COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT
First, the silly pope is speaking only for the establishment, something senior levels of the Church have always been an intimate part of.
This pope's entire term has been characterized very much by his own form of populism.
All the show and publicity over no traditional papal apartment, no fancy cars, etc.
The papacy obviously is not a democracy, but what is wrong with "populism" in a democracy anyway?
Nothing, of course.
What these establishment words really intend to suggest is that we are seeing incipient fascism, and despite that notion being promoted daily by our dishonest and self-interested corporate press, it is utter nonsense with no basis in fact.
This false theme just reflects the establishment lashing out over the seeming loss of its new world order, and, by the way, was there ever a more creepy, fascist-tinged phrase than "new world order"?
Second, Hitler was not elected, and talking this way reflects pure historical ignorance, yet I’ve read it a number of times. So much for the idea of people learning from the past.
Hitler, in his period of trying to be elected, never got more than about 37% of the vote.
He was appointed Chancellor by an aged (some would say, senile) President von Hindenburg, who was tired of the political turmoil in the streets of the time.
Hitler then quickly proceeded to seize absolute power with a wave of measures following the staged Reichstag fire event.
Now, more than a few observers have seen parallels between the Reichstag fire and all the measures which followed 9/11 and the beginning of the effort in earnest by America to establish a “new world order.”
I don’t know and remain open to whatever full evidence would reveal, but it is always true that big, sudden, watershed events in history, plotted ahead by leaders, were accompanied by massive lies.