The Nazi Next Door

It should be evident to many already – and it will be more, I am afraid, in the years to come – that Western democracies are becoming the biggest threat to Western freedom.

In a world more and more devoid of Christian values, and made more and more stupid by lack of proper education, freedom is dying a slow death.

In Anglo-Saxon countries, millions of young men and women think they are educated because they have a degree, though they cannot even write. Their cultural horizon stops at the X-Factor and Lady Gaga. They inform themselves from the crappy free “newspapers” they find at train stations. They are children making children – outside of marriage, now almost as a majority; but hey, “who am I to judge?” – who would not be able to assess any situation other than by following what the army of equally ignorant sheep around them does.

Add to this that, more than twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of Communism as a global threat, the West has remained without any significant external enemy, and even the wave of highly-organised Islamist terrorism has been, if we are realistic, almost completely destroyed and certainly reduced to a social irrelevance in less than a decade by virtue of smart intelligence work, and determined military action.

As a result, the already dumb sheep, unable to even spell but – other than the illiterate of centuries past – with an extremely high opinion of themselves, have never experienced a real threat to their societal structure, and have never had in front of their eyes the spectacle of a vast number of European countries deprived of elementary freedoms. They have, therefore, neither the intellectual not the practical instruments to understand the value of freedom.

To these people, other perceived “values” are more important than freedom. Not believing in God, they make gods of themselves and need to be utterly persuaded of the fundamental goodness of the little gods they think they are. Everything that threatens the perceived picture of their own goodness will have to be sacrificed in order for them to continue to feel good with themselves.

At this point, words like “hate crime” begin to emerge; the sheep, too stupid to understand that in a free society hate – even the real one – can never be a crime, will soon run to the help of the allegedly “hated”, firstly because they feel like as many little gods of niceness, and secondly because they desperately need to feel they are not the dumb idiots they in the end know they are. In an orgy of self-satisfaction, the measures against “hate” will become more and more harsh, and their application more stringent. “Hate” will become everything the majority of dumb sheep clearly sees as different from themselves. All this, cela va sans dire, in a perfectly democratic manner; then when the majority doesn't care for freedom, their democracy will make the work for them without the need for any blood to be spilled.

This society – the society the West is creating every day – will be eerily similar to Nazism, at least to the Nazism perceived by the usual German sheep in the Thirties: nice, harmless, friendly people loving their beer and pretzel, and seriously persuaded they are actually the best people on Earth whilst living in the middle of abortion, euthanasia, heathenism, and ferocious thoughts-control. It will be instructive to keep in mind that, though certainly in different circumstances, the Nazis went to power in a fully democratic way.

It is a legend that democracies protect freedoms. Democracies do not protect freedoms. People do. If a people's understanding of basic freedom deteriorates, their democracy will soon reflect the change.

If you think we are very far from a situation like this, I seriously invite you to think again. More likely than not, some of yours neighbours already wouldn't really object to you being put to jail for expressing “hate” if they think it is a serious threat to the image they have of themselves (say: by being a Christian, and saying it). The number of such people is clearly on the increase. They might not necessarily oppose your faith as long as it remains in your bedroom, but will consider it not tolerable – and worthy of detention – if it goes against the pagan god of their own goodness and, astonishingly, tolerance. They are stupid, and illiterate. They do not understand freedom, much less Christianity. They are in love with themselves, and will desperately cling to their love until the day they will have to die, and their friends will “celebrate” their “goodness”. This cult of one's own goodness requires the “intolerant” to be punished without any… tolerance.

Some people think the usual Nazi of the Thirties was a “hating” beast filled with hate for a world or perceived enemies. Nothing could be further from the truth. Nazi Germany was a perfectly ordered, peaceful, prosperous society enjoying their tranquility and defending themselves against the, erm, “haters”; haters clearly recognised as such by society and one's better, and therefore uncritically accepted as such whilst enjoying one's tea and scones (or rather, beer and pretzel).

Do not make the mistake of thinking your own neighbour is much different that the friendly lady or lad in Nazi Germany. Your own neighbour already accepted “hate” legislation and homosexual marriage, and would say to you “bullying” is so very bad, it must be severely punished, surely? They might soon start resembling their counterparts in, say, Magdeburg circa 1937. It will merely take more time.

The world was freed from the horrors of Nazism by kicking and bombing their ass to the tune of around, if memory serves, eight million dead when both soldiers and civilians are added (the number might be different, but you get my drift). But there is no seeing what earthly power can be a threat to the extremely wealthy, technologically advanced, and militarily powerful Western societies, now slowly sliding toward Nazism out of lack of faith in God, and a strong belief in their own goodness.

We must pray, and pray more. We must stop being appeasers now, if we want to have some chance of becoming the persecuted of tomorrow. Most of all, we must resist this horrible climate of political correctness, and stop being nice with the Nazis.

If you think yourself too fine to say “faggot”, you will one day have to be fine enough to have them instructing your children, making your laws, ruling your life, and oppressing your religion.

Still is not too late. But the number of Nazis next door is growing. Only a robust cultural offensive – also consisting in the rejection of political correctness – will stop the Nazi sheep.



Posted on August 6, 2013, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 11 Comments.

  1. Dear Mundabor, have you read The Whisperers: Private Lives in Stalin’s Russia by Orlando Figs? It accounts for how people abused the Stalin’s terror to gain personal gains.

  2. I would like to say how grateful I am for your blog. Despite the fact that not too many people seem to comment on your blog posts (compared to Rorate Caeli), you should keep up the great work! Indeed, your blog was one of the main reasons I am converting to traditional catholicism from the eastern orthodox church. I hope that many other silent readers have had the same experience as me. I have one question related to the canonization of John Paul II. Do you think that this is God’s sign that we should be more generous in canonizing other popes, who, doubtless have done a greater job as pope. I am thinking of many of the preconciliar popes besides the ones already in consideration or already canonized such as Pius IX, X, XII. I’m think of Leo, Pius XI, and others such as Pius VI (who is almost a martyr because he died in capitivity.) I just thought about this because it seems that although John Paul II seemed like a holy man his papacy was, admittedly, mediocre to plain bad. I’m curious if you think he did anything noteworthy (in a good way) besides being personally holiness. For example his opposition to communism and support of family values. These concepts were, of course, expressed much more clearly by preconciliar popes but we should at least give John Paul II credit for these. I just think that his canonization may be a sign that many of the preconciliar popes are just as holy (wondering if you think the same). God bless.

    • Many thanks, Coriolanus.

      This blog is very little compared to Rorate Caeli, and is run by one person only. We are at two different levels. I see my blog as one of the destroyers near the great aircraft carrier of Rorate Caeli in the traditionalist flotilla.

      As to JP The Catastrophic, I think that every canonisation of Popes reeks a bit of self-serving, and whilst it certainly made sense in the first century – also, with a great number of Popes obtaining the crown of martyrdom – should be very stingily applied to modern times.

      If I were Pope, I would only promote the canonisation of Pope for whom not only I have the usually requested two miracles, but who also were in their work as Pope of particular historical significance. Pope St. Pius X and Pius XII (supposing the miracles) would comply with this definition, but no other, not even the excellent Pius XI, not even if there were two miracles.

      The canonisation of John XXIII and JP II can – and will be – abused to defend the Conciliar agenda. Very bad.


  3. felicitasperpetua

    It’s already happening. Any adults with an IQ>70 still believing in the magical powers of democracy, freedom of speech and the tooth fairy should consider the following:

    She took her case to a court appeals and was lost again.

  4. To paraphrase John Adams: Democracy is suitable only for a virtuous people.

    In other words, the ‘people’ has to have a dispostion towards doing what is good, furthering the Common Good, etc.

    In a society of moral illiterates this poses something of a ‘challenge’.

  5. Dear Mundabor. Amen. In Canonising any person, Holy Mother Church is holding up that person as a holy role model whose actions ought be imitated.

    And I would like to read a delineation of the specific virtues that were practiced heroically as I believe what are now called virtues are not what Tradition has considered virtues.

    As I understand it, John 23rd was cited by JP II as having displayed heroic virtues and those virtues included ecumenism etc

    Ecumenism is now a virtue?

    • I know from my Italian years that Pope John was considered an extremely saintly man before his accession to the Throne of Peter, and independently from his work as Pope. I doubt his canonisation will be misused so easily.

      The case of JP II is different of course.


  6. Dear Mundabor. Maybe Pope John 23rd got that reputation, in part, due to V2 paying a periodical to cover the council.

    Here is another view of him:

    Click to access hutton_johnxxiii_book.pdf

%d bloggers like this: