babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » humanities & science   » Hitler is dead. Hitlerism endures.

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Hitler is dead. Hitlerism endures.
DownTheRoad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4523

posted 02 February 2004 09:08 PM      Profile for DownTheRoad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hitler's Second Book: The Unpublished Sequel to Mein Kampf

1943 again?

quote:
Consider again what Hitler wrote in 1928. Yes, it is insane; but take out the word "race" and replace it, say, with "Zionism" or "American imperialism," and replace the references to the Soviet Union with references to the United States, and suddenly the discourse is not only crazy but also quite common. The "soft core" of this poisonous rhetoric is to be found among some sectors of European and American intellectuals and academics. It tends to identify Israelis as culprits, and Jews as potential Israelis. It is obsessed with the influence of Jews on culture, politics, and economics around the world. The partially successful boycott of Israeli academics in recent years is a case in point, not least because it tends to affect precisely those who number among the most determined and articulate opponents of the current Israeli government's policies. The divestment campaign, calling on American and European universities to desist from any investments in Israel, is another example; this campaign provides cover, and even immunity, for all the regimes around the world that have never recognized academic freedom. The sympathetic understanding expressed in academic settings, and in liberal and left-wing publications, for suicide bombers who blow up innocent civilians in Israel creates a climate of tolerance for murder that is cleverly couched in the righteous language of liberation and justice.

quote:
This "Jewish problem" is not at all peripheral to Mahathir's argument, a sort of tithe to the masses and the clerics so as to push his program of modernization. It is central to his thinking. Modernization is justified, in his account, by the necessity of destroying the entity that has penetrated the Muslim world and polluted its soul. For, as he says, "we are all oppressed. We are all being humiliated." And thus the numerical and economic strength of Muslims must be complemented by military prowess: "We are now 1.3 billion strong. We have the biggest oil reserve in the world. We have great wealth.... We control 57 out of 180 countries in world. Our votes can make or break international organizations.... [But] we need guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships for our defense." Hitler used to mock those who were obsessed with obscure Germanic traditions, who were filled with rage at the defeat of 1918 and dreamed up all sorts of harebrained conspiracies in marginal militant fraternities. He wanted to build a powerful modern military. He was, in this way, a modernizer.

quote:
Hitler is dead, but there is a Hitlerite quality to the new anti-Semitism, which now legitimizes not only opposition to Zionism but also the resurrection of the myth of Jewish world domination. And those who foolishly think that doing away with Israel, not least in a "one-state solution," would remove anti-Semitism had better look more closely at the language of these enemies. For they--I mean the enemies--insist that the Jews are everywhere, and so they must be uprooted everywhere. Their outpost may be Israel, but their "power center" is in America, and their synagogues and intellectuals are in Germany and France, and their academics are in Russia and Britain. Since they are the cause of all evil and misfortune, the world will be a happier place without them, whether it is dominated by the Aryan Master Race or by the ideological soldiers of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Hitler taught humanity an important lesson. It is that when you see a Nazi, a fascist, a bigot, or an anti-Semite, say what you see. If you want to justify it or excuse it away, describe accurately what it is that you are trying to excuse away. If a British newspaper publishes an anti-Semitic cartoon, call it anti-Semitic. If the attacks on the Twin Towers were animated by anti-Semitic arguments, say so. If a Malaysian prime minister expresses anti-Semitic views, do not try to excuse the inexcusable. If a self-proclaimed liberation organization calls for the extermination of the Jewish state, do not pretend that it is calling for anything else. The absence of clarity is the beginning of complicity.



From: land of cotton | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 02 February 2004 09:50 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I once tried to read Mein Kampf. It was so frigging boring that I stopped after about a page and a half. The man missed his calling - he should have worked for a sleep aid company.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 02 February 2004 10:38 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I know. I found it equally hard going, and I actually forced myself to read all of it.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 02 February 2004 11:07 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't think I even lasted a whole page.

Das ist Schlofville, man.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mandos
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 888

posted 02 February 2004 11:44 PM      Profile for Mandos   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The key is at the end of what DTR posted: "The absence of clarity is the beginning of complicity." Yer eider wit' us or agin' us. Yeah.

The author is attempting to attack the distinction between causation and justification. No one on babble claimed that Mahathir meant anything more than what he said (same for other such people). It's just that what he said was in a different mental context from what we hear. Attempting to explain that context and the history behind it is not "excusing Hitler" or something silly like that.

It is perfectly appropriate to discuss how it is that Mahathir got to where he did. This includes the creation of Israel. And the author is dead wrong about the target of the ire. No one would be thinking about Jews if it weren't for Israel. They would be saying that the Muslim world was a victim of Crusaders. Zionists made themselves the most prominent focus and usurped the Enemy role from the Franj.

Consequently, the author is writing bunkum. It is worthy of an invocation of Godwin's Law. It is one of the usual attempts to draw a false, weak analogy between Hitler and Mahather/whatever. The only thing in common is that incidentally Jews are involved. Otherwise, the analogy is weak.


From: There, there. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 03 February 2004 01:49 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
No one would be thinking about Jews if it weren't for Israel. They would be saying that the Muslim world was a victim of Crusaders. Zionists made themselves the most prominent focus and usurped the Enemy role from the Franj.

You know this.

I know this.

Many others know this.

Why then, do so many claim that Antisemitism ® is even a consideration?


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 03 February 2004 04:11 AM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, they have to say something, don't they?

quote:
Consider again what Hitler wrote in 1928. Yes, it is insane; but take out the word "race" and replace it, say, with "Zionism" or "American imperialism," and replace the references to the Soviet Union with references to the United States, and suddenly the discourse is not only crazy but also quite common.

The very clear difference is that while it is insane to say that a race is "bad", "evil", or even "misguided", it is not at all insane to make this claim of an ideology, like possibly Zionism or American imperialism. Unlike races, some ideologies are in fact bad, evil, or misguided, and it behooves us as moral individuals to determine which they are. As usual, rational discussion is framed as hateful or insane by a desperate, grasping attempt to associate it with Hitler. It boggles the mind that this can be considered scholarship.

quote:
Hitler is dead, but there is a Hitlerite quality to the new anti-Semitism, which now legitimizes not only opposition to Zionism but also the resurrection of the myth of Jewish world domination.

Again, the attempt to equate opposing an ideology (perfectly legitimate) with opposing a race. Cynical sophistry at its best.

quote:
Hitler taught humanity an important lesson. It is that when you see a Nazi, a fascist, a bigot, or an anti-Semite, say what you see.

That's good advice.

quote:
And those who foolishly think that doing away with Israel, not least in a "one-state solution," would remove anti-Semitism had better look more closely at the language of these enemies. For they--I mean the enemies--insist that the Jews are everywhere, and so they must be uprooted everywhere.

The "they" he is talking about who say these things are, of course, anti-semites, but he lumps in anyone who is an enemy of Israel. In fact, Israel has incurred many enemies for entirely normal geopolitical reasons, such as would be incurred wherever there is an inbalance of power and the use of force to maintain it. However, "they" are all the same, and all want to uproot Jews everywhere. I think there can be no doubt that he is talking about the Arab world, who he wants to lump into one pile, represented by their most anti-semetic elements.

Also, the idea that a one-state solution is synomous with "doing away with Israel", as if only total seperation from the palestinians can ensure the survival of the state, strikes me as inherently racist.

Therefore, I conclude that I'm dealing with a bigot.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca