That’s what happens when liberals regain power: The U.S. Department of Homeland Security leaked a paper in early April warning of neo-Nazism.
Naturally, no concrete facts were made available, but given the fact that a black man was elected president in addition to the ongoing economic downturn, that was presumed to be enough for extreme right-wingers. They would be able to recruit followers more easily. Lone perpetrators or networks could easily develop into terror attacks. Few facts, free use of the subjunctive – but a clear message nonetheless: Danger from the right is at our doorstep.
Struggles against the right occur throughout the world. Many rightists in Germany are inclined to see any objection to them as freshly minted propaganda emanating from Germany’s left. That’s pure hogwash, of course. And the same arguments are popular in other countries as well.
That happens even when the right can’t be linked to the Nazi era. In the United States, conservative non-conformists are also branded as terrorists. It works the same here: German conservatives are stigmatized as Nazis.
Seeing conservatives as potential terrorists is a long-standing tradition in the United States. It began with Theodore Roosevelt, who first warned of a Ku-Klux-Klan revival, and later of a Nazi fifth column in America. The danger was always perpetuated by Hollywood’s pop culture.
Any number of films and books in the 1930s advanced the lies. Whenever Democrats were in power, they pushed the idea of “the dangerous right.” The latest example was the box office hit “Arlington Road” at the end of the Clinton era.
Two things make it easy for American liberals to attack conservatives: First, Republicans are generally supportive of the Constitution and its amendment protecting gun ownership while liberals suggest gun ownership leads to violence. Second, there were a couple of misguided right wing extremists who actually did commit serious attacks.
Best known is Timothy McVeigh, who blew up a government building, killing over 100 people. But to paint Republicans with the same brush would be like the Germans saying Andreas Baader was the same as Oscar Lafontaine.*
Now it begins again, the hounding of so-called right wing extremists in the United States. It’s historical irony that the Department of Homeland Security, created under President Bush, is now being used against the Republicans. It’s highly reminiscent of what’s going on here in Germany: While attempting to distance themselves from extreme rightists for opportunistic reasons, the CDU/CSU and FDP will find that the chickens come home to roost sooner or later.
Actually, it would serve those bourgeois hypocrites right if they’re forced to pay tomorrow for their cowardice today. That goes for Germany and, in particular, for America. The Republicans had a hand in everything George Bush did in furthering big government, war, public debt, the Patriot Act, and on and on. Now the tables have been turned on them. They only have themselves to blame.
*Translator’s Note: Andreas Baader was head of the terrorist Baader-Meinhof gang, and Lafontaine is currently the leader of the German Left Party.
I would like to point out a couple things that you
misrepresented or failed to mention. First Teddy
Roosevelt was a Republican, (conservative) if you will. Next, the report that you make reference to
was begun on the Bush watch. One thing that you are
totally correct about–they asked for it. But let’s not confuse the run-of-the-mill Republican with the radical right-wingers whom this report is about.
Interesting source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junge_Freiheit
I wouldn’t say they don’t have an agenda.
Thought this article would at least make passing reference to America’s history of the exact opposite, red scare, hollywood blacklists, McCarthyism etc. On the whole though I can agree with most of this articles assertions.
On a side note, while conservatives in the U.S. can’t be linked to the Nazi era that hasn’t stopped people from trying. I think it was Gore Vidal who either referring to William F. Buckley or conservatives in general (can’t remember which) coined the term “Crypto-Nazis”. Also, because of the amount of negative connotations that go along with the label “Neo-Conservative”, a word thrown around quite a lot, it’s an effective synonym for Nazi.
@peterhun
Ha, so true. I think the same thing every time I read a Pravda article. I’m also in the habit of wiki’ing most sources I’m unfamiliar with but i didn’t do this one. The most telling thing for me was their limited circulation of 35,000 copies.When a paper has a small reader base it’s usually because their slanted in someway and fill a niche market. Ultimately though, whether you think a paper is slanted or not comes down to where you stand politically.