How do we explain the inconsistency between  practices legalized today which yesterday were condemned as illegitimate?

The inconsistency which we have just analyzed is dramatic, for it reveals that in certain quarters people have not perceived the profound malice of Naziism. That is why the door is wide open to ultra-Naziism. By that we mean a Naziism brought to its supreme stage, made global and inscribed into practices, laws, institutions and even ethics.

a) People have not understood that this malice does not reside first in the regime which Naziism characterizes, but rather deep in the nature of the Nazi ideology. They haven't seen that the essence of Naziism is its totalitarian nature, that is to say its desire to destroy the Ego, both physically as well as psychologically. Naziism is haunted by the desire to inflict death.

b) Despite the loud denials of those who are animated by currents which, after legalizing abortion, are now endeavoring to legalize euthanasia, these currents are objectively inscribed with the Nazi tradition, and while drinking in its perversion, they go well beyond it. In effect, to inflict death is not just a "right" that society may exercise on the life it regards unworthy of living: It is also a "duty" whose execution the same society must guarantee for those who desire to "die with dignity" because their life is not worth living.

Added to the consideration of the right of society to inflict death on beings whose life isn't worth living, typical of Naziism, is a consideration typical of liberalism: the right of the individual to "die with dignity."

c) But in these two scenarios, and beyond the ideological travesties, the act of inflicting death is covered by law, and its execution is entrusted to medical personnel. In brief, the law now legitimizes medical murder.

d) For the same reasons, once a state grants parents the "right" to kill their children, it quickly finishes by granting children the "right" to kill their parents. Thus, in these different cases, the "law" is called upon to legitimize the "medicalization" of murder.

e) This totalitarian alliance between the lie and violence was implacably denounced by André Frossard: "The liar knows that he lies, the criminal hides or denies his crime, and the political systems that are the most diabolically injurious to the human species believe themselves constrained to give a decor of justice to their ignominies, and to feign a right each time it violates it."1


  1. Cf. André Frossard, Défense du Pape (Paris: Fayard, 1993) 48.

blint.gif (141 octets) Next page.

blint.gif (141 octets) Back to "Toward Ultra-Naziism".

blint.gif (141 octets) Back to "Summary".