And if Hitler were born in America?
May 9, 2008 by marranci
Few people, both in the US and in the rest of the world, may know that the US has had its own Nazi Party, which under other different names (such as the Social Revolutionary Party) is still very active. I do not have statistics about how many Americans read or have read Mein Kampf, and even less knowledge about how many may have been influenced directly or indirectly by its ideas. Often I have heard the argument that Hitler, despite his charisma, would have never succeed in reproducing in the US what he created in Germany. This argument, in other words, suggests that something exquisitely German existed in the formation and ascension of the Nazi delirium. As an anthropologist, I have my strong reservations about this suggestion.
I tend to think that Nazism achieved such an appeal because it is ‘natural’: it applies to the very basic emotions and instincts of human-primates. The rationale is the ‘extermination’ of the different, of the intruder, of the alien, seen as a monster and a barbaric deformation of the real prototype. In the case of Hitler, the Jews became the target.
They profiled well in the alienating Post-WWI Germany. People from a different religion, with a strong sense of community, who rejected assimilation or tried to maintain a community identity, spoke a different language or used a different language to pray, Jews fitted the increasingly collective imaginary not only of the enemy but of the uncivilised inhuman monstrosity, the aberrant barbaric urban savage.
I do not need to demonstrate the powerful rhetoric used by the German Nazi propaganda to represent the Jews as weak, vicious, terrorists who were monstrous creatures devoted to mysterious, uncivilised and demonic since anti-Christian rituals. We need just to mention the ‘blood libel’ among the many other imaginary chimeras.
According to Nazi propaganda, the uncivilised, the un-assimilated, the isolationists and arrogant monsters (Judaism claims an inherent superiority of Jews towards not only other religious people but all humanity) threatening German society had to be controlled, checked, marked, to guarantee the security of the nation, of the civilised people, of the state. Public safety was the main priority of the Nazi state. If this meant abusing human life and using torture and extermination, Nazi Germany had no soft heart: everything should be done for ‘public safety’. It is not just an old rhetoric; today the ‘public safety to all costs’ (even the cost of torture and arbitrary killing by proxy) is again here to stay probably for quite a long time. Only that this time is not the subversive, terrorist, communist, Jew from which the civilised have to defend themselves, but the Muslim (often seen as an undetermined category).
Today we know how the German Nazi dream of a civilised, secure, strong, nationalistic, and national value-based, Germany, which did not want to ‘give up’ its identity to the ‘degenerated’ influences of ‘alien’ cultures ended. We also know that from the ashes of the millions of Jews whom died during the Holocaust, Israel, sixty years ago, was born (and Palestinians started the sufferance of their nakba still enduring). Blood called for blood, and in the alchemy of desperation, a sort of genome of the Holy Land, the hopes and tears of joy of the new Jewish state translate into the agony and tears of the endless bereavement of the denied Palestinian state.
America today is a super power full of contradictions. Strong in its foreign policy, marked by preemptive wars for imposing ever-postponed democracies, the Goliath of the Atlantic has fragile feet of clay. Suffering only though dramatic terrorist attacks, Goliath seems trapped in an eternal fear. A fear which has changed: from the external foreign enemy, the international Islamic terrorist, to a generalised fear of Muslims, even the star-spangled banner waving Muslims.
If Hitler were born in the US in 1964, and had the same successful political career thanks to his political solutions, would Hitler’s solutions for the ‘Muslims issue’ be popular with Americans? Check this video below
I am not naïve. I know that, methodologically speaking, these interviews are very much MacEoin style, and we do not know where, when, in which US state, or on what occasion the interviewer collected them. Yet this may suggest that it is time that academics (me included) start to shift their over-focused research on Muslims to understand how Muslims are perceived by non-Muslims in the West and if 1930s solutions could appeal to the twenty-first-century human-primate as the final solution to our fear of Muslims: another possible Holocaust, this time crescent moon instead of Star of David badge wearing?
Hegel has suggested that historical facts never happen just once; Marx added, ‘history repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, the second
as farce’. Yet to those Americans (or Europeans or whomever) who dream of a Hitlerian solution to the increasing fear of Muslims, I have to remind them that, if Hegel is right and Marx convincing, this time, the conclusion of the new-old ‘final solution’ cannot be other than the Caliphate!
Gabriele
[...] Guardian) British Airways takes beef off the menu to avoid offending Hindus (Tom Kelly, Daily Mail) And if Hitler were born in America? (Islam, Muslims and an [...]
“I tend to think that Nazism achieved such an appeal because it is ‘natural’”.
Not sure about that. I’ve heard it suggested the Nazism in its German form was really just European Imperialism - with its scientific racism and militaristic nationalism - taken to its logical conclusion. I haven’t heard all the justifications for that assertion, but it sounds very plausible on the face of it.
Utter crap really and quite pathetic. “Often I have heard the argument that Hitler, despite his charisma, would have never succeed in reproducing in the US what he created in Germany. This argument, in other words, suggests that something exquisitely German existed in the formation and ascension of the Nazi delirium.” Nazism was quintessentially German as it like previous regimes was dependent on securing the ‘Reich’ through seizing territory abroad. As to your predictable contrast between how Germany treated the Jews and how Muslims in the west are today consider the following if you can:
1. Jews in 1930s Germany did not agitate for a Jewish state ruled according to their own religious laws taking precedence over Non-Jewish laws. Jews have never believed for instance that the world belongs to Allah an needs to be ruled according to divine dictates.
2. Jews in Spain, Italy or Germany for that matter were not committing and plotting to commit acts of terrorism aimed at slaughtering the civilian population on behalf of their religious beliefs. Rather they were alienated and subsequently murdered by a totalitarian racist ideology. Personally I think the Islamic system and by that I mean Islamic Jurisprudence and Sharia law has more in common with Nazism than the US. By that I refer to the way it is global in its aspirations and discriminatory in the way it seeks to subjugate non-Muslims and women. It is also as a theocracy authoritarian.
Seriously as an educated man why do you write such garbage? It is incredibly easy to refute these arguments of yours. A simple look at history shows that comparisons between 1930s Jews and modern Muslims are invalid. I mean how many Jewish riots where there over cartoons and books written about their faith? Also if you feel there is no comparison with political Islam and Nazism just go on youtube or Google and see what they have to say for themselves (the Islamist organisations).
Dear James
thank you for your comment. Although my post was about the comments that some people make in the US about Muslims which sound very similar to those solutions advocated by Nazi supporters, I can give some interesting historical examples that you probably missed while watching Youtube and using Google (not two of my preferred academic references I have to say!).
you said
First of all, speaking of Jews in general as well as Muslims in general is totally wrong. There are Jewish people of different denominations with different political aims as well as ideologies. The same can be said about Christians, Muslims and any other religion or even sect. To deny this would be extremely flawed or to use your expression a big pile of ‘garbage’.
Said this, here some examples of what, if we apply the same category you seem to about Muslims, you may like to call ‘Jewish terrorism’ during the 1940s and later in order to establish a Jewish state (Israel) to respect the will of God and the Torah:
Assassination of a British government official Cairo 6 November, 1944. Lord Moyne, Secretary of State, was assassinated by the Stern Gang. Yitzhak Shamir, a member of the Irgun and later leader of the Stern Gang was behind the plan.
Hostages Taking against the British in Tel Aviv, 18 June, 1946.
Blowing up government offices (including their civilian employees and visitors) Jerusalem, 22 July, 1946. The toll was 91 Britons dead, and 46 injured in King David Hotel. The terrorist attack was coordinated with and carried out under the instruction of the Haganah.
Booby-trapped suitcase: British Embassy in Rome (Italy), 13 October, 1946.
Booby-trapped car parked in civilian areas: against the British in Sarafand (east of Jaffa) on 5 December, 1946.
Flogging of hostages: British in Tel Aviv, Natanya and Rishon, 29 December, 1946.
Letter-bombs sent to politicians: twenty letter-bombs were sent from Italy to London between 4 and 6 June, 1947.
Murder of hostages as a reprisal for government actions: against the British in Natanya on 29/30 July, 1947 and making a booby trap out of their bodies!! The note left with the bodies read: “This is the sentence of the Irgun’s High Command”.
Postal Parcel-bomb sent to London, 3 September, 1947.
for more and for references you can read:
Shaul Zadka; Zeev Ivianski; Arie Perliger and Leonard Weinberg; Raider, Mark A.; and in particular Joseph Heller
So, what does history tell you here? Are these examples of ‘Jewish terrorism’ or actually of political organizations which used their Jewish identity and rhetoric (including the fact that killing gentiles is not a Jewish crime) for their own political aims and dreams? These organizations attacked internationally and they operated very much in the same political manner as Al-Qaeda since the message was ultimately the same: ‘leave our Holy land’. Of course the religious rhetoric, like in the case of al-Qaeda, was the way to recruit and receive support for their actions. I am sorry but I have the impression that you have referred to history without having deeply studied the radical organizations (both religious and atheist) which were involved in the struggle for the foundation of Israel.
In the 1930s in Germany there were certain Jewish movements and political organizations (which also used violence) which, after hoping in Hitler and his plan to gift the Jewish population with a state in Madagascar, started to become disaffected with the German regime.
Furthermore, no Muslim I know (other than very few extremists) wish to impose Shari’a on you, but many, even among the radical, see themselves as fighting to free sacred Muslim lands from oppression. This minority often wishes what actually a minority of Jews in the 1930s and 1940s wished for: a land in which to live under Talmudic Law or (as it happened) with compromises with the secularists (Zionists). This time of course, instead of the Talmud, it is the Qur’an.
So where is the difference? Jewish extreme and radical organizations bombed London, Italy and the British colonizers and civilians in the name of a Biblical land.
Today we have some fanatic, extreme Muslim organizations which bomb what they perceive as the new-colonial forces since they hope to establish a Caliphate, in the name of the Qur’an.
Yet, I have the impression that you are suggesting quite horrible things in your post: you said in your point 1:
You are implying that if Jews were to “agitate for a Jewish state ruled according to their own religious laws taking precedence over Non-Jewish laws” Hitler would have been right to do what he did!! You are saying that the Holocaust would have been justified.
But this is exactly how Hitler&Co saw the Jew!! He saw them as subversive of the German state because they refused to accept the non-Jewish law!! They rejected to recognise the German gentiles as superior to them since a Jew, by religious definition, is superior to a gentile (this is a simplification, but not a wrong one!)
I am sorry but if this above is your argument then it is a very very stinky pile of garbage
Best wishes
Gabriele
Right Gabriele, you seem to be confusing quite deliberately issues concerning Jihadi terrorism. However you do make certainly a coherent point here namely that terrorism was carried out by Jewish nationalists (or Zionists) in order to force the UK from Palestine.
” “These organizations attacked internationally and they operated very much in the same political manner as Al-Qaeda since the message was ultimately the same: ‘leave our Holy land’. Of course the religious rhetoric, like in the case of al-Qaeda, was the way to recruit and receive support for their actions. I am sorry but I have the impression that you have referred to history without having deeply studied the radical organizations (both religious and atheist) which were involved in the struggle for the foundation of Israel. “.
You also point out that some Jewish resistance groups were atheist or secular in origin. I would advise you to explore the implications of that point further. Quite simply these people by and large fought for nationalist reasons. Of course terrorism is terrorism but the aim was the foundation of a nation state. That is quite unlike Al Qaeda whose aim is global in creating a transnational Islamic state. They are not simply seeking to eject western presence from their lands. To them the world is theirs. Of course Gabriele I do not consider Youtube or Google to be academic sources I drew them to your attention however as there is a huge amount of evidence on them, produced by the Islamists themselves. Quite simply they make their point quite clear their aims are global and that is what they say. You may disagree and that is fine but I simply suggested that you look at what they themselves have to say.
“Furthermore, no Muslim I know (other than very few extremists) wish to impose Sharia on you, but many, even among the radical, see themselves as fighting to free sacred Muslim lands from oppression. This minority often wishes what actually a minority of Jews in the 1930s and 1940s wished for: a land in which to live under Talmudic Law or (as it happened) with compromises with the secularists (Zionists). This time of course, instead of the Talmud, it is the Qur’an.” Even if this were true and I do not believe it is it ignores the global aspirations of Islamists. Secondly it is wishful thinking in the extreme to suggest that Al Qaeda would even for one second be interested in compromise! Compromise with what secular Muslims and non Muslims on Al Qaeda’s agenda come on mate get real.
“You are implying that if Jews were to “agitate for a Jewish state ruled according to their own religious laws taking precedence over Non-Jewish laws” Hitler would have been right to do what he did!! You are saying that the Holocaust would have been justified. ” I said no such thing nor did I imply such a thing. I feel you have made this point rather disingenuously after I pointed out the falsity of drawing comparisons with 1930s German Jews. The Jews never agitated for Jewish law under Hitler. Nor did they commit violent acts against the German population in the name of Judaism. The tragedy was they were overall well integrated. It is an ironic fact of history that the German Colonel who pinned the Iron Cross on Hitler during ww1 was himself Jewish. Jews were undoubtedly envied by many Germans but they did not seek to subjugate the law ever in Germany at that time. Did they plant bombs on subway trains then, or threaten newspaper editors with death over harmless satire? We both know the answer is no. I have replied somewhat hastily here so have not included sources but certainly can if you wish. Check out just two sources for how Jihadists have global aspirations (those ones you seem to overlook):
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1761.htm
http://www.pmw.org.il/Bulletins_may2007.htm#b240507
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gze6Zsf30wi6C-EXEyb-1SP5DCVw
http://www.albawaba.com/en/countries/Iraq/226074
Note that the arguments are couched in religious terms. There are loads more but if you want to believe these people are somehow pluralistic nationalists dream on.
Dear James
thank you very much for clarifying some points. I am happy to know that you strongly condemn statements which are similar to those expressed in the video I have posted, and which resemble the Nazism and the anti-Jewish legislation of the 1930s.
Although there are many different groups, and things, as I have demonstrated in my book, Jihad Beyond Islam, are quite complicated as far as the personal opinions of those who considered themselves ‘jiahdis’, I suggest that you read this book:
Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden
I will be very happy to discuss how much of bin-Laden’s ideology is a real religious ‘Holy War’ against the infidel world in order to reduce it to Dhimmitude or actually a delirious political post-colonial struggle against what he sees as the neo-colonialist, imperialist, power(s), mainly the US, which is ‘oppressing’ the ‘Muslims’ and their lands (actually this may be a topic for a future post so we can widen the discussion).
Of course in both cases the result remains the same: lots of innocent people killed. But the actions to be taken to stop this situation may be different from one case to another.
Thank you for reading my blog and for your comments
yours
Gabriele
James says
that Jews under the Nazi regime, especially German ones, were well integrated and never sought to take over Germany and European society in the same way that bin Liner and his groupies are trying to do at the moment.
Er, well, not according to Hitler and Goebbels who collectively blamed Jewish Bolsheviks for wanting to do to just that, and who claimed German Jews were not integrated and were basically fifth columnists and terrorists and the like, attacking, not just Germany and the German people, but western civilisation as we know it -
cf ‘Kristallnacht’ just for instance - which was claimed by the Nazis as justified retaliation for a Jewish international terrorist act carried out in Paris against the whole of Germany, apparantly.
James merely repeats nazi dogma and propaganda - but updates it by substituting Muslims for Jews and gives Muslims collective responsibility for the crimes committed by certain individuals, whom none of them has voted for and very few support.
Strange how history repeats itself, I was just saying on another blog.
Substitute Jews and Judaism for Muslims and Islam, and we are back again in inter-war Europe.
..Jewish resistance groups..
- Surely you mean ‘terrorist groups’ James?
What exactly were they supposed to be resisting?
Isn’t it strange how some terrorists attacking Britian and the British military get rehabiliated and even held up as shining moral examples to the rest of - and others aren’t!
All the best IMaaA!
Joe, read what I said as you are wrong. Finally irrespective of what the Nazis said the claim that if you correctly point out that Islamist groups including violent ones are not only attacking the west but seeking to subvert it (again look at what these groups themselves say) makes you a Nazi is immature. Right so we must never criticise Hizb ut Tahir or Al Mujaroun then? Or point out the attacks in London, Madrid, Glasgow etc that killed hundreds? The plots uncovered that would have killed thousands these things should not be discussed as discussing them makes you a Nazi right? I did describe Jewish resistance to the UK in Palestine as terrorism and am happy to be unambiguous about that.
“Isn’t it strange how some terrorists attacking Britain and the British military get rehabilitated and even held up as shining moral examples to the rest of - and others aren’t!” Yes it is ironic you can even end up as a government minister in NI. However I can see little chance of rehabilitating Jihadis in such a fashion as their aim is to substitute our law with a theocracy (again before you claim I am a Nazi look at what Anjem Choudhary has to say for just one example).
An interesting corollary to the Nazis justification for launching ‘Kristallnacht’, the attack on a German diplomat in Paris by a Jewish gunman, is the justification used by the Israeli Government in 1982 for its illegal attack and invasion of Lebanon.
After a prolonged period of goading PLO forces in Lebanon into retaliating against repeated Israeli provocations which failed to produce to required excuse for a pre-planned Israel attack and invasion - the Israeli Government were finally reduced to using an assassination attempt on an Israeli Ambassador by the PLO-outlawed ‘Abu Nidal Organisation’ as a causus belli.
The scene of this supposed Palestinian crime against Israel was…London!