Donald Trump suggested we ban Muslims from entering the US and most people have reacted negatively(as they should). Most opposed argued that such a plan is Fascist and Hitler-esque, but now that a day has passed numerous conservative blogs are trying to spin that comparison back since apparently Jimmy Carter did the same 1980 as well as FDR before him. Right?
First off, I feel like I’m living in a bizarro world since conservatives are indirectly praising Jimmy Carter and FDR. Secondly, to suggest that Carter’s actions and Trump’s proposal are the same indicates a gigantic gaping hole of logic. The Carter and FDR’s administration targeted a nationality we were currently at war with, not a professed religion. What about the hundreds of millions of Muslims in Indonesia? Most people tend to forget that the middle east accounts for only about 19.8% of all Muslims in the world. If you want to equalize the situation to today then anyone claiming to be ISIS who wants to visit the United States would be turned away, as they should, and probably are if that ever happened.
Because ISIS is an ideological subset, a scalpel, not a broad brush will be required to confront it, especially since ISIS is attempting to capitalize on the cultural collateral damage that such a broad brush move would make. Banning Muslims would actually make it easier for ISIS to recruit.
Finally, I find it humorous that neoconservatives dance around Trump’s plan instead of confronting it, that suggests that there is a deep seeded closet support for it. Even further, instead of having a conversation about more acceptable, alternative ideas that are more compatible with the core of American religious freedom, the only thing they can do point to history and reference Carter or FDR to justify it, but even then completely ignore Chester A. Arthur’s Chinese Exclusion act of 1882. It may be because Arthur was a republican.
This is nothing but Grade A partisan bullshit.