10 ms·

At the same time, not all Nazi analogies are equally wrong- it's fallacious to claim that moustaches are evil because Nazis had them; it isn't exactly fallaciou

At the same time, not all Nazi analogies are equally wrong- it's fallacious to claim that moustaches are evil because Nazis had them; it isn't exactly fallacious to claim that persecuting and demonizing a minority combined with enthusiastic nationalism through slowly increasing propaganda campaigns under the leadership of a charismatic leader should seem at least slightly worrying because we have Nazis as a historical example. The Nazis and the 30s and 40s can present real historical lessons- another is that in the 30s, the German Communist party declared "After him, us!" in response to Hitler's rise and their refusal to cooperate with the socialists, with the reasoning being that his disastrous short term would hasten about a communist revolution. Unfortunately, we often see the exact same argument used by both socialists and some of the more extreme Bernie Sanders fans today with regards to Trump. There are historical lessons and analogies in the past which can be genuinely useful to understanding the present. At this rate, it feels like if 1930s Germany had Godwin's law, it would have been used to quash any dissent about the actual rise of Nazism.

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
You're right. Too right. The Nazis are a rightfully perfect metaphor for these times and many others. But there are always exceptions. Nobody is wheelbarrowing carts of Deutschmarks to buy a loaf of bread. Race (and the idea of inherent superiority/inferiority) is viewed much differently, in fact until the 70s it was generally accepted that Neanderthals became whites, Homo Erectus became Asians, and so on. And if the post-Cold War era has taught us anything, there is no "End of History" where humanity converges along the One True Path. No analogy is perfect. American slaves had little relation to Roman slaves aside from being owned people. Too much has changed since the 30s to be an exact repeat.
- stcredzero 10y ago
  Nobody is wheelbarrowing carts of Deutschmarks to buy a loaf of bread. Race (and the idea of inherent superiority/inferiority) is viewed much differently But that's almost never the specific argument of people who fall into the mistake of "Nazi" as analogy. In fact, many people use these overly-specific points as a fallacious straw-man rebuttal. Often, the specific, functional points are complaints of: - stereotyping of a group - quick and prejudicial characterization of a person as member of the group - certain moral/ethical positions irrationally ascribed to the group - said group being demonized with lurid, emotional language - actions by a number of persons against a perceived member of the group - use of exclusionary, inflammatory, and violent tactics against the same MLK and Gandhi carefully and very specifically structured their movements to account for people falling into such patterns of behavior and besmirching their causes. We are all subject to such mental patterns, and they require specific mental effort to combat. In particular, they were aware that people engaged in activism are especially vulnerable to these phenomena. Society and rational thought would be greatly helped by a language and cognitive tools to calmly think and speak about such phenomena.
  - Natsu 10y ago
    > MLK and Gandhi carefully and very specifically structured their movements to account for people falling into such patterns of behavior and besmirching their causes. I don't know enough of that history to know specifically what you're referring to, could you elaborate further on this point?
    - tamana 10y ago
      Short version: MLK and Gandhi soufht to make peace and unite with their opponents, not attack and destroy them.
      - stcredzero 10y ago
        It's quite unfortunate that many forget the Nazis in their early days were effectively activists organizing themselves into a political party. Maybe someone needs to write an article outlining historical groups who are good functional analogues and who aren't the Nazis?
        neffy 10y ago
        Kind of sort of, but at the same time they were also former soldiers, who thought they'd been forced to surrender when they still had a chance of winning, who organized themselves into a political party.
        stcredzero 10y ago
        Kind of sort of Any group that sets itself apart and has a burning collective desire to change things is waking the same psychological mechanisms. So is cheering for sports teams. We're a bit more savvy as a culture about harnessing and controlling that in the case of sports. Yet, look at some of the stupid stuff ports fans still can get up to. Just look at history, and it's quite apparent that politics awakens the exact same tendencies, but without the same cultural/societal checks. Hell, just listen to what people say and observe how they start to prejudge and target each other based on surface-level signals.
- RogtamBar 10y ago
  > is viewed much differently, in fact until the 70s it was generally accepted that Neanderthals became whites, Homo Erectus became Asians, and so on Nope. Multi-regional descent was a theory first proposed in 1984, and of a relatively brief lifespan. Before that monogenism was the prevailing theory. Multi-regional ascent was never the pre-eminent theory. Now we know we're all mostly descended from h.sapiens, with some minute neanderthal and denisovan admixture. However, the split between different branches of mankind dates as back as 300 kya. (To put that in perspective, brown and polar bears diverged approximately 500 kya)
th0waway 10y ago
we should be worried because we are humans - every human endeavor will, at some point, turn bad. It's human nature. Nationalism is good, to point. So are many other things. Blind nationalism with no empathy for anyone other than your own countrymen can be (but not necessarily is) bad. If you think there is any form of human institution than cannot be subverted to evil acts, you are uninformed.
zeemonkee3 10y ago
> the German Communist party declared "After him, us!" They were kind of prophetic about that.
marcoperaza 10y ago
Good job sneaking in a comparison of Trump to the Nazis without a shred of supporting argument. I'm no Trump fan but the comparisons to Hitler are totally unwarranted. Take his most controversial proposal. Deporting 11 million people--who don't have the right to be here in the first place--is bad policy and callous, but it's fair. There's plenty of examples of populist nationalist leaders hurting their countries, like Berlusconi in Italy. No need to raise the false specter of concentration camps, mass murder, and totalitarianism.
- tamana 10y ago
  He also proposed banning all Muslims from entering the US, and tagging and tracking all curent Muslim residents.
  - refurb 10y ago
    These political arguments never seem to go well, but anyways... I'd love to see a source/quote on that. From the news that I saw (actually digging into the details), Trump said something like "Until we have the proper means to screen Muslims for security risk, I propose we put a (temporary) halt to letting them immigrate." This was in direct response to the attacks in France. Now, for a lot of people, that's still an offensive proposal, but it's not the same as "lets ban all Muslims (forever)". What I think is interesting about Trump's appeal is that he doesn't filter what he says. A seasoned politician would say "I'm committed to securing this country against terrorist threats", then they put a ton of Muslims on no-fly lists and you kind of get the same thing. But it doesn't look as bad. I get the sense a lot of people, when they listen to Trump, think "At least he doesn't offer watered down drivel like most politicians".
    - foldr 10y ago
      First of all, the whole idea of some kind of special screening process for Muslims is already discriminatory, and quite possibly unconstitutional in itself. Second, it's patently obvious that no brilliant new techniques for screening out terrorists are magically going to materialize all of a sudden, so that the "temporary" ban would become effectively permanent.
btilly 10y ago
Unfortunately, we often see the exact same argument used by both socialists and some of the more extreme Bernie Sanders fans today with regards to Trump. Why do you consider this unfortunate? First of all it is not just those groups. Are you aware that the same comparison has been made by Holocaust survivors like Anne Frank's step-sister, national leaders such as the president of Mexico, and prominent conservatives like Glenn Beck? It isn't just a few socialists who are concerned. That said, it would be unfortunate if the assertion had no basis in reality. But does it? According to political scientists, the one trait that is most likely to predict you supporting Trump is how much you tend towards authoritarianism. This is why extremely authoritarian groups such as the KKK and neo-nazis have come out in support of Trump. Extreme authoritarianism certainly matches Hitler. Next there is the question of truthfulness. According to Politifact, over 2/3 of Trump's public statements are lies. In fact he's more likely to issue "pants on fire" lies than to say something that is true or mostly true. (See http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/ http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/ for a source.) Furthermore when he lies and is challenged on it, he shows no regard for the truth. Instead he repeats his lies over and over again, very forcefully. This "Big Lie" technique was a classic trademark of Hitler's. What else is characteristic of Hitler? Extreme nationalism! Do I need to enumerate instances? How about war mongering? Oh boy. So far Trump has promised to bomb North Korea, Syria and Isis. He has also suggested bombing Iraq and starting a trade war with Mexico to get them to pay for the wall he wants. What about mass deportion? Hitler promised to deport the Jews, then killed them when nobody else wanted to take them. Trump promises to deport about 11 million people from the USA. How do you think that will work in practice? You apparently think that Trump/Hitler comparisons are unfortunate. I consider it a quick way of identifying all of the characteristics that Trump has which make me afraid of the possibility of his being President.
- AReallyGoodName 10y ago
  The person you replied to was talking about the unfortunate situation of some communists and socialists supporting Hitler over the respective competing party. It's analogous to Bernie supporters saying they'd vote Trump over Hillary or vice versa.
lazaroclapp 10y ago
Do you happen to have a source for the "After him, us!" quote? I can't seem to find it, at least not literally. Googling for that phrase and 'german' gives me this thread.
- NoGravitas 10y ago
  Here's some of what I've been able to find. "Social fascism"[0] "After Hitler, Our Turn!"[1] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_fascism [1]: https://www.marxists.org/archive/james-clr/works/world/ch12.htm https://www.marxists.org/archive/james-clr/works/world/ch12....

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago

You're right. Too right. The Nazis are a rightfully perfect metaphor for these times and many others. But there are always exceptions. Nobody is wheelbarrowing carts of Deutschmarks to buy a loaf of bread. Race (and the idea of inherent superiority/inferiority) is viewed much differently, in fact until the 70s it was generally accepted that Neanderthals became whites, Homo Erectus became Asians, and so on. And if the post-Cold War era has taught us anything, there is no "End of History" where humanity converges along the One True Path. No analogy is perfect. American slaves had little relation to Roman slaves aside from being owned people. Too much has changed since the 30s to be an exact repeat.

stcredzero 10y ago
Nobody is wheelbarrowing carts of Deutschmarks to buy a loaf of bread. Race (and the idea of inherent superiority/inferiority) is viewed much differently But that's almost never the specific argument of people who fall into the mistake of "Nazi" as analogy. In fact, many people use these overly-specific points as a fallacious straw-man rebuttal. Often, the specific, functional points are complaints of: - stereotyping of a group - quick and prejudicial characterization of a person as member of the group - certain moral/ethical positions irrationally ascribed to the group - said group being demonized with lurid, emotional language - actions by a number of persons against a perceived member of the group - use of exclusionary, inflammatory, and violent tactics against the same MLK and Gandhi carefully and very specifically structured their movements to account for people falling into such patterns of behavior and besmirching their causes. We are all subject to such mental patterns, and they require specific mental effort to combat. In particular, they were aware that people engaged in activism are especially vulnerable to these phenomena. Society and rational thought would be greatly helped by a language and cognitive tools to calmly think and speak about such phenomena.
- Natsu 10y ago
  > MLK and Gandhi carefully and very specifically structured their movements to account for people falling into such patterns of behavior and besmirching their causes. I don't know enough of that history to know specifically what you're referring to, could you elaborate further on this point?
  - tamana 10y ago
    Short version: MLK and Gandhi soufht to make peace and unite with their opponents, not attack and destroy them.
    - stcredzero 10y ago
      It's quite unfortunate that many forget the Nazis in their early days were effectively activists organizing themselves into a political party. Maybe someone needs to write an article outlining historical groups who are good functional analogues and who aren't the Nazis?
      - neffy 10y ago
        Kind of sort of, but at the same time they were also former soldiers, who thought they'd been forced to surrender when they still had a chance of winning, who organized themselves into a political party.
        stcredzero 10y ago
        Kind of sort of Any group that sets itself apart and has a burning collective desire to change things is waking the same psychological mechanisms. So is cheering for sports teams. We're a bit more savvy as a culture about harnessing and controlling that in the case of sports. Yet, look at some of the stupid stuff ports fans still can get up to. Just look at history, and it's quite apparent that politics awakens the exact same tendencies, but without the same cultural/societal checks. Hell, just listen to what people say and observe how they start to prejudge and target each other based on surface-level signals.
RogtamBar 10y ago
> is viewed much differently, in fact until the 70s it was generally accepted that Neanderthals became whites, Homo Erectus became Asians, and so on Nope. Multi-regional descent was a theory first proposed in 1984, and of a relatively brief lifespan. Before that monogenism was the prevailing theory. Multi-regional ascent was never the pre-eminent theory. Now we know we're all mostly descended from h.sapiens, with some minute neanderthal and denisovan admixture. However, the split between different branches of mankind dates as back as 300 kya. (To put that in perspective, brown and polar bears diverged approximately 500 kya)

th0waway 10y ago

we should be worried because we are humans - every human endeavor will, at some point, turn bad. It's human nature. Nationalism is good, to point. So are many other things. Blind nationalism with no empathy for anyone other than your own countrymen can be (but not necessarily is) bad. If you think there is any form of human institution than cannot be subverted to evil acts, you are uninformed.

zeemonkee3 10y ago

> the German Communist party declared "After him, us!" They were kind of prophetic about that.

marcoperaza 10y ago

Good job sneaking in a comparison of Trump to the Nazis without a shred of supporting argument. I'm no Trump fan but the comparisons to Hitler are totally unwarranted. Take his most controversial proposal. Deporting 11 million people--who don't have the right to be here in the first place--is bad policy and callous, but it's fair. There's plenty of examples of populist nationalist leaders hurting their countries, like Berlusconi in Italy. No need to raise the false specter of concentration camps, mass murder, and totalitarianism.

tamana 10y ago
He also proposed banning all Muslims from entering the US, and tagging and tracking all curent Muslim residents.
- refurb 10y ago
  These political arguments never seem to go well, but anyways... I'd love to see a source/quote on that. From the news that I saw (actually digging into the details), Trump said something like "Until we have the proper means to screen Muslims for security risk, I propose we put a (temporary) halt to letting them immigrate." This was in direct response to the attacks in France. Now, for a lot of people, that's still an offensive proposal, but it's not the same as "lets ban all Muslims (forever)". What I think is interesting about Trump's appeal is that he doesn't filter what he says. A seasoned politician would say "I'm committed to securing this country against terrorist threats", then they put a ton of Muslims on no-fly lists and you kind of get the same thing. But it doesn't look as bad. I get the sense a lot of people, when they listen to Trump, think "At least he doesn't offer watered down drivel like most politicians".
  - foldr 10y ago
    First of all, the whole idea of some kind of special screening process for Muslims is already discriminatory, and quite possibly unconstitutional in itself. Second, it's patently obvious that no brilliant new techniques for screening out terrorists are magically going to materialize all of a sudden, so that the "temporary" ban would become effectively permanent.

btilly 10y ago

Unfortunately, we often see the exact same argument used by both socialists and some of the more extreme Bernie Sanders fans today with regards to Trump. Why do you consider this unfortunate? First of all it is not just those groups. Are you aware that the same comparison has been made by Holocaust survivors like Anne Frank's step-sister, national leaders such as the president of Mexico, and prominent conservatives like Glenn Beck? It isn't just a few socialists who are concerned. That said, it would be unfortunate if the assertion had no basis in reality. But does it? According to political scientists, the one trait that is most likely to predict you supporting Trump is how much you tend towards authoritarianism. This is why extremely authoritarian groups such as the KKK and neo-nazis have come out in support of Trump. Extreme authoritarianism certainly matches Hitler. Next there is the question of truthfulness. According to Politifact, over 2/3 of Trump's public statements are lies. In fact he's more likely to issue "pants on fire" lies than to say something that is true or mostly true. (See http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/ http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/ for a source.) Furthermore when he lies and is challenged on it, he shows no regard for the truth. Instead he repeats his lies over and over again, very forcefully. This "Big Lie" technique was a classic trademark of Hitler's. What else is characteristic of Hitler? Extreme nationalism! Do I need to enumerate instances? How about war mongering? Oh boy. So far Trump has promised to bomb North Korea, Syria and Isis. He has also suggested bombing Iraq and starting a trade war with Mexico to get them to pay for the wall he wants. What about mass deportion? Hitler promised to deport the Jews, then killed them when nobody else wanted to take them. Trump promises to deport about 11 million people from the USA. How do you think that will work in practice? You apparently think that Trump/Hitler comparisons are unfortunate. I consider it a quick way of identifying all of the characteristics that Trump has which make me afraid of the possibility of his being President.

AReallyGoodName 10y ago
The person you replied to was talking about the unfortunate situation of some communists and socialists supporting Hitler over the respective competing party. It's analogous to Bernie supporters saying they'd vote Trump over Hillary or vice versa.

lazaroclapp 10y ago

Do you happen to have a source for the "After him, us!" quote? I can't seem to find it, at least not literally. Googling for that phrase and 'german' gives me this thread.

NoGravitas 10y ago
Here's some of what I've been able to find. "Social fascism"[0] "After Hitler, Our Turn!"[1] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_fascism [1]: https://www.marxists.org/archive/james-clr/works/world/ch12.htm https://www.marxists.org/archive/james-clr/works/world/ch12....