|
It’s Raskolnikov’s “last straw”;
So what we have is the Winnipeg Free Press allowing [columnist Colleen Simard] to promote a Hitler-sympathizer and apologist. I can only assume that the reason for this is that the idiots at the Free Press have no clue who Horn is and don�t care; or else are too afraid to say anything against the house indian for fear she�ll go raving on about racism and censorship.
Imagine the outrage if someone promoted Zundel as a source, or a potential leader for that matter? Imagine if someone used Tom Flanagan as a source in an Indian-related story?
That�s what we have. And nothing, nothing, will be done about it.
I can rant and rave all I want. Simard will not be called to task.
I can write letters to the editor, I can write to B�nai Brith and point out what the Free Press allowed in their paper, but nothing will happen.
Simard will still have a job next week; despite promoting a Hitler-apologist in the pages of the Winnipeg Free Press, she will not be called to task for it.
[…]
I�m just too exhuasted to give a crap anymore. I�m tired of fighting on behalf of reason and getting pissed on.
He’s reposted the Horn article in full. Read the whole thing, and consider his request.
Last word to Jeff Goldstein;
[A]s I point out in one of my essays on race, the only real difference between those modern progressive race theorists who promote the social construction of race as a way to keep race a politically controversial issue and, say, the KKK, is that the latter doesn�t contort itself trying to justify its position: they believe in racial essentialism, and do so overtly.The social constructivists, on the other hand, are �animated� by an essentialism that THEY have �stripped� of its racist trappings in order to make it more palatable to mainstream progressives and liberal democrats. Utlimately, however, both groups wish to use that essentialism to promote a social policy of their liking.
(Definition: Essentialism )
It’s amazing that groups who have historically been harmed by the abuse of state power turn most to the state as the saviour to their problems. As they cede more and more of their freedoms to the state in exchange for short-term monetary benefits, they’re only setting themselves up for disaster. Governments have a dismal record of making sub-populations proud and self-sufficient. I think of the blacks in America, who should have no reason to trust government… yet are led by “leaders” who are almost entirely statist. It doesn’t make sense.
Ms K. Horn, the author of the screed painting Hitler as a social-democrat who “went too far” in extending the genocide beyond the Jews will no doubt remind others of the similar outburst by David Ahenakew.
Horn herself is a widely-travelled individual:
Unless my memory is faulty or she shares a very similar name with someone else, she was a civil servant who participated in the Mohawk rebellion at Oka, Quebec (in which a police officer was murdered by gunfire), and who then had the temerity to appeal the loss of her job.
She has more recently been a journalist with the Mohawk News Network. I would be very surprised to discover that that organization is not tax-payer funded — meaning that she is still on the public payroll.
She has recently been published in such venues as the Marxist-Leninist Daily (http://www.cpcml.ca/Tmld2004/D34094.htm#5), and her writings featured, apparently as a course assignment, at the University of Lethbridge program on “Globalization Studies.”
The woman is a tax-payer-funded professional agitator, though apparently, given the Hitler remarks, not a very intelligent one.
Mark Proudman
Wow! I am shocked that we as a society have allowed our values to go so far left that we are going to allow this to happen. Sometimes people just need a kick in the ass.
Welcome to Freedom of Speech. Like it or not.
National socialists are totally envious of anyone who had power over people, especially the power of life and death, that’s socialists for you, they want to make those who disagree with them suffer. Disgusting.
Chin up, girl.
We are your friends. Fight and die for you.
Beer?
“(Horn)defended the words of scumbag Dave Ahenakew and reminded us that despite killing six million Jews, Hitler got the trains running on time.”
This is an arguement that is often used pro and con with regards to Hitler. Marge Schott (ex owner of the Cincinatti Reds made comments years ago that eventually cost her ownership of her team. As follows
Marge Schott’s comments on ESPN about Hitler
— “Everything you read, when he came in [to power] he was good…They built tremendous highways and got all the factories going…Everybody knows he was good at the beginning but he just went too far.”
— are profoundly ignorant, offensive, and taint America’s beloved national pastime. Obviously, Ms. Schott, who was disciplined in 1993 by Major League Baseball for her racist and anti-Semitic remarks and favorable comments on the Nazi leader, has not learned her lesson.
What everybody knows, but apparently not Ms. Schott, is that Hitler’s blueprint for Germany’s dominance of the world and for the Jews were made public in 1924 in Mein Kampf, nine years before he came to power in Germany in 1933. Hitler was the personification of evil from the time he entered the public arena.”
I remember when this scandal occured and what seemed rather obvious to me at the time was that Schott was not promoting Hitlers agenda of Jewish extermination, but commenting that despite the fact that Hitler had commited the most egregious crime against humanity to date, that prior to this he had some good ideas. It would be quite different if Hitler had conducted the Holocaust – and then got the trains to run on time.
Had Marge read Mein Kampf? The author of the condeming article assumes so to justify his position.
But a braoder questin is does ones final action or actions lay waste to any prior achievments or philosophies?
Were a madman to invent a perpetual motion machine and then condone the killing of the weak, simple or non ethnically compliant make the perpetual motion machine any less relevant?
The point made by Schott and others is that despite the horrible result of Hitlers leadership, that he did many things that were beneficial to the German people.
Directly connecting any ultimately positive programs or policies instituted by (early)Hitler with the Holocaust, simply forces us to reject completely the validity of these programs by that negative association.
So as a result of some of (or many) of Hitlers actions we must render all of his actions as evil. Does this philosophy make sense?
But wait, Hitler is supposed to have been extreme right wing, so how could he have also been a social democrat aka a socialist?
Seriously though, Kahentinetha isn’t being a Hitler apologist but rather an apologist of socialism, much the way most leftists argue that there is nothing inherently problematic about communism that has led to tens of millions of deaths in the 20th Century, it’s only been implemented poorly. Or better yet, as the argument goes, Stalin’s and Mao’s and Ho Chi Minh’s “social engineering project(s) went too far.” But hey, as the leftists will tell you, you can’t bake a cake without breaking a few eggs.
This story and others (the Hynes story previously posted for example) highlight the fact that there is NO ACOUNTABILITY in society. It’s always someone else’s fault. Individuals don’t make errors, according to the philosophy. And, to make matters worse, it’s a very inclusive philosphy which covers government, religion, business, etc. etc. etc. No one takes the rap for their own stupidity.
And, the taxpayers keep right on paying.
Horn is actually wrong. The German welfare system was pioneered by Bismarck.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0194b.asp
But what else would one expect from a former fashion model?
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0003839
Mark
Ottawa
I’ve always said Hitler was a socialist ….
as well as a fascist and a racist. At the same
time as he eliminated, quite literally, the
socialist party, he adopted their policies.
Hey, he was misunderstood … all he wanted
was a little living room. Had it not been for
that warmonger Churchill, there would have been
no WWII and London wouldn’t have been bombed,
Coventry flattened, etc, etc.
For 5 points, point to a contempary analogy.
Well, it is nice to see the socialists finally admit that Herr Hitler is one of their own.
It clarifies the issue somewhat.
The characterization of Hitler as “right wing” is a canard that must be corrected every time one hears it. It’s done on purpose, to attempt to shift “guilt” for his atrocities away from the left.
Of course, they won’t “own” Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot either…. and do some rather remarkable hair-splitting in the attempt to distance their ideology from the historic consequences.
We all know there have never been atrocities perpetrated by right wing regimes.
Yah, it usually happens when they adopt left-wing principles.
“We all know there have never been atrocities perpetrated by right wing regimes.”
Unfortunately, that seems to be the attitude that left-wingers adopt to justify wiping away the memory of their own massacres. They refuse to even acknowledge the millions killed in Russian, Chinese, Cambodian, Eastern European, and African socialist regimes. Don’t confuse governments that are termed right wing with states that have limited government. As power to the state increases, the exact modus operandi of socialism, the more likely war becomes. If you refer to the Bush administration, make no mistake: rhetoric aside, his is not a conservative regime.
Seriously, tying the atrocities of dictators to “ideology” is a futile exercise, be they right or left. Murderous dictators don’t have any ideology other than oppressive power. Ideology is nothing to them except a demagogic means to an end. I lived and worked on a kibbutz in Israel for a while – and you don’t get any more communist an existence than that – and don’t recall seeing any torture chambers to discipline the rank and file.
“their own massacres”
So, Jonathan, those of us that espouse a certain political point of view are now responsible for atrocities committed by others throughout history? When do you plan on hauling me in front of the war crimes tribunal?
Avenger: OK please define or give us an example of a so called Right Wing Regime. We’ll then compare and see just what it most closely resembles from a historical perspective.
