Printable View
Drawing parallels to Hitler is not some new idea. People did it with Obama all the time. I was in England in 2000 and saw people on the street protesting the US. They had pictures of Clinton and Bush with the Nazi uniform and Hitler mustache.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I think " he's been good for the economy and seems racist" is probably one of the weaker connections I have seen. It probably fits Obama and Bush just as well minus the good for the economy part.
What was the Obama parallel?Quote:
Originally Posted by detltu
I didn’t make the connection to good economy, BTW. MAGA nationalism is right out of Hitler’s playbook. So is labeling ethnic and religious minorities as inferior or something to fear. So is protectionism.
The cultural aspects to Trump’s ascendancy to power is remarkably similar to Hitler’s. Hitler could not have convinced ordinary Germans to become enablers of his racism and authoritariansism if he didn’t deliver the improvement in wages and economic opportunity that he did.
As you know, he hated Jews and worked on getting guns away from them first.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I missed that part of his presidency.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
I don't remember the specifics because I recognize those things as BS, but I remember mentions of gun control, brownshirts, and maybe some class warfare issues being mentioned. I did a quick search and most articles talked about Obama comparing Trump to Hitler, but here was one website that popped out:Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
https://apholt.com/2017/01/12/everyb...er-these-days/
It seems the left would be much closer to the Hitler regime than the right. Many on the left have said they want to kill Trump or blow up the Whitehouse which would kill a lot of people. Maxine Waters wants to impeach Trump without just cause. She also wants democrats to attack people that are conservatives, no matter where they are or what they're doing at the time. There was a conspiracy started by the democrats under the Obama administration to try to keep Trump from getting elected and when their candidate lost, it has continued by the DOJ and FBI to try to get Trump impeached even though he has not broken any laws. There are groups on the left that cover their faces and are violent and destroy property. The thugs on the left are the ones wanting to destroy our present system of government. Trump is certainly not against Jews and has no hatred for any group or race of people that he would want to commit genocide. I keep trying to figure out what the democrats want and the only thing I can come up with is they want open borders so that thugs from all over the world can come here and destroy our country so the can take control and run it under a communist dictator. They do not want to hear anybody's ideas that are different from theirs. That works good for those that don't enjoy freedom, but, those of us that like our freedom are the ones that will continue to support our form of government and to support the second amendment. Tyranny will not prevail as long as we are armed. Thomas Jefferson said it best: The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms
is,as a last resort, to protect themselvesagainst tyranny in government."
By the way, the first thing Hitler did was take away everybody's guns.
Sucking up to Iran is one of many things the Jew hater Obama did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
He has ALWAYS been a supporter of taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. There are hundreds of anti-gun quotes from him and others in the party you favor.
The Libertarians are anti-gun now???Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
They are 1)anti Trump and 2) anti anything that Trump supportsQuote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
:laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
You don't even believe that.
I should say some who "claim" to be libertarians...Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
As I understand it, libertarians want individual freedom, which means less government intrusion in their (our) lives. That's the basic theme I've heard from true libertarians. That is no one on this forum....no regular poster anyway. I share some of the libertarian view on some issues. but certainly not all. I don't consider myself to be a true libertarian (little "l") and of course no Libertarian (capital "L"), a member of that political party.
Goosey is a devout socialist. As are several others here.
Trump has adopted. embraced, more libertarian principles than any POTUS since Reagan, and even the great Ronaldo Maximus was hardly a libertarian. But, like Reagan, Trump favors dismantling the bloated, entrenched bureaucracy of the federal government, starting with rolling back tons of harmful regulations. And the GOP, with all its faults and its role in The Swamp, is at least a little closer to the ideals of libertarianism than the current version of the democrap party. The 'craps don't even try to hide their socialism anymore.
On Hitler....
Mussolini had an interview published and worldwide newspapers picked it up and reprinted it. That was in the 1930's sometime, I don't recall the exact date. In it, Mussolini referred to himself as a facist, and also acknowledged Franco in Spain as being a facist. But of Hitler he said, Hitler is a national socialist.
In practice, Hitler's Nazis were facists. Facism is a political system whereby there is only one political party, and a single head of that party. That's it. That describes the Nazis of Hitler's Germany of the 1930's thru WWII. Hitler and his Nazis were facists by default i.e. that's the way things worked out, politically. But, and this might just be a technicality, it was NOT the intention of Hitler and his cohorts to be facists. They were "national socialists." That's what the acronym NAZI stands for. Hitler wanted Germany to be the dominant nation on Earth. That means politically, economically, and of course militarily.
Hitler used, tried, the open political system, a democratic process, to get elected. His early attempts failed, he lost in elections. He was a megalomaniac in the making. He harbored ill-will towards those who thwarted his efforts to become someone of influence. Mostly he blamed the Jews, bankers and others with money, who supported his political opponents. Point is, his later embracing of "facism" was a reactionary push-back against those who "dared" to challenge him politically. But, "facism" per se, was never his goal.
Hitler was a socialist. And like all such demented souls, he thought his version of socialism would be good. That the German people would benefit from his guiding, all-knowing benevolence. Socialism does NOT work. It never has, it never will. And, after the world began recovering from the economic crisis of 1929, the German people wanted/expected most, if not all, of the government's interventions to fade away. In the US we had the CCC, the Civilian Conservation Corps, which gave gainful employment to displaced workers. Once the economy began to recover, those CCC workers began to return to the private sector and the CCC "faded away." Hitler refused to relinquish the controls he had gained via his socialist policies. Again, it was the movers and shakers, bankers, the wealthy, many of them Jewish, who barked against the continuing socialism in Hitler's Germany. The world economy was recovering and such measures were no longer needed. We know how that history played out.
The "nationalist" part of Hitler's philosophy was he put Germany 1st, and no one was 2nd. Yes, he used others when it was convenient. Such as he allied with Franco and Mussolini, and then later Imperial Japan, because they helped his cause. But just as he turned on Stalin, he would have eventually turned on his Axis allies. Many socialist nations, even today, help each other such as the old USSR propping up Cuba, and Cuba in turn supporting socialist/communist movements in South America and Africa. They have to because socialism/communism are so inefficient they are doomed to failure, unless they get outside help. But Hitler wanted no part of helping any other nation. It was Germany first and only, as far as he was concerned.
Hitler favored a more liberal economic system than the rival system in Germany at the time, which was communism. Thus he moved the country in the direction of privatization and away from state ownership. He wasn’t anti-capitalism, but he was anti-communism. Socialism was the right wing of Germany at the time just like free market capitalism is the right wing in the US.
What difference does it make whether your hate and fear mongering is directed at Muslims/Mexicans or Jews? It is the exact same political strategy.
I can't speak to where your hate and fear mongering are directed, but it's a pretty big leap to compare illegal aliens and terrorists to all Mexicans and Muslims. There is fear mongering going on but it is coming from the left. Also I think Hitler used the relative wealth of the Jews (and their prominence in the banking industry) to garner support among the poor and lower class Germans. Kind of like what the left does with their class warfare. It's really not hard to draw parallels if you want to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp