Others, especially in the
Like the Germans, however, sometimes we can overreact to the subject of Nazism and the Holocaust and try to stamp it out of existence altogether.
While it's poor form to label your political opponents Nazis, fascists, and anti-Semites simply because they disagree with you, sometimes it's appropriate if certain clinical definitions are met.
True, Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies is at play, which states that as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of someone calling someone a Nazi or Hitler approaches one. If you use this Reductio ad Hitlerum attack, you've probably lost the argument.
However, that's not to say that you should never use it. In fact, if we can never mention Nazism or Hitler aren't we bound to forget it, and isn't that exactly what we don't want to do?
The Left disproportionately benefits from Godwin's Rule, because, let's face it--Hitler was a socialist. The Nazi Party was the National Socialist Party. They believed in big government, big education, big social programs, and top-down social engineering.
Now, that's not to say that all socialists are like Hitler because Hitler was a socialist. To say so would be to introduce a fallacy to the discussion. However, if Hitler liked socialist policy X (or libertarian policy Y), then it would be fair to point that out so that people might realize, "oh wait, maybe this is a bad idea."
Unfortunately, if someone makes that point now, they are attacked as poisoning the debate.
A Catholic bishop in
bishop made a comparison between the interests of the public school system and
totalitarianism, while discussing what he sees as a lack of school choice in
"In the totalitarian government, they would love our system," McFadden said. "This is what Hitler and Mussolini and all them tried to establish -- a monolith; so all the children would be educated in one set of beliefs and one way of doing things."
He said the "H" word, and the Anti-Defamation League and the ACLU jumped on it.
comments drew immediate criticism from the Anti-Defamation League and the
American Civil Liberties
You'd think the Anti-Defamation League, of all groups, would not want to stifle criticism of Hitler's policies.
"The Holocaust was a unique experience. It does not lend itself to inappropriate analogies. We have an obligation to protect the memory of those who suffered because of it from those who would distort it and undermine and trivialize the history of the Holocaust, however inadvertently. Our role should be to honor those who fought to defeat the murderous Nazis, and not to inappropriately draw reckless comparisons."
But in this case, the analogy is true. Hitler and Mussolini wanted state-run education that promoted the state. It's not inappropriate. If the ADL wants people to remember the Holocaust, than it should want to remember what sort of conditions made it possible. Government propaganda was one important factor.
It's also appropriate to point out that the Catholic Church would benefit financially from a voucher system that promotes more school choice. Dollars that would be spent on public schools would instead be attached to students that went to Catholic schools.
Adults need to be mature enough not to shut down a debate when the H-word is mentioned, or when schools are attacked, or when it's pointed out that non-profits might be motivated by money. Not being able to talk about certain things merely ensures they'll occur again.