By Vaughn Klingenberg for Veterans Today
As the old saying goes: “Does a fish know that it swims in water?” Similarly, does the public know that their moral climate and vocabulary are carefully manufactured and promulgated? I doubt it.
It is presumed and accepted as a given in today’s Western culture that the Nazis were the apotheosis of evil–not only in their day but will be for all time. Why is that? Why of all the myriad candidates of evil is it that the Nazis have been shouldered with this particular cross to bear? What interests are being served by inventing, promulgating, and employing an anti-Nazi moral vocabulary throughout society? Who benefits from this arbitrary and conventional (anti-Nazi) moral vocabulary and who suffers? These are some of the questions I wish to pose, and answer, in what follows. It is crucially important for the general public to become aware of the fact that their moral compass is not fixed and set as absolute for all time but that, often, consciously devised moral archetypes are invented and inculcated into the pliable consciousness of the public mind. Mass psychology and mass propaganda had already achieved a fair degree of sophistication by the outbreak of World War II, and the self-serving purveyors of war hysteria only perfected their game as the war developed. Truth, indeed, was the first casualty of World War II, and this applies especially to the machinations of the Allied leadership, masters of deceit in their own right.
Inviting attacks so as to mobilize the home front
In spite of (or maybe because of) being elevated to the very pinnacle of political leadership in a democracy the utter contempt hitherto honored leaders such as Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt had for the common man is breathtaking and no better represented than in their callous, surreptitious, and Machiavellian encouragement of attacks on their respective homelands. For example, Churchill’s de facto invitation to have the Germans sink the Lusitania in World War I (while he was the First Lord of the Admiralty) in order to bring the US into war on the side of the Entente. In World War II Churchill authorized the firebombing of German cities in order to get the Nazis to bomb British civilians in turn so as to rally British commoners behind the bellicose pro-war British leadership’s standard; also, Churchill’s disingenuous claim that he reluctantly permitted the fire-bombing of Coventry (a munitions manufacturing center in England) and scaled back its air defenses so as not to let the Nazis know that the German Enigma Code had been cracked. (The fact of the matter is that Churchill wanted Coventry torched–even after the Nazis communicated publicly that they were going to bomb that center of British armaments manufacturing–so as to use it as a propaganda tool to inflame bellicose passions in a pliant, malleable, and reactive public).
President Roosevelt had his own grave sins as well, namely, with respect to Nazi Germany, his lend/lease program of providing war ships to the United Kingdom was also, de facto, a casus belli. Furthermore, FDR’s selective enforcement of the Neutrality Acts of the 1930’s were discriminatory against Germany and Italy and favored Great Britain and certainly were against the spirit of the acts which the US Congress intended. With respect to Japan, Roosevelt had US oil shipments to Japan cut off; thereby he knowingly placing Japan in the untenable position of either having to end its imperial ambitions (and lose face) or strike back at the US (and save face). FDR almost certainly knew that the Imperial Japanese fleet had left port and was making its way across the Pacific Ocean in order to attack the US Navy installation in Hawaii–how could he not know this, the movement of dozens of Japanese Navy capital ships including aircraft carriers, battleships, cruisers, and destroyers all away at sea; nevertheless, FDR did nothing to warn our seamen in Hawaii to be on the alert. FDR wanted to shock the hitherto pacifistic, non-interventionist American citizenry into bellicosity and what better way to do this–to effect a dramatic volt-face–than to characterize the Japanese attack as an “unprovoked [sic, emphasis mine] and dastardly attack on the US”–“a date that will live in infamy!”
For their part German citizens and Nazis have been portrayed as obedient, having a “just following orders” mentality, and being willfully blind to the crimes of the Nazi regime. Hitler has been portrayed as a charismatic, hypnotic, speaker who could profoundly sway a mass audience. It is a worthwhile and instructive thought-experiment to substitute, say, Roosevelt, for Hitler and trace the analogy: Roosevelt certainly was a charismatic and hypnotic speaker (with his folksy, scripted, fire-side chats) who also could profoundly sway and manipulate a mass audience. As for the American audience (including those in the military), they were expected to be obedient and obey authority (to “just follow orders,” as did the bomber crews that firebombed and murdered hundreds of thousands–yes, hundreds of thousands–of defenseless civilians throughout Germany and Japan), and, intoxicated on the rightness of their cause, domestic civilians and fighting soldiers, too, were willfully blind to these crimes of the Roosevelt regime. The only difference here between Hitler and Roosevelt is that Hitler had lost the war and Roosevelt had won it. By placing the shoe on the other foot one comes to appreciate the moral equivalencies of both sides of the conflict in World War II.
[But of course the fact of the matter is that there was not moral equivalence during the war and events leading up to World War II. Stalin and his Jewish henchmen murdered, conservatively, 30 million non-Jews pre-war, and, in spite of Nazi efforts to bring the war to a close soon after it began, another 40-odd million would die during the course of the six year long conflict (since Roosevelt and Churchill would only accept “unconditional surrender” from the Nazis). The loss of 70 million souls in Europe in these two events alone in the first half of the 20th century is enough to cause one to despair of the sapience of homo sapiens and look for another, more fitting, nomenclature to describe human beings–homo ignoramus perhaps?! The only class of persons who directly and tangibly benefited from the war were Machiavellian Big Zionist Jews who were able to employ emotional and financial blackmail in order to wrest a racist, neo-colonial, apartheid state for themselves in post-war Palestine. This being the case, it is worth asking: did scores of millions of non-Jews die as pawns for that reason–to re-cast Jews not as truly conspiratorial manipulative predators but as, instead, harmless victims?! Was World War II in an important sense a massive public relations campaign to re-invent and re-imagine Jewdom and then flog that conception on the non-Jewish public?!]
Related to the above, as for the purported main substantive reason for the Nazis being so vilified today the simple answer is of course, in a word, the Holocaust–the alleged industrial scale assembly line mass murder of 6 million Jews. Whatever other crimes the Nazis may be responsible for they pale in comparison with the crime of the Holocaust. In fact, during the hitherto unprecedented war guilt/war crime trials that took place immediately post-World War II a new category of crime was invented (a violation of due process it being created ex post facto), namely, Crimes Against Humanity. [Apparently “humanity” is coterminous with being Jewish.] Of course the Holocaust is a fraud and the Nuremberg Trials were a joke and more heinous crimes done by the Allies were prohibited from being introduced into the court proceedings. Nazi guilt was a foregone conclusion. Many Germans ruefully called the Nuremberg show trials “victor’s justice” which it was.
But of course history is written by the victors. The post-war “de-Nazification Program” in Germany and Austria included universally and relentlessly rooting out anyone affiliated with, or sympathetic to, the Nazi party and its platform, ideology, or goals. Totalitarian control of the German media was exercised by the US Army and nothing was left to chance. For example, by July of 1946 the Information Control Division of the US Army controlled 37 German newspapers, six radio stations, 314 theaters, 642 cinemas, 101 magazines, 237 book publishers, and 7,384 book dealers and printers (not to mention film studios). Furthermore, a list of over 30,000 books was compiled, banned, and then–whenever said books were discovered– summarily destroyed. The partisan Media drum beat of unforgivable war guilt was relentlessly and universally driven into the minds of post-war Germans.
The dubious and immoral principle of collective guilt was applied to the German nation as a whole and a deliberate policy of starving the German population ensued immediately after the war. This incipient Morgenthau Plan (named after the vindictive Jew who originally devised it) had a two-fold purpose: one, to physically punish Germans with starvation for mistreating Jews and, two, to psychologically instill a sense of deserved punishment and guilt in the hearts and minds of the German population. Originally, one was guilty of having Nazi sympathies until proven innocent, but that became too unwieldy a procedure to apply to the whole German population, so a more targeted approach was later adopted. The eventual goal was to have quisling Germans, working in concert with the Allied occupiers, take over the post-war tribunals that vetted and punished those Germans who were seen to have been sympathetic to the Nazi cause, have Germans punish Germans and–for public relations purposes–gradually ween direct, hands-on, responsibility away from the foreign occupying authorities. It is an age-old strategy.
Relentless and severe de-Nazification continues up until today of course where contemporary police and judicial lackeys tirelessly pursue anyone who strays an iota from the strict conventional Establishment narrative of the Holocaust or the portrayal of the Nazis as evil, bloodthirsty villains. In most European states today it is a crime, punishable by fine and imprisonment, to challenge or even publicly question the highly suspect conventional account of the Holocaust. Totalitarian control of the Holocaust narrative remains in place 70 years after the end of World War II. So much for free speech and the give-and-take of the marketplace of ideas. (All of which raises an interesting epistemological question, namely, “If everyone believed a falsehood, would that make it true?!”) Anti-Nazi propaganda has been remarkably successful, not only in Germany, but throughout the West, especially with the inexperienced and impressionable youth. Part of this is because of the seamless transition from totalitarian anti-Nazi propaganda as disseminated by the Allied occupiers to domestic quisling German lackeys who willfully took up the mantle of being anti-Nazi inquisitors. Part of this also is because of Jewish domination and control of the Western Media which has been employed to fashion and promulgate an anti-Nazi moral vocabulary in its domain.
Of course we cannot talk about de-Nazificiation without discussing briefly the flip-side of it as well, namely, philo-Judaism, or the manufactured and subtly disseminated [Jewish-controlled] Media message of Jewish innocence, benignity, and–in spite of this–historical victimization at the hands of non-Jews. Inverse to the degree of Nazi evil is Jewish innocence. The Nazis allegedly had an irrational blood-thirsty race-hatred of Jews and their religion and believed themselves to be the master race to which Jews owed obeisance. Jews, on the contrary, we are told, simply try to mind their own business and avoid antagonizing the larger Gentile culture in which they find themselves. In spite of this Jews are often scape-goated by non-Jews resentful of Jewish wealth and success. But just as there is an institutional component to de-Nazification so also there is an institutional component to philo-Judaism. Besides Jewish ownership and control of the Media (which casts an invisible but tangible shadow over what is, and what is not, acceptable to broadcast about all things Jewish) there is also quasi-Israeli government sponsored “Hasbara,” the financing of private Jews to monitor social media and perform pro-Jewish, pro-Israeli, messaging and dialoging spin control on these sites, unbeknownst to the larger, ignorant and gullible, Gentile public.
The subsequent outcome of all of this is that today any non-Jew who criticizes a Jew or Israel is, predictably and deliberately, associated with being a hated Nazi-lover or, God forbid, an anti-Semite. The effect of this manufactured pejorative psychological association is that it intimidates and effectively shuts down any and all Gentile criticism of Jewdom, and gives Jews a free hand to perpetrate the most heinous of crimes–such as the “ethnic cleansing” of Palestinians from lands they have held for centuries–and not be held accountable for it. The ultimate goal of all of this psychological conditioning is to encourage an anti-Nazi moral vocabulary in the general public and foster self-censorship in those who would criticize Jews, untoward Jewish practices, or brutal Israeli state terrorism. As the Jew, Karl Marx, astutely noted, “The ruling ideas are the ideas of the ruling class,” and that is no better seen than in the anti-Nazi, philo-Jewish, moral vocabulary of our culture. Through the singularly influential and monopolistic Jewish-owned and controlled Media, the mouthpiece that shapes, defines, and forms our moral vocabulary, and thereby our moral conscience, we have pro-Jewish moral vocabulary archetypes promulgated, and from this we can deduce who in fact comprises the ruling crypto-elite in America, namely, not majoritarian Gentiles but distinctly minority clan Jews. Q.E.D.
1. “Major General Robert Alexis McClure, Forgotten Father of the US Army Special Warfare,” by Colonel Alfred H. Paddock, Jr., www.psywarrior.com/mcclure.html<http://www.psywarrior.com/mcclure.html>
2. Even though Jews comprise less than 2% of the US population they comprise approximately 48% of all billionaires (with majority stake holdings concentrated in the media sector of the US economy). “48% of US Billionaires are Jewish,” by Politics Inn, July 29th, 2013.