[shmerek]

An article I found somewhat interesting.

Gott Mit Uns: On Bush and Hitler's Rhetoric


by Bob Fitrakis

_



President Bush told Texas evangelist James Robinson that "I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen . . . I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it."

With 49.3% of New York City residents in a recent Zogby poll believing that some people in our government knew of the 911 attack in advance and allowed it to happen, the President as right-wing evangelical prophet is under siege in his Madison Square Garden bunker. Convention watchers should take careful note of the theocratic nationalist rhetoric at the Republican convention this week.

When was the last time a Western nation had a leader so obsessed with God and claiming God was on our side?

If you answered Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany, you're correct. Nothing can be more misleading than to categorize Hitler as a barbaric pagan or Godless totalitarian, like Stalin.

Both Bush and Hitler believe that they were chosen by God to lead their nations. With Hitler boldly proclaiming, before launching his doctrine of preventive war against all of Europe, that "I would like to thank Providence and the Almighty for choosing me of all people to be allowed to wage this battle for Germany."

"I follow the path assigned to me by Providence with the instinctive sureness of a sleepwalker," Hitler said.

Hitler stated in February 1940, "But there is something else I believe, and that is that there is a God. . . . And this God again has blessed our efforts during the past 13 years." After the Iraqi invasion, Bush announced, "God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did . . . ." Neither the similarity between Hitler and Bush's religious rhetoric nor the fact that the current President's grandfather was called "Hitler's Angel" by the New York Tribune for his financing of the Fuher's rise to power is lost on Europeans.

Pat Robertson called Bush "a prophet" and Ralph Reed claimed, after the 9/11 attack, God picked the President because "he knew George Bush had the ability to lead in this compelling way." Hitler told the German people in March 1936, "Providence withdrew its protection and our people fell, fell as scarcely any other people heretofore. In this deep misery we again learn to pray. . . . The mercy of the Lord slowly returns to us again. And in this hour we sink to our knees and beseech our almighty God that he may bless us, that He may give us the strength to carry on the struggle for the freedom, the future, the honor, and the peace of our people. So help us God."

At the beginning of Hitler's crusade on April 12, 1922, he spelled out his version of the warmongering Jesus: "My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter." Randall Balmer in The Nation, noted that "Bush's God is the eye-for-an- eye God of the Hebrew prophets and the Book of Revelation, the God of vengeance and retribution."

As Bush has invoked the cross of Jesus to simultaneously attack the Islamic and Arab world, Hitler also saw the value of exalting the cross while waging endless war: "To be sure, our Christian Cross should be the most exalted symbol of the struggle against the Jewish-Marxist-Bolshevik spirit.

Like Bush-ites, Hitler was fond of invoking the Ten Commandments as the foundation of Nazi Germany: "The Ten Commandments are a code of living to which there's no refutation. These precepts correspond to irrefragable needs of the human soul."

But if you ever wondered where Bush got his idea for so-called "faith-based initiatives" you need only consult Hitler's January 30, 1939 speech to the Reichstag. The Fuhrer begins, "Amongst the accusations which are directed against Germany in the so-called democracy is the charge that the National Socialist State is hostile to religion."

Hitler goes on to document how much "public monies derived from taxation through the organs of the State have been placed at the disposal of both churches [Protestant and Catholic]." Hitler gave nearly 1.8 billion Reichsmarks between 1933-1938 directly to the Christian churches. In 1938 alone, he bragged that the Nazis gave half a billion Reichsmarks from the national government and an additional 92 million Reichsmarks from the Nazi-controlled German states and parish associations.

Hitler made the intent of his faith-based initiative clear when he noted, "With a tenth of our budget for religion, we would thus have a Church devoted to the State and of unshakable loyalty. . . . the little sects, which receive only a few hundred thousand marks, are devoted to us body and soul."

Bush's assertion that "I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job" brings to mind God as a dull-witted, cognitively-impaired nationalist unable to utter a simple declarative sentence who spends his time preaching "blessed are the warmongers and profit-makers."

[zigzag]

I don't like the way Bush wears his religion on his sleeve, but I think he understands the secular nature of his office. His religion might give him personal strength but I think he understands that it isn't supposed to drive policy. Also, I think a good deal of the rhetoric is political posturing - Bush is a master at playing good cop/bad cop, appearing virtuous with one hand while applying the screws with the other.

I suspect that a lot of what Hitler said was also posturing. I suspect that it's also true of the Founders - people forget that they were politicians and that even then, politicians were expected to make noble pronouncements about God whether they really believed them or not.

[lurkalot]

Originally posted by shmerek:
An article I found somewhat interesting.

The only thing interesting about it, as far as I can see personally, is that someone would once again write/print or reproduce these shallow and completely counterproductive comparisons of everybody and their pet dog with Adolph Hitler and nazi ideas or ideologies. Are the examples cited so precise and unique that they are persuasive? I don't think so. Are there just as many differences as there are similarities? Without a doubt.

