The word of the day is Nazi, which could almost be the word of every day. I assume that translation is unnecessary.
What would politicians and “statesmen” do without Hitler or the Nazis? The guy is lucky he’s dead, because he would spend a lot of time in court suing people for misuse of his name and legacy.
Today, I read that the current British prime minister is trying to compare himself to Neville Chamberlin. Perhaps, he misread history and does not know that this man is considered a failure. And, I do not see the parallels in the Ukraine conflict with 1939. But, politician know that most people do not know history and learn most of what they think they know from television/film fantasy and exaggeration of events. They also know that there will be no backlash from the Nazis, because this lovely bunch of folks no longer exists.
I would like to see a bit more thought and creativity in statements by public officials, but truthfulness might not translate into votes, which is the only reason they open their mouths.
I have written before about history being what people remember, not necessarily what happened (pointed out by wiser folks than me). The author of the article linked below states: “Sloppy language is nevertheless an enemy to proper historical explanation. Germany and Germans suffer from this more than most.“
Here is an excellent explanation of one major aspect of German/world history, summarized in one of its sentences:
“There are many ways in which the uncritical use of ‘Nazi’ distorts the German reality during the Hitler years.”
If you not agree with or believe this, simply listen to Fox News...
Everyone else seems to be using the guy's name in vain, so I'll get on the stick, jump on that bandwagon, and beat that dead horse.
It seems that this "gentleman" has become extremely popular with Fox News pundits, talk radio blowhards, and dodgy Republican politicians. His name is the default criticism of anyone that disagrees with their ridiculous positions or opinions on anything.
Of course, it's obvious from their rhetoric, that few have read any history or the man's biography. I doubt any could find Germany on a map or know that the man was Austrian. "Hitler" and "Nazi" are easy labels to hang on anything to incite a rapid crowd of bigger idiots with even less general knowledge.
What got me going on this topic? I read that Qaddafi has called the coalition forces "Nazis" and their political leaders "Hitler". This must be irony. He also has not read history. He's the one that has bombed his own people; Hitler bombed other nations, not his own. He was rather benevolent to his own citizens (except the Jews, of course), unlike Stalin, Saddam Husein, Mugabe, and Qaddafi, to name only a few.
I do not want to apologize for old Adolf, I merely want people to get their symbolism correct. I realize that blowhards in the US use Hitler, because he cannot sue them for slander. He is simple (for simple-minded speakers and listeners) shorthand for evil, even if his name has been degraded from over-use.
Hitler made one big mistake. He failed to brand his name, likeness, and symbols of power (best CI ever). He should have trademarked everything and licensed the whole lot to some US corporation. Since all the big ones (IBM, GM, Ford) were doing business with the German government throughout WWII, he had enough potential partners that understood the power of brands. Unfortunately, only idiots can reap value from his memory.