In university debating, the first team to mention Hitler or the Nazi's loses by default. It's a rule I try to stick to when arguing any disputable point 
It was not at my uni when reading and debating 20th century history, far from it. Especially when the room was blessed by international students and the debates covered their former USSR states, Stalin, Hitler, and how their grandparents / parents now felt about all of it.
Study and debate of the philosophers, like Plato, Hobbes, Machiavelli and Nietzsche, in connection with 20th century history also frequently brought up the subject of Hitler and the Nazis generally.
No one can avoid THAT name in any debate based on that period of history, and before in the period from The Great War and WW2, then beyond that 
If you're debating historical figures or events relating to European middle 20th century history, then yes you can bring in anyone from history to illustrate your point. So comparing and contrasting Hitler to Stalin to Ghengis Kahn is tolerated.
But when discussing current people or events introducing 'them' is strictly verboten. In any argument comparing anything to 'them' it is assumed by default that 'they' were worse, and hence it is pointless comparing to them. Its the nuclear option, and hence not permitted. Same as what is colder than absolute zero or what happened before the big bang. Meaningless, and almost always meant as an insult rather than a valid debating point.
I was not comparing ANY current figure with Hitler, but only illustrating how attacking a minority can end, and considering how extreme the range can be of some human behavior, and the fine balance defining pure evil, mental illness, or just common "getting on" with life is. Hitler was just a single man who ended up causing havoc, with the assistance of others, due to his mind and what went on in it, but still got the masses to follow him.
Where have I stated exactly that anyone in particular is like Hitler? No, I have not and you have made the error of taking on board other peoples comments and not fully reading or comprehending what I actually wrote. I suppose that is the danger of these intense debates on a car forum.
It is clear by the comments by some on the OOF that they would love to "loose" Diversity and the people classed under that banner or label, which in fact I have explained should not be necessary in a fair and tolerant society.
I do not know what uni you went to, but at mine nothing was taboo when considering the philosophy and psychology of individuals in history and how they affected a small number of people, or whole states, that still effects us today. It was always healthy debate with the subject of the philosophers featuring as their writings, coupled with modern thought, help to give an understanding of how humans have acted or reacted in history and how we all could all fair in the future.
Author
Topic: Liverpool Women's (Read 6758 times)