Appeasement And All That
Every time the US Empire and its satraps decide to attack some country, they accuse the opponents of such aggression “appeasers.” That our corporate masters should have the gall to use this term is shocking. But this will take a little historical explanation. Had the French Army occupied the Rhine in 1934, Hitler would be a footnote in history. Contrary to the Treaty of Versailles, the Nazis sent troops into the region, but nothing was done. The French right-wing – at that time in power - appeased the Nazis. Much of the left remembering the union sacree of 1914 opposed any action. But Hitler was not Kaiser Bill. The pacifists were fighting against the last war. So 50,000,000 people ended up dying in the future war, a war that could have been stopped with few causalities in 1934, as the German Army was far weaker than the French at this time. After the Rhine occupation, Germany re-militarized – also in opposition to the Versailles Treaty. Then came their aggression in Spain, the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia and the seizure of Austria. Again not a finger was lifted to stop the Nazi advance. Hitler became seen as “invincible” , not because of any genius for political machinations, but simply because he had this string of victories. And as we know, “nothing succeeds like success.” The reason for Hitler's victories lay in the fact that the European and American ruling classes wanted him to win. He was their golden boy to stop the spread of socialism. Even Churchill was a Johnny-come-lately anti-fascist and only opposed the Nazis when he realized that they might threaten the British Empire. Had Hitler's bluff been called early on, his “magic touch” would have vanished and the German ruling classes would have sought another political device. The defeat of Fascism in Spain would have been a big victory for the left, further radicalizing the populations of Britain and France, which is why the rulers were opposed. The French far-right and the Radical Socialists (Neither radical or socialist, but centre-right) supported the Falange and prevented French intervention in Spain. A stronger personality than President Leon Blum, might have supported the Spanish left anyway, but being the person he was, he did not, and a golden opportunity was missed. Most of the American rulers and political establishment of the 1930s – the same group pooping bricks over the New Deal – were soft on fascism. Many like Ford, Hurst, and the Duponts were out and out pro-Nazi. They were on the outs with the Roosevelt people and especially had to pull in their horns when the US got into WW2. The more radical New Dealers were forced out at the end of the war and the former Hitler-appeasers came swinging back in. The American ruling class – largely appeasers, remember, feared a post-war depression. Rather than opting for social democracy as in some European countries, they went for military Keynsianism – the permanent war economy. In order to do this they needed some booga-booga – a scary-puppet enemy to rationalize all this waste of tax payer money. Stalin was quickly substituted for their former pal Hitler and Communism replaced Nazism as the world-conquering totalitarian threat. As cruel as Stalin was, he was not Hitler Mark 2. Nor was Stalinist “communism” Nazism. Stalin was actually a very cautious and conservative dictator, far too intelligent and knowledgeable to have loony fantasies about conquering the world. All he wanted was to maintain his sphere of influence and to be surrounded by nations that were not hostile to the USSR. The last thing he wanted was revolutions or more wars. Successful revolutions in Western Europe would have threatened the Stalinist regime far more than neutral or even pro-US regimes. US wars of aggression in Korea and Vietnam as well as coups against democratic governments like Iran in 1953 and Guatemala in 1954 were marketed like they were versions of D-Day. Those who appeased the Nazis – and every other type of fascism, before and after WW2, accused those who questioned the US war and subversion machine as “appeasers.” The liberals gobbled up this propaganda and became fanatical Cold Warriors. One more lost opportunity, after this string of lost opportunities; the Cold War might have been avoided, but thanks to the liberals it wasn't. Millions died as a result of their cowardice and trillions of dollars squandered on military expenditure. Enough wealth to end poverty world-wide. The liberals lack of clear thinking, their falling for cheap emotionalism (in spite of their endless bellowing about Reason) and their inability to distinguish between one historical situation and another was disgraceful. One expects as much from the pro-fascist appeaser wing of the ruling class, but not from those who fancy themselves as progressives. But they didn't want the old Nazi appeasers accusing them of appeasing “communism.” SORRY FOR LACK OF PARAGRAPHS BUT THIS FUNCTION IS NOW NOT WORKING, WHAT CAN WE EXPECT FROM PROGRAMS DESIGNED BY MORONS?