The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPaul Gottfried Archive
Correcting Richard
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In his response to an article on the supposed, mystifying limits of spreading democracy by Lawrence Kaplan in The New Republic, Richard Spencer seems bothered by Kaplan’s examples that ‘all peoples are capable of democracy.’ When Kaplan mentions the Germans, Japanese, and Catholics of South America as those who managed to practice democracy, contrary to onetime misconceptions, Richard offers what is intended as a refutation of the misrepresentation of the Germans. He notes that Germans had a constitutional monarchy in the nineteenth century. Moreover, German cities and towns are dotted with Rathuser, where presumably since the Middle Ages local councils had met under the direction of an elected mayor. The neocon response would be that none of this constitutes self-government, since neocons had not given it their stamp of approval. In fact every German elected body up until the postwar reeducation of the defeated Germans was pseudo-democratic and probably a preliminary stage leading to Hitler’s Final Solution. Therefore what would normally constitute sufficient proof of a constitutional, Western society would not apply to the Germans. Indeed the fact that Germany in 1900 or even 1850 had far more intellectual freedom than it does right now, under government-enforced ‘antifascist’ rules for expressing opinions or research findings, proves exactly the opposite of what we might think. It means that societies in the past were ‘less democratic’ because they did not act with sufficient vigor against German nationalists. In Germany’s case being ‘democratic’ has nothing to do with self-government. It refers to indoctrination and intimidation carried out by German and EU courts and public administration, in which what is practiced is the opposite of freedom and self-government.

(Republished from Takimag by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Germany 
Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Paul Gottfried Comments via RSS