Author Topic: The Nazi Mind-Set in America  (Read 5058 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JonTheSavage

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,655
The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« on: June 24, 2009, 12:12:06 am »
The Nazi Mind-Set in America, Part 1
by Jacob G. Hornberger, August 1994

Part 1 | Part 2 (http://www.fff.org/freedom/0994a.asp)

Before the end of World War II, in 1944, Friedrich A. Hayek, who was later to win the Nobel memorial prize in economic science, startled the Western world with a book entitled The Road to Serfdom . Hayek argued that despite the war against Nazi Germany, the economic philosophy of the Nazis and communists was becoming the guiding light for American and British policymakers. In his forward to the 1972 edition of the book, Hayek wrote:

But after war broke out I felt that this widespread misunderstanding of the political systems of our enemies, and soon also of our new ally, Russia, constituted a serious danger which had to be met by a more systematic effort. Also, it was already fairly obvious that England herself was likely to experiment after the war with the same kind of policies which I was convinced had contributed so much to destroy liberty elsewhere. . . . Opinion moves fast in the United States, and even now it is difficult to remember how comparatively short a time it was before The Road to Serfdom appeared that the most extreme kind of economic planning had been seriously advocated and the model of Russia held up for imitation by men who were soon to play an important role in public affairs. . . . Be it enough to mention that in 1934 the newly established National Planning Board devoted a good deal of attention to the example of planning provided by these four countries: Germany, Italy, Russia, and Japan.

As the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II approaches, Americans must ask themselves a troubling question: Did Hayek's concerns become reality — have Americans, in fact, traveled the road to serfdom the past fifty years? Or, put another way, did the Nazis lose the military battles but win the war for the hearts and minds of the American people?

Consider, for example, the Nazi economic system. Who can argue that the American people do not believe in and support most of its tenets? For example, how many Americans today do not unequivocally support the following planks of the Nationalist (Nazi) Party of Germany, adopted in Munich on February 24, 1920:

We ask that the government undertake the obligation above all of providing citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living. The activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the interests of the community, but must take place within its confines and be for the good of all. Therefore, we demand: an end to the power of the financial interests . We demand profit sharing in big business. We demand a broad extension of care for the aged. We demand. . . the greatest possible consideration of small business in the purchases of the national, state, and municipal governments. In order to make possible to every capable and industrious [citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of our system of public education. . . . We demand the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents. . . . The government must undertake the improvement of public health — by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor — by the greatest possible support for all clubs concerned with the physical education of youth. We combat the . . . materialistic spirit within and without us, and are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed from within on the foundation of " The Common Good Before the Individual Good ."

I repeat: How many Americans today do not unequivocally support most, if not all, of these Nazi economic and political principles?

And if there is any doubt whether the Nazi economic philosophy did, in fact, win the hearts and minds of the American people, consider the following description of the Nazi economic system by Leonard Peikoff in his book The Ominous Parallels :

Contrary to the Marxists, the Nazis did not advocate public ownership of the means of production. They did demand that the government oversee and run the nation's economy. The issue of legal ownership, they explained, is secondary; what counts is the issue of control . Private citizens, therefore, may continue to hold titles to property — so long as the state reserves to itself the unqualified right to regulate the use of their property.

What American objects to these principles of the Nazi economic system? Don't most Americans favor the planned economy, the regulated economy, the controlled economy? Don't most Americans favor the type of economic controls, and the right of government to institute such controls , that characterized the Nazi society: wage and price controls, high taxes, government-business partnerships, licensing, permits, and a myriad other economic regulations?

The truth is that Hayek's warning was ignored. Having defeated the Nazis in battle, Americans became ardent supporters and advocates of Nazi economic policies.

Why? Part of the answer lies in another feature that was central to the Nazi way of life: public schooling. "Oh, no! You have gone too far this time," the average American will exclaim. "Public schooling is a distinctively American institution — as American as apple pie and free enterprise." The truth? As Sheldon Richman documents so well in his new book, Separating School & State, 20th-century Americans adopted the idea of a state-schooling system in the latter part of the 19th century from — you guessed it — Prussia! And as Mr. Richman points out, public schooling has proven as successful in the United States as it did in Germany. Why? Because it has succeeded in its goal of producing a nation of "good, little citizens" — people who pay their taxes on time, follow the rules, obey orders, condemn and turn in the rule-breakers, and see themselves as essential cogs in the national wheel. Consider the words of Richard Ebeling, in his introduction to Separating School & State :

In the hands of the state, compulsory public education becomes a tool for political control and manipulation — a prime instrument for the thought police of the society. And precisely because every child passes through the same indoctrination process — learning the same ''official history," the same "civic virtues," the same lessons of obedience and loyalty to the state — it becomes extremely difficult for the independent soul to free himself from the straightjacket of the ideology and values the political authorities wish to imprint upon the population under its jurisdiction. For the communists, it was the class struggle and obedience to the Party and Comrade Stalin; for the fascists, it was worship of the nation-state and obedience to the Duce ; for the Nazis, it was race purity and obedience to the Führer. The content has varied, but the form has remained the same. Through the institution of compulsory state education, the child is to be molded like wax into the shape desired by the state and its educational elite.

We should not believe that because ours is a freer, more democratic society, the same imprinting procedure has not occurred even here, in America. Every generation of school-age children has imprinted upon it a politically correct ideology concerning America's past and the sanctity of the role of the state in society. Practically every child in the public school system learns that the "robber barons" of the 19th century exploited the common working man; that unregulated capitalism needed to be harnessed by enlightened government regulation beginning in the Progressive era at the turn-of-the-century; that wild Wall Street speculation was a primary cause of the Great Depression; that only Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal saved America from catastrophe; and that American intervention in foreign wars has been necessary and inevitable, with the United States government required to be a global leader and an occasional world policeman.

