Here’s her post on X on 26 January:
There’s a pattern here: first the nazi salute & now addressing an election rally of Germany’s far right party. When does this become too much even for Trump, or are there no limits now? Let’s remember that Nazi Germany was responsible for #genocide.
I can’t peer into her mind but I don’t believe that Helen Clark is stupid enough to believe what she is saying. And yet she says it nonetheless.
It’s the old communist playbook. Accuse your opponents of monstrous evil. And repeat the accusation. Endlessly.
The mob are trained to chant along. And it has worked. It hasn’t helped to say you are not a Nazi. All Nazis deny they are Nazis and denials fuels the accusation. The mob just chant louder.
Friends and supporters pull away. Potential allies are scared off: they don’t want to be similarly accused.
It’s a play that has worked well but it has been overworked and with X the responses are instant and compelling. The play has lost its sting.
Helen Clark didn’t originate the “Elon is a Nazi” accusation. She was simply a repeater of the legacy media including the New Zealand Herald. She knows her tribe. The accusation is made. She plays along, amplifying it for the mob.
No doubt the irony of her taking to X to denounce its owner was lost on her.
How crazy is it? Elon Musk invested US$44 billion in X so Helen Clark could call him a Nazi.
Elon Musk stands accused because he enthusiastically thanked Trump supporters saying his heart goes out to them and gesturing with his hand going from his heart to the crowd. That was enough. Was that a Nazi salute? Yes, it was! He’s a Nazi. Scream it from the rooftops. Fill the airwaves. Make it front page. Load up X. Pile in. Look, even former Prime Minister Helen Clark of New Zealand says he’s a Nazi.
Helen Clark adds that Elon Musk endorses the German Party AfD which is a Conservative Party that opponents label right wing. Germany, right wing, extremist, Nazi salute, and so Helen Clark adds hashtag genocide.
Of course, Elon Musk’s actual crime is switching his support to Trump. The attack on Musk is to get at Trump. Elon is just collateral.
Think about that. Our former Prime Minister is calling the world’s greatest entrepreneur a Nazi as a way of attacking the President of the United States. Her post on X makes the motive clear.
She doesn’t care about the damage or recklessness of her post: her target is Trump. Her ends justify her means and any pain and hurt are just necessary collateral damage.
It’s nasty.
The very day before Helen Clark declared Musk a Nazi, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took to X to defend Elon saying, “Elon is a great friend of Israel” and that he is “being falsely smeared”.
That’s a strong signal that Elon is not a Nazi.
Meanwhile Helen Clark supports UNRWA, calls for a ceasefire and demands a two-state solution. She is no friend of Israel.
As Elon Musk noted on X, “The radical leftists are really upset that they had to take time out of their busy day praising Hamas to call me a Nazi”.
Boom!
The perfect answer. On the perfect medium.
How great is X? The world’s greatest businessman, the Prime Minister of Israel, and the former Prime Minister of New Zealand, in their own words, instantly delivered to us.
There was a time that the mainstream media could clip and frame Elon Musk as a Nazi. But no more. We can all see what he actually said on X. And his reply.
If you are taking your news from the legacy media, you are being misled.
X is the media now.
Helen Clark has a big audience with 226,000 followers. Elon Musk has a bigger one at 215 million.
The New Zealand Herald and the New York Times are irrelevant.
Rodney Hide is former ACT Party leader, and Minister in the National-ACT Government from 2008 to 2011. This article was first published HERE
10 comments:
The saying goes "if you invoke the Nazis/Hitler you've lost the argument". Did Clark ever have an argument or is it just another pathetic attempt to try and appear relevant?
The perfect analysis Rodney. Well written.
Someone should research who is the biggest liar, Helen "I didn't know we were speeding" Clark or Jacinda "He Puapua is no government policy" Adern. At least in Helen's time we had a media with a bit of integrity who at least questioned some of her porkies, while with Jacinda the MSM just repeated them.
Helen Clark: Let’s remember that Nazi Germany was responsible for genocide.
Barrie Davis: Let's remember that Maori Aotearoa was responsible for genocide.
Poor old Helen.
Part of the fading "new-world order" but too dumb to recognise it yet. Supposedly highly intelligent but possessing the innate ability to throw logic under the bus when it suits her and her woke left-wing causes.
Clark like many others was apparently misled by the inaccurate reporting of the form of the salute.if it had been made clear that it was not a nazi slute it is incredibly unlikley Clark would have made such a bold statement.
Maybe she meant Ashkenazi, which would have been more accurate.
Helen who? Give me Elon any day.
'Nazi' is used as a put-down for right-wingers. The meaning of the contraction - of 'National Socialist' - is lost on most who use it thus. National Socialism presented a 'third way' in the 1930s when it worked extremely well in comparison to the capitalist order, reeling from the Great Depression, and Stalinism/Soviet Communism, which was about as good at raising living standards as North Korea today.
I wonder how much this had to do with the capitalists and communists joining forces and ganging up on national socialism.......... rather a lot, I suspect!
Barend
This obsession we apparently still have, almost 100 years after the fact, for "Nazis" is an extremely interesting meta-political phenomenon. At least in the West, anyway, because the the rest of the world is not incessantly propagandised about this era as we are. The Chinese, for instance, couldn't care less about Hitler, and I doubt there are any holocaust museums to serve as a reminder of the past and a justification of the present.
Why are "the Nazis" still at the center of our Western consciousness, and are really the thing that negatively defines and motivates the post-WW2 "liberal democracy" project? Why is it that anything that substantially deviates from our entrenched political system is identified with "the Nazis"?
Who were "the Nazis"? A collective of White people with a strong national allegiance, who rejected both Marxism and Capitalism for their deleterious influence (as you say, advocating a "third way" that was extremely successful in Germany) and who, to be sure, disliked Jews as a rival ethnic collective, not least because of their prominent roles as both revolutionary Marxists and usurious international finance capitalists and, perhaps relatedly, their subversion of Germany and Germanic culture.
Even if one accepts the many outlandish and oftentimes unevidenced claims about the alleged Nazi atrocities, in terms of numbers, the Nazis aren't even at the top of the list of 20th century killers, those spots held by those of a communist, rather than a fascist, bent.
So, what is going on here? To this day, enemy No. 1 is still the Nazis, shorthand for White people who may wish to collectivise and reject the dominant socio-political paradigm encapsulated in the idea of the Open Society, and necessarily those who derive benefit from it.
What can we deduce about the dynamic of the world we live in in 2024 when the Nazis and their enemies still dominate our thinking (or are made to dominate our thinking), the former as the embodiment of active evil and the thing we must reject as a first principle, and the latter as the embodiment of passive, blameless, unique and perpetual victimhood which is must be protected from criticism, lest "the Nazis" rise up again?
Post a Comment