← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Sertorius
Thread ID: 3277 | Posts: 16 | Started: 2002-10-29
2002-10-29 12:14 | User Profile
This article is to mark the 105 birthday anniversity of Dr. Paul Joseph Gobbels, for those interested in history and for the benefit of the A.D.L. lurkers we have. ( Make a copy for your hard drive, "C." :D ) Neocons are fond of praising Winston Churchill to the moon. I wonder just how many are aware that the term "Iron curtian" made famous by "Winnie" in Fulton, Missouri was actually plagerized from the article below? ÃÂ "Das Jahr 2000," Das Reich, 25 February 1945, pp. 1-2. ================================
The Year 2000 by Joseph Goebbels The three enemy war leaders, American sources report, have agreed at the Yalta Conference to Roosevelt's proposal for an occupation program that will destroy and exterminate the German people up until the year 2000. One must grant the somewhat grandiose nature of the proposal. It reminds one of the skyscrapers in New York that soar high into the sky, and whose upper stories sway in the wind. What will the world look like in the year 2000? Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt have determined it, at least insofar as the German people are concerned. One may however doubt if they and we will act in the predicted manner.
No one can predict the distant future, but there are some facts and possibilities that are clear over the coming fifty years. For example, none of the three enemy statesmen who developed this brilliant plan will still be alive, England will have at most 20 million inhabitants, our children's children will have had children, and that the events of this war will have sunk into myth. One can also predict with a high degree of certainty that Europe will be a united continent in the year 2000. One will fly from Berlin to Paris for breakfast in fifteen minutes, and our most modern weapons will be seen as antiques, and much more. Germany, however, will still be under military occupation according to the plans of the Yalta Conference, and the English and Americans will be training its people in democracy. How empty the brains of these three charlatans must beââ¬âat least in the case of two of them!
The third, Stalin, follows much more far-reaching goals than his two comrades. He certainly does not plan to announce them publicly, but he and his 200 million slaves will fight bitterly and toughly for them. He sees the world differently than do those plutocratic brains. He sees a future in which the entire world is subjected to the dictatorship of the Moscow Internationale, which means the Kremlin. His dream may seem fantastic and absurd, but if we Germans do not stop him, it will undoubtedly become reality. That will happen as follows: If the German people lay down their weapons, the Soviets, according to the agreement between Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin, would occupy all of East and Southeast Europe along with the greater part of the Reich. An iron curtain would fall over this enormous territory controlled by the Soviet Union, behind which nations would be slaughtered. The Jewish press in London and New York would probably still be applauding. All that would be left is human raw material, a stupid, fermenting mass of millions of desperate proletarianized working animals who would only know what the Kremlin wanted them to know about the rest of the world. Without leadership, they would fall helplessly into the hands of the Soviet blood dictatorship. The remainder of Europe would fall into chaotic political and social confusion that would prepare the way for the Bolshevization that will follow. Life and existence in these nations would become hell, which was after all the point of the exercise.
Aside from domestic problems of economic, social and political nature, England would suffer a declining population that would leave it even less able to defend its interests in Europe and the rest of the world than it is today. In 1948, Roosevelt's campaign for reelection would fail, just as Wilson's did after the First World War, and a Republican isolationist would become president of the USA. His first official act would likely be to withdraw American troops from the European witch's kettle. The entire population of the USA would doubtless approve. Since there would be no other military power on the continent, in the best case 60 British divisions would face 600 Soviet divisions. Bolshevism certainly would not have been idle during the period. A Labor government, perhaps even a radical half-Bolshevist one, would be in power in England. Under the pressure of public opinion whipped up by the Jewish press and a people weary of war, it would soon announce its lack of interest in Europe. How fast such things can happen is clear from the example of Poland today.
The so-called Third World War would likely be short, and our continent would be at the feet of the mechanized robots from the steppes. That would be an unfortunate situation for Bolshevism. It would without doubt leap over to England and set the land of classic democracy ablaze. The iron curtain would fall once more over this vast tragedy of nations. Over the next five years, hundreds of millions of slaves would build tanks, fighters and bombers; then the general assault on the USA would begin. The Western Hemisphere, which despite lying accusations we have never threatened, would then be in the gravest danger. One day those in the USA will curse the day in which a long-forgotten American president released a communiqué at a conference at Yalta, which will long since have sunk into legend.
The democracies are not up to dealing with the Bolshevist system, since they use entirely different methods. They are as helpless against it as were the bourgeois parties in Germany over against the communists before we took power. In contrast to the USA, the Soviet system needs to take no regard for public opinion or its people's living standard. It therefore has no need to fear American economic competition, not to mention its military.
