Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The anti-tobacco campaign of the Nazis: a little known aspect of public health in Germany, 1933-45
BMJ [British Medical Journal] ^ | December 1996 | Robert N Proctor

Posted on 10/13/2009 11:47:08 AM PDT by syriacus

One topic that has only recently begun to attract attention is the Nazi anti-tobacco movement.

Germany had the world's strongest anti smoking movement in the 1930s and early 1940s,supported by Nazi medical and military leaders worried that tobacco might prove a hazard to the race.

Many Nazi leaders were vocal opponents of smoking. Anti-tobacco activists pointed out that whereas Churchill, Stalin, and Roosevelt were all fond of tobacco, the three major fascist leaders of Europe-Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco-were all non-smokers.

Hitler was the most adamant,characterising tobacco as "the wrath of the Red Man against the White Man for having been given hard liquor." At one point the Fuhrer even suggested that Nazism might never have triumphed in Germany had he not given up smoking.

(Excerpt) Read more at bmj.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Health/Medicine; History
KEYWORDS: antismokingnazis; fakeconservatives; hitler; hitlerlegacy; libertarians; medicalmarijuana; nannystate; nationalizedmedicine; nazis; thirdreich; tobacco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last
"An ordinance on 3 November 1941 raised tobacco taxes to a higher level than they had ever been (80-95% of the retail price)."
1 posted on 10/13/2009 11:47:09 AM PDT by syriacus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: syriacus

“According to Germany’s national accounting office, by 1941 tobacco taxes constituted about one twelfth of the government’s entire income.”


2 posted on 10/13/2009 11:52:30 AM PDT by syriacus (I guess the IOC believed Obama's' 2 years of public comments that the US is bad, bad, bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Anti-tobacco is just one of many. When you compile a list of Nazi beliefs and modern leftist beliefs, the degree of commonality is chilling.


3 posted on 10/13/2009 11:52:33 AM PDT by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

I recently bought a couple of cuban cigars in Victoria BC, the clerk said that the tobacco tax was 90%....yikes! Now thats fascist!!!!


4 posted on 10/13/2009 11:52:47 AM PDT by HerrBlucher (Obamanos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Franz H Muller in 1939 and Eberhard Schairer and Erich Schoniger in 1943 were the first to use case-control epidemiological methods to document the lung cancer hazard from cigarettes.(22) (23) Muller concluded that the "extraordinary rise in tobacco use" was "the single most important cause of the rising incidence of lung cancer."(22)

At least the Nazis got one thing right.

5 posted on 10/13/2009 11:54:38 AM PDT by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Obama straddles the fence. He has prohibited all flavored tobaccos except for menthol flavored. He had prohibited candy cigarettes. And yet he still smokes several packs of the real thing every week.


6 posted on 10/13/2009 11:57:46 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (There is no truth in the Pravda Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

The current climate on tobacco use in the USA defines us as a Hitlerian Society.

I know that may be offensive to Bloomputz of NYC.


7 posted on 10/13/2009 11:59:25 AM PDT by swarthyguy (MEAT, the new tobacco. Your right to eat meat ends where my planetary ecosystem begins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fso301

Anti-tobacco is just one of many. When you compile a list of Nazi beliefs and modern leftist beliefs, the degree of commonality is chilling.
_____________________

That’s true. Has anyone compiled such a list? It would be very good to have such a list. Thanks.


8 posted on 10/13/2009 12:02:42 PM PDT by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

It’s all about control.

Liberals control easy, reasonable, things (like tobacco), to get a foothold, then slowly continue to expand control.

I smoke cigars on occassion just to make liberals mad.


9 posted on 10/13/2009 12:03:08 PM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (Nothing to see here. Move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Note to self: smoke good cigar tonight; strike personal blow against Hitlerism.


10 posted on 10/13/2009 12:03:47 PM PDT by joe.fralick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unkus
That’s true. Has anyone compiled such a list? It would be very good to have such a list.

Actually, I heard Rush did a segment on this a few weeks ago.

11 posted on 10/13/2009 12:07:12 PM PDT by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

I wonder if the Nazis issued summonses to people who possessed ashtrays.

http://www.theagitator.com/2003/12/04/dumbstruck/

Dumbstruck
Thursday, December 4th, 2003

You really need to read this NY Times article to believe it. Not only can you no longer smoke New York City’s public places, it is also illlegal to possess an ashtray in public. That would include collectables, antiques, even that lump of fired clay your kid made for you in art class. And “inspectors” can raid your office or place of business without a search warrant to find them.

Think I’m exaggerating? Read:

As some New Yorkers have learned the hard way, the mere existence of an ashtray in a place where smoking is prohibited can lead to a summons. It doesn’t matter if the ashtray is stored well away from public areas. It doesn’t matter if it is used as a decoration, or to hold paper clips or M & M’s. No ashtrays are allowed, period…

…As first reported in The New York Post the other day, health officials, acting on an anonymous tip, insisted last week on inspecting the office of the club’s executive director, John Martello.

They found no one smoking. But â?? shades of Eliot Ness on the trail of rum runners from Canada â?? they came upon three ashtrays on a shelf behind a desk.

THEY were there just to get them out of the way,” Mr. Martello said yesterday. “We had to get them out of the public eye. They were collected. Who thinks about throwing them out?”

“I think what I was most appalled about,” he said, “was the constitutionality of them being able to come in and search my office. Unlike the police, they don’t need a search warrant. They just walked in on an anonymous tip.”

Ms. Mullin acknowledged that “there is some discretion offered to our inspectors.”

“If we do see stacks of ashtrays,” she said, “it is tantamount to the potential that people are permitting smoking.”

You can’t make this up.

You can be fined for actions “tantamount to the potential” that you’re allowing people to smoke. Actual smoking need never have taken place.


12 posted on 10/13/2009 12:10:01 PM PDT by syriacus (I guess the IOC believed Obama's' 2 years of public comments that the US is bad, bad, bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

The anti-tobacco movement of today screams bloody murder when reminded of this simple fact. They get very testy when reminded of the Hitlerian similarities and immediately resort to pejoratives and denial that they have any similarities with Hitler and his anti-tobacco enactments.

This is particularly true here at Free Republic.


13 posted on 10/13/2009 12:10:40 PM PDT by Gabz (Not everyone can access online video or audio, please describe it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

It’s a terrible shame that the modern day anti-tobacco movement refuses to use the proper scientific methods, or anything even resembling such, in their rush forward to mimic what the Nazi’s did.


14 posted on 10/13/2009 12:13:09 PM PDT by Gabz (Not everyone can access online video or audio, please describe it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

When will Obama tell me (and all other freckled redheads) that we MUST wear sunscreen and brimmed hats to reduce our chances of developing melanoma?


15 posted on 10/13/2009 12:21:03 PM PDT by syriacus (When will Obama tell me I MUST wear sunscreen to reduce my chances of developing melanoma?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

I can’t understand why business owners, themselves, can’t decide whether to forbid smoking.

We should let the customers decide which businesses they want to patronize - smoking or non-smoking.

I hate having to walk through crowds of smokers who are loitering on sidewalks in front of public establishments.

Issuing summonses for ashtrays is especially Orwellian.


16 posted on 10/13/2009 12:29:15 PM PDT by syriacus (When will Obama tell me I MUST wear sunscreen to reduce my chances of developing melanoma?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

>>business owners, themselves

Heck, didn’t you hear the whining over the “level playing field” when at least here in MA, certain towns banned it while others didn’t, before the state ban kicked in....the same month our SC legalized gay marriage.

Certain symmetry there eh.


17 posted on 10/13/2009 12:31:52 PM PDT by swarthyguy (MEAT, the new tobacco. Your right to eat meat ends where my planetary ecosystem begins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
I can’t understand why business owners, themselves, can’t decide whether to forbid smoking.

We should let the customers decide which businesses they want to patronize - smoking or non-smoking.

That's the way it should be, was for a very long time, and remains so in some normal places. But that is not good enough for the control crowd, and Washington, D.C. is the perfect example.

Prior to the enactment of the total ban there it was determined that more than 90% of eating establishments were already totally non smoking. Yet that wasn't enough. They will not be happy unless they have TOTAL control.

I hate having to walk through crowds of smokers who are loitering on sidewalks in front of public establishments.

I can understand that, but look at it from the point of view of the smokers, shouldn't they also have a place to go and socialize?

18 posted on 10/13/2009 12:39:27 PM PDT by Gabz (Not everyone can access online video or audio, please describe it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

>> hate having to walk through crowds of smokers who are loitering on sidewalks

Well, the bright side is that at least in the northern half of the USA, the winters make fewer people stand outside.

And if the new ordnances being bantered about go through, they’ll have a smokfrei zone some arbitrary distance around and from the entrance to each establishment.


19 posted on 10/13/2009 12:42:29 PM PDT by swarthyguy (MEAT, the new tobacco. Your right to eat meat ends where my planetary ecosystem begins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

>.90% of eating establishments

100% in Boston before the bans.

Only seperate bars and music and night clubs allowed the tabak, but as you say, they wanted it all, including the banning of it on outdoor patios during our short summers, effective this last August.


20 posted on 10/13/2009 12:44:23 PM PDT by swarthyguy (MEAT, the new tobacco. Your right to eat meat ends where my planetary ecosystem begins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson