Being a Christianity-profaning cult, the Left needs a devil figure for their self-affirming Narrative. Since they deny the existence of both God and Satan, they've seized upon Hitler as the ultimate symbol of evil. They accuse transgressors against their creed Nazis much as Puritans made accusations of witchcraft. Except the Puritans were right.
19 comments
Hitler gets mentioned a lot right now because the American radical right borders on outright fascism. To the point that conspiracy theories about Jews are popping up again, out right repeats of WWII propaganda.
the Puritans were right
Such as Oliver Cromwell? Okay. The Parliamentarians after the English Civil War? Very Puritanical were they. But here’s the kicker:
From the English Civil War came the Parliament we have today. With not only the first Atheist Prime Minister but with a House of Commons within that Cromwell Puritan-created Parliament since 4th July a Palace of Diversity . Black, white, even a Sikh MP.
And with more LGBT MPs than ever.
Except
…it’s all blown up in your own face, Bri m’boy. Since Starmergeddon, in Soviet Democracy Exception is you .
Read or view a few exhibitions about exactly what the Nazis did, it isn't just Allied war propaganda to say that he was evil. But I don't take too seriously someone who thinks witches were real. Aroint thee, Brian!
You're trying to defend fucking Hitler and his crimes against humanity. If to you "Christianity" means Nazism, expect many profanators, not only from the left. Also admit that it's not profanation, but well deserved criticism of the unacceptable. That's not Christianity, heretic Nazi.
I recommend #psycho
Edit/Adding, because it's recent and seemed to be relevant:https://www.npr.org/2024/09/24/nx-s1-5118438/neo-nazi-haitian-springfield-trump-debate
Although it probably isn’t much to speak, I’m not sure he’s defending Hitler so much as he’s objecting to regarding anyone besides Lucifer as the incarnation of evil (i.e. however evil Hitler was, he would have been less evil than Lucifer).
Regarding the Salem witch hunts as right and proper still does him no favors, though. I’d consider having him look through Johann Weyer’s refutation of Malleus Maleficarum , but he probably sees witches as more like the conjurors that Weyer did think were an issue. Just without the tacit realization that those conjurors are over in the upper class (“This still isn’t enough power and prestige! I must have MORE! ”), not lower and middle.
@TheKingOfRhye #207403
Certainly at least ultimate human symbol of evil, although whether we’re narrowing ourselves to comparatively recent Eurosphere is a possible concern (Andrew Jackson and Leopold II of Belgium come to mind). But again, I think Niemeier is objecting to anyone besides Lucifer as being deemed Ultimate Evil, although what he has that Hitler et al. didn’t besides magnitude (will to tyrannize God and the entire cosmos, not “just” the Earth/solar system/galactic arm) is uncertain.
I think this is born out by his approval of the witch hunters, as warlocks/conjurors/etc. were supposed to be trafficking with Lucifer himself. He probably sees that as the limit of human malice and treachery.
@Skyknight #207415
True, there have been historical figures at least as bad as Hitler (Leopold II is a dark page on our history, thank goodness we’ve finally started to acknowledge that), but I’d say he’s still the most “popular” one.
That being said, all Lucifer ultimatly did was disagree with God (granted, for fundies that is the worst thing you can do, but I digress), Lucifer still has no power in who goes to Hell or anything nor did he ever outright kill anyone afaik. Plus his torturing of Sinners is still what YHWH wants him to do. Now, YHWH (who could remove Lucifer from the equation at any point if he really wished to) on the other hand… Ooh boy, the entire Old Testament is one big war crime…
A bit off topic, but: There’s a question of how much scale matters when determining how “evil” someone truly is. Lots of people would have been just as bad as Hitler or worse, they just didn’t have the power or opportunity to torture and slaughter millions. Take Liu Pengli, for example. He was a disgraced Chinese prince who raised up a gang of serial killers who tortured and killed for the sheer joy of it, and not for some higher purpose like “protect the motherland”. His gang’s kill count is unknown but believed to be on the scale of hundreds, not millions. If he had ascended to the throne at some point and then used that power to exponentially up the scale, even a significant fraction of a million would have been quite a feat circa 150-140 BCE. But assuming the records are accurate, from a purely moral perspective, I would argue that he was a bigger monster than Hitler.
Though ultimately, what matters most for a symbol is perception, not objective morality or scale.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