This brings us to the heart of the problem — the core of the Nazi mind-set: that the interests of the individual must be subordinated to the interests of the nation. This is the principle that controls the minds of the American people, just as it controlled the minds of the German people sixty years ago. Each person is viewed like a bee in a hive; his primary role in life is to serve the hive and the ruler of the hive, and to be sacrificed when the hive and its ruler consider it necessary. This is why Americans of our time, unlike their ancestors, favor such things as income taxation, Social Security, socialized medicine, and drug laws; they believe, as did Germans in the 1930s, that their bodies, lives, income, and property, in the final analysis, are subordinate to the interests of the nation.

As you read the following words of Adolf Hitler, ask yourself which American politician, which American bureaucrat, which American schoolteacher, which American citizen would disagree with the principles to which Hitler subscribed:

It is thus necessary that the individual should finally come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole; that pride and conceitedness, the feeling that the individual . . . is superior, so far from being merely laughable, involve great dangers for the existence of the community that is a nation; that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual; and that the higher interests involved in the life of the whole must here set the limits and lay down the duties of the interests of the individual.

Even though the average American enthusiastically supports the Nazi economic philosophy, he recoils at having his beliefs labeled as "Nazi." Why? Because, he argues, the Nazi government, unlike the U.S. government, killed six million people in concentration camps, and this mass murder of millions of people, rather than economic philosophy, captures the true essence of the Nazi label.

What Americans fail (or refuse) to recognize is that the concentration camps were simply the logical extension of the Nazi mind-set! It does not matter whether there were six million killed — or six hundred — or six — or even one. The evil — the terrible, black evil — is the belief that a government should have the power to sacrifice even one individual for the good of the nation. Once this basic philosophical premise and political power are conceded, innocent people, beginning with a few and inevitably ending in multitudes, will be killed, because "the good of the nation" always ends up requiring it.

Part 1 | Part 2

Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

http://www.fff.org/freedom/0994a.asp


The Nazi Mind-Set in America, Part 2
by Jacob G. Hornberger, September 1994

Part 1 | Part 2

Political killings of innocent people could never happen in America, our fellow citizens tell us. America is a democracy. But so was Nazi Germany. Hitler was popularly elected, and his economic policies were widely favored and acclaimed (by Germans and Americans!).

But there is another basic problem with that assertion: it is happening here in America. And like the German people of the 1930s, Americans either refuse to see it happening, or they rationalize what is happening so that they do not have to deal with it. Now, it is true that the killings do not number in the millions — but they certainly do number, so far, in the thousands.

Let's take some examples. The Branch Davidians at Waco, Texas. U.S. Army tanks and gas used against peaceful, religious, well-armed people. Over 80 Americans, including children, gassed and burned. And is there any remorse — any regret — any independent governmental investigation into this massacre? Not on your life. The government officials, just like their Nazi counterparts, think they did "the right thing" in killing our fellow citizens. And for those of you who look to the judiciary for protection, you had better look elsewhere: the federal judge who presided over the trial of the Waco survivors declared that he would not permit the government to be "put on trial," and then slapped 40-year sentences on the Branch Davidian survivors.

Or take Randy Weaver, his wife, and son, of Idaho. First, they were set up on an idiotic gun charge (Weaver sold a shotgun that was an inch too short, at the request of a U.S. government agent). Then, they sent Weaver a notice of a wrong trial date. When he failed to appear, they surrounded his house and attacked. A government sniper plugged his unarmed wife in the head with a bullet as she was holding her baby. And they shot Weaver's son in the back. Then, at Weaver's trial, they fabricated evidence and committed perjury. Fortunately, Weaver was acquitted. But have any criminal charges been brought against the government agents for the murder of Weaver's wife and son? Did the federal judge in the case even cite the agents for contempt for their reprehensible conduct? Well, did the Nazi government ever bring charges against the SS? Did Nazi judges ever punish Nazi officials for killing Jews?

They killed Donald Scott, a millionaire rancher in California. They claimed that they needed to barge into his house in the middle of the night in order to look for marijuana. And when Scott obeyed their order to lay down the gun he had picked up in his fear of the intruders, they shot him dead. And it later turned out that they had hoped to find marijuana so that they could confiscate his land and convert it to a national park.

These kinds of killings are going on every single week. But Americans either look the other way, the way the Germans did, or they rationalize what is happening by saying, "The war on drugs has gotta be won."

And it is not just killings. Just as the Nazis did, they are confiscating people's money, land, boats, cars — anything they can get their hands on. No longer do they need to depend only on taxes for their revenues — they just go grab the money and property directly and keep it, regardless of the guilt or innocence of the victims. And, of course, it's all rationalized because "the war on drugs has gotta be won."

And it's not just confiscations. It is also terror — the terror of Internal Revenue Service agents barging into people's homes, "visiting" them at work, and levying liens on bank accounts and real estate without any notice, hearing, or other semblance of due process.

Yes, it's true — we are not dealing with the killings and mass confiscations and infliction of terror on millions of people. It is happening only to several thousands. But that's today. What happens in a crisis? Suppose an American ruler decides he is not going to get "pushed around" by the ruler of North Korea, Haiti, Panama, Iraq, or Japan? What happens if a war is not over in a few weeks, but instead drags out into months, even years, with higher taxes, more controls, and . . . conscription? What happens if Americans, who are already being taxed 50 percent of their incomes, now find taxes at 60 or 70 percent? What happens if there is a massive tax strike in which millions refuse to pay their taxes? What happens if hundreds of thousands of American students refuse to be drafted by a president who refused to be drafted?

Will the government meekly surrender? Will it simply agree to lose "international face"? Not on your life. The Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the army will simply turn their massive powers against the leaders of the tax revolt and as many of its followers as possible. And they will do whatever is necessary to teach those "draft-dodging cowards" a lesson. The American people will learn what the German people learned: that the omnipotent state that loves the poor and the needy will remove its velvet glove and use its iron fist to smash those who interfere with the "good of the nation."

Let's look at some more examples of the Nazi mind-set in America — this time in the Department of the Army. The army conducted nuclear radiation experiments on American soldiers. Why? Because the good of the nation required it. The army conducted drug experiments on American citizens. Why? Because the good of the nation required it. The army conducted disease experiments on the American people. Why? Because the good of the nation required it. The army herded innocent Americans of Japanese descent into American concentration camps. Why? Because the good of the nation required it. The army entered into joint ventures with German Nazis at the end of World War II. Why? Because the good of the nation required it.

In other words, in the past, U.S. government officials have engaged in evil, Nazi-like conduct for the "good of the nation." Would they do so again? You can bet your life they would, if the good of the nation required it, and even if this entails the violation of every single restriction on governmental power set forth in the U.S. Constitution.

There is nothing inevitable in all of this. Through the power of ideas, we can reverse the trend. If ideas did not matter, governments would not try to suppress ideas. Ideas do matter; they do have consequences; they do influence people into acting, into changing, into reversing course.

But the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment — the right to speak, to write, to disseminate ideas — are not sufficient. The ultimate safeguard against the ultimate tyranny lies instead with the right to bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment. If this Amendment is destroyed or severely constricted, the rest of the Constitution becomes worthless. Because in a crisis in which their power base is threatened, and in which there are no means of forcible resistance, government officials will squash the things they view as "technicalities" — free speech, habeas corpus, trial by jury, and the other rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

Combine a crisis with a disarmed, discontented citizenry, and the concentration camp for hundreds of thousands becomes a real possibility. But when the citizenry, together with various patriotic sheriffs, police, and members of the armed forces, has the means to inflict severe casualties on their potential oppressors, tyrants think twice before they try to oppress their own citizens too heavily.

That is why every single effort to restrict or control or manage the ownership of guns must be resisted. The ultimate barrier to the ultimate tyranny lies not with the ballot box. It lies not with the soapbox. It lies not with the jury box. The ultimate barrier to the tyranny of one's own government lies with the cartridge box.

Contrary to everything our rulers tell us, and everything that our schoolteachers are teaching the children of this nation, the biggest threat to the lives and well-being of the American people lies not with some foreign government. The biggest threat to the American people today lies with the United States government. And while gun ownership stands as a barrier to potential, Nazi-like behavior, the long-term solution is to dismantle, not reform, the iron fist of the welfare state and the controlled economy. This includes the end (not the reform) of the IRS, the DEA, the SEC, the FDA, the Departments of HUD, HHS, Labor, Agriculture, Energy, and every other agency that takes money from some and gives it to others or interferes with peaceful behavior. It entails the repeal of all laws that permit such conduct. And it means the privatization of most of the bureaucrats who work for the U.S. government.

But it also entails the end of potential oppressors who, in the past, have shown no reluctance to engage in evil, malicious, illegal, Nazi-like conduct against American citizens, such as the CIA and the standing army.

Would this mean that the U.S. government would not be permitted to act as the international Roman emperor? That is exactly what it would mean. But what about threats of invasion of the U.S.? Such threats are virtually nonexistent. But if every single citizen is free to arm himself to the teeth, any nation contemplating invasion would know that attacking the U.S. would be like swallowing a porcupine. What about a quick mobilization? There would be no reason why citizen-soldiers would not quickly mobilize in the event of an emergency. For example, suppose that the standing army is disbanded. The members of the 82nd Airborne Division would not simply disappear. They would become private, productive citizens, but ready in times of peril to answer the call. They could be, and probably would be more than willing to be, at any location in the country within 24 hours.

Moreover, there would be a doubly positive effect in terms of economic prosperity. No longer would taxes have to be sucked out of the pockets of private citizens to support the armed forces. And the members of the armed forces, now privatized, would now be economically productive members of society.

In his book The Road to Serfdom , Friedrich Hayek warned Americans in 1944 that despite their military war against the Nazis, Americans were traveling the philosophical and economic road that the Nazis and the communists were traveling. Our grandparents and parents ignored Hayek's warning. Now, we are left with the consequences: a government of omnipotent size and power using its power to kill innocent, peaceful citizens and confiscate millions of dollars of property to feed its insatiable hunger for more power. Today, the number of victims is in the thousands. But at the end of this road lie the concentration camps for the multitudes.

Can the tide be reversed? Can the omnipotent state be dismantled, rather than simply reformed? Yes. It will take a return to first principles — the principles on which this nation, not Germany, were founded. Principles that hold that it is the individual, not the collective, that is supreme; that each individual has been endowed by his Creator with unalienable rights; that among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any government, including the American government, becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government; and that no individual — his life, liberty, or property — shall ever be sacrificed for the good of the nation. As Ayn Rand put it thirty years ago in her essay, "The Fascist New Frontier":

If you wish to oppose [statism], you must challenge its basic premises. You must begin by realizing that there is no such thing as "the public interest" except as the sum of the interests of individual men. And the basic, common interest of all men — all rational men — is freedom. Freedom is the first requirement of "the public interest" — not what men do when they are free, but that they are free. All their achievements rest on that foundation — and cannot exist without it. The principles of a free, non-coercive social system are the only form of "the public interest." Such principles did and do exist. Try to project such a system. In today's cultural atmosphere, it might appear to you like a journey into the unknown. But — like Columbus — what you will discover is America.

Part 1 | Part 2

Mr. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.


Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,299
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2009, 12:14:17 am »
For the most part, the big difference now is that the CURRENT "Nazis" are on the FAR Left(compared to Hitler and the FAR Right) - no wonder why everyone will be get caught off guard if/when TSHTF.

Offline JonTheSavage

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,655
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2009, 12:18:38 am »
For the most part, the big difference now is that the CURRENT "Nazis" are on the FAR Left(compared to Hitler and the FAR Right) - no wonder why everyone will be get caught off guard if/when TSHTF.

Hitler was far left. Nazi = National Socialist German Worker's Party

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,299
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #3 on: June 24, 2009, 12:23:26 am »
Hitler was far left. Nazi = National Socialist German Worker's Party

Interesting - the media, academia et al have brainwashed everyone into believing the Nazis were on the Far Right...if anything, they've also used this to manipulate everyone into believing conservative Republicans/Libertarians have Nazi views.(i.e. one of my Business Law professors had this view)

Thank you for clearing this up! :)

Offline Freeski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,706
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #4 on: June 24, 2009, 12:37:10 am »
America2, you're right that they make us think Nazis were "far right" (mainly because of the hate thing), but if you compare "extreme right" with "extreme left", you amazingly get the same thing.

Control over people.

So the solution HAS to be Liberty! (the opposite of control)
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,299
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #5 on: June 24, 2009, 12:44:43 am »
America2, you're right that they make us think Nazis were "far right" (mainly because of the hate thing), but if you compare "extreme right" with "extreme left", you amazingly get the same thing.

Control over people.

So the solution HAS to be Liberty! (the opposite of control)

Pretty much - the BIGGEST threats to the NWO are Christians, 2nd ammendment activists, Libertarians, people who want to expose the TRUTH(us people here), among other conservative sectors.

This is why our academia and MSM sectors have brainwashed the masses into thinking the conservative right-wingers are equivalent to the Nazis. For example, the GOP fiscal policies stress fiscal discipline, cutting spending, making gov smaller, and pretty much getting everyone's tails into the workforce. So b/c they SUPPOSEDLY do NOT favor African-Americans(and all this further brainwashing by our same institutions et al over how black people "steal" our welfare program), it makes their policies, and themselves Nazis...Right...I mean even my "Democrat" dad thinks this whole "Conservative Republicans hate black people b/c of their policies" is a bunch of BS. Even he gets how the conservatives feel the markets should be LEFT ALONE. Sounds like to me they're only stressing FREEDOM.

Again - when you WAKE UP, that rabbit hole just goes WAY down, and doesn't end.

Offline RoadRunner

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2009, 02:24:20 am »
Pretty much - the BIGGEST threats to the NWO are Christians, 2nd ammendment activists, Libertarians, people who want to expose the TRUTH(us people here), among other conservative sectors.

there is no threat to the new world order, america's fate has been set in stone, we will have complete economic collapse even if correct officials were put in office today, the entire world owns stocks and bonds in the US government, and our land and resources will become their property, the middle east wants to blow us up sky high for killing hundreds of thousands of their innocent citizens, the chinese would love to help us become a failed state, russia hates our guts, if we over throw the government through protests, we will be over thrown by the chinese or russian super powers while our internal affairs render us weak, if we dont over throw our government we will be the next nazi state off to fight world war 3, we are completely f**ked guys, i hate to be dr. doom but freedom loving is not a threat to guns and oppression, christianity / 2nd ammedment rights / libertarians did not stop hitler, and its not going to do jackshit now that the nazis are attempting their 4th riech in america


feel free to tell me why i am wrong, ill gladly listen
you can do anything you want
think anything you like
but you cant change human nature

Offline smoofness2k8

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2009, 02:30:53 am »
there is no threat to the new world order, america's fate has been set in stone, we will have complete economic collapse even if correct officials were put in office today, the entire world owns stocks and bonds in the US government, and our land and resources will become their property, the middle east wants to blow us up sky high for killing hundreds of thousands of their innocent citizens, the chinese would love to help us become a failed state, russia hates our guts, if we over throw the government through protests, we will be over thrown by the chinese or russian super powers while our internal affairs render us weak, if we dont over throw our government we will be the next nazi state off to fight world war 3, we are completely f**ked guys, i hate to be dr. doom but freedom loving is not a threat to guns and oppression, christianity / 2nd ammedment rights / libertarians did not stop hitler, and its not going to do jackshit now that the nazis are attempting their 4th riech in america


feel free to tell me why i am wrong, ill gladly listen

QFT! 
"In this country we have no place for hyphenated Americans" - Theodore Roosevelt

Offline chris jones

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,832
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #8 on: June 24, 2009, 08:24:42 am »

Gotcha, and agreed to 90%, however where do the Chinese come into the picture here, they seem to have a stake in this.
I liked the efort given to point out that they have moved in a fashion of leftist tactic, rather than Adolfs right wing hammer.
We are no longer the USA under the const, and BOR. Thats obvious to truthers, the silent majority is a different equation.


Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,238
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
The aristocratic mindset of the Austrian School
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2009, 09:17:21 am »
What Americans fail (or refuse) to recognize is that the concentration camps were simply the logical extension of the Nazi mind-set!

