Friday, April 22, 2005

Hitler spotting

I wandered onto a lengthy post by "badtux" that compared various contemporary American conservative pundits and public officials to Hitler, and it inspired me to e-mail badtux a reply. Now I'm promoting my e-mail to a blog entry, because I was pleased to see it gathered some diverse found opinions and personal thoughts into a sort of summary explanation or theory of Nazism. It's not comprehensive or organized, and of course it's unreferenced, unsubstantiated and beyond audacious, but hey this is a blog. Here's the e-mail:

I think you might just have a bulls-eye in equating Coulter's behavior with Hitler's, and I agree with the "just a guy" theory of Hitler, but I think you're overlooking the workings of the man's mind and seeing way too many Hitlers as a result. Germany produced many Gestapo and SS, but just one verified Hitler after all. So not all Republicans politicians get to be Hitler (we have to label Rove "Goebbels," for example). About mind workings I mean that I think Hitler really sincerely blamed the Jews for his problems; and because he was such a narcissist he saw his personal problems as problem for the whole world; and because he was a charismatic speaker in a country hungry both for a reason for optimism and change his ideas went over well...so well he got to make his problems the world's problems ultimately. But Germany was the most Jew-friendly country in Europe. Anti-semitism was an old song people could remember, which made it easy for the populace to pick up and join in en masse, but I don't think many Germans had aggressions specifically pent up for Jews. That's just where Hitler channeled them. Because Hitler was a deeply self-deluding, deeply defensive and angry and narcissistic guy, he in effect sincerely believed what he said about the Jews, making him the kind of guy who could order genocide, not to mention the kind of guy who would reflexively villify and ruthlessly crush as traitors anybody or any party who had any at all conflicting political project they might want to get off the ground. And because in the political and cultural climate of his era he was able to get into a position of totaltiarian dictatorial authority, it was a situation of what Hitler says goes, which enables pretty much everybody else to feel no guilt for the genocide decision--plus there was the strategy of keeping things hush hush and using sondercommando to help people feel guilt free. I imagine most Nazi politicians probably made only cynical use of Jew hatred, and I believe that with regard to many conservative views most of the Republicans are cynics too (Gingrich anti-gay with a lesbian daughter? Come on). But "Hitlers" are true believers. Coulter is such a shameless spewer of lies and is so over the top in her villifying rhetoric against domestic traitors and foreign enemies that I can believe she is a whacked out true believer of some very dangerous sort. But cynics have consciences and are pragmatic to boot, so I don't see them as nearly as dangerous. We want people to come when we cry wolf, so I think it's a mistake to cry wolf where there isn't one. Come up with something other than Hitler or wolf--"disease-ridden rat" maybe. One last thing, it's my impression Hitler made a blazing and strident rise to power and was an impatient, all or nothing guy. Such a guy would not be hanging out as a junior senator in today's United States. Such a guy would be down and out and homeless or leader of the Hell's Angels or else today's United States would look a lot like Nazi Germany and that guy would be our leader.

1 comment:

TRES CEE said...

the problem when u listen to an american publisher or writer comment on men and comparenthem to Hitler or other men and/or say insulting or belaboring their life with comments dimunition of their life or accomplishments while at the same time complementing men like Roosevelt or his Wife Eleanor, is that you one usually dont know if they really don't know their openess to honest and fair remarks on the Man they compare with Hitler, you don't know if they are honest and fair with Roosevelt and give him a fair judgement, he may be worse in character then the Guy you say is as bad or almost as bad as Hitler, so How can you judge without either knowing the Real Purpose of the Historian or Insulting Commenter of the Poor Recipient of the Detrimental Comment, one or Two Years ago, Ambrose a Professor at University of New Orleans was ACCUSED OF PLAGIARISM AND I BELIEVE THAT SIMPLY BECAUSE HE WAS HONEST HE WAS SO ACCUSED BECAUSE HE WAS PROMILITARY, AND SOME NEWS COMMENTATORS SUCH AS DAN RATHER WHO I THINK ARE ANTI MILITARY ATTEMPTED TO DISCREDIT HIM AS DID SEVERAL OTHER SO CALLED NETWORK ANCHORS, AND SO WHEN I SEE AND HEAR AN HONEST GOOD MAN GIVEN SHORT END OF EDITORIAL STICK AND RAMMED REPEATEDLY I GET STEAMED, AND I DO NOT LIKE TO BE SO TREATED TO SUCH AS THAT AFTER THE SO CALLED NEWS ANCHORS HAVE DONE IN RICHARD JEWELL REPEATEDLY THEN BLAMED THE FBI FOR IT, AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED WHEN A NEWS ANCHOR SAYS DID SUCH AND SUCH OCCUR, THEY HAVE CAUSED HARM TO A MAN'S REPUTATION AND HAVE DAMAGED HIS REPUTATION AFTER SOME WEEKS OFF THIS AND HAVE SO LIABLED HIM THAT THEY SHOULD MORE THEN AMPLY PAY HIM BACK FOR THEIR INTENTIONAL DAMAGE DONE HIS NAME,