From: spinoza@next07wor.wam.umd.edu (Yon Bonnie Laird of Cairn Robbing)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Well, Maybe Booth Ain't a Nazi, But he does saeem to be a Facist, so the variety doesn't really matter, does it? Mussoli was n't so hot either......Re: Ok, So booth Really is a Nazi Fan?
Date: 14 Oct 92 20:02:09 GMT

> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes on his theory of  
government, very educational actually, since very few ultra-conservatives  
are willing to publish broadsides like his which place the anti-abortion  
forces in such an embarassing position wrt privacy and civil rights:
> ]
> ] Well, actually my aim is very similar to Orwell's-- I plan to depict  
this
> ] New Order Party being elected by the people out of desparation.  The  
people
> ] are so sick of one type of extremeism, they accept another form of it
> ] without even noticing.  Extremism breeds extremism from the other  
side.
> ] I plan to demonstrate that such system might come to power if Liberal
> ] extremism runs unchecked.  Ever read about how Hitler was elected??
> ] Germany was in a state of anarchy, the Nazis were seen as the only  
alternative.



Simon, Simon, Simon,  what's gonna be with you? Your mother and I had such  
high hopes for you , and you've turned into a  
SporcoFacistaBorgoidRassmussenClone........

Just for your information, the Nazis were NEVER seen as the only  
alternative to the Weimar Government.  Hitler was made Reichschancellor  
due to the fact that the National Socialist Workers Party (on whose list  
he ran) received a plurality of the votes cast in the election. The  
National Socialists never won a MAJORITY of the electorate, the rest of  
the votes going to various Socialist, Communist, and other assorted  
parties. These other parties unfortunately split a large portion of the   
vote, enabling the Nazis to gain control of the government.  My  
grandfather & grandmother, both active Socialists (grandad was head of the  
local Bund in Leipzig, and stood for municipal elections in  those same  
elections - and won, as a matter of fact) , often remarked that the  
various "liberal" groups should have united together under a single  
political party, and forcefully rejected the right-wing hooliganism that  
you seem to advocate. Notice I do not say that you would support the  
National Socialist approach to societal reform, and indeed, it might be  
argued that many of those who voted for the National Socialist ticket were  
unaware of the eventual direction that would be taken by its leaders.   
Nevertheless, it was quite apparent by the time of the elections that they  
were a party of right-wing, intolerant ideologues (well,OK, maybe this  
does sound familiar, but that's not my fault. I wasn't the one who invited  
Pat to address the convention, was I?) who tended toward hooliganism, not  
unlike that of say, Operation Rescue, except that they were more concerned  
about the harm that might be done to BornPersons(tm) (Aryan ones, anyway)  
by those "Liberal Extremists". An excessive amount of people who are  
willing to respect others privacy and personal rights does not endanger  
either the United States or its people. On the other hand,  
BoneheadBorgoids like yourself, who would seem to support the use of force  
to promote your own twisted version of "family values", might very well be  
dangerous to the continued health of American society.............. 

ciao.

jeff

			

Newsgroups: talk.abortion