Thank you for your well-considered and thought-provoking response to our dialogue, Tereza.
At the risk of skipping over all of the positive contributions you made to this exchange, I do need to push back on your pushback regarding Hitler and the Nazis :-)
I never denied that Hitler and the Nazis performed a miraculous feat by restoring the pulverized German economy—indeed, I said as much in a comment on my first post in response to someone questioning the official Holocaust story:
“That’s not to say Hitler didn’t have his pluses (God knows this will be later taken out of context and used against me ;-)—he loved animals, brought us the Volkswagen, and salvaged an economy decimated by the brutality of the Versailles Treaty. That said, I draw the line at tyranny ;-)” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/a-primer-for-the-propagandized/comment/2548442)
Dictatorships are well-known for being able to perform such feats—just ask Justin Trudeau, who said the country he admires most is China because “their basic dictatorship is actually allowing them to turn their economy around on a dime” (https://rumble.com/vv0of1-flashback-trudeau-i-admire-chinas-dictatorship.html).
I don’t have time to go into extensive detail on this subject because I’m trying to wrap up a time-sensitive article (that actually ties into this topic, coincidentally), but I do discuss this in more detail in the comment thread above.
We have a gargantuan amount of uncontested primary sources, eyewitness testimonies of not only victims but also perpetrators, and historical evidence demonstrating that the Third Reich was a totalitarian dictatorship (I don’t think Hitler apologists even deny this as the trail of discrimination and oppression is baked into the legislation itself) and guilty of crimes against humanity. Whether it was six million or two million Jews who were exterminated (among other victims such as the disabled, infants, gypsies, homosexuals, and political dissidents) scarcely matters—the fact that people were incarcerated against their will (even if they weren’t murdered, which the evidence overwhelmingly supports) is enough to merit condemnation of the regime.
For those who question the nefarious actions of the Third Reich, I recommend the following books as they share eyewitness testimonies from the perspectives of ordinary Germans, Nazi Party members, and the executioners themselves:
Thanks for that thoughtful response, Margaret. I did go to your link and read your comment, and the one before (that linked to the 12 hr documentary!) and the thread after with Gigolo Joe. Lots of interesting information.
I think there's a relationship in this to CJ's point of departure with Mattias Desmet. Mattias looks at the psychology of the people that led to totalitarianism. CJ says it starts with the system, and then people justify their participation in it, leading to cognitive dissonance and psychosis.
It's not 1940 Germany that's about to be imposed on us but Germany 1930--no food, hyperinflation, foreclosures, bankruptcies, gutting of social services, savings and pensions. Our focus on the psychopathy of Hitler and the Nazis keeps us looking in the wrong place, I think, to understand how the same system is about to swallow us.
Didn't you recently quote (or was that Robert?) Truth needs no defense, lies don't want to be challenged? I don't think there should be anything that's off-limits to question, whether that's the Holocaust or 9/11 or Uvalde. If there's even one element you find to be a lie, it's like finding out your spouse lied. You can never again say, they would never do that. You can only ask, are they doing that now.
For me, rereading Night when my daughters were assigned it in school, made me see things I'd missed in my youth. Elie's statement that he 'saw with his own eyes babies being ripped from their mothers' arms and thrown into a flaming ditch' was as contrary to common sense as towers collapsing into their own footprints. No German who wants an orderly procession to the gas chamber would do that--it would immediately alert every person there that they had nothing to lose by overwhelming the guards. It's THE most emotionally incendiary act they could commit for no logical gain. And Germans are nothing if not logical.
So with that one sentence, I knew Elie was lying. Since then I've read him telling his rabbi as much in his autobiography, and I've read other things he lied about and even that he doesn't have a tattoo.
Why? Condemning people who are all dead by now doesn't really matter, it doesn't change anything. But who are we excusing or ignoring or even valorizing, whose descendants are plotting against us? First Weimar, then the World.
I agree re: 1930s Germany—indeed, I think you will especially appreciate Sebastian Haffner’s “Defying Hitler” memoir because he begins before the outset of World War I, and thus you can see the progressive destruction of Germany over the course of the war and especially the aftermath, making them vulnerable to the horrors to come.
Robert often quotes that truth needs no defense line (as have several others—Steve, I think, most recently), and I agree with it. I wholly condemn any laws that prohibit the questioning of the Holocaust or anything else and am critical of such laws in Germany in my upcoming article.
People have the right to question anything, but it doesn’t mean they’re always right. And just because Eli Wiesel and others are guilty of exaggerations or fabrications doesn’t mean the entire experience of millions of people, German and Jewish citizens alike, is negated.
