Which political party actually acts like Nazis? Trump Jr says it's the Democrats.

[Twilight Hue]

Or we'll see the opposite happen if they win it, or we won't see anything at all.

That's the thing about the future. We can all say whatever we like. But postulating on an imaginary future does make a solid foundation for an argument.

Maybe, maybe not.

 

[Augustus]

Again: this is the problem with using comparisons to Hitler. Saying “the danger now in the US is akin to the danger that faced Germany in the early 30s” magically morphs as it goes through the air until it hits the ears of a Trump supporter, who hears it as “The US now is exactly like Germany in the 30s... but if you can find just one difference, you can dismiss my whole argument and stop worrying.”

You make it seem like it would be totally unreasonable to consider that a link between current US policy and one of the most supreme acts of evil in human history is not particularly well justified and only a Trump supporter could see it as fundamentally false.

Not more likely than not, but likely enough to take the threat very seriously. The ingredients for genocide are present; whether events will bring these ingredients together is hard to say.

If I had to put a number on it, I’d say maybe 1 in 3? 1 in 4?

1/3 chance of hundreds of thousands of deaths in US custody?

That's highly irrational if not delusional.

And Australia gets condemned for their treatment of refugees. Not exactly a good club to be in.

There are grades between 'beyond reproach' and 'Hitler'...

By average global standards, large-scale deaths of refugees due to mistreatment aren’t unheard-of.

The systematic killing of hundreds of thousands of them is somewhat uncommon.

And, again, unethical or even cruel treatment of people is not automatically 'Hitler'.

The similarities are much more than “superficial” and “specious,” but to get a Trump supporter to acknowledge this means getting them to acknowledge negative traits in themselves. You can’t get someone to agree that their racism and xenophobia has the potential to kill lots of people until they agree that they’re racist and xenophobic, so it’s always going to be an uphill battle.

Being racist and xenophobic is not the only reason one may consider the analogy to be inane.

But what you call “preaching to the choir” can also be thought of as “rallying the troops,” which has purposes of its own. There’s great value in getting the message through to people opposed to what Trump is doing to get up, get involved, and do something to help stop it.

That something may work in a limited context from a propaganda perspective doesn't make the analogy any more legitimate though.

If you can’t “go full Hitler” when a country’s leader with autocratic tendencies has “undesirable” members of society rounded up en masse and put in concentration camps, when would it be appropriate? Trump really is inviting the comparisons with what he’s doing.

Deportation of illegal immigrants, even via methods that may be deemed cruel, is very different from rounding up Americans on the basis of ethnicity for imprisonment and eventual extermination.

 

[tytlyf]

We will see perchance the left loses the next presidential election cycle.

You think the republicans want to cheat again? Like usual? The republican party is dead, create a conservative party or something. Could go back to the Dixiecrat party?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Deportation of illegal immigrants, even via methods that may be deemed cruel, is very different from rounding up Americans on the basis of ethnicity for imprisonment and eventual extermination.

So their nationality is the point of distinction for you? Tell me again how your objections aren’t about xenophobia.

And remember that with the Nazis, the “extermination” part wasn’t common knowledge until well after the rounding up part. If we did it your way, we wouldn’t even be calling the actual Nazis “Nazis.”

 

[Augustus]

So their nationality is the point of distinction for you? Tell me again how your objections aren’t about xenophobia. And remember that with the Nazis, the “extermination” part wasn’t common knowledge until well after the rounding up part. If we did it your way, we wouldn’t even be calling the actual Nazis “Nazis.”

wood/trees

Detention awaiting deportation from a country you are in illegally is fundamentally different from being imprisoned/killed based on ethnicity in the country in which you are a citizen.

If you were detained in a foreign country for overstaying your visa by 2 years, or because you entered it illegally, would you consider it to be Hitleresque? Many countries would chuck you in jail for a few years on criminal charges prior to deporting you

 

[tytlyf]

When is Canada paying for their wall on the north side? We need secure borders!

Right now, the northern border is wide open! Why are republicans favoring open borders?

 

[Twilight Hue]

You think the republicans want to cheat again? Like usual? The republican party is dead, create a conservative party or something. Could go back to the Dixiecrat party?

That's quite an imagination you got there. ;0)

 

[Twilight Hue]

When is Canada paying for their wall on the north side? We need secure borders!

Right now, the northern border is wide open! Why are republicans favoring open borders?

I got a wild and crazy idea! Funnel all the "immigrants" to Canada!

 

[tytlyf]

That's quite an imagination you got there. ;0)

Well, conservatives always cry about their republican elected officials ignoring them once they're in office. Donald is even out there supporting GOP candidates (swamp). You either like the republican elitist GOP swamp or you do not. You don't keep supporting people you claim to dislike.

I think conservatives should create their own party, just like the Dixiecrats. You can have headquarters in Texas and use the southern strategy to gain membership.

 

[Stevicus]

The Nazi’s did not encourage anyone to confront people in power. If you confronted people in power under the Nazi regime you would be killed.

Actually, they did encourage that before they actually rose to power. That's what the Beer Hall Putsch was all about. In the intervening years before actually gaining power, they were involved in constant street battles with Communists.

What we see happening here is people calling any behaviour they don’t like “acting like a Nazi”

Yes, it's a pretty common trope these days. Any cop who hands out a traffic ticket might be called a "Nazi." Or an overzealous restaurateur might be called a "Soup Nazi." It might be used to describe anyone is too rigid or inflexible when it comes to rules, form, protocols, etc. I've heard terms like "Grammar Nazi" or "Fashion Nazi" at times as well.

It's become more of a personality type than a political position, at least in the way it gets used in some contexts.

That's why it's rather incongruous to refer to American politicians or institutions as "Nazi," since Nazi Germany is often portrayed as a bunch of sharply-dressed, goose-stepping, spit-and-polish types who blindly obey orders like robots - which just doesn't really fit in with the culture of America. Think Gomer Pyle or The Dirty Dozen or M*A*S*H. More often than not, Americans tend to be a motley crew of knuckleheads who thumb their nose at authority, who mouth off to superiors, and yet still manage to get the job done.

 

[Stevicus]

No - and this is the point I was getting at before: drawing the analogy gives Trump defenders an opening to throw a red herring into the discussion: “because 2010s USA isn’t exactlylike 1930s Germany, the lessons of that period have nothing to teach us.”

Actually, the main reason why I tend to reject these comparisons to Nazis is because there are probably better comparisons and analogies one can draw from U.S. history itself. I never could quite grasp the logic of drawing upon historical examples of other nations and applying them to US politics today, whether it's people comparing rightists to the German Nazis or leftists to the Soviet Communists.

As for the lessons we might learn from 1930s Germany or other periods in history, I agree fully with what you're saying. But it's also important to be aware of our own history, as that might have greater relevance to us today.

I’m not confident that the United States has much in the way of checks and balance these days; at least not ones that depend on the Legislative Branch, certainly. So far, the only rare checks on Trump’s power have come from the judiciary, but I question how effective even that will be in future now that Trump has had the chance to name two Supreme Court appointments.

I think the system of checks and balances might need to be reinforced somewhat. I think the primary check and balance would be the people themselves - at least the ones who vote. But there might be other ways of improving the system so that the voice of the people is better heard. The main impediment at present seems to be political inertia, which has existed for decades. Despite all the lip service about "change" that people have given, nothing ever really seems to change - and the system remains somewhat corrupted and fossilized.

Now, when the rubber meets the road, if any political leader had thoughts about becoming some kind of "dictator for life" (Hitler), then all those checks and balances wouldn't mean a thing if the military and intel/law enforcement communities were in cahoots with such a plan and supportive of it. That's what would be necessary in order to actually implement the kind of thing some people are suggesting.

That's where it would get dicey. Even if the top leadership in the military and enough troops support a dictatorship, not all of them would. Those who split off might join up with the number of state governments (and their National Guard forces) which would immediately oppose any kind of dictatorial regime.

Even assuming that all the Red States line up behind Trump (which probably wouldn't happen, as even some Red States would also oppose a national dictatorship), there would be likely many states in opposition - and they would be able to get assistance from those in the US military still loyal to Constitutional principles. They would also likely get support and assistance from other governments which would oppose a US dictatorship.

So, basically, it would come down to a civil war, which didn't actually happen in Germany after the rise of Hitler. The clinching moment was when the military was forced to take an oath to Hitler himself. At that point, there was no ambiguity or doubt as to who was in charge and what kind of system they were living under. Of course, they were already saying "Heil Hitler" at that point, so that would have been another clue.

If they start telling us that we have to say "Heil Trump" all the time, then it would probably be too late.

No, I don’t. Trump’s hate and anger seems more widely directed without a clear focus: where Hitler had a laser focus on the Jews, Trump jumps around from target to target.


This week, he seems more focused on Latinos than Muslims. Next week, who knows.

As for his concentration camps, though, I see the 19th-Century Cuban model as more likely than the German model:

The Cuban Holocaust No One Talks About That Inspired The Nazi

IOW, widespread death through neglect and incompetence, not through gas chambers.

Well, I think one can draw examples directly from U.S. history, as those would be more analogous to US politics than anything involving Cuba or Germany. Hitler and other German nationalists were probably inspired somewhat by the British Empire and perhaps the US expansionist policies of the 18th and 19th centuries.

I suppose if we're going to use a historical character to compare Trump with, I would suggest Richard Nixon - at least if we're going to assume the worst about him.

People who do - or support - evil don’t like having a mirror held up to what they’re doing. It’s still worth doing, though. It’s just a question of choosing the best tactics.


Even to the point of not acknowledging the danger?

And if you think that all Trump is doing is “cracking down on illegal immigration,” then you need to educate yourself on what’s going on.

And the situation I mentioned - refugee claimants seeking asylum - doesn’t even involve illegal immigration. The Trump regime’s treatment of immigrants who did break the law is unconscionable, but there are many people in custody now who literally did nothing wrong and broke no US laws.

I have. Using one approach doesn’t mean it has to be your only approach.

On his merits, the Trump regime is a violent, authoritarian nightmare that has victimized many vulnerable people. A comparison to Hitler can be, if the other side is willing to listen, an evocative way to express this idea, but it’s certainly not necessary to get the point across.

The real barrier to communication that I see is that many Trump supporters do really seem to see “outsiders” like undocumented immigrants, Muslims, and people of other political views as less than human.

I think that there is most definitely a danger to all that is happening in America, but I don't have any real serious fear that Trump will ever be able to establish some kind of dictatorship, not like Hitler at all. But the treatment you speak of regarding the illegal immigrants - that's very much like America, even if it's from past eras many Americans would like to forget. That doesn't make it any better, nor does it justify these policies - but it's still not Hitler.

I can't really say how Trump supporters (or even Trump himself) sees "outsiders," whether they're less than human or not. Probably some think that way, although I couldn't say how many.

The danger might be more in terms of what direction America will take after Trump is out of office. The effect all of this is happening seems to be polarizing left and right further into their own camps. But even if things go from bad to worse, it probably won't be anything resembling what happened in Nazi Germany. It'll be more like the Hatfields vs. the McCoys.

 

[Falvlun]

Well, let’s see which party compares best to fascism:

-opposition to Marxism.
Who hates communists?

-opposition to democracy
Who tries to restrict voting? Who supports gerrymandering? Who likes the electoral college system?

-opposition to political and cultural liberalism.
Duh.

-totalitarian ambitions.
“Maybe we’ll give that a shot some day.” -President Trump, on Chinese President Xi making himself president for life.

-Conservative economic proponents.
Duh.

-Corporatism
While both parties are captured by corporate money, one party consistently votes to give greater power to corporations, often at the expense of worker rights or consumer and environmental protections.

-Alleged equality of social status.
Well, this one does miss the mark for either party. Dems acknowledge the huge class divides, while Repubs celebrate them.

-Imperialism
While republicans like wars, they seem to be withdrawing more inward these days. I don’t see Dems as particularly imperialistic either.

-military values.
Uh-huh

-Volksgemeinschaft
That appears to mean something like “racially unified nationalism”. Where else does that seem to be occurring? I wonder...

-Mass mobilization
Traditionally this was through parades and mass meetings and rally’s. But today we could have Fox News and social media! Seriously, read the paragraph on this one. The parallels are creepy.

-the Leadership principle
The idea that the party and state should have a single leader with absolute power. I’m looking at you, Mr. “I can pardon myself” Trump.

-the “New Man”
Basically the glorification of traditional concepts of masculinity while demeaning any deviations from that.

-Glorification of youth
The democrats might have this one...

-Education as Character Building (instead of intellectual building)
“devalued the transmission of information, inculcated blind obedience to authority, and discouraged critical and independent thinking ...” Hmmm. I wonder which group promotes such things. Which group derides intellectualism and offers “alternative facts”?

-Opposition to Decadence in favor of Spiritual ascetism
Wouldn’t say this particularly fits either.

-Violence
Obviously there’s violence to go around. But Right wing terrorists have killed 10x the number of people as left wing terrorists since 1992. I also think it’s fair to note that violence is more glorified by conservatives than liberals.

-extreme nationalism.
MAGA!

-Scapegoating
Immigrants are stealing our jobs! Obama didn’t stop me from colluding with the Russians!

-populism
Particularly combined with anti-intellectualism.

- Revolutionary image
Note that this is more about imaging, while fascism is primarily rooted in traditionalism.

-antiurbanism
Who hates cities? Fascists.

-sexism and misogyny
Do I need to elaborate?

————————

I think it’s clear that one party more greatly resembles and actively strives towards fascism, of which Nazism was a shining example. Conservatives going “nuh-uh you’re the Nazi!” is the common republican tactic of throwing any accusations made of them back at those making them. Projection and “both sides are the same” are well-worn tools in that tool belt.

 

[esmith]

Is ANTIFA the new style Brown Shirts?
Antifa protesters accost conservatives Charlie Kirk and Candace Owens at Philadelphia cafe
Filmmaker describes Antifa violence at Berkeley protest
California police are facing backlash after publishing Antifa protesters' names and mugshots
Antifa Protest Movement & the Roots of Left-Wing Political Violence | National Review
Violence by far-left protesters in Berkeley sparks alarm

 

[Falvlun]

He's made some good points. It's no secret that Democrats have called for violence and in some cases had gotten violent already over political philosophy.

Trump Jr.: Democratic Party platform similar to Nazis' - CNNPolitics

Let the carnage of debate commence!

I read the article but I failed to see an actual comparison of the Democratic Party platform and the Nazi party of 1930s. Which policies, exactly, are similar to the Nazis? He never says. He just claims that they are really similar and that the media and history classes got it wrong. He didn’t actually support his assertions, either that there are similarities or that academia is selling a false narrative.

As for violence, that wasn’t mentioned anywhere in the article. Jr’s tweet says the economic platforms are similar (again, with no actual evidence provided).

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Is ANTIFA the new style Brown Shirts?

No; ANTIFA are the people fighting the new Brown Shirts.

 

[tytlyf]

No; ANTIFA are the people fighting the new Brown Shirts.

He's under the impression that Fascism is a LW ideology. He doesn't realize that these anarchists are ANTI-fascists. Most people are anti-fascist.

 

[esmith]

No; ANTIFA are the people fighting the new Brown Shirts.

He's under the impression that Fascism is a LW ideology. He doesn't realize that these anarchists are ANTI-fascists. Most people are anti-fascist.

What I failed to get across is that I am not saying they have the same political agenda as the Brown Shirts but the same type of methods of expressing their views.

 

[tytlyf]

What I failed to get across is that I am not saying they have the same political agenda as the Brown Shirts but the same type of methods of expressing their views.

Name one example that both sides do.

 

[esmith]

Name one example that both sides do.

non sequitur

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What I failed to get across is that I am not saying they have the same political agenda as the Brown Shirts but the same type of methods of expressing their views.

In what way are they the same?