Where does this article make that comparison? I don't see it. I see it pointing out there that is a loud new crop of American Internet Nazis, but that is not remotely the same as saying the US is like Nazi Germany.
Oh no. You can call people that, in large groups, exhibit traits similar to Nazis ( blaming all that is not well on some foreign element living among us for instance, nationalism, fair amounts of racism) because they resemble Nazis. That doesn't mean anything and everything also doesm
It isn't problematic to note that there are literal-not-figurative Nazis afoot. It is descriptive.
How one chooses to respond to that description is telling on oneself. And "see? just don't talk about politics, ignore the literal Nazis" is telling on yourself, too.
I see dozens of more-hyperbolic comparisons of political actions to Nazi Germany than this every week. Made by higher-profile people too. I’m surprised this one even rates on anyone’s radar.
This tendency to call everyone a Nazi is a very strange phenomenon in the USA. I think if Americans really experienced the atrocities of the Nazi, mass death camps, shootings of civilians, tortures - they would hesitate before they used this label against someone they don't like or whose views are different than theirs.
I agree, calling Trump a Nazi is both egregious and it also lessens any coherent argument about similarities between the populism of Trump's base and the beginnings of the Nazi party (not to imply too much similarity, but there is some). The Nazi label should not be trotted out without cause, but should be called into intelligent discussion where warranted. It seems we currently vacillate between using it too easily and too conservatively (Godwin's law).
The real problem is that both those extremes contribute to a system in which we believe a similar thing could never happen again by viewing them and their actions as distinct from us and what we are capable of, when there is no distinction. Closely related to the maxim that those that do not know history are doomed to repeat it is that those that view themselves as distinct from history are also doomed to repeat it. :/
Only a fraction of the people being referred to as Nazis in contemporary, largely-online discourse are saying anything close to this though. It's a routinely misapplied term.
It's not trying to discourage all reference to Nazis; only the sloppy, frivolous ones. It's too easy to shout "Nazi" and let the word do your work for you. But I would think a rationally supportable comparison with Nazis in any given situation would be appreciated, not to mention necessary to avoid repeating history.
Talking about actual Neo-Nazis is hard for Americans, because it makes it so much more difficult to paint the political opponent of the day here with that label. What we call a "nazi" is often totally indistinguishable from a social liberal when compared to the real thing.
Nazis? While your sentiment can be respected, comparing the US to a national-socialist political party that manufactured and entire industry of exterminating so-called inferior races is hyperbole to the extreme. Now if you had said Stasi..
Perhaps this would be a good time to point out that neither the article nor I were talking about Nazis. There's a lot of room to disagree before we hit Nazi.
Are you asking me to point you to a substantive internet comment drawing an interesting parallel between some divisive contemporary situation and Nazis, while managing not to be flamebait? I don't know of one. Note that word "if".
Although we find it distasteful it seems to be a pretty common refrain/analogy of those in politics & media.
reply