Ooops

Ron Paul: not a Nazi. I'm slightly bemused by the fact that the Nazis are so eager to claim Ron Paul as one of their own. I mean, not that Ron Paul isn't a perfectly nice guy, and so forth, but isn't claiming that you're friends with famous people who've never met you something you're supposed to grow out of in high school?

On second thought, I suppose a Nazi is definitionally someone who never grew out of anything in high schoool.

Comments

I consider myself a Nazi because I believe that the German race possesses higher levels of intellect than many others, and because I believe that I should live a life that benefits the German race, not just my own selfish interests. I believe that is the definition of a Nazi (by the way, definitionally is not a proper English word).

At the same time, unlike Megan apparently, I recognize that there is little to no correlation between people’s political views and their intelligence or maturity. For this reason, unlike Megan, I don’t engage in childish name calling when discussing political philosophies that I do not agree with.

Posted by Jeff Goldman | December 27, 2007 3:09 PM

To say that Nazis are simply the result of some sort of lacking in the ability to mature is insipid. Of all of the negative adjectives one could apply to that particular ideology, I wouldn't count foolish and callow among them.

Posted by Frances | December 27, 2007 3:32 PM

Come on, Megan.

Enough now. Paul is not Nazi. We all know that. He;s the anti-Nazi. I see close to nothing in the way of actual Policies that could Paul anywhere remotely close to the Nazis. Again, you know this too.

On the other hand, while none of the other candidates are Nazis, if we want to spit hairs and look for similarities in policy, you'll find the Nazis economic and foreign policies are much closer to the rest of the field on both sides than to Paul.

From the view of the role of government to the view of the role of society and all policies and laws, Paul is the furthest thing from a Nazi that you'll ever find.

If Hilter is a perfect 10, Paul is a big fat ZERO while all the others hover between 3 and 5.

And it's not a big leap to be half to Hitler. Many of his (and Benito's) policies were quite admired here in the prewar era. Hitler did get time's man of the year after all.

Posted by John V | December 27, 2007 3:33 PM

continuing a bit...

Nazi's is the full fruition of the view the view of maximum nationalism and cultural preservation and reverence coupled with a controlled economy that gets its marching orders from an all powerful government that dictates that the individual is subservient to society and society is subservient to the government because the government is the leader that makes society great.

Again, this the diametric opposite of Ron Paul.

If some supporters of Paul happen to be Nazi's, all it shows is that Nazi's, like everyone else from right to left, have errant libertarian sensibilities that can be tapped into.

Posted by John V | December 27, 2007 3:38 PM

John V: Hitler wasn't Time Man of the Year because his policies were admired here in 1938. It is a common misconception that the designation is given to the person who provided the most benefit that year, although I will allow that you may not be laboring under that notion in this case.

See the cover here: http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19390102,00.html

"From the unholy organist, a hymn of hate."

Also, thanks for going off on a "Ron Paul is the anti-Hitler, everyone else is half-Hitler!" tangent without bothering to understand that Megan obviously doesn't think that Ron Paul's policies are the least compatible with National Socialism.

Read -> Comprehend -> Post. It's not that hard.

Posted by BEB | December 28, 2007 1:42 AM

The Nazis make the exact same mistake that the Civil Rights reactionaries make.

They think a little reinstatement of the 10th amendment will bring back everything from Jim Crowe and maybe even slavery.

Posted by Andrew | December 28, 2007 9:51 PM