Tuesday, November 10, 2009

The Next Reichstag Fire

By Mark Ross, Contributing Writer

It was a risky political stunt that allowed the Nazi Party to consolidate its grip on the German nation.

The sad truth is that Hitler was elected democratically. The Nazis took advantage of a weakness in the Weimar constitution that allowed proportionate representation.

After an election, the seats in the Reichstag were distributed among candidates of most if not all of the various parties based on the percentages of the votes tallied. Fringe, screwball political movements got their feet in the door this way. Ironically, this is how Israel works.

The Nazis had incrementally worked their way up to having  plurality after the election of 1932. But that wasn’t good enough. In the campaign Hitler had promised, “An end to politics.” They were compelled to eliminate all opposition in order for their agenda of German reconstruction to take place.

Hence the Reichstag fire. On February 27, 1933, a mysterious arson gutted the German parliament. The loudest voices blamed Communists and their ilk (non-Nazis). Hitler swiftly moved to arrest and imprison all political opponents, and thus the way was clear for complete domination and the promised end to politics.

The American Left (a.k.a. Democrats) has taken over the national government. As a consequence they are being righteously creamed in the court of public opinion. Nothing would help them more in their quest to consolidate power than for the next two national elections to be canceled.

Even during the Civil War we held national elections, but then there was less of a political imperative for the party in power to stifle metastasizing dissent. What the Democrats could use is some kind of “event” that would allow them to declare an extraordinary national emergency -- the modern equivalent of the Reichstag Fire.

What kind of event? That’s a toughie. The domestic terror attack on the Oklahoma City Federal Building comes to mind. It would be easy to blame right wingers in the absence of tangible evidence. I’m sure Mr. Holder, the Attorney General, would be happy to help.

Plausibility for such a scheme rests on the fact that so many among us have already been stampeded by a fanciful hoax concerning vague trends in the weather.

Recently, while chatting with a friend about domestic politics he concluded that we are in a new civil war, though without guns.

Wars, however, go well beyond yelling, screaming, marching with placards and making evocative speeches. Should this be true -- and trends continue -- then some day the gloves will really start to come off.

What then? A precursor to our last Civil War was John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry in 1859. Just a thought.


  1. At this point, the best thing that could happen for the Dems would be for the president to be assassinated. Alive, his approval rating and the image of the party will continue to plummet. If he were to be martyred, public support for the liberal agenda (and his augmentation of the Bush regime) could grow in the name of his "legacy", etc. So I pray he physically survives his term.

  2. Are you serious? I mean, this is some really paranoid stuff - the equivalent of the paranoid pap tossed out by Democrats during the Bush years. The old "October surprise" (although I guess the news cycle is so quick now, it's the "November surprise")

    I'm sure these have been formulated into some snappy axioms but there's a few rules related to speculations like this - the main ones being that the government in general isn't smart enough to pull this kind of stuff off, and if they were they still wouldn't be good enough to keep it secret.

    I'd love to see (for instance) a comparison of the vibrancy of free press in Hitler's Germany near the time of this fire compared with what we have now

    Finally, you've violated Godwin's Law - simply by mentioning Hitler the conversation is doomed into a destiny of pointlessness

    Stick to verifiable facts, and check the level on that paranoia / sense of persecution. It assumes a unified coordinated enemy that I at least don't see. Its more of a shambling zombie, really. Very different thing, needs different rhetorical weapons.

  3. I do have to agree that the President and much of his cabinet would love to rule the world. Just think how much fun it would be if the power monger Hillary Clinton was let loose in the world. She is bad enough with the press following her every move. Though it is possible that there could be an event that would lead Obama to declare such an emergency that he would propose not having an election I am guessing that even he and his cabinet would have a hard time doing it. I am betting that there are enough of us out here not afraid of our own shadows that would not let that happen. We do have FOX News on our side for the time being.

  4. As we have been discussing the subject as lot as of lately, I felt this was a great follow-up