Posted on 05/13/2014 8:14:47 PM PDT by ReformationFan
Winger-left blowhard Ed Schultz got a mention on Drudge today, for sending out a Tweet that said, "Gay people were really the ones being persecuted in Hitler's Germany."
While 10,000-15,000 homosexuals were likely to have died at Hitler's hands (which is 10,000-15,000 too many), Schultz blithely and blindly ignores the plain historical fact that that number pales in comparison to the six million Jews who were gassed or shot by Hitler's goons.
What Schultz overlooks, perhaps out of sheer historical ignorance, is that the persecution of homosexuals in Hitler's Germany was carried out by other homosexuals.
Hitler was seeking to revive the Greek ideal of the hyper-masculine homosexual warrior, and thus gathered around him homosexuals like himself to serve with him in his sinister designs for the world.
The man who served as the director of the Institute of Sexology in 1930 wrote that "not ten percent of the men who, in 1933, took the fate of Germany into their hands, were sexually normal." Noted historian William Shirer, in his monumental work, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, observed of the "brown-shirted S.A." that "many of its top leaders, beginning with its chief, Roehm, were notorious homosexual perverts."
Adds historian H.R. Knickerbocker, "(Ernst) Roehm, as the head of 2,500,000 Storm Troops, had surrounded himself with a staff of perverts. His chiefs, men of rank of Gruppenfuhrer or Obergruppenfuhrer, commanding units of several hundred thousand Storm Troopers, were almost without exception homosexuals. Indeed, unless a Storm Troop officer were homosexual he had no chance of advancement."
So if Hitler's officers and enforcers were hyper-masculine homosexuals, who were the homosexuals they persecuted? The objects of Nazi wrath were soft, effeminate homosexuals whom the Spartan S.A. despised.
Prior to Hitler's assumption of power, homosexuality, known as "the German vice" was a crime. Those who were apprehended were sent for evaluation to the Institute of Sexology. Thus many of Hitler's officers had patient records in this institution which he could not allow to see the light of day.
Thus, In 1930, Hitler burned the Institute of Sexology to the ground to obliterate evidence of Nazi sexual proclivities.
According to Ludwig L. Lenz, the assistant director of the Institute of Sexology at the time, said, "We had a great many Nazis under treatment at the Institute. Why was it then, since we were completely non-party, that our purely scientific Institute was the first victim which fell to the new regime? The answer to this is simple...We knew too much...Our knowledge of such intimate secrets regarding members of the Nazi Party and other documentary material – we possessed about forty thousand confessions and biographical letters – was the cause of the complete and utter destruction of the Institute of Sexology."
Homosexual advocates often cite the "Night of the Long Knives," in which Roehm and other S.A. officers were assassinated, as evidence of Hitler's antipathy toward homosexuals.
However, noted German historian Lothar Mochtan, in his book The Hidden Hitler, written in 2001, argues that Hitler had Roehm killed for another reason: Roehm was about to out Hitler to the German public, to expose Hitler's own twisted sexual orientation, in a bid to remove Hitler from power and take the reins of Germany into his own hands. Roehm, in other words, was killed to protect Hitler's power and his sexual secrets.
One historian put it this way, "Ernst Roehm wasn't shot because the Nazi Party felt outraged by the abrupt discovery that he was 'having' his storm troopers – that had been known for ages; but because his sway over the SA had become a menace to Hitler."
So when Ed Schultz says that homosexuals were persecuted by Hitler, he is half right. The other half is that that persecution was carried out by other homosexuals. That half of the story is at least as important as Schultz's half, but it's the half that Ed Schultz and other members of the Gay Gestapo hope you never hear about. Well, now you have.
How about socialized medicine?
National Health Care: Medicine in Germany, 1918-1945
NOVEMBER 01, 1993 by MARC S. MICOZZI M.D.
Which says nothing about Hitler.
Correct. I do not.
Perhaps you could tell us why? Then we'll take it from there.
Nothing directly but if you'll notice, my comment was in reply to post #38 and a scene from the movie Exodos.
OK, it’s pretty simple. He has no direct evidence except for the testimony of two people who were Hitler’s enemies. Sorry, but that doesn’t cut it. His book is not a serious piece of work, it’s all just the same old rumors with absolutely nothing to back it up. On the other side, we have Hitler’s public history, which, absent any serious evidence, we have to take at face value: he was straight. Period.
Thanks for those links.
Fischer had another article about it years ago-
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/080515
First of all, I've never said there was direct evidence. Few people that were close to Hitler but for whatever reason got on his wrong side lived to tell about it.
Secondly, if you ever get a chance to read the book you will have to admit there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence that Machtan has assembled. Through much of his life Hitler was a man surrounded by homosexuals and who gravitated to a homosexual social environment. Not many straight men will over an extended period do that.
Sorry, but that doesn’t cut it. His book is not a serious piece of work, it’s all just the same old rumors with absolutely nothing to back it up.
You've obviously never read the book or you would cite specifics rather than rehash something written on an internet review and claim as your own. Good luck finding any negative review of his book that goes into specific rebuttals other than the lack of direct evidence and a few women Hitler was photographed standing next to.
On the other side, we have Hitler’s public history, which, absent any serious evidence, we have to take at face value: he was straight. Period.
Consistency of your argument requires that you believe Al Capone to have been a tax cheat and nothing more.
Consistency of your argument requires that you believe Al Capone to have been a tax cheat and nothing more.
Please don't try making analogies. It requires logical thinking, and your simile is EXACTLY backward. We had evidence Capone was a tax cheat. Consistency of your argument requires us to believe Capone didn't cheat on his taxes, because one tax collector cherry-picked Capone's known associations, and many of them were not tax cheats.
Like all politicians, Hitler knew an enormous number of people. Some of them were occultists. Thus: Hitler had a passion for the occult. Except ... he didn't. Some of them were homosexuals. Thus: Hitler was a homosexual. Except ... he wasn't.
I find it odd that if you really did read the book you won't cite specific rebuttals. Is that because internet reviews downplaying the book also fail to go into specific rebuttals?
Please don't try making analogies. It requires logical thinking, and your simile is EXACTLY backward. We had evidence Capone was a tax cheat. Consistency of your argument requires us to believe Capone didn't cheat on his taxes, because one tax collector cherry-picked Capone's known associations, and many of them were not tax cheats.
If you disagree with the proven evidence that Capone was a tax cheat and nothing more, what proof can you offer that he was a murderer?
Like all politicians, Hitler knew an enormous number of people. Some of them were occultists. Thus: Hitler had a passion for the occult. Except ... he didn't. Some of them were homosexuals. Thus: Hitler was a homosexual. Except ... he wasn't.
Okay. I see we will get nowhere with Lothar Machtan's book. Next on the list, why do you believe the wartime psychological profiles of Hitler were incorrect in their assessment that he had a mixed up sexuality and may be a closeted homosexual?
You have GOT to be kidding.
The "wartime psychological profiles" of Hitler by the OSS and some others are even stupider than Machtan -- incredible as that is. The basis of their "analysis" is 100% reconstruction of trivial childhood events based on the ... wait for it ... wait for it ... "theory" of "psychoanalysis." What? Were there no Witch Doctors, astrologers, palm readers or phrenologists available?
Psychoanalysis has as much scientific validity as Tarot Card Reading. Good Lord! No wonder you buy into Machtan's nonsense. You actually believe that the quackery churned out by "psychoanalists" is to be taken seriously.
Thanks for being my laugh for the week.
Psychoanalysis.
Good one!
No I'm not.
The "wartime psychological profiles" of Hitler by the OSS and some others are even stupider than Machtan -- incredible as that is. The basis of their "analysis" is 100% reconstruction of trivial childhood events based on the ... wait for it ... wait for it ... "theory" of "psychoanalysis." What? Were there no Witch Doctors, astrologers, palm readers or phrenologists available?
So, you believe the methodologies were so flawed as to render the entire reports invalid?
Psychoanalysis has as much scientific validity as Tarot Card Reading. Good Lord! No wonder you buy into Machtan's nonsense. You actually believe that the quackery churned out by "psychoanalists" is to be taken seriously.
What I believe is that your diatribes are cover for the fact that you haven't read Machtan's book nor have your read the wartime psychological profiles, nor have you read from anyone else close enough to have a conversation with Hitler aside from Shirer and Speer which are the only two you have been able to cite.
Thanks for being my laugh for the week.
You failed to respond to my question in the prior post. Do you still believe there is no evidence that Capone was a murderer?
There is NO METHODOLOGY. Psychoanalysis is NOT SCIENCE. "Reports" that Hitler might have been a pervert because of his mother's strict toilet training is so laughably absurd that no serious person in the 21st century would regard it as anything but risible nonsense. [And, I have read your idiot's book, and yes, I HAVE READ, among many other "scientific analyses," the OSS report, which actually says what I've attributed to it above -- apparently with a straight face.]
I'll says this again, because it can't be emphasized often enough: You actually believe that the quackery churned out by "psychoanalists" is to be taken seriously.
That tells any serious person all he needs to know about your powers of discernment. Psychoanalysis is NOT SCIENCE. It is no more related to psychology than astrology is related to astronomy. It is pure, unadulterated, 100%, BS. In fact, is is not even BS. It is the BS that BS wipes off the bottom of its shoes.
I don't answer your question about Al Capone because it is not serious.
It is a logical fallacy, referred to as the fallacy of denying the premise. There is no need to respond to it, because it makes no sense whatsoever, and as I have ALREADY explained to you two posts ago, your analogy is illogical, inapt, and indeed exactly backwards. Al Capone was guilty of tax evasion. His guilt with regards to tax evasion neither proves nor disproves his guilt about anything else. But the evidence of his tax evasion does not suggest that he was secretly not a tax evader, which is the gist of your silly "point" about Capone.
Who said it was? Why do you keep switching the goalposts?
"Reports" that Hitler might have been a pervert because of his mother's strict toilet training is so laughably absurd that no serious person in the 21st century would regard it as anything but risible nonsense.
Finding a vulnerability farthest from the core and using it as a broadbrush to distract away from the core and discredit everything is not novel.
From Langer's wartime profile of Hitler:
Hitler's associates know that in respect to women Hitler is far from the ascetic he and the Propaganda Bureau would like to have the German public believe. None of them with the possible exception of Hoffmann and Schaub (his personal adjutant), know the nature of his sexual activities. This has led to a great deal of conjecture in Party circles. There are some who believe that his sex life is perfectly normal but restricted. Others, that he is immune from such temptations and that nothing happens when he is alone with girls. Still others believe that he is homosexual.The latter belief is based largely on the fact that during the early days of the Party many of the inner circle were well-known homosexuals. Roehm made no attempt to hide his homosexual activities and Hess was generally known as "Fraulein Anna". There were also many others, particularly in the early days of the movement, and it was supposed, for this reason, that Hitler, too, belonged to this category. In view of Hitler's pretense at purity and the importance of his mission for building a Greater Germany, it is extraordinary that he should be so careless about his associates. He has never restricted them in any way except at the time of the Blood Purge in 1934 when his excuse was that he had to purge the party of these undesirable elements. At all other times, he has been liberal to a fault. Lochner reports:
"The only criterion for membership in the Party was that the applicant be 'Unconditionally obedient and faithfully devoted to me'. When someone asked if that applied to thieves and criminals, Hitler said, 'Their private lives don't concern me.'"Ludecke claims that in speaking of some of the moralists who were complaining about the actions of his S.A. men, [Hitler said:"He would rather his S.A. men took the women than some fat-bellied moneybag. 'Why should I concern myself with the private lives of my followers ... apart from Roehm's achievements, I know that I can absolutely depend on him.'"Rauschning says that the general attitude in the Party was: "Do anything you like but don't get caught at it."-cut-
Homosexuality.
The great difficulty is that this form of identification early in life carries the individual in the direction of passive homosexuality. Hitler has for years been suspected of being a homosexual, although there is no reliable evidence that he has actually engaged in a relationship of this kind. Rauschning reports that he has met two boys who claimed that they were Hitler's homosexual partners, but their testimony can scarcely be taken at its face value. More condemning would be the remarks dropped by Foerster, the Danzig Gauleiter, in conversations with Rauschning. Even here, however, the remarks deal only with Hitler's impotence as far as heterosexual relations go without actually implying that he indulges in homosexuality. It is probably true that Hitler calls Foerster "Bubi", which is a common nickname employed by homosexuals in addressing their partners. This alone, however, is not adequate proof that he has actually indulged in homosexual practices with Foerster, who is known to be a homosexual.
-cut-
The belief that Hitler is homosexual has probably developed (a) from the fact that he does show so many feminine characteristics, and (b) from the fact that there were so many homosexuals in the Party during the early days and many continue to occupy important positions. It does seem that Hitler feels much more at ease with homosexuals than with normal persons, but this may be due to the fact that they are all fundamentally social outcasts and consequently have a community of interests which tends to make them think and feel more or less alike. In this connection it is interesting to note that homosexuals, too, frequently regard themselves as a special form of creation or as chosen ones whose destiny it is to initiate a new order.
The fact that underneath they feel themselves to be different and ostracized from normal social contacts usually makes them easy converts to a new social philosophy which does not discriminate against them. Being among civilization's discontents, they are always willing to take a chance of something new which holds any promise of improving their lot, even though their chances of success may be small and the risk great. Having little to lose to begin with, they can afford to take chances which others would refrain from taking. The early Nazi party certainly contained many members who could be regarded in this light. Even today Hitler derives pleasure from looking at men's bodies and associating with homosexuals. Strasser tells us that his personal body guard is almost always 100% homosexuals.
-cut-
Hitler's sexual life has always been the topic of much speculation. As pointed out in the previous section, most of his closest associates are absolutely ignorant on this subject. This has led to conjectures of all sorts. Some believe that he is entirely immune from such impulses. Some believe that he is a chronic masturbator. Some believe that he derives his sexual pleasure through voyeurism. Many believe that he is completely impotent. Others, and these are perhaps in the majority, that he is homosexual. It is probably true that he is impotent but he is certainiy not homosexual in the ordinary sense of the term. His perversion has quite a different nature which few have guessed. He is an extreme masochist who derives sexual pleasure from having a woman squat over him while she uriniates or defecates on his face.
Although this perversion is not a common one, it is not unknown in clinical work, particularly in its incipient stages. The four collaborators on this study, in addition to Dr. De Saussure who learned of the perversion from other sources, have all had experience with cases of this type. All five agree that their information as given is probably true in view of their clinical experience and their knowledge of Hitler's character. In the following section further evidence of its validition will be cited. At the present moment it is sufficient to recognize the influence that this perversion must have on the conscious mental life of Hitler.
Unquestionably Hitler has suffered severe guilt reactions
*Note: There may be some people who would question the reliability of any information given by Otto Strasser because of his reputation. It is perhaps because of his reputation that he came by this information which had been so carefully guarded. He also supplied the interviewer with a great deal of other information concerning Hitler which checked very closely with that of other informants. As far as this study is concerned we have no reason to question his sincerity.-cut-In abandoning the genital level of libidinal development the individual becomes impotent as far as heterosexual relations are concerned. It would appear, from the evidence, that some such process took place during Hitler's early childhood. Throughout his early adult life, in Vienna, in the Army, in Munich, in Landesberg, no informant has reported a heterosexual relationship. In fact, the informants of all these periods make a point of the fact that he had absolutely no interest in women or any contact with them. Since he has come to power his peculiar relationship to women has been so noticeable that many writers believe that he is asexual. Some have surmised that he suffered a genital injury during the last war, others that he is homosexual. The former hypothesis, for which there is not a shred of real evidence, is almost certainly false.
-cut-
Even in these days he lived in [Page 206] a flophouse which was known to be inhabited by men who lent themselves to homosexual practices, and it was probably for this reason that he was listed on the Vienna police record as a "sexual pervert."
Nobody has ever offered an explanation of why he remained in Vienna for over five years if his life there was as distasteful and the city disgusted him to the degree that he claims in his autobiography. He was free to leave whenever he wished and could have gone to his beloved Germany years earlier if he had so desired. The fact of the matter is that he probably derived great masochistic satisfaction from his miserable life in Vienna, and it was not until his perversion became full-blown and he realized its implications that he fled to Munich at the beginning of 1913.
-cut-
When we remember, however, that for years he chose to live in a Vienna flophouse which was known to be inhabited by many homosexuals and later on associated with several notorious homosexuals, such as Hess and Roehm, we cannot feel that this form of attack, alone, would be sufficient to threaten his integrity to such an extent that he would repudiate his former self.
[And, I have read your idiot's book,
Yet you fail to offer evidence of having done so choosing instead to launch into frenzied diatribes and distract away from the topic.
and yes, I HAVE READ, among many other "scientific analyses," the OSS report, which actually says what I've attributed to it above -- apparently with a straight face.]
The OSS analysis was done during wartime using all information about Hitler that was available to the U.S. government at that time. It is naturally like a picture puzzle containing many missing pieces for which the analysts do not know what the picture is of. All they can do is take the available pieces and try fitting them together as best they can.
I'll says this again, because it can't be emphasized often enough: You actually believe that the quackery churned out by "psychoanalists" is to be taken seriously.
In retrospect, does anyone deny they reached an incorrect conclusion?
From Langer:
8. Hitler might commit suicide.That tells any serious person all he needs to know about your powers of discernment.This is the most plausible outcome. Not only has he frequently threatened to commit suicide, but from what we know of his psychology it is the most likely possibility. It is probably true that he has an inordinate fear of death, but being an hysteric he could undoubtedly screw himself up into the super-man character and perform the deed. In all porbability, however, it would not be a simple suicide. He has too much of the dramatic for that and since immortailty is one of his dominant motives we can [Page 248] imagine that he would stage the most dramatic and effective death scene he could possibly think of. He knows how to bind the people to him and if he cannot have the bond in life he will certainly do his utmost to achieve it in death. He might even engage some other fanatic to do the final killing at his orders.
So you believe Hitler didn't commit suicide and instead escaped to South America, or icebase Antarctica?
Psychoanalysis is NOT SCIENCE. It is no more related to psychology than astrology is related to astronomy. It is pure, unadulterated, 100%, BS. In fact, is is not even BS. It is the BS that BS wipes off the bottom of its shoes.
Why do you keep changing the subject?
I don't answer your question about Al Capone because it is not serious.
You know it is serious.
Al Capone was guilty of tax evasion. His guilt with regards to tax evasion neither proves nor disproves his guilt about anything else.
But you still have not answered my original question. Do you believe Al Capone was not a murderer?
But the evidence of his tax evasion does not suggest that he was secretly not a tax evader, which is the gist of your silly "point" about Capone.
Because you refuse to address it, I will cut and paste it from my original post.
Consistency of your argument requires that you believe Al Capone to have been a tax cheat and nothing more.
I'll says this again, because it can't be emphasized often enough: You actually believe that the quackery churned out by "psychoanalists" is to be taken seriously.
In retrospect, does anyone deny they reached a correct conclusion?
From Langer:
8. Hitler might commit suicide.
This is the most plausible outcome. Not only has he frequently threatened to commit suicide, but from what we know of his psychology it is the most likely possibility. It is probably true that he has an inordinate fear of death, but being an hysteric he could undoubtedly screw himself up into the super-man character and perform the deed. In all porbability, however, it would not be a simple suicide. He has too much of the dramatic for that and since immortailty is one of his dominant motives we can [Page 248] imagine that he would stage the most dramatic and effective death scene he could possibly think of. He knows how to bind the people to him and if he cannot have the bond in life he will certainly do his utmost to achieve it in death. He might even engage some other fanatic to do the final killing at his orders.
Your nonsensical analogy is silly, and repeating a logical fallacy that's been known since the Greeks doesn't improve your point; it just makes you look more and more desperate because you persist in repeating something stupid.
Your prodigious pasting of a report based on psychoanalysis is just more repetition of lunacy I have already demolished twice.
In my original post I told you why the wartime analysis of Hitler was not serious: because it was psychoanalytic and psychoanalysis is as valid as shamanism, Tarot, or astrology.
Do I deny that they came to the correct conclusion with regards to his suicide? No, and so what? Had the Germans made it to Moscow Stalin would have done the same. Does that prove the Freudians reached anything other than a purely fortuitous conclusion? Nope. Does it prove Stalin was a homosexual? Nope.
By all means, keep posting. Every moment you waste with me is at least a moment you aren't spreading your silly ideas on some other thread.
That would be you.
Why do you keep switching the goalposts?
No one is switching goalposts. You asked me if I believed the wartime analysis. I said no. You asked why. I told you: because they were based on Freudian "Theory." Nobody moved any goalposts. You just have a reading comprehension problem.
Your nonsensical analogy is silly, and repeating a logical fallacy that's been known since the Greeks doesn't improve your point; it just makes you look more and more desperate because you persist in repeating something stupid.
Since you are the one who has been consistently unable to refrain from personal insults, I'd say it is you that is desperate. You refuse to consider circumstantial evidence of Hitler's deviant sexuality and state that direct incontrovertible proof is the only permissible standard. Therefore, using your standard of proof, do you believe Al Capone was not a murderer?
Your prodigious pasting of a report based on psychoanalysis is just more repetition of lunacy I have already demolished twice.
I really don't care much about any form of psychobabble. What I care about is the available information about Hitler that was compiled by the U.S. Government. That to me is a puzzle that is missing some pieces. Whether Langer used psychoanalysis, or whatever your shrinks use to fill in the missing pieces is not particularly important to me. I can form my own opinion from the available evidence.
In my original post I told you why the wartime analysis of Hitler was not serious: because it was psychoanalytic and psychoanalysis is as valid as shamanism, Tarot, or astrology.
As I just said, I don't care one way or the other about psychobabble. I'm interested in the body of information that was compiled about Hitler as input to the report. I can read and form my own opinion about it.
Do I deny that they came to the correct conclusion with regards to his suicide? No, and so what? Had the Germans made it to Moscow Stalin would have done the same
Since you require direct incontrovertible evidence concerning Hitler's sexuality, what similar proof can you offer that Stalin would have committed suicide? We both know the answer to that, none.
Does that prove the Freudians reached anything other than a purely fortuitous conclusion? Nope. Does it prove Stalin was a homosexual? Nope.
There you go again, moving goalposts and creating distractions.
By all means, keep posting. Every moment you waste with me is at least a moment you aren't spreading your silly ideas on some other thread.
Fine with me.
Who said it was?In addition to the multiple personal insults you've hurled at me, now you knowingly falsely accuse me of claiming psychoanalysis a science. From the outset I've stated the evidence is circumstantial and you know that but I understand your objective is to keep the discussion away from the available evidence of Hitler's sexuality.That would be you.
It's springtime in Pennsylvania. Come out of your cabin, it will do you good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.