Comparing Germany in 1933 with the USA in 2001

[IkeWarnedUs]

At first I was uncomfortable with comparing Bush to Hitler. I thought it was another insult, like comparing Bush to a chimp. I have been reading more about the history of the 20th century and I now see that the comparisons between what happened in Germany in the 30's and what is happening today in the US are enormous and terrifying. I have prepared this to hand out to people and offer it to DU'ers to read and use as they like.

-----------

Prolog

Many years before he rose to power, Adolph Hitler wrote "Mein Kampf," which was a summary of his philosophy and a blueprint for Germany's future as the head of the Aryan master race and conqueror of surrounding lands. (1)

Before George W. Bush rose to power many members of his administration, including Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, wrote "Rebuilding America's Defenses; Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century," which was a summary of their philosophy and plans to create an American empire. (2)

1933

Adolph Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. He was not elected, and in fact had only received 37 percent of the popular vote in the election held on April 10, 1932. He was appointed after Chancellor Hindenberg was forced to resign due to a steady barrage of violence, blackmail, lies and subversion. (3)

On January 20, 2001 George W. Bush was sworn in as President of the United States after being declared the winner of a contested election by the Supreme Court in a split decision. Mr. Bush did not win the majority of votes cast in the election, either nationally or, as discovered later when the votes were recounted, in the disputed State of Florida. Furthermore, the elections in Florida were suspect due to cases of civil rights violations, vote fraud and intimidation. (4)

On February 27, 1933 the Reichstag building in Berlin (where the German Parliament was housed) went up in flames. When Chancellor Hitler arrived at the scene he described it as a "beacon from heaven" and "the beginning of a great epoch in German history." (5)

On September 11, 2001 airplanes crashed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. President Bush's immediate reaction was to read a story about a goat to a room full of children. (6) Later that night President Bush said in his diary, "The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today." (7)

A Dutch left-wing radical, Marinus van der Lubbe, was arrested at the scene of the Reichstag fire and declared to have been solely responsible for the attack on democracy in Germany. Further research suggests that it would not have been possible for van der Lubbe to have committed the crime alone and that the Nazi's themselves set the fire to advance their political agenda. (8)

At 4pm EDT on September 11, 2001, before the dust settled from the collapse of the twin towers of the World Trade Center, CNN reported that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the attacks. (9) Within days the FBI released the names and photos of the 19 alleged hijackers, even though none of the hijackers names were on the list of passengers and many of the named hijackers are still alive (10). Many people, including a former member of the British Parliament, have suggested the Bush administration allowed the attacks to happen to further their political agenda. (11)

On March 23, 1933, just weeks after the Reichstag fire, the German parliament passed The Enabling Act which abolished freedom of expression of opinions, freedom of the press, protection against unlawful search and seizure, individual property rights, rights to privacy in electronic and postal communications and right of assembly. (12)

On October 26, 2001, just weeks after the attacks of September 11, the American Congress passed the USA Patriot Act, which violates the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the US Constitution. It allowed for increased monitoring of financial transactions, creation of a DNA bank to identify terrorists and other violent offenders, changed the scope of search warrants, including for electronic information, and greatly increased CIA and FBI powers to monitor individuals, including US citizens. (13)

Epilog

Once his position of power was secured, Adolph Hitler went on to carry out his plans to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe and create an Aryan nation. Approximately 6 million Jews were killed and Germany conquered Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, and France and attacked Britain and Russia before he was stopped. (14)

Since September 11, 2001 the Bush administration has bombed Afghanistan, imprisoned people, including American citizens, without charges or access to attorneys, passed laws and issued Executive Orders eliminating constitutional rights for Americans, waged pre-emptive war on Iraq, killing and injuring tens of thousands, including American troops and reporters and more. (15)

Comparisons of President Bush to Adolph Hitler are painted as inflammatory partisan political attacks and dismissed by otherwise reasonable people.

I urge everyone to remember the words of philosopher George Santayana, who wrote, "Those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat it."

The stakes are too high to dismiss the parallels because the language seems inflammatory.

Footnotes

(1) http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/kampf2.htm

(2) http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

(3) http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-hitlerdemo.htm

(4) http://www.gregpalast.com/columns.cfm?subject_id=1&subject_name=Theft%20of%20Presidency

(5) http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_inganamort_123102_irrational.html

(6) http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/2002/06/11_Booker.html

(7) http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A43708-2002Jan26¬Found=true

(8) http://ww2.klup.info/?art=164

(9) http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chronology.attack/

(10) http://3d17.org/viewdocument/911911

(11) http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html

(12) http://www.parkland.sd63.bc.ca:1084/enabling_act.htm

(13) http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/DOJ_guidance.pdf

(14) http://www.holocaust-history.org/short-essays/adolf-hitler.shtml

(15) http://www.democraticunderground.com

[Lars39]

1. Good summary.

Duly bookmarked;looks like it would be a good handout. :)

[bobbieinok]

2. one error, I think

Hindenberg was president. He appointed Hitler after 2 or 3 appointees were not able to get support - mostly from the army, I think.

I'm about 90% sure of this; you should check it out.

This actually works better for the comparison -

...Hindenberg appointed Hitler

...Supreme Court appointed Bush


also maybe of interest - Hindenberg and Ludendorff were the German military commanders in WWI. They basically ran the country the last 2 years of the war.

[IkeWarnedUs]

10. Thank you bobbie

I went back and re-read the link and you are right, I misread it. Hitler ran against Hindenberg in the presidential election on March 13, 1932 and then the runoff election on April 10, 1932. The link I used said Hindenberg was "resigned" to appoint Hitler as Chancellor because of the pressure from "the industrialists who were financing Hitler, the military whose connections Hitler had cultivated, even Hindenburg's son, whom some historians believe the Nazis had blackmailed." (from the link)

I appreciate the proofreading. If anyone else finds an error, please speak up. I am trying to be very careful to be accurate in what I say.

It's too late for me to edit my original post, but I am revising the third paragraph to read this:

---------
Adolph Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. He was not elected, and in fact had only received 37 percent of the popular vote in the presidential election held on April 10, 1932. The Nazi party did not represent a majority, despite their extensive use of propaganda and violence. Hitler was appointed by President Hindenberg in an effort to to unify the country and put an end to the steady barrage of violence, blackmail, lies and subversion. (3)
---------

[Kellanved]

20. a few more

- it's von Hindenburg, not Hindenberg.
- When Hitler first became chancellor the NSDAP held 33.1%
- Backdoor deals were quite usual
- the Reichstag was made up by many small parties; the chancellor always came from a party with a non-absolute majority (sometimes no majority at all)
- appointment was the constitutional way to become chancellor
- several Governments failed prior to Hitler's appointment; Hitler's helper's to power, von Papen's, among them.
- the social situation in the Weimar republic is in no way comparable to the USA now. Misguided Kaiser-loyalists and general anti-democratic sentiments helped the Nazi's.
- the first real unconstitutional act was the banning of the Communist party, just after the 1933 (the final) elections. The Social Democrats were the only party to oppose the move; they were banned shortly thereafter.

[IkeWarnedUs]

21. thanks Kellanved

I really, really do appreciate the input. I am learning not only new facts, but new cultures and political systems as well. This would be so much easier in a classroom setting with a teacher to ask questions of and get input from.

A couple comments on your points -

I will change the name from Hindenberg to von Hindenberg.

Backdoor deals were not unusual and in fact seem to be somewhat intentionally built into their system in an effort to encourage different philosophies to work together. What was different is the use of violence, propaganda, blackmail, etc.

I have heard people say (and thought myself) that Hitler was an elected leader chosen by the German people. I was trying to illustrate that the German voters had a chance to elect him to office in the presidential election and didn't. Also, while you're right, the NSDAP (Nazi party) held 33.1% of the Reichstag when Hitler was appointed Chancellor, I used the more generous percentage of votes for the election he lost for continuity.

You are right, Germany in the early 30's and the US in the late 90's are not the same at all. But if it's true that misguided Kaiser-loyalists and general anti-democratic sentiments helped the Nazi's (and I agree) then I think there is a loose parallel there as well. I think whatever support Bush has with the American public is due to misguided loyalty to their leader in a "time of war" and a short-sighted attitude that social programs and labor initiatives generally favored by the Democrats are at the expense of hard working American taxpayers.

I don't know enough about the German constitution (yet) to comment on what was the first unconstitutional act. I don't talk about the Enabling Act as being unconstitutional, but as removing or changing what rights the German people had - however they had them. The Patriot Act does violate our constitution and that's the basis for cities and states around the US to ban its implementation.

You're right that the Nazi's quickly banned the Communist and Social Democrat parties. One could draw a parallel to how our current election process and lack of effective campaign finance reform has done the same thing in a more "politically correct" manner.

You make a lot of good points and I appreciate the input. There is so much more I could say, but I had to pare the events down to an easy to read flyer. It is by no means a definitive analysis. I hope it will be a starting point for people to think, read and discuss what is happening to our country.

[Kellanved]

22. no need

Sorry for being rude.
It's just that I don't like the Hitler comparisons at all.

(and: Hindenburg - burg is castle, berg mountain)

[Cleita]

3. Very good.

Thanks for posting.

[mike_c]

4. excellent post-- thank you!

eom

[HereSince1628]

5. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

or words to that effect.

The motto of the military intelligence organization in which I served was: Semper vigilans.

I'm not convinced Bush is a fascist or a Nazi, even though he and his team have behaved in ways that are similar. But I agree with you that it's way to serious to dismiss without consideration

[IkeWarnedUs]

11. I am not arguing that Bush is a Nazi (facist maybe)

I think the problem with saying Bush = Hitler is it oversimplifies the issue.

I don't think PNAC wrote their September 2000 report to mimic Hitler. I think they share his self-rightous arrogance and are proud of their desire to rule the world.

I don't think the neo-cons set out to have Bush appointed rather than duly elected. I think it shows how both groups (Hitler's Nazi's and the neo-cons) were out to take power by whatever means necessary. It also shows a total disregard for the will of the people they are supposed to be serving.

Staging a disaster, blaming it on a scapegoat and capitalizing on the fear and confusion are not new or original plans - and they work. And people with rights are harder to control, so it makes sense that both sets of murderous tyrants would use the fear and confusion to rid their people of their rights.

I guess my point is that if someone says they plan to do evil and you can see that they are achieving their plans, its time to get your head out of the sand and see things for what they are. If the American public thinks these guys won't really get as bad as the Nazi's, my question is, why not? At the very least we must demand our rights be restored and questions answered.

I am going to start passing this out everywhere I see signs and bumper stickers that say "Never Forget". We can't afford selective memories.

[HereSince1628]

34. I think he's a robber-baron not a nazi or a fascist

Although I will readily admit that many of the things his administration has done certainly have parallels.

Indeed, I've got hundreds of clippings on Bush administration behaviors that parallel fascist typology. The problem is fascism and radical rw conservatism share a lot of things. What we have is something like the perfect storm of political conservatism. Every weird manifestation of almost 200 years of conservatism seems manifest in one administration.

[jpgray]

6. Much more violent reaction in Germany before '33

Much more unemployment and violent discontent. The Social-Democrat led government murdered leaders of leftist parties, and dealt very brutally with revolutionary citizens, who in Germany at that time meant just about everybody.

But yes there are parallels as you show above.

[Terwilliger]

7. This should be a primer for the Freepers

maybe they can figure out what they look like after all.

[SheilaT]

8. As far as I'm concerned

it's crystal clear that Sept 11, 2001 was our Reichstag Fire.

[Terwilliger]

9. needs kicking

[Bozita]

12. good stuff ... here's a well deserved kick.

[seventhson]

13. Read "Der Fuehrer" by Konrad Heiden

If you want to see howclose the Bush plan is to the nazi plan.

It is truly the same playbook written by the same people and carried out too the same way.

But KNOWING this is truly frightening, especially when we find out i the same people and organizations, (Bush., Skull, Rockefeller, CIA, SDulles. Morgan Bank, etc.) who did it then and are doing it now. Just a new generation of the same wicked bad seeds (from Prescott and the Walkers to Dubya and Kissinger and Cheney)

[Karenina]

39. HALLO!!!

We haven't had any threads about "Christian Reconstructionism/-ists" lately. Time to connect some more dots, maybe?

[drdigi420]

14. Bush is much more dangerous than Hitler

there is no USA to stop Bush as there was to stop Hitler (not to dismiss our allies' roles in Hitler's defeat)

If there was another superpower capable of stopping the Bush Regime and Liberating the US from it's tyranny, maybe I would consider Hitler more dangerous than Bush.

Bush also has control of the largest arsenal of weapons of mass destruction ever amassed.

The only thing that makes Hitler more evil is the Holocaust, but then again, that may be what 'Gitmo' is the start of...

Scary times we live in

[RowWellandLive]

15. If you think Bush is more dangerous then

Hitler you either need to educate yourself better by reading about the Holocaust or recognize the fact that your hatred of Bush has driven you off the deep end.

Hitler set out (and almost accomplished) exterminating an entire race of people. To compare him to Bush is to trivialize and diminish the horrors perpetrated upon the Jews during the Holocaust. It also serves to alienate a huge block of moderate swing voters that do not and will not ever see Bush as evil. Especially when compared to Hitler. This crap gains him sympathy.

If you or anyone else here truly believes that it is Bush's intention to wipe out by murder an entire race of people please say so and provide proof. There are probably similarities between Hitler's regime and those of just about all national leaders. To extrapolate that into Bush = mass murderer, Jew exterminator Hitler will only serve to help defeat us in land side proportions.

Get a grip.

[Minstrel Boy]

16. "We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth

in defense of this great nation." http://www.counterpunch.org/hill01042003.html

I say the man who spoke those words, and whose force of arms far exceeds Hitler's wildest dreams, is more dangerous, yes, and undeniably so.

[IkeWarnedUs]

17. I did educate myself

I know your response was to what drdigi said, but actually, sentiments like yours, RowWellAndLive, are why I did educate myself and why I want to educate others.

I too thought that comparing Bush to Hitler was a flippant insult that trivialized what Hitler did to the Jews. And I still think it does. George Bush is not the driving force of evil Adolph Hitler was. Georgie didn't write "Rebuilding America's Defenses; Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century," while "Mein Kampf" was Hitler's work. Nor does "Rebuilding" call for genocide.

It is much more accurate to compare the events in Germany in 1933 to what happened in America in 2001 and the tactics of the Nazi party to those of the PNAC'ers. And then to look to what happened in Germany after that and see what is happening in America now.

We do know what the Bush administration does have in mind - an American empire. And, we have already had a taste of what they are willing to do to get it. Richard Perle (another of "Rebuilding"'s authors and a member of the Defense Policy Board) is all over the radio and TV promoting his new book and saying we need to overthrow more sovereign nations. Richard Clarke (National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism under Clinton and Bush) has written a book to be released in April called "AGAINST ALL ENEMIES: Inside The White House's War On Terror--What Really Happened" that is expected to talk about how the Bush administration dropped the ball on alQueda that let 9/11 happen.

I think drgigi's concern about the Bush administration being a greater threat because there is no one powerful enough to stop them is valid. Not that what they have done is worse than what Hitler did - drgigi didn't say that. But because of the unmatched power they have.

When I understood how Hitler and the Nazi party took power in Germany and positioned themselves to carry out their evil, I understood why the comparison is valid. Until I educated myself, I didn't know about the Reichstag fire and how it was used to justify the Enabling Act. I didn't know that Hitler ranted about the threat of Communism and used it to justify his actions. I didn't even know that it was Hitler's intention all along to overthrow and occupy Europe and Russia to create his utopian empire. I thought he rose to power and was elected because of the bad economy in Germany and fought WWII to defend himself.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I wonder RowWellAndLive, how much do you know about the events leading up to the Holocaust? I ask because I was amazed at what I didn't know. I thought I had a decent education (and by today's standards I did) but I am just finally learning not just what happened, but how and why. I have been buying books on world history and educating myself. I really want to know - not as a criticism, but to understand. How much do you know about the details of what took place?

[TankLV]

18. Hitler in no way "STARTED OUT" to exterminate. That came much later.

Only after very little resistence to his constant abrogation of international treaties and internal laws, which even Hitler himself expressed surprise at, and stated that he would have instantly reversed himself from invading other countries, etc., did he gain more and more power, and have the "courage" to do ever increasing horrors - which CULMINATED (ended) in the policy of the holocost. The holocost was the LAST horrible step in his ever demented plan to "deal with the jewish problem", etc. Even the NAZI's were unsure at first just how they would proceed.

You are comparing Hitler circa 1941 with bunkerboy now. Bunkerboy now is very much like Hitler circa 1933.

You cannot find one factual error in the comparisons being made here and other posts/threads. Not one. Therefore, the comparisons are extremely valid.

[BiggJawn]

19. No, YOU get a grip.

What's it going to take for you self-appointed "defenders of the Holocaust Dead" to get a grip? Will you see what the rest of us see ONLY after Bush kills 6,000,000?

How many Muslims and brown-skinned middle-easterners have already died for BFEE and PNAC policies? Oh, and include the ones killed by the Likud in that tally, too....

Hilter was so much MORE than the Holocaust, y'know...Or you WOULD know if you weren't so set on "saying the right thing"....

[Media_Lies_Daily]

23. You need to read some basic history about Germany...

...and learn how long it took for Hitler and the Nazis to formulate the "Final Solution" after they took political power in 1933. The NeoCon Junta has only been in office for three years and they have already started two wars. It took the Nazis six years to start WWII against Poland, and another year or two to enact the machinery of the death camp system.

By the way, in addition to the American troops that have died needlessly, how many Middle Easterners do you think are now dead, thanks to the NeoCon efforts over the past two years? How many foreign troops of the so-called "coalition" are also dead?

Maybe you're the one that needs to "get a grip".

[Karenina]

24. RowWelland Live

is reacting to an inculacted button being pushed. Please, I ask for your understanding of what appears to be a "knee-jerk" response and what we have to accomplish if we're gonna pull this poisonous weed out of the garden by the roots. We need RWaL's help to do it.

Did you see that nasty looking vine in the garden?

Yeah, I brushed a leaf and look at this rash.

Remember those stories Omi told about the "monster vine?"

Yeah, but it didn't look like this one.

Doch, doch!! Remember what she said about the shiny oily leaves???

BUT THAT VINE DESTROYED ALL THE LILIES!

Didn't the seed from this one come from Mavelia's Speisekammer? It's not so big now, if ALL of us pull it we can uproot it.

HOW DARE YOU IMPUGN MAVELIA'S HONOR!!! THE VINE OMI SPOKE ABOUT WAS A HORROR!!! THERE'S NO COMPARISON!!!

Look at it carefully. Look at this nasty rash on my hand...

[Media_Lies_Daily]

25. Interesting response...

...but not something even remotely understood.

[truth2power]

27. Well, there are parts I don't understand.

"Look at it carefully. Look at this nasty rash on my hand..."
And this is the way it begins...be warned.

I don't understand "Mavelia's Speisekammer", however. Can anyone help with this?

[Lars39]

29. Probably a neighbor they got the seeds from.

Very subtle, but accurate analogy to what is happening and people's understanding of it.

[Karenina]

36. We gotta pull it now.

You see how fast it grew overnight?

Mavelia promised it would yield enough fruit to feed us all well.

I got a rash and it's choking everything on the outskirts of the garden.
Please go look for yourself!

[peacetalksforall]

37. I believe you are jumping ahead of yourself...

we ARE in the pre-holocaust era - there may never be a matching holocaust era if we work at it...BUT the similarities of the pre-holocaust days are REAL and PRESENT. Don't leap and deny. Look at now and consider.

[LSK]

41. we are comparing early nazi germany to now

What indications in 1933 were around to warn anyone of the horrors to come? Yes early in Hitlers reign he made life very harsh for jews but he had not started killing them yet.

Please compare early Nazi Germany to current US, not the Nazi Germany of the 40s.

[IndianaGreen]

54. Hitler didn't have nukes!

Bush does! Bush can murder more people than Hitler did, and Bush can do it in the few minutes it takes for an American nuclear warhead missile to reach its target.

[Karenina]

56. Hey IG!

What's it gonna take, WHAT WILL IT FICKEN TAKE for da Volks to get a clue that Hitler in his wildest dreams could not have imagined the tools of destruction the Ami-nazis have at their disposal?

[smirkymonkey]

57. Bush hasn't done those things...

YET... There is still a lot of time left, especially if he wins the next election, in which case he will be bolder and more brutal.

Bush has been in power for less than four years. Hitler had been in power for almost twice that long before the Holocaust was in full swing.

The important thing is the comparison shows to what extent repressive totalitarian governments (and yes, that is how I see this administration) can go if left unchecked. The trajectory of the two so far shows remarkable similarity - if we don't recognize where this is heading early on, they could end up in the same way too.

IMO, it is a valid and worthy comparison.

[Deja Q]

26. kicking...

AWESOME POST!!! :yourock:

[djeseru]

28. This is good stuff...

...thank you.

I came across this link out at AllHatNoCattle just the other day:
http://www.re-select.com/bam/BAM_Bush_Hitler.htm

I am reading more and more of this Bush and Hitler subject - snowball effect? Or is it like Fox News suing Al Franken? The more the RNC complains about it, the more people are going to look into it.

[number6]

30. good info

..

[Brianne]

31. You people are disgusting...

This is my first time visiting here, and it will probably be the last. I'm a moderate, but you might as well push me over to the right if Democrats agree with this crap.

Comparing Bush to Hitler is not only ridiculous, it's self-destructive. I don't want Bush re-elected, simply because I don't believe he's a very good president. But if you have to make insane comparisons of our president to the most evil man in history -- with absolutely no weight to them -- you're alienating moderates, including myself.

I could match facts from Hitler's life to facts from Fred Rogers's life. Does this mean Mr. Rogers was as evil as Hitler?

[Lars39]

32. Didn't read it, links and all, huh?

You're already to the right if you call him your president.

I'd really like to see the comparisons between Fred Rogers and Hitler.

[Stuckinthebush]

33. Stick around

You may learn something.

Open up your mind and look at the world today. Bush is responsible for a great deal of pain and misery. The comparisons to Hitler are based on pre-Holocaust Hitler. Nobody is saying that Bush is planning to build ovens and exterminate Jews. Some are saying that Bush is a dangerous man because of his warped convictions. This is the comparison that is important.

Other than this, stick around...there are a great many learned people here.

[LSK]

45. sorry if the truth hurts

I have been reading "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer, considered by many to be a masterpiece on the history of Nazi Germany.

As I read Chapter 7, and when I read about the Reichstag fire and the events after it, I immediately thought of 9/11 and the Patriot Act.

Both events did happen, you cannot deny that.

We have history for a reason. We are to learn from the mistakes or history will repeat itself.

Before Hitler, Germany was a democracy.

Before Bush, America was a democracy. Let us keep it that way.

Do not run off because you think we are nuts. Do your own research. Learn history on your own. Form your own opinions based on FACTS.

[Karenina]

51. Enjoy your stay, Brianne

And if you wish to swing to the right that is YOUR choice and no fault of ours.

"But if you have to make insane comparisons of our president to the most evil man in history -- with absolutely no weight to them -- you're alienating moderates, including myself."

There's A VERITABLE LOAD of WEIGHT to them. Take a look around and you'll see. YOUR family may be hit next!!! Ignore the signs at your own risk.

[IndianaGreen]

55. Fuck "our President"!

But if you have to make insane comparisons of our president

Fuck "our President"! Bush is not my President, and his regime is not my government.

Sorry if you are offended...

I am more offended by the usurper in the White House and the tens of thousands that have been killed, wounded, or maimed for life on his account than I am about the sensibilities of those to afraid too consider the possibility that Bush is the first American Caesar, or Duce, or Fuhrer, or Second Coming of Christ.

[Interestedmod]

63. Scaring me

The very fact you can post this tripe seems to prove that the general assertions in this thread are wrong.

Anyway, don't call me a freeper - I voted for Nader.

[NavajoRug]

35. The comparison between Hitler and Bush is inaccurate

But an astute student of history might see a remarkable similarity between Germany in the 1920s under the Weimar Republic and the U.S. of the last couple of decades.

[Karenina]

38. Inaccurate in what sense?

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/printer_010904A.shtml

The Bush Hitler Thing
t r u t h o u t | Reader Submission

Friday 09 January 2004

Dear Sir,

My family was one of Hitler's victims...

<snip>

So far, I've seen nothing to eliminate the possibility that Bush is on the same course as Hitler. And I've seen far too many analogies to dismiss the possibility. The propaganda. The lies. The rhetoric. The nationalism. The flag waving. The pretext of 'preventive war'. The flaunting of international law and international standards of justice. The disappearances of 'undesirable' aliens. The threats against protesters. The invasion of a non-threatening sovereign nation. The occupation of a hostile country. The promises of prosperity and security. The spying on ordinary citizens. The incitement to spy on one's neighbors - and report them to the government. The arrogant triumphant pride in military conquest. The honoring of soldiers. The tributes to 'fallen warriors. The diversion of money to the military. The demonization of government appointed 'enemies'. The establishment of 'Homeland Security'. The dehumanization of 'foreigners'. The total lack of interest in the victims of government policy. The incarceration of the poor and mentally ill. The growing prosperity from military ventures. The illusion of 'goodness' and primacy. The new einsatzgrupen forces. Assassination teams. Closed extralegal internment camps. The militarization of domestic police. Media blackout of non-approved issues. Blacklisting of protesters - including the no-fly lists and photographing dissenters at rallies.

There isn't much doubt in my mind - anyone who compares the history of Hitler's rise to power and the progression of recent events in the US cannot avoid the parallels. It's incontrovertible. Is Bush another Hitler? Maybe not, but with each incriminating event, the parallel grows -it certainly cannot be dismissed. There's too much evidence already. Just as Hitler used American tactics to plan and execute his reign, it looks as if Karl Rove is reading Hitler's playbook to plan world domination - and that is the stated intent of both. From the Reichstag fire to the landing at Nuremberg to the motto of "Gott Mit Uns" to the unprovoked invasion and occupation of Iraq to the insistence that peace was the ultimate goal, the line is unbroken and unwavering.

I'm afraid now, that what may still come to pass is a reign far more savage and barbaric than that of the Nazis. Already, appeasement has been fruitless - it only encourages the brazen to escalate their arrogance and braggadocio.

[NavajoRug]

40. Well, for one thing, . . .

. . . Bush is facing re-election this year.

And if you go through the list of "greivances" posted in that article you referenced, you'll find that at any time in this nation's history (at least since the start of the age of television) you could have made a similar list, no matter who the president was.

[Minstrel Boy]

42. "Bush is facing re-election this year."

No he's not.

But since you think he is, it goes a long way towards explaining why you fail to see the likeness.

[NavajoRug]

43. He's not?

Do you know something that I don't know? Has Election Day been canceled this year?

[Karenina]

46. Errraaa....

Pssst... *dimwit dauphin was appointed by SCOTUS. Pass it on.

[NavajoRug]

49. Well, OK -- but you have to remember something . . .

. . . if the U.S. Supreme Court hadn't been involved in the 2000 election, we would have had a President Gore who was appointed by the Florida Supreme Court. So big deal -- would that have meant that we'd be discussing comparisons between Hitler and Al Gore here on this forum?

[Minstrel Boy]

52. I should hope so, if Al Gore had had a

Reichstag Fire, Enabling Act and Preventative War, for starters.

[Karenina]

47. Errraaa....

Pssst... *dimwit dauphin was appointed by SCOTUS. Pass it on.

[Karenina]

44. Good ! A chance to begin the process

of pulling this poisonous vine up. Your quip leaves the impression you are not paying close attention. "We the People" are in the crosshairs of an entity that has in its control the ways and means to toast our asses. People, please wake up.

[NavajoRug]

50. 1. Can you identify this entity? and 2. . . .

Has there ever been a time in this country when "we the people" have had much of a say in how this government works?

[Karenina]

53. 1. Yeah, I know lots of their names

financial entanglements and "organizational" affiliations. And 2. The record has been spotty, but does have its bright spots.

We can nitpick from now till the cows come home, dudical. Fact is that shadow you see is a jackboot comin down on a whole lotta necks.

[LSK]

48. William Shirers book

Read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" and then try and tell us the comparison is inaccurate.

Maybe not every little detail posted is 100% true, but Reichstag fire did happen.

Do your research before stating non-factual blanket statements.

[NavajoRug]

60. Reichstag fire . . .

. . . Gulf of Tonkin incident . . . "Remember the Maine!" . . . "Remember the Lusitania!" . . . blah, blah, blah . . .

This kind of shit happens all the time, in all kinds of situations, under any number of U.S. administrations.

What makes the current time period LESS like the early years of the Third Reich than most of the ones I mentioned is the stark absence of ANY real sense of nationalism here in the U.S.

[Karenina]

61. Pass me

some of whatever it is you been smoking! :smoke:

[lapauvre]

58. I know I am late, but...

This country simply cannot take four more years of Bush and the people behind him. I truly respect the presidency, and had some strong criticism for Clinton. But this, we cannot survive. If we don't get him and his supporters out now, we won't have to worry anymore. The right to choose will be gone.

I don't care who you vote for in the primaries, just vote for somebody who can defeat this ignorant man who is being used by the right wing. He cannot claim Alzheimer's. But he can do as much damage to our country as if he could.

[Yupster]

59. Go back to the history books

"Adolph Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. He was not elected, and in fact had only received 37 percent of the popular vote in the election held on April 10, 1932. He was appointed after Chancellor Hindenberg was forced to resign due to a steady barrage of violence, blackmail, lies and subversion. (3)"

Chancellor Hindenburg was not forced to resign because of blackmail or that other crap. Chancellor Hindenburg was not even Chancellor. He was President.And he didn't resign the presidency either. He died in office of old age.

The Weimar Republic had a parliamentary system. After the elections, the President (Hindenburg) asks a leader of one of the parties (traditionally but not always the biggest vote-getting party) to form a government made up of over 50 % of the parliament (Reichstag). If no party has over 50 % of the seats, a coalittion government is sought.

Hitler's party won the most seats, though less than 50 %. The Communist Party was the second largest. Together the two radical parties had over half the seats. Therefore to form a coalition government of 50 % or more, Hindenburg would have to include either the Nazis or Communists in the government. He chose the Nazis as the lesser threat to democracy. Bad call.

So was Hitler elected? As much as any other Chancellor in the pre-war period. Was Lincoln elected? He got 39 % of the vote in 1860. Since there were a multitude of parties in Germany, none ever got close to 50 %. Some of the Chancellors before Hitler got as little as 10 % because Hindenburg kept trying to patch together a coalition of the center against the two extremes. Once the Nazis and Communists got over 50 % that became impossible.

You can learn a lot on the internet. Too bad a lot of it is untrue.

[Interestedmod]

62. If you believe any of this, you are not a responsible political citizen

I am not sure where to begin refuting this half-mashed gibberish.

Chancellor Hindenberg? Might as well call him emperor.

Do you really think the US Govt allowed the attacks to happen? To further their own agenda? I hope you realize that the people who would find out the information first, CIA analysts, DIA, etc., would probably raise alarm bells if this happened.

[Dude_CalmDown]

64. While we're only at the earliest stages, far too many Murikans are ready..

...to shift into 1942. Don't believe me? Watch Washington Journal tomorrow morning.