Long time member. First time messenger. I am writing because of a metastasizing mass hysteria of the mob around Trump that is now personally felt. Are we descending into a Civil War?  One option is to pack a Sig Sauer P229 and hunker down, but instead, I am turning to the Ricochet community to at least ventilate my fears. This anxiety all came to a head yesterday when I received an email from a friend with a similar political persuasion who asked for solace after receiving an email from a longstanding friend. It was a crazy fanatical ranting, and my friend was frightened and sad. She thinks that friendship is over.  I feel it in the distancing of neighbors. I cannot talk politics with my liberal family.

And one of my very best friends sent me an email asking me to comment on her sense that there may be a “Final Solution” after reading an article consistent with her liberal views. She is Israeli. I am sending a copy of both her email and my response that I sent to her. Forgive me if it is long winded, but I need to get it out.

Here is the email from my good friend:

Hi Peter,

I know you feel different about Trump, but I needed to send this to you to see what you think.

• Step One for Hitler was to discredit the media.
• Step Two was to silence scientists and government employees.
• Hate crimes against minorities grew to the highest in their country’s history. Clashes between parties became so extensive that Hitler ended civil liberties (Step Three), giving “law and order” as the cause. Those who opposed Hitler were ridiculed and threatened.
• In Step Four wealthy supporters purchased media outlets, employing only those faithful to the ruling party.
• In his final step (Step Five) Hitler declared that the only way the country could be unified was to restore traditional values. Minorities including gays, the disabled, Jews, Roma, and people of color were considered “inferior” and sent to death camps for slaughter.

We’re between Steps 2-4.

This is in case you were always confused by how so many people could go along with Hitler’s Final Solution, this is exactly how it happened. Cannot even believe that this [expletive] is happening in this country, in our time.

For me, this is appalling scary and sad very dark week….

Xxxx
Rachel

And here is my response:

Hi Rachel,

First of all, thank you for asking what my thoughts are regarding your concerns. It is an opportunity to voice different views respectfully, and I am sure that our deep friendship will endure those differences.

I am sorry to hear that you are frightened about this week, but it is understandable given your fear that we are headed towards the “Final Solution.” My sense is that conclusion is quite a stretch to make.

The steps outlined may or may not have been a part of how Hitler achieved the final solution, but it is not “exactly” the only elements that led to such a tragedy. My recollection of history is that central to the rise of Hitler was a severe economic depression with hyperinflation such that money was worthless and unemployment was rampant. Severe reparations imposed by the Versailles Treaty of WWI where Germany had an even more difficult time recovering from a worldwide depression exacerbated it. The constitution of the Weimar Republic was also weak leading to a greater avenue to centralized power. Such destitution, resentment, and lack of a tradition of checks and balances led to profound social unrest and the rise of a charismatic despot.

Defining some of our political differences may address some of your fears. Forgive me for repeating what I have said before. Liberals and progressives believe in power from the top down with a strong centralized authority while conservatives and libertarians believe in decentralized power from the ground up with an emphasis on individual freedom and states rights. Examples are too numerous to enumerate here, but the pattern is very consistent. Additionally, liberals and progressives assume the moral high ground of equality and social justice above individual freedom. Conservatives and libertarians would prefer to be free to do what is best for them and their loved ones so long as it does not hurt others. It would be less command and control, a higher tolerance of uncertainly, and an emphasis on individual responsibility, but I think that it would lead to greater prosperity for all including the poor if we adhered more to the economic philosophy of the “invisible hand” of Adam Smith, and we would avoid “The Road to Serfdom” as warned of by Frederick Hayek.

I would suggest that there is a greater chance for a Hitler to arise when moral righteousness is aligned with a strong centralized power, especially if some conditions are present such as economic despair. As government is given more power, it only wants more; there is never enough. And power corrupts. The Founding Fathers knew this when they formed a Constitution that was designed to decentralize power through an elaborate form of checks and balances. All politics is confrontation that hopefully leads to compromise, but I would submit that liberal politics, even if well intentioned, is the politics of coercion and force. (“I am smarter and know what is right for you, and we will use our power to force you to give something up for the good of others”). Centralized power leads to greater conformity (e.g., political correctness) and force. Decentralized power curbs the tyranny of the majority. In the conservative desire for smaller government and individual freedom that dovetails with capitalism, there is more of an emphasis on voluntary cooperation and persuasion. There is a patience and tolerance for evolution (versus the liberal’s bent towards revolution), where many local communities and families and institutions such as religions and cultures evolve into a consensus of what is best. The assumption is that there is greater wisdom in the many than in the few and that innovation through greater freedom leads to greater and lasting social change.

