Profile image
Story Views

Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:

The Weekend Essay: Who Are the Heirs of Hitler….Trump and Farage, or Soros and Brussels?

Saturday, March 4, 2017 14:08
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

The Hitlerian threats and dangers whipped up to create Germany’s Nazi dictatorship were counterfeit. The fears of Trump and Farage are infinitely more factually based. While dictatorial tendencies anywhere need to be monitored diligently, Soros-supported supranational liberalism respresents the bigger threat.

The German élite has been trying since 1945 to dismiss Hitler as a one-off freak allowed by freak circumstances to come to power. The US Leftlibs tend to describe Trump in the same terms. But neither is prepared to admit that past German and present US problems represent systemic failure. The system doesn’t let any contrarians in; and thus, extreme views come to the fore beyond the legislature because the Establishment doesn’t meet contrarians inside the Chamber.  Opponents who disagree without being extreme aren’t heard because – at least half the time – they aren’t encountered. On the rare occasions they are, such free thinkers are dubbed ‘non-violent extremists’ by the Right; the Left simply uses its large mobs, huge sums of money and media narrators to shout them down.
Hitler and Trump do not qualify as freaks. The former’s ideas were little different to those of millions of Viennese and Berliner anti-Semites and nationalists in Edwardian Mitteleuropa. The latter reflects the views of many in the American business and military communities today; but above all, like Nigel Farage in the UK, he has given a voice to those who think liberals hold “permissive” views from the safety of expensive suburbs and gated communities. All three men are similar because they are on the edges of what is deemed “acceptable”. But politically acceptable views in 2017 are hugely restricted compared to those of the period, say, 1909-39.
The main thrust of both Trumpeter and Faragist policy is one of practical governance: they both refuse to accept that Leftlib complacency on drugs, pressures on welfare and housing, and Islamic intolerance are anywhere near fit for purpose. To compare these on the whole well-based fears with the culturo-racial Aryan supremacy ideas of the Nazi Party is beyond risible: it is deliberately misleading.

 Some describe Hitler as “a military genius”, but I don’t think his genius can be defined by specialism; he was simply an untutored genius in the field of how people will react and what they’re thinking. He was like the shark that can sniff a millilitre of fear-produced urine in an Olympic swimming pool.
Both Farage and Trump show signs of this – more so the latter I think – but they both share Hitler’s confidence in his own judgement.
When he told his generals in 1935 that he intended to take back the Rhineland, all of them had kittens. He was right, they were wrong. At Munich, his diplomats were sure the French & British would fight. He was right, they were wrong. In 1940, his determination in Blitzkrieg to push ahead of tank fuel terrified even Rommel. He was right, Erwin was wrong. But at each stage, all he was doing was reading the fear of others. In Court after the 1923 Putsch, in the Cabinet after 1933, purging the SA in 1934 and then playing on bourgeois fear via the Reichstag fire, his instincts were spot on.
During 1965 I interviewed some older Germans in West Berlin, and met one or two of Hitler’s Party contemporaries – as well as some 1944 Bomb Plot survivors and Resistance clerics. Right across the spectrum, all of them agreed that, be it in a Bier Keller or the Sportpalast, Hitler could literally sense what people dreamt of, cared about and would believe. A senior Party secretary insisted that the Fuhrer would change the content of a speech almost completely if, within a minute or two of starting to deliver it, he sensed the mass reaction was below par.
The reason Dolfi didn’t just remain an embittered little corporal stuffing his face with Apfelkuchen in Munich was that he was a megalomaniac. It was this engorged form of narcissism that led him to believe after 1938 that he was infallible. Thus, on Poland and in Russia, his ignorance of Stalin’s eventual guile, British ruthlessness and American ambitions led him to get the geopolitics wrong consistently after 1939.
Last Thursday night I watched Trump’s keynote address to a US Navy base. It was a classic of saying what the audience wants to hear: but above all, it felt bellicose, and somewhat dated in its desire to extol both US global hegemony and state-of-the-art weapons. I only hope it remains as rhetoric rather than policy. I continue to have higher hopes for Trump than most, but that won’t blind me to keeping a wary eye on the bloke.

For example, on violent Islam in Sweden, he has shown the Soros tendency to be full of it. This is good. But he – and we – need to cajole peaceful Islam into the camp that wants equality for all….and an end to camp followers happy to defend fundamentalism.


Trump is no Hitler. But if you think about it,  he could become dangerous longer term, in that he has correctly called out liberal correctness delusion on the subject of Islam, and this could in time give him a lot more credibility across the board. He is already close to seeing himself as infallible: let’s hope success doesn’t push him over the edge.

