The World Needs Another Hitler
December 21st 2007 18:00
Sounds crazy? In a way, yes, unfortunately it may really be true. We need another Hitler, but first let me define what I mean by Hitler. There are plenty of Hitlers all over the world, we see them walking down the street or read their hate filled rants online. The only thing that seperates them from the real Hitler is that none of them have the means to achieve their dreams. What we need is not only a political extremist hell bent on taking over the world but one that has the means to do so.
In this day and age of 'terrorism' we have fear with no real threat. People are afraid of the unknown enemy to the point they are willing to give up their freedoms for a little security. In effect neither is being achieved, the more freedoms that are given up proportionately increases the fear. When you have less freedom you inherintly become more worried.
There should be a real, unambiguous threat. The sort that really is a danger to freedom, the sort that snaps people out of a day dream that giving up freedom is the only way to be safe. The sort that makes people accept nothing less than freedom.
The problem with the current 'threat' to world peace, as reported by the media, is it doesn't exist, it's just a leap of faith undertaken by those who want to believe it exists. Therefore it's fictional reality, people don't actually believe it exists but since everyone says it does they concede that they are wrong, take a leap of faith and agree it exists. To that end the fear is being built with no real foundations and is being made worse when the government decides we can do without such and such God given right. What happens is people, based on that same leap of faith, become fearful that this enemy is so resourceful and intelligent that it has completely blended itself in with society. Therefore the only way to expose this enemy is by taking away the rights of everyone. Perhaps the enemy is so cunning and dangerous that even giving them a chance in a court of law will allow them to bring in new recruits while simultaneously getting off the charges.
Such musings belong to those who are deluded and mistake their nationalism for patriotism. Freedom must be fought for, yes, however the battle is not against Hitler. The battle is against ourselves, if we had a Hitler it would be easier, the enemy would be more readily identified. That's why we could use another Hitler, so long as we have so much death and destruction there should be a suitable heartless enemy to make up for it. At least then our fears would be genuine and we would as a people know that giving up our freedoms is not the way to destroy the enemy.
Make no mistake, it's a sad statement, unfortunately it's a true one.
In this day and age of 'terrorism' we have fear with no real threat. People are afraid of the unknown enemy to the point they are willing to give up their freedoms for a little security. In effect neither is being achieved, the more freedoms that are given up proportionately increases the fear. When you have less freedom you inherintly become more worried.
There should be a real, unambiguous threat. The sort that really is a danger to freedom, the sort that snaps people out of a day dream that giving up freedom is the only way to be safe. The sort that makes people accept nothing less than freedom.
The problem with the current 'threat' to world peace, as reported by the media, is it doesn't exist, it's just a leap of faith undertaken by those who want to believe it exists. Therefore it's fictional reality, people don't actually believe it exists but since everyone says it does they concede that they are wrong, take a leap of faith and agree it exists. To that end the fear is being built with no real foundations and is being made worse when the government decides we can do without such and such God given right. What happens is people, based on that same leap of faith, become fearful that this enemy is so resourceful and intelligent that it has completely blended itself in with society. Therefore the only way to expose this enemy is by taking away the rights of everyone. Perhaps the enemy is so cunning and dangerous that even giving them a chance in a court of law will allow them to bring in new recruits while simultaneously getting off the charges.
Such musings belong to those who are deluded and mistake their nationalism for patriotism. Freedom must be fought for, yes, however the battle is not against Hitler. The battle is against ourselves, if we had a Hitler it would be easier, the enemy would be more readily identified. That's why we could use another Hitler, so long as we have so much death and destruction there should be a suitable heartless enemy to make up for it. At least then our fears would be genuine and we would as a people know that giving up our freedoms is not the way to destroy the enemy.
Make no mistake, it's a sad statement, unfortunately it's a true one.
| 48 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by D. Armenta
The Florida Keys and Everglades
The Black Sheep Chronicles
What constitutes bad manners?
The male mystique
Debate Fan
Unfortunately, there are low elements out there who are trying their best to make certain religious groups out to be "Hitler II", based upon certain isolated incidents that are the exception, not the rule. I just hope that the majority of humans can recognise these hatemongers for what they are...
Comment by Ahmed
techy.Bytes
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Qwerk
Cinema Three
But yeah, until there's some sort of real world military power actively seaking world domination the whole 'war on terror' thing is just a wild goose chase.
Comment by Howard
Real Crash