Hey, where are all the left wing commentors on this thread? One of their own has not only claimed Hitler as one of their bright lights – but that, shucks, he’s actually an alright progressive socialist that might have gone a little too far.
So there we have it, the proud, bloody history of the left constructed by their heroes – Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot. Oh, and lets not forget nazi sympathizer and Jew hating terrorist – Pierre Trudeau.
Avenger, what the hell does a kibbutz have to do with anything?
Idiot.
Yep, Adolf was just a nice guy who had the occasional excesses. Did anyone point out that he liked his dog?
And of course Josef Stalin, was a paragon of virtue. You know he “reformed” farming in the Ukraine, from planting crops and harvesting to simple mass starvation. You just have to understand the grand plan!!
The duffusses at the top hold every and all power, the dumb schlemiels at the bottom lap it all up because they are simply mischugge.
Get with the freaking program; dictators are egalitarian!! They bring death, destruction and pestilence in equal measure to everyone.
Oh and we mustn’t forget the new catch phrase “essentialism”. The essential criteria to understand is you support the almighty power of the state or one becomes essentially dead.
When one is dead of course one is pure essence, thus the Ben Franklin dictum:
“We must all hang together or, assuredly, we will all hang separately.”
Thus we can conclude that Ben Franklin was the first “swinger” in America.
In the words of Harry ‘Breaker’ Morant “Don’t make a mess of it – shoot straight you bastards.”
Note: Morant was courtmartialed and executed by the British, charged with killing Boer prisoners. To the end he claimed to have been following orders.
The revolution is like Saturn: It’s devouring its own children.
Who: Pierre Vergniaud, French revolutionary
Socialists, communists, left liberals, nazism, fascism, islamism: the evil family of the isms.
There is no escape from the hell-on-earth gospel/dogma/religion of socialism. The natural end result of socialism: Death; as in Babi Yar ( 29-30 September, 1941). +
“Once one accepts the premises from which it starts, there is no escape from its logic. It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization.”
The Socialist Roots of Naziism
Friedrich A. Hayek
It is a common mistake to regard National Socialism as a mere revolt against reason, an irrational movement without intellectual background. If that were so, the movement would be much less dangerous than it is. But nothing could be further from the truth or more misleading. The doctrines of National Socialism are the culmination of a long evolution of thought, a process in which thinkers have had great influence far beyond the confines of Germany have taken part. Whatever one may think of the premises from which they started, it cannot be denied that the men who produced the new doctrines were powerful writers who left the impress of their ideas on the whole of European thought. Their system was developed with ruthless consistency. Once one accepts the premises from which it starts, there is no escape from its logic. It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an individualist tradition which might hamper its realization.
Though in this development German thinkers have taken the lead, they were by no means alone. Thomas Carlyle and Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Auguste Comte and Georges Sorel, are as much a part of that continuous development as any Germans. The development of this strand of thought within Germany has been well traced recently by R. D. Butler in his study of The Roots of National Socialism. But, although its persistence there through a hundred and fifty years in almost unchanged and ever recurring form, which emerges from that study, is rather frightening, it is easy to exaggerate the importance these ideas had in Germany before 1914. They were only one strand of thought among a people then perhaps more varied in its views than any other. And they were on the whole represented by a small minority and held in as great contempt by the majority of’ Germans as they were in other countries.
What, then, caused these views held by a reactionary minority finally to gain the support of’ the great majority of Germans and practically the whole of Germany’s youth? It was not merely the defeat, the suffering, and the wave of nationalism which led to their success. Still less was the cause, as so many people wish to believe, a capitalist reaction against the advance of socialism. On the contrary, the support which brought these ideas to power came precisely from the socialist camp. It was certainly not through the bourgeoisie, but rather through the absence of a strong bourgeoisie, that they were helped to power. The doctrines which had guided the ruling elements in Germany for the past generation were opposed not to the socialism in Marxism but to the liberal elements contained in it, its internationalism and its democracy. And as it became increasingly clear that it was just these elements which formed obstacles to the realization of socialism, the socialists of the Left approached more and more to those of the Right. It was the union of the anticapitalist forces of the Right and of the Left, the fusion of radical and conservative socialism, which drove out from Germany everything that was liberal.
The connection between socialism and nationalism in Germany was close from the beginning. +
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~grjan/hayeknaziism.html
Who gave Germany “THE PEOPLES CAR?” The VOLKSWAGEN.
“She advocated “Indian apartheid” or separate development, including preservation of the reserve system, teaching by natives only, and the banning of Indian white intermarriage.” “Horn, Kahn-Tineta, meaning “she makes the grass wave” in Mohawk
Thanks Mark Collins.
“Went too far” is a BIG understatement. But Kahentinetha Horn’s statement is otherwise fairly accurate. It leaves out a lot – murders of 6 million Jews, about 3 million other people whom Hitler disliked, and deaths in war of somewhere between 20 million and 100 million. But where the Hell do you think that Hitler’s hold on the Germans came from? He was a profoundly evil but very able man – he wouldn’t have had the effect he did otherwise. He dragged Germany out of depression, gave them (altogether too much) pride again. If he had died in 1938 he might well be remembered as the benefactor of his people. If he had shown up on the German political scene in the late 1920s with the sole idea of murdering Jews he would have gotten nowhere.
Get to know your devils. The big ones can do a lot of good, to set you up for even greater harm.
It’s never crossed this moonbat’s mind, I’m sure, that given Hitler’s proclivities for extermination all non-Ayrians – Jews, Gypsies, Slavs were on his list too – that if Native Americans had been part of the Reich’s demographics they would have been on the list too.
I always get a kick out of it when some lefty takes about “right wing” murderousness.
Scared right wingers surely are, or can be, pretty nasty customers.
BUT.
Stack all “victims of the rightwing deathbeasts from hell” on one side of your scale.
Then, stack civilian deaths from “peoples revolutions” and socialists and communist regimes on the other.
It quickly becomes evident that your “evil right wingers killings” are like an eroded molehill to the towering & majestic socialist mountain range of death.
I’d choose to live in a right wing “conservative hell” over any “lefty paradise” you care to name, almost without thought. The former is hell, but it’s retail hell , not wholesale hell.
“Yep, Adolf was just a nice guy who had the occasional excesses. Did anyone point out that he liked his dog?”
Not only did he like his dog, he was …
””’
”’wait for it …..
…A VEGETARIAN.
Hans R:
“The essential criteria to understand is you support the almighty power of the state or one becomes essentially dead.”
Great layman definition of “essentialism”! You can even replace “state” with other organizations like “MSM”, “liberals”, “eco-fascism”, “Kofi’s UN”, etc. Those organizations are adept at character assassination and burying truth.
Not only did he like his dog, he was…wait for it…A VEGETARIAN.
And a teetotaler too, who apparently didn’t take to sex much either.
Hitler: the Original Straight Edger!
Re Hitler being someone “who apparently didn’t take to sex much either” – he was a pervert (anyone interested in his tastes can find them in a WWII psychological study which can probably be found in a number of university libraries) one of whose mistresses (also his niece) killed herself, and another of whom attempted suicide.
He also had mind-numbing body odour, according to Speer.
The ironic part of this whole episode is the reality of the WHITE MAN’S INVASION of North America. Granted, our European predecessors were cruel and deceitful, but if it wasn’t for them………..Ms. Simard would be sending her article via smoke signal, followed by the traditional search for tubers and grubs for dinner. Ms. Simards ancestors could rightfully complain about cruelty and injustice, but today’s natives could lead a pretty good life if they chose less corrupt leaders. (we could do….for that matter)
My big hope is that “Rask” will keep blogging. His eloquence and passion, as well as his ability to dissect idiocy and shine a light on it are second to none. Let’s encourage him to continue, that his voice is heard…and appreciated
The eunuch:
Adolf Hitler
At one point, Hitler was taking as many as 28 separate medications. … the fall of Berlin the Soviet army came upon a man’s body having only one testicle. …
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/nazi/adolf-hitler/ – 14k –
Hitler was also an avid anti smoking propponet, any one want to agree with him?
Gacy dressed as a clown for local hospitals … entertained those that needed to have their spirits lifted. He will be greatly missed for his humanitarian contributions.
I find it ironic that a person like Ms Horn would become an apologist for a man who just might have tried to wipe out the native population had it lived in Europe like rather than in North America
Silverwinger beat me to it, but I was going to say that Hitler planned a major anti-smoking campaign to begin after Germany won the war. He felt that soldiers during war (he had been one in WWI) depended heavily on tobacco, so it would not do to tell them to quit.