3 ms·

You specifically compared it with Nazi brownshirts (which were a paramilitary wing of the Nazi Party). Your reasoning is that "isn't it strange there were no ar

You specifically compared it with Nazi brownshirts (which were a paramilitary wing of the Nazi Party). Your reasoning is that "isn't it strange there were no arrests"? Sorry, that's not the level of discussion I'm used to on HN.

leereeves 10y ago
It's as relevant as the comparison the author of this article made between a man who committed genocide and a man who restricted entry into the country from 7 nations, between someone who started his political career with an attempted coup and someone who started his political career by winning an election. But thank you for illustrating another drawback of Nazi-comparisons: they're almost always inaccurate.
- rjtavares 10y ago
  If the article was about Trump restricting entry into the country from 7 nations, I would agree 100% with you. It isn't about that, though: it's about very specific events and the overall relationship between media and government. It's a fairly interesting article that will, unfortunately, be dismissed by a lot of people because Nazi-comparisons are almost always ridiculous.
  - leereeves 10y ago
    It's about very specific events: > the November 1923 Munich “Beer Hall Putsch,” > the Munich Post found and published a Nazi party document planning a “final solution” > the Reichstag Fire and Hitler seizing the opportunity to institute martial law and crush electoral democracy And so on. It's an interesting history lesson for those who don't already know these facts, but the author fails to make any substantial connection between these events and Trump.
    - rjtavares 10y ago
      I agree. That's part of what makes the article interesting for me, though (you can draw your own conclusions), and what warranted discussion on HN. Unfortunately, the current climate makes political discussion almost impossible.
      - leereeves 10y ago
        What do you mean? The history is interesting, or the author's unfounded speculation about potential similarities is interesting?

leereeves 10y ago

It's as relevant as the comparison the author of this article made between a man who committed genocide and a man who restricted entry into the country from 7 nations, between someone who started his political career with an attempted coup and someone who started his political career by winning an election. But thank you for illustrating another drawback of Nazi-comparisons: they're almost always inaccurate.

rjtavares 10y ago
If the article was about Trump restricting entry into the country from 7 nations, I would agree 100% with you. It isn't about that, though: it's about very specific events and the overall relationship between media and government. It's a fairly interesting article that will, unfortunately, be dismissed by a lot of people because Nazi-comparisons are almost always ridiculous.
- leereeves 10y ago
  It's about very specific events: > the November 1923 Munich “Beer Hall Putsch,” > the Munich Post found and published a Nazi party document planning a “final solution” > the Reichstag Fire and Hitler seizing the opportunity to institute martial law and crush electoral democracy And so on. It's an interesting history lesson for those who don't already know these facts, but the author fails to make any substantial connection between these events and Trump.
  - rjtavares 10y ago
    I agree. That's part of what makes the article interesting for me, though (you can draw your own conclusions), and what warranted discussion on HN. Unfortunately, the current climate makes political discussion almost impossible.
    - leereeves 10y ago
      What do you mean? The history is interesting, or the author's unfounded speculation about potential similarities is interesting?