Some reasons Bush* is NOT like Hitler.

[rogerashton]

It's time to put paid for good to the Bush=Hitler idea. Let's list reasons why Bush is not like Hitler.

1) The German government caught and executed the person they say burnt the Reichstag. The Republican Government haven't come close to catching bin Laden.

2) Iraq isn't Czechoslovakia, Poland, and France. It's a lot more like Albania or Ethiopia.

3) Bush* and his clique have not yet made opposition parties illegal. They have, of course, promoted the idea that opposition is disloyalty, as Hitler did, and in fact that did not begin with Bush -- Republican totalitarianism goes back to the 1940's, the Nixon - Gahagan Douglas race, and Tail Gunner Joe. But they have never gone as far in that same direction as the NAZIs did.

4) Bush* and his clique have never actually purged the Republican party, although they have intimidated other Republicans in ways that they do seem to have originated. once again, they don't go as far as the NAZIs did.

5) Gitmo is not, so far as we know, a death camp, and pretty much everybody there is a prisoner of war in a war that drags on, so, although it probably is technically a concentration camp, it is not nearly as evil as those the NAZIs set up.

6) Hitler built up his country's military force. Bush* has done the opposite.

7) Hitler was loyal to his allies. Of course, he didn't have many. The Japanese were one. When the Japanese declared war on the United States, a ruthless and underhanded dictator would have abandoned them in a flash, and focused his forces on defeating Britain and the USSR. He probably would have won. NAZI Germany also sacrificed some advantages to maintain the "honor" of their Rumanian ally. If Tony Blair fell overboard, Bush would throw him an anchor!

8) Hitler's economic policies worked.

What a claim! The government of the United States defends itself on the grounds that it is not as evil as the NAZIs!

Anybody got any other ways Bush* is not like Hitler?

[latebloomer]

1. Well, Bill Maher gave three the other night

1. Hitler was elected
2. Hitler was a war hero.
3. Hitler had a mustache.

[David Zephyr]

11. I Saw That!

Mahr!

[DoYouEverWonder]

2. Hitler was smarter than W

n/t

[rexcat]

3. He does not have a mustache...

Hitler ended up destroying Germany and Bush has the same plans for the US.

[calimary]

15. Aw shoot! You beat me to the mustache punch.

And how far back did Hitler set the Germans? Gives you some clue as to what we can expect for another generation...

[NewJeffCT]

4. Don't forget

Hitler was an excellent speaker, but I believe he worked very hard to become an excellent speaker... Bush is a poor speaker and is too f-ing lazy to work hard at becoming a better one.

[LiberalFighter]

5. Hitler wrote a real book???

[economic justice]

9. Hitler

Ever read a good biography of Adolf Hitler? If not, I highly recommend it. He was actually, according to most everyone, an extremely nice guy with a "charm" about him that won over many of his most vocal early adversaries. He actually wrote *two books* -- one published under his own name, "Mein Kampf" and another of which only pieces exist. Another book, "Hitler's Table Talk, 1941-1944" is, in many ways, better than "Mein Kampf" as far as getting a feel for the man. It is a collection of notes taken at Hitler's "table talks" where he pondered Germany's future with his top aides on a same time, same place basis. It's important to know that totalitarianism doesn't always come by way of people with horns....let it never be forgotten that Hitler actually WON his election. Popularity and doing "good" are two different things, as the career of Adolf Hitler clearly shows.

[rogerashton]

6. I've been trying to avoid some of those --

the ones that suggest that Bush is worse.

We could say that Hitler was less of a hypocrite, but then, hypocrisy has gotten an undeserved bad press. I'm really interested in the ways Bush* is NOT AS BAD as Hitler. Point being: if the best that can be said about our current government is that it is NOT AS BAD as Hitler's government, that's really pitiful and needs to be brought home.

(Actually, I must admit, the one about Hitler being loyal to his allies does read that way, though.)

[doc03]

7. Hitler was a self made man

If Bush's daddy wasn't President he would probably be working at Radio
Shack or selling used cars.

[tom_paine]

8. Bush did coke, Hitler did meth

[Poiuyt]

10. Hitler spoke better English

[Endangered Specie]

12. Hitler rose from vagabond to dictator... Bush started wealthy

[ComerPerro]

13. Hitler actually had military service

I believe he was a message runner in WWI, which is just fucking insane.

Hitler also probably didn't go on vacation for two months a year

[solinvictus]

20. Bavarian Rifles

Hitler enlisted at the outbreak of the Great War. He was decorated for bravery and was wounded in a gas attack. Of course, he didn't have rich relatives to protect him from the war.

[Dirk39]

14. History has a logic...

I can hardly remember to ever have seen pictures that show human beings, completely deprived of their dignity as the ones I've seen of Guantanamo Bay.
Even if you would suppose that some of these people are terrorists, whatever they might have done - although we already know that many of them were arrested there for month, who are innocent:
It is by no means necessary to treat human beings like this. Nothing they could have done, could justifiy the way they are treated there.

And Ausschwitz has established a new imperative, a negative imperative.
To do something AFTER Ausschwitz that only slighty resembles the way human beings were treated by the Nazis, just completely discredites the people, who are doing it.
One example is antisemitism. There were antisemites before the nazis and many of them. The USA was full of antisemites and they were popular in the USA.
We look at them with different eyes after the Shoa, we cannot believe that people like Hegel did write what they have written, among many others. If we judge them, we have to consider, although it might be a hard thing to do sometimes, that they did this before Hitler and the many many many Germans, who followed him.

But every antisemitism AFTER Ausschwitz is justifying everything that was ever done to the jews.
And a place like Guantanamo Bay, where people are treated in a way, never seen before, without any access to justice, without any possibility to defend themselves - by the leaders of a nation that liberated Germany from the Nazis, by the leaders of a nation, who teached the world what civilization means, when they organised the Nuremberg trials?
This is barbarism.

It's not about, if Bush is comparable or worse or better than Hitler. It's about how a government, how an army of a democratic nation can do, what they are doing AFTER the Nazis.

Hello from Germany,
Dirk

[Rabrrrrrr]

18. Fascinating thesis!

Especially about the anti-semitism AFTER Ausschwitz as justifying everything before.

I had considered the irony - and the evil - of the fact that we are doing in Guantanamo exactly what we say we fought against in WWII (though of course, in WWII we weren't, because we didn't know what was going on, but what the hell, we'll take it at face value).

I like to think that we would have laerned our lessons after Nazi Germany. Sadly, the republicans learned the wrong thing - not "that should never happen again on this earth and we'll fight against it tooth and nail" but what they learned is a good way to try to take the world over and how to subjegate and enact evil on a grand scale, without committing the mistakes of Hitler in making that dream come true.

[Dirk39]

19. Thank you...

it often seems to me that U.S. people know more about history than the average German, but many Americans seem to look at history as though everything would happen at the same time or as if it doesn't matter, when things happen.
For example, although nationalism and patriotism are always in a way irrational. There can't be any "normal" german nationalism after Ausschwitz. This doesn't mean that all Germans have to feel guilty or that someone like me, born 1964, is responsible for Ausschwitz. But whenever a German states: I'm proud to be a german", it really means, what he doesn't want to say, but can in no way ignore: I'm proud to be a german, although Ausschwitz did happen. You can even hear it. You just have to look. You don't have to study history to notice that there is something wrong.
The voice is a bit too loud, as though they have to be loud enough to not hear a voice inside, telling them they can't do this no more. You can't become innocent again - innoncent in the rather theological sense of the word. Even today german nationalism is far more dangerous than every other kind of nationalism. It's not too loud, now, but I can only alert the rest of the world.
Now translate it to the U.S.A. and Guantanamo Bay, I'm proud not to be an american for ten seconds of my live. That's my revenge!
I can't get these pictures out of my mind.

Hi,
Dirk

[economic justice]

22. Very well said, Dirk. <eom>

[Hubert Flottz]

30. I agree Dirk!

The Nazi movement showed the entire world what NOT to be, ever again! Today's people seem to have forgotten what price the world paid to learn that lesson! The people bury their heads in the sand and think it could never happen again, but it has happened many many times in the past, whenever, or wherever, greed trumps all else! Civilization alway has taken one step foreword and two steps backward, or so it seems! The only good thing Hitler did, was to set an example of what is totally unacceptable in a civilized and sane world!

That being said, the German people I've met in my 53 years on Earth, are mostly good and admirable people in my opinion! Any human in any nation in the world can be misled by leaders motivated by nothing but pure greed, if those people do not question open aggression and they do not seek and face the truth!

[Rabrrrrrr]

16. Hitler appreciated the arts

and supported the arts (though, of course, eventually it was turned into propaganda - but then, he was a master also of USING art to enthrone the state, which is bad, but he was good at it.)

[rogerashton]

26. I don't buy that one.

Hitler interfered with the arts. Point for the Shrub.

[Spiderm0n]

17. Hitler slaughtered millions of Jews

[jmowreader]

21. And Bush has slaughtered thousands of brown people

That's the standard Repug talking point when someone compares Shit for Brains to Hitler: "But Hitler slaughtered nine million Jews!"

At this point in the Hitler regime, Hitler had not yet started slaughtering Jews.

The first gassing at Auschwitz occurred in September 1941. There were murders by other methods before then, but none as early as 1936. Bush, OTOH, started his killing spree in Texas, sending men to the death chamber on 15 minutes' review of their files. In October 2001, he started his war in Afghanistan, killing thousands of Afghani civilians who had no connection to the Taliban.

What will this monster do if he gets the same 12 years Hitler had? He started killing people at an earlier point in his administration than Hitler did in his. (At this point I'm not adding in the 173 in Texas.) And he has better weapons, and more of them.

[economic justice]

23. well....

The slaughter of millions of Jews - simply for being Jews - is much different than irresponsible use of military force between nations. Not to defend Bush by any means, but we can't take the analogy too far. That's a hard sell saying that the mass murders by Hitler have a parallel with the current Bush regime.

[ConsAreLiars]

24. not yet

What will happen in the next 4 years. Nixon slaughtered millions. What will this coward do?

[rogerashton]

27. Exactly my point.

It is bad enough, and no defense of this administration to say "not as bad as the NAZIs."

[robpopulace]

25. If we're to believe the Russians...

Bush has more balls than Hitler.
Well... one more.

[rogerashton]

28. The Russians know something about Shrub's privates?

eom

[rogerashton]

29. There is a line in politics

that separates pragmatism from depravity.

The NAZI party, the CPUSSR, and the Fascisti and Phalange are on the wrong side of that line, in my view. It seems to me that the Republican party of 2004 is on the same side, depraved rather than pragmatic, although, to be sure and in all justice, NOT AS depraved as the NAZIs, nor even the Phalange -- maybe pretty close to the Fascisti, though.