In my mind these two articles have a single theme:
Walter E. Williams asks:
Interestingly, it was Adolf Hitler, not Lenin or Stalin, who clearly stated everything Hussein & Company personify. Hitler reduced everything they do to the four words in the final sentence:
Williams identifies the worst offenders:
I want to separate the children from the others by turning to Hitler again:
If you doubt where American Communists were going long before Hussein came along apply Hitlers Children to Communist control of the public education system in this country.
Ninety-nine percent of Socialist education is formulated especially to indoctrinate young children into the joys of collectivism. Implanting the idea that there is good totalitarian government and bad totalitarian government is critical. All of the propaganda apparatus at the governments disposal cannot bury the bad. There is too much known about totalitarian governments to hide the bad; more so since the Internet.
Further education all the way through higher education reinforces the concept of good and bad totalitarian governments. Proof: Professor Williams et al., exposing totalitarianisms innate cruelty drives Socialists to point to Communist China and say See, communism is working. Thats good totalitarian government.
Obviously, the media elite, along with stalwarts of the Democrat party, totally ignore the Mao cited by Professor Williams, and the incomprehensible brutality Mao initiated against his own people in order to make communism work.
To Socialists/Communists there is but one sin: Pointing out that totalitarian governments must kill everyone who resists no matter how slight that resistence might be, and they must kill quickly, without mercy, lest they be overthrown by revolution. In the end, every totalitarian government will always do what Hitler, and Stalin, and Mao, and Pol Pot, and Castro and others did best murder, torture and enslave. Regardless of the evidence some still insist that a benevolent totalitarian government is possible.
Moving on
I learned something from James Simpsons piece that surprised me:
I was surprised to learn there were Muslim Communists with so much political influence, while I understand the marriage between the two ideologies perfectly. Islam and Communism are totalitarian theocracies.
Again, one can turn to Hitler who sanctioned marriage between totalitarians in a different context: Nazi Party recruiters had one standing order: Recruit new members from the ranks of the Communists because they always make the best Fascists. The context is different because Communists will not make the best Muslims, nor will Muslims make the best Communists.
Identical methods of subjugation aside, Muslims are asking for the dirty end of the stick on this one. A Muslim Communist might believe that Communist ideology can be adapted to accommodate Islam, while Communists will never allow any Supreme Deity religion to survive after Socialists/Communists consolidate political power. Indeed, Muslims will be slaughtered first because Communists fear all other forms of totalitarian government. Hitler covered that one, too.
There is no way in hell one totalitarian government will share power with another for very long. Hitler understood what had to be done; so he invaded the Soviet Union. Hitler well-knew that Stalin would have done it to Nazi Germany at the first opportunity. In fact, the very nature of totalitarian government abhors power-sharing. In that same vain it is logical to assume Mussolinis Italy was first on Hitlers hit list after Germany won the war.
WWII
Ive always said the wrong side won WWII in Europe. Communism is still alive and well while Fascism has disappeared. There is not one openly Fascist country today although many countries are dictatorships. There are several Communist countries.
Had Nazi Germany won WWII in Europe I doubt very much if that brand of totalitarian government would have survived after Hitler and Mussolini died. It is certain Nazism would not be a worldwide movement today as is socialism/communism. Fascists most certainly never would have infiltrated our government to the extent Communists have succeeded. In short: Hussein the Fascist would not have come as far as did Hussein the Communist.
Finally, the single theme I referred to in the first sentence of this thread:
Why Aren't Murderous Communists Condemned Like Nazis Are?
Tue, Aug 07 2012 00:00:00 E A13_ISSUES
By WALTER E. WILLIAMS
Posted 08/06/2012 06:58 PM ET
Socialists And Communists Are Even Bigger Murderers Than Hitler's Nazis Were - Investors.com
XXXXX
August 7, 2012
Vetting Conference Exposes More of Obama's Marxist Ties
James Simpson
Blog: Vetting Conference Exposes More of Obama's Marxist Ties
Walter E. Williams asks:
Why are the horrors of Nazism so well-known and widely condemned, but not those of socialism and communism? What goes untaught and possibly is covered up is that socialist and communist ideas have produced the greatest evil in mankind's history.
One answer can be seen in those who rant against war while calling for bigger government. The number of dead caused by all of the wars in the past five centuries is less than the total the number of murders modern totalitarian governments committed against their own people in just the last century. The totals cited by Professor Williams should shock every so-called pacificist out of their cherished benevolent-government fantasies:
Between 1917 and 1987, Vladimir Lenin, Josef Stalin and their successors murdered and were otherwise responsible for the deaths of 62 million of their own people. Between 1949 and 1987, China's communists, led by Mao Zedong and his successors, murdered and were otherwise responsible for the deaths of 76 million Chinese.
The most authoritative tally of history's most murderous regimes is documented on University of Hawaii Professor Rudolph J. Rummel's website, at Freedom, Democide, War: Home Page, and in his book "Death by Government."
How much hunting down and punishment have there been for these communist murderers? To the contrary, it's acceptable both in Europe and in the U.S. to hoist and march under the former USSR's red flag emblazoned with a hammer and sickle.
Mao Zedong has been long admired by academics and leftists across our country, as they often marched around singing the praises of Mao and waving his little red book, "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-tung." President Obama's communications director, Anita Dunn, in her June 2009 commencement address to St. Andrews Episcopal High School at Washington National Cathedral, said Mao was one of her heroes.
