in which I return (probably unwisely) to the strange American fascination with moralizing about the deplorable use of Hitler in political rhetoric

When I ran a post several days ago noting that American political rhetoric had long ago trivialized Hitler and the Holocaust, a anonymous commenter objected:

Nobody is burning David at the stake. People just asked that he get rid of that cheesy Hitler movie. He finally did. Good for him.

If your defense is look at all this other rotten stupid stuff people do, so why can't David be stupid too, that's pretty lame. The guy is an elected official.

...

I think the issue is portraying the President (Bush, Obama, Clinton, George Washington) as Hitler. It's as low as you go in American politics. Why do it? Why defend it?

That so misses the point by a breathtaking margin that I am moved to return to the subject of Third Reich imagery and comparisons in American politics (as well as rank hypocrisy in the Delaware blogosphere on the same topic) in the following disjointed manner:

The New York Times (ironically, writing about Mel Brooks' The Producers):  

Our culture's continuing fascination with the Nazis is a factor not only of their absolute evil but also of their status as pioneers of spectacular politics -- ecstatic mass rallies, orchestrated media campaigns, eroticized violence, pseudo-documentaries created to glorify a pop star-political leader.

Hoffstrizz:  

Isn't it ridiculous how easy it is for Americans to call each other Hitler?  Throughout the Bush years, comparing the American President to Hitler was a sport and business unto itself.  Nowadays, these m*****f**king teabaggers are going around saying Obama is Hitler and painting little moustaches on his face.  This is something both the left and the right does, and there may not be a better indication of the decline of the American politic than the fact that every political debate for the last ten years has devolved into one side calling the other "Hitler."

The President Nazi by Megan Gallagher (2005):  

Often times a reference to Hitler is not used to describe government sanctioned genocide, but rather the stifling of individual freedoms, imperialistic foreign policy or the misuse of government programs. Throughout the past 60 years, presidents from John F. Kennedy to George W. Bush have been criticized and called Nazi by their opponents. Interestingly, although Hitler was neither the first nor the last leader to hold tight control over his people and the government in which they lived or attempt to create an imperialistic empire, his reputation is frequently invoked. Today, the term Hitler is widely used in American vernacular by both liberals and conservatives to try and coerce a knee-jerk dislike as well as fear towards the person or action to which the comparison is made.

Keith Olbermann in 2010 (just one of dozens of Hitler references):

Most recently, Olbermann believed it appropriate to compare Obama’s surrender to Republicans on taxes as akin to Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of the Nazis in signing the Munich Agreement. Yes, apparently the Republicans are like Nazis because they argue that a lower tax rate on the wealthy would be a better stimulant to the economy than higher taxes.

Washington Jewish Week 2009:

Heeb magazine's latest issue is causing quite a stir. It features a photo shoot of Roseanne Barr wearing an Adolf Hitler mustache as she pulls a cookie sheet full of burned gingerbread "Jew cookies." Another photo features her with a swastika armband, about to bite the head off one of those cookies.

The Heeb issue also includes a recipe for The Final Solution German Chocolate Cake, with instructions to "execute with thoroughness and precision. Like the Germans would."

On her Web site, Barr defended the photos. Hitler "killed my whole family, it is true, but he is also dead, and I, a Jewish woman, am still alive to make fun of him, and I will continue to make fun of the little runt for the rest of my life! He, and his ideas need to be laughed at even more these days, picked apart and analyzed up and down, as there are more and more people denying his crimes, and more and more despots trying to copy them."

She's got a point, but "Jew cookies"?

Hitler clip used to attack budget cuts against a public library in Gloucestershire UK 2011:

A "SICKENING" video comparing the Holocaust to library cuts across Gloucestershire, has been further condemned today.

The spoof clip on Youtube shows Hitler in his bunker with supposed sub-titles of him shouting about the local authority cuts.

Glenn Beck on shootings in Norway 2011:

Beck said that the Labour party youth camp on the island, where 68 people were murdered, bore "disturbing" similarities to the Nazi party's notorious juvenile wing.

Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Wis) 2011:

Washington (CNN)-Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio invoked Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin while sounding off on union battles with state lawmakers in his state and in Wisconsin.

"I look back in history, in some of the worst governments that we had, you know the first thing they did, go after unions, Hitler didn't want unions, Stalin didn't want unions, Mubarak didn't want unions, these autocrats don't want independent unions," Brown said Thursday during a speech on the floor of the Senate.

Ted Rall (2004):

Lately we're being told that it's either (a) inappropriate or (b) untrue to refer to Bush's illegitimate junta as Nazi, neo-Nazi or neofascist. Because, you know, you're not necessarily a Nazi just because you seize power like one, take advantage of a national Reichstag Fire-like tragedy like one, build concentration and death camps like one, start unprovoked wars like one, Red-bait your liberal opponents like one or create a national security apparatus that behaves like something a Nazi would create and even has a Nazi-sounding name. All of those people who see a little Adolf in the not-so-bright eyes of America's homeland-grown despot are just imagining things. 

Me, I'm catching it for this week's cartoon for daring to suggest that, well--you know. 

Of course, there are differences. Hitler, for example, was legally elected. And he had a plan--not one that I like, but a plan--for the period after the war. 

I'll be happy to stop comparing Bush to Hitler when he stops acting like him.

The bottom line here is that we haven't just discovered Hitler/Nazi/Holocaust comparisons because Barack Obama is president--we've been using them flagrantly for decades.

And before that our political rhetoric featured papists, kikes, the Irish, darkies, faggots, wops, wogs--the list goes on and on.

American politics--especially in the internet age--is an unlovely process, and the only thing unlovelier than the use of repellant, offensive comparisons is watching the hypocrisy that occurs when people suddenly seem to think to themselves, "Aha!  My dastardly opponent used a Hitler or a Nazi reference!  I'll attack him in high moral dudgeon, because--of course!--I as the far more moral being will immediately embue my cause with ..."  blah blah blah

Locally, this has all played out most recently in the tempest in a teapot over David Anderson's interaction with the Anti-Defamation League over his allowing Fay Voshell to post a doctored-up Hitler clip about Democrats, Obama, and Attackwatch.

Blogger MJ at Delawareliberal couldn't wait to take the moral offensive, here and here.  Despite the fact that MJ has no problems characterizing anybody who disagrees with him as wankers, f**ktards, teajadis, klansmen, anti-semites, alcoholics ... I could go on, but why bother ... he has apparently developed very high standards regarding the use of Hitler/Holocaust/Nazi references, which he is quite willing to lecture anyone on at the drop of a hat:

MJ:  While we will still call out hypocrisy and wrong-headed ideas from the other side, we need to do it without using images from one of our darkest historical periods [in a post referencing the Third Reich and the Holocaust].

ADL (cited as critical reading by  MJ):  New York, NY, May 2, 2011 … Saying Holocaust and Nazi comparisons should never be used as political talking points, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today condemned two recent incidents of inappropriate Nazi analogies invoked by current and former elected officials.

JTA (cited as critical reading by MJ):  WASHINGTON (JTA) -- More than 300 Conservative rabbis signed a statement urging Americans to renounce the use of Nazi imagery in political discourse.

MJ:  And because we must never forget, we must also call out those who would compare us to Nazis because of our political views.




Unfortunately, while MJ aspires to high standards, the execution leaves more than a little to be desired:

MJ (post title):  Night of the Long Knives and Pitchforks (referring to Sussex County GOP meeting)

MJ:  (referring to Michael Steele):  My guess is if Mike was Jewish and imprisoned in Bergen-Belsen, he would have been a kapo. He has proved time and time again that he has no shame. And no backbone.

MJ:  Seriously, the only people he should be comparing himself to are P.T. Barnum (because he sure has suckered a lot of people) or Joseph Goebbels.  I’m not saying Beck is a Nazi, but he emulates everything that Goebbels did in the 1920’s and 1930’s.

MJ:  I find it ironic that the teabaggers and Lyndon LaRouche cultists (yes, they’re still around) compare POTUS and the Democrats to the Nazis. By their very actions of shouting people down and advocacy of mob rule, they are emulating the very brown shirts that were responsible for bringing Hitler to power.

MJ:  Calling them teabaggers is akin to them referring to POTUS and progressives as socialists, fascists and painting Hitler-type mustaches on POTUS.

MJ:  I can smell an anti-Semite a universe away). What do you do at night? Whack off to your copy of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and then come on here to post your BS?




So let's be sure we have the MJ standard down, because he likes to be very particular about language.


Comparing President Obama to Hitler:  unacceptable.


Comparing public figures he doesn't like to Joseph Goebbels or Jewish kapos:  perfectly fine.


Comparing progressives to Nazis:  unacceptable.


Comparing tea party members to Nazis:  perfectly fine.


Comparing Hitler's reaction to bad news to a US political figure's reaction to bad news:  unacceptable.


Comparing a meeting of the Sussex County GOP to a heinous Nazi massacre:  perfectly fine.




And finally ...


Citing sources like the ADL and JTA to buttress your outrage:  prefectly fine.


Following their recommendations in your own rhetoric:  unacceptable.




My point is somewhat different:  offensive, tasteless, poorly conceived political rhetoric is, quite simply, a consequence of our national commitment to the First Amendment and the absolute protection of political speech.  I'm completely OK with it, as long as the people who do it are willing to take their lumps.  My theory is that calling other people Hitler, Goebbels, Jewish kapos, or brown shirts pretty much seals you off from the mainstream.  If it doesn't, no speech code is going to save us.


Ironically, MJ and I would probably agree that money is not speech, and corporations are not persons with First Amendment rights, but where we differ is in his implicit assertion that it is OK for him to fully exploit those freedoms (including the freedom to be patently offensive), but not for his opponents.


I decided to call this blog "civil but disobedient" not just for the pun, but also because I'd like to stick to issues rather than name-calling.  I've done enough inappropriate name-calling of my own in the past to realize that it never really accomplishes much.  Inevitably, I'll fall off that wagon at one or more times in the future, but at least I am generally aware of it when I'm being a hypocrite.


Others often show no such pesonal insight.