Confusing Nazism With Terrorism
This blog/news site has addressed the importance of correctly framing the grave international threat that we face. Something which, as noted therein, we are decidely not doing.
The latest craze is to compare the specific terrorist threat that we face, with the rise of Nazism in Europe similar to the 1930's. But the problem is that one is a psychotic criminal threat by a loose network of borderless, sovereignless cells intent upon wreaking devastation upon innocents, with ostensible political overtones. The other is a sovereign state political ideology of intolerance for divergent views and differences, that may inevitably lead to depraved violence, devastation and imposition of one's sovereign states views and values, upon others.
Because of these fundamental, if not conflicting, differences, dealing with them is about as different as dealing with two potentially grave national security threats could be.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, however, exhibiting the group think mentality pervasive on this issue today, once again engaged in these comparisons. Yet Rumsfeld, in his well noted speech to the American Legion last week, went even further. While disagreeing viciously with other Americans for not agreeing with him that the threat that we all face is in fact the same as 1930's nazism, Rumsfeld exhibited the demonization of those who disagree that is one of the hallmarks of nazism himself .
The far right has also repeatedly used heavy rhetoric in condemnation of democrats as exhibiting a "pre 9/11 mentality." (Presumably, this must mean things like the republican opposition to attempts by then President Bill Clinton to expand anti terrorism efforts, opposing the tagging of explosives, and expanding legal wiretapping to include tapping the individual, not the cell phone). Yet frankly, even as successful prosecutions of terrorists are down to pre-September 11, 2001 levels, it seems all the far right wants to do post 9/11 is take away rights and make big government here even bigger and more intrusive, with fewer and fewer checks, and save the world by "forcing democracy," just like they did pre 9/11.
But that the far right's mindset is pre 9/11 could not be more adequately illlustrated than by this extremely misguided comparison to the rise of nazism. It illustrates that there is a reason they are not making America safer today. They don't understand nazism, they don't understand terrorism. They see some similarities, and therefore think they are the same, missing the fundamental differences, and more importantly, why both need to be dealt with very differently.
While Rumsfeld's speech contained a lot of demonizing rhetoric, again, here is what his speech actually meant:
Bad leadership, that not only does not fully grasp what is going on, but demonizes those who do, is the result of not being able to see any point of view but one's own -- something exhibited time and time and time and time again by the current far right wing leadership, Rumsfeld included.
(update: In his speech to the American legion, Rumsfeld also stated that many "believe that somehow vicious extremists can be appeased." Albeit increasingly common coming from the far right today, this is such a bizarrely erroneous statement that it defies analysis. Not only does it clearly exhibit the point in bold immediately above -- that Rumsfeld and those who continue to make this statement to the American people don't even have one iota of understanding of what those who disagree with him are saying -- it brings up the more pertinent question; "why don't they?"
update 2: In a followup editorial in the LA Times, frought with mischaracterizations at almost every turn, and ironically entitled, "New Enemies Demand New Thinking," Rumsfeld wrote that there is a "lack of perspective in our national dialogue." No doubt. Once again, the far right projecting it's own tendencies, onto everyone else. )
The latest craze is to compare the specific terrorist threat that we face, with the rise of Nazism in Europe similar to the 1930's. But the problem is that one is a psychotic criminal threat by a loose network of borderless, sovereignless cells intent upon wreaking devastation upon innocents, with ostensible political overtones. The other is a sovereign state political ideology of intolerance for divergent views and differences, that may inevitably lead to depraved violence, devastation and imposition of one's sovereign states views and values, upon others.
Because of these fundamental, if not conflicting, differences, dealing with them is about as different as dealing with two potentially grave national security threats could be.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, however, exhibiting the group think mentality pervasive on this issue today, once again engaged in these comparisons. Yet Rumsfeld, in his well noted speech to the American Legion last week, went even further. While disagreeing viciously with other Americans for not agreeing with him that the threat that we all face is in fact the same as 1930's nazism, Rumsfeld exhibited the demonization of those who disagree that is one of the hallmarks of nazism himself .
The far right has also repeatedly used heavy rhetoric in condemnation of democrats as exhibiting a "pre 9/11 mentality." (Presumably, this must mean things like the republican opposition to attempts by then President Bill Clinton to expand anti terrorism efforts, opposing the tagging of explosives, and expanding legal wiretapping to include tapping the individual, not the cell phone). Yet frankly, even as successful prosecutions of terrorists are down to pre-September 11, 2001 levels, it seems all the far right wants to do post 9/11 is take away rights and make big government here even bigger and more intrusive, with fewer and fewer checks, and save the world by "forcing democracy," just like they did pre 9/11.
But that the far right's mindset is pre 9/11 could not be more adequately illlustrated than by this extremely misguided comparison to the rise of nazism. It illustrates that there is a reason they are not making America safer today. They don't understand nazism, they don't understand terrorism. They see some similarities, and therefore think they are the same, missing the fundamental differences, and more importantly, why both need to be dealt with very differently.
While Rumsfeld's speech contained a lot of demonizing rhetoric, again, here is what his speech actually meant:
While Rumsfeld is busy characterizing the rest of the world as budding fascists, in the process of lashing out at those who think, let alone correctly, that the two problems need to be treated very differently, he also very ironically exhibits the beginnings of thought more associated with totalitarian regimes like fascism, than democracy; not only failing to understand it, but going so far as to demonize the informed dissent and disagreement which is at the heart of free and open democracy.
Bad leadership, that not only does not fully grasp what is going on, but demonizes those who do, is the result of not being able to see any point of view but one's own -- something exhibited time and time and time and time again by the current far right wing leadership, Rumsfeld included.
(update: In his speech to the American legion, Rumsfeld also stated that many "believe that somehow vicious extremists can be appeased." Albeit increasingly common coming from the far right today, this is such a bizarrely erroneous statement that it defies analysis. Not only does it clearly exhibit the point in bold immediately above -- that Rumsfeld and those who continue to make this statement to the American people don't even have one iota of understanding of what those who disagree with him are saying -- it brings up the more pertinent question; "why don't they?"
update 2: In a followup editorial in the LA Times, frought with mischaracterizations at almost every turn, and ironically entitled, "New Enemies Demand New Thinking," Rumsfeld wrote that there is a "lack of perspective in our national dialogue." No doubt. Once again, the far right projecting it's own tendencies, onto everyone else. )
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home