Hitler is a Tool
Most people think Hitler was evil. And, I agree. But, I find that a lot of the people that say Hitler was evil support the same ideas that Hitler supported. So, I'm proposing this heuristic: If Hitler was for it, maybe it's evil and we should be against it. Let's explore some of what Hitler was for and against.
Hitler was for judging people based on race rather than as individuals. This is directly opposed to the notion that Martin Luther King Jr. made famous that people "will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Racism changes terms based on the time and place, but this underlying essence is always the same: the race matters, the group matters, not the individual. In the US the more recent racist terms are "affirmative action" and "diversity and inclusion."
Hitler was for centralized government and authoritarian rule as opposed to a distribution of power with checks and balances. That's the definition of a dictator.
Hitler was for a justice system that treated people differently based on their group. One of the main things to be eliminated was due process. For the Jews, someone could just come grab them, their stuff, and hall them away at any moment. There was no process to it because there were no individual rights.
Hitler was for gun registration, gun confiscation, and weapon confiscation in general. Especially from certain groups that he deemed undesirable, i.e. Jews, blacks, gypsies, etc. He was against the right to defend yourself, especially against government tyranny.
Hitler was for the government regulation of speech. Freedom of speech is necessary for freedom of thought, to stop one stop the other. For the "public good," of course.
Hitler was for the central control of the press and manipulating public opinion. Hitler owned a newspaper on his rise to power. Stalin was a major editor, as was Mussolini. The control of the press is not an accident.
Hitler was against innocent until proven guilty. If you were part of a race that he didn't like, you were guilty. Or, if he said you were guilty, you were guilty.
Hitler was against the ability to change people in power. Once he had power, it was for life. Mr. Xi in China was recently able to declare himself "President for Life." If you can't be removed from power through a peaceful process, then you have arbitrary power until it ends.
Hitler was for slave labor in concentration camps. Stalin used a similar system in the Soviet Union in the gulags.
Hitler was for lying about the people you don't like to manipulate public opinion. He was for propaganda.
Hitler was for expanding the country and the economy through war. He was for annexing other areas and countries by force.
Hitler was for governmental control of schooling and education. Because, if you control what people learn, then you control people. That's why the Hitler Youth was such a priority. It's no coincidence that all governments control the school systems as much as possible.
Hitler was for a government controlled socialized healthcare system. Because, if people are just parts of the state then the state should take care of them, and control them, because the state owns them.
Hitler was for the initiation of force.
Hitler was against the protection of the individual rights to life, liberty, and property.
Hitler was for violent activism from paramilitary groups. That's what the Brownshirts were. In the US right now Antifa is almost a copy of Hitler's Brownshirts. Ironically, they call themselves anti-fascists even though they act just like the fascists and support the same policies as the fascists. If it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, and acts like a duck, and calls itself a chicken, it's still a duck.
Now, the best argument against my thesis is called the association fallacy. An example would be that just because Hitler wore shoes doesn't mean wearing shoes is bad. And, fair enough. But, here's the problem with that. These political and societal policies are not disconnected, as some people propose. They stem from a common source. They stem from the worldview that Hitler held. It was a consistent worldview. If you can't see the connection between restricting freedom of speech and slavery then maybe you're missing something. And if you're missing that connection, then maybe you're missing some of the others too, because these political and societal policies emanate from a common source.
The next time you're thinking through an issue, think about what Hitler would be for and what he would be against. Then, question whether you should really be on the same side of the issue as Hitler. Because, Hitler was consistently evil.
Hitler was for judging people based on race rather than as individuals. This is directly opposed to the notion that Martin Luther King Jr. made famous that people "will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Racism changes terms based on the time and place, but this underlying essence is always the same: the race matters, the group matters, not the individual. In the US the more recent racist terms are "affirmative action" and "diversity and inclusion."
Hitler was for centralized government and authoritarian rule as opposed to a distribution of power with checks and balances. That's the definition of a dictator.
Hitler was for a justice system that treated people differently based on their group. One of the main things to be eliminated was due process. For the Jews, someone could just come grab them, their stuff, and hall them away at any moment. There was no process to it because there were no individual rights.
Hitler was for gun registration, gun confiscation, and weapon confiscation in general. Especially from certain groups that he deemed undesirable, i.e. Jews, blacks, gypsies, etc. He was against the right to defend yourself, especially against government tyranny.
Hitler was for the government regulation of speech. Freedom of speech is necessary for freedom of thought, to stop one stop the other. For the "public good," of course.
Hitler was for the central control of the press and manipulating public opinion. Hitler owned a newspaper on his rise to power. Stalin was a major editor, as was Mussolini. The control of the press is not an accident.
Hitler was against innocent until proven guilty. If you were part of a race that he didn't like, you were guilty. Or, if he said you were guilty, you were guilty.
Hitler was against the ability to change people in power. Once he had power, it was for life. Mr. Xi in China was recently able to declare himself "President for Life." If you can't be removed from power through a peaceful process, then you have arbitrary power until it ends.
Hitler was for slave labor in concentration camps. Stalin used a similar system in the Soviet Union in the gulags.
Hitler was for lying about the people you don't like to manipulate public opinion. He was for propaganda.
Hitler was for expanding the country and the economy through war. He was for annexing other areas and countries by force.
Hitler was for governmental control of schooling and education. Because, if you control what people learn, then you control people. That's why the Hitler Youth was such a priority. It's no coincidence that all governments control the school systems as much as possible.
Hitler was for a government controlled socialized healthcare system. Because, if people are just parts of the state then the state should take care of them, and control them, because the state owns them.
Hitler was for the initiation of force.
Hitler was against the protection of the individual rights to life, liberty, and property.
Hitler was for violent activism from paramilitary groups. That's what the Brownshirts were. In the US right now Antifa is almost a copy of Hitler's Brownshirts. Ironically, they call themselves anti-fascists even though they act just like the fascists and support the same policies as the fascists. If it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, and acts like a duck, and calls itself a chicken, it's still a duck.
Now, the best argument against my thesis is called the association fallacy. An example would be that just because Hitler wore shoes doesn't mean wearing shoes is bad. And, fair enough. But, here's the problem with that. These political and societal policies are not disconnected, as some people propose. They stem from a common source. They stem from the worldview that Hitler held. It was a consistent worldview. If you can't see the connection between restricting freedom of speech and slavery then maybe you're missing something. And if you're missing that connection, then maybe you're missing some of the others too, because these political and societal policies emanate from a common source.
The next time you're thinking through an issue, think about what Hitler would be for and what he would be against. Then, question whether you should really be on the same side of the issue as Hitler. Because, Hitler was consistently evil.
________________________________________________
Read more of what Jeff deems worthy of attention at: http://www.JeffreyAlexanderMartin.com
Comments
Post a Comment