National Socialism In USA: GE Went From Hitler To Obama
General Electric is very tight with the Obama-Democrat Party administration currently ruling America.
Did you know that GE also did business with Hitler's Nazis?
As we probe into behind-the-scenes German interwar history and the story of Hitler and Naziism, we find both Owen D. Young and Gerard Swope of General Electric tied to the rise of Hitlerism and the suppression of German democracy. That General Electric directors are to be found in each of these three distinct historical categories — i.e., the development of the Soviet Union, the creation of Roosevelt's New Deal, and the rise of Hitlerism — suggests how elements of Big Business are keenly interested in the socialization of the world, for their own purposes and objectives, rather than the maintenance of the impartial market place in a free society.4 General Electric profited handsomely from Bolshevism, from Roosevelt's New Deal socialism, and, as we shall see below, from national socialism in Hitler's Germany.
Above and below: Barack Obama and GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt.
Snug as two bugs in a rug.
National Socialism.
History repeats itself.
SEE ALSO: GE paid no federal taxes in 2010
The top tax bracket for U.S. corporations stands at 35 percent, one of the highest rates in the world. So how is it possible that a giant of American business, General Electric, paid nothing in federal taxes last year, even as it made billions in profit?
And should the CEO of GE, Jeffrey Immelt, be advising the president on business?
Hmm. How about an Occupy General Electric protest? Oh, of course... the commie-unity organizers will NOT organize THAT kind of protest. Nein. Das ist verboten!
posted by Canadian Sentinel at 10:06 AM
9 Comments:
I am an employee of a Global Enterprise and, although I do not like where Immelt's nose is, I resent your insinuations re. Hitler and the '30s.
Everybody at that time, even Nevill Chamberlain and the French were too.
@Anon
Well sir, once bitten I always say.
Sighting Neville Chamberlain and the French is perhaps the weakest attempt at fortifying a point I have ever encountered. Thankfully they were not "everybody" at that time nor any other.
I think you may have missed the Sentinel's first link. If you click on the blue word(s) deja-vu in his post you will find supporting evidence which I hope will assuage your resentment.
In the spirit of once bitten, twice shy, I would recommend a historical comparison between the roles of General Electric and Ford Motor Company in the rise of the National Socialist German Workers' Party followed by contrasting these companies' dealings with the Obama regime.
The thing about fascism is that the political powers co-opt the businesses to support their cause ... or else. And offer fine endusements should they do so.
Why do you say Ford supports O-be-me I am The One?
Mathematical-symbols-with-an-owl-as-a-pic-to-enhance-the-apparent-magnitude-of your wisdom:
I didn't propose the weak kneed in order to support my case, rather demonstrate how everyone was week-kneed in front of obvious evil and danger of the times. Churchill was one of the few who stood firm, against a wind of derision.
Everyone else cashed in, including Stalin.
@Anon 5:10
In contrast I had hoped one would find that Ford doesn't.
@Anon 5:16
I did misinterpret your meaning there, but as an employee of a global enterprise are you in some way still engaged in apologetics here?
I guess the source of your resentment is at issue.
∞ ≠ ø is my brief resolute refutation of nihilism, which I despise. The great horned is the only natural predator of the skunk. Owls aren't that smart, but they see clearly and have good instincts. ;)
"So how is it possible that a giant of American business, General Electric, paid nothing in federal taxes last year, even as it made billions in profit?"
....same way it's possible for
Exxon Mobil, Bank of America,
Chevron, Boeing, Goldman-Sachs,
Citigroup, Conoco-Phillips and
Carnival Cruis Lines to pay no
US taxes...in fact get millions
in rebates. All you need is several hundred tax lawyers and an arrogant attitude....
Again, I must register my complaint, as a worker for a Global Enterprize, of the insinuation that a Global Enterprize was culpable in the Hitlerian death camps.
May I point out that everyone, except Churchill and a few hearts of oaks in England, also went along.
More modern complaints I do not offer an opinion on (although I do have them).
So, How many degrees of separation should be required, of global corporate entities, from genocide?
Clearly, German G.E. (A.E.G.)in its maintenance of a near monopoly on electrical production for the Third Reich, is inseparable from coal produced by slave laborers from death camps.
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007326
..."Between 1942 and 1945, hundreds of subcamps of concentration camps were established adjacent to coal mines, munitions and aircraft parts factories, sites for underground tunnels, and other sites convenient to production of goods for the German war effort. In the summer of 1942, for example, Auschwitz-Monowitz, or Auschwitz III, became a subcamp of Auschwitz. ..."
The link provided by C.S. states:
..."the A.E.G. plants in Germany were not bombed in World War II was confirmed by the United States Strategic Bombing Survey....the industry has never been attacked as a basic target system..."
The conclusion drawn by this article is quite defensible.
..."To conclude, we find that both Rathenau of A.E.G. and Swope of General Electric in the U.S. had similar ideas of putting the State to work for their own corporate ends. General Electric was prominent in financing Hitler, it profited handsomely from war production — and yet it managed to evade bombing in World War II. Obviously the story briefly surveyed here deserves a much more thorough — and official — investigation."
Simply put: It is fundamentally wrong for a corporation to place itself in a position which is contrary to its national interests or to any other nation's interest it operates within. In war, a side must be chosen, or the conflicted position(s) must be abandoned entirely. Playing both sides (condoned or not) is pure treachery.
The G.E. case is a fine example of moral relativism. Certainly this is not unique to the advance of "corporatism" which cannot be divorced from its ultimate incline, fascism.
Post a Comment
<< Home