Are Republicans Nazis ?

[woolfe9998]

Yeah, exactly. Fear of change and a deep distrust of democracy are in there as well. Plus some sort of weird insecurity about masculinity.

What's much less present in the US version is anti-Semitism. Which only seems to be there at the fringes of the Republicans. But maybe for that you can substitute racism against black people? They have a different selection of 'enemies'. Not really much point pushing hostility to 'Slavs' in a US context.

Yes, and as a secular half-Jew, I can tell you that the presence or absence of anti-semitism in particular is quite irrelevant to the comparison, except of course, to the Jews themselves should the fascists fully take over. All those things I listed about liberalism: modernity, cosmopolitism, internationalism, equality, science - all were associated, rightly or wrongly, with the Jews at that time. The Jews were just a symbol of everything the right thought was wrong with society. Today, it's brown people, immigrants (especially the brown ones), Muslims, and of course, more than anyone, it's liberals. Guess which group got locked up in concentration camps (Dachau) first, in the early 1930's? It wasn't the Jews. At the time, they called them "social democrats."

One of the more useful definitions I've read of fascism is this: put simply, it's extreme anti-liberalism.

 

[thraashman]

Yes, and as a secular half-Jew, I can tell you that the presence or absence of anti-semitism in particular is quite irrelevant to the comparison, except of course, to the Jews themselves should the fascists fully take over. All those things I listed about liberalism: modernity, cosmopolitism, internationalism, equality, science - all were associated, rightly or wrongly, with the Jews at that time. The Jews were just a symbol of everything the right thought was wrong with society. Today, it's brown people, immigrants (especially the brown ones), Muslims, and of course, more than anyone, it's liberals. Guess which group got locked up in concentration camps (Dachau) first, in the early 1930's? It wasn't the Jews. At the time, they called them "social democrats."

One of the more useful definitions I've read of fascism is this: put simply, it's extreme anti-liberalism.

"First they came for the communists..."

I'll say this, a frustratingly large number of Republicans are outright Nazis. Perhaps not all of them, but a huge amount. And the ones that aren't full blown Nazis, are skating real fucking close to the line.

 

[Jaskalas]

Well, for starters, fascists stand against liberal democracy which includes free and fair elections.

While I applaud a good idea to start with... one does not give a "Nazi" the right to vote and usurp power, to destroy said Democracy.
Or do they?

I imagine any conflict with them... is for the purpose of denying them the "right" to end our Democracy. Ergo they will be silenced and banned in various ways. Their "books" will be "burned", among other things. The use of force to stop them will look very much like their own methods. So I might suggest the answer is not as clear cut and dry as we would like to imagine. In conflict, we all stain our hands red.

 

[nakedfrog]

While I applaud a good idea to start with... one does not give a "Nazi" the right to vote and usurp power, to destroy said Democracy.
Or do they?

I imagine any conflict with them... is for the purpose of denying them the "right" to end our Democracy. Ergo they will be silenced and banned in various ways. Their "books" will be "burned", among other things. The use of force to stop them will look very much like their own methods. So I might suggest the answer is not as clear cut and dry as we would like to imagine. In conflict, we all stain our hands red.

Well, that's one way to look at it.
But maybe, just maybe, the way to stop them is something wild and crazy like addressing the issues with our voting system, and that doesn't look much like their methods to me.
Nobody is calling for the burning of copies of conservative-espousing books (that I'm aware of), nobody is calling for the dismantling of Parlr or Gettr or what-have-you. So I guess it's really accurate to disregard everything you said after "I imagine" because it really is imaginary.

 

[rommelrommel]

Well, it's actually frightfully close to historic fascist movements, including those of Germany, Italy and Spain. Animated by racism, xenophobia and nativism, as well as rampant hatred of the political left. Intensely nationalistic. Trump, who is clearly their uncontested leader, has about 23 of 25 personality traits identified by academics decades ago as characteristics of a fascist leader. Trump does not have a well developed political philosophy as did Hitler, but Trump's followers are close to Hitler's followers in every way that matters.

I guess it’s the lack of philosophy that throws the comparison for me. Hitler had ideals… mostly horrible ones but he had them. Trump’s only belief is in his own glorification.

 

[woolfe9998]

I guess it’s the lack of philosophy that throws the comparison for me. Hitler had ideals… mostly horrible ones but he had them. Trump’s only belief is in his own glorification.

Yeah, fascism is best understood through the lens of the ordinary rank and file fascist supporter, not the particular traits of the charismatic leader. Mussolini, for example, wasn't especially anti-Semitic. The main characteristics of the leader which matter are authoritarianism and the willingness to use both propaganda and violence to achieve their ends.

Look at the emotions which animate the movement. Fear and anger. Fear of and anger towards "the other," towards progress, towards change. It is essentially ordinary political conservatism taken to a grave extreme.

 

[woolfe9998]

While I applaud a good idea to start with... one does not give a "Nazi" the right to vote and usurp power, to destroy said Democracy.
Or do they?

I imagine any conflict with them... is for the purpose of denying them the "right" to end our Democracy. Ergo they will be silenced and banned in various ways. Their "books" will be "burned", among other things. The use of force to stop them will look very much like their own methods. So I might suggest the answer is not as clear cut and dry as we would like to imagine. In conflict, we all stain our hands red.

This is the perverse irony of free speech. It is, on the one hand, absolutely essential to a liberal democracy. On the other hand, it may well be it's death knell because to maintain a liberal democracy, one must tolerate its illiberal elements, until at a certain place and time, those elements gain enough traction to end democracy itself.

It may be that future history will reveal a pattern of democracy rising, falling, then re-asserting itself, in an endless cycle, and for this very reason.

In the shorter term, however, Nakefrog is correct: there are other things we can do, like passing a comprehensive voting reform package.

 

[tweaker2]

Fascism is about the only way the Repubs will be able to take control of the nation because their ideology is now driven by one and only one tenet: Seize control before it can't be done.

And let's not forget the fact that the folks who control the Repub party's inner workings is waging a campaign of which creating a fascist state is only one battle being fought in an overall campaign. That being the War Of The Classes. If a fascist state is created under the rule of the GOP, the War Of The Classes will be won by the ultra wealthy few who run the party to the demise of the nation's middle class of whom include those millions of working class Repubs that are being exploited and being made fools of by their aristocrat masters.

 

[nickqt]

While I applaud a good idea to start with... one does not give a "Nazi" the right to vote and usurp power, to destroy said Democracy.
Or do they?

I imagine any conflict with them... is for the purpose of denying them the "right" to end our Democracy. Ergo they will be silenced and banned in various ways. Their "books" will be "burned", among other things. The use of force to stop them will look very much like their own methods. So I might suggest the answer is not as clear cut and dry as we would like to imagine. In conflict, we all stain our hands red.

No, their ideology and hate will not be banned. It's impossible.

Most likely it will have to be killed out.

The only good fascist is a dead fascist. Unless you're a fascist of course.

 

[ivwshane]

This is not at all a useful comparison. The particular policies are mired in events pertinent to that time period and nation. So, take the first one on that list.



At that time, there was another nation of Germans, called Austria. There were also whole regions of western Poland and western Czechoslovakia dominated by German speakers. The Nazis wanted them all united under one flag. This is obviously inapplicable to America today. As are many of the other issues.

Also, these policies were formulated mainly by Alfred Drexler, the original founder of the party, in 1920. Many of these policies changed under actual Nazi rule. So, for example, the original founder took the "socialism" in National Socialism more seriously than did Hitler. Under Hitler's rule, the Nazis sided with the industrialists because they needed them for war production, and smashed the trade unions.

It's more useful to examine the core philosophy. Hatred of liberalism in all its forms: equality, modernity, cosmopolitism, internationalism, science. Hatred of anyone not like oneself. Authoritarianism based on a cult of personality surrounding a charismatic leader. And very intense nationalism. When you understand that this is the core of fascism, the comparison is spot on with the current American right, and only the American right.

I don’t know if it’s important to look at the core philosophy as you say. Many horrific things have been done in the name of some philosophical movements. Many of those movements when looked at with blinders, as blackangst1 demonstrated, look noble and moral. The problem is when man sees their morality and nobleness as justification for their actions, no matter how horrific (religion is a perfect example of this). I think what’s more important is to look at history and to see how and when red flags are raised and hopefully stop them.

So if we ignore philosophies and look for actions I think that opens up the number of examples we can find throughout history (unfettered capitalism and slavery are perfect examples of this).

Unfortunately my knowledge of history isn’t good enough to be aware of examples that were stopped before they turned bloody.

 

[uallas5]

Are Republicans Nazis ?

No.

But the proper question really should be are Nazis Republican? By and large, Yes. The only ones that aren't are the ones who don't vote.

 

[soulcougher73]

The thing I focus on is how tempting and appealing fascism is to me. How would I be able to see it in others without that inner experience.

Education?