There was a certain point in my life that I got to where I didn't want to hear anything good about Barney and I didn't want to hear anything bad about Barney. I just didn't want to hear about Barney. The Bush/Hitler comparisons are becoming equivalent to Barney references in my mind. They may have been useful to get some people motivated to go out and vote who might not have otherwise, but now I think they just harden the position of those who held their noses and voted for Bush because they thought it dangerous to change presidents in mid-war. I personally subscribe to the theory that Bush believes all his press and is just not swift enough to see inconsistancies in his rhetoric such as bringing democracy to Iraq by means of force. He is not aspiring to become another Hitler. He is not even aspiring to become another Mussolini. There are plenty of things to dink our President on. I don't think wildly overstating things helps the progressive cause now, no matter how emotionally satisfying it might be.
at what point does a comparison become appropriate?
if at any point in how far down the line of government control and loss of individual rights, its always "well, its only for a little while" and "its not that bad, compared at what Germany did".
well, if you look at what Germany did, it was NEVER a sudden, bam! here's fascism. every step towards the hell that Germany was, 1936-1945, was slow, steady, single steps at a time.
to remember that is CRITICAL to keeping this country free.
especially as each subset of the administration says their particular incroachment on our freedoms and rights isn't going to change us all that much.
no, each department's ideas of how to be "more secure" by eliminating a right we've had for decades or more isn't going to turn us into Germany. but start to add them all up and see what happens.
Ok you can see the comparison and so can I. That the Bushies are taking us one step in the direction toward the formation of a totalitarian state. However you're not going to sell any moderate conservatives on the idea that Bush is a potential Hitler cuz he's all christian n stuff. If you want to scare a republican on this issue, ask them how they would feel about the Patriot Act if Kerry had won and decided to give Janet Reno her old job back, and remind them that the congress put a sunset clause on the PA because they thought that the powers it grants were deemed to dangerous for the US government to have in perpetuity. If you keep implying that Bush is a Hitler in the making, the people that need to be convinced are just going to get mad and ignore you.
well, the moderates are already powerless at the present thanks to voter apathy at the primary level (the reason conservatives are the ones getting to congress for the republicans is because the moderate electorate isn't voting in the primaries that select congressional candidates, especially in the off-election years like 1998 and 2002), and thanks to Karl Rove and the tactics he employs that have been duplicated by many.
trouble is, fiscally and economically, the moderates on both parties are far more alike than different, so only social policies differentiate them. that left the opening for Uncle Newt to come along and push the social differences to the point that they alone define what people see in the parties. The economic realities of the ultra-conservatives are ignored because the people have been duped by their own history to think that its what all republicans want.
I think we need to use more than one tactic simultaneously. It's not a big debate with all of us in one room and a representative for each side speaking at a time. It's thousands of conversations happening simultaneously all over the country.
Some places you shout. Some places you whisper. Some places you ask Socratic questions. Some places you wait for a better opportunity. Use all the tools, just pick where and when to use each.
Except that it's not about convincing people "Bush is evil"; it's about making people pay attention so that we don't let history repeat itself. It's about vigilance. It's about the memeset and the policies, not the man.
No, I don't think Bush aspires to be another Hitler. I do think that a group of people around him collectively have similar aspirations despite none of them seeing themselves in that role individually. More importantly, I see a lot of people saying, "oh it's just this one thing," or, "oh we need to let them get away with that 'because of the terrorists'", who need to be reminded that some of these words -- and steps -- sound familiar.
It's not "Ooh, demon Bush! We hates him!" It's "Hey folks, stay alert and don't let America become Hitler's Germany."
It's a matter of keeping that thought in the back of everyone's mind: "Wait, do we want to jump right into this just because of some Christian/terrorist-FUD rhetoric? Let's slow down and consider the larger picture, possible unintended consequences, balance of power, and such first."
It's a bit late to try to convince people to vote for Kerry. Even I know that. I want to remind people to remind their representatives to preserve American democracy in the face of temptations to rub it away a little at a time for short-term benefits.
(no subject)
(no subject)
if at any point in how far down the line of government control and loss of individual rights, its always "well, its only for a little while" and "its not that bad, compared at what Germany did".
well, if you look at what Germany did, it was NEVER a sudden, bam! here's fascism. every step towards the hell that Germany was, 1936-1945, was slow, steady, single steps at a time.
to remember that is CRITICAL to keeping this country free.
especially as each subset of the administration says their particular incroachment on our freedoms and rights isn't going to change us all that much.
no, each department's ideas of how to be "more secure" by eliminating a right we've had for decades or more isn't going to turn us into Germany. but start to add them all up and see what happens.
freedom requires vigilance.
grump
Re: grump
(no subject)
(no subject)
trouble is, fiscally and economically, the moderates on both parties are far more alike than different, so only social policies differentiate them. that left the opening for Uncle Newt to come along and push the social differences to the point that they alone define what people see in the parties. The economic realities of the ultra-conservatives are ignored because the people have been duped by their own history to think that its what all republicans want.
(no subject)
Some places you shout. Some places you whisper. Some places you ask Socratic questions. Some places you wait for a better opportunity. Use all the tools, just pick where and when to use each.
(no subject)
No, I don't think Bush aspires to be another Hitler. I do think that a group of people around him collectively have similar aspirations despite none of them seeing themselves in that role individually. More importantly, I see a lot of people saying, "oh it's just this one thing," or, "oh we need to let them get away with that 'because of the terrorists'", who need to be reminded that some of these words -- and steps -- sound familiar.
It's not "Ooh, demon Bush! We hates him!" It's "Hey folks, stay alert and don't let America become Hitler's Germany."
It's a matter of keeping that thought in the back of everyone's mind: "Wait, do we want to jump right into this just because of some Christian/terrorist-FUD rhetoric? Let's slow down and consider the larger picture, possible unintended consequences, balance of power, and such first."
It's a bit late to try to convince people to vote for Kerry. Even I know that. I want to remind people to remind their representatives to preserve American democracy in the face of temptations to rub it away a little at a time for short-term benefits.