Radio Show
      Listen Host Guests Archive
On The Side

View the Latest Action Alerts and Stay informed!

Read our current Commentaries for indepth analysis into hot issues!

 

 

 




May 2005   Alan Stang
 
In Bed With Hitler, The Totalitarians Respond By Alan Stang

IN BED WITH HITLER THE TOTALITARIANS RESPOND

By: Alan Stang

Alan,

Please pardon the terseness of this message but…

Man, you seriously got to give it a rest. I mean, BushCo are probably the most despicable s---heads ever to run this country, but to call them Communists is patently absurd, and you should be embarrassed to show your face in public for being so obtuse as to say so, or for circulating this absolutely ridiculous screed. This piece of anti-intellectualism would be laughed out of a third grade classroom. I mean, you can’t possibly be serious?

Bush et.al are Fascists. They employ none of the tenets of Communism. They are totalitarian fascists, marrying State and Corporate power. The last thing on earth these people would ever want is to dismantle private ownership in favor of State ownership, or provide communal education, health care, housing, and pensions, which are the hallmarks of Communism. They are the ultimate privatizers, and Socialism is their mortal enemy.

What country have you been living in? Have you been in a coma the last 25 years?

All you manage to do by circulating this harebrained garbage is undermine our ability to get rid of these people on legitimate grounds. You make the resistance look like a bunch of shrill, dimwitted, sectarian idiots.

Please, for all of our sake, stop. Or learn how to read and do research.

Sheesh!

_________________________________

A friend of mine loves to repeat what his grandmother used to say. "When you throw a rock in among some hogs, the one that screams is the one you hit." The screaming hog we quote above is the editor-in-chief of an internet site, whose primal scream I quote in its entirety, except for his name and url, which we leave it to him to promote; and the insertion of some hyphens to blunt his profanity.

His message is one of many in the growing avalanche of response to my piece, below, entitled "The Coming Resistance," and many readers have asked me to respond. I leave it to you to decide how well I read and do research, and whether I should be laughed out of a third grade classroom. His main complaint is that I call Communist world government traitor George W. Smirk a Communist. Our visiting expert says he is instead a Fascist.

As you can see, he is furious, so furious he makes himself silly. Why? Because I am exposing his dirty, little secret. He is a far leftist, a collectivist, who bills his internet publication as part of the "new counterculture," which means he counters our American culture. Notice his breathtakingly loving rendition of Communism; his moralistic assertion that Smirk & Company are mortal enemies of Socialism.

For too long, far left cohorts like him have been allowed to get away with the preposterous assertion that Communism and Fascism are opposites. In the neat formulation our visiting expert and his collectivist colleagues endorse, the Communists, on the left, offer the benefits that flow from complete government control; the fascists, on the "far right," are the "ultimate privatizers."

The tactically brilliant reason the Communists defend this utterly phony formulation to the death—your death—is that it allows them to discredit everyone who is not a Communist as a Fascist, or a Nazi. That is why Hollyweird keeps the "Nazi threat" alive, a full sixty years after Viennese homosexual prostitute Hitler finally flushed himself in Berlin.

The way the metastasizing Holocaust industry tells it, one would think the Nazis were about to stage a coup. There are thousands of horror stories about Communism waiting to be told, but Hollyweird will not tell them, despite the fact that Communism remains a mortal threat today; to do so would destroy this immensely valuable weapon in the arsenal of dialectical materialism.

So, what is the difference between Communism and Fascism? There is a difference in style, the same difference there is between people. But that’s all it is. If you and I do exactly the same thing, there will be differences, for the obvious reason that you and I have different personalities, different styles.

That won’t change what we are doing. Thus, Clinton, our first "black" President, drops his pants and asks for sex. Smirk, our first "homosexual" President, does not. It doesn’t matter because they are doing the same thing, going to the same place. It is a difference without a distinction.

Thus, the Communists want total government. The opposite of total government is—the envelope please!—no government. But the Fascists do not want no government. They too want total government. Remember? That was how Mussolini "made the trains run on time." That was why FDR’s Washington spoke so lovingly of him.

