diesel1719

[diesel1719]

[diesel1719]

[diesel1719]

x

[diesel1719]

[diesel1719]

Azure’s Corner

Who was Jim Crow and why is this as a rallying cry for Democrats?

When a fictional character in a meets mental illness…

Jim Crow was a fictional character in a minstrel act performed by Thomas Dartmouth Rice. Mr. Rice was a white actor in the 1800s. During that time in his 20s, he was a devoted actor who came up with a way to portray a black person on stage. It was a mistaken belief that his style of dress and song depicted a traditional black person from the era. He chose to imitate this and represent a black person on stage.

Now days, this is considered racist. In Thomas Rice’s mind, he wanted to expose the audience to black people who couldn’t be on stage. Think about it in the context of it then being illegal for a black person to be on stage and there were no representations of black people. Slap on a bit of ignorance about black people because education wasn’t very prolific in a stratified educational system, and you have the birth of black face.

From a historical context, Thomas Rice’s “Jim Crow” was very controversial. By no means do I attempt to apply his views to modern morality and views of black face as a means to defend the practice today. I am also not going to apply the inverse to judge the man by today’s standards. That would be completely ignorant of the truth.

In the 1800s with racism very prolific as owed to the times, laws were created with the intent to maintain control over the black communities. Toward this end, Thomas’s character was subverted to become the poster child for the movement. Keep in mind that copyrights did not cover his character and therefore, he had no way to maintain control over his likeness. This also led to the very law that allows politicians to use any music and images or likenesses for their political uses without having to get permission or pay royalties. More on this later…

Alas, Thomas Rice would be overshadowed by his own creation having been abused by … wait for it … the Democrats.

The bulk majority of Jim Crow Laws that came about in the 1800s and maintained their prominence until the 1960s were crafted and defended by the Democrats. Unfortunately this information is often not provided when you read about Jim Crow Laws. You only hear about how these laws stemmed to suppress black people and not who created them. Gee, I wonder why?

The Republicans were staunchly against the Jim Crow Laws. During years where Republicans were in majority, these laws were systematically removed as they could be. In years as they were the minority, the Democrats reinforced Jim Crow Laws not otherwise removed or deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Don’t believe me, then let’s look at who really toppled these laws in the 20th Century.

1948 - President Harry S. Truman - Republican

1963 - President Lyndon B. Johnson - Democrat

These two Presidents were in different parties. President Truman initiated the call to integrate the military and remove segregation. The Democrats hammered him repeatedly for his views. President Johnson was a moderate Democrat who was attacked for his actions following a study he called upon with Illinois Governor Otto about the race riots. Republicans attacked him because he had lost control of the country. He took action for civil rights for all Americans, especially blacks. While he signed the Civil Rights Act, he ultimately failed at implementation because of his party’s actions and the Vietnam Conflict.

Why is this important? Well, let’s set the record straight that President Johnson only became President after the assassination of President Kennedy. The Civil Rights Act was President Kennedy’s dream, efforts and position. It was one in which President Johnson attacked the Kennedy family with repeatedly. The Democrats impressed upon Kennedy to select Johnson as his running mate. Then, surprise, Johnson took power…

So why did he sign the Civil Rights Act?

To appease the public during the turmoil of the 1960s Race Riots, that’s why. He had the Vietnam War raging. He had riots in the streets that were otherwise making headlines and diminishing his Presidency. So in using President Kennedy’s shadow was to continue his legacy as a beloved public figure. Despite this, President Johnson loathed President Kennedy and is the subject of many theories that President Johnson was selected to take the seat in a planned assassination of President Kennedy by his own party.

In reality, President Kennedy is more responsible for the downfall of Jim Crow Laws than President Johnson. President Kennedy wouldn’t have had the capability if it wasn’t for President Truman. President Eisenhower, a Republican, helped President Kennedy rise to power.

Why is Jim Crow returning to present day?

The simplicity of it. Democrats need a new piñata to beat in front of the realm of the Public Court of Opinion. They’re well aware that the bulk majority of those between the ages of 13~30 are unaware of Jim Crow beyond the references to the laws toppled in the 1960s. Furthermore, they lack the context of time. Without President Trump and the realization that their abuse of Godwin’s Law during the past four years has led to an unstably divided society that normalized violence as political action, Democrats needed a fictitious strawman to avoid the public from turning against real people.

Many people I’ve seen, including Hollywood actors, believe Jim Crow was a real person. Funnier yet, they believe Jim Crow was a white politician who instituted these laws. That’s why I made it abundantly clear that this is hardly accurate. Democrats are waving the fear flag that Republicans want to bring back Jim Crow Laws.

Do note that the Liberal view is that there are things only for people of color that exclude white people. This isn’t segregating white people, this is segregating people of color. The Liberal view is also that people of color are also different from one another and also have things that exclude each other. This is further segregating people by color. All of this is glossed around the ideology that everyone is special and therefore separate from each other. That’s called racial segregation, and it’s illegal.

Is it true that Jim Crow Laws can come back?

No. The Democrats created, supported, and defended Jim Crow Laws until President Johnson was pressured into signing the Civil Rights Act that was supported by President Kennedy to save his own Presidency. Jim Crow Laws would never pass today’s Senate and are already illegal, as deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court rulings against challenges to the Civil Rights Act.

Can a State implement Jim Crow Laws to suppress the Black Voter?

No. They’re Constitutionally invalidated and Federally illegal. The 10th Amendment prohibits States from going against the Federal Government. Since it’s Federally illegal to deny any Citizen the right to vote.

Then why are Democrats saying Jim Crow Laws are coming back?

To scare people into allowing Democrats to create laws that allow non-Citizens the right to vote. They also want to make it easier to commit voter fraud by making it impossible to determine if a person is or is not allowed to vote. Specifically, if you need to recount and make sure someone is allowed to vote, you have a tight timeframe to do that. We witnessed this during the last Presidential election. While there were extensive discrepancies, many challenges failed because of the extent to which the delays would overrun mandated deadlines and the patchwork of voter laws which vary by State. It was not for a lack of evidence.

Doesn’t Federal Law define voting rights?

Nope. The 14th Amendment (President Abraham Lincoln [Republican]) states in the reverse that the Federal Government cannot impinge the authority of State laws. This is confusing to most people, but let’s say that Kansas says it’s illegal for someone to jump up and down on Fridays between 2 PM to 3 PM. A Federal Law saying it’s legal to jump up and down doesn’t override Kansas’s law, it only says that Kansas cannot make it totally illegal to jump up and down. Kansas simply has a restriction on when this cannot be done. However, Kansas cannot make a law that says one can only jump up and down between 2 PM and 3 PM, because this is considered a violation of Federal Law in prohibiting people from jumping up and down. Furthermore, if Georgia passes a law to say that black people can’t jump up and down between 2 PM and 3 PM, the Civil Rights Act, 1st Amendment, and all other laws prohibiting discrimination and racial segregation say that that law is Federally illegal and wholly unconstitutional – rendering it null and void.

Also note that The 9th Amendment specifically prohibits the States and Federal Government from exercising the few rights extended to them in the purpose of denying or infringing upon the rights of Citizens. This is very important in the context of voter rights. The Democrats want to make a Federal Law that allows them to define who can vote. The Republicans want to make a Federal Law that defines limitations on the States’ ability to define who can vote. There’s a big difference here.

The Democrat Voter Rights Law is misleading. You already have the right to vote as a Citizen of the United States as defined by the Constitution. A gray-blue skinned pansexual CIS Female identifying alien Princess with six azure colored eyes who is gender-fluid in a Sapphic relationship and a Citizen of The United States of America, has the right to vote! Democrats want to extend this right to non-Citizens of the United States. This effectively allows people who know nothing about our country and the Constitution to vote on laws that directly impact the rights of those who are Citizens.

The Republican supported Voting Laws, similar to Georgia’s and New York’s, require States to ensure that voters are Citizens (by presenting a Federally recognized State-issued “Real ID”) in support of the Constitutional requirement that voters are United States Citizens. Ladies and Gentlemen, The 15th Amendment states that only Citizens have the right and privilege to vote, and it shall not be impinged unless that privileging is revoked by commission of a crime per the 14th Amendment (another reason why Democrats keep calling the Capitol Hill riot an insurrection, despite that this is no longer a requirement to strip someone of the privilege of voting).

To summarize in closing: Georgia’s Voter ID Law (Republican) is not any more tough as New York’s requirements (Democrat). Both States require that a person present identification as proof of who they are. New York’s law requires that a person provide the same, but specifically indicating from which borough that they reside in. This is actually tougher than Georgia’s Voter ID law, despite only requiring a utility bill or photo ID with name and address because they can only vote in that borough. Georgia’s Voter ID Law only requires a State provided, Federally mandated Real ID (Republican) and a person can vote anywhere in the State (Local elections excluded).

You’re being lied to by Democrats. Don’t fall for the propaganda and mouthpieces. Learn the Truth. Understand History and the context of the times.

Contextual Lives Matter.

[diesel1719]

[diesel1719]

[diesel1719]

[diesel1719]

Trump getting infected was a matter of when rather than if with the shit he pulled. I'm actually surprise it didn't happen sooner honestly.

China promptly stamps out their outbreak with oppressive efficiency and two seasons later the us president is hospitalized lol

[diesel1719]

Mike Rowe is one of the best people ever and no one talks about him enough.

[diesel1719]

#SaveTheTrees

[diesel1719]

[diesel1719]

[diesel1719]

[diesel1719]

30+ year nurse, I have fully supported all of the precautions with COVID-19. But this post really made me think,... I share it here for your consideration as well:

Thank you to whoever wrote this.

******

What is the end game with the ‘rona? Anyone? ���

What is the magic formula that is going to allow us to sound the “all clear?” Is it zero cases? For a while, the goal was to simply “flatten the curve,” but now that we are disconnecting utilities for gatherings in California, setting up check points in New York, and recommending goggles (what’s next?), it seems as if there is, in fact, no end game. And, truthfully, the only way that we will see numbers drop is if we cease testing and stop reporting. Keep in mind that hundreds of thousands have shown up to be tested, registered, left due to long waits, and still come up positive when they received their results. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Is it a vaccine💉? It took 25 years for a chicken pox vaccine to be developed. The smallpox inoculation was discovered in 1776 and the last known natural case was in 1977. We have a flu vaccine that is only 40 to 60% effective (that’s generous- the last two years it was more like 20-25%), less than half of the US population chooses to get one, and roughly 20,000 Americans still die annually due to flu or flu complications.

Oh, you'll mandate it in order to attend school, travel to some foreign countries, etc.? We already have a growing number of vaccine researchers refusing proven, tested, well-known vaccines that have been administered for decades! Do you really believe the majority of people will flock to get a fast-tracked vaccine, whose long-term side effects and overall efficacy rates are anyone's best guess? How long are we going to cancel? Postpone? Reconsider?

Now we are advised against in-person school until second quarter? What if October's numbers are the same as August's? Then what?

Move football to spring? What if next March is worse than this March?

When do we decide quality of life outweighs risk?

We understand this virus can be deadly for SOME, but so are shellfish, peanut butter, and bee stings. We take risks every day without a second thought.

We know driving a car can be dangerous, but we don't leave it parked in the garage for months on end. We know the dangers of smoking, drinking, and eating fried foods, but we do it, none-the-less. We speed on highways, some idiots still don't buckle their seatbelts, we take medications more than “as directed,” and a good number of individuals don't think twice about unprotected sex.

Is hugging Grandma really more dangerous than rush hour on the freeway? Is going to a bar with friends more risky than four day old gas station sushi? Or operating a chainsaw?

When and how did we so quickly lose our free will?

I want a waiver that says, "I understand the risks, but I choose a life with hugs, smiles, college athletics, the state fair, concerts, and school dances."

I understand that there is a minuscule possibility I could die but, more probable, I will end up feeling like junk for a few days.

I understand I could possibly pass this virus onto someone else, but I can pass ANY virus onto someone else at any time until the end of time.

Are we busy living or busy dying?

It’s hard to tell these days.

[diesel1719]

The Post Office Controversy is More About Bailing Out a Government Agency Than It Is About the Election

By Kevin Ryan There is nothing new about the reduction in public mailboxes. According to a 2009 Washington Post article, between 1985 to 2009, the number of the iconic blue mail collection boxes nationwide declined from 395,000 to 177,000. And in the years since, the number has declined another 20%, to 141,900 as of last year. For decades, the Post Office has been slowly shifting away from letter collection, which has seen a 30% decline in demand over the last decade due to the rise of email, text messaging, and competition. Nevertheless, the issue has been politicized in recent days by media and politicians claiming it’s a threat to the upcoming November election, and demanding the congress allocate billions to prevent disaster. The reality, however, is that the public is being goaded into picking sides in a political battle over funding the Post Office. As Rahm Emmanuel once said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” And the coronavirus pandemic has provided just such an opportunity. Here are the facts. • THE USPS IS AN INDEPENDENT AGENCY. In 1971, the Post Office was reformed to remove it from the direct control of the president. It has a Board of Governors that, although appointed by the president, is bipartisan. The Board appoints the Postmaster General, who reports to it. However, most of its employees are unionized, and the unions are heavily Democratic. Its more than 600,000 people are organized by seven different unions. The largest postal worker union, The National Association of Letter Carriers, which consists of 300,000 workers, just last week endorsed Joe Biden. • THE POST OFFICE HAS MORE THAN ENOUGH RESOURCES TO HANDLE MAIL-IN BALLOTS. Every year during the week before Christmas, the Post Office processes and delivers 2.5 billion pieces of first-class mail. That’s about 500 million cards and letters a day (not to mention packages), or about four times more in one day than the entire number of ballots (in-person included) cast in the 2016 election. “From a sheer numbers perspective, none of the experts I spoke with doubted that the Postal Service could handle a vote-by-mail election, even if every one of the nation’s more than 150 million registered voters stuck their ballot in a mailbox,” Russell Berman writes in The Atlantic. “As one noted to me, a presidential election might be a big deal, but in postal terms, it’s no Christmas.” • IT DOES NOT OPERATE ON TAXPAYER MONEY. The Postal Service receives no tax dollars for operating expenses, and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations. USPS may request an appropriation for “public service costs” for up to $460 million annually. However, it has not requested or received this reimbursement since 1982. • THE PROBLEMS AT THE USPS ARE NOT DUE TO A LACK OF GOVERNMENT FUNDING, BUT INSTEAD TO STRUCTURAL ISSUES EXACERBATED BY POLITICAL MANDATES. The aforementioned public shift away from first class mail has hurt revenues at the Post Office, but an increase in parcel delivery has helped offset it. But while private sector companies have been able to adjust and remained profitable, the Post Office has been stymied by ill-advised political mandates. The USPS’s price increases on letters and junk mail, for example, are capped at the rate of inflation, meaning it cannot adjust its prices as effectively as its private sector competition. Also, the Postal Service has billions in assets for retiree health care, but it’s barred from investing them except in U.S. Treasurys. And a 2006 law compels the USPS to pay in advance for the health and retirement benefits of all of its employees, which has cost an estimated $55 billion over the next 10 years. The USPS unions with their 600,000 workers have repeatedly pushed congress to stop most attempts at reform. In 2013 it quashing an attempt to save $2 billion a year by stopping Saturday delivery for regular mail, but not packages. And Congress nearly always refuses to allow closure of even the least active branches for fear of angering constituents. All of the above has led the agency to slide closer and closer toward insolvency with every passing year. In FY2019, the USPS reported an annual net loss of $8.8 billion, its 13th straight multi-billion dollar loss, and more than double the $3.9 billion loss in fiscal 2018. $3.5 billion of the loss came from an increase in workers compensation expenses. The USPS projects losses will continue “at accelerating rate.” However, the USPS has enough liquidity to operate through the election and into next year, meaning it’s not the upcoming election that requires more funding, as politicians would have you believe. Instead, politicians are attempting to lure the public into an existing political debate over whether the USPS should remain self-sufficient via badly needed structural reforms to address the above-mentioned issues, or whether it should essentially become another bailed out government program that relies on taxpayer funds. And so far, the politicizing has worked. White House negotiators offered $10 billion for the Postal Service as part of their recent talks with Pelosi and Schumer over another COVID relief bill. Democrats want $25 billion in taxpayer funds, and Nancy Pelosi has called the House back into session to negotiate it. Private sector shipping competitors, meanwhile, faced the same technological headwinds. But instead of just racking up losses, companies like UPS and FedEx have innovated, cut costs, and became more efficient… and managed to stay profitable, all while routinely outperforming the USPS. SOURCES: https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/10k-reports/fy2019.pdf http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/10k-reports/fy2018.pdf http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/10k-reports/fy2013.pdf http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/10k-reports/fy2010.pdf http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/10k-reports/fy2007.pdf https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/FDX/fedex/net-income https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/UPS/ups/net-income https://multichannelmerchant.com/operations/usps-net-loss-doubles-2019-package-volume-slightly/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-postal-service-and-the-2020-election-what-you-need-to-know-11597619119 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-post-offices-problem-isnt-trump-11597360885 https://thehill.com/homenews/house/512320-democrats-plan-saturday-vote-to-prop-up-postal-service https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/n7wk9z/the-post-office-is-deactivating-mail-sorting-machines-ahead-of-the-election http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/07/24/ST2009072403875.html https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/the-case-of-the-disappearing-mailboxes-14907467/ https://facts.usps.com/table-facts/ https://apnews.com/5d02ef9cbbeddb977200eb20d9acc019 https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/512128-union-representing-postal-union-endorses-biden-citing-threats-to-usps https://www.businessinsider.com/us-postal-service-delay-funding-crisis-mail-election-trump-explainer-2020-8 https://money.yahoo.com/usps-handles-500-million-letters-132504195.html https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/08/how-postal-service-preparing-election/615271 https://medium.com/@nharpermn/stop-panicking-about-the-post-office-8bcd689b9601 https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2019/1114-usps-reports-fiscal-year-2019-results.htm https://www.uspsoig.gov/sites/default/files/document-library-files/2019/RISC-WP-20-001.pdf

[diesel1719]

“I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history.

If you remember the plot of the Sound of Music, the Von Trapp family escaped over the Alps rather than submit to the Nazis. Kitty wasn’t so lucky. Her family chose to stay in her native Austria. She was 10 years old, but bright and aware. And she was watching.

“We elected him by a landslide – 98 percent of the vote,” she recalls.

She wasn’t old enough to vote in 1938 – approaching her 11th birthday. But she remembers.

“Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.”

No so.

Hitler is welcomed to Austria

“In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25 percent inflation and 25 percent bank loan interest rates.

Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food. Not that they didn’t want to work; there simply weren’t any jobs.

“My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need. Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people – about 30 daily.’

“We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany, where Hitler had been in power since 1933.” she recalls. “We had been told that they didn’t have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living.

“Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group – Jewish or otherwise. We were led to believe that everyone in Germany was happy. We wanted the same way of life in Austria. We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family. Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back.

“Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler.

“We were overjoyed,” remembers Kitty, “and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades. The new government opened up big field kitchens and everyone was fed.

“After the election, German officials were appointed, and, like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order. Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed. The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service.

“Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home. An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn’t support his family. Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been required to give up for marriage.

“Then we lost religious education for kids

“Our education was nationalized. I attended a very good public school.. The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler’s picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn’t pray or have religion anymore. Instead, we sang ‘Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles,’ and had physical education.

“Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance. Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum. They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time. The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail.”

And then things got worse.

“The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination. The rest of the day we had sports. As time went along, we loved it. Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free.

“We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had.

“My mother was very unhappy,” remembers Kitty. “When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent. I told her she couldn’t do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful. There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun – no sports, and no political indoctrination.

“I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it. Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home. I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing.

“Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me. They lived without religion. By that time, unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler.

“It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly. As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn’t exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy.

“In 1939, the war started, and a food bank was established. All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps. At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn’t work, you didn’t get a ration card, and, if you didn’t have a card, you starved to death.

“Women who stayed home to raise their families didn’t have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men.

“Soon after this, the draft was implemented.

“It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps,” remembers Kitty. “During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys.

“They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines.

“When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat.

“Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack. I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service.

“When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers.

“You could take your children ages four weeks old to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, seven days a week, under the total care of the government.

“The state raised a whole generation of children. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had.

“Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna..

“After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything.

“When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full.

“If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.

“As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80 percent of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families.

“All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.

“We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables.

“Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn’t meet all the demands.

“Soon, he went out of business. If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.

“We had consumer protection, too

“We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the livestock, and then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.

“In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps. The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated.

“So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work.

“I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van.

“I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months.

“They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness.

“As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia.

“Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law-abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long afterwards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.

“No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.

“Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.”

“This is my eyewitness account.

“It’s true. Those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity.

“America is truly is the greatest country in the world. “Don’t let freedom slip away.

“After America, there is no place to go.”

Kitty Werthmann

***Re-read the part where she says “everything was free” - healthcare and so on. Very much worth reading twice.****