the habit of bringing up comparisons with Hitler and the Nazis

[Rumpel]

the habit of bringing up comparisons with Hitler and the Nazis

It seems to be a popular game.
Remember Godwin's Law.
What do you think about it?

What I think about it I will write later on

 

[washunut]

the habit of bringing up comparisons with Hitler and the Nazis

It seems to be a popular game.
Remember Godwin's Law.
What do you think about it?

What I think about it I will write later on

Seems to me that some people start their discussions making these comparisons.

 

[Rumpel]

Seems to me that some people start their discussions making these comparisons.

Start it - or bringing it up sometime - or end it that way

 

[washunut]

Start it - or bringing it up sometime - or end it that way

Start it by saying such and such acts like a Hitler.

 

[calamity]

the habit of bringing up comparisons with Hitler and the Nazis

It seems to be a popular game.
Remember Godwin's Law.
What do you think about it?

What I think about it I will write later on

I bring it up with apt.

 

[Rumpel]

"Hitler" has no become a household word, so to speak ....

 

[Rumpel]

I bring it up with apt.

You mean to say you have got a Hitler app on your smartphone?

 

[Nomad4Ever]

There is nothing wrong with making these comparisons where relevant.

 

[MaryP]

There is nothing wrong with making these comparisons where relevant.

How often is it 'relevant' to compare anyone to Hitler? There can be valid comparisons to some of the tactics the right is using like discrediting the press and preying on people's prejudices to create an 'enemy.' But those tactics come from the same playbook most dictators snd fascists use to gain power.

I'm sorry we went there with the Nazi hyperbole. It disrespects those who died and suffered under that man.

 

[Rumpel]

There is nothing wrong with making these comparisons where relevant.

Yes - where relevant.
But often it isn't.

 

[Rumpel]

I'm sorry we went there with the Nazi hyperbole. It disrespects those who died and suffered under that man.

So it is ....

 

[Nomad4Ever]

How often is it 'relevant' to compare anyone to Hitler?

Hitler, in many ways, was not special. He was not uniquely evil or especially smart. He just happened to be one of the worst people to have in his command that much political power. For example, Richard Spencer has openly said as horrible things as Hitler during his speeches. He just happens to not have political power. I think comparing him to Hitler is fine.

When I compare someone to Hitler/Nazis, it's not comparing what they've done to what Hitler did. That would be ridiculous. I'm comparing their beliefs and trends in their actions.

But those tactics come from the same playbook most dictators snd fascists use to gain power.

That's the point of the comparisons. It's not saying that those people/groups are literally hitler/Nazis. It's that a lot of their tactics are the same and they use the same rhetoric. For example, I think demonizing the media is a very dangerous thing to allow. Yes, other fascist/totalitarian government have done it. But pointing out to someone that the Nazis also de-legitimized the press sometimes help people see how dangerous a path that can lead down.

It's not that demonizing the press is unique to fascism, but it can lead to or enable fascism.

I'm sorry we went there with the Nazi hyperbole. It disrespects those who died and suffered under that man.

No. What disrespects them is thinking of Hitler and Nazism as some aberration of humanity, as a unique occurrence in history where "pure evil" just happened to manifest itself.

It makes it seem like something from Lord of the Rings. Some far off fictional horror that could never happen today. It could happen today. Germany was the most progressive country in Europe before the Nazis took power. Gay people would go honeymoon in the Weimar Republic because it was the most accepting country in Europe at the time.

People as morally evil as Hitler are born every day. It would be disrespectful to be complacent and assure that something like that happens again.

 

[EdwinWillers]

There is nothing wrong with making these comparisons where relevant.

I would add - "and accurate." Sometimes relevancy does not equal accuracy. If you're going to compare someone's actions or ideology to Hitler's, make sure the comparison is accurate.

As you correctly note, there is plenty of occasion to make such comparisons; we shouldn't be afraid of someone claiming "Godwin!" against us merely because the comparison involved Hitler or the Nazis. One is only godwin-ing a thread when the comparison isn't relevant or accurate.

 

[MaryP]

Hitler, in many ways, was not special. He was not uniquely evil or especially smart. He just happened to be one of the worst people to have in his command that much political power. For example, Richard Spencer has openly said as horrible things as Hitler during his speeches. He just happens to not have political power. I think comparing him to Hitler is fine.

When I compare someone to Hitler/Nazis, it's not comparing what they've done to what Hitler did. That would be ridiculous. I'm comparing their beliefs and trends in their actions.

That's the point of the comparisons. It's not saying that those people/groups are literally hitler/Nazis. It's that a lot of their tactics are the same and they use the same rhetoric. For example, I think demonizing the media is a very dangerous thing to allow. Yes, other fascist/totalitarian government have done it. But pointing out to someone that the Nazis also de-legitimized the press sometimes help people see how dangerous a path that can lead down.

It's not that demonizing the press is unique to fascism, but it can lead to or enable fascism.

No. What disrespects them is thinking of Hitler and Nazism as some aberration of humanity, as a unique occurrence in history where "pure evil" just happened to manifest itself.

It makes it seem like something from Lord of the Rings. Some far off fictional horror that could never happen today. It could happen today. Germany was the most progressive country in Europe before the Nazis took power. Gay people would go honeymoon in the Weimar Republic because it was the most accepting country in Europe at the time.

People as morally evil as Hitler are born every day. It would be disrespectful to be complacent and assure that something like that happens again.

Food for thought. I'm chewing.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

I would add - "and accurate." Sometimes relevancy does not equal accuracy. If you're going to compare someone's actions or ideology to Hitler's, make sure the comparison is accurate.

As you correctly note, there is plenty of occasion to make such comparisons; we shouldn't be afraid of someone claiming "Godwin!" against us merely because the comparison involved Hitler or the Nazis. One is only godwin-ing a thread when the comparison isn't relevant or accurate.

I agree.

To be clear I think the comparison is overused; which unfortunately dilutes the effect of accurate comparisons.

 

[Bullseye]

I bring it up with apt.

Sadly, you rarely know when it is "apt". IF EVER.

 

[Common Sense 1]

Hitler and the Nazi's murdered and maimed millions.... Kinda hard to compare others to that record.

Calling out people using this has diminished what the Nazi killing machine actually did during World war II.

 

[EdwinWillers]

No. What disrespects them is thinking of Hitler and Nazism as some aberration of humanity, as a unique occurrence in history where "pure evil" just happened to manifest itself.

It makes it seem like something from Lord of the Rings. Some far off fictional horror that could never happen today. It could happen today. Germany was the most progressive country in Europe before the Nazis took power. Gay people would go honeymoon in the Weimar Republic because it was the most accepting country in Europe at the time.

People as morally evil as Hitler are born every day. It would be disrespectful to be complacent and assure that something like that happens again.

This sir, is a great comment.

It actually speaks to a general truth about contrasting worldviews - especially as it respects our views towards humanity. You see, some do not believe that last sentence. Some believe man is basically good and will, in time, ever succeed at improving himself (ala Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek paradigm). Others however believe man is fundamentally flawed, prone (if you will) to evil, that certain restraints need be put on mankind to keep this aspect of our nature in check.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Hitler and the Nazi's murdered and maimed millions.... Kinda hard to compare others to that record.

Calling out people using this has diminished what the Nazi killing machine actually did during World war II.

It's perhaps a matter of perspective, or perhaps degree. For instance, applying the same logic to Mao or Stalin, who killed 5 - 10 times more people than Hitler ever did, and thus preventing comparisons to them would be unfortunate.

It's in the manner of comparison we make. There's certainly nothing wrong with pointing out for example how someone's actions or ideology mirrors aspects of Mao's, or Stalin's, or Hitler's. True, they may not be at the same scope of damage done, but scope at that point is really not a matter of ideology or evil, but merely one of scope - which is really just a function of opportunity.

Indeed, one might (though I concede it would be difficult) suggest there were / are individuals even more evil than Mao or Stalin or Hitler but individuals whose opportunities to do their evil were far less than those.

 

[MrWonka]

the habit of bringing up comparisons with Hitler and the Nazis

It seems to be a popular game.
Remember Godwin's Law.
What do you think about it?

What I think about it I will write later on

Towards the beginning of Trump's first campaign, Godwin himself came out and said that he wished his so-called Law didn't exist.
Or at the very least he said that if such comparisons are accurate you should go ahead and make them.

Godwin's Law is not a Logical Fallacy. It simply points to a tendency. But if the actions of a politician or political party do in fact resemble the actions of Hitler or Nazis we should be pointing that out. That is a valid argument.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

It actually speaks to a general truth about contrasting worldviews - especially as it respects our views towards humanity.

It really is an interesting question to ask people. Everyone seems to have very different and personal answers.

You see, some do not believe that last sentence. Some believe man is basically good and will, in time, ever succeed at improving himself (ala Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek paradigm).

I agree. Many people seem to think we are on an inevitable march forward of improvement. To be fair, generally things seem to improve historically speaking. But that improvement is fair from inevitable. Backslide is always possible.

Others however believe man is fundamentally flawed, prone (if you will) to evil, that certain restraints need be put on mankind to keep this aspect of our nature in check.

I don't think we are necessarily prone to "evil." As a social species, there seems to be some predisposition to working together and altruism for the good of the group. I do think that we are very capable of "evil" and that what people consider "evil people" is actually somewhat common. For example, Hitler didn't act alone. Look how many people fully willingly played a part in his regime, or Mussolini's, or Stalin's.

To varying degrees of awareness we all buy products made with child labor. Look at what is still happening at our own border.

At a US border detention centre in the Texan desert, migrant children have been living in alarming conditions - where disease is rampant, food can be dangerous and there are reports of sexual abuse, an investigation by the BBC has found through interviews with staff and children.

Findings from the BBC's investigation include allegations of sexual abuse, Covid and lice outbreaks, a child waiting hours for medical attention, a lack of clean clothes and hungry children being served undercooked meat.
The BBC has spoken to camp employees about these conditions and seen photos and video smuggled out by staff.

'Heartbreaking' conditions in US migrant child camp

An investigation by the BBC has uncovered alarming conditions at a child migrant camp in Texas.

www.bbc.com

Everyone likes to think that back in the day, they would have been an abolitionist, or a feminist, or opposed Hitler. The fact is, most Americans originally supported Hitler. We were actually pretty anti-semetic back then.

Lindberg was also notoriously anti-Semitic -- and so were a lot of other Americans at that time. Did that make it easier for American journalists and diplomats in Germany to brush off the warning signs they saw?

Sure. When the controversy over the 1936 Berlin Olympics took place, one of the American Olympic Committee members who went to check out the place said at a certain point, "Well, my men's club in Chicago won't accept Jews either." So there was a kind of camaraderie there, a sense of, "Ho, ho -- we all do that."

Early Warnings: How American Journalists Reported the Rise of Hitler

Andrew Nagorski, author of the new book Hitlerland, discusses the way Americans saw -- and wrote about -- the early days of the Third Reich.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Blue Dog]

More often than not going Godwin is an excuse to argue hyperbolically.

 

[bongsaway]

How often is it 'relevant' to compare anyone to Hitler? There can be valid comparisons to some of the tactics the right is using like discrediting the press and preying on people's prejudices to create an 'enemy.' But those tactics come from the same playbook most dictators snd fascists use to gain power.

I'm sorry we went there with the Nazi hyperbole. It disrespects those who died and suffered under that man.

The few times I use a reference to hitler and germany under hitler I am pointing out mostly the attitude of some folks on the right as if I can see them traveling down the same road of hitler's actions. They will destroy our democracy to have complete control.

 

[MaryP]

The few times I use a reference to hitler and germany under hitler I am pointing out mostly the attitude of some folks on the right as if I can see them traveling down the same road of hitler's actions. They will destroy our democracy to have complete control.

Yeah, with a few of them, the path is obvious, and that's why I hope the Jan 6 Committee is able to flush a few of those birds out of the bush.

 

[EdwinWillers]

It really is an interesting question to ask people. Everyone seems to have very different and personal answers.

I agree. Many people seem to think we are on an inevitable march forward of improvement. To be fair, generally things seem to improve historically speaking. But that improvement is fair from inevitable. Backslide is always possible.

I don't think we are necessarily prone to "evil." As a social species, there seems to be some predisposition to working together and altruism for the good of the group.

I generally agree - we are social beings and prefer "community" to isolation. However, we have always recognized that to live peaceably in community requires all adhere to certain rules, restrictions on behavior - which I think speaks to our fundamental weakness as humans. I might cite children and what it takes to raise a responsible child to live in society responsibly - a fair amount of discipline and training is involved.

I do think that we are very capable of "evil" and that what people consider "evil people" is actually somewhat common. For example, Hitler didn't act alone. Look how many people fully willingly played a part in his regime, or Mussolini's, or Stalin's.

Perhaps this is just semantics. "Prone," "capable..." The possibility for "bad" behavior not only exists, but we've all - repeat, ALL exhibited it at some point(s) in our lives - be it lies, deceit, theft, anger, selfishness, hedonism, gluttony, indulgence, etc. etc. etc.

The bottom line is that if humans are to coexist, we need a certain social "structure" so we can coexist peacefully - and that because it's (and I'll merely appeal to millenia of history here) inevitable that without it, we'll find ourselves at each other's throats - Gene Roddenberry or no.

Everyone likes to think that back in the day, they would have been an abolitionist, or a feminist, or opposed Hitler. The fact is, most Americans originally supported Hitler. We were actually pretty anti-semetic back then.

Touche. Or Christians today were they in Pilate's courtyard 2000 years ago as he brought forth Jesus and asked what he should do with Him. How many would have screamed with the crowd, "Crucify Him!"

I've read several books about Germans and Hitler - some fascinating psychology there. A nation which has literally been the battleground for invading armies for centuries as they've had to pass through Germany to get north or south, east or west. The Germans had, over the centuries, learned how to live as a conquered people over and over again. I'm working now on another book called "Ordinary Men - Reserve Police Battalion 101" - how a group of ordinary people turned out to be vicious killers in Poland. Scary what we're genuinely capable of.