I don't see anything stunning in the NYT article- it is a very early view on an emerging political phenomenon on the other side of the ocean- certainly in a wor

I don't see anything stunning in the NYT article- it is a very early view on an emerging political phenomenon on the other side of the ocean- certainly in a world pretty different from our own, one where open display of racism and political violence were just a cause for concern rather than absolutely unacceptable. On the other hand the world was just emerging from a war that had killed about 20 million people, while Russia had just gone through a bloody revolution that produced the first communist state- with all the hope and terror that that entailed- all followed by the Spanish flu just to to top it off (another 50 million deaths). In the context, the NYT article sounds actually pretty insightful; I find the expectation that a 1922 article would describe Hitler in the exact same terms of a 2016 one to be just deeply ignorant.