize them.

          You can't make this stuff up.

          by David54 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 07:26:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Koch, ALEC=Modern John Birchers=? (13+ / 0-)

    Good pick up.  the quotes are gold.

    New day, same themes.    

    If they tell you to "f' off", that's a lawful exercise of their religious freedom.  You tell them to "f' off" back, they wet their pants for fear and claim there is a Crisis.

    “Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects.” ― Will Rogers (Of course this also applies to me.)

    by MugWumpBlues on Sat Mar 22, 2014 at 11:27:39 PM PDT

  •  Ku Klux Kristians Projecting Their Evils on Others (4+ / 0-)

    If ultraconservatives can't impose their dangerously stupid, morally bankrupt, mentally ill social values, beliefs, and politics (anti-freedom, anti-choice, intelligent design/creationism taught in school science classes, the Sun revolves around the Earth, the Earth is 6000 years old, the Earth is flat, homosexuality is a choice, poverty is caused by poor moral values, conspiracies everywhere, all unemployed people are on drugs, etc.) on everyone, then they consider themselves to be subjects of  persecution.

  •  Let us look at this in a different way.... (3+ / 0-)

    Let us change a few more words and see what happens...

    The Fundamentalist Jews (liberal) glories in religious persecution as the Tea Party American glories in patriotism. Religious prejudice is the Fundamentalist's Jews (liberals') chief expression of their own patriotism.

    It is the only well-organized, active and successful form of religious prejudice in the country because they have succeeded in pulling off the gigantic trick of making not their own attitude, but any opposition to it, bear the stigma of "prejudice" and "persecution."

    That is why the Fundamentalists Jews (liberal) uses these terms so frequently. He wants to label the other fellow first. That is why any investigation(investigator)  of the Fundamentalist Jewish Question (racism) is so wickedly advertised as anti-Christian Semitism (racist) - the Jew (liberal) knows the advantage of labeling the other man.

    "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." ~ Edward Abbey

    by SaraBeth on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 05:17:29 AM PDT

  •  No (0+ / 0-)

    You have a superficial similarity at best, and you're justifying the old argument by analogy. It's best not to do so.

    The American religious right goes on and on arguing about persecution of Christians with claims that range from those we see in the Saturday Nutpick here at DailyKos (i.e. "Any Democrat Party member who has a gun is taken out and shot! All liberals who believe in God are kicked out") to, much more commonly, anecdotal evidence.

    First, there is a highly obnoxious behavior of atheists toward the religious. (This is independent of whether anyone else is obnoxious; the point is: if people act like asses, it gets noticed.) Second, there is an easy trick whereby prohibition on being able to enact a religious belief is mistaken for a repression on a religious belief. Third, where there are individuals with anti-democratic or illegal religious desires, they relay their stories stripped of context. The result is chain e-mail fodder that resonates (the obnoxious behavior) and misleads.

    They thus convince each other that they are "persecuted." They have a different path for making the case that "liberals" are the persecuters. Mainly, they have to rely on the "everybody knows _diametrically opposed group_ must be running things" assumption. They change the identity of the people "in charge" and recycle the instances of injustice to fit.

    No: without "Jew" as a racial/cultural as well as religious identity, the change loses all of its genocidal force and goes back to somewhat trite opportunism and politics.

    "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

    by The Geogre on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 06:16:59 AM PDT

    •  I think he looks at how this is different from (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      geez53, Dirtandiron, blueoasis

      genocide at the same time he is looking at the not accidental similarities in propaganda methods and political agendas between the two periods. I don't think he's making a starkly exact equivalency.
      I think you're downplaying the threat posed by Christian Nationalists in the service of Wall Street in this country.

      You can't make this stuff up.

      by David54 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 06:54:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sorry, I am not seeing the connection (0+ / 0-)

    of what Ford's history of anti-Semitism has to do with today's right wing assertions about liberals and Christianity, nor is there any relevance to what happened with the Holocaust. Henry Ford's assertions about International Jews, his relationship with Hitler are separate instances in history.

    If we constantly denigrate them for comparing or using the term nazi to describe us or Obama, the same holds true for us. There is no way the worst of right wing fanatics or historical American corporate tsars can compare to what happened to millions in Europe in the 30s and 40s, or their hate filled rhetoric that turned into the blood bath of all times and then somehow use that to compare the propaganda of today's political environment.

