The Nazis killed people by the tens of millions. So did the Maoists. We don’t see anything remotely comparable in the modern developed world. To even suggest so is hysterical or offensive—probably both. Readers know that I’m a utilitarian, which means I think quantities are important, indeed all important.
And yet . . . to compare two things is NOT to suggest that they are comparable. At least not in the “similar” sense of the term ‘comparable’.
At a stylistic level there are deep similarities between modern (Western) political movements and the worst excesses of the 20th century.
Maoists believed in the idea of “capitalist privilege”. Even if you were poor, the mere fact that your ancestors were landlords meant you needed to acknowledge this taint and be apologetic. Those that were working class should be favored. They believed that silence on political issues was not acceptable, you had to affirmatively spout the party line. They believed in tearing down statues that were seen as reactionary. They believed in the young engaging in the public shaming of older people with non-PC views. They believed in forcing public apologies, even though both sides knew that the apologies were insincere.
And they killed tens of millions of people.
Nazis engaged in the big lie. Truth was whatever the Great Leader said. They believed in white-washing history, promoting a fake version that glorified the homeland. They demonized minorities and foreigners, using them as scapegoats for the country’s problems. They were misogynist. They were corrupt. They were cruel, relishing humor that made fun of the suffering of their enemies. They were pro-torture. They were militaristic, favoring parades with a big show of force. They were anti-intellectual, suspicious of professors, artists, reporters, etc.
And they killed tens of millions of people.
In contrast, modern American right wing nationalists and left wing PC proponents almost never kill anyone, at least not directly.
As I keep saying, the first time as tragedy and the second time as farce.
PS. How many intellectuals out there think I’m “half right” in these comparisons? And how often do those who think I’m half right believe I’m correct in my comparisons of the styles of those on the other side of the spectrum. I suspect that about 95% of intellectuals think I’m half right.