…and this is a 
Nice photo
Category: Politics
Posted on: May 5, 2008 8:58 AM, by PZ Myers
"The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation. It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life" ('My New Order', Adolf Hitler, Proclamation of the German Nation at Berlin, February 1, 1933)
Funny…those words could be taken straight from just about any American religious right web site in 2008, and they'd fit right in.
Comments
Don't forget to mention that pro-Darwinian books were banned under the Nazis.
Posted by: Brandon P. | May 5, 2008 9:03 AM
Aahhh, history... doomed to repeat itself over and over as long as those who think they KNOW the truth keep themselves from learning from it, or just plain ignore the past as long as it fits their agenda and delusions. This is one pic I'm going to keep on my desktop, ready to employ when the old and stale arguments about Hitler and atheism show their ugly little heads.
Posted by: Clan:Rewired | May 5, 2008 9:05 AM
Don't forget to mention that pro-Darwinian books were BURNED by the Nazis.
Posted by: Tristan | May 5, 2008 9:10 AM
That's not fair, P.Z. You're fighting those ID'ers with the TRUTH. How dare you!
Posted by: Gary | May 5, 2008 9:11 AM
Orac's post "A question for Ben Stein: Why are you singling out Darwin and ignoring the true inspirations for the Holocaust, Pasteur and Koch?" is still the most damning, imo. If Hitler was so thorough in likening the Jews to germs, then it follows* germ theory is unethical, antisemitic and fascist. So why isn't there an equal outrage for this?
*In the minds of deluded religiosos, ed.
Posted by: Niobe | May 5, 2008 9:20 AM
When are you shaving for the Hitler stash PZ?
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 5, 2008 9:20 AM
I assume those guys in the black coats are biologists.
Posted by: Ashley Moore | May 5, 2008 9:23 AM
Yeah, the jewelry in the shape of laminin is a dead giveaway.
Posted by: PZ Myers | May 5, 2008 9:28 AM
Watch out for Godwin's Law.
(...though technically, the IDers have already lost).
Posted by: sputnik | May 5, 2008 9:32 AM
I don't understand why the IDiots cannot see why the ToE had nothing to do with Hitler. You do not derive an ought from an is, and on top of that, Hitler was a creationist.
The ideas of eliminating other races, because you feel they're inferior, predate Darwin by a longshot.
Posted by: Leigh Shryock | May 5, 2008 9:38 AM
Wow, that's kind of a low blow. Full-on ad hominem, if you ask me.
Posted by: John | May 5, 2008 9:44 AM
Did you see the story about McCain's superstitions? http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/05/05/superstition-aint-the-way/
Posted by: Michael | May 5, 2008 9:45 AM
a nice reminder. Theists are always holding up Bonhoeffer, the heroic priest who was executed after deciding (after a great moral struggle) to join a plot to assassinate Hitler, but those same theists like to ignore the hundreds or thousands of other priests and prelates who happily tolerated or colluded with the Nazis.
Posted by: Hillary Rettig / The Lifelong Activist | May 5, 2008 9:45 AM
If by "low-blow" you mean "truthful" and by "ad hominem" you mean "accurate historical depiction of Hitler", then yes, I agree wholeheartedly. PZ, knock it off! By which I of course mean "keep doing that."
Posted by: Thomas S. Howard | May 5, 2008 9:49 AM
Posted by: C.W. | May 5, 2008 9:54 AM
John in #11
An ad-hom against who? Hitler for associating him with the church? The church for showing their actual relationship with Hitler? Please be more clear.
Posted by: AllanW | May 5, 2008 9:56 AM
I'm not saying it's not historically accurate (I'm assuming it's an undoctored scan). But I was talking about this part:
The clear implication is that the religious right is Hitleresque, without making any substantive claims to that effect. It's no better than when IDers quote-mine Darwin or other scientists to make them appear evil.
I'd rather appeal to people's sense of reason, rather than making vindictive statements.
Posted by: John | May 5, 2008 9:56 AM
Ah! John at #16, I see now; you're a concern troll. Thanks for clearing that up.
Addressing the point; you cannot see the substantive claims? Read the words on the caption above then visit the sites to appreciate how substantive and clear that point is. PZ just assumes the people who read his site have already done that; come on back when you're done. We'll be waiting for ya!
Posted by: AllanW | May 5, 2008 10:01 AM
John,
I'm sure if you listen to any of the "This is a Christian Nation" crowd, which includes wing-nuts as well as senators and representatives (see House Resolution 888), you could find some similarity to what Hitler is quoted as saying in that caption. So if Hitler said that, and we can find Christian Nationalists saying much of the same, you don't have to call them Hitlerian. It's obvious to anyone who is not an idiot. Ad Hominem is not the issue here. You just don't like this true statement.
Posted by: Schmeer | May 5, 2008 10:02 AM
John - I don't agree. I read that statement as mostly an afterthought on PZ's part. If you ignore the picture and the slightly antiquated phrasing, the identical ideas are expressed in today's politics.
Posted by: idahogie | May 5, 2008 10:03 AM
BTW PZ, I love that you use the 'argumentum ad Hitlerum' as the start of a thread. Bravo!
Posted by: AllanW | May 5, 2008 10:05 AM
"The clear implication is that the religious right is Hitleresque, without making any substantive claims to that effect. It's no better than when IDers quote-mine Darwin or other scientists to make them appear evil."
The clear implication is that the words used by Hitler in that quote are also used by right-wing Christians in the US (and elsewhere) today. Unless you can offer evidence that either that quote is wrong, or that there are no right-wing Christians who have the same sentiment then I fail to see what your point is.
Posted by: Matt Penfold | May 5, 2008 10:06 AM
Yes, of course. It is rather insulting to call Hitler a Nazi.
Posted by: raven | May 5, 2008 10:11 AM
Are you suggesting that the American religious right does not make family and religion central icons of their ideology? Of course they do. Kinder, Küche, Kirche would make a perfectly appropriate motto for organizations like Dobson's Focus on the Family (note that it's right there in the name: family. And Dobson also likes to claim that we are a Christian nation.)
And no, I'm not claiming that Dobson is Hitler. Family and religion are strong motivators, so both good and wicked people will latch on to them as ways to manipulate the masses. Darwin, science, biology, physics, chemistry…mmmm, not so much.
Posted by: PZ Myers | May 5, 2008 10:14 AM
CW said:
"Link please."
Here you go, it's toward the bottom.
http://www.library.arizona.edu/exhibits/burnedbooks/documents.htm
Posted by: Tristan | May 5, 2008 10:15 AM
Welcome to reality,John...Ad Hominem and all
No quote-mining here,just a look at what was and what will be....
I reckon thats a great picture,and a great analogy...
Posted by: clinteas | May 5, 2008 10:18 AM
Did some quick checking. From all appearance from several sources the text is accurate for that speech.
In the process I also stumbled upon this bit as well:
Today Christians ... stand at the head of [this country] ... I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity .. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit ... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theater, and in the press--in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past ... [few] years.
* The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pp. 871-872.
I think PZ's "Funny...those words could be taken straight from just about any American religious right web site in 2008, and they'd fit right in." is scarily accurate.
Posted by: Mike Visser | May 5, 2008 10:18 AM
Raven - That's not at all what I was claiming. I'm sure that sounded very funny in your head, though.
PZ - Fair enough. I probably just read into it too much.
Posted by: John | May 5, 2008 10:19 AM
Actually, the Death Cultist fundies make Hitler look like an unimaginative amateur.
1. The rapture monkey losers fondest dream is for god to show up, kill 6.7 billion people and destroy the earth. Even Hitler only wanted to kill nonAryans and rule the world.
2. The Xian Dominionists say often they want to destroy the USA, set up a theocracy, and head on back to the Dark Ages.
In the meantime they while away their time publishing To Kill lists. So John who is on your To Kill list? In the likely event you are too stupid to make one, just take Rushdooneys. He was an equal opportunity mass murder wannabe who had 297 million US citizens on his list. He was also the founder of Xian Dominionism and Pat Robertson's mentor.
And, oh, the evidence is below in their own words. They not only list who is to be killed, they occasionally kill them.
Posted by: raven | May 5, 2008 10:23 AM
A little digging around found this article at panda's thumb which contains extracts of the list linked to by Tristan. Of particular interest of books banned by the Nazis are:
"Writings of a philosophical and social nature whose content deals with the false scientific enlightenment of primitive Darwinism and Monism (Häckel)."
and
"All writings that ridicule, belittle or besmirch the Christian religion and its institution, faith in God, or other things that are holy to the healthy sentiments of the Volk."
Strange that Ben Stein neglected to mention this, eh?
Posted by: SteveN | May 5, 2008 10:34 AM
Great picture. Let's see what can be done...
Posted by: Moses | May 5, 2008 10:35 AM
"Yes, of course. It is rather insulting to call Hitler a Nazi."
Indeed, he made Germany lose the war! How could he have been a Nazi? ...
/sarcasm
History makes me sick sometimes.
best regards
cptchaos
Posted by: cptchaos | May 5, 2008 10:36 AM
John, you don't seem to know what "ad hominem" means. "X is such a great scientist, therefore what he says must be true" is an ad hominem argument. Any attempt to evaluate an idea by evaluating who came up with it is an ad hominem argument. This is completely orthogonal to concepts like "insult".
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | May 5, 2008 10:38 AM
That photo only shows the view from the top. For the rank-and file, check these pictures:
Assembly of chaplain for the Fascist Party Militia, Italy, probably around 1922: http://www.fisicamente.net/preti_fascisti.bmp
Bishops saluting along with fascist gerarchs:
http://www.terraligure.it/blog/preti_fascisti1.jpg
Posted by: glopk | May 5, 2008 10:45 AM
Hitler believed in the creationist theory of "kinds":
Common descent and evolution leads you to a glorious place. Kinds leads to killing people. /sarcasm
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 5, 2008 10:46 AM
The Catholic church has a sordid history of sharing beds with fascist regimes: Spain, Italy, Germany, and all over Latin America. However, the willingness of the Catholic Church hierarchy to support right wing regimes probably has more to do with the 'conservative' values of the hierarchy than it does with theology. To be sure, the state-church relationship has always been symbiotic and corrosive in totalitarian regimes. (And it was for this reason that Thomas Jefferson and like-minded thinkers pushed for religious freedom in the United States.)
Posted by: sdh | May 5, 2008 10:46 AM
It was Sinclair Lewis in the 1930s who said:
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."
People have been able to connect these dots for a long time. This is not to say that all Christians are fascists, only that dictatorial, totalitarian personalities will happily take advantage of existing modes of groupthink to accomplish their aims. The best way to defend against a wolf in sheep's clothing is don't be a sheep.
Posted by: sad | May 5, 2008 10:49 AM
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | May 5, 2008 10:52 AM
More of Hitler on the theory of "kinds" and macro vs micro evolution:
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 5, 2008 11:11 AM
leigh @ # 10, The ideas of eliminating other races, because you feel they're inferior, predate Darwin by a longshot.
It sure does. Genocide. There's plenty of instances of that in the feckin' bible book. It even advocated killing all the animals too.
Non biblical sources of the history of Mesopotamia & surrounding regions also demonstrate that the rulers were sadistic, ruthless, jealous, & thoroughly nasty. Their gods, (Ea, Enlil, Marduk, etc), were just like themselves, but even more so. And the god of Abraham, (& of the bible), evolved out of these gods, influenced by the Hebrews' often unpleasant experiences roaming around that region & also Egypt.
Ohhhhh, how can anyone nowadays be so stupid as to believe in all that Jewish, Christian, Moslem crap?
Posted by: Richard Harris | May 5, 2008 11:13 AM
David @30: A nitpick. Ad hominem is a fallacy (a persuasive but invalid argument) based on *irrelevant* characteristics of the person making the argument. We all necessarily are ignorant in most areas, and it is appropriate to accept (at least provisionally) authorities in the field under discussion.
PZ is qualified to make statements about biology, altho he should not be considered the last word. He is not more qualified to discuss, say, the history of Gaelic than most of us are. Science ultimately depends on facts, after all, and while facts are verifiable, most of us will not reproduce 150 years of biology - or even a few weeks - just to confirm a claim.
It can be argued that even philosophers are only more qualified to explain technical arguments and the history of various opinions of ethics. Perhaps some day soon evolutionary biologist *will be more qualified to explain the origins of human ethics; I suspect so. We'll see if that leads to insights about proper behavior for humans.
"Ad hominem abusive" uses an irrelevant and insulting argument to attempt to refute an argument. E.g. "Einstein is Jewish, therefore his theory of relativity is wrong". ("Jewish" is of course an insult only for anti-Semites.) For John I would suggest that pointing out that the Hitler rejected evolutionary science and the Nazis had strong ties to Christianity is an appropriate response to Stein's charges that "Darwinism" was a necessary precursor to Nazism.
Besides, it's amusing to point this out. But I doubt if anyone here suggests that genocide couldn't occur without Christianity, or that the latter inevitably leads to the former :\
Posted by: Kermit | May 5, 2008 11:16 AM
And remember anti-semitism in Germany goes back a long way...
What did Luther ever propose as a solution to the "Jews and Their Lies"?
Posted by: Pablo | May 5, 2008 11:18 AM
Just curious...
Are there any good links on the Vatican and Hitler?...
As far as I knew, they never excommunicated him...
Posted by: Bob | May 5, 2008 11:21 AM
Here is a link to a site with dozens of pics of Hitler with priests, at church or at various religious celebrations.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm
Who do you believe, Ben Stein or your lyin eyes?
Posted by: Dirk Diggler | May 5, 2008 11:26 AM
Hitler had a dog, therefore all dog owners are Hitleresque.
But seriously, the evangelical Christian community appears to be great friends with Jews and Israel. I have not heard evangelicals calling for ovens to be built. Lots of Blacks and other minorities singing the gospel. In fact, it seems a lot more diverse than many segments of society.
Stop being disingenuous, folks. Why even mention right wing Christians in the article unless it was intended to take the analogy all the way to Godwinland? It's meaningless otherwise.
And this is from a hard core atheist. You're stooping to the Ben Stein level, and looking like utter hypocritical tools. Stop embarassing yourselves.
Posted by: Xuul | May 5, 2008 11:28 AM
Ha, I just saw this on another thread:
Random Quote(Complete listing)
Kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man ... , keep alive for yourselves.
[Moses, relaying God's orders to his people, Numbers 31:17-18
That kind of shit should majke anyone with a properly functioning brain abandon crap like Judaism, Christianity, & Islam. Feckin' edjits!
Posted by: Richard Harris | May 5, 2008 11:29 AM
Oh, good! Use the Ben Stein approach we just spent weeks criticizing!
Yeah, that'll work!
(rolls eyes and clicks out to cuteoverload.com)
Posted by: Quiet_Desperation | May 5, 2008 11:33 AM
These human practices predate Darwin by centuries:
Genocide, comparing other groups to apes and other nonhuman animals, social body metaphors that label certain groups as disease, scapegoating minority groups and outsiders for misfortune, forced sterilization of men belonging to stigmatized groups, infanticide of handicapped newborns.
They also predate Christianity by centuries.
Of course, none of this means that there were not more specific and proximate ideological currents leading up to the Holocaust. In addition, Nazi beliefs regarding Christianity and biology were complex (and multiple), and do not easily fit into America's current culture wars. While the Nazis were certainly not "liberal fascist" atheists, nor were they fundies on steroids.
It is true that appeals to family, faith, and culture are important tools for all kinds of elites. But appeals to science, while rarer, are not unknown. Marxist-Leninism constantly insisted that it was a science. (As it turned out, it was more a form of Gnostic millenarianism than a science.) Objectivists claim to be all about reason and science rather than Rush albums. (Not that there's anything wrong with the latter - 'Priests of Syrinx' kicks ass.)
Posted by: Colugo | May 5, 2008 11:35 AM
I believe that's an appeal to authority. An ad hominum is when you attack the person, not the argument, to make the argument false. For example: PZ Myers has a beard, men with beards are hiding something, therefore his arguments about evolution are false.
By the way, an "appeal to authority" is not, per se, a logical fallacy. The fallacy should be best expressed as "Appeal to an Inappropriate Authority." For example: Dr. Dembski has a PhD in math. Therefore, what he says about evolution (something pretty much unrelated to his alleged expertise) is true.
In real life Dembski may know something about math (though seeing his fallacies illustrated, I have my doubts to the quality of his knowledge) but he is a layman when it comes to an expert opinion evolution. And, considering what he's said, he's not even demonstrated a reasonable understanding I would expect a layman to have.
Posted by: Moses | May 5, 2008 11:37 AM
Ah, a picture tells a thousand words. How would B.S. explain this?
Then again, facts are not a determinative part of their agenda.
Posted by: allkom | May 5, 2008 11:38 AM
Moses: "PZ Myers has a beard, men with beards are hiding something"
He's hiding another fist! No, wait, that's Chuck Norris.
Posted by: Colugo | May 5, 2008 11:40 AM
@#42 Xuul --
A lot of the pro-Israel sentiment is coming from dispensational premillenialists (2nd coming/rapture obsessed Xians). See this video about our favorite pastor John Hagee's Washington-Israel Summit and the rapture-obsessed beliefs of many of the Xians there...the weirdest part is how willing the Jewish people are willing to accept this false support -- Joseph Lieberman calls Hagee a "man of God."
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 5, 2008 11:46 AM
You are missing the point. Most of the Death Cultists don't trouble themselves a lot about the Jews. They have much, much bigger plans. See those plans in #26.
They all want to destroy the USA, set up a theocracy, and head on back to the Dark Ages. They say so often.
The numbers they want to kill or hope die vary with cult.
1. The Rapture Monkeys want everyone to die. When that happy day comes when god shows up, kills 6.7 billion people and destroys the earth. This is why they are nice to the Jews these days. According to various interpretations of Revelations, the Jews and Israel are involved in the last days. Some of them even try to assist the coming of the Rapture in various ways that make sense to them.
2. The rest of the cults vary in their To Kill lists. Many of them look at the Catholic church, for example, as the church of satan. That is a billion Fake Xians right there. Toss in the Moslems and Hindus, all the violators of the 400 different commandments of the OT and you end up with a Rushdooney class list of 99% of the population or so.
If the Xian Doms ever took power, the least would be the USA becoming a banana republic theocratic hellhole. At worst, the bodies would be piled into mountains. These are evil people of the sort we've seen throughout history.
Posted by: raven | May 5, 2008 11:52 AM
Hey xuul,
His point is SPOT ON. The christian right sounds exactly like fascists.
It also lays to rest the "Hitler was an atheist" claims that Stein makes.
Posted by: Steve_C | May 5, 2008 11:57 AM
The Religious Right isn't trying the argument of a Christian nation? Really?
Well, here's some more of what Randall Terry (operation rescue) had to say about that at an anti-abortion rally in Fort Wayne, IN:
--Fort Wayne News Sentinel August 16, 1993
And here's what Focus on the Family has to say:
Kennedy over at Coral Ridge Ministries goes into exhaustive detail about the matter(if you can stomach it).
Those things are nothing like the picture's caption. Nope. Nosirreebob! /sarcasm
And it didn't take but a few minutes to find just those examples. There are more. Many, many more.
