Without exception, every generation considers itself to be the smartest generation to have ever existed (despite clear evidence to the contrary). I wish this one would realize it isn’t, and try to learn something from history.
|
Nazi |
Democrat |
Republican |
Tea Party |
|
|
Anti-Semitism |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
Statist / Promotes Big, Centralized Government |
Yes |
Yes |
Partially* |
No |
|
Eugenics |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
Exerts Control of the Media for Political Gain |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
Gun Control / Gun Registration |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
Strong Nationalism |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Nationalized Healthcare |
Yes |
Yes |
Partially*** |
No |
|
Political Intimidation / Targeting |
Yes |
Yes |
Partially** |
No |
|
Religion |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Use of Public Education in Political Indoctrination |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
Use of Racial Divisiveness for Political Gain |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
* Government expansion has occurred onder several republican administrations. |
||||
|
** Political intimidation occurred under the Nixon Administration |
||||
|
*** Romneycare |
||||
I’d probably change the bit about strong nationalism under Nazi from “yes” to “partially”, and put under **** that the definition of Nationalism under the Nazis is not the same as Nationalism under traditional definitions (certainly not the same as the definition used by the Republicans or Tea Party members), and in fact, they hate the traditional definition due to being “bougeoise”. He hints at this in the December 6th, 1931 edition of Der Angriff, and elaborates a bit further in his pamphlet “Those Damned Nazis”, which I’ll briefly quote:
“We are nationalists because we see the nation as the only way to bring all the forces of the nation together to preserve and improve our existence and the conditions under which we live.”
“The nation is the organic union of a people to protect its life. To be national is to affirm this union in word and deed. To be national has nothing to do with a form of government or a symbol. It is an affirmation of things, not forms. Forms can change, their content remains. If form and content agree, then the nationalist affirms both. If they conflict, the nationalist fights for the content and against the form. One may not put the symbol above the content. If that happens, the battle is on the wrong field and one’s strength is lost in formalism. The real aim of nationalism, the nation, is lost.”
“That is how things are today in Germany. Nationalism has turned into bourgeois patriotism and its defenders are battling windmills. One says Germany and means the monarchy. Another proclaims freedom and means Black-White-Red [The imperial colors]. Would our situation today be any different if we replaced the republic with a monarchy and flew the black-white-red flag? The colony would have different wallpaper, but its nature, its content would stay the same. Indeed, things would be even worse, for a facade that conceals the facts dissipates the forces today fighting against slavery.”
“Bourgeois patriotism is the privilege of a class. It is the real reason for its decline. When 30 million are for something and 30 million are against it, things balance out and nothing happens. That is how things are with us. We are the world’s Pariah not because we do not have the courage to resist, rather because out entire national energy is wasted in eternal and unproductive squabbling between the right and the left. Our way only goes downward, and today one can already predict when we will fall into the abyss.”
“Nationalism is more wide-reaching than internationalism. It sees things as they are. Only he who respects himself can respect others. If as a German nationalist I affirm Germany, how can I hold it against a French nationalist who affirms France? Only when these affirmations conflict in vital ways will there be a power-political struggle. Internationalism cannot undo this reality. Its attempts at proof fail completely. And even when the facts seem to have some validity, nature, blood, the will to life, and the struggle for existence on this hard earth prove the falsity of fine theories.”
You can read more here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20020213233649/http://www.calvin.edu:80/academic/cas/gpa/haken32.htm