Hitler, the new catch phrase

Published on October 27, 2005 By foreverserenity In Current Events

[Inspired from an article written by Kathleen Parker, “It’s time to Retire Hitler”.]

I have noticed this happening a lot lately even before reading Ms. Parker’s article in my local paper.

Politicians are invoking the name of Hitler when they want to insult their opponents. His name is mentioned so much that you can Google it and receive quite a lot of responses! That’s how popular Hitler as become, even today.

Studying the rise and fall of Hitler is important because doing so will hopefully prevent another occurrence of someone like that (and there are many who want to be like him). However using the name as it’s being used right now should not be tolerated. Referring to him is not acceptable because he wasn’t a great leader who did good things. He wasn’t a hero, regardless of those out there who worship him.

Society should not be indifferent to his prior existence but his actions should not be held up as examples because he was an evil man!

His name, his cause, his actions should not be held up as examples as a metaphor for evil; making others look bad; comparing our President to him; comedians using him as a punch line…enough already!

Comments (Page 1)

Dr Guy

on Oct 27, 2005

5 stars! Excellent! VERY WELL SAID!

Moderateman

on Oct 27, 2005

well hitler was not all bad donna, well maybe mostly bad, ok down right evil, not totally evil just some, well mostly.

Cordelia

on Oct 27, 2005

I totally agree foreverserentiy! John Stewart said something like "stop comparing everyone to Hitler. Its demeaning to the person being compared to Hitler, it's demeaning to you, and it's demeaning to HITLER". Sheesh.

der'morat'draco

on Oct 27, 2005

Indeed I agree. Don't compare someone to Hitler unless you really mean that the person in question ranks with Hitler (having ordered the deaths of some 6 million people and tried to take over the world ranks pretty high on the "bad" list IMO). It is quite a statement, so please don't use it so lightly.

bakerstreet

on Oct 27, 2005

WHo is saying Hitler is a great man? I think it is fine to use Hitler as a comparison if it is apt. Hitler didn't just kill 6 million people, he also oppressed Germany, and used specific tactics throughout his career.

Saying that you can only associate Hitler with his own acts of genocide is silly, because he did a lot more that we should remember with caution beyond genocide. People are just too ignorant to associate those practices with anything but the holocaust. Frankly, I think people don't know ENOUGH about Hitler, and in many cases could do with a bit MORE reminding.

If people knew more, they wouldn't be associating him with Republicans, or Conservatives, when in fact his whole philosphy has a lot more in common with the Left. I don't think his name should be tossed around lightly, but if it quacks like a duck you should call it a duck.

So, to tie it up, taking Hitler lightly is bad, but so is JUST associating him with genocide. He did a lot more things, and taught mankind a LOT more lessons that it is just wrong to kill millions of people.

There are plenty of world leaders floating around that might never kill millions, but who could easily be another Hitler. Until people are more fearful of Hitler's cause, and not just the genocidal effects, they'll have to be reminded.

Dr Guy

on Oct 27, 2005

Saying that you can only associate Hitler with his own acts of genocide is silly, because he did a lot more that we should remember with caution beyond genocide. People are just too ignorant to associate those practices with anything but the holocaust. Frankly, I think people don't know ENOUGH about Hitler, and in many cases could do with a bit MORE reminding.

I think you missed the point. Comparing Saddam to Hitler is apt. Comparing Bush or Blair or Pope Benedict XVI is not. That is the reason they should stop. Not when doing an appropriate comparison.

The only difference between Saddam and Hitler was the relative size of his army and the reach of his evil.

bakerstreet

on Oct 27, 2005

mmm, hmm. I've actually read the article in question. I don't think you got my point, Doc. You don't have kill anyone or even have an army to be worthy of the comparison. Hitler wasn't just a military leader or racist. He did a lot of other things and had a lot of other political ideas.

I agree with Ms Parker to a point, but I don't agree with the criterea she seems to be promoting in this article. She makes a couple of good examples of how it is misused, like the Virginia election, but I don't believe that Hitler is just to be used in circumstances of heinous evil. Hitler didn't get where he was by being a monster, nor will the people who come later.

I don't agree with comparing Hitler to Bush, Blair or the Pope, but only because there is no real comparison to make. That's not saying that someone has to be a white suprimacist or killer of millions to be worthy of the comparison, though. Hitler was supposedly giving the German people a great new world, improving things, making things better, right?

If he had announced he was going to slaughter millions and provoke the world's rage I doubt he would have done well politically. By the time you know these people are monsters, it's too late. I think a lot of LIberals are very Hitleresque in their view for the perfect world and the amount of oppression they'd tolerate to get it.

Does that mean they are white supremacists or would kill millions? Nope, but they'd still deserve the comparison.

Furry Canary

on Oct 28, 2005

'Hitler didn't just kill 6 million people ...'
Er, 6 million was the Jews alone. Hitler and the Nazis killed many, many more than that. 25 million people in the USSR for starters.

bakerstreet

on Oct 28, 2005

eh... I think you need to check your figures, fuzzy, Hitler didn't kill 25 million Russians. Depending on who you read, Hitler has between 10 and 25 million democides attributed to him, total. I tend to agree with the higher number, since so many just "disappeared."

Stalin, on the other hand, killed many more than that of his own people during the purges. Mao and the rest of the hateful Chinese leadership down through the years are estimated to have killed 50 or 60 million of their own people, if not more. When people compare Stalin and Hitler and the Chinese leadership, though, Hitler always seems more evil to them. The highest death toll doesn't always win in the court of public opinion.

Anyway, like I said, the number of people Hitler killed isn't his only defining characteristic. He didn't start out by making a campaign promise to kill several million people and ruin his country. If we wait until people become monsters to start drawing comparisons we'll always figure it out way, way too late.

Dr Guy

on Oct 28, 2005

She makes a couple of good examples of how it is misused, like the Virginia election

Ok, I better understand your point now. However the above is just stupid. If Ms. Parker had taken the ad in context (and it was a bad one any way for other reasons), no one was being Compared to Hitler. Instead, one candidate said the other would not have put Hitler to death given the opportunity (opposition to the death penalty, not an affinity for the man).

It is probably the most excitement the campaign saw! And it has only a week and a half to go. At least that ad made the papers and got people thinking about the election.

Dr Guy

on Oct 28, 2005

When people compare Stalin and Hitler and the Chinese leadership, though, Hitler always seems more evil to them. The highest death toll doesn't always win in the court of public opinion.

I think that has to do with who they kill. Stalin and Mao pretty much kept it to their own people (as did Pol Pot), while Hitler exported his death. No one is afraid of the leaders of Sudan, except Sudanese, because they are not a threat to anyone outside their own country.

foreverserenity

on Oct 28, 2005

Thank you guys for responding to this article. I'm a little busy and will come back to it later so I'm not ignoring you.

bakerstreet

on Oct 28, 2005

It was a Kilgore ad that said the opponent wouldn't support the death penalty, even for Hitler. Sorry, I should have shared a link.

Chaos Manager

on Oct 28, 2005

You know what's funny? Khaine's response to the "Won't enforce the death penalty" complains that Kilgore is picking on him for his religious beliefs. "No we don't kill people 'cause they did something to deserve it" but he's one of the first one's to jump on the abortion bandwagon. IMO, they're the same thing, just different points in the victim's life.

Hypocritical politicians (both of 'em).

foreverserenity

on Oct 31, 2005

Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Thursday, October 27, 20055 stars! Excellent! VERY WELL SAID!

Thanks Doc!

Reply By: ModeratemanPosted: Thursday, October 27, 2005well hitler was not all bad donna, well maybe mostly bad, ok down right evil, not totally evil just some, well mostly.

Elie....you've got to make up your mind.....of course he was...annilihating so many people and if he had lived today......I won't even go there!

Reply By: CordeliaPosted: Thursday, October 27, 2005I totally agree foreverserentiy! John Stewart said something like "stop comparing everyone to Hitler. Its demeaning to the person being compared to Hitler, it's demeaning to you, and it's demeaning to HITLER". Sheesh.

Exactly Cordelia, exactly what I'm saying too!

Reply By: der'morat'draco

Don't compare someone to Hitler unless you really mean that the person in question ranks with Hitler

It is quite a statement, so please don't use it so lightly.

Exactly der'morat'draco! (that's quite a mouthful!) people should be more responsible in what they say. Comparing anyone to Hitler, no matter how humorous it might be is NOT funny!

Reply By: BakerStreetPosted: Thursday, October 27, 2005WHo is saying Hitler is a great man?

Some people who use him as an example as to why THEY should hate and others should join them.

I think it is fine to use Hitler as a comparison if it is apt.

I guess it's ok only in the sense of a "what not to do" example, because we have to be aware of people who think the way he did.

If we wait until people become monsters to start drawing comparisons we'll always figure it out way, way too late.

I agree with you on this Baker. That IS why we shouldn't forget what he did or the tactics he used, just so that we hopefully will see before it's too late if anyone else try to do the same thing.

Comparing Saddam to Hitler is apt. Comparing Bush or Blair or Pope Benedict XVI is not. That is the reason they should stop. Not when doing an appropriate comparison.The only difference between Saddam and Hitler was the relative size of his army and the reach of his evil.

I agree with you on this point too Doc! I think sometimes people forget what Saddam has done and what he was doing.

If he had announced he was going to slaughter millions and provoke the world's rage I doubt he would have done well politically. By the time you know these people are monsters, it's too late. I think a lot of LIberals are very Hitleresque in their view for the perfect world and the amount of oppression they'd tolerate to get it. Does that mean they are white supremacists or would kill millions? Nope, but they'd still deserve the comparison.

You know Baker, I do see your point here. People will believe what they do and some people will get what they want by any means necessary. So I guess if they have to "pull the blinders over someone's eyes" to achieve what they really want they will do it. And you won't realise it, til it's too late. Especially if what they do affect millions of people. The thing is, there has to be at least one person nearby who will see what's being done and it will be up to that one person to alert everyone else.

Reply By: Furry CanaryPosted: Friday, October 28, 2005'Hitler didn't just kill 6 million people ...'Er, 6 million was the Jews alone. Hitler and the Nazis killed many, many more than that. 25 million people in the USSR for starters.

I don't know for a fact how many he killed and I can look it up if I want to but won't. We all know he killed enough people to have eliminated a nation.

It is probably the most excitement the campaign saw! And it has only a week and a half to go. At least that ad made the papers and got people thinking about the election.

It's always down to these types of dirty tactics isn't it? It's always throw thrash at the opponent to make them look bad no matter what. It's too bad politicians always stoop to this level when they campaign. The public is so gullible after all, we get suckered in and do what they want us to do. It never fails and so they keep on doing it!

while Hitler exported his death.

That's an interesting way to put it Doc! It's weird but when we look at it that way...he most certainly did!

No one is afraid of the leaders of Sudan, except Sudanese, because they are not a threat to anyone outside their own country.

And this is why they will keep on doing what they do. Because they keep their murderous ways inside their countries, they are getting away with it.....no one does anything! Or not enough of to stop them!

Reply By: little_whipPosted: Friday, October 28, 2005Who is being referred to as Hitler in the VA election? I'll be sure to vote for him just to piss the liberals off.

I'm not following it (the election) myself, but it's making the headlines!

Hypocritical politicians (both of 'em).

Show me one that isnt,

! Politicians will, IMO, do anything to win! As the saying go one has to choose the best of two evils!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!