-Caveat Lector-
from;
from alt.conspiracy
-----
As always, Caveat Lector.
Om
K
-----
<A HREF="aol://5863:126/alt.conspiracy:535117">BLAIR AS HITLER - REPOST</A>
-----
Subject: BLAIR AS HITLER - REPOST
From: peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 03 July 1999 08:24 AM EDT
Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Copyright 1998 Times Newspapers Ltd
Tuesday February 9 1999
Third Way, or Reich?
THE advent of new Labour has produced a steady stream of books
explaining its victory in terms of the personalities involved and the
stratagems they employed. Since they are unlikely to contain much that
is new they make boring reading. Even less useful are the efforts of
Downing Street's tame sociologists to give some meaning to the empty
concept of the "Third Way". One does better reading books that add to
one's general understanding of politics. High on the list should be the
first volume of Professor Ian Kershaw's magisterial biography: Hitler.
The tale he has to tell is chilling - the violence involved in Hitler's
march to power was the prelude to the much greater violence which will
feature in the second volume. Yet if one excludes the political violence
and racism of Nazism, which one must, there are still telling parallels
between then and now. The similarities between Adolf Hitler and Tony
Blair's path to power are hard to dismiss.
Ian Kershaw explains how Hitler rose to power, and then having achieved
office, led the Nazi Party to complete domination in every aspect of
German life. It is that second aspect of the story which is particularly
helpful in explaining the unfolding agenda of new Labour.
While most of the dictators whose careers have disfigured this century
achieved power through military force, Hitler achieved it through
elections in a system of universal suffrage. Because the Nazis, unlike
new Labour, never obtained an overall majority before they were in power
they needed allies to take office. They pioneered the co-option of dupes
to push through the constitutional changes which then entrenched their
own dominance. Labour constantly invokes its own claim to a popular
mandate for its own assault on our country's historic constitution. But
the party has followed the Fuerhrer in using dispensable allies to lend
its project an extra legitimacy.
The Nazis realised that the process of seeking total and permanent
authority required them to find within the existing system collaborators
who thought that their own interests would be advanced if the party
could be inducted into office under their aegis. Hitler's gift as a
tactician was to see how far he could push his demands at each stage
without alarming his dupes, and at what point he could safely get rid of
the encumbrances which his temporary allies represented. The use of
political figures from other parties to camouflage new Labour's purposes
is directly reminiscent of Hitler's tactics. Chris Patten has been taken
on to help to emasculate the Royal Ulster Constabulary, while Lord
Wakeham must give respectability to the destruction of the Lords. Mr
Blair has clearly learnt from history. These gentlemen have not.
Neither, I fear, has business. One of the prime necessities for a party
seeking power is money. Hitler could hardly hope that the subscriptions
of the rank and file would suffice. So money was sought from business.
Much tact was required - a political party, even one making much of its
hostility to "Bolshevism", which had "socialist" and "workers" in its
title, did not obviously commend itself to industrialists and bankers -
but enough businessmen were won over to pay for Hitler's non-stop
campaigning. In return, the donors were assured that economic policy
would not be radical and that the power of the trade unions would be
curtailed.
The Blairite offensive in the City of London had the same general
objective and was along the same lines. But in this case personal cards
were also played. Once Labour was in government, peerages and even
ministerial office were bestowed on some big subscribers. For some
multinationals the promise of a more Europhile policy was no doubt an
incentive. Money alone would not put Hitler into office. He also needed
to win over some of the political, military, and even cultural, elites.
Again radicalism had to be put into the background and the "vons" co-
opted. In the end he had to exact from Hindenburg the Chancellorship
nomination and the necessary powers to make it effective. The "Austrian
corporal" had to receive the field marshal's blessing. Once the
Government and the Reichstag were controlled by the Nazis, such allies
were needed only to assuage foreign fears while rearmament began. It was
therefore in the Diplomatic Service that the old elite retained their
usefulness. Even when Hitler needed the key post of the London Embassy
for a member of the Nazi gang, Ribbentrop had to be married to a fortune
and allowed to add a "von" to his name before the appointment could be
made.This Government's handling of Whitehall displays every bit as much
finesse in stroking the mandarin ego as the Nazis ever deployed.
When Hitler was able to recast the constitution with the aid of pliant
legal scholars - to concentrate in his own person the dual roles of head
of government and head of state - the full impact of a non-party state
was finally apparent to all but the wilfully blind. By then rival
parties - except among the self-exiled - had disappeared. The
old parties of the Right and Centre Right, which were needed to make up
a majority for the enabling legislation, had succumbed to a mixture of
blandishments and pressure. Those who thought that by entering a
coalition they were going to share power were to have a rude awakening.
Are the Liberals listening to history while they decide on a new leader?
While the historic kingdoms and provinces that have gone to make up the
old German empire and its successor, the Weimar Republic, could not be
eliminated from the map, they were subjected to a degree of
centralisation that made a mockery of any idea of their separate
personalities. The party "Gauleiters", not elected officials, were the
key to the new regime. We can now see that the Blair "project" embodies
similar aims, based on similar methods. When Mr Blair took office,
Britain was still a unitary state. But "devolution" has made its parts
more amenable to party control than the nation state would have been; we
have our Gauleiters-in-waiting - Donald Dewar for Scotland, Alun Michael
for Wales, and an as yet undisclosed nominee for London. Meanwhile, the
electoral rules for the new parliaments and assemblies, and for the
European Parliament, are devised to ensure that Labour will dictate who
is elected. The destruction of the House of Lords - reform is a word
that sits as ill with Mr Blair as it did with Hitler - is intended to
remove yet one more obstacle to Labour Party domination.
The leaders of Britain's other political parties have shown themselves
as gullible as their German counterparts. If Paddy Ashdown had studied
the fate of Hitler's allies he would hardly have believed that Mr Blair
would give him the guarantee for his party's survival inherent in the
Jenkins proposals for proportional representation. The Liberal Democrats
are not to be preserved, but absorbed. It is not clear where the
constitutional ambitions of Mr Blair and his coterie stop.
Hitler became Fhrer - the sole embodiment of the German State. We still
have a monarchy. But the blow to the hereditary principle in the Lords
has revived Labour republicanism. It is not yet clear if Mr Blair wants
to include the Royal Family in his "project", or if he wants to present
himself and his family as a kind of ersatz royalty.
Once in power, Hitler showed little interest in the details of policy -
not for him files or Cabinet meetings, let alone parliamentary- style
debate. The resemblance to Mr Blair is again striking. A small body of
acolytes acted as a buffer between Hitler and the world just as the
Downing Street staff now protects Mr Blair. Architects, film-makers and
actors figure inboth leaders'courts. One can see in the House of Lords
Mr Blair's own Albert Speers and Leni Reifenstahls.
What next? Mr Blair has no Wehrmacht to bring Europe under his sway, but
by aligning himself with European Union Socialist parties, and accepting
their agenda, he may hope to create the illusion that Europe belongs to
him. Meanwhile, we may note that this first volume of Professor
Kershaw's book has the subtitle "hubris". The second volume will no
doubt be subtitled "nemesis". Need one say more?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<end of forwarded message>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
