I understand the term. You said it’s a technique and ElvisL1ves said it’s a tactic. What it actually is is a description of a lie.
I do. In which case I think you should stop arguing that this is an acceptable type of Nazi comparison because it’s a description only of a technique when it’s really just a way to discredit your opponents by comparing them to the Nazis. The Republicans have lied repeatedly and often outrageously about the health care bill, full stop. It’s not necessary, helpful, productive, civil, or accurate to compare that to the work of Goebbels. And when you make that comparison, you are begging for a diversion into a debate of the analogy instead of the lies themselves.
If Cohen wanted to say “They’re lying”. That would have been great. But to say, “They’re like the Nazis.” Not so great, in light of the recent call to civility.
It’s certainly a technique, Marley23. I have no idea why you continue to argue that it isn’t.
However, your point is quite valid about the diversionary affect caused by naming the technique while calling it out. It will indeed inevitably lead the discussion down the irrelevant sidetrack we just followed.
So I concede your point that it’s not a productive or appropriate reference in political debate.
But I do not concede that the term is “a description of a [specific historical] lie”. That’s just wrong, and in fact I cannot find a single on line reference which limits the term to that meaning.
Nevertheless, it is fair to compare the GOP’s work in the health-care debate to the work of Goebbels, regardless of whether the commonality is labeled “the Big Lie” or something else.
It was a dumb tangent the first time. I’m not doing it twice. All I will say is that you don’t have much grounds for complaining about the Republicans comparing the Democrats to Nazis and Communists if you want to turn around and compare them to the Nazis as well. “I’m only talking about their tactics” does not work as a rationalization.
The Forces of Darkness spew hatred and venom on a daily basis, tons of the shit spilling out over the airwaves. And this one guys says “Nazi”. And that’s “equivalence”? Horseshit.
I didn’t say the volume of crap being spewed is equivalent. I don’t think it is. I said that if you demand your opponent be civil, you need to do the same - meaning if you don’t want them to call you a Nazi, you can’t do it either. I think that’s fair. And I don’t think the distinction that is being drawn about tactics (‘we’re not saying they are Nazis, we’re saying they used tactics the Nazis used’) is a valid one. I’m from the Jon Stewart school as far as this stuff goes: stop drawing Hitler mustaches on people who aren’t Hitler. None of that takes away from the fact there is a civility problem in politics and it needs to be dealt with regardless of why Rep. Giffords got shot. Right now national politics is turning into a game of who can accomplish less and blame the other guy more.