We’ve experienced this ourselves in the COVID truth movement. Someone on “our side” carelessly reports information that turns out to be false, and those on the other side use it to discredit the entire movement.
Condemning people who are dead isn’t the point—the point is to prevent it from happening again, which, unfortunately, it is and on an even grander scale than the Nazis could have ever imagined.
I'm looking forward to your upcoming article, Margaret. Thanks for the Haffner recommendation and for the kind response. Glad to be in dialogue with you!
I agree with your daughter - that those of us who consider ourselves awake to the current propaganda - we just haven't found the cult that might suck us in yet. I wonder what am I not yet awake to? I also wonder about how to move forward, with many of my friends and family hurt by vaccine rules in the last two years. I have my own feelings about it, but only lost a few friendships and had some hard conversations. A friend of mine leads Authentic Communication groups, and he says the most powerful motivator for change is through relationship. We apologize, we change because we care about our impact on those we love. It is a freedom for relationship change, not a forcing or blaming or shaming into change. I wonder if there is a way forward here. Or do we do our own work to heal ourselves, knowing that we probably are hurting others in ways we don't see yet? We're no different than anyone else. We all are perpetrators in some way.
Thanks, Marta, for that perceptive comment. I was just posting elsewhere that the more I learn, the less I know. And the less I think I know, the more I learn.
I'm completely with you in not knowing how to move forward. I don't know if we're all perpetrators or all victims of the layers upon layers of deception.
I've been dealing with the question in my personal life and I don't have an answer. What I've realized is that the harder someone's been potentially hit by vaccine injury or vaccine rules, the more hurtful it is to point out the connection--even when it maybe could save their life. What a horrible dilemma they've placed us in!
Even with the relationships closest to me, I tread lightly. Even when it breaks my heart.
I'm with you. It's a nice safe place to feel like I know something smart, to feel I've got it figured out. But really, have I? I'm still so easily blended with the old belief of being a victim, and that's a reality lie for sure! And I think of what you are proposing, new alternative societies. Well, if we all had the hutzpah to make that happen, we wouldn't be in this mess! But what holds me back from taking action in this arena? And letting myself stay stuck and powerless in this way, in a way that's not empowering or healthy for me or my family, that's no different than someone else going along with vaccine regulations. So, how do I get unstuck to create a better society, like the one you are proposing?
And, yes, it is so very, very tender around vaccine injuries and vaccine rules. One of my biggest lessons during the pandemic is that no one wants to be convinced or taught by my beliefs, including my husband. The more I tried to convince him, the less he listened. He has ZERO desire to hear different information, and I'm learning that that is his right and he's on his own journey. I'm curious to learn what is the healthy and loving way forward in conversing and connecting with him on this topic.
It's a joy to share experiences with you, Marta. You stay so vulnerable and self-reflective. I'll link the Substack episode at the end that's the intro to my book. It suggests that you let go of the need for action. There's an arrogance to action, thinking that of all the people over the last 3500 years, we can be immune and act honorably. This is a time, I think, for imagination, for stepping back and realizing there's nothing we can do. But using the time to figure out what we want, in very practical and test-worthy forms.
For me, it's my daughters who are more likely to do the opposite. But I did have a deep conversation with the one whose job requires her to get the vaccine. I asked where the anger came from when I talked about it. And she told me it was because, deep down, she was sure I was right and there wasn't anything she could do about it but worry.
I really enjoy engaging with you as well, Tereza. I have your book on my desk and I'm feeling some eagerness to read it, now that you've shared about the intro. Doing/non-doing while being open to change, and how the mysteries of deep, real change work in us - I am so interested in these concepts. Maybe it's like an "active non-doing"? Not passively checking out. Thanks for inviting in imagination and dreaming for what we really want.
Hugs for your daughter, and for your relationship with her. I'm appreciating your wisdom.
Oh Marta, you have my book! I realized later I'd forgotten the link, which I'll post but you don't need it! I'm so happy that my book is in your hands. I hope that it lives up to what you're looking for, and I share your interest in the process of change as collaboration with spirit. Hugs!
Thank you for your well-considered and thought-provoking response to our dialogue, Tereza.
At the risk of skipping over all of the positive contributions you made to this exchange, I do need to push back on your pushback regarding Hitler and the Nazis :-)
I never denied that Hitler and the Nazis performed a miraculous feat by restoring the pulverized German economy—indeed, I said as much in a comment on my first post in response to someone questioning the official Holocaust story:
“That’s not to say Hitler didn’t have his pluses (God knows this will be later taken out of context and used against me ;-)—he loved animals, brought us the Volkswagen, and salvaged an economy decimated by the brutality of the Versailles Treaty. That said, I draw the line at tyranny ;-)” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/a-primer-for-the-propagandized/comment/2548442)
Dictatorships are well-known for being able to perform such feats—just ask Justin Trudeau, who said the country he admires most is China because “their basic dictatorship is actually allowing them to turn their economy around on a dime” (https://rumble.com/vv0of1-flashback-trudeau-i-admire-chinas-dictatorship.html).
I don’t have time to go into extensive detail on this subject because I’m trying to wrap up a time-sensitive article (that actually ties into this topic, coincidentally), but I do discuss this in more detail in the comment thread above.
In short, I don’t claim the official narrative propounded by the victors was 100-percent accurate, but that doesn’t mean Goebbels’s propaganda was “the truth,” as the Good Germans (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/are-you-a-good-german-or-a-badass) and Holocaust deniers (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/letter-to-a-holocaust-denier) believe.
We have a gargantuan amount of uncontested primary sources, eyewitness testimonies of not only victims but also perpetrators, and historical evidence demonstrating that the Third Reich was a totalitarian dictatorship (I don’t think Hitler apologists even deny this as the trail of discrimination and oppression is baked into the legislation itself) and guilty of crimes against humanity. Whether it was six million or two million Jews who were exterminated (among other victims such as the disabled, infants, gypsies, homosexuals, and political dissidents) scarcely matters—the fact that people were incarcerated against their will (even if they weren’t murdered, which the evidence overwhelmingly supports) is enough to merit condemnation of the regime.
For those who question the nefarious actions of the Third Reich, I recommend the following books as they share eyewitness testimonies from the perspectives of ordinary Germans, Nazi Party members, and the executioners themselves:
• “Defying Hitler” memoir by Sebastian Haffner
• “They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933–45” by Milton Mayer (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/i/40357231/they-thought-they-were-free-the-germans-paperback-kindle-audiobook)
• “Ordinary Men: Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland” by Christopher Browning
Thanks for that thoughtful response, Margaret. I did go to your link and read your comment, and the one before (that linked to the 12 hr documentary!) and the thread after with Gigolo Joe. Lots of interesting information.
I think there's a relationship in this to CJ's point of departure with Mattias Desmet. Mattias looks at the psychology of the people that led to totalitarianism. CJ says it starts with the system, and then people justify their participation in it, leading to cognitive dissonance and psychosis.
It's not 1940 Germany that's about to be imposed on us but Germany 1930--no food, hyperinflation, foreclosures, bankruptcies, gutting of social services, savings and pensions. Our focus on the psychopathy of Hitler and the Nazis keeps us looking in the wrong place, I think, to understand how the same system is about to swallow us.
Didn't you recently quote (or was that Robert?) Truth needs no defense, lies don't want to be challenged? I don't think there should be anything that's off-limits to question, whether that's the Holocaust or 9/11 or Uvalde. If there's even one element you find to be a lie, it's like finding out your spouse lied. You can never again say, they would never do that. You can only ask, are they doing that now.
For me, rereading Night when my daughters were assigned it in school, made me see things I'd missed in my youth. Elie's statement that he 'saw with his own eyes babies being ripped from their mothers' arms and thrown into a flaming ditch' was as contrary to common sense as towers collapsing into their own footprints. No German who wants an orderly procession to the gas chamber would do that--it would immediately alert every person there that they had nothing to lose by overwhelming the guards. It's THE most emotionally incendiary act they could commit for no logical gain. And Germans are nothing if not logical.
So with that one sentence, I knew Elie was lying. Since then I've read him telling his rabbi as much in his autobiography, and I've read other things he lied about and even that he doesn't have a tattoo.
Why? Condemning people who are all dead by now doesn't really matter, it doesn't change anything. But who are we excusing or ignoring or even valorizing, whose descendants are plotting against us? First Weimar, then the World.
I agree re: 1930s Germany—indeed, I think you will especially appreciate Sebastian Haffner’s “Defying Hitler” memoir because he begins before the outset of World War I, and thus you can see the progressive destruction of Germany over the course of the war and especially the aftermath, making them vulnerable to the horrors to come.
Robert often quotes that truth needs no defense line (as have several others—Steve, I think, most recently), and I agree with it. I wholly condemn any laws that prohibit the questioning of the Holocaust or anything else and am critical of such laws in Germany in my upcoming article.
