Liberal Internet Kristallnacht: If and When is it Most Likely to Happen?

[tom_paine]

One of the things which I have been saying since late 2001/early 2002 or so, once the Bushies deepening reseblence to Nazis became clearer and clearer, was that a Kristallnacht would eventually happen, but that it would by necessity have to take a different form than the Nazi Method.

But there is now another outlet for the Kristallnacht Forces that are building in this nation, waiting their chance for some imprimatur of approval from society to act. In keeping with another key difference between Bushies and Nazis, the Bushies do most of their "violence" and bullying in a virtual space. Our conflicts are not physical, as the street fights in Germany in the 20s and early 30s between the Nazi Supporters and Opposition.

But the same types of conflicts do take place in cyberspace, I believe.

My theory is, when ceratin BushPutinist Forces, and they seem almost unstoppable now (2008 being the last tiny spot where it might be stopped or at least slowed down), reach a critical mass and the upper branches of government have been further hollowed out and enslaved, a kind of Kristallnacht will happen.

But it will be on line, I believe, that Kristallnacht happens this time, so it doesn't bring up disturbing images of the original.

It's only good PR for the Bushies to make sure there are no unpleasant associations for those who will perpetrate Liberal Internet Kritsallnacht by making it as different as can be from the original it will be patterned after.

Trends are easier to predict that the specific cirumstances that will occur when these things actually happen.

1) Will it be the government itself, triggered by a "terrorist attack" that crashes the Left Blogoshpere and ends "Net Neutrality" in a BIG way?

2) Will it be more like the original in that it will be a massive and permanent DOS attack, with the assistance of the Loyal Bushies in the appropriate places to look the other way or provide tech support where needed? All crimes against THE PARTY prosecuted to the fullest, all those committed by THE PARTY, well think about the Anthrax Investigation to find your answer...

3) Could it be that there will be no single event, but a slow decrease in Net Neutrality (mysteriously not shared by the Busheviks) that strangles thoe without State Approval slowly into the dust?

4) Or something else?

Tell me what you think, I am very interested how people react to this quetsion as opposed to 2002 or 2004, because the deeping outline of the New Totalitarianism is now so much more real, clear, and obvious than it was even 2 years ago.

What say you, DU?

[in_cog_ni_to]

1. I've often wondered how much longer they will let the Internets live. It's their achilles heel. As

long as people can get the TRUTH online, it's a true danger to their plan. I suspect they'll do something within the next year after they install Martial Law after their next MIHOP attack. We will be attacked before the '08 election. It's the ONLY way they can retain the Dictatorial power they seek.

[Crayson]

6. Taking your freedoms one by one

I don't think "Net neutrality" will play a role in it.

You can always have your own net in the net.
The net is not your only form of resistance.

It will more be along the lines of rights and freedoms taken from you one by one.
And every single one will look just fine because it was taken away for your own security.

People will just have to accept that there is no ultimate security, noone can grant that to you and therefor nobody needs to strip away your rights to pretend he could.
Ultimate is only death, so don't worry.
^_^

<Anarchism> <--|--> <Police State>
Something in between would be preferably, the US is definitely leaning towards "Police State"

[in_cog_ni_to]

16. I'm computer illiterate. I didn't know you could still have your own net in the net.

That's good to know.:)



"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
The_Craven

Joseph Goebbels


“Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.”

Joseph Goebbels


“Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for every form of power politics and any dictatorship-run state has its roots in the street.”

Joseph Goebbels

[porphyrian]

2. The reason the internet stays as it is is that people like it how it is.

Sure, corporations want to turn it into a bigger source of revenue, censors want to control the content, and the government wants to monitor and control the flow of information, but all of the individual users want it to be pretty much what it is. As long as this doesn't change, neither will the internet, in any dramatic way.

[bryant69]

3. Well if you believe in MIHOP/LIHOP and that we are close to the Bush Dictatorship

That is the next logical step.

Incidentally there is plenty of ground between "Bush is a dictator just waiting for the right moment to impose martial law" and "Bush is a good president and we have nothing to worry about."

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[tom_paine]

12. Yes, there is plenty of ground betwen those two poles.

And while I think LIHOP at the very least a 30-40% possibility (yes, some days it feels closer to 90% certain, which it may well turn out to be), there is certainly plenty of room for people on the LIHOP/MIHOP side to be incorrect about how bad things are and how bad the people we face.

In fact, I daresay that most believers in MIHOP/LIHOP or in general that this is something mroe than a normal iteration of American History, would be ecstatic if we/they turned out to be wrong and you turned out to be right.

What is so infuriating, in the end, Bryant, is that you refuse to make the same concession, that you could be a brutally wrong as any German in 1939 who still believed that Hitler might have been a bad guy, but surely not as truly evil as those "conspiracy theorists" made him out to be.

I mean, come on, making soap from people's skin after they gassed them death by the trainload? Who could be so montsrous to order those things? And they could never find enough people to carry them out, even if they wanted to, could they?

Also, that would be crazy, undertaking such an operation during a war, when all resources are needed to fight national enemies. They are much too smart to divert so many materiels to such a cause. It's contrary to the interests and health of the nation.

Finally they could NEVER keep such a massive undertaking secret fromthe general populace, could they? I mean, such a crazy conspiracy theory would involve the complicity of thousands...millions even.

Sound familiar?

[bryant69]

14. Nice

Why should I make that concession?

It wouldn't be enough to satisfy the MIHOP/LIHOP faithful who are convinced that if i would just look at the evidence I would be on their side?

I just don't see the point.

Comparing me to a Hitler supporter though - nice touch. Cause that certainly has me questioning my position.

Bryant

[Beetwasher]

19. "Why should I make that concession?"

Umm, because otherwise you're saying your beliefs about Bushco's motives and goals are not belief, but rather certainty. You are 100% certain that your position and beliefs about Bushco. are correct? Praytell. Did you have a vision from god on the subject?

"Comparing me to a Hitler supporter though .."

Ahh yes, because history NEVER repeats and people have changed so much in 50 years. Why, we're a different species in fact, one that could NEVER let that happen! And I'm 100% certain about this too! :eyes:

[bryant69]

20. There it is - either I believe LIHOP/MIHOP

or I'm a Hitler supporter.

It is a possibility that I am wrong about President Bush's involvement in 9/11. But I am certain enough that I am correct that I feel pretty comfortable making fun of people who do believe in LIHOP or particularly MIHOP. And that's pretty certain, I suppose.

Bryant

[in_cog_ni_to]

21. Loose Change:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501

[tom_paine]

24. How well you pyramid the Straw Men into a Straw Monster!

1) I NEVER compared you to a Hitler Supporter.

I compared you to the Good Germans of the kind Patton had marched into the concentration camp afterwards, to give them the "concrete evidence" they so missed when dissmissing those "conspiracy theories". Oh THEN they got their concrete evidence, 12 years too late.

Do YOU support Bush? Then how could you be compared to a Hitler supporter. No, no, you are NOT like a Hitler supporter. Much more like the great mass of Germans who dismissed those Loony Conspiracy Theories of concentration camp atrocities.

I say again, so far as I can tell you are nothing like a Hitler Supporter. But a Good German? Oh yeah.

Don't try and tell me there isn't a world of difference betwen those two classifications of people. Active support vs. passive denial.

2) Asking you to admit a possibility is MUCH different than demanding you give 100% belief to it or you're labelled a Hitler supporter.

That is absolute nonsense, even as a Straw Man. If you want to believe that's what people are saying, I hope that convenient untruth works out for you and provides a modicum of serenity.

[bryant69]

27. People who support LIHOP/MIHOP have been very aggressive

in their attacks on those of us who doubt the theory. Or disbelieve it in my case. I certainly have been accused of being Pro-Bush for my lack of belief in the LIHOP/MIHOP fairy tale.

I admit the possibility that Bush might have engineered 9/11 in a LIHOP/MIHOP scenario. I rate the probability of such a possibility extremely low - on about the magnitude of President Bush being secretly an extremely talented genius.

Hell anything is possible. Maybe if we all clap our hands we can save Tinkerbell.

Bryant

[tom_paine]

28. No more aggressive than the Conspriacy Smearers, as I like to call them

dismissing it as 100% loony, and RIPPING THE SHIT, out of anyone who disagrees.

If nothing else, the number of times that stuff like this has happened in history should give you pause, which it clearly doesn't.

Fine. But at least we found some common ground to speak civilly about these things.

And yes, I am overlooking the ad hominem in the last line of your last post because that is a type of denial that I can get behind. <sigh>

Peace.

[Beetwasher]

32. And Maybe If We BELIEVE Hard Enough And Clap Our Hands

Then Bushco. really AREN'T constitution destroying monsters, and the Nazi's will have been a once in the history of the universe abberration. :eyes:

I find your cognitive dissonance amusing. I've seen you post about your faith and your belief in god. So for you to be so "agnostic" about and "disbelieving" of the possibilities of frankly, quite plausible, man-made "conspiracies" and yet profess such rigid, dogmatic and fervent belief in a god, is, well, pretty funny.

[warren pease]

34. Problem is, when you reduce the arguments pro and con to belief systems...

...then it starts to take on elements of religiosity, which is antithetical to the process of finding the truth based on evidence, both physical and circumstantial.

I happen to "believe" that 9/11 was a Cheney-led false flag black op designed to produce exactly the climate of fear, war fever and reliance on big government for salvation that it has, in fact, produced. A scared populace is by nature compliant and will accept almost any suspension or cancellation of its rights as citizens, as well as respond favorably to propaganda identifying an external threat, and then support the attempt to obliterate that threat. That Bush himself has said there's no connection between Iraq and 9/11 hasn't seemed to penetrate the skulls of the blithering idiots who consume TV news and think they actually know stuff.

But I base my "beliefs" on circumstantial and physical evidence, not fantasy. The top three pieces of circumstantial evidence, imo, are the lack of NORAD interception; the sheer impossibility of pilots who weren't particularly competent on Cessnas making the kinds of precise maneuvers, in large commercial jets, necessary to hit targets that, from the air, look like proverbial needles in a haystack; and the fact "Operation Northwoods" from back in the early '60s already demonstrates that the US government isn't above developing a plan to murder its own citizens, including hijacking and then shooting down these supposedly hijacked airliners, if there's a war coming up that needs the buy-in of the people. Much, much more, including PNAC's call for a "new Pearl Harbor," but...

The physical evidence is overwhelmingly against the official story, imo. Everything from the UL Labs and NIST investigators, along with BYU physics professor Steven Jones (google for him and 9/11 explosives or thermite/thermate) who have concluded that it's impossible for the towers to have collapsed at near free-fall speeds from the heat caused by burning jet fuel and office materials (a few thousand degrees lower than the 5000 degrees Fahrenheit required to melt structural, fire-shielded steel); to the unexplained collapse of building 7 which bears all the characteristics of controlled demolition (as do towers 1 and 2 and which goes completely unmentioned in the "official" 9/11 report); to the fact that all recordings of FAA flight controller-to-NORAD communications have been destroyed in the name of national security... so many more, but you get the idea.

You don't "believe" any of the above reveal flaws in the official story, which is of course your right. I'm just curious how you arrived at that conclusion. Did you simply reject it out of hand as being too evil for even this bunch, or have you picked through the accumulated body of evidence, resolved the contradictions and are now convinced that this was in fact an attack perpetrated by Al Qaeda?

Just curious.


wp

[Beetwasher]

31. That's Pretty Dishonest Parsing

Par for the course I guess. Where did I say that? Either you are 100% correct in your beliefs, or OTHER things are POSSIBLE. What's so hard to understand about that? I suspect you understand perfectly yet purposely misrepresent what other people say.

[tom_paine]

22. Thank you, beetwasher. I could not have said any better

Let me say it again though, in bold italics:

To Bryant:

because otherwise you're saying your beliefs about Bushco's motives and goals are not belief, but rather certainty. You are 100% certain that your position and beliefs about Bushco. are correct? Praytell. Did you have a vision from god on the subject?

EXACTLY.

It is that certainty, which would be a poor characteristic in anyone, that is so damning.

Why should you make that concession? No reason. You either have those progressive characteristics of being able to question yourself and the "conventional wisdom"...

...or you don't.

How's that for grammar?

[zeemike]

4. It already is happening

But too slow and in such darkness that we don't even know it.
But the data base is being created so they will know just what your politics is and if one becomes a threat a little sneak and peek and even a kick the door in can solve a problem that gets our of line.
Fascism is so much more easy in this age.

[GirlinContempt]

5. Wait, so a dos attack on a message board is like

beating Jews to death, sending 30,000 men to concentration camps, ransacking synagogues and homes how?

[nebenaube]

7. 785,000 to the "camps" just last year....

wake up!

[GirlinContempt]

8. Elucidate please?

[tom_paine]

10. Yes, please do elucidate, and provide some links.

I mean, we know KBR is building Halliburton Homeland Security Camps, but that is a far cry from asserting that they've filled them already.

Please provide some links or evidence as to your assertion.

[nebenaube]

35. one every 41 secs...

we have been breeding a criminal class thanks to prohibition.

[tom_paine]

9. No. Not at all. You miss my point.

As Bushevism is MUCH kinder and gentler than Nazism (although I do wonder how much that gap will close over the decades as the fist tighetns further), and will be using Americans, with a vatsly different national mythology and ethos, not to mention in a different age, something as directly brutal as Kristallnacht can never happen, at leats not for a couple generations at least.

And I am not speaking of a single DOS attack, but the ultimate eradication of opposition thought online, or to such a degree that it might as well be total and 100% complete.

Let me say again, loud and clear: This in NO WAY compares, in terms of physical tragedy and lost lives, to Kristallnacht. But it will compare sociologically. On that plane, and ON THAT PLANE ONLY, do I compare these things as being key "checkpoints" in the Death of a Republic, be it Weimar or American.

My only point was to ask DUers if and when they thought such a thing was likely.

I apologize to anyone who believes that I am comparing even a million DOS attacks on website to be the same as even one human being killed by Hitler and his henchmen, because I MOST DEFINITELY AM NOT.

[GreenEyedLefty]

11. Eh, there will always be an "underground"

And some way to circumvent the "authorities." It happened then, and it can happen now.

Perhaps a change in screen name to Pollyanna may be in order, but I don't subscribe to gloom and doom scenarios.

The original Tom Paine wrote: "and until an independence is declared, the Continent will feel itself like a man who continues putting off some unpleasant business from day to day, yet knows it must be done, hates to set about it, wishes it over, and is continually haunted with the thoughts of its necessity"

When we've had our belly full, we'll do something about it.

[tom_paine]

13. I and most DUers pray that you are correct in the end

I just don't see a lot of evidence of it yet.

Oh well, maybe 2008 will prove me wrong.

[Ezlivin]

18. "When we've had our belly full, we'll do something about it."

Okay, I'll bite.

How?

Say that you awoke tomorrow to find the internet dark. No e-mail, no usergroups, no World Wide Web, no forums, no YouTube/Metacafe. Nothing but the same message "Cannot connect."

What will you do? Unless you have the phone numbers of people like us here on good ol' DU, how will you coordinate a response?

You get in your car to drive to the house of some friends on the other side of town, but police have erected security "borders" to keep "looters at bay."

What then? Do you sit down and write letters to others? Do you know your neighbors, their names, their political affiliations?

If you are like most other Americans, if the internet goes dark so do your chances to do anything.

Please, please, please write a reasoned rebuttal to the above. Expose all the flaws in my argument.

I'm not a glutton for punishment, I just want to see the same ray of light you do.

[GreenEyedLefty]

33. I'll try.

I don't see how it would be plausible to shut down the entire internet in order to quell freedom of speech, since as many corporatists are in favor of net neutrality as are against it. There's too much money to be made to make worthwhile shutting down the works in order to shut up a few rabble rousers.

Frankly, this country is too vast and our military too tied up, demoralized and gutted to effectively marshal up the troops for a "military rule" strategy of the entire country. In my area, the police departments have minimal staffing. If the 'net were to shut down and we were to suddenly turn on state-run television, there would be rioting freaking everywhere.

And if, somehow, the government were successful in putting up a police state, like-minded individuals will still gather together. They find each other. Don't underestimate the resourcefulness of people, particularly the left-wing rebellious types. :-)

Read the Declaration of Independence. The Colonists were not unlike us, today. They were willing to go along with King George so long as they were reasonably comfortable.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

This is the time to re-read history. Read about the Revolution. I say it again, when we've had our belly full, we'll do something about it.

I don't know how reasoned this is, but I gave it a shot.

[warren pease]

30. The '60s didn't have an internet or WWW...

...yet organization was better then than now, imo. One of the biggest differences I see is that, in the '60s, the colleges and universities were the hubs of dissent and had built-in organizational systems and communications resources that reach across campus, and between campuses as well.

The coffee houses, concert halls, "tribal" gatherings and entire neighborhoods composed of lefties formed much of the exoskeleton. We had the draft as a coalescing issue, since most of us were draft age, and the anti-draft movement built its own organization of underground railroads to Canada and elsewhere, as well as staging mass protest and card-burning rallies. We had plenty of lawyers working pro bono whenever somebody got busted on political charges.

We also had leaders like King, Bobby Kennedy and a few people like Howard Zinn, Chomsky, the Berrigan Brothers and others who put themselves on the line time after time and, in the cases of King and Kennedy, were eventually killed for their beliefs.

Today, the bulk of current anti-war, anti-BushCo sentiment isn't centralized in the universities these days, and the organization necessary to take on these issues, is coming from groups like Code Pink and Cindy Sheehan's group who attract fans from all segments of society, but certainly aren't a group of pissed off college idealists with the energy and courage of their convictions.

Now it's the internet and that's great because its reach is gigantic. And the research capabilities alone make it more difficult than ever for governments to hide secrets behind the wall of national security.

But the internet is a two-edged sword; when it's working at peak efficiency, it's the greatest organizing tool in history. But if it goes away, as have so many freedoms and infrastructure systems we took for granted just 6.5 years ago, then we're pretty well fucked.

We have no real back-channel communications system in place to stay in touch with one another. As others mentioned here, if the lights go out, we're back to being anti-administration basement dwellers with no support system and little ability to organize beyond a bullhorn on a soapbox -- which is of course now illegal under various patriot act provisions and presidential directives.

So maybe the answer is to trust each other enough to drop the screen names every now and then, meet locals and exchange contact info, and at least have a back-up plan in case BushCo decides to drop the hammer on this kind of site.

Comments?


wp


Edited extensively because the previous version just wasn't very good. Hopefully this is an improvement.

[Javaman]

15. None of the above...

one day, you go to your computer, link to the net and you will get a giant warning, "you have been removed from service".

And that will be it.

no ifs, ands or buts. no ready explanation other than it's for national security. It will come completely out of the blue and will be in place until some foreign nation comes in and frees us from our self imposed tyranny.

[Beetwasher]

17. They MUST Shut The Internets Down

It's not something that they really planned for and it scares the shit out of them. It's OUR last hope and bulwark against their tyranny so of course they must destroy it.

After the next terror attack they will shut it down or tightly control it in the name of fighting terror. But they will get the "pieces" in place first. I have to think it will have to happen BEFORE the next election, that way they can remove it as a tool for US to use to remove them from power via that election.

[IDemo]

23. I don't believe we are facing anything so Draconian

But there have already been laws proposed to eliminate anonymity on the net. That alone would serve to stifle a lot of voices.

[sybylla]

25. You're scaring me, tom_paine

Not because I don't see the potential, nor the connections to Hitler's takeover of government, but because I have looked through newspapers from the 1930's and read terrible accounts of Kristallnacht in the American press. We knew what was happening in Germany. We saw the signs then and we did nothing to stop it. You point out the signs now that there is something potentially terrible happening in my own country and I feel helpless to stop it. Propaganda is maybe not the first step in a complete take over but a necessary step. Controlling the media and the message is the only way to gain power and hold power. The neocons already have control of most of our media and the messages we receive. The internet is the last free forum for ideas and discussion we have as a country. I fear what will happen when it is no longer free.

[tom_paine]

26. Sorry, sybylla. Remember, I may entirely wrong about this.

Hell, I may be entirely wrong about everything.

Maybe this is just another iteration of American History, like the Gilded Age, and we will come out of it stronger in the end.

Maybe. Hope still exists, and the outcome of the struggle of Liberty vs. Tyranny in America is still in doubt.

I also fear what will happen after Liberal Internet Kristallnacht, but there is still the possibility, maybe as high as 30%, that it will not happen at all.

Keep alert and watch the signs, the same way you would keep an umbrella handy if you were walking outside and black clouds were on the horizon.

Maybe I am wrong. Maybe we are all wrong about the severity of the danger and the evil of the Bushies, as well as their capacity in their followers for blind obedience.

At this point, it seems to be the only hope we have left, that and the outside chance the Democrats are right about 2008 and how letting the Bushies off the hook for their many crimes will benefit the nation later on.

[warren pease]

29. What's happening with Net Neutrality and that FCC move to auction a 700 Mhz broadband segment?

There was talk at the time (about 2-3 months back) that the FCC's move was a designed as a back-handed attack on net neutrality, the FCC was going to charge web sites premiums for high-speed access (which would leave the corporate shits still standing, but seriously harm places like DU), and that this was the beginning of the end of unrestricted broadband internet access.

Anybody know what's happened recently on that subject? I googled a bit, but couldn't get much of a handle on the issue (probably due to my modest level of technical comprehension).


wp

[KoKo]

36. There's talk about the Major Media Companies enforcing copywrite laws

because they don't like their work being cut and pasted or showing up on You Tube.

I already notice that sites like MSNBC, CNN, Yahoo and WaPo and some others, make it ever more difficult to cut an paste a snip of an article I want to post on DU. Either ads block it or I have to scroll to "Print" and my printer immediately goes to print rather than giving me a version I can copy. Sometimes it's so difficult, I don't have the time...so I don't post the article.

Tightening the Copywrite laws so that even snips of articles posted on websites are forbidden would be a simple way of them shutting down the Liberal Internets. While the argument could be made that not allowing anymore "sharing" of the MSM's work would be bad for their business...we already know that these big companies make their money off their other business and not providing the little news they give. I think this will be their first step and I expect it before the 2008 Election. It's just so simple and easy for them to do with courts stacked with their own judges and a PR Machine that will explain how their work is being stolen by Bloggers and Posters who are unfairly abusing copywrite laws.