    You write "this is not to equate the plight of the Jews and any other group, liberal or conservative.  It is showing how propaganda written 90 years ago is still in constant use with only minor modifications, and these modifications are entirely consistent with the source material." I absolutely disagree with that statement. As bad as you think those right wing zealots are, there is no way they even come close to the propaganda of Goebels or Hitler. Plus, we do some propaganda ourselves. Everyday on Jon Stewart or Bill Maher every week, everyday on MSNBC we give back just as much to them. I realize it is tempting to use metaphors, analogies and other tools to dramatize how wrong-headed or even evil our political foes are, but we too push the envelope and come off looking a little off-kilter with our comparisons. History is a great teacher, but the student needs to interpret history in the right way or the actual historical events become blurred and distorted.

    Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others....Groucho Marx

    by tazz on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 07:12:50 AM PDT

    •  Sorry, I am disputing your contention (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blueoasis, travelerxxx

      You are applying a 20-20 hindsight filter to what happened in the 1940s. A better approach would be to correlate the 1920s and 1930s, when propaganda was accelerating but before the end result was known. Had Hitler been stopped at the propaganda stage, the Holocaust would not have happened.

      In addition, you are creating a false equivalency between the rightwing propaganda machine with its reach into every aspect of life and the few hours each day Monday through Friday MSNBC interrupts its prison reality shows to put on an Ed Shultz or Rachel Maddow. Meanwhile, the Koch / Ailes / Murdoch propaganda machine operates 24/7/365.

      If you don't watch news, you're un-informed. If you watch Fox news, you're mis-informed. (paraphrasing Mark Twain)

      by edg on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 12:51:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Here's another excerpt from (7+ / 0-)

    Mein Kampf with "liberal" substituting for "Jew," &c:

    It must be admitted that all this was partly the result of extraordinary crafty tactics on the part of Liberals on the one hand, and obvious official stupidity or naiveté on the other hand. The Liberals were too clever to allow a simultaneous attack to be made on the whole of their Press. No one section functioned as cover for the other. ...The national papers, also in Liberal hands, knew how to camouflage themselves as model examples of objectivity. They studiously avoided harsh language, knowing well that blockheads are capable of judging only by external appearances and never able to penetrate to the real depth and meaning of anything. ... This form of human frailty was carefully studied and understood by the Liberal Press..

    Certainly in days to come the Liberals will raise a tremendous cry throughout their newspapers once a hand is laid on their favorite nest, once a move is made to put an end to this scandalous Liberal Press and once this instrument which shapes public opinion is brought under Conservative control and no longer left in the hands of Liberals and enemies of the people. I am certain that this will be easier for us than it was for our fathers. The scream of the twelve-inch shrapnel is more penetrating than the hiss from a thousand Liberal newspaper vipers. Therefore let them go on with their hissing..

    By means of the Liberal Press, the Liberals spread the colossal falsehood about 'American Militarism' throughout the world and tried to inculpate America by every possible means, while at the same time the Democrat Party refused to assent to the measures that were necessary for the adequate training of our national defense forces. .

    What soon gave me cause for very serious consideration were the activities of the Liberals in certain branches of life, into the mystery of which I penetrated little by little. Was there any shady undertaking, any form of foulness, especially in cultural life, in which at least one Liberal did not participate? On putting the probing knife carefully to that kind of abscess one immediately discovered, like a maggot in a putrescent body, a little Liberal who was often blinded by the sudden light.

    In my eyes the charge against Liberalism became a grave one the moment I discovered the Liberal activities in the Press, in art, in literature and the theatre. All unctuous protests were now more or less futile. ... Here was a pestilence, a moral pestilence, with which the public was being infected..

    I was happy at last to know for certain that a Liberal is not an American.

    Something Ann Coulter could have written. This isn't exactly a new idea; Thom Hartmann wrote and talked about this in the mid-2000s. There are plenty of other examples.

    Propaganda is propaganda. I remember visiting the U.S. Holocaust Museum several years ago, when there was a special exhibit on the lower level featuring all forms of Nazi (and American WWII) propaganda. The similarities to the modern right-wing media were striking. But not at all surprising.

    •  Yes Hitler Actually Said "The Liberal Press" (6+ / 0-)

      ...and he used that interchangeably with "the Jewish press."

      I have often wondered if he was the first one to complain about "the liberal press," although any free press would have been likely to be called "liberal" in the classical liberal sense of opposing monarchy.

      Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

      by bernardpliers on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 09:03:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Pre-revolution loyalists in this country may not (0+ / 0-)

        have used the term, but you might be hard pressed to find a fan of Ben Franklin among them.

