 |
On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 21:33:47 -0700 (PDT), Melodious Thunk <...@gmail.com
On Jun 28, 5:09 pm, "ske...@aol.com" <...@aol.com
Fascinating person. He wrote that before the civil war.
If he were alive today, he'd probably appreciate how emotional the
celebration of Juneteenth is, which took place last Thursday, in the
29 states that celebrate it.
|
|
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 05:34:25 -0500, Topaz <...@hotmail.com
Letter To The Citizen by F. Rundle
A White Man's Apologies.
Along with the other South African Whites who are apologising for
Apartheid, we Whites who are not part of that liberal select group
would like to apologise to the Black people for the following heinous
crimes:
We apologise for bringing clothing to a land where the Black people
were naked or only had animal skin loincloths to cover themselves
before our arrival;
We apologise for bringing doctors and free medical care, as a result
of which the Black people have been able to survive plagues and
catastrophes and grow in numbers;
We apologise for teaching Black people to read and write;
We apologise for providing the money to build schools and universities
for the Black people, always rebuilding them when they were burned
down or vandalised;
We apologise for bringing vehicles and roads to a land, which did not
have the wheel, before we arrived here 350 years ago;
We apologise for building dams which stored water for times of
drought, and we apologise for bringing running water systems to the
houses we built;
We also apologise for bringing electricity to this country;
We apologise for building factories, highways, and buildings that gave
Black people employment and money;
We apologise for developing commercial farms which to this day feed
the bulk of Africa, the like of which the Black people never had
before;
We apologise for taking minerals from the earth, which the Black
people neither used, nor wanted, nor even knew were there;
We apologise for those among us who have established welfare
organisations and have devoted their entire lives towards making life
richer and better for the Black people;
We apologise for paying the lion's share of taxation
while spending
less
on ourselves than on the Black people;
For all these sins we humbly beg forgiveness, and if they will only
accept our apology we will be happy to take back all of the above evil
and horrible things we have done to you and return to Europe.
F Rundle
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html
|
|
On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 19:31:08 -0700 (PDT), oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
On Jun 28, 5:09 pm, "ske...@aol.com" <...@aol.com
Well, to me it's about watching the fireworks and waiting for martians
to land! I like gatherings where people are lying on blankets spread
out on the grass, watching the sky, and kids are running around with
sparklers, laughing. In the ozarks there would be fireflies. Here
there are frogs. Last year i watched the whole thing with 3-D glasses.
Of course, as a white person (and an american) i tried not to be
revolting, barbaric or shameless... seeing as how it was a special
occasion.
The *national independence* part is a little more difficult to
celebrate these days, seeing as how it is dying.
Oldwifetale - June 28, 2008
|
|
On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:19:23 -0700 (PDT), skepticl1 <...@aol.com
On 28 Jun, 19:31, oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
O Click on this link, which is a revolutionary perspective on the 4th
of July celebration, it shows the top part fireworks exploding, over
reflection on water, and below that is the famous photo of the bodies
at the Massacre of Mi Lai in Vietnam:
http://www.rwor.org/a/134/cover134-en.html
|
|
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:08:46 -0700 (PDT), oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
On Jun 28, 10:19 pm, skepticl1 <...@aol.com
I suppose you can explain how the 3 people in office who tried to warn
the american public about the communist infiltration throughout US
government (and about communists in high positions of authority) were
able to claim 10 and 15 years 'beforehand' that this communist
infiltration would ultimately lead to both the Korean and Vietnamese
wars.
|
|
On Jun 29, 4:08 pm, oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
|
|
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 19:08:28 GMT, "Freedom Fighter" <...@once.net
"oldwifetale" <...@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 28, 5:09 pm, "ske...@aol.com" <...@aol.com
Well, to me it's about watching the fireworks and waiting for martians
to land! I like gatherings where people are lying on blankets spread
out on the grass, watching the sky, and kids are running around with
sparklers, laughing. In the ozarks there would be fireflies. Here
there are frogs. Last year i watched the whole thing with 3-D glasses.
Of course, as a white person (and an american) i tried not to be
revolting, barbaric or shameless... seeing as how it was a special
occasion.
The *national independence* part is a little more difficult to
celebrate these days, seeing as how it is dying.
Oldwifetale - June 28, 2008
------------------
Fireworks and sparklers? Where I live you can get arrested for them, even on
"Independence Day." At the very least the police will steal - that is,
"confiscate" them, and you get verbal abuse if not a summons as well. Looks
like there really isn't much freedom left to celebrate anyway, and there may
be some truth in the saying that 200 years is too long to go without a
revolution!
|
|
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 12:54:32 -0700 (PDT), oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
On Jun 29, 12:08 pm, "Freedom Fighter" <...@once.net
Gee, "freedom fighter" - maybe you oughta move. Does the communists'
silent 'revolution' need to do your packing for you? Live a little!
Light a sparkler.
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:18:22 GMT, "Freedom Fighter" <...@once.net
"oldwifetale" <...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 29, 12:08 pm, "Freedom Fighter" <...@once.net
Gee, "freedom fighter" - maybe you oughta move. Does the communists'
silent 'revolution' need to do your packing for you? Live a little!
Light a sparkler.
------------------
Despite the legal risk, I will.
Freedom is as freedom does!
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:14:30 -0700 (PDT), "ske...@aol.com" <...@aol.com
On 29 Jun, 12:08, "Freedom Fighter" <...@once.net
Good for you Freedom Fighter. Oldwifetales don't reflect reality, it's
the John Birch Society stuff origniating the CIA.
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:37:29 -0700 (PDT), oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
On Jun 30, 12:14 pm, "ske...@aol.com" <...@aol.com
John Birch, haha. Are they still around? I haven't seen any of their
stuff since i was about 12. My thoughts do not have anything to do
with any organization's thoughts - they are my *own* thoughts. I have
grown children and grandchildren and have lived awhile, long enough to
know a 'threat' to my offspring when i see it, and i see it in your
communist rhetoric.
You don't have sparklers? Then that is *your* reality, created by your
own fascist communist leaders (having inserted themselves into our
government since the beginning) who would do anything to destroy any
remaining 'american' traditions by constant association with war or
brutality.
Guess what???? Thanksgiving isn't even about indians and pilgrims to
most people. I know that in my family, an indian or pilgrim never
entered the conversation, and the only presence was a child's
construction-paper cutout taped to the refrigerator. It's about family
gatherings and turkey, mashed potatoes and cranberry sauce! And to
some it's about a pre-usa feast that was observed in the month
assigned to the ruler 'Zeus/Jove/Thor - the 'god of abundance'. Even
its 'day' of he week is Thor's, and it's entirely pagan. Learn your
star lore.
You bring up death in association to our independence as a nation and
our break from the British? What does one have to do with the other?
Pretty interesting that you arrive at a conclusion that my thoughts
make me a John Birch Society follower.
Your attitude is something i'm used to - as a woman in *my society*.
For all the so-called equality (women being *allowed* to labor in the
work force rather than being able to watch out for their own
children), men still to this day do not want to hear women speak of
politics. Communists have a goal to dissolve all barriers, from
national barriers to gender barriers. Better work on that because
you're still showing 'bias'. Communists want to end families, saying
"it takes a village to raise a child", but show me a single mother
throughout all of Time and across all cultures who would not wail when
her child is taken forcibly by the 'state' or when she is forbidden
from her predominant role in the mother-child relationship. What you
promote as 'natural' is about as 'un-natural' as it gets. You think
all that is 'healthy' when in reality it's toxic.
In fact, you are a hypocrite, S - pointing fingers of blame when the
mormon women had their children temporarily taken, yet promoting a
society wherein families do not matter. Pointing to war-related deaths
by the usa when tens of millions were killed by the bolshevik
communist revolution, and millions more by the maoist revolution.
Where are your pictures of *those* bodies? What about the relocations
and the labor camps?
Those didn't exist?
And what happened to the ones who didn't want to conform (the
'undesirables) to these new 'democratic' societies filled with perfect
obedient scared-silent automatons? Answer that.
Seriously now... how much of your utopian communist society "reflects
reality"?
Do you even live in the usa?
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:12:29 -0700 (PDT), "ske...@aol.com" <...@aol.com
On 30 Jun, 14:37, oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
How could the Communist have influence the US government 'from the
beginning' when Communism as a theory wasn't even invented yet O? You
could also accuse the Communists of murdering millions of Germans when
they invaded the Soviet Union. It would be a false accusation. It
matters in what context a killing happens where it's right or wrong.
