Genesis and Genocide, Hitler and Moses

"And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain." - Deuteronomy 2:34 (Holy Bible)

In Jewish and Christian mythology the first five books of the Bible are said to have been written by Moses himself. Certainly Moses is a central figure, particularly in the second book, Exodus, in which he leads the Jews out of slavery in Egypt. At the end of the fifth book, Deuteronomy, Moses is said to have died at the age of 120, in Moab, never having entered the land of the Canaanites. Joshua then led the Jewish tribes, conquering the city of Jericho and, afterwards, conquering areas west of the Jordan River and Dead Sea.

It is likely that the Jewish original conquest of what I will call Palestine was not quite as clearly genocidal as the Bible indicates. The above quote from Deuteronomy is ascribed to the period during which the tribes were wanderers, before settling in Palestine. The Jews where not alone in trying to exterminate their neighbors, they just recorded it earlier than most. Enslaving the conquered was another common option, as was killing all males and keeping women as wives and slaves. The Egyptians, Sumerians and Babylonians also boasted of their skills at war and built their grand civilizations with slaves.

Many other instances of genocide are recorded in the Bible. For instance in Samuel, Chapter 15, God himself is quoted as saying: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."
At one point the Babylonians did an ethnic cleansing of Judah, leading to the Exile. Most scholars think most of the Bible was written in Babylonia to keep the Jews culturally united until they could return to Judah. [6th century BCE; see Babylonian captivity]

What makes the Hebrew record different is its pretense to being a display of God's plan for the world. If you accept the Bible as a plan, you are basically stuck with approving of genocide and ethnic cleansing.
Adolf Hitler could well be said to have been the Moses of Germany. He was born in an ethnically German area of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The most fateful decision of his life was doubtless when he decided to abandon a career as an artist to enroll in the German (rather than Austro-Hungarian Empire) army at the beginning of World War I.

Germany defeated Russia in the war and still had troops in France when it surrendered. Corporal Hitler, like many Germans, went into denial. Instead of accepting that if Germany had fought on its army would have collapsed, the myth of the "stab in the back" was created. In this version of history Communists and Jews (often the same people in Germany) were blamed for the loss of the war. There was some basis for this mistaken view. The Balfour Declaration, which may have induced some German Jews to hope for a British victory in the War. After Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated, the transitional government that negotiated the surrender of Germany was socialist (of the Marxist, internationalist sort, not of the nationalist, Nazi sort).

Germans had some genuine postwar complaints. The United States piled into the war late, tipping the military balance. A just peace was promised in return for an armistice. Instead the British, French and Americans imposed a very punitive peace that essentially destroyed Germany.

For Hitler and his admirers the Promised Land was a Germany consisting of all ethnic German majority areas. For Hitler and the more anti-Semitic National Socialists these lands would also have to be purged of foreign races, including (but not limited to) Jews and Gypsies. The more aggressive version of this doctrine included invading non-German areas, purging them, and colonizing them with Germans. Not unlike the prior colonization of the United States and British Empire.

The German nationalists wandered in their wilderness only slightly more than a decade before gaining power in Germany, or the rump of Germany that had been left by the wolves after World War I. In the late 1930's Hitler's government started taking back, or incorporated for the first time, the ethnic German areas outside the official borders. To be sure, he was happy to seize some areas that were not German, like much of Czechoslovakia. The last (perhaps) piece of German pie Hitler gobbled was western Poland (which was a part of Germany taken away by the peace treaty after World War I). The mighty British Empire, itself built over the centuries by the process of military conquest, ethnic cleansing, and genocide, declared war on Germany soon after Poland was attacked. World War II was on.

Like Moses, Hitler was not to see his promised land. Other nations were not interested in accepting the Jews he wanted expelled, so he killed them in the Holocaust, which is one of the most appalling acts of cold blooded mass murder of non-combatants in modern history.

In the end Germany was dismembered, not reunited. Hitler committed suicide rather than surrendering, echoing Masada, and the concentration camps were liberated before they completed their grizzly task. Later the capitalist West put together its three bites (British, French, and American) of Germany in order to use them as a shield against the Communist Block. Only in 1990 did East Germany reunite with West Germany to form the modern (and might I add, civilized and non-militaristic) nation of Germany.

Since World War II ethnic cleansing, and even genocide, has continued here and there around the world. Nationalism, religious prejudice, and greed are still problems. Yet a new earth has grown up too where many if not most people have a modern, civilized outlook. Civilized nations do not even have the death penalty for criminal acts. In theory no nation is supposed to engage in military aggression, though in reality the U.S. has been the worst offender in the last decade or two.

We need to keep a watch out for leaders who advocate ethnic cleansing, genocide, or war. They need to be stopped before they cause harm. We need, in particular, to respect the rights of indigenous peoples and minorities. The whole world should accept the enlightenment ideal of religious toleration and the brotherhood and sisterhood of the human race.

History books are filled with wars and genocides. This makes us forget that most people have lived in peace most of the time. Most people do not murder their neighbors. Nor do villages or cities exist in a perpetual war with each other. Even mighty nations have spent most of their times in treaty-bound peace with their rivals. We have much to build on even as we remember and criticize the horrors of the past.

Franz von Papen, Adolf Hitler, and Two Popes

I was at Four-Eyed Frog Books in Gualala, California hoping that, despite the small size of the store, I would find something worth buying to read. I walked away with a copy of The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East
by Robert Fisk in my hands. It is a 1112 page paperback, and was a bit shopworn, but the cover price was only $20.00. The cover says it is an international bestseller, and it deserves to be. Sales in the United States have not been exactly brisk, however. It is more reading than the average American would undertake in a year; it is more serious reading than most Americans get through in a lifetime.

And who should pop up on page 329? Why Franz von Papen. He gets only two sentences:

Franz von Papen, for example, was chief of staff of the Fourth Turkish Army during the 1914-1918 war and served as Hitler's vice Chancellor in 1933. During the Second World War, he was the Third Reich's ambassador to Turkey.

The context for this passage is an entire chapter on the Armenian genocide carried out by the Turkish governments (and aided by Germans, Kurds and others). The historical connections turned out to be more interesting than I had anticipated, but since this essay is on von Papen, I'll urge you to read the chapter in the course of reading this enlightening book.

Of course I cannot be sure when my eyes first saw the name "Franz von Papen," but my guess it was while reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany
by William L. Shrirer. Unfortunately my folk singer friend Texas John borrowed my copy, so I can't quote you chapter and verse at the moment. My impressions of von Papen were that he was a powerful man from the German aristocracy. There were many right-wing German parties before Hitler came to power; most were way to the right of the Nazis, in the sense of being traditional rather than modernizing parties. Franz, like so many other of these powerful men, did not really like Adolf Hitler. But their own parties were not all that popular, and they needed the National Socialist voters block in parliament to set up their grand-right wing coalition. After Hitler made himself dictator most of them became Nazis, but many could not stomach being ruled by someone who started as a nobody, and an Austrian nobody at that, so they went back to their wealthy estates and grumbled while Germany was destroyed.

As detailed as Rise and Fall is, it leaves out a major theme. Franz von Papen was not just a right-wing leader. He worked closely with two Popes, Pius XI and Pius XII. And they were the ones who decided that Hitler was the man for the job. The real job was destroying socialism and communism, including the ultimately failed attack on the Soviet Union. The Roman Catholic Church thrilled as their guy, Hitler, liquidated over twenty million atheists. When the Catholics/Fascists lost World War II, however, suddenly the Popes pretended like they had never liked Hitler. They used to the political muscle of Catholics in the United States, who were almost all Democratic Party supporters, to make a deal to hush up their involvement with the Nazis. With the Cold War settling in shortly after the Nazis were defeated, suddenly Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Churchill and all wanted the Catholic Church to help stiffen up resistance against the global communist movement.

Rather than repeat myself, I refer you to Pius XI and the Rise of Adolf Hitler. Note that Pius XII was Pius XI's henchman in Germany during most of the period when the Nazis were rising to power.

And why is the Armenian Genocide issue so important in this context? Because the Catholic Church historians have gone to great lengths to pretend that they had nothing to do with the Jewish Holocaust. But Robert Fisk deduces, with good reason, that Hitler started planning to liquidate Jews (and Poles, and atheists, etc.) early on and discussed the methodology of such large-scale murder with von Papen, Max von Scheubner-Richter and others. So the Pope's guy was part of a gang that helped plan the Holocaust long before Hitler was anywhere near being in power.

Fisk's chapter on Armenia made me think about just how common genocide has been historically. It has been all too common, not the exception. The Jews record using genocidal methods against the Canaanites at the dawn of recorded history. The American Indians were the victims of genocide. Even the Angle-Saxons, after launching genocide against the Celtic inhabitants of the isles, found themselves victimized in much the same ways by first the Danes and then the Normans.

It really is way past time to put a stop to genocide, and war of all kinds. I hope you will join me and millions of others around the globe in demonstrating against the Barack Obama's war in Afghanistan, and war in general, this October. Check with your favorite peace group for details.

Franz von Papen Wikipedia page

Give the Iraq Money Back

Billions were stolen by the Bush administration and friends - and now we aren't talking contracts for Halliburton or a few federal dollars for church-based proselytizing. In Billions Over Baghdad former Time reporters Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele tell the story of how money that had been seized from Iraq was given away to well-connected corrupt friends of the Pentagon and CIA.

Oh, it is not the first time in American history. As early as the Revolutionary War money that was supposed to go for one thing went into dishonest men's pockets. In every war since then taxpayer money has disappeared or been traded for shoddy or even phony goods. Harry Truman documented the wasteful spending just before the U.S. entered World War II.

But in this case it was not American taxpayer money that was grabbed. It was Iraqi money. Taking the money was an act of genocide. I don't trust the Democrats to investigate, because though they might like to make the Republicans look bad, they have a long history of corruption themselves and are probably just mad the money ended up in the other guy's pockets.

Maybe a special prosecutor could do the job, given enough resources. But again, this isn't ordinary stealing, this is the moral equivalent of genocide. So I think the best institution for conducting the investigation could be the World Court.

Better still, let's really go for justice this time. Let's empower a group of Iraqi clerics noted for their incorruptible nature to investigate and determine punishment. While I am against the death penalty as a matter of general principle, I think beheading would not be inappropriate for anyone who dipped into the Iraqi cash fund or looked the other way while it was happening.

So we would lose much of the senior Bush administration, campaign donors, Pentagon contract boys and CIA we-can't-buy-heroin-without-front-money spooks. I guarantee you that if this is pursued far enough, the Republican Party and probably the Democrats too will collapse like the House of Usher. Apparently the Federal Reserve was originally in charge of the money; how safe is the rest of our money system?

Okay, enough said. Let's end the war and start behaving like a civilized race. Let justice be done, though the heavens fall.

The War of 1812, Andrew Jackson and Slavery

The one thing most people can remember about the War of 1812 is that the U.S. won the war as demonstrated by the Battle of New Orleans. In that battle British troops marched in tight ranks towards some well-barricaded American troops and 2000 or so were mowed down by rifle fire. Hurray for the good old U.S.A. The troops were led by the gallant General Andrew Jackson, the Hero of New Orleans, who later went on to become the first Democratic Party President of the United States of America.

Any longer gloss of the war tends to mention a few more discouraging facts. The peace treaty had already been signed before the Battle of New Orleans, but the news before radio and telegraph traveled slowly. British troops burned Washington D.C. In fact, the only major battle clearly won by U.S. troops was the final one in New Orleans.

What caused the war? Why, those evil Brits. They could not stand the fact that we had wupped them in the American Revolution. They were harassing our merchant shipping and impressing our sailors. It was a war of defense against British aggression. That, at least, is the red-blooded American view.

Before I get to what was really important about the War of 1812, consider the standard British point of view. Feel free to recall that the peace-loving British government conquered a larger empire than any other nation, before or since. The red-blooded British point of view is that they were locked in a war with the evil Napoleon Bonaparte. America was welcome to trade with Britain; we just were not welcome to trade with France. In fact on June 16, 1812 Lord Castlereagh announced that Britain would no longer seize U.S. merchant ships heading to France. As to the impressed U.S. sailors, they had been enrolled in the British Navy and had no right to desert it in time of war, or under their service contracts. Britain did not start the war. The U.S. Congress declared war on June 18, 1812 because it wanted to add Canada to the United States. It was a naked war of U.S. aggression. The British army, what little could be spared from fighting Napoleon's legions, acquitted itself quite well, repelling the U.S. invasion of Canada. Napoleon abdicated the French throne in April 1814. Having failed to take Canada, and having lost France as an ally, the U.S. was eager for peace, resulting in the Treaty of Ghent on December 23, 1814.

Some other facts need to be filled in in order to understand what was really going on in the U.S. when war was declared. Which is why these facts are almost never filled in.

The United States of America had been founded on the principles of slavery and racial inequality after the Somerset Decision of 1772 had threatened to impoverish men like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. True, the ending of slavery within the British Empire had then been delayed by economically powerful men who owned stakes in Caribbean sugar plantations. But the gradual abolition of slavery had been made law in Canada in 1793, and the anti-slavery movement in England was quite strong by 1812. Racial inequality also took the form of near total disregard for native American Indian rights, in particular their rights to their ancestral land.

Britain had drawn a line to protect Indian tribes, the Line of 1763. George Washington and other speculators claimed to own what were actually Indian lands that were beyond this line. In the settlement of the Revolutionary War the new U.S. government was given sovereignty over the Northwest Territory, but in fact needed to engage in wars of aggression (now recognized as war crimes) to control the land and allow speculators to sell it to white settlers. Canada did not recognize U.S. seizures of Indian lands. Led by Tecumseh, in 1811 the Indians began fighting to defend their lands and take back the lands already stolen from them in Ohio. Of course to America's ruling class Indians defending their land was savagery, whereas killing Indians to take their land was just good sensible economics. The war of 1812 was a draw for the British, but Tecumseh was killed and the Indian tribes of the midwest defeated.

Even in it most evil days, America has had people who showed a high degree of ethics. In 1812 there was already a substantial minority of Americans who wanted to abolish slavery and treat native American Indians fairly. There were two major political parties at the time, neither of which exists today: the Republicans and the Federalists. Yet the original grounds for division between those parties were wilting away. Both parties were dominated by rich white males. But slave owners were more likely to be Republicans and the rich merchant and manufacturers were more likely to be Federalists.

This ruling, political elite was divided about the war. Most war votes in U.S. history have been unanimous, but in the U.S. House of Representatives the vote was 79 for, 49 against declaring war. The slave state representatives were mostly for the war, but there were some Republicans who were not slave owners who did vote with their political party, for the war.

Andrew Jackson had been a significant, but not prominent, officer in the war, but as the victor in the Battle of New Orleans he came out of the war a national hero. He was a greedy, dishonest man who made his living by speculating in lands stolen from Indians, lawyering, and by running a plantation using Negro slaves. He was elected as the state's first Representative to Congress in 1796. In 1812 Jackson first commanded the Tennessee militia, then was made Major-General of American forces in the South.

Many Indians still lived in parts of the southern United States. Some tribes tried to remain neutral; others fought on the American side. Finding himself desperately short of fighters, Jackson enlisted Cherokee fighters, promising them future protection against more land theft. With them his army defeated the Creeks who were fighting on the British side at the Battle of Horseshoe Bend in 1814. Jackson's army then marched to New Orleans.

While Canada remained a problem for America's slavers, Florida was more of a problem because it was close to large populations of slaves. While Spain still allowed slavery, the practice in Florida was to free escaped American slaves if they would convert to Catholicism. Jackson led U.S. troops into Florida in 1818 in the First Seminole War. In 1819 the U.S. government purchased Florida from Spain, thus strengthening the cause of the Slave states. Andrew Jackson became the first American governor of Florida in 1821.

The ultimate result of the War of 1812 was the formation of the Democratic Party, a party devoted to the principles of Slavery and Genocide. For more on the history of the Democratic Party see my pamphlet on the subject. As President Andrew Jackson would order the Cherokee Tribe, that he promised to protect in 1814, expelled from their lands.

The key thing to remember about the War of 1812 was not who won the battle of New Orleans. The War of 1812 was about 2 U.S. war aims: taking more territory (Canada and Indian lands) and enlarging the institution of slavery.

Learn more: Internet Biography of Andrew Jackson