Don't compare Bush to Hitler, compare Bush to the Hitler of 1935

[RegenerationMan]

Many have simply compared Bush to Hitler. But to historians, Bush has not gone as far as Hitler did--yet. What the real comparison should be is Bush to the Hitler of 1935, before Hitler showed his true colors. This distinction must be made. When it is, it throws the whole election and Nader's announcement today into a new light.

In 1935, the media admired Hitler and he had yet to commit his most horrible atrocities. Yes there was the Reichstag Fire (think 9-11), then laws passed to limit civil rights (think Patriot Act), then the Night of the Long Knives, in which all top political resistance was intimidated out of existence through violence (think Anthrax Attack on Daschle and Leahy after they spoke out against the Patriot Act).

But Hitler in 1935, like Bush, had yet to show his true colors. The world had not yet experienced the remilitarization of Germany (think a 2005 military draft) and the invasion of Europe (think PNAC Plan to take Iran, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Khazakistan, Georgia, Azerbaijan, etc.) and the Holocaust (think a fleet of 60 jets armed with 2 Mw lasers able to shoot 180 miles by 2008, then orbiting lasers in the 2010s--allowing total world domination or the United States of Earth).

And the Western media still mostly admired Hitler in 1935. So you can't simply compare Bush to Hitler. That confuses the issue.

You must compare Bush OF 2004 to the Hitler of 1935.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

1. I'm reading William Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the 3rd Reich"

right now. The comparison between the 1930s Nazi Party and the Neo-Cons is pretty accurate. I think there is a potential here of moving farther toward totalitarianism, especially if-God Forbid-we have another terrorist attack. Many of the center and left parties in Germany dismissed Hitler, until he managed to become Chancellor. I don't even think we've seen the true colors of this administration.

[rock]

2. Interesting distinction

and I suppose correct if you want to be accurate.

[Pale_Rider]

3. Bush 2004: Better than Hilter!

As one DUer has in his/her sign line.

[Fridays Child]

4. This is a much better way of illustrating the similarities because...

...the majority of Americans associate Hitler with a heuristic, almost iconic, grasp of the Holocaust--as if he did not exist until that brief and horrible moment in history.

[patricia92243]

5. It won't be US of the World - It will be China States of the World>

[Broadslidin]

6. The Blood Of Prescott Bush Flows In His Viens.

As documented in Mark Crispin Miller's book,
"Dyslexicon: Observations On A National Disorder",
When speaking punitively, when he is talking about violence,
when he is talking about blood revenge,
Mr. Bush's syntax and grammer rings extremely clear.

As he attempts to identify with the "common folks"
he has been designed to appeal to,
does he become detached.
Within seconds, he is unable to keep focus on a social plan
that means nothing to him.

So far, his handlers have been very very careful to
choreograph every move he makes.
But with the wall and the fast fuse burning,
what event is in store for us that will allow
Prescott Bush to fully re-emerge?

[tjwash]

7. Not even close.

Hitler had taken over a country mired in the deepest economic depression it had seen, and turned it around through the use of public works, providing job's, and services to people. That's why the Volkswagen "beetle" was invented. Volkswagen literally means "peoples car", and was invented so that everyone in Germany at the time could have a car. Before absolute power corrupted absolutely, the people and press in Germany actually did love the slimebag.

Bush* on the other hand inherited a sweet booming economy from the Big Dog, and has ran it into the ground, squeezed it dry, handed it to all his corporate sponsors, and shows no sign of turning it around, nor even act's as if he cares that he does.

Of course Hitler could also put more than two words together in a sentence(way before the emergence of the TelePrompter), without sounding like a freaking retard, while georgie boy....

If you want to compare this Administration to anyone, compare it to the Soviet Union under Stalin. They had a stranglehold on the press, publishing the well known "Pravda", which very much compares to our "USA Today", and I am quite sure if they had a news network on TV back then, it would have been a lot like faux news or msgop. Not to mention had quite the penchant for using military power to keep the unwilling members of the the SU under control....

[ComerPerro]

8. Actually

I think that Bush wanted the economy to go sour just so he could pretend to turn it around, as he is doing now.

But the Stalin comparison is good too

[newyawker99]

9. Hi tjwash!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast: