HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Mike 03 » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Mike 03

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Modesto California
Home country: United States
Current location: Arizona
Member since: Mon Oct 27, 2008, 05:14 PM
Number of posts: 16,616

Journal Archives

Stone, Flynn and Bannon seem like more likely candidates IMO.

Longtime Trump advisers connected to groups behind rally that led to Capitol attack

Roger Stone, Steve Bannon and Michael Flynn all promoted the Jan. 6 rally.


Personally, I can't imagine Trump putting Don Jr. in charge of anything large or small. Rudy? Maybe.

Alex Jones, Ali Alexander, Gosar, Biggs, Moe Brooks and some other shady figures are also floating around in this mix.

Totally agree

Richard J. Evans
Ian Kershaw
Adam Tooze
Richard Overy
Antony Beevor
Max Hastings

Although I do think with Ian Tolle, Christopher Browning and Timothy Snyder (and Anne Applebaum and Stephen Kotkin--at least on Stalin) we are catching up.

Thank you, Malaise!

You deserve another heart for that.

For what it's worth, Shirer's book is sixty years old.

Richard J. Evans' Third Reich Trilogy is a recent, comprehensive history that contains tons of information that was unavailable in in the 1950s. It is unlikely to be surpassed in terms of sheer scholarship, depth, and explaining and documenting the ascent, reign and collapse of the Reich. (It's just very, very long)

In terms of how Hitler acquired power, a more current history has been written by Benjamin Carter Hett in his minor masterpiece The Death of Democracy: Hitler's Rise to Power and the Downfall of the Weimar Republic. He highlights all the modern parallels.

That sure as hell caught my ear too.

Load up on guns and bring your friends
It's fun to lose and to pretend
- Nirvana

It definitely can happen

It happens even in very serious criminal trials, where the defense argument is basically: "The prosecution clearly hasn't met its burden of proof." And they make a closing argument without ever presenting a case.

IIRC, the defense for Michael Lee King in the murder of Denise Amber Lee (a death penalty case, no less!) didn't present a defense, but during the penalty phase they did call character witnesses in mitigation. Of course it is their right not to mount a defense, but it always blows my mind when it happens, especially in a capital case. And the jury is not allowed to draw any negative inference from it.

Of course this is different because it's an impeachment trial in front of the senate and the legal parameters are different.

Does "The Happening" count?

Art Bell used to use this song as bumper music for his all-night talk show, and it's just irresistible!

Not so crazy.

Your post reminds me about the Holly Bobo murder case. Only in that case they told the dumbest of the four suspects to "get rid of her clothes" (and purse and other items), believing that was one simple task he might be capable of, and he drove to where one of the other suspects lived and scattered her things on the road in front of his trailer, leading investigators right to one of the scenes of the crime.

When I see a lone shoe on the road I sometimes think about a vechicular abduction, with someone who was walking being dragged into a vehicle. I guess I've listened to too many episodes of "Forensic Files"

"We don't want lower bread prices, we don't want higher bread prices..."

Your post and Turbineguy's below reminded me of this passage on page 197 from The Death of Democracy by Benjamin Carter Hett

The best explanation of Nazism that Drucker had ever encountered came from a Nazi agitator "whom, many years ago, I heard proclaim to a wildly cheering peasants' meeting: 'We don't want lower bread prices, we don't want higher bread prices, we don't want unchanged bread prices--we want National-Socialist bread prices.'" Since their logically inconsistent rage and hatred could never deliver any satisfactory social progress, the Nazis' only recourse was to this kind of irrationality: Nazism could only "accomplish its task through a miracle." Higher bread prices, lower bread prices, and unchanged bread prices "have all failed. The only hope lies in a kind of bread prices which is none of these, which nobody has ever seen before, and which belies the evidence of one's reason."

Making their own reality.

From the Wikipedia entry on Q Clearances:

In popular culture

"Q" Clearance was a 1986 novel by Peter Benchley, satirizing Cold War secrecy and politics.[9] [10]

In "Nellis", episode 7 of season 6 of the television show Archer, Sterling Archer uses Q clearance to gain access to Area 51 after landing illegally on the airstrip.[citation needed]

The QAnon conspiracy theory is named such because the 4chan poster who created the conspiracy claims to be an indivual with Q level security clearance.[11]


That episode of Archer aired on February 19, 2015, not long before Pizzagate and then QAnon. I wonder if the phony behind QAnon got the idea from this series?


That clearance has to do with nuclear materials. Q never put (I'm using the past tense because he's gone) himself in a position where people could actually ask him questions, so he never had to prove he knew anything about the DoE or nuclear materials. His areas of expertise seemed to be pedophilia and cannibalism.

This isn't worth a long response:

1. Most of the discussion of the Nazis is in reference to the authoritarian playbook, which didn't even originate with Hitler, and has been used for the last 100 years. The enablers are a key facilitator of the rise of the dictator, so it's quite sensible to compare Trump's enablers to Hitler's enablers (or Mussolini's, Stalin's, Pinochet's, Franco's enablers)

2. The second important analogy is how Hitler acquired power, turning a functioning democracy into a dictatorship. You may not think it is a good analogy, but great thinkers do. Timothy Snyder does. Ruth Ben-Ghiat does. Benjamin Carter Hett wrote an entire book just about this. Richard J. Evans, the greatest Third Reich scholar of all time, thinks it is.

(I've already wasted too much time)

3. Lastly, the psychiatrists... And I don't have time to look them all up but it only takes Google. The crucial thing is that Hitler and Trump were both malignant narcissists. For that reason, they do believe in making this comparison. One of the psychiatrists interviewed for #UNFIT (the documentary) said, to paraphrase: People get upset with me for comparing Trump to Hitler, but I do do it, and I'm going to keep doing it. Why? Because their diagnosis is the same.

Trump is more dangerous than Hitler, says a forensic psychiatrist

Anybody who will listen, I tell them the same thing:

If you want to understand the politics of what is happening as authoritarians attempt to overthrow democracies from Hungary and Poland to India, Brazil and the United States, there is no better template to study than the ascent of the Third Reich (starting with the conclusion of WWI). The details may differ, the regime may be left or right, but the entire thing is right there. I would go even further and say, "You only have to study the ascent of the Third Reich" to understand the appeal of authoritarianism and the danger to democracy it poses. It is IMO one of the most well spent uses of time I can think of: Study WW2 in general and the ascent of The Third Reich particularly.

That's my two cents on this.

Yale psychiatrist Bandy Lee says Trump worse than Hitler: 'At least Hitler ... had discipline'

Some Books:

The Death of Democracy by Benjamin Carter Hett is a good place to start.
Strongmen by Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a good place to start.
The Road to Unfreedom by Timothy Snyder is a good second place to go.
Black Earth: The Holocaust as History and Warning, by Timothy Snyder

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »