Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Update: Donald Trump (and therefore the Republican Party) has given a shout-out to Charles Lindberg's movement by coining his slogan: AMERICA FIRST!
Some people wonder why conservative republicans, who nearly always support military action, believed in isolationism while the Nazis were conquering Europe. The chief spokesperson of the conservative republican isolationist movement, Charles Linbergh, says it best: Aviation, Geography, and Race by Charles A. Lindbergh featured in Reader's Digest, November, 1939, pp. 64-67 Aviation has struck a delicately balanced world, a world where stability was already giving way to the pressure of new dynamic forces, a world dominated by a mechanical, materialist, Western European civilization. Aviation is a product of that civilization, borne on the crest of its outlook. Typical also of its strength and its weakness, its vanity and its self-destruction - men flung upward in the face of God, another Icarus to dominate the sky, and in turn, to be dominated by it; for eventually the laws of nature determine the success of human effort and measure the value of human inventions in that divinely complicated, mathematically unpredictable, development of life at which Science has given the name of Evolution. Aviation seems almost a gift from heaven to those Western nations who were already the leaders of their era, strengthening their leadership, their confidence, their dominance over other peoples. It is a tool specially shaped for Western hands, a scientific art which others only copy in a mediocre fashion, another barrier between the teeming millions of Asia and the Grecian inheritance of Europe - one of those priceless possessions which permit the White race to live at all in a pressing sea of Yellow, Black, and Brown. But aviation, using it symbolically as well as in its own right, brings two great dangers, one peculiar to our modern civilization, the other older than history. Since aviation is dependent on the intricate organization of life and industry, it carries with it the environmental danger of a people too far separated from the soil and from the sea - the danger of that physical decline which so often goes with a high intellectual development, of that spiritual decline which seems invariably to accompany an industrial life, of that racial decline which follows physical and spiritual mediocrity. A great industrial nation may conquer the world in the span of a single life, but its Achilles' heel is time. Its children, what of them? The second and third generations, of what numbers and stuff will they be? How long can men thrive between walls of brick, walking on asphalt pavements, breathing the fumes of coal and of oil, growing, working, dying, with hardly a thought of wind, and sky, and fields of grain, seeing only machine-made beauty, the mineral-like quality of life. This is our modern danger - one of the waxen wings of flight. It may cause our civilization to fall unless we act quickly to counteract it, unless we realize that human character is more important than efficiency, that education consists of more than the mere accumulation of knowledge. But the other great danger is more easily recognized, because it has occurred again and again through history. It is the ember of war, fanned by every new military weapon, flaming today as it has never flamed before. It is the old internal struggle among a dominant people for power; blind, insatiable, suicidal. Western nations are again at war, a war likely to be more prostrating than any in the past, a war in which the White race is bound to lose, and the others bound to gain, a war which may easily lead our civilization through more Dark Ages if it survives at all. In this war, aviation is as important a factor as it has been a cause - a cause due to its effect on the balance of strength between nations, a factor because of the destruction and death it hurls on earth and sea. Air power is new to all our countries. It brings advantages to some and weakens others; it calls for readjustment everywhere. If only there were some way to measure the changing character of men, some yardstick to reapportion influence among the nations, some way to demonstrate in peace the strength of arms in war. But with all of its dimensions, its clocks, and weights, and figures, science fails us when we ask a measure for the rights of men. They cannot be judged by numbers, by distance, weight, or time; or by counting heads without a thought of what may lie within. Those intangible qualities of character, such as courage, faith, and skill, evade all systems, slip through the bars of every cage. They can be recognized, but not measured. They lie more in a glance between two men than in any formula or mathematics. They form the unseen strength of an army, the genius of a people. Likewise, in judging aviation, in its effect on modern nations, no satisfactory measurement of strength exists. It is bound to geography, environment, and racial character so closely that an attempt to judge by numbers would be like counting Greeks at Marathon. What advantages will they gain? What new influence can they exert? To judge this, one must look not only at their aviation but at them, at the geography of their country, at their problems of existence, at their habits of life. Mountains, coastlines, great distances, ground fortifications, all those safeguards of past generations, lose their old significance as man takes to his wings. The English Channel, the snow-capped Alps, the expanses of Russia, are now looked on from a different height. The forces of Hannibal, Drake and Napoleon moved at best with the horses' gallop or the speed of wind on sail. Now, aviation brings a new concept of time and distance to the affairs of men. It demands adaptability to change, places a premium on quickness of thought and speed of action. Military strength has become more dynamic and less tangible. A new alignment of power has taken place, and there is no adequate peacetime measure for its effect on the influence of nations. There seems no way to agree on the rights it brings to some and takes from others. The rights of men within a nation are readjusted in each generation by laws of inheritance - land changes hands as decades pass, fortunes are taxed from one generation to the next; ownership is no more permanent than life. But among nations themselves there is no similar provision to reward virility and penalize decay, no way to reapportion the world's wealth as tides of human character ebb and flow - except by the strength of armies. In the last analysis, military strength is measurable only by its own expenditure, by the prostration of one contender while the other can still stagger on the field - and all about the wolves of lesser stature abide their time to spring on both the warriors. We, the heirs of European culture, are on the verge of a disastrous war, a war within our own family of nations, a war which will reduce the strength and destroy the treasures of the White race, a war which may even lead to the end of our civilization. And while we stand poised for battle, Oriental guns are turning westward, Asia presses towards us on the Russian border, all foreign races stir restlessly. It is time to turn from our quarrels and to build our White ramparts again. This alliance with foreign races means nothing but death to us. It is our turn to guard our heritage from Mongol and Persian and Moor, before we become engulfed in a limitless foreign sea. Our civilization depends on a united strength among ourselves; on strength too great for foreign armies to challenge; on a Western Wall of race and arms which can hold back either a Genghis Khan or the infiltration of inferior blood; on an English fleet, a German air force, a French army, an American nation, standing together as guardians of our common heritage, sharing strength, dividing influence. Our civilization depends on peace among Western nations, and therefore on united strength, for Peace is a virgin who dare not show her face without Strength, her father, for protection. We can have peace and security only so long as we band together to preserve that most priceless possession, our inheritance of European blood, only so long as we guard ourselves against attack by foreign armies and dilution by foreign races. We need peace to let our best men live to work out those more subtle, but equally dangerous, problems brought by this new environment in which we dwell, to give us time to turn this materialistic trend, to stop prostrating ourselves before this modern idol of mechanical efficiency, to find means of combining freedom, spirit, and beauty with industrial life - a peace which will bring character, strength, and security back to Western peoples. With all the world around our borders, let us not commit racial suicide by internal conflict. We must learn from Athens, and Sparta before all of Greece is lost. http://www.charleslindbergh.com/images2/am_first.jpghttp://drrichswier.com/wp-content/up...ca-first-2.png (I know it looks like the eagle is sodomizing him, but this is the best image I could find.) |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Of course, all this was written after Britain had gone to war with Germany and before the slants took out Pearl Habor in ‘41. So, on the basis that the map of Europe is not much changed when comparing 1939 with the present, Lindbergh had it about right – an internecine strife that did little other than weaken Europe.
As far as the slants are concerned, his words, 2 years before the Pearl Harbor show the man’s far-sightedness Quote:
M't:13:57: And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house. Perhaps we should have listened to him. |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
Note that Charles Linberg's arguments also apply to the other two wars that republicans opposed - the first world war, and the war against Slobodon Milosovich. America has fought 233 wars*, not including the ones against indians. 230 of these wars have been against brown people, and have been supported by conservative republicans. The world wars and the Yugoslav war are the only wars America has ever fought against white people, and are the only wars republicans have opposed. (Trump wants better relations with Russia, our only potential enemy with white skin). *(I don't count the dispute with revolutionary France in which nobody got hurt, but I do count the War on Terror.) The revolutionary war and the war of 1812 were fought against both indians and brits. Conservative republicans, at the time called "loyalists", opposed fighting the british but supported fighting the indians.) |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
Additionally our Forefathers weren't fighting the English, they were fighting the English big government (westward migration limitations), tax and spend (stamp tax), socialism (the mercantile system) and unfair immigrant polities (the Indians) The American Revolution was the libertarian revolution so of course conservatives supported it. Do you picture good Christians like Washington, Franklin, Jefferson and Tomas Pain supporting a liberal anti-white war? Of course not! |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
http://graphics.boston.com/resize/bo..._7929/539w.jpg "Look at me!! I'm indoctrinatin'!" |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
When Germany was united, the polacks all went to poland and the Saxons - the ones related to us, and therefore decended from Adam, and therefore are made in the image of God - took over. Then they launched a preemptive strike against polackofascism and the Western-Civilization-hating liberals in Britain and France declared WW2. Charles Linebacker (I'm sure he would prefer a less french name, and a more American one) was a visionary, the closest thing we have these days to a prophet. I Guess it takes a pilot to see the big picture. Pop quiz: when was the last time the Republican Party nominated for president someone who wasn't a fighter pilot? Answer: 30 years ago. |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
Brother Jeb, you found an incredible piece of our nation's precious history. To bring us Lucky Lindy's actual words is a priceless reminder of his wisdom. In this day when all three of those third world groups continue their inroads into this golden land, we find ourselves still fighting them. Sadly, when all those darkies came to us begging for jobs back in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries we naively let them in, gave them jobs, places to live and food to eat. How do they thank us? By taking over our government! We kicked the slopes butts back in the 40's. Toward the end of that war we knew our troops would have to take over their homeland, but we were very concerned about what germs they would face so we disinfected Hiroshima and Nagasake. Our troops were safe. But then we felt sorry for them and started buying cheap crap from them to help them out. How did they show their gratitude? By flooding our shores with cars and mopeds! As for as the brown ones go, you can't swing a dead burro without hitting one. They're all over the place. This has got to stop!!! |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
|
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Dear Jeb-
You may or may not have noted my introduction forum posts. I am an Aussie of heathen "Darwinist" educational background, striving against this to become a True Christian. I find Charles' article most interesting - but confusing. In our sickular, multicultural-tolerant Aussie school system, much is made of Greek classical culture as a critical foundationstone for modern Western development. And a large proportion of Australia's population is of Greek origin, and overweeningly filled with hubris they are of thier mighty contributions to the story of mankind. But now that I am reading the KJV-1611, I see these Greeks for what they are - the "Christian" Orthodoxy of Constantine "the Great"! And those chaps at Marathon, Thermopylae and the rest - sure, much kudos for thier unmatched example of Manliness - but these people were Idolaters! Not even any Imperfect version of Christianity at all. Most confusing of all, the KJV-1611 doesn't seem to talk about these things anywhere! As though God thinks them of ZERO importance. These apparent contradictions are as the knot of Gordia to me, the philosophical ramifications are beyond my shallow understanding of God's Plan. Classical Greece empahsises personal achievement and daring, pride and competitiveness, and induvidual opinion - while Christianity emphasises humility, obedience and homogeny of opinion. Perhaps you could generously expound further on these apparent paradoxes, so as to show me the relationship between these cultures - I fear I am as a dacian catamite before these weighty questions, and seek your enlightened assistance. |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Mark,
Many of the Classical Greeks were truly Proto-True Christian™. Of course, they are burning in hell, but God did use them to set an example for the rest of us in the future so their lives were not in vain. Take Plato for example. His allegory about "shadows in a cave" is a beautiful and wonderful rendition of what life was like before Christ. Plato realized we could not understand reality (God) for what it was. He likened it to a bunch of seeing the shadows of something else, illustrated on cave walls. Once Christ came into being, that gap was bridged. We were then allowed to see God who He is through the King James Bible. The Bible allowed us not to have to look to cave walls, but to see outside the cave. Plato was simply a pawn in God's plan to explain how Salvation® works. Or take the glorious example of Alexander the Great. He conquered many mud races under his majestic white empire. The Persians, the Indians, and whatever brown races were put under subjugation by a White Emperor. God used Alexander as an example of how Christianity should be today. The White Man needs to civilize the lesser races and bring Christianity to them. So, while the relationship between Classical Greek culture and modern Christianity are highly nuanced, there is a strong link between them. God put those idolatrous heathens to good use by providing historical inspirations for modern day True Christians™. |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Thank you for those clarifications, Rev. Osborne -
This does, however, bring up another one. Most Greek chaps I know, they're not exactly white, not "saxon" white if you know what I mean. And by "saxon" white I mean goes lobster coloured after 2 minutes of Australian sunlight like a pom! Greeks I know, they're mostly black hair, black eyes, olive skin - are you telling me that in Alexander's day they were whiter? Did those millions of smokin-hot captured Persian dancing girls and concubines "brownify" the old Greeks? |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
Pastor Billy-Reuben |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
|
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
:( One can only wonder where all the good men have gone? To fight the rising odds? Isn't there a white knight upon a fiery steed? And he's gotta be fast and he's gotta be fresh from the fight? And finally my friends,he's got to be a Republican!
|
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
That was a fine and inspirin bit of actual footage, from the time when the Yankee navy and airforce helped us Aussies out against the hordes of the Yellow Peril. That desert looked a fair bit like Australia in fact, but I never saw huge cacti like that here. Brother Bathfire, do you happen to know what Coral Sea Island those fellas were landed on?;) |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
I suspect the cactus seeds had been brought in on airplanes that brought the missionaries.
|
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
|
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Update: Donald Trump (and therefore the Republican Party) has given a shout-out to Charles Lindberg's movement by coining his slogan: AMERICA FIRST!
http://www.charleslindbergh.com/images2/am_first.jpghttp://drrichswier.com/wp-content/up...ca-first-2.png I know it looks like the eagle is sodomizing him, but this is the best image I could find. Oh, and here's a reason Dr. Seuss books should be banned and burned: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_kvNaYLuu3j...s320/seuss.jpg |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
Personally, I am confident that if Donald Trump would have been alive at the time of Lindberg, he, rather than Lindberg, would have been the first pilot to have crossed the Atlantic. Donald is a Lindberg kind of hero. |
Re: Charles Lindbergh's 1939 Reader's Digest article
Quote:
He took out a $400 million loan, personally guaranteeing $100 million of that, to buy the Eastern Air Shuttle for $365 million—even though the company itself had just valued the shuttle at $300 million. Talking to reporters, he compared this, too, to the Mona Lisa. He wanted to decorate the insides of the planes with marble before being told that would make them too heavy to fly. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:10 PM. |
Powered by Jesus - vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Landover Baptist Forums © 1620, 2022 all rights reserved