Tag Archives: Nazis

EXPECT MORE CHARLOTTESVILLES

The one question nobody has asked in all the discussion over events in Charlottesville, Virginia, is this:   why was the statue of Robert E. Lee, a giant of American history, being pulled down in the first place?   In the last few years, only ISIS and the Taliban have destroyed statues.   Are Americans now to copy them in an attempt to erase history?

It was this action that provoked the demonstration by white people, who have been labeled “racists”, “white nationalists”, “white supremacists”, “fascists”, “Nazis”, “neo-Nazis” and other names.

They were also called liars.   Yet, for fifty years, Americans have been fed a lie by liberals in both political parties.   The lie?   That ethnicity doesn’t matter any more.  Multiculturalism has been the fashion of the time.   This period has been an aberration in history – the denial of ethnicity (but only in the West).   This overlooks the fact that people identify first and foremost with their ethnic group.   The “Black Lives Matter” movement of the last four years shows this to be a fact.

The great African-American boxer, Muhammad Ali, once observed:

“It is against God’s law to integrate.   It’s only nature, not hatred, to keep people among their own kind.   A man has to be a fool to want to live in any other culture but his own.”

This quote shows just how much American thinking has changed in fifty years!

If a white American made the same comment today, he would be labeled “racist” and likely prosecuted.

Yet, Ali’s comment should help us understand the “white nationalist” movement that has been in the news over the weekend, following a demonstration that went wrong in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Before we leave Muhammed Ali, here’s another quote from him:

“Bluebirds like to be together, eagles hang out with eagles, sparrows stick with sparrows, buzzards go with buzzards.   They’re all birds, but they go with their own.”

Again, you couldn’t say that today.

Clearly, attitudes change.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Before 1965, America was 88.6% white (1960 census).    It’s fair to say that they considered their country the best in the world.  They wanted to keep it the way it was and immigration policies reflected their desire to maintain the racial balance.   Immigrants from Europe were preferred; and restrictions were put on immigrants from the rest of the world.   By our standards today, they were all racists!

President Theodore Roosevelt, who died exactly a century ago, warned that the Anglo-Saxon race was in peril because of a high rate of breeding amongst non-Anglos and the tendency of the Anglo-Saxons to voluntarily practice birth control, which he condemned.

From Minnesota Public Radio:

At the turn of the 20th century, infertility became an obsession for the eugenics movement.  The growing scientific field of genetics led some political leaders to embrace the notion of controlled breeding to favor “advanced” races.   White Americans feared an “infertility crisis” in their neighborhoods.   President Theodore Roosevelt warned in 1903 that immigrants and minorities were too fertile, and that Anglo-Saxons risked committing “race suicide” by using birth control and failing to keep up baby-for-baby.

In one speech, Roosevelt said:   “The chief of blessings for any nation is that it shall leave its seed to inherit the land.   The greatest of all curses is sterility, and the severest of all condemnations should be that visited upon willful sterility.”

The notion of breeding as an act of national service would reappear during World War II.”

Take note of the final paragraph – that those who fought the fascists in World War II thought that breeding white Anglo-Saxons was a national service for Americans.

A few years after TR, Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, oversaw unprecedented segregation in federal government offices.

The Democrats gave birth to the Ku Klux Klan, glorified in the 1915 movie “The Birth of a Nation,” a movie Wilson lauded.   It’s considered the most influential movie in history.   It was blatantly racist.

Clearly, the white nationalist movement is not new.   The movement today is perhaps more desperate, facing the realization that in less than twenty years, after four centuries of domination by one ethnic group, America will be a non-white country.   That will change everything, as assuredly as it has done elsewhere in the world.  When domination by one ethnic group ends, fundamental changes take place that target the ethnic group losing power.

This is already happening, and not just in the United States.   The destruction of Confederate statues in southern states is similar to the destruction of Cecil Rhodes statues and other monuments in southern Africa; in England, too, attempts were made to destroy statues of Rhodes at Oxford University, though doubtless students would still be willing to accept Rhodes scholarships.

All of this reflects the growing numbers of non-whites, together with their liberal-leftist supporters who want to destroy America and replace it with something else.

Every TV station, without exception, failed to give any background to the “white nationalist” demonstration.   There was a concerted campaign to denigrate them, calling them “fascists,” “white supremacists” and other names, with no attempt to understand their frustrations.    Undoubtedly, some could be labelled with these words, and the television media loves to zero in on those in particular, but many are motivated by a simple desire to preserve their national identity, including their own history and culture.

Since 1965, with the passing of a new Immigration Act, that encouraged immigration from Africa, Asia, the Middle East and South America, we have witnessed a deliberate and concerted campaign to finish off traditional America.   The bill was sponsored by Senator Edward Kennedy who promised it would not change the demographics of America; Republicans favored it to get cheap labor for factories and in agriculture.   No thought was given to assimilation, or, rather, the lack of it.

When TV reporters last weekend talked about all the lies coming from the “white nationalists” they never once mentioned the lies of the last 50 years from both political parties about the coming destruction of the America built up in earlier centuries.

A backlash was inevitable.  It did not start in Charlottesville.   It was even apparent at the last election, won by Donald Trump.   Support from disgruntled whites, who have lost their good-paying jobs to other countries and are having to compete at the bottom of the financial ladder with imported domestic labor, put Trump in the White House.   Many of those who supported him will slowly realize that they cannot reverse the trends through the ballot box.   Their only option will be the streets.   At that point, there may be similarities with the fascist movements in Germany and Italy in the 1930’s.

RETURNING TO ETHNICITY

What we are witnessing in the United States and other western nations is a return to ethnicity.   Politicians and the media will quickly condemn this.   But it needs to be remembered that ethnic identity was very much a part of peoples’ lives down through the centuries. In the last two generations, an attempt was made to eradicate ethnic identity.   In the West, this was at the expense of white people who were forced to change their thinking on everything, involuntarily.   A backlash was only to be expected.   The liberal-leftist multiculturalists assumed everybody would agree with them but, unfortunately for them, some people still think for themselves.

And they do not appreciate their heritage being attacked.

Jesus Christ predicted that one of the signs of the end-time is that “nation will rise against nation, kingdom against kingdom” (Matthew 24:7).   Whereas a kingdom is a political entity like the United States, the word for “nation” used here is ethnos, meaning ethnic group. Ethnic groups will turn against each other is what He was saying.

In Charlottesville, we witnessed a return to ethnicity.

It didn’t start in Charlottesville – and it won’t end there.

Expect more Charlottesvilles.

(This blog is a fully independent blog that has no connection to any church or secular organization. It was started to keep people informed on international affairs in light of the scriptures.   Financial support comes from myself and readers who generously donate to help cover costs.)

Advertisements

COMMON SENSE, WITH TACT

Donald Trump Muslims

After Donald Trump’s call for a temporary halt in allowing Muslims to move to America, there has been a great deal of “moral outrage,” as CNN called it.   Prominent members of the liberal intelligentsia have been appearing on the various news channels.   Accusations of Trump being “un-American” are constantly being yelled out, even though America had no Muslims in its infancy and few until a change in the immigration laws fifty years ago.

Donald Trump has called for a ban on immigration to the United States by Muslims.  TV talk programs seem to have discussed nothing else since his controversial call Monday, which he referred to as “common sense.”

The liberal media, plus almost all politicians of both major parties, have condemned Mr. Trump and called him a “racist” and lots of other bad names.

Methinks they protest too much!   Why are they so determined to see so many Muslims in America?

Let’s consider the facts ……

The US is the leading nation of the western world.   The country has experienced a number of terrorist attacks by Muslims, including San Bernardino, Boston, Chattanooga, Garland, Fort Hood and 9-11.

The number two economy in the western world is Japan, with 130 million people.   Japan has not had a terrorist attack perpetrated by Muslims.   Japan has a very strict immigration policy, which does not encourage Muslims to move there.   Could there be a connection?
Mr. Trump lacks tact, a quality he needs and one that needs to be brought into this debate.

I remember a conversation with a member of the diplomatic service in an African country some years ago.   My wife and I were enjoying our visit to his country and I expressed the hope that they would have more tourists, which would boost their economy.   I told him that one thing they could do to help encourage tourism was to abolish the visa requirement for tourists.

He responded that the country had to require a visa, at a cost of $100, before any tourist could visit.   He explained that it was reciprocal. In other words, because the US insisted people from his country must get a visa to enter America, his country had to insist on visas for Americans.

The US requires peoples in many countries to get visas, to screen them before they visit and to weed out those who might visit and stay to look for work.

But my point is that visa requirements are reciprocal.

Can’t we do the same when it comes to immigration?

We should apply the same rules to people wanting to come to the United States, as their countries apply to Americans who go there.