Many still see Hitler as a cardboard madman. The same two-dimensional thinkers would have you believe Trump is from the same mould.
Was Hitler mad? Even today – – the German media love to “confirm” this. But – at least until late 1944 – the facts deny it. The Norwegian secret service bugged Hitler’s table-talk during a visit in 1943, and the transcript reveals an intelligent man admitting he had underestimated Russian nationalism. Goering is on the record many times as saying Hitler “poked fun” at people like Himmler and Hess for being naive fanatics. Overall, the terrifying dimension of Adolf Hitler is that was quite clearly not a psychopath. He was capable of kindness with no advantage in return with animals, his secretaries, and the French woman who bore his child in 1916. He forgave Speer for disobeying his nihilistic orders after 1944, and retained the services (complete with total protection) of several Jewish professionals right to the end. Perhaps most amazing of all, when told by the Gestapo that his chauffeur Maurice was regularly bonking Eva Braun in the back of his limo, Hitler smiled and said, “They are young, let them be young”.
The uncomfortable Truth about the most famous man in history is that he was not insane, and he did not have “magical powers” over people. He simply took broadly accepted shibboleths, and used them – in concert with a genius for predicting every aspect of the human zoo’s behaviour – to create a murderous cult of personality.
It is I think vitally important to grasp the difference between Hitler’s shibboleths, and  our contemporary geopolitical Truths.
While I both fear and ridicule the dumbed-down Western media’s attempt to cement Groupthink into the younger generation, it would be myopic indeed to miss the element of “mass instinct” also present in the personality of Donald Trump. He too is a narcissist who has taken broadly held beliefs and used them to propel him to power. I find Farage boorish as a personality, and he clearly has a massive ego: but a nose for populism (based in his case on a sincere belief) has made him without doubt the defining UK politician of the 21st century to date.
However, viewed objectively both men are if anything closer to Churchill than Hitler. They lack WSC’s native wit, powerful oratory and natural sense of style; but like him they have taken real dangers (not an imagined eugenic one) and pointed them out. The difference between 1939 and 2017 is that we have a blinkered Leftlib rigidity that simply refuses to recognise empirical facts, dismissing them as “fake news”. I proffer three examples in support of that argument.
The first involves another target of the Soros manipulated Believer community, Viktor Orban of Hungary. Enormously popular in his home country, he has been bullseye-right about the euro, Syrian invention, the migration that would inevitably follow it, and the ramifications of that for Europe. But the liberal hegemony soaks up the Brussels, Soros and CIA fake news about Orban like so much brainless blotting paper….while ignoring the fact that Hungarian opposition to Orban consists almost entirely of former USSR apparatchik interests.
A second case concerns the mutation of Paris (in the aftermath of the Calais camp closure) into a city of running  battles between those same camp dwellers and the French police. The large-scale news blackout of this in Britain is a national disgrace – but entirely predictable given the appalling media self-censorship of the violent chaos that had earlier reduced Calais to a Wild West town of the 1850s. However, the truly staggering denialism shown by the likes of Yvette Cooper and Lilly Allen (along with most of the Labour Party) in their pursuit of “humanitarian relief” for “small children” in the Calais camp was true four-fingers-in-Room 101 stuff. The attempt to square shots of young bearded adult males with the original propaganda depiction of under five year old girls made the hairs on my neck prickle. (Later stats issued by the cops showed that under-five females were under 2% of camp “residents”)
The third example made my prickling hairs stand on end. On the Sunday evening, Trump spoke of violent events involving Islamists in Sweden. The next day, the entire gamut of Western press and TV media variously accused and lampooned Trump about his ‘invention’ of ‘fake news’.
However, revelations from Sweden during the following days showed that the Swedish government had lied through its collective teeth about the “complete calm” in that country. Eventually, testimony from policemen, social workers and local government officials was added to citizen stills and mobile videos to show the astonishing duplicity and attempted censorship of official sources at Cabinet level.
What followed was a blanket silence from Sorosland.
This is the key flaw in the Leftlib narrative, and one that should be recognised by all free thinkers and independent minds everywhere: when their hysterical charges are challenged by overwhelming contrary evidence, the response is never, ever one of contrition and rethink. It is, rather, to avoid the subject and move on to the next accusatory chapter of the Encyclopaedia of Propaganda.
Trump and Farage are far from innocent in the near-universal contemporary manipulation of reality; but on balance, my perception is that they are more sinned against than sinning.
For me, the insidious nature of Leftlib assertion is where the comparison with Hitler and Stalin really does stand up. Remember: George Orwell’s assumption in 1984 was that Big Brother would be a Superstate centraliser, not a “Little Englander”. The terms he used for the three global regions in his masterpiece – Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia – suggest his premonition of globalist mercantilism and hatred. Hitler in 1940 posited in his Tabletalk that the three tectonic powers would be the British Empire, the Third Reich and the Japanese Empire. By 1950, Stalin had similar views about America, the USSR, and the Chinese People’s Republic.
Clintonian foreign policy, the aims of George Soros, the crypto-Imperial European Union and the objectives of NATO are all things that, by and large, most Anglo-Saxon Leftlibs sign up to. All of this twisted futurology desires a New World Order that has little to do with individual freedom, and everything to do with Stalinist élite socialism.
This isn’t something they’ve been forced into: it’s a goal they actively espouse. The citizen enslaved by centralised nationalism is to be transmuted into squashed clay. As a bloke who wants the diametric opposite of that, I cannot but be opposed to those who yearn for it.

I have deliberately omitted Marine Le Pen from this analysis, for reasons which should become clear in the coming days 

Filed under: Uncategorized, Why the next Hitler will be a liberal Tagged: Adolf Hitler, Donald Trump, George Soros, NATO, Nigel Farage


Report abuse


Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Total 1 comment
  • The only factor Hitler and President Trump have in common is that they both share being geniuses who are also very charismatic.

    The cheney administration is the closest thing to Nazi Germany we have been, which is no surprise considering the bush/walker wealth has roots in Nazi Germany.
    The speeches that were written for bush ( who is barely literate enough to read them to a crowd) pandered to the churches and to fear, just like with Hitler.
    Fatherland security made is a tattletale state that accepts government intrusion in the best interest of “national security”.

    President Trump is trying to give us REAL security by keeping outsiders outside where they belong instead of treating citizens like the enemy, the way the cheney administration did.
    President Trump wants us to be essentially a self supporting semi-closed system that is not dependent on our enemies for natural resources and cheap labor.
    As opposed to the cheney administration that destroyed the economy in the best interest of providing fascism with slaves who are kept under control.

Top Stories
Recent Stories



Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.