Even were the war to end as Roosevelt and Churchill imagine, the plutocratic countries would be defenseless before the competition from the Soviet Union on the world market, unless they decided to greatly reduce wages and living standards. But if they were to do that, they would not be able to resist Bolshevist agitation. However things turn out, Stalin would always be the winner and Roosevelt and Churchill the losers. The Anglo-American war policy has reached a dead end. They have called up the spirits, and can no longer get rid of them. Our predictions, beginning with Poland, are beginning to be confirmed by a remarkable series of current events. One can only smile when the English and Americans forge plans for the year 2000. They will be happy if they survive until 1950.
No thinking Englishman fails to see this today. The British Prime Minister wore a Russian fur coat at the Yalta Conference. This aroused unhappy comment in the English public. When the London news agencies later reported that it was a Canadian fur coat, no one believed them. People saw in the matter a symbol of England's subordination to the Kremlin's will. What happened to the days when England had an important, even decisive say in world affairs! An influential American Senator recently remarked: "England is only a small appendix of Europe!" His comrades treat it that way already. Has it deserved any better? At a dramatic moment in European history, it declared war against the Reich, unleashing a world conflagration that not only went out of control but threatens to leave England itself in ruins. A tiny extension of Germany into purely German territories to the East was sufficient ground to see a threat to the European balance of power. In the resulting war, England found it necessary to throw out its 200-year-old policy of the balance of power. Now a world power has entered Europe that begins to the East in Vladivostok and will not rest in the West until it has incorporated Great Britain itself into its dictatorship.
It is more than naive for the British Prime Minister to plan for the political and social status of the Reich in the year 2000. In the coming years and decades, England will probably have other concerns. It will have to fight desperately to maintain a small portion of its former power in the world. It received the first blows in the First World War, and now during the Second World War faces the final coup de grace.
One can imagine things turning out differently, but it is now too late. The Führer made numerous proposals to London, the last time four weeks before the war began. He proposed that German and British foreign policy work together, that the Reich would respect England's sea power as England would respect the Reich's land power, and that parity would exist in the air. Both powers would join in guaranteeing world peace, and the British Empire would be a critical component of that peace. Germany would even be ready to defend that Empire with military means if it were necessary. Under such conditions, Bolshevism would have been confined to its original breeding grounds. It would have been sealed off from the rest of the world. Now Bolshevism is at the Oder River. Everything depends on the steadfastness of German soldiers. Will Bolshevism to pushed back to the East, or will its fury flood over Western Europe? That is the war situation. The Yalta Communiqué does not change things in the least. Things depend only on this crisis of human culture. It will be solved by us, or it will not be solved at all. Those are the alternatives.
We Germans are not the only ones who say this. Every thinking person knows that today, as so often in the past, the German people have a European mission. We may not lose our courage, even though the mission brings with it enormous pain and suffering. The foolish know-it-alls have brought the world more than once to the edge of the abyss. At the last moment, the sight of the terrifying misery alarmed humanity enough for it to take the decisive step backwards at the critical moment. That will be the case this time as well. We have lost a great deal in this war. About all we have left are our military forces and our ideals. We may not give these up. They are the foundation of our existence and of the fulfillment of our historical obligations. It is hard and terrible, but also honorable. We were given our duty because we alone have the necessary character and steadfastness. Any other people would have collapsed. We, however, like Atlas carry the weight of the world on our shoulders and do not doubt.
Germany will not be occupied by its enemies in the year 2000. The German nation will be the intellectual leader of civilized humanity. We are earning that right in this war. This world struggle with our enemies will live on as a bad dream in people's memories. Our children and their children will erect monuments to their fathers and mothers for the pain they suffered, for the stoic steadfastness with which the bore all, for the bravery they showed, for the heroism with which they fought, for the loyalty with which they held to their Führer and his ideals in difficult times. Our hopes will come true in their world and our ideals will be reality. We must never forget that when we see the storms of this wild age reflected in the eyes of our children. Let us act so that we will earn their eternal blessings, not their curses. à[url=http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goebmain.htm]http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goebmain.htm[/url] ================================= The good doctor is a little off on his predictions, I would say. He didn`t realize that it would be the descendents of bolsheviks that eventually would subvert America and have it surplant the Evil Empire in internationalist wars that have nothing to do with the interests of America.
Instead of the cry of Communism sweeping the globe it is now global democracy, which is the same repackaged shoddy goods.
2002-10-29 14:55 | User Profile
The leaders of Nazi Germany, for better or worse, were the LAST in the line of historic men who sacrificed life and comfort to fight and die for what they truly believed was right for their people, posterity and the world at large. Aside from the exact timing predicted by J Goebbels, et al, the NS visionaries were so right about the future plague of the world, that I often wonder if these men weren't supernatural.....
