“Struggle is the father of all things. It is not by the principles of humanitythat man lives or is able to preserve himself above the animal
world, but solely by means of the most brutal struggle”
-Adolf Hitler 1
The Topics Covered in This Essay Are As Follows:
Hints at the Other Side of the StoryHitler as Bible Expositor
Nazism and Abortion
Hints at the Other Side of the Story
First, I would like to simply point out an example of why I referred to Richard Smith’s article as “one sided, narrow and incomplete.” Note that his 27th statement reads,
“Great Britain_which [Hitler told Field Marshall Rundstedt] must be looked on, together with the Catholic Church, as one of the cornerstones of Western civilization.” (citing “Hitler, Bulluck, 589”)
Richard Smith does not counterbalance such statements with the likes of those which Hitler made while General Ludendorff spoke out against the Catholic Church,
“I entirely agree with His Excellency_but I need, for the building up of a great political movement, the Catholics of Bavaria just as the Protestants of Prussia, the rest can come later.”2
Moreover, Hitler stated:
“The enemies of National Socialism include not only the ‘Jewish Marxists’ and the Catholics but also certain elements of an incorrigible, stupid and reactionary bourgeoisie.”3
Hitler said what he had to, when he had to, in order to cause the effect that he wanted and gain the support that he sought-he was a consummate opportunistic politician.
Hitler as Bible ExpositorRichard Smith’s 20th point quotes a speech by Hitler:
“My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison.”4
As preposterous as it seems to critique Hitler’s understanding of the Bible (I mean please, we’re talking about Hitler) it may be advantageous to do so if for no other reason than to demonstrate that even if he was a Christian he most certainly had a profound misunderstanding of its teachings (shocking to ponder, I’m sure).
He views Jesus as a fighter and offers an example, without a citation, but appears to be describing Jesus and the disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane. Even if this was not the event that he had in mind it certainly undermines his point.
“Jesus came with them to a place called Gethsemane…And He said to the disciples, Sit here while I go and pray there…Then He came to His disciples and said to them…Rise, let us be going; behold, he who is betraying Me is at hand. And as He was yet speaking, behold, Judas came, one of the Twelve. And with him came a great crowd with swords and clubs, being sent from the chief priests and elders of the people…Then they came and laid hands on Jesus and took Him. And, behold, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand and drew his sword, and he struck a servant of the high priest and cut off his ear. Then Jesus said to him, Put up your sword again into its place; for all who take the sword shall perish with a sword. Do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He shall presently give Me more than twelve legions of angels?…Then all the disciples fled, forsaking Him…But Peter followed Him afar off to the high priest’s court, and he went in and sat with the servants to see the end” (Matthew 26:36-58).
Where, precisely, does the fighting take place? When Peter cuts off the man’s ear? Or when Jesus tells him to cease his actions and to put away his sword? Perhaps when the disciples flee and Peter follows them alone from a long ways off.
“Jesus went into the temple of God and cast out all those who sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of those who sold doves. And He said to them, It is written, ‘My house shall be called the house of prayer’; but you have made it a den of thieves’” (Matthew 21:12-13).
The Jew Jesus frequently attended the Jewish Temple and engaged in Jewish worship of the Jewish God. This had nothing to do with Hitler’s view of the Jews as poisonous. This had to do with putting the focus of the Jewish Temple and the Jewish worship on the Jewish God. Jesus attended the Temple before this and after this.
Hitler also wrote,
“turning of both cheeks is not a very good recipe for the front”5
He fails to note that the text to which he is referring states,
“If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also (Matthew 5:39 and Luke 6:29).
A slap in the face is not correlative to military conflict; a slap in the face is an insult thus, do not return insult for insult.
Nazism and AbortionRichard Smith’s 43rd point makes the following statement:
“Often today the word holocaust is used by those against abortion. This of course conjures up images of the slaughter of Jews and others (one group frequently overlooked in the killing are atheists) during World War II. Adolf Hitler, in Mein Kampf, made plain his Catholic feelings on abortion. ‘I’ll put an end to the idea that a women’s [sic] body belongs to her…Nazi ideals demand that the practice of abortion shall be exterminated with a strong hand.’ Hitler sentenced so-called Aryan women who had abortions to hard labor after the first offense, to death after the second.”
(citing “Mein Kampf, Hitler, 173”)Richard Smith is making at least two false equivocations.First I note that he appears to be complaining that the correlation of abortion and the Holocaust is an exaggeration. Yet, he then correlates the pro-life movement with Hitler.Of course, Hitler’s statement, “I’ll put an end to the idea that a women’s [sic] body belongs to her” is not the pro-life position which is that a women’s body most certainly does belong to her but when she is pregnant there in another, an additional, a different, body within her.Here again, we are presented with another one sided, narrow and incomplete statement. Mein Kampf, which is from whence the abortion quote was taken, was published in two volumes in 1925 and 1926. However, by 1933 when Hitler came to power he legalized abortion. In 1941 a Nazi decree pertaining to Poland solidified abortion on demand. In 1942 Hitler stated that “In view of the large families of the Slav native population, it could only suit us if girls and women there had as many abortions as possible. We are not interested in seeing the non-German population multiply…It will be necessary to open special institutions for abortions and doctors must be able to help out there in case there is any question of this being a breach of their professional ethics.”Simply stated, it appears that he discouraged Aryan abortions in order to grow their numbers but encouraged non-Aryan abortion in order to decrease their numbers.
But what if Hitler was completely pro-life or anti-abortion? What would that prove? Nothing.
What does it prove that Hitler was in favor of animal rights? That PETA are neo-Nazis who are influenced by Hitler? No.
What does it prove that Hitler is thought to have been a vegetarian? That vegetarians are neo-Nazis who are influenced by Hitler? No.
What does it prove that Hitler was against smoking? That non-smokers are neo-Nazis who are influenced by Hitler? No.
What does it prove that Hitler was against alcohol? That non-partakers of adult beverages are neo-Nazis who are influenced by Hitler? No.
