Prince Charles says Russians are Nazi-like? And the British are different?

A former Polish war refugee who met Prince Charles in Canada has said he likened some Nazi actions in Europe to those of Russia's Vladimir Putin.
Marienne Ferguson was speaking after meeting Prince Charles at a Nova Scotia immigration museum where she works.
As they discussed Hitler's takeover of countries, the prince "said something to the effect of 'it's not unlike... what Putin is doing,'" she recalled.
- bbc

In a nutshell, Its kind of funny to see the British talking about Nazis considering the fact that they were pronounced Nazis themselves for more than a hundred years in their view and dealings with the lands they colonised.  They actually viewed peoples of other lands as inferior for a number of reasons from their not practicing capitalism, exploiting the land, being nude or semi-nude, being communal, or not having vast cities.  And that served as one of significant bases upon which they determined how the various colonised ought to be treated.  

So in some climes, they were just killed; in others, the children were kidnapped and brought up ‘to be white’; in others they were enslaved, and in others, they were made 2nd Class citizens of their own states.  Millions and millions, as a result, died for the British Nazi ‘Queen/King and country’. 

The worst part of this tale is that the British still think similarly.  The strongest evidence for which is their thinking nothing of the hundreds of thousands of deaths they, the west, had inflicted on, for instance, the people in the Middle East through embargoes, support of tyrannical regimes, supplying arms to murderous leaders, etc, but were quick to get angry when the americans suffered a few thousand deaths as retaliation on 11/9.  I personally was flabbergasted when i saw a BBC reporter state on the televised news that, "It wasn't half a million Iraqi children whom died due to US embargoes, but JUST 350,000."  'Just'?  Well, that's white supremacism for you. 

All in all, the only difference between the British and the Nazis was that the British were economically pragmatic in their racism.  The British were more ‘humane’.  They let millions work themselves to death whilst enriching their Queen/King and country unlike the Nazis whom simply killed you.  How nice and civilised, the British.

That clearly indicates that they view ‘white lives‘ as more valuable than non-white.  During colonial times, people who retaliated were called ‘savages’ because they dared to resist people whom saw themselves as 'civilised'.  Now they are called ‘terrorists’ for shooting back when they only have a right to be shot at the behest of the white man.  With these words - 'savages', 'terrorist' - no analysis was required as they present them simply as ‘bad‘ or ‘evil‘ people with no need to search for causes.  Hence, the western ‘we are the Chosen People‘ mentality, with a greater right to life still continues, as i discovered post 11/9.  Up to then, i thought the west had learnt their lesson and become egalitarian.  But 11/9 served as incontrovertible proof that the colonial white supremacist view was alive and kicking in the west.

All in all, the only difference between the British and the Nazis was that the British were economically pragmatic in their racism. They view you as inferior, so they exploit you even if it costs millions of the lives of the colonised. When the German Nazis saw you as inferior, they simply killed you.  So the only difference here was that the Nazis didn’t make much money out of the people they killed.  The British were more ‘humane’.  They let millions work themselves to death whilst enriching their Queen/King and country unlike the Nazis whom simply killed you.  How nice and civilised.

If you think about it, all those iconic British industries, their NHS, their roads, their underground, amongst a host of others were funded by the colonised.  And if that isn't bad enough, they now close off their borders to non-whites with the formation of the EU.  And none of them realise the racist significance of this.  One Brit told me, when i spoke about it, that it wasn't intentional.  My response was, "Yes, it isn't intentional, but it is nevertheless a consquence of the preponderance of the racist and nazi colonial mentality amongst you people in the present that stops you from realising it in the first place."

I've spoken to quite a few Brits about this, and their reaction ranged from, 'well, all those millions of deaths amongst the colonised resulting from British action wasn't intentional', to, 'Well, it was a long time ago."  To which i had responded, "you can't say that it isn't intentional if you are well aware of the consequences.  Causing the deaths of millions whilst profitting from their lives shows an equally clear disregard for life as the German Nazis who killed people despite not gaining profit."  And to those who had said that 'it was a long time ago, i responded with, "well then, why not wait for a year after 11/9 before you retaliate?  Then you can say that 11/9 was a long while back so you needn't bother?"  Well, the British are quite reasonable enough to usually shut up after that.

You could say that without the British and other western colonial powers, Hitler wouldn't have thought the way he did.   In fact, the Nazis did the British a favour.  By being more obvious about their disregard for life than the British, they enabled the British, and the rest of the western underworld, to claim that they themselves were saints because they fought against them.  So as for Charlie, which peasants refer to as ‘Prince’, comparing the Russians to the Nazis, i think it would be quite appropriate to retort it in an american way, 'go blow it out of your ass'.



  1. Very thought provoking post! I wonder how many people actually see beyond the surface and consider the true meanings behind the actions. I must say I concur with your views.


Post a Comment

The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.

Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.