Ideology Of Nazism As A Threat To Modern Democracy

In recent times, democratic countries have faced persistent attempts of public opinion deception and manipulation through certain media outlets using unethical communication methods like disinformation and psychological manipulation. This threatens our shared values, human dignity, and stability of democracy as a whole. Who is behind the harmful disinformation aimed at destabilizing democratic society?

PROPAGANDA AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION IN EUROPE

On October 1, 2024, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) adopted Resolution 2567 (2024), PROPAGANDA AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION IN EUROPE ¹. 

This document states that “Council of Europe member States must shield themselves against all forms of propaganda which are illegal under international law, including propaganda for war, incitement to genocide and other international crimes, hatred, terrorism and discrimination, and they must be able to defuse propaganda that clearly runs counter to the fundamental values of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 5, “The Convention”) and is detrimental to democracy. Indeed, according to its Article 17, the Convention does not permit any propaganda aimed at the destruction of any rights and freedoms set forth therein.”

PACE recommended that member States impose targeted sanctions on those Russian media outlets such as RT and its affiliates, whose work violates journalism ethics and represents a threat to the national security of member States;

Moreover, PACE urged to recognize that “the Russian Orthodox Church is being used as an instrument of Russian influence and propaganda by the Kremlin regime”, as well as to “recognise the role of the Russian Orthodox Church as a tool of Russian State propaganda, and evaluate and address the involvement of religious institutions that are used for spreading the Kremlin’s propaganda in their countries.” The document states that countries must be able to defuse propaganda that clearly runs counter to the fundamental values of the European Convention on Human Rights and provide effective responses to the spread of misinformation and harmful propaganda. Specifically, PACE demanded to “ensure that propaganda prohibited by international law and propaganda which seriously threatens democracy and human rights is declared illegal in domestic law.”

COVERT REVIVAL OF NAZISM: PROPAGANDA OF SUPREMACY IDEOLOGY

What does the Russian Orthodox Church have to do with geopolitical tools of influence and propaganda, one may ask? For those in the know, the answer is obvious. “The IMPACT” documentary (2024) presents evidence and facts of international informational terror activities carried out by a network of anticult (antisect) organizations that have infiltrated missionary departments of the Russian Orthodox Church. Major players in this field are the pro-religious Russian Association of Centers for the Study of Religions and Sects (RACIRS), the Information and Consultation Center for Religious Studies in the name of St. Irenaeus of Lyon, and the European federation FECRIS associated with them. The documentary reveals international connections and manipulative methods used by anticultists and their agents of influence recruited in various countries, who jointly engage in harmful activities listed in the aforesaid PACE resolution. They use not only international mass media, but also legislative, law enforcement, and judicial institutions. 

Evidence presented in the film shows a continuity of methods used by anticultists since the Nazi era. Just like Nazis, anticultists compile blacklists of religious and secular organizations in order to illegally persecute, stigmatize, and terrorize them, often blaming others for what they themselves are actually doing. Similar to the Nazis, by artificially shaping a favorable public opinion, anticultists put pressure on the authorities, then penetrate the government, and eventually seize power. 

The methodology of apologists and all those engaged in anticult activities involve various techniques and methods of manipulating consciousness of the masses through forced psychological conditioning. This is carried out by programming the behavior of individuals via subliminal implants, through hidden embedding into a targeted person’s psyche of goals, desires, intentions, attitudes, or predispositions that benefit manipulators. Their primary tool is disinformation which includes slander, lies, and creating conditions for destabilizing any legitimate authority and societal structures, as well as inciting fear to control public consciousness. 

This kind of covert manipulation is not only aimed at forming passiveness in the masses, but also seeks to cultivate aggressive minorities within society in selected regions. Through remote informational coding, those groups, involving both children and adults, are transformed into controlled killers. Even security and law enforcement professionals are susceptible to this influence, as shown in “The IMPACT” documentary which discusses the puzzle coding method, school shootings, and the Waco tragedy. Thus, global anticultism poses a serious threat to society and the national security of democratic countries.

As a matter of fact, global anticultism represents a covert revival of Nazism, only in a harsher and more advanced form that impacts consciousness and subconsciousness of the masses through sophisticated manipulative technologies. The ultimate goal of global anticultism is to lay a groundwork for establishing a totalitarian Nazi regime worldwide. This is evidenced by the strategies and tactics of anticultists and their agents of influence operating globally. Their main goal is to sow division and chaos in people’s minds and “unite” them under a single banner — the Nazi ideology of supremacy of some groups over others.

In this regard, it is crucial that we thoroughly investigate this issue and uncover the real culprits behind the resurgence of a new hidden form of Nazism: is it the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), or is it an international terrorist anticult group that has infiltrated ROC structure and subdivisions?

HISTORY OF THE REVIVAL OF NAZISM AS ANTICULT PHENOMENON 

The roots of modern anticultism go deep into antiquity. However, bloody traces of this shameful phenomenon of humankind may still be found today. Contemporary society still remembers the scars of World War II where millions of people perished. Anticultists of that time, or, as they called themselves, apologists for exposing sects and studying religious cultism, played a significant role in inciting that bloody war, genocide, and crimes against humanity. At that time, anticultism chose the Protestant Church as its victim and made it incite and spread Nazi ideas in German society.

As a rule, anticultism as a phenomenon hostile to society and bearing covert Nazism at its core penetrated religions and secular society through theology, in this particular case through apologetics, meaning not through science as such, but through certain individuals, usually theologians by specialty, who pursued their selfish goals and craved power. Apologetics was a convenient springboard for them: through training courses and lectures it opened access to young people and specialists of public authorities; it became a cover for implementing global political goals and imperial ambitions of their masters, a loophole to start illegal actions, repression and genocide against entire peoples and unleashing of global wars.

APOLOGETICS

Originally, the word APOLOGETICS (Greek: ἀπολογία) meant “speaking in defense, justification, advocacy.” In Greece and Rome, “apologies” were defense speeches or other works in favor of the accused. Nowadays, according to the Orthodox Christian Encyclopedia ², this “weapon of reason” represents “any defense of Christianity against accusations and criticism from its opponents, and specifically a branch of theology aimed at refuting incorrect religious and ideological views opposing Christianity.”

It is worth mentioning that apologetics contains many historical examples, methods and ways of dehumanizing, attacking and persecuting Christians, as well as continuously improving forms of appealing to public opinion. The latter, “though slowly, but surely achieved their goal”: they familiarized society with Christianity and destroyed bias and prejudice against Christians.” (Bolotov, V. V. (1910). Lectures on the History of the Ancient Church. Vol. II, p. 165, St. Petersburg, Russia)

Thus, among other things, apologetics has amassed historical experience in various forms and methods of unlawful accusations, stigmatization, persecution, manipulation of public opinion, discrimination, incitement to hostility and hatred, genocide, terrorism, and diverse examples of using terms such as “sect,” “sectarian,” “cult”, and “cultist” in a derogatory sense.

MIRROR REFLECTION MANIPULATION METHOD

Today, ample evidence shows that global anticultists (antisectarians) successfully use the aforesaid unlawful methods and tactics to persecute hundreds of thousands of people in different countries who hold alternative beliefs or are atheists. The anticultists’ major manipulative technique is a mirror reflection method that involves copying defensive strategies, phrases, and arguments of their opponent and using them against him. This applies both to specific cases and to global strategies. Just as some entities harshly dealt with Christian sects in the past, so today antisectarians use the same inquisitorial methods against modern humankind, inciting enmity and hatred among people and instigating them to war and genocide.

Here’s an interesting excerpt from the article “Introduction to Orthodox Apologetics” by Archpriest Gleb Kaleda (Russia), published in “Alpha and Omega” journal, Edition 35, 2003. This is the same Gleb Kaleda who, together with the well-known Danish anticultist Professor Johannes Aagaard, founded the Center for Religious Studies in the name of Hieromartyr Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon, which has been headed by their disciple, Alexander Dvorkin, to this day ³. 

“In the first centuries, Christians were accused of all imaginable and unimaginable crimes: they ‘violated’ state laws, destroyed the state itself, destroyed the family, committed debauchery, infanticide, blasphemy, etc. Christians were put to death, fed to wild animals in circuses, turned into living torches to illuminate night festivities of the pagan plebs, and later destroyed, tortured, buried alive, and for three days the earth breathed with human lungs. Throughout Church history, many works of anti-Christian, anti-Church, pagan or outright atheistic content have appeared. Already in the first centuries, Christianity was portrayed as a superstition that had originated in the East, or at best as one of the despicable sects of obscure Judaism.” 

Suffice it to read and watch the public harassment organized by anticultists in modern mass media against law-abiding people and organizations from various countries, which they branded as “cults” and “sects”, and you will understand that anticultists still use the same manipulative methods and ways of dirty stigmatization, denigration, labeling, forgery, and falsification. 

Let’s give an example. In a book by respected European scholars and lawyers, titled “Freedom of Religion or Belief. Anti-Sect Movements and State Neutrality. A Case Study: FECRIS,” published by Human Rights Without Frontiers in 2012 ⁴, there is a quote by Alexander Dvorkin: “They would turn individuals into tools of cults and destroy their families. Cults harm individuals, families, societies and countries like ‘cancerous cells’ in a healthy body. Cults make no contribution to society. But they kept absorbing human resources and wealth from it. Like cancerous cells, they obtain nutrition from the healthy body of society until it collapses.”

Isn’t this the same rhetoric of denigration as the one used by antisectarians in Christ’s time? Isn’t this the same rhetoric Hitler used when he regarded Jews as a cancerous tumor on the body of German society? Yet, who inspired him to use the rhetoric of denigration and slander known to anticultists from church history? Antisectarian Walter Künneth. And what was the outcome for society as a whole?  

CHURCH HISTORY. THE REIGN OF EMPEROR JUSTINIAN I

Here is another example that theology professors have obviously mentioned to their students many times. Archipresbyter John Meyendorff (church historian, professor of patrology and Byzantine theology, teacher and former confessor of Alexander Dvorkin), in a journal article “Justinian, the Empire and the Church,” ⁵ gives the following historical example:

“Reaching the imperial throne in 527 at the age of 45, Justinian I, …throughout his entire reign, showed constant awareness of his prestige. “He was convinced that the strength of the Empire lay not only in the success of his army, but also in permanent struggle against the forces of internal disintegration.”

“His religious policy obviously expressed the same concern. It was directed, on the one hand, toward the final liquidation of dissident groups — pagans, Samaritans, Christian heretics, which were small enough to be dealt with by simple administrative measures, and on the other toward a severe limitation in the civil rights of those whose simple annihilation was either impossible or undesirable. The Jews found themselves in the last category, but the Monophysites presented by far the major problem.” 

Then he writes: “Professor Francis Dvornik, in his article on “Emperors, Popes and General Councils”, has brilliantly shown the political importance acquired by ecclesiastical councils in the post-Constantinian era. Gathered and regulated by the emperor, they were expected to produce definitions of faith which would be regarded as imperial law.”  

Isn’t this an interesting piece of information, given the current activities of the Russian pro-religious organization RACIRS and the interference of its agents in modifying laws, along with their unabashed desire to build a continental empire?

Brief historical note ⁶: prof. Francis (František) Dvornik’s article “Emperors, Popes and General Councils” was written in 1951. Professor Francis (František) Dvorník, born on August 14, 1893 in Chomýž, Moravia, Austria-Hungary, died on November 4, 1975 in Chomýž, Czechoslovakia, was an American priest, theologian, church historian, slavist and byzantinist of Czech descent.   

BLACKLISTS

Now, let’s go back to the history of Nazism formation. In 1921, an Apologetic Center was established under the Protestant Church, serving as a precursor to a modern anticult organization. The center was initially tasked with monitoring activities of various religious movements and informing the Protestant community about them. In practice, it started gathering information on various sects, societies, movements, and other groups, which was essentially an illegal collection of personal data of German citizens who belonged to those lawful associations. The very fact of this practice raises questions about its legality, given that those societies, movements and religious associations included people (a part of the German population) who, under the Weimar Constitution (Part 2, “Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of Germans,” Section 3: “Religion and Religious Societies”), were entitled to such freedoms.

It is worth recalling that Germany’s Weimar Constitution (1919–1949) was the first democratic constitution in the country, establishing a republic and ensuring broad opportunities for direct expression of citizens’ will, separation of church and state, freedom of conscience and religion, equality before the law, and abolition of class distinctions. 

In the early 1930s, Walter Künneth, a 30-year-old German theologian, anti-Semite, and lecturer at the University of Berlin, gained the approval and support of church leaders to head the Apologetic Center. Originally from Etzelwang, Bavaria, Künneth was the chief editor of the Protestant journal “Word and Deed” (“Wort und Tat”). 

During that time, he started expanding anticult activities and fighting against non-Christian movements such as anthroposophy, Darwinism, monism, spiritualism, occultism, and other trends that Protestant Church leaders viewed as competition.

In the public information space, Künneth’s antisectarians launched a campaign to discredit those movements through lectures and articles that shaped public opinion regarding new religious movements and minorities in favor of the Apologetic Center. In other words, they engaged in systematic dissemination of false information and manipulative narratives, thus significantly contributing to subsequent escalation of tensions among the population, creating conditions for society destabilization and a severe decrease in the level of trust in authorities. In 1932, the Apologetic Center compiled and published its materials as a manual, “Freethinking and the Church,” aimed at combating all dissenting organizations. Events soon unfolded to serve the anticultists’ intent to enter the government and then control and manipulate its leadership as puppets in order to achieve their global objectives.

Let’s recall that in modern times, in 1990, a similar “blacklist” of new religious movements, or the so-called “sects” and “cults,” was compiled by Friedrich Wilhelm Haack, a key figure in the international anticult movement and a carrier of Nazi ideology, who held the role of international research director for the American Family Foundation (AFF) in the United States. Haack was a friend of anticultist Johannes Aagaard, founder of the Danish Dialog Center. These individuals were ideological mentors to Alexander Dvorkin who also created his own “blacklist” of cults and undesired organizations.

FATAL LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN GERMANY

The year 1933. When Hitler came to power, democracy in Germany de facto collapsed. The law of July 14, 1933, banned all political parties except the Nazi party.

How did this happen, and does history teach us anything? Although the Weimar Constitution formally remained in force, its civil rights sections were not upheld, also because of the internal destabilization caused by anticultists. Following the Reichstag fire on February 27, 1933, a terror campaign began in Germany against leftist groups. Reich President Hindenburg issued two decrees: “Against Treason to the German Nation and against Traitorous Activities” and “For the Protection of the People and the State.” These documents effectively annulled the mandates of many deputies (the Communist Party of Germany was totally banned) and provided the basis for extensive restrictions and repressive measures, including against members of religious communities. Some deputies were unlawfully arrested and imprisoned, while others fled. Thus, conditions were created to secure the two-thirds majority required to amend the Constitution. Several constitutional articles were suspended, restricting citizens’ personal rights and freedoms, including freedom of speech, press, assembly, and protest. Citizens’ correspondence could be monitored, phone conversations tapped, and property searched and seized. In other words, the rights of German citizens were restricted, including the right to privacy.

These legislative changes paved the way for the “Law to Remedy the Distress of People and Reich,” or Enabling Act (German: Ermächtigungsgesetz) ⁷ passed on March 23, 1933, which ultimately entrenched the Nazi dictatorship in Germany.

The law consists of five articles. Article 1 grants the imperial government the authority to issue state laws. Article 2 permits such laws to deviate from the German Constitution, with exceptions only for the powers of the Reichstag, Reichsrat, and the rights of the Reich President. Article 3 mandates that laws are to be signed by the Reich Chancellor and take effect upon publication in the official gazette “Reichsgesetzblatt.” Article 4 grants the Reich government full discretion in negotiating treaties with foreign states. Article 5 sets the term for these powers, granting them to “the government currently in power.” 

The transfer of legislative powers to the imperial government eliminated distribution of legislative and executive authority, favoring the latter. The powers granted to the government to enact laws that contradicted the constitution basically devalued the constitution itself, meaning it no longer protected the rights and freedoms of the German people. Although the law was originally limited to a five-year term, it was continuously prolonged until Hitler personally extended the law validity indefinitely in 1943. The law remained in force until the fall of Nazi Germany and the NSDAP regime.

LAWS AND AMENDMENTS IN RUSSIA

Let’s return to our times and look at how present-day anticultists are destroying democracy in Russia. What amendments have been made to laws, particularly with the involvement of Alexander Dvorkin and his subordinate anticult organizations?

In 2020, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) published a report titled “The Anti-cult Movement and Religious Regulation in Russia and the Former Soviet Union” ^{8, 9}, providing a lot of legal details.

On September 26, 1997, the Federal Law No. 125-FZ “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Associations” was adopted in the Russian Federation, which put an end to the government’s permissive attitude to religious minorities and introduced norms based on the previous Soviet policy. The law put pressure on all religious groups to get legally registered in the country, restricted activities of foreign missionaries, and introduced an additional requirement: in order to register and obtain a legal entity status, an applying community must operate in the country for at least 15 years. All other communities may operate without state registration as a religious group, which significantly limited their missionary and educational capabilities, or may register with their head organization. Diverse amendments are continuously made to the law, primarily complicating the missionary and educational activities of religious associations. After the law adoption, groups that had not been re-registered before December 31, 2000, were subject to legal dissolution (often translated as “liquidation”), i.e. deprivation of legal status.

The new legislation basically legalized and reinforced the privileged status of “traditional” religions. The law preamble recognized “the special role of Orthodox Christianity in the history of Russia, in formation and development of its spirituality and culture,” along with traditional religions such as Islam, Buddhism and Judaism that represent “an integral part of the historical heritage of the peoples of Russia.”

ROC, the anticult movement, and particularly Dvorkin actively lobbied and mobilized supporters to get the law passed. Thanks to his ideas about the need to rescue helpless citizens from the clutches of totalitarian sects through repressive religious norms, Dvorkin found allies in the government that sought to regain control over society.

In 2002, Russia adopted the Federal Law “On Countering Extremist Activities,” which doesn’t contain a clear definition of extremism and stipulates criminal prosecution for “inciting social, racial, national or religious enmity” or “propaganda of a person’s exclusivity, superiority or inferiority on the basis of their social, racial, ethnic, religious or language affiliation, or attitude to religion”…

As stated in the 2009 Report on International Religious Freedom, issued on October 26, 2009 by the BUREAU OF DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND LABOR ¹⁰, the Russian “2002 law on extremism, amended in July 2006, can affect religious groups, particularly Muslim groups, by criminalizing a broad spectrum of speech and activities. The 2006 amendments allow charges of extremism where persons are alleged to have defended or expressed sympathy for individuals already charged with extremism.”

On July 4, 2008, the State Duma adopted and the Federation Council approved amendments to a few federal laws. Among other acts, the amendments were made to the Federal Law “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Associations,” first and foremost changing the procedure for religious expert examination at the regional level. The influence of expert councils now largely depends on their members. 

In 2009, Dvorkin was appointed head of the Expert Council for the State Religious Expert Examination and tasked with monitoring religious activities and approving legal registration. The council was initially established in 1998 to help enforce the 1997 law. The amended law of February 18, 2009 expanded the council’s functions and gave it the authority to oversee the activities, structure and religious content of registered organizations, and to control the registration process. 

The above-mentioned events resulted in the fact that in 2009, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), that had been monitoring and reporting on the situation with religious freedom in Russia since 1999, for the first time included this country in the list of severe violators of religious freedom.

In 2015, amendments were made to the Federal Law “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Associations,” toughening registration of religious groups and diminishing the rights of local religious organizations.

In July 2016, Russia adopted two federal laws on amending several legislative acts. The laws were declared by their authors as having an antiterrorist agenda and became known as the Yarovaya Law. They significantly expanded the scope of regulation and charges compared to the previous laws on religion and extremism. This set of laws qualifies dissemination of religious faith and invitation to religious services as illegal missionary activity if it occurs outside officially registered places, including in private homes or via the Internet. The amended legislation also prohibits any former member of an allegedly “extremist” religious organization from carrying out the so-called “missionary activities” and creates quite favorable conditions for arbitrary rule of public officials. The Yarovaya Law expands opportunities for persecuting people who publicly express their beliefs. The legislation allows the government to control private electronic correspondence, which observers describe as an outright “echo of KGB’s extensive powers.”

On April 20, 2017, following an accusation of being an “extremist organization,” Jehovah’s Witnesses became the first religion to be completely banned throughout Russia. In the same year, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services recommended the Department of State to include Russia in the list of countries of special concern under IRFA (International Religious Freedom Act of 1998), as one of the worst violators of religious freedom in the world. Since then, hundreds of Jehovah’s Witnesses have experienced raids, search, imprisonment, and even tortures.

Excerpt from the 2009 Report on International Religious Freedom, dated October 26, 2009, of the BUREAU OF DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND LABOR ¹¹:

“Vague legislation to counter ‘extremism’ has had a detrimental effect on religious freedom. There were indications that security services treated the leadership and literature of some minority religious groups, including Jehovah’s Witnesses, as security threats. Alexander Dvorkin, an outspoken proponent of categorizing minority religious groups as extremist cults and ‘sects,’ was elected to head the Council of Experts that makes recommendations on designating these religious groups. Societal attitudes toward traditionally Muslim ethnic groups were negative in many regions, and there were manifestations of anti-Semitism as well as hostility toward Roman Catholics and other non-Orthodox Christian denominations. Instances of religiously motivated violence continued, although often it was difficult to determine whether xenophobic, religious, or ethnic prejudices were the primary motivation behind violent attacks. Conservative activists claiming ties to the Russian Orthodox Church occasionally disseminated negative publications and held protest meetings against religions considered nontraditional, including alternative Orthodox congregations. Some Russian Orthodox Church clergy, including Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill, publicly stated opposition to the expansion of the presence of some non-Orthodox Christian denominations, though other prominent societal leaders took positive steps to promote religious freedom.”

TERROR IN NAZI GERMANY

In 1933, against the background of political events, Walter Künneth expressed his intention to liquidate religious and political minorities and agreed with Adolf Hitler on the need “to eliminate Jewish influence in public life.” On December 16, 1933, the work and methods of anticultists (meaning, of the Apologetic Center) were noticed and appreciated by the Gestapo. 

Here’s what Künneth wrote in his report to the leadership of the Reich’s Protestant Church: “The Gestapo expressed great interest in the sect archive of the Apologetic Center, as well as in our work on combating free thinking, Marxism and Bolshevism. The Gestapo expressed willingness to lead the fight against illegal free thinking together with the Apologetic Center in the future. An exchange of materials between the Gestapo and the Apologetic Center has already begun.”

Thus, the Apologetic Center started supplying the Imperial Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Propaganda, and the Gestapo with slanderous pseudo-expert opinions and information about political views of various religious communities. Blacklists of the so-called “sects” were expanded and included any associations which the Apologetic Center considered “dangerous” for the new state ideology. Consequently, a part of the German people were severely persecuted, and members of various associations and communities were even sent to concentration camps.

An excerpt from “The IMPACT” documentary (2024): “Historian Horst Junginger writes: ‘If in 1931 they counted about 150 religious and non-religious ideological communities for which data were collected, and two years later about 250, then by 1936 the archival lists recorded about 500 groups and cults considered ‘dangerous’.”

Investigating the history of this issue, we can see what people who were publicly slandered by the Apologetic Center felt, and what terrible consequences this part of the German nation, who suddenly became “dangerous,” faced. For instance, let’s recall the Holocaust victims, and how Jews were persecuted and exterminated by Nazi Germany in 1933-1945. 6 million Jews died during the Holocaust ¹². 

Yet, how severely were other religious groups and public organizations repressed? For example, what kind of persecution did Jehovah’s Witnesses face in Nazi Germany? ¹³ 

They were deprived of jobs, businesses, the status of civil servants, trade and mobile trade licenses, agricultural permits, or other business licenses. Their property, land plots, apartments, houses, and vehicles were confiscated. They were deprived of pensions, unemployment benefits and social security subsidies. Jehovah’s Witnesses were considered incapacitated “antisocial elements” who were thus ineligible for unemployment benefits. At that time, 6,262 believers were imprisoned and 8,322 sent to concentration camps. According to various sources, between 1933 and 1945, 6 to 10 thousand Jehovah’s Witnesses became victims of Nazism, and many of them died in camps or prisons ¹⁴. 

Moreover, how many children’s lives were ruined just because the public and law enforcement did not timely stop the Apologetic Center’s illegal actions aimed against the German people? More than 500 children were separated from their parents who were Jehovah’s Witnesses and sent to Nazi correctional schools. Meanwhile, it’s only one organization among hundreds included in the list of objectionable organizations compiled by the Apologetic Center, and subjected to Nazi repression. We’ll remind once again that in 1936, the aforesaid list consisted of 500 objectionable organizations, and it was continuously supplemented with new “enemies of the nation” year after year. So it is quite possible that there were hundreds of times more innocent little victims of Nazi ideology.

What did children experience when they were suddenly separated from their parents just because someone wanted more power in this world? In her book “Facing the Lion,” Simone Arnold-Liebster, a board member of the European Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses, tells about his childhood years in France where she was captured by the Nazis, psychologically pressured and threatened with physical violence. Her parents were Jehovah’s Witnesses. Under the Nazi regime, when Simone was 12 years old, she refused to do the ritual salute “Heil Hitler” and join the League of German Girls, so she was separated from her parents and sent to a prison-type correctional school (Wessenberg Center for Re-education of Сhildren in Konstanz, Germany), while her parents were sent to concentration camps. Fascists tried to “bring Simone to reason,” or “deprogram” her as it is called nowadays. They bullied the girl in every way possible, humiliated and starved her, forced her to work hard, and forbade her to talk for almost two years. By a happy coincidence, she and her parents remained alive despite all the Nazi harassment and were released in 1945. Thanks to these circumstances, she remained alive, and the world discovered the truth about their fate.

In fact, there were lots of such children, separated from their parents, tortured and killed simply because someone compiled “blacklists,” considering certain people to be competitors to his power, slandered their parents and diredited their families in the eyes of the public, inciting hatred and enmity among people, propagandizing war, and instigating to genocide.

Therefore, in Germany of the early 20^th century, the leaders and customers of Walter Künneth’s Apologetic Center, established with the consent of the Protestant Church leadership, were largely responsible for the spread of Nazism among the German people and the outbreak of World War II with its numerous victims.

DEMOCRATIC TRIAL

You might think: how can words affect actions, and is there a connection between the two? Can words and implanted images influence people’s behavior, turn them into Nazis with the idea of their supremacy over others, and push them to commit acts of genocide? The answer is yes, and Walter Künneth’s Apologetic Center proved this in practice. After the end of the war in Europe in May 1945, there arose a daunting task to reform German society and restore critical thinking in people after 12 years of the Nazi rule and its constantly imposed hate propaganda. The German writer Victor Klemperer wrote in 1946: “Nazism permeated the flesh and blood of the people through single words, idioms and sentence structures which were imposed on them in a million repetitions and taken on board mechanically and unconsciously.”

The International Military Tribunal that started in Nuremberg on November 20, 1945 was an unprecedented trial. For the first time in history, propagandists, i.e. those people whose words, patterns of speech and publications contributed to Nazi acts of aggression, persecution and mass murders, were on trial for war crimes. According to the prosecutor, those people were in the dock not as free journalists, but as official Nazi-controlled propagandists who largely assisted the Nazis in tightening the noose around the necks of German people.

One of the criminals charged was Julius Streicher, publisher of Der Stürmer (German for “The Stormtrooper”). Although he defended himself in every possible way, insisting that he had learned of the massacres only after his arrest by the Allies, that his speeches and articles were not intended to “incite” the Germans, but only to “inform” and “educate” them “on a matter which seemed to be one of the most important”, all of this didn’t help him to escape severe punishment. In their closing arguments, accusers in the Nuremberg courtroom said, “The defendant Streicher is an accessory to the persecution of the Jews within Germany and in occupied territories which culminated in mass murder of an estimated six million men, women, and children. The propaganda in Der Stürmer and other Streicher publications… was of a character calculated to stir up fanatic fear and hatred of the Jewish people and to incite to murder. …Through propaganda designed to incite hatred and fear, defendant Streicher devoted himself, over a period of twenty-five years, to creating the psychological basis essential to carrying through a program of mass murder. This alone would suffice to establish his guilt as an accessory to the criminal program of extermination.” 

Does history teach us?

Does history teach us? For thirty years, Alexander Dvorkin and his international team of anticultists have been lobbying for harsh, Nazi-like measures against numerous people whom the anticultists arbitrarily label as members of “totalitarian sects” or “destructive cults.” Through slander and lies, anticultists have not only created conditions for repression of law-abiding citizens belonging to various religious minorities as well as individuals and organizations they deem undesirable, but also fostered conditions for negative scenarios within countries, sowed discord and hatred, and generated aggressive social attitudes towards authorities.

So who is behind the revival of Nazism today? Who is truly to blame for the distortions within ROC and the spread of Nazi ideology in general? The answer is clear after the facts presented. RACIRS agents have infiltrated the Orthodox Christian Church and twisted its very essence. Now, using the church as a cover, they distract attention from themselves, their control, and their role as the ideological center of modern Nazism.

Today, global anticult activities led by RACIRS and the organizations it controls have not only tarnished the Orthodox Church’s honorable reputation worldwide, but also incited hatred between nations and instigated genocide and a civilizational war. There is substantial evidence of this, including the eight-hour documentary “The IMPACT” that reveals facts and proof of the antidemocratic, illegal covert activities of global anticultism, showing its ideological and methodological ties to Nazism. The documentary addresses informational terror, genocide, and crimes against humanity committed by global anticultism.

“The IMPACT” documentary has uncovered the truth about the real face of global anticultism. It has lanced this abscess on the body of humankind, exposing its festering necrotic core which for 30 years has been the cause of countless misfortunes, wars, terror attacks, school shootings, and other dramatic events in the lives of many people and organizations across different countries. If the world hadn’t learned the truth now, it’s hard to predict what dangerous consequences this hidden anticult lawlessness could have caused in the future. Nobody knows how many more countries and people would have been drawn into the antidemocratic, pathological process of infecting society with the anticult poison of total deceit and lawlessness — the process that could ultimately result in destruction of human society under the global dominance of a new form of covert Nazism.

Perhaps, current generations should reflect on the words of repentance spoken by Hans Fritzsche, an official of the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda in Nazi Germany, who was accused at Nuremberg: “After the totalitarian form of government has brought about the catastrophe of the murder of 5 millions, I consider this form of government wrong even in times of emergency. I believe any kind of democratic control, even a restricted democratic control, would have made such a catastrophe impossible.”

 

---

Sources

1. https://pace.coe.int/en/files/33808/html
2. https://www.pravenc.ru/text/75696.html 
3. https://www.pravmir.ru/apologetika-znachenie/#sdfootnote4sym
4. https://www.academia.edu/21732719/Freedom_of_Religion_or_Belief_Anti_Sect_Movements_and_State_Neutrality_A_Case_Study_FECRIS 
5. https://predanie.ru/book/216371-pashalnaya-tayna/#/n_529
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Dvornik 
7. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erm%C3%A4chtigungsgesetz_vom_24._M%C3%A4rz_1933 
8. https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/2020%20Anti-Cult%20Update%20-%20Religious%20Regulation%20in%20Russia%20edited.pdf
9. https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/2020%20Anti-Cult%20Update%20-%20Religious%20Regulation%20in%20Russia%20edited.pdf
10. https://web.archive.org/web/20120119151002/http:/www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2009/127333.htm
11. https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2009/127215.htm
12. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/documenting-numbers-of-victims-of-the-holocaust-and-nazi-persecution
13. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_in_Nazi_Germany
14. https://www.blagovest-info.ru/index.php?ss=2&s=3&id=6517