Thursday, January 20, 2011

The Anatomy of a Nazi

I am intrigued with those pundits who are quick to reach into their ammo pouch and pull out the “Nazi” label and apply it to those with whom they vigorously disagree. In recent days it has become all too fashionable to tar-and-feather one’s ideological opponents with the “Nazi” brand. If one doesn’t buy the popular promotions of climate change then one is branded a “climate Nazi”. If one disagrees with Obamacare and nationalized health care, then according to one US congressman you are a “Nazi” propagating Hitler’s Big Lie. If you oppose same-sex marriage and homosexuality then not only are you a homophobe, but a “Nazi” to boot. But all of this labeling begs that all essential question: What is a Nazi and what did they really believe?

Here is a short summary and assessment of who the Nazis really were and what they believed:

1. Nazis believed in socialism--hence The National Socialist Party of Hitler. Do conservatives believe in socialism? Hardly.

2. The Nazis were committed to existential philosophy and its correlate nihilism i.e. “God is dead” (Nietzsche). Does this sound like a mainstream conservative belief? Hardly. Rather, postmodernism is closely wed to this thinking. Postmodern thought can be directly traced back to the very philosophers who had a very pronounced influence on Hitler. Who is it that subscribes to postmodern deconstructive thought today? Certainly not those who believe in absolutes and the authority of God’s word.

3. The Nazis were obsessed with Darwinian evolution and especially the tenant of the survival of the fittest. This belief led Hitler on the eugenics crusade along with "progressives" around the world. While some conservatives might hold to a belief in evolution, many deny it. But who are the main cheerleaders for this ideology?

4. The Nazis and Hitler were morbidly infatuated with the occult. In fact the swastika, along with many other Nazi symbols, was an ancient occult symbol from Hinduism and Buddhism. The whole notion of the Aryan race stems from this and was then coupled to the dogma of survival of the fittest. Hitler was a disciple of occult practitioner Guido Von List, an Austrian German. So when you hear someone say Hitler was a Christian, they are ignorant of the facts. Again, does this sound like the belief of someone who would classify themselves as a conservative? Hardly.

5. When you add up all of the above, what does the sum of this equation equal? A transvaluationist: a transvaluationsit is someone who calls good evil and evil good ... black is white and white is black. Though the Bible does not use the term, it does perfectly describe what a transvaluationist believes and does: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20). Interestingly, Isaiah’s depiction of a transvaluationist is clearly set in the context of spiritual and moral apostasy. As absolutes are abandoned and replaced with the sweet-nothings of relativism, transvaluations become the norm. Those who really stand for truth and righteousness will be recast as unrighteous obstacles to the truth and to progress itself. One need only to look at the issue of homosexuality and how the transvaluations have been applied to legitimize what God clearly calls sin. Those who disagree with the PC screed on this issue are readily demonized and vilified as hate-filled rubes.

Hitler was a master transvaluationist often guilty of the very things he accused others of. This is what enabled him to deceive millions with the Big Lie. Even a majority of the churches in Germany bought into the transvalutionist creed, as 100 years of higher critical thinking foisted on the Bible prepared the way. As the German church kicked God’s word to the curb with Redaction Criticism, they replaced the vacuum it left with Hitler’s lies and transvalued assessments. It is no wonder that many German churches replaced their crosses with swastikas. The transvaulation was complete.

Does any of this sound familiar? A liberal media can scream about "civility" while calling others names and using incendiary rhetoric. Under the guise of “free speech”, they try to censor the speech of those with whom they disagree. They have even gone to the extreme of criminalizing metaphors, as if they have never made use of the same! They liberally accuse others of crimes which they didn’t commit. This is the hallmark of a transvalutionist.

How many churches have replaced God’s word with so-called “science” to justify homosexuality, abortion, and left-wing politics to include socialism? How many pulpits have jettisoned the cross of Christ in favor of mainstream culture? How many churches and denominations have marginalized the gospel with recycling, curbing carbon emissions, and pursuing everything “green”? It is all a direct result of substituting God’s word for the lie and succumbing to the transvalued version of the gospel, devoid of sin and repentance. No doubt they have worshiped the creature rather than Creator (Romans 1:18-32).

Based on the above summary, whom does this really describe? Not conservatives that is for sure! Not those who classify themselves as Bible-believing Christians. Maybe those invoking the “Nazi” label need to go take a good, long, hard look in the mirror and ask "Is it I?"


Anonymous said...

You said, "What is objectionable is when the workplace becomes a platform for advancing the gay agenda by coercing others into acquiescing to the homosexual lifestyle through intimidation techniques and bullying tactics."

Mark, no one in the gay community is trying to coerce others into engaging in the "homosexual lifestyle". No one in the gay community is trying to coerce others into thinking that the "homosexual lifestyle" is moral. We only are working to promote a work environment where we aren't harrassed because of our sexual orientation.

The Radical Watchman said...

The trouble is that you define "harassed" as simple disagreement with the morality of homosexuality. You say that you have a "sexual orientation" towards homosexuality. What if some one has moral "orientation" against adultery, pedophilia, homosexuality and the like? Should they be forced to conform and accept the promotion of that which goes against their moral orientation?

Besides, you misquote me--I never said that gay activists are coercing people to "engage" in the homosexual lifestyle. Rather, I said they are forcing--through legislation and judicial activism--those who disagree on moral grounds, to ACCEPT their lifestyle. There is a big difference.