There are two types of violence, the violence of a person being raped
and fighting back against their attackers is different than the
violence of the rapist. Even in your dream society, 'the best of all
possible worlds' Capitalism and bourgeois democracy, you dream society
was founded in bloodshed, against those 'poor, innocent' British, the
'Founding Fathers' were killing their own two, because at the time
they were a colony of the same country, Great Britain. The Soviet
Union was a liberating and emcipating society, in a way the United
Snakes has never been. Within that context, some of the killing the
USSR, was unjust, and it was murder. That being said, the USSR and
China was a better society than bourgeois societies in the west, and a
more moral society too. Mao Tse Tung said: "It's right to rebel--
against reaction."
|
|
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 01:08:33 -0400, BDK <...@silentexplosions.com
In article <b59d9f61-e464-4976-bc77-ade157b62e26
@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com
Tell me what drugs you've taken to fuck your head up so bad, so I will
know to totally avoid them at all costs. Even the kid in high school who
was a "burnout" isn't as whacked as you are...
--
BDK
kOOk Magnet!
NJJ CLUB #1
Shillmaster
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:15:07 -0700 (PDT), oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
On Jun 30, 7:12 pm, "ske...@aol.com" <...@aol.com
Communism existed as a 'reality' for well over 2400 years before it
existed as a 'theory'. It is apparent in every doctrine that is based
on an ideology (political, economic and religious) that involves
central power in a global realm, monotheistic religion included. Maybe
psychologically you could call it the King of the World Complex - Type
A. The Communist Manifesto is just a re-write, created for
'revolutionaries' who are expendable. The Constitution was supposed to
protect us from a capitalist (and definitely from a communist)
economic system that had a basic tendency to become centralized. This
depended on a free enterprise market that discouraged monopolization -
and NO central banks. Centralization can only exist when the
'citizenhip' is homogenous, so to speak - less about individuals, more
toward the 'collective' we-are-all-one thing, there is no expression
of individuality (geez, can't ya just *hear* their 'heavenly choir' of
perfect little angels all singing for the central power?) Sorry S, but
communism has been with us all along, and the 'real' communists know
how capitalism can be 'transformed' itself into communism. Look around
you... are these not wonderful times for a 'communist' like yourself?
Communists remind me a lot of christians... only difference is they
won't be getting raptured.
Dang.
But!... apparently you have decided that the egg came before the
chicken, and that some guy named Karl came up with this 'brilliant
idea' on his own whilst impregnating his wife's maid and living off
those capitalist cottonmill proceeds. Sure, that could happen.
You
Then why bring it up?
Is that a common accusation?
Something you hear often?
It
Who told you that?
the violence of a person being raped
And your point is... that the only 2 kinds of violence is either that
of a 'victim' or that of a 'scum bucket? Is that how you will treat
warriors in your society? What about the ones they kill? Are they
classified as victims or scum buckets? If they are scum buckets, what
will that make your warriors who perpetrate the violence? Victims?
You don't want to go there, oh no you don't...
Founding Fathers? Bourgeois democracy? What the hell are you talking
about? My ancestors fought in the revolutionary war, and i even have
one or two ancestors who were *accused* of being a tory - a loyalist!
I have the written recitation of my ancestor's oral account of his
part in the war. I know what they gave up to be here. My ancestor was
a 'founding father' every bit as much as any one of those people who
'framed' the constitution or the bill of rights or signed any indian
treaty, and my ancestors were 'founding mothers' as well. My ancestors
were here as quakers, mennonites, lutherans, 'witches', atheists,
irish, black (yes a slave), etc. - but you can be certain that every
single one of them were operating on the 'assumption' that we (the
people) composed our own nation, independent of Britain's rule. Where
are you from? Have you even *been* to the usa, much less lived here?
The Soviet
Mmm-hmm, and how'd that work out?
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:55:48 -0700 (PDT), skepticl1 <...@aol.com
On 30 Jun, 20:15, oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
Skeptic Responds:
You can't blame Communism for things done before Communism was even
thought as a theory.
Skeptic Responds:
Violence doesn't exist in a vaccum, it is done for good or ill, in
context. We can both think up examples where we would agree that
violence is just, like using violence to protect a child who is being
abused.
Skeptic responds:
But in your opinion it is such a wrong to rebel against your mother
country. The America rebels were using violence against their own
mother government, Great Britain. How dare they?! Were they 'scum
bags' or 'victims' O?
O, Google 'John Birch Society' and you find the opinions you think you
created or found out are really the fables of the John Birch Society.
The John Birch Society is a creation of the CIA, in order to fool
people.
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 22:33:28 -0700 (PDT), oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
On Jun 30, 9:55 pm, skepticl1 <...@aol.com
So you think a thing can't exist until there's a 'theory'?
What about gravity? What about social phenonomena?
Perhaps ancient humans were all standing around like movie 'extras'
waiting for someone to write the script.
I guess it doesn't occur to you that a 'theory' written for your
*public consumption* could have pre-existed in its entirety among more
'private' circles.
There's also more than "two kinds of violence", but communists are
required to put things in groups and subgroups, then label. If you're
talking about the usa, you're talking about me personally. I'm an
american here; it's my born nationality. And unless the government's
every action is in representation of *the people* - you have no right
to call the usa (the people) anything whatsoever based on government's
actions. Even those stupid polls admit that the 'majority' of people
do not feel represented - so all your anti-american crappola is
inappropriate, and your communist solutions unwelcome except to those
whose loyalties are not with their own nation at all. In which case,
they are not 'the people' of america. They are just posers. Like
yourself. America as a nation is based on an ideology outlined in the
Constitution and Bill of Rights. Outside of those things, it is not
even the 'usa' you are talking about. That's like saying to a xtian,
"You can keep your religion, but the jesus part has to go." Or saying
to a smoker, "You can still legally smoke cigarettes, but you can't
smoke them in public or private places." Or how about, "You can have
free speech so long as it pleases everyone all the time."
It is wrong to rebel against your own nation as a People. It is fine
to rebel against your government when it becomes a 'rulership' - at
least under *our* constitutional rights.
Start reading instead of being so enamored with your own words. I
already told you i knew all about the Birchers since before i was even
12 years old. That is old-hat stuff. Some of it's even true.
|
|
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:14:09 -0700 (PDT), "ske...@aol.com" <...@aol.com
On 30 Jun, 22:33, oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
Skeptic responds:
O, you constantly use fallacious circular reasoning. Example:
Communism
must be responsible for the crimes of the world even before Communism
was invented because Communism was the secret plans of the
'Centralists.' Also: Now that Communism has been defeated worldwide,
the crimes of the Capitalists, are really the secret crimes of the
Communist Cabals.
|
|
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:53:32 -0700 (PDT), oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
Sure S...
"Now that Communism has been defeated worldwide..."
That's a good one.
|
|
On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:31:18 -0500, Topaz <...@hotmail.com
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:14:09 -0700 (PDT), "ske...@aol.com"
<...@aol.com
Here is a quote from Mein Kampf:
"the Jew seized upon the manifold possiblities which the
situation offered him for the future. While on the one hand he
organized capitalistic methods of exploitation to their ultimate
degree of efficiency, he curried favour with the victims of his policy
and his power and in a short while became the leader of their struggle
against himself. 'Against himself' is here only a figurative way of
speaking; for this 'Great Master of Lies' knows how to appear in the
guise of the innocent and throw the guilt on others. Since he had the
impudence to take a personal lead among the masses, they never for a
moment suspected that they were falling prey to one of the most
infamous deceits ever practiced. And yet that is what it actually
was."
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html
|
|
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 00:53:00 -0400, BDK <...@silentexplosions.com
In article <...@hotmail.com says...
Sane people know Hitler was a raving kook. Probably applies to you too.
--
BDK
kOOk Magnet!
NJJ CLUB #1
Shillmaster
|
|
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 04:55:20 -0500, Topaz <...@hotmail.com
Here is part of Hitler's speech at Rheinmetall-Borsig Works, Berlin,
on December 10, 1940:
"In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which
means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must
possess some means of giving expression to their thoughts or their
wishes. Examining this problem more closely, we see that the people
themselves have originally no convictions of their own. Their
convictions are formed, of course, just as everywhere else. The
decisive question is who enlightens the people, who educates them? In
those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing
more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and,
as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are
more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.'
By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an
uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to
make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national
control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital
and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak
of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of
the 'freedom of the press.'
In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every
case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the
editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor
tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next
day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless
slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus
mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties.
The difference between these parties is as small as it formerly was in
Germany. You know them, of course - the old parties. They were always
one and the same. In Britain matters are usually so arranged that
families are divided up, one member being a conservative, another a
liberal, and a third belonging to the labor party. Actually, all three
sit together as members of the family, decide upon their common
attitude and determine it. A further point is that the 'elected
people' actually form a community which operates and controls all
these organizations. For this reason, the opposition in England is
really always the same, for on all essential matters in which the
opposition has to make itself felt, the parties are always in
agreement. They have one and the same conviction and through the
medium of the press mold public opinion along corresponding lines. One
might well believe that in these countries of liberty and riches, the
people must possess an unlimited degree of prosperity. But no! On the
contrary, it is precisely in these countries that the distress of the
masses is greater than anywhere else. Such is the case in 'rich
Britain.'
She controls sixteen million square miles. In India, for example, a
hundred million colonial workers with a wretched standard of living
must labor for her. One might think, perhaps, that at least in England
itself every person must have his share of these riches. By no means!
In that country class distinction is the crassest imaginable. There is
poverty - incredible poverty - on the one side, and equally incredible
wealth on the other. They have not solved a single problem. The
workmen of that country which possesses more than one-sixth of the
globe and of the world's natural resources dwell in misery, and the
masses of the people are poorly clad.. In a country which ought to
have more than enough bread and every sort of fruit, we find millions
of the lower classes who have not even enough to fill their stomachs,
and go about hungry. A nation which could provide work for the whole
world must acknowledge the fact that it cannot even abolish
unemployment at home. For decades this rich Britain has had two and a
half million unemployed; rich America, ten to thirteen millions, year
after year; France, six, seven, and eight hundred thousand. Well, my
fellow-countrymen - what then are we to say about ourselves?
It is self-evident that where this democracy rules, the people as such
are not taken into consideration at all. The only thing that matters
is the existence of a few hundred gigantic capitalists who own all the
factories and their stock and, through them, control the people. The
masses of the people do not interest them in the least. They are
interested in them just as were our bourgeois parties in former times
- only when elections are being held, when they need votes. Otherwise,
the life of the masses is a matter of complete indifference to them.
To this must be added the difference in education. Is it not ludicrous
to hear a member of the British Labor Party - who, of course, as a
member of the Opposition is officially paid by the government - say:
'When the war is over, we will do something in social respects'?
It is the members of Parliament who are the directors of the business
concerns - just as used to be the case with us. But we have abolished
all that. A member of the Reichstag cannot belong to a Board of
Directors, except as a purely honorary member. He is prohibited from
accepting any emolument, financial or otherwise. This is not the case
in other countries.
They reply: 'That is why our form of government is sacred to us.' I
can well believe it, for that form of government certainly pays very
well.. But whether it is sacred to the mass of the people as well is
another matter.
The people as a whole definitely suffer. I do not consider it possible
in the long run for one man to work and toil for a whole year in
return for ridiculous wages, while another jumps into an express train
once a year and pockets enormous sums. Such conditions are a disgrace.
On the other hand, we National Socialists equally oppose the theory
that all men are equals. Today, when a man of genius makes some
astounding invention and enormously benefits his country by his
brains, we pay him his due, for he has really accomplished something
and been of use to his country. However, we hope to make it impossible
for idle drones to inhabit this country.
I could continue to cite examples indefinitely. The fact remains that
two worlds are face to face with one another. Our opponents are quite
right when they say: 'Nothing can reconcile us to the National
Socialist world.' How could a narrow-minded capitalist ever agree to
my principles? It would be easier for the Devil to go to church and
cross himself with holy water than for these people to comprehend the
ideas which are accepted facts to us today. But we have solved our
problems.
To take another instance where we are condemned: They claim to be
fighting for the maintenance of the gold standard as the currency
basis. That I can well believe, for the gold is in their hands. We,
too, once had gold, but it was stolen and extorted from us. When I
came to power, it was not malice which made me abandon the gold
standard. Germany simply had no gold left. Consequently, quitting the
gold standard presented no difficulties, for it is always easy to part
with what one does not have. We had no gold. We had no foreign
exchange. They had all been stolen and extorted from us during the
previous fifteen years. But, my fellow countrymen, I did not regret
it, for we have constructed our economic system on a wholly different
basis. In our eyes, gold is not of value in itself. It is only an
agent by which nations can be suppressed and dominated.
When I took over the government, I had only one hope on which to
build, namely, the efficiency and ability of the German nation and the
German workingman; the intelligence of our inventors, engineers,
technicians, chemists, and so forth. I built on the strength which
animates our economic system. One simple question faced me: Are we to
perish because we have no gold; am I to believe in a phantom which
spells our destruction? I championed the opposite opinion: Even though
we have no gold, we have capacity for work.
The German capacity for work is our gold and our capital, and with
this gold I can compete successfully with any power in the world. We
want to live in houses which have to be built. Hence, the workers must
build them, and the raw materials required must be procured by work.
My whole economic system has been built up on the conception of work.
We have solved our problems while, amazingly enough, the capitalist
countries and their currencies have suffered bankruptcy.
Sterling can find no market today. Throw it at any one and he will
step aside to avoid being hit. But our Reichsmark, which is backed by
no gold, has remained stable. Why? It has no gold cover; it is backed
by you and by your work. You have helped me to keep the mark stable.
German currency, with no gold coverage, is worth more today than gold
itself. It signifies unceasing production. This we owe to the German
farmer, who has worked from daybreak till nightfall. This we owe to
the German worker, who has given us his whole strength. The whole
problem has been solved in one instant, as if by magic.
My dear friends, if I had stated publicly eight or nine years ago: 'In
seven or eight years the problem of how to provide work for the
unemployed will be solved, and the problem then will be where to find
workers,' I should have harmed my cause. Every one would have
declared: 'The man is mad. It is useless to talk to him, much less to
support him. Nobody should vote for him. He is a fantastic creature.'
Today, however, all this has come true. Today, the only question for
us is where to find workers. That, my fellow countrymen, is the
blessing which work brings.
Work alone can create new work; money cannot create work. Work alone
can create values, values with which to reward those who work. The
work of one man makes it possible for another to live and continue to
work. And when we have mobilized the working capacity of our people to
its utmost, each individual worker will receive more and more of the
world's goods.
We have incorporated seven million unemployed into our economic
system; we have transformed another six millions from part-time into
full-time workers; we are even working overtime. And all this is paid
for in cash in Reichsmarks which maintained their value in peacetime.
In wartime we had to ration its purchasing capacity, not in order to
devalue it, but simply to earmark a portion of our industry for war
production to guide us to victory in the struggle for the future of
Germany...
One thing is certain, my fellow-countrymen: All in all, we have today
a state with a different economic and political orientation from that
of the Western democracies.
Well, it must now be made possible for the British worker to travel.
It is remarkable that they should at last hit upon the idea that
traveling should be something not for millionaires alone, but for the
people too. In this country, the problem was solved some time ago. In
the other countries - as is shown by their whole economic structure -
the selfishness of a relatively small stratum rules under the mask of
democracy. This stratum is neither checked nor controlled by anyone.
It is therefore understandable if an Englishman says: 'We do not want
our world to be subject to any sort of collapse.' Quite so. The
English know full well that their Empire is not menaced by us. But
they say quite truthfully: 'If the ideas that are popular in Germany
are not completely eliminated, they might become popular among our own
people, and that is the danger. We do not want this.' It would do no
harm if they did become popular there, but these people are just as
narrow-minded as many once were in Germany. In this respect they
prefer to remain bound to their conservative methods. They do not wish
to depart from them, and do not conceal the fact.
They say, 'The German methods do not suit us at all.'
And what are these methods? You know, my comrades, that I have
destroyed nothing in Germany. I have always proceeded very carefully,
because I believe - as I have already said - that we cannot afford to
wreck anything. I am proud that the Revolution of 1933 was brought to
pass without breaking a single windowpane. Nevertheless, we have
wrought enormous changes.
I wish to put before you a few basic facts: The first is that in the
capitalistic democratic world the most important principle of economy
is that the people exist for trade and industry, and that these in
turn exist for capital. We have reversed this principle by making
capital exist for trade and industry, and trade and industry exist for
the people. In other words, the people come first. Everything else is
but a means to this end. When an economic system is not capable of
feeding and clothing a people, then it is bad, regardless of whether a
few hundred people say: 'As far as I am concerned it is good,
excellent; my dividends are splendid.'
However, the dividends do not interest me at all. Here we have drawn
the line. They may then retort: 'Well, look here, that is just what we
mean. You jeopardize liberty.'
Yes, certainly, we jeopardize the liberty to profiteer at the expense
of the community, and, if necessary, we even abolish it. British
capitalists, to mention only one instance, can pocket dividends of 76,
80, 95, 140, and even 160 per cent from their armament industry.
Naturally they say: 'If the German methods grow apace and should prove
victorious, this sort of thing will stop.'
They are perfectly right. I should never tolerate such a state of
affairs. In my eyes, a 6 per cent dividend is sufficient. Even from
this 6 per cent we deduct one-half and, as for the rest, we must have
definite proof that it is invested in the interest of the country as a
whole. In other words, no individual has the right to dispose
arbitrarily of money which ought to be invested for the good of the
country. If he disposes of it sensibly, well and good; if not, the
National Socialist state will intervene.
To take another instance, besides dividends there are the so-called
directors' fees. You probably have no idea how appallingly active a
board of directors is. Once a year its members have to make a journey.
They have to go to the station, get into a first-class compartment and
travel to some place or other. They arrive at an appointed office at
about 10 or 11 A.M. There they must listen to a report. When the
report has been read, they must listen to a few comments on it. They
may be kept in their seats until 1 P.M. or even 2. Shortly after 2
o'clock they rise from their chairs and set out on their homeward
journey, again, of course, traveling first class. It is hardly
surprising that they claim 3,000, 4,000, or even 5,000 as compensation
for this: Our directors formerly did the same - for what a lot of time
it costs them! Such effort had to be made worth while! Of course, we
have got rid of all this nonsense, which was merely veiled
profiteering and even bribery.
In Germany, the people, without any doubt, decide their existence.
They determine the principles of their government. In fact it has been
possible in this country to incorporate many of the broad masses into
the National Socialist party, that gigantic organization embracing
millions and having millions of officials drawn from the people
themselves. This principle is extended to the highest ranks.
For the first time in German history, we have a state which has
absolutely abolished all social prejudices in regard to political
appointments as well as in private life. I myself am the best proof of
this. Just imagine: I am not even a lawyer, and yet I am your Leader!
It is not only in ordinary life that we have succeeded in appointing
the best among the people for every position. We have
Reichsstatthalters who were formerly agricultural laborers or
locksmiths. Yes, we have even succeeded in breaking down prejudice in
a place where it was most deep-seated -in the fighting forces.
Thousands of officers are being promoted from the ranks today. We have
done away with prejudice. We have generals who were ordinary soldiers
and noncommissioned officers twenty-two and twenty-three years ago. In
this instance, too, we have overcome all social obstacles. Thus, we
are building up our life for the future.
As you know we have countless schools, national political educational
establishments, Adolf Hitler schools, and so on. To these schools we
send gifted children of the broad masses, children of working men,
farmers' sons whose parents could never have afforded a higher
education for their children. We take them in gradually. They are
educated here, sent to the Ordensburgen, to the Party, later to take
their place in the State where they will some day fill the highest
posts....
Opposed to this there stands a completely different world. In the
world the highest ideal is the struggle for wealth, for capital, for
family possessions, for personal egoism; everything else is merely a
means to such ends. Two worlds confront each other today. We know
perfectly well that if we are defeated in this war it would not only
be the end of our National Socialist work of reconstruction, but the
end of the German people as a whole. For without its powers of
coordination, the German people would starve. Today the masses
dependent on us number 120 or 130 millions, of which 85 millions alone
are our own people. We remain ever aware of this fact.
On the other hand, that other world says: 'If we lose, our world-wide
capitalistic system will collapse. For it is we who save hoarded gold.
It is lying in our cellars and will lose its value. If the idea that
work is the decisive factor spreads abroad, what will happen to us? We
shall have bought our gold in vain. Our whole claim to world dominion
can then no longer be maintained. The people will do away with their
dynasties of high finance. They will present their social claims, and
the whole world system will be overthrown.'