Even if the comparison is valid -which I don't think it is in Bush's case- what possible purpose does it serve at this point in time -except to entrench and inflame- to revive the memory of the man from Braunau? The Pope also speaks frequently about divine inspiration and personal destiny. Is Bush like the Pope? How about mother Theresa?

Bush is not Hitler or like Hitler. Saddam is not Hitler. Pachead is not a nazi. AP journalists are not nazis. Can we find someone else to evoke?

Damn I just wrote another rant. Maybe I should shut up for a while...

[Dale Sorel]

Comparing Bush with Hitler is absolutely ridiculous

[PacHead]

Originally posted by lurkalot:
Bush is not Hitler or like Hitler. Saddam is not Hitler. Pachead is not a nazi.

I feel honored to be lumped together with so many esteemed people. I didn't realize I was an historical figure.

[smacintush]

Yes. Interesting.

Interesting that an adult, an educated adult could be so ignorant and full of so much hate to make this comparison.

There are many roads, down which I could go to dispute this nonsense but it's just not worth it. Anyone who actually believes this kind of crap should have their voting rights taken away for stupidity.

[phoenixboy70]

Originally posted by zigzag:
I suspect that a lot of what Hitler said was also posturing. I suspect that it's also true of the Founders - people forget that they were politicians and that even then, politicians were expected to make noble pronouncements about God whether they really believed them or not.

this is very true.

yet, the VALID comparison (analogy) between bush and hitler is that they are/were both megalomaniacal fascists, imo. of course bush is not a "national socialist" by any stretch of the imagination. but what most people forget is the "core values" of the nationalsozialistische deutsche arbeiterpartei weren't the gassing of jews in auschwitz, or invading poland and starting ww 2.

the "root philosophy" of hitler and his followers was fascism. the belief in one's own (god given) superiority over others (as a nation), and the naturally following subjugation of everybody else to one's own standards. in the beginning hitler's speeches were much more vehemently directed against communists and socialist (who in his mind betrayed the "german people"). later he used the term "communist" and "jew" almost interchangeable...

yes, in quite a few aspects bush is very different from hitler (and national socialism, of course), but in some respects scarily similar (war mongering, fear mongering, social darwinism, anti-choice, anti-diversity etc.).

[shmerek]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
this is very true.

yet, the VALID comparison (analogy) between bush and hitler is that they are/were both megalomaniacal fascists, imo. of course bush is not a "national socialist" by any stretch of the imagination. but what most people forget is the "core values" of the nationalsozialistische deutsche arbeiterpartei wasn't the gasing of jews in auschwitz, or invading poland and starting ww 2.

the "root philosophy" of hitler and his followers was fascism. the believe in one's own (god given) superiority over others (as a nation), and the naturally following subjugation of everybody else to one's own standard. in the beginning hitler's speaches were much more vehemently directed against communists and socialst (who in his mind betrayed the "german people"). later he used the term "communist" and "jew" almost interchngeable...

yes, in quite a few aspects bush is very different from hitler (and national socialism of course), but in some respect scarily similar (war mongering, fear mongering, social darwinism, anti-choice, anti-diversity etc.).

I completely agree.

It is too bad about the knee-jerking of those who don't even bother to read what the article is saying.

[UR-20]

Originally posted by lurkalot:
The only thing interesting about it, as far as I can see personally, is that someone would once again write/print or reproduce these shallow and completely counterproductive comparisons of everybody and their pet dog with Adolph Hitler and nazi ideas or ideologies. Are the examples cited so precise and unique that they are persuasive? I don't think so. Are there just as many differences as there are similarities? Without a doubt.

It hurts when you find out the truth about a person you once thought was a great man. It did for me



How, oh how could you betray me!?!

[Zimphire]

[UR-20]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:


the "root philosophy" of hitler and his followers was fascism. the belief in one's own (god given) superiority over others (as a nation), and the naturally following subjugation of everybody else to one's own standards.

I don't know what the difference between that and the promotion of ethnocentrism in the U.S. is? After the WTC, we had a TON of racism that was acceptable which to me was very similar to the racism that resulted in Hitler's era after the Reichstag was bombed. Hitler took advantage of a "terrorist" situation to gain respect and power, similar to what Bush did. Had he (Bush) had enough ambition, he could have easily at that time created a dictatorship. You've got the population scared, you pump tons of funds into the military and they're on your side, all that's left is to call meeting of the house to have them grant "emergency powers" (which are in our constitution) to you
and there you have it. The vast majority of the fearful population wouldn't say a thing because they'd have been too busy looking over their shoulders for suicide bombers.

[UR-20]

Originally posted by Zimphire:

I never know when you're serious and when you're kidding.