It was James Whitcomb Riley, a Hoosier, not a Texan, who is credited with having said: "When I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck." A thing or a party is what it does. This simple epistemological principles applies to everything from sub-atomic particles to mega-galaxies on the very edge of the universe and everything in between to include 'political parties'. Merely putting a name on something does not explain it. Putting the label 'Nazi' on the US GOP does not explain either GOPPS or Nazis; it just helps us sort them out. I am sick of 'labels' and sick of the way labels have subverted American thought processes and debased the quality of debate and discourse. Labeling is passive. Meaningful sentences consist of subjects, ACTIVE verbs and, often, direct objects which are affected by some action that is taken. It is not enough for me to discount a politcian because they 'are' Republican. If I am to make my case, I must allege an 'action' --a GOP action --that has had, in fact, a harmful result. Indeed, it is the panoply of harmful actions that define this 'duck', this web-footed, forked tongued GOP!
The wake of WWII left many declaring that it must never happen again. If 'it' was to be prevented, however, it was clear that 'it' must be explained. The origins of WWII, however, could not be understood without first understanding a 'Nazi' mentality that provided it fertile soil and nurtured its growing roots. The Nazi weed grows and is cultivated in the US by bigots, authoritarians, and corporatists i.e, fascists. At war's end, the victorious allies had in their custody the 'super-stars' of Hitler's Third Reich and imprisoned them at Nuremberg. Some believed that they should have been summarily executed. Others advocated trial for crimes against the peace and humanity. This is the legacy of Nuremberg: it left us what I hope is the lasting framework against which future crimes may be prosecuted. I have in mind the crimes perpetrated by the US against the sovereign nations of Iraq and Afghanistan and the peoples in those nations. War criminals are where you find them. In the US, there were war hawks in both major parties, eager to avenge 911 and strike a blow against 'terrorism'. This is simplistic thinking. Terrorism is so vague as to be meaningless, certainly any act against US interests 'not liked' by the US or the specific interests affected. What if the 'interest' itself is illegal --the theft of Iraqi oil, for example. What about acts of terrorism perped by the US? Will the US govt root itself out and bring itself to justice? Don't hold your breath. The US govt has been, of late, fucked up!
'Revenge' is similarly problematic. 911 did not, does not and cannot justify the US invasion of either Afghanistan or Iraq for numerous reasons not the least of which is this: no one had been able to pin the 'rap' on Al Qaeda. Does al Qaeda exist? Could it possibly have pulled off 911? George W. Bush boasted of having killed alleged al Qaeda members though there was absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Afghanistan had anything whatsoever to do with crime of 911.
I believe that this statement speaks to George W. Bush's guilt of war crimes that were defined and prosecuted by the US and its allies at Nuremberg. I believe that Bush should be cross examined with regard to this statement. It should be put to Bush: what --specifically --was that fate? Are we saying that the US rounded up Afghanis en masse and subjected them to summary executions? Who ordered these summary executions? Were the executions sanctioned by the President? If so --then the President and those carrying out the murders should be charged and, when found guilty, they should be hanged! How to Know a Nazi When You Find One Nazis are where you find them. In pre-war Germany, they were found in the party which gave them their name. In the US, latter day Nazis will be found in abundance in the GOP and even among the Democratic right wing. Nazis are what Nazis do!
All told, more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. And many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way: They are no longer a problem to the United States and our friends and allies.--George W. Bush, State of the Union Address, January 29, 2003
Ritzler and his colleagues saw a socially distant, intellectually pretentious person lacking depth of character...this psychological profiled belonged to a simple man. They speculated that he attained his success by being a good organization man, doing what he was told to do and not making waves. ...no one suggested a person from academia, the clergy or the arts....the experience of learning the subject's identity has been unforgettable. the psychological protocol belonged to Adolf Eichmann!The Quest for the Nazi PersonalityAs he was tried, Eichmann was portrayed in the media as a 'depraved killer responsible for the deaths of millions'. And so he was but only because he was a bureaucrat, a 'Republican', an 'organization man', a man whose truth was the party line and modus operandi. The very face of 'evil' as it was glimpsed by Dr. Gilbert and, later, Hanah Arendt, turned out to be the banal face of a bureaucrat. Nazis may not have issued membership cards and a subscription to a newsletter! They were defined, however, by a psychological characteristic perhaps first described by Dr. Gustav Gilbert, the American psychologist who 'interviewed' Nazis imprisoned at Nuremberg. It was Gilbert who defined the Nazi mentality by its 'utter lack of empathy', a trait that has been identified in the contemporary US GOP. See John Dean's 'Conservatives Without Conscience'.