I will say, the moment in a rally a couple weeks ago in which one of Trump's supporters tackled and tossed out a protester then was praised by Trump gave me a distinctly Brownshirt-y feel that made me shiver.

 

That said, this isn't that place and Trump isn't that man.

 

The frustration for a lot of people is real and I wish it didn't lead them to Trump, but this is something different enough that I think the comparison is mostly for effect.

I will say, the moment in a rally a couple weeks ago in which one of Trump's supporters tackled and tossed out a protester then was praised by Trump gave me a distinctly Brownshirt-y feel that made me shiver.

 

That said, this isn't that place and Trump isn't that man.

 

The frustration for a lot of people is real and I wish it didn't lead them to Trump, but this is something different enough that I think the comparison is mostly for effect.

 

Reading back on European history lately and it was hard not to draw certain parallels. As I said, they clearly aren't identical, but the lesson I draw from history is that Nazism, fascism, Marxism, Bolshevism, whatever, didn't emerge spontaneously because of random chance or because of a charismatic leader or simply the inevitability of the universe. They were all responses to rapidly changing structural conditions, largely economic, that led to social upheaval and these various -isms were the responses to it. I think one can take away the lesson that Trump or Sanders aren't spontaneous, random, or the result of charisma, but likely the response to changing structural conditions. I think we ought to examine what it is and consider the ramifications.

Hitler...or former US Presidents.

 

Try this quote for a comparison:

 

"We must Americanize them in every way, in speech, in political ideas and principles, and in their way of looking at the relations between Church and State. We welcome the .... who becomes an American. We have no use for the .... who remains such. We do not wish .... who figure as such in our social and political life; we want only Americans, and, provided they are such, we do not care whether they are of native or of .... ancestry. We have no room for any people who do not act and vote simply as Americans, and as nothing else. We stand unalterably in favor of the public-school system in its entirety. We believe that English, and no other language, is that in which all the school exercises should be conducted. "

 

If one is to villain-ize...villain-ize all who have said similar things about our society and how to assimilate into it.

That's Hillary

 

Satan is a female? Who would have thought that?

You should read it because you've completely misunderstood what he is saying. In no way is he comparing ANYONE to Hitler.

 

I read it. Sorry it's an unintelligent approach to a conversation that should be had.

 

He is trying to make a correlation with an agenda.

You should read it because you've completely misunderstood what he is saying. In no way is he comparing ANYONE to Hitler.

 

I will also add you have compared Trump to Wallace and now Trump with articles you've posted.

 

It use to be intelligent posters or people on both sides of the aisle frowned on these correlations or comparisons .

 

I'm not a Trump supporters but these type of articles and ideas are low brow at best .

I will also add you have compared Trump to Wallace and now Trump with articles you've posted.

 

It use to be intelligent posters or people on both sides of the aisle frowned on these correlations or comparisons .

 

I'm not a Trump supporters but these type of articles and ideas are low brow at best .

 

 

Be smarter.

 

This is NOT comparing Trump and Hitler. It is comparing factors in their rise (as the title says) and not THEM. It is more of a statement on the populace than it is about either of them.

 

It's about US.

Be smarter.

 

This is NOT comparing Trump and Hitler. It is comparing factors in their rise (as the title says) and not THEM. It is more of a statement on the populace than it is about either of them.

 

It's about US.

 

Does it call for a direct comparison ? No it does not. It does try to create a correlation between situations. It's a very low brow attempt by the author.

 

There is a reason it's frowned upon to use correlations like these . You may find valid points to compare but that is irrelevant.

 

It's the same reason the left gets up in arms when people on the right compare gun confiscation , gun restrictions or National registry of guns to Nazism. Sure could I write a semi intelligent article comparing the lefts passions for these types of laws and actions by Nazis , sure I could. But it is low brow and creates a false equivalent on motivation .

 

I'm sorry if you want to read this article and say it's thought provoking we will disagree. I'd say it's a weak attempt to compare a sore spot in Human history to something present day that some may not like and even a sort of scare tactic by creating a cheap correlation.

Kinda stupid to not even want to think about this. Trump aint Hitler, but that doesn't mean that some of the same sentiments/resentments/feelings that Hitler used to come into power are not worth comparing to current sentiments/resentments/feelings. If for no other reason than it's interesting, compare and contrast and discuss.

