Skip to comments.Why German Christians Elected and Supported Hitler
Posted on 11/13/2008 8:40:57 AM PST by fightinJAG
Economy in a freefall. Political rhetoric. An apathetic electorate dismayed by the slide of their country into irrelevence. Theological liberalism. Doctrinal indifference.
No. Germany, just before electing Adolf Hitler to lead their country, with the apparent support of the majority of those who considered themselves Christians.
We're rereading a book by Erwin Lutzer . In it Lutzer looks at the holocaust and the rise of Hitler and asks the question: where was the Church? This book is a fascinating read, particularly in this time of economic upheaval and election year rhetoric.
Did you know that Hitler was elected to power through a democratic process? He only became a dictator after he had risen to power through the voting process. And the people elected him in large part because they were convinced he would fix the deteriorating economy and restore Germany to the prominence and prosperity it had once enjoyed. Writes Lutzer:
...he would give the appearance of being one of the masses, but in reality he would be quite another...At times he could be charming and forgiving...Privately (and sometimes publicly) he prided himself in his honesty, yet often he reveled in his abilty to deceive. "The German people must be misled if the support of the masses is required," he mused.
Hitler holds a fascination for us because his dictatorship enjoyed such wide support of the people. Perhaps never in history was a dictator so well liked. He had the rare gift of motivating a nation to want to follow him. Communist leaders such as Lenin or Mao Tse-tung rose to power through revolutions that cost millions of lives; consequently they were hated by the masses. Hitler attracted not only the support of the middle class but also of university students and professors.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.worship.com ...
Coincidentally enough, Hitler is on the cover of this month’s “Military History” magazine. The advertised article covers how he rose to power.
‘electing Adolf Hitler’
Hitler was appointed.
Because they wanted 'Change They Could Believe In'.
One must consider what Marin Luther had to say about the Jews in context of what Christian Germans history of Jewish relations were, and were to become. Hitler knew all the right buttons to push to get them on his side and whip up some hatred and blame for ‘the other’.
ping for future study
Ahhhh yes the much ballyhooed intellectuals who are supposed to know so much that we should worship the very ground they walk on because they are soooo wise.....LOL! Steyn was right.....Intellectual morons....to hell with them.
” Confiscation of guns will start as soon as the brown shirts are organized to go door to door. “
Buy, buy buy now while you still can.
I know how it works.
Hitler lost in the ‘Elections’. The people didn’t want him.
I think that might be a bit simplistic.
IIRC, some of the strongest proponents of surrender in WWI were Jews. As a result it was easy to stereotype them as the cause of all the misery that followed with losing in WWI. In addition, Jews had been very succesful in business and were not in the trades which was the sector that was first affected by the depression.
His party won a third of the seats and it was through strong arming a coalition was formed. Nobody would stand up to him.
Future implications: We aren’t Germans.
What about registration?
Obviously many of the German people did want the Nazi party, some 43.9% to be precise.
This piece is very over-simplistic in it’s explanations.
Part of the reason for the rise of Adolph Hitler and the National Socialists was the treatment Germany received at the hands of the triumphant Europeans after the First World War, in particular the French who tried to occupy the Ruhr and Rhine valleys.
If you think that the Iraqi insurgency is bloody, do some reading about the period immediately after Versailles and the the rise of the Third Reich about what kind of time the French had during their occupation...
It’s a very complex story and does not lend itself to simple explanations.
Anyone can slap on the "Christian" nametag. But electing someone like Hitler just because they wanted a fatter wallet shows that their fruit was rotten. (And those in the True Vine don't produce rotten fruit.)
Same goes for the "Christians" who voted for Obama because they wanted "change".
I am pretty concerned about the similarities in the growth of govt and it's involvement in all aspects of our lives. The trump card is our military. If our govt becomes authoritarian I don't believe the military will view it's authority as constitutional.
This is a homosexual agenda article.
Actual christians were already a minority in Germany.
Hitler killed the real christians in germany.
Hitler himself was a total pagan
Every single message that Hitler preached from the early twenties until the mid-30s...was about blame and how he’d fix all the problems. Nationalist socialists means something...because they have to use national funds to repair and fix the entire state. The war was actually part of the repair to the nation in the end...which is the peak of Hitler’s entire dream.
I think the tern “National Socialist” was to differentiate themselves from “international socialists”; i.e. communists. They wanted to put a German face on socialism and say it was what was good for the German people. That is what Nationalism, as a movement, is about - exhortation of national spirit.
Hilter was elected with a small percentage. They were liberal Christians or as we say today, piss poor Christians.
That was a month after he was appointed Chancellor, however.
Strange but true the Illinois state lottery pick three numbers came up 666 the day after obama was so called elected.
Also, 5 of the 7 ringleaders of the communist takeover of München in 1919 were Jews. That certainly gave credence to Hitler's assertions they were enemies of the country.
You’re absolutely right about the over-simplicity.
I’m currently reading Patrick J. Buchanan’s book HITLER, CHURCHILL, AND THE UNNECESSARY WAR. It’s a very good read and fully documented.
For a whole year after WW1 Churchill and England kept the food embargo against Germany starving the populace. The Allied Powers via the Versailles Treaty instilled enormous enmity (justifiably) among the Germans. Of all the villians in WW1 most historians hold Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm II the least culpable.
It was the folly of President Wilson’s “Self-Determination” policy that made such a mess of the Balkanized world we have today.
Good point because we must remember that Hitler was bad for everyone and not just the Jews.
We should be concerned about the direction of our country, but comparisons to Hitler will overexcite the alarms and then we’ll be glad that Obama is just a hard core leftist.
Hitler in Germany (and the German people) saw Stalin’s genocide of 7 million Ukrainians for no other reason than the Ukrainian farmers wanted to maintain private property rights. Stalin in the USSR was also a real threat. The USSR is so close to Germany in physical proximity it’s similar to NYC and Pittsburgh.
So, when the German people saw the wantan genocide of the Ukrainians and knew of the Stalin death camps in the USSR (Stalin, for the record, may have killed as many as 60 million of his own people)...
Hitler was a historical anomaly. Stalin was made into a hero by the U.S. movie industry of the WWII period...
Hollywood supported WWII because we were fighting alongside “Papa” Joe Stalin - even though we knew he was more genocidal than Hitler.
So, it’s an ugly business looking at history as it actually was and not how we’d like it to be.
The moral to my message? Don’t compare Obama to Hitler because when you find out he’s Stalin’s little brother you’ll breath a sigh of relief and say “At least he’s not Hitler.”
Thanks voters for electing Obama, we got our work cut out for us.
Thanks decrepit Republicans, you elected a despicable turncoat who hates conservatism even more than illegal immigration.
Well, FREEPS, lets get to work.
And at that point I hope we have the courage to use them as the The Founders foresaw.
Libs conveniently forget NAZI meant National Socialist German Workers’ Party.
You should read this on Atlas Shrugs
Some comparisons between Hitler and Obama. Seems the writing is on the wall.
Si, y aqui se habla espanol.
The similarities are stunning, although anyone can find details that allow them to deny it.
Both of them manipulated the system, appealed to the public's base instincts, and demonized 'others'; and won.
Both had a plan that would transform the world, not only Germany or America, into what it 'should be'.
Both of them telegraphed what was coming. Both times the voters assumed either that it wouldn't really effect them, or that they'd be the beneficiaries.
Some here have commented that Hitler used intimidation after his party 'won' the plurality, granted. However, anyone who'd deny that the Obama campaign just as surely intimidated both an already compliant media and any mere citizens who might criticize the new order simply does not understand the differences of both time and place.
(I hope it is only coincidence that Axlerod looks so much like Hitler with a better mustache - I still imagine the happy face hitler on Golberg's book cover every time he appears.)
He only got 32% of the vote.
FDR got more than that.
I am stocking up but if we don’t have a fighting force of our own what good is it going to do? This is serious stuff.It would help if we had some of the military on our side.
About the same percentage that blindly votes Democrat.
The problem we have is govt is becoming a co-owner in private business and as it assumes more control we will become less competitive in business and our standard of living will decrease. Already you see European leaders stating the dollar should no longer be preeminent. The US bond rating may be reduced.
In addition, we have congressional "leaders" calling for investigations of the Bush admn. (criminalizing opposition).
Censorship of the airwaves is being proposed and I'm sure the internet will not be far behind.
IOW, authoritarian fascistic govt. is on the march in our country.
All is not lost! We still have the 2010 elections. We need to gain state govts, because with the census and then reapportionment red states should be gaining and blue states losing congressional seats and electoral college votes. However, we need party discipline among the congressional Pubs, especially the senate Pubs. They have to keep placing the blame for everything on the Rats and talking about lost freedoms under Rat rule.
Maybe secession is an option.
It was the ability to stigmatize a whole group, in this case the Jews, on the basis of the actions of a few that helped create the thinking that they were a threat to national security. The churches should never have allowed themselves to be a part of it and I sure don't want to be near any of the pastors or priests that were, when they are judged.
I wonder if the movement to blame white conservative Christians will suffer the same fate as the Jews. I don't think so because our numbers are so much greater.
intersting article on World Net Daily
Yep, because Von Pappen and Von Schleicher thought they could use Hitler against each other in their personal rivalry.
If we go down this radical leftist road it will be the military that steps in and fixes the problem. The left hates the military because they will not blindly follow orders. The orders must be constitutional and their loyalty is to the constitution.
Had the U.S. lost the same proportion of its population as did France it would equal about 16 million deaths.
WW I took the romance out of war and gave us the monster U.N. as the League morphed into.
He promised them change.
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.