I went looking for Noam Chomsky t-shirts, and ended up finding a bunch of Hitler quotes on the Wikiquote that I found quite interesting:
It is Christianity that is the liar. It is in perpetual conflict with itself.
Oops. Not so good for the Christian White Supremacists in America and elsewhere. Not good for the merely racist white Republicans in America, either. I know a good percentage of them hate blacks, Jews, hispanics, arabs, French, and any other group of people that their favoriate politicians wish to use as punching bags.
On the perpetual conflict within Christianity, it seems that as a Christian, you have three choices - defend the Bible books in a literally, figuratively, or using a bit of both. Both singular approaches have problems because of the myriad contradictions in the Bible books. Which leads us to option #3, what I consider to be the strongest contender for the basis on which to defend the Bible books - though, it is still hardly convincing. The third way is what I have just decided to call 'The Mixed Martial Arts' approach - or MMA, for short. The MMA strategery works like this: Use the literal interpretation first. If it doesn't fit the narrative, go to your ace in the hole - the figurative approach. That way, when the story's not working, just make some shit up. And hope nobody asks questions.
Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?
One of the consequences of not officially recognizing genocide, and punishing those responsible is that it allows future leaders - in this case Hitler - to think they will not be punished for their crimes. TAOTP just recently found out about the Armenian Genocide.
Mr. Chamberlain likes to take weekends in the country; I shall take countries in the weekend!
Kinda sick, in a way, but a very witty quote, nonetheless. Still looking for some video footage of the U.S. armchair generals and newscasters using the word 'modern-day blitzkrieg' to describe our plans for invading Iraq. I know it's out there. Who has it?!
I shall give a propagandist reason for starting the war, no matter whether it is plausible or not. The victor will not be asked afterwards, whether he told the truth or not. When starting and waging war it is not right that matters but victory. Close your hearts to pity. Act brutally, eighty million people must obtain what is their right. Their existence must be made secure. The strongest man is right.
This sounds an awful lot like the Bush plan. Say what is necessary to get to war, then just make sure you win. Now you know why Bush needs so badly to create the perception that he won this invasion of Iraq. Hitler finishes with the 'might makes right' doctrine - obviously an idea that Bush and the Republicans have taken to heart. Beat an old lady to death? Why not? Hey - if you're strong enough, and you can get away with - go for it!
The great masses of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. Especially if it is repeated over and over.
More Bush strategery? Definitely some truth in this one.
What luck for the rulers that men do not think.
Ummm, yeah - some truth in that one, especially on the Rethug side. A heavy, consistent dose of illegal, covert government propaganda helps, too - allows men to think, but keeps their thinking well-bounded.
Christianity was the first creed in the world to exterminate its adversaries in the name of love.
Who knew that Hitler was such a raving anti-Christian. I never would have thought so, given the often-cited links between right-wing religious extremist groups in the U.S. and the person they refer to as 'God'. I can definitely see how Christians would be 'up in arms' (pardon the pun, or not) or defensive about this quote, but really, how do you defend against this quote - Christians killing in the name of love? You can not. Better to just admit that the Crusades were caused, in large party, by crazy Christian fanatacism and swear off the Christianity altogether.
It is not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death. A slow death has something comforting about it. The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science. Religion will have to make more and more concessions. Gradually the myths crumble. All that is left is to prove that in nature there is no frontier between the organic and the inorganic. When understanding of the universe has become widespread, when the majority of men know that the stars are not sources of light but worlds, perhaps inhabited worlds like ours, then the Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.
Can I really be agreeing with Hitler? Spooky. Well, I've agreed with many things Bush has said, too, so maybe I shouldn't be completely surprised.
What is this God Who takes pleasure only in seeing men grovel before Him? Try to picture to yourselves the meaning of the following, quite simple story: God creates the conditions for sin. Later on He succeeds, with the help of the Devil, in causing man to sin. Then He employs a virgin to bring into the world a Son who, by His death, will redeem humanity!
Sounds a little bit like what Marilyn Manson was saying here.
When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let us be the only Folk who are immunized against the disease.
Sounds a lot like a recent study supports Hitler's claim that Christianity is a disease.
Give me ten years, and you will not recognise Germany.
Scary. Bush: Give him eight years, and you will not recognise the United States.
I guess it makes sense that Hitler hated Christianity - because Jews invented it (that's one way to say it, right?) - and Hitler hated Jews - exactly why, I don't recall. So, how much of Hilter's anti-Christian rhetoric was due to the fact that he thought of Christianity as a Jewish invention? Got me. Sounded like he really believed what he was saying, though.
Seems like this discussion of Christianity ties in nicely to a very hot topic over at dKos.
As for the Chomsky t-shirts, I want to make sure he gets royalties, or at least, that the money goes to progressive causes, so need to be careful who I buy from.
...On November 10, 2002, CNN ran some of those infamous 'modern-day Blitzkrieg' comments, with Anderson Cooper leading the way:
Cooper: In Jamie McIntyre's report they talked about a modern day blitzkrieg. Is that what this thing is going to look like?
Harrison: I think that's exactly what it'll look like. I think this war, if and when it comes, will be characterized by what I call shock and sustainment. It'll be an initial heavy blow, primarily air, but certainly supported by all kinds of other sorts of operations. But it won't be a one-time shot, it'll be a sustained operation so that the enemy -- the Iraqis -- don't have an opportunity to recover from the shock.