why the heck is bush constantly compared to hitler?

Originally posted by bushfriend
i also disagree with BeefotronX. Clinton might not have been my favorite president but he was no hitler. In fast he didn't even attack the enemies of the US or claim there were and make significant action

www.cnn.com...

Sounds familiar, does it not?

Originally posted by vor78

Originally posted by bushfriend
i also disagree with BeefotronX. Clinton might not have been my favorite president but he was no hitler. In fast he didn't even attack the enemies of the US or claim there were and make significant action

www.cnn.com...

Sounds familiar, does it not?

I bet Saddam has a tough poker face.

Originally posted by dgtempe
Similarities between Hitler and Bush

Sorry this is so late into the discussion.
But, dgtempe, this is from another board and is not linked to any research. So, perhaps merely the authors ideas, not necessarily fact.

Originally posted by BeefotronX
People are so quick to forget that Hitler was a National Socialist.
Most critics of the Nazi party were dismissed as conservative reactionaries, and any wealthy 'conservatives' were robbed by the state. Phony news of Jews and Gypsies planning armed opposition to the Reich led to registration of private firearms, and the Reichstag bombing was used to excuse the confiscation of private guns.

And the Republicans are the Nazis.

[edit on 1/30/2005 by BeefotronX]

Many conservatives accuse Hitler of being a leftist, on the grounds that his party was named "National Socialist." But socialism requires worker ownership and control of the means of production. In Nazi Germany, private capitalist individuals owned the means of production, and they in turn were frequently controlled by the Nazi party and state. True socialism does not advocate such economic dictatorship -- it can only be democratic. Hitler's other political beliefs place him almost always on the far right. He advocated racism over racial tolerance, eugenics over freedom of reproduction, merit over equality, competition over cooperation, power politics and militarism over pacifism, dictatorship over democracy, capitalism over Marxism, realism over idealism, nationalism over internationalism, exclusiveness over inclusiveness, common sense over theory or science, pragmatism over principle, and even held friendly relations with the Church, even though he was an atheist.

www.huppi.com...

---------------Food For Thought-----------------

I'm not accusing Hitler of being a leftist, I'm accusing him of being perhaps not so far to the right as people like to think these days. Socially he was totally authoritarian but economically he was not that liberal.

His domestic policy is far more similar to the Democratic Party of the US than the Republicans, is what I am saying.

If they're not racist, why do they push for affirmative action and ethnic quotas? Are minorities not good enough to make it on their own, so we have to lower our standards?

If they're so peaceful, why are they trying to build a police state with all these gun control laws with double standards that exempt police officers?
Who was in charge of the Waco incident?

If they're so much for civil liberties why don't they trust me with my own money?

If they're so much for freedom of reproduction why is the middle class forced to have two working parent households in order to succeed? The parents are so tired they barely have time to have kids, and these are the families with decent work ethics that would lead to a more prosperous future.

Originally posted by BeefotronX
I'm not accusing Hitler of being a leftist, I'm accusing him of being perhaps not so far to the right as people like to think these days. Socially he was totally authoritarian but economically he was not that liberal.

Yes, Hitler was NOT a leftist, OR a liberal.

His domestic policy is far more similar to the Democratic Party of the US than the Republicans, is what I am saying.

If they're not racist, why do they push for affirmative action and ethnic quotas? Are minorities not good enough to make it on their own, so we have to lower our standards?

If they're so peaceful, why are they trying to build a police state with all these gun control laws with double standards that exempt police officers?
Who was in charge of the Waco incident?

If they're so much for civil liberties why don't they trust me with my own money?

But above, you said Hitler was not a Leftist? How can the Democratic party be like Hitlers Nazi party if Hitler was not a Leftist? You have contridicted yourself.

If they're so much for freedom of reproduction why is the middle class forced to have two working parent households in order to succeed? The parents are so tired they barely have time to have kids, and these are the families with decent work ethics that would lead to a more prosperous future.

The middle class is forced to work two jobs now because our dollar has been sliping in worth for 30 years, and conservatives dont care if the poor have to pay more taxes. Every time a republican conservative gets in office, They attempt to cut taxes for the Rich and that leaves the middle and lower class's to pay the Rich's share of the taxes as well as thier own. This leaves the 2 lower class's with less and less money. If you want the 2 lower class's to work less, then have Bush take more taxes from the Rich, and less form the poor.

BTW, you have the wrong president on Hitlers left side there. It should be the one that came AFTER Bill.

Hitler was a socialist.

Nazi = National Socialist German Workers Party

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Hitler was a socialist.

Nazi = National Socialist German Workers Party

I hope you are not equating socialism with the Democratic party. Lets just look at the definition of socialism. Shall we?

Main Entry: so·cial·ism
Pronunciation: 'sO-sh&-"li-z&m
Function: noun
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

www.m-w.com...


Hmmmm.................Sure doesnt sound like the Democratic party to me. It actually sounds more like the NeoCon way of thinking. Especially definitions 1 and 2a.

[edit on 1/31/05 by Kidfinger]

Originally posted by Kidfinger
Isnt this the very same excuse that Hitler said of the Russians?

I think he and his cronies also applied it to the anglo capitalists. Difference is, the US is being attacked. If 911 didn't occur, or it were something like a modern reichstag 'false flag' operation, then the comparison would be apt where its critically important.

Rant
You don't see those similarities?

I see some similarities, but not on the scale that the nazis used it. Everyone uses, to one degree or another, irrational fears to advance their interests. take gun control. The right will scream 'des is gonna take our gunses away ands enslave us', the left says 'omygawd dos guns is so dangerous we've gotta get rids of them all or we is gonna die'. Neither party engages in rational gun control discussions, certainly not as a matter of core ideology.

The history of Republicans using homophobia for political gain

The republicans wouldn't have won if there weren't also homophobic democrats in those 'red states' crossing over party lines. Bigotry is hardly limited to the right.

Then I guess every leader that ever fought a war is like Hitler

Indeed, there needs to be a strong correlation that doesn't exist amoung numerous others in order for the analogy to be meaningful.

Instead, they use his name to ignorantly slander people they also don't know.

I really think that that has more to do with it than anything else. Lots of people are enraged at bush, so they call him a nazi. Doesn't need to be taken much further than that. The idea that he's a dolt, but got elected because of charisma is said to support the comparison, or that conservatives are by definition nationalists, or that because he's a 'leader' that he's a 'fuhrer' are all cited to support the idea, but, really, hitler murdered oer 6 million of his own people. He rounded htem up in walled off sections of the cities, then moved them to forced labour camps, and then systematically exterminated them. Thats what hitler was really about, thats what was evil, and thats not something that bush has done or is even leaning torwads doing. Hitler made it very clear what his plans were, and people tacitly accepted them. Bush has gone thru lenghts to state 'we are not in a clash of civilizations, islam if a religion of peace, islam is not the enemy, arabs are not evil' and all the rest. He's specifically identified a problem, global terrorist organizations and the radical rogue states that support them, and decided that those structures need to be destroyed for american security. This makes bush no more like hitler than FDR was like hitler for reasoning that the fascist expansionist japanese agressor was a threat that had to be attacked.

hitler was by no means a genuis. He was an idiot

Indeed, his policies of having a centrally planned economy based apparently almost completely on public ownership of property and war mobilization are widely thought to mean that nazi germany, even if not defeated militarily, would collapse, in a way similar to the soviety union. He had a certain 'genius' about him one could say, and certainly at the time the german public must've thought he was, but I suspect his skills lay entirely in politicing and demagougery.

Hitler was a socialist.

The national socialists weren't merely nationalists or socialists. If that were true then they'd get along nicely with the communist aggitators in germany. The nazis found their support everywhere in germany except amoung the communists.

I hope you are not equating socialism with the Democratic party

Indeed, national socialist ideology has more in common with the socialists then the democratic party has with socialism, or even outright actual liberalism. The nazis were undoubtedly a right leaning party, but they don't quite 'fit' into the usual poltical spectrum. THey're more like fascists, who can be more easily said to be in the far right, but they're not even quite an exact match to the actual fascists either.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Kidfinger
Isnt this the very same excuse that Hitler said of the Russians?

I think he and his cronies also applied it to the anglo capitalists. Difference is, the US is being attacked. If 911 didn't occur, or it were something like a modern reichstag 'false flag' operation, then the comparison would be apt where its critically important.

Umm. WE were not attacked by Iraq

Originally posted by Kidfinger
WE were not attacked by Iraq

Yes, I understand that Iraqi government agents did not attack the US, and that terrorists from iraq did not attack the US. This, however, is irrelevant. Iraq allowed terrorists to train and operate in itse borders. One camp at least had apassenger plane fuselage that they trained on. The US was attacked by terrorists, aided, at least tacitly, by states. Thus, terrorists, and nation-states that allow them to operate in their borders, are the enemy that attacked the US and the enemy that the US will attack.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Kidfinger
WE were not attacked by Iraq

Yes, I understand that Iraqi government agents did not attack the US, and that terrorists from iraq did not attack the US. This, however, is irrelevant. Iraq allowed terrorists to train and operate in itse borders. One camp at least had apassenger plane fuselage that they trained on. The US was attacked by terrorists, aided, at least tacitly, by states. Thus, terrorists, and nation-states that allow them to operate in their borders, are the enemy that attacked the US and the enemy that the US will attack.

This is not irrelevant. We were told Iraq was a threat to the US because it had Nukes. Not because they were training terrorist, which I might add, has never been confirmed. The trianing areas are now thought to be part of Saddams plan to train the insurgents.

from Kidfinger

Yes, Hitler was NOT a leftist, OR a liberal.

In the USA, it's kind of backwards on economics. Economic conservatives (for government control) are on the left, and economic liberals (against government control) are on the right. So, yes, I did not contradict myself. Hitler was farther to the left compared to the fascists of Italy.

The middle class is forced to work two jobs now because our dollar has been sliping in worth for 30 years, and conservatives dont care if the poor have to pay more taxes. Every time a republican conservative gets in office, They attempt to cut taxes for the Rich and that leaves the middle and lower class's to pay the Rich's share of the taxes as well as thier own. This leaves the 2 lower class's with less and less money. If you want the 2 lower class's to work less, then have Bush take more taxes from the Rich, and less form the poor.

That's funny, I could have sworn my middle-class parents got a piece of the last tax cut. If you want the low and middle classes to work at all, then don't take so much money from the rich. They're the ones with the spare money needed to create new businesses, which create jobs.

BTW, you have the wrong president on Hitlers left side there. It should be the one that came AFTER Bill.

Dubya didn't do anything like Waco or say things like this:
"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans..."
"The purpose of government is to rein in the rights of the people."
"When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly ... [Now] there's a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there's too much freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it."

Well, Bill Clinton did say things like this, and one cannot honestly say that this is not the slightest bit Hitleresque.

The 14 characteristics of fascism are:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symb ols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses, and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

Sound like Bush??
1 = Inaguration
2 = Patriot act 1/2
3 = Muslims / terrorists
4 = Given
5 = Boy's clubs like bohemian grove
6 = Given, Fox ect.
7 = Homeland security/ Patriot acts
8 = Given, (re-elected on Moral issues)
9 = Dick Cheney and friends... Given
10 = Outsourceing, loss of middle class.
11 = Ok this one isn't being done (yet)
12 = Patriot act, T.I.P.S., ect.
13 = Given
14 = Given

If it sounds like a duck, looks like a duck, it must be democracy.

Originally posted by Kidfinger
Not because they were training terrorist, which I might add, has never been confirmed. The trianing areas are now thought to be part of Saddams plan to train the insurgents.

I would be interested to see more documentation on this. I personally think that iraq was a threat either way, but there not being any terrorists in iraq would be significant.

Originally posted by BeefotronX
I'm not accusing Hitler of being a leftist, I'm accusing him of being perhaps not so far to the right as people like to think these days. Socially he was totally authoritarian but economically he was not that liberal.

I just brought that article up because I thought you might enjoy reading it. I really didn't care what you were saying about him, I just thought it was interesting read.

Originally posted by BeefotronX

In the USA, it's kind of backwards on economics. Economic conservatives (for government control) are on the left, and economic liberals (against government control) are on the right. So, yes, I did not contradict myself. Hitler was farther to the left compared to the fascists of Italy.

Huh? Libs on right Cons on left? Have yo gone mad? Hitler was a socialist. he wasnt a Leftist, or a righty. I already gave the definition for socilism above. You might want to read it.

That's funny, I could have sworn my middle-class parents got a piece of the last tax cut. If you want the low and middle classes to work at all, then don't take so much money from the rich. They're the ones with the spare money needed to create new businesses, which create jobs.

Thats funny. I see no tax relief any where. I am certianly NOT upper, or even middle class. More like upper low class The rich can make enough to live well without hogging every last cent. Hoarding of profits by the corporations is the number one reason why people dont make a good wage. It all amounts to the greed of the rich.

Dubya didn't do anything like Waco or say things like this:.................

No, Bush only said that America would be much better and easier to run if it was a dictatorship. Then he stated he wished to be the dictator. That is on record.

[edit on 1/31/05 by Kidfinger]

Originally posted by Nygdan

I would be interested to see more documentation on this. I personally think that iraq was a threat either way, but there not being any terrorists in iraq would be significant.

That is from you Nygdan. Remember your thread on it this morning? I asked you for a linky?

Originally posted by dgtempe
Simple. Do a search on "Hitler" and you will see the similarities. Except for the fact Hitler had a very high IQ....

Wow, I thought the slogan for this site was "beny ignorance". Since when has Bush killed millions of jews?

Originally posted by GnuLoCo

Originally posted by dgtempe
Simple. Do a search on "Hitler" and you will see the similarities. Except for the fact Hitler had a very high IQ....

Wow, I thought the slogan for this site was "beny ignorance". Since when has Bush killed millions of jews?

He wouldn't hurt Jewish people. He only kills opponents of the Jewish state.