Thursday, August 27, 2009

Hitler / Obama Comparisons: Is Barack Obama Like Adolf Hitler or The Nazis?

Sources: Hitler | Obama - (CC) and GFDL respectively

Is Barack Obama like the Nazis or Adolf Hitler? Does even asking the question make you a right-wing nut or a partisan hack? Is it distasteful to mention Hitler or the Nazis to make a point? Let's take a sober look at the answers to these questions below:


Godwin's Law

Adolf Hitler seems to appear frequently in political debates. Reference to Hitler or Nazism is so commonplace that in 1990, U.S. attorney and author Mike Godwin coined an adage that has become well known on Internet discussion forums as Godwin's Law: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."

Why does that seem to be the case? Because in a fierce political disagreement, there is at least one area of common ground that almost everyone will share: that Adolf Hitler was evil, unequivocally and without argument. Even self-professing moral relativists are hard pressed to maintain otherwise. Adolf Hitler was evil.

When two sides seem to disagree about everything else, that area of common ground can (if emotions don't flare as they often do) actually form a bridge of understanding and communication. People grasp for "the Hitler card" because they know their opponent will agree with the major premise that Hitler was evil. Then it's on to the minor premise, which takes the form of "...and x is just like what we agree made Hitler evil."

"Therefore x is also evil," the debater concludes.


Argumentum ad Hitlerum

The first thing to remember as we approach this issue is that it is a logical fallacy to assert that if Adolf Hitler did or believed x, then x must automatically be bad. It is an association fallacy referred to as "argumentum ad Hitlerum" in parody of the formal titles of other logical fallacies such as "argumentum ad hominem."

Just because Hitler was opposed to smoking tobacco, it does not follow that someone is evil or morally equivalent to Hitler if they abstain from tobacco use. Adolf Hitler did all kinds of things that other people do who are not morally equivalent to him. Hitler painted flowers. So did Georgia O'Keeffe. That does not make Georgia O'Keeffe a genocidal maniac by association.

But it is possible, logically sound, and perfectly fair in some cases to draw a deeper kind of comparison to Hitler. We can assert of someone (if we have the facts to substantiate our claim, of course) that they are morally or politically equivalent- or at least similar- to Hitler because their actions spring from the same ideology and/or tend to produce the same results.

In the case of U.S. President Barack Obama, we must determine whether comparisons of his policies to those of Adolf Hitler are the first kind of accusation (and therefore a fallacy) or the second kind of accusation; and if they are the second kind, then we must determine whether the the comparison is supported by the facts, or if it is a false comparison.


Obama/Hitler Comparisons

Conservatives can intuit (and some can explicitly understand and articulate) that Barack Obama's political program is similar in remarkable and chilling ways to that of Adolf Hitler's. Their argument does not commit the "argumentum ad Hitlerum" fallacy because their assertion is that President Obama's policies and worldview share the very characteristics by which we reckon Hitler as evil, not other irrelevant characteristics.

The actions of the Nazi regime, which are almost universally regarded as vile, were rooted in the ideologies and political programs of socialism, eugenics, and imperialism. Obama's ideology, associations, and governance of the United States thus far betray a fervent and unambiguous commitment to socialist nationalization and government direction of America's major industries, a eugenicist program of strict population control, and a continued policy of aggressive American imperialism and global dominance through force.

One Miami columnist disagreed with this assessment, and criticized what he considers a flippant attitude, which makes light of the Holocaust. He writes:

"I thought it would be good to make you sick, i.e., to spend a few minutes reminding some and teaching others what you invoke when you invoke the Nazi regime.

For the record, then: It was Nazis who shoved sand down a boy's throat until he died, who tossed candies to Jewish children as they sank to their deaths in a sand pit, who threw babies from a hospital window and competed to see how many of those 'little Jews' could be caught on a bayonet, who injected a cement-like fluid into women's uteruses to see what would happen, who stomped a pregnant woman to death, who once snatched a woman's baby from her arms and, in the words of a witness, 'tore him as one would tear a rag.'"


America's Holocaust

So President Obama does not deserve a comparison to the Nazis because the Nazis perpetrated a genocide? Pardon me, sir- isn't Mr. Obama perpetuating a genocide!? He has been accurately described as "the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the office of President of the United States. He is the most extreme pro-abortion member of the United States Senate. Indeed, he is the most extreme pro-abortion legislator ever to serve in either house of the United States Congress."

While there is not enough space in this essay to treat of abortion, let me explain briefly that I believe unequivocally, on the basis of uncontroversial scientific facts and a sound anthropological ontology, that a unique, whole, and individual human being is created at conception. For an exhaustive explanation and defense of this belief, let me refer you to my essay entitled: "The Abortion Debate: A Reasoned, Scientific, Pro-Life Argument."

The relentless propaganda to the contrary, dehumanizing and miscategorizing human fetuses, is reminiscent of and similar to the Nazi campaign of dehumanization to justify their brutal treatment of helpless minorities like the Jews. The experimentation carried out on stem cells extracted by destroying human embryos, is chillingly like the medical experimentation carried out by Nazi scientists on their victims.


Eugenics and the Obama Administration

Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Regime were also obsessed with eugenics. They actively worked towards assuming power over Germany's and eventually, the entire world's reproductive rights, with the goal of allowing only the most desirable human beings to reproduce. Obama's appointment of John Holdren as his Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (or more informally, "Science Czar") betrays his administration's eugenicist agenda.

As an anonymous Internet sleuth uncovered after John Holdren's appointment (HT: to Michelle Malkin):

"In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that: Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not; The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food; Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise; People who 'contribute to social deterioration' (i.e. undesirables) 'can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility' -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized. A transnational 'Planetary Regime' should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force."

You read all of that correctly. If you don't believe me, do the research for yourself. Go out there and find it, but do not write this off and ignore it. I know that what you just read seems too horrible to be true, but it is the truth. John Holdren is our nation's "Science Czar" and he did write these terrible things in his 1977 book, Ecoscience. How can a U.S. President possibly appoint such a person to an office in the White House if he feels about that person's views what any normal and not morally-deranged person would feel?


Socialism and The Obama Administration

In popular conception, "left-wing" politics taken to the extreme produces Stalin, while "right-wing" politics taken to the extreme produces Hitler. What a stupid contrivance! Why should two mass-murdering autocrats end up on opposite ends of a political spectrum? The general American public seems oblivious to the fact that the word "Nazi" is an abbreviation for the "National Socialist German Workers Party." (In German, the word "national" is pronounced nawt-zi-uh-nal.)

Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party were socialist. The horrors inherent in socialism have made themselves all too apparent at this point on the timeline, after a century of warfare and bloodshed unrivaled in human history- the handiwork of socialist ideology and its adherents. His socialism is part of what made Adolf Hitler so evil. There can be no argument that President Obama is likewise, a socialist.

President Obama's unprecedented assumption of powers to himself and his office is remarkably and frighteningly similar to Adolf Hitler's rise to power in Germany. Obama has already suspended habeas corpus by claiming the right of indefinite detainment of potential terrorists without charges. This occurred very shortly after his Department of Homeland Security issued two reports labeling supporters of Ron Paul, certain amendments of the Constitution, devolution of Federal power to the states, or Pro-Life beliefs as potential terrorists.


Conclusion

This is just one of a lengthy list of examples of such abuses- all straight out of the pages of history and Adolf Hitler's playbook. In just a few months as President, Obama has been prolific in his assault on liberty and assumption of boundless executive power. You might even call it a "blitzkrieg." There is simply not enough room to catalog these abuses and yet bring this essay to a timely close (it may be too late for that already!). If you have been paying attention, you know exactly the kind of things to which I refer.

In closing, here is a recap of the questions at the beginning of this essay with their respective answers in light of the information above: Is Barack Obama like the Nazis or Adolf Hitler? Strikingly so. Does even asking the question make you a right-wing nut or a partisan hack? Absolutely not. The evidence is incontrovertible. Is it distasteful to mention Hitler or the Nazis to make a point? Sometimes, but certainly not in this case.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

One difference in my mind between Nazi's and communists is that the former did place emphasis on the superiority of their own race. Kill the others who don't belong to the superior races.

Did the Miami writer document the source of those atrocities?

Communism seems a universalist creed wanting to take over the masses for the movement. Kill the others who impede implementation of the workers paradise.

The similarity is that all encompassing centralized governments can become deadly to neighbors and their own citizens. And may distinguish them from simple thugacracy where the rulers are corrupt, want money but otherwise leave subjects alone.

thedailyquoi said...

Nice post Wes. Here was my contribution to the debate:

http://rightaislereview.com/2009/05/05/21st-century-scapegoat/

ofthepeople said...

Hm, the Nazi socialist/communist regime under Hitler did none of the above atrocities.

BTW, Nazism is national socialism - Communism is international socialism both started by the same tribe of crazed psychopaths of Mongol descent. The same tribe of psychopaths have controlled the government fully since 1913, with the advent of the Federal Reserve and the fraudulently installed 16th Amendment. One should study the ancestry of Hitler, his administration, the SS, and search for facts on the alleged "holocaust", a word of the tribe meaning "burnt offering", such as the fire bombing of Dresden, German, or the awful slaughter of thousands upon thousands of Japanese. Or even the Armenian Holocaust carried out by the tribe. Or the take-over of Russia in 1917 by the same tribe. One might be rather surprised, as history books controlled by the tribe have changed the facts to suit them and their take-over of all countries on Earth.

RealEstateGuy said...

Hmmm... Abortion. Perhaps you were unaware that Hitler prohibited abortion. Come to think of it so did Stalin, and the rullers of Romania, Bulgaria and almost every other despotic leader of a country. Prohibiting abortions is done not to protect the unborn but to control womens bodies, and her sexuality.

This is because the "unborn" are not people. A fetus, in particular a non viable fetus, is a human only in the very narrow technical scientific sense that humans beget humans. And even that is not always true on the assumption that a fertilized egg that could NEVER survive outside the womb is not a human in the normal sense.

There is no philosophical or religious (as in the bible which allowed parents to kill their unruly children) rational for calling a fetus a human.
In fact the killing of fetus by a person harming the mother was a property crime requiring a nominal payment. TO THE FATHER!!!

And finally, I am saddened to see that the author of this screed has never changed his mind in 30 years. One would think that over the span of a lifetime one would learn something and mellow.

W. E. Messamore said...

@anonymous "...And may distinguish them from simple thugacracy where the rulers are corrupt, want money but otherwise leave subjects alone."

Right- reminds me of a certain quote by C. S. Lewis... and another by Henry David Thoreau.

@thedailyquoi- Nice article! Thanks for sharing it.

@ofthepeople "Hm, the Nazi socialist/communist regime under Hitler did none of the above atrocities."

I'm afraid I'm not sure what you mean.

@RealEstateGuy Your claim about the Nazis and abortion is simply counter-factual.

In his paper entitled "The Abortion and Eugenics Policies of Nazi Germany (http://tinyurl.com/mwbdhc)," Dr. John Hunt, a professor of modern European History, wrote that abortion became completely legal for the first time in Germany under the Nazis- for reasons of "racial hygiene."

You are correct to the extent that abortion was prohibited to "pure-blooded" Germans under the Nazis- but again, my point remains that legal abortion and the eugenicism of der Fuhrer (and modern "progressivism") are inextricably intertwined.

More importantly, it wouldn't matter even if your claim were true. That would be an instance of the argumentum ad hitlerum I described in the article. Just because Hitler prohibited abortion (which again, isn't entirely the case anyway), it doesn't follow that prohibiting abortion is wrong.

It certainly does not follow that prohibiting abortion is about controlling women and their sexuality. Whether you agree with it or not, can you at least acknowledge that some Pro-Lifers have a principled stand on the abortion issue, derived from their belief in the humanity and legal rights of the preborn? (I link to a thorough explanation of that principled stand in the article above.)

Can you acknowledge that we are not all out to control women? I'm not saying you have to agree- but simply acknowledge that our motives are not necessarily the ones you ascribe to us. If you cannot, I suggest that I may not be the only one in need of "mellowing."

And while we're taking a look at history, allow me to point out that the most ardent "pro-choice" abortionists like Margaret Sanger were also the most vocal in their support of forced sterilizations and other restrictions of a woman's reproductive rights.

I'm also frankly uninterested in what you think the Bible or any other religious text has to say about abortion. The issue is clear enough on the basis of uncontroversial science and simple ontology. There's no sense in complicating it with an ultimately irresolvable hermeneutics debate.

And a final correction (forgive me for making so many): the author of this piece is only 22 years of age.

Anthony said...

I am not sure that the comparison is completely viable, but another point that should be noted is the view of the Jewish people. Hitler attempted to annihilate the Jewish population. Although I believe President Obama to be anti-semitic as seen through his speeches and various associations, he has not murdered Jews.

W. E. Messamore said...

Thanks for commenting, Anthony!

You're totally right that Mr. Obama has not murdered any Jews, but I did make the case in the article that he and his administration are driven by the same ideology (eugenics and socialism) that ultimately perpetrated that genocide, and is inherently prone to perpetrate other such genocides.

Though the particular "genus" of the victims may vary, make no mistake that there will always be victims en masse when these twin scourges (again, eugenics and socialism) inform the actions of the ruling class.

Anonymous said...

Your next assignment is to write a screed proving that George W. Bush was Hitler

Then you can compare the screeds. I suspect you can do a better job with the Bush assignment, maybe's it'll be worth an F+.

BTW, under "socialism," the state owns the means of production. Whatever he called himself in 1922, Hitler was certainly not a socialist in 1933. Obama is not a socialist in 2008. Just another way in which they are identical.

Here's a way they are different. From the start, Hitler had plans to make Germany strong and for Germany to dominate other countries. Obama evidently has no such plans for the United States.

W. E. Messamore said...

I must say am entirely puzzled by your comment! Lol.

I cannot decipher what point of view you are coming from, what in your comment was sarcastic, and what was earnest.

For instance, could you summarize your thoughts on our most recent two presidents? My opinion of Bush, by the way, is hardly more flattering than my opinion of Mr. Obama.

Anonymous said...

this is ridiculous...obama isn't like Hitler...it is absurd to even try to make a comparison...get your facts straight. It's not like Obama is forcing soldiers to forcefully kill a woman's child. It is her choice, and the choice that best suits her future child and her body. If they control what we are able to do with our bodies, what will be next?

W. E. Messamore said...

Let me refer you to the article I linked to in the post above entitled "The Abortion Debate: A Reasoned, Scientific, Pro-Life Argument."

Esther said...

I agree with first poster about a very crucial point: Hitler emphasized racial cleansing. He had the belief that removal of gypsies, the severely disabled, Jews, and all opposition to the Nazi party in general (i.e. the Social Democratic Party).

For this reason, I don't think that drawing a parallel to the War on Terror is completely accurate. Yes, in both cases, we have chosen a foreign body as a scapegoat, and yes both wars have created racism (If you don't think that the War on Terror promoted racism, think back to the years following 9/11 where Middle-Eastern and Indian men were specifically targeted at security gates in airports and at metal detectors).

However, the Jewish people never had a terrorist body in Weimar Germany. There was never an attack against the German people the way we had the events of 9/11. I think this is a very important difference that cannot be overlooked when drawing this comparison.

Anonymous said...

I lived in Germany during the Nazi period. I am an old man, but the memories I have from my youth are still strong.

Believe me, president Obama is nothing like Hitler. Making such a comparison makes a mockery of who Hitler was. It downplays the evil of that time. I don't like big government either, but there are plenty of leaders to compare Obama to that might be more accurate -- FDR, Johnson, even George W Bush, who lost my conservative vote because he spent us to oblivion. Obama is far more like those people than the man who is responsible for several deaths in my family, misery, and mass murder.

If you respect history, then you must not dilute it by comparing Hitler to someone like Obama. I can remember not only horror (I was born in 1936 in Cologne) but a lot of joy in the early Nazi years. Childish joy like you cannot imagine -- nothing that Obama can create. It was a dark joy, but I must be honest about how many of us felt in the early years of Nazism. It was that level of joy that Hitler turned into something brutal, something the world has never seen before or since.

Respect history and don't manipulate it to suit your political argument. THAT is like Hitler, my friend.

May God keep you and yours.

J. Muller
Eastpointe, MI

W. E. Messamore said...

Mr. Muller,

Thanks for leaving a thoughtful comment about this issue and sharing your memories from Nazi Germany. I found your tiny window into the early years of the Third Reich very fascinating. I would love to interview you and pick your brain for as many other memories of your childhood as you may still have.

While you object in principle to making Hitler comparisons lightly (an objection and principle I share), I must ask if you have any specific rebuttals for the detailed comparisons I draw in the article above.

Either 1) my characterizations of the Obama Administration must be false, or 2) they are not examples of the essential things we find evil about Nazism, or 3)it is in fact, accurate and proper to compare Obama to the Nazis and Hitler.

Which of those first two alternatives do you believe is the case, and why?

Last of all, even though it was- at least partially- a humorous closing argument, your comparison of my arguments to Hitler at the very end of your comment do the very thing to which you object, and which you believe dilutes and trivializes Hitler's evil.

Anonymous said...

hitler=obama
don't care what you say!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! people worshiped hitler now people worship Obama, Hitler had hj (hitler youth) Obama has kids singing worship songs to himself and do thing that Obama want! he does not talk rationally, but rather only says what people want to hear but takes no action or act on his word!

Sponsored Post

Why invest in precious metals?

Over the last 5 years, the US dollar has lost nearly 50% of its value relative to the other major currencies, as the value of the U.S. Dollar declined, gold and silver prices have increased.

Posted by W. E. Messamore Comments (0)