Comparing Bush to Hitler hurts our credibility.

[Zynx]

Hitler was the most supremely evil man who has EVER walked this earth and I doubt he will ever be surpassed. We hurt our own credibility by comparing Bush to Hitler because Bush, as bad as he is, is nothing close to Hitler. We also invite attacks comparing our candidates to Hitler by comparing Bush to Hitler. Please, let's not use an inaccurate and distorted comparison.

He is a great deal closer to Antonio de Oliveira Salazar of Portugal who was dictator from 1932 until 1968. Salazar did all of the following:

1. Fought imperial wars that killed thousands(Angola and Mozambique)
2. Shunned the international community and was shunned by it
3. Obtained power through shady dealings
4. Imprisoned people without charges and held them for months
5. Enacted policies that benefited only the wealthiest who were also his supporters
6. Nearly bankrupted his country through his imperial wars

The one thing he didn't do though was use the death penalty like Bush has. Sure the imperial wars killed thousands, but he actually abolished capital punishment.

If you are going to compare Bush to a vile tyrant, at least use one that is applicable.

[JohnLocke]

1. THANK YOU!

Excellent post! :toast:

[Zynx]

2. You're welcome.

:)

[TruthIsAll]

14. So Salazar is better because he only killed thousands?

The Bush - Hitler comparison makes a lot of sense to me.

Bush has laid the groundwork for pre-emptive wars throught the world. And unending terrorism directed at the U.S.

At least German POW camps obeyed the Geneva Conventions and in general our POW's were fairly treated.

The difference is this: Hitler came into power when Germany was down and out. And started WWII along with the Holocaust.

Armageddon, if it comes, will be a Bush legacy.

Bush came into power when the U.S. was respected throughout the world. And a short 3 1/2 years later, Bush is the most hated man in the world. Quite a trick, no?

[Zynx]

25. Bush isn't killing his domestic opposition left and right.

Hitler did that by this point. Political parties were also completely banned by this point in Hitler's Germany.

Like Salazar, Bush has killed tens of thousands overseas fighting imperial wars whereas Hitler not only killed tens of millions in his imperial wars, but killed hundreds of thousands at home for political dissent.

There is a comparison to made in terms of scale of death and destruction. Currently, Bush's amount of death and destruction does not even come close to Hitler's, but is much closer to Salazar's.

[Eloriel]

55. Oh, REALLY? Hmmm.

Bush Body Count
http://www.bushbodycount.com/index.php

And the site owner doesn't even have a FULL count.

Off the top of my head, here are the names of those IMO killed or attempted to be killed by either the Bush Family or related interests:

* JFK
* Reagan attempted assassination
* Mel Carnahan
* Paul Wellstone
* David Kelley
* a BUNCH of microbiologists
* Danny Casalaro
* James Hatfield
* Frank Olson
* Hale Boggs
* Salem bin Laden (???? pure speculation on my part -- I've seen nothing to actually point to this)
* Sen. John Heinz (more speculation on my part)
* Jim Tower (is that the right name? from the Tower Commission?)
* attempted on Rudi Decker and his brother -- a funny one since they kept living thru their little plane crashes (don't know what has happened to them since, tho)

There've been plenty of political assassinations.

But there's another point to be made here. People are also looking for exact, identical, mirror images of what Hitler did. What they SHOULD be looking for is an American version of fascism, a "kindler, gentler" fascism, if you will. Some of my list if not all if it WERE political assassinations. BUT in many ways, it may not be all that necessary to kill all political opponents if you can marginalize them enough. Further, if you can steal elections, why NOT allow the illusion of democracy to continue. Keeps the need to bust heads way down if people continue to think they're still living in a democracy while still getting what you want done?

Here's something else to consider:

Lest we be too complacent and say "it can't happen here", consider another point from the review of Hitler's Justice:

Second, we like to think that civilization, a sophisticated legal system and respect for the rule of law stand as firm bulwarks for the protection of individual liberties against infringement by the state. Yet Muller's book reminds us of the disheartening truth - the fragility of even long-standing legal systems and the fact that not only will they crack under stress but may in fact be enlisted as a potent tool in the legitimation of oppression and the powers of evil. Remember: the Nazis did what they did not by ignoring law but by manipulating it.
http://home.pacbell.net/dsfinley/politics/torture_memo_comments.html

Finally, please remember that Genl Zinni told us that IF (when?) there's another terrorist attack, martial law WILL be imposed and the Constitution suspended. Please remember that the next time you hear someone from the administration PROMISE us that there WILL be another terrorist attack here in the U.S.

[Kurt Remarque]

3. i'll stick to satan then

[H2O Man]

50. bush is satan

in the literal sense of the word. Not a red colored devil with a long tail and a pitch fork, but a confused person. He takes religious teachings from a higher moral plane, and applies them to the lower level that he inhabits. This is what Jesus refered to as "satan" when Peter mixed up the teachings. Peter, however, was unlike bush in that he was not responsible for the deaths of thousands of people.

To "compare" bush to hitler is an entirely subjective exercise. It's comperable to debating who was the greatest heavyweight champion, or the best baseball team in history.

An objective exercise would be to connect the bush family with the German war machine that hitler used to reach his goals. The book "American Dynasty" by Phillips gives numerous examples of strong connections that simply can NOT be debated. They exist.

There are times when objective debates are more effective than subjective debates. It removes the emotional factor, in this case, and is therefore more effective when presented to "mainstream" America.

[Cleita]

4. Hitler hated Jews. Bush doesn't. That's the only difference I see.

His camp though has done their best to turn this nation against liberals, though, with the same arguments and propaganda techniques that Hitler did to turn the German people against Jews. If you haven't paid attention to what they are saying about Michael Moore, a liberal, and how they are attempting to marginalize him, then you need to go back and read about the history of the third reich.

[Zynx]

7. I understand that, but those are tactics of all fascist dictators.

Salazar in Portugal did the same thing, but was not nearly as bad as Hitler. Hitler ran a complete totalitarian state. Currently, we are following more the lines of Portugal, Chile, and Spain which were simply authoritarian. There is a big difference. Also, by this point in his reign, Hitler was running domestic death camps and Bush isn't.

[jjmalonejr]

11. Genocide. Genocide. Genocide.

Hitler didn't just hate Jews the way Nixon hated Jews. Hitler sought to EXTERMINATE them.

I know people don't intend to be Hitler apologists, and that's not what people who dislike the Bush/Hitler comparisons are alleging, but there is just no comparison.

The propaganda techniques are certainly similar, and those comments are apt, but I agree with the original posters. Bush/Hitler comparisons are overly hysterical and do so much to damage the credibility of liberals who use them.

[Cleita]

16. There are so many similarities it's scary.

If you let the scales fall from your eyes, you will see them. Compare Bush to Hitler's first three years of his chancellorship. You will see the similarities. Bush hasn't had enough time to become as bad as the rest of them. I think the comparisons are valid and when our German DU'ers come in and tell us that we are going through the first stages of the third reich, we should sit up and listen.

[Zynx]

18. By his third year, Hitler had banned political parties altogether except

Nazis. He was also outright killing his domestic opposition. Bush, as much as I don't like him, is not doing this.

[Cleita]

28. Not killing his opposition? Ever heard of Paul Wellstone?

How about the fact that Republicans control everything including the state of California, whose majority are Democrats. You don't see anything sneaky or nefarious about these occurrences? The USA is much larger than Germany, but I think the comparisons are pretty close.

[Zynx]

34. I don't believe that the Wellstone thing was a murder.

That actually should have helped us if it wasn't for our own screw up.

As for California, Gray Davis had horrible circumstances to run in and his defeat was predicted by the polls. Even if California was a manipulated election, that is much closer to a Salazar type move than a Hitler move.

[Eloriel]

57. Does it have to be overt to qualify?

Have you heard of the K Street Project?

Have you heard about some of the shenanigans the Repug Congress does to completely exclude Democrats from the process of governing?

How about all the anti-liberal hate talk? Do you really not think they're trying to politically kill us completely? Look what they did to Howard Dean, the one person who could have won in a landslide and would have changed everything, putting power back into the hands of the people.

Further, as others have said, it's EARLY. Look at the brazen thuggery the BushCos have engaged in all the while facing an upcoming election -- how brazen do you think they'd be with no election to face?

Further still, we haven't had this election yet. We don't know FOR SURE if there even will be one. As I posted in a different post, we've been PROMISED a terrorist attack, and before the elections to boot, and we've also been promised that if that happens there'll be martial law. DO NOT FOR A MINUTE imagine that these people are not capable of such a stunt. As another DUer said recently (and I wish I noted who), they didn't steal an election to do good.

And they're NOT going to give it up easily, and possibly not at all.

[jjmalonejr]

23. Cleita, dear, you and I have butted heads before, but we're cool.

Please don't accuse me of having "scales before my eyes." That's unfair. You're not debating a completely unarmed opponent.

I have no illusions about how scary the Bush Administration is and the alarming direction our country is heading in. And echoes of Nazi Germany are indeed audible.

All I'm saying is that Bush is no Hitler. Bush is dangerous and corrupt and an awful, awful leader. He is not a homicidal/genocidal maniac.

I'm not pooh-poohing you. I just feel that the comparison is overwraught and hyperbolic that it is a big turnoff to people who might ordinarily be open to listening to what you have to say..

[Cleita]

31. Ya know if I were at a non-partisan message board I would agree

with you but supposedly we are among our own here at DU and we should be able to say the truth as we see it.

[jjmalonejr]

37. No one's saying you don't have the right to say it.

We're disagreeing with you and telling you why we feel the comparisons are overblown and unproductive.

What I objected to, was your implication that I don't see the "truth" your way because I'm somehow blind or ignorant. Not fair, IMHO, and you'll never convince people of your ideas by condescending to them.

[Cleita]

54. Okay, I get you. You think I am trying to push my views on you.

What I am really saying is for you to please look into what is going on because our future freedom as Americans may depend on it. That's all I'm saying. When something like this is so crystal clear to me and others, as well, it is frustrating to watch our liberty going down the toilet because some of us refuse to believe our leaders would do such things in our name. Well, the torture tapes from Abu Ghraib should be a wake-up call. It was for me and many others. The people running our country are no better than the totalitarian martinets of all stripes who have preceeded them. Call them what you like, but don't deny me calling them what I like to call them.

[jjmalonejr]

60. No, you don't get me, because you're doing it again.

You're telling me to "look into what is going on" as if the only reason I disagree with you is because I'm not as well informed as you are. That is so incredibly condescending. I'll listen to your arguments and have a discussion with you, but it is extremely irksome to be condescended to.

The reason why I say Bush is no Hitler is not because I'm so naive and blind that I "refuse to believe out leaders would do such things in our name." Believe me, I'm well informed and reasonably intelligent, I see the things our leaders are doing in our name, and it makes me sick. I'm no babe in the woods. I simply disagree with the facile statement that Bush=Hitler. Hitler was a genocidal megalomaniac. In the grand organizational chart of evil, Bush could not even shine Hitler's shoes.

I'm not denying you your right to say whatever you want, but don't try to imply that my disagreeing with you is a result of ignorance.

[Cleita]

61. So be it.

I don't think you are ignorant. I hope you do start thinking about possibilities other than what you want to believe. Time will be the ultimate judge.

[jjmalonejr]

62. I'm glad you don't think I'm ignorant.

I'm just stunned by how unbelievably arrogant your posts continue to be on this subject:

"I hope you do start thinking about possibilities other than what you want to believe."

You continue to assume that people that don't think the way you do are just lost and unwilling to see the truth. It must be tiresome to know everything.

Unbelievable.

[merh]

5. Forgive me, how can they compare Kerry to Hitler if he isn't the

leader and hasn't had an opportunity to carry out the atrocities that * has done? I just don't understand that fear or warning.

[Endangered Specie]

6. Id say hes more like Mussolini or Franco than Hitler...

But Salazar is a good comparison too.

[Zynx]

10. Mussolini and Franco work pretty well too, but Bush isn't as hard on

domestic opposition as they were. They outright killed their opposition. Salazar simply found ways to silence them through media manipulation and the occasional jail sentence without charges.

[Endangered Specie]

15. true... but I doubt as many people know about Salazar as the others.

If you are going to compare Bush to Hitler, that really only applies to the first 2 or 3 years of the third reich at best. I suspect most people mean it that way.

I couldnt help but notice some vague similarities between what happened to Tenet and what happened to Roehm.

[2Design]

8. hitler in the early 1930's seem tame compare to what it was in 1942

there are very similar signs... read the book coming of the third reich published in the last year...you can search on amazon for it..

You don't want to be fooled as the germans were by the early 1930's... the hate crimes are starting tooo.. against jews and muslims....
It starts with some other group until....it can include 'liberals' but by that time it is too late...

[rock]

9. A comparison is not the same as identity

No one is saying that bushsucks* is Hitler. We're saying there's similarities. And there is.

[jjmalonejr]

12. But we rant and rave about Saddam/Hitler comparisons.

It's just such a facile argument and is so emotionally charged that it discredits most arguments that follow.

[Zynx]

13. However, the comparison implies that we think he is as bad to others.

I've heard a number of moderates who think that the left comparing Bush to Hitler is ridiculous and it hurts our chances of getting them to vote for us. While there may be some points of comparison, when you say "Bush and Hitler are the same in (Insert Comparison Here)" people say "You must be some kind of lunatic to compare Bush to Hitler". You see, the argument simply doesn't have any credibility with those we are trying to sway.

[Manix]

17. ...I agree.....it's over the top for a lot of moderates.

[Endangered Specie]

19. What your saying is...

whether or not the comparison is right or wrong... it doesnt realy matter. What does is how we look making these arguments to the average undecided.

I can agree with that.

Ive seen better arguments on DU that are less charged but still gets the point across (watch out, they may turn facists). Like one thread on the 'twelve signs' of facsism, and pointing out things in the W admin that fit each category.

[rock]

21. Yes, but those people can't think logically

They're hopeless.

[Zynx]

35. We need moderates to vote for us and comparing Bush to Hitler doesn't get

them.

[LibertyorDeath]

20. So Salazar was like Hitler who is like bush

:)

[Zynx]

30. There is a difference in the scale of evil and in some of the categories.

Bush, like Salazar, just doesn't kill political opposition. He finds ways of silencing them through other means and manipulating the media. Hitler just went off and killed people by the thousands and later by the millions.

[Trajan]

39. Bush: Like Hitler, but nicer ...

Yeah, I get it ...

Bush: like Salazar, but with a richer daddie ...

Bush: like The Shah, but less persian ...

Bush, like Pinochet, but, north american ...

Im getting the hang of this ..

[Zynx]

40. If you wish to put it that way, basically yeah.

He is on the level of some of the lesser(but still bad) tyrants like Salazar, but not Hitler. Tyrants share a number of traits, but that doesn't mean they are all as bad as Hitler.

[taquinas101]

22. Are you saying that accusing Bush of being a facist is not credible?

I don't see too many posts actually comparing Bush to Hitler. However, I do see a lot of posts saying that the Bush administration is moving the country down the road towards facism, which I think is a valid observation. While I agree that comparing Bush with Hitler is not helpful, I think we do need to warn folks about the dangers of facism.

[Zynx]

26. Salazar was a fascist.

[taquinas101]

58. I assume your answer is no?

Once again, I don't see too many folks actually comparing Bush with Hitler, though there are a few on this board. Instead, the typical conversation goes like this:

Liberal: Bush's policies are facist.

RW: Facist? There you go again, comparing Bush to Hitler, and our soldiers to Nazis. Why do you liberals hate America?

[leesa]

24. No it doesn't.

[Zynx]

27. Oh yes it does. Go up to a swing voter and pursue that argument if you

don't believe me. That comparison makes them think that we are a bunch of whacked extremists.

[U4ikLefty]

49. Okay, really this is your concern???

That we will lose a significant number of "swing votes" due to comparisons of Bush to Hitler on DU???

How do you know what these mysterious "swing voters" think...are you a mind reader???

[FascistAdder]

29. A useful tool

I would suggest that while the comparison is not exactly accurate to the kinds of events tendered by Hitler, it is a easily recongnizable analogy that is useful as a political tool to encourage people to pay close attention to his moves, motives, friends, business partners, websites, and any other yet unknown quantities in his political activities. The man clearly presents a great many dangers to a stable civilization globally. For this reason it is important for us to be in good communication regarding his activities and those who represent him.

[malatesta1137]

32. I don't see too much difference, sorry.

Bush might not be as pathological a person as Hitler was, but you forget the people surrounding Bush who, combined, have access to more nuclear power than Hitler ever dreamed of.

Hitler wanted to conquer the world, which is what PNAC is all about.

Hitler killed millions in the name of the German race supremacy, Bush killed thousands in the name of the American corporate supremacy, that's the only difference. But give Bush time.

[southernleftylady]

33. I agree. Bush is evil but NOT quite up to Hitler yet. So lets just focus..

on the facts they are bad enough!

[Just Me]

36. You're right. Bush is FAR worse than Hitler because,...

,...you're either with him or against him. Hence, when it comes to destroying anyone,...he doesn't discriminate.

Bush is an evil unto himself,...a one of a kind!!!!

[Zynx]

38. If this were Hitler's Germany, you would be shot for speaking your mind.

Haven't you noticed that we are able to say as many negative things about Bush as we want? If Bush was as bad as Hitler, you would have been shot for saying what you just wrote.

[Minstrel Boy]

51. If this were Bush's Iraq, you would be.

Maybe after being bagged, stripped, stacked and raped.

But since it's Bush's America, you're merely ignored or marginalized as "wild eyed."

[Trajan]

53. You know: .. that didnt suddenly happen ..

Hitler didnt shoot EVERY critic as soon as he took office ...

It takes TIME to develop the ability to shoot and kill all opposition ...

I have problems with this argument:

It's as if the person of 'Hitler' is being 'reserved' for an advanced, extreme evil ... that NONE can be allowed to compare to him, unless they cross a decided threshold; say of 6 million persons killed; THEN one can compare to Hitler if one kills 6 millions people .... otherwise: NYET ! ...

Well: Stalin killed at least 25 million during the Ukrainian Famine and Cossack rebellion: Mao killed perhaps 35 Million during the Long March ....

Why isnt Stalin called a 'Hitler' ? ... he killed MORE than Hitler, didnt he ?

WHY isnt Mao called a 'Hitler' when he surpassed the sheer numbers of those killed by Hitler .. right ? ..

So: let me get this straight: Those who are lesser killers cannot be identified with Hitler, and those who are GREATER killers are not identified with Hitler either ....

Let's make this perfectly clear: Hitler was Hitler, Bush is Bush, Stalin was Stalin, Mao was Mao, Salazar was Salazar, Pinochet is Pinochet, the Shah is the Shah; NONE of them are ANY OTHER ...

NONE can be identified 'precisely' with another: except by specific traits shared by each ... traits that as a whole form too complex a type for easy identfication of similarity and difference ..

YES; Hitler was unique, and perhaps some wish to preserve HIS special brand of evil as their OWN devil: one whom they can point to with righteous derision and say "He is a devil: and he is OUR devil". But Hitler is not ANY ONE's devil, his history is world history, he is not just a jewish history lesson .... he 'belongs' to ALL of us ...

That being said: it is important to extract the essense of that evil: the callous disregard for human life in favor of ideological cause ... THAT is what is shared ultimately by Salazar, Hitler, Mao, and Stalin and their ilk ... By measure of sheer death: Hitler was a pipsqueak compared to Mao and Stalin, but his CALLOUSNESS in the cause of ideological purity compares in full measure ...

ALL of these murderous despots share other traits; traits the mold and shape the polity of their respective states ... There restriction of criticism, control of the media and their use of scapegoat and patriotic excess to demean their opposition .. THESE are familiar themes to ALL tyrants; it is THESE themes that are reminscent in todays's political landscape that forces men TODAY to make comparisons to the fascists of yesteryear ... One can rightly say that Bush resembles MORE Hitler, in that both manifest a union between Corporatism and State, creating a militant, plutocratic authoritarianism that seeks to quash dissent as it increases profit by its conquering and war-making in the guise of state prerogative ... In this respect: Bush MORE mimics Hitler than any other ..

One CANNOT be EXACTLY like another man, yet they CAN rightly be said to share traits: .. some metaphors and similes are APT and proper: some are not ...

Nevertheless: Hitler is NOT the WORST, he is NOT the least .. he is middling ... and he is fair game as an archetype of 'evil', in that those TRAITS that he DOES share can rightly be brought to mind, even if all traits are not comparable ... they can NEVER ALL be perfectly comparable ... his treatment of the opposition, especially BEFORE he consolidated his power, can rightly be compared to present day tactics in may places. including here ...

and let's NOT make Hitler an exclusive devil, only to be brought out by a certain segment of humanity: he is a devil of ALL humanity ... not just those who hold him as the ultimate personification of evil ...


In closing: Bush is NOT Hitler, and the GOP is NOT Nazi's; But they ARE tending close to fascist tendencies that SHOULD make us uncomfortable by the similarities that call out to us from the recent past ..

We shouldnt ignore that call ...

[southernleftylady]

41. Hitler would kill anyone that opposed him. Bush isnt that far gone yet

[shadu]

45. Hitler would have exported death and destruction to the four

corners of the earth to serve millions;
Bush would do the same to serve hundreds.
They are far far far more similar than they are different.
Comparisons are not only fair game, but essential.
We must study the enemy to defeat him.

[alarcojon]

42. I agree.

The comparison is not politically useful. I also happen to disagree with it, though I hear what others here are saying.

Bush/Hitler stuff may mobilize part of the left, but moderates and independents are almost certainly turned off by it. When they think of Hitler, they think of trains full of millions of people being shipped off to gas chambers. They just don't see anything like that here.

[neoteric lefty]

43. Good post... I know you'll get some attacks from people here

but I am glad you spoke up.

[Zynx]

44. Thanks.

I'll need support here because some people are misguided. :)

[ItsThePeopleStupid]

46. if bush is still in power and there is a spectacular terrorist attack

I tremble to think what will happen.

Don't you think it's important to warn people about the power grabbing and the stifling of opposing views?

How about "incipient fascism"? Most people don't remember Salazar.

[Zynx]

47. Facism is fine because a lot of Bush's policies mirror it minus the

dictatorship that kills all domestic political opposition.

[riverwalker]

48. If we wait until he equals Hitler

none of us will be able to discuss it.
Personally, it's a risk I don't care to take. If thats all it takes to offend a few "moderates" who are not offended by this administration already, I think they are already drinking koolaid and looking for an excuse to drink more.

[Solon]

52. I would say Bush is the ideological decendant of Hitler...

more accurate, you must remember history, many of these fascists, seeing the war is lost, sided with American interests to survive. And thanks to those policies, we see them rear their ugly heads from time to time.

[sampsonblk]

56. I disagree

There are some stunning similarities between Bush and Hitler:

1. Enabling/Patriot Act
2. Patriotism as a political weapon
3. Demonizing political opponents
4. War against "terrorists" to protect the homeland
5. Bizarre and questionable path to power, and denying its unusual
6. Demanding (and getting) more and more authority for himself
7. Outright lying propaganda
8. Turning the truth on its head (Where are the cehmicals?) and insisting that we believe it
etc.

The problem isn't making the comparison. The problem is (1) having those fact-based comparisons turned ino a Bush = Hitler argument. Bush is not Hitler. And (2) being WEAK about it. When I make a comparison, I always get "how can you compare Bush to Hitler???" So I go on to explain the similarities. Too many of us are weak about this, and immediately apologize, as though WE are the ones doing something wrong. Fluck that. Facts are facts!

[sffreeways]

59. I don't compare

I simply acknowlege the connections