Going THAT Far?
There was an interesting Op-Ed piece in the Twin Cities paper the Star Tribune today. It started by describing Gerany in the 1920s in a way that sure sounded a lot like the USA today. Then he goes on to say the following. From the Star Tribune

Of course, America is not 1920s Germany... But even in these relatively secure times, we have shown an alarming willingness to choose headstrong leadership over thoughtful leadership, to value security over liberty; to accept compromises to constitutional principles, and to defy the opinion of the rest of the world.

How would we react if things got worse? If we were to lose the war in Iraq, leaving a fundamentalist regime in place; if we endured several more major terrorist attacks; if the economy collapsed; if fuel prices reached $7 per gallon -- would we cling even more fiercely to our democratic ideals? Or would we instead demand greater surveillance, more secret prisons, more arrests for "conspiracies" that amount to little more than daydreams, and more quashing of dissent?

Our history suggests the latter. We Americans have had our flights from democracy -- the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II, the Red Scare and the McCarthy era, Watergate -- but we have always pulled back from the brink and returned to normal.

The time is coming for us to pull back from the brink again. This must happen before the government gets so strong that it can completely demonize opposition, gain complete control of the media, and develop dossiers on all its citizens. By then it will be too late, and we'll have ourselves to blame.
--Brian E. Fogarty, a sociology professor at the College of St. Catherine in St. Paul, is the author of "War, Peace, and the Social Order."

It is a series of sobering and challenging questions. He is right that our nation, like any nation, can easily lose its ideals when faced with extreme issues. Even Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. We have been fortunate, Franklin Roosevelt packed the Supreme Court, and John Kennedy threatened to nationalize the steel industry. And these weren't madmen like we have seen in Richard Nixon.

Which is why, in spite of every ounce of the way I feel about detestable protests like the anti-gay group that demonstrates at military funerals, we can't make them illegal. Control them, limit how close they can get? Probably. But they should have the same rights as we do. Disagreements, i.e. the extremes of opinion, can often be the source of great compromise and the revealing of new and hopeful ideas. Don't ask me how in some of these. Maybe in showing the detestable behavior on either extreme we can limit their power and ability to persuade - like Edward R. Murrow did with Joseph McCarthy.

Can we elect a Hitler? Can we allow such a deterioration of rights and freedoms? Maybe. But I pray not. Only by standing for our rights- and defending the rights of others- will we be able to work out or differences. Deep, angry divisions will not do it. But divisions will exist. Let's make sure we keep talking and allowing the other opinions to talk, too.