08-25-2020, 06:18 PM
(08-25-2020, 12:15 PM)Dill Wrote: There are no such "entries." And baseless accusations certainly don't set you on some higher moral ground for judging others' "low blows."
And now I'll do a little "reiterating" myself.
It is PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE to make analogies between US politicians, policies, and party platforms and those of any other country, present or past--including the NS state. Analogies are by definition of unlike things, so they don't assert identification: Trump=Nazi. They are a perfectly legitimate analytic tool.
For people who can distinguish between demagoguery and analysis, the only question should be regarding the quality/validity of any proffered points of analogy. If that discussion is not possible, then it is not possible to really have an open political discussion/critique of authoritarianism when it comes to power in the US and exercises that power.
If you really want to make a substantial contribution to this thread, then drop the moral posturing and demonstrate why the correspondences given in post #13 don't fit. It is not "unacceptable" for Americans to note, discuss and make a case for such correspondences if they are really there. It should be unacceptable to acknowledge they are there but deny the discussion.
This is a lot of words to basically say it's ok to do it when you think it's ok to do it. I suppose comparing someone to the Nazis would be perfectly acceptable if they were for building more highways? Not a charged comparison at all, right?