You already knew that. I am simply reminding you of something you already knew. Yes, there were the inevitable differences—Mussolini was horrified by Hitler’s homosexual Nazis, but they agreed on the basics. Hitler was a Socialist. How do we know? He said so. The term "Nazi" is merely the contraction formed from the first two syllables of the German words for National Socialist. Didn’t Adolf hand out the same handouts our visiting expert attributes to Communism? Yes, he did. It’s called "bread und circuses."

Corporal Hitler said this: "[T]here is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separates us from it. There is, above all, genuine, revolutionary feeling, which is alive everywhere in Russia except where there are Jewish Marxists. I have always made allowance for this circumstance, and given orders that former Communists are to be admitted to the party at once. The petit bourgeois Social-Democrat and the trade-union boss will never make a National Socialist, but the Communists always will." (Quoted in Hermann Rauschning, Hitler Speaks, London, T. Butterworth, 1940)

So, Hitler was a man of the far left. Remember that he and Stalin began World War II as treaty allies. Nazi Foreign Minister Von Ribbentrop said he felt at home in Moscow. There is a little known photo of Hitler in a procession carrying the coffin of a deceased Communist leader and wearing Communist insignia. The proof goes on and on. Yes, Hitler attacked Stalin. Mafia chieftains attack each other. So what? Haven’t you ever seen a movie?

How does this apply to President Smirk? First, remember that the United States government installed the Communists in power in Russia, and then saved the Soviet Union again and again from collapse. I have proven this so many times, I do not need to repeat myself here. Go to my writing and look.

The District of Criminals installed the Communists in China. The District of Criminals installed the Communists in Cuba. And on and on. It is not at all an exaggeration to say that without the decisive influence of the District of Criminals, Communism would be nothing more than a footnote in a college textbook. Instead, we have far leftist Richard Nixon, who confessed his Socialism when he said, "We are all Keynesians now." Keynes was of course sodomite economist John Maynard Keynes, a hero in the Soviet Union.

Finally, our visiting expert says Smirk & Co. are the "ultimate privatizers." Is that true? It is just as true as it was under Hitler. Yes, there is endless talk about "privatization." What does "privatization" mean? It means no government. It means private people doing business without government interference. It means people to people communication. Is that what we have?

No, we have just the opposite. We have "Socialism for the rich." The District of Criminals tells us that its "trade agreements" like NAFTA, amount to "free trade," because "free trade" sounds so appealing. Do they? No, they impose literally thousands of pages of government regulations. We have less free trade than we had before.

Yes, you could call this Fascism. But as we have seen, Fascism and Communism are the same thing at heart. It is as Communist as it is Fascist. Doesn’t the District of Criminals already own outright almost half the land area of the United States? Yes, it does. Isn’t it moving rapidly to control it all? Yes, it is. Isn’t government control of the land the first plank of the Communist Manifesto? Jawohl!

The reason we must call Smirk a Communist is that it drives the Communists crazy. As we have seen, calling him a Communist ruins the immensely helpful dialectical tool they have used for decades to terrify and neutralize opposition. Many people shrink from opposing the Communists for fear of being called a Nazi. Most important, the fact that Communism and Nazism are basically the same puts the Communists in bed with Hitler, where they belong.

Yes, our visiting expert is the hog we hit. Go back to your sandbox, Sonny. We won’t play your game.

Alan Stang has been a network radio talk show host and was one of Mike Wallace's first writers. He was a senior writer for American Opinion magazine and has lectured around the world for more than 30 years. He is also the author of ten books. Go to www.stangbooks.com to read about Alan Stang's blockbuster new novel, He, about the greatest hero of all time, Jesus Christ.

If you would like him to address your group, please email what you have in mind. He is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.

Alan Stang can be reached at: feedback@stangbooks.com

We invite you to visit his website at: www.stangbooks.com

Alan is a member of The Distinguished Board of Advisors for The Welch Foundation