4 Comments
User's avatar
Randomize12345's avatar

“The most lasting devastation that Nazism wrought was on Europe itself.” I’d say the damage on Jewish world population and collective psyche is more lasting.

Ben Koan's avatar

The two claims aren't mutually exclusive. By destroying European Jewry, the Nazis also weakened Europe itself. Beyond the immediate loss of life, Hitler also extinguished an untold number of future Einsteins, Kafkas, and Mahlers. That Nazi Germany caused the actual Einstein (and many other Jewish scientists) to flee to America and aid the Allied war effort illustrates antisemitism's self-destructive nature.

Israel has the highest total fertility rate of any developed country and a civilizational will to survive, while Europeans have below-replacement fertility rates and aren't even willing to defend their own countries (https://news.liga.net/en/politics/news/the-telegraph-almost-60-of-germans-are-not-ready-to-fight-for-their-country-in-case-of-invasion). So in the long run, the Jewish world population and collective psyche may indeed recover better than Europe from the 20th century's catastrophes.

User's avatar
Comment removed
Jan 24
Comment removed
Ben Koan's avatar

Thank you. As I say in the article, the point of the comparison isn't to score rhetorical points or engage in demonization. Populism isn't fascism and Trump isn't Hitler. But there are parallels between our era and interwar Europe that we can learn from. Also, a vocal segment of the American right now either openly embraces Hitler or excuses those who do (the Fuentes/Carlson axis). So I consider reasoned analyses of why, in fact, Hitler was bad and should not be a model for the contemporary right to be fair game.

User's avatar
Comment deleted
Jan 23
Comment deleted
Eugine Nier's avatar

Does it take effort to be as dumb as you are, or does it just come naturally?