 

I also find it interesting that no one really has a problem with calling Bernie a communist, or Stalin, or a socialist when he has stated repeatedly he is a democratic socialist. No has a problem with ignoring his proposals which are not anymore "socialist" than the most successful and beloved government policies we have.

 

So it is fair, to come to a snap judgment about Bernie that deliberately misconstrues what he says, and refuses to have any consideration of his actual ideas, but it is wrong to even discuss parallels between Trump and Hitler. Whole lot of just outright hatred of knowledge going on.

Here is where this comparison should be considered. The anger of the electorate in Germany led to the election of a radical nationalist. Could the anger of the American people lead to an election result that we later regret? This is what the comparison makes me think about. Trump is saying things that would have caused him to be ridiculed out of the race 20 years ago. Today the angry masses are eating it up. He is the most unpresidential candidate of my lifetime, and people are so fed up with Washington that they love him for it.

I dug this post up from December. My thoughts are mostly the same, but it's a little more coherent than my hastily-mashed-out-on-my-phone posts yesterday.

 

I hesitate to respond because that would invoke Godwin's Law of the internet and comparisons to Hitler are the laziest, dumbest comparison in politics. Yet, I think what Trump is saying and the support he's getting deserves some historical treatment. I'm not going to compare him to Hitler or Mussolini, because that isn't accurate, but there are some interesting parallels between Trump and the rise of fascism in Europe. There are also some incongruencies which makes me reluctant to make that particular connection too, but I think we ought to analyze it some.

 

Trump has done a few things that are noteworthy in terms of parallels. He has no discernible political ideology (and he's been opportunistic with which policies he endorses, preferring vaguery). He has made nationalism a rallying cry largely through the demonization of the "other," which in our case are immigrants and Muslims (but this can be broadened to basically anyone outside of the white working class). And lastly he's channeled this nationalism into a belief that he alone is capable of "making America great again."

 

But, the reason I bring this up is because when I hear his rhetoric and the responses its gotten I think about our reaction to the Holocaust. We universally consider it the ultimate crime and clearest expression of human wickedness, but we don't often consider how it came to be.

 

Nazi's didn't just choose Jews out of a hat, but demonized them as corrupt, insufficiently German, dangerous, and part of an ethnic cabal to seize control of the world. You wonder how a society could become so deranged that they'd go through with such a thing, but I think for many in 1930s Germany they believed they were expelling the threat. It had a logical basis to them (and many felt they, as Germans, had been given a voice by someone who would speak out in favor of them). And when I hear the things Trump says and how his supporters rally behind his personality I wonder if we haven't learned anything.

 

It's not just that Trump has said something that is xenophobic or bigoted, it's that his entire status as a politician is predicated on expelling what's unAmerican and thus turning it back into the powerful, respected country it used to be and that has galvanized a good number of people. This isn't one rash politician, but something closer to a movement, and I think we ought to look ourselves in the mirror over why and whether we should be so condoning of it. If we say this is "OK" now, when do we say "this is a bridge too far?"

Funny thing is that 8 years ago I thought that Obama's rise to power was very similar to Hitler's.

 

Took advantage of personal charisma, new media and a poor economy to gain power.

Does it call for a direct comparison ? No it does not. It does try to create a correlation between situations. It's a very low brow attempt by the author.

 

There is a reason it's frowned upon to use correlations like these . You may find valid points to compare but that is irrelevant.

 

It's the same reason the left gets up in arms when people on the right compare gun confiscation , gun restrictions or National registry of guns to Nazism. Sure could I write a semi intelligent article comparing the lefts passions for these types of laws and actions by Nazis , sure I could. But it is low brow and creates a false equivalent on motivation .

 

I'm sorry if you want to read this article and say it's thought provoking we will disagree. I'd say it's a weak attempt to compare a sore spot in Human history to something present day that some may not like and even a sort of scare tactic by creating a cheap correlation.

 

It's only a "cheap correlation" to those unable to understand the point being made - not about Trump - about the populace.

 

If you're saying because most folks lack the basic ability to think that one should never talk about anything related to Hitler then I'd argue that only exacerbates the issue.

 

I'm not going to pass on interesting discussion due to a majority of people not being able to understand said conversation. They can go read the "poop" threads.

I would argue that it says as much about the powers in Washington over the past decades as it does about the populace.

Funny thing is that 8 years ago I thought that Obama's rise to power was very similar to Hitler's.

 

Took advantage of personal charisma, new media and a poor economy to gain power.

 

It is a fair discussion and one that is, again, not about them but , rather, us.