16 ms·
The weird part is they arent doing it for political reasons, this is to protect the image of their corporation. But we havent been told that. There is so much o
by corporateslave3 9y ago
The weird part is they arent doing it for political reasons, this is to protect the image of their corporation. But we havent been told that. There is so much obfuscation of the truth in politics, I am constantly amazed and dismayed at the same time.
- gremlinsinc 9y agoPretty sure that's part of it, but I'm also sure most of these people/ceo's are definitely not closet Nazi's and they definitely don't want another Hitler to rise in America as that would definitely be bad for business...
- corporateslave3 9y agoIn what ways has Trump done anything similar to Hitler?
- gregpardo 9y agoOh you didn't get the memo... He's LITERALLY the same. The media told me so.
- mulletbum 9y agoAttacked the media and placed almost all the blame for American hardships on immigrants?
- eggpy 9y ago'so-called judges' is a terrifying precedent...
- davidreiss 9y agoSo-called judges once ruled that blacks were property rather than human. We have a long history of "so-called judged". Go read about what lincoln felt about judges.
- gertef 9y agoDisagreeing but obeying with a decision is quite different from denying judicial authority. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/20/lincoln-versus-judicial-supremacy/?utm_term=.776f751813bc https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201... "Supreme Court opinions decide only the individual case before the court, Lincoln argued. They do not bind members of Congress or the President in their political actions. It was thus proper for the other branches of government — and for the people — to resist wrong and harmful decisions of the Supreme Court and to seek to have them reversed and overturned. That was simply part of the Constitution’s system of checks and balances. …"
- coffeevradar 9y agoIf you're suggesting that Hitler also placed all of the blame on immigrants, you must mistakenly believe that the Jewish people were immigrants to Germany and Nazi-occupied Europe. This was not the case. The Jewish victims of the Holocaust were targeted for being Jewish, not because they hadn't been born within certain borders.
- dragonwriter 9y agoTrump's attacks on both Muslims and Hispanics have not been restricted to immigrants (though in the latter case the attack on non-immigrants has been based on their presumed alignment with immigrants of the same ethnicity.) Like Hitler's attacks on, among others, Jews they are treated as alien others even when not immigrants.
- vaishaksuresh 9y agoTrump isn't going after immigrants, he is going after brown people and more generally non-white people. It doesn't matter to him if they were born here or came here.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Consultant32452 9y agoHitler placed almost all of the blame for German hardships on the 1% (racial stereotype: Jews). This may also be a good time to point out that Nazi stands for National Socialist.
- orclev 9y agoNazis were not socialists, that was optics. The Nazi party actually got into power in a reaction to an attack that was blamed on communists (burning of the reichstag). Whether it was actually communists, or a false flag by the Nazis to seize power is an ongoing debate without enough evidence either way. What is a matter of record is that the very first thing the Nazis did after seizing power was to round up all the communists, and communist sympathizers (or political rivals they could accuse of being communist sympathizers) and arrest them.
- Consultant32452 9y agoCommunists were globalist socialists and the Nazis were nationalist socialists. Hitler went after the communists because he felt they wanted to subjugate Germans under an international Jewish global finance regime (1%ers again).
- gertef 9y agoAnd the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a "Democratic" "Republic". Don't believe everything everyone says about themselves.
- passwordreset 9y agoHmmm. I wonder what that means for the "United" States.
- orclev 9y agoWell, vaguely revisionist history aside, that was at least part of what the civil war was over. The southern states were upset that the constitution in the case of slavery could override their state powers and ban slavery. The confederate states wanted to rewrite the constitution to strip the federal government of essentially all powers except the power to wage war and the regulation of interstate commerce, essentially blocking it from having any impact on the activities wholly within a state. The Union states of course wanted to keep the constitution as it was (or even strengthen it), that is giving the federal government veto power over states and the ability to enforce human rights guaranteed by the constitution. Thus in one sense the civil war was a fight over a weak vs. strong federal government. When making that argument though it's important not to downplay the importance of slavery as a motivating factor for the confederate states. Many revisionist white supremacists try to make that argument as a way of whitewashing the confederate states actions and trying to re-frame the confederate states motivations as being non-racist, when they were anything but.
- gremlinsinc 9y agoBy putting people in 'groups' and having those who support him also enforce this idea that we're all in separate groups and need to look out for own little group--this is how fascism grows, this is how hitler took over Germany, this is how a new Hitler figure could take over America too... It's not outside the realm of possibility sure Germans in 1900 couldn't forsee the horrors of 1940. Here's a good video from 1947 explaining the whole thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23X14HS4gLk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23X14HS4gLk
- krautsourced 9y agoWait - aren't you exactly describing identity politics?
- Analemma_ 9y agoPrepare to have your mind blown: it's possible to both dislike contemporary leftist idpol and still think Nazis are indisputably much worse.
- krautsourced 9y agoI know. I just found it amusing to read it like that. And even though using the term "both sides" has now become tricky, I think indeed left and right have done their fair share to make it come to the situation we are in, with constant hyperbole and hysteria and grandstanding in the media, rather than discussing issues (which probably still happens, one would hope, but it does not make it to the front pages any more).
- r00fus 9y agoSure, as long as you define identity political groups to allow things like subjugating and terrorizing other groups, sure. Treating violent white nationalists like just another "political identity" is disingenuous. Like saying ISIS members are "just Muslims". We treat identity groups with violent tendencies as terrorists (but only prosecute if their skin is brown)
- 9y ago
- dmode 9y agoHere are some specific things that Trump has done that are very similar to Hitler: 1. Created a narrative via dog whistles that white folks are actual victims in this country in the hands of minorities, immigrants, BLM etc. A strong undercurrent of "us" vs. "them" narrative. As a result a significant portion of Republicans believe that white people are more discriminated in this country 2. Undermined free press with constant attacks and going so far and creating his own news network - a clear propaganda approach 3. Allowed the FCC to enable Sinclair broadcasting takeover of local news media, creating a powerful propaganda arm in the form of local news 4. Undermined democracy via nepotism and nominating unqualified family members to important positions 5. Brutally attack critics in an attempt to shut down criticism
- gertef 9y agoSinclair was well into its takeover before Trump took office.
- dmode 9y agoHere's a great article on NYT on the Sinclair situation https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/us/politics/how-a-conservative-tv-giant-is-ridding-itself-of-regulation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/us/politics/how-a-conserv... Here's the key quote "The moves, which include easing a cap on how many stations a broadcaster can own, have opened up lucrative opportunities for Mr. Smith, among them a $3.9 billion bid to buy Tribune Media, another large owner of stations."
- mattcaldwell 9y agoOh, well. I guess it's all fine then.
- AnimalMuppet 9y agoWell, it's unfair to label it as "Trump being evil".
- throwaway7312 9y agoOoh! This is fun. The "how someone is just like Hitler game." I know this game. Here's my entry: 5 things Barack Obama did that were very similar to Adolf Hitler: 1. Assumed a populist mantra of taking back government from corrupt politicians ("change you can believe in" "not beholden to special interests") 2. Employed blitzkrieg tactics against unsuspecting and peaceful nations (Hitler: Poland; Obama: Libya) 3. Armed and funded radical revolutionaries in other nations in hopes of governmental overthrow and replacement by sympathetic new governments (Hitler: Spain; Obama: Ukraine, Syria, Iran; the Arab Spring more generally) 4. Designed a national healthcare system with a close analogue in Hitler's national socialist healthcare 5. Used inspiring rhetoric to distract from policies unpopular among the majority of the electorate (such as Obama's transgender bathroom policies, which almost 2/3 of Americans disliked) Who should we do next? I'm thinking challenge round: either Bono, Hulk Hogan, or the Dalia Lama.
- lisper 9y agoFor starters, he has singled out a religious minority for persecution (Muslims instead of Jews this time), endorsed the use of violence to silence political opponents and protesters, and encouraged law enforcement to use violence against suspects. Oh, he also failed to do anything about it when a foreign government (Turkey) used violence against protestors on American soil. Hitler never had the opportunity to do that, but he surely would have approved.
- davidreiss 9y agoHis daughter is jewish and his son in law is jewish, so that must mean he hitler.
- pas 9y agoHitler eventually married a jew... so, what's your point?
- patrickg_zill 9y agoThread status: Godwin'd.
- AnotXOR 9y agoWe're at peak activism today and corporations are the primary targets. My guess is those CEO's were flooded by "concerned customers" who were probably as fake as so many twitter/facebook bots.
- glhaynes 9y agoMy guess is those CEO's were flooded by "concerned customers" who were probably as fake as so many twitter/facebook bots. Thanks for adding this random made-up idea to the discussion.
- kiba 9y agoHow could you distinguish between "images" and "moral courage" in an environment that practically demand you to do so? You don't.
- Consultant32452 9y agoIt's definitely political posturing/virtue signaling to customers. The big gripe is that Trump didn't explicitly call out white supremacists when denouncing hate and violence. The Sheriff explicitly stated that there was violent escalation from both the white supremacists and the antifa crowd. A single member of the white racist asshole group escalated the violence to the next level and someone got killed. I'm on board with explicitly calling out the white supremacists, but I think the reaction by the media is eye-rollingly inconsistent. They didn't hold anyone's feet to the fire when BLM killed cops, or antifa has previously escalated to violence. In short, this is fair criticism of Trump, but the scale of the response is kinda ridiculous. But also, I welcome the media to the club. Maybe we'll also get Islamic terrorists called out by their group identity too.
- Analemma_ 9y agoSigh. "Virtue signaling" has become yet another formerly-useful concept now drained of all meaning because everyone uses it to mean "thing I don't like" (ironically, usually because they're virtue signaling). Listen up: people, including CEOs, actually can have their own opinions on things. They can decide "hey, I don't want to support this guy who refuses to condemn neo-Nazis". That is hardly an unthinkable prospect.
- Consultant32452 9y agoA neo-Nazi killed someone and Trump's first response was to condemn all hate and violence. Was that some sort of secrete white supremacist code that meant hate and violence from neo-Nazis is totes cool? Is that seriously your narrative?
- orclev 9y agoThe problem is that his first reaction was to basically say both sides were equally wrong. In this context the two sides where A) neo-nazis and white supremacists, and B) counter protestors who were there to oppose the neo-nazis and white supremacists. This was not a BLM rally, this was an alt-right rally. There might have been some BLM members there, there might even have been some antifa there, but the majority of the crowd that was there was a reaction to the alt-right and in opposition to them, not acting as a member of some other group. By saying both sides were equally to blame he was saying that opposing neo-nazis and white supremacists was wrong. Additionally by not calling out the neo-nazis and white supremacists, and instead merely talking about violence, he's tacitly providing support for them, he's saying that it's only the violent act that was wrong, not the racists or fascists.
- empath75 9y agoI am willing to entertain the idea that the ceos of large corporations are also decent human beings.
- davidreiss 9y agoWasn't there a study that said CEOs tend to be overrepresented in the sociopathetic personality? CEOs of large corporations have no problem doing business with china or israel or russia or any other questionable locations.
- actsasbuffoon 9y agoMore likely than the population at large, but it’s still a minority of CEOs who are sociopaths.
- corporateslave3 9y agoSpeaking generally, the board and shareholders would never allow a CEO to sacrifice the stock price for the CEO's morals, unless those morals aligned with the good of the company. Very naive to think otherwise.