Abstract

Bush as Hitler? Let's Be Fair

The author argues that the policies and rhetoric of most U.S. presidential candidates resemble those of Adolf Hitler in some respects, and claims the candidates could learn from Hitler's economic policies. Beyond the shared enthusiasm of the Führer and all US Presidents (with the possible exception of Warren Harding) for mass murder as an appropriate expression of national policy, I've never seen any particularly close affinity between Adolf Hitler and the current White House incumbent, but the Republican National Committee seems peculiarly sensitive on the matter. At the end of the first week in January the RNC lashed out furiously at the Democratic website MoveOn.org for including in its competition for robust campaign ads for 2004 a couple that offered Bush/Hitler comparisons. Hitler/Bush comparisons began their current vogue after an article by Dave Lindorff appeared last February on CounterPunch.org, the website edited by Jeffrey St. Clair and me. My problem with the Hitler-Bush pairing is not so much the comparison per se, which is solidly in the respectable mainstream of political abuse, but in the strange hysteria of Democrats about Bush as a leader of such consummate evil, so vile that any Democrat would be preferable. The central political issue this year is the absolute corruption of the political system and of the two parties that share the spoil. Hitler, genocidal monster that he was, was also the first practicing Keynesian leader. Not just Bush but Howard Dean and the Democrats could learn a few lessons in economic policy from that early Keynesian.