John Aravosis asks what he obviously considers a "fair" question about Pope Benedict XVI:

When is it fair to call a Nazi a Nazi?

That seems to be the debate surrounding Cardinal Ratzinger, the new Pope. He was a member of the Hitler youth, and he belonged to a a Luftwaffe AA battery. And sure, as some on the left note, just because he was a German soldier doesn't make him a Nazi (though I must admit the nuance is lost a bit on me - I mean, yeah, he was just being a good German, but I thought that excuse went out of favor a long time ago).

The thing is, I feel like some are exonerating Ratzinger's past SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF his past. It's almost as if the fact that he was in the Hitler Youth and the Nazi army somehow means "of course he wasn't a Nazi." That logic is a bit weird. It's as weird as folks today who say "how dare you compare what is happening in America to what happened in Nazi Germany." Many people like to think, for whatever reason, that the sins of the Nazis could NEVER happen again, so per se it's bad form to even worry that they might or are. That's a rather dangerous and flippant view of history. And I think it's what's motivating some of the "how dare you call Ratzinger a Nazi" rhetoric.

It's almost as if we've gone from "how dare you think the Nazi horror could occur again" to "how dare you think the Nazis were Nazis?" Folks aren't saying - yes, Ratzinger has some explaining to do. Rather they're saying, per se it's unfair to worry about his unfortunate youth working for Hitler's final solution and victory, and to at least suggest that maybe the Catholic Church could have done better for itself and the memories of what it did, or didn't do, during WWII.

I don't think it's fair

In response to the question, "When is it fair to call a Nazi a Nazi?"

I'd say, "When it's fair to call a Communist a Communist!"

MORE: Anyone who thinks it's fair to call a Communist a Communist should read this (via InstaPundit).