Posted by: Aquaria | May 5, 2008 11:57 AM
Kinder, Küche, Kirche
They were going to make the slogan Kinder, Kueche, Naturwissenshaftslabor to show their dedication to "darwinism", but it didn't alliterate, so the church got stuck in instead.
One could argue that by putting Kirche in with the the "womanly pursuits" of Kinder and Kueche, the Nazis were demoting it from an important masculine thing to a less important feminine thing, but that's about as far as one can reasonably go toward claiming that the Nazis were anti-Christian.
Posted by: Dianne | May 5, 2008 11:59 AM
@raven: I think your nightmare scenario is self defeating. How does a group which, by your own definition of the Death Lists, is 1% of the population (probably less), take over power and maintain a hold on it? Also, I'm not going to lie awake worrying about the Rapture.
You might as well present a "What if Scientologists take over" scenario. :-)
Or "What if the Santeria Cult takes over". Keep your chickens in at night, I guess.
On the other hand, threats like the one you detail are why I'm a gun owner and strong supporter of gun owning rights. :-)
Posted by: Quiet Desperation | May 5, 2008 12:03 PM
Maybe someone else can provide an English source, but here's one of Luther's most condensed and relentless takes on Jews in facsimile:
http://www.sgipt.org/sonstig/metaph/luther/lvdjuil.htm
Burning their synagogues, taking away their belongings, destroying their houses, burning their holy scripts, barring them from teaching, withdrawing protection from Jewish travelers, putting "arbeitsscheue" Jewish boys and girls in concentration camps, it's all in there. Hitler, or anyone else, didn't exactly have to make that stuff up.
And here's some topping:
Which, roughly, translates to: "Therefore one should show no mercy, to not encourage them in their nature. And if that does not help, we have to drive them away like mad dogs, lest we take part in their horrid sacrilege and their vice and earn, like them, God's wrath and be damned. I did what I could; and everyone should strive to do his share. I am excused [meaning, no one can accuse him of having not done his share].
Nice guy, huh. Fits right in in the long line from the "hysterical salesman from Tarsus" (as Onfray puts it) to our contemporary salespeople of doom.
^_^J.
Posted by: gyokusai | May 5, 2008 12:03 PM
The Hitler quote refers to the state imposing Christian values -- I don't see anything there about Jews. The similarity drawn is between the religious right and fascism, not anti-Semitism. Would you argue that evangelicals have not expressed a similar desire for the government to establish Christianity as the basis of governance and social values?
In any case, like Etha points out, most fundamentalist Christians are only "friends" with Israel because they see it as ground zero for the Apocalypse. These are not ecumenical friends of Judaism, or of the Jewish people -- they are instead enamored of the notion of hastening the Second Coming by realizing prophecies centred in Israel. The sentiment is rather repulsive, but Israel and the fundies seem to both get something out of the relationship, even if both thinks the other is insane and/or going to hell.
Posted by: Tulse | May 5, 2008 12:05 PM
I find it interesting that the photo was taken on February 1, 1933 just two days after Hitler became Chancellor of Germany. So what happened in the next 12 years? Did the Nazi government maintain Christianity as the foundation of its national morality? Well, actually, No.
Here is what the United States OSS (Office of Strategic Services) had to say about the matter. They produced this document in preparation for the Nuremburg Trials of 1946:
http://www.lawandreligion.com/nurinst1.shtml
http://www.lawandreligion.com/publications/nazimasterplan01.pdf
"THE PERSECUTION OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
1. THE NATURE OF THE PERSECUTION
Throughout the period of National Socialist rule, religious liberties in Germany and in the occupied areas were seriously impaired. The various Christian Churches were systematically cut off from effective communication with the people. ...
III. THE BASIC NATIONAL SOCIALIST ATTITUDE TOWARD CHRISTIAN CHURCHES
National Socialism by its very nature was hostile to Christianity and the Christian churches. The purpose of the National Socialist movement was to convert the German people into a homogeneous racial group united in all its energies for prosecution of aggressive warfare...
Important leaders of the National Socialist party would have liked to meet this situation by a complete extirpation of Christianity and the substitution of a purely racial religion tailored to fit the needs of National Socialist policy...
So far as this sector of the National Socialist party is concerned, the destruction of Christianity was explicitly recognized as a purpose of the National Socialist movement..."
So, nice try P.Z. in linking Nazism and Christianity using one photograph. I suggest you do more historical research on the subject before you make more comments which make you look foolish.
Posted by: Tom Marking | May 5, 2008 12:06 PM
@#54 Quiet Desperation --
Though I wouldn't say it's extremely likely, the takeover of Rapture-obsessed Xians is actually somewhat more dangerous because these are people in very high positions of power. If you check out the Washington-Israel summit video (which I highly recommend, btw...it's rather revealing of this whole movement), you will see that a lot of very powerful people are involved in the movement -- Tom DeLay, Tom Hagee, and even Joe Lieberman and various jewish leaders (who believe "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"). They're talking about being very pro-Israel and attacking Iran -- sound like anything that's being talked about in government? I think the influence of these wackos is not being over-exaggerated by any means.
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 5, 2008 12:08 PM
re: my #59 -- the video is here.
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 5, 2008 12:09 PM
One of the ironies of history, largely forgotten in the West as far as I can tell, is that Hitler was elected in an anti-feminist backlash and his motto was "Church, Children, Kitchen*"--a woman's proper concerns.
* I forget in what order.
Posted by: Monado, FCD | May 5, 2008 12:16 PM
Tom Marking: Here is what the United States OSS (Office of Strategic Services) had to say ... in preparation for the Nuremburg Trials ...
No bias or political agenda to be found there, no way!
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | May 5, 2008 12:23 PM
You need to read the newspaper more. The xian Doms own president moron Bush, controlled the US congress from 2000 to 2006 and have taken over the republican party and Texas. Huckabee who could be our next president in a plausible scenario, is one. He only got about 10% of the total vote, but really, 10% of the electorate wants to destroy the US by electing another xian extremist.
It won't happen in one day. Hitler took power in the early 30's. Then things just went downhill gradually until in 1945, Europe was in ruins and most European Jews were dead.
Same thing happened when the Soviet Union collapsed. Things built up, events happened, a tipping point was reached, and...a sudden collapse.
It could take the Xian doms a few decades to destroy the USA. So far, they've made a good start.
Posted by: raven | May 5, 2008 12:26 PM
Actually yes. German variant Xianity was always incredibly antisemitic. Martin Luther, a vicious antisemite, devised the Final Solution 400 years ago in his tract, On the Jews and their lies. At Nuremberg, many Nazis said they were just carrying out Luther's plan.
Hitler had millions of Xian followers, admirers, and helpers. Without them, he would have just been another loon, sitting in a bar, ranting and raving, and waiting for the internet to be invented so he could reach an audience of dozens.
Posted by: raven | May 5, 2008 12:32 PM
I think it's hilarious when Evolutionist Professsors dress up like bishops for laughs. Clearly, Hitler is enjoying the joke too.
PZ, do you have a mitre and cope for when parties just get too crazy?
Posted by: aiabx | May 5, 2008 12:36 PM
Tom Marking,
I read through much of the report at your link. I have several observations.
1. No where in the article is any evidence of "complete extirpation" of Christianity given. It is alleged several times, but never supported. The closest that the author comes to supporting that claim is to say that the larger churches receive state support that smaller ones do not. I believe this is actually evidence of state support of Christianity.
2. The author begins with his definition of what Christianity must be, continuing on to say National Socialism does not fit this definition. Therefore, "that's not my religion".
3. The link is to Rutgers' Law and Religion student organization whose mission statement begins:
"The Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion, founded in 1999, is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship with a focus on religion."
I wonder what possible bias could that group have?
Posted by: Schmeer | May 5, 2008 12:38 PM
BURN!
Posted by: kcanadensis | May 5, 2008 12:48 PM
Part of the xian coverup after the war. The fact is, the German Xian churches were in up to their neck with the Nazis. After the war, other xians, who were understandably appalled, tried to rewrite history. They even went so far as to forge Hitler documents implying he was an atheist.
To be fair, not all xians get to be Nazi supporters. The Xians of the west and the atheistic commies of the east defeated the Nazis and rescued what remained of the Jews.
Posted by: raven | May 5, 2008 12:48 PM
"They even went so far as to forge Hitler documents implying he was an atheist."
Raven, I'd love to read about that if you knew where it was cited...........
Posted by: RAM | May 5, 2008 12:55 PM
I'm currently reading Evans' "The Coming of the Third Reich". The Catholic church had a policy of establishing alliances with right-wing regimes as a strategic means of self-preservation. Even so, they were reluctant to back Hitler, due to the extremism of his speeches. It wasn't until 1933, when they saw how effortlessly he destroyed the three majority parties (Communist, Social Democrat, Nationalist) that they decided it would be best to ally with Hitler.
But before 1933, where did the support for Nazis come from ? Given that Hitler was a Catholic, and many/most of his key people were Catholic/southern, it was suprising even to them when floods of support came from northern Protestant regions. They even adapted their campaign/propaganda efforts to further bolster this un-sought-after Protestant support.
Another thing that suprised me was that the early growth of the Nazi party was not due entirely, or even primarily, to its policy of anti-semitism. (All the other parties and the public at large were already anti-semitic.) Where they really churned up the support was in their opposition to "Godless" Communism, Modernism, and secularism of all kinds (due, of course to the pernicious influence of Jews...).
As soon as they snuffed out their chief political rivals, the Nazis set about ridding Germany of anyone behind the Modernist movement or any sort of innovative or permissive trends in art, music, cinema, theater, etc., whether they were Jewish or not. The idea was to get "back to" a pure German culture, which like the "Christian America" fantasy we hear about today, never really existed in reality.
Posted by: jeff | May 5, 2008 12:56 PM
Tom @ 60 :
Your point is well taken.
The overall history of Hitler and the Nazi party is not one which reflects the desires of Christians, by and large. But OTOH, that's not really the point.
The point, IMO, is the way he came to power. How does a democracy crumble and become taken over by a strongman ? For that, it's best to look at the 1920's and early 30's. Who helped this guy on his quest for power ? Hint : it was NOT biologists.
I think that the concerns that any educated, thoughtful person in America should have about the religious right and their activities do merit comparison with early Naziism. Lots of people with "good" intentions are following and enabling people whose stated goals are to undermine and replace our secular Constitution and government. Just because the the masses don't intend for it to have negative consequences doesn't mean it isn't a cause for alarm.
Posted by: jeff | May 5, 2008 1:12 PM
There was an old saying...The Pope and the clergy are hand in hand with the regime. Moreover, there is never an important Fascist ceremony at which the clergy are not in the place of honour."
Hitler had a connection with Catholicism, but it's influence wasn't believing in the elimination of a "weaker race". Rather, it's influence spread across other areas including conquering various countries. Catholicism always wanted to regain that power it had during the middle ages before the Reformation...
One thing to note, Hitler wasn't a Christian, nor was he following Christianity, the slaughtering of many Jews was one of many indications that He wasn't following the Bible. The Bible clearly states not to murder anyone, and an unrepented murder doesn't go to Heaven.
Posted by: Michael | May 5, 2008 1:20 PM
Holy shit people...
IS THAT MARTIN HEIDEGGER IN THE BACKGROUND!?
Compare: http://www.jraibley.com/ex/heidegger.jpg
Posted by: MC | May 5, 2008 1:22 PM
Michael @74
You misspelled "No True Scottsman"
Posted by: Schmeer | May 5, 2008 1:23 PM
Oh, so that's why the past twenty centuries of Christian history are so "blood-free" ? (ROTFL)
Posted by: jeff | May 5, 2008 1:27 PM