Adolf Hitler

We all know what Godwin’s law is…leftists usually are the first to break it, but now it is thought there is a new Godwin’s law.

Samuel Johnson once said that “patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.” Patriotism, and bad analogies.

For the uninitiated, Godwin’s Law is one of the cardinal rules of the Internet. Coined in 1990 by Internet law expert Mike Godwin, the principle — confirmed by countless contentious comment threads across the web — is that the longer an online discussion persists, the greater the odds become that someone will make a comparison to Nazis or Adolf Hitler, to the point of near-inevitability. Nothing ends a debate faster than the hyperbolic unsupported counterfactual: “You know who else did [INSERT SUBJECT OF ARGUMENT HERE]? Hitler!”

We get this all the time…usually from teachers unions…they used it against Anne Tolley and are yet to deploy it against Hekia Parata…only a matter of time though.

But Hitler and the Nazis aren’t the only recurring straw men used to end debates. Over the past 12 years, it’s become clear that the longer a national security debate persists, the more likely it becomes that someone will try to end it by suggesting something — some policy, some person, some technology — “could have prevented 9/11.”  Read more »

Jeremy Elwood, the unfunny comedian who likes to dance on Margaret Thatchers grave, has shown no contrition.

He even thinks that she is the same as Adolf Hitler:

@irenecpink I will never apologise for dancing on Thatchers grave. She was my personal Hitler. P.H. was just a guy.

— Jeremy Elwood (@JeremyElwood) April 29, 2013

Read more »

Many people, mainly from the left wing conveniently ignore the socialist roots of fascism. they wrongly describe fascists as “far right”, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Then again when have the left wing ever bothered with such trivialities as the truth:

‘I am a Socialist,’ Hitler told Otto Strasser in 1930, ‘and a very different kind of Socialist from your rich friend, Count Reventlow’.

No one at the time would have regarded it as a controversial statement. The Nazis could hardly have been more open in their socialism, describing themselves with the same terminology as our own SWP: National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

Almost everyone in those days accepted that fascism had emerged from the revolutionary Left. Its militants marched on May Day under red flags. Its leaders stood for collectivism, state control of industry, high tariffs, workers’ councils. Around Europe, fascists were convinced that, as Hitler told an enthusiastic Mussolini in 1934, ‘capitalism has run its course’.

One of the most stunning achievements of the modern Left is to have created a cultural climate where simply to recite these facts is jarring. History is reinterpreted, and it is taken as axiomatic that fascism must have been Right-wing, the logic seemingly being that Left-wing means compassionate and Right-wing means nasty and fascists were nasty. You expect this level of analysis from Twitter mobs; you shouldn’t expect it from mainstream commentators.  Read more »

Yesterday Megan Woods compared John Key’s led government with Adolf Hitler’s nazi party.

Hitler had a pretty clear manifesto that he campaigned and won on. Question: does this make what he did ok @NZNationalParty? #SaveOurAssets

— Megan Woods (@Megan_Woods) June 26, 2012

She was attacked immediately on Twitter and on my blog, but remained unrepentant even offering explanations as early as this morning.

@myfewcentsnz1 point is that simply stating something before an election does not make it right! Example is extreme but exposes logic

— Megan Woods (@Megan_Woods) June 26, 2012

As well all know explaining is losing….and so Megan Woods has now apoligised…sort of…like most Labour politicians she doesn’t know how to say the word Sorry.

My comments yesterday were said in heat and were extreme and I apologise.

— Megan Woods (@Megan_Woods) June 26, 2012

Sorry really does seem to be the hardest word:

ᔥ Sydney Morning Herald

The Bavarian Government is going to republish Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf after a ban of more than 67 years. The case shows why in suppression anything, including books and even names just leads to the creation of a conspiracy. People want to know why something is suppressed, or who is hiding, when the opposite of suppression, that of openness often leads to the same ends that suppression was attempting to do.

For me we shouldn’t ban things that are distasteful or offensive, we should mock the ideas, subject them to ridicule. To suppress them just gives them credence.

The truth is that in this digital world, there’s no such thing as suppression any more. Just ask the state government of Bavaria, which has decided to republish Adolf Hitler’s 1925 work Mein Kampf before the book’s copyright expires in 2015.

Rights to the book are owned by the Bavarian finance ministry, though publication of the work has been banned in Germany since 1945.

So why offer formal state publication to this book, from which the German people, on the whole, have spent the past 67 years firmly distancing themselves?

Because the book is so widely available – you can find the whole thing with a few keystrokes – that the only purpose being served by formal suppression is the conferment of an illicit thrill for those who track it down.

To publish the book in all its ugliness and stupidity and leaden prose, its fascinatingly silly perorations on racial purity – ”the titmouse seeks the titmouse,” intones the Fuehrer, at one point, in all seriousness – this is, in the present environment, the best way to strip the work permanently of its appeal to residual fans.

Deprived of its titillating suppression order, this banned book becomes … a book. A bad book, at that, for all sorts of reasons – most of which become thuddingly clear upon cracking it open. Similarly treated, a conspiracy theory becomes a theory, just like any other – nothing more.

This kind of stupidity is why church going numbers are falling, and not just for the Catholics as the former head of the CoE demonstrates:

In an article for the Daily Mail, Lord Carey claimed the proposal to change the status of marriage “constitutes one of the greatest political power grabs in history”.

I hardly think marriage equality is the greatest political power grabs in history.

What about Hitler in 1933? Or Stalin in 1924?

Readers can put other greatest political power grabs in history in the comments section. 

The Great Depression
Prohibition
The Rise of Adolf Hitler
1932 The National Socialist Party became the largest party of the Weimar Republic
Mussolini’s Imperialism
Kristallnacht
The New Zealand National Party formed
Japan Invades China
The Start of World War II
Springboks win the 1937 series in New Zealand 2-1
The Six O’Clock Swill
Jim Anderton was born

To celebrate this tragic era the National Party is having a fancy dress 1930’s theme for their conference dinner. The only real question is whether iPredict will offer odds of the media showing silly old people dressed in dumb clothes to take the piss out of National Party when they should be talking about issues that win them votes.

Lessons from history – if you make an offensive statement but get away with it, making an absolute dick of yourself in the process, then make sure you don’t do it again.

Unless, of course, you are the thoroughly unpleasant Invercargill principal and NZPF/NZEI activist Marlene Campbell.

This nasty piece of work recently described Anne Tolley as Hitler, because she refused to back down in the face of whining leftie principals over National Standards.

The lovely Marlene was forced to apologize to her board of trustees, school, and the local community – but didn’t apologize to the education minister.

A few of the left-wing principals protested yesterday at MoE offices – but only 140 failed to hand in legal documents as opposed to the 350 that were threatening.

Rather then keep her mouth shut, Marlene decided it would be a good idea to speak to Cue TV and this time compare Anne Tolley to Joseph Goebbels – Hitler’s chief propagandist.

Not only that, she had a good old laugh about her previous Hitler comments.

Some questions. Is it appropriate for this woman to be in charge of young children – what kind of hysterical offensive nonsense is she putting in their minds?

She apologized once and got away with it – what action is her board now going to take?

If she feels so strongly anti-government, why doesn’t she resign and stand for parliament?

She could begin by handing back the extra $2000 she gets a year to teach literacy and numeracy programmes.

Meanwhile, Tolley is starting to threaten rebel schools she will take away their funding if they don’t do as they are told. And it’s working a treat.

I watched Don Brash v. Hone Harawira on Close Up last night. I can’t hardly wait for TVNZ to send me their made up viewer statistics.

The show was very revealing. It showed that ACT in wanting all New Zealanders to be treated equally under teh law isn’t racist and that the Mana Party lead by Hone Harawira is all about naked, unashamed racism.

Hone Harawira was shown to be the bigoted, ill-informed, stupid oaf that he is. His grasp on history, even in New Zealand history is as tenuous as his grasp on reality.

Hone started the interview by talking about Hitler, Jews and Don Brash all in one sentence. He failed Godwin’s Law in the first sentence. Of course he won’t care about Godwin’s Law because he will think it is some sort of Pakeha law invented to persecute and oppress Maori.

Later on he compared ACT and Brash to the Ku Klux Klan. He was off his stride, rolling his eyes, huffing and puffing and showing genuine rudeness that would have his mother slapping his face if he did the same to her.

Don Brash on the other hand showed decorum and intellect, slowly skewering Hone’s false and racist assertions one by one.

Then this morning we get another glimpse of the pure hatred of Hone Harawira:

Hone Harawira has described Osama bin Laden as “a man who fought for the rights, the land and the freedom of his people”.

In tributes on Maori-language television, the leader of the new Mana Party said the al-Qaeda founder should be “honoured” rather than “damned” in death according to Maori culture.

Mr Harawira twice paid tribute to bin Laden in te reo, saying it was Maori custom to acknowledge the dead.

So just three days after Hone said he was comfortable with a terrorist worshipper like Annette Sykes standing for his party of mal-content, haters and anarchists, Hone himself is professing admiration for Osama bin Laden.

Make no mistake that Hone Harawira is a racist and his party is filled with like-minded racists.

They should be encouraged to speak out more. I welcome their contribution to political discourse.

Activist Principal Marlene Campbell who twice compared Education Minister Anne Tolley to Adolf Hitler has apologised.

A Southland principal who compared Education Minister Anne Tolley to German dictator Adolf Hitler has apologised to her school.

Marlene Campbell, principal of Invercargill’s Salford School, said on her Facebook page on November 5: “And the MOE (Ministry of Education) attack schools deferring setting targets, thats a constructive response? Excuse me Minister Hitler? Am I in Germany? Is this the end of self managing schools? read Kelvin Smythes latest blog, he is a true hero!”

Salford School is boycotting national standards, introduced this year.

Ms Campbell’s post was picked up by bloggers Whaleoil and Kiwiblog. Her page has now been made private.

On Salford School’s website today Ms Campbell said she regretted and withdrew her comments.

Oh…a faux apaology…you know like when kids at school are asked to apologise and they go “Soooooooooooory”. She apologised to the school but not to the person she insulted. What a fine example for all the children of the country for how NOT to apologise. She reminds me of Father Jack saying sorry to Bishop Brennan.