A lot of people came down on Bill Maher for his report about dining with Trump at the White House and, although Maher took Trump to task several times during that visit for the administration’s policies, he had the temerity to confess being surprised that Trump actually was gracious to him in person and even laughed. For saying that Maher was demonized widely. Larry David joined in the pile-on in a satire in the NYT called “My dinner with Adolf“, a satirical parallel about dining with Hitler and finding him gracious.
Well, I wasn’t so amused by that parallel, for although I think Trump is a narcissistic loon who is on track to wreck the country, he is not equivalent to Hitler, and I detest the “Hitler parallel” that is so widespread these days. The trope, of course, is that if you dislike someone and his actions, then every single thing that person does must be bad and he’s pretty much like Hitler.
This extremism and demonization is in fact the subject of a good book I’m reading now: Greg Lukianoff and Rikki Schlott’s The Canceling of the American Mind , which takes up Great Untruth #3 of Haidt and Lukianoff’s earlier bestseller The Coddling of the American Mind (2018). Let me remind you of all three of those Untruths whose embrace by the young is, Haidt and Lukianoff argued, responsible for a lot of turmoil, divisiveness, and rancor on and off campus:
- What doesn’t kill you make you weaker
- Always trust your feelings
- Life is a battle between good people and evil people
We see #3 on both sides in American politics, including in the criticism of Maher, and all I can say is that by and large I embrace the arguments of Democrats, but I try hard not to see Republicans as evil, much less as a pack of Hitlers. Yes, of course there are some bad Republicans, but they’re not all Hitler equivalents.
Indeed, some of the NYT readers pushed back on David in a new collection of responses.
I had no doubt that after the dinner Maher would go back to dissing Trump on his show. And sure enough, he did in his latest “Real Time” comedy/opinion bit, called “New Rule: Flirting with Fascism”. Watch the 7.5-minute video below. As you see, Maher more or less calls Trump a liar, a violator of the Constitution, a flirter with authoritarianism and dictatorship, and an instigator of the January 6 insurrection. Not to mention the title of the bit. . .
Maher tells Democrats that they have to evolve a new strategy to win back seats and perhaps the White House, but he still favors trying to talk to the other side. He even mentions the crap he took for dining with Trump. Here’s the last bit that starts at 6:11:
“I’ve taken some shit from the looney Left for just reporting honestly how the President reacted in private when I criticized him to his face. What I should have said is that he eats with his hands and that he showed me his collection of human ears pressed between the pages of Mein Kampf. . . . But I didn’t do that. I was honest about it, and that gives me standing to say to conservatives, ‘Now okay: you appreciated my honesty and balls, now I want to see your balls. . . . It’s not how I meant it to come out. . . . What I mean is ‘It’s your turn. You know things aren’t going well and the first hundred days has been, yes, a shitshow. Show me that you can be honest about that. Show me that you’re not just a MAGA cultist’.”
I would say that’s a pretty hard-headed criticism of Trump, and you won’t find harder criticism even in the NYT. So let’s not have any demonization of Maher or flippant comparisons with Hitler here. If you want to emit the Hitler tropes, I’d advise you to abstain and reserve them for other websites I can point you to. In fact, I may make that the latest one of the Roolz.
The link of Trump to Hitler and fascism is ridiculously feeble compared with identifying Progessives and Democrats with Marx and communism, where the family resemblance is undeniable.
[Note, I am not a fan of Tump and republicans]
The trouble with comparing Hitler to Stalin (perhaps the only real equal) is that the circumstances around each of these monsters were so completely different. What unites them is the willingness to find the worst in people who surrounded them, and make it the kingpin of their reign. Hitler instrumentalized ruthlessness, Stalin cowardship, and Trump is trying to do it by I don’t know what, perhaps foolhardiness. Trump may still be able to pull it off, but perhaps he is not quite capable. And I really hope never to find out.
Agreed. I think “Trump = Hitler” is a kind of gentrification of fascism, and it denigrates the suffering and deaths of millions of people who were killed by real Nazis.
Also I liked the “Andrew Dice Trump” line, but I thought that photo had more of an Ali G vibe.
Yeah, about that standing. There’s the famous Barney Frank line about how conservatives see every liberal as a potential convert while liberals see every other liberal as a potential heretic. We usually focus on the latter as illustrating how the left defeats itself, but the former is also worthy of consideration. When you talk to a potential convert, you aren’t interested in what they have to say. You’re interested in getting them to agree with you. Nothing but positive agreement with you gives them any standing.
Yes, but a presumed convert who then espouses heresy is worse than an infidel. Maher was even blessed by having an audience with the anointed one, which makes the heresy even more abominable. Seriously, he should watch his back.
Thanks for the tip; reserved The Canceling of the American Mind at my local library.
For years I lived in the liberal swamp that is Austin and now I live in a small Texas town on the Gulf of Mexico. We are a red county and, in fact, I am registered as a Republican because that is the only way I can vote for a viable candidate for local office; Texas requires party affiliation to vote in the primaries. I wish we could vote as Independents.
No Trump is no Hitler…yet. But there are many types of despicable human behavior. Here is the text of a letter I wrote to Maher:
Dear Mr. Maher,
I was a prosecutor for about 6 years of my legal career in public service. I was trained to prosecute cases, not people. But when I look back on my experience prosecuting many sexual assault cases, I realize without hesitation that rapists are the lowest form of life on earth. I swore that I would never shake hands with one.
Donald Trump has been adjudicated as having raped E. Jean Carroll. Did you even think of this when you met him? The vision I have in my mind of you shaking one of the hands used to assault Ms. Carroll is revolting. You mentioned that Trump acted normal during your encounter. I suspect that E. Jean Carroll wishes he had acted in a similar manner during her encounter with Trump. But you normalized his assault by your visit.
Your name is now added to the ever-growing number of people that have been played by this charlatan. Trump once said he was surprised how easy it was to turn politicians. He may not have wanted to bother turning a comedian, but he certainly found it easy to make you look like a fool.
I will no longer watch your show.
From NPR:
NEW YORK — A federal jury has found former President Donald Trump liable for battery and defamation in the lawsuit brought by writer E. Jean Carroll, who says he raped her in a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s.
The nine jurors, who deliberated for barely three hours before reaching their unanimous conclusion, did not find that Trump raped Carroll. But they agreed that he “sexually abused” her and that he defamed her when he denied her story.
Carroll was awarded $5 million in total damages for both claims.
What is the difference though ? It seems like a semantic game.
There is quite a difference between defamation, unwanted touching, and rape. But you’re right about legalese often being a semantic game.
Actually, as the Judge pointed out, they did find that Trump “raped” Carroll as the term is commonly understood, by unwanted insertion of his finger. This is not how rape is defined in the New York Statutes, (which are in bad need of being updated). The legal definition of rape varies from state to state. The common definition includes both the unwanted sexual activity such as insertion of a penis or finger or any foreign object ( such as a coke bottle).
See for example:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rape
In Wisconsin (one of the two states I prosecuted rape cases) the word rape is not even used in the criminal code.
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/940/ii/225
In Wisconsin, had this case been tried there, Trump would have been found liable for what in Wisconsin is First Degree Sexual Assault, whether the jury found Trump inserted his penis or his finger. In Criminal cases in Wisconsin, someone who is found guilty of First Degree Sexual Assault can be sentenced up to 60 years, and it would matters not – in terms of conviction for First Degree Sexual Assault – whether the perpetrator used a penis, finger, or any object.
Below is the document that was filed by the Court in the Carroll case that adjudicated that Trump had raped Carroll as the term is commonly understood.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790/gov.uscourts.nysd.543790.200.0.pdf
Two reforms that are needed in our laws as far as sexual assaults are concerned are: 1) The Statute of Limitations needs to be extended to at least, in my opinion, 30 years; 2) The elimination of nondisclosure agreements, which are legalized bribes to keep quiet. The latter were apparently used quite effectively to keep Trump out of legal and political trouble.
Yes, thank you for your response. I agree
I think it’s a bit of a strawman to suggest that the relevant people are saying Trump is as bad as Hitler. That’s different than what I think most of them are doing: noticing parallels between Trump and Hitler. There are certainly very important parallels to draw, and, if we’re to learn from history, we should be able to recognize those parallels to avoid repeated it. Cordoning off Hitler for comparison risks missing important warnings that history has to offer.
Here’s a parallel; the Dalai Lama is a vegetarian. So was Hilter.
I think those of use who think comparisons are pointless aren’t saying there aren’t any comparisons. There are. But to equate the two is where, I at least, have a problem. Trump is no Hitler. Musk is not a Nazi. Equating them trivializes what the real victims of real Nazis suffered.
So, may I ask that those considering Trump=Hitler, try to find another awful person that fits. Ceiling Cat know, we have an abundance of those.
Obviously Trump is not Hitler. It’s Göring who had two but they were small.
I was going to bring that up. It’s a good response since the percentage of vegetarians is probably higher among the woke than in the general population and vice versa. Yet none of the claim that all vegetarians are Nazis, nor that one must eat meat in order to distance oneself from Nazism. That is quite different to their stance on other issues, which is very much us vs. them and assuming that something MUST be wrong because someone who is wrong about something else said it.
So Maher is now Witch of the Week . Frankly, i think that’s an honor. It usually means they’ve said something true but forbidden. It proves they’re a heretic and no matter which side they’re on, heresy is always ok with me.
The Hitler comparison has obvious problems as others have mentioned.
Trump is more like Saddam Hussein.
This is very good at highlighting the theme of power. This is very important in the formula for the United States.
Indeed, I have come to the view that the constitutional congress of yore simply accepted after much thought that [A] everyone is bound by an intrinsically flawed human nature so [B] separation of power is necessary for a free country and [C] if you go into politics, into government, you can and should expect to give and take tons of shit of any sort continuously, and have to shape up or ship out. No one is a saint – it’s your job to object, not invent apologetics, or chicken out. Really, Shapiro and Kirk should know better – it’s not hard, and your guy won’t feel a thing.
That was well before Mao and similar innovators in subversive political warfare. But same rule applies I think – Scottish Enlightenment Common Sense Realism / individualism vs. Rousseau and the resentment/envy/Social Contract Theory of the French Revolution.
Maher using the word “fascism” in the title appears to be an afterthought to support the humor. No connection to The Doctrine of Fascism (Mussolini, Gentile, 1932) is attempted.
Pretend I didn’t write “Indeed” – definitely don’t want that there but only thought of it now.
“Your guy won’t feel a thing”, except resentment and an aching thirst for revenge. I’m a believer in principled ethics, but even more a believer in survival. Sometimes you just gotta bend the knee and kiss the ass. Ever been an employee¹ ?
¹ Aka “servant” in English law.
I think the notion of ‘saying things so other people like you’ applies here –
Maher, … Hitchens, etc. strike me as unapologetically … coming from the heart (or whatever).
And this :
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parrhesia
Per my undergraduate business law course textbook, in the U.S. the relationship was/is formally described as “Master-Servant.”
U.S. citizens are wont to use the phrase “public servant” to remind elected and appointed officials, and government employees, of their subordinate relationship to and standing with citizens. After all, it is “public service.”
It seems that “private servant” is no less apropos (if politically incorrect) in describing employees in the private sector. I think the descriptor more clearly describes the reality and how the Masters of Mankind view us. Same with human “resources” and “capital.” It used to be “personnel.” Why the change? Was “personnel” too humanizing?
It seems that “private tyranny” is also applicable, in that corporations are certainly not democracies. At least private corporate tyrannies can’t jail us. (Though consider the actions of the United Fruit Company leading to the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy and Hawaii’s resulting subjugation by the U.S. As John Dewey said, “Government is the shadow cast by Business.”)
🎯
And for an even darker look at the nature of corporations I expect you’ll like The Corporation documentary film (2003, 8.0 IMDB user rating). Don’t be mislead by the bland title. Do be prepared for a little psychobabble.
Charles Krauthammer: “Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil.“
If you disagree with the Left, you are not jut wrong but evil. It has been that way for a long time now.
And Conservatives relish “pwning the Libs” because they hate stupidity?? That would be awfully mean of them, one might even say evil.
My take is that they relish exposing the stupidity of wokeness. Which in many cases is not very hard to do.
Surely you are not suggesting that personally attacking stupid people is a blow for non-stupidity; that would be, uh, stupid.
I was not referring to “personal attacks”, rather attacks on stupid opinions. TWAW comes to mind – Dr. Coyne has posted a number of JK Rowling tweets pointing out the stupidity of that.
Maybe you weren’t, but your compatriots “pwning the Libs” very often are.
…and the hypocrisy. California voters, some of the most liberal in the nation, twice rejected ballot measures that would have allowed affirmative action in admissions. Or, my neighbor with the front yard BLM sign next to his “save our local park” sign that advocated against rezoning the block.
I still think Maher just whitewashed Trump’s behavior.
And if he thinks his actions will have any impact on die hard Trump supports, well, he really has not learned anything in the last 10 years.
+1
I agree.
I doubt he was appealing to die-hard Trump supporters. I think he was appealing to rational conservatives.
I like Maher’s piece!
As for the New York Times “Larry David: My Dinner With Adolf,” not so much. I knew when the Harris campaign started playing the Hitler card near the end of the campaign that Trump was going to be the next president. It’s a losing tactic and it will always be.
I think the parody can be interpreted as “anyone can be portrayed in a positive light if you try hard enough”. Even though Hitler’s misdeeds are far more evil than Trump’s so far, Trump is starting to resemble a dictator more everyday. Deporting people to savage jails in Guatemala without due process (at least one documented innocent man), arresting a judge for interfering with ICE, dismantling government institutions, saying he would seek a third term…
This looks like the fable of the frogs in the boiling water.
Pedantries:
1. El Salvador.
2. As a matter of fact, real frogs are not that clueless (unlike us human metaphorical frogs).
I couldn’t disagree less with your take on the Maher fails to adequately demonize Trump brouhaha. Nuance is a sorely lacking feature of the current political discourse. That said, I hope Bill continues to refer to and reprise his brilliant joke about Trump’s “Jerking two guys off at once” dance. 🙂
Hairy quadruple negative there (-n’t, dis-, less, fails). The net does though come out non-negative in my dialect, after some head scratching.
Considering the fact that Larry David never mentioned Bill Maher in his editorial, it’s telling that so many people bring Maher up after reading it. This is of course the brilliance of David’s piece. Maher doesn’t need to be mentioned. People understand instantly.
It’s safe to assume that no one will rack up the Hitler’s record of death and hatred, but modern dictators and wannabes like Trump don’t need to kill 6,000,000 Jews to be compared to Hitler. They are all of a kind.
Trump has already tried to overthrow an election, and is planning to cheat or suspend the next. He has also deported legal residents and at least three US citizens with no trial or hearing. He and is lawyers are ignoring the principle of habeas corpus, a bedrock of English common law since 1166, and part of Article One of the US Constitution.
Unfortunately, we also have the problem in Germany that public figures who do not make clearly progressive statements and seek contact and discussions with right-wing conservatives are very quickly labeled as New Right, fascists or even Nazis.
The result is now like Aesop’s fable “The Boy Who Cried Wolf”. The moderate left and liberals (villagers) are tired of listening to the progressives (shepherd boy), so the wolves (right-wing extremists) can approach and threaten the sheep (democratic institutions) quite freely.
“[A]lthough I think Trump is a narcissistic loon who is on track to wreck the country, he is not equivalent to Hitler, and I detest the “Hitler parallel” that is so widespread these days. The trope, of course, is that if you dislike someone and his actions, then every single thing that person does must be bad and he’s pretty much like Hitler.” – J. Coyne
This is a straw-man objection to Larry David’s satirical comparison, which is in effect an argument from analogy that doesn’t employ a “Hitler-parallel trope” as defined above. I presume he is aware that Trump isn’t Hitler 2.0, and that Trumpism isn’t National Socialism 2.0.
That said, the point is that “Larry David’s satire brings out the fact that it isn’t just a matter of meeting people we disagree with; it all depends on what those people are guilty of. It isn’t merely that Larry and Adolf have different views; Hitler was an evil man responsible for the worst atrocity in history. You don’t have a cozy dinner with a man like that. The question, then, is whether Trump is an evil man responsible for evil acts. That is the question Maher avoided in his justification for meeting with Trump.” – Colin McGinn: https://www.colinmcginn.net/meetings/
To argue that Trump is “an evil man responsible for evil acts,” and that therefore one ought not to “have a cozy dinner with a man like that” is not to assert that he is as evil as Hitler. There are certainly levels of evilness or badness below Hitler’s one.
Sorry, but Maher did call out Trump during the dinner for actions that Maher thought were reprehensible. Maher did not evade that question.
You posted the same point twice.
Your dear leader continues to muse about annexation of other countries… he claims he is serious, he has media personalities who also support this position.
From the outside his words sound a lot more like Putin before the Ukraine invasion than Hitler, I don’t think that is much better.
You can claim he isn’t serious all you want. Everyone said the same thing about Putin. The US has the worlds largest military, that is not a country who’s leader should be musing about annexation of other countries.
If he acts on his delusions you will be looked upon as those Germans and Russians who coddled fascists.