Steve Bannon.

[*bfine32*]

(02-14-2017, 09:29 PM)Dill Wrote: Unclear what you mean by "fairness."  But you may have hit upon a big difference between Trump supporters and Trump opponents.


The point of political comparisons /analogies is to produce understanding and re-evaluation of policies and candidates. Everyone understands (or should) that analogies are always partial; politicians, historical and political circumstances are never identical. Still, comparisons/analogies help us avoid errors of past candidates and policies.

They are only "unfair" if factually false, or distorting--as in emphasizing traits in one candidate which also exist in an opponent, or all candidates in general, or in creating false equivalences.

So the "intent" of anyone making comparisons should not play a role in judging the validity of his comparisons. Rather the comparisons should be judged on whether correlations made are accurate, based on factual evidence.  And if they are, then the comparison is not "unfair" just because the result does not favor some favored candidate or policy.

If I point out that Hitler hated liberals, tore up treaties, called the press liars, and wanted to boot immigrants and expand the military, and that Trump also hates liberals, calls the press liars, and wants to tear up treaties, boot immigrants and expand the military, the validity of those correlations in no way depends on whether I, personally, want to be "fair" or "unfair."  The historical record is there to check and it remains unchanged whether I am fair or not.

So I don't expect anyone to assume I am making a comparison out of "fairness." I expect them to either accept the comparison as valid--"fair" if you will--or explain why it is not.  

Same goes when others are making comparisons. I care only whether the correlations are true, not whether the person making them was fair or unfair.

 

Let's compare Hitler to Trump



Hitler: Born in Austria to a failed farmer, relocated to Germany, had no interest in education, served as a Soldier, joined various ideological political parties at a young age, and joined a coup to overtake Moscow


Trump: Native born citizen, went to College and became a business man


Hitler: Frequently denounced Capitalism


Trump: Internationally known Capitalist


Hitler: Rose to power by being a popular figure in his Nation's most powerful Political party


Trump: Rose to power by being hated by both political parties of his Nation


Hitler: Sought “living space” for his people by invading other countries


Trump: Sought a stronger country by expelling folks from other countries


Hitler: A life-long Bachelor


Trump: Married 3 times


Hitler: Rose to power through a life of politics at 44


Trump: Political outsider elected to his first government position at 70


But it is "fair" (use whatever meaning for the word you wish) to compare the two because they both say the same rhetoric that 10s of thousands of Politicians have said throughout the history of politics.

Would it have been fair to compare Obama to Pol Pot because they both wanted change and screwed up medical care to there citizens.