Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[martinuzz]

But seriously, has anyone seen a sign of life ever since Trump abruptly ended his late night Tweet in gibberish, and the tweet was removed 6h later?
It kinda looks like he keeled over and died while typing his last tweet.

[Max™]

(removed)

[hector13]

I'd also note that "nazi" stands for national socialist, and while your right wing is pretty nationalistic (as any is, really), it's about as anti-socialist as it gets, to the point where "socialist" is an insult on your political scene. A tendency I'm noticing in American politics is redefining words with negative connotations to mean people you disagree with and not yourself.

So do yo think the addition of the "socialist" (or the rest of National Socialist German Workers Party, for the full name) made them less right-wing? Would you suggest, then, that having an ideal associated with the right-wing and an idea associated with the left-wing then smashing them together made the Nazi party moderate?

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say.

[Pancakes]

I'd also note that "nazi" stands for national socialist, and while your right wing is pretty nationalistic (as any is, really), it's about as anti-socialist as it gets, to the point where "socialist" is an insult on your political scene. A tendency I'm noticing in American politics is redefining words with negative connotations to mean people you disagree with and not yourself.

Do note that North Korea refers to itself as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, which is about as far away from the truth as you can get. Names of groups/countries/people tend to be a projection of what that group thinks themselves to be, not what they actually are.

[scriver]

Max, do you really think the US entered WW2 because they disliked Nazis? They didnt. And neither did the Nazis dislike America - the US literally was the foremodel to them, they based many of their race laws on examples set by America. The only reason the US got involved was because of Japan attacking them.

[Sheb]

Max, do you really think the US entered WW2 because they disliked Nazis? They didnt. And neither did the Nazis dislike America - the US literally was the foremodel to them, they based many of their race laws on examples set by America. The only reason the US got involved was because of Japan attacking them.

Well, that's not the only reason, Germany invading Poland and then France was too much for the US, hence lend-lease and the like. Pearl Harbor just made it infinitely easier to sell a war to a relatively isolationist US public.

[Virtz]

Virtz: It's been pretty effective: look at the way the right manage to stain most of movements like BLM as terrorists so that anything to do with them is toxic.

Also, those nazis aren't prominent, no. And we'd like to keep it that way. Which is why some here expressed concerns with that bumfuck county guy.

What's effective for the right is not necessarily as effective for the left. Especially not if you believe the left is (or should be) on average more enlightened or honest than the right. I believe the left stands only to lose by willingly lying and appealing to more extreme sentiments.

And I wasn't aware that hiring a paramilitary for security is synonymous with "gas the jews".

snip

I guess you missed the whole part of the discussion about the definition of "nazi" being used inappropriately to justify being shitty to random people you disagree with on something.

I'd also note that "nazi" stands for national socialist, and while your right wing is pretty nationalistic (as any is, really), it's about as anti-socialist as it gets, to the point where "socialist" is an insult on your political scene. A tendency I'm noticing in American politics is redefining words with negative connotations to mean people you disagree with and not yourself.

So do yo think the addition of the "socialist" (or the rest of National Socialist German Workers Party, for the full name) made them less right-wing? Would you suggest, then, that having an ideal associated with the right-wing and an idea associated with the left-wing then smashing them together made the Nazi party moderate?

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say.

I mean the modern American right-wing is pretty different from the European right-wing of the time (modern as well), and it kinda goes contrary to the definition of "nazi" to call the American right-wing that since it's so opposed to socialism. "Left-wing" and "right-wing" doesn't necessarily imply the ideology behind a given political spectrum.

I'd also note that "nazi" stands for national socialist, and while your right wing is pretty nationalistic (as any is, really), it's about as anti-socialist as it gets, to the point where "socialist" is an insult on your political scene. A tendency I'm noticing in American politics is redefining words with negative connotations to mean people you disagree with and not yourself.

Do note that North Korea refers to itself as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, which is about as far away from the truth as you can get. Names of groups/countries/people tend to be a projection of what that group thinks themselves to be, not what they actually are.

So you think the National Socialist party wasn't actually socialist by our understanding of the term? How so?

[misko27]

I think he's implying that because the Nazi party had the word socialist in it, Republicans would disapprove of them. While this statement, by itself, raises alarm bells I didn't even know I had, the second-half might actually clear it up: I think that the line about redefining words is actually intended to raise a point about we use and abuse language in political discourse, using the "Nationalist Socialist" thing as an example.

Or he's being completely literal and saying that calling Republicans Nazis is just wrong, because Republicans can't be Nazis, because they hate socialists.  Which... I leave to someone with more sleep and fewer pending deadlines them myself to deal with.

I'd also note that "nazi" stands for national socialist, and while your right wing is pretty nationalistic (as any is, really), it's about as anti-socialist as it gets, to the point where "socialist" is an insult on your political scene. A tendency I'm noticing in American politics is redefining words with negative connotations to mean people you disagree with and not yourself.

Do note that North Korea refers to itself as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, which is about as far away from the truth as you can get. Names of groups/countries/people tend to be a projection of what that group thinks themselves to be, not what they actually are.

So you think the National Socialist party wasn't actually socialist by our understanding of the term? How so?

Oh, ok. Have fun you guys. I'll merely add in while I'm not a fan - to put it mildly - of comparing Trump or Republicans to Nazis (My grandfather would actually return from the grave to slap me), you're kind of going too far with this line here:

And I wasn't aware that hiring a paramilitary for security is synonymous with "gas the jews".

I don't think anyone reasonable is arguing that (and anyone unreasonable who is not currently the President of the United States can be safely ignored). Nazism was a lot of things to a lot of people during the existance of the original NSDAP. It was genocide, it was racial purity laws, it was militarism, it was a lot of different things. What I mean here is that setting the standard as high as literally quoting Mein Kampf is already a bit of a problem, I think; not specifically with Nazism, but with any "ism" that people don't like. People say "Well if I'm not actually gassing jews I'm not a Nazi" or "Well if I am not going around flinging racial slurs at people in the street or lynching negroes, so I'm not a racist." It reminds me of something from Catch-22 (Censored because I don't remember forum policy on these things, and I'd like to not be warned today.):

Racial prejudice is a terrible thing, Yossarian. It really is. It's a terrible thing to treat a decent, loyal Indian like a n****r, k**e, w*p, or s**c.

You're right that people have an amazing ability to make negative words mean "people I don't like", but you should also remember the "and not me" part. You're going on about the context of the NSDAP party, and that's fine; but when you consider that someone may well just be referring to Neo-Nazis, your analysis loses a bit of punch. These things are real, and it should be possible to call something out as being a part of that without all the "But HOW DARE YOU" that comes up. Yes, it's possible to be a racist or a nazi without personally murdering six million Jews, and the fact is that standards tend to inflate towards that, for ourselves, and away for others. Both angles need to be rememebered.

(Also fuck you I NEED TO WRITE AN ACTUAL ESSAY DAMN IT)

Max, do you really think the US entered WW2 because they disliked Nazis?

Do you think the US would have gotten involved if they did like Nazis?

They didnt. And neither did the Nazis dislike America - the US literally was the foremodel to them, they based many of their race laws on examples set by America. The only reason the US got involved was because of Japan attacking them.

A) I would not confuse considering US eugenics laws as a legal model, and admiring the country as a whole. Nazis respected the methods and efficiency of Bolsheviks, for example, but the massive violence visited upon the Soviet Union indicates that that sort of respect counts for little. B) Nazi Germany declared war on the US, not the other way around. The US declared war on Japan in response to Pearl Harbor, but not Germany. Germany and Italy declared war on the US three days later on December 11th, with the US only responding later that day; hardly a coincidence. C) It's not like the US was actually as neutral as it claimed to be before Pearl Harbor. Lend-Lease was pretty huge. US support was real and significant.

But seriously, has anyone seen a sign of life ever since Trump abruptly ended his late night Tweet in gibberish, and the tweet was removed 6h later?
It kinda looks like he keeled over and died while typing his last tweet.

Best explanation: Trump is actually a physical manifestation of my will to live (I'm so sorry), and when my will to live gave out while writing endless text, so did he. As the poets say, "covfefe". (I demand "covfefe" or some variation thereof be the new thread title! Make it happen!)

On an unrelated note, massive blast in Kabul claims at least 80 lives.

[SalmonGod]

So let me ask, where do you see these prominent "nazis" on the American political scene prescribing the ideas of genocide you've just described? Actual quotes if you may. Cause the term's been getting thrown around more and more lately, and any time I see anyone using the term, it's not directed towards someone actually suggesting "gassing the gays, jews and liberals" nor replacing democracy with a dictatorship. At best it's just directed towards someone who made a mildly racist, homophobic or nationalistic remark, because apparently you're not allowed to have typical irrational human tribalist biases (or even joke about having them) without being an evil nazi beyond all hope of redemption.

Richard Spencer himself should be suitable for this, since its his infamous on-camera punching that kicked off the whole public debate on this subject, right?  Well, here's your 2-minute google.

The ideal I advocate is the creation of a White Ethno-State on the North American continent.

America was, until this last generation, a white country designed for ourselves and our posterity. It is our creation, it is our inheritance, and it belongs to us.

And when White men talks about “restoring the Constitution”—or, more so, “Taking Our Country Back”— leftists and non-Whites are right to view this as threatening and racialist: it implies a return to origins and that the White man once owned America.

Yeah, not everyone who supports Trump is racist.  Plenty of people are caught up in the whole antifa frenzy that shouldn't be.  But if you're saying stuff like this, or publicly supporting someone who does?  Nothing mild about it.

