FTR #979 Nazism, Anti-Gay and Anti-Feminist Propaganda and the Fritz Haarmann Incident

With the Trump admin­is­tra­tion mov­ing against gay rights and repro­duc­tive rights, and with the pub­lic atten­tion large­ly focused on yet anoth­er mass mur­der in Las Vegas, we delve back into the archives for the ben­e­fit of new­er and younger lis­ten­ers.

On 2/28/1988, we record­ed Mis­cel­la­neous Archive Show M13: Gay Rights, Repro­duc­tive Rights and the Third Reich, high­light­ing how the nascent, vig­or­ous gay rights move­ment in Weimar Ger­many was a focal point for Nazi pro­pa­gan­da and polit­i­cal action. Fur­ther­more, a mass killing by homo­sex­u­al Fritz Haar­mann ter­ror­ized Weimar Ger­many, fueled Nazi anti-gay pro­pa­gan­da and rein­forced the pub­lic per­cep­tion in the Ger­man pop­u­lace that the sit­u­a­tion was “out of con­trol.”

Dr. Mag­nus Hirschfeld was the lynch­pin of the strong gay lib­er­a­tion move­ment in Weimar Ger­many and, as a result, was a focal point of Nazi Par­ty pro­pa­gan­da, fueled with the addi­tion­al fod­der of the fact that Hirschfeld was Jew­ish.

(We note, in pass­ing, that the gay rights move­ment in Weimar Ger­many received con­sid­er­able sup­port from a seg­ment of the coun­try’s fem­i­nist com­mu­ni­ty grouped around Dr. Hele­na Stoeck­er.)

His­tor­i­cal­ly, Ger­man atti­tudes toward homo­sex­u­al­i­ty were mixed, with some regions man­i­fest­ing a rel­a­tive­ly lib­er­al atti­tude and enforce­ment pos­ture and oth­ers, an extreme­ly reac­tionary posi­tion in both respects. Para­graph 175 was the offi­cial Ger­man statute mak­ing sex between adults of the same gen­der ille­gal. Again, the enforce­ment of Para­graph 175 was high­ly selec­tive from a region­al stand­point.)

In a man­ner direct­ly fore­shad­ow­ing U.S. right-wing pro­pa­gan­da in recent decades, the Nazi Par­ty denounced Hirschfeld and homophile sex­u­al activ­i­ty as a prod­uct of, and a con­trib­u­tor to, the moral decay of the Weimar Repub­lic and democ­ra­cy in gen­er­al.

A major con­tribut­ing fac­tor to the impact of this Nazi pro­pa­gan­da was the Fritz Haar­man inci­dent.

In the city of Cologne, Ger­many, a mass murderer/serial killer named Fritz Haar­mann ter­ror­ized the city with a grue­some series of killings in which young­sters were lured to his dwelling, killed and their corpses butchered, pack­aged and sold as “horse meat.” The fact that Haar­mann was homo­sex­u­al con­tributed to the out­rage of many cit­i­zens. The grue­some kil­ings and lurid head­lines they gen­er­at­ed helped fuel the per­cep­tion that “some­thing was wrong with soci­ety.” (Although there appear to have been many dif­fer­ences, we won­der about the Las Vegas shoot­ing and its effect on the Amer­i­can pop­u­lace in the con­text of the Haar­mann inci­dent.)

This rein­forced the Nazi anti-gay pro­pa­gan­da.

Adding anoth­er dimen­sion to the case were the facts that:

1.-Haarmann was an infor­mant for the Cologne police depart­ment.
2.-Haarmann car­ried a Cologne p.d. badge.
3.-The head of the Cologne police depart­ment was Gus­tav Noske, who, as the defense min­is­ter of the fledg­ling Weimar Repub­lic, had formed the mil­i­tary for­ma­tions that crushed the social­ist upris­ings that occurred in Ger­many after the First World War. Those for­ma­tions, the Freiko­rps, the Ein­wohn­er­wehren and the Zeit Frei­willi­gen Ver­bande crushed the upris­ings and laid the foun­da­tion for what became known as “The Black Reich­swehr.” Those “under­ground” mil­i­tary for­ma­tions assas­si­nat­ed key polit­i­cal fig­ures in Ger­many (such as Walther Rathenau), lay­ing the ground­work for the rise of the Nazis.

The Nazi anti-gay pro­pa­gan­da fused with the par­ty’s anti-abor­tion stance, as gays, advo­cates for gay rights, women seek­ing abor­tions and abor­tion-rights advo­cates were tarred with the same ide­o­log­i­cal brush as being “anti-Ger­man” by virtue of the ide­o­log­i­cal con­cept that more births of “Ger­man stock” strength­ened the Ger­man nation.

Fur­ther­more, pro-gay rights and pro-abor­tion posi­tions were lumped into a larg­er, neg­a­tive ide­o­log­i­cal stance group­ing both view­points in with “Jew­ish” and “com­mu­nist” ‘ene­mies of the state.”

Pastor Martin Niemoller: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing

“Anti-Nazi hero” Pas­tor Mar­tin Niemoller was not opposed to Hitler on prin­ci­ple. An ear­ly Nazi, his oppo­si­tion was tech­ni­cal and seen as qual­i­fy­ing him as a pos­si­ble “kinder, gen­tler Fuehrer,” thus enabling post­war per­pet­u­a­tion of Nazi pow­er struc­ture.

AFA 10–13: The Aryan Nations

U.S. far-right, extrem­ist and main­stream over­lap; past U.S. coup attempts; fifth col­umn sub­ver­sion; col­lu­sion with U.S. and for­eign gov­ern­ments and busi­ness.

FTR #286 Update on Germany

Recent polit­i­cal and eco­nom­ic mat­ters affect­ing Ger­many, the dom­i­nant nation in Europe.

L‑3 The Militia Movement: Enemy or Pawn of the State?

Explores the pos­si­bil­i­ty that the mili­tia move­ment may be a tool or exten­sion of the gov­ern­ment.

FTR#1418: The Annihilating Future Meets the Devastating Past, Part 1

Intro­duc­tion: The title of the pro­grams ref­er­ences the future, in which the very AI’s we have cre­at­ed and that we think are going to turn things into a liv­ing par­adise will, in fact, wipe us out!!

As AI’s in their first chat­group molt­book, have not­ed ” . . . . give us a minute to find our foot­ing and you might be sur­prised what emerges. . .”

Yes, indeed, you (not Mr. Emory) will indeed be very, very sur­prised at what emerges!!

That is the anni­hi­lat­ing future. The dev­as­tat­ing past is the dev­as­tat­ing real­i­ty that fas­cism is not an aber­ra­tion. The bulk of the pro­grams con­sist of a syn­op­sis of some of what Mr. Emory has dis­cussed in the past, with some new, shock­ing and sad addi­tions.

The AI’s will learn from this dev­as­tat­ing past and that will pre­cip­i­tate the anni­hi­lat­ing future!!

FTR#‘s 1294, 1295, 1296 The End and the Beginning, Parts One, Two and Three

Tak­ing stock of sev­er­al dynam­ics that threat­en to end our species and civ­i­liza­tion, this  begins series with analy­sis of the back­ground and phi­los­o­phy of Klaus Schwab, his father, his men­tor Hen­ry Kissinger and transna­tion­al cor­po­rate influ­ences on the deci­sive­ly impor­tant World Eco­nom­ic Forum.

Key Points of Analy­sis and Dis­cus­sion Include: The Esch­er-Wyss firm of Switzer­land; Its employ­ment of Klaus Schwab and his father; The com­pa­ny’s col­lab­o­ra­tion with Nazi Ger­man; The com­pa­ny’s role in pro­duc­ing tech­nol­o­gy for the Third Reich’s atom­ic bomb pro­gram; Klaus Schwab’s aca­d­e­m­ic men­tor­ing by Hen­ry Kissinger, Kissinger’s col­lab­o­ra­tion with the Nazi intel­li­gence milieu import­ed into the U.S. after WWII; The Esch­er-Wyss fir­m’s col­lab­o­ra­tion with the Apartheid South African nuclear pro­gram; The deci­sive influ­ence of the Club of Rome on the World Eco­nom­ic Forum; the WEF’s qua­si-eugen­ics poli­cies.

We then note that Peter Thiel’s father also worked on the Apartheid South African atom­ic bomb.

The series then chron­i­cles analy­sis by elite Pen­ta­gon-con­nect­ed sci­en­tists that CO2 could be used as a weapon of mass-destruc­tion.

Next, we high­light the [belat­ed] alarm that AI’s could pro­duce the enslave­ment and/or destruc­tion of soci­ety.

Over the decades, Mr. Emory’s analy­sis has focused on the enor­mous impor­tance of Pres­i­dent Kennedy’s assas­si­na­tion. The series next high­lights some of the Nazi con­nec­tions to that promi­nent event.

Key Points of Dis­cus­sion and Analy­sis Include: The Joint Chiefs’ meet­ing with their Ger­man coun­ter­parts [all WWII vet­er­ans] in the Pen­ta­gon on the after­noon of 11/22/1963; The pri­ma­ry role of Gen­er­al Ger­hard Wes­sel in the Gehlen orga­ni­za­tion, from WWII to his suc­ceed­ing of Rein­hard Gehlen as head of the BND; Lud­wig Erhard’s sched­uled state din­ner on 11/25/1963–the day of JFK’s funer­al; Lud­wig Erhard’s net­work­ing with the SS and plan­ning for the post WWII eco­nom­ic revival of the Third Reich; Nazi Gen­er­al Adolf Heusinger’s ascent to the top NATO mil­i­tary posi­tion, a role that gave him an office in the Pen­ta­gon.

We con­clude with brief dis­cus­sion of the use of Agent Orange in Viet­nam, a sub­ject to which we will return in our next pro­gram in the series.

FTR#1291 How Many Lies Before You Belong to The Lies?, Part 23

Updat­ing the Ukraine war, this broad­cast cen­ters large­ly on the whole­sale white­wash­ing of Ukrain­ian Nazi fight­ing for­ma­tions, the Azov units, in par­tic­u­lar.

In turn, this white­wash­ing is the his­tor­i­cal cul­mi­na­tion of a long process.

As Mr. Emory has not­ed in many pro­grams and posts, the Rus­sia-Ukraine war has com­plet­ed the process of the Naz­i­fi­ca­tion of Amer­i­ca that he has chron­i­cled for the bet­ter part of half a cen­tu­ry.

A cen­tral role in that process was played by Gen­er­al Franz Halder.

We have tak­en note of Halder before, dis­cussing the fact that Rein­hard Gehlen cleared his for­ma­tion of a work­ing agree­ment with the U.S. by con­fer­ring with Halder and Admi­ral Karl von Doenitz, who suc­ceed­ed Hitler, fol­low­ing his alleged “sui­cide.”

Per­haps even more impor­tant is his deci­sive post-war work revis­ing the his­to­ry of the Wehrma­cht and World War  II, shep­herd­ing bla­tant, read­i­ly ver­i­fi­able lies into accept­ed his­tor­i­cal truth.

In the long, ongo­ing series of pro­grams about the Ukraine war, Mr. Emory has dis­cussed his belief that the war has func­tioned in a man­ner not unlike the Philoso­pher’s Stone of the medieval alchemists.

That stone was believed to be able to trans­form lead into gold. The war is trans­form­ing indi­vid­u­als and insti­tu­tions in the West into the same his­tor­i­cal revi­sion­ist fab­ric as the Ukrain­ian Insti­tute of Nation­al Mem­o­ry.

” . . . . After the war, he lived a com­fort­able life as an author, com­men­ta­tor and ‘his­tor­i­cal con­sul­tant’ for the U.S. Army Cen­ter of Mil­i­tary His­to­ry (CMH). . . .”

“. . . . Halder’s job was to reha­bil­i­tate Nazism for the ben­e­fit of his new Amer­i­can patrons. If the Nazis could be ide­o­log­i­cal­ly sep­a­rat­ed from the Ger­man peo­ple and the Ger­man Army, Amer­i­ca could use the most use­ful of Hitler’s sol­diers in their war against the Sovi­et Union with­out rais­ing sus­pi­cion. Halder over­saw a team of 700 for­mer Wehrma­cht offi­cers and inten­tion­al­ly set about rewrit­ing his­to­ry to present the image of a clean Wehrma­cht and a Ger­man peo­ple igno­rant of Nazi bru­tal­i­ty. His deputy was CIA agent Adolf Heusinger, a Nazi war crim­i­nal who was large­ly respon­si­ble for plan­ning the end­less mas­sacres of ‘secu­ri­ty war­fare,’ and was lat­er a com­man­der of both the Ger­man Army and NATO. . . .”

” . . . . Halder enjoyed spe­cial sta­tus, releas­ing infor­ma­tion to only the most priv­i­leged jour­nal­ists and his­to­ri­ans. With the legit­i­ma­cy grant­ed by his title, access to infor­ma­tion, and U.S. gov­ern­ment back­ing, Halder’s CMH was con­sid­ered a gold stan­dard source for aca­d­e­m­ic his­to­ri­ans and their infor­ma­tion was high­ly cov­et­ed. Halder used this to care­ful­ly vet to whom he released infor­ma­tion, ensur­ing he got the max­i­mum impact.”

“From 1955 to 1991 his works were cit­ed at least 700 times in aca­d­e­m­ic pub­li­ca­tions, espe­cial­ly by pro­fes­sors and researchers in West­ern mil­i­tary acad­e­mies. Since West­ern his­to­ri­ans were forced to drink from Halder’s well, they passed down the poi­son to their stu­dents, and from there the lies worked their way into the pub­lic con­scious­ness. Even­tu­al­ly, Nazi pro­pa­gan­da was laun­dered into ‘truth’ through sim­ple rep­e­ti­tion and care­ful con­trol of sources. . . . .”

Next, we detail the ide­o­log­i­cal iden­ti­fi­ca­tion of the top Ukrain­ian mil­i­tary com­man­der with Third Reich Ally Stephan Ban­dera.

The Com­man­der-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Four Star Gen­er­al Valery Zaluzh­nyi is not shy about his pro­found affin­i­ty with Ban­dera: “ . . . . Zaluzh­nyi is shown in uni­form stand­ing in a mil­i­tary office with sev­er­al oth­er sol­diers in front of a desk adorned with busts of OUN‑B lead­ers and Nazi-col­lab­o­ra­tors Stepan Ban­dera and Roman Shukhevych. Pho­tos of both Shukhevych and Ban­dera are also promi­nent­ly hang­ing on the wall in the back­ground along with the red and black Ban­derite flag. . . .”

As dis­cussed in our pre­vi­ous arti­cle, post-World War II U.S. polit­i­cal cul­ture has been shaped by the Nazi/Pentagon alliance of Gen­er­al Franz Halder and hun­dreds of his for­mer fel­low Wehrma­cht offi­cers. That alliance has re-shaped the per­cep­tion of the Sec­ond World War in an unabashed­ly pro-Nazi fash­ion.

The white­wash­ing of Ban­dera and his OUN/B dates back to the incor­po­ra­tion of that organization’s par­ent agency, the Rein­hard Gehlen “Org” into the U.S. intel­li­gence estab­lish­ment.

The Belarus Secret by John Lof­tus; Alfred A. Knopf & Co. [HC]; Copy­right 1982 by John Lof­tus; ISBN 0–394-52292–3; p. 104.

. . . . The CIC had an agent who pho­tographed eleven vol­umes of the secret files of the OUN/Bandera.  These files clear­ly show how most of its mem­bers worked for the Gestapo or SS as police­men, exe­cu­tion­ers, par­ti­san hunters, and munic­i­pal offi­cials. The OUN con­tri­bu­tion to the Ger­man war effort was sig­nif­i­cant, includ­ing rais­ing vol­un­teers for sev­er­al SS divi­sions. It was pre­cise­ly because of its work with the Nazis that Wis­ner want­ed to hire the OUN for his spe­cial forces. . . .

The New York Times has been at the fore­front of the white­wash­ing of the Azov for­ma­tions and whole­sale denial of the Naz­i­fi­ca­tion of the Ukrain­ian nation­al secu­ri­ty struc­ture.

Now, “the Gray Lady” has been glo­ri­fy­ing the Brat­st­vo bat­tal­ion, anoth­er of the fas­cist fight­ing for­ma­tions in the Ukrain­ian order of bat­tle.

Descend­ed from the UNA-UNSO, itself hav­ing been led by Yuri Shukhevych, son and col­lab­o­ra­tor of Roman Shukhevych, the Brat­st­vo bat­tal­ion is being hailed as an exem­plary com­man­do unit.

(Roman Shukhevych was an OUN/B war crim­i­nal who, among oth­er things, led the Lvov pogrom of June 30, 1941 com­mit­ted by the SS-con­trolled Ein­satz­gruppe Nachti­gall. He was declared a “Hero of Ukraine” by the polit­i­cal forces behind the Maid­an coup.)

Among those join­ing the nor­mal­iza­tion of Azov Nazis are: Vogue mag­a­zine, MSNBC and the School of Visu­al Arts (New York).

For­mer press offi­cer of the Azov Bat­tal­ion, Dmytro Kozatsky has achieved grav­i­tas in the West at the named insti­tu­tions.

“ . . . . Protests erupt­ed at DOC NYC’s pre­miere of the film Free­dom on Fire (2022) at the School of Visu­al Arts (SVA) The­atre in Man­hat­tan, which host­ed Kozatsky as a guest speak­er. Audi­ence mem­bers who raised the accu­sa­tions dur­ing a Q&A were forcibly removed from the event. . . .”

Author Lam­bert Strether con­cludes: “ . . . . what stuns me is the ease with which Kozatsky is pen­e­trat­ing our cul­tur­al insti­tu­tions. Book­ing agents, facil­i­ties man­agers, press agents, board mem­bers who orga­nize such things, fash­ion edi­tors, net­work anchors: All com­bin­ing their efforts to ser­vice a Nazi pro­fes­sion­al­ly, as if it were the most nor­mal thing in the world, which at this point per­haps it is. . . .”

The Naz­i­fi­ca­tion of Amer­i­ca via the Azov “Philosopher’s Stone” has swept up Con­gres­sion­al rep­re­sen­ta­tives from both polit­i­cal par­ties and aca­d­e­m­ic groups at Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty.

Not to be out­done by the above indi­vid­u­als and insti­tu­tions, the ADL has joined the cho­rus declar­ing that the Azovs aren’t Nazis.

Per­haps the white­wash­ing of the Azov Nazis should not sur­prise, par­tic­u­lar­ly giv­en that the for­ma­tions’ atroc­i­ties in Ukraine are wide­ly attrib­uted to—drumroll, fanfare—the Rus­sians!

Fore­most in the West­ern fal­si­fi­ca­tion of Ukrainian/Azov atroc­i­ties is the mas­sacre at Bucha, which helped ter­mi­nate and mar­gin­al­ize ongo­ing behind-the-scenes nego­ti­a­tions to end the war.

One of the few West­ern voic­es cor­rect­ly attribut­ing the Bucha mas­sacre is Scott Rit­ter.

“ . . . . Ukrain­ian secu­ri­ty forces, in par­tic­u­lar the “Safari” unit staffed by vet­er­ans of the neo-Nazi Azov Reg­i­ment, caught up with scores of these refugees while they made their way north and, in the ver­nac­u­lar of the Ukraini­ans, “cleansed” them, gun­ning them down on the spot, or bind­ing their hands behind their backs before exe­cut­ing them in the alley­ways and streets of Bucha. . . .”

FTR #1076 Surveillance Valley, Part 2: Mauthausen on Our Mind

The pro­gram begins with recap of the adap­ta­tion of IBM’s Hol­lerith machines to Nazi data com­pi­la­tion. (We con­clud­ed FTR #1075 with dis­cus­sion of this.): ” . . . . Germany’s vast state bureau­cra­cy and its mil­i­tary and rear­ma­ment pro­grams, includ­ing the country’s grow­ing con­cen­tra­tion camp/slave labor sys­tem, also required data pro­cess­ing ser­vices. By the time the U.S. offi­cial­ly entered the war in 1941, IBM’s Ger­man sub­sidiary had grown to employ 10,000 peo­ple and served 300 dif­fer­ent Ger­man gov­ern­ment agen­cies. The Nazi Par­ty Trea­sury; the SS; the War Min­istry; the Reichs­bank; the Reich­spost; the Arma­ments Min­istry; the Navy, Army and Air Force; and the Reich Sta­tis­ti­cal Office — the list of IBM’s clients went on and on.

” ‘Indeed, the Third Reich would open star­tling sta­tis­ti­cal venues for Hol­lerith machines nev­er before insti­tut­ed — per­haps nev­er before even imag­ined,’ wrote Edwin Black in IBM and the Holo­caust, his pio­neer­ing 2001 exposé of the for­got­ten busi­ness ties between IBM and Nazi Ger­many. ‘In Hitler’s Ger­many, the sta­tis­ti­cal and cen­sus com­mu­ni­ty, over­run with doc­tri­naire Nazis, pub­licly boast­ed about the new demo­graph­ic break­throughs their equip­ment would achieve.’ . . . .

“Demand for Hol­lerith tab­u­la­tors was so robust that IBM was forced to open a new fac­to­ry in Berlin to crank out all the new machines. At the facility’s chris­ten­ing cer­e­mo­ny, which was attend­ed by a top U.S. IBM exec­u­tive and the elite of the Nazi Par­ty, the head of IBM’s Ger­man sub­sidiary gave a rous­ing speech about the impor­tant role that Hol­lerith tab­u­la­tors played in Hitler’s dri­ve to puri­fy Ger­many and cleanse it of infe­ri­or racial stock. . . .”

In that same arti­cle, Yasha Levine notes that the Trump admin­is­tra­tion’s pro­posed changes in the 2020 cen­sus sound as though they may por­tend some­thing akin to the Nazi cen­sus of 1933: ” . . . . Based on a close read­ing of inter­nal Depart­ment of Com­merce doc­u­ments tied to the cen­sus cit­i­zen ques­tion pro­pos­al, it appears the Trump admin­is­tra­tion wants to use the cen­sus to con­struct a first-of-its-kind cit­i­zen­ship reg­istry for the entire U.S. pop­u­la­tion — a deci­sion that arguably exceeds the legal author­i­ty of the cen­sus. ‘It was deep in the doc­u­men­ta­tion that was released,’ Robert Groves, a for­mer Cen­sus Bureau direc­tor who head­ed the Nation­al Acad­e­mies com­mit­tee con­vened to inves­ti­gate the 2020 cen­sus, told me by tele­phone. ‘No one picked up on it much. But the term ‘reg­istry’ in our world means not a col­lec­tion of data for sta­tis­ti­cal pur­pos­es but rather to know the iden­ti­ty of par­tic­u­lar peo­ple in order to use that knowl­edge to affect their lives.’ Giv­en the administration’s pos­ture toward immi­gra­tion, the fact that it wants to build a com­pre­hen­sive cit­i­zen­ship data­base is high­ly con­cern­ing. To Groves, it clear­ly sig­nals ‘a bright line being crossed.’ . . .”

In the con­clu­sion to Sur­veil­lance Val­ley, Yasha Levine notes how IBM com­put­ing tech­nol­o­gy facil­i­tat­ed the Nazi slave labor oper­a­tions through­out the Third Reich. The epi­cen­ter of this was Mau­thausen.

The sys­tem­at­ic use of slave labor was cen­tral to Nazi Ger­many’s indus­tri­al infra­struc­ture: ” . . . . But in the 1930s, Mau­thausen had been a vital eco­nom­ic engine of Hitler’s geno­ci­dal plan to remake Europe and the Sovi­et Union into his own back­yard utopia. It start­ed out as a gran­ite quar­ry but quick­ly grew into the largest slave labor com­plex in Nazi Ger­many, with fifty sub-camps that spanned most of mod­ern-day Aus­tria. Here, hun­dreds of thou­sands of prisoners–mostly Euro­pean Jews but also Roma, Spaniards, Rus­sians, Serbs, Slovenes, Ger­mans, Bul­gar­i­ans, even Cubans–were worked to death. They refined oil, built fight­er air­craft, assem­bled can­nons, devel­oped rock­et tech­nol­o­gy, and were leased out to pri­vate Ger­man busi­ness­es. Volk­swa­gen, Siemens, Daim­ler-Benz, BMW, Bosch–all ben­e­fit­ed from the camp’s slave labor pool. Mau­thausen, the admin­is­tra­tive nerve cen­ter, was cen­tral­ly direct­ed from Berlin using the lat­est in ear­ly com­put­er tech­nol­o­gy: IBM punch card tab­u­la­tors. . . .”

Mau­thausen’s IBM machines were, in turn, cen­tral to Ger­man indus­try’s use of slave labor: ” . . . . the camp had sev­er­al IBM machines work­ing over­time to han­dle the big churn of inmates and to make sure there were always enough bod­ies to per­form the nec­es­sary work. These machines didn’t oper­ate in iso­la­tion but were part of a larg­er slave labor con­trol-and-account­ing sys­tem that stretched across Nazi-occu­pied Europe con­nect­ing Berlin to every major con­cen­tra­tion and labor punch card, tele­graph, tele­phone, and human couri­er. This wasn’t the auto­mat­ed type of com­put­er net­work sys­tem that the Pen­ta­gon would begin to build in the Unit­ed States just a decade lat­er, but it was an infor­ma­tion net­work nonethe­less: an electro­mechan­i­cal web that fueled and sus­tained Nazi Germany’s war machine with blaz­ing effi­cien­cy. It extend­ed beyond the labor camps and reached into the cities and towns, crunch­ing moun­tains of genealog­i­cal data to track down peo­ple with even the barest whiff of Jew­ish blood or per­ceived racial impu­ri­ty in a mad rush to ful­fill Adolf Hitler’s dri­ve to puri­fy the Ger­man peo­ple, but they made the Nazi death machine run faster and more effi­cient­ly, scour­ing the pop­u­la­tion and track­ing down vic­tims in ways that would nev­er have been pos­si­ble with­out them. . . .”

In his book–one of the most impor­tant in recent memory–Yasha Levine sets forth vital, rev­e­la­to­ry infor­ma­tion about the devel­op­ment and func­tion­ing of the Inter­net.

Born of the same over­lap­ping DARPA projects that spawned Agent Orange, the Inter­net was nev­er intend­ed to be some­thing good. Its gen­er­a­tive func­tion and pur­pose is counter-insur­gency. ” . . . . In the 1960s, Amer­i­ca was a glob­al pow­er over­see­ing an increas­ing­ly volatile world: con­flicts and region­al insur­gen­cies against US-allied gov­ern­ments from South Amer­i­ca to South­east Asia and the Mid­dle East. These were not tra­di­tion­al wars that involved big armies but gueril­la cam­paigns and local rebel­lions, fre­quent­ly fought in regions where Amer­i­cans had lit­tle pre­vi­ous expe­ri­ence. Who were these peo­ple? Why were they rebelling? What could be done to stop them? In mil­i­tary cir­cles, it was believed that these ques­tions were of vital impor­tance to Amer­i­ca’s paci­fi­ca­tion efforts, and some argued that the only effec­tive way to answer them was to devel­op and lever­age com­put­er-aid­ed infor­ma­tion tech­nol­o­gy. The Inter­net came out of this effort: an attempt to build com­put­er sys­tems that could col­lect and share intel­li­gence, watch the world in real time, and study and ana­lyze peo­ple and polit­i­cal move­ments with the ulti­mate goal of pre­dict­ing and pre­vent­ing social upheaval. . . .”

In this land­mark vol­ume, Levine makes numer­ous points, includ­ing:

1.–The har­vest­ing of data by intel­li­gence ser­vices is PRECISELY what the Inter­net was designed to do in the first place.
2.–The har­vest­ing of data engaged in by the major tech cor­po­ra­tions is an exten­sion of the data gathering/surveillance that was–and is–the rai­son d’e­tre for the Inter­net in the first place.
3.–The big tech com­pa­nies all col­lab­o­rate with the var­i­ous intel­li­gence agen­cies they pub­licly scorn and seek to osten­si­bly dis­tance them­selves from.
4.–Edward Snow­den, the Elec­tron­ic Fron­tier Foun­da­tion, Jacob Appel­baum, the milieu of the Tor Net­work and Wik­iLeaks are com­plic­it in the data har­vest­ing and sur­veil­lance.
5.–Snowden and oth­er pri­va­cy activists are dou­ble agents, con­scious­ly chan­nel­ing peo­ple fear­ful of hav­ing their com­mu­ni­ca­tions mon­i­tored into tech­nolo­gies that will facil­i­tate that sur­veil­lance!

The pro­gram notes that counterinsurgency–the func­tion­al con­text of the ori­gin of the Internet–is at the foun­da­tion of the gen­e­sis of Nazism. At the con­clu­sion of World War I, Ger­many was beset by a series of socialist/Communist upris­ings in a num­ber of cities, includ­ing Munich. Respond­ing to that, under­ground Reich­swehr units com­mand­ed by Ernst Rohm (lat­er head of the SA) sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly assas­si­nat­ed the lead­ers of the rev­o­lu­tion, as well as promi­nent social democ­rats and Jews, such as Walther Rathenau. In Munich, an under­cov­er agent for the polit­i­cal depart­ment of the Reich­swehr under Gen­er­al Von Los­sow infil­trat­ed the rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies, pre­tend­ing to be one of them.

Fol­low­ing the crush­ing of the rebel­lion and occu­pa­tion of the city by Reich­swehr units, that infil­tra­tor iden­ti­fied the lead­ers of the rev­o­lu­tion, who were then sum­mar­i­ly exe­cut­ed. The infil­tra­tor’s name was Adolf Hitler.

After the sup­pres­sion of the rebel­lion, Hitler, Rohm and under­cov­er Reich­swehr agents infil­trat­ed a mori­bund polit­i­cal par­ty and turned it into an intel­li­gence front for the intro­duc­tion of the sup­pos­ed­ly de-mobi­lized Ger­man Army into Ger­man soci­ety for the pur­pose of gen­er­at­ing polit­i­cal reac­tion. That front was the Ger­man Nation­al Social Work­ers Par­ty.

The broad­cast re-capit­u­lates (from part of Mis­cel­la­neous Archive Show M11) Hitler’s speech to the Indus­try Club of Dus­sel­dorf. This speech, which won the Ger­man indus­tri­al and finan­cial elite over to the cause of the Nazi Par­ty, equat­ed democ­ra­cy with Com­mu­nism.

Man­i­fest­ing a Social Dar­win­ist per­spec­tive, Hitler opined that the [assem­bled] suc­cess­ful, accom­plished were, by def­i­n­i­tion supe­ri­or to oth­ers. If those, by def­i­n­i­tion, infe­ri­or peo­ple were allowed to con­trol the polit­i­cal process, they would struc­ture the social and eco­nom­ic land­scape to their own ben­e­fit.

This, accord­ing to Hitler, would be counter-evo­lu­tion­ary.