Русские 'Tанки' в Приштине 1999.06.12

A RECORD OF A KIKE OPERATION IN SUPPORT OF KIKERY AGAINST THE FAITH

39 YRS IN UK & STILL CAN'T WRITE ENGLISH

CURRY MAN STILL CAN'T WRITE BASIC ENGLISH AFTER 39 YEARS IN U.K.

Balvir Singh Bhachu:

We all indians worked hard in this country and I am since 1974. Worked Ford Motor co Ltd.

Paid tax and National insurance all my life what I get back nothing.

Please ian dunkin deport us and give us lump sum money to go back our country.

Please refund our tax and N I which we paid to this country in the last 40 years.

Please ian dunkin do yodoo mazic or black mazic also do some indian mazic.

Poorest peoples are in the uk now days.
Most of them are sleep in the cubicle box.
Shame of you britain.



(A comment in response to "Iain Duncan Smith: I will fight on in row over migrant benefits")

BBC: "FARAGE SMOKES & DRINKS TOO MUCH?"



Milliband on Banking

By Godfrey Bloom

2012.07.09

I listened carefully to Ed Milliband’s dissertation on banking. I learned much, he confirmed without any doubt, he does not understand what has gone wrong with banking. No more of course than the coalition government. The collapse has been caused by the fractional reserve banking system where banks can lend money which does not exist on a mammoth scale to fuel asset bubbles doomed to bust. A central bank is basically an arm of government which encourages this behaviour. When the money eventually runs out, central banks, at the behest of the Treasury, electronically print yet more money, compounding the problem even more. This is nothing to do with codes of conduct, numbers of branches, number of banks, failed regulation, bonuses or meaningless buzz words like ‘stewardship banking’.

The whole concept is rancid and doomed to failure. Government is part of the problem not the solution. Interesting and sad none of the journalists who asked questions after Milliband’s speech even knew what questions to ask.



n.b.: Bloom is a bit of a glibertarian (Kike Von Mises variety). He is an ex Army Officer. He graduated from the Royal College of Defence Studies (Strategy), where his dissertation was entitled "War Aims and the Economic Consequences for the UK".

FRIKORPS DANMARK

Freikorps Danmark

FRIKORPS DANMARK

Cheferne:
  • SS-Obersturmbannführer Christian Peter Kryssing (1941.07.19-1942.02.23)
  • SS-Obersturmbannführer Christian Frederik von Schalburg (1942.03.01-1942.06.02)
  • SS-Obersturmbannführer Hans von Lettow-Vorbeck (1942.06.09-1942.06.11)
  • SS-Obersturmbannführer Knud Børge Martinsen (1942.06.11-1943.03.21)
  • SS-Sturmbannführer P. Neergard-Jacobsen (1943.03.21-1943.05.20)


Frikorps Danmark 1941

Medlemmer af Frikorps Danmark står under en modificeret udgave af Dannebrog og heiler i 1941 (Bundesarchiv Bild 101III-Weill-096-27 "Deutschland, Vereidigung von Dänen")

FRIKORPSMAND OTTO BERNT JENSEN

En Frikorpsmand bliver interviewet på Østfronten under kamp. Kriegsberieter Bjørn Bjørnson interviewer Otto Bernt Jensen.





SS-OBERSTURMBANNFÜHRER CHRISTIAN FREDERIK VON SCHALBURG

Maj 1942, Demjansk Biakowo. Schalburg holder en kort radiotale før indsats.



SS-OBERSTURMBANNFÜHRER KNUD BØRGE MARTINSEN

Kommandør for Frikorps Danmark Martinsen holder tale ved frikorpsets orlov 1942. Sted Københavns Hovedbanegård.



Frants J. Langhoff: Frikorps Danmark Historie:


Freikorps Danmark

THE CHEEK OF ARABY



From the KikeTube comments:

xzubsx: "racist white cunts!! how could this be allowed on national tv!!"



U.K. SKINNED ALIVE

I'm sure this movie, Cleanskin (distributed by The Kike's Warner Brothers), is full of all sorts of kike-correct ("PC") nonsense, since it's probably illegal in the UK to make a movie with a negative Muslim character without including multiple caveats and blatant messages that "TERRORISTS AREN'T REAL MUSLIMS!" and "MOST MUSLIMS ARE DECENT, HONEST, LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS!" and "ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE!" But I wonder if it's worth watching, even though it's written and directed by Muz Hadi Hajaig.

Charlotte Rampling is best known (by me) for her role as a kike LOLoco$t sahvihvah who enjoys being tortured and humiliated by a queer secret ex-SS officer.



Sad to see British talent used to promote The Kike's agenda.

Of course if "The West" was really "at war with Islam", as morons and liars assert, then my film starring Sean Bean and Jason Statham as SAS men leading a successful coup would have been made and released years ago, to rave reviews.

Hadi Hajaig

Amelia Rosenthal speaks with director Hadi Hajaig about his new film Cleanskin and how terrorism is portrayed on the big screen.


The View, 02/05/2011

[The Kike Rosenthal:] What is Cleanskin all about?

[The Muz Hajaig:] It’s an intelligent [the screenwriter and director humbly says] action thriller. On one level, it shows Sean Bean’s character, a secret service agent chasing a suicide bomber Ash (Abhin Galeya) and his cell and this involves lots of action, lots of set pieces and a fast paced moving plot. On another level it also looks at the path taken by an everyday British born citizen who becomes a terrorist and the affect [sic] that terrorism has on its victims.

[The Kike Rosenthal:] Terrorism has become a highly topical issue and there is a real emphasis upon it in today’s culture. How do you think this might affect Cleanskin’s reception? Did the audiences reception to such a controversial subject effect how you wrote at all?

Terrorism is without doubt occupying the current zeitgeist [sic]. I feel we have handled the subject in an intelligent, exciting and well researched manner that does not deal with it in simplistic terms, so I hope this approach will affect the reception in a positive way and of course primarily entertain them in a positive way, at the end of the day it is a non-stop action thriller. As I felt we took the correct approach, it didn’t affect how I wrote at all. When I write a script I do a lot of research and consider the subject matter from all angles, if you have these issues in place then it shouldn’t affect how you write. It’s a fascinating subject for a feature film as it has scope for intrigue and emotionally resonant personal stories.

[The Kike Rosenthal:] How does this film differ from other films about terrorism?

[The Muz Hajaig:] The film is a combination of a fast paced action thriller and a look at how British born terrorists are radicalised and also the affects [sic] terrorism has on the victims, and this combination is not something I have seen in recent films about the subject, so I feel we have dealt with it in a unique and exciting way.

[The Kike Rosenthal:] Who and what were the biggest influences on this film and your biggest influences on filmmaking in general?

[The Muz Hajaig:] I think the events of the last ten years were so filled with epic incident that one could not help but be influenced about what was going on. All writers are influenced with what is going on around them, so I’d say the events are the biggest influence on my film. Also the works of John le Carre and the films of the 70’s, which involved lots of political intrigue and conspiracy. The 70’s was a time for Vietnam and much political intrigue and the films of the time reflected this, parallax view, 3 days of the condor, etc. The past 10 years were very similar, we are still in a war and conspiracy stories abound. In film making in general, where do I start? Early Scorsese, especially Taxi Driver which has a lot of connection to Cleanskin in that that when I researched radicalized characters for this film I found many surprising similarities to Travis Bickle. Early [KIKE] Oliver Stone, The [KIKE] Coen Brothers, Jonathan Demme, Coppola and Spike Lee. A lot of American influences as you can see, but all these film makers made intelligent films that thrilled and entertained, which is what I’m aiming for in Cleanskin.

[The Kike Rosenthal:] How do you manage to combine writing, directing and producing?

[The Kike Rosenthal:] You have attracted a very talented cast. What was it like working with them?

[The Muz Hajaig:] It was the best time I have had on set with actors. Working with the more established cast, Sean Bean, Charlotte Rampling, James Fox and Peter Polycarpou was fantastic. It was a pleasure and a very relaxed experience, and to be honest they are so good you don’t need to do much at all as a director. They just do it and it’s exactly what you want. The newcomers Abhin Galeya, Tuppence Middleton and the rest of the cast were a real treat to work with, full of enthusiasm which was infectious and they had just a frightening amount of talent, I can see them all going on to bigger and better things.

[The Kike Rosenthal:] This is the second feature you have funded using the EIS tax break system, following Puritan in 2005. Do you think it is more difficult to find funding for films in Britain? What other challenges do you think British filmmakers face?

[The Muz Hajaig:] Its [sic] difficult in al [sic] the countries around the world to raise the money for a film, in Britain the purse strings are controlled by the same people more or less since I started to pursue my career and nothing seems to have changed that much, but that shouldn’t make a difference to new film makers, there are countless new talents emerging through that network, you just have to have the ability to negotiate it and find a way to make your film, if you cant work the system then do it independently like I’ve done. I think the key is that film making needs to be a passion, you have to be passionately obsessed with your film to get it made, it’s pointless to sit in pubs and moan about the state of the British film industry, it doesn’t get you anywhere, if your interests lie elsewhere than solely making your film then I can see it being very difficult to break through, so passion and belief can take you a long way.

[The Kike Rosenthal:] What advice would you give young British filmmakers?

[The Muz Hajaig:] Persevere. The business is very difficult and lots of people will try to dissuade you from attempting to get somewhere with your work based on their opinions, but opinions are meaningless in this business and should not be listened to at all. There are lots of obstacles, but as I said, if you keep going and develop a thick skin and push till something gives then you have a chance of making your film, that doesn’t mean that the film will be a success or any good but if you get as far as making a film then you’ll get better at making the next one. Just don’t give up.



EIS SCHEMES

Her Majesties Customs & Revenues office:

"The Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS) is designed to help smaller higher-risk trading companies to raise finance by offering a range of tax reliefs to investors who purchase new shares in those companies."



EIS Provisions:
  • An individual with no more than a 30% interest in the company can reduce his income tax liability by an amount equal to 30% of his share subscription. The minimum subscription is £500 per company and the maximum per investor is £100,000 per annum.
  • Deferral of gains realised on a different asset, where disposal of that asset was less than 12 months before the EIS investment or less than 36 months after it. (Deferral relief). This relief is not limited to investments of £400,000 per annum and can be claimed by investors whose interest in the company exceeds 30%. It is available to individuals and trustees. Where gains arise on the EIS investment, taper relief is available. Note that deferral of gains is no longer available by investing in VCTs.
  • No capital gains tax payable on disposal of shares after three years (after five years for investments made before 6 April 2000) provided the EIS initial income tax relief was given and not withdrawn on those shares.
  • If EIS shares are disposed of at any time at a loss, such loss can be set against the investor's capital gains or his income in the year of disposal.
  • EIS Investments are exempt from inheritance tax after two years of holding such investment.[citation needed], subject to the Company being allowable under Business Property Relief ("BPR").

OLDHAM UNION JACK INCIDENT

An attempt at clarification, regarding Offensive British Flag Incident No. 3,564,987.

As far as I can figure out, based on various reports, and not having seen any official response from the police, what seems to have happened is this:
  • A woman in Oldham was carrying the Union Jack and what could be called a banner.
  • The banner allegedly had "NO MORE MOSQUES" written on it.
  • I read that there are 29 mosques in Oldham now.
  • The "NO MORE MOSQUES" banner was taken from the woman.
  • Some Paki kept complaining about her. I can easily imagine that he was demanding (as they tend to do) that the police arrest her and "charge her with racism!" or the kike-invented "Islamophobia", or some such thing.
  • The Union Jack was also removed from her possession, confiscated, and chucked in a paddy-wagon.
  • I am sure the police would say that they were "merely trying to defuse a potentially dangerous situation", and would throw in some spin that the flag was taken away because it was a "potential weapon" (referring to the stick it was attached to).

The usual apologists for the police state and for the muslim presence have mounted an Internet campaign to try to justify and minimize the incident, employing various semantic arguments in the process, trying to characterize any negative reaction to the incident as and racial or nationalistic hysteria.

To this end they claim the woman was never "arrested", and that the police were even doing her a favour, protecting her from a violent reaction to her "provocations".

Most people think "arrested" is synonymous with being charged with a crime, and that "detained" means to be handcuffed and/or held in a holding cell or remand centre or some such place, awaiting a hearing.

I don't know if this woman was formally "arrested", but she was stopped (the literal meaning of "arrest", detained by the police, questioned, treated as a possible criminal, prevented from going about her business, prevented from expressing herself freely, and had her property unreasonably confiscated.

It is possible she was detained for verbally threatening the police or the Paki, or over an outstanding warrant or some such thing, but I very much doubt that's what happened.

It is possible that someone could be arrested in the U.K. for carrying a banner stating "NO MORE CHURCHES". It would be unlikely, since it is the sort of thing one reads, sees and hears all the time in the regime media. However, such an action would be within police powers in England, and I suppose it could happen in certain circumstances. However, I think it more likely that any police at the scene would gather to protect such a person and to allow them to express themself without let or hindrance. And any police action against such a banner would most likely only occur after receiving permission from a police chief or the CPS, since the cop on the scene would be afraid of being demoted, fired, or sued for violating a citizen's civil rights.


(There are always certain tedious pedants who love to point out that, "the British flag is called 'the Union Flag' -- 'Union Jack' refers to the naval flag!". But "Union Flag" is too generic, especially for non-Britons, and I almost always call it The Union Jack, which is the common nickname for it. I've also noted that anti-patriots/anti-nationalists tend to call it 'the Union Flag'. I'd say that's because they find "Union Jack" offensive because it has a good old-fashioned patriotic ring to it.)

KIKEBRAIN

Outbrain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article appears to be written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by rewriting promotional content from a neutral point of view and removing any inappropriate external links.

Outbrain is a [KIKE] content recommendation service whose widget offers to help internet publishers increase web traffic at their websites. It does so by presenting them with links to articles and other content.

The company was founded by [KIKE] Yaron Galai, who had sold his company Quigo to AOL in 2007 for $363m, and [KIKE] Ori Lahav, who had previously been with Shopping.com before their purchase by eBay.

Outbrain uses behavioral targeting to recommend interesting articles, blog posts, photos or videos to a reader, rather than relying on a more basic 'related items' widget.

Outbrain uses the cost-per-click charging model. The service is free to install onto websites, but only offers revenue sharing to content creators with greater than 10 million US page views per month.

Internet content publishers whose websites have used or are using Outbrain include USA Today, Boston Globe, Washington Post, Daily Beast, New York Observer, Slate, The Street, Elle, Hollywood Reporter, CNN, Fox News, Hachette Filipacchi Media, Mashable, MSNBC and the Guardian.

As of April 2013, it is used by over 90,000 websites and blogs.




OUTBRAIN

Our Team

Say hello to



Yaron Galai

Co-Founder & CEO


Yaron Galai is Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer at Outbrain. Prior to founding Outbrain, Mr. Galai was Co-Founder, SVP of Quigo, Inc., a provider of performance-based marketing solutions for advertisers and premium publishers. He previously served as the CEO of the company for three years. Quigo was acquired by AOL in December 2007. Previously, Mr. Galai was Co-Founder & VP Business Development at Ad4ever, a developer of rich-media advertising technologies for the web which was later acquired by Atlas (a division of aQuantive). Earlier, he was the Founder of NetWorks Web Design - an SEO and web design firm. At NetWorks he oversaw the production and search engine optimization of over 30 websites. Mr. Galai studied industrial design at the Holon Technological Institute, and is a Major (reserve) officer in the Israel Navy.

Ori Lahav

Co-Founder & CTO


Ori Lahav is Co-Founder and Chief Technical Officer at Outbrain. Ori oversees the company's R&D center located in Israel. Ori's duties include overseeing all technical aspects of the company including algorithmic design and product innovation. Prior to co-founding Outbrain, Ori led the R&D groups in search and classification at Shopping.com, which was acquired by eBay for $634 million. Ori also previously led the video streaming Server Group at financial technology company Vsoft. A practical engineer from the Rupin Academic Institute Ori is also a Major (reserve) officer in the Israeli Navy.

'Swedishness must be split from being white'


'Swedishness must be split from being white'

The Local: Sweden, 21 May 13

Sweden needs a new story better equipped to deal with and include today's demographic diversity and create a new Swedishness that is separate from whiteness, write representatives from the Multicultural Centre (Mångkulturellt centrum) in Botkyrka near Stockholm.

Why is it that the notion lives on about what a Swedish appearance looks like? The radio programme Studio 1 asked this question in March during a debate about racism in Sweden today. The question of Swedishness is a loaded one and the debate heats up when race becomes an ever-more central concept in order to understand racist practices in every-day life in Sweden.

Our thoughts and our actions are affected by history and by society's structures and norms. Society and its different shapes existed before each and every one of us alive today were born. In other words, we are born into a web of thought patterns and values that influence how we treat and regard each other and ourselves. We are quite simply greatly affected by structural power hierarchies that came about during a period in history marked by racism and colonialism. Of course there is development over time, but when it comes to norms and stereotypes it takes a long time.

Swedes do not stand apart from the world and its history of racism and colonialism. Our way of dealing with this has so far been to deny that race exists, while we have also wanted to affirm the unknown and the new. Most Swedes will claim they are colour blind, and only see a human before them when they meet someone new. This denial risks hiding from view the discrimination and the segregation that is so tangible and evident for the many who are not seen as Swedes, and whose stories make up a painful testament to the state of things in Sweden.

Several articles and debates have recently criticized Multicultural Centre's exhibition Warning For Race and our anthology Race And Whiteness In Contemporary Sweden. We have read twenty-odd texts that object to our choice to use the term race. We know that the word race is taboo today, but at the same time it is related to a history that we still have not managed to come to terms with.

Critics say we are trying "fight fire with fire", as a Svenska Dagbladet (SvD) editorial writer put it, or they say speaking about race doesn't lead anywhere in attempts to understand today's Sweden. What the criticisms has in common is that they strongly argue for how things should be - that race should not have any significance in today's Sweden - instead of looking at what they actually look like.

That is why we argue that Sweden needs a non-colour-blind anti-racism that enables an understanding of the thought structures behind today's exclusive Swedishness. That is what we are trying to talk about and what we intend the exhibition Warning For Race to contribute to.

Like most other people, we do not believe that separating people into race would solve any social problems. But if certain groups of people with similar backgrounds are found over and over in the lower tiers of the statistics tables, then there is a reason to seek out knowledge about it and try to understand what the consequences are.

The reason Multicultural Centre raises the concept of race is because we still think race is an active category in Sweden, or, as we say in the exhibit, "race is still done" all the time in today's Sweden even though the concept itself has been discarded by science and politics alike.

We still separate people based on what they look like. Not always and not everywhere, but it is happening all the more often and in particular in relation to who is regarded as being Swedish or not. It happens in the media, it happens in culture.

There is even solid empirical research about Swedish every-day racism that has chronicled the experiences of non-white Swedes. It does not make for fun reading.

For the past 15 years, we at Multicultural Centre have studied and worked with the phenomenon of every-day racism in an educational manner. From there, we have concluded that we need to speak about race, instead of just contenting ourselves with analyses of ethnicity, meetings between cultures, and general xenophobia.

Despite most Swedes today distancing themselves from racism, we still meet stereotypical images and descriptions of non-white minorities and non-Western cultures in contemporary Swedish culture. Comparatively, Sweden has established some of the strongest laws against discrimination, and therefore gets top grades in the Migrant Integration Policy Index for creating the best preconditions for integration of new citizens. This isn't what needs improving.

We see a segmented labour market, and we see housing segregation - even when we compare with other countries that are much more cautious towards people who are not seen to belong to the majority population.

Taken together, this should prompt us to pause for reflection.

We want a new Swedish story better equipped to deal with and include today's demographic diversity and to create a new Swedishness for the future. That new story's main task is to separate whiteness from Swedishness in order to be a socially sustainable future Swedishness.

To find our way to that story, we think we must make visible the suppression and discrimination based on appearance, which we do in the exhibit and in the anthology. Let us not pretend that Sweden and Swedes stand apart from the world, history and the racial thinking and the norm of whiteness that still live on both in other countries and in our own society.

Christina Zedell, Willy Viitala, Leif Magnusson and Tobias Hübinette of the Multicultural Centre, which was established as a foundation by Botkyrka Municipality in 1987.

COMMENTS

Casper
One thing is clear: Sweden is the epicenter of political correctness. And it's digging its own grave.

botti
Indeed, this is an utterly horrendous genocidal article. Next they will be demanding that being Israeli must be split from being Jewish, or being Japanese must be split from being...Japanese.

What exactly is the need for these unique, high trust, societies to be dissolved? In years ahead historians will wonder why these societies destroyed themselves.

It's not as if the research suggests there is some special benefit to be gained from this path:

"But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam -- famous for "Bowling Alone," his 2000 book on declining civic engagement -- has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings."

asfsdf
You were doing OK but the Jewish - Israeli thing doesn't fly. There are paid ads all over the US media about how wonderfully multi-cultural with Jews Christians and Muslims enjoyuing equal rights. Nobody believes it, but they are trying to sell themselves as the opposite of what you say.

Black_Man_Winning
Nonsense.

William Harper
why is it arabs & africans move to white countries but white folks arent moving to arab or african countries,liberalism will be the death of ya...

Leonidas
Whites did that, they moved to the Native-Americans occupied America, they colonized African regions and drew the country borders with rulers, separating tribes and families that caused territorial conflicts still unresolved today. Need I say more?

William Harper
whites propped these folks up & made socities,,can u not tell the truth about any thing ???
arabs attacked greece & made turkeybut thats ok right ...

William Harper
long live GOLDEN DAWN.....:-)

DLund
Probably something to so with imperialism, slavery and the rape of natural resources in most Middle East and African countries..

William Harper
rape of natural resources ,really ? how come these natural resources were never used to an advantage til the evil european showed said folks how to use them...just askin ...

loisaandersson
Look, if you do not like the Local's point of view and feel they are race baiting, the asnwer is not to waste time commenting here and cursing immigrants and Muslims. That's what the Local wants as it increases their clicks and their ad revenue. You're better writing to the Local's sponsors and letting them know about the bias, how it is negative for Sweden and how sponsoring that bias will cost them sales. In what strikes me as an insane business move, the Local seems at war with its readers and they will continue that until it affects their bottom line.

Flyover099
I wonder who funds and/or controls the Multicultural Centre. My guess is it isn't muslims....rather the same troublemakers we have in the US.

jocelynintoitxx
At the page bottom Local is trying to get advertising with saying "reach 2.5 million foreign professionals." Ha! They may reach 2.5 million, but professionals are not reading this nonsense with everything race and feminism and about how Sweden sucks in general.

Jack Nordstrom
^ The Local is an international newspaper, present in a number of different EU countries, and any newspaper online or not needs to produce news that represent what most people are interested in. They would not do this if they weren't giving results. If you think there is no 10-man marketing research crew behind this to tell them what to write about, then you are completely wrong.

Voltaire
No, the editors can write about everything they want. Conspiracy theorists will dispute it, but that's how most mainstream newsrooms operate. It makes the whole situation even more cringe worthy if you think about it.

ionafilbertore
I'm sure their topics give results as the first writer says. It certainly generates interest and that means revenue. Doesn't mean there not peddling garbage. They are certainly generating a lot of vile, hateful and potentially dangerous commentary. Is that good business? It is until people stop buying.

edgrenjonas
I see mathem.se everywhere on this site. They can kiss my business hej då.

Robinhood
I wrote a post on Monday almost exactly in line with the Prime Minister's comments yesterday about people who think they can change things by way of violence being out of line with the traditional Swedish way of solving issues. The Local declined to publish it. It seems the Prime Minister too fails to meet The Local's standards. I'm in good company.

Cliff Arroyo
"write representatives from the Multicultural Center"

Of course they do, without the constant ferment of balkanization stirring things up how could they justify their existence?

Proofteller
Wake up Sweden,wake up! The Liberals are destroying your country before your very eyes.Do not be afraid of them.Wake up!

BvB
You are damn right !!!

DLund
Go back to sleep racist..

simpy
This article is just more evidence that Sweden is finished. People should get out while they still can. No matter what happens, whites and blacks cannot live together without whites being more successful and blacks being resentful for it. Swedes are too soft and too feminized to stand up for their culture and their nation. It is game over. In twenty years it will be closer to Somalia than a proper European nation.

Steve
Agree. I already left.

DLund
Go home then.. Silly little racist.

simpy
We left Sweden four years ago after my 14 year old daughter was raped by a Somali
immigrant. He served four months; my
daughter hasn’t spoken since. Just
collateral damage in the quest for a multicultural utopia I guess.

And six centuries ago people who dared criticize the Catholic Church were called
heretics. Nowadays, racist is the preferred
term for anyone who criticizes the Right for pumping in lots of worthless
immigrants to both lower wages and ultimately destroy the welfare state – or
points out that the Left want to create a permanent underclass that will always
vote for them. “Antiracism” is now on
the side of power and authorities, the modern day Brown Shirts destroying the
working class. As Susan Sontag said, “The white race is the cancer of human history."
That is the battle cry of the so-called “antiracists”.

Flyover099
Look what Sontag and minions have turned my country, the US, into. Quite horrible.

caleb taursus
The Somali trash can be "taken out," if you wish!

Leonidas
Good for you that you migrated to another country where people don't accept immigrants :-P

forKnowledge
So you're now an immigrant, right?

something
While I do not agree that any human being is worthless... I would recommend that you don't feed the troll- he is rather clearly baiting you.

DLund
Glad you left! Its fantastic news!

DLund
You left Sweden?! Fantastic news!

Silly little racist..

Voltaire
More like a traumatised man..

DLund
Haha another silly little racist..

Voltaire
thank you, I respect your opinion to. Now go back to making fun of a traumatised father of a rape victim.

DLund
Damn! I was hoping to insult the mother.. Maybe she'll make an appearance tonight?

Voltaire
I'm sure you will be there so Go Lund! You seem to know how to connect the different Swedes

Chloë Fallberg
You sound like a butthurt little boy. How about YOU get out of my country then you stupid idiot.

ReturnOfTheKing
Your country?

Chloë Fallberg
My country:) Ethnic Swede born and raised here by ethnically Swedish parents:)

DLund
Weird as your picture would indicate your a Norwegian girl called Betina. You took the photo from her site:

http://betinabf.blogg.no/

More than likely a fat English/American loser sitting by his computer trowling the internet for pictures of underage girls.. A racist and a peado.. Probably

Wotans Wrath
Yeah son, she said her country. If she's White and Swedish it is her country. The country founded by her ancestors, built up over the course of thousands of years.

ReturnOfTheKing
Thousand of years Swedes are never proud of themselves

James Flower
This entire article is a racist, anti-white piece of Marxist propaganda, it seems the entire premise of the authors was to talk about ways to eradicate 'whiteness' and eradicate Swedish people from their own freaking country.

Sweden is a White country! Europe is a White continent! Its where White people are from for Gods sake!

308 comments • 28 reactions
× Comments for this thread are now closed.

Casper • 5 days ago
One thing is clear: Sweden is the epicenter of political correctness. And it's digging its own grave.

botti Casper • 5 days ago
Indeed, this is an utterly horrendous genocidal article. Next they will be demanding that being Israeli must be split from being Jewish, or being Japanese must be split from being...Japanese.

What exactly is the need for these unique, high trust, societies to be dissolved? In years ahead historians will wonder why these societies destroyed themselves.

It's not as if the research suggests there is some special benefit to be gained from this path:

"But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam -- famous for "Bowling Alone," his 2000 book on declining civic engagement -- has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings."
see more

asfsdf botti • 5 days ago
You were doing OK but the Jewish - Israeli thing doesn't fly. There are paid ads all over the US media about how wonderfully multi-cultural with Jews Christians and Muslims enjoyuing equal rights. Nobody believes it, but they are trying to sell themselves as the opposite of what you say.
12 4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Noa Black_Man_Winning • 4 days ago
Well you would say that, wouldn't you?

William Harper • 5 days ago
why is it arabs & africans move to white countries but white folks arent moving to arab or african countries,liberalism will be the death of ya...

Leonidas William Harper • 4 days ago
Whites did that, they moved to the Native-Americans occupied America, they colonized African regions and drew the country borders with rulers, separating tribes and families that caused territorial conflicts still unresolved today. Need I say more?
5 7 •Share ›

William Harper Leonidas • 4 days ago
whites propped these folks up & made socities,,can u not tell the truth about any thing ???
arabs attacked greece & made turkeybut thats ok right ...
14 1 •Share ›

William Harper William Harper • 4 days ago
long live GOLDEN DAWN.....:-)
6 •Share ›

DLund William Harper • 5 days ago
Probably something to so with imperialism, slavery and the rape of natural resources in most Middle East and African countries..
4 6 •Share ›

William Harper DLund • 4 days ago
rape of natural resources ,really ? how come these natural resources were never used to an advantage til the evil european showed said folks how to use them...just askin ...
19 •Share ›

loisaandersson • 6 days ago
Look, if you do not like the Local's point of view and feel they are race baiting, the asnwer is not to waste time commenting here and cursing immigrants and Muslims. That's what the Local wants as it increases their clicks and their ad revenue. You're better writing to the Local's sponsors and letting them know about the bias, how it is negative for Sweden and how sponsoring that bias will cost them sales. In what strikes me as an insane business move, the Local seems at war with its readers and they will continue that until it affects their bottom line.
84 2 •Share ›

Flyover099 loisaandersson • 5 days ago
I wonder who funds and/or controls the Multicultural Centre. My guess is it isn't muslims....rather the same troublemakers we have in the US.
66 1 •Share ›

jocelynintoitxx loisaandersson • 5 days ago
At the page bottom Local is trying to get advertising with saying "reach 2.5 million foreign professionals." Ha! They may reach 2.5 million, but professionals are not reading this nonsense with everything race and feminism and about how Sweden sucks in general.
35 •Share ›

Jack Nordstrom loisaandersson • 6 days ago
^ The Local is an international newspaper, present in a number of different EU countries, and any newspaper online or not needs to produce news that represent what most people are interested in. They would not do this if they weren't giving results. If you think there is no 10-man marketing research crew behind this to tell them what to write about, then you are completely wrong.
8 •Share ›

Voltaire Jack Nordstrom • 6 days ago
No, the editors can write about everything they want. Conspiracy theorists will dispute it, but that's how most mainstream newsrooms operate. It makes the whole situation even more cringe worthy if you think about it.
8 •Share ›

ionafilbertore Jack Nordstrom • 6 days ago
I'm sure their topics give results as the first writer says. It certainly generates interest and that means revenue. Doesn't mean there not peddling garbage. They are certainly generating a lot of vile, hateful and potentially dangerous commentary. Is that good business? It is until people stop buying.
2 1 •Share ›

edgrenjonas ionafilbertore • 5 days ago
I see mathem.se everywhere on this site. They can kiss my business hej då.
2 1 •Share ›

Robinhood edgrenjonas • 5 days ago
I wrote a post on Monday almost exactly in line with the Prime Minister's comments yesterday about people who think they can change things by way of violence being out of line with the traditional Swedish way of solving issues. The Local declined to publish it. It seems the Prime Minister too fails to meet The Local's standards. I'm in good company.

Cliff Arroyo • 6 days ago
"write representatives from the Multicultural Center"

Of course they do, without the constant ferment of balkanization stirring things up how could they justify their existence?

Proofteller • 5 days ago
Wake up Sweden,wake up! The Liberals are destroying your country before your very eyes.Do not be afraid of them.Wake up!

BvB Proofteller • 4 days ago
You are damn right !!!

DLund Proofteller • 5 days ago
Go back to sleep racist..

This comment was deleted.

Steve simpy • 5 days ago
Agree. I already left.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

Flyover099 simpy • 5 days ago
Look what Sontag and minions have turned my country, the US, into. Quite horrible.

caleb taursus simpy • 4 days ago
The Somali trash can be "taken out," if you wish!

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

Voltaire DLund • 5 days ago
I'm sure you will be there so Go Lund! You seem to know how to connect the different Swedes
9 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

ReturnOfTheKing Chloë Fallberg • 5 days ago
Your country?
3 7 •Share ›

Chloë Fallberg ReturnOfTheKing • 5 days ago
My country:) Ethnic Swede born and raised here by ethnically Swedish parents:)
52 5 •Share ›

DLund Chloë Fallberg • 5 days ago
Weird as your picture would indicate your a Norwegian girl called Betina. You took the photo from her site:

http://betinabf.blogg.no/

More than likely a fat English/American loser sitting by his computer trowling the internet for pictures of underage girls.. A racist and a peado.. Probably
5 4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

ReturnOfTheKing Wotans Wrath • 5 days ago
Thousand of years Swedes are never proud of themselves
2 4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

SigurdReg • 5 days ago
Sweden was a great place to live before the Swedes decided to import social pathologies from the third world. Maybe you need to give them more money and more free stuff. Sucks to be you Sverige. Really.

This comment was deleted.

Leonidas BarryBarry • 4 days ago
You are a bit late there, Loreen has already represented Sweden in ESC.

BarryBarry Leonidas • 4 days ago
But was she wearing a Burka?
1 •Share ›

RumFellow • 5 days ago
What they actually mean by 'Swedishness must be split from being white' is that the Swedish race and her culture must die. I'm not sure which would be the biggest loss to the world but it will certainly set a precedent that will follow the European to the grave. You see a culture is created by a people, not a people by a culture; all this political correctness will do is transplant other cultures (sometimes hostile to each other and to you) from around the world and into your home.

Don't mistake my comment for hate because it has nothing whatsoever to do with hate, it is simply that the more people come in, the more European cultures are is displaced and diluted. Are the Swedish worthless? Do you deserve this deliberate destruction of your culture? Because that will be the unfortunate result of this insane path you are following.
26 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund James Flower • 5 days ago
I'm a non white Swede : )
2 6 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

botti • 5 days ago
The existence of Swedes in the US does not mean it's sensible for Swedish politicians to act in a deeply immoral and undemocratic manner, while increasing the risk of rape for Swedish women.
9 1 •Share ›

HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! ReturnOfTheKing • 5 days ago
The ability to lose their lands to invaders?

William Harper ReturnOfTheKing • 5 days ago
because they are,just like irish americans,scottish americans,french americans...etc,etc...

Achilles7 • 6 days ago
Saying that Swedish people have traditionally been White (and have often had blonde hair and blue eyes to go with it) is not a racist statement: it's simply a fact. Is it racist to say that the majority of people in Africa are black?
Another fact is that races are different. Human beings have been slowly evolving on this planet in different corners of the globe for hundreds of thousands of years. Yes, immigration has always been taking place somewhere, but never anywhere near the scale and and at the pace that it is today. It would be very strange and highly counter-intuitive to suppose that we would all be identical after so many years of evolution. Is the African elephant exactly the same as the Indian elephant? Is the Asian lion exactly the same as the North American mountain lion?
Of course we are different. We have different personality traits, different temperaments, different senses of humour, different physical characteristics, different susceptibility to certain diseases, etc. etc.
This is not racist. This is simply a fact. Of course, as intelligent, social animals, we should treat everybody fairly and with respect but it is simply a lie to claim that race does not exist.
84 6 •Share ›

Leonidas Achilles7 • 5 days ago
Your comparison between African/Indian elephants and people from different continents is a bit flawed. There has not been a viable offspring between mating of African and Indian elephants, they are not regarded as same species. Humans on the other hand, have not yet had the time to evolve into different species. We are all humans. A more scientific analogy here would be African elephants in one African country, compared to another horde in another African country.
2 2 •Share ›

Johanna Saarni • 5 days ago
China must be separated from being chinese, Israel must be separated from being jewish, Kongo must be separated from being black.....
Does not sound good, as your finnish neighbor I implore you to stop trashing your country and genes like this!
24 •Share ›

joru100 • 5 days ago
"How to commit suicide." by Sweden
56 3 •Share ›

Flyover099 • 5 days ago
Such anti-white bias.
52 3 •Share ›

Mike • 6 days ago
Very few times in history has a homogeneous culture like sweden shifted so fast with the massive influx of foreigners over the past few years. It's no wonder there is massive troubles and issues.
42 2 •Share ›

epp.opp.ork.ahh.ahh • 6 days ago
Twenty-three comments so far in the comments section and the Local's guardians of free speech still haven't shut it down. These guys must be off their game today.
32 1 •Share ›

scott81 • 5 days ago
if swedes really are prepared to abandon their entire ethnic culture to accommodate immigrants then you cowards don't deserve to exist.
21 •Share ›

botti scott81 • 5 days ago
I think it's more evidence of anthropologist Peter Frost's domestication theory. Frost argues that European (and probably East Asian) countries have undergone genetic pacification. Frost notes a similar process occurred in ancient Rome, leading to its downfall:

In an important article Peter Frost describes essentially the same process in the Roman Empire with its Pax Romana. Here again a central government with courts and constabulary shaped a new version of human who was peaceful and law abiding and worked hard. Frost also describes the reaction of this new version of human to the Barbarian invasions:

Nonetheless, when Rome faltered in the fifth century it did so as never before. Earlier, the third century had seen a similar crisis: civil war, foreign invasion, return of brigandage, and steep economic decline. Yet Rome fought its way back and reasserted its authority. There was no such response in the fifth century. Instead, the crisis was met with a strange mixture of complacency and willful naiveté.

We cannot understand this change without considering the ideology that now shaped the Roman worldview, i.e., all humans share the same potential for peaceful and submissive behavior. This was largely true among the pacified populations inside the empire’s borders. Outside, it was largely false. Tragically so.

http://westhunt.wordpress.com/...
see more
5 •Share ›

RumFellow • 5 days ago
The international definition of genocide includes...

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Surely this covers deliberately shipping in populations with a high birth rate into a country whose own population has a low birth rate? It appears that your leaders have deliberately set out to destroy the Swedish and their culture; just like mine have set out to destroy the British.
31 1 •Share ›

expat RumFellow • 4 days ago
If the swedes think they have it rough with immigration they should try living in the UK......its a good example of what happens when immigration isn't regulated.
5 •Share ›

William Harper • 5 days ago
yeah,multiculturism is getting ya real far ain't it....they burnt they're own neighborhoods down now they should be made to live in it like it is...
20 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

Steve Wotans Wrath • 5 days ago
Not rue. White converts are often as radical as other muzzrats. Islam is the problem, not (just) race.
14 •Share ›

chalons • 5 days ago
This is essentially a call for Sweden to commit cultural suicide. It takes a special sort of learned stupidty to sign up for that program.

The idea that 'Swedishness' needs to be redefined into something other than what it is could not be more absurd.

100% opposition is my only response to it.
19 •Share ›

Bob Honiker • 5 days ago
Do the authors believe in the Tooth Fairy too?
28 1 •Share ›

Calebian22 • 6 days ago
Sweden has a distinct identity and culture. Swedes don't want to change this for the newcomers, and they shouldn't be forced to do so because of bs pc shame.
85 9 •Share ›

Lemon1987 • 6 days ago
I see it like this after Stockholm riots - Sweden you will never going to be the same again. You are added to "burn down cities" as Paris and London...
78 8 •Share ›

Ju • 5 days ago
Okay, then I am white S*malian from today. Where can i get my free housing and money?
18 •Share ›

Licurg Enescu • 5 days ago
"There is even solid empirical research about Swedish every-day racism
that has chronicled the experiences of non-white Swedes. It does not
make for fun reading."

How about researching the swedish girls that get gang-raped by these filthy invaders every day? Think that might make for fun reading ?

http://www.brusselsjournal.com...
18 •Share ›

clasifi1 . • 5 days ago
Kinda like saying: 'Japaneseness must be split from being asian'...(which is pure insanity)

I feel sorry for you swedes..It's as if you guys are eager to eradicate what's left of your civilisation. In the name of "diversity" , you'll one day become a minority in your own country. (like the native indians). cheering your dwindling influence and power in the country that your forefathers built is pretty crazy. All for "tolerance" , "human rights" , "equality"....Wow!...And to think that these people were once warriors!
25 1 •Share ›

DLund clasifi1 . • 5 days ago
No its saying that the colour of your skin doesn't dictate your social identity, nor should it effect how you are perceived within society. I.e How "Swedish" you are.
Japan is a country within Asia. Asia is made up of various different races and religions, so your point makes no sense.
How can a Swede become a minority in Sweden? Or do you mean white people will become a minority? Who cares?! We're all human beings. The only people Swedes want out of their society is the hateful few. ...Like yourself
9 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Leonidas MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
It's not what the article tries to say. It's about identity, the question of being able to allowed to integrate and feel like home. Nowadays more and more Swedish locals are marrying non-Swedes, do you propose that their half-Swedish children should be deported out of the country? One Swedish friend of mine from Gotland, his family is as Swedish as they can date back. He has blue eyes, but his hair color is very dark and his skin color is also happens to be a bit brown-ish. Due to the darker skin tone, despite his heritage people often treated him like a Turk and he told me he sometimes felt he was treated as if he doesn't belong here. The idea of associating "Swedishness" with white skin, blonde hair and blue eyes is stupid, because many, if not most of the Swedes don't even fulfill all three criteria simultaneously. This is in the genetics of Sweden since long before the first non-European immigrant sat foot in this country.
1 2 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Leonidas MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
I have lived for more than 10 years in Asia including Japan. I know Japan is a very racist country that consider every non-Japanese second-class citizen. Chinese and Koreans living in Japan often ended up getting Japanese names and pretending they are Japanese. If that's where you want to live then fine. ATM I'm not speaking on the behalf of the immigrants, I'm speaking for the ethnic Swedes that happen to have less-than-stereotypical of what you think is Swedish looks. They may not fit your definition of "White" and "Swedish", but they are by all accounts Swedish, you can't change that fact.
1 2 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Leonidas MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
So now you run out of arguments and have to switch topic eh? If it hurts you so much to see me use your beloved King's name as my alias, then I'd be happy knowing that. Besides so far you only tried to dodge my questions. What is your opinion on ethnic-Swedes and half-Swedes who don't look very "white" or "Swedish"?
3 •Share ›

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
I would urge you to look up the meaning of marxist and re-evaluate your decision to move to Sweden... Assuming you live in Sweden?
4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
No. do you understand the term "marxist"? Why have you moved to Sweden if you hate marxism?
3 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

botti Alexey from RU • 5 days ago
Anthropologist Peter Frost suggests that European (and probably East Asian) countries have undergone genetic pacification. Frost notes a similar process occurred in ancient Rome, leading to its downfall:

In an important article Peter Frost describes essentially the same process in the Roman Empire with its Pax Romana. Here again a central government with courts and constabulary shaped a new version of human who was peaceful and law abiding and worked hard. Frost also describes the reaction of this new version of human to the Barbarian invasions:

Nonetheless, when Rome faltered in the fifth century it did so as never before. Earlier, the third century had seen a similar crisis: civil war, foreign invasion, return of brigandage, and steep economic decline. Yet Rome fought its way back and reasserted its authority. There was no such response in the fifth century. Instead, the crisis was met with a strange mixture of complacency and willful naiveté.

