Comparing Nazis’ treatment of people in an effort to reach their desired results with modern woke zealots’ behavior will be resented—by modern Nazis. However, my analysis will be accepted by informed people. The historic Nazis made their vile mark upon the world but were stopped and almost eliminated, while modern wokers are dismantling a thriving society with little opposition. America and the world will never be the same because of the virulent, venal, even vicious virus of wokeism.
Think with me along these lines—the Nazis’ dangerous, disastrous, and deadly system as compared with what the wokers are doing.
Would you permit your disabled child to be killed by the state to keep him or her out of pain and make life easier and better for you and your family?
Or to save the government health care system from going belly up!
Where did you or the state get the authority to do the above? Does any state or jurisdiction have the right to mistreat a helpless citizen?
USSANews.com reported a Canadian man was euthanized by health officials after being hospitalized for “hearing loss,” according to reports. He had texted his brother, asking him to “bust him out” of the hospital, but it was too late. He was killed by those allegedly called and trained to save lives and “to do no harm.” In reasonable, humane societies, his euthanasia would be considered murder. However, “authorities” in medicine and politics seem to be all-powerful.
Both medicine and politics need to have their wings clipped. That will keep them closer to earth and common sense.
In 1920, a world-shaking book was published by Germans Karl Binding and Alfred Hoche with the English title, Permission to Destroy Life Devoid of Value or Permitting the Destruction of Life Unworthy of Life. It addressed the legal relationship between suicide and euthanasia and extended it to killing the mentally ill. The book suggested that killing a patient was justifiable when it led to saving other lives, particularly when the patients in question were of no value to themselves or society. The book advocates killing the mentally ill or the intellectually dead, especially since such people were a drain on society—useless eaters.
When Hitler came to power legally, he wanted a pure nation of strong, blond, blue-eyed Germans. Those who could not contribute to that view of National Socialism had to go. Many thousands left the country. Others stayed and were sent to work camps. The Nazis used the legal and medical research of Binding and Hoche to support their culling of the weak, incompetent, demented, etc. And this was supported by the German people. A 1925 poll of German parents of disabled children indicated that 74% favored euthanizing their children! The book helped to make suicide and euthanasia legal.
If you think it couldn’t happen here, you had better think about the above poll—in the land of Martin Luther and thousands of Catholic and Lutheran churches.
Before Hitler’s rise to dictator in 1934, grotesque laws were framed as public health measures with the goal of strengthening society. The German euthanasia program was officially adopted in 1939 and accelerated quickly to bizarre lengths. Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide author Robert Jay Liftin revealed that Nazi policy underwent several modifications.
“Of the five identifiable steps by which the Nazis carried out the principle of ‘life unworthy of life,’ coercive sterilization was the first. There followed the killing of ‘impaired’ children in hospitals. Then the killing of ‘impaired’ adults, mostly collected from mental hospitals, in centers especially equipped with carbon monoxide gas.” This bizarre project was extended to “impaired” inmates in concentration camps.
The Nazis did the above and more based on the best medical science at the time. The diseased and disabled individuals were unproductive members of society and drained out of society much more than they contributed. Plus, they were a lot of trouble to care for!
More than half of all German physicians became early members of the Nazi Party, exceeding the party enrollments of all other professions. That suggests to me that M.D. might refer to morally deficient. National Socialist officials could say, “Hey, we are only doing what the medical experts tell us the science requires.”
Well, we have sure heard that many times recently.
The world had embraced the “science” of eugenics. The Germans, yes, even the Nazis, thought they were good people acting on sound evidence and a solid ethical basis. These defendants engaged in genocide, but they did so under the protective cover of medical authority and official legitimacy. Almost anything can be justified if based on “following the science.”
We sure know about that, don’t we?
Our government has permitted electric shock; lobotomies (Rosemary Kennedy, sister to the late president John F. Kennedy the most famous victim); cocaine sold like candy in drug stores and used in the first Coca-Cola in the late 1880s; Bayer began advertising a heroin-laced aspirin in 1898 until 1913; forced sterilization; forced inoculations; etc., that compare with Nazi policies.
However, no government has the authority to slaughter innocent unborn babies; permit, even encourage, assisted suicide; sterilize people against their will; authorize immorality (heterosexual or homosexual) of any kind; legalize unwanted medical treatment; permit children to have their sexual organs chopped off or be mutilated; encourage and sponsor changing genders—which can’t be done; and on and on.
While we question the morality and the competence of Hitler’s experts, we must also question modern health officials as well as politicians who think they can make a pretend boy become a real boy.
No, government officials in Germany and the U.S. don’t have the authority, but they have the power since they carry the guns.
The expression “life unworthy of life,” which appeared first in Binding and Hoche’s book, was essential to Nazi ideology. The two authors, a lawyer and a physician, were not political and for sure were not National Socialists. They were academics dealing with a very delicate subject: Does the state have the right to kill some people for the good of many? Does the state have a right to decide when a life is unproductive?
Between 1934 and 1939, the number of people sterilized ranged from 200,000 to 400,000 Germans to keep a clean or pure race. Between 1933 and 1945, roughly 15,000 deaf people were forcibly sterilized. In Canada, they kill them as the news revealed.
According to Hoche, “some living people who were brain damaged, intellectually disabled, autistic (though not recognized as such at the time), and mentally ill were ‘mentally dead,’ ‘human ballast’ and ‘empty shells of human beings.’” Hoche believed that killing such people was helpful since they made no contribution to society and were considered disposable.
They were useless eaters.
New Nazis are walking among us today and are considered intellectuals teaching at major American universities, receiving generous salaries and perks. The wokest among them tell us a child can decide what gender he/she/it wants to be. Moreover, such confused children have a right to receive hormone blockers and even have their tell-tell organs chopped off to give credibility to their insane fantasies.
To hide a male’s sexual organ before surgery (mutilation), the Boston Children’s Hospital advises transgender teenagers as young as 13 to implement “safer tucking” to make their penis look like a vagina. Taping with medical tape is recommended using tape for that purpose; however, if boys use duct tape, the hospital (that used to have a sterling reputation) added, “if you do use duct tape, remember to shave (although not right before, as that can cause irritation) so that the tape does not pull hair. Soak in a warm bath before removal to make the tape less sticky.”
Those hospital officials are not only woke but weird, even wacky. But double board certified.
Furthermore, childbirth, monthly periods, and menopause are no longer strictly the bailiwick of females, and such events can now be experienced by any male who desires them according to the wokest of the woke. But then, why would any sane man want those experiences?
American philosopher Peter Singer Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and others have made similar arguments for any time abortion to weeks following birth and any time euthanasia. Singer declares, “It would be morally wrong to choose to have a child with disability.” He and other fuzzy, foolish, and fatal ethicists believe permitting a disabled child to live is wrong. Therefore, if killing a hemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, in their view, be right to kill him.
Singer—not only woke but wicked—has no problem with sex with the dead (necrophilia) as long as consent was given to the person while alive. Of course, sex with animals is acceptable. Not sure about needing consent. Maybe the wag of a dog’s tale is sufficient. But it gets worse—it always does. Singer told ABC, “A woman has oral sex performed by her dog. I know women who have said this is something that pleases them. The dog is free to do it or walk away. There is no dominance over the dog. That seems to me harmless.”
Notice that having personal supremacy over the dog would be wrong but perverted sex is acceptable.
To be clear, I have more respect for the dog than I do for the woman or Singer, and under normal circumstances, such disgusting subjects should not be discussed by normal people; however, we are living in very unusual times.
Humans are responsible for living as humans and will give a personal account to a just and holy God one day.
University of California professor Kenneth Watt opined, “Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.”
Watt, Singer, and Company are far from harmless. As in Germany, freakish, foolish, and fraudulent scientists declared war on the culture to replace it. Tenured professors’ positions are secure no matter how unbiblical, un-American, unqualified, or stupid they are. Moreover, they are generally safe from being fired unless caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.
Woke fanaticism is obvious, as supported by watching almost any television show. Radicals have put the cult in culture and removed the civil from civilization. It almost makes me want to resign from the human race.
And it has lost its humanity.
See original post article link and more articles from Don Boys, Ph.D.
By Don Boys