2002-10-30 00:59 | User Profile
I wonder just how many are aware that the term "Iron curtian" made famous by "Winnie" in Fulton, Missouri was actually plagerized from the article below?
Wow. And just when I thought my opinion of that Jew-controlled tinpot couldn't possibly get any lower...
2002-10-30 13:34 | User Profile
Valley Forge,
That is just one more piece of history that has been saved from the memory hole. I`m glad to have been able to enlighten you on this, for that makes the post worth posting. I hope there are others out there as well.
What I find amusing today is the idiots that are always accusing someone of being "goebbelesque" in a statement. Usually it is "liberals" or Neo-cons that engage in this sort of things. I have found that Goebbels was a hell of alot more honest than this comtemporaries. By the low standards we have today he would be the man Diogenes was looking for! :D
The site I found the article on is a great one.
2002-10-30 14:37 | User Profile
**The good doctor is a little off on his predictions, I would say. He didn`t realize that it would be the descendents of bolsheviks that eventually would subvert America and have it surplant the Evil Empire in internationalist wars that have nothing to do with the interests of America. **
Indeed. His words here seem strongly influenced by the date, 1945. With the writing on the wall, the Soviet Bear drawing ever closer and "victor's justice" awaiting him, Goebbels fixated upon the largest immediate threat - Stalin. He may have even believed that the Jews' Frankenstein monster of Bolshevism had overwhelmed them, supplanting them as the greater menace. How bitter his peals of laughter to learn that even the Soviets' 600 divisions would not long withstand the three balls of the Pawnbroker!
This is a great grab, Sert. The more people are exposed to the actual words of men like Goebbels, the harder it becomes to dismiss them. One or two of them might even discover, to their surprise, that the sky does not immediately fall crashing to earth upon realization that the Nazis were right.
2002-10-30 16:20 | User Profile
Originally posted by il ragno@Oct 30 2002, 09:37 ..... upon realization that the Nazis were right.
Yes, indeed they were. So while we're on the subject.... "It is out of the question to think that such a revolutionary reconstruction could be carried out by those who are the custodians and the more or less responsible representatives of the old regime, or by the political organizations founded under the old form of the Constitution. Nor would it be possible to bring this about by collaborating with these institutions, but only by establishing a new movement which will fight against them for the purpose of carrying through a radical reformation in political, cultural and economic life. And this fight will have to be undertaken even at the sacrifice of life and blood, if that should be necessary."- Hitler, 1/30/37
[url=http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/hitler1.htm]http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/hitler1.htm[/url]
2002-10-31 02:01 | User Profile
Sertorius,
Great Post! All too true.
Related threads:
Alfred Rosenberg [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=3482&]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...f=11&t=3482&[/url]
Julius Evola: [url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=3982&]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...f=11&t=3982&[/url]
2002-10-31 12:04 | User Profile
Il Ragno,
When it comes to history I firmly believe in letting the cards fall where they may. In the case of Dr. Goebbels whether I agree with his political beliefs or not doesnt change my opinion that he was one of the greatest intellects the dismal 20th Century produced. I have quite a bit of material about him and *by him.* What amuses me is to read some of these books where they have been annotated by some writer where he tries to put something that Goebbels wrote in the worst light possible and to compare it with what has happen over the last 57 years. Not surprisingly, Goebbels has been correct far more often than the commentator. Why is that? Because the commentator/"court historian" has alot of skeletons in the closet that he/she doesnt want people to see for the embarrassment they would cause the people who undeserved reputations for greatness they are trying to protect.
I have been studying history, particularly 20th Century History since I was 10 years old and in the case of WW II, I don`t think there has been a period where there have been more lies told. Unfortunately for the professional liars who have a rather nasty agenda to hide the truth has a rather ugly habit of shoveling it bony fingers above the ground at the most embarrassing moments. Such will ultimately happen here.
Hitler and Goebbels got a hell of alot more right than they got wrong. Not only that but people can say what they want, but they actually served their countries in the best manner they knew how, unlike "our" so-called leaders who serve everyone else under the sun except the land that they are citizens of.
There is something else the good Dr. said. I`ll have to look up the exact quote but it was words to the effect that 50 years from now (1945) people would admire them for what they tried to do.
2002-10-31 21:11 | User Profile
Sertorius, Great article. The others on that site are well worth reading too.
Slightly off topic, there's something that has cropped up here on OD in the past I'd appreciate your opinion on. On the one hand, it has been claimed that German actions with regard to the Soviet Union were primarily defensive. I can't square this with the calls for the conquest of 'Living Space' in the east, which date back at least as far as Mein Kampf.