Interestingly, it was Adolf Hitler, not Lenin or Stalin, who clearly stated everything Hussein & Company personify. Hitler reduced everything they do to the four words in the final sentence:
"Of what importance is all that, if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot escape? Let them own land or factories as much as they please. The decisive factor is that the State, through the Party, is supreme over them regardless of whether they are owners or workers. All that is unessential; our socialism goes far deeper. It establishes a relationship of the individual to the State, the national community. Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings."
Williams identifies the worst offenders:
Path To Genocide
Whether it's the academic community, the media elite, stalwarts of the Democratic Party or organizations such as the NAACP, the National Council of La Raza, Green for All, the Sierra Club and the Children's Defense Fund, there is a great tolerance for the ideas of socialism a system that has caused more deaths and human misery than all other systems combined.
I want to separate the children from the others by turning to Hitler again:
When an opponent declares, I will not come over to your side, I calmly say, Your child belongs to us already. . . . What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.
If you doubt where American Communists were going long before Hussein came along apply Hitlers Children to Communist control of the public education system in this country.
Ninety-nine percent of Socialist education is formulated especially to indoctrinate young children into the joys of collectivism. Implanting the idea that there is good totalitarian government and bad totalitarian government is critical. All of the propaganda apparatus at the governments disposal cannot bury the bad. There is too much known about totalitarian governments to hide the bad; more so since the Internet.
Further education all the way through higher education reinforces the concept of good and bad totalitarian governments. Proof: Professor Williams et al., exposing totalitarianisms innate cruelty drives Socialists to point to Communist China and say See, communism is working. Thats good totalitarian government.
Obviously, the media elite, along with stalwarts of the Democrat party, totally ignore the Mao cited by Professor Williams, and the incomprehensible brutality Mao initiated against his own people in order to make communism work.
To Socialists/Communists there is but one sin: Pointing out that totalitarian governments must kill everyone who resists no matter how slight that resistence might be, and they must kill quickly, without mercy, lest they be overthrown by revolution. In the end, every totalitarian government will always do what Hitler, and Stalin, and Mao, and Pol Pot, and Castro and others did best murder, torture and enslave. Regardless of the evidence some still insist that a benevolent totalitarian government is possible.
Moving on
I learned something from James Simpsons piece that surprised me:
This working relationship, and how it developed, was explained in depth by a prominent Soviet KGB defector, Konstantin Preobrazhensky, who spoke on his report, Communists and Muslims, the Hidden Hand of the KGB. For example, he describes the work of Karim Hakimov, a Soviet KGB operative who was one of the first of many "Muslims with a communist heart". An expert in Islam, he helped found the modern state of Saudi Arabia and befriended King Saud. He was instrumental in forming an anti-West group which was the precursor to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. As a result, Russia has "Observer" status with the group.
He also cites Alexander Litvinenko, the KGB agent murdered by the Kremlin with Polonium 210, who charged that al Qaeda's current leader, Ayman al Zawahiri, was a trained agent of the KGB. Preobrazhensky further discusses a Taliban leader and close advisor to Osama bin Laden, Juma Namangoniy. Namangoniy was born in Soviet Uzbekistan and was also a KGB-trained communist. He was supposedly killed by coalition forces but his body has not been found.
I was surprised to learn there were Muslim Communists with so much political influence, while I understand the marriage between the two ideologies perfectly. Islam and Communism are totalitarian theocracies.
Again, one can turn to Hitler who sanctioned marriage between totalitarians in a different context: Nazi Party recruiters had one standing order: Recruit new members from the ranks of the Communists because they always make the best Fascists. The context is different because Communists will not make the best Muslims, nor will Muslims make the best Communists.
Identical methods of subjugation aside, Muslims are asking for the dirty end of the stick on this one. A Muslim Communist might believe that Communist ideology can be adapted to accommodate Islam, while Communists will never allow any Supreme Deity religion to survive after Socialists/Communists consolidate political power. Indeed, Muslims will be slaughtered first because Communists fear all other forms of totalitarian government. Hitler covered that one, too.
The great strength of the totalitarian state is that it forces those who fear it to imitate it.
There is no way in hell one totalitarian government will share power with another for very long. Hitler understood what had to be done; so he invaded the Soviet Union. Hitler well-knew that Stalin would have done it to Nazi Germany at the first opportunity. In fact, the very nature of totalitarian government abhors power-sharing. In that same vain it is logical to assume Mussolinis Italy was first on Hitlers hit list after Germany won the war.
WWII
Ive always said the wrong side won WWII in Europe. Communism is still alive and well while Fascism has disappeared. There is not one openly Fascist country today although many countries are dictatorships. There are several Communist countries.
Had Nazi Germany won WWII in Europe I doubt very much if that brand of totalitarian government would have survived after Hitler and Mussolini died. It is certain Nazism would not be a worldwide movement today as is socialism/communism. Fascists most certainly never would have infiltrated our government to the extent Communists have succeeded. In short: Hussein the Fascist would not have come as far as did Hussein the Communist.
Finally, the single theme I referred to in the first sentence of this thread:
It was decent but misguided earlier generations of Germans who would have cringed at the thought of genocide who created the Trojan horse for Hitler's ascendancy. Today's Americans are similarly accepting the massive consolidation of power in Washington in the name of social justice. Walter E. Williams
And this:
. . . a huge network of U.S. and foreign communist and hard left organizations connected to this President has colluded with radical Islam for decades to oversee the destruction of their mutual enemy: America. James Simpson