AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND

American colonialism served as inspiration for Hitler, and the history of America is packed solid with violent othering of various groups.

It's not wrong, although I would stress, that fascism is not just that, and there is a reason why we only call those systems starting in the 20th century fascist.

It is also class collaborationism, and trying to somehow have the advantages of capitalism without its utter destruction of social norms and traditions. It is intertwining state and capital with the ideological aim to create a "strong nation" in the fight against other nations. It is imagining society as a body with people being its organs, who should serve their allotted place in society, and not rebel against it. America also had non-fascist tendencies woven within into history, and the settler-colonial era was still too early to be called "fascist", lacking the kind of developed industrial capitalism and violent reaction to socialist class struggle 20th century fascism was born in.

Yeah, we've rarely been the good guys in history.

No, Jim crow was the inspiration for Hitler, he wrote about it explicitly in mein kampf as the model that must be followed.

The Nuremberg Laws are actually, I shit you not, Jim crow but watered down as Germans wouldn't tolerate the 1 drop rule.

The south was so impossibly evil even the nazis blanched, and we never did anything to solve their unimaginable inhumanity.

We (the USA) were smoldering fascists prior to WW2. Let’s not kid ourselves.

Eh, I actually disagree. The US did a social democratic turn after the Great Depression, I think it was one of the eras where the US was furthest from fascism. It ultimately still created and maintained the conditions of fascist tendencies later on and only very partially did the work analysing their own history of imperialism, but I really dislike overuse of the word fascist, because it blunts the analytical edge. The implicit neoliberal social contract was different than the implicit fascist one (which was different than the more social democratic one solidified under FDR, etc.) - and the system no longer having to wear the mask of humanity has real life consequences and creates its own dynamics.

World history is rife with people trying to gain power so they can kill all the people who don’t look like them.

Indeed, but I think it is a fallacy to use that as an ideological framing of inevitability (unsure if that was your aim here). Ingroup-Outgroup thinking is one of the few things, that I think is indeed fundamental to the human condition, but the way it materialises is dependent on the interaction of that tendency with material and historical conditions. Without colonialism, the specific framing of race, for example, would not have existed in the same way. And universalism as a current within modernity is not just a fluke or illusion, but a proper potential tendency within human behaviour as well, one that relies on cultural and material conditions of its own.

Cynicism is in its own right an ideological distortion, where it leaves analysis and tries to impose its interpretation on reality.

Three. The camera wasn't on him for the third Nazi salute.

I mean it is respectful but just to Hitler.

I'm an eternal optimist

We are not of value to Trump.

He does not have the mental capacity to have a conscience.

He does not care if we live or die.

To him, it is not Russia that he is helping, only Putin because he has a compulsive need for validation from him.

Ultimately, it's not even about Putin. It's just fulfillment of his personal need for validation, a constant quest for self-gratification through the validation of those he sees as being of value