Fascism: Succeeding Democracy

Well, here you have it, as only Fr. Rutler can do it.

Hollis's point is that the author in his crosshairs [Wedgwood] fails to see that fascism was latent in the democratic system, and what holds it back is the "aristocratic taste" for liberty among those with a sense of tradition and freedom from economic reliance on government assistance. "It is no coincidence that Fascism has made its appearance in the age of democracy," he went on. "As long ago as Plato the succession of the one to the other in invariable sequence was noted. . . . Where there is no aristocratic element, you get just as much tyranny but no protest against it."

Thus, criticism of a book written in 1942.

We note that the Tea Party folks would be considered 'aristocratic' (and to 'have 'taste') by Hollis.

He's right, you know.

Another notable item:

...the Vatican radio announced in German a summary of the joint pastoral letter of the archbishops and bishops of Austria (the "Greater Reich") on the "sexual revolution" of the Nazis, who encouraged immodesty and promiscuity in the name of liberation from Christian strictures.

...[The Bishops] denounced the "naturalism" promoted by Nazi university professors, which taught that "natural functions," being "natural," should be freed from moral inhibitions.

Gee, that sounds vaguely familiar.

The bishops also objected to the attempts of the government to defy natural law by making itself the sole arbiter of what constitutes marriage. "From this point of view it is merely another step to the monstrous idea of sexual relationship without recourse to marriage at all, and the scientific breeding of the superman . . . ." The bishops baldly and boldly declared: "A people that presumes to be the only and exclusive arbiter of morality, and goes to the length of sanctifying whatever means it adopts for its terrestrial purposes, must perish through its own blasphemy."

So the Nazis were the originals of what's become the gay "marriage"-licensure routine. Think of it: Tommy Barrett, Nazi protege!

The entire essay is worth reading, all the way to the terrific allusion at the very end.