Ralph Raico writes:
- On Monday, the indefatigable, indispensable Justin Raimondo gave us a column titled, The Fallacy of 39: Why is every petty tyrant dubbed the new Hitler?
That is a very good question. Here is a possible answer.
For many millions of Americans, the first figure in 20th-century European history who comes to mind, often the only one, is Adolf Hitler.
Taking my own college students, not the best in the country but not the worst, and probably better informed than the average citizen: these state-schooled kids are mostly not even sure who exactly Churchill was. But Hitler they know, and what they know about him is that he was a very bad man. Which, needless to say, he was.
Given the general ignorance, it is not surprising that, to justify their own hegemonic designs, the contemptible opportunists who pose as our leaders invoke Hitlerian opponents at every turn.
Oh, so many Hitlers! Now the Iranian mullahcracy, a while ago Hussein and Milosevic, before them Cedras in Haiti, Aidid in Somalia, Noriega in Panama, and it goes on, and it will go on and on. After all, our leaders’ power feeds on the people’s boundless cluelessness, doesn’t it? I hereby propose a test to judge whether a future designated enemy of the Washington power elite is or is not a real Hitler.
He will rule over a population comparable to 80 million Germans. He will be able to conquer more of Europe than Napoleon, and even to set out, foolishly, fatally, on the conquest of Russia. Unless a future adversary more or less fits this description, the lying D.C. warmongers should just shut up about all their Hitlers popping up around the world. But don’t hold your breath.