As none of the 57 majority Muslim countries allows Americans to immigrate into their countries, we would effectively achieve the ban on Muslims Mr. Trump wants, but do it more tactfully.   The ball would be in their court!

Yes, there are Americans living in Muslim countries.   Some are married to locals in those countries, while some work there on contract, providing skills their economies need; but none have permanent resident status and will never be allowed to apply for citizenship.  Muslim nations know that Muslims and non-Muslims just don’t mix!

Quid pro quo.   Problem solved.   With tact, Mr. Trump!

There was also a lack of tact in the White House when Josh Earnest, White House spokesman, described Mr. Trump’s comments as “fascist,” forgetting that the most famous Democratic president of all, Franklin Roosevelt, interred Japanese, German and Italian Americans during World War II.

Meanwhile, a great deal of ignorance has been exposed in the media on this issue.   A number of news people have told us that Mr. Trump’s suggestion goes against the constitution.   It’s difficult to justify such a statement when there were no Muslims in the country at the time the constitution was written.   It wasn’t until after the Civil War that Muslims first came on the scene and the first mosque was built in Chicago as recently as 1929.

Nihad Awad, Executive Director and Founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, likened Mr. Trump’s comments to those of Nazis against the Jews, asking:  “Haven’t we learned anything from history, Mr. Trump?”   This blatant double standard went unquestioned.   It was a perfect opportunity to raise questions about attitudes toward Jews shown in some Muslim countries and during the Holocaust.

On the same day that this dominated the news, TIME magazine announced its choice of “Person of the Year.”   This year’s choice is Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, who opened Germany’s doors to allow in one million migrants this year, the equivalent of the US taking in four million.   The decision has already resulted in negative repercussions that must be borne by the German people.

The question arises – why is the media so determined to see the end of the European races?   At the same time as ridiculing Trump, most news sources are seen praising Frau Merkel for her decision.

Whatever you may think of Mr. Trump’s call to halt Muslim immigration at this time, Americans should be thankful the issue has been raised for one simple reason – any more attacks could easily result in a violent backlash against Muslims by other Americans. The population needs to be thoroughly educated on the religion and its goals toward the United States so that a responsible debate can take place.

 

 

 

 

HOMAGE TO AUSTRALIA

 

Australian soldiers at Galipoli
Australian soldiers at Gallipoli

The Woman in Gold is a movie that’s showing in cinemas right now.   It tells the true story of an elderly American Jewish lady who takes the Austrian government to court to reclaim a family painting that was stolen by the Nazis during the 1938 Anschluss, when the vast majority of Austrians welcomed Adolf Hitler’s annexation of his home country.

The movie stars Helen Mirren as the elderly lady and Ryan Reynolds as her lawyer.

In one scene, Reynolds is sending a package to the Austrian government from somewhere in Los Angeles.   The man behind the desk commented on how he had always wanted to go to Austria.   His daughter, he added, loves kangaroos!

He’s not the only person who is ignorant of Australia.   Americans, in particular, have difficulty telling the difference between an Australian and a British accent.   I’ve often had people ask me which part of Australia I come from. Unlike many of my compatriots, this does not upset me – I consider it a great honor to be taken as an Aussie.   If I were 24, instead of 64, I would move there.   Australia has an American lifestyle without the frenetic pace that makes life in the US so stressful.

Tomorrow, April 25th, is Australia’s special day – ANZAC Day, a commemoration of Australia’s losses in the wars of the last century. ANZAC stands for the “Australian and New Zealand Army Corps.”

It’s exactly a hundred years since the great battle that was a defining moment for the new countries.   Australia became a Dominion of the British Empire in 1901; New Zealand in 1905. Dominion status meant they were independent but still a part of the Empire, which was transforming into a Commonwealth, united in a common loyalty to the Crown, fulfilling the biblical prophecy of “a multitude of nations” (Genesis 48:19), descended from the patriarch Joseph’s son, Ephraim.

When the British went to war in August 1914, these two dominions, together with the other dominions and colonies of the Empire, went to war as well.   The Australians quickly took over German territories in the Pacific.   But it’s the Battle of Gallipoli, which is remembered most and commemorated on this day, the day the conflict started.   It was to last over eight months.

