And if you tried to play apologist for Hitler by trying to make an equivalence between him and all prior antisemites, it would sound about the same as this does.
And I said:
Have you never heard of antisemitic pogroms?Hitler had technological advances for his genocide, but he was far from the first.
If you think that's a non-sequitor, that explains a lot of your attempts at discussion.
They just didn't have the technology to enact something on the scale of the Holocaust, but the genocidal intent was the same. Not to mention the hundreds of years of legal subjugation and regular scapegoating. I don't see why you think it's useful for you to pretend that Republican extremeism is new, if anything this is the latest iteration of an ongoing plan. One could definitely argue that it's urgent to outvote Trump, and acknowledge his place in the context of history. What you are doing is intellectually dishonest.
Did you really not understand what I was saying? Do you think anti-semetism was not broadly acceptable before the Holocaust? Hitler got his ideas from somewhere. The violence during the Holocaust was tolerated for a reason. Anti-semetic officials in the United States government enabled the Holocaust to continue for longer than it could have, had action been taken.
In January 1944, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Josiah E. DuBois Jr. authored a report detailing how certain officials within the Department of State had worked to prevent assistance to Jewish refugees and obscure information about the Holocaust. In response, President Roosevelt created the War Refugee Board as an independent agency to help Jewish refugees
I don't see how it benefits you to deny history. We exist in the context, etc etc