People have the right to question anything, but it doesn’t mean they’re always right. And just because Eli Wiesel and others are guilty of exaggerations or fabrications doesn’t mean the entire experience of millions of people, German and Jewish citizens alike, is negated.
We’ve experienced this ourselves in the COVID truth movement. Someone on “our side” carelessly reports information that turns out to be false, and those on the other side use it to discredit the entire movement.
Condemning people who are dead isn’t the point—the point is to prevent it from happening again, which, unfortunately, it is and on an even grander scale than the Nazis could have ever imagined.
I'm looking forward to your upcoming article, Margaret. Thanks for the Haffner recommendation and for the kind response. Glad to be in dialogue with you!
I agree with your daughter - that those of us who consider ourselves awake to the current propaganda - we just haven't found the cult that might suck us in yet. I wonder what am I not yet awake to? I also wonder about how to move forward, with many of my friends and family hurt by vaccine rules in the last two years. I have my own feelings about it, but only lost a few friendships and had some hard conversations. A friend of mine leads Authentic Communication groups, and he says the most powerful motivator for change is through relationship. We apologize, we change because we care about our impact on those we love. It is a freedom for relationship change, not a forcing or blaming or shaming into change. I wonder if there is a way forward here. Or do we do our own work to heal ourselves, knowing that we probably are hurting others in ways we don't see yet? We're no different than anyone else. We all are perpetrators in some way.
Thanks, Marta, for that perceptive comment. I was just posting elsewhere that the more I learn, the less I know. And the less I think I know, the more I learn.
I'm completely with you in not knowing how to move forward. I don't know if we're all perpetrators or all victims of the layers upon layers of deception.
I've been dealing with the question in my personal life and I don't have an answer. What I've realized is that the harder someone's been potentially hit by vaccine injury or vaccine rules, the more hurtful it is to point out the connection--even when it maybe could save their life. What a horrible dilemma they've placed us in!
Even with the relationships closest to me, I tread lightly. Even when it breaks my heart.
I'm with you. It's a nice safe place to feel like I know something smart, to feel I've got it figured out. But really, have I? I'm still so easily blended with the old belief of being a victim, and that's a reality lie for sure! And I think of what you are proposing, new alternative societies. Well, if we all had the hutzpah to make that happen, we wouldn't be in this mess! But what holds me back from taking action in this arena? And letting myself stay stuck and powerless in this way, in a way that's not empowering or healthy for me or my family, that's no different than someone else going along with vaccine regulations. So, how do I get unstuck to create a better society, like the one you are proposing?
And, yes, it is so very, very tender around vaccine injuries and vaccine rules. One of my biggest lessons during the pandemic is that no one wants to be convinced or taught by my beliefs, including my husband. The more I tried to convince him, the less he listened. He has ZERO desire to hear different information, and I'm learning that that is his right and he's on his own journey. I'm curious to learn what is the healthy and loving way forward in conversing and connecting with him on this topic.
It's a joy to share experiences with you, Marta. You stay so vulnerable and self-reflective. I'll link the Substack episode at the end that's the intro to my book. It suggests that you let go of the need for action. There's an arrogance to action, thinking that of all the people over the last 3500 years, we can be immune and act honorably. This is a time, I think, for imagination, for stepping back and realizing there's nothing we can do. But using the time to figure out what we want, in very practical and test-worthy forms.
For me, it's my daughters who are more likely to do the opposite. But I did have a deep conversation with the one whose job requires her to get the vaccine. I asked where the anger came from when I talked about it. And she told me it was because, deep down, she was sure I was right and there wasn't anything she could do about it but worry.
So I keep that in mind.
I really enjoy engaging with you as well, Tereza. I have your book on my desk and I'm feeling some eagerness to read it, now that you've shared about the intro. Doing/non-doing while being open to change, and how the mysteries of deep, real change work in us - I am so interested in these concepts. Maybe it's like an "active non-doing"? Not passively checking out. Thanks for inviting in imagination and dreaming for what we really want.
Hugs for your daughter, and for your relationship with her. I'm appreciating your wisdom.
Oh Marta, you have my book! I realized later I'd forgotten the link, which I'll post but you don't need it! I'm so happy that my book is in your hands. I hope that it lives up to what you're looking for, and I share your interest in the process of change as collaboration with spirit. Hugs!
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/in-the-beginning-was-the-purpose
Hi Tereza,
Just now listening to the first video and responding there in YouTube. Will get back to you soon.
Cheers from Japan!
steve