        21st Century America: The distracted, superficial perception of a virtual reality. Gettov Milawn

        by geez53 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 09:39:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Just To Be Clear That Quote Is A Spoof (0+ / 0-)

      I've had an occasional beef with Thom Hartmann

      http://www.commondreams.org/...

      and the real quote is this

      The so-called liberal press was actively engaged in digging the grave of the German people and the German Reigh (Mein Kampf p243) It is this press, above all, which wages a positively fanatical and slanderous struggle, tearing down everything which can be regarded as a support of national independence, cultural elevation, and the economic independence of the nation. (Mein Kampf p323)
      The Hartmann thing is a Coulter spoof, like "I Fucked Ann Coulter In The Ass. Hard"
      There is a specter haunting Europe,’ I began, and she started to convulse spasmodically with her own thrashing orgasm, her head now dribbling in a blur against my groin. I repeated every Karl Marx quote I could think of until I reached my own ‘historic inevitability’ and launched surge after surge from my hairy boda bag.

      Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

      by bernardpliers on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 02:59:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  A good article on Christian claimes of (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dirtandiron

    persecution.

    https://www.au.org/...

  •  I'm not comfortable with this diary. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SpamNunn

    I get what you're trying to say but it seems too much like an effort to conflate anti-liberal propaganda with anti-Semitism. And that should be no more acceptable on the left than the right.

    "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

    by raptavio on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 09:13:20 AM PDT

  •  I think you're on to something here (4+ / 0-)

    The Nazis were able to make people believe an absolutely absurd, murderous ideology in only a few years. Supposedly they studied American advertising techniques to manipulate public opinion. I don't think the desired end is anti-Semitism like the nazis. I don't think conservatives all hate Jews, on the contrary some prominent conservatives like the Kochs are Jewish. It's the methods of public relations, the social engineering of making people actively work extremely hard against their own interests that reminds me of Nazis. I think a lot of people who listen to talk radio and watch Fox News would commit literal atrocities today if the echo chamber told them to. Probably not against Jews necessarily, but against Democratic people. I fear one day the "cut down the tall trees" message will come over the radio and any person/organization perceived as "Democrat" will be in imminent physical danger.

    Where are all the jobs, Boehner?

    by Dirtandiron on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 01:03:33 PM PDT

    •  Beck's "Christian" Fans' Genocidal Fantasies (3+ / 0-)

      from an earlier diary about Becks fans going nuts over a rumor that firearems companies were being bought up by George Soros (OMG The International Jew himself!)

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      There is much talk about "Just war" where God will forgive you for the ruthless slaughter of your enemies.

      Over politics....

      by hunting commies I AM protecting my family. It will soon be open season on these vermin and thousands will die. Not my fault, they are ones who have fomented this crisis. I stand ready to deploy, engage and destroy the enemies of the United States of America in close combat. Clean up America, kill a liberal.
      Death squads....
      .. I pray and hope it NEVER comes to .... hunting that Domestic destroyer of our freedom, and shooting them TO protect my family.
      Assassination....
      It only takes one bullet to stop a tyrant, look at Lincoln. A Christian can ask for forgiveness afterwards.
      Because Christian love....
      Christians ain’t the ones with the violent speech and actions. We are for peace and freedom. But if someone is here to steal our freedom, family and life you bet we have the right to defend it and to say “not” is NOT an option.

      Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

      by bernardpliers on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 02:40:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I did not realize that mocking people of faith (0+ / 0-)

    with the Flying Spaghetti Monster was a Nazi construct.  

    I learn something new here, every day.

    If you get confused, listen to the music play - R. Hunter

    by SpamNunn on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 05:46:10 PM PDT

  •  The Koch brothers are Jewish? My head (0+ / 0-)

    is exploding.  Must be some conservative conspiracy like double secret probation.

    If I comply with non-compliance am I complying? Sarcasm is the ability to insult stupid people without them realizing it.

    by thestructureguy on Sun Mar 23, 2014 at 08:09:30 PM PDT

  •  Most Liberals are Christian. (0+ / 0-)

    That is a fact. The idea of Liberals persecuting Christians makes about as much sense as Liberals persecuting rich people.

    It's also a fact that, for some reason, right wingers NEED to feel persecuted to justify their opinions. To me, that's downright weird.

  •  .....Thanks To Everyone That Participated (0+ / 0-)

    That was a lively discussion on a touchy subject.

    Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

    by bernardpliers on Mon Mar 24, 2014 at 07:45:03 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site