Today: The Defeat of ISIS, The Dutch beat the English at Dungeness, 1st Notice of the Holocaust, Royals behaving badly, Christmas Music, . . .
AND MORE [Read more…]
Today: The Defeat of ISIS, The Dutch beat the English at Dungeness, 1st Notice of the Holocaust, Royals behaving badly, Christmas Music, . . .
AND MORE [Read more…]
A look at some of the history and holidays on December 7
The U.S. and Japan were in ongoing peace negotiations when, at 7:48 AM Hawaii time on this day in 1941, the Imperial Japanese Navy launched a surprise attack on the U.S. Naval Base at Honolulu, home to the U.S. Pacific Fleet. The goal of the IJN was to convince the U.S. to come to an acceptable bargain, or barring that, to sufficiently damage the Pacific Fleet that it would not hinder Japanese planned offensive operations in the Pacific against resource rich Islands controlled variously by Britain, the Netherlands and the U.S.
Three U.S. Aircraft Carriers assigned to the Pacific Fleet were operating outside of Pearl Harbor when the IJN attacked. The IJN was aware of this but was operating on the premise, incorrect, that battleships would be the decisive weapons of naval warfare. The reality turned out to be that airpower launched from the carriers was decisive. Thus, the IJN attack at Pearl Harbor, even though it sunk 4 battleships and damaged four others, was not the decisive blow the Japanese had hoped. Moreover, the IJN forces concentrated on the ships in and around the harbor and the airplanes on the ground. The IJN did not attack Pearl Harbor’s support facilities whose loss would have severely hampered the American navy.
Ninety minutes after the IJN attack began, it was over. The U.S. have suffered 2,403 people killed and 1,143 were wounded, Japanese losses were minimal, but they withdrew from the battle thinking incorrectly that they had succeeded in their mission. The U.S. was able to regroup, and with its aircraft carriers intact, scored a strategic victory in the Battle of the Coral Sea six months later.
In 1994, Congress passed a resolution making Dec. 7 Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day in honor of the Americans who perished and were injured in the attack.
In America, the term Right Wing is misused to imply that conservative Americans are fascists lusting for world domination; in fact, the opposite is true.
(As my regular readers (to whom I am endlessly grateful) know, I was away from my blog for some time caring for a relative who had surgery. Being away that long gave me time to think about “going a little crazy,” as Bob Ross likes to say when he adds another tree to a painting. In my case, “going a little crazy” meant wondering if I could do a video as well as a podcast.
In addition to the time spent researching how to do go about making a Power Point video (I’ve got to start somewhere), it took me six hours to create a 35 minute video and companion podcast. They both are a little glitchy, but not bad for a first effort. I will get better. But I will never forget my readers, so here is the same content in written form.)
The idea for this video came when I ended my trip with a much-needed massage. Because this is Tennessee, my masseur is a liberty-oriented man so, in the midst of a far-ranging conversation, he asked this question: “Why are conservatives called “fascists,” when fascism is a socialist doctrine?” An excellent question, and one I wanted to answer here.
The reality is that, even though the media loves to talk about “right wingers” (although never left wingers), there is no “left wing” versus “right wing” in America, at least as those terms are understood in the rest of the world. Instead, we only have liberty versus tyranny, along with the supporters of both those ideologies.
Ironically enough, although the French Revolution post-dated the end of the American revolution by six years, the terms “right wing” and “left wing” are leftovers from that overseas kerfuffle. Let me explain.
The French Revolution had as its slogan “Liberté, égalité, fraternité.” Liberty, equality, fraternity! In the context of the French Revolution, those words were always lies.
At the start of the Revolution, France had an absolute monarchy that sat on top of a large, equally absolutist aristocracy. It was not a sustainable system, and the revolutionaries intended to topple it. However, unlike the American revolutionaries who envisioned limited government coupled with individual liberty, that’s not what the French wanted. Instead, the revolutionaries imagined an absolutist commune, with the monarchy and aristocracy replaced by an equally controlling cabal of “the people.”
In this Bookworm Podcast, I examine how the term “Right Wing” is misused to imply that conservative Americans are fascists lusting for world domination.
My latest podcast is up and running. You can listen to it through the audio embed below, or at LibSyn, or through Apple Podcasts. Also — and this is a grand experiment I cooked up while spending 12 hours hopscotching from Tennessee to California and another 12 hours (a week later) making the return trip — I’ve made a companion video, which I’ve also embedded below.
The video is very much an experiment and I have to confess that the video and the companion podcast (which is a direct copy of the audio on the video, minus some long pauses) have a few rough spots. I’ve figured out how to work out those rough spots, but after spending more than six hours yesterday making a 35 minute video, I was just too “done with” the project to make repairs. Bear with me, though, for it will get better. [Read more…]
Jexodus (or Jexit) asks Jews to leave an increasingly anti-Semitic Democrat Party, something I’m trying to facilitate with tweets to my #DearFellowJews.
If you’ve been paying attention to the news of late, you can’t have missed stories about anti-Semitism. For example, for many years now, France has periodically been roiled by grotesque anti-Semitic murders, including one that happened in connection with the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, in January 2015.
I mention that massacre specifically, because it was an event that lifted for Leftists American Jews, even if ever so slightly, the veil hiding the anti-Semitic rot at the heart of the Democrat Party. As you may recall, in January 2015, Islamists committed a mass murder at the headquarters of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo because it had dared to mock the eminently mockable Mohamed. Two days later, a member of the same radical Islamist community entered a kosher market in Paris, took hostages, killed four people, and injured nine.
The massacre did not occur because anyone in the Hypercacher market had mocked Mohamed. No one had, of course. The only reason the Hypercacher massacre happened was because Islamist murderers always use the opportunity of a massacre to include a few Jews. Thus, when Islamists committed the exceptionally bloody Mumbai massacre, they wasted resources deviating from their central massacre just so that they could torture to death a rabbi and his wife who had a small Chabad House in Mumbai.
In a way, this Muslim massacre technique (a big massacre that includes, as a sideline, brutally killing a few Jews) is comparable to Hitler’s Holocaust: For Hitler and Germany, the primary goal was world conquest. However, just as was the case with the Islamists, Hitler’s anti-Semitism was so all-encompassing that he willingly diverted resources from the main goal to accomplish a secondary goal that was neither ancillary to nor necessary for world conquest. Indeed, it lessened the chances for world conquest, but Hitler couldn’t stop himself.
But I digress. This is not a post about rising anti-Semitism around the world. It’s just a prelude to a post about rising anti-Semitism in America and, more specifically, about the anti-Semitic rot at the heart of the Democrat Party . . . which brings me back to the purposefully anti-Semitic attack on Jews in the Hypercacher market in Paris. [Read more…]
The pause in North Korea negotiations reveals that the media is locked in a dangerous imaginary world where negotiations play out like bad old-time movies.
To date, the stupid Leftists in the media have been trained like Pavlov’s dog to expect “a win” whenever there’s a summit with a foreign leader. Past presidents have always emerged from the meetings with “a deal,” even if that deal was either illusory or, worse, gave away the store.
Media hacks therefore have no template within which to fit an actual negotiation, such as the one Trump is conducting with North Korea. That’s why we end up with these headlines (to which I will not hyperlink):
Trump-Kim Summit’s Collapse Exposes the Risks of One-to-One Diplomacy (New York Times)
Trump Kim talks: What to make of the Hanoi summit collapse? (BBC News)
Trump Cuts North Korea Summit Short After Talks Collapse (iHeart News)
Will nothing go right on this trip? Officials have to manually push stairway from Air Force One after they broke down in Vietnam – just like Trump’s disastrous summit with Kim Jong Un (Daily Mail)
Hanoi summit collapse could be ‘big blow’ to North Korean leader’s pride, experts say (ABC News)
Summit Collapse: How Trump’s Hanoi Talks With Kim Unraveled (Bloomberg)
Aside from the Borg-like repetition of the word “collapse” (those “journalists” must all drink coffee around the same cooler), the collective media is displaying its inability to see beyond a Hollywood moment. You know what Hollywood moment I mean.
To the media, every negotiation is one of those old black-and-white films in which the leaders of two nations on the brink of war are sitting around a conference table, exhausted, their ties loose, their shirt sleeves rolled up, five o’clock shadow on their faces, ash trays stacked with cigarette stubs. If they walk away, the negotiation is over and the world explodes into war. Then, suddenly, our hero rushes in with a brilliant idea or a piece of breaking news. Instantly, the stalemate is broken, the joyous negotiators dance around the room, and the hero and his girl fall into each other’s arms, the world once again saved. [Read more…]
What is it that we are remembering on Holocaust Remembrance Day? Is is just a day of mourning, or is it a warning as well?
I am sure there is not a one of us unaware of slaughter of the seven million innocent Jews and several million other undesirables by the Nazis as part of their Final Solution. But few of us are ever forced beyond the superficial knowledge of those facts.
Ms. BWR is one step removed the Holocaust and can tell the stories of her father who escaped it, other of her family and her parent’s friends who survived, and others of the same ilk who did not survive it. Her “remembrance” on this day is without doubt exponentially different from mine and most other people, who only read of the Holocaust in school, seeing the occasional anodyne picture of the horrors. We know intellectually that what happened was evil, but not emotionally — not viscerally.
And unfortunately, without something to trigger the visceral emotional response of horror to what happened, it is hard to get to the other purpose, I think, of Holocaust Remembrance Day and that is to recognize the danger of evil and the danger of governments with enough power to effectuate that evil on a grand scale, leaving mountains of bodies in their wake.
Holocaust Remembrance Day focuses on that evil in relation to the Jews, perhaps the most persecuted people in history. For much of our history, that is because the Jews made the perfect scapegoats in largely tribal societies — they were a very insular minority that refused to bow down and eschew their religion regardless of the pressure placed upon them. Can anyone doubt that scapegoating such people and using that as justification to carry out murderous pogroms against them was evil. In a sense, Holocaust Remembrance Day should have us contemplating our historic treatment of the Jews, for Hitler’s Final Solution was no or more less evil than the Jew hatred and bloody slaughters of old. Rather the Final Solution was the natural culmination of it all, a horror that Hitler was able to effectuate on an industrial scale simply because of the power his government had accumulated, his disarming of the Jews, and the technology of his era.
Certainly one of the things we should recognize on Holocaust Remembrance Day is that the danger for Jews to suffer yet another Holocaust is well imaginable in our lifetimes. Murderous Jew hatred could not be more alive and well amongst many in the Muslim world. Muslim triumphalists want to see all non-Muslim faiths wiped out, but the Jews are and have always been first on their list. The Muslims simply have never had the power to make it happen — yet. Does anyone doubt the truth of the rather dark joke going around, that if you take away all of the guns from all of Muslims in the Middle East, you would see no more war there, but take the guns away from all of the Jews and you would see no more Israel there.
And I think there is a secondary lesson from Holocaust Remembrance Day. It is to remember the near certain danger of allowing any government to accumulate so much power that they can disarm the populace and, once disarmed, scapegoat and murder whatever pockets of them are necessary to advance the government’s agenda. We’ve seen variants on that throughout the 20th century, where the rise of socialism ended in the mass murder of nearly a hundred million innocents. We see it still today in places like Venezuela and Cuba, two of socialism’s last failed vestiges.
But now to come full circle. As I wrote above, without something to trigger the visceral horror of what happened with the Holocaust, it is hard for one to fully appreciate the warnings that are part and parcel Holocaust Remembrance Day. I’ve been fortunate enough — or perhaps unfortunate enough, depending on how you look at it — to have had an experience that triggered the visceral horror.
Many years ago, I visited the site of Bergen-Belsen Concentration Camp. It was one of the most memorable and shocking experiences of my life. On this Holocaust Remembrance Day, I include a post I wrote about that visit with minor edits: [Read more…]
This Bookworm Beat shows that, on Halloween, there’s nothing scarier than Leftist politics and the consequent racist, anti-American shenanigans.
For Halloween we now have two racially approved costumes. If you’re still struggling to think of a costume for yourself or your child, I am happy to report that the Black Panther creators and the gal who voices Moana have both stated explicitly that all races are allowed to use their costumes. Whew! The only thing sad about these two linked stories is that we live in a world in which people of various races need permission to dress up as wildly popular fictional characters whom they admire.
As the election nears, the Left escalates its Hitler comparisons. I was listen to today’s Dan Bongino show, and he dedicates the first few minutes to discussing the escalating Trump = Hitler rhetoric from the Left and from the NeverTrumpers who, like true converts and zealots, outdo their new political travelers when it comes to heated rhetoric. Bongino played audio of the various talking heads fighting to come up with the most extreme Trump = Hitler (or ISIS) analogy (I’ve queued the audio to the point at which the Trump = Hitler tape begins):
TV media is not alone. This is a recent headline from the WaPo:
An alternative headline for that same opinion piece could have been “Hitler was an honest leader.”
Even that hardcore socialist (and pedophile supporter) Pope Francis gets into the Hitler comparison act, comparing “populists” who oppose mass Muslim migration to Hitler. His use of the word “populist” interests me, because it’s a reminder that, to the elites, it’s inconceivable that the masses might have a good idea. If the masses want it, it must automatically be bad. Frankly, I don’t see anything bad about Europeans resisting an influx of people who subscribe to an ideology that is the antithesis of everything the West has struggled to achieve over the centuries in terms of civil rights, individual liberty, respect for different races and faiths, etc. The Pope is insulated from this influx behind is walls, but the Europeans being murdered, raped, stabbed, blown up, and evicted by the new immigrants have skin in this game.
For some good push back against this type of rhetorical madness, I recommend Sarah Hoyt’s Don’t Let The Media and Democrats Get Away With It. I especially liked her conclusion, although I do recommend reading the whole thing:
Whenever the left is meeting with opposition they retreat into this condemnation of our lack of civility.
They are right, you know? If we shut up and let them beat us, attack us and call for guillotines to kill us, without protest, it’s all very civil. Or at least, there isn’t a fight.
Are you going to do that? Are you going into cowering and apologizing mode because the left is hanging a multiply-convicted felon with an incoherent hodgepodge of beliefs around your necks? Are you going to let them get away with it AGAIN?
Or are you going to answer this the only way you can? With humor? “Oh, please, if he were a real Republican he’d know how to build bombs that go boom. We’re competent.” Or “Yeah? Hey, he hates Monsanto. Weren’t you yelling about Monsanto last week?” Or “Did I hear you beating your chest and apologizing for the shooting of Scalize? The beating of Rand Paul? No? Then take my answer as the same.” Or “You know if you guys didn’t keep felons out of jail this stuff wouldn’t happen.” Or my favorite “Not my circus, not my monkeys. We know you’re a hive mind, but we’re individuals. None of us know this nut.”
Keep calm and “no sale”the left’s bullshit.
And vote. Vote like your life depends on it. With the calls for guillotines and Antifa on the loose it very well might.
The EU continues its bow to sharia law. Speaking of the effect of the elite-approved Muslim invasion of Europe, you probably already read that an EU court in Austria held that the EU’s promise of free expression does not extend to insulting Mohammed: [Read more…]
On 4/20, even stoners would rouse themselves and find enticing the marvelous collection of political posters at today’s illustrated edition.
Trump’s decision to change the paradigm with North Korea illustrates the precept in my annual Passover post: Tyrannies must be decapitated, not placated.
Starting with Bill Clinton, America fawned over North Korea’s tyrannical rulers, sending them money and promising not to hurt them. In those same years, North Korea’s rulers expanded their concentration/death camps, presided over unnecessary famines, and somehow managed, with every passing year, to find more ways to crack down on a people already starved, terrorized, and denied any rights.
It did not matter one whit to the Kim dynasty that their people experienced incomparable suffering (most of it at the hands of the Kims). The only thing that mattered to the Kims and those closest to them was maintaining their power, prestige, and oh-so-comfortable lifestyle, complete with the finest food (as their people starved), the most luxurious products from around the world and, of course, sex slaves. Lots and lots of sex slaves.
Then something changed. Beginning in January 2017, instead of an American president saying to Kim Jong-un “What can I do to make you happy?” we got a president who said “I’m going to kill you.” He also said to the Chinese, “I’m not very happy with your behavior either, although I’m sure we can resolve our differences when you stop using economic war against America and trying to turn the international waters off of China into your own pond.” Very impolitic. Very mad man. Very undiplomatic. A very big break from more than a quarter century of “diplomacy.”
The usual talking heads amongst the chattering class promised Armageddon. Interestingly, something entirely different happened: With the threat brought directly home to him, Kim Jong-un changed his behavior. He sent athletes and sex slaves to the Olympics. He reached out to South Korea. And of course, most importantly, he scuttled off to China and, rather than admitting the truth — namely, that he feared the “crazy” guy in the White House — announced that the wise Chinese had persuaded him to abandon his nuclear dreams. Even if Kim and the Chinese won’t admit it, you and I know where the credit goes for this announcement.
Watching Trump’s conduct and its outcome, I had to ask myself, has he been reading my annual Passover post or, perhaps, talking to one of Ivanka’s rabbis? Or maybe he’s just had a chance to think about things as he’s attended family Seders over the years.
Did I just hear someone say “What annual Passover post?” Well, this one. As I do every year, I’ve edited it to reflect current concerns. [Read more…]
A trip through a few days worth of my Facebook posts shows that, with little effort, I can expose Proggies to ideas and facts they usually miss or ignore.
Of late, between paying work, family demands, and a touch of the blecchies (not the flu, thank goodness, but I wasn’t feeling great), I’ve been posting on my real-me Facebook more than I’ve been blogging. Blogging requires paragraphs; Facebook requires sentences, a word here or there, or no comment at all to introduce an article.
My two goals on Facebook are to entertain people, so they keep coming back to my feed, and to place before them things that they won’t normally see as they shuffle back and forth between The New York Times, The Washington Post, Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, and the usual mono-ideologues who make up their intellectual world. I try to do the latter in an entirely non-judgmental way, so that people will stop and think, rather than block and argue.
To give you a sense of my M.O., here’s a sampling of things from my real-me Facebook feed over the last few days, many of which you’ll probably recognize from Instapundit and other familiar sites:
I knew that Cape Town’s imminent water shortage was its own fault because it failed to plan for drought, despite living where they regularly occur and despite a population much larger than the last time a drought rolled around. That was the same problem California had with its recent drought (and may continue to have, because last year’s big rains, rather than heralding the end of drought seem to have been just a pause). What I didn’t know was that it was South Africa’s poisonous antipathy to Israel that prevented it from saving itself. Now, when I see Cape Towners lined up with little cans at communal fountains, I don’t feel sorry for them, just as I really didn’t feel sorry for Californians (myself included) stupid enough to live in a state that failed to prepare for inevitable dry periods.
Everybody loves MacDonald’s — even Lefties. That’s why, back in 1990, when the first MacDonald’s opened in the former Soviet Union, 30,000 Russians lined up for the chance to eat there:
Emotional support pets on planes are too often a scam. I adore my dog, who makes me happy, and I’d definitely be a less panicked airplane passenger if I held him in my arms, but he’s still not medically necessary, and most other so-called emotional support pets aren’t either. The way people have abused the service pet exception to animals on planes is especially bad because it’s making things so difficult for those people who genuinely need an animal at their side to help them navigate their world or to guard them against dangerous seizures and other serious ailments. And so I said on Facebook.
Sharyl Attkisson, one of the last honest reporters, explained that the Nunes memo indicates that the FBI violated Woods Procedures. So that my friends don’t have to exhaust themselves clicking over to the article, I explain that this means that the FBI isn’t attesting to its own probity, or even the probity of the person who assembled a dossier. It needs to make a colorable showing that the person who first voiced the information — the anonymous source — is credible. I added that I was interested in learning more about those sources. Since then, of course, we’ve had intimations that the sources are Sidney Blumenthal and friends, people so devious and untrustworthy that only the Clintons could bear their presence. I haven’t mentioned those last facts to my Proggie friends. [Read more…]
No matter what the news says, Proggies so reflexively equate Trump to Hitler, I suspect that in a decade or so, we’ll have an entirely new form of greeting.
When I’m on my real-me Facebook, I always check out what my Progressive friends have to post. I do this, not only because they are friends and I like seeing pictures of their children growing up, but also because it’s the easiest way for me to understand what the people in my uber-Left world are thinking.
I have to tell you that the Washington Post is very, very popular among that crowd. Reading the Post articles my friends highlight, though, is kind of sad. Mistakes, raw emotions, un-sourced hearsay upon hearsay, and hysterical hatred power so many of the articles my friends share.
These same articles also tell me that the Post got its new motto just a little bit wrong. Instead of “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” the Post’s motto should be “Creating the Darkness in Which Democracy Dies.”
Here’s what I’ve also noticed: My friends are apparently a higher class of Progressive, because they never actually say “Hitler” in their posts. However, without fail, when these friends put up an “oh, my God, can you believe how awful he is?” post about Trump, at least one of their friends will say “He’s Hitler.” [Read more…]
Orwell said, “In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” A brave journalist reporting on Antifa proves Orwell was right.
If you ever question whether the American media has morphed into Pravda — a tightly controlled outlet for socialist propaganda — you need to check out a Facebook post from Frank Somerville (which I’ve embedded below). Somerville, if you’re wondering, is a very well-respected San Francisco Bay Area TV journalist.
Somerville’s post is an interesting one at two levels. First, it’s interesting because he reports honestly about the hatred and violence that characterized Antifa’s latest riot in Berkeley.
Second — and this is the important part — it’s interesting because he feels compelled to explain the pressure he felt not to do this accurate, honest reporting, including pressure from his wife, who fears for his safety (whether professional or personal is not clear).
As you read the following words, keep in mind that Somerville is not a journalist in Putin’s Russia or in Iran or in the Gaza strip. He is a journalist in the San Francisco Bay Area who has to screw up his courage and take a stand to report . . . the facts:
M wife told me I’m going to get crucified by posting this. I told her I didn’t care. This is what happened. This is what I saw. This is what I experienced. This is the truth. Period. If people dont want to heat the truth thats not my problem. I have No agenda. Im just saying that this is what happened to me today, think about it. And make your own decision.
Here’s Somerville’s entire post: [Read more…]
The upcoming Winston Churchill biopic reminds us that a nation’s elite tend to have nothing but disdain for an indispensable man — a man such as Trump.
I tend to be leery of biopics because I hate having my history filtered through Hollywood. It always grates on me when I hear a parent explain to a child that this or that movie “is history.” No, it’s not. History is history. All books and movies are merely interpretations and retellings of that history, with some retellings being a whole lot better than others.
Hollywood has always taken liberties with its biopics. There’s the happily married, completely heterosexual Cole Porter in Night and Day (Porter’s homosexuality got better treatment in the otherwise awful De-Lovely); the cutely Irish, completely heterosexual, almost impressively non-Jewish Lorenz Hart in Words and Music (Hart was a brilliant, anguished Jewish homosexual); the charmingly goyish Jerome Kern in Till the Clouds Roll By (Kern was another Jewish kid from New York); and on and on, in an endless parade of movies both old and new in which history takes a backseat to marketability and prejudice.
I tend to know old musicals, but if you’re really interested in the liberties Hollywood takes, I recommend History v. Hollywood, a website that tackles the challenge of separating historic fact from Hollywood fiction. (The Desmond Doss/Hacksaw Ridge post is especially compelling.) Some of the changes make sense, such as time compression or composite characters. After all, a two-hour movie can only touch the high points of a real person’s life or a history event. Other changes, though . . . well, I have a three-letter word for you: JFK.
Knowing Hollywood’s general tendency to bastardize stories, and its modern tendency to go hard-Left in its rewrites, explains why I’m not 100% enthused about the upcoming film Darkest Hour, which is the newest Churchill biopic, due out at Thanksgiving. Gawd alone knows what the movie will do to Churchill’s amazing ascendency in the early months of World War II. Still, the first trailer hints at a movie in which the historic license might be reasonable and the historic facts might be true:
What I find fascinating about the trailer is that it seems to focus so tightly on the elite’s contempt for Churchill. After all, technically speaking, he was one of them — he came from wealth and the uppermost of upper castes in an aristocratic society — yet in practical terms he was not of them at all. He fundamentally offended their values, values that, in the years following WWI, leaned to pure pacifism and a naïve faith in the power of words and sophistication to face down predators.
Is it just me or does that remind you of what’s going on now with Donald Trump? Technically, he should be seen as one of the elite. He came from a monied background that, while not making him a member of America’s self-styled blue bloods, was certainly enough to make him a natural candidate for America’s elite.
But instead of constantly congratulating himself on his sophistication and elegance, Trump instead turned into a scrapper. His wealth wasn’t based on paper exchanges through banking deals or tinkering about with electronics; it was made in the hard-charging world of New York property development.
Moreover, once had made his billions, Trump didn’t endow universities that already have more money than God or subsidize symphonies that can’t make in the free market. Instead, he spent his money on parties, beauty contests, and gilt-furnished penthouses in shockingly excessive buildings.
Trump is a class traitor. No wonder the upper echelons of the American Left, the ones who call the shots with help of all the useful idiots they’ve engineered in America’s colleges and universities, despise him as they do. [Read more…]
For those caught in its toils, communism has been every bit as evil as Nazism, except with a greater scope. No wonder, given that they’re the same ideology.
I have written thousands of words about the fact that communism and Nazism are siblings, in that they are both variations on socialism. It’s easy to figure this out because both of their names give the game away: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National-Socialist German Workers’ Party) and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Both were predicated on total state power.
Hitler differed from the Soviets only in that he was willing to maintain an industrial class, which could derive profits from that industry, provided that the industrialists ceded ultimate control and management to the state. Call it crony capitalism, if you like.
To the extent the Nazis fought with the communists within Germany’s borders during the 1920s and 1930s, that was a form of internecine warfare, with both parties struggling to obtain total control. Because they are both totalitarian ideologies, neither Nazism or Communism can suffer a pluralist government. All battles are zero sum games with only one party emerging to hold all power within the state.
Once Hitler obtained total control in Germany, he was in a position to negotiate an alliance with Stalin. These two socialist nations were now fellow totalitarian travelers, at least for as long as Hitler needed Stalin’s aid and military passivity to retain power and aid his war effort. Once Stalin ceased being useful — and once Hitler desperately needed the Soviet Union’s oil fields — Hitler just as easily snapped back into his earlier adversarial posture. It was always about power and never about core ideological differences.
In America, before Hitler attacked the USSR, communists did not support the war. They had no desire to go to war against a socialist state. Their goal, after all, was to see America become a socialist state. If Stalin could tolerate Hitler, so could they. [Read more…]