Here's a link to the site where the above article has been copied from.

If you click on the link for 'free inquiry' you will find out from which camp the article comes from. I must say I am very pleased that an article from the skeptical movement gets such a positive mention here. But why this article of all the good ones in that magazine?

As for the list Britt has written down I have the impression that it has been written down with an eye to the result. He has left out or smoothed what didn't fit into the picture he wants his readers to get.

So let me add some critique from a German perspective. He has made some good points, but I don't agree with a lot of details and omissions.

(1) What he has left out completely is the feeling in that time that the own nation has not the correct place in the community of nations it should have. The fascist states tried to climb a bit on the ladder of nations to undo (real or imagined) past wrongs. (Wouldn't really fit the USA; they seem to be quite pleased with their present position in the world).

(2) What he leaves out completely too is (at least for Italy and Germany) the wish for a larger country including Italiens/Germans presently (at that time) living under foreign rule ('Heim in's Reich', bring them home to our country). I see no parallel at all with the USA. And that was one of the most dangerous aspects of fascism for the international peace in Europe.

(3) Religion: The Nazis had quite a contempt (most of them) for the traditional religion. They didn't dare to confront organised religion directly (made compromises), but many of them are on record saying that after the war they will have to deal with the Christian churches. Not a convincing parallel with the USA of today. I know that local leaders in the Nazi movement were under some pressure from above to actually leave the churches.

(4) Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. I do not see here a good understanding of the role of physical labour in Nazi Germany. The Nazis have introduced First of May as Labour day in Germany, contempt for being poor was unknown. At least officially, the work with the hands was seen as superior to other work and there was (that was the angle against the Jews and their 'financial might') open contempt for wealth coming from other sources than work, especially when wealth came from what the Americans now term 'making money'.

(5) Anti-Abortion??? Yes, when it was a healthy child from German parents. Not at all, when the child was not healthy according to their racist ideas or a child from 'lesser' races.

(6) He doesn't mention the euthanasia program of the mentally ill? Why not? Because it has no parallel in the USA?

There are several more points that do not fit well. I have only selected the most obvious to me. Other points do fit. But my overall impression is that there was a preconceived theory in search of corroborating data at the onset of his article.

He has made some good points but has failed to convince me that there is more to it than (in his words) 'verbal gymnastics'.

Wolfgang