O'Reilly: Lefties Are Nazis
“The far left in this country, the zealots, these are zealots-are Nazis…and this is exactly what the Nazis did.”
Actually, Bill, the zealots (ie., the O.G. Zealots) were Jews radically committed to fighting against oppression and Western imperialism. The Nazis, well, they killed the descendants of those people, and anyone who thought like them.
Were you only to call for the mass-execution of liberals who you detest oh so much, well, see that’d put you kind of in the same camp as the Nazis.
If you want a more accurate analogy, call the Lefties Bolsheviks. That works. Same kind of fascist thuggery against those who didn’t think like them, except masquerading behind principles of universal social justice.
See, that’d be a fair critique. Hell, the Lefties might even learn something.
Oh but right — you’re a friggin’ tool.
Hmmm, interesting that.
“If you want a more accurate analogy, call the Lefties Bolsheviks. That works. Same kind of fascist thuggery against those who didn’t think like them, except masquerading behind principles of universal social justice.”
Just so I’m clear, I don’t advocate name calling on any level as I think it detracts from the point that one is trying to make. However, I’m confused…why are we supposed to be upset when O’Reilly makes this comparison but it’s okay for Mobius and John Brown to make this comparison when discussing Israeli government or police reponse?
Seems to me that we could all be just a bit more responsible in eradicating the use of hateful namecalling (e.g. Nazi) during debate.
that’s one perspective matityahu. and it’s not invalid.
however, there is a very very big difference between pointing to a specific policy (targetting terrorists families) and comparing it to a policy used by the nazis (sippenhaft) in order to make jews aware of who they look like when they enact such policies; or pointing to riot police beating jews inside a synagogue and calling them ‘stormtroopers on a pogrom’ in order to draw attention to this terrifying incident; and just calling anyone you disagree with a nazi, as bill o’reilly and ann coulter have done.
nobody said boo to the fuckers w/the orange stars. nobody complained about their judenrein posters hanging up all over jerusalem with the picture of the boy being held at nazi gunpoint. we were the only blog (to my knowledge) that actively criticized it, despite its suggestions that the israelis were nazis and that the disengagement was the shoah.
now, when israelis beat satmar chasidim up inside their shul, or when they start enacting the same policies nazis onced used against jews (which is not to go so far as to say what’s happening here is a nazi genocide because it most certainly isn’t), and we point it out and say, “you’re acting like nazis, holy hell, cut it out,” we’re told that we’re a bunch of lefty idiot anti-zionist assholes who hate israel. what i think is up is that y’all just don’t like what you see when you look in the mirror, and you need to sideline us so you aren’t forced to see your reflection.
I take your point. I still don’t agree with it, but I do understand how you got there.
“nobody said boo to the fuckers w/the orange stars. nobody complained about their judenrein posters hanging up all over jerusalem with the picture of the boy being held at nazi gunpoint. we were the only blog (to my knowledge) that actively criticized it, despite its suggestions that the israelis were nazis and that the disengagement was the shoah.”
I can’t speak to the rest of the internet or the entirety of that great big thing we call the world, but I can tell you that I heard my rabbi preach against the use of Nazi imagery by the anti-disengagement protestors on more than one occasion. I also noted plenty of op-ed pieces here in the UK in the Jewish Chronicle and the London Jewish News. For the record, those who supported the use of such imagery were in a minority so small they could have easily fit in a London phone box. So, I’m not sure about you assertion there. And it doesn’t excuse anyone else for using Nazi imagery for any reason, in my opinion.
“what i think is up is that y’all just don’t like what you see when you look in the mirror, and you need to sideline us so you aren’t forced to see your reflection.”
Sorry, mate, but you’re deag wrong on this one. I’m happy to listen to and actively engage with views counter to my own. But I favour intellectual honesty in debate and firmly believe that one can make very valid and lucid points without the use of Nazi imagery or similar comparisons. If we’re going to criticise O’Reilly for using Nazi imagery (and I do, by the way…it’s unacceptable and he needs to know that) we have to look OURSELVES in the mirror and ask…’could I hae made my point or argument without having to draw comparisons to Nazis’?
I’m an adult and consider myself of reasonable intelligence. I can make comparisons on my own and decry illegal or harmful policies of the Israeli or indeed any other government without someone having to point out that they think it may be comparable to what the Nazis did.
Point out the injustices in the world, abolutely. I might just march in the streets with you to condemn them. But I can assure you that I won’t if you and your mates use Nazi imagery or comparisons.
that’s entirely fair. and i actually just had a lengthy talk with shleve about that. it’s true — the invocation of nazi imagery sullies the issue.
it’s the same thing w/the israel-apartheid issue. while most of the readers on jewschool agreed, when the debate came up, that many of the policies on the books here in israel are equivalent to those enacted under the apartheid regime in south africa, it is not quite the same political situation, and the word apartheid itself is so loaded a term that it makes discussing the issue impossible (because it causes peoples’ sensitives flare up).
such is the same with the nazi analogy. it’s not that the analogy is necessarily wrong all of the time. but people get so loopy and irrational the second the word comes up, that it’s impossible to have a frank discussion about whatever legitimate concerns are present.
Mobius: That’s where I’m coming from, yes. I also think that it’s dishonest and entirely unfair to pick a policy(or even several policies) and try to make a comparison with Nazi Germany or apartheid South Africa. See, what I think people are reacting to is the fact that there was so much more evil to Nazi Germany and apartheid SA than just a policy or two. So when one makes a comparison of an Israeli policy to the behaviour of Nazi Germany the context, in my humble opinion, is lost.
It would be like watching a Nazi make a ‘sieg Heil’ salute and saying that just the arm is a fascist. If you flip that logic and say that in this case, we’re looking at Israel, a liberal democracy where there is a lot of good being done and a healthy internal dialogue regarding just about everything, and picking a policy (or, to fair, a few policies) and trying to compare them with Nazi Germany.
Anyway, we seem to be roughly in agreement.
Matityahu,
this:
“It would be like watching a Nazi make a ‘sieg Heil’ salute and saying that just the arm is a fascist.”
is one of the best examples of what is wrong with this:
“such is the same with the nazi analogy. it’s not that the analogy is necessarily wrong all of the time.”
It is wrong all the time because the context is different all the time. It’s why you never…NEVER…(unless you want your relationship to end quickly) in the middle of an arguement with your girlfriend say: “Yeah, that’s exactly what my ex used to do…say”.
Shtriemel:
I’m kvellin ova here! Stop already!
But seriously, I agree with you. And I haven’t found a clever answer to my wife’s query ‘Does my arse look fat in this skirt?’
Agutten Shabbos Matityahu.
while most of the readers on jewschool agreed, when the debate came up, that many of the policies on the books here in israel are equivalent to those enacted under the apartheid regime in south africa …
I’m sorry?
just as a nebbishy point of historical accuracy, the “zealots” were probably invented by Jospehus.
keepin’ it real
~invisible
How about we don’t feed Bill O’Reilly MORE anti-communist diatribes to rant with? It’s a compromise that just does not need to be made. The man’s idiocy and lack of rational reasoning is easily lampooned by even the most half-brained liberal websites. Don’t over-estimate his strength.
No matter what you think of the Bolsheviks (and I think there were some sincere communists among a pack of dictators generally whose leader mal-interpreted Marx to offer not only a massively flawed interpretation of Imperialism but also set the stage for the anti-Jewish anti-capitalism of the German left and eventually yes, the SS themselves) there’s no need to further inflame America’s anti-communist traditions by giving O’Reilly license to rant against Bolsheviks.