I know nothing of history? Hitler came to power via an electoral plurality and a CIVILIAN militia motivated by an extreme racialized ideology - not a military coup. He took advantage of hard times to scapegoat others and be lifted up by (enough of) the people - he did not impose order on chaos first to establish his rule. He was actually at odds with the Prussian old guard of the military. As a general trusted to keep the peace who seized power, the 20th Century dictator Kuvira’s rise is closest to would probably be Franco or Pinochet.
Putting dissenters in prison camps is hardly distinct to Hitler. That pretty much universal for dictators. Comparing her to Hitler is intellectually lazy - it’s using his name as a buzzword. How systemically RACIALIZED Nazi ideology was as its central principle is what makes it distinct. Ideologically she’s clearly drawing first and foremost on Chinese Nationalist Fascism, complete with the overthrow of monarchist rule (something Hitler did not do in Germany or Austria).
I didn’t say Stalin or Hirohito would be better comparison’s either. An even nominal Marxist who seized power through paranoid backstabbing is right out, and Hirohito was a hereditary ruler.
Q: Saying Kuvira isn't comparable to Hitler is essentially saying that you know nothing of history. Kuvira is doing many of the same things, and if you didn't catch - she's putting dissenters into prison camps. Don't forget, Stalin and Hirohito killed more innocents than Hitler even came close to.
asked by Anonymous