Quantcast
Ron Rosenbaum, world-class expert on the rise of Hitler compares him to Trump

Forums - Politics Discussion - Ron Rosenbaum, world-class expert on the rise of Hitler compares him to Trump

Imaginedvl said:
Flilix said:
Like I expected, everyone here says that nobody should be compared to Hitler. A lot of people seem to think that Hitler was the devil himself, that he was the worst leader in history, that every single thing he did was bad...
But Hitler was just a president. Yes, he started a world war and he killed millions of people. But a lot of kings and presidents did things that were even worse. And a lot of people would have done things even way worse than these, but they luckily never got the power to do it.
There were enough things Hitler has done that were actually good for the people and the country.

So if someone compares Trump to Hitler, that doesn't mean he's saying Trump is pure evil, but it means that Trump's regime has some worrysome similarities with the regime of a dangerous dictator, and that we need to be careful so that he doesn't take things too far.

I do not think you realize how much the context is different from what happen in Germany after the first world war defeat (which was actually not really a defeat but anyway). Even without comparing Trump to Hitler, the context is totally different... Everybody can find similarities between any democracies or situation out there and any dictatorial regime if you really want to spend time on it...

Comparing the US current state and Germany's situation (and then Hitler regime) is just completly out of place imo.

A lot of Americans nowadays think they live in a bad time. Both Hitler and Trump (and other populists) constantly say that times are bad (mostly because of foreigners, a certain group of people...), that everything was better a few decades ago when the country was still very powerful, and that he will solve all the problems by bringing the country back to its most glorious times.



Around the Network
Srassy said:
Peh said:

You compare competely unrelevant subjects.

Hitler was a populist, so is Trump. That's a much better comparision. And both used it to gain votes.

See, I never got the populist angle.  You mean that he said stuff to get votes?  Like a politician?  Why do we call it populist for the people we dislike?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism

Populism is a political style of action that mobilizes a large alienated element of a population against a government which is seen as controlled by an out-of-touch closed elite that acts on behalf of its own interests. The underlying ideology of Populists can be left, right, or middle. Its goal is to unite the uncorrupt and the unsophisticated (the 'little man') against the corrupt dominant elites (usually the orthodox politicians) and their camp followers (usually the rich and the intellectuals). It is guided by the belief that political and social goals are best achieved by the direct actions of the masses. Although it comes into being where mainstream political institutions fail to deliver, there is no identifiable economic or social set of conditions that give rise to it, and it is not confined to any particular social class.[1]



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti 11GB VRAM | Asus PG27UQ gaming on 3840 x 2160 @120 Hz GSYNC HDR| HTC Vive Pro :3

Reached PC Masterrace level.

Lol no.



Peh said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism

Populism is a political style of action that mobilizes a large alienated element of a population against a government which is seen as controlled by an out-of-touch closed elite that acts on behalf of its own interests. The underlying ideology of Populists can be left, right, or middle. Its goal is to unite the uncorrupt and the unsophisticated (the 'little man') against the corrupt dominant elites (usually the orthodox politicians) and their camp followers (usually the rich and the intellectuals). It is guided by the belief that political and social goals are best achieved by the direct actions of the masses. Although it comes into being where mainstream political institutions fail to deliver, there is no identifiable economic or social set of conditions that give rise to it, and it is not confined to any particular social class.[1]

Yeah, I'm aware of the dictionary definition.  But aren't they all trying to do that?  To varying degrees of success and subtlety?  Would Bernie Sanders be considered populist for you and why do I never hear him described in such terms?



Someone trying too hard to show his job isn't useless.



Around the Network
Peh said:
Srassy said:

See, I never got the populist angle.  You mean that he said stuff to get votes?  Like a politician?  Why do we call it populist for the people we dislike?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism

Populism is a political style of action that mobilizes a large alienated element of a population against a government which is seen as controlled by an out-of-touch closed elite that acts on behalf of its own interests. The underlying ideology of Populists can be left, right, or middle. Its goal is to unite the uncorrupt and the unsophisticated (the 'little man') against the corrupt dominant elites (usually the orthodox politicians) and their camp followers (usually the rich and the intellectuals). It is guided by the belief that political and social goals are best achieved by the direct actions of the masses. Although it comes into being where mainstream political institutions fail to deliver, there is no identifiable economic or social set of conditions that give rise to it, and it is not confined to any particular social class.[1]

So... Bernie Sanders?



Trunkin said:
Peh said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism

Populism is a political style of action that mobilizes a large alienated element of a population against a government which is seen as controlled by an out-of-touch closed elite that acts on behalf of its own interests. The underlying ideology of Populists can be left, right, or middle. Its goal is to unite the uncorrupt and the unsophisticated (the 'little man') against the corrupt dominant elites (usually the orthodox politicians) and their camp followers (usually the rich and the intellectuals). It is guided by the belief that political and social goals are best achieved by the direct actions of the masses. Although it comes into being where mainstream political institutions fail to deliver, there is no identifiable economic or social set of conditions that give rise to it, and it is not confined to any particular social class.[1]

So... Bernie Sanders?

And Obama ? Bush ? Justin Trudeau (Canada) ? Jack Layton (Canada too) ?

They pretty much all used the same methods to a different degree to get their votes. As said describe by the definition, populism has no political allegiance.



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

RolStoppable said:

I've read it all. There was a lot of history about Hitler, then barely any comparison to Trump. I suppose it's because the comparison works for hardly anything.

But for someone who is anti-Trump, they would have to assign a high level of intelligence and acting ability to Trump to buy into this article. Are they willing to do that? I mean, calling Donald Trump a mastermind seems to be the last thing they would do.

On a sidenote, the German party SPD has announced a new candidate for the chancellor position (the most powerful position in Germany) for the upcoming election this year and the strategy is to mobilize the hard working people and make them vote SPD. It's an appeal to the working class similar to Trump, so the first naysayers are already throwing around the terms post-factual and alternative facts. Regardless, early survey data puts Schulz in the lead.

I don't support the terms post-factual and alternative facts, because I believe in the fact that the rich get richer while the poor get poorer, and the poor people as well as the lower middle class amount to the majority of eligible voters. And that's why appeasing them is going to win elections. If they are offered a chance for improvement, most of them will take that over status quo in a heartbeat and there's nothing illogical about that.

lol, it never ceases to amaze me how so called "middle class" and "poor" people fall for this scam every single time. Do you even know Trump's tax policy? It's the same tax policy that's been gutting the middle class since the 80s by giving huge tax breaks to rich people, that's when wealth disparity began to explode under Reagan. 

And then of course you think it's going to trickle down to you ... lol, rich people are laughing their asses off that the "masses" fall for this every single time, you guys willingly vote to have your own social services axed and tax breaks being given to the wealthiest and then you wonder why the rich are getting richer. This is easier than taking candy from a baby. 

And get used to "alternative facts" you have at least 4 years of them coming on up. 



Flilix said:
Imaginedvl said:

I do not think you realize how much the context is different from what happen in Germany after the first world war defeat (which was actually not really a defeat but anyway). Even without comparing Trump to Hitler, the context is totally different... Everybody can find similarities between any democracies or situation out there and any dictatorial regime if you really want to spend time on it...

Comparing the US current state and Germany's situation (and then Hitler regime) is just completly out of place imo.

A lot of Americans nowadays think they live in a bad time. Both Hitler and Trump (and other populists) constantly say that times are bad (mostly because of foreigners, a certain group of people...), that everything was better a few decades ago when the country was still very powerful, and that he will solve all the problems by bringing the country back to its most glorious times.

Every politician out there are populists. 

And you cannot possibly compare how Germany was back then (and not only the state of mind of people but also its position within the world power, not even mentionning how France and England treated them as loser while they all signed an armistice and basically make peace to end the war) with the USA today; it just does not make any sense. 



Populist is different from using xenophobia and racism to scape goat certain groups and buoy yourself to popularity. In that sense Trump is very much taking a page out of Hitler's play book, however in the long run that will blow up in his face.