Home :: Blogs :: madcap's blog

Bush and Hitler

Submitted by madcap on 12 October 2006 - 7:47pm.

Comparing Bush and Hitler

By, Chuck Jines
Shawnee_hollow@hotmail.com
globalconservative.blogspot.com

In order for someone to compare the policies of Bush to those of Hitler, something like this should be happening…….
September 11, 2001: Bush declares marshal law, and begins to have members of congress arrested and charged with treason.
Bush orders that all Muslims within the contential U.S. be rounded up and brought to designated locations. Trains shuffling past are seen with box cars packed with Muslim men, women and children, headed to a concentration camp just north of Memphis, Tennessee.
Bush takes full authority over the military and declares war against all nations that harbor Muslims. Also, Colin Powel announces to the United Nations that the U.S. intends to utilize the full extent of the Laws of War, by executing all unlawful combatants on sight.
Some special prisoners are taken to a classified locatation in Cuba, where Bush orders our greatest scientists to begin conducting experiments.
Bush wants to know if a human could live with a dogs’ head attached to their body. Scientists begin cutting people’s heads off and sewing dogs’ heads in their place.
Scientists begin to conduct experiments in order to advance interrogation techniques. Gasoline and other chemicals are injected into prisoner’s veins in order to extract information. Human skulls are cut opened on conscious prisoners, without anesthesia, and brain manipulations are applied. Eyes are poked out, tongues and fingers, arms and legs are cut off. Many die of starvation. Generals often come to watch through one-way mirrors.
After rounding up some twelve million Muslims worldwide, a full cabinet meeting is called. All those within the inner circle of the Bush Reich are present to discuss the most efficient process for the extermination of all Muslims. Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell offer a plan that General Tommy Franks has endorsed.
The plan calls for the building of gas chambers and large incinerators at all camps throughout the world. The largest would be constructed at the secret location in Cuba. Building materials would be taken from the countries under Bush’s control. The prisoners themselves would provide the labor for the construction of their own death machines. Bush smiles and orders the plan to be implemented at once.
Afterwards, down in the deepest tunnel of the Pentagon, a Pagan ceremony is held for all the Joint Chiefs of Staff, where they eat human pineal glands, in search of immortality...

.

Why do you post the comments

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on 22 February 2007 - 1:03am.

Why do you post the comments of an idiot like Chuck Jines?

Accepting negative comments

Submitted by Treesong on 1 December 2007 - 12:59am.

Why do I accept idiotic comments like the ones from Chuck Jines a while back? Really, I found it interesting that someone with such different views from mine would even post here. I also thought it might be a good opportunity for some dialog among guests here who actually have something interesting and/or important to say... :)

P.S. Your blog moved

Submitted by Treesong on 16 October 2006 - 7:52pm.

P.S. Since your blog has apparently moved, I went back and edited the link at the top of your post to reflect that fact. I also put the first sentence of your post into the Preview box so that people can see a summary of the blog entry in lists.

Bush's Velvet Glove

Submitted by Treesong on 16 October 2006 - 7:46pm.

I don't talk about Bush as much as I used to. I still talk about him from time to time among friends, but I mostly focus my energy on creating positive projects rather than criticizing the work of others.

Even so... people who make the Hitler analogy aren't looking at the details of the Bush regime so much as the spirit of what is happening. Bush as an individual is arguably a "true believer" who truly believes that his actions are ultimately serving the American people [and "God"]. But some of the people who put him into power are clearly disingenuious individuals whose chief desire in life is power for its own sake, no matter the cost to the common good.

Whether the people in the Bush administration are "true believers" or Machiavellian manipulators is largely irrelevant. Either way, they are all participating in a political, economic, and cultural movement that is fascist -- or at least proto-fascist -- in nature.

Of course, today's American fascists are mostly using methods of social and psychological means of control rather than the horrific holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis and their allies. But when our freedom is taken from us, and a war results, it matters little whether our freedom was taken by an iron fist or a velvet glove. Either way, we are still left in a world where a small number of powerful people control the lives of the masses without their consent [and often without their knowledge].

I don't think that anyone I know would question the fact that Bush has not yet met Hitler's level of profound and prolific atrocity. The Holocaust is a hard measure for any aspiring fascists to live up to. And whether it's morality or timidity that's restraining him, Bush simply hasn't gone in that direction with his "Master Plan." His body count is much lower, and the incidence of open torture and macabre spectacle is much lower as well.

And yet, there IS a body count, and there IS open torture, and there IS a macabre spectacle. And Bush's administration does have a Master Plan -- an unthinkable, intolerable intention to lay siege to the entire world in pursuit of ever-greater amounts of money, power, and control.

Believe it or not, fascism is about more than racking up the highest number of bald atrocities. It's about something called Weltanschauungskrief, aka Worldview Warfare. It's about the belief that We are Right; that the Disbelievers must be Converted; and that the Evildoers must be Destroyed.

Why this focus on Weltanschauungskrieg? Because a fascist is someone who never feels safe until all people who are perceived as threats are either converted, controlled, or killed. From this basic fear emerges a mass psychology and a mass movement to conquer the world in the name of one's Worldview -- whether that be defined as a Race, a Nation, a Culture, a God, or something else entirely.