We cannot understand this change without considering the ideology that now shaped the Roman worldview, i.e., all humans share the same potential for peaceful and submissive behavior. This was largely true among the pacified populations inside the empire’s borders. Outside, it was largely false. Tragically so.

http://westhunt.wordpress.com/...
7 1 •Share ›

Alexey from RU botti • 5 days ago
Normal people in normal countries transferred part of its powers to the State. It's the police, the courts, the army, the social system. If the state does not fulfill these powers, the government needs to point out errors (elections or something worse). This position is peculiar mentality and thinking of normal people.
Wild men are accustomed to act more independently.
These two systems can not soschestvovat together.
Or are you willing to live in a new country under the new rules - or leaving home. There is no third in the world (in my opinion).
•Share ›

Christian • 6 days ago
First thelocal.se shuts down comment sections on all the riot articles where the readers are discussing the obvious drawbacks of the Swedish governments policy of paying uneducated immigrants to come to Sweden and live off the system, and then they find this nonsense article blaming Swedes for being too white. This is not a news site- only propaganda plain and simple.
96 13 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

as ReturnOfTheKing • 5 days ago
self hating white shoot your self
16 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

ReturnOfTheKing Guest • 5 days ago
I guess you come from another planet to make such an absurd comment. There are only two nations in Africa that history make us to believe that they are not colonized Liberia and Ethiopia. Africa was destroyed by imperialist Europe and is still being destroyed by Europe. Up to the 14th century A.D. Africa was ahead of Europe or on par with Europe militarily.

Earlier educated Greeks received their education in Africa, to be precise in Mizraim (ancient Egypt). This is corroborated by “the father of European history,” Herodotus himself. He is supported by other ancient historians such as Diodorus.

Africa has suffered the worst genocide and holocaust at the hands of the architects of slavery and colonialism. What is called “European Renaissance” was the worst darkness for Africa’s people. Armed with the technology of the gun and the compass it copied from China, Europe became a menace for Africa against her spears. So-called “civilised” Europe also claiming to be “Christian” came up with the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. There was massive loss of African population and skills. Some historians have estimated that the Gold Coast (today’s Ghana) alone, lost 5OOO to 6OOO of its people to slavery every year for four hundred years.
3 5 •Share ›

Alexey from RU ReturnOfTheKing • 5 days ago
Oh, yes! you're always looking for the guilty. Ancient Egiped was founded not by Africans (in the modern sense of the word). As a result, ancient Egiped was destroyed by the Muslims.
10 1 •Share ›

Leonidas Alexey from RU • 5 days ago
So where is "Egiped" eh?
1 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

William Harper Thutmose Piye • 5 days ago
i call bullshit !!!
5 •Share ›

William Harper ReturnOfTheKing • 5 days ago
destroy their lands,are u kidding,whites made something of that land,now look at south africa now that africans are in power you cant even deny the failed state that it now is...
15 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Alexey from RU James Flower • 5 days ago
They can not do that. Who will feed them?
11 •Share ›

ReturnOfTheKing James Flower • 5 days ago
For you information, Sweden was a very poor country one century ago and the Swedes are not the ones that built the economy. Immigrants are the ones that come with technology and knowledge that built the steel industries, wood, textiles and the list goes on and on.
6 6 •Share ›

Alexey from RU ReturnOfTheKing • 5 days ago
Immigrants from Africa? Left demagoguery.
7 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

ReturnOfTheKing Wotans Wrath • 5 days ago
Fellow whites are still immigrants as long as they are not ethnic Swedes. Tell me am wrong racist?
4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Alexey from RU Black_Man_Winning • 5 days ago
The police should shoot at risk. Problems of the old idiot with a knife - not a problem the police.
7 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Voltaire Black_Man_Winning • 5 days ago
Please be a troll, please be a troll.
13 2 •Share ›

Christian Black_Man_Winning • 6 days ago
Well, the Swedish government let in 40,000 last year, and are slated for 50,000 this year. But I am sure they are all highly educated- you can tell by the 80% unemployment rate in housing projects like Husby.
44 14 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

as Thutmose Piye • 5 days ago
says the jiggaboo
6 1 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

ReturnOfTheKing sunzu • 5 days ago
Well this clearly shows that racism is deeply rooted in this our society. Believe it or not, an immigrant will presided the affairs of this nation someday as Obama is presiding the affairs of US. 20-30 years to come immigrants will determine who become the PM of Sweden since the population of the blonde hair and blue eyes is declining and aging every single day while that of immigrants is increasing exponentially
5 7 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

ReturnOfTheKing sunzu • 5 days ago
Well you cant do anything about that so long Europeans population continue declining
4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

ReturnOfTheKing Wotans Wrath • 5 days ago
I am not a whitephobia like you are afrophobia
1 4 •Share ›

Alexey from RU ReturnOfTheKing • 5 days ago
Very fast. like locusts. Necessary to reduce the food supply.
2 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

Licurg Enescu • 5 days ago
"Almost 90% of all robberies reported to the police were committed by
gangs, not individuals. “When we are in the city and robbing we are
waging a war, waging a war against the Swedes.” This argument was
repeated several times. “Power for me means that the Swedes shall look
at me, lie down on the ground and kiss my feet.” The boys explain,
laughingly, that “there is a thrilling sensation in your body when
you’re robbing, you feel satisfied and happy, it feels as if you’ve
succeeded, it simply feels good.” “It’s so easy to rob Swedes, so easy.”
“We rob every single day, as often as we want to, whenever we want to.”

http://www.brusselsjournal.com...

Yes, I can see how Sweden might benefit from having "people" like this...
16 •Share ›

meal • 4 days ago
And it troubles me a lot that why Sweden is still stick to multi-culturalism while German and British Prime minister both declared that it had faileded in their country.
15 •Share ›

DLund meal • 4 days ago
No they haven't... When has David Cameron or Angela Merkel said the exact phrase "Multi-Culturalism has failed in our society".... Never.
3 •Share ›

meal DLund • 4 days ago
I read those reports and the following discussion on Chinese, Japanese, English sites. Can't you google it yourself?
5 •Share ›

DLund meal • 4 days ago
Ok great, can you show me the UK or German newspaper that they were printed in. I cant seem to find them... Thanks
3 •Share ›

meal DLund • 4 days ago
here's one. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...
3 •Share ›

DLund meal • 4 days ago
No, she doesn't say multi-culturalism has failed. She simply points to the failings of the current integration policy within Germany.
1 1 •Share ›

Steve • 5 days ago
Me thinks some countries in Africa should embrace white people more and make their countries white and judeo-christian. Would be a nice sign of mutual respect, you know.
15 •Share ›

Guest Steve • 5 days ago
ok,ok,i can see that...
3 •Share ›

botti • 5 days ago
What a disgusting article. Next they will be demanding that being Israeli must be split from being Jewish, or being Japanese must be split from being...Japanese.

What exactly is the need for these unique, high trust, societies to be dissolved?
14 •Share ›

Bob A • 5 days ago
Multiculturalism is nothing but the old pig of tribalism with lipstick.
12 •Share ›

DLund Bob A • 5 days ago
No I think you mean racism is the old pig of tribalism with lipstick...
5 •Share ›

Bob A DLund • 5 days ago
No. Multiculturalism creates tribes where it is the tribe against everyone else. Multiculturalism creates hate of other groups and encourages discrimination of all other groups. Multiculturalism destroys countries.
10 •Share ›

DLund Bob A • 5 days ago
You mean racism does that.. I understand.
4 •Share ›

Robinhood • 6 days ago
Is it only me, or this a load of pseudo-intellectual claptrap?

I struggled through it all, and the conclusion seems to be that Swedes are very racist and should try harder to be less racist.

Please tell me the Botkyrka tax payers haven't paid for this.

BvB • 4 days ago
Cant you understand? the Islam wants to occupy the world, no matter if its in Sweden, the Middle East, UK or elsewhere. That's all due to your tolerance- the Muslims know how to make use of it.
16 1 •Share ›

DLund BvB • 4 days ago
What has Islam got to do with Swedes being white? Wrong topic... Yaaaaaaaaaawn

caleb taursus • 4 days ago
Dear Swedes. Take a look at what has/is happening in the U.S. over the last 150 years dealing with minorities and wise up.

Eat the cost of repatriating them and save a lot of grief and unending expense!

This comment was deleted.

as Black_Man_Winning • 4 days ago
jiggaboo please

DLund as • 4 days ago
Nobody cares about the US (East and West coast aside).. It's full of inbred white people.. And please don't get me started on America, it is a nation built on immigration. No white person is native to America. Thats a fact.

as • 5 days ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

14 1 •Share ›

Cliff Arroyo as • 5 days ago
Well thank god this busybody is willing to shine her moral superiority upon the Swedes and tell them what they "must" do.

If it weren't for her, they might get the funny idea that they have some say over their internal affairs (like who they let in the country and under what terms). Fortunately she's in charge instead of those pesky, unworldly Swedes....
7 •Share ›

DestruX • 5 days ago
In my opinion, If you move to another country by choice you do this because there was something wrong in your previous lifestyle.
If you then demand the same lifestyle in your new environment you are also moving the problems from before with you.

In my opinion it is OK to teach people about "your home-country if they want to, but it should not be a thing your new country MUST adapt to.

You choose to move to another country, then respect the rules and environments, and don't complain about them living the same life they have been living for hundreds of years before you moved in.
9 •Share ›

Eric • 4 days ago
This is the most racist article I have read in a long time. Racism against caucasians is disgusting.
17 2 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

This comment was deleted.

Leonidas sunzu • 4 days ago
Now the food has gone, but the comment above showed up after a while. So I guess the comment above must be the excrement of dogs.

DLund botti • 5 days ago
Load of rubbish.. Obviously. Racist

DLund Leonidas • 5 days ago
It seems this site is drowning in racism..

Leonidas DLund • 5 days ago
Agreed. It looks like all the racists are coming out on a parade or something...

as Leonidas • 4 days ago
also seems the anti white crowd is flooding thesite but this being a swedish site i guess theres no short age of jiggaboo loving anti whites
4 1 •Share ›

Freek • 6 days ago
Why is it so hard for Sweden to acknowledge that culture is a factor in the riots besides the social-economical aspects? The way the media in Sweden is trying to make this a story about unemployment and crypto-racism is fascinating to watch.

Fascinating to see how a couple of insults from a police officer became the main narrative. How the aggressors became the victims and the censorship (at least on this site) that followed.

Yes Sweden must loose its whiteness. I wonder if that also means that Sweden stops linking white man to peado-holidays and football hooliganism. I hope not. If you want to investigate Swedish hooliganism you're looking for culture group of white males between 18-30. If you want to understand the riots in Husby you investigate the culture of non-western immigrants between 18-30.

This investigation may lead to uncomfortable truths, but truths nonetheless.

Do it Sweden, make it happen. Because lets not forget that the biggest losers of this mess are the good-hearted immigrants. imagine being a hard working Lebanese swede surrounded by people of your social/cultural group acting like uncivilised people. You are angry because they not only trash your place, but also gives you a bad name as an Arab looking person.

And than comes Christina telling you that the real problem is the the way of the Swede.

Now the uncivilised people don't only trash your place and your name, they also have a legitimate reason to do so by the politico correcto white Swedish elite!

TL/DR: Political correct thinking is hurting the good-willing immigrant the most. Stop it.
22 4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

onesided James Flower • 5 days ago
One word to disprove this BS: adoption.

Leonidas Freek • 5 days ago
I agree with you. Why can't TheLocal write more about the successful, law-abiding and hardworking immigrants? People might come to say that they are few, but positive role-models are always good to have, right? My mother works as a professor in a Swedish university, her work is well-recognized Internationally, but her recognition within Sweden isn't even remotely close. It could be that she's a foreigner and woman, although I also think she should make a better job selling her profile to the peers. If the society brings out more of the good immigrants and makes it easier for immigrants to succeed, then there wont be as much animosity as we have seen lately. Sadly, the media chose to portray immigrants as weak and the ones who are always discriminated against. This puts them into the shoes of the victim and inadvertently denies their values, strengths and ways they can contribute to the society.

bigone4u • 4 days ago
Diversity kills. We know it in the USA. Now you Swedes know it. Are you man enough to do anything about it? I think you're cowards and I'm sorry to have to say it. If you're not cowards then do what your Viking ancestors would have done: Expel the invaders.

meal • 4 days ago
I'm non-white. In my opinion, this author,alone with those users calling other people racist are incurably racist and arrogant.
To conclude, they call on the native people to adopt a new way of thinking and get rid of cultural heritages so they might achieve a society without any "inequality." Maybe the Husby riot is just one of the inevitable events of the transition to the ideal society?
And billions of money spent on immigrant is generous enough,that's brain-wrenching. I'm very happy that mass immigration didn't happen in my country. The purpose of a nation is not to sustain foreigners and poor people from all over the world.
13 2 •Share ›

as • 4 days ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

14 3 •Share ›

DLund as • 4 days ago
Wow now the real crazies have come out of the woodwork.. White Pride? Seriously grow up!
2 9 •Share ›

William Harper DLund • 4 days ago
theres asian pride,mexican pride,african pride but white pride's wrong ...smh..
12 •Share ›

DLund William Harper • 4 days ago
You'd have to be very unintelligent to be proud of your skin colour... Personally I have better things to pride myself on.. Grow Up!
Allright Hamilton! • 4 days ago
Right Swedes (and other Europeans) could end the problem in a few years. In 36 months a woman can have four children. Demographic problem solved! Get to work you lazy Swedes, "Make Love, Not War!"
6 1 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund ProudAngloWarrior • 5 days ago
Ha idiot! "Proud Anglo Warrior" Is that your wrestling name? Silly little boy
1 7 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund ProudAngloWarrior • 4 days ago
I think someones been watching a bit too much Russel Crow in Gladiator... Get out and live in the real world! Nothing to fear : )
2 •Share ›

NotSweden • 6 days ago
That is a rather racist article, calling Swedes "white". There are many Swedes which are not white.

The issue is fundamentally not skin color. There are many Swedes happily married to people from other continents, often with no issues whatsoever.

The issue arises when different cultural values clash. Western countries have fought long and hard to get democracy, free society, equal rights for men and women, voting rights for women, rights for homosexuals, etc. If large amounts of people from other cultures come that do not share these values, there will obviously be conflict. It is inappropriate to keep such values that conflict with the laws and society that Sweden wants to be under the pretext of religious freedom and political correctness. However, one has to also acknowledge human nature, and that it takes generations to change cultural values. It probably would be fair to inform incoming people of these values, and if they wish to not share them, then they should choose an other country. The other alternative would be for Sweden to give up some of its values it has acquired over time.

A further issue is the large amounts of asylum seekers that Sweden lets into the country with respect to its population (probably the highest in the world).
Quote:
"The industrialised countries with the largest number of asylum applications in 2009 were the
United States (49,020), France (41,980), Canada (33,250), United Kingdom (29,840), Germany (27,650) and Sweden (24,190)."
Now, consider that Sweden has only 9 Million people compared to the rest which have 62 Million (UK) and more. That gives
2560 / 1 Mil. people Sweden
642 / 1 Mil. France
481 / 1 Mil. UK
338 / 1 Mil. Germany

Sweden has no coherent plan how to accommodate and integrate such numbers. Sweden has already an unsolved housing crisis (Stockholm in particular) for the people who are already here.

So, one ends up with housing ghettos, poor school areas, poor language education, poorly educated youths with different cultural backgrounds, with no prospects, a receipt for disaster anywhere in the world.

This is not solved by ideological gobbledygook.
see more
13 8 •Share ›

Steve NotSweden • 5 days ago
Swedes that are not white are no Swedes. Simple as that.
18 •Share ›

Leonidas Steve • 5 days ago
And what about children who have both Swedish and non-Swedish parents, do you suggest kicking them out? The number of half-Swedish children in Sweden will only increase, because for some reason both Swedish guys and gals are marrying more and more with foreign people, you can't do anything about it.
3 2 •Share ›

DLund Steve • 5 days ago
Humans beings as bigoted as you are animals. That simple
2 •Share ›

Anders Eklof NotSweden • 5 days ago
Finally someone with objective facts and insight! "Race" is a word that generates a lot of emotion and hot air, but it is not very relevant in practice. Culture, religion and educational level plus language skills are the real problem areas that we need to come to grips with.
5 5 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Leonidas ProudAngloWarrior • 4 days ago
Anders Eklöf is the name of a typical Swedish male, mostly likely "white" with a typical "Swedish" look, and that still can't spare him from being "voted down" by you? Not all "whites" think like you and if you really wanna start a fight you'd have to deal with them before getting out on the "non-whites".
2 •Share ›

DLund ProudAngloWarrior • 5 days ago
I voted you down. . : (
2 •Share ›

Lali Landana NotSweden • 6 days ago
#1 Sweden has a dying native population.

#2 Look beyond the propaganda. Democracy is a word that is past around a lot, however it is rarely practiced.

Actually the U.S.A is not a democracy it is a Republic. Neither is Sweden.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

3 3 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
Being a Swede has nothing to do with being white. I'm a Swede and I'm not white. I have a Swedish passport and I pay Swedish taxes and I live with a Swedish girlfriend and will have Swedish children.
7 •Share ›

William Harper DLund • 4 days ago
u have a swedish passport really ?your not a fuc-ing swede,do u got a green card too ?
8 1 •Share ›

DLund William Harper • 4 days ago
A green card? No I dont't, my sister does though (well that's a lie, she has a 7 year working visa). . We're a clever family that get to travel the world and live happy lives.. I feel sad for you.. Stuck in the same country forever : (
5 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
But obviously I am Swedish. I was born in Sweden.. Silly
7 •Share ›

Johanna Saarni DLund • 4 days ago
No, you are something in-between, a nonesuch. You are never fully excepted into the tribe, you and your offspring will always be outsiders.
10 1 •Share ›

DLund Johanna Saarni • 4 days ago
I've never been part of a tribe no..
2 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
How can you invade somewhere you were born in? You're not particularly bright are you...
5 •Share ›

Johanna Saarni DLund • 4 days ago
does not matter where you are born, if you do not belong to the tribe of germanics you are not a swede. I'm sorry.
11 •Share ›

DLund Johanna Saarni • 4 days ago
Germanic? No I'm Swedish! : )
3 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
My parents were born in Sweden also. Both of them. My mother is from Falun and my father from Stockholm
5 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
My family are Swedish.. You're an immigrant in my country from the sounds of it..
4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
Of course I'm Swedish I was born here..
5 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
Of course you would as that would be your nationality! You'd be Japanese. The colour of your skin has nothing to do with nationality. You really need to open your mind, go to school and learn about the world. Filling your head with inaccuracies and hate will just grind you down.
1 7 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
The reality is i'm a Swede with a Swedish passport and you're not... Stop hating and educate yourself. There is nothing to be afraid of.
5 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
Non white invader? I was born here, you are the only "invader" Please don't "route" me, it sounds painful..

Don't revile me, it shows your fear. Instead embrace diversity : )
5 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
White people are in decline in the world. So I doubt that will happen actually... More likely we'll have a more diverse range of genders and races in our governments that will improve the diversity and overall happiness of people across the globe. Can't wait!
7 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
Ok thanks..

p.s. Are you scared of busses too? ; )
6 •Share ›

Leonidas DLund • 4 days ago
Oh man, this is hilarious, you are delivering some major ass-whopping to the idiot up there.
6 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund ProudAngloWarrior • 4 days ago
.... I think you got served a rather large one.. ; )
3 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund ProudAngloWarrior • 4 days ago
There is a difference between the genocide, slavery and rape of the native Americans and South African tribes as well as the theft of raw materials from their lands by European settlers. America is a nation built on immigration, a white American is an American of course, as is a white South African. Nobody is disputing that. So I can't see the double standard..
5 •Share ›

onesided • 6 days ago
Why is it so hard for Sweden to acknowledge that culture is a factor in the riots besides the social-economical aspects? The way the media in Sweden is trying to make this a story about unemployment and crypto-racism is fascinating to watch.

Fascinating to see how a couple of insults from a police officer became the main narrative. How the aggressors became the victims and the censorship (at least on this site) that followed.

Yes Sweden must loose its whiteness. I wonder if that also means that Sweden stops linking white man to sex tourism and football hooliganism. I hope not. If you want to investigate Swedish hooliganism you're looking for culture group of white males between 18-30. If you want to understand the riots in Husby you investigate the culture of non-western immigrants between 18-30.

This investigation may lead to uncomfortable truths, but truths nonetheless.

Do it Sweden, make it happen. Because lets not forget that the biggest losers of this mess are the good-hearted immigrants. imagine being a hard working Lebanese swede surrounded by people of your social/cultural group acting like uncivilised people. You are angry because they not only trash your place, but also gives you a bad name as an Arab looking person.

And than comes Christina telling you that the real problem is the the racist way of the Swede.

Now the uncivilised people don't only trash your place and your name, they also have a legitimate reason to do so by the politico correcto white Swedish elite!

TL/DR: Political correct thinking is hurting the good-willing immigrant the most. Stop it.
see more
3 1 •Share ›

Empty barrels • 6 days ago
Empty barrels make the most noise, Sweden is good COUNTRY I love it here..
5 5 •Share ›

Empty barrels Empty barrels • 6 days ago
PS. I am a Immigrant :-), we all need to contribute in a country to make it to a safe society for everyone.. Not only Swedes..!
5 6 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Casper DLund • 5 days ago
Please explain me why diversity is good. I happen to live in another country where multiculturalism failed completely, despite all the good intentions of political correct idealist like yourself.
I'm happy to say that today, in my country almost everybody woke up from that dream. Maybe it's time for you too to pull your head out of the sand.
22 1 •Share ›

Steve DLund • 5 days ago
Swedes are no immigrants. They have been herer for thousands of years and it's their country, moron.
14 1 •Share ›

DLund Steve • 5 days ago
No ex-pats like yourself are though. Moron
2 •Share ›

Christian DLund • 6 days ago
You are right. Immigration is often a good thing- when the immigrating class actually contributes something positive to the culture. This is not happening in Sweden where the political elites steal money from hard working Swedes in order to feed and house unemployable immigrants so as to create a state dependent underclass for the bureaucracy to rule over. This will not end well.
22 4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund Guest • 6 days ago
Sshhhhh quiet down and go back to your silly little country. Im sure you're silly views are welcome there.
4 8 •Share ›

Guest DLund • 6 days ago
You're in my silly little country bro. (I presume)
10 3 •Share ›

DLund Guest • 6 days ago
Your country? Ha! You're an immigrant! silly boy. .
4 6 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund James Flower • 5 days ago
Of course white Swedes are native to Sweden. As are Black Swedes.. The colour of your skin doesn't not dictate the country in which you are born.
2 •Share ›

epp.opp.ork.ahh.ahh DLund • 5 days ago
Technically, you're correct that we're all, or most of the people on this site are immigrants. Well, actually, some of us are just long-term visitors. Anyway, the problem is differentiating between good immigrants and bad ones. The good ones work hard and dump ridiculous amounts of tax money into Sweden's system while the bad ones rape, pillage and burn stuff in Stockholm's suburbs. It's that simple.
3 •Share ›

DLund epp.opp.ork.ahh.ahh • 5 days ago
No it's not that simple though is it. Most of the teenagers involved in the riots were Swedes not immigrants. They were likely born and raised here. They are angry with the lack of opportunity and racism imbedded within society.
3 •Share ›

epp.opp.ork.ahh.ahh DLund • 5 days ago
If their lack of success here actually is due to racism then, unfortunately, they've only made it worse.

Additionally, while I might sympathize with older non-ethnic swedes with engineering or comp sci degrees who have spent years driving a cab, I have no sympathy for these young punks. They're not old enough to know about lack of opportunity and, besides, don't they have free college education here? If it's really that bad here and if they had any brains, they would study hard, have Sweden pay for a good degree and then move somewhere else where they could have a good life.
4 •Share ›

DLund epp.opp.ork.ahh.ahh • 5 days ago
But why should they have to leave their country and their friends in order to find acceptance? The Swedish government must take responsibility and enforce far more rigid equal opportunity laws.
These kids didn't ask to grow up in the worst part of town, nor did they choose to have parents who are quite probably very resentful of their position within society.
All they want is a normal middle class life in Sweden, something hard to obtain if you're perceived as different. When kids have nothing to do, it only takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.
1 1 •Share ›

Guest • 4 days ago
Wow. I can see how multicult is working out for Britain as well:


3 2 •Share ›

Lycanthrope • 5 days ago
As a South African who grew up in a ridiculously racist environment, I can tell you quite comfortably that the problem in any society is when "race" gets involved. The problem is rarely ever "race" but cultural, religious, superstitious and personal bigotry--these are the things that bring a country and a civilisation, to its knees.

I grew up around black professionals who were as proud, noble and endearing as you could ever imagine. These are people I went to school with, who had manners, who often saw the world in much the same way I did.

And yet here I have been greeted by innumerable white people spitting phlegm in the streets, leaving their cigarette butts everywhere, throwing garbage out of their apartment windows (is it any surprise there's so much of it?), graffiti everywhere. That is bad upbringing, not race.

When I moved into my apartment, it was a Muslim gentleman who helped me carry my new couch through my front door. That is a good upbringing, not race; not religion.

My point is that you get good people (of all races) and bad people (of all races).

Pinning the blame on race is a short-sighted, narrow-minded approach because, frankly, that's not how the real world works. That's just how you WISH it did. It would make everything so much easier, wouldn't it, if morality were colour-coded like that.

But here's a newsflash: you have white Eastern Europeans coming here and causing problems. You have white Swedes pissing in the streets and throwing their garbage out of their apartment windows. And, when last have you looked at the football hooligans? Not a lot of Arabs there.

But this is all meaningless to the majority of you who refuse to see the real problems and find it easier to just blame skin-colour.

The problems you have are because of problems closer to home: you have an immigration policy that isn't strict enough about the kinds of people (their cultural views, their personal morality; not their "race") it allows in. You have a mentality of "us against them" that results in outsiders (Arabs, Africans, etc) feeling vulnerable and ostracised and then you wonder why their kids eventually rebel (not unlike your own).

Sweden is a great, proud and noble country and racist, knuckle-dragging troglodyte keyboard warriors who would rather sit and bitch than go out and make a positive difference, are precisely what is bringing Sweden down. Not the immigrants, not the Arabs, not the blacks.
7 11 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Lycanthrope William Harper • 5 days ago
The entire legacy of slavery in humanity's history is just lost on you, isn't it?
1 6 •Share ›

Casper Lycanthrope • 5 days ago
So if I understand you correctly, slavery in history is an excuse to ignore the law and do as you like?
6 •Share ›

HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! Casper • 5 days ago
Why would a "sane" people choose to invade another and make them slaves for that matter without considering future repercussions?
2 2 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
It was part of a bigger plan to take over the world...and now you are shaking because you didn't think it was gonna hit you that hard did you? The tide has turned, and we are very aware that the leaders "you put there" are no longer our leaders. In reality they are stooges of external powers which are siphoning our resources on a constant basis and it’s about time that we began to think about how to create a new leadership, a new leadership which will protect the wealth of Africa for the African people, a new leadership which will insist on a new and fair international economic order…” A kind that begins with taking back whats ours!

Pay back is a bitch innit?
2 •Share ›

William Harper Lycanthrope • 4 days ago
which slaves do u refer to sir ???

let me enlighten ya...

It was during the 1600s that Barbary corsairs—pirates from the Barbary Coast of North Africa (today Algeria, Libya and Morocco)—were at their most active and terrible. With the full support of the Moorish rulers of North Africa, these Muslim slavers raided southern Europe, the Atlantic European coast, Britain and Ireland almost at will.

There are, sadly, no complete records for how many Europeans were captured by the Muslim slavers, but most estimates—based on the size of the Moorish cities—indicate that by 1780, at least 1.2 million Europeans had been seized.
a quote from a google site^^^
so again i ask slavery is indeed a legacy invited upon all humanity,not just the african slave trade which i presume u are trying to point out...
2 •Share ›

William Harper Lycanthrope • 4 days ago
which legacy ??theres several,for example..

It was during the 1600s that Barbary corsairs—pirates from the Barbary Coast of North Africa (today Algeria, Libya and Morocco)—were at their most active and terrible. With the full support of the Moorish rulers of North Africa, these Muslim slavers raided southern Europe, the Atlantic European coast, Britain and Ireland almost at will.

There are, sadly, no complete records for how many Europeans were captured by the Muslim slavers, but most estimates—based on the size of the Moorish cities—indicate that by 1780, at least 1.2 million Europeans had been seized.
3 1 •Share ›

botti Lycanthrope • 5 days ago
It's more to do with what traits were selected for in different environments (eg gene-culture coevolution). Societies with polygamy & female farming systems had selection for different behavioural traits to those in Asia or Europe.

http://www.edge.org/response-d...

http://the10000yearexplosion.c...
1 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Lycanthrope Steve • 5 days ago
No, you just can't read. I said that he helped me because of a good upbringing--something you folk clearly lack--and not his religion.

Clearly comprehension is something that you were never taught.
3 5 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Lycanthrope Wotans Wrath • 5 days ago
South Africa has a population of over 50,000,000 of which only 11,000,000 are tax-payers. It has 25% unemployment. It has strikes, it has high and violent crime.

What you don't seem to understand as that pre-1994, the black demographic didn't exist. It didn't have police protection and life was pretty much hell.

I don't know what you're trying to elicit from me apart from the usual trollish attempts at provocation. But farmers are not murdered "en masse" though there is a significant problem. The farmers, however, are not singled out. It is a problem everyone faces: black and white and, the black farm hands have it much worse.

Unless you think that the townships are some kind of paradise? That the farm workers are treated like kings and go home to a five-bedroom mansion? No, they go home to their shacks, often with less than 35kr per day.

That is the reality in South Africa. It has a long way to go but it is by no means the hell hole that your kind are so fond of making it out to be.

South Africa has a great service industry, an amazing tourist industry and an incredibly high quality of life for the middle-class and the private health-care is bar none.

But you don't break out of privileged minority rule and expect it to be possible for the tax of 10,000,000 and a thinly-spread police force to suddenly take care of 40,000,000.

But you do, don't you? For you, reality is just something other people experience, isn't it?

I grew up in South Africa with coloureds, blacks, Asians and Indians. I also grew up with the rather ironic bigotry between Afrikaans and English (two white) cultures. But there is definitely equality. There is no "white" or "black" or "Chinese" or "Indian" South African, we're all South African; we're all immigrants.

People like you, however, exist in South Africa as well, and they like to perpetuate discrimination. They like to say "South Africa belongs to the blacks" or they like to say, "South Africa belongs to the Afrikaaner." Must be nice for someone like you to hear that there are black people who think in exactly the same way that you do.

Those are the people who damage South Africa. And I lived there long enough to realise that and see the harm it causes. And now that I live here, I see the same thing. Except, South Africa's been doing it for a long, long time and we've become good at being open about our problems and defusing them quickly. Sweden's new to this.

Sweden likes to deny that it's responsible for its own problems. It MUST be the immigrants, it MUST be the other races. Surely, we can't be responsible too. Not for the racial slander, not for making generations of non-white Swedes feel like outcasts, not for making immigrants feel ostracised.

No, you're completely innocent.
3 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

Lycanthrope Wotans Wrath • 5 days ago
Comprehension is really lacking in The Local's readership, it seems.

Oh well, I'll just go bang my head against a wall, that'd be a far more productive use of my time.

forKnowledge • 5 days ago
Oh, looks like I've stumbled on a fringe Swedish hate site...
4 6 •Share ›

botti forKnowledge • 5 days ago
you have - the article suggests that being Kenyan must be split from being African. It appeared to be advocating a kind of soft genocide against Kenyans.

HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! • 5 days ago
Sweden temporarily controlled several settlements on the Gold Coast (present Ghana) since 22 April 1650, but lost the last when on April 20, 1663, Fort Carlsborg and the capital Fort Chistiansborg were seized by Denmark. Another trading company with a royal charter was responsible for pursuing Sweden's interests in Africa, the Swedish Africa Company (founded in 1649). In 1650, an expedition under the command of Henrik Carloff was send to Africa. Carloff made a treaty with the King of Futu (also Feta) on selling some areas of land. On April 22, 1650, the Swedish Gold Coast was founded and Carloff became its first administrator.

In 1656, Johan Filip von Krusenstierna (brother of the great-grandfather of the famous admiral and explorer Adam Johann von Krusenstern) was appointed the new Governor. This enraged Carloff. He left Cabo Corso only to return on January 27, 1658, on the danish Privateer "Glückstadt." Fort Carlsborg was seized and made part of the Danish Gold Coast colony.

King Charles X Gustav of Sweden made this one of his reasons to go to war with Denmark. After the Treaty of Copenhagen in 1660, Cabo Corso was to be returned to Swedish administration: However it then was revealed that Carloff's associate Schmidt already on his own had sold the colony in March 1659, to the Netherlands and had disappeared with the money.

Later, the local population started a successful uprising against their new masters and in December 1660, the King of Futu again offered Sweden to take control over the area. A new expedition was send to the colony which remained under Swedish administration only for a short period. von Krusenstierna was reappointed as administrator.

On April 20, 1663, Fort Carlsborg and the capital Fort Christiansborg again were seized by the Dutch after a long defense under the Swedish commander Tönnies Voss.

On May 9, 1664, the area again was seized, this time by the British who made it part of the British Gold Coast colony.

In 1652, the Swedes took Cape Coast (in modern Ghana) which had previously been under the control of the Dutch and before that the Portuguese. Cape Coast was centered around the Carolusburg Castle which was built in 1653, and named after king Charles X Gustav of Sweden but is now known as the Cape Coast Castle.

.......The Swedish Atlantic slave trade...........

During this time, the small Swedish slave trade began. However, after the fall of New Sweden to the Dutch, the slave trade ended. It would later be rejuvenated under Gustav III who would founded a Swedish colony on Saint-Barthélemy in 1785, and made the island a center for slave trading. The Swedish West India Company was established on the island in 1786.
see more
3 5 •Share ›

HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! • 5 days ago
Is Sweden an example of European country that, by principles, renounced to colonization?

Well, it isn't. The fact is that Sweden tried hard to grab its own colonies... but failed especially in AFRICA! Specifically in modern day GHANA, which was then know as the GOLD COAST... I bet "they" don't teach that in Swedish History, do they?Have you ever wondered why there is no Swedish Embassy in Ghana?

Here is a wikilist of that country's attempt to make an empire for itself.

Sweden possessed overseas colonies from 1638 to 1663 and from 1784 to 1878. The former Swedish colonies in Africa were:

(1) Swedish Gold Coast (1650–1663; lost to Denmark and the Dutch) Including the Cape Coast (1649–1663) consisting of the following settlements:

Apollonia, presently Benin: 1655-1657.
Fort Christiansborg/Fort Frederiksborg, which became the capital, presently Osu: 1652-1658
Fort Batenstein, presently Butri: 1649-1656.
Fort Witsen, presently Takoradi: 1653-1658.
Carolusborg: April 1650 - January/February 1658, 10 December 1660- 22 April 1663

(2) The former Swedish colonies in America:

Guadeloupe (1813–1814; returned to France)
Saint-Barthélemy (1784–1878; sold to France)
New Sweden (1638–1655; lost to the Dutch)
Tobago (1733; attempt for settlement thwarted by natives)
3 5 •Share ›

chalons HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! • 5 days ago
Staying germane to the discussion does not appear to be one of your strengths.

Those are some pretty inconsesequential and irrelevant historical footnotes that you are sharing.
6 •Share ›

HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! chalons • 4 days ago
You egg! Do you know anything about system thinking at all? The solution to Sweden's problems are hinged on history! You cannot erase the past which has shaped your identity and that of others. You had the right to label a part of a black continent the "Swedish Gold Coast", yet you hate that blacks be called swedes? I chipped in that piece of well hidden history because the solution to the current "there can only be white swedes" problem should be based on the understanding the dynamic behaviour of complex systems; the recognition that the African system you once invaded has a particular structure composed of interlinked unique elements, different in behavior from those of other regions and and interference with such a system no matter how long it takes, will yield repercussion. That is why today we are all Swedes too and you don't get it!

Cant you see what is happening in every colonial country? Why isn't Mexico or China or Chile complaining? Because they didn't distort global systems for their own selfish economic growth. Perhaps you should be thankful that it has taken centuries for blacks to be called Swedes...
4 •Share ›

HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! chalons • 4 days ago
It refutes claims that Swedes did not inherit attitudes of racial and cultural superiority from the colonial period that have complicated the way in which some former colonial powers view the rest of the world, even though the cover-up of history was massive...
3 •Share ›

Allright Hamilton! HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! • 4 days ago
Don't forget Delaware! We celebrated 350th anniversary of Swedes bringing Africans to Delaware this week!
1 2 •Share ›

HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! • 5 days ago
Legacy????

The fact that Sweden lost its colonies before anti-colonial, freedom movements began means that the decolonization process and many of the consequences of this that other colonial nations experience, such as fighting protracted and expensive wars, did no apply. Sweden's switch to a neutral position in the early eighteenth century made Sweden an inviting place for people fleeing war elsewhere, a safe haven for refugees. This switch from concern to be a military power to neutrality had consequences for the way in which Sweden viewed her role in the world. Instead of wanting to dominate the world as a great power, although this had certainly played a role in her earlier self-understanding, Sweden became more interested in spreading Enlightenment values. In the post-World War II context, in proportion to her Gross National Product, Sweden has been one of the highest contributors to aid and development.

The legacy of the colonial empire left Sweden with knowledge of and interest in other parts of the world, which has translated into concern for issues of global justice and peace making Sweden one of the most active countries in supporting United Nations peace keeping activities. Swedes did not inherit attitudes of racial and cultural superiority from the colonial period that have complicated the way in which some former colonial powers view the rest of the world, as, despite the end of colonialism, a theater for the pursuit of their own interests and agendas. Nor has Sweden favored former colonial territories in its aid program, since links that did exist are too distant in time to have any continued claim.
3 6 •Share ›

Aba Abeba • 4 days ago
Although this insurrection against police brutality was preformed by people of Arab descent; the focus is on Africans. Why is this the case? The answer is that there is a deep seeded inadequacy that white people feel around African / Black people. Let’s not jump around the subject.
What is the source of this inadequacy, jealousy. Although white racist like to couch different arguments; They instinctively know that they are not fully humans. Maybe they are just shaved chimpanzees? Instead of whites admitting that they are jealous of not having Black / brown skin they attempt to debase those that do. However, it is biologically proven that white skin is a recessive and a deleterious skin condition. It nothing to envy or to aspire to have.

Let’s talk about the bottom line reasons why the so called white population across the Earth is dying off. It has nothing to do with them waiting to have children at a later date (although that contributes to their decline). It is because the white man and woman are not natural. This group was not supposed to grow to level that they are now, and it evident that nature is fighting back to make sure that their existence will come to an end soon.

2 7 •Share ›

chalons Aba Abeba • 4 days ago
Wow. That's some seriously deluded BS you're spewing there. Gonna burn a car tonight?
12 1 •Share ›

William Harper Aba Abeba • 4 days ago
wow,i cant even call it,i cant even take u seriously...
3 •Share ›

DLund • 5 days ago
SO MANY TERRIFIED LITTLE RACISTS ON THIS SITE!
1 8 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
But you're afraid of people with different skin colour. Surely that makes you a " spineless beta-male"?
6 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
You're obviously afraid of people who look different to you. You are a racist.
You're scared. .
5 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
But you're scared of anyone that doesn't look like you? I urge you to travel more. There's nothing to be afraid of..
4 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
Your fear is making you hate.. There's nothing to be afraid of. We're all just human beings.
3 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund MarxistMangler • 4 days ago
There are many races yes and you don't have to be afraid of any of them.
3 •Share ›

This comment was deleted.

DLund ProudAngloWarrior • 4 days ago
I just want to help you overcome your fear of skin colour..

HisBlacknessALMIGHTY! • 5 days ago
Its about time....

Freek • 6 days ago −
Why is it so hard for Sweden to acknowledge that culture is a factor in the riots besides the social-economical aspects? The way the media in Sweden is trying to make this a story about unemployment and crypto-racism is fascinating to watch.

Fascinating to see how a couple of insults from a police officer became the main narrative. How the aggressors became the victims and the censorship (at least on this site) that followed.

Yes Sweden must loose its whiteness. I wonder if that also means that Sweden stops linking white man to sex tourism and football hooliganism. I hope not. If you want to investigate Swedish hooliganism you're looking for culture group of white males between 18-30. If you want to understand the riots in Husby you investigate the culture of non-western immigrants between 18-30.

This investigation may lead to uncomfortable truths, but truths nonetheless.

Do it Sweden, make it happen. Because lets not forget that the biggest losers of this mess are the good-hearted immigrants. imagine being a hard working Lebanese swede surrounded by people of your social/cultural group acting like monkeys. You are angry because they not only trash your place, but also gives you a bad name as an Arab looking person.

And than comes Christina telling you that the real problem is the the racist way of the Swede.

Now the monkeys don't only trash your place and your name, they also have a legitimate reason to do so by the politico correcto white Swedish elite!

TL/DR: Political correct thinking is hurting the good-willing immigrant the most. Stop it.

Freek • 6 days ago
Why is it so hard for Sweden to acknowledge that culture is a factor in the riots besides the social-economical aspects? The way the media in Sweden is trying to make this a story about unemployment and crypto-racism is fascinating to watch.

Fascinating to see how a couple of insults from a police officer became the main narrative. How the aggressors became the victims and the censorship (at least on this site) that followed.

Yes Sweden must loose its whiteness. I wonder if that also means that Sweden stops linking white man to sex tourism and football hooliganism. I hope not. If you want to investigate Swedish hooliganism you're looking for culture group of white males between 18-30. If you want to understand the riots in Husby you investigate the culture of non-western immigrants between 18-30.

This investigation may lead to uncomfortable truths, but truths nonetheless.

Do it Sweden, make it happen. Because lets not forget that the biggest losers of this mess are the good-hearted immigrants. imagine being a hard working Lebanese swede surrounded by people of your social/cultural group acting like uncivilised people. You are angry because they not only trash your place, but also gives you a bad name as an Arab looking person.

And than comes Christina telling you that the real problem is the the racist way of the Swede.

Now the uncivilised people don't only trash your place and your name, they also have a legitimate reason to do so by the politico correcto white Swedish elite!

TL/DR: Political correct thinking is hurting the good-willing immigrant the most. Stop it.


CHECHNYA: RELIGION OF PEACE CONFERENCE

"Islam Is A Peaceful Religion – International Forum", convened in Chechnya

An international conference has convened in Chechnya’s capital, Grozny, with the stated aim of demonstrating that Islam is, as George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Barack Obama, David Cameron and others have called it, "a religion of peace".

Representatives of 25 countries are taking part in the conference.

Ramzan Kadyrov, "Head" of the Chechen Republic, in his opening remarks at the forum called on all Muslims to be peaceful and tolerant.

Kadyrov:

“The armed conflict in Chechnya was settled not only by the authorities’ efforts, important as they were. The conflict died away, to a large extent, thanks to the fact that many people have realized that violence contradicts true Islam.”



After his father, President (and Imam) Akhmad Kadyrov, was assassinated on 2004.05.09, Ramzan Kadyrov was appointed Deputy Prime Minister of the Chechen Republic.

Responding to a question about how he would "avenge the murder of his father", Kadyrov said:

"I've already killed him, whom I ought to kill. And those, who stay behind him, I will be killing them, to the very last of them, until I am myself killed or jailed. I will be killing for as long as I live."



When his sister Zulai was detained by the Dagestan police in January 2005, Ramzan and some 150 armed men drove to the Khasavyurt City Police (GOVD) building. According to the city mayor, Kadyrov's men surrounded the GOVD, forcing its duty officers against the wall and assaulted them, after which they left the building with Zulai Kadyrova, shooting in the air.

In August 2005, Kadyrov declared that Europe's largest mosque would be built in downtown Grozny shattered downtown. He also claimed that Chechnya in a few years would be "the wealthiest and the most peaceful" place in the world.

Following a car accident in December 2005, in which Chechnya's Prime Minister Abramov was injured, Kadyrov functioned as the caretaker mrime minister. He immediately proceeded to implement elements of Sharia law, such as declaring a ban on alcohol.

In February 2006, Kadyrov banned Danish citizens from entering Chechnya. Moscow countermanded that diktat.

On 2006.03.01, Prime Minister Abramov resigned, telling the Itar-Tass news agency that he did so "on the condition that Ramzan Kadyrov lead the Chechen government." Kadyrov then decreed that all women in Chechnya must wear headscarves in public, and demanded more money from Moscow.

Kadyrov also the head of the Kadyrovtsy paramilitary group founded by his imam father.

While the leaders of the British, American and Chechen ruling regimes all agree that Islam is a religion of peace, the British and American regimes consider Kadyrov a terrorist and a dictator, who doesn't represent "truel Islam", and the Chechen regime regards Muslim terrorists opposed to their Islamic rule as puppets of the UK and the US, and not representative of "true Islam".

"ORDINARY SWEDE" MOHAMMMED ABBAS

Stockholm riots leave Sweden's dreams of perfect society up in smoke

A week of disturbances in Sweden's capital has tested the Scandinavian nation's reputation for tolerance, reports Colin Freeman

By Colin Freeman, Husby, The Telegraph [UK], 25 May 2013

Like the millions of other ordinary Swedes whom he now sees himself as one of, Mohammed Abbas fears his dream society is now under threat. When he first arrived in Stockholm as refugee from Iran in 1994, the vast Husby council estate where he settled was a mixture of locals and foreigners, a melting pot for what was supposed to be a harmonious, multi-racial paradise.

Two decades on, though, "white flight" has left only one in five of Husby's flats occupied by ethnic Swedes, and many of their immigrant replacements do not seem to share his view that a new life in Sweden is a dream come true. Last week, the neighbourhood erupted into rioting, sparking some of the fiercest urban unrest that Sweden has seen in decades, and a new debate about the success of racial integration.

"In the old days, the neighbourhood was more Swedish and life felt like a dream, but now there are just too many foreigners, and a new generation that has grown up here with just their own culture," he ["Ordinary Swede" Mohammed Abbas] said, gesturing towards the hooded youths milling around in Husby's pedestrianised shopping precinct.

"Also, in Sweden you cannot hit your children to discipline them, and this is a problem for foreign parents. The kids can feel they can cause whatever trouble they want, and the police don't even arrest any of them most of the time."

This weekend, after six consecutive nights of rioting, Mr Mohammed was not the only one questioning the Swedish social model's preference for the carrot over the stick. Many Swedes were left asking why a country that prides itself on a generous welfare state, liberal social attitudes and a welcoming attitude towards immigrants should ever have race riots in the first place. [Answer: Because it has a generous welfare state, liberal social attitudes and a welcoming attitude towards immigrants.]

The disturbances erupted in Husby last weekend, after police shot dead an elderly man brandishing a machete inside his house. Angered at what they saw as police heavyhandedness, youths torched cars and buildings and stoned police and firefighters. Police were then forced to draft in extra manpower from outside Stockholm as the trouble spread to other immigrant-dominated suburbs of the capital and towns such as Orebro in central Sweden, where 25 masked youths set fire to a school on Friday night.

Up too in smoke has gone the notion that egalitarian Sweden, which has largely avoided the global recession, might be immune from the social problems blighting less affluent parts of Europe.

Sweden's centre-right prime minister, Frederik Reinfeldt, blamed "hooligans" but also talked sympathatically of the difficult "transition period between different cultures". Meanwhile politicians from the Swedish Left, which ruled the country for most of the post-war period, blamed the trouble on social spending cuts introduced by Mr Reinfeldt, whose Moderate Party vowed to trim - though not slash - the welfare budget when he took office in 2006.

But amid the soulsearching last week, perhaps the most telling comment was the one from Kjell Lindgren, the spokesman for Stockholm Police. "We don't know why they are doing this," he said, when asked for a cause for the riots. "There is no answer to it."

Certainly, wandering around Husby last week, it was hard at first glance to see quite what the problem was. Built in the 1970s as part of the "Million Programme" that aimed to give affordable housing for all Swedes, the estate is one of dozens on Stockholm's outskirts that now house mainly immigrant populations, including large numbers from Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Iraq.

However, comparisons to the Paris "banlieus", or indeed riot-hit Tottenham or Salford, are limited. Between the rows of clean-looking housing blocks are well-tended flowerbeds and neatly- kept public gardens, and in the shopping precinct, where an ornamental fountain still bubbles away, there are bars, shops, and a smart cafe-bakery that would not look too out of place in an IKEA catalogue. At eight per cent, Husby's joblessness rate is three times the Swedish average, but only slightly higher than that in the UK.

Likewise, although the rioting has been large scale by Swedish standards, seen up close it has less of the ferocity of the 2011 disturbances in Britain. When The Sunday Telegraph visited Husby late on Wednesday night, the highlight was a hit-and-run arson attack on two parked cars. Police were hardly to be seen, and when they did arrive, it was purely to protect the firefighters dealing with the car blaze rather than make arrests.

Instead, teams of well-intentioned volunteers from local community groups and Islamic associations mingled with the crowds of excited onlookers, politely suggesting that they expressed their grievances peacefully.

Among a large group gathered on an overhead walkway was Mohammed Abdu, 27, whose family came to Sweden from Eritrea when he was aged three, and who now works as a security guard. While he condemned the violence as "hooliganism", he claimed that many Husby residents still suffered from discrimination from the police and employers. Besides, he added, living in such a prosperous, advanced country offered no real satisfaction for those so conspicuously at the bottom of the heap.

"It's true that the welfare system here is an example to the rest of the world, so if you fall here you do not fall all the way to the bottom," he said. "But people don't like being dependent on social welfare, and there is hidden racism."

Not so, argued Yusuf Carlos, 32, a construction worker from Palestine. "It is just kids causing this trouble, that is why the police are not doing much about it," he said. "Sweden is fair towards immigrants and it isn't hard to find work, or not before these riots anyway. The problem is that the Swedish people are angry now. They don't know why people here in Husby are doing this, only that they come from this neighbourhood."

Certainly, claims of racism upset many Swedes, who have little colonial history, and whose decision to admit large numbers of Third World migrants from the 1980s onwards was born of no particular political obligation, more just a very Swedish sense of humanitarian duty to the wider world. From the very start, the government also sought to avoid creating a German-style "guest worker" class by promoting immigrants' rights and introducing a plethora of programmes to promote racial integratkion.

Yet despite Swedish language education being offered free to all long-term immigrants, ghettos of foreigners have flourished in recent years. So too have Far Right parties challinging the political class's long-standing pro-immigration consensus, who now command up to 10 per cent of the vote and may increase their share in next year's elections.

"We have tried harder than any other European country to integrate, spending billions on a welfare system that is designed to help jobless immigrants and guarantee them a good quality of life," said [Kike] Marc Abramsson, leader of the ["Far-Right"] National Democrats Party. "Yet we have areas where there are ethnic groups that just don't identify with Swedish society. They see the police and even the fire brigade as part of the state, and they attack them. We have tried everything, anything, to improve things, but it hasn't worked. It's not about racism, it's just that multi-culturalism doesn't recognise how humans actually function."

Aje Carlbom, a Swedish academic and author of a critical study into Swedish immigration policy, added that despite the increasing appeal of Far Right parties, mainstream Swedish politicians were still reluctant to even ask the kind of questions that the likes of Mr Abramsson was already offering answers to.

"Anyone who wants to regulate immigration is immediately classified as a nationalist, which also implies a racist as well," he said. "It is still almost impossible to debate this question."

Still, some of Husby's younger generation argue that it is unreasonable of Swedes to expect them to be perennially "grateful" for taking them in, even from the dire circumstances in their homelands.

Among them is local youth worker Rami al Khamisi, 25, whose family escaped to Sweden from Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 1994, smuggling themselves first through Turkey [Muslim-Occupied Byzantium] and Russia and then across the Baltic in a fishing boat commandeered by a people smuggler. "I was six years old and the boat was packed with about 60 people," he said. "An old man died, and they threw him in the water because his body was smelling a lot."

That, though, he says, is his only real memory of the hardships of his early life, and as such, he finds it hard to be as thankful as his parents still are to his adopted homeland. "They compare it to Baghdad or Somalia," he said. "But we younger immigrants only really know Sweden, and we just compare our situation to the one around us."

With Stockholm still burning this weekend, though, that may be asking for just a little too much understanding - even in compassionate, generous Sweden.

"WEST" IS FIGHTING FOR "ORDINARY" MUZZIES

I wonder if Lee Rigby was ever deployed to Bosnia or Kosovo as one of the "Western troops...tasked with protecting the Muslim population from the Serbs’ genocidal designs”:

[See: "The West is fighting on behalf of ordinary Muslims – and winning", by Con Coughlin, The Telegraph, 24 May 2013]

The West is fighting on behalf of ordinary Muslims – and winning

Our enemies are utterly misguided in their denunciation of Britain’s interventions overseas

By Con Coughlin, The Daily Telegraph, 24 May 2013

There will inevitably be those who have some sympathy with the justification given by Michael Adebolajo for his slaughter of a British soldier on a south London street on Wednesday afternoon. “The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers,” was his illiterate pronouncement, made to the mobile phone of a passing member of the public as he waited for the police to arrive, his blood-stained hands still grasping the machete he had used to murder Drummer Lee Rigby.

While Muslims of a more moderate temperament have been quick to condemn the Woolwich atrocity, those of a more radical persuasion, such as Anjem Choudary, the former head of the banned Islamist organisation al-Muhajiroun, seem to have no difficulty agreeing with Adebolajo’s reasoning. The murder of Drummer Rigby, Mr Choudary proclaimed from the sanctuary of a BBC television studio this week, was due to the “presence of British forces in Muslim countries”.

These sentiments were also supported by Omar Bakri Mohammed, another veteran of London’s thriving Islamist scene. From exile in northern Lebanon, where the radical preacher has settled since his banishment from Britain, Bakri Mohammed gave a newspaper interview in which he praised Adebolajo’s “courage” in carrying out the murder. “I saw the film and we could see that he was being very courageous,” the cleric was quoted as saying. “Under Islam this can be justified – he was not targeting civilians, he was taking on a military man in an operation. To people around here [in the Middle East], he is a hero.”

It is difficult to see what, precisely, is “courageous” about butchering an unarmed British soldier in cold blood as he tries to make his way back to his barracks. If anyone serving in the British Forces were to commit a similar act of savagery, they would quickly find themselves facing a court-martial and, if convicted, a lengthy prison sentence. Five Royal Marines, for example, are facing murder charges over the death of an insurgent in Afghanistan in 2011.

But then, Islamist extremists have never played by the same rules that we seek to uphold in the West. Back in 2007, when British security officials disrupted an al-Qaeda plot in Birmingham to kidnap, torture and behead a British Muslim serving in the Army and broadcast his murder on the internet, Bakri Mohammed was secretly recorded urging his followers to “use the sword and remove the head of the enemy”.

Acts of terrorism such as this week’s appalling scenes in south London are, therefore, for the likes of Choudary and Bakri Mohammed, regarded as a legitimate means of waging war against the West and all that it stands for. And in seeking to justify their barbarous conduct, they have proved themselves to be highly skilful at blaming law-abiding countries such as Britain, America and France for their actions. Just like Adebolajo, these radical Islamist preachers – who, by all accounts, helped to indoctrinate him and his accomplice in the first place – argue that they are obliged to act in this way because, in their view, the West is at war with radical Islam. In fact, the opposite is the case: radical Islam is at war with the West.

During the past decade, when British and American forces have found themselves embroiled in long and bitter conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, I doubt there has been a single politician on either side of the Atlantic who has wanted our brave young men and women to remain in these dangerous, hostile environments a day longer than was absolutely necessary.

Indeed, I suspect many of them were reluctant to deploy our forces in the first place, particularly when it came to Iraq. And if you look back at the West’s military involvement in the Muslim world since the early 1990s, it could be argued that, for the most part, Western forces have been fighting to protect Muslim interests, not to violate them.

The first Gulf War in 1991 was fought to liberate Kuwait’s Muslim population after the sheikhdom’s illegal occupation by Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, while the subsequent conflict in 2003 was designed to liberate the long-suffering Iraqi people – Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims alike – from his brutal repression. In between these conflicts, Western troops sent to Bosnia in the mid-1990s were tasked with protecting the Muslim population from the Serbs’ genocidal designs, while our more recent involvement in Afghanistan, where Drummer Rigby had served a tour of duty, has been undertaken to help the country’s predominantly Muslim population to rebuild the country after three decades of almost incessant conflict.

For, contrary to the anti-Western propaganda propagated by radical clerics like Choudary and Bakri Mohammed, the 444 British soldiers who have so far been killed in Afghanistan have sacrificed their lives trying to make the country a better place for ordinary Afghans, rather than seeking to subjugate them. Indeed, when you examine the overall casualty rate in that benighted country, the Taliban are responsible for the deaths of many more Afghan civilians than have died as a result of the military action taken by Nato forces.

But this is not the narrative you will hear from Islamist militants who, rather than concede that the West is actively seeking to improve the lot of ordinary Muslims, prefer to portray us as invaders, as neo-colonialist proselytisers attempting to impose alien values on the oppressed masses.

The real reason, of course, that radical Muslims violently oppose these well-intentioned efforts is that they interfere with their attempts to impose their own brand of uncompromising Islamist ideology.
Before coalition forces overthrew the Taliban government in Afghanistan, Islamist hardliners had subjected the Afghan population to a reign of terror equal to the worst excesses of the French Revolution. The only entertainment on offer at the local sports stadium in Kabul during that period was the regular executions that took place after Friday prayers. Not surprisingly, few Afghans want to see the Taliban return, but that has not prevented the movement from seeking to regain power by waging an indiscriminate campaign of violence in which Afghan civilians are as likely to die as British soldiers.
Indeed, the reason our forces deployed to Afghanistan in the first place, in 2001, was because the Taliban had made the error of providing al-Qaeda terrorists with a safe haven from which to launch attacks against the West. And so long as Islamist militants – be they based in Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya or Mali – are working on their vile schemes to wreak havoc in our cities, the West has no choice but to defend itself, even it means killing the occasional Islamist militant, such as Anwar al-Awlaki, the US-born cleric dispatched by a US drone strike two years ago.

Because of the success the West has enjoyed in disrupting al-Qaeda’s terror network, the organisation has been thwarted in its efforts to carry out spectacular operations on the scale of the September 11 attacks, or the July 7 bombings in London. As a result, Awlaki urged his followers to carry out their own, home-grown attacks. It might be scant consolation to the friends and relatives of Drummer Rigby, but it shows the West is winning the war against radical Islam when its supporters have to resort to such desperate measures as murdering a defenceless British soldier



[Note: If you're on the DT website and click a link to another story on the same site, the browser goes there via "outbrain.network.com", and my computer, at least, slows down and sometimes freezes in the process.]

WAR DECLARATIONS

I Declare War

Country: Canada

Rating: PG. Not recommended for young children, violence, offensive language

Director: Jason Lapeyre
Writer: Jason Lapeyre


Starring: Siam Yu, Gage Munroe, Michael Friend, Aidan Gouveia, Mackenzie Munro, Alex Cardillo, Dyson Fyke, Spencer Howes, Andy Reid, Kolton Stewart, Richard Nguyen, Eric Hanson, Alex Wall

Studio: Drafthouse Films

Synopsis: A group of 13-year-old friends play an innocent game of Capture the Flag in the neighborhood woods, arming themselves with nothing more than sticks, their imagination and a simple set of rules. One afternoon the game takes on a more serious tone and the quest for victory pushes the boundaries of friendship, giving the would-be warriors a glimpse of the darker side of human nature as their imaginations take them beyond the rules of the game and into an adventure where fantasy blurs with reality.

Scanned from a paper text (hence the numerous typos):

Mickey Mouse and the Nazis: The Use of Animated Cartoons as Propaganda During World War II

By Jason Lapeyre


A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts

Graduate Program in Film and Television

York University, North York, Ontario, May 2000

Abstract

During World War II, the governments of both the United States and Germany heavily regulated the production and distribution of popular films. One of the outcornes of this regulation was the production of animated cartoons as propaganda by both nations, due to the popularity of the medium during the war years, The thesis attempts to explain how this unique historical moment, during which cartoons were used as war propaganda by Nazi Germany and the United States, came about. The historical development of the relationship between state and film industry before and during the war is investigated, with particular attention paid to the place of animated cartoons within this relationship. Both Hollywood and the large production companies in Germany such as Ufa and Tobis-Klangfilm were-intent on maintaining the monopolistic practices they had become accustomed to, and cooperated with government agencies in return for being allowed to dominate the industry. Animated cartoons were hugely popular during the late 1930s and 1940s, and the work of Walt Disney was popular worldwide. Disney's studio was recruited by the American govemment to produce training films for the military, and funded by the Coordinator for Intra-American Affairs to produce propaganda films to turn South Arnericans against Nazi Gerrnany. In 1943, 94% of the Disney studio's output was for government contracts. In Germany, Joseph Goebbels established a production company, Deutsche Zeichenf ilm GmbH, to produce German animated cartoons in the style of Walt Disney. The venture was a failure, with only one short produced in the company's three-year history, although other production companies in Germany produced several cartoons, Textual analysis of the American and German cartoons is used to show how both sides used propaganda cartoons partially as escapism for audiences and partially to enact wartime policy regarding attitudes towards the enerny, The thesis concludes that looking at the similarities between the U.S. and Germany regarding the production of wartime propaganda cartoons complicates the straightforward morality surrounding the history of the Second World War.

Acknowledgment

Janine Mar chessault, for guidance; Irmgard Steinisch für deutsche Geschichte; Lynne Hunter, for translating Nazi cartoons; Ron Cunnane, for the idea; all of the authors whose work I amalgamated into rny argument. Most of all, thank you to Lorraine Hardie, for kindness and for being real.

Table of Contents

Introduction ... 1
Chapter One: The Culture Indus try Goes to War ... 10
Chapter Two: The 'Special Valuer of Entertainment ... 47
Chapter Three: Rabbits and Ducks ... 78
Chapter Four: Foxes and Rhinoceroses ... 118
Conclusion ... 154
Bibliography ... 167

List of Illustrations

Page 01: Mickey Mouse Gas Mask issued by the Sun Rubber Company

Page 10: Mickey Mouse comic strip produced by the Walt Disney studio during World War II

Page 47: Animation cell from the Walt Disney short Der Fuhrer's Face starring Donald Duck (Academy Award 1943 - Best Animated Short)

Page 78: Animation ce1 £rom an animated cartoon produced by the Walt Disney studio for the Canadian government before American involvement in World War II

Page 118: Animation ce1 £rom the Dutch animated cartoon Van den vos Reynaerde depicting the character Jodocus the Rhinoceros

Page 154: Photograph of a pocket watch found in the aftermath of the Hiroshima bombing, stopped at the exact time of the bomb's detonation (8:15 a.m. )

Introduction

One of the most interesting uses of a Disney
character during World War II was the creation of a
Mickey Mouse gas mask by the Sun Rubber Company of
Barberton, Ohio. This was not a toy but a real
protective mask made under the auspices of the
Army's Chemical Warfare Division and the Disney
Studio and designed by Bernard McDermott of Sun
Rubber . The intention, said a company spokesman,
"was an attempt to lessen the fear of a gas attack
for children by taking the conventional, gruesome
looking gas mask and turning it into something
fun.

This thesis was triggered by an article in the Sunday Times
of London; an article that turned out to be untrue. Under
the headline "Nazis stole Disney tricks for anti-Jewish
cartoonsw, Michael Woodhead reported that German film
historians searching the archives of the former East German
Republic had uncovered "more than 100" cartoons produced by
the Nazis that "used techniques copied from the works of
Walt Disney." I was unable to confirm this story with
either the ombudsman of the Times or Woodhead himself
(neither of whom would retum my email) , none of the
scholars or archivists I spoke with over the course of
researching this thesis had heard of this discovery, I was
unable to contact any of the people mentioned in the
article, and finally subsequent research established that
such a volume of Nazi animation simply could not have been
made. It was a bad start.

However, Woodhead was right about a few things, even if
most of his facts were questionable. First of all, the
Nazis did make cartoons. And secondly, those cartoons were
certainly influenced by the work of Walt Disney - as most
animation of the time was. This kernel of accuracy in the
article led me dom a path of research that revealed that
animated cartoons were produced during World War II with the
approval of the National Socialist party, and that those
cartoons sought to further the political and cultural aims
of the party. Furthermore, 1 knew £rom my own lifelong
interest in animation that Arnerican animated cartoons £rom
World War II were also used as propaganda for the Roosevelt
administration's war aims- This unlikely similarity between
the United States and Germany provided the foundation for a
comparative analysis of the relationship between govexnment
and film industry during World War II in Germany and the
United States, and the cartoons produced in each country for
the purposes of propaganda.

AS mentioned, one of the reasons for undertaking this
thesis is my own lifelong interest in and love of animated
cartoons, but another consideration was the disturbing gap
in film studies regarding animated films. Disturbing
because of the importance of animation to film history:
£rom a technological point of view, cartoons were the first
films to achieve perfect frame-by-frame sound
synchronization (Steamboat Willie, Walt Disney, 1928 - the
technique is still referred to as "mickey-mousing") and the
first to use three-colour Technicolor (Flowers and Trees,
Walt Disney, 1932 and The Three Little Pigs, Walt Disney,
1933) 3. Also, the use of digital technology in contemporary
filmaking was pioneered by cornputer animators such as John
Lasseter (Toy Story, 1995). From a cultural point of view,
cartoons were a staple feature of the film bill along with
newsreels and coming attractions £rom the mid-thirties until
the mid-sixties, and their immensely popular humour was
based on the contemporary social reality of its audience,
making them a valuable historical record. Finally, from an
artistic point of view, Giannalberto Bendazzi has argued
that the cinematic sensibilities of Tex Avery (A Wild Hare,
1940; Red Hot Riding Hood, 194) are second only to those of
Buster Keaton, and [KIKE] Sergei Eisenstein has written that the films of Walt Disney are "the greatest contribution by the American people to art", and compared them to the sermons
given by St. Francis of Assisi.5 Despite these
achievements, animation has been ghettoized by history as
children's entertainment, and by film history as trivial.
By writing about how two of the most economically powerful
participants in World War 11 used cartoons as propaganda, I
hope to fill in some of the gaps in film history concerning
animated cartoons.

Methodology

Ian Kershaw mites that the primary task of a historian is

6

to explain the past. The past event 1 am attempting to
explain here, an event 1 feel requires explanation, is the
moment at which two governments decided that it was a good
idea to use animated cartoons as propaganda on their people.
This explanation/thesis is divided into two halves: the
first half is an historical investigation into the
relationship between the government and the film industry in
both the U-S. and Germany in the years leading up to and
including World War II, and what role animated cartoons
played in that relationship- By looking at how audiences
saw cartoons, how the industry saw audiences, and how the
government sàw the industry during these years, 1 hope to
provide an explanation of how such a decision came about.
The second half of this explanation is a textual
analysis of the cartoons themselves, and a cornparison
between the psopaganda present in the cartoon narratives and
the wartime policy of the government that allowed its
popular distribution during wartime. This part of the
thesis attempts to explain how these governments used
animation as propaganda, and what goals they sought to
accomplish through cartoons. The textual analysis within is
based primarily on Steve Neale's 1977 Screen article
"Propagandau, which outlines two main characteristics that
make a film propagandistic rather than just persuasive. The
first is a film's effort to create either sympathy or
hostility in an audience for specific ideas presented in the
film. The second is the attempt by the film to mark the
events psesented in the film as having a consequence in the
real world, thus provoking the audience to respond to the
real equivalent of what they have just watched. This
analysis attempts to explain how certain unique features of
animated cartoons were used to address specific concerns of
the governments that recruited them.

Materials

Linda Schulte-Sasse mites:
Nazi cinema drives to an extreme the problem of how
to distinguish propaganda f rom entertainment,
because the German film industry was as once heavily
regulated and heavily profit-oriented.'

The problem of what constitutes the ciifference between
entertainment and propaganda is partially resolved by using
the distinctions provided by Neale above. As part of this
explanation, however, 1 want to establish that it is exactly
the blurriness of this line that was taken advantage O£ by
the governments who recruited popular film as propaganda.

The cartoons selected for analysis were chosen because they
represented popular works of art using established icocs
intended for viewing by large numbers of people. Bugs
Bunny, Daffy Duck and Popeye the Sailor appear respectively
in Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips, Daffy the Commmando, and You 'xe
a Sap, Mr, Jap, three of the films looked at in the chapter
on American animated propaganda. Since the German £ilm
industry lacked an established "cartoon star system", there
are no farnous characters at the heart of their cartoon
propaganda, but nevertheless the films are light,
entertaining and funny, airned at mainstream German tastes.

These are the people that the Nazis and the Arnericans were
trying to address with wartime propaganda: the people who
went to movie theatres twice a week or more to get their
information about the war in the absence of television.
During the war years, these figures are astronomically high:
90 million attending per week in the U-S-, 20 million per
week in Germany. H011ywood enj oyed the most profitable
four years in its existence, and theatres were open 24 hours
a day to accommodate war-industry shift workers.

Governments knew at least one thing fox certain during the
war - where the people were. If they wanted information
dissednated to the public, movie theatres were the surest
method before the invasion of television, The films chosen
here are typical examples of the films that would have been
seen in theatres during the war, entertaining and
propagandising at the same time -

Hypothesis

The goal of this thesis is to explain the past, but also to
question the present. The 'high school history' version of
World War 11 presents a black and white historical event in
which evil men fought good men and the latter triumphed-
"The century's greatest force of evil, the Nazi regime of
Adolf Hitler", write Peter Jemings and Todd Brewster in
their account of the 20th century, The ~entury.~ The book
accords five pages of text, including a full page eyewitness
account, to the horrors of the Final Solution, but only one
line to the internent of Japanese-Americans in California,
Oregon and Washington during the war. Canadian high school
textbooks are no better- They continually identify the
entire country during this period with Adolf Hitler and use
hyperbole to distance Germany £rom Canada, despite our own
internent of Japanese Canadians during the war". Phrases

  • The worst example of deliberate inhumanity in the history of the human race. 1
  • the greatest demagogue in history. 2
  • a depth of hatred that would drive him to greater extremes than any other racist in history 3
  • Himmler, a Nazi fanatic behind thick eyeglasses and bland features, was at once a racist and a supreme organizer. 4


serve only to distance us from the past and make it seem
alien, not like us. Such historical writing fails Kershaw's
challenge; rather than explsining the past, it reduces
history to something easily comprehended-
One of the goals of this thesis is to complicate this
account by pointing out some of the similarities between the
U-S- and Germany during the war - some of which are
disturbing. The danger in representing Nazi Germany as a
country populated by evil footsoldiers is that the result of
this conception of the Nazis works to keep the idea of
Nazism at armrs length, as something that can be easily
identified, understood, and disposed of. By not fully
understanding the problem and its causes, the likelihood of
its re-emergence increases. By very slightly reducing the
cornfortable distance between 'us" and "the Nazis", we can
more effectively guard against the tendencies in our own
culture that also existed in Germany in 1933.

Footnotes
Shzrle, p. 87
2
Woodhead, p. 1
Cook, p. 258
beendazzi, p. 96
Eisenstein, pp. 1-2
6
Kershaw, p. 4
Schulte-Sasse, p- 4
8
Cook, p. 443; Spiker, p- 197
Jennings, Brewster, P. x
10
Newman & Grenier, p- 274
11
Christopher & Wittet, p. 303
l2 Netman & Grenier,, p. 275
13
ibid
l4 Newman & Grenier, p- 279

The Culture Industry Goes to War

Introduction

[KIKE] Theodor Adorno and [KIKE] Max Horkheimer argued in 1947 that rnass
culture in the United States was essentially the same as
that in Gemany under the National Socialists.' The two
theorists were in a unique historical position to make such
a judgment. Having lived and practiced cultural criticism
in Germany until 1934, they witnessed the introduction of
new f orms of rnass media, the manipulation of these forms by
the National Socialists, and the transfamation of the
German people into an unprecedented political mass under
fascism. Fleeing Nazism after Hitler's rise to power and
eventually relocating to New York in -193 8, they stepped up
their attack on the forces of müss culture that they
perceived to be operating in equal force in the U.S. 2
In their famous essay "The Culture Industry:
Enlightenrnent as Mass Deceptiontr, their descriptions of the
operation of American popular culture sound like attacks on
a fascist social order:
In the culture industry the individual is an
illusion not merely because of the standaxdization
of the means of production. He is tolerated only so
long as his complete identification with the
generality is ~nqyestioned.~
The disappearance of individuality is a consistent theme in
their writing about popular films, radio and magazines,
which they perceive as a monolithic entity that seeks to
restrict the freedom of its audience: Adorno mites that
'' the culture indus try intentionally integrates its
consumers £rom &oven4 and in Dialectic of Enlightenment
films, radio and magazines make up a system which is
uniform as a whole and in every part.,[they] are one
in their enthusiastic obedience to the rhythm of the
iron systen~.~
To summarize, for Adorno and Horkheimer popular culture was
nothing more or less than the indoctrination of the masses
by those in control of the means of production:
The cinema makes propaganda for the cultural combine
as a whole ...[ radio] collects no fees frorn the public,
and so has acquired the illusory form of
disinterested, unbiased authority which suits
Fascism admirably.=
In this
authors
quote lies the essential association that the
are operating £rom - that the increase in the
rationalization of industrial production in the United
States, whether it be of cars, clothes, or in this case
entertainment, must lead towards a specific goal, a goal
which [KIKE] Adorno and [KIKE] Horkheimer felt that they had already seen
achieved in Nazi Gemany- [KIKE] J.M. Bernstein supports this
interpretation of the [KIKE] Frankfurt Schoolrs critique of the
rationalization of the entertainment industry:
While Adorno nowhere identifies the culture industry
with the political triumph of fascism, he does imply
that the culture industry' s effective integration of
society marks an equivalent triumph of repressive
unification in liberal democratic states to that
which was achieved politically under fa~cisrn-~
Adomo and Horkheimer thus perceived the power that popular
culture exerted over its consumers, and the relations of
power that governed the production of that culture.
This essay does not argue that the United States was a
fascist society, nor does it argue that the United States
under Roosevelt was comparable to Hitler's Germany. The
point to be made with Adorno and Horkheimer's observations
is their recognition of the fundamentally political
relationship between those in power and the media with
regard to the population being both govemed and
entertained: the "liberal culture industry" is a myth.
Contrary to the judgments made by Adomo, however, this
relationship is neither solely fascist nor solely
democratic in character, since it operated at equal levels
of importance in both the U-S. and Germany-
This study concerns the actual practice of the
political relationship between the state and the
entertainment industry in both nations during the
propaganda-rich Second World War- By looking at the
political situation of the U.S. during the war, how that
situation changed the relationship between the government
and the entertainment industry, and the changes made to the
content of wartime entertainment as a result of this
relationship, the political nature of popular culture
production becomes apparent. The regulation of filmmaking
by the government and the changing of content to ref lect
U-S- wartime policy operated at every level in the £ilm
industry, £rom feature films, to newsreels, al1 the way
dom to cartoons.
Pol i ti cs Ts Okay, But What We Really Want To Do 1s Direct
The United States of£icially entered World War 11 on
December 7, 1941, one hour after the American Pacific fleet
was bombed at Pearl Harbour by the LJapanese8. Exactly one
day after the official declaration of war, the U-S.
government offered its first film industry contract to the
Walt Disney studio to produce training films for the
military. 9
The groundwork for the cooperation between the
government and the entertainment industry regarding the
European war had been laid more than a year and a half
before this contract was offered. On June 5, 1940,
industry representatives including D.W. Griffith formed the
Motion Picture Cornittee Cooperating for National Defence
(MPCCND) with the support of Palmer Hoyt, later to become
the chief of domestic operations for the Office of War
Information- 'O The MPCCND would later become the War
Activities Committee (WAC), the industry body through which
government films would be commissioned. Although the early
formation of this cornmittee seems incongruous with the mood
of the times, consider that popular opinion conceming the
war was in a state of flux in the U.S. in 1940, with
isolationisrn slowly giving way to anti-Nazi sentiments and
concrete material support for Britain after the fa11 of
France." A debate was underway both in Congress and in
public concerning America's wartime position, and whether
the country should enter the war or remain in what
contemporaries called an 'aid-short-of-war" position, under
which the U. S. would provide f inancial aid and equipment to
Britainrs war effort- Looking at the historical details of
this deliberation, it becomes apparent that the formation
of the embryonic WAC a year and a half before the
declaration of wzr is not as inconsistent as it seems.
Even without direct government intervention, Hollywood
studios were involving politics in their storytelling as
early as 1939. Warner Bros. gambled that there was enough
public antagonism towards the Nazis to fil1 movie theatres,
and released Confessions of a Nazi Spy ([KIKE] Anatole Litvak) on
April 28, 1939, more than two years before the U.S.
declared war .12 No doubt this early anti-Nazi effort was
also inspired by the high concentration of Jews in powerful
Hollywood positions and in the Warner Bros . studio, which
consistently led the way in anti-Nazi filmmaking. l3 The
release of Sergeant York (Howard Hawks) by the studio in
July of 1941, a sincere and compelling argument against
isolationism at a crucial time of national indecision, is a
clear indication of Warner Bros ' efforts and Hollywoodr s
willingness to get involved wîth politics-
The material results of this pro-involvement mood in
America soon materialized. As mentioned, sympathy for the
European victims O£ the Nazis rose sharply with the fa11 of
France in May of 1940, and the subsequent passing of the
Lend/Lease Act by Roosevelt in March of the following year,
which provided for the British and the Russians to purchase
military equipment £rom the U.S. on credit, was for al1
intents and purposes a U-S. engagement with the Nazis on
paper: the exact wording of the Act is that it is "An Act
to Promote the Defense of the United States" -
Consequently, both Hollywood and the Arnerican govemment
were at some degree of engagement with the Axis powexs in
June of 1940, making the formation of the MPCCND far more
understandable, and laying the groundwork for further
Hollywood/government cooperation.
The MPCCND produced defense-related shorts and
trailers for army recruitrnent , including Power for De£ ense
(commissioned by the Tennessee Valley Authority, Feb.
1941). Anny in Overalls (Civiliari Conservation Corps, June
1941) and Bomber (Office of Emergency Management, October
1941) .14 With the actual production of films for the
government already underway in 1941, the formalization of
this relationship with Hollywood would be irnmediate with
the begiming of direct American involvement in the war.
Three Lines of Defense: Warti xne Censorshig of Hollywood
The U-S- government's interest in Hollywood revolved around
one powerful statistic: during the war years, an estimated
90 million Americans went to the movies every week- 15
American politicians knew that information concerning the
war distributed via movie theatres would reach a guaranteed
audience. What they wanted was a guarantee that these
audiences would get the right information, ie. information
that corresponded to their war agenda. This guarantee took
the form of three bodies that exercised influence over the
content of Hollywood films during this period, one self-
appointed by the indus try themselves and two government-
based organizations.
The first of these censoring bodies was the Production
Code Ad-nistration, commonly known as the Hays Office,
administered by Joseph 1, Breen. This was a voluntary
system of self-regulation that the irzdustry had placed on
itself after the notoriously decadent reputation Hollywood
had garnered in the early 30s, culminating with the Fatty
Arbuckle murder scandal.16 The official mandate of the Hays
Office was concemed with the moral consequences of a film
rather than the patriotic, however with the outbreak of war
the Code became only one of several regulatory bodies
affecting the content of motion pictures- Breen himself
stated that the war would not affect the decisions made by
his office, pledging to continue the pre-war practice O£
requiring producers to supply £ive copies of each script to
the Secretary of War or Navy together with a "specific
description of military locations, equipment, personnel or
operations for filming of which permission is ~ought."'~ In
this way, the U, S - Defense Department had a system of
control over war-related films even before their official
entry into the war-
Il days after Pearl Harbour, Roosevelt officially
drafted Hollywood by appointing a man named Lowell Mellett
to the position of Coordinator of Government Films. Six
months later, Roosevelt created the Office of War
Information (OWI) , charged with the gathering of "al1
varied government press and information services under one
leadership". l8 The man in charge of the OWI was Elmer
Davis, and he renamed Mellett ' s office to the Bureau of
Motion Pictures (BMP), effectively putting a civilian in
the position of liaison between the government and
Hollywood. This was the second regulatory body affecting
Hollywood during the war, and the one responsible for the
most actual change in the content of wartime films. Eariy
on, the BMP would in fact produce information shorts and
war bulletins itself, but in 1943 the Republican Congress,
which felt that the Bureau was as pro-FDR as it was ariti-
Axis, financially gutted it. Reduced to advisory status,
Hollywood became responsible for al1 wartime film
production and the BMPrs usual protoc01 involved requesting
a preliminary review of al1 war-related films, which it
would then recommend cuts for, and whose advice was almost
always followed. In addition, the BMP distributed a fifty-
page loose-leaf brochure called "Government Information
Manual for the Motion Picture Industry", a portion of which
had specific suggestions £rom the OWI for full length
f eatures . 19
The final body that had the power to regulate movie
content during the war was the War Department's OfEice of
Censorship (OC), which was authorized by the American 1917
Espionage Law, and which had a mandate of clearing incoming
foreign films and approving outgoing domestic films for
foreign export. The OC only ever asked one question with
regards to the content of a film: 'Will this rnaterial be
of value to the enemy?" If they felt it wasn't, then the
film could be exported to any of the remaining European
countries that were still allowed to show Hollywood films,
and which still comprised a significant chunk of
Hollywoodrs market. This relationship illustrates an
explanation for Hollywoodr s willingness to cooperate with
the governent regarding the content of their films: the
sooner the European continent was freed of the scourge of
Nazism, the sooner their markets would open up again and
the higher their revenue wodd be.
Thomas Doherty points out that these three bodies
correspond to three centres of authority in wartime
America: morality (the PCA), wartime policy (the BMP) and
militas. security (the OC) .20 Doherty characterizes the
nature of government intervention in the industry as
ambiguous and sometimes difficult to locate. His
hypothesis regarding this ambiguity is that it may have
been intentional, and that somewhat undefined centres of
power suited the purposes of both the industry and the
government. The entertainment industry reluctantly
tolerated government interference in their business, but
was able on occasion to negotiate these indeterminate
authority centres and bend the rules. The government, on
the other hand, needed Hollywood to disserninate information
but had no technical or business grasp of the industry and
its workings, and was probably more cornfortable making
generalizations about content rather than specific
requests. Despite these nebulous exertions of power on
both sides of the relationship, the nation's films were
regulated alrnost as tightly as Germany's , whether directly
or indirectly, and without the benefit of legislated
dictatorial government control.
The Econodcs of Voluntary Censorshig
The American film industry had very specific reasons £or
CO-operating with the government during wartime- The
prospect of losing a war to Fascists undoubtedly
contributed to a patriotic zeal for victory, but in
addition to this self -preservation instinct were economic
factors. Three extenuating circumstances complicate the
issue of industry CO-operation: the Selective Service Act,
the Justice Department ' s anti-trust investigation, and the
closure of European markets to Hollywood films with the
progression of the war.
David Cook points out that the Selective Service Act
ruled in 1942 that the movies were an "essential industry"
whose equipment and materials were subject to price
controls and whose personnel could not be drafted, although
this rnove was heavily criticized by the public. *' The more
convincing Hollywoodrs on-screen war, the less likely that
industry personnel would be to actually go to war.
Secondly, the Justice Department had begun its antitrust
suit against the studios before American involvement in the
war, but voluntarily suspended this investigation while
Hollywood continued to produce war films. It did not
resume its case until August of 1944, when victory in
Europe was clearly in sight. This might be viewed as
tantamount to blackmailing the studios into cooperating -
Finally, the most economically damaging side effect of the
war for Hollywood was its loss of an estimated one-third to
one-half of al1 its traditional revenues as markets closed
one by one with the advance of Hitler's was machine through
Europe- The sooner the war ended in favour of the U.S.,
the sooner Hollywood films could once again collect revenue
in those markets. One of the government's strategies for
helping the industry offset these losses was their
encouragement of southward expansion to South America.
Walt Disney played a fundamental role in this expansion,
and the specifics of this program will be outlined below in
the section dealing with the Disney studios.
Unsurprisingly, it would appear that the link between
government and film industry during wartime was about the
profit motive as much as genuine patriotism. This was not
a uniquely American condition, however - we shall see that
the German film industry's cooperation is based on similar
financial pretences.

Training and Entertaining

The material results of the affiliation between the White
House and the studios appeared at every level of
production, £rom features to 8 rnovies to newsreels to, of
course, cartoons. The results had two manifestations ,
which can be categorized as either (a) entertainment or (b)
non-entertainment. The first result was effected by the
total incorporation of World War II into the "Hollywood
universe" - the fictional world populated only by movie
stars was suddenly at war, and al1 the stars felt the same:
the Nazi menace had to go, and the American patriot was the
man for the job, The second group of films was represented
by the wholesale production of films for the government by
Hollywood, whether they be documentaries, training films
(exemplified by the Disney studio), recruiting films, or
advertisernents for war bonds. The production of short
animated films by the studios appeared in both of these
groups, in the form of theatrical cartoons, and as training
films, Their incorporation of the war into the universe of
Donald Duck and Popeye was as complete as that of any other
Hollywood star.

Features

The first category of wartime films, those intended for
entertainment, were primarily represented by the feature
film, the main product rolling off the line at the Dream
Factory. This category has been the focus of most of the
film scholarship surrounding Hollywood during wartime. The
general consensus of the studies conducted on these films
is that feature filmaking absolutely reflected American
government policy during wartime as a result of the various
censorship bodies put into place by both the government and
the i nd~st ry. ~~ One such book, which in its very title
supports this argument, is Clayton R- Koppes and Gregory D
Black's Hollywood Goes to War : How Politics, Profits and
Propaganda Shaped World War II Movies. The authors argue
that
During the war the government, convinced that movies
had extraordina- power to mobilize public opinion
for war, carried out an intensive, unprecedented
effort to mold the content of Hollywood feature
films, [and] was able to exercise a considerable
in£ luence over the content of wartime Hollywood
movies . 23
From Oscar wi mers to combat films to B-movies, every
war-related fi l m released by the big £ive or little three
studios went through one of the censorship boards and came
out the other side a fervent argument for American victory.
No filmrnaker was too busy to be assigned a war film that
promoted the Allied cause, and the more popular their work,
the better. The list of directors recruited included
Howard Hawks (Sergeant York, 1941; Ai r Force, 1943) ,
Michael Curtiz (Casablanca, 1942 - Best Picture; Yankee
Doodle Dandy, 1942) , Wi l l i a m Wyl er (Mrs. Mi ni ver, 1942 -
Best Picture; The Best Years of Our Lives, 1946 - Best
Picture) and even Alfred Hitchcock (Lifeboat, 1944) . The
patriotism extended beyond just the f eature and a£ f ected
rnost aspects of film-going culture, for example the film
bill now included a pitch for bonds after the newsreel,
which could be purchased right in the lobby of the theatre,
thus reaching 90 million potential bond customers every
week -

Documentaries

The second category of government-influenced films, non-
entertainment films, includes documentary films made about
the American involvement- The primary example of
documentary f ilmmaking undertaken by the government is the
MThy We Fight (1941-45) series, seven documentaries
commissioned by the War Department f rom Frank Capra, which
sought to explain the motives for America's entry into the
war. In his book An Historical and Descriptive Analysis of
the Why We Fight Series, Thomas Bohn contends that the
eight thernatic concerns of the films include

  • the U.S. citizen as common man, as opposed to Nazi
  • supermen
  • religion as the precursor to the equality of all men,
  • Nazi prohibition of religion
  • children as 'what we're fighting for", atrocities by Nazis against same
  • historical tradition of freedom-fighting in U.S. and world conquest in Germany
  • U.S. atternpts to avoid the war; war was imposed on U.S.
  • Personification of the enemy as their leaders, focusing aggression on dictators
  • Dehumanization of the enemy as a "war machine"
  • U.S. buying time for the world; Allies fighting for 'freedom everywhere'


24

Originally, the films were only to be shown to the
military, but were deemed to be so effective by the OWI
that some were released into theatres. Clearly, the films
were consciously planned as indoctrination: they were made
to support the war effort and to raise morale regarding the
necessity, and probability, of Arnerican victory. Other
notable examples of wartime documentary include John Ford's
The Battle of Midway (1942) and December 7'" (1943). Li ke
his feature war efforts such as The Long Voyage Home (1940)
and They Were Ewendable (1945) , the films emphasized the
necessity of winning the war by showing the horror that it
inflicted on the men who fought it.
Cartoons
The other group of entertainment films heavily influenced
by the government-industry association is the subject of
this essay: theatrical cartoons. There were over 500
cartoons released theatrically in the U-S. between January
lSt, 1939 and September 3oth, 1945, and according to Michael
Shull and Michael Wilt, over one quarter of these contained
references to the war. 2s The volume should not be
surprising: al1 of the big £ive studios (MGM, Paramount,
Warner Bros., 2oth Century Fox and RKO) and two of the three
minors (Universal and Columbia) had animation departments
responsible for producing seven minute animated films to
accornpany their features, ideally a new cartoon for every
feature. These entertainment cartoons were no exception to
the censorship process, and it is important to note that
their intended audience was adults, not children. However,
they were thought of less seriously than feature films,
populated as they were by talking animals, and Doherty
believes that this triviality granted them a certain
license in representing the war. Wliereas the government
required Hollywood features to "properly direct" their
anger towards the military dictatorships that governed the
Axis nations, cartoons could openly mock and ridicule
Hitler and Hirohito. In Doherty's words, the cartoons were
"allowed a level of narrative engagement that features were
denied. "26
Training Films
Cartoons also played a part in the non-entertainment sphere
of goverment-reg-ulated films. A large number of the films
made for the government by ~ollywood were never intended to
be viewed by the public, but rather were for information
dissemination amongst troops. This group of films includes
The Army-Navy Screen Magazine (TANSM) , a biweekly series
which would update the troops on the progress of the war
and entertain them with celebrity appearances, each
instalment ending with a short cartoon, Here is one of the
most significant uses of animation by the Arnerican
government during World War II, The "Private Snafu" series
comprised 25 seven minute cartoons psoduced by the highest-
echelon directors working at Warner Bros,, including Chuck
Jones, Bob Clampett and Friz Freleng. Several episodes
were written by Theodore Geisel (aka Dr- Seuss) , and
feature rhyming narration easily mernorable to soldiers,
The cartoons featured a bumbling private by the name of
Snafu who routinely carries out some part of his duties
incorrectly, xesulting in a successful attack by the enemy.
In the course of showing how not to perform certain duties,
the films remind soldiers and sailors how to effectively do
their job. Topics included the withholding of military
secrets ( Spies) , proper protection f rom malaria-carrying
rnosq[uitoes (Snafu vs - Malaria Mike) , and how not to spread
rurnours around the base (Rumors) .
The tone of the cartoons is light, however, and humour
is the basic tool used to convey the message. Eric Smoodin
argues that the Snafu cartoons were ideally suited to be
instructional films, considering the young age of many of
the troops (42% of enlisted men were between 20-24 years of
age in 1943, the yeax TANSM began) and the simplicity with
which animation and humour can convey ideas. Furthemore,
he points out that Snafu, through his cornplaining about his
position, actually represents dissent, which the films then
manage by creating a wartime national identity that Snafu
(and the grunts) can then live up to. 27
The series was originally going to be produced by
Disney, who was underbid by Warners (who off ered to do them
for 35% of what Disney was asking). In addition, Warner
Bros- was contwacted by the government to produce a handful
of short films encouraging audiences to buy bonds (Any
Bonds Today?, 1941) and contribute scrap metal to the war
effort (Scrap Happy Daffy, 1943). The war-related content
of the rest of Warner Bros.' output was instigated by the
studio themselves. The Snafu cartoons and the handful of
shorts mentioned represent the only government contracts
for cartoons not issued to the Walt Disney studio, the
single most pwolific and cooperative filmmaker in wartime
Hollywood -
The Magic Kingdom Goes to War
The case of Walt Disney is unique in film history for many
reasons, one of which is his studio's unprecedented
relationship with the Arnerican government during Wol r l d War
11. This relationship encompassed the transformation of
the studio into a war plant, the operation of its ernployees
under the Manning Table and Replacement Schedule (thus
exempting them £rom the Draft) , the storage of milieary
supplies on studio grounds, the incorporation of the studio
with a nearby Lockheed Aircraft Plant, the production by
Disney of animated films for the Navy, the Army Signal
Corps, the Army Air Force and the Air Transport Cornand,
and the financing by the government of animated propaganda
Eilms for domestic and international distribution, 2 8
The sequence of events that led the govemment to
recruit Disney began with riveting and the government of
Canada. Disney apparently was trying to break into the
educational films market when he approached the Lockheed
Aircraft Corporation located near his Burbank studios and
persuaded them to allow him to make, at his own expense, an
experimental employee training film called Four Methods of
Flush Riveting. Richard Shale writes, "the subject was an
apt choice for demonstrating the capabilities of the
medium, X-ray animation provided a look at riveting which
no live action photography could ever hope to reveal. "29 On
April 3, 1941, Disney held a con£ erence for several people
including representatives £rom the aircraft industry at
which he screened this film and proposed that animation
could serve more than entertainment purposes. Among his
guests were Leo Rosten, Chief of the Motion Picture Section
of the Advisoq Committee to the Council of National
Defense, and John Grierson, Co~ssioner of the National
Film Board of Canada.
The xesult of this conference was the purchase by
Grierson of the Canadian rights to Four Methods of Flush
Riveting and the codssion by the NFB of four short
subjects which would promote sales of war bonds. The four
films were The Thrifty Pig, The Seven Wise Dwarfs, Donaf d's
Decision and Al1 Together (al1 1941) , al1 of which used
popular Disney characters to make specific appeals to the
Canadian people to purchase bonds. The format of al1 four
films is identical: a two and a half minute cartoon
presenting a light hearted pitch to purchase war bonds,
followed by one minute of more serious propaganda: symbols
or written slogans which showed, graphically, how the
Canadian government would use the revenue £rom these bond
sales to finance the war effort- A fifth film was also
commissioned that provided detailed instructions on the
operation of the Boys Anti-Tank Rifle. It was on the basis
of the success of these shorts in Canada that the American
government sought out Disney's help with their war effort- 3 O
The extent of Disney's war production is enormous: in
1943 alone, 94% of the studior s output of over 200,000 feet
of film was to fulf il1 governerit contracts . " This output,
like that of the rest of Hollywood, £el1 into two
categories: non-entertainment training films and
entertainment films, The training films were just that:
no humour, no characters, no situations, only diagrams and
instructional narration- Examples of the over two hundred
titles in this category include Protection Against Chemical
Warfare; Service, Inspection and Maintenance of the AT-1 I :
Landing Gear; High Level Precision Bombing: Bombing
Compu ters ; Gyroscopic Creep and Precession in Torpedoes ;
Fundamentals of Artillery Weapons and Ward Care of
Psychotic Patients-
The entertainment films, which Shale nurnbers at 28
during the war years, include lighter propaganda in which
popular Disney characters would suddenly be drafted or have
jobs in the service as well as £ive films that can be
characterized as "hard propaganda". Four of the films are
Education for Death: The Making of a Nazi; Der Fuhrer's
Face (which won the Oscar in 1943 for Best Short Subject
(Cartoon) ) ; Chicken Little, and Reason and motion (al1
1943), al1 of which are short subjects and were distributed
as such, These four films were partially financed by the
Coordinator for Intra-American Affairs, a govenvnent agency
seeking to promote Roosevelt's Good Neighbour Policy (see
below). The fifth film is Victory Through Air Power, a
feature film in which Major Alexander De Seversky narrates
what is essentially a pitch to the government to increase
its long-range bombing power as a strategy to win the war. 3 2
RKO, Disney's regular distributor, refused to handle the
picture and it was distributed as Disney's own expense, to
lukewarm critical and public reception.
Governent interest in the specificities O£ animation
as propaganda is thus a historical fact. What Shale mites
about the advantages of showing flush riveting with
animation holds true for propaganda as well:
assembly lines of war saving certificates dissolve
to planes, ships, tanks; and incentive slogans
written in the smoke of defense factories link the
idea of investment with the production of war
materiel. 33
Cartoons had a different level of narrative engagement with
the war and the Axis primarily because they were capable of
a different level, and the results were popular with the
public. Seeing the success that these films had
domestically, government agencies now wanted to test
cartoons' usefulness as a tool of colonization-
The Coordinator for Intra-American Affairs, a
government agency responsible for improving North and South
American economic and cultural ties, showed a marked
interest in using animation as a colonizing tool to win
over South America as an ally before the Nazis reached it.
During World War II, the agency was headed by Nelson A.
Rockefeller, who was also one of the biggest shareholders
in RKO pictures. Rockefeller may have used his influence
at RKO and decided that the most effective way to win over
the continent to the south was through Hollywood, an
organization with a proven track record of effective
colonialist practice. RKO promptly arranged for
Hollywood' s current golden boy, Orson Welles, to travel to
Brazil and make a documentary about some of that country's
heroes . 34 The trip was CO-sponsored by the State Department
with the express intention of developing the Good Neighbour
Policy, Roosevelt's plan to strengthen the economic and
cultural ties between North and South Arnerica in an effort
to keep the continent resistant to Nazi influence. 35 The
strategy of the Welles project seems to have been the
winning over of a nation's audiences by glorifying their
culture in a Hollywood movie- Unfortunately, Welles'
continua1 financial disasters in Hollywood and possibly his
integrity caused this first atternpt at an intra-American
affair to fizzle, and he returned to America with ari
un£ inished documentary, It's Al1 True, not to be completed
until after his death.
Still intent on forging a cultural partnership, the
CIAA then financed a tour for MO'S second-biggest (and
most prominently anti-Nazi, cf. Der Fuhrer's Face) star in
1943: Donald Duck. Walt Disney and fifteen of his
animators and other staff took a two month long visit to
South Amesica, visited several major cities, and took notes
and sketches for a future feature The project
eventually resulted in two features, Saludos Amigos (1943)
and The Three Caballeros (1945), both of which were
marketed heavily throughout South America. The two films
feature popular Disney characters interacting with South
American locals and experiencing the sights, as well as
South mesican animated characters and live actors
performing songs. Clearly the films were meant to be
watched in both markets, and were recognized as an attempt
to promote cultural ties by critics at the time, one of
whom called Saludos 'at once a potent piece of propaganda
and a brilliant job of picture-making". " Here is a clear-
cut example of the real nature of the CO-operation between
governments and studios during World War 11: the
governments sought the influence over audiences that the
movies had, and the film industry sought the influerice over
foreign and domestic government agencies that Washington
had, in order to open up new markets and maintain their
monopoly in Hollywood,
In addition to the South American trip, the CIAA
partially financed Disney's four hardest examples of anti-
Nazi propaganda: the above mentioned Reason and Emotion,
Education for Death: The Making of a Nazi, Der Fuhrer's
Face, and Chicken Little, providing Disney with 14,000
dollars per film in exchange for the exclusive rights to
non-theatrical 16 mm distribution throughout South America-
The non-theatrical nature of the bargain indicates the
CIAArs interest in showing the films in non-entertainrnent
venues, furthering the thesis that the films were intended
to be used as indoctrination.
Disney and the government were in such tight
synchronization during the war that the IRS even
commissioned a film showing Donald Duck returning his taxes
early, which anecdotal evidence suggests was a spectacular
success3*. As Richard Shale States in his book Donald Duck
Joins Up: The Wal t Disney Studio During World War II,
"America's entry into World War II had occasioned a liaison
between the Disney Studio and the U-S. government which was
unprecedented in the history of the film ind~stry."~~
Other Studios
Cartoon propaganda did not stop at the walls of the Walt
Disney and Warner Bros. studios, only direct government
contracts for cartoon propaganda. The non-contractual
output of Warner Bros. and the five other animation-
producing studios also reflects a propagandistic effort to
manifest the government's wartime policy.
Shull and Wilt estimate that 83 of the 234 cartoons
released by Warner Bros. between January 1939 and September
1945 contained references to the war (35%' the highest of
any studio's commercial output, including ~isne~)*O, ail of
which of course corresponded to the War Department's agenda
since they had been passed by censorship boards. Examples
include The Ducktators (1942) , which depicts the three Axis
leaders as barnyard fowl who take over a farm and are
defeated by "the dove of peace"; Daffy the Commando (1943),
which pits Daffy against a pair of incompetent Nazi birds
and ends with the duck bashing Hitler on the head with a
mallet; and Bugs Bmy Nips the Ni ps ( 1984) , a typically
racist scenario in which Warner Bros.' biggest cartoon star
thwarts babbling, bucktoothed Japanese soldiers.
The other three studios in the 'Big Five", MGM,
Paramount and 2oth Century Fox, each had their own animation
units which produced scores of cartoons a year that made
reference to the war in ways that could only be described
as propagandistic, although they were never directly
encouraged or compensated by the governrnent to contain
specific content. MGMts perpetually popular cartoons (six
Oscar victories in the 40ts, compared to Disney's two)
featuring Tom and Jerry and the unique work of Tex Avery
were, according to Shull and Wilt, "the least war-oriented
of a11" .41 Still, the studio pxoduced such titles as Blitz
Wolf (1942), in which the Three Little Pigs fend off a
caricature of Adolf Hitler as the Big Bad Wolf, and The
Stork's Holiday (1943 ) , which explains how the birth rate
has dropped because Doc Stork keeps running into anti-
aircraft fire, searchlights and enemy fighters. Upon
appeal £rom his patriotic ancestors, however, he resumes
his duties, making a 'V" for Victory with his cigar smoke.
Paramount's animation division was headed by Max and
Dave Fleischer, animation pioneers who were Disney's chief
competition in the feature film market, having produced two
full-length animated features before being driven under by
Disney's popularity- Their legacy includes the Superman
series, Betty Boop and Popeye, al1 of which were used to
boost morale with references to the war and some
particularly savage characterizations of the Japanese.
Examples include Japoteurs (1942 ) , a Superman instalment
that features Japanese saboteurs in America trying to steal
American war technology (a new bombing aircraft). Superman
defeats thern. Also, cartoons like Scrap the Japs and
You're a Sap, Mir. Jap feature Popeye, one O£ the most
popular cartoon characters of the 1940s, having joined the
navy and pumrnelling grotesque, buck-toothed caricatures of
Japanese sailors, with dialogue such as Popeye' s
declaration, '1 never seen a Jap that wasn't yeller. " The
discrepancy between representations of the Germans and
JZ~..~PSP ic American propaganda will be covered in chapter
three .
The other studios, Universal, Columbia and 20'" Century
Fox, ctlso put out their fair share of propagandistic
cartoons- Shull and Wilt's book, Doing Their Bit: Wartime
Animated Short Films, 1939-1945, gives an exhaustive
account of these cartoons, so 1'11 just give one
representative example f rom each studio. Consider
Universal ' s Andy Panda 's Victozy Garden (1942 ) , f eaturing
one of the studio's most popular characters working in his
titular victory garden, trying to remind audiences to do
the same through his follies. Columbia's Song of Victory
(1942) features three dictatorial animals - a vulture, a
hyena and a gorilla with familiar faces - that bring
tyranny to the jungle only to be driven out in the end.
The most interesting point about this cartoon is the OWI
report on it, which states that 'it is important to note
that the invaded ... oppose .. .not with more force, but with
symbolism - and triumph [by destroying the invaders
morale] w42, a scenario in which propaganda becomes the key
to victory. Finally, 20'" Century Fox's Cat Meets Mouse
plays out an allegorical story of a cat herding mice into a
concentration camp, only to be defeated in the end. The
convolution of symbolisrn here might have struck some
viewers as hypocritical, since although the cartoon is
ostensibly about German intednt of Jews, Japanese
internent camps in the U.S. were simultaneously promoted
as a necessary evil. Audience members may have been
confused about whether they should be rooting for the mice
or the cat.
Plotlines such as the above cannot be fully explained
by audience demand for stories about the war - In fact,
Doherty cites requests £rom exhibitors for more escapist
f are £rom the studios :
By eaxly 1943, however, motion picture exhibitors,
the branch of the industry closest to the public,
were sending back word that war-themed films were
commercially languid and that escapist fare was the
big money maker.- [Exhibi tors reported that 1 "The
preponderant demand is for entertainment and
entertainment of the sort that puts aside the cares
of these war worn days, when every day fills the
lives of the millions with intense emotional
concem. " 43
While studio head patriotism can partially account for the
decision ignore reports,
matter these cartoons mus t
the propagandis tic
part f rom the
voluntary cooperation of the studios with the Bureau of
Motion Picture's guidelines for wartime content.
Conclusion
Doherty writes thzt :
The liaison between Hollywood and Washington was a
distinctly American and democratic arrangement, a
mesh of public policy and private initiative,
state need and business enterpri~e.'~
If Horkheimer and Adorno can be accused of overstating
their case, 1 think Doherty cari be charged with
understating his. First of all, the three-tiered system of
censorship controlling Hollywood content was, as we shall
see, not distinctly American: the Third Reich's systern of
Cilm censorship is remarkably similar to it, While it may
be true that the cooperation was a mixture O£ "public
policy and private initiative", the private initiative
presumably being the studio heads' patriotic enthusiasm for
victory, it is the "state need and business enterprise"
which dominates the relationship. The Arnerican government
needed to mobilize the entire population of the country to
a state of war-readiness, and Hollywood had several
financial interests in the pact, including the State's
anti-trust investigation, the closure of European markets
and the opening of South American markets to their product,
al1 of which benefited £rom CO-operation with the
government .
Cartoons are an illustrative example of the degree of
complicity between state and industry during the war, doing
double duty as entertainment and training films- As
propaganda, they were especially effective, as they were
able to engage with the enemy in ways that features or
newsreels could not: cartoons allowed audiences to release
some of their anxiety by mocking the enemy, making light of
wartime restrictions of food, material and behaviour, and
generating enthusiasm for victory with symbols, music ad
songs. Furthemore, cartoons were used to sel1 bonds,
encourage responsible wartime behaviour , and, as we shall
see, construct an ideological position towards the enemy.
The intersection of profit-oriented entertainment and
wartime government ideology in this medium thus
demonstrates how the United States government politicized
entertainment during World War II
Footnotes
Cf. "The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception" in
Dialectic of Enlightenment, pp- 120-167; The Culture Industry:
Selected Essays on Mass Culture, esp. pp- 2-3
' http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/help/£rmk-htm
Horkheimer & Adorno, pp . 154
Adorno, pp, 85
Horkheimer & Adorno, pp . 120
Ibid, pp- 154, 159
' Adorno, pp. 3 (Introduction by J.M- Bernstein)
Parker, p. 83
Shale, p. 22
l0 'In Announcing Griffithsr OWI Post, Hoyt Plugs Film Biz's Co-op with
U.S." Variety. August 29, 1943. p- 22
Keylor, p- 193
l2 This film was followed by a Warner Bros, cartoon parody during the
war entitled Confusions of a Nut zi Spy (Norman McCabe, 1942) .
l3 For more on the influence of Jews on American culture through their
position as Hollywood executives, see Hollywoodism: Jews, Movies and
the American Dream (Simcha Jacobvici, 1998).
la Doherty, p. 39
l5 Cook, p. 443
l6 Cook, p. 214-15
-- -
" Doherty, p- 37
la Doherty, p- 43
l9 D~herty, p. 45-46
20 Doherty, p- 43
21 Cook, p. 439n-
" The best-known examples of these studies include Janine ~asinger's
The World War 11 Combat Film (Columbia University Press, New York,
19861, Bernard F. Dick's The Star-Spangled Screerr: The American World
War 11 Film (The University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, 1985 1 and
Thomas Doherty's Projections of War: Hollywood, American Culture, and
World War II (Columbia University Press, New York, 1993), al1 of which
support the thesis that feature fihs reflected the Roosevelt
administration's policy.
23 Koppes & Black, pp. vii-viii
24 Bohn, p- 131
25 Shull and Wilt, p. i
26 Doherty, p. 125
27
Smoodin, p. 94-95
28
Shale, p- 24
29
Shale, p. 16
3 O
Shale, p. 22
3 1
Shale, p. 89
l2 This film is an anomaly, since it is not technically government
propaganda, contradicting as it does officia1 policy. Apparently the
film was rebuked in Washington with the attitude 'we don't tell them
how to make movies, they can't tell us how to win the war", a revealing
statement in itself- cf. Doherty, p - 119
33~hale, p. 90
34 Cook, p. 412: "Behind the venture was Nelson Rockefeller, then
Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs and a major RKO stockholder; in
neither role did he lack self -interest - "
3S Keylor, p. 220: "While the Good Neighbour Policy terminated the
practices of military intervention and f inancial supervision, i t
replaced this discredited diplomacy of the gunboat and the dollar with
a more indirect form of American control. In essence this consisted of
the utilization of noncoercive means of enlisting the assistance of
indigenous political, military, and business elites in preselrving the
United States' grip on the economic resources of the region." Also, p.
222: 'In order to counter this new menace posed by the informa1
"unholy alliance" of Nazi Gerrnany, Fascist Italy, and Imperia1 Japan,
the United States sought to strengthen the peacekeeping machinery of
the Pax Americana."
36 Shale, p, 41-42
37 Howard Barnes, quoted in Maltin, Leonard. The Disney Films- Crown-
New York- 1973.
38 Shale quotes a Treasury Department report that more than 32 million
taxpayers saw the film, and that 37 percent of those felt it had
affected their willingness to pay their taxes, Shale, p. 32
l9 Shale, p. 112
Shu11 and Wilt, p. 161
41 Shull and Wilt, p. 123
42 Shull and Wilt, p. 105
'" Doherty, p. 18 1
44 Doherty, p. 61
The Special Value of Entertainment"
Introduction
Conventional histories of the National Socialist regimefs
relationship with the German film industry portray it as a
matter of the Nazis bending reluctant artists to their
will. The first chapter of David Hull's book Film in the
Third Reich (1969), for example, is titled "1933: The
Subversion of the Film IndustryWf and he writes that
"Throughout the whole period the Filmelt [German film
industn-3 was a hotbed - however passive - of lirnited
resistance to the government"l. However, recent
historiography by such authors as Julian Petley and Jurgen
Spiker complicates this portrayal through an economic
analysis of the film industryfs cooperation with the
National Socialist government- While the historical
situation of the United States was £undamentally different,
such historiography points out that there were several
similarities between Germany and the United States
regarding the intersection of politics and entertainment
during the war- Comparing the way both nations used
cartoons as a propaganda tool highlights these similasities
and complicates the traditional division of these countries
into 'good" and 'bad" in World War 11 history.
Pre-War Coogeration
As in the United States, cooperation between government and
film industry predates the outbreak of World War II, and
long before Hitler's rise to power the German film industry
was in the hands of conservative industrialists - The two
bigges t production companies in Germany were Uf a, the
largest single studio in Europe before World War II, and
Tobis-Klangfilm, which had risen to power on the strength
of their rnonopoly of sound-on-film techn~logy.~ Ufa had
been founded in 1918 by government decree, with the
financial assistance of the Wilhelmian administration, who
contributed one-third of its start-up capital with the
express intent of encouraging production of high-quality
nationalistic films.3 With the end of World War 1, however,
the company was privatized and the government sold its
shares to the Deutsche Bank and to large corporations such
as Krupp and I.G. Farben. Between the two World Wars,
Germany experienced twenty years of f inancial crises of
varying degrees, and at the same time wealthy
industrialists were running both Ufa and Tobis-Klangfilm. 4
The primary concern of these industrialists was to rnake
their companies profitable again through governent
assistance, and in an attempt to achieve this goal they
patronized the National Socialist Germari Workers Party- 5
The connection between Ufa and the Nazis is not hard
to trace, The president of Ufa in 1932, the year before
the Nazi dictatorship began, was a man named Ludwig
Klitzsch, the general director of the Germari publishing
house Scherl-Verlag. Scherl-Verlag was itself part of a
media empire owned by Alfred Hugenberg, a key political
figure in Germany who had been the head of the extremely
right-wing German Nationalist Party (DNVP, whom the Nazis
formed a political coalition with during their first years
in power) .6 Hugenberg later went on to become the president
of Ufa, as well as serving as the Minister of Economic
Affairs for the Nazis during their first year in power.
Klitzsch, who worked for Hugenberg and who can thus be
traced directly to the National Socialists, came to be
regarded as the major representative of the Geman film
industry duxing the early 1930s.
As Jurgen Spiker argues in Film und Kapital,
The film industry swam along in the wake of the most
reactionary elernents in the capitalis t system which
were working directly towards an alliance with the
NSDAP, with Hitler as head of the new regime.7
The "reactionary elements" he refers to are political and
business leaders such as Hugenberg, Klitzsch, and the
consortium of Dutch bankers who had taken control of Tobis-
Klangfilrn in the early 1930s. The alliance between
entertainment and politics began to manifest itself as
early as 1932, with the emphasis on nationalism during a
radio address delivered by Klitzsch in which he stated that
the industry was
not neglecting Our orher task, which consists in
reflecting our contemporary spiritual and national
plight, holding up the joys of the German past and
calling forth through film our people's sense of
construction and confidence.'
Nationalistic feature films, so vital to the Nazi's concept
of German culture, were being promised to them even before
they gained power.
The partnership between the film industry and the
National Socialists was consolidated through the industryrs
main prof essional representative body, known as SPIO. The
head of SPIO in 1932 was Ludwig Klitzsch, and the
explicitly stated intent of the organization was to work
towards the establishment of a nationalist consemative
g~vernment.~ Foreshadowing later developments, in that year
SPIO called for the establishment of a film ministry within
the government to re-organize the industry. The unstated
intention of this cal1 was to further concentrate
production into the hands of large production cornpanieç
such as Ufa and Tobis-Klangfilrn. Co-operation between the
film industry and the burgeoning National Socialist
government thus pre-dated their dictatorship, some six
years before the outbreak of war, and reveals an
intersection O£ entertainment and politics based on
economic need as much as political objectives, a situation
that echoes the cooperation of Hollywood with the Roosevelt
administration.
The Economics of Compulsory Censorship
As we have seen, the defining characteristic of the
cooperation between those in the Geman film industry who
dealt with the Nazis was their interest in receiving
financial aid in the form of subsidies and the
concentration of production into the hands of large
production compariies. The final years of the Weimar
Republic, the fifteen-year democratic era that bridged the
end of World War One and the coming to power of Hitler,
were a series of ever-deepening financial crises and
rampant in£ lation for German indus try, the f llm indus try
being no exception. Petley cites rising costs, fierce
cornpetition (primarily £rom Hollywood), the introduction of
sound and falling audiences who could not afford even the
price of a movie ticket as reasons for this f inancial
crisis in the film industry. The key to understanding the
actions of SPI0 in light of this crisis is to realize that
the industry ' s primary motivation was not nationalism, nor
totalitawianism, nor the Nazis: it was to make the
industry profitable again. Whatever else they might have
seen Hitler as, Hugenberg, Klitzsch and the other studio
heads (not to mention nearly half of Germany's industrial
labour force that was unemployed in 1932") must have seen
him predominantly as a way out of a severe economic
depression. Goebbelsr first address to the film industry
following Hitler's appointment as Chancellor in January
occurred on March 28th, 1933 and reflects how successful the
industry had been in communicating these goals to the
party :
We have no intention of obstructing
production.aeither do we wish to hamper private
enterprise: on the contra-, this will receive a
great deal of impetus through the national
movement . l2
It was by providing the studios with a promise of f inancial
stability that the Nazi party was able to gain the willing
assent of the industry to an unprecedented level of
censorship on its products. 13
The new government moved swiftly-to secure the
resources of the culture industries in Germany. One rnonth
before Goebbels' address, on February 28=", 1933. an alleged
"communist saboteur" set the Reichstag (Geman Parliament)
on fire, giving Hitler the pretext to suspend civil
liberties in the face of this so-called "national
emergency"; an emergency deriving £rom an act that many
historians have surmised was cornmitted by the Nazis
thernsel~es~~- A week later, Germans went to the polls and,
convinced that a communist uprising was imminent, put
Hitler and the Nazis into power by a slim rnaj~rit~'~. The
new regimers first edict was to pass the Enabling Act,
dissolving the Weimar constitution and legislating Hitler's
dictatorship. One of the earliest initiatives taken by the
new government was the establishment of the
Reichsministerium £ur Volksaukarung und Propaganda (Reich
Ministry for the People's Enlightenment and Propaganda;
RMVP) on March 13, 1933, the first governmental body of its
kind in any western government and the most important
regulatory body over the German film industry16.
Space doeç not allow for a full history of the
involvement of Germany in World War II, but sorne economic
history is required to understand how successful the Nazis
were in restoring the film ihdustry to profitability and
merging entertainment with the political sphere . The
Germari film industry and the rest'of Germany was indeed
pulled £rom its financial crisis and deemed to be in good
health as of 1943, with the average German going to the
cinema an unprecedented 14.4 times a year and the film
industry the fourth largeçt industry in the country'7. For
this to happen, a complete restructuring of the industry
was required, a process that was facilitated by the
complete nationalization of the film industry by the Nazis
in 1941. Using a trust company called Cautio, the state
amalgamated al1 large and middle-sized production companies
into a giant holding company called Ufa-Film GmbH on
January 10, 1942". This nationalization represents the
most signif icant di£ f erence between the American and Geman
film industries during World War II. Although Julian
Petley makes the point that the practical result of
nationalization was to make the industry less under direct
government f inancial control, the Nazis still had overall
control of al1 artistic and political film content?
Several different censorship boards regulated this control,
just as in the United States.
The central concept behind the di£ ferent levels of
film censorship in Nazi Germany is the National Socialist
concept of Gleichschal tung, de£ ined as 'the obligatory
assimilation within the state of al1 political, economic
and cultural activities", structured in a top-dom
f ashion - 20 Notoriouç for their overcornplicated bureaucracy,
the Nazis' agencies of censorship differed £rom the
American system in that they were unambiguously organized,
had a specific purpose and were answerable to each other in
a rigid hierarchical fashion. Intervention by these
agencies took the form of instigating production on
explicitly political films (which accounted for
approximately 10% of feature production per year) , the
introduction of complex pre- and post-production
censorship, and even regulating marketing and distribution-
The three agencies of content control were the Ministry of
Propaganda, the Reich Chamber of Culture and the Central
Film Office.
The Ministry of Truth
The Reich Ministry for the People's Enlightenment and
Propaganda was an unprecedented political organization when
the Nazis established it in 1933 - Never before had a
government accorded such a level of importance to the
functioning of culture. The ministry was headed by Dr.
Paul Joseph Goebbels, a failed novelist holding a powerful
position in the party hierarchy and credited by historians
as having an unprecedented grasp of the operation of
propaganda and mass psychology. Within the RMVP was a film
department which had the task of "representing the
interests of the '~ilrnpolitik' "21; 'Filmpolitik' implying
that there was a concretely articulated set of requirements
that made a film National Socialist in spirit- In reality,
no such 'politikr existed, probably due to the many
cornpeting factions within the Nazi party, each of whom had
ideas pertaining to the use of film as propaganda-
Subordinate to the Film Department were regional Reich
Propaganda Offices which had various responsibilities
including the examination of film projects, financial
support of the industry, clearance of completed films,
weekly newsreels, distribution and export.
Also under the RMVP was the Reich Film intendant,
whose responsibility was \'safeguarding the interests of the
art of the film". This was a post created late in the war
(July 1944) by Goebbels as a way of revitalizing German
films during a time of crisis and accusations of stagnant
product by more radical elements in the party. This is an
example of Goebbels' stated intention of keeping 'art' and
'commercer as clearly separated spheres, each ruri by fully
qualified prof essional experts.
The final body under the RMVP, which had no direct
control over film content but was still part of the
hierarchy, was the Reich Delegate to the German Film
Industry, with a mandate of "representing the interests of
the film industry", supposedly to the government, which was
a paradox after 1942 since the industry had been
nationalized -
The Reich Chamber of Culture
Separate from the RMVP, but still under the control of
Goebbels, was the Reichskulturkammer (Reich Chamber of
Culture; RKK) , whose unstated intention was the purging of
Jews and leftists £rom the culture industries - On paper,
it administered the various cultural activities
incorporated into the state as a result of Gleichschaltung
and had seven departments, each corresponding to a
different fom of public expression: press, radio, art,
music, literature, theatre and film. The RKK's most
significant act was the of ficial abolition of arts
criticism on November 27, 1936, after which no German film
critic could judge films; they could only describe their
content. Judgement was reserved for the state- In ef f ect,
critics were reduced to plot synopsis, a "re-hash of film
Company publicity material", *' which more of ten than not waç
written by sorneone from the Chamber of Culture- In this
way, the government could influence not only the content of
a film but also its preferred reading-
The most important section of the RKK for the purposes
of this study was the Reichsfilmkammer (Reich Chamber of
Film; RFK), officially established on September 22, 1933.
Note the speed with which the Nazis attended to their
culture industries: not even in power for half a year and
already three agencies in place to help regulate the film
industry. Rather than being horrified by this new
hierarchy of governmental film control, the industry was in
fact somewhat relieved, as it finally had a government
willing to take an interest in its affairs. In fact, the
RFK had been fomed largely out of SPIO, the aforementioned
'industry representative' group that was in fact comprised
only of board members £rom the largest of Gemanyls
production companies and headed by the president of Ufa,
Ludwig Klitzsch. This can be taken as the Nazi's direct
xesponse to SPIO's cal1 for the appointment of a
governmental body to restructure the film industiry and make
it profitable again- Petley argues that this response
confirms the Nazi's cornmitment to laissez-faire capitalism
and to the established production companies:
The RFK's origins in SPI0 clearly demonstrated that
the new regime intended the hitherto dominant
elements of the industry to remain dominant and was
committed to retaining the system of private
ownership and upholding the principle of 'free' -
cornpetition on the 'open' market.23
Goebbels allowed the studio owners to maintain their
monopoly of the industry in exchange £or the production of
films that conformed to his plans for Nazi culture. The
same principles motivating cooperation between the American
industry and the Roosevelt administration can be found at
work in the German case, where. politics and entertainment
intersect at the deutschmark instead of the dollar.
The RFKfs responsibilities included drawing up
cultural policy and the 'artistic supervision of film
productionf, including the issuing of a certificate that
al1 films required in owder to be shown in Germany or its
territories. This is where the final vote was cast about
whether a film represented the interests of the National
Socialists, and if it di.&'t, then it would simply not be
shown, regardless of how much money had been spent on its
production. The RFK were not shy about exercising this
power, and banned dozens of features and shorts between
1933 and 1945~~.
The Central Film Office
The final governmental body with influence over the content
of films in Nazi Germany was the Reich Propaganda Central
Office of the National Socialist Party itself, more
specifically a subsection of the Office known as the
Central Film Office. The responsibility of this body was
'for Party leadership and educational tasks" , and it would
ovewsee films for schools, films for Hitler youth, and
Kulturfilme, a series of shorts expounding the merits of
German culture and shown in theatres between newsreel and
f eature . 25
The "Special Valuefr of Entertaiment
The intersection of politics and entertainment had benefits
for both the industry and the government in the United
States. In the German example, it has been established
that certain captains of the film industry collaborated
with the Nazis in the hope they would be bailed out of a
crisis-ridden period while being permitted to maintain
their monopoly ownership. The reasons for the party's
interest in film are not as immediately clear, but
ultimately revolve aromd the idea of controlling the
content and regulating the degree of politics in the
public' s entertainment, much as the Roosevelt
administration wished to do to Hollywood films. However,
whereas the American government wanted the political
content of films to be more prominent, the Nazis were
interested only in decreasing the number of political films
and concentrating propaganda into in£ requent , ' special '
Eilms.
Goebbels is frequently lauded in histories of the
Third Reich as having an unprecedented, near-superhuman
grasp of the powers of propaganda. Typical of this are the
cornments of David Hull that Goebbels "probably understood
films as well as any industry executive, and probably
better."26. Regardlsss of the accuracy of these clairns,
Goebbels did have very specific and sophisticated ideas
about the role of cinema in the Third Reich- One of his
mos t f mous arguments concerning propaganda was that if
people were aware that they were watching propaganda, then
they respond it:
.-entertainment can be poli tically of special value,
because the moment a person is conscious of
propaganda, it become ineffective. However, as soon
as propaganda as a tendency, as a characteristic, as
an attitude, remains in the background and becomes
apparent through human beings , then propaganda
becomes effective in every respect. 27
In actuali ty, propaganda under the Nazis was f requently
overt, probably due to the difficulty in communicating
specific party principles such as anti-Semitism and
euthanasia through subtle, "background" means. However ,
these political £ iims account for only a tenth of the films
released during the Nazi dictatorship, the rest being
largely apolitical. The result of Goebbels' ideas about
film was the production of German films that were primarily
escapist, with the occasional epic work of propaganda meant
to glorify the Nazi party and its policies.
Filmmaking under the Nazis consisted of 90% generic
comedy, romance or drama and 10% hard, vicious propaganda,
and most of the propaganda citizens saw came £rom newsreels
and documentaries rather than feature films. 28 Goebbels
had censors on the lookout for anything in a film's content
that could be politically volatile, uriless the Ministry had
specifically requested such content, and if they found
anything the film was either heavily re-cut or banned
outright. The conclusion to be &am £rom this evidence is
that while the Nazis partially relied on the film industry
to promote Nazi ideology throughout Germany' s population,
they used it more as a mass catharsis apparatus,
specifically disallowing political content £rom the
nation's entertainments in order to set aside some escapism
for their already heavily Nazified lives- One-tenth of the
time, however, audiences would be subjected to severe
dramatizations of Nazi ideology, This practice was of
course in flux throughout the regimers domination, and
began to break dom towards the end of the war with the
approach of defeat, but in general the Nazi partyrs
interest in film cari be explained by their use of the
medium as a source of pleasure and escapism alternating
with vigorous propaganda-
Features
As with the Arnerican industry's wartime output, features
have been the focus of most of the film scholarship
undertaken regarding Nazi Germany, and several books have
been devoted to this subject already2'. This study is
concemed with cartoons rather than features, but a brief
summary of the nature of feature production will help to
put cartoons in the propex context of meeting point between
politics and entertainment. Eric Rentschler breaks dom
feature production under the Nazis as
295 melodramas and biopics
123 detective and adventure films
523 comedies and musicals
153 other30
This accounts for the 1094 features released in Germany
£rom 1933 to 1945, with the category of "other" including
documentary features, eqlicit propaganda and £ilms that
were not generic in nature-
Films that have been described as apolitical thus far
were devoid of overt political content, but the films which
came closest to Goebbels ' concept of 'background
propagandar were the string of historical &mas released
by the major studios, obviously intended to stir Germans '
nationalist sentiment- Titles in this category include
Bismarck (Wolfgang Liebeneiner, 1940), about the man who
united the various provinces of the Holy Roman Empire into
what is now known as Germany; Der Grosse Koni g (Frederick
the Great) (Veit Harlan, 1942) , a biography O£ the king who
elevated Prussia to the rank of European power through
victory in several wars; and Kolberg (Veit Harl an, 1945)'
about the resistance of a small German Town to Napoleon's
1806 invasion.
Another category meant to appeal to the German spirit
was the Blut and Boten films - films about the Volk; the
people, the lower classes, the 'heart' of Germany. Films
such as Blut und Boten (Blood and Soil) (Rolf von
Sonjewski-Jamrowski, 1933), Peer Gynt (Fritz Wendhausen,
1934) and Opfezgmg (The Great Sacrifice) (Veit Harlan,
1944) told stories about honest, working-class Germans and
their xelationship with the idealised German environment:
towering rnountains, lush countryside, golden fields . An
important cornponent of Nazi ideology was the belief in the
purity and cleanliness of rural life as opposed to the
inherent moral and physical pollution of the city-
Of the ten percent of features that were explicitly
propagandis tic, notable examples include Jud Süss (Viet
Harlan, l94O), an anti-Semitic film about the self -
destruction of a politically powerful Jewish financial
advisor, which was declared mandatory viewing for the SS
and the police by Heinrich ~immler~'; Ohm Krüger (Hans
Steinhoff, 1941), an anti-British film highlighting
atrocities cornmitted by English soldiers during the Boer
war; and Die Rothschild Aktien von Waterloo (Erich
Waschneck, 1940), an anti-Sernitic-and-British film which
tells of the 'schemingt Jewish-English Rothschild Eamily,
and how they made millions as profiteers £rom the
Napoleonic wars. Propaganda at the Germari cinema was
certainly less frequent than in American cinemas, but upon
its arriva1 was just as obvious as its Hollywood
couilterpart and as likely to be ethnically-oriented as it
was nationalist,
Documentaries
Documentaries played a special part in Nazi film culture.
One of the most famous German actresses of the tirne had
become a leading director of documentaries, the off icial
filmmaker of the Third Reich and a rumoured mistress to
Adolf Hitler. Leni Reifenstahlls Triumph des Wi l l ens
(Triumph of the Wi l l ) (1935) served as the blueprint for
propaganda not only for the Nazis but for the Arnericans as
well . 32 Also, her film record of the 1936 Olympics held in
Germany, Olympia (1938) , has been referred to as "powerful"
and as a "masterpiece". 33 Both films have an aesthetic that
transfoms human bodies into geometric shapes (the colossal
crowds at the Nuremberg rally; the slow-motion Olympic
divers) and emphasizes the classical Greek ideal of human
form in a way that conforms to Nazi concepts of Aryan
perfection. Der ewige Jude (The Eternai Jew) (Fritz
Hippler, 1940) is another "documentary" that draws
fictional cornparisons between Jews and vermin, charges that
Jews dominate the world economy and contrasts an imaginary
filthy Jewish lifestyle to an equally imaginary clean,
ordered German lifestyle.
Cartoons
Cartoons were no exception to the total integration of
politics and entertainment under the Nazis, due largely to
their popularity with the public. As in most western
nations during the thirties, much of this popularity can be
traced to Walt Disneyt s product - Disney's films were
extremely popular in Germany, and Rentschler argues that
"Calmong the successes at German box offices, nobody's
films figured as strongly as Walt Disney". 34 However,
German-made short animated films suffered £rom the same
problems that affected the feature film industry:
cornpetition f rom foreign (chie£ ly Hollywood and
particularly Disney) cartoons, falling attendance at
theatres and monopoly practices by larger studios. German-
made cartoons became an area of interest with the recovery
of the film industry and received a huge impetus when the
Nazis decided to ban Arnerican films £rom distribution in
Germany and German-held territories in 1937, cutting off
the river of Disney cartoons that had impaired indigenous
animation. Combined with this sudden vacuum that needed
filling was Goebbelsr own love-hate relationship with
Disney's films, admiring them on the one hand but convinced
that Germans could do better on the other. The outcorne of
these coincidences was the building of a German animation
Company in an attempt to rival the Disney studio and the
production of Nazi-authorized cartoons. This
- identification of cartoons as an appropriate meeting point
for politics and entertainment rnirrors the way animation
was treated in the United States and highlights the
similarities between the two nations' wartime cultures.
Hitler himself was among the majority of Germans who
loved Disney's films, but never publicly acknowledged his
admiration for the American filmmaker. Goebbels' diary
entry of December 2oth, 1937, though, reveals how much the
dictator liked Mickey Mouse: '1 presented the Führer with
thirty of the best films £rom the last four years and
eighteen Mickey Mouse films for Christmas. He is very
pleased. w35 Nevertheless, the ideological contradiction of
admiring a cartoon rnouse while decrying Jewish vermin was
apparent even to the Nazis, and Goebbels banned Disney's
films in 1937. While the banning of Disney's films was
inevitable, Moritz notes that it was probably influenced by
Goebbelsr refusal to pay Disney's excessive fee for the
rights to distribute the feature-length Snow White in
Gemany . 36 As in the United States, economics contributes
to the ideological motivation leading to the development of
wartime animation.
An article in the German f i h magazine Film-Kuxier in
December 1938 illustrates another reason Goebbels would
have been interested in animation:
men Wal t Disney's creatures-.march through the
woods, run, stumble, fly, dance - this whirl of
events seems to occur naturally and yet in fact is
just like a fairy tale, so much so that children
feel the subtle effects in their very imaginations.
There are no words spoken, This is a purely visual
experience, something to be taken in with the eyes
and the sense, and not wi t h the intellect-37
Such a film would conf orm exactly to Goebbels ' s conception
of 'background propaganda', triggering an emotional but not
an intellectual response. Another German film magazine,
Kinematograph, gave an ultimatum: in a July 1934
editorial, the magazine demanded that
... the German cartoon must come back- Mickey Mouse
fi l ms have proven to be a worldwide success, and
that an audience exists for these films in every
theatregoing country. Theatre owners in Germany
wi l l acknowledge that its customers welcorne these
films. Why in the world doesn't Germany produce
such films? We have enough draughtsmen, a look into
any of our large illustrated newspapers proves that
an abundance of talent is available. One can state
without presumption that we can step confidently
into cornpetition with any other ~ouiltry.~'
What the magazine didn't acknowledge was that only small,
simply-equipped animation houses existed in Germany, as
opposed to the massive studio of Walt Disney that, with its
hundreds of employees, allowed for a high degree of
specialization among artists and an asserribly-line
production technique. This short-sightedness would
ultimately lead to the failure of the German cartoon
enterprise.
Nonetheless, the magazine's cal1 was answered seven
years later by a government advisor working in the RMVP
named Kari Neumann, who wrote a proposal to Goebbels in May
of 1941 entitled "Suggestions for the Structure of a German
Cartoon Production Company with the Target of the
Production of Feature Length ~artooris"~~. Goebbels,
motivated by his interest in upstaging Disney, but also
aware of the power that these cartoons had in expressing
ideas, leapt at the idea- Putting Neumann in charge of the
new enterprise, one month later he created the production
company Deutsche Zeichenf ilme GmbH ( "German Cartoons Ltd. " )
as a subsidiary O£ the giant Ufa-Film GmbH holding Company,
with its products to be distributed by Ufa- The company's
charter declared that "the subject of the enterprise is the
production and the selling of artistically superior
animated creations of al1 kinds".
Neumann's original outline provided for the expansion
of the company £rom 50 employees producing one short film
per year in 1942 to 500 employees producing one feature and
a handful of shorts per year in 1950- Unfortunately for
Neumann, his ambitions exceeded the industry's
capabilities - Taking office on January lSt, 1942, Neumann
should have realized that the production of cartoons would
not have been a priority for a country about to erribark on a
two-front war. As a result, most of the cartoon production
in Germariy was still being done in srnall production houses
scattered around the country and its territories while
Deutsche Zeichenfilm in Berlin worked through bombing raids
on its first, and ultimately its only, production. En
1943, the company released Der Arme Hansi (Gerhard Fieber),
a 15-miriute cartoon distributed by Ufa about a canary named
Hansi, who yearns to escape his cage to meet a female bird,
Upon escaping, he runs into problem a£ ter problem out in
the 'worldf, and at the end of the cartoon winds up safe
and sound with the female bird back in her cage.
On July 26, 1944, the company was deactivated by Hans
Hinkel as part of an effort to cut costs in the industry.
A financial audit of Deutsche Zeichenfilme dated November
17, 1944, criticized the Company for having completed only
one film between its inception in June of 1941 and July
1943, but costing the Reich 2.75 million Reichsmarks in
that period. 40
Three other f ilmmakers were responsible for notable
contributions to the Nazi cartoon genre. Hans Held was a
Babelsberg-based assistant director for live-action films
with the Company Bavaria Filmkunst who made an animated
film called Der Storenfried: Einigkei t Macht Stark (The
Troublemaker: Unity Makes Strength, 1940) that is the
clearest example of animated Nazi propaganda. Heldrs only
animated film, it is the most blatantly propagandistic of
the German cartoons, telling a story of a fox that
terrorizes the
united animal s
animal
wasps and
kingdorn
precise military
dispatched
attacks
armoured porcupines . 4 1
machine-
the
Hans Fischerkoesen, an animator who had made only
advertising films up until the beginning of the war, made
the most prolific contribution to German animation during
the war- In May 1941, encouraged by Neumann's enthusiasm
for the possibilities of a German animation industry,
Goebbels demanded that Fischerkoesen rnove his production
studio to Potsdam, just outside of Berlin, and work on
story-films instead of advertising, Fischerkoesen
protested that he didn't have the ability or the talent to
make story-films, but was only assigned a writer to
conceive story ideas for him to animate. In a journal
entry dated September 29, 1943, Goebbels writes that Karl
Neumann had requested the transfer of Fischerkoesen to
Deutsche Zeichenfilme, where Neumann would be his
supervisor. Goebbels re j ected the suggestion, writing that
competition £rom Fischerkoesen would encourage Neumann to
work harder. 42 The four films that derived £rom this
recruitment of Fischerkoesen were Verwitterte Melodie
(Weather-Beaten Melody, 1942). Der Schneemann (The Snowman,
1943) Das Dumme Gonslein (The Silly Goose, 1944) and
Hochzeit im Korallenmeer (Wedding Under the Coral Sea,
1945)- The three films are fairly benign in their content,
and Moritz goes so far as to suggest that they are
subversive :
While, on the surface, [The Silly Goose] could
satisfy Goebbels' dictum for "blood and soil" fi l ms
that glorify the German peasant life, Fischerkoesen
creates a cornplex and ambiguous narrative that
confuses and contradicts Nazi p01icy.~~
Finally, Van den vos Re-maerde (About Reynard the Fox,
1943), a 20-minute animated film made by the Dutch National
Socialist party in Den Haag, represents another example of
overtly propagandistic anti-Semitic animation. Concerning
the invasion of a peaceful animal kingdom by a comiving
rhinoceros drawn as a Jewish stereotype, complete with huge
nose and money-hoarding tendencies, the film was directed
by Egbert van Putten and made at the behest of the Dutch
equivalent of Goebbels' Ministry of People's Enlightenment
and Propaganda. the "Department of People ' s In£ ormation,
Service and Arts". It was the biggest production of the
Dutch film industry during the war, yet mysteriously was
never released. 44
Conclusion
As Adorno and Horkheimer have alluded to in their
writing on the American culture industry, the history of
the union of politics and entertainment at the site of
filmmaking in Nazi Germany bears many similarities to the
marner in which Hollywood was recruited by the Roosevelt
administration to promote U.S. involvement in the war.
Motivated by both political and economic factors, the
government sought a cultural outlet for wartime ideology
that they were able to regulate. Meanwhile, the industry
sought financial protection for its monopoly position in
feature film production. The sidlarity in this pattern of
development in both a fascist and a democratic country
challenges traditional conceptions of an oppressive Nazis
government forcing the German film industry to its knees,
or a dutiful American film industry rising to the patriotic
challenge of rousing a nation to war.
75
The production of animation in both countries provides
a distilled version of this comparable intersection of
politics and entertainment, Although the attempt by
Goebbels to rival the American animation industry cal only
be described in terms of its failure, the economic and
political factors that affected the decision to use
animation as a form of propaganda in Germany were the same
as those in Amewica - the popularity of the medium and
their effectiveness in communicating ideas. The project
failed: the seven films described here (Der Arme Hansi,
Der Storenfried, Verwi t terte Melodie, Der Schneemann, Das
D m e Gonslein, Hochzeit im Korrallenmeer and Van den vos
Reynarde) represent the majority of the animated films made
under the direct supervision of the Nazis. Nevertheless,
as with the features produced during this time, they can be
divided into either politically benign or overtly
propagandis tic, with no middle ground between the two
categories- Both of these types of cartoons served the
purposes of the Nazi government: the escapist
entertainment that balanced out the overly politicized
lif estyle of the Gennan citizen, and political propaganda
that motivated hatred of the enemy, specifically Jews in
the case of Van den vos Renarde. This is the grain of
accuracy in Adorno and Horkheimer's sweeping generalization
about American media - the manipulation of the culture
industry to meet the goals of the political elite:
"Enlightenrnent as Mass Deception", as they describe the
Arnerican situation, is in Germany the Ministry for the
People's Enlightenment and Propaganda. As we shall see, a
critical analysis of the content of both the American and
German cartoons reveals that the two nations used cartoons
for similar wartime pi;rrposes.
Footnotes
' Hull, p. 7
Cook, p. 106, 347
Cook, p. 106
James, p. 125: These crises stemmed £rom hflerinflation, repaxations
payments, unemployment, lack of foreign investment and an unstable
govemment. In 1923, one American dollar was worth 4 million marks.
There was a period of semi-stability between 1924 and 1929, but by 1932
unemployment had broken the 6 million mark-
Petley, p. 45; this idea is stated explicitly on this page of Petley's
book although it is one of the key theses of his entire study.
Petley, p. 2
' Quoted in Petley, p- 45
Petley, p- 45
ibid
'O Petley, p. 4
l1 Parker, p. 2
l2 Petley, p- 48
l3 Of course, the industry had no choice but to cooperate as the Nazis
had dictatorial power over the entire country. Nonetheless, the party
facilitated the process by showing an interest in returning the German
film industry to a position of financial profit.
l4 Shirer, p. 192, for more on the Reichstag Fire contxoversy see Hans
Mommsen's "The Reichstag Fire and its Political Consequences" in
Aspects of the 3rd Reich, H.W- Koch, ed. New York: St. Martin's Press,
1985.
l5 Raf f , p. 278 : "-.the Nazis only garnered 43.9 percent of the vote in
the ensuing elections ... In order to maintain a façade of legality, the
National Socialists entered another coalition with the German National
People's Party [Hugenberg8s party], which had won 8 percent of the
popular vote- Together these two parties could muster a slim
majority-"
l6 Welch, p. 12
l7 Petley, p- 86-87
Petley, p- 83
l9 Petley, p- 96
20 Welch, p- 10
2L Petley, p- 97
22 Petley, p- 98
23 Petley, p, 57; emphasis in original
24 Rentschler, pp. 225-271: Appendix A - Films and Events, 1933-1945
25 Petley, p- 97
26 Hull, p. 12
27 James, p. 148
2a Rentschler, p, 7; Rentschler claims that 941 of 1086 features
released under the Nazis can be classified as generic cornedies, dramas
or romances, and that these films are largely apolitical-
29 Cf. Eric Rentschler' s book The Ministry of Illusion (Harvard
University Press, London, 19961, Linda Schulte-Sasse's Entertaining the
Third Reich (Duke University Press, Durham, 1996) or for a historical
survey Erwin Leiser's Nazi Cinema (Secker and Warburg, London, 1974) or
David Hull's Film Under the Third Reich (University of California
Press, Berkeley, 1969) .
30 Rentschler, p- 7
'' Himmler was the Nazi chief of police £rom 1936-1944, Raff, p- 454-55
l2 Doherty reports that Frank Capra was inspired to create the Why We
Fight series after watching a copy of Reifenstahl's documentary.
Doherty, pp. 21-22
l3 Cook, p. 353; Hull, p. 132
Rentschler, p- 110
l5 ibid
l6 Moritz, p. 4
37 quoted in Rentschler, p. 110
3 8
Laqua, p. 109; al1 translations by the author
39
Laqua, p. 112
4 0
Laqua, p. 117
41 Moritz, p. 8
42 Goebbels, p- 624
43 Moritz, p. 10
4 4
Barten and Groenveld, p- 208
3
Rabbits and Ducks
Introduction
Under the supervision of the American government, the
Hollywood studios proceeded to wage war against the Axis
powers- This deployment of entertainment included each
studio ' s cartoon department - Propaganda was alrnos t always
in the minowity: only during one year of the war (1943)
did cartoons conceming the war outnumber non-war cartoons.
In fact, the most prolific producer of war-themed cartoons,
Warner Bros., had only 35 percent of its commercial cartoon
output in that category for the entire wars1 This statistic
establishes that both Hollywood and the government wanted
films and cartoons to act as entertainment and diversion
rather than primarily as propaganda, much as Goebbels
wanted Ge- films to act as an escape £rom heavily
politicized day-to-day lif e .
Nevertheless, both nations did produce films that took
on specific political content and served a propagandistic
function. The identification of these films as propaganda
and an analysis of their content shows the different uses
that wartime cartoons were put to in their construction of
an ideological position for American audiences and
demonstrates how the intersection of politics and
entertainment duxing'world War II manifested itself in
cartoon form.
Theorizing Propaganda
To analyze the content of what the American government
sanctioned as acceptable wartime storytelling requires a
Eormal de£ inition O£ propaganda- Al1 films have
ideological content, and questions such as what
differentiates propaganda £rom other fonns of filmmaking,
how propaganda analysis differs £rom analysis of regular
popular entertainment and what methodology should be used
to examine propaganda in terms of its ideology need
resolution before undertaking a textual reading of these
films .
Julian Petley makes two important points that lay the
groundwork for an ideological reading of propaganda.
First, he argues for a distinction to be made between
propaganda and films that serve a propagandistic function,
i.e. a distinction between films that are desigried as
propaganda £rom their inception and films that are
appropriated for an unrelated political purpose. Secondly,
he declares that propaganda analysis should be
distinguished f~om readings of non-propaganda films by an
emphasis on the apparatuses of production, distribution and
exhibition that surround the propaganda. 2
Steve Neale's attempt to theorize propaganda provides
a good mode1 of how these concerns can be incorporated into
an ideologicaf reading- Petley's first concern is dealt
with by Nealers attempt at a practical definition for
propaganda films. Citing the propaganda films of the Third
Reich, he points out how they are structured to align the
viewer 'as in a position of struggle vis-à-vis certain of
the discourses and practices that have been signified
within i t ~ . ~ The filmsr narrative includes a representative
of the viewer, in the form of a character, a narrator or a
mode of address, which is pointed out as such to the
audience, so that no mistake cari be made about which side
the viewer is on. The constant use of the first person
plural is given as an example of how propaganda films
"...[bind] the spectator into its discourse as the place of
its en~nciation."~ Neaie emphasizes the role of voice-over
commentary in this process. Phrases such as 'we Germans"
of 'the average American" abound in German and American
propaganda respectively, leaving no room for doubt about
what the viewer's position is relative to the discourses
presented.' The 'correct' side having been established, the
films then introduce the opposing side, and thus the
' struggle vis-à-vis ... the discourses and practices ' that the
viewer must then conf ront .
However, this description could easily apply to the
typical strategies of a classical narrative film, in which
viewers are commonly aligned in positions of good
struggling with evil, or more realistically with liberal
capitalisrn vs. laissez-faire capitalism. The ambiguous
nature O£ the distinction between the two types of film
highlights how close narrative strategies are to
propagandistic strategies. Despite this similarity, Neale
maintains that there is a difference: the distinction he
points to is how propaganda films signify their struggle
"in such a way as to mark them as existing outside and
beyond it".= The struggle shown in the film intentionally
has no clear resolution, since it is cirawn £rom real life,
and when the viewer leaves the theatre, s/he will have to
engage with that very same struggle having now been aligned
with the 'properl side. This is opposed to a classical
realist text, in which there exists
definite procedures for marking closure as closure,
for demarcating a definite space and distance
between the text and the discourses and practices
around it . '
Propaganda, on the other hand, works to reduce the distance
between the text and the discourses of the real world that
surround it. Neale gives the example of the title card
that closes Der Ewige Jude: 'Keep our race pure. Racial
purity for ever. ' The f irst person plural ( 'our" ) , the
struggle (Aryan vs- Non-Aryan) and the lack of closure on a
real-lif e corollary ("Keep..," ) are al1 present, This
attempt to put the spectator in a position of conflict with
a specific discourse that has a real-world effect, Neale
argues, is "the £undamental mark of a propagandist text". 8
These attempts to make specific references to the
historical situations of the viewing audience, and so
indicate that the struggles referred to exist beyond the
film, frequently date propaganda and make them
incomprehensible outside their specific historical context.
For example, the numerous ref erences in Warner Bros . '
wartime cartoons to being '4FJ, ration cards, and working
the 'swing shift at Lockheed' are almost unintelligible to
a conternporary audience lacking historical knowledge of
wartirne America, The present-day need for interpretation
simply to understand the literal meaning of these cartoons
highlights the importance of placing them in their proper
historical context when decoding their ideological meaning.
Analyz ing Propaganda
The ideological analysis of propaganda, then, cari
begin with a checklist of these textual elements as
outlined by Neale. But, as mentioned, both Neaie and
Petley warn that it is important not to stop there- The
crucial aspect of propaganda analysis is context - the
rigorous identification'of the historical, economic and
social juncture that the propaganda appeared at and its
place within these junctures. The questions asked by Neale
- What use were the texts put to? How were they intended
to function? What is their place within ciaema conceived
as a social practice? - these are the elements of an
ideological and historical analysis of propaganda. 1 have
provided a general historical framework for the production
of these cartoons in the first chapter of this thesis. The
analysis in this chapter will place individual texts within
that framework in order to consider each film's
propagandis tic f unction the intersection politics and
entertainment.
This analysis of Arnerican cartoons will focus on how
they existed at the meeting point of the government's
desire to put forth specitic ideological positions and the
audience's specific wartime ideology- This investigation
will not look at the animation that was cormnissioned
directly £rom the studios by the government (i. e. Disney's
wartime training films , Wamer Bros . "SNAFUn series ) since
these were never intended for general audience consumption.
Propaganda by de£ inition is produced for a mass audience,
and these comrnercially produced cartoons went through the
channels of censorship that dictated their content as
acceptable for the consumption of American wartime
audiences. By looking at the kind of cartoons one dght
see in front of a typical double bill on a typical Saturday
night at the movies between 1939 and 1945, it will be
possible to describe the place of these films within cinema
'as a social practice', and as a result their ideological
content -
Bearing in mind Neale ' s warning that no textual
analysis should be limited to a checklist of a set of
textual characteristics, it seems appropriate to begin £rom
there and move on to an ideological investigation- Such a
cornparison makes a good starting point for discussing how
the cartoons fulfilled some of the same functions as
wartime features in expressing attitudes towards the war,
and allows us to see how they eclipsed these 'official
attitudes' in some instances-
Regresenting the Enemy
The most notable fact of American wartirne ideology that was
transmitted by cartoon was the difference between attitudes
toward the German enemy and the Japanese enemy. William
Keylor notes that American wartime policy did not take the
Japanese as seriously as the Germans from the outset of the
con£ lict :
From the beginning of the Pacific war it was certain
that Japan could pose no serious threat to the
national existence of Great Britain and the United
States ,'
Even after the Pearl Harbour bombing of the Arnerican
Pacific Eleet, "the American and British governments agreed
that Gennany was the main enemy" . This opinion was of
course based on fact - Japan simply did not have the naval
strength successful attack either country.
But this factual basis for Arnericafs opinion of Japan as an
in£ erior enemy was soon bound
pse judice and resulted the
with cultural
characterization
and ethnic
the
Japanese not only as an inferior enemy, but also as an
in£ erior people. The cultural stereotypes that resulted
£rom this wartime hatred of the Japanese included the idea
that they were fanatical, primitive and treacherous, which
led to some ideological contradictions regarding Japanese-
Americans . Despi te the con£ idence of the Americans that
Japan was incapable of directly attacking the U. S , ,
paranoid delusion about an impending invasion led
Californian politicians to
[persuade] the Roosevelt administration to authorize
on February 9, 1942, the forced evacuation and
internment of 120,000 Japanese-Americans in
California, Oregon, and Washington on the grounds
that they represented a fifth column of potential
value to a Japanese invasion force.''
While Arnerican wartime ideology allowed for the relocation
of Japanese families to internent camps - thus replicating
the actions of the Nazis in their treatment O£ the Jews -
it did not permit the same action against German or
Italian-Americans. The only explanation for this
contradiction lies in the idea disseminated throughout
Arnerican wartime culture that the Japanese were an inferior
and untrustworthy people. This is the social 'use', in
Neale' s words, that some propaganda was put to during the
war - the construction of two differing ideological
positions concerning America' s endes.
This negative ideological position regarding the
Japanese f ound a particular forceful outlet in Hollywood.
Ralph R. Donald outlines the strategies used by feature
films to characterize the Japanese:
Donald
In Hollywood feature films, Germany, Italy, and
Japan were not treated as viilains of equal
stature---the Japariese became Arnericars number one
object of hate-''
also sugges ts that the course this uneven
emphasis was a perceived racial and cultural dif£erence
f rom America ' s European enemies :
Racial differences (as well as political and moral
differences} made the Japanese easier propaganda
targets than the Germas or Italians- More tools to
use and no need to hold back.13
Finally, he lists the lexicon for referring to the Japanese
in wartime features, much of which is in evidence in (and
well suited to) the cartoons under analysis:
Anthropomorphisms were used often to portray the
Japanese as lower creatures-.the most common [of
which] was the monkey ... the Japanes e were called
monkeys f ive tlmes in Guadalcanal Diary, four times
in The Fighting Seabees, three times in both
Objective Buma and Bataan, twice in Gung Ho!, and
once each in China Girl, Blood on the Sun and Air
Force -
Also :
Another anthropomorphism of ten used agains t the
Japanese was the "rat, " and screenwriters didnr t
hesitate to suggest that the enemy should be
favorably compared to them.
He gives examples of "rat" references £rom The Purple
Heart, Destination Tokyo, God is My Co-Pilot and Bataan.
The obvious comection to be made here is to Nazi
strategies of characterizing Jews as rats and vermin,
culminating in their use of Zyklon B, a vermin poison, in
the gas chambers- While the Arnerican government never went
as far as to exterminate the Japanese-Americans they held
in camps, such a comparison nevertheless draws them
uncomfortably close to an enerny that History tells us was
the moral opposite of the Allies and the embodiment of
evil.
This diffewence in treatment between the Japanese and
America' s other great enemy, Germany, becomes evident in
comparing the content of two Warner Bros. films I've
chosen, one in which the Japanese play foi1 to Bugs Bunny -
Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips (1944, Friz Freleng) and the other
portraying Daffy Duck's attack on the Germas - Daf f y the
Commando (1943, Friz Freleng) . The analysis will begin by
comparing the films' form to Neale's template for
propagccnda, to see if they actually qualify for that
category- Their content will then be compared to the set
of themes identified by Thomas Bohn in the Why We Fight
series of documentaries, in order to determine what
ideological stance the cartoons take regarding official
American wartime policy. By examining how the two cartoons
apply this wartime ideology to the representation of
Japanese and Germari enemies, it becomes possible to see how
two different ideological positions were constructed for
American audiences,
Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips
This embarrassingly named 1944 short, directed by Friz
Freleng and written by Tedd Pierce, exhibits several of the
characteristics indicated by Neale as belonging to the
taxonomy of propaganda. The cartoon is structured as a 'we
vs, you' conflict, in this case 'we ~mericans vs. you
Japanese'. The viewer is aligned with the main character
through a number of strategies: by virtue of the cartoon
'star system', contemporary viewers must have realized £rom
the moment they saw his name that Bugs Bunny was the hero.
Beyond that, Bugs is the only American in the film, and
speaks with an American accent. Near the end of the film,
he celebrates the arriva1 of an American navy ship
decorated with American flags. Since the film was
originally intended to be shown in the U.S. and Canada, we
can assume that audiences identified with him.
Ln addition, viewers would be inclined to identify
with Bugs as a reaction to the variety of ways that the
film alienates viewers £rom the Japanese characters in the
film. Having aligned the audience's sympathies with Bugs,
the cartoon irnrnediately places them, in Neale's words, "in
a position of struggleM- The moment we are introduced to
'the other sidef, there is conflict. A Japanese soldier
attacks Bugs without provocation the instant the soldier is
introduced, and a series of supposed markers of Japanese
culture (i-e, discourses of 'Japanese-ness') are then
placed in conflict with the audience's representative:
samurai swords , military servility, sumo mes tling, geisha
girls, the rising sun flag - al1 are mocked or defeated by
the American.
Finally, the film exhibits the true mark of propaganda
by implying that the fight it represents has a specific
conseqyence in the real world. Obviously, no member of the
film's conternporary American audience could have been
unaware that the country was at war with Japan in 1943, but
before the cartoon a newsreel featuring an update on the
conflictfs progress would have reminded them of this fact.
Newsreels in 1943 were of course the emblems of 'reality',
and having seen black and white images of Japanese soldiers
moments before seeing Bugs Bunny doing battle with one in
animated form must have served as a heavy anchor securing
the cartoon conflict to actual, out-of-theatre experience.
In addition, the cartoon uses the real Arnerican and
Japanese flags, again symbolizing for the audience what
these cartoons represent: actual nations at war- While
the film does have a sense of closure in that Bugs defeats
al1 the Japanese soldiers he encounters and is rescued by
the Navy, the cartoon signifies that Bugsr fight is only a
portion of what has to be done to end the war.
E'unction of the Rabbit
Having established that the film qualifies as propaganda
according to Neaie's criteria, we can begin to look at how
the film functioned as a wartime text in terms of "cinema
as a social practice". The three most readily identifiable
war-propaganda themes present in Bugs B my Nips the Nips
are what Bohn calls "the United States citizen as cornmon
man", "the war imposed on the United States", and
"dehumanization of the enemy". l4 These themes work together
to construct an image of the Japanese enemy as an
uncivilized, servile group forcing the war ont0 ~rnerican
soil.
The Warner Brothers series was perfectly suited
to promote the idea of the American as an everyman, since
their stable of animated stars was predicated on the
studio's historical patronage and celebration of the
working cla~s.'~ Bugs Bunny in particular was ideal for the
role: the premise of the character, with his working-class
Brooklyn accent and sarcastic attitude, is that of a
peremially harassed average joe who just wants to live his
life but constantly runs into outside interference, much as
the U.S, wanted to see its' own involvement in the war.
From a 1946 'interview' with Bugs courtesy of the Warner
Bros. publicity department :
The boys on the Coast try to think of situations in
which I get involved through no fault of my own, and
then have me tum the tables on the trouble-makers.
Itrs the old story of an underdog getting the best
of his oppressors, and do they love it ! L6
The self-image that the United States government wanted to
project to wartirne audiences is neatly summed up in this
post-war description of Bugs Bunny. It was not difficult
to adapt these established storytelling conventions to the
wartime demands that the government placed on filrnmakers.
In Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips, the theme of the Arnerican
citizen as the cornmon man is exploited effectively when our
put-upon everyman is forced into a confrontation with the
Japanes e navy .
The imposition of trouble on the innocent Bugs, trying
to mind his own business, is the most prominent theme of
the cartoon and reflects the greater theme of the war
having been forced on the U.S. The film begins with an
idyllic scene of Bugs floating along, a title card telling
us he is "sornewhere in the pacific" , under a perfect blue
sky as serene xylophone notes establish a mood of
Bugs s ings portentous
Someone's rocking my drearnboat
I1m captain without a crew
We were sailing along
So peaceful and strong
Suddenly something went wrong
The cartoon's opening notes already establish the potential
external threat to our herors utopia. Arriving at an
island, the calmness of the scenario is again established
as Bugs calls it a "garden of Eden", "Shangri-La", and 'so
peaceful.,.so quiet". This of course sets up the disruption
of Bugsr Eden by explosive shelling, and when ke hides in
the first available haystack he discovers a Japanese
soldier hiding inside. The war is brought to Bugs, and the
source of the war is the Japanese. He does nothing to seek
it out, and his involvement is purely for self-defense-
Thus begins the dehumanization of the Japanese as an
enemy, through caricature of their physical, psychological
and cultural characteristics to make thern appear
uncivilized, murderous and servile. The standard Hollywood
codes of 'Japanese-ness' are in full effect here: the gong
upon entry of the Japanese soldier, the bucktee th, the
glasses. A Stream of nonsensical babbling intended to
represent the Japanese laquage accompanies every .action
taken by Bugsr foil, the Japanese soldier- Finally, for
some reason, the Japanese soldiers are al1 drawn barefoot,
perhaps again alluding to their 'uncivilizedr nature- By
characterizing the soldiers as primitive, the cartoon works
to dehumanize them in the eyes of the audience and justify
a position of U-S. moral and cultural superiority towards
the enemy,
These physical distortions are combined with cultural
stereotypes and misrepresentations as the Japanese are
portrayed as murderous, obsequious and dim-witted. Bugs'
first words to the soldier are neutral - the traditional
"what' s up doc?" - but the soldier responds without
hesitation by trying to kill our hero with a sword (another
stereotypical marker of his ethnicity) while continually
babbling in 'Japaneser. The supposed servility of the
Japanese is also caricatured when Bugs reappears dressed as
a Japanese general. The soldier immediately prostrates
himself and offers to comit 'hari-karir (hara-kiri: ritual
suicide) for having offended his superior- Finally, al1
the Japanese soldiers fa11 for Bugsr ploy to distribute ice
cream bars containing hand grenades. The soldier who has
been BugsJ chie£ enerny even retums after his ice cream
explodes and demands another. Kowever, remember that the
generic conventions of the Warner Bros. cartoons always
dictate that the role of the main character's foi1 is to be
played by an easily fooled, childish simpleton. Still,
while this rnay explain some of the stupidity of the
Japanese soldierfs actions, it does not excuse the negative
association made between the Japanese and stupidity, Once
again, by associating the Japanese with inhuman character
traits, nonsensical babbling and the grotesque appearance
of the soldiers, the cartoon works to dehumanize the
Japanese and validate an Arnerican ideology of superiority
regarding their culture-
Daffy the Commando
Once again, analysis of Daffy the Commando (1943, directed
by Friz Freleng, written by Michael Maltese) can begin by
going through the critesia for propaganda established by
Neale. The 'we vs. you' structure of the film is firmly
established using the same strategy as the Bugs Bunny film.
Daffy, the sole American/Allied Forces soldier, is pitted
against various Germans and the discourses associated with
them - the rigid hierarchy of comand, the absolute
obedience to their leader, the Nazi f lag, their
humourlessness, the übermench, and the Geman language.
The discursive repwesentative of the American ideological
apparatus is Daf £y: the individual, rebellious, humourous
average American soldier. This is the role with which the
American audience will sympathize.
Combat is assumed: the film &aws on the contemporary
audience's very specific assumptions about their current
(i.e. 1943) historical situation to provide the context for
the fighting that ensues. We are given no narrative reason
for the conflict between the American Daffy and the Geman
soldiers - it simply exists- There are two of Neale's
identifying marks of propaganda here- First, it locks the
two opposing discourses into a struggle with one another as
a matter of common sense. The audience is to assume that
no reason is necessary for fighting to occur between
Americans and Germans. We know the reason - we are
enemies. No further explanation given or needed. Second,
the fact that the narrative's raison dretre is to be
assumed £rom the audience's knowleCLge of the real world
both marks the struggle as having a real-world e£fect, but
also shows the interaction of the audience with the text-
As Neale argues, propaganda cannot simply be considered a
hypodermic needle of in£ ormation in j ected into the brains
of the audience. It relies on their knowledge:
The 'current situation' is a crucial element in
propagandist texts: propaganda places the spectator
in relationshîps with discourses and practices
existing outside of the text, as in a position of
struggle vis-à-vis some, and (perhaps shifting)
identification with others - The existence of those
other discourses and practices is theref ore
necessarily posited as contemporary with the
audience at the time of the text8s production-L7
This relationship between the text and specific events in
the real world of the spectator is another crucial marker
of propaganda, one exhibited by Daffy the Commando -
the
By looking at how the Gemans are caricatured by the Warner
Bros - studio in relation to the Japanese, it becomes
apparent that they were not assigned the same role in the
American ideological category of 'the enemy' . The cartoon
in question is structurally identical to the previous 'Bugs
Bunny vs, the Japariese' cartoon except that it features
Daffy Duck battling the Germas: he parachutes into German
territory and terrorizes a Nazi general and his bumbling
private. However, there are key differences in the two
cartoonsr representation of the hero's adversary that seern
point di£ f erent estimation the Germans and the
Japanese . Consequently , Daf fy the Commando appears to
serve a dif ferent function than Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips.
Rather than simply dehumanize the enemy as primitive, it
attempts to portray the Germans as a genuine threat that
needs to be stopped- By looking at how the three themes
identified in the Bugs Bunny cartoon about the Japanese are
treated in this cartoon about the Germans, we can begin to
understand how the Germans were a sigriificantly different
opponent for the United States.
Once again the theme of the American citizen as common
man, identifying with the working class, is brought to the
forefront. Like Bugs, Daffy enters singing a song that
sets up the thematic content of the next seven minutes:
Itrs the same the whole world over
It's the poor what get the blame
While the rich has al1 the gravy
Now ain't that a blinkin' shame
To further the association, Daffy sings the song in a
working class English accent. This introduction differs
£rom Bugsf entrance in two significarit ways: firstly,
Daffy cornes to the war rather than vice versa. The Germans
are a serious threat that has to be put back in their
place, and Americans go to Europe to do that, rather than
an intrusion into 'ouw backyardr, "sornewhere in the
Pacif ic" . Secondly, by singing the song in an English
accent, Daffy calls attention to the role of the U.S- as a
merriber of the Allies rather than as an individual nation -
promoting the United Nations was another wartime goal of
the Roosevelt administration1'. Also, the necessity of
belonging to a group to defeat this enemy again lends
credence to their formidable nature as opponent. As we
shall see, the key divergence £rom Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips
is that Daf£y the Commando subtly represents the Germans as
an enemy to be taken more seriously than the Japanese-
The dehumanization of the enemy that is so prominent
in the Bugs Bunny cartoon is limited to mockery and
caricature of the Germans in Daffy the Commando. The
Germans are assigned a markedly different set of
characteris-tics than their Japanese counterparts, all of
which reinforces the idea that they are an enemy to be
taken seriously. The matter of language is the most
conspicuous: whereas 'Japanese' is reduced to a series of
incoherent syllables obviously intended to represent
infantile babbling as much as it does language, 'German' is
not only a clearly identifiable language but in some cases
proper vocabulary is used. At one point in the cartoon a
German telegram appears which reads:
Dumkopf ! !
1st das nicht ein sauerkrauten kartoffel
Süppe nicht effen gemachtes kalbfleisch!!
der Apf en von geschichte.
This message then dissolves into its 'translation' :
Dumkopf ! !
If vun more komando gets through
It's your ka-rear! !
The Apes of Wrath
While the translation is of course wronglg, the fact that
actual German words are used grants more authenticity to
German culture than babbling does to Japanese- Later in
the cartoon, an interesting moment arises when Daffy
addresses the Gemian officer in his native language and
holds up a sign translating for the audience- Most
remarkable is that the second time this happens, Daf £y
speaks accurate Germari. 20 The legitimacy granted to the
German language is denied to Japanese, and works to
humanize these caricatures of German sol&ews, ultimately
inscribing a different position for them as 'enemy' than
the one assigned to the Japanese soldiers in the previous
Other characteristics assigned to the Germans are also
distinctly di£ ferent and work to distinguish them £rom the
Japanese . First of all, while understandably stereotyped
as authoritarian, their servility is of a wholly different
nature than their Asian comrades- They are allowed
rebellion, or at least insubordination. When the German
general receives the telegram telling him to do his job
better, he becomes enraged (another marker of 'German-
ness') and mutters about his superiors and Hitler. Later
on, a skunk crosses his path and he salutes it with a loud
"Heil Hitler!", although he seems confused about just why
he did this - Jwctaposed with the toadying of the Japanese
soldier in the former cartoon, these German characters seem
more rational in their behaviour,
A final notable difference in the treatment of the
Germaris is the cartoon's effort to identify the Nazis as
their leader, Adolf Hitler. His name is mentioned
constantly throughout the story, £rom the telegram at the
beginning to the saluting of the skunk to the film's
bizarre conclusion: Daffy is shot out of a cannon and
lands, presumably, in Berlin, where Hitler is giving a
speech. Waiting for an opportune moment, he jumps up and
beats the eerily wealistic-looking dictator on the head
with a mallet, eliciting a cry of pain in German. This
Eilm never lets us forget that the source of evil in
Germany is Adolf Hitler's dictatorial policies, and that
his bumbling cronies are simply blind patriots carrying out
his wishes . The Japanese, on the other hand, are more
faceless and less rational. They are barefoot, babbling,
murderous automatons of a more primitive kind of fascism-
We even learn the German soldiers' names in the latter
cartoon, while the Japanese are simply cogs in the Rising
Sun war machine -
Rabbit vs. Duck
One final difference between these two cartoons lies in
their endings- Neal e tells us that 'truer propaganda has
an open ending that urges the viewer's assistance in
resolving the conflicts it sets forth as they exist in the
real world. Neither of these two shorts has a perfectly
resolved ending, yet the Bugs Bunny film certainly has a
more comfortable narrative endpoint: the Japanese are
defeated, if only temporarily, the American Navy is on the
scene, and Bugs is chasing a beautiful female bunny into
the jungle. The war might not be over, but we've won an
island back.
Daf fyf s situation is a little more perilous - Having
landed in the middle of a Nazi party rally, he smashes
Hitler on the head with a mallet, at which Hitler screams
in pain. Iris out. Arguably this is simply a case of
'wrapping it up', ignoring narrative logic due to tirne
constraints, but the fact remains that this cartoon has no
real resolution. The protagonist is about to be in
trouble, but instead of allaying the audience's
expectations, the film ends. One explanation for this
aborted ending might be that the tendency to resolve a
storyline is relative to the amount of confidence the
filmakers had regarding the two different enemies - the
Japanese are dispatched by Bugs Bunny and their story ends,
while the Germans still loom threateningly over Daffy.
That particular story still needs resolution, the cartoon
seems to suggest. Keyior again:
Yet even in the face of the expanding power of Japan
across the Pacific, and despite the absence of any
irrimediate German threat to America' s vital
interests, Roosevelt resolved to pursue a "Europe-
first" strategy in the warm2'
And:
In the aftermath of Pearl Harbour, the Arnerican and
British governments agreed that Germany was the main
enemy . **
It is a historical fact that the U.S. considered Germany a
more serious threat than Japan. This was not a wholly
irrational policy, as the fa11 of Europe would presumably
lead to the fa11 of North America, given the Nazi's stated
intentions. Furthermore, Japan simply did not have the
material resources required for an invasion of the United
States. 23 Nevertheless, by looking at these
entertainment/propaganda cartoons, we can see that these
political policies were bound up with cultural attitudes
that dictated different attitudes towards the two enemies.
By comparing and breaking dom the representation of these
two ethnicities in Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips and Daffy the
Commando, we can see how politics intersected with
entertainment to reinforce two different ideas of 'the
enemy' in Arnerican ideology, and how one of these enemies
was considered less human than the other.
Other Militant Animais
As mentioned above, only a small percentage of the cartoons
released between 1939 and 1945 by the Hollywood studios
were related to the war and could be considered to have a
propagandistic function. Al1 the same, each and every
studio did put out its share of anti-Axis cartoons, not
just Warner Bros. (the most prolific) and Disney (the most
popular) . The dichotomy in representation between the
Japanese and the Germans repeats itself throughout these
cartoons, showing that ,this approach to representation was
industry wide and not restricted to Warner Bros. Paramount
studios had several epiçodes of itç f lagship cart60n
series, Popeye, deal with the Japanese menace in less than
noble fashion, including the cleverly titled You're a Sap,
Mr. Jap (1942; directed by Dan Gordon, written by Jim Tyer
and Car1 Meyer), Also, Tex Avery at MGM studios personally
took on Hitler in a cartoon he directed called Blitz Wolf
(1942, written by Rich Hogan) . Through a brie£ analysis of
these two films, it becomes possible to see that the
degradation of the Japanese and the identification of the
Gemans with a maniacal leader was not limited to the
exploits of Bugs Bunny and Donald Duck, and that during the
war cartoons £rom every studio took on the features of
propaganda .
Both films con£ orm to Nealef s criteria for propaganda:
they establish opposing groups, align the viewer with one
of those groups using an us/them narrative strategy,
represent the two groups as having separate and
antagonistic discourses and finally, mark that antagonism
as existing beyond the movie screen. The first concern of
both cartoons is to establish the opposing sides and
identify the American team as superior. You're a Sap, m.
opening has the f ollowing lyrics the job:
You're a Sap, Mr. Jap
You make a Yankee cranky2'
You're a Sap, Mr . Jap
Uncle Sam is gonna spanky
Wait and see before we're done
The Yankee C-N-D will sink your rising Sun
To complete the alignment of the viewer, the narrative
associates the pro-American Song with the protagonist. The
cartoon's first image is of the hero, Popeye, on his "Navy
Patrol" boat looking through binoculars and hmng the
Song we have just heaxd, then singing "you're a Sap, Sap,
Sap, Mr . Jap" . By using the f irst person plural for the
Arnericans ( "bef ore we ' re done" ) and third person for the
Japanese ("sink your rising sun") , the film literally sets
up an us/them viewpoint. Dialogue reinforces this viewing
position - exclamations by Popeye of "wer 11 stop 'em" and
'so, you want to tangle with us Arnericans, huh?" while he
chases Japanese sailors attempt to bring the viewer ont0
his side. By creating an anti-Japanese position for the
spectator, You're a Sap, Mr. Jap conforms to Neale' s mode1
of propaganda .
Avery's Blitz Wolf takes a slightly different strategy
to achieve the same effect: after the opening credits,
during which we hear the patriotic Song 'Over There", a
title card appears with the message
Forward: the wolf in this photoplay
in NOT fictitious. Any similarity
between this wolf and that *! !$#@%
jerk Efitler is purely intentional!
This title card serves the same purpose as that which Neale
describes in Der Ewlge Jude: it not only sets up both
sides of the conflict, but marks it as existing beyond the
fictional domain of the cartoon- The audience is further
aligned with a position against the Germans with the first
appearance of 'Adolf Wolf", complete with Nazi uniform and
tiny moustache- Sticking his head out of a tank and
salivating for a moment, he suddenly stops, looks at the
audience and holds up a sign reading "Go Ahead and Hiss -
Who Cares?" Following this aggression against the
spectator, a rotten tomato appears £rom the audience's
irnaginary space and hits the wolf in the face. This
extraordinary exchange literally brings the conflict into
the space of the spectator and allies the audience against
the Hitler representative. As in Daffy the Commando, it is
not simply the Americans that must deal with the Nazis, so
the coding of the protagonists as Arnericans is not as
complete as in You're a Sap, Mr. Jap or Bugs Bunny Nips the
Nips- However, an opposing discourse is clearly
established by the cartoon, using the first person plural:
"support our national defense program", one of the
protagonists tells another, and a title card tells us
"we'll skin that skunk âcross the pond". Thwough this
strategic use of pronouns, insults and nationalism, both
cartoons use similar tactics to oblige the spectator to
I
their discourse.
The next indication that these cartoons conform to
Neale's definition of 'propagandar is their representation
of two opposing discourses and the rnarking of those
oppositions as having a real-world extension. You're a
Sap, Mr- Jap uses the same lexicon of stereotypical
Japanese-ness employed by Bugs B u ~ y Nips the Nips to
portray the Japanese as primitive, servile and treacherous .
The stereotypes became universal during the war years: the
film's title is written in a font that resembles kanji, one
of Japan's three alphabets, a gong is sounded with the
first appearance of two Japanese 'fishermenr, we see the
rising sun flag and the fishermen have the requisite
glasses, buck teeth and slanted eyes. The cartoon
establishes the p5mitivism of the Japanese by showing the
two fishermen wearing sandals and robes, using fishing
poles that are just sticks with string on them, and their
boat is an archaic wooden junk. Once again, their language
is a string of incomprehensible syllables intended to
indicate Japanese. Their servility cornes into play on two
occasions: the fishermen bow to Popeye as soon as they
meet him, offering him a peace treaty - a reference to
peace treaties broken by Axis powers, and a definite marker
of a situation existing outside and beyond the -screen. .-
Servility cornes into play again when a despondent Japanese
sailor, upon being defeated by Popeye, decides to corrunit
suicide by drinking gasoline and swallowing firecrackers.
The treachery of the Japanese is, for this film, their
defining characteristic: the fishermen offer Popeye a
peace treaty upon meeting him, then break it while he is
signing;
lobster;
warship ;
they offer hirn flowers that contain a killer
the fishing boat transforms into a massive
Popeye verbalizes the cartoon's attitude toward
the Japanese by calling them "double-crossing chimpanzees".
When the Japanese warship suddenly falls apart for no
apparent reason, the narrative gets in a final discursive
jab by having Popeye pick up a piece of the collapsed ship
that reads "Made in Japantl - a now-ironic reference to
contemporary attitudes towards Japan's budding
manufacturing economy. 25 The cartoonf s final image, of the
rising sun flag sinking into the ocean to the sound of a
toilet flushing, makes it clear: Japanese discourse is not
to be supported.
Blitz Wolf also creates two distinct discourses for
the audience, using the fairy tale of The Three Little Pigs
to create a wolf-like discourse of 'German-nessf consisting
of greed, savagery, warmongering and treachery. Avery's
cartoon does differ £rom the Popeye cartoon in identifying
this opposing discourse almost entirely within a single
representative figure: Adolf Hitler. From its opening
moments, with the cartoon's title and the aforementioned
sign, the narrative establishes that when it says Nazi, it
means Adolf Hitler. This is the cartoon's chief strategy
for rnarking its conflicts as having real-world consequences
- the shared knowledge with the audience that Hitler is an
actual historical figure. It also alludes to the European
conflict, showing a newspaper headline and diagram of the
enemyr s invasion plan for "Pigrnania". The multiple arrows
indicating invading armies testify to the excessive
warmongering of the Nazis. As with the Japanese, the
enemy's treachery is established by showing Adolf Wolf
breaking a peace treaty with the pigs and being the chief
aggressor in the conflict, although treachery is not the
chief characteristic assigned to the Germans. The wolf's
walk speaks volumes about the cartoon's construction of a
German discourse: ever salivating, he alternately goose-
steps and sneaks fomard on tiptoe, simultaneously a
ravenous monster, rigid fascist and double-crossing
backstabber. Blitz Wolf also has an open resolution that
leaves a door ajar between the text and the real world.
Itrs closing title card reads:
The End.,
Of Adolf
If You'll Buy a Stamp or Bond
We8 11 Skin that Skunk Across the Pond
By creating opposing discourses and relating them to the
actual lived experiences of the audience, Blitz Wolf fits
the de£ inition of propaganda provided by Neale.
The OWI report concerning You 're a Sap, Mr. Jap
actually describes it as "propaganda on the absurd side
[because] .At laughs at the enemy in such a way as to
discredit their real danger. "26 Despite this disapproval ,
the cartoon was released with the approval of the three
wartime censorship bodies. While the report seems to
contradict the thesis that the Japanese weren't taken as
seriously as the Germans, the cartoons themselves tell a
dif ferent story. As with the two Warner Bros . examples,
the cartoon attacking the Japanese is much more
convincingly resolved than the one attacking the Germans,
and the nature of its attacks more dehumanizing.
Consequently, these two cartoons serve as further evidence
that the transformation of animated shorts into wartime
propaganda with specific goals was not restricted to the
Disney and Warner Bros. studios, but rather was an
industry-wide phenomenon.
Conclusion
The final point made by Neale in his theorization of
that the theoris t should f orget
her ideological position as a factor when reading
propaganda. Hisiorical propaganda studies are done with
20/20 hindsight, and when investigating the social,
economic and cultural conjuncture that produced a certain
piece of propaganda and determined how it was read, the
inves tigator also working f rom specif ic social,
economic and cultural conjuncture that detednes the way
the same propaganda is analyzed- Neale argues that
.hoth the identification and evaluation of
propaganda have to be based on an assessrnent of the
conjuncture, and that the latter in particular rnust
always proceed frorn a constructed ideological and
political position, in relation both to the
conjmcture as a whole and to the particular text
under consideration. 27
The position question one yearç af ter the a£ ter
the Al l i es were victorious in World War II and the Japanese
and Germans were defeated. The wartime policies of the
Axis have corne to define our concepts of irnperialism and
genocide and are universally held to represent immoral
nationalism, while laissez-faire capitalism and democracy
have emerged as 'the right way to liverc However, my
reading is being conducted from the position of an academia
in which the values that were victorious in World War II
are as heavily criticized as those that were defeated.
Thus the extreme ambivalence towards the American animation
in question, with one of the ultimate points of this thesis
being the similarity between the propaganda techaiques used
by the Americans and the Gemans.
Despite this ambivalence, it is not the goal O£ this
thesis to magically reveal that democracy is secretly as
bad as fascisrn- Instead, in the face of books like
Jemings and Brewster's The Century, I hope that this
reading will complicate the simplistic opposition usually
provided when explaining World War II. This argument is
not entirely straightforward and unproblematic: it is
important not to forget that these are the cultural
products of a nation at war. Chuck Jones, the Warner Bros.
animation director who was responsible for many of the
cartoons in question, points out that the racial
stereotypes at work in these films are not aimless,
irrational hostility, but rather an ideoLogica1 assault
against a fascist enemy that had declared its intention to
destroy their way of life.28 By putting the films in these
terms, Jones complicates any attempt to dismiss them as the
result of the racist sensibilities of a more uneducated
time, but more importantly places them response the
Axis aggression, nullifying any comparison to Nazi
propaganda - While powerf ul , this argument leans back
towards the 'war imposed on the U.S." ideology promoted by
documentaries such as Mhy We Fight-
On the other hand, what does make the films ethically
suspect and subject to a comparison with Nazi propaganda
techniques was the way that they prescribed di£ ferent
values to different groups based on their ethnicity. As 1
have shown in this chapter, wartime cartoons constructed
the (Asian) Japanese as a primitive, murderous and servile
people unworthy of our full attention as an adversary - an
opinion based partially on fact, but also on cultural
pre judice . The (European) Germans , however, are
treacherous, humourless and bent on world domination, but
at the same time are a strong, dangerous people unduly
influenced by a maniacal leader that can only be de£eated
by the full cooperation of the American people. The
contradictory ideological stance taken towards these two
enemies is evident in these two portraits.
This irresponsible distinction based on ethnicity is
complicit in the wartime ideology that dehumanized the
Japariese, and consequently Japanese-Americans, and which
paved the way for the rationalization of such atrocities as
the internent of Japanese-Americans in camps and the
decision to &op two nuclear weapons on a civilian
population. This is the mresolved ideological
contradiction that this paper seeks to expose: that on one
hand, the paradigro of evil for this century is the
Holocaust - which included the internment of humans based
on ethnicity and their mass execution - while the
relocation of Japanese-Arnericans and the dropping of two
nuclear weapons on a civilian population have become
justified by History. This incongruity in attitudes
towards historical atrocity does the most to increase the
moral ambiguity around the usually straightforward
historical perception of World War II-
' Shull and Wilt, p- 161: Appendix A - ~ar-Related Arnerican Cartoons
Petley, p. 95
' Neaie, p. 31
Neale, p. 30
These two examples are take,rl from Der Ewige Jude (Nazi anti-Jewish
propaganda film) and The Spirit of ' 43 (American propaganda film
encouraging payment of taxes) respectively.
Neale, p. 31
' ibid
' ibid
Keyior, p- 253
la ibid
If ibid
'* Donald, p- 1
I3 ibid
l4 Bohn, p. 131; these themes are taken frorn the list Sohn identifies in
Frank Capra's documentary series "Why We Fight", promoted through these
films as the governmentrs officia1 wartime ideology regarding the enemy
and U. S. involvement in the war
IS Roddick, p. 11
16
Adamson, p. 27
" Neale, pl 33n
la
Keylor, p. 247
l9 The telegram's literal translation is "Chump! This is not a
sauerkraut potato! The soup is nol even made with cal£ meat!! Signed,
the Apes of history. "
20 Asking for a coin for the telephone, he says 'Bitte mein herr, haben-
sie ein five-pfennig stück? Danke scheune'. He gets one word wrong,
but itts certainly more than Bugs tried to speak Japanese-
21 Keylor, p. 194
22 Keylor, p. 253
23 ibid
24 Shull and Wilt translate this lyric (p. 110) as 'to make a Yankee
cranky", although repeated viewings of the cartoon led me to hear the
nonsensical "Hooray for Yankee cranky". 1 have listed it hexe as it
was intended - to establish that the Japanese are an aggravation for
the Americans .
25 Keylor, p. 453-458
2"hull and Wilt, p- 110
27 Neale, p- 40
le Jones in Ducktators
4
Foxes and Rhinoceroses
Introduction
Hitler legalized his dictatorship on March
23, 1933, and on the same day arinounced in the Volkischer
Beobachter
,a systematic campaign to restore the nation's moral
and rnaterial health. The whole educational sys ta,
theatre, film, literature, the press, and
broadcasting - al1 these will be used as a means to
this end.'
Over the next twelve years, the German film industry
produced 1,086 feature films in service of this campaign;
largely generic, the films either seemed to avoid politics
altogether or made dogmatic pro-Nazi staternents, Most of
the pro-Nazi propaganda that audiences were submitted to
came £rom the newsreels that imediately preceded the
feature films. Occasionally, between the newsreel and the
feature, the audience would also be treated to a cartoon.
Up until 1937, that cartoon could even have been an
Arnerican one, more likely than not a Walt Disney product,
hugely popular as they were with German audiences and
apparently apolitical.' Tt was soon decided by Goebbels,
however, that Disney fi l ms did not serve the health
campaign proposed by Hitler, and that Germans should make
their own cartoons.
This endeavour was not successful, Managing to
produce only a handful. of films before the collapse of the
Reich, the cartoons made in wartime Germany were
nonetheless a microcosm of the feature film industry, At
the same time that the RMVP realized that German cartoons
should first and foremost be entertaining, they were aware
of the propagandistic potential of such a popular art form.
The result was a majority of benign animated short films
and a small percentage of inflammatory propaganda cartoons.
This situation is comparable to the United States' cartoon
output for two reasons: one, in that blatant propaganda
was the exception rather than the rule, and two, in that
the cartoons served very specific propagandistic needs and
attempted to construct an unambiguous ideological position
for audiences,
Theorizing Nazi Propaganda
Steve Nealers model of propaganda analysis, used in the
previous chapter to dissect American cartoons, was
originally written using Nazi feature film and documentary
propaganda as its area of investigation. Therefore, It is
safe to assume that we can use this model to examine Gerrnan
wartime cartoons as well, Neale himself applies his mode1
specifically to Nazi cinema: he mites about the
relationship between the state and cinema in wartime
Gennany and its "multiplication and duplication of
ideological apparatuses"' that served to control the content
and even the reading of films. Neale argues that this
arrangement of state-controlled filmmaking created
,.an ideological division between 'entertainment' and
-politics ' , a division embodied in Goebbels '
thinking on and policies for the cinema, while
allowing close supervision over both and the
possibility of carefully planned and calculated
interventions in each4
This differs £rom the American system, he argues, in that
Goebbels had declared that entertainment and politics were
not to fuse, and encouraged filmmakers to produce either
one or the other but not both at the same time. This
division was more ideological than real, since the
propaganda was being made by professionals in the
entertainment field, for a mass audience, and therefore had
to exhibit characteristics of both in order to gain an
audience, Nonetheless, Neale cites the system of film
awards used by the Nazis to prove that entertainment and
politics were separate. These awards were:
1. Politically and artisticilly especially valuable
2. Politically and artistically valuable
3. Politically valuable,
4. Artistically valuable
5. Culturally valuable
6. Educationally valuable5
This system of awards highlights the point made by Neale
that when Nazi films were propagandistic, they were
explicitly so- Reading Nazi propaganda, then, becornes a
matter of locating the political problem that the
propaganda was trying to solve (e . g. producing ideological
racial difference within occupied countries and thus an
anti-Semi tic audience) and showing how the propaganda seeks
to create a position for the spectator that responds to
this problem,
One aspect of Nazi cinema that Neale's mode1 does not
respond well to is the question of pleasure. Both Eric
Rentschler and Linda Schulte-Sasse point out that much of
the scholarship on Nazi cinema has a tendency to hornogenize
German audiences as malleable masses that responded to
propaganda films like Pavlovian dogs. Both writers argue
that this problem can be accounted for by addressing the
idea of pleasure - of what the audiences themselves found
pleasurable in the films. Rentschler argues that
contemporary audiences were not so naïve that they did not
notice that Nazi films consciously avoided explicitly
political topics. He quotes the Nazi youth newspaper,
Wi l l e und Macht, £rom 1938:
One has to look a long the before one finds a
cinema program announcing a film with an obvious
political slant- Even the most suspicious filmgoers
cannot clah that German films seek to hit them over
the head with politics or to impose a world view-
Except for portions of the newsreels, cinema in a
newly politicized Germany amounts to an unpolitical
oasis.
If the cinema did not serve the purpose of indoctrinating
audiences with blatant National Socialist messages, as some
film historians have reduced its ' role to7, then the task of
historical film scholarship is to discover what purpose it
did serve.
Both Schulte-Sasse and Rentschler believe that the
pleasure of watching Nazi cinema for Gemans consisted in
seeing representations of social harmony and a unified
populace. Schulte-Sasse sees a response to this desire for
unity not only in the films of the period but in Nazismfs
ernphasis on mass rallies, an 'aesthetic of wholeness' and
an ideology of purity and cleanliness. Arguing that the
individual paradoxically gains a sense of identity under
fascism by çublimating him or herself to the mass, she
points to a political work, Triumph of the Wi l l , as
evidence that audiences responded to the representation of
social stability and uniformity. Both Hitler, in Mein
Kampf, and Goebbels, in his novel Mi chael , wrote about the
positive effects on the individual of feeling like part of
a massSg Schulte-Sasse argues that this desire for unity
and aspiration to national identity is rnanifested in the
central social/political fantasies of National Socialism,
the " Jew" (someone to unite against) and the King/Leader
(someone to unite f or/under) . Her study revolves around
the tendency of Nazi cinema to fetishize the 18'~ century as
the imaginary location of this social fantasy of Germanic
unitylO. Rentschler, on the other hand, sees the social
function of cinematic pleasure as one O£ escapism:
Films of the Third Reich often allowed viewers
vacations £rom the present in fanciful spheres so
that they could forget politics and civic
responsibilities-Screen illusions cushioned people
against grim realities, offering the solace of
worlds that were in order and seemed to allow
unencurnbered movement, safe havens and playgrounds
where one could dream freely-Il
Both writers contend that the role of pleasure in the
cinema of the Nazis has to do with the resolution of the
problem of national unity, an issue that was at the heart
of the role National Socialism played in the history of
Germany .
The Search for Unity in German National Identity
Modem Germari history is characterized by the desiwe to
unite disparate national elements and the pursuit of an
imaginary nation, cohesive and s trong . The
establishment of Germany as a formai political entity
occurred on January 18, 1871, only 62 years before the rise
to power of the National Socialists. The consensus of
Ger ma historians regarding these early yeaxs is that the
transition from an agricultural to an industrial economy,
the first World War, the division between socialists aad
aristocrats , multiple revolutions and the Napoleonic Wars,
among other factors, resulted in a country suffering £rom
severe interna1 tensions and an absence of national
identity by the early 1930s. 12
German historians locate the source of the country's
disunity in political, regional and cultural disparities.
Harold James contends that ever since its inception as
"Germany" out of the remnants of the Holy Roman Empire in
1815, the country has sought identity through unity. He
argues that nationalism in Germany developed in the
century as the result of a search for a unified set of
doctrines with which to settle claims to legitimacy in a
country with over 300 different states and 1500 knights'
estates. l3 By 1834, with the establishment of Germany's
first inter-regional tariff union, the idea of unity had
not gained any ground: Prussia, the largest state,
dominated the
disparity was
union, classes were
more pronounced and
polarized, social
conceptions of national
identity were more widely separated than ever. l4 James goes
on to describe the rise of large unions and a powerful
popular socialism in Gewmany after 1871, a socialism that
was denied access to meaningful political power in the
country's archaic, aristocrat-dominated governmental
system- Huge segments of the population were denied a
voice, which James maintains led to social disunity and a
lack of identity. l5 Arno Mayer supports the idea that
tension between insurgent popular forces and xesurgent
ultraconservatives contributed to the nation's
fragmentation, painting a picture of Germany at the turn of
the century as a country heavily divided by pro- and anti-
aristocratic £actions- l6 Irmgard Steinisch maintains that
when looking at nation building in Germany, it is essential
to remember that regionalism is the primary force dictating
identities, and that there is no way of describing a
unified German nationalism. l7 Finally, James Sheehan mites
that German history in the 18'" century is characterized by
social fragmentation, and that this fragmentation carried
over to the lgth and 2oth centuries. He argues that the
years from 1900-1914 are marked by divisions between social
groups that include class, regionalism and religious
denomination. The nationalism and irnperialism that led to
two World Wars, claims Sheehan, came to be employed as
devices to paper over the fissures of class and status,
drawing a theoretical line from Germany's disunity to the
rise of fascism in the 30s and 40s. 18
The Nazisr efforts to directly address this lack of
uriity and provide an imaginary alternative to it, using the
cinema as one of its tools of propaganda, played a
significant part in their rise to power. The party created
the word ' Volksgemeinschaftr to describe their concept of a
socially and politically unified people led to new glory by
a great leader, and they implemented this concept
vigorously in every available medium, including film. 19
Rentschler describes the ideology of National Socialist
films as "seeking to obliterate first-person consciousness
and to replace it with a universal third person"20; Schulte-
Sasse sees it as "pretending to retrieve a community
perceived as ' los t ' "" and "incessantly reinforcing an
imaginary collective identity via rituals sustaining the
illusion of social harrn~n~"~~; Leiser describes it as
"order, unity and determination". 23 Over and over again,
the idea of unity rests at the heart of the fantasies
conjured up for public consumption under this regime. The
Nazis came to power out of the crisis-ridden years of the
Weimar era by promising to reconcile the different segments
of the German populace, £aiLing to mention that this
reconciliation would largely be imaginary-
Analyzing Nazi Progaganda
The recurring thematic element s in propagandis tic Nazi
film, as outlined by Leiser, are al1 governed by this
fantasy of social unity:
1) absolute devotion to country
2) abandonment of individuality
3) fear of disorder/fiIth/uncleazlliness
4) sacrifice/ to die ' for something'
5) supreme ability of the Führer
6) preference for strength over weakness
7 ) Jews as vermin/di~ease/unclean~~
This is the particular context in which Nazi animated films
were shown, and any reading of them must be informed by the
accompanying history. In reading the following cartoons as
Nazi propaganda, the centrality of the theme of unity will
guide an attempt to answer Neale's questions about the
function of propaganda: what use were the films put to,
how were they intended to function, and what is their place
within the social practice known as cinema.
The three cartoons that will be analyzed here are Der
Storenfried, Van den vos Reynarde and Der Arme Hansi.
These cartoons, like their Arnerican counterparts, will be
considered in ternis of their place in cinema as a social
pxactice, i -e. for what propagaridistic goal they sought to
achieve- In light of the historical conjuncture that gave
rise to the Nazis in Germany, these films can be seen as
expressions of the imaginary ideal of unity, whether that
ideal is 'unified againstr (the Jews) or 'unified under'
(the Führer) . Furthemore, the analysis will take into
consideration that most of these cartoons, along with the
rnajority of the films produced under the Nazis, were
intended as escapist £are rather than as political
agitation. By examining how these cartoons attempt to
represent an imaginary Germany based on an ideology of
unity and sacrifice, it becornes possible to understand how
politics and entertainment intersected in an attempt to
construct an imaginary ideological position of social
harmony for their audience.
Der Storenfried: Einigkeit Macht Stark
Hans Heldrs 1940 animated short, whose title translates as
"The Troublemaker", is listed in some film catalogues as
Einigkeit Macht Stark: Unity Makes Strength. This film is
the most clear-cut example of a Nazi cartoon propagandizing
the Volksgemeinschaft - the fantasy of social unity that
governed Nazi ideology. Obviously intended as blatant
propaganda and not just entertainment with a rnetaphorical
dimension, its story concerns a peaceful animal community
that is violated by the invasion of a fox who kidnaps an
animal-child, This attack throws the comunity into
confusion, and the animals consult a soothsayer owl for
advice, who tells them that "when we al1 unite, we can
defeat the fox", Consolidating their power, a hedgehog
army joins with a wasp air force to launch an attack on the
fox, ultimately killing him with the aid of the community.
The cartoon conEorms to Nealefs criteria for
propaganda by providing the audience with competing
discourses, although these discourses extend no further
than the individual vs. the group- The film attaches the
audience's sympathy to the group through conventional
narrative means - the fox is evil, the fox kidnaps a child
- but also through pronouns: the owl uses the word 'wef
twice in its advice to the cormnunity, Furthermore, there
are cultural markers that tie the animal community to the
audience: some of the victimized animals Wear lederhosen
and other traditional Geman clothing. Finally, the
narrative is put into the context of the was through the
military imagery in the film, £urther aligning the audience
with the community- The hedgehogs Wear amour patterned
after Nazi helmets and equiprnent; their communications
headquarters has a propaganda poster on the wall stating
that "The enemy hears as tvell", based on an actual Nazi
propaganda poster; the machine-gun toting wasps fly in
formation just as Nazi Messerschmidts might, Al1 three of
these allusions to the war also fulfill fleale's second
criterion for propaganda, that the film mark the narrative
struggle as existing outside and beyond the screen. By
these examples, the film fits the definition of propaganda
and constructs a position for the audience that is
sympathetic to the community and hostile to the individual
threatening it-
Function of the Fox
The furiction of Der Storenfried within Nazi ideology
has to do primarily with the aforementioned fantasy of
social harmony. The cartoon exhibits several of the themes
mentioned by Leiser, notably 'preference for strength over
weakness' and 'fear of disorder/filth/uricleanliness', but
it is the 'abandonment of individuality' that governs the
narrative £rom start to finish. The fantasy of social
harmony so present in Nazi ideology revolved around the
concept of the people abandoning their individual desires
and coming together as a mass under their leader. This
initiative found expression in several key Nazi programs:
G1 eichschal tung, the "obligatory assimif ation wi thin the
state of al1 political, economic and cultural activitie~"~~;
Volksgemeinschaf t, the "community of the people", an agenda
which pushed the idea of a socially and politically unified
country, purged of alien elements, rising to power under a
charismatic leader26 ; even the Volkssturm, the armed
civilian militia that the Nazis atternpted to create at the
end of the ~ a r ~ ~ , reflects the belief in a society so
unif ied that each and every citizen would f ight to protect
it.
Richard Tayl or argues that these ideas were not hidden
in Nazi propaganda, but that Goebbels recopized the
importance of unity to the National Socialist movement and
saw it as a chief function of his Ministry of Propaganda.
Taylor mites that '...the purpose of the National Socialist
propagandist was to weld [the] disparate elements into a
united nation" 2a, and f inds evidence of this purpose in
Goebbels ' own speeches :
In the past few weeks we have experienced a growing
political coordination between the policy of the
Reich and the policy of the Lhder and 1 see the
first task of this new Ministry as establishing a
coordination between the Government and the whole
people - 29
The purpose of Our Movement was to mobilize people,
to organise people and to win them over to the idea
of the National ~evolution.?~
Ian Kershaw sums up the importance of this goal for
Goebbels and the Nazis:
Since the cleavages in German society, in particular
along class and denominational lines, were
extraordinarily deep, the sense of 'national
community' had clearly to be man~£actured-~l
Der Storenfried cari be seen as an explicit attempt to
manufacture this sense of national community in its
audience.
The methodology that Der Storenfried uses to
manufacture unity is the very sarne used by the Nazis: by
introducing an easily identifiable extemal threat to the
community, interna1 problems are forgotten in the response
to the enemy. Whereas the Nazis used Judaism and
Bolshevism as the external threat, this cartoon uses a
metaphorical fox to establish a position for the spectator
that encourages group action against an enemy, resulting in
a united comrnunity. The theme of ' abandonment of
individualityf is evident £rom the beginning of the film,
with an emphasis on group rather than individual activity.
A sense of peaceful community among the animals is
established with idyllic images of lederhosen-clad children
skipping along a path and an elderly man doing
callisthenics to a morning radio program. The children who
are kidnapped become vulnerable to the fox's attack simply
because they wander away £rom their community, The
animals, and the audience, are didactically instructed by
the owl to join together, Volkssturm-like, to defeat the
fox. The subsequent attack on the fox is simply community
effort: a telegram £rom the wasps to the hedgehogs reads
'march with me against the fox"; the 'civilianr animals
lift a giant rock with ropes to Eire cannonballs at the
fox; a chicken lays eggs for the cause, which are thrown at
the fox; the wasps dive-bomb the enemy- There is no doubt
that the animals are winning not because they are smarter
than the fox, but because they are stronger, and stronger
in nurribers. The fox does not retaliate against the attack,
he simply suffers the cannonballs and machine-gunining of
the animals' onslaught. Eventually he is dispatched for
good when his head lands under the rock that the animals
have been lifting, and they drop it, crushing his skull.
Finally, the animals dance as a group in celebration O£
their victory. The victory is brought about through the
abandonment of individuality and the reconciliation of
differing sections of the animal population against a
specific , individual enemy . In this way, Der Storenfried
uses a fantasy of social harmony to brlng about narrative
closure and construct an ideological position for its
audience emphasizing the strength that results from
conf ormi ty .
Van den Vos Reynarde
If Der Storenfried is the most blatant example of animated
Nazi propaganda, then Van den Vos Reynarde is the most
vicious, Unmistakably a parable of Jewish corruption, the
film fits our definition of propaganda by establishing
competing discourses that correspond to an imaginary
Judaism and Nazism, aligning the audience against the
discourse of Judaism and then marking those discourses as
having an effect in the world beyond the rnovie screen.
Made by the Dutch National Socialist Party, the film tells
the story of yet another animal kingdom, one whose
leadership is in turmoil. While the animals argue about
who is the legitimate ruler, a new animal appears:
Jodocus, the rhinoceros. Jodocus asks for a place in the
animal empire, so that he can 'modestly grow thistles'. As
the story progresses, Jodocus increases his political power
and introduces new ideas to the animals, including the
establishment of a Republic, in which liberty, equality and
fraternity exist, animal miscegenation and payment of taxes
to Jodocus. Eventually, Reynarde, the fox hero, leads a
rebellion of the anirnals and manages to drive Jodocus and
his rhinoceros compatriots into the sea. Peace is restored
to the kingdom,
The conflict that drives the narrative in Van den vos
Reynarde is structured as a 'we vs- you' opposition,
bringing the cartoon squarely under Neale's definition of
propaganda, which is unsurprising considering that the film
was originally conceived as anti-Semitic dogma. 32 The
opposing discourses in the film are associated with Jodocus
the rhinoceros on the one hand and Reynarde the fox on the
other. Jodocus is associated with the disruptive values
that he introduces to the animals - liberty, fraternity and
equality, animal miscegenation, taxation and eventually,
power-mongering. Jodocus himself
discourse short speech given
articulates this
upon
In civilized count~ies, there is no distinction
among the races. AI1 animals are equal and must
intermarry between th-, It is a heathen custom
that a dog should marry a dog and a bu11 a cow.
Furthemore, every civilized country has a good tax
system. Who could better serve you as tax collecter
than 1, Jodocus, and rny relatives? We have a lot of
experience in the f inancial field. 33
Reynarde the fox represents the competing discourse, one
that is set up in rebellion against Jodocus. Both
Reynarde's opposition and the alignment of his discourse
with the audience are established in an early scene where
he reads a proclamation of the new rules, turns toward the
audience, winks, and tears it down £rom the tree it is
posted on. The opposing discourse is not articulated much
beyond a general opposition to the rules of Jodocus:
Reynarde is seen rousing animals to dissatisfaction,
pointing out the unnatural animal combinations that have
resulted £rom interbreeding and leading a rebellion against
the rhinoceroses- Tt would appear that the strategy of the
film is not so rnuch the promotion O£ a positive set of
values as it is the condemnation of a negative system, one
which is associated with Jodocus the rhinoceros.
The film ultimately establishes itself as propaganda
by rnarking its narrative as existing beyond the screen, in
this case by clearly associating the behaviour of Jodocus
with the supposed cultural values of what the Nazis called
'International Jewryr- Firstly, the name of the
antagonist, Jodocus (pronounced yoh-doh-kuss) , is a play on
the Dutch word for 'Jew' : Jood (pronounced yohd) .
Furthermore, the Dutch word for rhinoceros is 'neushoornr,
which literally means 'nose hornf, a reference to the
popular stereotype of Jews having big noses. Jodocus'
introductory speech is laced with references to Jewish
stereotypes: '1 have travelled a lot" - the wandering Jew,
the Jew without a homeland; "Let me be your counsellor" -
the Jew as advisor, the infamous anti-Semitic film Jud
Süss, about a powerful Jewish f inancial consultant; "We
have a lot of experience in the financial field" - the
money-hoarding Jew, the f inancially adept Jew. Jodocus is
also drawn as a caricature of Jewish antbropomorphic
qualities- Finally, the driving of Jodocus and his fellow
rhinoceroses £rom the animal kingdom at the end of the
cartoon corresponds with the well-publicized goal of the
National Socialists to 'puwifyf Germany and Europe and rid
it of 'the Jewish probl_emy. 34 This relationship between the
cartoon and specif ic discourses in the world of the
audience denotes Van den vos Reynarde as an authentic work
of propaganda that calls on the audience to help resolve
the con£ lict it presents to them.
Function of the Rhino
One of the most important components of the National
Socialists' attempt to unify Germany was the promotion of
anti-Semitism- By encouraging Germaris to perceive Jews as
the source of their countryr s problems, they hoped to make
Germany forget about the regional, political and class,
conflicts that had kept them divided and manufacture social
unity in the face of an (imaginary) enemy. Karl Dietrich
Bracher writes that
National Socialist control and victory over Jews and
' in£ erior peoples ', the Volkisch-racial revolution,
remained the single genuine core in Hitler's
Weltanschauung [worldview] . 3S
This "revolution" is what Van den vos Renarde attempts to
promote. Tt first establishes the "international Jewish
con~~irac~"'~ by introducing its blatantly Jewish antagonist
£rom another empire, who has "travelled a lot" and who
convinces the King and Queen to adopt his value system,
based on animal (xead 'racialr) interbreeding and taxation
to be paid to Jodocus, the "unselfish servant". Jews are
characterized as outsiders, meddling in the domestic
affairs of other countries for their own gain, a
representation that attempted to fulfil the National
Socialistsr goal of turning Europeans against Jews-
Having established Jews as outsiders, the cartoon then
furthers the idea of the negative consequences of a Jewish
presence. These consequences would be both intentional and
unintentional, resulting £rom the value system of the
morally suspect Jews. Goebbels1 speeches articulate the
two contradictory levels of this threat - on the one hand,
the intentional destruction wrought by Jews:
The Jewish race has prepared the war; it is the
spiritual originator of the whole misf ortune that
has overtaken humanity. Jewry rnust pay for its
crime just as our Führer prophesied in his speech in
the Reichstag when he said that the Jewish race
would be wiped out in Europe and possibly throughout
the entire ~orld.~'
On the other hand, the unintentional breakdown of morality
as a resuit of the innate nature of Jews:
We cannot speak flatly of a conspiracy of the Jewish
race against Western man; this conspiracy is more a
matter of race than of thought-out intentions. Jews
will always act according to their instincts-38
The reign of Jodocus in Van den vos Reynarde embodies both
of these threats- His malicious intentions are revealed
when we see a goose that is unable to pay its taxes evicted
£rom its home and stripped of al1 possessions by the
rhinoceroses. Reynarde then guides the audience through
the home of an ostrich-goose couple, a rnarriage now
permitted under Jodocust laws. We see the couple's first
child, an ostrich-goose, which makes the parents happy,
although they seem confused by the creature's appearance.
The couple's next child hatches £rom its egg: an ostrich-
hare. The next, an ostrich-frog- Finally, an ostrich-
rhinoceros. The ostrich defends her infidelity by pointing
to Jodocus' proclamation on the wall, which the goose
destroys in a rage. The cartoon thus indicts Jews as both
intentionally malicious, hoarding money and exploiting the
poor, and as morally corrupt, tampering with the 'natural
order' of the community and the values that underlie it,
The cartoon's final function as propaganda involves
attaching the resolution of the narrative to the removal of
Jodocus £rom the community. Arnong the plethora of Nazi
propaganda dictating such a solution to 'the Jewish
Question' , this quote f rom Goebbels stands out, emphasizing
as it does the unavoidability of destruction, since the
nature of the Jew does not permit him to live among others:
The complete elimination of the Jews £rom Europe is
not a question of ethics, but a question of State
security..Like the Colorado beetle which destroys,
indeed must destroy the potato crops, so the Jew
des troys nations. There is only one cure, namely a
radical elimination of the danger 39
It is this 'radical elimination of the danger" that brings
about narrative closure in Van den vos Reynarde, The final
scene of the film consists of a party thwown by the
Jodocuses for themselves, with all the other animals
serving as waiters and attendants to the hedonistic
rhinoceroses- Outside the party, Reynarde incites the
animals to revolt, and as a unit they storm the
rhinoceroses and chase them out of the party and over tall
dunes, where they tumble dom the other side into the sea.
The cartoon's final image is a victorious Reynarde and his
sons in silhouette, standing on top of the dunes that
overlook the sea. As propaganda, the film's furiction
involves the creation of a position for the spectator that
opposes the discourses associated with Jews and suggests
that the only solution to these discourses is the removal
of their source by radical means, presumably including
extermination- By encouraging audiences to hate this
imaginary representation of Jews, the producers of the film
hoped to resolve the interna1 divisions of their audience
and unite them against a cornmon enemy, with the long-term
goal of generating assent for the Holocaust-
Der Arme Hansi
The only project to be completed by Goebbels' animation
production company, Deutsche Zeichenfilme GmbH, this film
is the closest thing that exists to a cartoon directly
produced by the Nazi Party. However, contrary to what one
might expect, it is not didactic, dogmatic or allegorical.
In fact, it doesn't qualify as propaganda at all, according
to Nealers criteria. It is instead a representative of the
other goal that National Socialism envisioned for the
cinema: providing a means of escape for audiences £rom
their heavily politicized lives.
Closely emulating Disney films of the same era, the
cartoon tells the story of a canary named Hansi who longs
to be freed from his cage and explore the world. When he
spies a female bird, his frustration overwhelms him and he
violently breaks out. Getting into various adventures with
a kite, a chimney, another canary, a scarecrow, bad
weather, and finally a cat, Hansi always gets the worst of
the situation and winds up worse off than he was before-
The outside world, it appears, is not as wonderful as he
might have hoped- At the end of the cartoon, Hansi is
soaking wet, dirty, and tired, but cornes upon the beautiful
bird he saw £rom his cage at the begiming of the story-
He sings a Song to her, and the peg holding her cage shut
floats out of its hole, allowing Hansi to fly into the
cage. She welcomes him with open arms, the door shuts
behind them, and they are caged together in perfect
As tempting as it might be to read this cartoon as a
subtle allegory, telling Germans that "imprisonment is
freedom" and warning them to be content with their current
situation, it is important to note that the film does not
conform to Neale's definition of propaganda. Neale's first
criterion for propaganda is that it must put the viewer
into 'a position of struggle vis-à-vis certain of the
discourses and practices that have been signified within
it", The only discourses that can arguably be perceived in
Der &me Hansi are the inside world (Hansi's cage) vs, the
outside world, with inside associated with safety and
outside associated with danger. However, the presentation
of these discourses in the cartoon is so broad and
unspecific as to be ineffective in terms of associating
specific values with each discourse. Furthemore, the
cartoon is dialogue-free, which means that nowhere is the
audience bound to either of these discourses through a 'we
vs. you" alignment of sympathies. There is a tendency to
sympathize with the protagonist, Hansi, but against what?
The world? The inanimate objects he interacts with?
Perhaps the cat, but the cat represents no discourse other
than his own hunger, and he is only on screen for just over
a minute of this ten-minute cartoon. This failure to
present a conflict for the viewer to take sides in means
that this cartoon does not conform to Nealers first
criterion O£ propagandistic film.
Finally, Neale' s "fundamental mark" of propaganda,
that a film works to reduce the distance between the text
and the discourses of the real world that surrounds it, is
completely missing f rom Der Arme Hansi. There are no f lags
indicating nationalism, no references to contemporary life
in Germany, no acknowledgement that a war is on, no mention
even that Hansi is a German bird- The tom he £lies over
is vaguely European, but beyond that, the story could take
place anywhere, at ariy time. In that it presents no
cornpeting discourses, does not align the viewer with any
value system beyond the happiness of its protagonist, and
maintains a distinct distance between itself and the real
world that surrounds it, Der Anne Hansi can be classified
outside the realm of propaganda.
Function of the Canary
The lack of propagandistic material in Der Arme Hansi means
it was probably read by audiences simply as a pleasant,
escapist, apolitical, Disneyesque cartoon- Yet it was made
inside the walls of the Nazi f ilmmaking powers, and
undoubtedly conf ormed to the National Socialists ' agenda
for entertainment in the Third Reich. The explanation for
the film's apparently apolitical nature lies within
Goebbelsf larger program for entertaining Germans: that
escapism as a social function of the cinema was vital to
the stability and ideological unity of social reality in
Nazi Germany. Rentschler, who notes that almost 90% of
Nazi cinerna can be classified as generic es~a~isrn~~, argues
that there were practical and ideological reasons for the
absence political subjects on movie screens . These
reasons include using Germain films as a way of showing non-
Germans the stability of German life and providing a forum
for escapism and motion for the German people in a forum
divorced £rom politics.
Goebbels indicated from early on in his reign as
Minister of Propaganda that he wanted German films to be
able to make money in territories acquired during the war,
as well as act as a representative for how Nazism had
improved life in Germany, assurning that viewers would
recognize what they saw on screens as contemporary Germany:
From the start Goebbels articulated a desire to
create a cinema that could both satisfy the domestic
market and function as a foreign emissary..-It was to
move the hearts and minds of masses while seerning to
have little in common with politics or party
agendas .
reports that the war progressed, the potential
audience for German films grew exponentially and included
many non-Germans . Attendance figures rose f rom 62 3 million
in 1939 to over one billion in 1942 due to the addition of
German-speaking territories such as Austria, the
Sudetenland and Luxembourg, among others. 42 Thus, the
absence of politics on screen and the representation of a
prosperous, stable Gemany acted as an important
ideological envoy for the Nazis, providing entertainment
for the new territories, generating revenue from that
entertainment, and at the very least not increasing
resentment of National Socialism.
The ideological reasons for producing escapist films
were similar to the practical reasons: the National
Socialists had a larger program of manuEacturing consent
among the German people, and part of that program was to
entertain them without causing them to think about
politics, an arena in which the people had no voice.
Rentschler argues that
[nlarrative films of the Third Reich granted few
direct glimpses of everyday life in the new Germany-
Nazi features were more a showplace for strong
feelings and cheerful diversions than they were a
forum for realistic tableaus or topical the ma tic^.^^
This is how the majority of Nazi cinema functioned, in
terms of filmgoing as a social activity: it was a
catharsis-generator. There is no reason not to assume that
this agenda applied equally to cartoons, especially a
cartoon made under such close supervision as Der Arme
Hansi.
In this context , Der Anne Hansi almost becomes a
metaphor for its own social function. Literally about
escape, the film provides sorne cathartic adventures for its
protagonist until he is safely back in the confines of a
cage- The film is free of any overt ideological stance,
and although there are a few ethnic characterizations (the
kite Hansi tangles with has an sia an face painted on it and
the cat that chases him looks vaguely like it is wearing a
fez a£ter being hit on the head with a f lowerpot) no
specific negative values are associated with those
ethnicities. 1 certainly don't want to suggest that the
film has no ideology, but rather that its function was to
appear ideology-free as part of Goebbels' overall agenda
for entertainment under the Nazis- Der Arme Hansi is thus
one of the majority of German films produced under National
Socialism that sought only to create pleasure for its
audience, thereby providing them with a form of escape £rom
their heavily politicized lives under Hitler.
Conclusion
Rentschler writes that analysis of Nazi films is too often
oversimplified:
Neither a dumping ground of propaganda nor a moronic
cult of distraction and surely not a locus of
resis tance, Nazi f eature production warrants more
caref ul scrutiny. 44
While closer reading of specific films does reveal an
overlapping of pleasure and propaganda, it is nonetheless
surprising to what degree the films produced under the
Nazis cari be divided into either political or apolitical
camps. The cartoons analyzed here serve as a good example,
as each had a specieic political function - extremely
political films: the demonization of an ethnic group and
the unification of Germans; apolitical films: the
mollification of citizens living under National Socialism.
This was not a secret operation. Germans were fully aware
of the blatant presence or lack of politics before them,
and saw no need to cornplain about the absence of Nazis on
their movie screens. Nor was complaining about theis
presence advisable.
Rentschler's quote regarding escapism is worth
repeating here :
Screen illusions cushioned people against grim
realities, offering the solace of worlds that were
in order and seemed to allow unencumbered movement,
safe havens and playgrounds where one could dream
f reely . 45
The "order" that was on screen was either imaginary or
created by the suppression of ideological enemies. The
flip side of films such as Der Arme Hansi was the vicious
hate propaganda produced for the sole purpose of uniting
Germans against a cornmon enemy, as in Van den vos Reynarde.
Bearing in mind Rentschler's warning about
oversimplification, Nazi cartoons can be said to have
fulfilled a specific social function in (a) providing a
means of escapism for German audiences, (b) creating
imaginary representations of enemies that need to be
defeated, and (c) rnanufacturing solidarity and nationalism
during a time of crisis. These three functions can be
grouped under the central platform of Goebbelsf Ministry
for the People's Enlightenment and Propaganda, which was
the generation of ideological assent for the policies of
the Third Reich. The argument of this thesis is that these
films perform the exact same function, using the exact same
tools, as the animated cartoons produced in the United
States during the same period in history. The anti-
Semitism of Van den vos Reynarde mirrors the ethnic durs
of Popeye against the Japanese in You 're a Sap, Mir. Jap,
with its creation of imaginary enemies to focus a
population's hatred onto; the cal1 to arms of Der
Storenfried is a more generalized version of Blitz Wolf' s
cal1 to buy war bonds as a means of generating national
solidarity; and Der Arme Hansi is based explicitly on
Disney's simplistic, escapist shorts of the late 30s aild
early 40s. The emphasis on certain ideological points may
have been different, as ~azi films and cartoons were more
ardently concerned with issues of national unity than
American, and American cartoons more prolif ic in their
racisrn than their Nazi counterparts, but the role both
cartoons played in their nation's war machine was
unmistakably similar .
The conclusions drawn in this thesis about the
character of Nazi propaganda cartoons are not new -
previous readings of other types of Nazi propaganda have
led to similar results. The goal of my argument is to
establish how comparable the character of Arnerican wartime
propaganda was to the character of the Nazis', and how this
forces a revaluation of the usually straightforwztrd
moxality surrounding World War II. In the face of two
films such as You're a Sap, Mr. Jap, and Van den vos
Reynarde, and in the historical context of
Hiroshirna/Nagasaki and the Holocaust, it is impossible to
maintain a simplistic perception of World War II.
Rentschler, p. 227; the Volkischer Beobachter was the chief party
newspaper of the Nazis.
Rentschler, p. 110
Neale, p. 35
ibid
ibid
Rentschler, p. 19
' cf. Hull, Leiser
Schulte-Sasse, p. 24
Hitler writes, "The mass meeting is...necessary for the reason that in
it the individual, who at first, while becoming a supporter of a young
movement, feels lonely and easily succumbs to the fear of being alone,
for the first time gets the picture of a large community, which in most
people has a strengthening, encouraging effectThe community of the
great demonstration not only strengthens the individual, it also unites
and helps to cxeate an esprit de corps." Goebbels, on the other hand,
fictionalizes a response to such a mass meeting: the narrator of his
novel describes how "Shivers of hot and cold ran through me, 1 had no
knowledge of what was happening inside me. But al1 at once 1 seemed to
hear cannons thunderRevelation! Revelation!..,I no longer knew what 1
was doing, 1 was alrnost out of my minAIn this instant 1 was reborn..I
was intoxicated." Schulte-Sasse, pp- 20, 22
10
Schulte-Sasse, p, xx. Calling this fantasy "the illusion of
reconciliation experienced via the mass ornament (alluding to
Kracauer's essay, the feeling of being a part of the rnass) " , Schulte
Sasse points out the frequency with which Nazi cinema sought to
recreate the 18& century in some of the era's most popular films such
as Jud Süss (l94O), Friedrich Schiller (1940) , Komodianten (1941) ,
Friedmann Bach (19411, and the three biographies of Frederick II of
Prussia, Fredericus (1936), Der grosse Konig (1942), and Der alte und
der juge Konig (193 5 -
Rentschler, p. 218
l2 Diether Raffrs A History of Germany: From the Medieval Empire to the
Present (St. Martin's Press, New York, 1985) gives a succinct account
of the problem of social unity throughout German history, while Harold
James' A German Identity: 1770-1990 (Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London,
1989) provides an economic reading of the upheavals surrounding the
nation's cittempt to achieve social and political uriity.
l3 James, pp. 34-5
l4 James, p. 61
l5 ibid
16
Mayer, p- 33 re: the removal of von Caprivi in 1894
l7 Steinisch, Irmgards- Lecture Notes from Graduate History course
Modern German History, York University-
18
Sheehan, p. 103
l9 Welch (î983b) , p. 88
2 0
Rentschler, p- 222
2 1
Schulte-Sasse, p. 22
22 Schulte-Sasse, p. 28
23 Leiser, p. 25
These themes are condensed £rom Erwin Leiserrs Nazi Cinema, but are
corroborated in readings by both Rentschler (cf, pp. 149-154) and
Schulte-Sasse (cf. pp. 92-125
25 Welch (1983b), p. 206
26 ibid
27 Welch (l983b), p. 95
28 Taylor, p. 38
29 Taylor, p- 36
30
Taylor, p- 39
31 Kershaw, p- 188
32 Barten & Groeneveld, p- 201
33 Barten & Groeneveld, p. 210; a synopsis of the screenplay, with some
translated excerpts, appears at the end of their article,
34 The phrase 'the Jewish problemr is taken £rom the film programme
which accompanied the release of Der ewige Jude, the Nazi 'documentary'
-
regarding the Jewish corruption of Europe (quoted in Welch (1983a) , p -
2931, but the phrase and others like it ('International Jewryr, 'the
Jewish Questionr) were popularized as part of a massive propaganda
campaign against the Jews duxing the war.
3S Quoted in Welch (1983a) , p. 280
36 ibid
37 Quoted in Welch (1983a1, p. 282
Goebbels, p- 287
39 Quoted in Welch (1983a1, p. 303
4 0
Rentschler, p. 7
41
Rentschler, p. 19
42 Spiker, p, 197. It is relevant to note Petley*~ argument that
increased audience size had to do not only with an increase in
potential audience but also the fuller use of existing cinemas as a
result of pro-cinema propaganda campaigns and the importance of
newsreels to audiences during the early yeaxs of the war, Petley, pp.
75-6
43 Rentschler, p. 19
44 Rentschler, p. 23
4 5
Rentschler, p. 218
Conclusion
Conclusion
In the introduction to this thesis, 1 cited Ian Kershaw's
description of the prima- task of any historian: to
explain the past, not just describe it. The goal of this
thesis was to explain why both Ge-y and the United
States, two of the most economically and culturally
advanced countries in the world, chose to use animated
cartoons as propaganda during World Wa r II - a situation
that had never happened before and has never happened
since. Furthemore, the consequences of this similarity in
propaganda strategy were inves tigated, and what other
historical implications they led to, namely, revaluating
the conventional perception of the morality of World War
II. This explanation was attempted in two ways: through
an economic/historical review of the events leading up to
and during the production of propaganda cartoons in both
countries, and through a textual analysis of the cartoons
thernselves, and how they related to the war aims of their
respective countries.
In her analysis of Nazi feature films, Linda Schulte-
Sasse issues a warning to Nazi f ilrn historians that is
relevant to al1 parts of this thesis:
A - perhaps the - major challenge when reflecting
back on National Socialism is to prevent it £rom
becoming a narrative. By narrative 1 mean a
tendency to project homogeneity upon Nazism, to
assume not only that 'it" al1 fit together, but that
it worked on everybody. As already suggested, if we
approach Nazi cultural products with firmly fixed
expectations, we will surely find what we are
looking for and nothing more,'
An example of this tendency can be found in the writings of
Adorno and Horkheimer, whose belief in the collapse of
civilization governed their pessimistic mi ting American
culture and its similarity to Nazi culture- The pro j ec t
this thesis was to counter such 'narrativizing' tendencies
conventional histories World War which tend
paint the war as a struggle between the 'Good Allies', such
as the United States, and the 'Evil ~azis', meaning al1 of
Germany, By investigating the specific historical context
of a moment where both 'Good' and 'Badr countries appeared
to be doing the same thing - rnaking animated cartoon
propaganda - a simplistic, black-and-white understanding of
World War II breaks dom in favour of a more complex
portrait which National Socialist films are based
Walt Disney cartoons and American films contain more racism
Nazi propaganda -
creating simplistic
Furthermore,
narrative out history
avoid
has been
made throughout this analysis, Tt does history a
disseryice to paint an exaggeratedly negative portrait of
the United States in order to facilitate cornparison with
fascist Germany. In the following smary O£ the
similarities between the two countries, extra attention has
been paid not to generalize about entire populations, to
not base analysis on the presumed reactions of audiences,
to not assume the cornplicity of whole nations in the
actions of their governments, and to not think of the
United States or Germany in terms of one-dimensional
characterizations.
Any intention on rny part of revealing a previously
unsuspected mirror-image of Nazi Germany in the United
States is undercut by a simple example: the release of
Walt Disney' s Victory Through Air Power (1943 ) , a f eature
film in which an independent military strategist tries to
raise support for what he believes is a more effective way
to win the war; victory through long-range bombing- RKO,
Disney's regular distributor, refused to handle to film,
and Disney personally paid for its distribution. The
governrnent ignored it, the public showed little attention,
and it quickly disappeared £rom theatres- Nonetheless, the
film was not censored, it was not withheld £rom release,
and Disney was not sanctioned in any way by the government
£or distributing it- There are economic factors at work
here: the refusal of RKO to distribute the film is
directly linked to their cooperation with the Roosevelt
administration, which is a form of censorship. Also,
Disney's prolific military contracts assured hirn preferred
treatment by the government . However, in Germany the film
would undoubtedly have been denied distribution outright,
as dozens of features that were felt not to reflect
National Socialisrn were, and the producers of the film most
likely would have suffered political (or worse)
repercussions, as dissidents under the Nazis frequently
did- The point here is that the fundamental differences
between these two countries must be recognized before
begiming to compare their similarities, the most important
of which was that the United States was a functioning (if
not idealized) democracy, in which the appearance of
freedom had to be maintained, and Germany under Hitler was
a repressive façcist state. All subsequent comparisons of
the two countries rnust be governed by this fact.
Being careful not to project homogeneity on the
subjects being analyzed, either in terms of their
equivalence or in terms of their identity, it is possible
to compare their historical situations. The similarities
in the relationship each governent had with its national
film industry, and the anirnated cartoon products of that
relationship, reflect a surprising amount of correspondence
between wartime America and Nazi Germany.
Historical and Economic Similarities
Key to the understanding of why animated cartoons were used
as propaganda, and the most important similarity between
the United States and Germany's use of film propaganda in
genewal, is the yole played by economics in the complicity
of the national film industry with the state, Economics
was not the sole explanation: without a doubt, there was a
certain amount of patriotism behind Hollywood's cooperation
with the Roosevelt administration. The anti-Semitism of
the Nazis surely aEfected powerful Jewish studio executives
such as Louis B. Mayer and the Warners, and the fear that
America would be next after the fa11 of Europe both
contributed to Hollywood's agreement to regulate the
content of their films. Likewise, there is a possibility
that the leaders of SPI0 and Ufa were genuinely interested
in portraying a proud, nationalistic Germany on screens at
a time of national crisis. However, Ln both countries the
concems of business played a fundamental role in the
intersection of politics and entertainment. In the United
States, the exclusion O£ studio employees frcm the
Selective Service Act, the temporary halting of
investigation in the governmentrs anti-trust case against
Hol~ywood's vertical integration and a need for new markets
in the wake of the Nazi war machine persuaded the studio
heads to allow the government an unprecedented level of
input in the creation of its films, This input included
pre-distribution screenings of al1 films containing
references to the war, power of censorship over such films,
and the regulation of film exports overseas. As a result,
the studios generated thousands of films that reflected the
wartime policy of the Roosevelt administration, including
hundreds of short animated cartoons.
In Germany, the efforts of powerful film studios such
as Ufa and Tobis-Klangfilrn to secuwe a monopoly over the
Geman film industry led to their collaboration with the
Nazi regime. In exchange for their agreement to allow the
Nazi party full control over the content of Geman films,
industry captains like Alfred Hugenberg and Ludwig Klitzsch
were assured first of al1 that the Nazis would rnake an
effort to return the film industry to a position of
financial stability, which they did in 1943, secondly that
large film studios would retain a position of monopoly when
the film industry was eventually nationalized in 1941, and
third that they would receive positions of prominence in
the new regime, which they did - Hugenberg as the Nazi
Minister of Finance and Klitzsch as a powerful member of
the Reichsfilmkarrimer, As a result, every film released
during the reign of the Nazis fully conformed to the
National Socialists agenda for the cinema, resulting in
over a thousand films that can generally be characterized
as either escapist or rigidly nationalist. As part of the
Nazis' efforts to make the film industry self -sue f icient
and more German in character, Goebbels personally oversaw
the formation of a Nazi-controllei! animation Company,
Deutsche Zeichenf ilm Gmbh, to supplant the in£ luence of
Wal t Disney Europe and exploit the populari ty
animation in German cinemas. Under the Nazi agenda £or the
cinema, these cartoons were also chawacterized by either
light-hearted escapism or unmistakable propaganda.
Along with this historical explanation comes a
surprising amount of correspondence between the two
countries, Both countries recognized the importance of the
cinema, at the time the only source of moving pictures for
the public, as a means of social influence and sought to
control that in£ luence. Cooperation between the film
industry and the government predated the war in both
countries: in the U.S. with the establishment of the
Motion Picture Committee Cooperating for National Defence,
in effect an embryonic War Activities Committee; in Germany
with the close ties between Alfred Kugenberg, the head of
Ufa, and the Nazi party even before they rose to power.
Both countries had three lines of censorship surrounding
film production: the U.S. had the Production Code
Authority, the Bureau of Motion Pictures and the Office of
Censorship; the Nazis had the Ministry for the People's
Enlightenment and Propaganda, the Reich Film Chamber and
the Central Film Of fice. Both used film as a means of
colonization: the U-S. in South America using Nelson
Rockefeller's influence with RKO to send Orson Welles and
Walt Disney on diplornatic tours; the Germans with
apolitical films meant to play in newly acquired German-
speaking territories. in both countries, the most popular
and respected directors made propaganda films: in the
U.S., Frank Capra, Howard Hawks and even Alfred Hitchcock;
in Germariy, Viet Hawlan and Leni Reifenstahl. To be
accurate, there were also very important differences: the
relationship between the government and the industl-y in the
U.S- was sornewhat vague and unclear, with indeterminate
centres of power - a situation that suited both parties.
In Germany, however, the centres of power were very clear,
and enforced constantly- This list of similarities and
differences serves as an example of the central point 1 am
trying to make with this thesis: that while the countries
were unmistakably di£ f erent in important respects, upon
closer inspection there are similarities that work against
any conventional understanding of the war which
characterizes the United States as purely good and Nazi-
controlled Germany as the opposite of the United States.
Textual Similarities
The similarities between the United States and Germany also
extend to the content of the cartoons that each psoduced as
propaganda. Both countries recognized that an important
function of the cinema during wartime was to provide a
means of escapism for the general population, and both
produced many more escapist or non-war-related films than
they did straight propaganda or war-themed films, a ratio
which also holds true for animated cartoons. Those
cartoons that did serve a propagandistic function attempted
to create an ideological position for their audience that
reflected specific wartime policies of the governments that
influenced their production. in the United States, issues
163
of national unity were stressed through calls for war bonds
and representations of animated stars such as Bugs Busuiy
and Daf£y Duck as patriots fighting for the cause. Also,
the different attitudes towards the Pacific and European
enemies were recreated in ethnic stereotypes and visual
slurs against the Japanese, characterizing the entire
populace as subhuman, treacherous and infantile. American
cartoon representation of the Germans, while still
negative, was preoccupied with Hitler and his negative
influence on a malleable, authoritarian population.
Cartoon depictions such as these reflected the American
government's interest in seeking approval from its
population for a wartime policy that took the Germans more
seriously than the Japanese and allowed for two nuclear
strikes on Japanese civilians resulting in approximateiy
200,000 deaths in three days.
Gemany's cartoons were also concerned with creating
an ideological position for its spectators that re£lected
the governmentrs wartime cultural aims, again concentrating
on issues of national unity and ethnicity, The Nazi goal
of generating national and social harmony to overcome class
and regional conflict was represented in cartoons as a
populace unified against the threat from outside enernies-
Ethnicity played as prominent a role in German cartoons as
it did in American cartoons, with the Nazi racial policy
against Jews manifested as a story about the negative
effects of an imaginary Jewish lifestyle on a confused and
unstable community similar to Gemany. Such cartoons
justified the dictatorial methods used by the Nazis to try
and achieve an authentic national unity and the anti-
Semitic policies that led to the 6,000,000 deaths of the
Holocaust -
I may have failed Kershaw's test: I find I can explain how this al1 came about, but I cannot explain why.
1 can explain that capitalism was a central feature of both
regimesr wartime policy concerning the media, but 1 cannot
explain why beyond a cynical resignation that human nature
is overly concerned with materialism. Furthemore, 1 can
explain that despite the democratic tendencies of the
contemporary United States and Germany, capitalism is still
a, if not the. fundamental grease oiling the cooperation of
an ever-expanding media industry with the state. From
CNNrs coverage of American involvement in the Gulf War to
the American media's apparent obsession with Elian
Gonzales, rnainstream media content continues to reflect the
policies of the state. 1 suspect that another thesis on
this relationship would reveal similar financial
motivations on the part of the media, but Noam Chomsky has
already covered that ground-
This thesis is an attempt to explain the complicity of
animated cartoons, a medium known for its humour and
innocence, in figures such as those cited above: 200,000
dead at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 6,000,000 dead in the
Holocaust- The conclusion arrived at offers capitalism as
the conduit between them. As a response to Kershawrs cal1
for an explanation of the past, these statistics and
conclusion highlight the difference between explanation and
unders tanding .

[1. Schulte-Sasse, p. 11]

Bibliography

Adorno, Theodor W. The Culture Industry: Selected Essays
on Mass Culture. Ed- J.M. Bernstein, London: Routledge,
1991.
Barten, Egbert and Gerard Groeneveld, "Van den vos
Reynaerde' (1943): How a Medieval Fable Became a Dutch
Anti-Semitic Animation Film". Historical Journal of Film,
Radio and Television, Vol. 14, No. 2. 1994-
Bendazzi, Giannalberto. Cartoons: One Hundred Years of
Cinema Animation. London: John Libbey, 1994.
Berghahn, Volker Rolf. Modem Gemany: Society, Economics
and Politics in the 20'" Century. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1987.
Cook, David A. A History of Narrative Film- New York:
W-W. Norton & Co, 1996.
Doherty, Thomas. Projections of War. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1993.
Donald, Ralph R. "Savages, Swines and Buf f oons :
Hollywood~s Selected Stereotypical Characterizations of the
Japanese, Germans and Italians in Films Produced During
World War 11". Images: A Journal of Film and Popular
Culture, [Online] Available
http://www.imagesjournal.corn/issueO8/features/wwii/
February 1, 2000.
Eisenstein, Sergei. Eisenstein on Disney. Jay Leyda, ed.
London: Methuen, 1988-
Goebbels, Joseph. Die Tagebücher von Joseph Goebbels.
Miinchen: K.G. Saur, 1994.
Hiden, John & Farquharson, John. Explaining Hitler's
Germany: Historians and the Third Reich. London: Batsford
Academic and Educational Ltd, 1989.
Horkheimer, Max and Theodor W. Adorno. Dialectic of
Enlightenment. Translated by John Cumming. New York: The
Seabury Press, 1972.
Hull. David Stewart, Film in the Third Reich: A Studv of -. . . &
the Geman Cinema 1933-1945- Berkeley: University of
Calif omia Press, 19 69 -
"In Announcing Griffithsr OWI Post, Hoyt Plugs Film Biz's
Co-op with U-S-" Variety. August 29, 1943. p. 22
James, Harold, A German Identity: 1770-1990. London:
Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1989.
Kershaw, Ian- The Nazi dicta tors hi^: Problems and - - - - . - A
Perspectives of Interpretation. London: Edward Arnold
Press, 1989.
Keylor, William R. The Twentieth Century World. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1992 .
Koppes, Clayton R. and Gregory D. Black. Hollywood Goes to
War: How Politics, Profits and Propaganda Shaped World War
II Movies . New York: The Free Press, 1987.
Laqua, Carsten, Wie Mickey Unter Die Nazis Fiel: Walt
Disney und Deutschland. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt,
1992 -
Leiser, Erwin, Nazi Cinema- London: Secker and Warburg,
1974.
Mayer, Arno J- The Persistence of the Old Regime: Europe
to the Great War. Pantheon: New York, 1981.
Myers, James M- The Bureau of Motion Pictures and its
influence on Film Content During World War II: The Reasons
for its Failure. Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1998.
Neale, Steve -
1977.
Parker, R . A. C -
Oxford: Oxford
Propaganda" . Screen - Vol - 18, No. 3 .
The Second World War: A Short Historv.
University Press, 1997
Petley, Juiian. Capital and Culture: Gerrnan Cinema 1933-
1945- Colchester: Spottiswoode Ballantyne, 1979.
Raff, Diether- A History of Germany: From the Medieval
Ernzoire to the Present. New York: St. Martinr s Press, 1985.
Rentschler, Eric- The Ministry of Illusion. London:
Harvard University Press, 1996-
Roddick, Nick. A New Deal in Entertainment: Warner Bros.
in the 1930s. London: BFI Publishing, 1983.
Schulte-Sasse, Linda. Entertaining the Third Reich.
Durham: Duke University Press, 1996-
Shale, Richard, Donald Duck Joins Up: The Walt Disney
Studio During World Wax II. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press,
Sheehan, James. German History, 1770-1866. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1989.
Shirer, William L. The Rise and Fa11 of the Third Reich:
A History of Nazi Germany. New York: Simon and Schuster,
1990.
Shull, Michael and David Wilt. Doing Their Bit: Wartime
Animated Short Films, 1939-1945. Jefferson, N-C: McFarland
& Co., 1987.
Smoodin, Eric. Anirnating Culture. New Brunswick: Rutgers,
1993.
Spiker, Jurgen, Film und Kapital. Berlin: Verlag Volker
Spiess, 1975.
"The Marxists Fnternet Archive: Biography of Theodor
Adorno" . [Online f Available
http://~~~.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/help/frank-
htm February 15, 2000.
Welch, David. Propaganda and the German Cinema 1933-1945.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983.
Welch, David, ed, Nazi Propaganda: The Power and the
Limitations. London: Barnes & Noble, 1983.
Wooàhead, Michael "Nazis stole Disney tricks for Anti-
Jewish Cartoons" . The Sunday Times [London] - 2 May, 1999 ,

Filmography

The Architecture of Doom- Videocassette. First Run
Features. 1989. 90 min.
Cartoons Go To War- Videocassette- A&E Films. 1995- 60
Ducktators. Videocassette. First Run Features- 45 min.
Bugs Bunriy Ni ps the Nips. Warner Bros. 1944.
Daffy the Commando. Warner Bros. 1944-
Ducktators. Warner Bros. 1942.
Blitz Wolf. MGM. 1942.
Tokio Jokio . Warner Bros . 1943.
You're a Sap, Mr . Jap. Paramount. 1942.
Any Bonds Today? Warner Bros . 1942 .
Scrap Happy Daffy. Warner Bros. 1943.
Japoteurs . Paramount . 1942.
Der S torenfried. Tobis KlangEilm- 1943
Der Arme Hansi. Deutsche Zeichenf ilme. 1943-
Verwitterte Melodie. Deutsche Bundesarchiv. 1942.
Hochzeit irn Korallenmeer, Deutsche Bundesarchiv. 1945.



N.B.

Francesco Rosario Capra "directed his first 'real' sound picture, The Younger Generation, in 1929. It was a rags-to-riches romance comedy about a Jewish family's upward mobility in New York City, with their son later trying to deny his Jewish roots in order to keep his rich gentile girlfriend. According to Capra biographer Joseph McBride, Capra 'obviously felt a strong identification with the story of a Jewish immigrant who grows up in the ghetto of New York... and feels he has to deny his ethnic origins to rise to success in America.' Capra, however, denied any connection of the story with his own life. Nonetheless, McBride insists that The Younger Generation 'abounds with parallels to Capra's own life.'" [Wikipedia] [The Younger Generation: Directed by Kike Frank Capra; Produced by Kike Jack Cohn; Written by Kike Howard J. Green (dialogue), Kike Fannie Hurst (play) and Kike Sonya Levien; Starring Ricardo Cortez; Music by Freemason Mischa Bakaleinikoff; Cinematography by Kike Ted Tetzlaff; The Kike's Columbia Pictures.]

Kike Leon Schlesinger (1884-1949): Film producer; founded Leon Schlesinger Studios, which later became the Warner Bros. Cartoons studio; a relative of the Kike "Warner" Brothers.

Kike Isadore "Friz" Freleng (1905-1995), sometimes credited as I. Freleng: An animator, cartoonist, director, and producer best known for his work on the Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies series of cartoons from The Kike's Warner Bros.

"VÆRRE END DEN BLODTØRSTIGE JØDE" ?

Søren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Enten – Eller.

Første del

Der skal som bekjendt etsteds i England være en Grav, der ikke udmærker sig ved et pragtfuldt Monument eller en vemodig Omgivelse, men ved en lille Indskrift – »den Ulykkeligste.« Man skal have aabnet Graven, men intet Spor fundet af et Liig. Vækker det mest Forundring, at man ikke fandt et Liig, eller at man aabnede Graven? I Sandhed besynderligt, at man har givet sig Tid til at eftersee, om der fandtes Nogen i den. Naar man paa et Epitaphium læser et Navn, da fristes man let til at tænke, hvorledes mon hans Liv henrandt i Verden, man kunde ønske at stige ned i Graven til ham for at samtale med ham. Men denne Indskrift, den er saa betydningsfuld! En Bog kan have en Titel, der giver Een Lyst til at læse Bogen, men en Titel kan i sig være saa tankerig, saa personlig tiltalende, at man aldrig vil læse Bogen. I Sandhed, denne Indskrift er saa betydningsfuld, alt eftersom man er stemt, rystende eller glædelig – for hver den, der i sit stille Sind hemmelig maaskee havde trolovet sig med den Tanke, at han var den Ulykkeligste. Men jeg kan tænke et Menneske, hvis Sjæl ikke kjender slige Sysler, ham har det været en Opgave for hans Nysgjærrighed at faae at vide, om der virkelig fandtes Nogen i denne Grav. Og see, Graven var tom! Er han maaskee staaet op igjen, har han maaskee villet spotte Digterens Ord:

– – i Graven er Fred,
Dens tause Beboer af Sorgen ei veed;


fandt han ingen Hvile, end ikke i Graven, vandrer han maaskee igjen ustadig om i Verden, har han forladt sit Huus, sit Hjem, blot ladet sin Adresse tilbage! Eller er han endnu ikke funden, han den Ulykkeligste, hvem end ikke Eumeniderne forfølge til | han finder Templets Dør og de ydmygt Bedendes Bænk, men hvem Sorgerne holde i Live, Sorgerne følge til Graven!

Skulde han ikke være funden, da lader os, kjære συμπαϱανεϰϱωμενοι, som Korsriddere tiltræde en Vandring, ikke til hiin hellige Grav i det lykkelige Østen, men til hiin sørgelige Grav i det ulykkelige Vesten. Ved hiin tomme Grav ville vi søge ham, den Ulykkeligste, visse paa at finde ham, thi som de Troendes Længsel stunder til den hellige Grav, saaledes drages de Ulykkelige mod Vesten til hiin tomme Grav, og Enhver opfyldes af den Tanke, at den er bestemt for ham.

Eller skulde en saadan Overveielse ikke være en værdig Gjenstand for vor Betragtning, vi, hvis Virksomhed, at jeg skal efterkomme vort Selskabs hellige Skikke, er Forsøg i den aphoristiske tilfældige Andagt, vi, der ikke tænke og tale aphoristisk, men leve aphoristisk, vi, der leve ἀϕοϱισμενοι og segregati, som Aphorismer i Livet, uden Samfund med Menneskene, udeelagtige i deres Sorger og deres Glæder, vi, der ikke ere Medlydere i Livets Larm, men eensomme Fugle i Nattens Stilhed, kun en enkelt Gang forsamlede for at opbygges ved Forestillinger om Livets Usselhed, om Dagens Længde og Tidens uendelige Varighed, vi, kjære συμπαϱανεϰϱωμενοι, som ikke troe paa Glædens Spil, eller paa Daarernes Lykke, vi som Intet troe paa uden paa Ulykken.

See, hvor de trænge sig frem i talløs Mængde, alle de Ulykkelige. Dog, Mange ere de, som troe sig kaldede, Faa ere de Udvalgte. En Adskillelse skal der befæstes imellem dem – et Ord, og Hoben forsvinder, udelukkede ere nemlig, ubudne Gjæster alle de, som mene, at Døden er den største Ulykke, som bleve ulykkelige, fordi de frygte Døden; thi vi, kjære συμπαϱανεϰϱωμενοι, vi, som de romerske Soldater, frygte ikke Døden, vi kjende værre Ulykke, og først og sidst fremfor Alt – det at leve. Ja hvis der var et Menneske, der ikke kunde døe, hvis det er sandt, hvad Sagnet fortæller om hiin evige Jøde, hvorledes skulde vi tage i Betænkning at erklære ham for den Ulykkeligste? Da lod det sig forklare, hvorfor Graven var tom, for at betegne, at den Ulykkeligste var den, | der ikke kunde døe, der ikke kunde slippe ned i en Grav. Da var Sagen afgjort, Svaret let; thi ulykkeligst var den, der ikke kunde døe, lykkelig den, der kunde det, lykkelig den, der døde i sin Alderdom, lykkeligere den, der døde i sin Ungdom, lykkeligst den, der døde idet han blev født, allerlykkeligst den, der aldrig var født. Men saaledes er det ikke, Døden er den fælleds Lykke for alle Mennesker, og forsaavidt som derfor den Ulykkeligste ikke er funden, da maa han være at søge indenfor denne Begrændsning.

See, Hoben forsvandt, Tallet formindskedes. Ikke siger jeg nu: skjænker mig Eders Opmærksomhed, thi jeg veed jeg har den; ikke: laaner mig Eders Øren; thi jeg veed, de tilhøre mig. Eders Øine funkle, I reise Eder i Sæderne. Det er en Væddestrid, som det vel er værd at være med i, en Kamp endnu forfærdeligere end om den var paa Liv og Død; thi Døden frygte vi ikke. Men Belønningen, ja den er stoltere end nogen anden i Verden, og vissere, thi den, der er forsikkret om, at han er den Ulykkeligste, han behøver jo ikke at frygte Lykken, han skal ikke smage den Ydmygelse i sin sidste Stund at maatte raabe: Solon, Solon, Solon!

Saa aabne vi da en fri Concurrence, fra hvilken Ingen hverken ved Stand eller ved Alder skal være udelukket. Udelukket er Ingen uden den Lykkelige og den, som frygter Døden – velkommen er ethvert værdigt Medlem af de Ulykkeliges Menighed, Høisædet bestemt for enhver virkelig Ulykkelig, Graven for den Ulykkeligste. Min Stemme lyder ud i Verden, hører den, alle I, som kalde Eder Ulykkelige i Verden, men som ikke frygte Døden. Min Stemme lyder tilbage i Tiden; thi ikke ville vi være sophistiske nok til at udelukke de Afdøde, fordi de ere døde, thi de have jo levet. Jeg besværger Eder, tilgiver, at jeg et Øieblik forstyrrer Eders Ro; møder ved denne tomme Grav. Tre Gange raaber jeg det høit ud over Verden, hører det, I Ulykkelige; thi ikke er det vor Hensigt her i en Afkrog af Verden at afgjøre denne Sag imellem os. Stedet er fundet, hvor den maa afgjøres for Alverden!



Søren Kierkegaard, en af de kendteste danskere nogensinde, var glødende antisemit.

Af: Thor Wilkens, Kultur, 24. Okt. 2010

Den store filosof følte sig såvel personligt som teologisk krænket af jøder. De havde en "Forkjerlighed for Penge", og kun døden var "værre end den blodtørstige Jøde", erklærede han.

Kierkegaards antisemitisme har været kendt eller formodet i forskerkredse, men er ikke tidligere præsenteret for en bredere offentlighed. Det bliver der lavet om på, når Kierkegaard-forskeren Peter Tudvad den 9. november udsender bogen "Stadier på antisemitismens vej - Søren Kierkegaard og jøderne".

Over for Berlingske Tidende forklarer Tudvad, at det manglende offentlige kendskab til Kierkegaard antisemitisme formodentlig skyldes, "at man nødigt vil bringe Kierkegaard i miskredit".

En spændende sag

Den udlægning mener direktøren for Søren Kierkegaard Forskningscentret i København, professor dr.theol. Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, at Tudvad kan have ret i. Ifølge Berlingske Tidende betegner Cappelørn Kierkegaards racistiske tilbøjeligheder som "en utrolig spændende sag".

Direktøren af forskningscentret understreger dog, at man bør skelne mellem en kritik af jøder, som han finder forkastelig, og en teologisk kritik af jødedommen, hvilket han betegner som helt i orden.

Desuden påpeger Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, at antisemitismen ikke findes i Kierkegaards almene forfatterskab, men i hans journaler til personlig brug.

- Han holder det for sig selv, siger Cappelørn til Berlingske Tidende.

Ikke desto mindre "har han desværre en næsten klichéagtig opfattelse af jøder, som vi i dag ville kalde antisemitisme. Sagen kommer ikke bag på mig," fortsætter han om den store filosof.



The Corsair Affair

Fra Wikipedia

On 22 December 1845, Peder Ludvig Møller, a young "seducer" of Kierkegaard's generation who studied at the University of Copenhagen at the same time as Kierkegaard, published an article indirectly criticizing Stages on Life's Way. The article complimented Kierkegaard for his wit and intellect, but questioned whether he would ever be able to master his talent and write coherent, complete works. Møller was also a contributor to and editor of The Corsair, a Danish KIKE satirical paper that lampooned everyone of notable standing. Kierkegaard published a sarcastic response, charging that Møller's article was merely an attempt to impress Copenhagen's literary elite.

Kierkegaard wrote two small pieces in response to Møller, The Activity of a Traveling Esthetician and Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action. The former focused on insulting Møller's integrity while the latter was a directed assault on The Corsair, in which Kierkegaard, after criticizing the journalistic quality and reputation of the paper, openly asked The Corsair to satirize him.

Kierkegaard's response earned him the ire of the paper and its [publisher and] second editor, also an intellectual of Kierkegaard's own age, [KIKE] Meïr Aron Goldschmidt. Over the next few months, The Corsair took Kierkegaard up on his offer to "be abused", and unleashed a series of attacks making fun of Kierkegaard's appearance, voice and habits. For months, Kierkegaard perceived himself to be the victim of harassment on the streets of Denmark. In a journal entry dated 9 March 1846, Kierkegaard made a long, detailed explanation of his attack on Møller and The Corsair, and also explained that this attack made him rethink his strategy of indirect communication.

On 27 February 1846 Kierkegaard published Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments, under his first pseudonym, Johannes Climacus. On 30 March 1846 he published Two Ages: A Literary Review, under his own name. A critique of the novel Two Ages (in some translations Two Generations) written by Thomasine Christine Gyllembourg-Ehrensvärd, Kierkegaard made several insightful observations on what he considered the nature of modernity and its passionless attitude towards life. Kierkegaard writes that "the present age is essentially a sensible age, devoid of passion [...] The trend today is in the direction of mathematical equality, so that in all classes about so and so many uniformly make one individual". In this, Kierkegaard attacked the conformity and assimilation of individuals into "the crowd" which became the standard for truth, since it was the numerical.
As part of his analysis of the "crowd", Kierkegaard accused newspapers of decay and decadence. Kierkegaard stated Christendom had "lost its way" by recognizing "the crowd," as the many who are moved by newspaper stories, as the court of last resort in relation to "the truth." Truth comes to a single individual, not all people at one and the same time. Just as truth comes to one individual at a time so does love. One doesn't love the crowd but does love their neighbor, who is a single individual. He says, "never have I read in the Holy Scriptures this command: You shall love the crowd; even less: You shall, ethico-religiously, recognize in the crowd the court of last resort in relation to 'the truth.'"

Kierkegaard takes out his wrath on the crowd, the public, and especially the newspapers in this short sample of his work. In this quote he also gives an inkling of what true Christianity is like. God must be the middle term.

"The crowd is untruth. And I could weep, in every case I can learn to long for the eternal, whenever I think about our age's misery, even compared with the ancient world's greatest misery, in that the daily press and anonymity make our age even more insane with help from "the public," which is really an abstraction, which makes a claim to be the court of last resort in relation to "the truth"; for assemblies which make this claim surely do not take place. That an anonymous person, with help from the press, day in and day out can speak however he pleases (even with respect to the intellectual, the ethical, the religious), things which he perhaps did not in the least have the courage to say personally in a particular situation; every time he opens up his gullet—one cannot call it a mouth—he can all at once address himself to thousands upon thousands; he can get ten thousand times ten thousand to repeat after him—and no one has to answer for it; in ancient times the relatively unrepentant crowd was the almighty, but now there is the absolutely unrepentant thing: No One, an anonymous person: the Author, an anonymous person: the Public, sometimes even anonymous subscribers, therefore: No One. No One! God in heaven, such states even call themselves Christian states. One cannot say that, again with the help of the press, "the truth" can overcome the lie and the error.

"O, you who say this, ask yourself: Do you dare to claim that human beings, in a crowd, are just as quick to reach for truth, which is not always palatable, as for untruth, which is always deliciously prepared, when in addition this must be combined with an admission that one has let oneself be deceived! Or do you dare to claim that "the truth" is just as quick to let itself be understood as is untruth, which requires no previous knowledge, no schooling, no discipline, no abstinence, no self-denial, no honest self-concern, no patient labor! No, "the truth," which detests this untruth, the only goal of which is to desire its increase, is not so quick on its feet. Firstly, it cannot work through the fantastical, which is the untruth; its communicator is only a single individual. And its communication relates itself once again to the single individual; for in this view of life the single individual is precisely the truth. The truth can neither be communicated nor be received without being as it were before the eyes of God, nor without God's help, nor without God being involved as the middle term, since he is the truth. It can therefore only be communicated by and received by "the single individual," which, for that matter, every single human being who lives could be: this is the determination of the truth in contrast to the abstract, the fantastical, impersonal, "the crowd" – "the public," which excludes God as the middle term (for the personal God cannot be the middle term in an impersonal relation), and also thereby the truth, for God is the truth and its middle term."

-- Søren Kierkegaard, Copenhagen, Spring 1847



Part I of the Preface to Tudvad’s book Stadier paa antisemitismens vej

2011

Stages on the Way of Anti-Semitism: Søren Kierkegaard and the Jews

By Peter Tudvad


Preface

I ran across a couple of articles on Søren Kierkegaaard from the beginning of the 1940s while doing research for a book about a Danish nurse in the German Red Cross during the Second World War. To stumble on article on Kierkegaard was in itself not surprising. What was surprising was that they were in National Socialisten [the National Socialist] and Jul i Norden [Jul in the North], two strongly anti-Semitic publications associated with the Nazi party in Scandinavia.

“Søren Kierkegaard is without question the greatest genius the Danish nation has produced” began one of the articles. Moreover, continues the author, “his writings contain the best instructions for the liberation of the Danish people from the spirit of Judaism which has come increasingly to dominate Denmark and which he saw himself as called by providence to fight. One could thus to this extent be justified in asserting that Søren Kierkegaard was the first Danish National Socialist.”[1]

The author would not have been able to support such a claim, even if he had done extensive research, given that Kierkegaard was vehemently opposed to every form of both nationalism and socialism. On the other hand, there is something to the claim that Kierkegaard wanted to free the Danish people–or preferably all of Christendom–from “the Jewish spirit” which he, like the Nazis, viewed as materialistic, and which he increasingly portrayed as essentially in opposition to Christianity.

A limited agreement with a later political ideology does not, of course, make Kierkegaard responsible for what was committed in its name, but when the agreement consists of an anti-Semitism that indisputably belongs to the historical and cultural presuppositions for the Nazi’s attempted extermination of the Jews, it should at least serve to dampen some of the hitherto unreserved enthusiasm for this national icon. Such, however, does not appear to have been the case in that Danish Kierkegaard scholarship–which the Nazi author, Richard Geill, disparages for other reasons–has rarely acknowledged the pronounced anti-Semitic tendencies in Kierkegaard’s authorship.

Geill asserts that “Jews in Denmark do their best to keep the [Danish] people ignorant about Kierkegaard by presenting a distorted and misleading picture of [Denmark’s] greatest son.”[2] He is referring here to a few Jewish scholars who had distinguished themselves in Kierkegaard research in the period before the war. Even after the war, however, the overwhelming majority of Christian scholars appeared not to find sufficient grounds for concerning themselves with the anti-Semitic side of Kierkegaard’s authorship. One can only speculate about the motives for such neglect. It seems reasonable to suppose, however, that there was a general reluctance to turn a critical eye on this aspect of Kierkegaard’s work and thus, and perhaps more importantly, on the theology that profited from the esteem in which Kierkegaard was held.

....

I realized to my own shame, after reading these two articles, that I had also been all too willing to ignore, or to explain away, Kierkegaard’s anti-Semitism. I thus wrote an article on this topic for the magazine of Jewish culture, Guldberg. I cited Kierkegaard’s references, just as had Geill, to a Jewish editor as a “Jøde Dreng” [Jew-boy] and to “en trællesindet Jøde øvende Herskermagt” [a servile Jew exercising power] as well as his observation concerning this same editor and the distribution of his paper that “only a Jew could be fitted for this most equivocal of all tyrannies, even more equivocal than that of a usurer (to which the Jew, however, is best suited).”

Kierkegaard, a philosopher ordinarily critical of the status quo, can also be accused of evincing the stereotypical view of the Jews’ purported “Forkerlighed [predeliction] for money” as well as for the assertion that death, in that it was like a merciless usurer, was “worse than the most bloodthirsty Jew.”[3]

....

The limitations on space placed on an article for a popular cultural magazine did not allow for a full treatment of the issue, but the issue clearly requires such treatment. “Kierkegaard’s relation to Jews and Judaism is an astonishingly neglected area of research”[4] noted a Norwegian philosopher and intellectual historian in 1996. At that time there was, to my knowledge, only one American historian who had done research on this issue and published the results of this research in an article in Kirkehistoriske samlinger (an anthology of church history) in 1992 and latter in two derivative pieces, first in ALEF-tidskrift for jødisk kultur (a magazine of Jewish culture) and then in Kierkegaardiana two years later.[5] “Kierkegaard is and remains one of the most profound and important thinkers for the present age,” he asserted, “but we need to look honestly at his remarks concerning Jews and Judaism. This may be unpleasant, but we must do it despite this.”[6]

He’s right. I believe, however, that even this historian shies away from recognizing the consequences of the premises he’s presented to the extent that he refers to Kierkegaard’s allegedly ubiquitous irony as if his anti-Semitic statements were not really meant seriously. He thus interprets Kierkegaard’s anti-Semitic remarks as camouflaged critiques of the Christianity of his contemporaries. They certainly were meant in this way. Kierkegaard could use Jews and Judaism as a caricatured picture of Christianity, however, only because his anti-Semitism is genuine. The credibility of this historian is further impugned when despite the fact that he asserts Kierkegaard’s anti-Semitism was intended to be ironical, he praises it for its straightforwardness in contrast to the feigned tolerance, that serves only to conceal an arrogant contempt for Jews, who it is assumed, will in the end convert to Christianity, or at least reject their antiquated religion.

“But to demand a pluralistic tolerance–i.e., a tolerance which the present age considers real, genuine tolerance–is perhaps too much, it’s perhaps to demand something that would have been anachronistic” continues this historian, as if a thinker one ordinarily praises for being ahead of his time was unable to transcend given boundaries, and as if there were no one during this time who gave more than lip service to a defense of tolerance, when in fact there were genuine defenders of tolerance during this period.

In any case, Kierkegaard in no way shared lukewarm liberal tolerance and his remarks can thus be offensive and even shocking. On the other hand, there is perhaps an advantage in such offensiveness in contrast to the insidiously “tolerant” forms of anti-Semitism that, each in its own way, furthers the gradual and unacknowledged disappearance of Judaism. Kierkegaard’s rhetoric is provocative. It forces us to take a position. And by taking the issue seriously we come to understand that however offensive the rhetoric may be, it has relatively little to do with Jews or Judaism but is primarily Kierkegaard’s confrontation with the lukewarm and irresponsible form Christianity had taken in his day.[7]

This convenient and self-contradictory apology has since been more or less sanctioned by two short and uncritical references to it by a church historian in an otherwise thorough and rigorous work on the relations between Christians and Jews in a period of Danish history that corresponds closely with that of Kierkegaard. He says first that ‘Kierkegaard’s references to the Jews were much harsher than those of other intellectuals of the period, but then that it is believed that he identified himself with Jews whom he thought were fundamentally unhappy.” He observes later that Kierkegaard emphasized “Judaism was the enemy of Christianity, but most of what he objected to in Judaism was precisely what he criticized contemporary Christianity for.”[8]

Once again, the reader is instructed to appreciate that despite Kierkegaard’s apparent anti-Semitism, he was not anti-Semitic in that his overarching purpose was an attack on the Christianity of his day rather an attack on Judaism, and it is in this light that one must understand his possible identification of himself with Jews as an unhappy people.

Even though there is more than a grain of truth in this, it is far from being a satisfactory answer to the question of to what extent Kierkegaard was anti-Semitic, whether he became increasingly anti-Semitic with time, and the respect in which his views on Jews and Judaism influenced his theology and vice versa. So far as I know, no one until now has answered these questions, despite the fact that a Danish scholar touched on aspects of the reciprocal relationship between Judaism and Christianity in Kierkegaard’s authorship in 1999.[9]

[1]Richard Geill, “Søren Kierkegaard og Jøderne. Kronic” (Søren Kierkegaard and the Jews. Chronicle), National Socialisten (the national socialist), 17 Feb. 1940, nr. 4f, p. 10.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Peter Tudvad, “Stadier paa antisemitismens vej–Søren Kierkegaard og jøderne” (stages on the way of anti-Semitism: Søren Kierkegaard and the Jews), Goldberg, nr. 10, Nov. 2008, p. 34. See also NB 3: 20, SKS 20, 255, 14; NB3: 20, SKS 20, 255, 11f.: NB 10: 51, SKS 21, 283, 5-7: FF: 187, SKS 18, 111, 3 and Stadier paa Livets Vei (stages on life’s way), SKS 6, 308, 11.

[4] Håkan Harket, “Kierkegaards evige jøde” (Kierkegaard’s eternal [or wandering] Jew), Innøvelse I Kierkegaard. Fire essays (Practice in Kierkegaard. Four essays), (Oslo, 1996), p. 134.

[5] Bruce Kirmmse, “Kierkegaard, Jødedommen og Jøderne” (Kierkegaard, Judaism and the Jews), Kirkehistoriske samlinger (collections of church history) (Copenhagen, 1992), pp. 77-107. Also, “Kierkegaard, Jews and Judaism,” Kierkegaardiana, nr. 17, 1994, pp. 83-97, and “Søren Kierkegaard og det jødiske. Var filosoffen antisemit?” (Søren Kierkegaard and Jewishness. Was the philosopher an anti-Semite?) ALEF–tidskrift for jødisk kultur (magazine of Jewish culture), nr. 8, 1992, pp. 25-33.

[6] Kirmse, “Kierkegaard, jødedommen og jøderne (Kierkegaard, Judaism and the Jews), p. 96.

[7] Ibid. 98.

[8] Martin Schwarz Lausten, Frie jøder? Forholdet mellem kristne og jøder i Danmark fra Fridhedsbrevet 1814 til Grundloven 1849 (Free Jews? The relation between Christians and Jews in Denmark from the charter of 1814 until the constitution of 1849), Kierkehistoriske studier, 3, nr. 10, 2005, p. 134.

[9] Klaus Wivel, Næsten Intet. En jødisk kritic af Søren Kierkegaard (Almost Nothing: A Jewish critique of Søren Kierkegaard) (Copenhagen, 1999).



Damning with Faint Praise: Bizarre Defense of Kierkegaard in Danish Newspaper

Kierkegaard and the Jews, December 16, 2011

Just when you thought the debate surrounding Peter Tudvad’s book Stadier på antisemitismens vej: Søren Kierkegaard og Jøderne (stages on the way of anti-Semitism: Søren Kierkegaard and the Jews) (Rosinante, 2010), had probably died down, it’s actually flared up again. Ole Jørgensen published what has got to be the most bizarre defense of Kierkegaard yet. Jørgensen’s article, “Sjusk med ord. Søren Kierkegaard var ikke antisemit” (Linguistic carelessness. Kierkegaard was not an anti-Semite) appeared in Monday’s edition of Kristeligt Dagblad (Christian daily news). The title might lead one to suppose that Kristeligt Dagblad is a relatively obscure paper. It isn’t. Remember, Denmark has a state church. The Danish Lutheran Church is the official church of the Danish people. This undoubtedly explains why Jørgensen took it upon himself to defend not only Kierkegaard, but also Martin Luther against the charge of anti-Semitism. Luther, he asserts, merely “chastens the Jews in his book On the Jews and their Lies.” One might be tempted to conclude from that remark that Jørgensen hasn’t actually read Luther (or Tudvad either since Tudvad quotes extensively from Luther’s works where they bear on the Jews).

It’s not clear whether Jørgensen has seriously studied Luther on this issue. What is clear, however, is that Jørgensen has what one could charitably call a rather idiosyncratic understanding of what constitutes anti-Semitism. He observes, for example, that far from being an anti-Semite, “Kierkegaard even had a Jew in his employ for several years: Israel Levin, who […] was thus able to advance himself, in the manner Jews are so good at, both economically and socially.” That is, Jørgensen apparently does not see the generalization that Jews are particularly good at advancing themselves economically and socially as in any way anti-Semitic, which is bizarre given such a generalization buys into stereotypes concerning Jews and money, and that there is hardly a worse crime in the eyes of the Danes than social climbing.

Jørgensen observes that “[o]ne should use some other word than ‘anti-Semitism’” to apply to Kierkegaard. “[I]t was more Kierkegaard’s [religious] zeal,” he continues, “that led him to rein in [lægge mundbidslet på] these occasionally mischievous [frække] Jews.”

It wasn’t merely Kierkegaard, or even Luther, who felt it necessary, according to Jørgensen, to “rein in,” or “chasten” the Jews. Christ himself, observes Jørgensen, “pulls no punches” (lægges der virkelig ikke fingre imellem) when he “says to the Jews: ‘You are of your father the devil and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and a father of lies’” (John 8:44).

“See how closely,” asserts Jørgensen, “lies and murder are connected with each other–both with the Jews and with Hitler. The lies of the Jews crucified Christ. Hitler’s lies murdered six million Jews.” Jørgensen’s digression on what he claims is the connection between lies and murder is not merely a stylistic flaw in his piece; his attempt to use this purported connection to draw an analogy between the Jews and Hitler suggests he may be suffering from some sort of cognitive disorder. How could anyone trot out the stereotype of the Jews as “Christ killers” (a stereotype so offensive that even the pope was forced recently to officially repudiate it) in an article that purports to defend someone, anyone, against the charge of anti-Semitism?

“Søren Kierkegaard was not an anti-Semite,” concludes Jørgensen, “That’s a careless us of language and an [attempt to] exploit Kierkegaard’s good name for personal gain.” That is, Kierkegaard was no more an anti-Semite than Luther was, or than Jørgense’s “careless use of language” make him appear to be. Wow, that puts a whole new spin on the expression “damning with faint praise.” It makes the textbook example of “For a fat girl, you don’t sweat much,” seem positively considerate!



Exhibition on Jews in the Danish Theater takes a Page from Tudvad’s Book!

Kierkegaard and the Jews, May 29, 2011

There is a new exhibition entitled “Teater og kultur” (theater and culture) in the museum that is part of Hofteatret (the court theater) at Christiansborg Palace on Slotsholmen in Copenhagen. It concerns the relation between theater and the social-political life in mid-nineteenth-century Denmark. This was an extremely tumultuous period in Danish history. It was the beginning of genuine democracy in Denmark as well as the period of the Three Year’s War in Schleswig, a war as divisive for much of Danish society as was the Civil War for American society.

There are three parts to the exhibition. The first is entitled “Breve fra et grænseland” (letters from a borderland) and concerns the effect of the Three Year’s War on Fridolin Banner, a soldier on the Schleswig front, and his father, Johan Daniel Bauer an actor in the Danish Royal Theater who endured not merely constant rumors relating to the conflict in which his son was involved, but also a raging cholera epidemic in Denmark’s capital.

The second part of the exhibition is entitled “Kærlighed og magt I korridoreren” (love in the corridors of power) and concerns Frederik the Seventh and his lover, Louise Rasmussen, also known as Grevinde Danner (Countess Danner), to whom he was “married” as the Danes say “til venstre hand” (to the left hand).

Finally, the third part of the exhibition is entitled “Salomon, Esther og Shylock–jøder på scenen” (Salomon, Esther and Shylock–Jews on the stage). The following is a quotation from the AOK-Guide online (AOK stands for “Alt om København” which translates as “everything about Copenhagen”):

“As Peter Tudvad shows in his book Stadier på antisemitismens vej (stages on the way of anti-Semitism) (2010), Søren Kierkegaard went about in the middle of Golden-Age Copenhagen and contributed to the debate concerning the assimilation of Jews into Danish culture. One can also read in Tudvad’s book about the view of Jews in the theatrical community and their role in the Danish theater. The Theater Museum at Slotsholmen has taken up this thread from Tudvad’s book with an exhibition entitled “Salomon, Esther and Shylock–Jews on the stage.” The exhibition covers the period of Kierkegaard and Johanne Luise Heiberg up until the premier of Henrik Nathansen’s “Indenfor Murerene” at the Royal Theater in 1912–the same year the theater was opened.”



Rabbi Wolff’s Danish Knighthood!

Kierkegaard and the Jews, May 4, 2011

It’s been a while since I’ve put up a post. That’s what teaching does, it eats up one’s time, if one does it well anyway. Still I am now only a few pages away from finishing the 100-page-long chapter of Tudvad’s book Stadier på Antisemitismens Vej: Søren Kierkeaard og Jøderne (stages on the way of anti-Semitism: Søren Kierkegaard and the Jews) that deals with the theological treatment of Jews and Judaism. The first part of the chapter focuses on the views of 19th-century Christian theologians, with occasional references to Luther and a few other earlier theologians. (I’m a philosopher rather than a theologian, so I was shocked to learn just how rabidly anti-Semitic Luther was. His views were so extreme, they look more like a kind of mental illness than the sort of character flaw under which we would normally classify bigotry). The second part of the chapter deals with Kierkegaard’s own views. My plan is to make two separate posts, one on the first part of the chapter and another on the second part.

In the meantime, however, I thought I would relate an interesting little story the appears near the end of the chapter about Abraham Alexander Wolff, the chief rabbi of Denmark during the middle to later part of the nineteenth century. Wolff, as you will see if you click on the link to his entry in the online Jewish Encyclopedia, was a talented and prolific scholar and writer. He was also an extraordinarily important figure in the history of Danish Jewry. He was a progressive thinker who is credited with improving relations between Jews and Christians. He was honored for his work with the prestigious Order of the Dannebrog. That is, he was given a knighthood by the Danish king.

That’s when the trouble started. The official sign of this order was a cross which Wolff wore on public occasions, but which he apparently removed before entering the synagogue. This, according to Tudvad, “offended a certain Joseph Perstein, who therefore on the 24th of April 1855 published an article in Kjøbenhavns Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger, or as it was called back then–Adresseavisen, where he demanded of Wolff that he explain why” he did this. Perlstein claimed that one of the requirements of the Order of the Dannebro was that one should be a Christian. A crucifix, he claimed further, ought to be offensive to any Jew, hence he demanded that Wolff either give up his knighthood or his Judaism!

Sad eh, that relations between Jews and Christians had reached the point where what had originally been a sect of Judaism had come in the minds of both Jews and Christians to represent its diametrical opposition. That certainly wasn’t Jesus’ intention [!!!???], not, in any case, according to contemporary historical scholarship.



Ahasverus and Vampires

Kierkegaard and the Jews, February 25, 2011

The second chapter of Peter Tudvad’s Stadier på Antisemitismens Vej: Søren Kierkegaard og Jøderne (stages on the way of anti-Semitism: Søren Kierkegaard and the Jews) deals with the legend of Ahasverus, the “eternal Jew” in Danish, or “the wandering Jew,” in English. Ahasverus is a character who supposedly taunted Christ on the way to his Crucifixion and was condemned, as a result, to wander the earth forever. This chapter, which is more than one hundred pages long, examines the legend of Ahasverus in such detail it could legitimately be published as a monograph on the subject independently of the rest of the book.

Students of romantic literature will eat this chapter up because it is filled with references to that period of literary history. In addition to a general survey of literature on Ahasverus, there is a great deal of interesting material on the history of Kierkegaard’s preoccupation with the concept of the wandering Jew. In fact, the material in this chapter could easily form the basis of a dissertation on the subject. I’ll confess, however, that I found making it through this portion of the book something of a hard slog.

One of the most interesting aspects of this chapter, from my perspective, was the similarity that gradually became apparent to me between the legend of Ahasverus, and the mythical character of the vampire. I promised earlier to come with a post on Kierkegaard and vampires. Given the current popularity of vampires, cynical readers might have interpreted this as a shameless attempt to boost the popularity of my blog. I should confess that that was part of my motivation. There really is a striking similarity, however, between Ahasverus and vampires. First, both are “undead.” That is, both are condemned to live forever and, unlike so many people today who appear to think an indefinite extension of the human lifespan would be a wonderful thing, both see this as a fate much worse than death. Both are melancholy and incapable of forming close emotional relationships with ordinary human beings. Even more interesting is that, according to Tudvad, the character of Ahasverus in Percy Bysshe Shelley’s Queen Mab, like the vampire, casts no shadow.

The legend of Ahasverus apparently originated in Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages (there is no support for it in Christian scripture). So, it appears, did the legend of the modern vampire. Both were also favorite subjects of authors during the Romantic period. Jungians have argued that the vampire actually belongs to the collection of archetypes inherent in human consciousness. The similarity of Ahasverus to the vampire suggests this figure is simply another instantiation of the same archetype.

There are so many interesting topics to be explored here: What is the historical relation between the two legends? What is the literary relationship? Are they expressions of a single archetype? If so, what does this archetype reveal to us about human nature or about the psyche? So far as I know, none of these questions has been given serious scholarly treatment even though the time is clearly ripe for such treatment.



Is Christianity Anti-Semitic? Danish Theologian Defends Tudvad’s Book.

Kierkegaard and the Jews, February 9, 2011

“Long before Peter Tudvad’s book Stadier på Antisemtismens Vej: Søren Kierkegaard og Jøderne [Stages on the Way of Anti-Semtism: Søren Kierkegaard and the Jews] appeared, the theological rationalizations were already lined up,” writes Danish theologian Lone Fatum in Kristeligt Dagblad. “No one had read the book, but everyone had an opinion on it. When the book finally appeared, on the anniversary of Kristalnacht, reviewers immediately banded together. ‘Kierkegaard was not anti-Semitic–end of discussion!’”

Tudvad explained in my interview with him, as well as in the Danish media, that he believes that what really incensed critics of his book was less that he had charged Kierkegaard with anti-Semitism than that he had argued there was a disposition toward anti-Semitism in Christianity itself. Denmark, after all, still has a state church, the Danish Lutheran Church. Christianity, for many Danes, is as much a cultural institution as a religious one. Danes have prided themselves, and not without reason, on their historically liberal attitude toward Jews and Judaism. To argue as Tudvad does in his book that Christianity has inherently anti-Semitic tendencies is thus to strike at something that is very near the heart of Danish culture.

Fatum asserts that the numerous efforts to explain away Kierkegaard’s anti-Semitic remarks “appear to support Tudvad’s claim that [the persistence of subtle forms of anti-Semitism] is an problem people are unwilling to face.” Fatum argues, however, that the disposition toward anti-Semitism in Christianity is more pronounced than even Tudvad suggests. All the Gospels, she asserts, were written after the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in the year 70, which many early Christians saw as God’s punishment of the Jews for their having killed Christ. Anti-Semitic sentiment, she asserts, is clear throughout the Gospels, but particularly in John (e.g., John 8: 21-47 where Jesus appears* to assert that the devil, not Abraham, is the father of the Jews).

But are the Gospels really that anti-Semitic? There is no question that Fatum is correct in her claim that there are numerous passages throughout the Gospels that lend themselves to interpretation as anti-Semitic. According to many New Testament scholars, however, there was a great deal of ambivalence among early Christians concerning their relation to Judaism and this ambivalence is reflected, I would argue in at least the synoptic Gospels, if not in the entire New Testament canon.

There can be no dispute, however, concerning the presence of strong anti-Semitic tendencies among the early church fathers and later Christian thinkers such as Martin Luther, just as there can be little doubt that Kierkegaard was influenced by these thinkers. It is less clear whether Kierkegaard’s anti-Semitic attitudes came directly from this tradition or whether their evolution had a more subtle and complex origin. That’s part of what makes Tudvad’s book such an important work. He attempts to trace the evolution of Kierkegaard’s views on Jews and Judaism. Scholars who actually engage with his arguments may come to have legitimate disagreements with him and one hopes that other treatments of this important topic will eventually emerge. For now, though, all we have is Tudvad book. It is nice to see that it is beginning to receive the recognition it deserves.



* The Kikes [Judeans who rejected Christ]: "Abraham is our father." -- Christ Jesus: "You are of your father the devil."

'THAT NIGGER'S YOURS, NOT OURS!'

KEEPING IT REAL WITH YOUR GIRL ADEOLA: THAT NIGGER'S YOUR NIGGER, NOT OUR NIGGER!


In Keeping it Real episode 74, Adeola wonders who should take the blame for the two children of Nigerian immigrants who killed a British solider. She also raises the question of identity: Is the child of Nigerians born abroad a Nigerian?

Adeola celebrates Four Nigerians among 5 shortlisted for African writing prize.

A Kenyan man burns his wife for being too pretty, find out how she’s educating others about domestic violence.

All over the world, Guineans are protesting bad governance, ethnic cleansing, corruption, and insecurity among many things. Find out what has been happening in the West African country.

An elaborate Indian wedding that took place in South Africa has become the hot topic on the streets of South Africa, when the bride’s family chattered a plane which landed at a military base. The bridal party also discriminated against black waiters and waitresses at Sun City resort.



Controversy Over Baby Born With Quran

African Spotlight, May 9, 2012

A big controversy is raging in Lagos following the birth of a baby boy said to be clutching a miniature Holy Quran at birth. The baby was born at a white garment church in Mushin, Lagos State, Southwest Nigeria.

While some dispute the claim, others say it is possible. A large crowd gathered at 1, Sonde Street, Ijeshatedo, Lagos home of the boy’s parents yesterday, as news of the birth spread rapidly.

His mother, Mrs. Kikelomo Ilori, 32, a Cosmetologist, told P.M.NEWS that he was born on Monday after she had carried the pregnancy for about 10 months. The single mother claimed she was abandoned by her husband who denied responsibility for the pregnancy and encouraged her to abort it. The woman told P.M.NEWS yesterday: “When I refused to abort the pregnancy, he deserted me, saying ‘that is your own problem’.” Mrs. Ilori expressed surprise at the birth of the boy. She added that the nurse who delivered her of the baby was physically challenged, but went about it commendably.

“When my baby was delivered holding a Quran in his hand, the nurse said the Quran should be thrown away. But I insisted my mother must see it before any action could be taken,” Kikelomo, who is a Christian, further explained.

Corroborating the story, Senior Rev. Victoria Yetunde Dada said during the pregnancy, Kikelomo was always coming to her for prayers and counselling.

“I advised her not to abort the pregnancy because she might die in the process. Again, I told her the foetus was sent by God and will be great,” Apostle Mother Dada told our correspondent. Controversy has continued to trail the seemingly spurious claim.

Reacting, Medical Director of Bodet Hospital, Ikeja, Lagos, Dr. Bode Tawak said scientifically, it was not possible for a baby to be born holding a Quran.

“How big is the baby’s hand to hold the Quran? How big is the Quran? How did the Quran get into her mother’s womb? I don’t know how a Quran can get into a womb. But there are things you can’t explain,” Dr. Tawak responded. He said while the incident cannot be explained medically, in Nigeria many mysterious things happen. A Kaduna-based medical practitioner, Dr. Munir Yusuf said from a medical point of view, it was not possible, but added that depending on the size of the Quran, it was possible metaphysically.

He explained that if the Quran is small enough to pass through the diameter of the vagina, with the child, it is possible. In the same vein, a herbal medicine practitioner, Chief Dr. Bola Adegunloye believes nothing is impossible, but said too much importance must not be placed on the incident.

http://www.africanspotlight.com/2012/05/09/controversy-over-baby-born-with-quran

THE 'GET OUR TROOPS OUT OF OUR LAND' SPEECH

U.K.-BORN ISLAMIC TERRORIST ADEBOLAJO'S WOOLICH KILLING JIHAD-SPEECH

PLUS POLICE-SHOOTING OF THE MUZ SCUMBAG




MICHAEL "MUJAHID" ADEBOLAJO'S "GET OUR TROOPS OUT OF OUR LAND" SPEECH

"The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers, and this British soldier is one, is a eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

"By Allah, we swear by the Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone. So what if we want to live by the Sharia in Muslim lands? Why does that mean you must follow us, and chase us, and call us 'extremists', and kill us?

"Rather, you lot are extreme. You are the ones. When you drop a bomb, do you think it hits one person, or rather your bomb wipes out a whole family? This is the reality.

"By Allah, if I saw your mother today with a buggy, I would help her up the stairs -- this is my nature. But we are forced by the Koran in Sura at-Tawba [Chapter 9 of the Koran], through many, many ayah [verses] throughout the Koran that we must fight them as they fight us -- an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

"I apologise that women had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same.

"You people will never be safe. Remove your governments. They don’t care about you. Do you think David Cameron is gonna get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? Do you think the politicians are going to die? No it’s going to be the average guy, like you, and your children. So get rid of them.

"Tell them to bring our troops back so we can, so you can all live in peace.

"Leave our lands and you will live in peace.

"That’s all I have to say.

"Allah’s peace and blessings be upon Mohammad, as-salamu alaykum.”



Римский-Корсаков "Царская невеста"

2005


2007

CORONATION STREET ?

BREAKING NEWS

Chris Durban: I sank a German U-boat in 1943, I was just 20-years-old and terrified

Nicholas Milton, The Independent, 23 May 2013

The last time Able Seaman Chris Durban saw a U-boat he was ramming the HMS Brilliant destroyer into it in the middle of the Atlantic on Christmas Day 1943.

Now, aged 90, the World War Two veteran is once again staring at the menacing form of a U-boat - although thankfully this time it is U-534 which is safely in dry dock in Liverpool.

“I never thought I’d see one again, especially this close up,” Durban says. “When I last saw a U-boat 70 years ago they were firing at me as they went down. I was just 20-year-old and I was terrified”.

Although he didn’t come quite as close as Durban, Winston Churchill shared the young sailor’s fears. The wartime Prime Minister wrote in his memoirs: “The only thing that ever really frightened me during the war was the U-boat peril. I was even more anxious about this battle than I had been about the glorious air fight called the Battle of Britain.”

Durban, who also served on the Flower-class corvette HMS Primrose, believes all those who took part in the Battle of the Atlantic should be given the same recognition as those who fought in other services during the war. “It was an absolute disgrace those who took part in the Arctic convoys had to wait 70 years for a medal,” he says. “At least we got the Atlantic star after the war. But still far too few people know what we went through.”

“What made the battle so nerve-wracking was that you hardly ever saw the enemy. But for weeks on end you thought that at any moment you would be hit by a torpedo. It was psychological torture and they knew it. The only time I ever saw a German on board was when we picked up a Luftwaffe pilot we had shot down. But he died a few hours later”.

The Battle of the Atlantic was epitomised in the 1953 film The Cruel Sea starring Jack Hawkins as the skipper of the Compass Rose. At the end of the film he lowers the cargo nets and takes on board the survivors from a U-boat that has been depth charged and forced to the surface. His number one, played by Donald Sinden, remarks poignantly: “Not so very different from us, are they?”

By contrast, when Durban and his comrades rammed the U-boat, the German survivors were left to die in the water. “I can still vividly see their faces. They were waving at us thinking we were going to pick them up. They were just boys fighting for their beloved Führer. But it was us or them.”

The Battle of the Atlantic was the longest continuous military campaign of the Second World War and was vital to Britain’s war effort. It brought food, supplies and military equipment from the United States and Canada to Liverpool, London and Londonderry. It lasted from 1939 until the German surrender on 8 May 1945, during which between 30,000 and 40,000 seamen died and over 5,000 ships were sunk, the majority by U-boats.

From 1940 to the spring of 1942 U-boats inflicted heavy losses on the Atlantic convoys but then better tactics, training and equipment swung the battle decisively in favour of the Allies. This culminated in what the Germans called “Black May 1943” when the German Navy suffered such heavy losses that they temporarily withdrew all U boats from the North Atlantic on 24 May 1943. Crucial to this was the cracking of the German Navy’s enigma code at Bletchley Park by Alan Turing and his colleagues. Plus the Allies began closing the ‘air gap’ in the mid-Atlantic by using long-range aircraft such as Sunderlands.

Next week in celebration of the 70th Anniversary of the Battle of the Atlantic 25 warships will visit Liverpool, the national focus for the anniversary, followed by a march past of veterans and a service at Liverpool Cathedral. “These celebrations will be the last ones,” Durban says. “The average age of the veterans will be at least 90. It will be the final opportunity for society to remember their sacrifice.”

Today there are only four surviving U-boats left in the world and U-534 is the only one in Europe outside Germany. It was sunk just days before the end of the war on 5 May 1945 by RAF Coastal Command and lay buried off the coast of Denmark for 48 years until it was salvaged in 1993.

The salvagers had hoped to find a store of gold and diamonds on board, but were disappointed. Instead they found uniforms, binoculars, documents, medals, games and even bottles of wine, all perfectly preserved by the mud and water-tight compartments.

Surprisingly the finds included a British Admiralty map of Newfoundland and charts with shipping silhouettes issued by Lloyds of London. Pride of place was an enigma machine and a coded message from Grand Admiral Karl Doenitz revealing he had been named Führer after Hitler’s death.

The U-boat Durban helped sink brought an unexpected bonus. “Usually Christmas Day was just like any other day at sea. But this Christmas to celebrate we got corn dog sandwiches and then the order was given to splice the mainbrace. I’d just turned 20 so got my extra tot of rum for the first time. Before that I’d had to make do with lime juice”.

Churchill, perhaps realising that history would remember the sacrifice of more high profile battles, wrote: “We shall not fail, and then some day, when children ask ‘What did you do to win?’, one will say ‘I was a fighter pilot’, another will say ‘I was in the Submarine Service’ another ‘I marched with the Eighth Army’. A fourth will say ‘None of you could have lived without the convoys and the merchant seamen’”.

PC PLOD CRACKDOWN ON SHOUTY TERROR

The British public can sleep safely tonight after an 85-year-old domestic terrorist was arrested for raising her voice outside a mosque, asking the Muzzies why they don't go back where they came from.

Woman, 85, arrested after abuse hurled at Muslims outside Gillingham mosque in wake of Woolwich terror murder

By Lynn Cox, lcox@thekmgroup.co.uk

KentOnLine 2013.05.24

[Photo: A high-profile police presence at Gillingham Mosque in the wake of the Woolwich murder]

An 85-year-old woman has this afternoon been arrested after abuse was hurled at Muslims outside Gillingham Mosque.

The pensioner was handcuffed and taken away in a van by officers attending the Canterbury Street mosque for Friday prayers.

As worshippers gathered outside the venue, a woman at a nearby bus stop shouted: "go back to your own country".

The arrested woman, from the Maidstone Road area of Chatham, was taken away by officers at about 1.45pm and is now in police custody.

A Kent Police spokesman said: "An 85 year old woman from Chatham was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."

It comes as a man appeared in court this afternoon accused of raiding the same mosque in Gillingham.

And another suspect remains in custody today over an alleged racist attack - also in Gillingham.

"She just started shouting, calling them names and telling them to go back to their own country..." - witness outside Gillingham Mosque

Extra police patrols were outside Gillingham Mosque this afternoon as the force promised to take a hard line against reprisal attacks following the Woolwich terror murder.

The abusive woman had earlier been enjoying lunch with her husband at the nearby KFC restaurant before waiting at a bus stop opposite the religious building.

One witness, who did not want to be named, said: "She just started shouting, calling them names and telling them to go back to their own country.

"Then someone started shouting back at her and it got worse, the shouting and swearing.

"The police then came over and she was arrested. They put her in a van and her husband had started wandering off down the road, I don't think he wanted anything to do with it."

[Photo: Police cars outside Gillingham Mosque as worshippers arrive]

Other witnesses said a woman ran down the road to tell the arrested woman's husband she had been arrested.

He managed to get to the van before his wife was taken away, but was not allowed to go to the police station with her.

[Video: Heavy police presence outside Gillingham Mosque this afternoon]

Before the incident, many Muslims turning up for Friday prayers were pleased to see a police presence of three vehicles outside.

One young worshipper, who did not want to be named, said: "I'm part of this community and I feel safe anyway, but it is nice to see the police presence here today."

PC Plod welcomes Rivers of Blood

[Photo: PC Dave Saunders greets worshippers at Gillingham Mosque before Friday prayers]

Last night, a 27-year-old man was arrested after an assault outside a shop in Gillingham.

Police were called to the High Street at about 5pm and arrested him on suspicion of racially aggravated assault, threats to damage property and a public order offence.

The man remains in police custody today.

[Photo: Damage inside a Gillingham mosque hours after a 'terrorist' murder]

A 45-year-old man appeared at Medway Magistrates' Court this afternoon after an attack at Gillingham Mosque on Wednesday night.

Andrew Grindlay, of Granville Road, Gillingham, pleaded not guilty to religiously aggravated criminal damage and burglary.

He was released on bail after a 40-minute hearing and will next appear at the same court on Monday, July 22 when his case will be send to Crown court.

The mosque in Canterbury Street was damaged in an attack in which windows were smashed and bookcases containing copies of the Koran damaged.

A door frame, lock and carpet were damaged, three windows broken, two shelves pulled off the wall and a copy of the Koran damaged.

It happened just hours after 25-year-old Drummer Lee Rigby, of 2nd Battalion The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, was hacked to death by suspected Islamist extremists in Woolwich, south east London.

[Photo: Drummer Lee Rigby was killed in a terrorist murder]

Extra police officers are out in force today to prevent potential reprisal attacks at Kent mosques during Friday prayers.

The heightened patrols come as police promised a "zero tolerance" approach to anyone who targets the county's Muslim community.

Assistant Chief Constable Gary Beautridge, from Kent Police, said: "We have made it clear what our approach will be to any reports of crime or disorder following the incident in Woolwich on 22 May.

"We will be continuing that approach and will act swiftly to bring anyone into custody that is suspected of committing any offences."

Mr Beautridge confirmed extra officers will continue to patrol the county.

He said the force has not received intelligence to suggest any direct threat, but "additional resources will continue to patrol to provide a reassuring presence in potentially vulnerable communities".

Mr Beautridge said: "We've looked at where we believe, working with other community leaders and other institutions, tension points could possibly occur.

"That's a result of intelligence we have and we have put patrols where we believe they'd be best suited to protect the public.

"These are additional patrols that we have put on the street. I've authorised additional patrols to be out there as a visible presence, working with community leaders."

His comments come as Muslim community leaders and Gillingham and Rainham MP Rehman Chishti appealed for calm.

Meanwhile, Medway Council bosses have met with representatives from the Muslim community in the Towns to offer reassurance.

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway_messenger/news/Friday-prayers-patrol-1128



85-year-old arrested for shouting outside Mosque

(Kent) An 85-year-old woman has been arrested for allegedly shouting outside the Jamia mosque in Gillingham today (Friday 24 May). She is currently in police custody for a public order offence.

http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/update/2013-05-24/85-year-old-arrested-for-shouting-outside-mosque

http://vimeo.com/66923239#



Ten-year-old girl warned by Kent police that hopscotch lines are 'illegal' and constitute 'criminal damage', claims father

Angry father told local press that officers had frightened his daughter

The Independent, 10 May 2013

A ten-year-old girl from Kent has reportedly been warned by police after drawing a chalk hopscotch grid on the pavement outside her home.

Bob Allen, from Ramsgate, told local press that officers had frightened his daughter when they approached her saying it was 'illegal to draw on the floor' as it was 'criminal damage'.

According to reports the family have made an official complaint to police after the incident which is alleged to have taken place on Monday 6 May.

Mr Allen told the BBC: "They've just gone and said something to her and then just driven off."

"That's not the way for the police to deal with the problem, if there is a problem. And I don't think there is a problem here, so they shouldn't have said anything in the first place."

Kent Police said they have been unable to trace a force vehicle in the area at the time it is claimed the incident happened.

A spokeswoman said: “We are trying to trace the officers who are reported to have made this comment. From the circumstances described, it would not appear to have been necessary to advise the young girl that chalking a hopscotch grid may be criminal damage and illegal.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tenyearold-girl-warned-by-kent-police-that-hopscotch-lines-are-illegal-and-constitute-criminal-damage-claims-father-8610608.html

MASKARADE





KORSFARERNE

Profile

卍心の智

Author:卍心の智

Search form
Latest Journals
Latest comments
Monthly archive
Friend Request Form

Want to be friends with this user.

Link