I can well understand that they declare: 'Let us prevent this at all
costs; it must be prevented.' They can see exactly how our nation has
been reconstructed. You see it clearly. For instance, there we see a
state ruled by a numerically small upper class. They send their sons
to their own schools, to Eton. We have Adolf Hitler schools or
national political educational establishments. On the one hand, the
sons of plutocrats, financial magnates; on the other, the children of
the people. Etonians and Harrovians exclusively in leading positions
over there; in this country, men of the people in charge of the State.
These are the two worlds. I grant that one of the two must succumb.
Yes, one or the other. But if we were to succumb, the German people
would succumb with us. If the other were to succumb, I am convinced
that the nations will become free for the first time. We are not
fighting individual Englishmen or Frenchmen. We have nothing against
them. For years I proclaimed this as the aim of my foreign policy. We
demanded nothing of them, nothing at all. When they started the war
they could not say: 'We are doing so because the Germans asked this or
that of us.' They said, on the contrary: 'We are declaring war on you
because the German system of Government does not suit us; because we
fear it might spread to our own people.' For that reason they are
carrying on this war. They wanted to blast the German nation back to
the time of Versailles, to the indescribable misery of those days. But
they have made a great mistake.
If in this war everything points to the fact that gold is fighting
against work, capitalism against peoples, and reaction against the
progress of humanity, then work, the peoples, and progress will be
victorious. Even the support of the Jewish race will not avail the
others.
I have seen all this coming for years. What did I ask of the other
world? Nothing but the right for Germans to reunite and the
restoration of all that had been taken from them - nothing which would
have meant a loss to the other nations. How often have I stretched out
my hand to them? Ever since I came into power. I had not the slightest
wish to rearm.
For what do armaments mean? They absorb so much labor. It was I who
regarded work as being of decisive importance, who wished to employ
the working capacity of Germany for other plans. I think the news is
already out that, after all, I have some fairly important plans in my
mind, vast and splendid plans for my people. It is my ambition to make
the German people rich and to make the German homeland beautiful. I
want the standard of living of the individual raised. I want us to
have the most beautiful and the finest civilization. I should like the
theater - in fact, the whole of German civilization - to benefit all
the people and not to exist only for the upper ten thousand, as is the
case in England.
The plans which we had in mind were tremendous, and I needed workers
in order to realize them. Armament only deprives me of workers. I made
proposals to limit armaments. I was ridiculed. The only answer I
received was 'No.' I proposed the limitation of certain types of
armament. That was refused. I proposed that airplanes should be
altogether eliminated from warfare. That also was refused. I suggested
that bombers should be limited. That was refused. They said: 'That is
just how we wish to force our regime upon you.' ...
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/
http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html
|
|
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 22:25:26 -0700 (PDT), skepticl1 <...@aol.com
On 3 Jul, 18:31, Topaz <...@hotmail.com
Hey O your fallacious circular reasoning was even spewed by Herr
Hitler, as well as the CIA and the John Birch Society. What kind of
company are you keeping with your Reich wings ideas against the people?
|
|
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 22:43:29 -0700 (PDT), oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
Nice try, S. I haven't actually said much about Jewish 'leadership',
although i'm sure there's something to be said if one was permitted to
say it. But certainly you don't think that Mein Kampf was devoid of
any truth whatsoever as a writing that would be taken seriously by
that nation's 'people'. You should know that any 'great master of
lies' does, indeed, know how to appear in the "guise of the innocent".
In fact, you should know that one especially well considering your
party affiliation.
Therefore, at least refer to your 'social sciences' if you want to get
into this debate. I am not associated or affiliated with any group,
organization, party, movement, ideology or religion - and don't "keep
company" of such - which makes it less convenient for you to engage in
accurate pigeon-holing.
|
|
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:19:00 -0700 (PDT), Melodious Thunk <...@gmail.com
On Jul 3, 10:43 pm, oldwifetale <...@yahoo.com
<snip
Hitler was very respected among educated Americans (which, of course,
included most of the elected government) prior to 1939. For example,
Princeton Univ. had a longstanding policy of quizzing incoming
freshmen about who they most admired. In both 38 and 39, Albert
Einstein finished 2nd, to Hitler.
|
|
|