No, what too many unwitting readers fail to recognize is that this is the same old ridiculous, slanderous lie that Austrian School cultists have been parroting for decades -- the lie that anyone who supports having any sort of social safety net is, by definition, a philosophical soul mate of Adolf Hitler!  ::)

Although they'll never admit to this openly, the real reason said cultists are so morally and self-righteously offended by the very idea of a social safety net is not because they love "liberty" so much, but because their cult was founded by privileged, parasitic aristocrats who had a deep-rooted disdain for the poor and underprivileged -- a disdain matched only by the deep-rooted love they had for their own elevated social status. There's nothing these aristocrats hated more than the sight of millions upon millions of what were once poverty-stricken, working class peasants transforming into a relatively healthy, happy and prosperous middle class. So they silently funded a propaganda campaign to counteract this trend:

----------------------------------

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/print.html?path=HL0812/S00378.htm

Mr. Anonymous and the Not-So-Spontaneous Birth of the Libertarian Movement

William S. Volker (1859-1947)
Mr. Anonymous

William Volker, alias "Mr. Anonymous," alias the "First Citizen" of Kansas City, Missouri, "was an extremely modest, enormously wealthy home-furnishings tycoon. He became the unrecognized donor of thousands of gifts, large and small."

Volker was born on April 1, 1859 into a prosperous household in Hanover, Germany. At age 12, Volker's family immigrated to Chicago. At 17 he went to work for a picture frame manufacturer. With the death of his employer in 1882, Volker bought out the company and moved the enterprise to Kansas City. From there, his "little window shade business" grew into a national giant.

In 1911, 52 year old William Volker married. Returning from his honeymoon, he announced he had put one million dollars in his wife's name and, he said, intended to give the rest of his enormous fortune away. Over the next 36 years, he donated millions of dollars, much of it anonymously. When Volker died at age 88 on November 4, 1947, many schools, parks, and public spaces were named for the furnishings tycoon.

So why pick on this guy?

The answer is that the overwhelming priority of Volker's "philanthropy" was focused, not on public spaces but on reactionary ideology. Dismayed by the rise of Socialism in America and doubly dismayed by what he saw as the evolution of government and political thinking towards accommodation and a "new liberalism", eventually personified by the widespread adoption of the economic views of John Maynard Keynes and the New Deal policies of Franklin Roosevelt, Volker set out to create a new and much more reactionary "mainstream" ideology based loosely around his own ideas of "laissez-faire" capitalism (i.e. a largely unregulated economy) and social Darwinism (the pseudo-scientific notion that in society, unhindered competition would allow the "cream to rise to the top").

In truth, Volker was no great scholar or thinker. The ideology he set out to create was built upside down, starting only with a set of foggy conclusions for which he had a predisposition. From these conclusions, it was the task of Volker's considerable fortune to find a set of justifications, then an enabling ideology or "theory" that gave it all perspective and unity and, eventually, a true philosophical platform from which to launch the whole. But if this task was analogous to building the Great Pyramid, starting from the top, Volker was undaunted. He may not have had a brain but he had money... and he had a personal connection to one of the most reactionary sections of that most reactionary of organizations - the National Association of Manufacturers. Volker's "associates", who would all participate closely, included Jasper Crane of DuPont, B. E. Hutchinson of Chrysler, Henry Weaver of General Electric, Pierre Goodrich of B.F. Goodrich, and Richard Earhart of White Star Oil (which through many mergers and acquisitions would eventually become Mobil Oil). Moreover, Volker had "influence" at the leading scholarly institution in his home town: The University of Chicago was founded by none other than John D. Rockefeller and created with a certain ideological "bent".

In 1932 Volker established the William Volker Fund and, with that, started on the road to becoming perhaps the most significant anonymous asshole of our times. In every way, William S. Volker was the true "father" of Libertarianism and Modern Conservatism.

For the first dozen years, the fund largely floundered. There is some evidence that Volker may have flirted with Fascism. That ideology though, which attracted such celebrities as Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh, was thought to have a limited future in America. In the face of Keynesian economics, widespread social spending, and the CIO, what was really required was a return to pre-New Deal economic policy and an anti-communist/anti-union social policy.

Eureka!

The breakthrough came in 1944, when Volker's nephew, Harold Luhnow, took over, first the business and then the Fund. In the same year, Friedrich Hayek's The Road to Serfdom was published. The book was a product of the "Austrian School" of economists, originating at the University of Vienna and first coming to modest prominence at the end of the 19th century in its attacks on Marxist and Socialist economics. Hayek's book was an almost mystical (and hysterical) defense of laissez-faire capitalism and the "free market". According to Hayek, market prices created a "spontaneous order, or what is referred to as 'that which is the result of human action but not of human design'. Thus, Hayek put the price mechanism on the same level as, for example, language." In turn, any attempt at regulation would inevitably lead to "totalitarianism" and in this, both Marxist and New Deal "socialism" were essentially similar. The theory was perfect . Volker and Luhnow had found their ideology. The cash began to flow.

In short order, the Volker Fund and its larger network arranged for the re-publication of Hayek's book by the University of Chicago (a recurring and important connection) despite the fact that it had been almost universally rejected by the Economics establishment. A year later, the book was published in serial form by the ultra-reactionary Readers Digest not withstanding the fact that it was supposed to be a "scholarly text", ordinarily inappropriate for the readership of the Digest, and despite the fact that it had also had been panned by literary critics. In 1950, the Fund arranged for Hayek to secure a position at the University of Chicago and when the University only granted an unpaid position, they arranged for the Earhart Foundation to pay him a salary. Hayek was only the first of a veritable flood of émigré, "scholars".

Recruiting the Homeless

Hayek's teacher in Vienna had been one Ludwig von Mises who, in turn, had been the student of Eugen von Boehm-Bawerk (who had gained fame for his attack on Marxist Economics) and who, in his turn, had been the student of Carl Menger, the founder of the Austrian school. Each of these had published several books that were virulent attacks on Socialism and defended "pure capitalism". It was all very good. Von Mises book was called Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis and it too had been received with yawns when it was published in English in 1936.

