Mein Kampf Revisited

hitlerIn 1925 Adolph Hitler’s Mein Kampf was first published and outlined in vivid detail Hitler’s philosophies and plans for world denomination. As noted by famed author William L. Shirer in his epoch treatise, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, “The blueprint of the Third Reich and, what is more, of the barbaric New Order which Hitler inflicted on conquered Europe in the triumphant years between 1939 and 1945 is set down in all its appalling crudity at great length and in detail between the covers of this revealing book.” Hitler’s racist views on Jews and non-Aryans, their “treacherous acts” against German society and the need for what became the “final solution” were clearly outlined for all to see, assuming they were able to work their way through this rather ponderous and tedious book. While history and the Allied armies of World War II ultimately rebuked Hitler’s attempts at a new world order under laid by nationalistic and nihilistic racism, unfortunately, we continue to face ongoing assaults on our basic liberties and freedoms both within and outside of our country.

ISIS Terrorists

ISIS Terrorists

Today we are faced with challenges and concerns, not unlike those of the past century: we have seen global economic challenges—witness the Great Recession and the Greek economic crisis; regional wars and conflicts that have challenged our military power— Iraq, Afghanistan, the Ukraine, Syria; racism and civil unrest that continue to fester in our communities—Ferguson, Missouri; Charleston, South Carolina; Chicago, Illinois; national security fears focused on terrorism here and abroad—first Al Qaeda and now ISIS; fear of a “flood” of immigrants, documented or undocumented somehow distorting “our” way of life here and in Europe; national capitals, including ours, seemingly powerless to confront and solve the problems facing us. As we enter full blown into a Presidential election year, we must be careful we do not head down a path that would trade critical national values of freedom and liberty for those of illusionary security and national greatness.

The political rhetoric has gotten particularly heated within the Republican primaries where, without a single vote’s being cast, several would-be candidates have already dropped out—Perry, Walker, Jindal, and Pataki. A surprise to many, outsider Donald Trump has surged to a commanding lead in recent polls (38% of potential GOP voters) followed by Ted Cruz (18%) and Mario Rubio (11%), with Ben Carson and “others” in the single digits. Most professional pundits and pollsters predicted Trump would fade rapidly, given his lack of political credentials but now have to consider the “what if” of Trump winning the GOP candidacy. While not an experienced politician, Trump is particularly adept as a salesman and promoter, especially when the product is himself. Self-financed and unabashedly wealthy, he is unburdened in seeking funds from any super-PACs, special interest groups or the National GOP apparatus itself. His bombastic statements against “illegal” immigrants as murders, rapists and thieves; his railings against women (immediately followed by “I love women”!); a proposal to build a wall between the US and Mexico to ensure national security; a promise to round up and deport the more than 11 million “illegal” immigrants (“I love Mexicans”!); and his proposal to first suspend legal migration of Syrian refugees and then, upping the ante, of all Muslims. These, among many other controversial and sometimes contradictory proposals, have only increased his profile and standings among potential Republican voters. Cruz, Rubio and the others while at first having tried to distance themselves from his proposals, now try to “out-Trump” Trump, pushing their own rhetoric to histrionic levels in hopes they can rise higher in the polls.

Some of this could be seen as comical, the actual stuff of late night TV shows, where entertainment of the masses is far more important than serious policy debate, if not for the critical and grave nature of the outcome of these elections, not only to our country but to the world at large. Hilary Clinton, the Democratic Party front runner recently stated Trump’s statements were no longer humorous and needed to be taken seriously. Indeed. His statements to use religion as a litmus test to prohibit the legal migration of Muslims, as well as a proposal to create a national Muslim data base, earned him the rebuke of national and international world leaders, including the House and Senate GOP leadership. Many noted that his singling out Muslims for such special treatment only played into the hands of ISIS and other extremists committed to our nation’s destruction.

Donald Trump at a recent rally

Donald Trump at a recent rally

In a little reported 1990 Vanity Fair interview it was revealed that ex-wife Ivana Trump claimed Trump kept a copy of Hitler’s Speeches at his bedside, reading them from time to time. After first acknowledging that a friend had given him a copy of Mein Kampf (it was actually a copy of Hitler’s speeches: My New Order), Trump stated: “If, I had these speeches, and I am not saying that I do, I would never read them.” Whether Trump has or has not read Hitler’s books, it is apparent that he has taken a page or two from Hitler’s repertoire:

  • Using racism and xenophobia in attempting to rise to power.
  • Proposing mass deportations to solve our economic and political problems.
  • Promising to “Make America Great Again.” (Hitler promised to “Make Germany Great Again.”)
  • Blaming our problems first on Mexicans, followed by the Chinese and, now, the Muslims. (Hitler placed all blame on the Jews and non-Aryans.)
  • Suggesting Muslims should wear special ID’s. (Remember the yellow “Stars of David” worn by Jews under Hitler?)

Not surprisingly, Trump’s positions have won him the endorsement of the American neo-Nazis. Jared Taylor, the editor of a prominent white supremacist magazine, told the New Yorker, “I’m sure [Trump] would repudiate any association with people like me, but his support comes from people who are more like me than he might like to admit.”

Unfortunately, with Trump leading the charge and with the other Republican candidates looking to match him with ever more aggressive positions, we are seeing the promotion of policies that normally would be seen by most as reprehensible and counter to our American values. The American electorate is being subjected to tactics of fear and hysteria while more moderate voices in both parties are being drowned out or marginalized by the sheer volume and shrillness of the conservative extremists.

Even should Trump ultimately fail at winning the Republican nomination, it is clear he has set the course of debate and public policy focus in directions that no one thought acceptable or even possible a few short months back. Should Trump win the nomination, we all have much to fear as we march down a path that clearly resembles that seen in Germany in the beer halls of Munich in the 1920s. To paraphrase George Santayana: Those who fail to learn from the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.—Paul Maxwell

This document was edited by Carol Feickert, CeeJay Publications, Denver, Colorado. Contact [email protected]

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditFacebooktwittergoogle_plusreddit

15 thoughts on “Mein Kampf Revisited

  1. “…more moderate voices…” i.e., code for the same old BS from both parties whose collective platform can be reduced to war, debt, and protecting the tax privileges of an elite donor class while they squander the 300 year patrimony of America enterprise. Another Blue Pill phrase is,”comprehensive immigration reform” that, translated into GOP means, ” Keep those cheap, docile workers coming.” In Demopcrap it translates to, “Someday they’ll be a permanent welfare class who will keep us in office for decades.”

    These code phrases have the credibility of Hillary’s $200K a pop speeches to investment bankers lecturing them on income inequality. Yeah, she means it. People are getting wise to it now and the only candidate pulling Oz’s curtain aside is Trump. No surprise he’s doing as well as he is; he’s the Red Pill for the 2016 silly season.

    So, to the liberal hand-wringers inside the Beltway and to the GOP/Koch Brothers and super PAC establishments and to the PC ninnies in academia and to the globalist tycoons who want their corporate welfare and bailouts and offshore tax breaks while they pack your job off to China, too all of you I say, “Buckle your seat belt, Dorothy, because Kansas is going bye bye.”

    • Jerry, not sure what version of kool aid you are drinking but I couldn’t disagree more about your assessment that Trump is simply “pulling Oz’s curtain aside.” Unlike the fictional “Wizard of Oz” we are talking about real evil and real consequences with global implications. I did not choose the title or the neo-Nazi undertones of Trump’s and, yes, Cruz’s campaigns simply to be sensationalistic. Most of the establishment politicians of the early 20th century didn’t take Hitler seriously until they found his storm troopers in their back yard. We can not seat idly by and watch our country’s values and ideals, no matter how imperfect our current set of leaders may appear, be hijacked by the likes of Trump or Cruz. You better pray Kansas stays exactly where it is.

  2. Back when America was young, it needed emigrants. The world has changed drastically in 100 years and we can no longer afford to allow emigrants to flood into the country unchecked.
    It is also not fair to the people who followed the rules and came to this country legally.
    Obama wants to pardon all of these illegal emigrants because the Democrats will gain approximately 11,000,000 plus new voters.
    By the way, no one has mentioned that Obama’s reading list included ” Rules for Radicals” by Saul Alinsky. A primer on how to create havoc and fear among the citizens of a country and make them more dependent on government.
    I think Trump says some pretty silly things but he is popular because people are sick and tired of do-nothing politicians.
    Democrats or Republicans, they all lie and will say and do anything to get elected or stay in office. They know that they will never have to keep campaign promises because they can always blame the other party for not keeping them.
    Always remember, things are not always as they appear to be. Especially in politics.
    If it was up to me, I would get rid of our system of government and run the country like a corporation, but it would still have a system in place for checks and balances. At least you could fire leaders immediately, who did not do their job.
    With our system of government you have to wait til the next election to get rid of a bad apple. Unless of course he or she did something so egregious that they could be removed right away.
    Instead of a president and vice president, we would have a board of directors and under them would be the various departments, The Interior Dept, The Dept. of Defense, The Justice Dept. etc.
    Politics however, is a very lucrative business to too many people. So I doubt that things will change anytime soon.
    What will change is our way of life. The country is headed for a socialist society.
    People are becoming more dependent on the government every day. !984 is coming, it’s just a little late.
    Think about it. You can’t go anywhere anymore without papers. There are cameras just about everywhere. Every time you use the computer, someone is gathering information on you. Eventually all citizens will be micro-chipped with all of their information. There will be no more money. All purchases and bank transactions will be electronic. The cashless society has been talked about for some time now.
    I can only guess what this country will be like in another 20 or 30 years.

    • There is no problem with anyone reading Mein Kampf, your reference to Rules for Radicals, or whatever floats their boat. Its what people do with what they read. Mein Kampf has such negative and inflammatory influence on an entire epoch of political upheaval that its very publication was banned in Austria and Germany until just recently. While one can question whether Trump has read Mein Kampf or not it is clear that his actions are following a pattern that are extremely nihilistic and xenophobic. He is not just saying some “silly things”. They are egregious and repugnant to the vast majority of our nation not to mention the international community (when was the last time the UK or any other nation voted to prohibit the travel of a Presidential candidate to their country?!). Your idea of running the country “like a corporation” is part of the problem with those who have no understanding and have had no experience in trying to govern. The government is not a profit motivated business and any policy based on a “business” model fails the litmus test of “governing” to provide defense, education, health, environmental services, roads, a justice system and all the other issues essential for true governance. It would be the quickest way we would bring in the spectra of 1984. Yes, our current leadership is addressing some of the critical needs of the country but I suggest in lieu of blaming the system to blame the individuals. Vote them out of office or put pressure on them to change their ways. That’s what democracy is all about. To quote Winston Churchill: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the rest.”

      • Ever hear of a non-profit corporation? And how is it that you are familiar with what I understand or don’t understand or what my experiences are without knowing anything about me? Since you like quotes, how about this one: “Whoever you think I am, I may not be, and whoever you think I am not, I may be.” – F. Steven Jones
        Corporations do govern, they have a board of directors that “govern.” A corporation can set up departments the same as a government. And yes, the government is a business in one sense of the word. It takes in money and it spends money. No, it is not supposed to be a profit making operation but it should not spend more than it takes in. Unfortunately, it does.
        You say you can vote bad apples out of office? That’s great, but while they are in office they can do a tremendous amount of damage to the economy. And it can take a year or more to get them out.
        As for a democracy, we do not have a true democracy. Many times laws are made without the consent of the citizens. Many congressmen are controlled by special interest groups and the bills they submit do not always benefit or represent their constituents. Yes, they can be voted out of office, but by then it is too late.
        I don’t think you properly read my reply. 1984 has already begun. The elements needed to control and keep track of the populace are rapidly becoming a reality. The collection of data on individuals by the government is not a conspiracy theory, it’s been exposed already in the news. And as I have already mentioned, there are cameras everywhere you go now.
        People in America already have the mentality that it is the responsibility of the government to take care of them and keep them safe. They have no problem with losing some of their freedom as long as they think it is done for their security.
        I don’t worry too much about myself, I’m 68 and I may not live to see what America will be like for my children. I do know it will be unrecognizable to the America I grew up in, and not in a good way.
        One last thing. We can debate about the problems of the world and how to solve them all day long, but in the end we will have accomplished nothing. As long as there is greed, avarice, envy, wrath and all the other deadly sins and men wanting to control other men, any solution would be only temporary. The only thing we can do is to do the best we can while we live on this earth and try to leave it a little better than we found it.
        You know, if it weren’t for people, this earth would be a great place to live.

        • Steven, you raise more problems than I could possible respond to in this forum in any reasonable way. As to non-profits, yes, I am well aware of how they operate having run one over many years. You say “get rid of our system of government and run the country like a corporation” suggesting a “non-profit corporation” as the model. A “Board” would need to be selected in some fashion, and then a “CEO” and various officials appointed by the “Board”, various departments created, and “by-laws” (a constitution?) developed, etc. Depending on how you select the governing “Board” (elections? self-selected? a lottery?) and who the “CEO” is, what are the defined departments, what are the “by-laws,” and so forth, at the level of a nation state the size of the US you could end up with something very similar to what we already have (a democracy, parliamentary rule, a republic) or worse an oligarchy, a dictatorship or a military regime or junta. All these forms of government are “non-profits” but I doubt they are what you or any of us are looking for. Personally, I will stand with Winston Churchill and work on making our democracy, however, imperfect it is, work.

          • No, I did not say we should run the country as a non-profit. You implied that corporations are for profit only. Actually non-profits have to make a profit also. The only difference is they generally don’t pay tax on their profits/reserves. In order to keep their doors open, they have to run in the black. The government should run in the black but it doesn’t.
            Tell me, how much difference is there in the organization of the government than a corporation? They are very similar. You have a president and a vice president; you have a board of directors/cabinet; you have the various departments. The biggest difference is that the leaders of a corporation are hired and the leaders of the government are elected. The government has congress, corporations have shareholders. The big difference there is that shareholders cannot steal money from projects and congressmen can, as many have done.
            You can still have elections with a corporation. However, the leaders would be held to a higher standard than our politicians and we would have the capability of replacing them immediately if they did not perform.
            Do you not think that what Obama is doing is coming close to a dictatorship? He is trying to make an end run around congress with these executive orders. He finally shoved Obamacare down our throats. As with all government programs, it was not well thought out and has hurt some people and helped others. Before he leaves office he is going to cause as much problems as he possibly can and there is nothing anyone can do about it until he leaves office.
            In order to make democracy better in this country, you would have to change the mindset of politicians. Being elected to office brings with it many perks, among which is to get rich off the taxpayer. Not all congressmen are able to steal because some of them are not as smart as others or are not in a position to make backroom deals.
            Here’s one way to improve our system. Do away with Democrats and Republicans and all parties. Whoever wants to run for a particular office would register the same as they do now. Then they would campaign and tell the populace what they would do if elected. They would not be allowed to insult their opponents. I want to know what he intends to do to make life better, not what he thinks about his rival.
            You keep bringing up Churchill, does the British parliament have the same problem with unethical behavior as we do or are the British above that sort of thing? That would be interesting to know.

      • Apparently, Winston Churchill was ignorant of these other types of governments when he made that statement. The following is some of the best and most efficient governments in the world. The United States didn’t even make the list. Neither did Briton. Some of these countries do combine elements of democracy with their rule.
        Strangely, New Zealand having the same government as Briton seems to do a better job of governing. My first wife’s mother was a New Zealander. Her father was the Chief of Police of Auckland. Her family still owns large sheep ranches in New Zealand.

        Qatar – absolute monarchy – is a high income economy with the highest per capita income in the world. Qatar is classified by the UN as a country of very high human development and is the most advanced Arab state for human development

        Singapore – The nation’s core principles are meritocracy, multiculturalism and secularism. It is noted for its effective, pragmatic and incorruptible governance and civil service, which together with its rapid development policies, is widely cited as the “Singapore model”. Gallup polls shows 84% of its residents expressed confidence in the national government, one of the highest ratings recorded. Singapore is a unitary multiparty parliamentary republic, with a Westminster system of unicameral parliamentary government.

        Finland – Finland is a parliamentary republic with a central government based in the capital Helsinki, local governments in 317 municipalities. Finland is a top performer in numerous metrics of national performance, including education, economic competitiveness, civil liberties, quality of life, and human development. In 2015, Finland is ranked first in the World Human Capital and the Press Freedom Index, and as the most stable country in the world in the Failed States Index.

        Hong Kong SAR – Hong Kong Basic Law, the territory’s constitutional document, which outlines the system of governance of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, but which is subject to the interpretation of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC).

        The primary pillars of government are the Executive Council, the civil service, the Legislative Council, and the Judiciary. The Executive Council is headed by the Chief Executive who is elected by the Election Committee and then appointed by the Central People’s Government. The civil service is a politically neutral body that implements policies and provides government services, where public servants are appointed based on meritocracy. The Legislative Council has 70 members, 40 seats are directly elected by universal suffrage by permanent residents of Hong Kong according to five geographical constituencies and a District Council functional constituency. 30 seats from functional constituencies are directly elected by a smaller electorate, which consists of corporate bodies and persons from various stipulated functional sectors. The entire council is headed by the President of the Legislative Council who serves as the speaker. Judges are appointed by the Chief Executive on the recommendation of an independent commission.

        Note: To be fair, not all are happy with the government but no matter what, someone is going to be unhappy. I would bet there are unhappy people in heaven. Some old grouch is probably complaining that the glare from the streets paved with gold are hurting his eyes.

        New Zealand – New Zealand is a high-income economy and ranks highly in international comparisons of national performance, such as health, education, economic freedom and quality of life. Nationally, legislative authority is vested in an elected, unicameral Parliament, while executive political power is exercised by the Cabinet, led by the Prime Minister. Queen Elizabeth II is the country’s head of state and is represented by a Governor-General. In addition, New Zealand is organised into 11 regional councils and 67 territorial authorities for local government purposes.

        Malaysia – is a federal constitutional monarchy located in Southeast Asia. It consists of thirteen states and three federal territories. The country is multi-ethnic and multi-cultural, which plays a large role in politics. The constitution declares Islam the state religion while allowing freedom of religion for non-Muslims. The government system is closely modelled on the Westminster parliamentary system and the legal system is based on common law. The head of state is the king. He is an elected monarch chosen from the hereditary rulers of the nine Malay states every five years. The head of government is the prime minister.

        Switzerland – is a federal directorial republic consisting of 26 cantons, with Bern as the seat of the federal authorities, called Bundesstadt (“federal city”) The country has a long history of armed neutrality—it has not been in a state of war internationally since 1815—and did not join the United Nations until 2002. Nevertheless, it pursues an active foreign policy and is frequently involved in peace-building processes around the world.[8] In addition to being the birthplace of the Red Cross. Switzerland ranks top or close to the top in several metrics of national performance, including government transparency, civil liberties, quality of life, economic competitiveness, and human development. It has the highest nominal wealth (financial and non-financial assets) per adult in the world according to Credit Suisse and the eighth-highest per capita gross domestic product on the IMF list. Zürich and Geneva have each been ranked among the top cities with the highest quality of life in the world

        Luxembourg – a representative democracy with a constitutional monarch, it is headed by a grand duke, and is the world’s only remaining grand duchy. Luxembourg is a developed country, with an advanced economy and the world’s highest GDP

      • I want to apologize for that last post. I did not mean to disparage Winston Churchill. He was a very intelligent man and a great man. Oddly enough I saw his younger brother John Strange Spencer Churchill on an old episode of “What’s My Line” from the early 50’s only a few days ago.

  3. We need immigration. In fact you could say that US identity is our common immigrant heritage – E pluribus unum. I just believe that it is us selecting who is allowed to emigrate here based on our needs and culture, not their desire just to come here.

    • You are correct. We can’t take in the whole world. There needs to be a better system in place. Why it is so difficult to design a good system is beyond me.
      As for Mexican workers, we used to have the Bracero program that worked well as far as I know. Why not bring back something like that?
      What Hitler did is not the same as us wanting to control our borders. And deportation of illegals is not the same as extermination.
      My wife came to this country legally. She spent the money to hire an immigration attorney and became a US citizen the proper way. It is not right that others can just come across illegally and and become citizens because Obama waves his magic wand.
      How would you feel if you went to a ballgame and spent a lot of money on tickets to get in and other people jump the fence and get in free and the management looks the other way. And besides that they take your seats?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *