With closed source software, such as the firmwares and MacOSes of the world, it is impossible to have 'checks and balances'. Yet without computers to run and develop open software on, it is that much harder to create alternatives to those closed systems.
I think this is very much a sliding scale. And that therefor the quote very much applies.
I'm still a bit flabbergasted: you really truly believe that disallowing installing Linux on a particular brand/model of laptop is directly comparable to the forced labor and extermination of millions of Jewish people during WW2?
Of course I do not believe it the way you portray it. It is called a 'sliding scale' for a reason, my friend. A 'slippery slope'[0], if you will. Completely different from 'directly comparable'.
At the top of the slope, it's "merely firmware, what is the problem?". At the bottom of the slope are warcrimes and genocide. It is very hard to stop sliding down a slippery slope once you've started.
So when you disallow Linux on a laptop you are very much at the top of the slope. And there is a long way to go. But my, oh my, it sure is slippery.
Because we live in a digital age. More and more so. And in this age, there is no way to have 'checks and balances' without access to the source code of the software. And without checks and balances, it is very hard to have Separation of Powers[1].
Interestingly enough, I've found that survivors of WW2 tend to understand this better than most.
There's no need for every slippery slope argument to make an allusion to the genocides committed by the Nazis.
Otherwise, "my friend", one invites analogies to Godwin's law, and rejection out of hand for using a reductio ad Hitlerum.
People make slippery slope arguments all the time, but often (and quoting your [0]), "as a form of fear mongering, in which the probable consequences of a given action are exaggerated in an attempt to scare the audience. The fallacious sense of "slippery slope" is often used synonymously with continuum fallacy, in that it ignores the possibility of middle ground and assumes a discrete transition from category A to category B. In a non-fallacious sense, including use as a legal principle, a middle-ground possibility is acknowledged, and reasoning is provided for the likelihood of the predicted outcome."
What was missing, in the recasting of Niemöller's poem, was the 'reasoning ... provided for the likelihood of the predicted outcome'.
I reluctantly comment here, but.. The misuse of technology (see: end of encryption; end of privacy; end of freedom; slippery slopes, etc.) could (by my perspective) lead to massive problems, including political/ideological persecution. However, "directly comparable" it probably isn't, yet.
If (IF) a time comes when the only software available is proprietary, restrictive, invasive and possibly insecure, in a world where software is ubiquitous and often essential, I think that could be bad. The definition of fascism does come to mind.
I suspect a three-letter agency or two may be taking some steps, certainly not impaired by telemetry, backdoors or hording vulnerabilities - all of which I sort of prefer to try and avoid by using the OS and configuration of my choice.
Come on. Do you really wan't to demonize people from using allegories?
User languagewars is in good company. Orwell compared early dissidents in USSR to chickens in his Animal farm. Jesus compared Kindom of Heaven to mustard seed, himself to wine and bread, redemption to finding a coin and true faith to freaking oil lamp. Plato compared whole human existence to group of dudes sitting in a cave. Socrates compared himself to gadfly.
This is one of the most used literary vehicle. By the best and most famous thinkers of all times.
I believe control and misuse of computers will have everything to do with the next genocide of that scale and had a bit to do with that one. I also believe genocides like that start with an alignment of corporate interests and government interests against individual privacy interests.
Certainly bugs in Telegram and the use of the wrong social software among dissidents (or software that unknowingly leaks, or is endemic like windows) has everything to do with how they are spied upon. Many of those dissidents are from ethnic minorities that are targeted or will be targeted.
The holocaust was a terrible thing, but not talking about any road signs to the next genocides to avoid upsetting people isn't the prevention mechanism my history teachers had in mind.
I think this is very much a sliding scale. And that therefor the quote very much applies.