While von Mises really had "taught" at the University of Vienna, his was an unpaid position. The University had turned him down on four separate occasions for a paid position. Not surprisingly, in 1940 the nearly destitute von Mises had emigrated to the United States. In 1945, an unpaid "visiting professorship" was obtained for him at NYU while his salary was paid by "businessmen such as Lawrence Fertig". Fertig was an associate of the Volker Fund and a friend of Henry Hazlitt, the Fund's friendliest journalist. In all, they would fund von Mises for 25 years and von Mises never would need a "real job".

In fact, this was typical of the Fund's "bait and switch" tactic for developing resumes. In the United States, von Mises was the "famed economics professor from the University of Vienna". In Europe, he would become the "famous American economist from NYU".

Local Reinforcements

The economist Milton Friedman, during his fifteen minutes of fame, took the opportunity of the publication of his opus, Capitalism and Freedom to decry the shabby treatment that the likes of Hayek and Mises had received from the Economics "establishment". On his own similar reception, he wrote in the 1982 preface of his book:

    "Those of us who were deeply concerned about the danger to freedom and prosperity from the growth of government, from the triumph of welfare-state and Keynesian ideas, were a small beleaguered minority regarded as eccentrics by the great majority of our fellow intellectuals.

    "Even seven years later, when this book was first published, its views were so far out of the mainstream that it was not reviewed by any major national publication--not by the New York Times or the Herald Tribune (then still being published in New York) or the Chicago Tribune, or by Time or Newsweek or even the Saturday Review--though it was reviewed by the London Economist and by the major professional journals. And this for a book directed at the general public, written by a professor at a major U.S. university, and destined to sell more than 400,000 copies in the next eighteen years."

It is attractive to believe that Friedman was really this foolish and that his expertise in the "politics of fame" was similar to his expertise in Monetary Policy. In fact, his separate acknowledgements of the importance of the Volker Fund belie this possibility. In truth, the Fund and its progeny identified Friedman early on, shepherded his career at the University of Chicago, subsidized him through a paid lecture series (which eventually were combined into Capitalism and Freedom), paid his way to Mont Pelerin, arranged for the serialization of his book by Reader's Digest, and bought a significant number of the books that Friedman was so proud of "selling".

Friedman was only one of dozens of such local "scholars" who were suddenly "discovered" through the efforts of the Fund.

The Fund also now began to recruit friendly young "future-scholars" and subsidize their development. Not only was the cause thus advanced, but a modest intelligence network became a part of the "Libertarian Movement". One such early recruit was Murray Rothbard, later to become famous as the "father" of "Left Libertarianism", "Libertarian anarchism", and "anarco-capitalism". Later much castigated for his "sellout to the Right-wing Republicans", Rothbard had, from the first, been intimately wrapped up in Anti-Communism, McCarthyism, the "Old Right", and the right-wing ideology of the Volker Fund. It was through the Fund that he became an associate of Ayn Rand and a student of Mises.

"Rothbard began his consulting work for the Volker Fund in 1951. This relationship lasted until 1962, when the VF was dissolved. A major part of Rothbard's work for the VF consisted of reading and evaluating books, journal articles, and other materials. On the basis of written reports by Rothbard and another reader - Rose Wilder Lane - the VF's directors would decide whether to undertake massive distribution of particular works to public libraries.

The VF also asked Rothbard to submit reports on particular questions, such as how to rank sundry economists in terms of friendliness to the free market, surveys of the literature on monopoly, Soviet wage structures, etc., etc. Rothbard's memos number several hundred, covering works in economics, history, philosophy, and political science. The memos, which range in length from one page to seventy pages, provide a window into the scholarship of the period - and Rothbard's views on that scholarship. They thereby shed much light on Rothbard's emerging worldview and his systematic defense of liberty."

They also shed "much light" on how the Fund decided which "scholars" to promote, and which to attack. Rothbard later called his work with the Volker Fund, "the best job I've ever had in my life".

Multiplying Like Rabbits

In support of the imported scholars and the new ideology, the Volker Fund also pioneered a process which would become the hallmark of the "Libertarian Movement". The Fund started to spin-off organizations by the boatload, each intended, not just to serve specific purposes but to give the appearance of many "independent" efforts spawned by a "mass" appeal. The list of "begats" is too numerous to chronicle but the first set are illuminating.

Among the very first "front organizations" of the Volker Fund was the "National Book Foundation". While the Foundation's affiliation to the Volker Fund was not hidden, it was circumspect enough to suggest, even to most "Libertarians", that it was independent. The fund began modestly enough by distributing free copies Eugene Böhm-Bawerk's works to thousands of libraries and universities across the country. As the Volker efforts geared up, the Foundation began to distribute millions of books from dozens of authors, all coming from the Fund's stables. Many educational "incentives" were initiated such as "teach a course on Hayek, get 10 (or 100) textbooks for free"...

The Foundation for Economic Education was spun out in 1946, under the leadership of Leonard Read, a leading figure in the Chambers of Commerce. The grand-daddy of all libertarian "think-tanks", the FEE initiated the original Mont Pelerin Society meetings. Its own publication, The Freeman, became the founding journal of "Libertarianism". The rent was paid by Volker.

The Institute for Humane Studies was created by Floyd "Baldy" Harper, the "ace recruiter" of the Volker Fund, in 1961. The IHS identified and subsidized "bright young students" and "promising scholars" friendly to the new "Libertarian" doctrine. Not only did the IHS fund thousands of "students", but it spawned dozens of similar organizations throughout the world. After the Volker Fund was finally closed, subsidies for the IHS shifted to some of the most reactionary organizations in America: The Scaife Foundation, Koch Family Foundations, The Bradley Foundation, and the Carthage Foundation.

