Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Sowell On the Real History of Slavery

Thomas Sowell takes on the loathsome subject of slavery. The vast majority of readers of this blog agree that slavey is odious. The sole exceptions are Ducky and 167 who endorse its modern equivalent in Gulags.

Sowell points to world wide concept of slavery. Africans, Asians, Native Americans and almost every group under the Sun owned slaves. Slaves were a part of mans ancient history. Most of the time slaves were of the same race as their owners. Unlike popular fiction the TransAtlantic slave trade was often carried out by Black and Arab raiders who did the actual capturing and sold the Slaves to ships on the coast of West Africa.

The Arab slave trade lasted far longer and was far deadlier then the familiar translantic period. Castration and journeys overland produced high mortality rates. Nor was the trade in slaves limited to blacks. Muslims had plenty of slaves from the Caucus and other white areas. The notion that slaves under Islam or African areas were treated better is fiction. This is akin to the ancient myth that slaves in the South were part of the family.

Thus today we have the modern day know nothings of the Nation of Islam concocting a myth that Jews ran the slave trade. There were Jews and every other group involved in the Slave trade. There were plenty of blacks and Native Americans who also owned slaves. The fact that the NOI focuses on the role of Jews alone is more proof of the pathological Antisemitism of that group. Yet Farkhan and all the black followers of the NOI turn history on its head and ignore the Arab role in slavery. In fact where slavery exsists today we find the Sons of Allah reverting to form. What do the PC left define as racism . Israel a multi racial and religious solciety building a security fence to keep out terrorists. The black Sudanese sold into Slavery by Moooooslims gets scant notice except by religious Christians and Conservatives who have been complaining since the mid 1980's. Nor did the left say a word when Uganda expelled Indians and stole all their property. It does not saw a word when Mugabee steals white farms and lets his population starve.

The left has gotten a free pass on slave labor for too long. Gulag prisoners were modern day slaves created by Marx. The high mortality rates often produced worthless projects. Today Marxists avoid any discussion about Civil rights of gulag residents.
W-w-w-w-w-ell we were for civil rights for blacks in the 60's and against the Vietnam war. The fact that more people died in SE Asia after the USA left was just a minor detail. The fact that SE Asia remains a mess and a human rights cesspool is also a minor detail. We cared sooooooo much about the Vietnamese people that we ignored their failed attempts at Utopia. This Utopia is sooooo great people fled in boats risking their lives to get away from it. The similar fantasies about Cuba and the great medical care are common myths. Cuba is sooooo great people do the same. Communist societies are like prisons that require walls and guards to keep the slaves in.

The time has come where we should end our genteel treatment of the far left. We do not treat Nazis, Racial power goons and criminals with kid gloves. Jihadists and Communists deserve scorn contempt that we fail to heap on them.

Myth number one is that sedition is protected free speech. Sedition is a criminal act and not protected. Calls for domestic Jihad and revolution should be treated as sedition and dealt with apropriately.

Myth number two is that people can not be denaturalized. They can be denaturalized and deported as alternatives to incarceration.

Myth number three immigration is a right. No immigration is a honor the American people can grant the fortunate.

Myth Number four Free speech in the workplace is a right. This is also a myth as educators have a specific charge . Failure to perform is malfeasence and cause for termination.

Mr Beamish in 08 the Georgetown elite are packing for Canada, Ducky to the Chopping Block and 167 relegated to oblivion on a site with zero comments

On Deck more Sowell on the real history of the slave trade.

45 comments:

kev said...

This subject is a PRIME example of rewriting history by the left. While slavery is absolutely evil, it certainly did not start with the European white man, slthough one would never know that listening to black leaders, including calypso louie. As a matter of fact many white men died over the issue of slavery. Thanks Dr. Sowell.

Mr. Ducky said...

Kind of a dilemma you have yourself in here, Beak. Yes, the Gulag was primarily a (failed) forced labor program but it was the revolution which freed the serfs.

Now you will immediately argue that life was even worse under communism for the serfs and you would, of course, be blowing smoke out your ass if that is your contention.

So once again history is a lot more complex than you can deal with.

Freedomnow said...

It was the fall of the Soviet Union that freed the serfs from Communist Party bosses. That is why Poland is one of our best allies.

Life was much worse for those serfs because of Stalin's Five Year Plan, Mao's Great Leap Forward and Pol Pot's Killing Fields.

Communist Propaganda has no bearing on reality. Try again Ducky...

beakerkin said...

Ducky

Death is a kind of Freedom but only in Commie speak. My family is well aware of the Ukranian famine caused by Marxism. Mass state sponsored starvation should never be confused with Liberation.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Czar Alexander II freed the serf's in 1861. By 1917 the "serf's" were too rich for Stalin's taste. So he "re-collectivized" them. And we all remember what happened to the Kulaks.

I though you has some Russian blood in you, ducky... so why is it that you don't even know your own history?

-FJ

kev said...

Daffy, you're trying to defend communisom in the wrong place. No one here is buying your bullshit. I'm sure you know some nice commie blog where the people will be happy to listen to your nonsense. There is NO justification for communism. The revolution was just a different kind of serfdom, and it goes on today. Anonymous--ducky's bloodline is obviously commie.

American Crusader said...

Louis Farrakhan is the definition of racism. His anti-Semitic, anti-Caucasian hatred is equal to any present-day KKK hatred of blacks. Farrakhan either is totally ignorant of historical facts or decides to distort them to fit whatever scenario is presently being advocated. Farrakhan has spoken often at the Islamic Center of America in Detroit Michigan as a guest of Iman Quazini. The same Iman who addressed 108th U.S. Congress. Together they press forward their anti-American agenda while publicly professing the need for tolerance. If ever an old-fashioned "lynching" was called for...

Robert Bayn said...

Myth number one is that sedition is protected free speech. Sedition is a criminal act and not protected. Calls for domestic Jihad and revolution should be treated as sedition and dealt with apropriately.

I imagine that would also go for Militia groups with in the United States which advocate for the destruction of our current government. Webster dictionary describes Sedition as the following "incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority", many civil right fights have begun with going against authority, though i for the most part beleive in going by the law, in certain cases if the law is insane, than going against authority is needed.

Myth number two is that people can not be denaturalized. They can be denaturalized and deported as alternatives to incarceration.

Totally disagree with this, i can't even begin to put into words just how wrong that is.

Myth number three immigration is a right. No immigration is a honor the American people can grant the fortunate.

Here is one we agree with, our borders should not just be open to anyone, if that is the case, why have borders?

Myth Number four Free speech in the workplace is a right. This is also a myth as educators have a specific charge . Failure to perform is malfeasence and cause for termination.

We disagree here too, educators have a right to free speech as well, as long as they identify it as as personal opinion open to debate and not as a fact.

Mr. Ducky said...

Hey kev, don't be a dope. I only state that life was better for the lower class after the revolution. It's just a fact you have to accept like the fact that a lot of poverty has been eliminated in China under a communist government.

Beak, let me reiterate about the famine. i worked on the film "Harvest of Despair". We had a great deal of trouble getting PBS to air it because we were getting resistance from jewish groups (as Feingold understands).

The only way the film was allowed to air was with a discsussion group afterwards that challenged to possibility that anything could contend with the Holocaust in the pantheon of human atrocities(many things can). So you might be able to understand that my antipathy to your stupidity has a lot of its roots in the image of actually having to ask jews for their permission for the story of the famine to be told.

You understand how it works.

Mr. Ducky said...

Farmer, when Alexander the Second was assassinated serfdom became de facto much as southern blacks had to wait to be freed from the sharecropping system.

Mr. Ducky said...

oh and farmer. The kulaks were starved because they were Ukrainian. It was an ethnic genocide. Don't be a denier like Beak.

Mr. Ducky said...

Hey Beak, regarding the boat people. That's what happens after a massive civil war. People die, people try to leave.

You think the killing was limited to one side? Don't be a moron.

