|Although some results of this politically-correct redaction are hilarious,
such as to make Mamma "crackle so, and spit, and flame", that is Orwellian re-writing of history; and the Christchild isn't the
only thing that the translation published by Project Gutenberg (and various other modern translations
as well) managed to edit
out. Amongst many other things, the politically-correct translations
managed to replace parents with "mother and nurse" or "Mamma and Nursey", and did a good job of
meticulously replacing most references to "father" in the German original
with "mother" or "Mamma" in the English text. For that reason I prefer to show
here the original translation by Mark Twain. Except for the
limitations imposed by the constraints of the English language, Mark Twain's
translation is true to the core.|
Still, to make Marxist-feminist propaganda effective, the
politically-correct redaction of reading material must extend far beyond
mere children's books.
In Canada, the rewriting of the text books used in the education
curriculum was done in about 1987. J. L. Granatstein, a Canadian historian,
recounts in his book "Who
killed Canadian History?" how the Canadian curriculum had been
changed by "warmed-over Marxism" in the sheltered environment of our
universities, to give little attention to any logical sense of history now.
The revised "history" is currently being presented to our students in
disjointed sound bites that show an undue focus on social engineering
issues, with extremely little attention on national issues, thereby
deliberately obliterating any concept of a national identity, in an effort
to promote only what is deemed politically correct: "women's" and racial
issues, and the "oppression by men" of racial minorities and women.
J. L. Granatstein stated on page 61 of his book:
"...women's historians pored through textbooks to determine sex
equity content. One 1987 study reported on the results: "Researchers
read each  books from cover to cover, noting, by page, references to
women and/or girls and to 'women's issues' such as the fight for
child and infant mortality or prohibition . . . passing references . . .
were also noted by page. We then calculated the extent of sex equitable
content using each reference, even those of a single word." None of the
surveyed books met the sex equity policy of the Ontario Ministry of
Education, and the researchers concluded that women had been
marginalized by historians. Other provinces conducted similar surveys
that produced equivalent results. No one seemed to care that most of
Canada's history had been made by men, however unfair that might have
been, and that any overt attempt to write more women into history might
distort the past."
There is absolutely no doubt that now men are being marginalized to a far
greater extent than women ever allegedly were. That is the motivation
for the creation of this website. To show how big a role fathers once
played in families, here is Mark Twain's translation of Der
By Dr. Heinrich Hoffmann
Der Struwwelpeter (Slovenly Peter)
Translation by MARK TWAIN
See this frowsy "cratur"
Pah! It's Struwwelpeter!
On his fingers rusty,
On his tow-head musty,
Scissors seldom come;
Let his talons grow a year,
Hardly ever combs his hair,
Do any loathe him? Some!
They hail him "Modern Satyre
[On the front cover Dad]
children gentle be,
Then the Christchild they shall see;
If they eat their soup and yet
Still their bread they don't forget,
Handle silently their toys,
Taking pains to make no noise,
And when a pleasure-walk is planned,
Let Mother lead them by the hand,
For every blessing they may look,
And get, besides, a Picture Book.
[On the back cover. Dad]
The Story of Ugly Frederick
O waly me! O waly me!
Just such a boy I ne'er did see.
He caught the flies, poor helpless things,
Made hoppers of them, minus wings.
He killed the birds, where'er he could,
And catless made the neighborhood;
And worst of all that he did do,
He banged the housemaid black and blue.
A dog stood drinking at a pump
The way he made that doglet jump!
He sneaked upon him unaware,
He whacked him there, he whacked him there,
He whacked with all his might and main,
He made him howl and dance with pain,
Until, o'ercome by woe and grief,
The dog, desiring some relief,
Did bite that brutal boy full sore,
Which made the latter prance and roar.
And then the dog did grab the whip,
And with it homeward he did skip.
To bed the boy [then] had to go
And nurse his bite and wail his woe,
The while the Doctor healing brings
And loads him up with drugs and things.
And all this time the dog below
Sings praises soft and sweet and low
O'er Fred'rick's dinner waiting there
For Fred'rick (or for Fred'rick's heir).
The dog's his heir, and this estate
That dog inherits, and will ate. *
He hangs the whip upon the chair,
And mounts aloft and seats him there;
He sips the wine, so rich and red,
And feels it swimming in his head.
He munches grateful at the cake,
and wishes he might never wake
From his debauch; while think by think
His thoughts dream on, and link by link
The liver-sausage disappears,
And his hurt soul relents in tears.
|* My child, never use an expression like that.
It is utterly unprincipled and outrageous to say
ate when you mean eat, and you must never
do it except when crowded for a rhyme.
As you grow up you will find that poetry
is a sandy road to travel, and the only way
to pull through at all is to lay your grammar
down and take hold with both hands.
The Sad Tale of the Match-Box
Paulinchen was alone at home,
The parents they down-town did roam.
as she now through the room did spring,
All light of heart and soul a-wing,
she saw wherewith one strikes a light.
"Oho," says she. "My hopes awake;
Ah what a plaything these will make!
I'll rake them on the wall, h'oo!
As oft I've seen my Mother do."
And Mintz and Mountz, the catties,
Lift up their little patties,
They threaten with their pawses:
"It's against the lawses!
Me-yow! Me-yo! Me-yow! Me-yo!
You'll burn yourself to ashes, O!"
Paulinchen heard the catties not,
The match did burn both bright and hot,
It crackled gaily, sputtered free,
as you it in the picture see.
Paulinchen waltzed and whirled and spun,
Near mad with joy for what she'd done.
Still Mintz and Mountz, the catties,
Lift up their little patties,
They threaten with their pawses:
"It is against the lawses!
Me-yow! Me-yo! Me-yow! Me-yo!
Drop it or you are ashes, O!"
But ah, the flame it caught her clothes,
Her apron, too; and higher rose;
Her hand is burnt, her hair's afire,
Consumed is that child entire.
And Mintz and Mountz wild crying,
The while the child was frying,
"Come quick!" they said. "O Sire.
Your darling child's afire!
Me-yow! Me-yo! Me-yow! Me-yo!
She's cinders, soot, and ashes, O!"
Consumed is all, so sweet and fair,
The total child, both flesh and hair,
a pile of ashes, two small shoes,
Is all that's left, and they're no use.
And Mintz and Mountz sit sighing,
With breaking hearts and crying,
"Me-yow! Me-yo! Me-yow! Me-yo!
How could we let the parents know!"
While round that ash-pile glowing
In brooks their tears keep flowing.
The Tale of the Young Black Cap
There came a-walking past the door
A coal-pitch-raven-black young Moor.
The sun it smote him on his smeller,
And so he hoisted his umbrella.
While in his wake skips William free,
with hair neat-combed and hoop, you see.
The three they laugh and scoff and wink,
And mock at that poor Missing Link,
Because his skin is black as ink.
Forth stepped the mighty Nicholas,
Who hates rude ways and slang and sass,
And brought his ink-stand too, alas!
Says he, "You children list' to me
Pray let the little stranger be;
He cannot help his sooty hue;
Bleach out at will, be white like you."
But still these urchins, lacking grace,
Did scoff and laugh right in the face,
And laughed yet heartier than before
At that poor pitch-black piteous Moor.
Then Nich'las he did rave and rage
as per the picture on that page
And grabbed those urchins trembling there,
By arm and crop and coat and heir!
Grabb'd William first and Ludwig next,
And Kaspar third (as per the text),
And quicker than the three could wink
He soused them in the turbid ink!
Soused them down with holy spite,
Soused them down with grim delight,
Soused them down clean out of sight!
You see them here, all black as sin
Much blacker than that Niggerkin
The Moor a-marchin in the light,
The Ink-Blot following dark as night.
Now if they had but hid their glee,
They'd still be white and fair to see.
The Tale of the Terrible Hunter
Behold the dreadful hunterman
In all his fateful glory stand!
He took his game-bag, powder, gun,
And fiercely to the fields he spun. *
Brer Rabbit spied him, smug and trim,
And made the grossest fun of him.
|* Baby, you must take notice of this
awkward form of speech and never use it,
except in translating.
Full soon the sweat begun to run,
And mortal heavy grew his gun;
He sought the sod, that green old boy,
(Which filled the spy with evil joy);
And as he dreamed and snored and slept,
The furry rascal to him crept,
And stole his gun and smooched his specs,
And hied him with these effects.
The specs he set across his nose,
And as his joke upon him grows
He thinks it would be darling fun
To see that hunter skip and run
In front of his own stolen gun.
He drew a bead, the hunter fled,
And fled! and fled! and fled! and FLED!
And howled for help as on he sped,
Howled as if to raise the dead;
O'er marsh and moor, through glade and dell,
The awful clamor rose and fell,
And in its course where passed this flight
All life lay smitten dead with fright.
At last the hunter struck a well,
And in he plump'd with final yell,
The very moment that there rang
O'er all the place the loud "cheBANG!"
The hunter's wife, with window up,
Sat sipping coffee from her cup;
The bullet split the saucer clean
And scared her to a pallid green.
Now by the well in hiding lay
The rabbit's child, and saw the fray,
And glanced aloft with aspect gay
(Unwatchful of the coffee spray);
And would have laughed, but changed his mind
When that hot coffee struck him blind.
He snatched the spoon and capered out
With many a baleful murd'rous shout,
To club to death the clumsy lout
Who'd brought this accident about;
But when he saw it was his pa,
He changed his mind again, aha!
Story of the
"Konrad!" cried his mamma dear,
"I'll go out, but you stay here,
Try how pretty you can be
Till I come again," said she.
"Docile be, and good and mild,
Pray don't suck your thumb, my child,
For if you do, the tailor'll come
And bring his shears and snip your thumb
From off your hand as clear and clean
As if paper it had been."
Before she'd turned the south,
He'd got his thumbkin in his mouth!
Bang! here goes the door ker-slam!
Whoop! the tailor lands ker-blam!
Waves his shears, the heartless grub,
and calls for Dawmen-lutscher-bub.
Claps his weapon to the thumb,
Snips it square as head of grum,
While that lad his tongue unfurled
And fired a yell heard 'round the world.
Who can tell mother's sorrow
When she saw her boy the morrow!
There he stood all steeped in shame,
And not a thumbkin to his name.
The Tale of
Young Kaspar he was kernel-sound,
A fleshy cub and barrel-round;
Had cheeks all rosy-red and fresh,
Was fond of soup it added flesh.
But finally, with scowling brow,
He said he'd strike, and make a row:
"No swill for me; I'm not a cow;
I will not eat loathe it now;
I can't! I won't! I shan't, I vow!"
A day rolled slowly o'er his head
Behold, his flesh began to shed!
Yet still his strike he did maintain,
And screamed as erst with might and main:
"No swill for me; I'm not a cow,
I will not eat it loathe it now;
I can't! I won't! I shan't, I vow!"
The third day came lo, once so sleek,
Observe him now, how thin and weak!
Yet still his flag he feebly flew
And hailed that humble dish anew:
"No swill for me; I'm not a cow,
I will not eat it loathe it now;
I can't! I won't! I shan't, I vow!"
The fourth day came, and here you see
How doth this little busy bee;
He weighed perhaps a half a pound
Death came and tucked him in the ground.
[It seems to me that anyone who as a child became familiar with the story of Soupy
Kaspar won't be required to receive therapy for
nervosa as an adult. Right? Dad]
The Tale of Fussy-Philip
"Philip, if 'twon't make you ill,
Try to sit a minute still."
So, in earnest tone and rough,
Spake the father to his tough,
While the mother's troubled glance
Prophesied a present dance
When these two should get a start.
And so it made her sick at heart
To see the boy hadn't heard
His restive father's warning word.
On his chair and squirmed galore:
"Philip this doth irk me sore!"
See, ye darling little chaps,
Number Two of Phil's mishaps:
Observe, the picture shows the fact;
See! he tilts his chair aback
See! he's going going gone!
Grabs the cloth and what's thereon,
Sprawls heels upward on the floor.
Dishes follow, crash and roar,
Down they clash and plash and slash,
Down come soup and cheese and hash,
And under them the boy they mash!
Father stares in consternation,
Can't size up the situation,
While the mother's troubled glance
Notes fulfilled the promised place.
Philip's buried, hide and hair,
Naked stands the table there!
All the fam'ly had for dinner
Decks the grave of that young sinner
Soup and sausage, wholesome bread,
Gone to hide that foolish head.
Soup-tureen is split in two
What shall they do, what shall they do!
Frantic view they this defeat
They've not a single bite to eat.
The History of Hans Stare-in-the-Air
Now when this lad to school did go,
He never saw what's here below;
His eyes were always in the sky,
'mong roofs and clouds and things that fly;
He never saw, along the street,
The common things about his feet,
So people used to cry, "Ah, there!
That is Hans Stare-in-the-Air!"
There came a dog a-tearing by,
Hans was gawking at the sky
Just as ca'm
As a ham
No one warned him with a yell.
What! Ker-blim! and down they go
Boy and doglet in a row!
Once he snooped along the strand
With his atlas in the hand,
And his pug-nose tilted back
So he could watch the swallow's track;
and never got it through his gourd
That he was walking overboard,
although the fishes, frightened, shout,
"We are orphans, please look out!"
Another step another yet
And finds himself amazing wet!
The fishy orphans, scared full sore
Turned tail and travel for the shore.
Now by luck two men arrive,
And with their hooks and sticks contrive
The struggling dunderhead to hive,
and soon they fish him out alive.
Stands he now, the dripping bloke,
And sees no humour in the joke;
Water streams from hair and clothes,
And flows in rivers down his nose;
He's water-soaked from head to heels,
But can't express half what he feels.
Those little fish go swimming by
And up at him they cock their eye,
And stick their heads out full aspan,
And laughs as only fishes can;
Laugh and giggle, jeer and snort
How strange to see them thus cavort!
Meantime the atlas, gone astray,
Has drifted many yards away.
The Story of Flying Robert
When the rain comes down a-dash,
When the storms the meadows lash,
Boys and girls stay snug at home
Preferring to let others roam;
But Roberts thinks, "Ah, me,
It's just the time outside to be!"
and so, umbrella'd safe and sound,
Takes to the fields and slops around.
My! how shrieks the windy storm,
and how the big tree bows its form!
Hoho! the 'brella's caught the breeze,
And Robert sails above the trees!
Above the houses, church and steeple,
and out of sight of all [the] people!
Above the clouds he spins at last,
His hat is gone, and he's aghast!
And so he sails and sails and sails,
Through banks of murky clouds, and wails,
And weeps and mourns, poor draggled rat,
Because he can't o'ertake his hat.
Oh, where on high can that hat be?
When you find out, pray come tell me.
Since the time it was first published in 1844, "Der Struwwelpeter" got
translated not only into English but into many other languages, amongst them
Dutch, French, Danish and Mandarin. Most of the illustrations and the German, French
and English versions of all of the verses contained in "Der Struwwelpeter" are
(the translation into French of one single verse is missing). The translation of
"Der Struwwelpeter" into English shown on this page was done by Mark Twain.
(Note: By the year 2005 the website
ceased to exist, but the text extracted from that website can still be
accessed in an archived text version of the web page. Clicking on the
preceding link will take you to the archived version. The graphics shown in
this page come mostly from an
e-book version by Project Gutenberg.)
According to David Shackleton, the editor and publisher of Everyman magazine, who wrote
and published an essay about the evil of feminism (Everyman, Jan/Feb 1999) and who equated
the definition of the evil of feminism to that of Nazism, Nazism in Germany was an
inevitable outcome of a culture that found itself compelled to produce a children's book
depicting "cruelties and brutalities" such as those in "Der
Struwwelpeter." David Shackleton was particularly troubled by the story of the
The book contains other examples of "child abuse" equally gross and perhaps even
more insidious that David Shackleton didn't notice or mention: the fact that children were left at home
without baby-sitters, that they were given wine with their meals, and many other infractions
that would illustrate to the politically-correct that parents in the mid-nineteenth century were extremely abusive or
neglectful. Today's social workers would have a heyday with the numerous violations
of good and responsible parenting practices, by which they would then decide
that the parents of the mid-nineteenth century shouldn't have been allowed
to be parents or even to raise children, and that, by extension, anyone
providing to children the original German text or Mark Twain's translation
of the book must be called to task.
Of course, we mustn't forget that in those days children were not thought of as budding
victims but rather as being responsible for their actions, something that the children of
those times often had a hard time measuring up to, but they were allowed in those days to
learn from their mistakes, instead of being denied the opportunity to make any and to
learn as little as today's children do.
Moreover, the situation is even worse than that today. Children now
routinely don't listen if their parents dare to tell any rules that children should go by.
Instead, children call 911 or a children's aid society, to rat on their
parents, thereby to initiate the wholesale destruction of heir family.
Furthermore, if today's
children disobey their parents, the parents will often be threatened or punished on
account of their children's infractions. And if today's children get into trouble of
any kind because of the upbringing that our social engineers insist our children are best
equipped to provide to themselves for the sake of their "self-esteem" then the parents are being held
responsible for not properly having done their job.
There are even plans afoot (already put into law in a good number of
locations) that now hold the parents, whose hands are tied in the upbringing
of their children, legally responsible for all of the damages that their children
cause. The trend that is becoming established is to not only sentence parents to pay
for the damages that their disobedient children cause, but to levy fines against parents
in such instances for having been negligent in raising their children.
It appears that the premise is that it is far better for children to teach
themselves and their peers, because people with the necessary power and
influence are in control who insist that children are inherently
good, and that if anything goes wrong with them or if they do anything
wrong, it is always the parents' fault. It appears that in such cases
parents not only need to be punished, but that the children are then to be
taken into the care of the State, who is said to be a much better parent
than parents could ever hope to be. It must be true. After all,
how many parents can afford to hire teachers and child psychologists, but
look how many of those the government can afford to employ with our taxes, of course.
Well, considering how much damage the government causes to our children,
whether that is through the frequent neglect by children's aids societies or through child
welfare services, the claim that all that the government does is to act in the best
interest of our children is most likely no more true than one of the most-often told
"I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you."
In a debate pertaining to his hypothesis that a nation capable of being sufficiently
brutal to produce Der Struwwelpeter would of necessity be brutal enough to
produce the Hitler regime and its brutalities, David Shackleton held that the brutality of
the Nazi-regime was a case which deserves a special place in history. Why should
cruelties comparable to and exceeding those committed by the Nazis not deserve a
comparable place in history? It seems that such a place in history arises mainly out
of the circumstances that place the deprecated nationality into the camp of the losers.
David Shackleton's hypothesis appears at best to be an illogical conclusion. It is
at least as tenuous as to argue that all men are violent (which they are no more than all
Germans, Russians, Japanese or Americans are likely to be evil) because of their
upbringing. What David Shackleton's hypothesis fails to explain is why other nations
managed to become at least as cruel as Nazi-Germany did. Stalin murdered at least 30
million people in labour camps and by various other methods. For example, in a
program of deliberate starvation directed against one particular ethnic group, he starved
to death more than two million Ukrainians. Yet, in spite of the fear and terror that
Stalin struck in the hearts of Russians, at the viewing of his corpse during his funeral
ceremonies 1,500 people were trampled to death in the throng of grieving mourners
out of love for Stalin!
The number of people murdered by Mao Tse-tung's regime is of an order comparable to the
horrors committed by other nations. Mao, too, murdered more than 30 million people:
enemies of the state. Perhaps that was so because Der Struwwelpeter,
one of the most popular children's books in history, had also been translated
into Mandarin. Is it possible that Mao, too, read Der Struwwelpeter
during his formative years?
According to figures quoted in Michael MacLear's "The 10,000 Day War," 10
million Vietnamese, mostly civilians, were killed by American forces in a program of
ethnic cleansing that hasn't received much more attention than Bill Clinton's
participation in, and profiting from, the
the blood supply in North America and elsewhere, as a result of which untold numbers
of innocent people world-wide became infected with HIV, Hepatitis C and other deadly
It is pointless to argue over which nation or which part of
the world is the most cruel, the most deadly. The fault is with the powers that
control us, not so much with the people that are being led around by the nose. The
evidence is more than sufficient to prove that for more than a hundred years it was more
or less the same interest groups that determined which ideology had to rise to
power, or which had to be fought in attempts to create a better balance of power.
They determined, for example, that the Bolshevik Revolution needed to be funded and gave
the necessary money to Lenin and Trotsky. They then became frightened by their
success (or they became motivated by greed) and decided that Hitler needed to be brought to power to
counter Bolshevism and made sure he had the money, the technology and the arms
to do it with. Just the same, after Hitler was
defeated, they made sure that the U.S.S.R. had the technology to be
reasonably successful in waging the cold war, all to establish a better
balance of power.
These power groups or cartels have no allegiance to any nation or religion. Their
only allegiance is to themselves, and their power far exceeds that of any government in
existence. They determine who'll be the government at any
given point in time and in the most powerful nations on Earth. Just one little
glimpse into their methods of operation will do more than convince even the most hardened
opponent of conspiracy theories.
It is debatable whether a conspiracy exists. There is most certainly an agenda for
world domination, although some may debate even that. Some will boil it all down to
greed and the lust for power. However, the most powerful interest groups have no
need to conspire, they just do. Only the weak need to conspire. Given that
these powerful interest groups are implementing the deliberate deconstruction of
humanity and are succeeding at it virtually unopposed, while hundreds of millions of
people die in the process, there should be no doubt that these people are absolutely not
weak. "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
Take World War II. What was it really that made it possible for Hitler to get into
power in a country whose finances were totally devastated on account of the crushing debts
resulting from the treaty of Versailles? Can anyone pull himself up out of the mud
by his boot straps? No more so than that an obscure corporal can rise to power and
defeat the democratic government of his nation without a massive influx of money and
weapons from outside of his country that was supposedly disarmed.
Where did Hitler's political and financial support come from? It wasn't on account
of a children's book that scared little boys into not sucking their thumbs anymore.
More than faith, money moves mountains. Where did the
money come from to do it with in a country whose own currency was worthless and whose
economy was in chaos? How was it applied? How was Nazism brought into play so as to
ultimately bring about a war that caused the death of 60 million people and enormous
devastation of property that involved the whole world? It was done through
The Hitler Project The
man who had sent that reference to me is someone who's been writing well-respected and
widely-quoted articles about and against feminism. He wrote:
The book if true, and it seems plausible, will make you see history
in a different light. I had always dismissed conspiracy theories but no more.
There is no doubt that people can be manipulated to love and adore their leaders
even to love and support them fanatically to the extent that they follow orders to commit,
and actively participate in, evil deeds. It doesn't matter so much whether the
leaders are evil or not, but it does matter that people can be manipulated and
indoctrinated regardless of national origin, location or time in history to
become hysterical, cruel, and heartless, and to become intolerant of others, even to the
extent that they'll destroy their own society. But there is also no doubt that the
affliction of long-lasting national mass hysteria and evil extremism takes considerably
more indoctrination than reading a children's book that attempts to teach children the
difference between right and wrong and about the relationship between actions and
The powers that control the destiny of the world and world governments control also
virtually all of the media, to such a large extent that today it is more likely that one
finds the truth in the Russian newspaper
("Truth" formerly the party organ of the USSR) and on the Internet than
in the daily newspapers of the "free" world.
|John Swinton, the former Chief of Staff of the New York Times, called by
his peers, "The Dean of his profession," was asked in 1953 to give a toast
before the NY Press Club:
There is no such thing at this date of the world's history, in America, as an
independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who
dares to write your honest opinions and if you did, you know beforehand that it would
never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinions out of the
paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar
things and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on
the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in
one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The
business of a journalist is to destroy truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to
fawn at the feet of mammon and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread.
You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We
are the tools and vassals for rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks,
they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are
all the property of other men.
We are intellectual prostitutes.
To forestall any attempts by the masses to feel their oats, we resort to
the simple expedient of taxing the hell out of them and keeping them supplied with TV,
peanuts and beer. That's all it takes.
Of course, anyone not playing along with the politically-correct official version of our
current world view and history
will instantly be brought down. We are civilized. We no longer
declare objectors and opponents to taxpayer-funded and business-driven
indoctrination to be enemies of the State and execute them. We merely
ridicule them as being revisionists and drag them through courts and human
rights tribunals to devastate them financially, which is in a
consumption-oriented society just as effective in making them powerless –
and far more economical – as it was in the USSR to send them to Siberia or
in Nazi Germany to send them to the concentration camps or to send them to
the Russian front to clear mine fields. By turning whole countries and
the whole nation into an economic Gulag we don't need as many guards.
We merely have to find ways for people to willingly and subconsciously
surrender their civil liberties, their human rights and freedoms. TV,
peanuts, beer and consumerism, with a good dose of sexual freedom thrown in
for good measure, do it every time, and bring far better financial returns
to the powers in control of and driving it all, while all of that inexorably
increases the power of the powers behind the scenes to tyrannical dimensions. The masses,
without the protection of the families they once had – the only thing
that safe-guarded them from the ravages of rapacious governments – are
through that easily turned into a mindless, aimless and amorphous
conglomerate of powerless and compliant individuals: sheep, or lemmings, if
you will; some call them sheeple.
Many historians who contemplated the rise of Nazism see the
take-over of the very popular youth movement by the Nazis between 1920 to 1933 as the
primary reason for the growing popularity of the Nazis in Germany. The German youth
movement of the time, which came into existence in the last decade of the 19th century,
was a manifestation of modern liberalism that expressed itself as a rebellion against the
established, stuffy traditions of the rule by parents, the education system, government and the
The German youth movement in the beginning of the 20th century was
in a fashion a predecessor of the radical students' movement of the 1960s and coincided
with the beginnings of the women's liberation movement, as well as with the beginnings of
socialism in Germany. Government-operated pension schemes and old-age security had
their origins in Germany at about exactly the same time.
The funding provided through the
Hitler Project enabled the Nazis to offer what
the more than 30 individual independent German youth organizations in the 1920s
couldn't. The Nazis could offer uniforms, drums, fanfares and pipes, flags, summer
camps with free accommodations and food (in a nation in which
most people starved and millions were unemployed), free transportation to the camps, and,
of course, free and incessant indoctrination in Nazi ideology. Still, all of that
wasn't quite enough. There was considerable opposition.
However, in a series of coldly and shrewdly calculated moves, radical extremists usurped
the youth movement that was very much splintered along political and religious ideological
lines and consolidated it into a unified and rigorously controlled sector of the German
population. The slogan that motivated the Nazi leaders was an adaptation of a slogan
attributed to Napoleon "Who controls the youths controls the future!" (Wer
die Jugend hat, hat die Zukunft), although its origins go back to Socrates (whom
Plato, in Republic, has offer this advice to philosopher kings: "Take all
the children from their parents and rid the city of adults."), and, as the
history of Ancient Greece shows with respect to Sparta, even
farther back in antiquity.
Hitler made it quite clear that he had a very good appreciation of the import of
that slogan and made sure that it was central to his evil agenda. He wrote in
Kampf that the State,
...must set race in the center of all life. It must take care to keep
it pure. It must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people.
It must see to it that only the healthy beget children....[my emphasis
A different adaptation of the slogan was used by Lenin. He said "Give me
your 4-year-olds, and within a generation I'll build you a Socialist State."
The Russian women's liberation movement became
Communism (Russia was
the first country in the world to give women the vote in 1917), and the Russian
youths were put into an organization, the Pioneers, that grew into the model
after which the
Hitler Youth became fashioned. It was a successful recipe for indoctrination and total domination
that was repeated in the People's Republic of China (the corresponding youth organization
there is The Red Guards) and in every other totalitarian country in the world ever since.
"President Obama is committed to helping states develop
seamless, comprehensive, and coordinated 'Zero to Five' systems to improve
developmental outcomes and early learning for all children....it will be the
goal of this Administration to ensure that every child has access to a
complete and competitive education -- from the day they are born to the day
they begin a career."
Sheet: Expanding the Promise of Education in America, Mar 10, 2009
Remarks of President Barack Obama –
As Prepared for Delivery Address to Joint Session of Congress, Tuesday,
February 24th, 2009)
In the "free" western world, modern feminism replaced women's liberation and,
along with the radical students' movement of the 1960s, evolved into the social evolution
towards increasing liberalism along increasingly more radical, extremist forms during the
last two decades of the 20th century.
The feminists didn't bother to declare their designs on youth as openly as some other
political movements did. They did things differently. They steadily promoted a
policy of implementing the goal first expressed by Karl Marx and Frederick
Engels, when they called for the
destruction of the family in
the Communist Manifesto.
They did that by devising a very effective means to bring about the materialization of
that goal. They attacked the weakest link in the family, first by vilifying it and
then thereby justifying its removal: fathers as the heads of families. Thereby
thousands of years of evolutionary progress of civilization is being brought to an
end. When the family is brought to an end, civilization as we once knew it surely ends as well.
From the website of the
The Soviet Story:
The film tells the story of the Soviet regime and how the
Soviet Union helped Nazi Germany instigate the Holocaust.
“The Soviet Story” is a story of an Allied power which helped the Nazis
to fight Jews and which slaughtered its own people on an industrial scale.
Assisted by the West, this power triumphed on May 9th, 1945. Its crimes were
made taboo, and the complete story of Europe’s most murderous regime has
never been told. Until now…
DVDs of the documentary can be
purchased through Amazon.com, but the documentary is also accessible
See a review of
the documentary on the soviet holocaust
or democide, the definition of democide being the extermination of a
people by its government. It is estimated that during the height of the
men comprised 98 percent of the 8-million people that were being exterminated
in just two years, 1937 and 1938.
The feminists are a little more covert about declaring their intentions than either Lenin
or Hitler were. They rationalize that everything they do is being done in the name
of equal rights for women and
in the best interest of
children. Note that equal rights for women means that those rights must be taken
away from men, which is applicable even to men's right to an equally long life.
The gap in the respective life expectancies of the sexes has widened to around six years,
from about one year in the beginning of the 20th century. In all Western developed
nations men now live on average
six to seven years
less than women do. In Russia and other former member nations of the U.S.S.R.
the gap in the life expectancies of the sexes widened to as much as 14 years.
Thereby women aren't really blessed with equal rights but are rather deprived of the main
breadwinners for their families, have to raise children largely by themselves and are
likely to live out their days lonely and deprived of a full pension income that a man
could have earned for his family if he would have been permitted to live out a full life.
Twice as many productive man-years than
productive women-years of life are being lost due to people dying prior to retirement
age. The losses to the GDPs of nations are substantial on account of that.
Of course, it is not an easy task to eliminate what comes as a given in the evolution of
the history of mankind. A radical extremist minority of adults can't simply declare
that society must be made over according to a new design and hope that such a grave
change-over will happen all on its own. Such a radical change of the fabric of
society needs time and much indoctrination, beginning with the indoctrination of
children. Unlike fascists and communists, who went at that task through organizing
the existing youth organizations into coherent, unified and rigidly controlled movements,
the feminists began to infiltrate the education system and to change it from within.
Christina Hoff Sommers, in
Who Stole Feminism?
How Women Have Betrayed Women, points out that when the American
Association of University Women discussed the gains made by feminism,
nothing really concrete could be identified, other than that they changed
the curriculum. They did that not by accident and in doing so they
changed society. It was done by design, for the same reasons that
motivated any other totalitarian interest group anywhere to use the
education system for the purpose of indoctrinating children and students.
It is not something that was done in secret. It was done in full sight
and with the willing participation of all of society. No-one ever objected to it effectively.
Moreover, while the feminists were promoting their ideology through the women's
studies programs that are being taught the world over, and while they propagated that
ideology into the education curriculum of the universities of the world and from there
into all sectors of the education systems, they made no bones about being
Marxist or socialist feminists.
F.L. Morton and Rainer Knopff, in the
& The Court Party, a book in which they examine the re-writing of the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedom, with the aim to cater to and accommodate primarily the
feminist agenda, explain:
Contemporary (or second wave) feminism has aptly been described as "Marxism
without economics," since feminists replace class with gender as the key social
construct. Of course, what society constructs can be deconstructed. This is
the feminist project: to abolish gender difference by transforming its institutional
source the patriarchal family. Certain streams of the Gay Rights movement
have taken this analysis one step farther. The problem is not just sexism but
heterosexism, and the solution is to dismantle not just the patriarchal family but the
heterosexual family as such. ...[p. 75]
Of course, with the Marxist feminists having prepared the ground by gaining social and
political acceptance, that premise, too, is gaining more and more ground. There is
no clash between the Gay ideology and Marxist feminism. The two complement one
another and have one common enemy "ultra conservative, extremist, right wing,
fundamental Christians," which is one of the labels they attach to anyone who opposes
their liberal agenda. Frequently they pop in the modifier bitter for good
measure or call such objections the right-wing backlash. Lack of logical
deduction never stopped any self-respecting feminist from promoting her or his
ideology. No ideology requires logic to become respectable. A large proportion
of the Marxist-feminists are gay rights activists who also have the undisguised goal
of dismantling the heterosexual family in any of its traditional and modern forms.
The evidence for the solid communist roots (see
Matriarchy in USSR
— off-site) of the feminist ideology and of
the gender agenda surprises many people. Some
write it off as a conspiracy theory and an attempt at reviving McCarthyism. There
most certainly were many Jews, too, who scoffed at the idea that the Nazis wanted to turn
them to ashes, even though the Nazis had for decades declared it to be their ultimate and
primary goal to rid the world of Jews. Anyone dismissing the feminist agenda should
keep that in mind when he contemplates the future of his children, of his present and
future son-in-law, or of his sons. He should keep in mind that the feminists, too,
have a final solution in mind, the reduction of all human males in the world. They
want to reduce the number of human males by
percent down to a level that is sufficient to maintain genetic diversity (and of
course to have enough men around to do all of the dirty and dangerous work that needs to
communism in drag, that much is clear
(see Matriarchy in
USSR — off-site). Working from
within the education system to bring about feminism's Marxist goal of abolishing the
patriarchal family comes as no surprise. Not only that, but since the basic
psychological matrix of people is finished by the time they reach age four, the feminists
adopted the time-proven strategy of the communist regimes for removing children as early
as possible after birth from the imprinting that they receive from their parents that is
so important in shaping children's psychological matrix. Hence the big push
for government-sponsored daycare, ostensibly to help mothers, in
reality to begin the indoctrination process that will turn children into Nebbish who have
not the least inclination of being what nature designed them to be, boys and girls who
grow up into men and women who beget and raise more boys and girls within the confines of
warm, loving, trusting, protective and caring families.
In all of this the feminists and gender advocates are claiming that they are not changing
human nature, but that they are just changing its definition, right in line with the
declaration provided by Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto:
The communists are not inventing the influence of society on education, they are only
changing its character, they tear education away from the influence of the ruling class.
In other words, the feminists gained control of the education system and thereby became
the ruling class.
If there are similarities between the evolution of the German youth movement into the
Hitler Youth and the evolution of the women's liberation movement into gender feminism, it
is that both movements were taken over by radical extremists and were deliberately
subverted to serve extremist ends wherever they came to play a role in the world. It
appears that the radical gender activists are far more effective in the indoctrination of
their adherents and in the promulgation of their agenda than Lenin, Mao Tse-tung or Hitler
ever hoped to be.
We are horrified today at the atrocities that were so brutally committed by communists and
Nazis alike, but we hardly flinch at the atrocities that are being committed today,
ostensibly in the name of women. Stalin murdered 1 million people/year during his
regime. Hitler murdered an average of 1.5 million/year during his reign. The
efforts of the international eugenicists that did so much to bring about Hitler's
holocaust (Illustrated by Judith Reisman in
Kinsey: Crimes &
Consequences) have now escalated to the killing of 55 million unborn children
per year. Their next target is the implementation of policies for the
extermination of the elderly and infirm that would have made Hitler proud and are little
other then an extension of his euthanasia program.
Update 2006 05 14
Chilling perspectives on "Ethics"
In case of a deadly flu pandemic, whom should we save?
Once-upon-a-time a question like that never came up, except in
totalitarian nations such as the USSR, Red China and Nazi Germany.
The presence of universal moral standards in the cultural heritage of
the West ensured that the answer to such a question was, women and
children first, then the elderly, the weak and the sick. We fought
wars to preserve that as a right of humanity, to ensure the abolition of
slavery and the right of everyone to life and liberty. That had
made our society reach the heights it attained before its fall.
However, those standards no longer exist. Now the legalization of
euthanasia, assisted suicide and rigorous culling to establish the
survival of the fittest is the norm in our brave-new world.
In the name of science it is now rationalized that rigorous
selective culling is needed on the basis of economics, not survival of
the weak on moral grounds. The outcomes of such practices are
similar to those that the Nazis hoped to achieve, for similar reasons;
only the methods differ. The Nazis actively killed those that were
— and in our brave-new world we actively withhold the means to keep
alive those that are — deemed not worthy to let live, although in the
rationalizing for the eradication of the right to life of the weakest of
all, those not yet born, we have already shown ourselves to be far more
ruthless than the Nazis ever were.
Still, vestiges of our largely vanished great cultural aims
still exist, or else it would not be that the proposal by Ezekiel
Emanuel and Alan Wertheimer (in the journal Science, May 12,
2006) sparked as much
public discussion as it did. (The discussion is still growing.
A May 13, 2006 search per the preceding link provided 539 entries in the
search return list. Sixteen hours later, May 14, the entries in the
return list for the search had grown to 572.)
Although the radical extremist gender activists by far outdo both Stalin and Hitler in the
magnitude of the atrocities inflicted upon humanity, very few people consider it worth
wasting any thoughts on. Mass extermination in decentralized abortion clinics is so
much more expedient and much more acceptable by becoming part of everyday life
than having it done in specially constructed and centralized extermination camps
that burden the transportation system to the extent that it interferes with the
economy. Those people who do object to either are deemed politically incorrect and
are often sent to jail when they express their displeasure with the radical, extremist
However, today's totalitarian political systems in the "free" world haven't
quite yet progressed to the point where their opponents are routinely sentenced to death,
although without any doubt a considerable number are being stripped of their
property. Many become incarcerated in addition to that, frequently for life.
Other than that, the wrath and fury of the people affected by radical extremists is almost
exclusively directed at the defenceless, primarily the unborn, but also the young, the
sleeping, the intoxicated, and the sick. The indoctrination through ideologists in
the youth movement has long ago been replaced by the far more thorough indoctrination
through the liberal ideologies promoted via the ever-present television. Absolute
and totalitarian control of the youth movement has been replaced by absolutely
totalitarian marketing strategies aimed at our captive youthful TV audience.
Just as there were people who gladly sacrificed their lives, morality and conscience for
Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and the Japanese Emperor, so there are today countless people willing
to accept the decline of their own morality and conscience for the sake of radical gender
activism and the ostensible "rights of women" or the promotion of
"rights" for minority groups with the kind of sexual orientations that played
such a large role in the history of the Nazis (see:
The Pink Swastika,
by Scott Lively). As a consequence of that, it isn't just the lives of unborn
children and the helpless that are being destroyed and obliterated, but primarily the very
family traditions that once caused our society to function well and guaranteed and
protected the rights and freedoms of individual family members.
As we are destroying our families we are losing the protection and safety that they can
give us and become isolated individuals who each think that they are at the
centre of the
Universe (see also:
The Copernican Myths). Instead of having concern for what each individual can offer to other
members in his family and to society in general, each individual insists on what society
owes him in the way of entitlements. Instead of giving freely and lovingly (or even
out of a sense of duty) to others and thereby receiving lovingly and generously from
others in return, increasing numbers of individuals force all members of society to fund
the perceived entitlements through taxation and redistribution of wealth to individuals
via various means.
Such is the process of the destruction of our families. We allow radical, extremist
gender-activists to destroy civilization itself, because, as surely as civilization came
into existence as a result of the creation of the concept of the family and as surely as
it thrived through the nurturing and refinement of that concept, so civilization will most
certainly decline into savagery again when a sufficient proportion of society doesn't live
by the rules any longer that formerly protected family values.
Walter H. Schneider
Bruderheim, Alberta, Feb. 6, 1999
The protectors of women time and again
praise to 'Wessi' (Westie) women the wonderfully complete world of the 'Ossi' (Eastie)
women, ever since the end of the GDR, whose all-encompassing children-crèche system
secured full-time earning potential and thereby the personal freedom of mothers.
What a full-day program for the children of fully-employed
looks like has been thoroughly experienced by the mothers of the former GDR. Marlene,
herself a crèche-child and subsequently an educator for child-educatoresses from Potsdam,
told it to me. [Full Story]
Germany devours its children
Families today: Exploited and burned out
If you have concerns about these and other issues related to the condition of
seniors, visit, contact and perhaps even join:
SUN — Seniors United Now
The up- and coming, rapidly-growing advocacy organization
for seniors (55 years and over) in Alberta
There are in the order of about half a million or more people of age 55 and
over in Alberta. If all of them were to join SUN, they would become the most
powerful advocacy organization in Alberta; and seniors would no longer be robbed
of their comforts and otherwise ignored.
At the price of one package of cigarettes seniors will be able to
gain a voice that will be heard by a government that otherwise can and will take
from seniors what they worked for all their life to enjoy in their old age.
If you are concerned about how seniors are affected by the
systematic destruction of our families and society, a search
at google.com (for elderly OR seniors OR grandparent OR grandfather OR
grandmother site:https://fathersforlife.org) will provide you with the links
to about 80 web pages at Fathers for Life that will be of interest to you.