The Intercollegiate Studies Institute was founded in 1953 to combat what they would eventually call "political correctness" and "'left-bias" in colleges and universities. The organization now consists of 50,000 college students and faculty and through its lavish subsidies, sponsors dozens of programs representing the entire spectrum of right-wing "Libertarian" causes. The first president of the ISI was a young William F. Buckley Jr.

The Earhart Foundation was created by and named for Richard Earhart of White Star Oil, one of Volker's original collaborators in the National Association of Manufacturers. This foundation was used to subsidize various émigrés and not only financed Hayek but also Eric Voegelin, yet another "Austrian". Through Voeglin, the Earhardt Foundation became connected with the infamous Leo Strauss and, since then, various "projects" of not just a "libertarian" but of a "neo-conservative" perspective have been beneficiaries of the Foundation. In addition, The Earhart Foundation helped to pioneer still another use of the newly-emergent Libertarian think-tanks. As the network of these think-tanks grew, they undertook not only to promote ideology but also specific points of policy, particularly in support of private corporations. The culmination of the Foundation's efforts in this direction came with the founding of the George C. Marshall Institute in 1984. The Institute was initially a foremost proponent of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), heavily promoted by the Defense Industry, and later became the leading non-industry critic of "Climate Change". The CEO of the Institute is currently a registered lobbyist for ExxonMobil.

Through the list of organizations, above, the Volker Fund's near-biblical "begats" encompass nearly every single prominent individual and organization of the "Libertarian" and "New Conservative" movements of today.

The Not-So-Secret Society

"In 1947, 39 scholars, mostly economists, with some historians and philosophers, were invited by Professor Friedrich Hayek to meet at Mont Pelerin, Switzerland, and discuss the state, and possible fate of classical liberalism and to combat the "state ascendancy and Marxist or Keynesian planning [that was] sweeping the globe". Invitees included Henry Simons (who would later train Milton Friedman, a future president of the society, at the University of Chicago); the American former-Fabian socialist Walter Lippmann; Viennese Aristotelian Society leader Karl Popper; fellow Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises; Sir John Clapham, a senior official of the Bank of England who from 1940-6 was the president of the British Royal Society; Otto von Habsburg, the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne; and Max von Thurn und Taxis, Bavaria-based head of the 400-year-old Venetian Thurn und Taxis family."

If the above rings of "Bohemian Grove" and similar fodder for conspiracies, it is because informal "retreats" at out-of-the-way resorts are one of the favorite methods by which the wealthy of many countries formulate a common international policy. What distinguishes the Mont Pelerin Society, however, is that it did not consist primarily of the wealthy. Instead, it was comprised of a majority of marginal, thread-bare "scholars", united only by their common hatred of "socialism" and Keynesianism (which were one and the same for most of them) and sprinkled with only a handful of rich patrons and journalists. In fact the Mount Pelerin Society was organized as much by the Volker Fund as by Hayek himself and the Foundation paid the way for all 10 of the American "participants".

Once in Switzerland, the "scholars" agreed on their hatred of "socialism" but on little else except to meet yearly to "facilitate an exchange of ideas between like-minded scholars in the hope of strengthening the principles and practice of a free society and to study the workings, virtues, and defects of market-oriented economic systems."

From this not-so-secret-but-thoroughly-right-wing society's more than humble beginnings, the phoenix of laissez-faire capitalism would rise, propelled skyward by unlimited funds. Over a dozen of the scholars who could not previously get a job, a review, or a book deal would go on to win the "Nobel Prize in Economics" (this "epic" story will be told separately). More importantly, the Mont Pelerin Society would itself beget 500 foundations and organizations in nearly 80 countries... again with strategic contributions from Mr. Anonymous. Once transformed into an "international movement", there was no end to what was possible. One example tells the story.

Initiated at Mont Pelerin and copying the FEE, the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) was created in London in 1955. Serving as a conduit for both cash and "ideas", the IEA set about the task of "rejuvenating" the dead and decaying British Tories. By 1985, the "Iron Lady", Margaret Thatcher, would positively gush on the occasion of the Institute's 30th Anniversary: "You created the atmosphere which made our victory possible... May I say how thankful we are to those who joined your great endeavor. They were the few, but they were right, and they saved Britain." With that, the IEA begat the Atlas Economic Research Foundation, which in turn created a network of over 50 "think-tanks" in more than 30 countries.

[Continued...]

----------------------------------

Note: In my view, a more accurate title for the above essay would be: "Mr. Anonymous and the Not-So-Spontaneous Birth of the Royal Libertarian Movement."

Also, notice how it dovetails with the following interview of Webster Tarpley:

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuHCAXtjZ6Q (part 1 of 4)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlJT-5w21IY (part 2 of 4)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxe-LlAO_cQ (part 3 of 4)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl5jOUvIcuI (part 4 of 4)
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://schalkenbach.org
http://www.monetary.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline blackturtle.us

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
    • blackturtle.us
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2009, 10:50:41 am »
Hitler was far left. Nazi = National Socialist German Worker's Party

This is a bit misleading. The Nazis were without a doubt extremely conservative on social issues. Keep in mind that they went after the homosexuals before they went after the Jews. Further the version of socialism they pushed was one that did not allow for democratic control of the means of production. That's not really socialism at all. That's just a government run production model. (This system may have been sold to the public under false pretenses, but it wasn't truly socialist by any stretch of the imagination.)

To further confuse things is the observation that both the Republican and Democratic parties in the USA tend to endorse limitations on personal freedoms. It's not so much a liberal versus conservative issue so much as a fascist versus libertarian issue. Both parties lean towards the fascist end of the spectrum. There are individuals on both sides of the liberal versus conservative spectrum who endorse libertarian values. Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are the obvious examples here.

kushfiend

  • Guest
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2009, 11:08:16 am »
there is no threat to the new world order, america's fate has been set in stone, we will have complete economic collapse even if correct officials were put in office today, the entire world owns stocks and bonds in the US government, and our land and resources will become their property, the middle east wants to blow us up sky high for killing hundreds of thousands of their innocent citizens, the chinese would love to help us become a failed state, russia hates our guts, if we over throw the government through protests, we will be over thrown by the chinese or russian super powers while our internal affairs render us weak, if we dont over throw our government we will be the next nazi state off to fight world war 3, we are completely f**ked guys, i hate to be dr. doom but freedom loving is not a threat to guns and oppression, christianity / 2nd ammedment rights / libertarians did not stop hitler, and its not going to do jackshit now that the nazis are attempting their 4th riech in america


feel free to tell me why i am wrong, ill gladly listen

While I tend to agree that WW3 is pretty much unavoidable at this point - I'd like to think that if we can just open the majority of the Americans' eyes to the global enslavement we are all plunging into it can still be adverted.

If you cut off Obama's financial and ideological backing from the majority of the American people - I.E. people just stop paying taxes in mass or something - I guarantee you can at the very least delay their plans by years and hopefully their grip will crack for some reason.

Offline Mr Grinch

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,715
Re: The Nazi Mind-Set in America
« Reply #12 on: June 24, 2009, 01:08:26 pm »
No, what too many unwitting readers fail to recognize is that this is the same old ridiculous, slanderous lie that Austrian School cultists have been parroting for decades -- the lie that anyone who supports having any sort of social safety net is, by definition, a philosophical soul mate of Adolf Hitler!  ::)

Although they'll never admit to this openly, the real reason said cultists are so morally and self-righteously offended by the very idea of a social safety net is not because they love "liberty" so much, but because their cult was founded by privileged, parasitic aristocrats who had a deep-rooted disdain for the poor and underprivileged -- a disdain matched only by the deep-rooted love they had for their own elevated social status. There's nothing these aristocrats hated more than the sight of millions upon millions of what were once poverty-stricken, working class peasants transforming into a relatively healthy, happy and prosperous middle class. So they silently funded a propaganda campaign to counteract this trend:

----------------------------------

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/print.html?path=HL0812/S00378.htm

Mr. Anonymous and the Not-So-Spontaneous Birth of the Libertarian Movement

William S. Volker (1859-1947)
Mr. Anonymous

William Volker, alias "Mr. Anonymous," alias the "First Citizen" of Kansas City, Missouri, "was an extremely modest, enormously wealthy home-furnishings tycoon. He became the unrecognized donor of thousands of gifts, large and small."
======
n 1932 Volker established the William Volker Fund and, with that, started on the road to becoming perhaps the most significant anonymous asshole of our times. In every way, William S. Volker was the true "father" of Libertarianism and Modern Conservatism.

For the first dozen years, the fund largely floundered. There is some evidence that Volker may have flirted with Fascism. That ideology though, which attracted such celebrities as Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh, was thought to have a limited future in America. In the face of Keynesian economics, widespread social spending, and the CIO, what was really required was a return to pre-New Deal economic policy and an anti-communist/anti-union social policy.
======================
[Continued...]

----------------------------------

Note: In my view, a more accurate title for the above essay would be: "Mr. Anonymous and the Not-So-Spontaneous Birth of the Royal Libertarian Movement."

Also, notice how it dovetails with the following interview of Webster Tarpley:

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuHCAXtjZ6Q (part 1 of 4)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlJT-5w21IY (part 2 of 4)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxe-LlAO_cQ (part 3 of 4)
       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl5jOUvIcuI (part 4 of 4)

Holy slanted article Geolibman.

Ive been doing a little research for a thing Im thinking about writing and I came upon an interesting list of some of the founders of the "Progressive" movement/ political ideology that has served the uegenicists so well....

All movements can be hijacked or steered, and slandered in the fullness of time when the history were taught is so obfuscated by bias.

from wiki
Quote
Notable progressives

    * Jane Addams, social worker
    * Charles Beard, historian and political scientist
    * Napoleon Bonaparte Broward, governor of Florida
    * William Jennings Bryan, Democratic presidential nominee
    * Lucy Burns, suffragette
    * Andrew Carnegie, steel and philanthropy
    * Carrie Chapman Catt, suffragette
    * W. E. B. Du Bois, Black intellectual
    * Thomas Edison, inventor
    * Irving Fisher, economist
    * Henry Ford, automaker
    * Charlotte Gilman, feminist
    * Lewis Hine, photographer
    * Charles Evans Hughes, statesman
    * Robert M. La Follette, Sr., Wisconsin politician
    * Walter Lippmann, journalist
    * John R. Mott, YMCA leader
    * George Cardinal Mundelein, Catholic leader
    * Alice Paul, suffragette
    * Ulrich B. Phillips, historian
    * Gifford Pinchot, conservationist
    * Jacob Riis, reformer
    * Theodore Roosevelt, president
    * Margaret Sanger, birth control
    * Anna Howard Shaw, suffragette
    * Upton Sinclair, novelist
    * Albion Small, sociologist
    * Ellen Gates Starr, sociologist
    * Lincoln Steffens, reporter
    * William Howard Taft, president and justice
    * Ida Tarbell, muckraker
    * Frederick Winslow Taylor, efficiency expert
    * Thorstein Veblen, economist
    * Booker T. Washington, Black leader
    * Woodrow Wilson, president

The History Of Political Correctness or: Why have things gotten so crazy?

Common sense is not so common.

I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire