[Politics] Nazis Attack LGBT Pride Parade

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

Dreiko:
Well, they were doing that to that guy who was banned a few days ago so it's only fair in my book to have it done to them when suspended. As long as you never say anything worth suspending you over I don't think it's a concern XD.

Not asking what others did or didn't do. Asking if you would like to be treated that way; if not, don't do it. That's how the golden rule works, pay attention to it. Eye for an eye makes the whole world blind and all that.

trunkage:
You know what I find funny. That we are waiting for Nazis to kill someone to then do something about them.

No one knew about the holocaust until pretty much after WW2 was over. They thought it was a similar situation to WW1, that Nazi Germany wasn't really being bad guys like we see them today. Not many in German army knew either.

American went to fight in Europe over a much less threshold than Holocaust. Yet, that seems to be the bar for today. Could we have a lower bar than genocide for dealing with hate groups?

Also, it funny how that people predicted this if Trump got in... oh the lulz

Or how about when people tried to tell me I was exaggerating on what Trump would do in office and how there was No way people would just allow him to do these things even though I told them he would just fire whoever didn't do what he told them to do and replace them with someone who would... Now that he has been getting rid of anyone who would stop him from doing whatever he wants and has an attorney General willing to break the law to defend him at all costs, how exactly do they propose stopping him when they can't even get the justice department to arrest him if found guilty or impeached? Barr, who is in contempt himself, is in charge of the justice department so who exactly is going to remove him from office when he has already fired everyone that would uphold the law?

I REALLY wanted to be wrong about him tbh, the fact that Trump is in charge of the Military and fired all his top generals to stop him from making a mess while he becomes more belligerent by the day is frightening to say the least.

TheIronRuler:
Saelune doesn't seem to want to engage in a discussion with the purpose of challenging their opinions. .

Saelune has severe depression and snapped when donald won. It makes her have a very black and white morality.

Leg End:
Children conscripted to military service are not Nazis.

They probably were though.

The Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933. The defence of Berlin was in 1945. An entire generation of German children grew up under Nazi rule, constantly exposed to the propaganda and ideological control of a system which was designed in a calculated fashion to instil them with Nazi values. Eugenics (meaning Nazi racial theory) became a core part of the curriculum taught to children in school. Before Jewish children were banned from education in 1938, children were encouraged to humiliate and abuse Jewish classmates. Outside of class, membership of Nazi youth organizations became compulsory for all "Aryan" children in 1936. One of the explicit goals of youth organizations was to encourage loyalty to the state over traditional social bonds. Children were encouraged to denounce their teachers, family members and neighbours for ideological crimes. Many people of this generation have been fairly open about the effect this ideological indoctrination had on them.

Here are some more Nazi child soldiers. They are not conscripts. They are enlisted soldiers of the 12th SS Panzer Division "Hitlerjugend" (note their SS patches). The 12th division was formed before the normandy landings, with the majority of its enlisted soldiers being boys under 18, like these kids (although this photo was taken later). These were mostly willing combatants who enlisted themselves. They had been raised to be willing to fight for Nazi ideology, and so they did. Although the Volkssturm, the conscript army formed later which also employed many child soldiers, were conscripts, do not assume they were unwilling conscripts. They were children who had been raised within an ideological system which viewed fighting for the Nazi cause as the ultimate virtue.

Children are not pure innocent creatures whose natural goodness and innocence will win out against the ideological forces of tyranny. They are, in fact, incredibly vulnerable to ideological manipulation. Totalitarian regiemes have intentionally sought to used children as soldiers, torturers and informants precisely because they are so vulnerable to ideological manipulation.

Anyway, the point..

See, by fixating on the idea of the poor innocent child soldiers forced to fight against their will, you're actually dodging the meaningful question of rehabilitation. Many German children of this generation were successfully rehabilitated. Over time, they were able to process what had happened to them and to understand how they had been manipulated. Some, however, could not. Some were never able to square that the society they had grown up in and the way they had been taught to believe was wrong. The liberal idea that rehabilitation is always possible, that all people have some intuitive spark of goodness in them which will naturally come out if they're "educated" or "informed", is nonsense. Children can be Nazis, and some children who were Nazis will never stop being Nazis.

The children you were try to show were almost certainly committed, ideologically motivated Nazis. Even if they weren't, the fact remains that they were doing Nazism just as if they were. They were participating in a regime that murdered tens of millions of people, including children. Saelune's point, which is a valuable point I think, is that the possibility of rehabilitation doesn't absolve people of what they've done, what they've tolerated or what they would be willing to tolerate. It isn't hard to see those who have made their way into extremist ideologies as victims, we're naturally going to want to question how a "normal" person got there. Saelune's point is that it doesn't ultimately matter when you are the victim of those people.

TheIronRuler:

undeadsuitor:

TheIronRuler:
Saelune doesn't seem to want to engage in a discussion with the purpose of challenging their opinions. .

Here's a secret. The alt right? Nazis? Etc? They thrive off people "challenging" their opinions in open debate. Why? Because facts and logic doesn't apply to their ideals, so it's impossible for them to "lose".

You show me a video of an alt right dude getting fucking wrecked in a debate and I'll show you the same video spread around subreddits and chan boards of that same man "owning the lefties". Any publicity is good publicity for them, and its monumentally better to just not give them a platform.

.
I've written in a previous post, one of the first I responded with to criticism over my appeal to reason. I said that if you silence the opposition you lose the ability to follow their moves and push them further to the edge. You wouldn't make it stop - you'd only make it harder to join - but if you make it illegal, you make it more radical and exciting to join as well.

This is the problem you have with me - I ask for dialogue. You're not the only person that has this problem with me. I've been to /pol/ last week for the first time partly because of your remarks. I wanted to check it out and see it for myself. If I wasn't one of their greatest enemies I would have been sucked in because it's fascinating. I realized how deluded these guys are... It made me check some of their memes, and a whole new world of conspiracies opened up for me. It was like I was a kid in a candy-shop, and every candy was a lollipop with a razor in it. I tried to take them seriously - because so many people do - and I couldn't. My take on it - they're deeply entrenched in their dream-world, and there's little you can do to pull them back if you debate them on the internet. The solution? Ah. Here is my solution. Do not push them outside of the law. Address the issues that some of these people are facing - hardships that plagued regions in America which the media and government forget to acknowledge... Drugs, unemployment, neglect... People who voted for Trump because they were in a bad spot economically and wanted to change that.

I do not think that people who voted for Trump voted for him because they were racists or bigots or whatever.

Saelune just likes to activate Godwin's law like it's a stand.

Here's the original post if you care to read it.

TheIronRuler:
Call up the boys, resurrect the Black Panthers and use your god-given right to carry firearms and scare the crap out of white people.

Legally owned and licensed firearms, held by organized law-keeping black citizens for the safety of their communities.

Police wouldn't risk starting a riot, they'd rather protect the nazis from getting lynched.

Y'know when Nazis marched in New York in the 30s Lansky was asked low-key by the US government to crash their rallies and beat them to pieces...

https://allthatsinteresting.com/meyer-lansky-punch-a-nazi

He delivered.

This shouldn't be made illegal by any means. Let this surface, identify the ring-leaders and plan retribution. If you allow this to bubble under your feet you will lose track of the movement.

I regularly play devil's advocate here when "white nationalists" (as if that's a thing, bitter poor whites turning to populism for salvation) gets conflated with nazis. It's more productive to have a dialogue with these people and understand why they are lashing out (hint: It's opium, mechanization and globalization), and maybe even address these issues... These nazis? Break them.

Who said I was pushing them outside the law? For someone who wants dialog, you do absolutely nothing but talk for both sides. Asking for opinions and then responding to what you wanted people to say instead of what they said.

Ignore alt right shit. Belittle Nazis. Do literally everything but act like their ideas are worth debating.

Unless of course you believe there's so middle ground to their ideas. Do you?

TheIronRuler:

Silvanus:

Leg End:
The way I read this does not in any way involve enlistment in the military, but instead relates to the political sphere and thus, the German people as a whole.

This seems to directly refer to people that supported him during his rise to power.

And... yes, they held some measure of responsibility for what came after.

.
You shouldn't try to play attorney for Saelune.

Saelune:

100% of Hitler's supporters are Nazis. Every soldier that fought for Nazi Germany was a Nazi, whether they joined the party or not, whether they 'agreed' with him or not, because in the end, they helped him commit his evil, they fought his war, they ousted their neighbors to the camps. Maybe they were 'just protecting their family' or 'defending their homeland', but at the cost of their very souls.

Saelune is like... the image I had when I was heavily invested in alt-right american media of the typical leftist... It surprised me they weren't all just hyperbolic nonsense. There are people that feel that the most important things in life are equality and the environment, and that all conservatives that supported Trump are racist bigots, etc. and to top it off, Saelune doesn't seem to want to engage in a discussion with the purpose of challenging their opinions.
.

Leg End:

Silvanus:

Hmm, I can see a lot of stuff about soldiers (with caveats about children being victims themselves). Nothing about "all citizens".

Part of the choice was not letting Hitler come to power. Hitler made no secret of his bigotry, his rise to power relied on it. He was supported BECAUSE he was bigoted.

The way I read this does not in any way involve enlistment in the military, but instead relates to the political sphere and thus, the German people as a whole.

.
It was about German soldiers under the Nazi regime. No doubt about it.
.

Abomination:

McElroy:
Everyone who supported Nazis was responsible and anyone who didn't do everything they could against it chose to effectively support it too. Heavily implied.

More so in regard to conscription, if you did not resist conscription (i.e. submit to execution) then you are just as bad as those who were forcing the conscription upon you.

I believe the words were that if anyone fought for Nazi Germany then they were as bad as the Nazis, despite them not knowing exactly what crimes the Nazi regime was guilty of. According to most they were just an occupying force.

.
Agreed, with one caveat. Many regular Germans knew about what the SS units were doing in the east. The undesirables weren't deported to a different land... they were deported to the sky, in the form of ash.

Silvanus hates bullshit, and bullshit is what was being delivered.

Also thanks for proving me right about you. Your views on 'typical leftists' and your embracing of right-wing views. I was right about you just as I am right about so many other things. Thanks for erasing any doubt I had.

Leg End:

Silvanus:

Hmm, I can see a lot of stuff about soldiers (with caveats about children being victims themselves). Nothing about "all citizens".

Part of the choice was not letting Hitler come to power. Hitler made no secret of his bigotry, his rise to power relied on it. He was supported BECAUSE he was bigoted.

The way I read this does not in any way involve enlistment in the military, but instead relates to the political sphere and thus, the German people as a whole.

Ofcourse the way you read it would do that. But if you read what I said, then you wouldn't be able to argue.

Saelune:

100% of Hitler's supporters are Nazis. Every soldier that fought for Nazi Germany was a Nazi, whether they joined the party or not, whether they 'agreed' with him or not, because in the end, they helped him commit his evil, they fought his war, they ousted their neighbors to the camps. Maybe they were 'just protecting their family' or 'defending their homeland', but at the cost of their very souls.

Dreiko:
Well, they were doing that to that guy who was banned a few days ago so it's only fair in my book to have it done to them when suspended. As long as you never say anything worth suspending you over I don't think it's a concern XD.

I would love to be 100% honest. I just get in trouble when I do that. I assure you, everything I said about The Lunatic I would love to have said to them directly.

TheIronRuler:

Saelune just likes to activate Godwin's law like it's a stand.

The topic is literally about Nazis. Godwin's law is not even a fallacy, it is simply a theorized observation.


Godwin on the Charlottesville Nazi parade.

Godwin's law is not that comparing people to Nazis is bad or wrong, only that it is a common conclusion to many arguments on the internet, even if the starting topic is irrelevant to Nazis.

Saelune:
Godwin's law is not that comparing people to Nazis is bad or wrong, only that it is a common conclusion to many arguments on the internet, even if the starting topic is irrelevant to Nazis.

That's because up until circa 2016, we could all reasonably agree that fucking Nazis were the epitome of "bad guys." Nowadays, it's to the point where you actually see "But not all Nazis!" comments being posted in genuine seriousness....

Avnger:

Saelune:
Godwin's law is not that comparing people to Nazis is bad or wrong, only that it is a common conclusion to many arguments on the internet, even if the starting topic is irrelevant to Nazis.

That's because up until circa 2016, we could all reasonably agree that fucking Nazis were the epitome of "bad guys." Nowadays, it's to the point where you actually see "But not all Nazis!" comments being posted in genuine seriousness....

Saying 'punching Nazis is ok' is treated as worse than saying 'kill all jews/blacks'.

This should be open and shut no room maybes just full on nazi's being assclowns at a gay pride parade. Open and shut they can go fuck themselves. Also not the throw salt on the wound but Lunatic dropped all pretenses of trolling a while ago or only so many times you can say "free speech" and gaslight a discussion in the worst faith imaginable.

Saelune:
The topic is literally about Nazis. Godwin's law is not even a fallacy, it is simply a theorized observation.

It's even worse than that.

Godwin's Law is a joke.

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1 is a valid statement, but it's a meaningless statement if taken seriously because it literally just describes how time works. You may as well say as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of everyone involved being destroyed by vacuum decay approaches 1 and because we haven't clarified what "longer" or "approaches 1" actually means it's still technically valid. The rhetorical point is that people compare things to Hitler too much and inappropriately.

The fallacy which Godwin's Law references is Reductio ad Hitlerum, or more formally an association fallacy whereby an irrelevant association is used to discredit something by comparing it to Hitler or the Nazis. Note that I've bolded the word irrelevant, because that's the actual important bit.

Mike Godwin has always been very clear that the point of "Godwins Law" is not to provide a cover for actual far right policies or activities, or to censor relevant comparison between contemporary political debates and Nazism from the internet, but to make people think twice about the seriousness of such comparisons.

evilthecat:

Saelune:
The topic is literally about Nazis. Godwin's law is not even a fallacy, it is simply a theorized observation.

It's even worse than that.

Godwin's Law is a joke.

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1 is a valid statement, but it's a meaningless statement if taken seriously because it literally just describes how time works. You may as well say as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of everyone involved being destroyed by vacuum decay approaches 1 and because we haven't clarified what "longer" or "approaches 1" actually means it's still technically valid. The rhetorical point is that people compare things to Hitler too much and inappropriately.

The fallacy which Godwin's Law references is Reductio ad Hitlerum, or more formally an association fallacy whereby an irrelevant association is used to discredit something by comparing it to Hitler or the Nazis. Note that I've bolded the word irrelevant, because that's the actual important bit.

Mike Godwin has always been very clear that the point of "Godwins Law" is not to provide a cover for actual far right policies or activities, or to censor relevant comparison between contemporary political debates and Nazism from the internet, but to make people think twice about the seriousness of such comparisons.

I have compared things in the past to Nazis that I would not do now, because I naively thought we would never let anyone get this close to actually being a second Hitler! I honestly did not think the Republican Party would ever actually get this far this way.

I also think most people think Hitler happened over night, that it was like, Day 1: Hitler becomes leader, Day 2: Holocaust, when actually Hitler was in power nearly a decade before he really got a Hitler'ing. The Nazi Party led by Hitler was around since 1920.

Saelune:
Saying 'punching Nazis is ok' is treated as worse than saying 'kill all jews/blacks'.

I do have to ask where and when? Because if we take this forum as an example, no one has ever said all jews or blacks should be killed. And I doubt anyone would get away with that. I'd even assume a warning/suspension/ban would follow such a statement. (Meanwhile inciting violence against Nazis seems to be ok with the rules)

People questioning calls for violence towards people who are defined as "Nazis" doesn't suggest calls to eradicate certain races would go unquestioned. And mind you that inciting violence against Nazis would probably not be challenged as much if "Nazis" wasn't used to label anyone "too right wing in my opinion" so often.

Saelune:

I also think most people think Hitler happened over night, that it was like, Day 1: Hitler becomes leader, Day 2: Holocaust, when actually Hitler was in power nearly a decade before he really got a Hitler'ing. The Nazi Party led by Hitler was around since 1920.

Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933, in February 1933 he issued the Reichstag Fire Decree which suspended a ton of civil rights, including free speech, freedom of press and habeas corpus. the NSDAP got full legislative power in March 1933 via the Enabling Act, which allowed the Cabinet to pass laws without a majority vote in the Reichstag. In March 1933 Dachau, the first Nazi concentration camp, was founded to intern the political opposition to the NSDAP. In April 1933 the Boycott of Jewish Business took effect and the Civil Service Law was passed, which forced Jewish people working in the civic administration of Germany to retire. In 1935 the Nuremberg Laws were passed, which were the laws that would later drive most anti-Semitic actions of Nazi-Germany. Around that time the first Jewish people and other "undesirables" were sent to concentration camps.

Hitler and the NSDAP had been in power for about four weeks when they struck the first major blow to the democratic institutions of Germany. They wasted no time at all and had effectively laid the groundwork for both WW2 and the Holocaust by mid-1935, 2,5 years after they seized power. So really, if you want to use the speed of take over as an argument, then comparing the Republican Party of today with the NSDAP really is Goodwin's Law. They are far too inept (and probably unwilling) to emulate the speed and ferocity with which the NSDAP repressed vast swathes of the German population and made political opposition illegal.

generals3:

Saelune:
Saying 'punching Nazis is ok' is treated as worse than saying 'kill all jews/blacks'.

I do have to ask where and when? Because if we take this forum as an example, no one has ever said all jews or blacks should be killed. And I doubt anyone would get away with that. I'd even assume a warning/suspension/ban would follow such a statement. (Meanwhile inciting violence against Nazis seems to be ok with the rules)

People questioning calls for violence towards people who are defined as "Nazis" doesn't suggest calls to eradicate certain races would go unquestioned. And mind you that inciting violence against Nazis would probably not be challenged as much if "Nazis" wasn't used to label anyone "too right wing in my opinion" so often.

Every time anyone comes to the defense of Nazis and condemns me for being so inconsiderate of their views and situations.

You're literally in a topic about literal Nazis literally attacking a gay pride parade where I literally got criticized for 'Godwin's Law'.

It is pretty clear to me at this point that people just dont like me criticizing Nazis.

Gethsemani:

Saelune:

I also think most people think Hitler happened over night, that it was like, Day 1: Hitler becomes leader, Day 2: Holocaust, when actually Hitler was in power nearly a decade before he really got a Hitler'ing. The Nazi Party led by Hitler was around since 1920.

Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933, in February 1933 he issued the Reichstag Fire Decree which suspended a ton of civil rights, including free speech, freedom of press and habeas corpus. the NSDAP got full legislative power in March 1933 via the Enabling Act, which allowed the Cabinet to pass laws without a majority vote in the Reichstag. In March 1933 Dachau, the first Nazi concentration camp, was founded to intern the political opposition to the NSDAP. In April 1933 the Boycott of Jewish Business took effect and the Civil Service Law was passed, which forced Jewish people working in the civic administration of Germany to retire. In 1935 the Nuremberg Laws were passed, which were the laws that would later drive most anti-Semitic actions of Nazi-Germany. Around that time the first Jewish people and other "undesirables" were sent to concentration camps.

Hitler and the NSDAP had been in power for about four weeks when they struck the first major blow to the democratic institutions of Germany. They wasted no time at all and had effectively laid the groundwork for both WW2 and the Holocaust by mid-1935, 2,5 years after they seized power. So really, if you want to use the speed of take over as an argument, then comparing the Republican Party of today with the NSDAP really is Goodwin's Law. They are far too inept (and probably unwilling) to emulate the speed and ferocity with which the NSDAP repressed vast swathes of the German population and made political opposition illegal.

Trump's incompetence at taking advantage his absolute power over the Republican Party cannot be used as an acceptable excuse to ignore his intentions. His incompetence and that the US was supposed to prevent people like Trump from turning this country into a fascist state (and ironically, the strength of state powers) is the only reason we aren't building giant gold statues of Trump to replace the Lincoln Memorial, probably by slave immigrant labor who would then be put into MORE internment camps. Not new ones, Trump already has some.

Saelune:
Trump's incompetence at taking advantage his absolute power over the Republican Party cannot be used as an acceptable excuse to ignore his intentions. His incompetence and that the US was supposed to prevent people like Trump from turning this country into a fascist state (and ironically, the strength of state powers) is the only reason we aren't building giant gold statues of Trump to replace the Lincoln Memorial, probably by slave immigrant labor who would then be put into MORE internment camps. Not new ones, Trump already has some.

But this is a whole other argument to make then "Hitler moved slowed at the start too" which was your original argument. Goal post moving, I think is the term.

Gethsemani:

Saelune:
Trump's incompetence at taking advantage his absolute power over the Republican Party cannot be used as an acceptable excuse to ignore his intentions. His incompetence and that the US was supposed to prevent people like Trump from turning this country into a fascist state (and ironically, the strength of state powers) is the only reason we aren't building giant gold statues of Trump to replace the Lincoln Memorial, probably by slave immigrant labor who would then be put into MORE internment camps. Not new ones, Trump already has some.

But this is a whole other argument to make then "Hitler moved slowed at the start too" which was your original argument. Goal post moving, I think is the term.

My goal was to point out that Trump is on the same path as Hitler, and that it was not a sudden thing in either case. My goal was to justify the Hitler comparisons.

Saelune:
Trump's incompetence at taking advantage his absolute power over the Republican Party...

To answer Freddie's eternal question, this is not real life, this is just fantasy.

Hitler comparisons are a cheap tactic tbh. When people employ that, they're really just trying to use the genocide and concentration camps as an easy way to trigger moral outrage without actually having to give solid justifications for their reasoning.

Far as I can remember, like 80% of the country has been accused of being bigots and white supremacists since trump got elected. This is one of the few threads in 3 years where the label actually fits. Congrats i guess. Some people might use this incident to say their doomsaying was right all along. Except these groups have already been around and it's not actually a sign of escalation.

Shadowstar38:
Hitler comparisons are a cheap tactic tbh. When people employ that, they're really just trying to use the genocide and concentration camps as an easy way to trigger moral outrage without actually having to give solid justifications for their reasoning.

Far as I can remember, like 80% of the country has been accused of being bigots and white supremacists since trump got elected. This is one of the few threads in 3 years where the label actually fits. Congrats i guess. Some people might use this incident to say their doomsaying was right all along. Except these groups have already been around and it's not actually a sign of escalation.

Using this response is more about not wanting to discuss a point, more about trying to silence an opponent, than anything else.

I.e. saying that "using the word Nazi is a cheap tactic" is more about you being Politically Correct than anything else.

generals3:
(Meanwhile inciting violence against Nazis seems to be ok with the rules)

*Shrugs* This is at it's core supposed to be a video game forum, and I've been shooting Nazi in the face in video games for three decades. (1988's Bionic Commando if I had to pick a starting point.) Because history has decided what they stand for makes them ubiquitous as a universal bad guy. The absolute lowest bar to having villains no one can complain about.

Shadowstar38:
Hitler comparisons are a cheap tactic tbh. When people employ that, they're really just trying to use the genocide and concentration camps as an easy way to trigger moral outrage without actually having to give solid justifications for their reasoning.

Far as I can remember, like 80% of the country has been accused of being bigots and white supremacists since trump got elected. This is one of the few threads in 3 years where the label actually fits. Congrats i guess. Some people might use this incident to say their doomsaying was right all along. Except these groups have already been around and it's not actually a sign of escalation.

So, should we just assume that the rise of Hate Crimes that has been climbing steadily over the years to be the actual escalation, and this is just a showing of power?

Because yeah, that seems apt.

tstorm823:

Saelune:
Trump's incompetence at taking advantage his absolute power over the Republican Party...

To answer Freddie's eternal question, this is not real life, this is just fantasy.

What's fantasy here?

Trump has been blocked by his own people from doing illegal things and they get fired. Is that not attempting to gain absolute power? Fire all those you diagree with you

Or are you talking about Trump not being incompetent...

trunkage:

Shadowstar38:
Hitler comparisons are a cheap tactic tbh. When people employ that, they're really just trying to use the genocide and concentration camps as an easy way to trigger moral outrage without actually having to give solid justifications for their reasoning.

Far as I can remember, like 80% of the country has been accused of being bigots and white supremacists since trump got elected. This is one of the few threads in 3 years where the label actually fits. Congrats i guess. Some people might use this incident to say their doomsaying was right all along. Except these groups have already been around and it's not actually a sign of escalation.

Using this response is more about not wanting to discuss a point, more about trying to silence an opponent, than anything else.

I.e. saying that "using the word Nazi is a cheap tactic" is more about you being Politically Correct than anything else.

Feel like that should be made more clear then. Also, not sure what's going on with that second sentence? This doesn't have much to do with political correctness.

Shadowstar38:
Hitler comparisons are a cheap tactic tbh. When people employ that, they're really just trying to use the genocide and concentration camps as an easy way to trigger moral outrage without actually having to give solid justifications for their reasoning.

Far as I can remember, like 80% of the country has been accused of being bigots and white supremacists since trump got elected. This is one of the few threads in 3 years where the label actually fits. Congrats i guess. Some people might use this incident to say their doomsaying was right all along. Except these groups have already been around and it's not actually a sign of escalation.

I don't think it is usually universally applied to " right wing". When I think of Hitler, I do not immediately go to the most horrific things he was responsible for, I think of how it was allowed to get to that point as being the most dangerous part. That was just allowing his course to play out. The worst part about what happened was the social conditioning of the people toward irrational hatred that allowed for such things to take place. The racism and hatred is what is most commonly associated with Hitler and for good reason. Right wing should not have anything to do with xenophobia and racism, but it currently does and that is part of the problem that should be expunged from the right before it can move forward without the association. Racism and xenophobia should not be recognized as a legitimate political platform and has no place in modern politics. Until they lose the " southern strategy" they cannot lose being associated with what history has taught us where that leads.

And while yes, these groups have been around, every indicator out there has shown us that yes, there is a current escalation. They are growing and increasing in numbers and activity.

*The Southern Poverty Law Center reports a dramatic increase in the number of white nationalist groups in the U.S., from 100 chapters in 2017 to 148 in 2018.

*The Anti-Defamation League reports a 182 percent increase in incidents of the distribution of white supremacist propaganda, and an increase in the number of rallies and demonstrations by white supremacy groups, from 76 in 2017 to 91 in 2018.

*A study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies found the number of terrorist attacks by far-right perpetrators quadrupled in the U.S. between 2016 and 2017, and that far-right attacks in Europe rose 43 percent over the same period. Among those incidents, CSIS states, the rise of attacks by white supremacists and anti-government extremists is "of particular concern."

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/the-facts-on-white-nationalism/

The facts support that there is an actual escalation, not just manufactured outrage over past war crimes as you seem to suggest. The outrage should be about the social conditioning of people to target and irrationally oppose members of certain groups being allowed to happen, not ever actually allowing it to get to the point of violence, but we have already been allowing it to get to the point of violence and that is already a serious issue that is long past due needing to be addressed.

ObsidianJones:

So, should we just assume that the rise of Hate Crimes that has been climbing steadily over the years to be the actual escalation, and this is just a showing of power?

Because yeah, that seems apt.

This guy knows what's up.

Armadox:

generals3:
(Meanwhile inciting violence against Nazis seems to be ok with the rules)

*Shrugs* This is at it's core supposed to be a video game forum, and I've been shooting Nazi in the face in video games for three decades. (1988's Bionic Commando if I had to pick a starting point.) Because history has decided what they stand for makes them ubiquitous as a universal bad guy. The absolute lowest bar to having villains no one can complain about.

I am hoping folk have the awareness to recognize there's a difference between a video game character set in the 1940s during a war and a modern, real-life scenario involving fellow citizens.

An interesting point brought up in Nazi Germany's rise to power was the immediate restriction on free speech of those deemed harmful or dangerous to the new regime. I fear the hypocrisy of encouraging people to "punch Nazis" is synonymous with another lovely 1940s slogan "Slap a Jap".

Yes, their message or political affiliation is in opposition towards most democratic systems of government, but democratic ideals are about allowing those with opposing beliefs the right to express them without direct or indirect suppression. Of course, people will be quick to call this "defending Nazis" or being "pro-fascism" when its only a call to not become that which one hates. Don't fight Nazis by using Nazi policy - that's exactly how the Nazis cemented their power in the first place. I certainly do not trust the current administration to use such precedent in a responsible manner. So don't fashion the noose that may be thrown around your own neck.

Abomination:

Armadox:

generals3:
(Meanwhile inciting violence against Nazis seems to be ok with the rules)

*Shrugs* This is at it's core supposed to be a video game forum, and I've been shooting Nazi in the face in video games for three decades. (1988's Bionic Commando if I had to pick a starting point.) Because history has decided what they stand for makes them ubiquitous as a universal bad guy. The absolute lowest bar to having villains no one can complain about.

I am hoping folk have the awareness to recognize there's a difference between a video game character set in the 1940s during a war and a modern, real-life scenario involving fellow citizens.

An interesting point brought up in Nazi Germany's rise to power was the immediate restriction on free speech of those deemed harmful or dangerous to the new regime. I fear the hypocrisy of encouraging people to "punch Nazis" is synonymous with another lovely 1940s slogan "Slap a Jap".

Yes, their message or political affiliation is in opposition towards most democratic systems of government, but democratic ideals are about allowing those with opposing beliefs the right to express them without direct or indirect suppression. Of course, people will be quick to call this "defending Nazis" or being "pro-fascism" when its only a call to not become that which one hates. Don't fight Nazis by using Nazi policy - that's exactly how the Nazis cemented their power in the first place. I certainly do not trust the current administration to use such precedent in a responsible manner. So don't fashion the noose that may be thrown around your own neck.

Another point to bring up about Nazi Germany's rise to power is how frequently they eat breakfast. So many hypocrites fighting Nazis after eating breakfast. Who is the real fascist here!

Out of joke, I'd like first to see you acknowledge the greater amount of Nazi-like policies that the GOP has implemented that are harming people. Then we can talk about how much free speech is a stake.

Abomination:

Armadox:

generals3:
(Meanwhile inciting violence against Nazis seems to be ok with the rules)

*Shrugs* This is at it's core supposed to be a video game forum, and I've been shooting Nazi in the face in video games for three decades. (1988's Bionic Commando if I had to pick a starting point.) Because history has decided what they stand for makes them ubiquitous as a universal bad guy. The absolute lowest bar to having villains no one can complain about.

I am hoping folk have the awareness to recognize there's a difference between a video game character set in the 1940s during a war and a modern, real-life scenario involving fellow citizens.

An interesting point brought up in Nazi Germany's rise to power was the immediate restriction on free speech of those deemed harmful or dangerous to the new regime. I fear the hypocrisy of encouraging people to "punch Nazis" is synonymous with another lovely 1940s slogan "Slap a Jap".

Yes, their message or political affiliation is in opposition towards most democratic systems of government, but democratic ideals are about allowing those with opposing beliefs the right to express them without direct or indirect suppression. Of course, people will be quick to call this "defending Nazis" or being "pro-fascism" when its only a call to not become that which one hates. Don't fight Nazis by using Nazi policy - that's exactly how the Nazis cemented their power in the first place. I certainly do not trust the current administration to use such precedent in a responsible manner. So don't fashion the noose that may be thrown around your own neck.

Fellow citizens who idolize the ideas of the war criminals from the 1940s that we made video game villains of in the 1980s because they was terrible people. But, hey let's let them speak, gain sympathizers, organize, arm themselves and... peacefully debate them when they march in larger numbers the next time right? The annoying part of this is, is that there is no means that by simply talking over them will do the job, and they have the leverage of violence on their side without the same moral qualms about using it. Would they have shot people at that parade? Absolutely if given the chance, and they think they could get away with it.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/06/09/detroit-man-arrested-lgbtq-triple-homicide/1401406001/

I'm tired of seeing these kinds of news stories.

The first amendment states the Government can't abridge your freedom of speech, but being an actual Nazi has consequences, and nothing says the citizenry has to give them a soapbox in the middle of the commons. I am not The Government, and I have no problem using the common sense to say," They could have been asked to leave because they present an actual threat to the events preceding and can come back later." If you want a middle ground. But I'd prefer if we never had another "Unite the Right" rally or equivalent as long as I live.

Abomination:

Armadox:

generals3:
(Meanwhile inciting violence against Nazis seems to be ok with the rules)

*Shrugs* This is at it's core supposed to be a video game forum, and I've been shooting Nazi in the face in video games for three decades. (1988's Bionic Commando if I had to pick a starting point.) Because history has decided what they stand for makes them ubiquitous as a universal bad guy. The absolute lowest bar to having villains no one can complain about.

I am hoping folk have the awareness to recognize there's a difference between a video game character set in the 1940s during a war and a modern, real-life scenario involving fellow citizens.

An interesting point brought up in Nazi Germany's rise to power was the immediate restriction on free speech of those deemed harmful or dangerous to the new regime. I fear the hypocrisy of encouraging people to "punch Nazis" is synonymous with another lovely 1940s slogan "Slap a Jap".

Yes, their message or political affiliation is in opposition towards most democratic systems of government, but democratic ideals are about allowing those with opposing beliefs the right to express them without direct or indirect suppression. Of course, people will be quick to call this "defending Nazis" or being "pro-fascism" when its only a call to not become that which one hates. Don't fight Nazis by using Nazi policy - that's exactly how the Nazis cemented their power in the first place. I certainly do not trust the current administration to use such precedent in a responsible manner. So don't fashion the noose that may be thrown around your own neck.

Nazis are a political ideology built on ethnic cleansing. Japanese people are Japanese people. You can stop or start being a Nazi just by changing your opinions, being Japanese is more complicated than that.

STOP COMPARING ETHNICITIES TO POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES!

Its usually people saying hating blacks is the same as hating Republicans, but this is the same faulty logic here now too.

Also stop defending Nazis.

Video Games rarely actually address just how evil Nazis were. If anything, video games humanize Nazis more than not. Im guessing most people would not be able to last 5 minutes playing a game that depicted Nazi's evil accurately.

CaitSeith:
Out of joke, I'd like first to see you acknowledge the greater amount of Nazi-like policies that the GOP has implemented that are harming people. Then we can talk about how much free speech is a stake.

The solution to autocracy is not more autocratic policy.

Armadox:
Would they have shot people at that parade? Absolutely if given the chance, and they think they could get away with it.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/06/09/detroit-man-arrested-lgbtq-triple-homicide/1401406001/

I'm tired of seeing these kinds of news stories.

The first amendment states the Government can't abridge your freedom of speech, but being an actual Nazi has consequences, and nothing says the citizenry has to give them a soapbox in the middle of the commons. I am not The Government, and I have no problem using the common sense to say," They could have been asked to leave because they present an actual threat to the events preceding and can come back later." If you want a middle ground. But I'd prefer if we never had another "Unite the Right" rally or equivalent as long as I live.

I am 100% behind the government using force to enforce law when a group or an individual present a genuine threat to the safety of others.

The citizenry is under no obligation to give a political group anything, but at the same time they have no right to take anything from them either.

Saelune:
Nazis are a political ideology built on ethnic cleansing. Japanese people are Japanese people. You can stop or start being a Nazi just by changing your opinions, being Japanese is more complicated than that.

STOP COMPARING ETHNICITIES TO POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES!

Its usually people saying hating blacks is the same as hating Republicans, but this is the same faulty logic here now too.

Also stop defending Nazis.

The Nazis were not built on ethnic cleansing, it was a tactic adopted as a means of enforcing their authority by generating an "other" to hate. A convenient scapegoat that was taken way too far, and the preacher started drinking his own coolaid.

The comparison is on how dangerous it is to make it socially acceptable to inflict violence on a group of people, especially when designating one as a particular group is nebulous.

Again, I am not defending Nazis, I am in opposition to groups being free targets of hate and suppression. That protection extends in all directions.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here