Gallipoli is a peninsula in North West Turkey.   It’s sometimes called the Dardenelles.   At the time, Turkey was called the Ottoman Empire. In November, 1914, it made the fatal mistake of allying itself with the two central European empires, Germany and Austria-Hungary, against Great Britain and its allies.   Less than ten years later, the Ottoman Empire collapsed and was replaced by the Turkish Republic.   The founder of the republic was Kemal Ataturk, who was one of the military commanders on the Ottoman side at Gallipoli.

The battle was a military disaster for the Allies. Australians, New Zealanders, the British and French all fought there and lost a great number of men, many on the first day when soldiers were landed on a thin strip of beach, looking up cliffs at Ottoman positions, cannon fodder for the enemy.   They fought valiantly.   Ataturk afterwards talked of their bravery.   Turkey’s president is hosting a commemoration today, a gathering of world leaders including Prince Charles and Prince Harry.   Harry is currently serving with the Australian military.   Commonwealth ties remain, even though they have been weakened in recent decades.   The prime ministers of Australia and New Zealand laid wreaths.   The President of Ireland was also present, a reminder that Ireland was then a part of the United Kingdom and lost many of its native sons in this battle.

74,000 Anzac troops fought at Gallipoli. 10,000 died.   To understand the full impact of that loss, let’s remember these were troops from two new countries, that were thinly populated.   At the time, the United States had just over 100 million people, the UK 40 million. Australia’s population in 1915 was under five million.   New Zealand’s was a little over one million.   To compare the losses to the US, we need to multiply the figures by twenty.   The 10,000 dead was the equivalent of 200,000 American losses, or 80,000 British servicemen.

The British lost 25,000 at Gallipoli, out of a total of 350,000 men.   The French also suffered heavy losses, 10,000 out of 79,000 men.

On the other side, the Turks lost 86,000 out of 400,000 combatants.

The figures are staggering, far greater than losses suffered in recent conflicts.

And the sobering reality is that the war was so unnecessary.   Some wars were unavoidable – World War Two, for instance, when the Western powers had to defeat the evil of fascism.   Ironically, if World War One had not been fought, there would have been no World War Two.

If the Ottoman Empire had not been defeated, its constituent territories would not have been carved up, ultimately creating the modern Middle East.   The ripple effect of that first global conflict of the twentieth century continues to this day.   The wars we are fighting now all originated in World War One.

Australia, it should be noted, is the only country to have fought in all these conflicts from beginning to end.   Gallipoli was just the start (in fact, Australians had been fighting in the Empire’s wars even before independence).   Australia was always ready to fight alongside the British to preserve freedom in a dangerous world. After World War Two, when America became the pre-eminent power, Australians fought alongside Americans in all America’s wars.

The land down under is an under-appreciated country.   It’s time to publicly pay homage to a great nation that has done so much for the western world.

Let’s remember and give thanks for their many sacrifices on this ANZAC day.

NETANYAHU’S ADDRESS HIGHLIGHTS DIVISIONS OVER ISLAMIC MILITANTS

Netanyahu

Prior to 9/11, most Americans were barely aware of the religion of Islam.

In the short time since that tragic day, Islam has established its presence in the country with mosques and schools in every sizeable community.   The president of the United States has even said that the country was founded on Judeo-Christian-Islamic principles.

One thing the religion has done is divide the country and other nations where there has been widespread immigration from Muslim lands, mostly in the Middle East.

At no time has that division been greater than now.

In France, it was the Charlie Hebdo killings that caused the division, between those on the right of the political spectrum who want an end to Islamization and the immigrants themselves, supported by those on the left who side with them.

In Germany, there is PEGIDA staging weekly demonstrations against the Islamization of Europe.   Critical of PEGIDA are the established political parties who bend over backwards to assure Muslims that there is a place for them in their societies.

Now division has come to the United States with the visit of the Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu.

Some would say the division is over Israel.   But the divide is also over how best to handle militant Islam.

The gulf between the two became clearer today when the Prime Minister addressed the US Congress in Washington.

The invitation to speak came from the Speaker of the House, John Boehner. The White House made it clear that it was opposed to Netanyahu speaking, claiming it was a breach of protocol so close to the Israel election.

Although most Democrats did listen to the speech, Nancy Pelosi, former Speaker of the House, was very critical almost immediately afterwards, claiming she was “near tears” throughout the speech and “saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States.” She was reportedly visibly agitated while Mr. Netanyahu was speaking.

The subject of the speech was Iran and the imminent deal between western allies with the Iranian regime over its nuclear program.   The deadline for this agreement is March 31st.   Mr. Netanyahu believes that the impending agreement will make it more likely that Iran will develop nuclear weapons – and soon.

The division is clear – and not just over Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.

The division is between those who see a serious threat from militant Islam and those who are in denial.   Iran is not the only threat but it was the focus of the prime minister’s address.   Iran with a nuclear weapon could annihilate Israel, a small country and near neighbor.   Indeed, Iran has threatened to annihilate “the world’s only Jewish state.”

The prime minister reminded his audience of the story of Esther, the Jewish queen married to a Persian king in the fifth century BC.   The Persian king at the time wanted to annihilate the Jews, just as today’s Iranian leadership does.   Tomorrow (Wednesday, March 4th) is the Feast of Purim, which commemorates the delivery of the Jews from total disaster.

More recently, the leader of Hezbollah, Iran’s chief terrorist proxy said:  “If all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of chasing them down all over the world.”

Although Iran is not an Arab country and has traditionally been isolated as the only major Shi’ite Islamic nation, today it dominates four Arab capitals, Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Sana’a.   Mr. Netanyahu referenced Iran’s support against Sunni Islamic ISIS, claiming that their support against ISIS does not make them a friend of America.   It’s a case of “the enemy of your enemy is your enemy!”

“Both ISIS and Iran want to impose a militant Islamic empire,” he warned.

“The greatest danger facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam and nuclear weapons.”   This clearly would change everything in the Middle East and the wider world beyond.

Mr. Netanyahu’s address was impassioned.   We have not heard such a powerful speech from a politician in many years.   It is particularly impressive when we consider that English is not his first language.   Mr. Netanyahu and former British statesman Sir Winston Churchill are the only two world leaders who have addressed Congress on three occasions.   Following the speech, Netanyahu was compared on at least two news channels to Churchill, who spent the 1930’s warning of the impending threat from the Nazis, as Netanyahu warns of the increasing threat from militant Islam.   If the world had heeded Churchill, the Holocaust would not have happened. If the world listens to Netanyahu, a future holocaust may be averted.

Students of the Bible know that Jerusalem, Israel’s “eternal capital” will be the focus of major conflict in the near future.

The Old Testament prophet Zechariah, writing about events leading up to the Second Coming of the Messiah, prophesied that Jerusalem and Judah (Israel) will be at the center of the final conflict to confront mankind.

“Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of drunkenness to all the surrounding peoples, when they lay siege against Judah and Jerusalem.   And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it.”  (Zech 12:2-3.)

Zechariah 14:2 adds:   “For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem.”

Centuries later, Jesus Christ, answering a question about the “signs of His Coming,” said:   “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near.”

Mr. Netanyahu was right when he pointed out that “we share a common destiny.”   What happens over there will affect us over here – and all countries in between.

The day before he addressed the US Congress, Mr. Netanyahu spoke to AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), one of the most powerful lobby groups in the United States.   He said then that, whereas the President of the United States spends every day thinking about America’s security, as Israel’s prime minister, he spends every day thinking of Israel’s survival.

In that one sentence, he encapsulated the difference between the leaders of the two nations.   At the present time, militant Islam is a matter of national security to the United States.  If Mr. Netanyahu’s warning is not taken seriously, it could soon become a matter of national survival, as it is in Israel.

LIBERATION OF AUSCHWITZ, 70 YEARS AGO TODAY

auschwitz

I had originally intended to return to the US and give a sermon on it, but I couldn’t.   I would not have been able to hold back the tears.

I’m referring to my visit to Auchwitz, one of the worst of the Nazi death camps where six million Jews died.   An estimated 1.1 million people died in Auschwitz, most of them Jews.   Men, women and children.

Most memorable in my mind was all the pony-tails cut off the heads of little girls.   They were stacked up high behind a see-through glass wall.   This was the hair of young female victims.   All I could think about was my four young grand daughters!   Auschwitz is set in a peaceful rural setting – what happened there could happen anywhere.   I had had the same thought when visiting Anne Frank’s house in Amsterdam, which reminded me of where my grandparents lived.

Auschwitz is the stuff of nightmares.   At the arrival point, where families had to get out of box-cars and were immediately sorted into those who would live and those who were assigned to immediate annihilation, I felt their hopelessness.   There would have been no opportunity to say good-bye to loved ones, none at all.   People were treated like animals.

The gas chamber was particularly horrific.   I stood under one of the vents through which came Zyklon B, the poisonous gas that quickly killed its victims.   In an adjacent room we saw where the corpses were first taken – to remove gold from teeth and cut off hair that could be made into rope or wigs for fashionable ladies.   The people who did all the work were inmates, forced to work on fellow inmates who had been selected to die.   Bones were boiled and made into soap.

The dormitories left an indelible impression on my mind.   Bunk beds were stacked to the ceiling.   There were three levels and, I believe, nine people slept to a bed.   Everybody would rush to get in the dormitory when bed-time came.   If you could get to the top level, there was fresh air coming through a gap between the wall and the roof.   Also, at the top, you would avoid human waste falling through the slats onto you during the night.   Because the diet was so poor, concentration camp victims had permanent diarrhea.   They could not use toilet facilities, such as they were, during the night and simply lay there relieving themselves onto those below.   How could one forget such an image?

Today is the seventieth anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz by Soviet troops.   When they arrived they found 7,000 survivors, all ill or starving.   In the West, we tend only to remember what our nations did in World War II.   We fail to appreciate that it was the Russians who contributed the most to the defeat of Nazi Germany.   Russia (the USSR) lost twenty million people.   They were the first to get to Auschwitz and, a few weeks later, to Berlin, where Hitler had committed suicide rather than face a trial for war crimes that included the camps.

The cool and calculated way in which the Nazis selected Auschwitz as their biggest concentration camp is chilling.   Auschwitz is close to Krakow, Poland, at the very heart of Europe.   Trains from all over the continent could easily get there, bringing Jewish victims in their tens of thousands.

A tour of the Jewish quarter in Krakow is a suitable accompaniment to the day in Auschwitz.   At one time the quarter was thriving.   Now only thirty Jews congregate in the one remaining synagogue that is still used.    Jews started moving to Krakow when they were expelled en masse from Spain by Ferdinand and Isabella.   In the same year that Christopher Columbus was sent to discover the New World, the king and queen decided they wanted their country to be free of Jews. 450 years later, Hitler wanted the same thing for Europe.

I asked our tour guide in Krakow why people hated the Jews so much. His reply was that “the Jews are different.   They go to church on Saturday, we Poles go on Sunday.”   In other words, they were persecuted for keeping the seventh day Sabbath.   Poles, like other conquered Europeans, co-operated with the Nazis when it came to handing over Jews.   Some helped the Jews, but most people were too afraid.

James Carroll, a former priest in the Roman Catholic Church, traces anti-semitism back to the church, which always blamed the Jews for killing Christ.   His book (also a DVD) is called Constantine’s Sword:   The Church and the Jews – a History.   He did not set out to blame his own church for the holocaust but his book shows the historical connection.   When Hitler visited Cologne Cathedral prior to World War II, he told the Archbishop that all he was doing was finishing the work the Catholic Church had started.

Sadly, anti-semitism is once again on the rise. Last year, almost 7,000 Jews left France for Israel.   In Britain, a recent survey showed Jews are increasingly afraid to live there.   The biggest single factor in anti-semitism is Europe’s rising Muslim population.   France has 500,000 Jews, the biggest number in Europe; the Muslim population is ten times that, at five million.   There have been a number of attacks on Jewish targets in recent years, the latest being the terror attack on the kosher supermarket in Paris last month.   Anti-semitism did not begin with the Nazis and it didn’t end with the fall of the Third Reich, either.

Why did God allow it to happen?   This is the question most often asked.   To me, the answer is quite simple – man rejected God. Men do not want to obey the Laws of God.   So they reap the consequences of disobedience, including the Holocaust.   Auschwitz is a sobering reminder to pray fervently “Thy Kingdom Come” (Matt 6:10).

If you can ever go to Poland, be sure to visit Krakow and Auschwitz. One is a well-preserved medieval city, the other a constant reminder of man’s inhumanity to man.

Everybody should go to Auschwitz.   Everybody.   If they don’t, it could happen again.

 

 

LESSONS FROM WEIMAR

Weimar_Republic_1919-1933-300x225

At the birth of the euro, The Economist magazine reminded readers that one of the great lessons of history is that paper money eventually always fails.

That doesn’t just go for the euro – it applies to dollars and pounds, too.

One way it fails is through hyperinflation.

We tend to think that hyperinflation only happens in banana republics like Zimbabwe, Ghana, and Argentina, forgetting that we also like bananas.  It can happen here, too.

It happened in Germany.

After fighting and losing World War One, Germany entered a period known as the Weimar Republic.  Its constitution was written in Weimar, a city 50 miles from Leipzig.

The victorious powers made the great mistake of forcing Germany to pay reparations after the war.  The French, in particular, insisted on their neighbor paying for everything – even invading the German industrial heartland, with assistance from Belgium, in 1922.  If the Germans wouldn’t hand over their wealth, they were simply going to take it!

All the main participants in the war suffered greatly.  This does not include the United States, as America was only a factor in the closing months of the conflict.  The established order in Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary was overthrown, replaced by chaos and confusion.  Serious financial problems also developed as somebody had to pay for the war.

In most countries it was the working class that had to foot the bill.  In Germany, it was more the middle class.  Successive Weimar administrations – and none of them lasted very long – gave in to the workers’ demands rather than try to enforce fiscal discipline.   Additionally, Germany had the most generous welfare benefits in the world at the time, introduced by Otto von Bismarck in the 1880’s.  Together with reparations, the result was a high rate of inflation.

Hyperinflation is when inflation gets out of control and prices are increasing at more than 50% a month.  Very quickly, that becomes 50% per week, then 75% and 100%.   Eventually, workers have to be paid hourly in wheelbarrows full of money, which then has to be spent quickly before prices go up even further.

Weimar-MArk

The fixed-income middle class, professionals on salaries or pensions, soon suffers.   Skilled workers can often barter their skills for food.  In an attempt to control inflation, mistakes are made – freezing rents, for example, with resultant negative effects.

This was Germany in the early 1920’s.  By 1923, the situation was out of control.

The Downfall of Money explains all this very well.  The book is written by an Englishman named Frederick Taylor.  It shows clearly how World War One led inevitably to World War Two, via hyperinflation and the rise of right-wing parties, culminating in the Nazis coming to power.

When economies collapse, people look for simple solutions – jobs and food are far more important than constitutional niceties and democracy. 

The parallels in the United States and Great Britain today are disturbing.

Our governments are recklessly over-spending, borrowing to excess.  The US is printing an extra $85 billion per month, “quantitative easing” as it’s called.  This is enabling some to take advantage and make a lot of money, while the vast majority is finding it harder and harder to make ends meet.

Part of the justification involved in QE was the fear of deflation after the financial crash of 2008.  The value of homes dropped dramatically in the crash; some commodities have been dropping as the global economy enters a slump.  Deflation is the worst thing that can happen to an economy.  It’s almost impossible to stop the downward spiral.

Hyperinflation is the second worst thing that can happen.  One can lead to the other.  As central banks print money to avoid the one, it can inadvertently get out of control and hyperinflation can take over.

The end result is that almost everybody loses everything!  Those that gain by taking advantage of the situation also lose as the people will turn on them as they did in Germany.

“The Germany of the inflation was paradise for anyone who owed money.”  (The Downfall of Money, by Frederick Taylor, page 206)  A high rate of inflation reduces the amount of debt people owe.  “By the same token, this was a very bad time for creditors of all kinds, for savers, and for investors depending on a fixed return.  That meant large numbers of the old German middle and upper middle classes suffered a drastic, even catastrophic, fall in their standard of living.” Appropriately, chapter 21 of the book is titled:  “The Starving Billionaires.”

Inflation is not something new.  The prophet Haggai wrote about it 2,500 years ago.

“You have sown much, and bring in little; you eat, but you have not enough; you drink, but you are not filled with drink; you clothe yourselves, but no one is warm; and he that earns wages earns wages to put it into a bag with holes.”  (Haggai 1:6)

We all hope that hyperinflation is not the consequence of over-spending by the US, UK and other governments.  But it’s difficult to see how it can be avoided.  It seems as if the only way we can create greater wealth today is by printing more money – a recipe for inflation.  In turn, inflation can quickly get out of control, soon turning into hyperinflation.

It can all happen very quickly as it did in Zimbabwe a few years ago and in Germany in the 1920’s.

A spiritual lesson we should remember in these turbulent times is found in Matthew 6:19-21:  “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust does corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal.  But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust does corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal.  For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

The Economist was correct with its warning of all currencies eventually collapsing.  It’s only a matter of time.  The accumulation of wealth may seem important, but clearly we need to be prepared for losing it all as did millions in Germany.  As Jesus Christ pointed out, treasures in heaven are more important and more reliable than treasures on earth!