This is article two of a three part series addressing the horrendous massacre in Pittsburgh. The first article can be found here.
The paladins of our current regressive society–from Joe Scarborough to Chris Mathews (video) –say that Trump is Hitler. It is in fact become a standard piece of leftist rhetoric, in the past couple of years.
Is Trump Hitler?
Immediately, some similarities spring to mind. Hitler did not drink alcohol. Trump doesn’t drink alcohol. Hitler did not smoke. Trump doesn’t smoke. Hitler liked military history. Trump likes military history.
But against those similarities are differences. Hitler had a mustache. Trump, in contrast has no facial hair; supposedly he didn’t originally like National Security Advisor John Bolton on account of the latter’s mustache. Also, there is the question of drugs. Hitler used drugs. Trump doesn’t. Let’s not forget dogs. Hitler really loved dogs. Trump has been criticized for being the first president in a century without an animal as a pet in the white house, and only invokes the word “dog” to drive home his rhetoric.
But, one key fact has been brought to my attention that would seem to tilt the scales. Hitler murdered six million Jews. Trump has not.
This obsession by the Trump haters (who suffer from an ailment called Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) has evoked different responses. Some are infuriated. To compare the president of the United States to the devil incarnate is something that should anger all decent people. Some people are frustrated. They lament the decline of civics education in the US that would precipitate such widespread ignorance that such a comparison would gain nominal, let alone widespread, purchase. Unfortunately, I can’t muster any emotion stronger than mild bemusement–the sort of reaction that I have when being told of some fantasy by a delightful seven year old. When a kid of that age once instructed me as to the best way for the US to win some war (Iraq, I think), I smiled indulgently, patted him on the head, and went on with life. At this stage, that’s what I think about the Hitler comparisons.
This hysterical Hitler-evoking partisanship was revived after the Pittsburgh massacre, during which eleven Jews were gunned by an actual Nazi (by which is meant here someone who shares the historical Nazi ideology, and would like to implement the political agenda derived from said ideology). Obama’s Rahm Emanuel said that “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” and this was no exception.
Saying that Trump is Hitler is the new vogue. The bodies of the dead Jews were not quite cold before Trump was declared to be guilty of inciting the Nazi who killed eleven Jews, of being Hitler. Fake Republican and real harridan Anno Navvaro said that Trump is at fault. The Washington Post wrote that, “Trump, GOP defiant amid allegations that incendiary rhetoric contributed to climate of violence.” The accusations against the president were on a spectrum. At one end were the views enunciated by the likes of Julia Joffe and Franklin Foer. Joffe, a twitter personality who virtually accused Trump on CNN of radicalizing the murderer, wrote, “And a word to my fellow American Jews: This president makes this possible.” Foer, a writer for The Atlantic, penned in that formerly august paper, “In Donald Trump’s abhorrence for globalism and in his inability to smack down David Duke, it was easy to hear the ominous chords of history, to see how he was activating dormant hatreds with his conspiratorial tropes.” Only slightly more restrained was the reaction by former Anti Defamation League (ADL) head Abe Foxman, who said in part, “Trumpism legitimized the bigots to come out of the sewers and gave them a platform to play on. Trump is part of the problem but not the problem.” Even people who said that Trump was not responsible for the Nazi shooting the Jews in a synagogue, like Republican Senator James Lankford, were pressured by the media to condemn Trump. Lankford said that Globalism “[h]as long been a euphemism for Jewish people among white nationalists and anti-Semites.”
Trump’s vitriol against globalism is seen by these people as the latest evidence of his Nazism. When Foer speaks about “activating dormant hatreds with his conspiratorial tropes” he is obliquely calling Trump Hitler. Hitler, and many anti-semites of his type and of other types, believed in a debunked conspiracy called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which claims that the Jews (“Zionists”) secretly control the world. Trump, is alleged to be echoing and channeling these “conspiratorial tropes.”
In reality, Trump is not Hitler, and he is not advocating inane conspiracy theories like the ones Hitler and Saddam Hussein believed.
In truth, strident opposition to George Soros and his globalists is fully justified. The latter is a mutated modern day communism. In its day communism was, in fact, a worldwide phenomenon where millions of intellectuals, and the peasants who followed them, formed a worldwide alliance in an attempt to overthrow significant aspects of Western Civilization, the least which isn’t traditional capitalism, in their quest to establish hell on earth. Globalism today is different than Communism was in its heyday, but the aforementioned definition fits quite well regarding globalism as well. There was nothing wrong with being anti-Communist then, even if many Communists were Jews, and there is nothing wrong with being anti-Globalist today, even if many globalists are Jews.
In the past hundred years many people who opposed the Nazis were smeared as Communists–and some, in fact, were!–and many people who opposed Communism were smeared as Nazis–and some, in fact, were!. We must believe that that in the same way that one can utterly oppose Nazism and Fascism without necessarily being a Communist, one can utterly oppose Communism and Globalism, without necessarily being a Nazi.
Therefore the accusation, by the formerly reputable Washington Post and Anti Defamation League (ADL), that Trump and his allies opposition to George Soros is Hitler incarnate is slander. Trump is not Hitler.
All that being said, why not do broad based comparisons with Hitler as our foil? It could be educational. Let’s contrast, in the broadest of strokes, Hitler, one time Chancellor of Germany, with Merkel, current Chancellor of Germany. Hitler wanted the German people to conquer, subjugate, decimate other people. Shockingly, this actually happens with some frequency in the history of the world. Hitler can be compared to Attila the Hun and Genghis Kahn. But unlike Hitler, who used his Germans to conquer other peoples, Merkel used other peoples to conquer her Germans. Now that is just strange, perplexing even. Are there many such instances in history?
What about Trump? He represents a third category, broadly speaking. He doesn’t want to use his people to conquer other people. He also doesn’t want other people conquering his people. Broadly speaking, it is that attitude that is most idealistic, if not always practical.
Again, Trump is not Hitler. Not even a little bit.
It should be little surprise that Trump’s biggest political issues: the Muslim ban, and building a wall deter illegal immigration, fundamentally touch upon the historical and continued sovereignty of the United States. So do many of his minor issues: his criticisms of and/or withdraw from NATO, TPP, NAFTA, the Paris Climate Deal, and Iran Nuclear Deal all pertain to the issue of American sovereignty.
Trump is someone that represents American sovereignty–and ultimately sovereignty in general– in a fundamental way that boggles the minds and sensibilities of half the West. But it is precisely that half of the West that condoned or excused or otherwise ignored Merkel, a woman they saw, and who saw herself, as the anti-Hitler. The West will probably not survive the onslaught that Merkel, Soros and their ilk had have unleashed upon it, but if they do, it will be because of people like Trump.