THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

EXTREMIST MEANS WHO LOST THE LAST WAR | 2011-05-19

It is an embarrassing and little-discussed fact, but until May 8, 1945, Germany operated under the Weimar Constitution.

After the Reichstag Fire the Reichstag put the emergency clause in the Weimar Constitution into effect.

The only reason the Weimar Constitution is no longer in effect is because Germany lost World War II.

I wrote a piece about Militant Obedience.

No matter how many words you cover it with, the only LOGICAL difference between Lincoln's new Constitution declared in the Gettysburg Address and Hitler's Weimar Constitution is that Lincoln won and Hitler lost,

We DO NOT want to get derailed on this fact, but it IS a fact.

It is a simple fact of life that the parameters of ANY discussion of public affairs are set by who won.

This is not even mildly disputable. If, as Buchanan discusses in his book, Britain had not gone nuts and declared war on Germany when Germany AND Russia invaded Poland, all of our public discussion would have an entirely different twist.

Germany would have been able to invade Russia, an aim Hitler had announced in Mein Kampf in the 1923.

Please note that I am NOT discussing anything specific about alternative history, which is subject to debate. All I am saying is that any alternative history would have produced an alternative DEBATE. History COULD have been different.

No one has any trouble with the simple fact that history COULD have been different.

I am talking about an equally indisputable fact: If history had been different, all the "reasonable discussion" we see professional commentators engage in would be unrecognizable.

If Englishmen and Americans had not been killed off by Churchill and Roosevelt, Hitler would have had Stalin all to himself. Ideally, the two dictators would have worn each other out, but in the long run, in a one-to-one match up, the USSR would probably have been beaten.

Now imagine the "reasonable debate" in the post-War years.

Germany would have had nuclear weapons. It would be the Lindbergh faction who would have bumper stickers saying "Better Nazi Than Dead."

The left would have been made up entirely of nuke crazies.

HISTORICAL FACT AS HISTORICAL FICTION | 2005-06-21

This is from Book One of the Arthurian Saga by Mary Stewart. It takes place in the fifth century, which will require a little arithmetic on your part.

When Christians met Mithraism, Christians honestly believed that the Mithraism from Iran had copied Christian doctrine, just as Old Testament fanatics today believe that the Magi had to know the Old Testament.

They've got it backwards.

So here is Mary Stewart's very accurate portrayal of Mithraism in the fifth century:

" I knew I had seen more than was in the painting. I had seen the soldiers' god, the Word, the Light, the Good Shepherd, the mediator between the One God and man. I had seen Mithras, who had come out of Asia a thousand years ago (500 BC). He had been born, Ambrosius told me, in a cave at mid-winter (December 25), while shepherds watched and a star shone....and then, after eating his last meal of bread and wine, he was called up to heaven. He was the god of strength and gentleness, of courage and self-restraint."

Mary Stewart is a good Catholic. But she does not depend on ignorance to confirm her faith.

ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963 | 2003-11-22

The entire country used to go into deep and ostentatious mourning on this day each year. It was the date on which Saint John the Kennedy was shot.

Saint John the Kennedy has gone the way of Saint Christopher. The liberal popes have declared him a fake. The absolute silence about the real John Kennedy that the media maintained for so long has been breached. The truth about John Kennedy has come out, and the truth ruins liberals.

The truth ruins leftists. That is why the files on Saint Martin Luther the King have been closed by law for fifty years. They'll be burned before they are opened and no one in the press will ever speculate on what's in the King Files.

The late Veneration of Saint John the Kennedy is directly related to the runaway popularity of Howard Dean among Democrats. Howard Dean is from New England. He is the first New England presidential candidate since Kennedy that everybody doesn't yawn at.

You know all those pitiful, elderly people who still think they are the "With It" Generation of 1965, the Old Hippies? Keep them in mind and I'll explain another, bigger group of liberals to you.

For the media, Kennedy represented the Good Old Days when presidents came from New England. Back then there were three TV networks. In Kennedy' day all three networks and the two national wire services were in New York City

In the days of Saint John the Kennedy, in the days of Camelot, all the media were in New York City, of New York City, and by New York City. New York was the Center of the World back then and the world was the Northeastern United States.

In the Kennedy days, the only Republicans who mattered were the Rockefeller Republicans of the liberal Northeast. Any part of America outside of the Northeast was openly considered to be alien territory, populated entirely by yokels.

Nowadays most people won't know where the Allegheny Mountains are unless one points out that it is the upper part of the Appalachian Range. But in the Kennedy Days, the Alleghenies were the western border of the media's idea of the Real America.

As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "Europe extends to the Alleghenies. That is where America begins."

The media's idea of the "Only True America" has another border. It is the Mason-Dixon Line.

THE "NEOS" HELPED CAUSE TODAY'S SUPPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH | 2001-03-24

David Horowitz is the leading opponent of slavery reparations. He could not have any debate on American campuses about it, so he decided to put paid ads in campus newspapers. Most student papers banned those, too.

The few campus papers that took Horowitz' ad faced major campus uprisings. At the University of California, the Daily Californian ran a front-page editorial apologizing for having allowed the anti-reparations ad.

At the University of Wisconsin, 100 students confronted the student editor demanding her resignation.

On other campuses, gangs of students openly took the papers from distribution racks and trashed them.

Leon Botstein, president of Bard College in New York, said that Mr. Horowitz was clearly on a campaign of provocation but that colleges were easy prey. Contrary to their image as arenas of intellectual debate, Mr. Botstein said, colleges tolerate dissent poorly.

Botstein said this was particularly true of race, which he called "the central question of life in America."

David Horowitz, like all accepted spokesmen for the right against today's racial excesses, is a neoconservative. This means that he backed the leftist approach to race issues all the way until recently. According to him and his fellow "neos," everything was fine with liberal policy until, suddenly and inexplicably, it went to extremes just recently.

Horowitz was a good leftist until he sent a friend of his to work for the Black Panther Party. She was murdered there, he said, "for asking too many questions." He said the Panthers were a front for criminal and drug activities

It took that kind of shock for him to see what had happened. Until now, according to neoconservatives, the race issue was being handled just fine. Respectable conservatives not only agree, but do not allow anybody but a "neo" to represent the right on racial issues.

But if you take the line that "neos" and respectable conservatives take, the anti-Horowitz protesters are perfectly correct. Horowitz argued, for example, that American blacks don't deserve reparations because the slaves' descendants today earn fifty times as much money per capita as blacks whose ancestors were not slaves.

That's true, but according to the rules agreed to by neos and respectables, you are not allowed to talk about race just because what you say is true. No one is allowed to point to white achievements, and every conservative publication agrees to this. A British court sent a man to prison under the Hate Laws with the flat statement, "The truth is no excuse."

White people are only to be mentioned when something they did was bad. If it's good, "humankind" did it. All through the civil rights battle, liberals made it clear that if you are free to discuss what each race actually did, that leads you straight into white supremacy.

You could not have gotten integration, much less the total suppression of all dissent on campuses, if racial heresy were allowed.