[smjjames]

But seriously, has anyone seen a sign of life ever since Trump abruptly ended his late night Tweet in gibberish, and the tweet was removed 6h later?
It kinda looks like he keeled over and died while typing his last tweet.

He did joke about it later.

Sources are saying that Trump is expected to withdraw from the Paris climate deal, though we all knew that, right?

[Starver]

Do note that North Korea refers to itself as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, which is about as far away from the truth as you can get.

It is a generally accepted truism that having Democratic (usually followed by Republic) in a country name is a sign of the opposite.

Oh look, someone did some spadework on this.

As to National Socialists being right-wing, it all goes round in a circle, anyway, via the Authoritarianism axis. See how Communist Russia has been transitioning in the other direction...

[Frumple]

Probably don't want to tempt fate that much. Moment you change the name like that is the moment zombie diana rises from the grave and reinstitutes an absolute monarchy, then proceeds to devour the brains of the living.

[Starver]

But would that be a bad thing? Who can resist that slightly mouldy smile and those doey eye-sockets. Truly, she is the Queen of our Brainzzzzz...

[Playergamer]

when people use the phrase "punching nazis" they generally refer to doing this. anyone who unironically talks about "punching nazis" instantly earns my ire, especially when you consider the huge amount of influence these groups have gained just by being punched.

What should be particularly worrisome about supposedly "anti-fascist" terrorists like this is that not only do they approve of "punching" (often actually assault with a deadly weapon) "Nazis," but their definition of "Nazi" is as fluid as a Usenet poster's.  It is essentially anyone who disagrees with them in any way.

I'm googling it and I literally cannot turn up a single person killed by Antifa?  Like typing things like "antifa killing" "killed by antifa" or "killed by anti-fascist" is literally just turning up antifascist people who were killed by neo-nazies... in other countries.  Hell, I looked up "list of antifa attacks" and I got... Berkley.  It wasn't even a list, it was just that.

Which is funny because I can find at least one person who was killed by a neonazi in America since 2017.

"assault with a deadly weapon" is not "murder."

as someone who lives in berkeley, I can list a shitload of instances of antifa morons assaulting people with a deadly weapon, i.e. Eric Clanton bike-locking three people, all of them non-violent, at the April 15th rally, or someone who still hasn't been fucking caught hitting a prone man over the head with a shovel. If you think this isn't a fucking problem...if you think that two lone wolf stabbings by mental cases are worse than a nationwide trend of political violence...I don't think I can help here. It's despicable the kind of damage alt-right types do, but trying to deflect using that is cowardly.

And SalmonGod, I'm not going to bother going back to find the specific quote, but look at some of the links I posted earlier. This one or this one or hell, even this one (it's not caught in the video, but the unconscious guy was hit over the head with a shovel.) All this does, all this has done, is exactly what you seem so shocked by with the militias in Portland. Do you expect these people not to protect their events when violent "protestors" attack them? You're all worried about the evul fash overtones of this, but what did you expect? If the evil Nazis are the only people who can provide security, then they'll be the ones doing it.

I'm going to add a final note here: Remember the Milo talk when the university kicked him out and kept his security payment? That's why you want security that agrees with you, and isn't just going to stand by and watch.

[RedKing]

when people use the phrase "punching nazis" they generally refer to doing this. anyone who unironically talks about "punching nazis" instantly earns my ire, especially when you consider the huge amount of influence these groups have gained just by being punched.

What should be particularly worrisome about supposedly "anti-fascist" terrorists like this is that not only do they approve of "punching" (often actually assault with a deadly weapon) "Nazis," but their definition of "Nazi" is as fluid as a Usenet poster's.  It is essentially anyone who disagrees with them in any way.

I'm googling it and I literally cannot turn up a single person killed by Antifa?  Like typing things like "antifa killing" "killed by antifa" or "killed by anti-fascist" is literally just turning up antifascist people who were killed by neo-nazies... in other countries.  Hell, I looked up "list of antifa attacks" and I got... Berkley.  It wasn't even a list, it was just that.

Which is funny because I can find at least one person who was killed by a neonazi in America since 2017.

"assault with a deadly weapon" is not "murder."

as someone who lives in berkeley, I can list a shitload of instances of antifa morons assaulting people with a deadly weapon, i.e. Eric Clanton bike-locking three people, all of them non-violent, at the April 15th rally, or someone who still hasn't been fucking caught hitting a prone man over the head with a shovel. If you think this isn't a fucking problem...if you think that two lone wolf stabbings by mental cases are worse than a nationwide trend of political violence...I don't think I can help here. It's despicable the kind of damage alt-right types do, but trying to deflect using that is cowardly.

Cites Berkeley (literally a byword for the far-left in America), extrapolates this to "a nationwide trend of political violence".
Well done.

Newsflash: Outside of Berkeley, antifa isn't doing jack.