How many people would be remembering the Holocaust today, let alone pondering on 'never again' anything? Very few. And, because they don't remember or care, history keeps repeating itself or, more correctly, people keep doing the same things. There's an automatic, 'how awful; we mustn't do that again' initially, then nothing.

We are hearing, right now, things like 'its just like the 1930s', 'Xi is the new Hitler' and so on; but it's all talk. There are not enough people left - certainly not enough capable of doing anything or with power - to do anything about anything at all

MORAL EQUIVALENCE?

Unsure if this author is pondering a bizarre moral equivalence between:

- Hitler's Nazis

- with much more moderate Social Media, the Left and Central Government!

Biodata at http://goodsauce.news/about/
_________________________

ISRAEL

For Israel "Never Again" has deep significance - that there will Never Again be a Holocaust.

This is because Israel now has the strong conventional military and (even more so) Nuclear Weapons to prevent Israelis/Jews again being slaughtered by enemies.
___________________________

AUSTRALIA

Australia should also be contemplating nuclear weapons against the 1930s Japan-style growing China threat.

'Good people' never created Nazi Germany.

Nazi Germany was the result of historical developments that allowed fascists to rise to power and led the German nation to give political legitimacy to the Nazi Party.

Xi: the new Hitler.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/beware-chinas-dictator-just-lied-like-hitler/news-story/14f632a61c9a5f71fcd037fcfe200c07

We should know about the past, and learn from it.
But people are very human, and forget details easily.
Newer generations don't have the first hand experience of living through 'wars or famine'.
So, the lessons of the past are forgotten, and present day events are front and centre.
Such is the way it is to be human.
So the query, 'never again what' can be very relevant.
But even so, an ethical 'controlling body' (government) should remain aware of past mistakes, and make every effort to avoid repeats?

Thought leads me to believe that it would help to get rid of the 'black and white' image some hold of other humans.
It seems to be their notion that people are either 'bad' or 'good'.
And that being of the 'good' ilk entitles a person to condemn, or be harsh towards, those seen as 'bad'.
The truth is that all humans are motivated by their instinctive behaviour, which is (hopefully) modified by wise thought.
We all 'run on instinct', but we use sound reasoning to control or direct it?
In that way, we manage to 'improve our lot', and make life more certain and more comfortable.

Some have wiser thought processes than others, but rather than belittle those who don't manage life well, we should look after them instead?
Of course, when their instinctive behaviour is so aberrant that it is harmful to those around, steps must be taken to prevent more damage.
But far too often, those who 'offend' are seen as 'game': they are used as an excuse to exercise man's strong instinct to chase, catch, and devour.

So, we must stop seeing others as irksome creatures, and try to help those who were born with a 'less enabled' ability to reason?
We could even introduce an extra 'R' in to schooling: we could have Reading, 'Riting, 'Rithmetic, and Reason?
But, any help given needs positive outcomes, so our 'government' should act from a position of (ethical) strength.
Then society can be progressive, comfortable, and a measure of 'luxury' can prevail.

Good people did not create Nazi Germany! The evil personified tyranny in their midst did! And because they believed the lies and Hitler knew how to read a room//work a mob/appeal to inherent prejudice! And told less so big, that none believed lies could be so big, therefore, believed monstrous lies.

The Jews were easy targets and therefore, by reason of elimination? Believed the lies/propaganda! Complied with the orders that saw six million of their number, disarmed, murdered!

Moreover, every country has some resident neo-Nazis! Who as always, want to control the world! [There's a reason why we are the only "democracy" that still doesn't have a bill of irrevocable rights!]

When we allowed WW11 displaced people to migrate here we imported a lot of it and the homophobic rage and xenophobia that is their brainwashed from birth, belief system! And where the science disproves that belief? Ditch the science!

They want the lies to be true! Even lies invented over 2,000 years ago that are a good fit with their beliefs!

I was chilled to the bone by the attack on capital hill and democracy! And by the clear intention of some of the rioters to gas their elected representatives inside escape tunnels It was the intention to gas that did it and the antisemitism that simply has not gone away!

These folk will be with us for generations and we allow their leaders virtual carte blanche instead of treating them as the right-wing terrorists/treacherous traitors they really are! If you would kill a snake? You need to cut off its head! With that done the followers need to be, reeducated!
Alan B

I’m heartily sick of hearing about the death of six million Jews.
The use of Jewish history such as the sop of this article, is full to the brim with hypocrisy.

Germany is not alone in world history, for its leaning towards genocide tendencies under Hitler rule.

Here is one I go along with, from the historic pages of our Chinese brothers;
The mass killing of landlords under Mao Zedonds land reforms.
Australia is overdue for a repeat of this tidy innovation.

Dan

I watched a recent SBS show on Nuremberg trials.

One witness recalled being told that one night's horrific screaming at a concentration camp was caused by the Nazis running out of gas and throwing children in the ovens to burn alive.

I don't think that is something that should ever be forgotten, a horror caused by the most stupid of ideologies that targeted a race/religious group.

And, yes, I saw another documentary (Michael Portillo) that showed how the British treatment of the Boers also caused much death and suffering through a kind of concentration camp system.

On one hand we have Democracy, which as Churchill said was "the worst type of government ever invented, except nobody has found anything better." He also said that the best argument against democracy was "a five minute talk about politics with the average voter."

Then there are the four totalitarian forms of government. The first is absolute monarchy, which existed until the nineteenth century with "Emperor" Napoleon Bonaparte and the Russian Czar. The second is a Theocracy, with the priesthood in charge of everything. An example would be the Papal States of Italy which were once administered by the Pope. But it was also the form of government advocated by Mohammad in the 6th century, although it only exists today in Iran.

The last two are the Socialist totalitarian systems. These are Left wing totalitarianism, also called Communism, and Right Socialist totalitarianism, also called Fascism or Nazism. What is the essential difference between right and left Socialist totalitarianism? In form, not much. As the German soldier who fought on the Russian front, Guy Sajer wrote in his book "The Forgotten Soldier", "We were dying by our millions to destroy a system of government which was almost identical to our own."

The difference between left and right totalitarianism is which classes in society advocate the totalitarianism. Left wing totalitarians are usually generally of minorities, homosexuals, the public service, union leaders, whatever working class people who can be conned into believing nonsense, academia, and the "artistic" classes. Right wing totalitarians are generally composed of the military, the clergy, the middle and upper classes, returned or demobilised soldiers, the police, and whatever members of the working class who hold middle class ideals.

Some people may be confused as to the concept that Fascism or Nazism are socialist. But Hitler never tired of declaring "we are socialists, we do not believe in Democracy." That is why the full name of the Nazi party was the Nationalist Socialist German Workers Party.

continued.

That is why Communists and Fascists absolutely hate each other. They are two power blocks representing the different classes in every society. Both seek absolute control to promote their particular ideologies.

I fear the European world is moving away from democracy to some form of absolutism. In my opinion, it is the Left who were the main offends in promoting the disintegration of European democracy through Multiculturalism, Tammany Hall style vote buying of immigrant minorities, and identity politics. This is leading to the upsurge of right wing totalitarianism within European societies, as the Right begins to organise against their class enemies.

The slogan "never again" is just that, a well meaning slogan. It is as puerile as the post WW1 slogan "the war to end all wars." That didn't work out so well either. As for myself, I prefer democracy. But if I have to choose between left wing socialist totalitarianism or right wing socialist totalitarianism I would prefer right wing socialist totalitarianism. At least the fascists are not like the lefties who appear to quite openly hate my white race and seek it's social suicide. And Fascists do not believe in the airy fairy concept of one world government, they are nationalists, as I am.

Any astute and impartial historian knows that human history has always been summed up in the little ditty...

"The history of the world reveals a simple plan,
He takes who has the power, he holds who can."

The applied christian politics of Constantine's famous Sword 101 - which has been the norm ever since christian-ISM became the official "religion" of the Roman State
http://www.logosjournal.com/hammer_kellner.htm

And of course the systematic murder and attempted extermination of the Jews was the INEVITABLE outcome of centuries of the applied christian politics of anti-Jewish pogroms etc.

Plus I thoroughly recommend the book by Alice Miller titled For Your Own Good Hidden Cruelty In Child-Rearing and the roots of Violence in which she gives a very plausible explanation of the hell-deep psychic repressed anger hate and rage that hitler tapped into and empowered. Repressed rage (etc) which was the result of the toxic child-rearing (read BEATING) practices which were popular in the decades (even centuries) leading up to hitlers' appearance. She begins the book with extensive quotes from some of the popular and influential books of the time.