I also share your concern about Trump’s temperament, and we will all be subjected to a roller coaster of emotions with his actions. As you know, I was in the Never Trump camp, but in the end, I am more relieved that Hilary is not in power. His ideology is unclear, and I think that liberals and conservatives alike will disagree with many of his decisions. But to me, I think that he is imperfectly committed to smaller government (e.g., “drain the swamp”), greater individual choice and competition (e.g., school choice) and a stronger Constitution (Supreme Court). I am also more optimistic about emerging from this economic quagmire to have greater prosperity for all (reduced taxes and regulation). All of these factors mitigate against him becoming a Hitler. I actually think that Obama had a greater likelihood of becoming a dictator if it were not for the checks and balances of the Constitution. It is his lack of compromise regarding his singular piece of legislation in Obamacare and his sweeping dictatorial executive actions with pen and phone that will lead to the unraveling of his legacy to a footnote. Time will tell if Trump will also do the same. I, for one, will give him time and try to judge him more by his actions than his rhetoric.

Regarding the LBGT rights, I heard Trump say on election night that the issue of gay rights has been legally settled. However, your implied concern about being a victim of “the Final Solution” raises a question for me that perhaps you can help me understand. I cannot understand how you think that Trump is anti-Semitic? He is the most pro-Israel president we have had in a long time. His son-in-law is an Orthodox Jew. Ivanka Trump converted to Judaism. The Republican Party has been decidedly pro-Israel since its beginnings. Yet what perplexes me is why American Jews are at least 70 percent liberal? It is obvious that Obama is anti-Israel: the UN abstention establishes that any Israeli occupying the West Bank or worships at the Wall is a war criminal, and it takes away any need for the Palestinians to negotiate with Israel; he gave $221 million to the Palestinians who have repeatedly walked away from the table despite concessions from Israel. Alan Dershowitz has not only said that Steve Bannon is not anti-Semitic, but he also says that if you want to experience that bigotry, just join him when he goes on any liberal campus. I just don’t get it.

Finally, I will tell you my thoughts regarding each of the quoted steps:

•  Step One for Hitler was to discredit the media.

I have no problem with discrediting the media. With the exception of Fox and the WSJ, every major outlet has been liberally biased: NYT, Washington Post, CNN, NPR. Whether directly or subtlety, consciously or unconsciously, Americans have been forced fed this pabulum for a very long time.

•  Step Two was to silence scientists and government employees.

I actually think that it is the liberals who are silencing the scientists, whether through the withholding of federal grants, the withholding of tenure, or the oppression of group think of liberal institutions that do not tolerate dissenting views. It is my contention that the debate over climate change may be another example of this and that there may now be a more open debate. Academicians are now starting to voice their concerns. (Just to clarify, I have no doubt that human beings are affecting the climate. The question is can we measure the effect, does man truly have the ability to alter nature on such a scale, or is it hubris, and is it then fair to the poor that mammoth resources be diverted? So far, all the modeling has come up well short of predictions. I am inclined to put my government resources towards the basic sciences for cleaner energy and let the market develop technology. You can export new technology to other polluting countries; exporting regulations makes no sense. Finally, when you talk about silencing, read The Silencing by Kirsten Powers. She portrays the rampant oppression of political correctness on liberal campuses today with its use of micro-aggressions, safe spaces, trigger points, etc. Oberlin is the poster child for it. (One of her sons went there. I am a graduate) One example is that the classic Antigone was banned from the curriculum because a student complained that it traumatized him. Get real. And if by silencing government employees, we are talking about the “Deep State” or putting a curb on federal departments such as the EPA dictating regulation rather than following Congress, I am ok with that.

• Hate crimes against minorities grew to the highest in their country’s history. Clashes between parties became so extensive that Hitler ended civil liberties (Step Three), giving “law and order” as the cause. Those who opposed Hitler were ridiculed and threatened.

There is greater racial divide now than before Obama because of his divisiveness, but I do not believe that there are greater hate crimes today. And just an example of media bias: when that white developmentally disabled kid was systematically abused by those four black kids, the media was very challenged to call it a hate crime. As for “law and order,” I can understand that it does not make sense to the progressives when violence often accompanies the demonstrations of liberals. I think that reflects the revolutionary psyche of progressives in that the end justifies the means. There was not one unlawful violent behavior that occurred during the many demonstrations of the Tea Party.

•. In Step Four wealthy supporters purchased media outlets, employing only those faithful to the ruling party.

By definition, those who purchase media outlets need to be wealthy, and again, those outlets are predominantly liberal. I suppose this author may be referring to Steve Bannon, but there was certainly no outrage over Al Sharpton being at the side of Obama. I would put Bannon’s character up against Sharpton anytime.

•. In his final step (Step Five) Hitler declared that the only way the country could be unified was to restore traditional values. Minorities including gays, the disabled, Jews, Roma, and people of color were considered “inferior” and sent to death camps for slaughter.

We’re between Step 2-4.

This is in case you were always confused by how so many people could go along with Hitler’s Final Solution, this is exactly how it happened. Cannot even believe that this [expletive] is happening in this country, in our time.

Traditional values include the rule of law and respect for family and religion. Liberal progressive philosophy is rooted in Marxism, which is focused on the destruction of the family and religion so that the state takes over. People went along with the Final Solution where they were deprived of their voice because the government had taken over.

So when you have time, let me tell you what I really think.

Xxxx,

Peter

To the Ricochet community, thank you for listening. Do you feel me? I feel better already. But do you guys know the address of the closest local gun shop?

Sincerely,
A San Francisco Resident