Any thoughts ? Thanks.
2002-11-01 03:32 | User Profile
Let us not forget the last Words of Julius Streicher!
"The Bolsheviks will hang you(Americans) one day."-Julius Streicher
2002-11-01 04:42 | User Profile
Reichmarschall Göring when asked to autograph a copy of the indictment by the prison psychiatrist at Nuremberg wrote the following:
"Der Sieger wird immer der Richter und der Besiegte stets der Angeklagte sein!"
That is:
"The victor will always be the judge and the vanquished the accused!"
2002-11-01 11:02 | User Profile
Leveller,
Thank you, I`m glad you enjoyed it as well as that website.
Yes, I have a few views on the subject. I`m familiar with the claim you have heard that this was a defensive war. That claim is based, in my opinion, on what occurred at the end of WW I. If you recall, the Bolsheviks and their allies engaged in actions to try to turn Germany into another Soviet. In some cases, they succeeded briefly as in Bavaria.
At one point in the early 1920s, the Bolshevik made an aborted attempt to seize power that was called off at the last minute except in Hamburg, where the plotters didnt get the word. The Kriegsmarine crushed it.
Needless to say, Trotsky and the Soviet Union was involved in this, as they regarded Germany as the next logical step of the revolution and the industry of Germany would have been a godsend to the war ravaged Soviet Union. It was only with difficulty and the efforts of the brave men of the Reichswehr and the FreiKorps that they were defeated.
After these failures the Bolsheviks decided to try to bring about the revolution "legally" and at one point became the second largest party in Germany just before Hitler came to power. During that period the Nazis were in constant battle with the Bolsheviks over control of Germany, except for one brief period in 1932 in regard to a transportation strike.
The "respectable" political parties were next to usless against something as dynamic as Bolshevism was at that time. As for the Social Democrats, they were as useless then as they are today. Hitler was the only man that could deal with a threat like the one Bolshevism posed to Germany.
It is my opinion that this was a close run thing and if Hitler had failed, Germany would have gone Bolshevik in the mid- 1930`s.
I think this is where the claim that this was a "defensive war" comes from and I would say from the experience they had they can make this claim. However, we do have to take into consideration Germany`s experience from WW I and the blockade.
As you noted in Mein Kampf, Hitler was concerned with Lebensraum. Hitler was equally concerned with raw materials and agricultural products. It was the inability of Germany to produce enough food and its inability to import food due to the blockade that was primarily responsible the collapse in the rear. Hitler was determined to prevent that from ever happening again and at the same time insure that Germany had enough raw materials that could be securely brought to Germany where Germany would be economically independent and not susceptible to any interruption of supply.
As a result of these two things Hitler conceived "Operation Barbarossa," part payback and part war of conquest. That is how I view it.
I also think that part of the confusion with the business about a "defensive war" comes from the efforts of Goebbels after Stalingrad to place more emphasis on the concept of "fighting for the Western Civilization." This had always been an underlying theme, as can be shown by the efforts of the Germans to raise combat forces from the western nations, whether they be occupied or not. (Sweden) After Stalingrad, they really cranked up this effort that the war in the East as being a battle between the West and the East.
Whatever the reason, the West has alot to be grateful to the Germans for, no matter what the Chosenites and the "court historians" like William Shirer (C.F.R.) say. I believe "Operation Barbarossa" bought the West a number of years worth of time because of the severe damage they inflicted on the Soviet Union.
2002-11-01 14:14 | User Profile
To Sertorius' excellent summary, I would add a detail concerning German recognition, shortly before Barbarossa, that Stalin was creeping ominously westward, and that a preemptive strike by the Germans was thus indicated.
2002-11-02 14:19 | User Profile
NeoNietzsche,
Thank you.
You are quite correct and that should have been included. The above is what I consider a long term strategic view of what the Germans` objectives and moltivations were and a historical view of the situation as well. They certainly recognized the threat for what it was.
Tactically one can make a case that "Operation Barbarossa" when a defensive operation for like you I believe that Stalin was going to attack ("Operation Groza.") within a month when looked at in a narrow confine.
2002-11-03 12:28 | User Profile
Sertorius (and NeoNietzsche),
Thanks for the detailed answer!
It is my opinion that this was a close run thing and if Hitler had failed, Germany would have gone Bolshevik in the mid- 1930`s.
And after Germany, probably Spain and France too, at least?
2002-11-03 12:34 | User Profile
Leveller,
You`re welcome.
Yes, at the very least. Here`s thread on "Operation Barbarossa" you may have not seen.
[url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=1827&hl=operation+barbarossa]Operation Barbarossa.[/url]