Also check out:
http://www.violence.de/index.html
http://www.wombecology.com

Also check out the truth-telling book by Philip Greven titled Spare The Child - The Religious Roots of Punishment and the Psychological Impact of Physical Abuse, a book which is very much relevant to American christian child-beating practices (in particular)

David Pellowe,
"Beyond extraordinarily ignorant, it's immensely offensive that the phrase might be used in the wake of a school shooting to advocate gun control, precisely the policy of the Nazi party."

If you think it's offensive to apply the phrase "never again" to schools shootings then YOU DESERVE TO BE OFFENDED!

And if you really can't tell the difference between gun control (restricting the entire population's access to the weapons that make it easier to kill a lot of people) and the policy of the Nazis (disarming the Jews but not disarming their own supporters) then you're morally bankrupt!

I must get a copy of "The Holocaust Industry" by American academic Dr Norman Finkelstein. All his close relatives except for parents died in the Holocaust. Yet has written a book about and campaigned against the scam aspects of it, presumably without downplaying suffering of genuine victims. Have long gathered from various sources there have been a lot of beatups and lies about the Holocaust. Described by some as "Holohoax". Word about these getting about has been slowed considerably by Zionist influence managing to have it made an offence to question "official" accounts of the Holocaust in about 15 countries. Note that obviously due to Jewish political influence in Australia, historian David Irving has been denied entry. Are claims he can make they do not like but cannot dispute on facts so do all they can to try and have them not exposed. Also more recently was proposed Dr Finkelstein would visit Melbourne on a speaking tour. For some reason it did not eventuate. Would not surprise me if was Jewish influence stopped him from obtaining a visa.

The Nazis obviously did some very nasty things but is important to remember that accounts of wars in which there was a clear victor is usually largely according to what the winning side wants believed. Think from all I have come across that in some way challenges this that the quote "MORE LIES HAVE BEEN TOLD ABOUT ADOLF HITLER THAN ANY OTHER MAN IN THE 20TH CENTURY" is probably correct. With leading peddlers of them Jews. Note how Hitler and associates built Germany into a strong country after the devastation of WW1 and for good reasons was regarded by many as "THE GREAT ONE". However, one thing he did early was try to get Jews out of positions of power because of their inclination to do things benefitting their own to the detriment of others. Result was political manipulating by Jews to get others fighting a war on their behalf. One example of this was what happened in Poland starting WW2 which could have been resolved peacefully but was exploited by warmongers.

"Government's purpose is to protect God-given freedoms: first of all life, and then liberty."

This is just a lame excuse after the fact.

Why should government have any purpose at all?
Did it ever ask the ordinary people whether they want it to protect their lives and/or liberty?

The author speaks of all kinds of popular freedoms such as the freedom of speech, assembly, association, property ownership, self-defense and life, but truly there should be just one and only one freedom: the freedom to not be a part of and have nothing to do with the society whom government assumes to represent.

On the other hand, if one freely volunteers to be part of a society, then there is nothing wrong about that society limiting their freedom in an agreed manner in exchange for the protection(s) it offers - a deal is a deal!

For a deal to be a deal, there obviously must be a deal: can the author or anyone else actually show our signatures on such a deal where we sacrificed our freedom in return for security?

Good post, MOX.

My interpretation of WW2 was that the Germans supported Hitler because of many reasons.

Firstly, the Treaty of Versaille stripped Germany and Austria of about 50% of their own territory, creating two new states (Poland and Czechoslovakia) from these territories. The situation in Poland was especially galling to the Germans as it essentially split Germany in two. The "Danzig corridor" was populated almost entirely by Germans who did not want to be Poles. Had the Poles relinquished the Danzig corridor (and another tiny sliver of Germany held by Poland in the South) the whole damned war might have ben averted. But they did not, because the French lied to the Poles and told them that if Germany attacked to reclaim their stolen land, they would attack Germany.

the second reason was because after WW1 when germany became a democracy, the allied powers were so intent upon punishing Germany with the harshest possible sanctions that the new German democratic government had no chance of ever getting Germany back on it's feet. So it came down to a choice between two totalitarian systems. either left wing Socialist totalitarianism or right wing Socialist totalitarianism. The majority of Germans chose right wing Socialist totalitarianism. Which system a German chose was largely a matter of class.

Lastly, I don't know if MOX's claim that German Jewish public servants were arranging things to benefit mainly Jews, but it could be true as that is usually the way all close social groups tend to operate. But one thing I think is true, is that Jews seem to have been disproportionately represented in the German Communist movement. Stalin himself dispatched two German Jews from Moscow to stir up trouble in Germany and one of the two leaders of the Communist movement in Germany was a female Jew. That is one reason why Hitler hated the Jews.

LEGO, as a NAZI apologists you do a damn fine job of trying to mitigate the evils of the ideology. Along with your tag-team partner MOX you look for scapegoats to be used to excuse, and justify the horrors of Nazism. Is this because of your stated racism and other beliefs that you are actually a supporter and a believer?

The 'Treaty of Versailles' was an attempt to punish the vanquished, but it was also a way for greedy Capitalism to obtain wealth at the expense of Germany. Its actually a myth that Germany failed because of the treaty, in fact by the late 20's, despite the harshness of Versailles, Germany had made a reasonable recovery thanks to vast American loans. Then the 'Great Depression' struck and America immediately demanded repatriation of the loans. This action by the Capitalists bankrupted Germany. With bankruptcy came mass unemployment and economic collapse. The Nazi's had failed at the 1928 election, scoring less than 3% of the vote. Hitler only obtained power in 1933 with the assistance of the moderate conservatives and the Catholics.

Hiya Paul1406, long time no see.

I am neither an apologist for left wing socialist totalitarianism, nor an apologist for right wing socialist totalitarianism. I believe in democracy, but I can see that this concept is probably doomed in the western world. To have a democracy you need a population which is smart enough to have a general agreement on what constitutes correct behaviour. With the importation of third world immigrants in ever increasing numbers, who's values, beliefs and cultural values are often diametrically opposed to that of the host white European population , that is becoming increasingly impossible.

"Diversity" literally means "division" and you only need look at the USA today to see that the world's greatest democracy is coming apart at the seams through racial division. A division stoked by the left through Tammany Hall politics and identity politics. The US division to my mind is, on one hand, the US public service, (who ran the crooked election) crime and welfare prone minorities, many white welfare recipients, spoiled rich kids with a narcissism problem, and crooked politicians. On the other, the productive white people, and those of the minorities who just happen to be smart enough to be productive, successful, law abiding, and patriotic. My sort of people.

As for your take on the Treaty of Versailles, you seem to be another lefty who can only see history through the lens of the nasty capitalists causing all the problems of the world. Sorry, where your point of view may have some validity in some situations, my reading of history was that one reason for Hitler's popularity in Germany was because he demanded that all those lands taken from Germany as war reparations be returned to Germany. I don't think that if this had been done that war would have certainly been averted. Hitler wanted to expand eastward anyway. But by not telling the Poles to hand back what was (and still is ) German land, the French and British guaranteed that they and Germany would go to war.

I agree with LEGO to a point:

«To have a democracy you need a population which is smart enough to have a general agreement on what constitutes correct behaviour.»

So far so good, however:

«With the importation of third world immigrants in ever increasing numbers, who's values, beliefs and cultural values are often diametrically opposed to that of the host white European population , that is becoming increasingly impossible.»

Beliefs and values can be diametrically opposed between any two people regardless of race or origins. This forum itself is evidence that great differences in beliefs and values exist even within the white European Australian population. German Jews were anything but a monolithic group: some were communists, other capitalists, some were Zionists, some such German nationalists they even supported Nazism ("Raus mit uns"), some were very orthodox, others conservative and reform Jews, some converted to Christianity, others were completely atheist, etc. The Nazis didn't care about any of that, they killed them all.

Indeed, nobody should be forcibly subjected to "belong" to a nation, democratic or otherwise, whose values regarding "right" and "wrong" contradict their own, but national divisions must only be based on fundamental values and never be made along lines of race, culture or arbitrary geographical lines.

Thank you for some sanity, Yuyutsu :)

Joe

Well said Yuyutsu, its the racists who identifies a group according to some basic distinguishing trait applicable to the entire group, their religion, Muslims, the colour of their skin, Blacks, or their ethnicity, Jews. The racists is quick to negatively stereotype the entire group, or stigmatise all based on the actions or perceived actions of one, or a small minority within the group.

"When walking down the streets of Washington at night, I always feel safer knowing there is a white man behind me than a black man."

Jesse Jackson.

Former head of the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People. (NACCP)

Hiya LEGO Matey

A slight misquote by you - but the same meaning:

The Rev. Jesse Jackson was reported to have actually said:

"There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery. Then (I) look around and see someone white and feel relieved."

The Baltimore Sun, December 3, 1993, http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1993-12-03-1993337169-story.html

Goes to show, as we get on in life, even proud black men fear being mugged.