ZGram - 9/6/2003 - "How would YOU choose?"
zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org
zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org
Sun Sep 7 14:39:00 EDT 2003
ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny: Now more than ever!
September 6, 2003
Good Morning from the Zundelsite:
Is this ever an essay of mixed messages! Thought-provoking,
nonetheless! Lots of intriguing information you don't ever see on
CNN!
The Hitler Test
by Butler Shaffer
by Butler Shaffer
In previous years, and on the first day of class, I have given my new
students a ballot, indicating that "it is time to elect the leader of
a great nation," and offering them two candidates, A and B.
Candidate A is identified as "a well-known critic of government, this
man has been involved in tax protest movements, and has openly
advocated secession, armed rebellion against the existing national
government, and even the overthrow of that government. He is a known
member of a militia group that was involved in a shoot-out with law
enforcement authorities. He opposes gun control efforts of the
present national government, as well as restrictions on open
immigration into this country. He is a businessman who has earned his
fortune from such businesses as alcohol, tobacco, retailing, and
smuggling."
Candidate B is described thusly: "A decorated army war veteran, this
man is an avowed nonsmoker and dedicated public health advocate. His
public health interests include the fostering of medical research and
his dedication to eliminating cancer. He opposes the use of animals
in conducting such research. He has supported restrictions on the use
of asbestos, pesticides, and radiation, and favors
government-determined occupational health and safety standards, as
well as the promotion of such foods as whole-grain bread and
soybeans. He is an advocate of government gun-control measures. An
ardent opponent of tobacco, he has supported increased restrictions
on both the use of and advertising for tobacco products. Such
advertising restrictions include: [1] not allowing tobacco use to be
portrayed as harmless or a sign of masculinity; [2] not allowing such
advertising to be directed to women; [3] not drawing attention to the
low nicotine content of tobacco products; and, [4] limitations as to
where such advertisements may be made. This man is a champion of
environmental and conservationist programs, and believes in the
importance of sending troops into foreign countries in order to
maintain order therein."
The students are asked to vote, anonymously, for either of these two
candidates. I employ this exercise only every other year, at most, so
that students will not have been told to expect it. Over the years,
the voting results have given candidate B about 75% of the vote,
while candidate A gets the remaining 25%. After completing the
exercise and tabulating the results, I inform the students that
candidate A is a composite of the American "founding fathers" (e.g.,
Sam Adams, John Hancock, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, etc.).
Candidate B, on the other hand, is Adolf Hitler, whose advocacy for
the programs named can be found in such works as Robert Proctor's The
Nazi War on Cancer.
In one of my classes a few years ago, we were discussing the
Schechter case, in which the United States Supreme Court struck down
the cornerstone legislation of the "New Deal," the National
Industrial Recovery Act. I was explaining to the students how this
legislation had transformed American commerce and industry into a
system of business created but government-enforced cartels. I also
pointed out to them how popular fascist/socialist programs were
throughout much of the world at that time. There was Stalin in the
Soviet Union, Mussolini in Italy, Hitler in Germany, Franco in Spain,
and Roosevelt in the United States.
I then informed my class how Winston Churchill had, in 1938, praised
Hitler, as had such luminaries as Ghandi, Gertrude Stein (who
nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize), and Henry Ford (who was
pleased to work with the German leader). One of my students could
take it no more. "How can you say that so many people could support
such an evil man as Adolf Hitler?," she pleaded. "You tell me," I
responded, "just two weeks ago 78% of you in this class voted for
him!" Some twenty seconds of pure silence settled into the classroom
before we moved on to the next case.
A couple days ago, I decided to introduce a new group of students to
this exercise. After they voted - again, anonymously - I tabulated
their votes and discovered that, once again, Hitler had prevailed,
but by a much narrower margin than in earlier years. In my two
classes, Hitler won by a 45-41 combined total of votes (nor did he
require the Supreme Court to validate his victory). His support, in
other words, had fallen from previous averages of 75% to about 52.3%.
One of my students wrote on his/her ballot "leaving ballot blank, or
writing in a socialist candidate if one exist." At the following
class meeting, I read this notation aloud and told the class that a
"socialist candidate" did exist: candidate B, in the person of Adolf
Hitler. The word "Nazi" was derived from the formal name of Hitler's
party: the National Socialist German Workers' Party. That so many of
Hitler's policies have become the essence of modern "political
correctness," as well as "mainstream" Republocratic platforms, is a
sad reflection on just how far the American culture has deteriorated
in recent decades.
Still, there may be some basis for optimism in this latest response
from these students, who had never had a class with me before. When
close to half of these young people were more comfortable siding with
the kind of men whose thinking was reflected in the Declaration of
Independence, there may be healthy signs that support for the
Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft/Ridge form of fascist state is starting to wane.
Additional evidence of a diminishing enthusiasm for leviathan can be
seen in the resolutions passed by over one hundred city/town councils
- plus one state legislature - stating their opposition to, or even
refusal to abide by, the Patriot Act! The lobotomized voices that
insist upon passive submission to authority may find themselves
screeching to a rapidly depleting audience. They, and their statist
overlords, may be able to count on the continuing complicity of a
round-heeled Congress, but many thoughtful men and women may be
peeling the "love it or leave it" bumper-stickers off their minds and
cars.
Having had a brief taste of the brown-shirted culture of the present
administration, perhaps enough Americans are rediscovering the
significance of their own history. As the media lapdogs continue to
recite their scripts and slobber on cue, it may prove to be the case
that the "spirit of '76," with its love of liberty and distrust of
governments, is still sufficiently engrained in the fabric of our
society.
August 22, 2003
Butler Shaffer [send him e-mail] teaches at the Southwestern
University School of Law.
More information about the Zgrams
mailing list