Anonymous said...

mr ducky,

Then just who were the kulaks and why did they have to get "freed" from their possessions and sent to labor camps in the 20's/30's? And how come the Soviet army used to have to be called in every year to pick the USSR's potatoes? Were the liberated serf's all vacationing at their luxurious dachas on the Black Sea?

-FJ

beakerkin said...

Rob

Lets use the Duck as an example of number two. He is an advocate of a system of governance that seeks the violent overthrow of the United States Government. Should he be caught advocating or taking any steps towards that goal he should lose his right to be a citizen.

Rather than house the Duck we can place him in the Commie country of choice like North Korea or Cuba.
Being a citizen carries some duties and responsabilites that are abrogated at the hint of the violent overthrow of the US government.

Anonymous said...

I guess once a freed serf becomes a Ukranian, his lot has been improved...how? Non-sequitor, monsieur le duque... being targetted for "genocide" is hardly an "improved" condition over "serfdom".

-FJ

beakerkin said...

Wrong again Duck

People still flee both Cuba and Vietnam in Boats years later. The greatest predictor of starvation and refugees is the imposition of Marx.

Anonymous said...

ps - I miss kerouac, mr. ducky. Krazy Kat should get spayed and Ignatz trapped.

"An immediate progenitor of the Beat Generation and its roots could be traced back to the glee of America, the honesty of America, its wild, self-believing individuality."--Jack Kerouac (supposedly, the "it" referred to is Krazy)

You have written truth, you friends of the shadows: yet be not harsh with Krazy, he is but a shadow himself caught in a web of mortal skein. We call him "Cat". we call him "Crazy". Yet he is neither. At some time will he ride away to you, people of the twilight, his password will be the echoes of a vesper bell, his coach a zephyr from the west. Forgive him, for you will understand him no better than we who linger on this side of he pall.

-FJ

Mr. Ducky said...

Once again Farmer. The famine targeted Ukrainians as an ethnic people not an economic class. That's very easy toparse.

beakerkin said...

Good heavens is there no end to this perfidity ? The famine was one of many used to subdue a population that objects to Marx. This seems to happen wherever Marx is imposed. Starving the masses to liberate them is insanity.

Robert Bayn said...

Rob

Lets use the Duck as an example of number two. He is an advocate of a system of governance that seeks the violent overthrow of the United States Government. Should he be caught advocating or taking any steps towards that goal he should lose his right to be a citizen.

Rather than house the Duck we can place him in the Commie country of choice like North Korea or Cuba.
Being a citizen carries some duties and responsabilites that are abrogated at the hint of the violent overthrow of the US government.


To me that is just not a reasonable action to take, Ducky has a right to his opinions, even if they are stupid, if anyone is advocating for a violent overthrow of the government, it should be investigated, and if they are a threat to the united states, put them in prison.

Mr. Ducky said...

Who is advocating the violent overthrow of the U.S. government?

Your stupidity is more a threat to the nation than my politics.

What is it with you fascists that you think anyone who isn't lock step behind your brown shirt tactics is advocating a "violent overthrow" of the government.

You really do tear the fabric of reason, robert.

beakerkin said...

Lets diferentiate between legitamate opinions and those outside the system. You and I can excersize our first amendment right because we both believe in the process of governmental policy.
Therefore any position either of us holds is within the Democratic framework.

Now if Ducky advocates the violent overthrow of of the United States government he has commited Sedition. Throwing him in jail is a waste of tax payer money. It is easier to denaturalize him provided we can find a country willing to accept him. This should have been done with the Weathermen.
Instead Bill Clinton pardoned them and now they teach on college campuses.

Mr. Ducky said...

Why so blood thirsty, beak? If our intelligence services weren''t a fucking Keystone Kops organization they would have nabbed the Weather Underground back then. So first off it is instructive to realize what a bunch of schmucks we have in the FBI. Homeland Security hasn't changed that and while we piss away a half trillion in iraq it doesn't improve the situation.

Time changes people. Can you demonstrate that they represent a threat. There was a very good documentary released a couple years ago that says definately not.

Go stew in your hatred, Beak. Or as Saul Bellow said "Live or die but don't poison everything". That's good advice for you and your brownshirts.

beakerkin said...

Lets see Ducky

If Justice worked Bernadine Dorn and Bill Ayers should be pushing up daisies. Seditious violent criminal acts against the United States Government is a Capital Offense.

I do not care what they have done it does not cancel the acts of criminality. These people have zero business in the United States . Yet the Commies on the left granted them jobs in college faculties.

Merely advocating Communism or Marxism is probable cause for prudent surveilance. If any evidence of seditious behavior is found you should be denaturalized and deported. The taxpayer should not have to subsidize your incarceration.

Advocay of a philosophy that seeks the violent overthrow of the US government is not a right. Nor, is sedition covered under free speech.

Send a letter from North Korea or whatever Communist Paradise suits you. FYI members of the Communist party are still barred from citizenship or visas.

Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Ducky is confused when he calls us "brownshirts." Nazi Germany was one of the most successful implementations of leftist government policy the world has ever seen.

Got that, Ducky? Hitler, fascism, Nazis, brownshirts, these are YOUR leftist brothers.

beakerkin said...

Ducky

I would like you to define denaturalization at a bloody process. Merely taking away citizenship an banishing Commies is more humane then any Commie government in history.

Why should those who advocate the violent overthrow of the US government be allowed to be citizens. This is not a First Amendment Issue ?

Always On Watch said...

Interesting book of revisionist history: The Servants of Allah. Ever heard of it? I wonder if Sowell mentions the book?

Review from Amazon:

B.L. Robinson-Jones, Ohio University, Choice, 1999
Outstanding Academic Title - Choice 1999


Diouf has written one of the few works that not only chronicles the history of Muslim men, women, and children during the Atlantic slave trade and American slavery, but also provides illustrated examples of how African Muslims preserved their faith and maintained their religious lifestyle in the midst of a hostile environment. Diouf asserts that although they left a mark on the religious and cultural landscape of African America, the Muslims have disappeared from the African American collective consciousness and have been overlooked by scholarly research. Replete with examples from the personal narratives and correspondence of the Muslims during this time period, Diouf's study demonstrates how enslaved Muslims served as agents in history, making this work a necessary addition to history and African studies collection. Highly recommended. All levels.


Excerpt availalbe here.

I found a copy of Servants at the local public library a few years ago. The book was placed by CAIR.

Mr. Ducky said...

Yeah Beamish, that's why the socialists and commies were the first in the camps. Bore me later.

beakerkin said...

Wrong Ducky

The reason they were in the camps was Comunists were Nazis rival. Nazis and Commies have a history of colaberation

Warren said...

Nostradumbass,
The reason the Kulaks were starved is that they resisted collectivisation. Thus they became one of the groups deemed "Enemies of the State".

Instead of turning their possessions over to the Soviet, they burned their property and ate their farm animals. It would have made no difference if they had been Georgian, their fate was sealed!

It was an act of spite, ideology and the typical evilness that always springs forth from Marxist ideology.

Big deal, you worked on "Harvest of Despair". Another piece of leftist propaganda that lets drooling armchair commies set around and wipe their copious tears on silk handkerchiefs while pausing long enough for a two fingered golf clap.

Maybe I'll order a copy of the script in case I run out of Charmin.

BTW, you're still a low-life thief. Your avatar has changed but you're still stealing bandwidth.

MissingLink said...

it was the revolution which freed the serfs.
Totally false statement.

As Anonymous said it was the reforms 1861-64 which effectively ended serfdom in Russia as well as in some occupied by Russia territories (e.g. Poland).
At the same time there was a land reform, which gave the peasants the right to cultivate the land.
These reforms enabled the surplus of people to move from overpopulated villages to the cities and so the Russian industry picked up and started a slow progress.
Another trend was the colonize the vast area of Siberia and so massive FREE migration of peasants followed until the WWI. In Fact Siberia was one of the places where each peasant settler was granted over 40 acres of land (decree 1889) as his own property (in most parts of the empire each village owned the land and therefore individuals could not sell the land they cultivated), additionally the settlers were excluded from taxes for 3 years three years, and they were released from military duty for 9 years.

The Siberian peasants all disappeared (murdered or sent to forced labour) in the early stages of the Bolshevik rule.

The famine targeted Ukrainians as an ethnic people not an economic class.
Not true.

All peasant across former Russian empire suffered the same fate.
Forced acquisition of grain and starvation

At the same time communists “discouraged” all national movements (just implementing Marxism).
In Bolshevik Russia national movements were "strongly discouraged" by military force and extermination not only in the Ukraine but everywhere else as well.
(e.g. Armenia, Georgia, Crimean Tartars, Kazakhs, Chechens etc.)

I only state that life was better for the lower class after the revolution.

A myth created by the Soviet propaganda and repeated by the Western communist religiously.

Actually my grandparents remembered vividly the “before” and “after” the revolution and they told me stories about it.

the fact that a lot of poverty has been eliminated in China under a communist government.

Not true again.
During the first 20 years under the communist government in China the world witnessed probably the biggest genocide due to starvation (as always the most effective way of killing).
It is estimated now that up to 70 million people perished in communist China mostly from starvation.
This book is actually very well written & documented:
Jung Chang and Jon Halliday: MAO: The Untold Story
I work with people (peasants), who escaped from China their sories also do not support "the better situation" theory.

Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Mr. Ducky,

Leftists kill other leftists all the time.

Didn't you get the memo?

Robert Bayn said...

Well, let little ole' me chime in here for a second.

Nazi party actually was a right wing party, that gave pride in nationlism, created jobs, and attempted to make Germany better. Nazism failed when it decided that certain people in the country had to go and decided to do a take over of the region, Hitler above all things was a warmonger. Hitler was also a man of faith, he often talked about his faith in Christ and growing up as a Catholic.

Back in the early 1900's the Communist party faught with radical right parties in Russia they were at that time trying to get rid of Jews, where the infamous book about Jews taking over the world came from, Commies died in Russia defending Jews.

In 1928 communism was still partly ruling Germany, this was when Hitler became big, there could be a argument that it came together with Communism during this time, but i think people often forget Nazism really started on the right, as a labour party. I'm not pro-nazi or pro-communism, but i'am pro-let hear all the facts.


In early 1920, the party changed its name to the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) which quickly got corrupted to 'Nazi' by both enemies and supporters alike. Hitler wrote out the party's beliefs in the so-called 25 Point Party Programme. This party programme was a curious mixture - right wing nationalism; anti-capitalism; anti-socialism; anti-wealth etc.

This rag-bag mixture would have been laughable in normal circumstances but Germany was not in normal circumstances. The NSDAP played on the Germans hatred of the Treaty of Versailles (which it said it would ignore); the belief that Germany had been stabbed in the back. Even in its early days, the NSDAP tuned in to many peoples' emotions. However, in 1920, the party was just one of many right wing parties that seemed to exist in Germany at this time.

MissingLink said...

Robert,
Hitler was born to a Catholic family but he himself was a an raving atheist and hated Christianity with all his might.
Catholic priest were decimated and sent to concentration camps like flies.


The best book about Hitler:

Alan Bullock: Hitler a study in tyranny.

In 1928 communism was still partly ruling Germany, ....

No, they were strong but it was the Social Democrats who held the Parliamentary majority.

Robert Bayn said...

In part you could be right, the problem is this, the evidence i have read on Hitler points out differently, also i always say consider the source, to often today people say something with a agenda in mind, and ignore other facts, but i will above all else beleive honest historians, and Hitlers own quotes:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm

The bottom line is this, when it comes to history, people can twist things in order for it to fit into their agenda, i respect what your saying and your book, however just because someone wrote it in a book, dosent make it true, who the person is, their political agenda, their religious views all come into play when your looking for truth, it's never as black and white as some might think. I wasn't alive than, so i can only go by history and Hitlers quotes and the facts about him, which lead me to beleive as i do, but i do respect that people beleive differently on this issue.

Warren said...

Robert said;

"Nazi party actually was a right wing party, that gave pride in nationlism, created jobs, and attempted to make Germany better. Nazism failed when it decided that certain people in the country had to go and decided to do a take over of the region,"
Stating and re-stating of of a premise does not make it so.

It was "National Socialism" instead International Socialism", but socialism none the less. National Socialism may be to the right of Communism but they rest side by side on any scale you care to use use.

"but i think people often forget Nazism really started on the right, as a labour party."

Please explain to me how being a labor party makes it right wing as labor parties and movements always push toward socialistic policy. The president of the AFL-CIO is an avowed Socialist.

It seems to me that you Equate "violent" Anti-Semitism with the right and use this as a marker for left/right.

Please excuse misspellings etc, I have more to say. Have to go.

Anonymous said...

Recent Arab violence...

Sudan - Two million killed, 4 million displaced and countless women raped and turned into slaves.

---

Kashmir (India vs Pakistan) 65,000 dead Kashmiri's

---

Ethiopia vs Eritrea - Border dispute 50,000+ dead

---

Chechnya (Islamic Wahabi's) vs Russia - 80,000

---

Algeria (Gov vs Islamic Salvation Front) - 75,000

---

Afghanistan - 1,000,000+

---

Lebannon - Thousands

---

Turkish gov't vs Kurds - 120,000+

---

Myanmar/Burma - 9,000

--

Chad ('65-'88) - 15,000

---

Nigeria/Cameron ('94- '96) - unknown

---

Indonesia/Western Borneo - unknown

---

Armenia/Azerbaijan ('88- '94) - 30,000

---

Isreal/Palestine - 125,000

Anonymous said...

btw - the highest estimates of victims from 1960 onward from the Vietnam War I've seen is 2M. That ties us w/the Muslim's in Sudan alone. Better get out your pencil and start counting casualties from the Grenda and Panama invasions ducky. Cuz they got us beat by a mile in the total body count.

-FJ

kev said...

These points brought up by daffy have been argued and re-argued. His leftist views will not change in spite of the facts. I notice he keeps accusing Beakerkin and others of us of being hate-filled, all the while blaming eveything on Jews. Rarely does he submit an entry that doesn't rail against Jews. Your movie, "harvest of despair," sounds like a documentary of leftist causes, a very appropriate title. The people Beakerkin mentioned, ayers, dorn, and many others who now teach in our colleges, absolutely did advocate the violent overthrow of our government, and took part in overt acts. Self-denaturalization would have been fitting, but like good little commies, they chose to stay and indoctrinate our youth. Many of the anti-(Iraq) war people of today are anit-(Vietnam) war people of that era. Robert bayn, it is well known that hitler was anti-religion, in spite of earlier catholicism. A formula for communists seems to have always been, make villains of business and industry owners/operators,remove guns from citizenry, and restrict or obliterate Christian and Jewish religions. Sound familiar?

Anonymous said...

The kulaks were starved because they were Ukrainian. It was an ethnic genocide. Don't be a denier like Beak.

and

Once again Farmer. The famine targeted Ukrainians as an ethnic people not an economic class. That's very easy toparse.

Soviet Encyclopedic Dictionary, Volume 2, April 6, 1954, page 200

Kulaks rural bourgeoisie, the most numerous of the bourgeoisie layers in a capitalist village. The Kulaks enrich themselves through the cruel exploitation of farm laborers, the village poor and other layers of the working rural population. The Kulak class is the result of the corruption of small goods production.

In Czarist Russia in 1913, the Kulaks were 12.3% of the population. They “produced” 50% of all bread. The Kulaks concentrated on their farms a large portion of agricultural machinery and instruments of production, also owned commercial-industrial enterprises and ruthlessly robbed working peasants by practicing usury. Along with capitalists and landed gentry, the kulaks are the most rabid, the most unappeasable enemy of the proletariat revolution. During the period of the foreign military intervention and civil war 1918-20, the Kulaks, the owners of surplus bread, tried to strangle with hunger the young Soviet Republic. The Kulaks organized gangs, viciously dealt with workers and rural poor, helped the interventionists. Under the direction of the Communist party the working class and village laborers undertook a ruthless struggle against the Kulaks.

Until 1929 the Soviet government pursued policies of restricting and displacing the Kulaks, decisively suppressing all their attempts to fight the Soviet authority, spoil state bread procurements, kill village activists, etc. As a result of forced collectivization, the Kulaks were liquidated as a class (see Agricultural collectivization). With the victory of the kolhoz* system the conditions that gave rise to the Kulak order disappeared. In Soviet villages, the bourgeois ownership system has been forever liquidated and the socialist system created.

In nations with people’s democracy, in conditions of intense class struggle, after World War II agrarian reforms were carried out, undermining the basis for large-kulak ownership; the special weight of the village socialist sector continues to grow and conditions are being created for it’s total victory.

*kolhoz – collectively owned farms


Somebody's floating in a "river in Egypt", and I don't its' the farmer... more likely one of his escaped barnyard critters.

-FJ

Anonymous said...

Stalin killed between 5 and 10 million of kulaks in what he called his de-kulakization program. At one point, all it took was being an inconvenience to the regime to be labeled a "filthy blood-sucking Kulak."

-FJ

Anonymous said...

Nope, nothing about Ukranians only in NKVD order #00447.

-FJ

Anonymous said...

mr. ducky,

When the beak begins to execute Homeland Security Order #00447 and label you an "American kulak", you'll have a valid reason to squawk and complain. Until then, why don't you swim down to the bottom of the lake and catch a few crawdads.

-FJ

Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Nazi party actually was a right wing party, that gave pride in nationlism, created jobs, and attempted to make Germany better.

So did Lenin and especially Stalin, for Soviet Russia. Hitler and Roosevelt both had their own Russian-inspired "five year plans" of socialist public works programs and projects. And government-sponsored nationalistic passions were stoked quite a bit from the pulpits of churches in the Soviet Union's "Great Patriotic War" (that's "World War 2" to we mere proles). Were Roosevelt and Stalin right-wing?

MissingLink said...

Robert,

Probably the best summary on Hitler’s “religiousness” you can find here:
http://www.adherents.com/people/ph/Adolf_Hitler.html


Hitler was a pragmatic man and he knew he couldn't just ban religion.

The political leader should not estimate the worth of a religion by
taking some of its shortcomings into account, but he should ask himself
whether there be any practical substitute in a view which is
demonstrably better. Until such a substitute be available only fools and criminals would think of abolishing the existing religion.


Adolf Hitler: Mein Kampf (Vol. 1 Chapter X)

However, Hitler wanted to eventually replace the existing religion with his new Nazi.
Here are some of Hitler's the Christian deeds:
Five days after becoming Chancellor in 1933, Hitler allowed a sterilization law to pass, and had the Catholic Youth League disbanded.
The latter was a measure applied to other youth organizations too, in order to free up young people to join the Hitler Youth.
Parents were pressured to take their children out of religious schools.
When the Church organized voluntary out-of-hours religious classes, the Nazi government responded by banning state-employed teachers from taking part.
The Crucifix symbol was even at one point banned from classrooms in one particular jurisdiction, Oldenburg, in 1936, but the measure met with fierce public resistance and was rescinded.
Civil, state marriage ceremonies were encouraged.
Hitler remained conscious of the affection for the Church felt in some quarters of Germany, particularly Bavaria.
But later on, though, a wartime metal shortage was used as the excuse for melting church bells.
Persecution of clergy continued throughout Hitler's reign.

Additionally it is important to know Hitler's view on religion from other books and sources, diaries etc.

The books listed below have all the sources quoted as well as summaries of HItler's view on religion in general and Christianity in particular:
William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Arrow, 1991 ** (one of the best)
Richard Grunberger, The Twelve Year Reich, Henry Holt, 1979
Richard Grunberger, A Social History of the Third Reich, Penguin, 1991
Michael Burleigh, The Third Reich: a New History, Pan, 2001
George Stein, The Waffen SS: Hitler’s Elite Guard at War 1939 – 1945, University of Cornell, 1984
Charles Sydnor, Soldiers of Destruction, Princeton University Press, 1977
Joachim Fest, Hitler, Thomson Learning, 1994
Alan Bullock, Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, Penguin, 1990 (*** probably the best)