In this department of Weltanschauungskrieg, the Bush administration's moderately more nuanced approach to fascism is far outshining the coarse and brutal methods of his predecessor. Less people are dying -- but more people are being controlled, with bombs over Baghdad and a media blitzkrieg at home.

In the end, this approach -- which looks less brutal in some regards on the surface -- doesn't mean that Bush is any less of a fascist. It simply means that the people who control Bush are more effective at what they do than the Nazis were. This is almost certainly because they've had 60+ years to refine their propaganda techniques, military weaponry, and other methods of physical, social, and psychological control. On the homefront, instead of enduring the dread flights of the Nazi Luftwaffe over our cities, we have the likes of Republican Fox News flying through our airwaves, saturation bombing the American public with so much fear and close-mindedness that we will wage war on our sisters and brothers in other nations simply because formerly-US-backed terrorists may or may not be hiding somewhere amongst their cities.

In conclusion... yes, it's clear that the details of Bush's deeds don't nearly match up in their brutality to the details of Hitler's Holocaust. So on some level, I agree with you that the comparison of Bush's deeds to Hitler's deeds is a bit absurd. But deep down, the two political-cultural movements share a similar spirit -- the spirit of fascism. And in all honesty, I believe that American fascism is largely just a new evolution of the fascism that swept through Europe 60+ years ago. But that's a whole nother story...

First, I want to thank you

Submitted by Anonymous on 25 October 2006 - 11:52pm.

First, I want to thank you for posting my article. I have posted a responce to your comments you made concerning my other article titled fascist tolerance:Fascist Tolerance Two…

By, Chuck Jines

Earlier this month, I posted an article titled Fascist Tolerance, that highlighted the acts of violence, that have been committed by liberals upon conservatives. I used national examples that have repeadly occurred, such as the recent incident at Columbia University, as well as my own personal experiences of vandalism that have happened to my car due to my Bush bumper sticker. I explained in the article that the cause of this social phenomenon was due to the liberals’ frustration at their inability to win in the arena of ideas through rational debate and dialogue. I use the phrase “social phenomenon” because this pattern of intolerance is far more that just a few isolated incidents, but rather part of a persistent and frequent surge of unofficial persecution and discrimination. It is a symptom of a subtle, all-pervasive demand for egalitarian conformity. For an in-depth analysis I would highly recommend reading Eric Voegelin’s enlightening book titled The New Science of Politics, or Ken Wilber’s Sex, Ecology and Spirituality. You can access both of these great thinkers’ web sites by going to my links list.
In response to my original article, a comment was posted that provides a wonderful opportunity to further illustrate the legitimacy of the charges in my first article.
The comment was posted by a gentleman who goes by the name of “Treesong,” who stated the following: “It never ceases to amaze me that a political movement that controls all three branches of government and the news media can play the victim.”
Treesong has confessed that he is confused, by making the statement “never ceases to amaze me.” I will do my best to help the poor boy out by going real slow, for him and any other liberals who might be lost in an ocean of relativity.
Here is how one can “play” the victim: 1) If someone takes a key and scrapes it down the side of your car because they do not like your bumper sticker, it’s not hard to “play” the victim. 2) If someone mule-kicks a dent in the back of your car because they don’t like your bumper sticker, it’s not hard to “play” the victim. 3) If someone spits a big green hocker on your window while uttering profanities because they don’t like your bumper sticker, it’s not hard to “play” the victim. 4) If someone decides to smear veggie burger on your windshield because they don’t like your bumper sticker, it’s not hard to “play” the victim. 5) If someone decides to leave messages under your windshield wiper claiming that you are a “Nazi” or “baby killer,” it’s not hard to “play” the victim. 6) If you have been asked to give a talk at a university, and people choose to yell and scream so you cannot be heard, it’s not hard to “play” the victim. 7) If you have been asked to speak at a university, and someone chooses to smack you in the face with an object, it’s not hard to “play” the victim. 8) If you have been invited to speak at a university, and people choose to scream, yell, charge the stage, tear down the podium, and intimidate the guest speakers with physical violence, it’s not hard to “play” the victim. 9) If it is voting day, and a retirement center in Minnesota discovers that 30 of their transport vans have had their tires slashed in an attempt to prevent them from voting, it’s not hard to “play” the victim. 10) If you take the time to write about the acts of vandalism you have experienced due to a bumper sticker, and a deluded liberal submits a comment that tolerates, even justifies such acts of fascism, it’s not hard to “play” the victim. A quote from Treesong, “If Liberals do get irrational sometimes, it’s probably because of the conservatives…”
I stand by my original propositions that liberals are only tolerant of those who agree with them. Liberals will attempt to justify their intolerable acts of violence rather than come clean about there being a problem with their own thinking. Their philosophy of radical egalitarianism is founded not upon rational reasoning, but upon emotion. Treesong, like most radical liberals, is living in a self-created world of delusion that is incapable of dealing with reality in a rational manner. His own words prove my point. He indeed subscribes to and justifies Fascist Tolerance.
As a side note, I once read the following statement written on the bathroom wall of a local coffee house, the same coffee house where my car was repeatedly vandalized. I think it clearly highlights my point. “Ann Coulter needs to be taken out back and shot in the head because that’s what you have to do to fascists.” The message was signed, “Liberal Warrior.” For the best interest of all, may more rational minds prevail.