[anon-e-moose]

"Are those positions "evil" in the same sense that say Hitler was evil?"

Since you seem worried about this I'll help you out a bit. Since the American right wing lacks a specific plan to exterminate millions of a certain race or religion, or conquer the world with a master race, then the answer is clearly "no".

Was that even an intellectually serious thought though? If you are an American, do you literally worry about the day when your outspoken liberal drinking buddy will be taken to a work camp, if the Republicans should take back Congress or the White House? Or was it just a cheap slur.

[mkramlich]

You're assuming things I did not say. Go look at the actual things I said I've seen them advocate (pro-rich, anti-environment, etc.) -- none of them involved race or work camps. They are more pro-superstition ('faith' is probably their agreed upon buzzword used to convey this without having to say Christianity explicitly) than say the Democratic Party -- any reasonable study of that should lead you to that conclusion. If you are pro-religion or pro-aristocracy, you should prefer the R's over the D's, that's for sure. Pro-pollution? Also better to vote R than D. Anti-gay? Vote R rather than D. The list goes on.

Calling bad/evil things bad/evil is not a cheap slur, it's like calling water wet. People just have different views on what constitutes bad/evil.

[anon-e-moose]

In other words, you also agree that they are not as evil as Hitler, but feel that they align with bigoted or superstitious interests. So it wasn't a cheap slur, just a fitting comparison. Much like comparing a Canadian goose to the space shuttle.

[mkramlich]

Also instead of "right wing" I should have said Republican Party. I think you can be "right" politically and not necessarily agree with everything the RP promotes. In the US they tend to get conflated however.

I'm going to shutup now in this thread area though. Way too political of a topic. Sorry, fellow HN readers. :(