3 ms·

I understand in these tumultuous times, life comes at you fast. Let me give you a quick guide on how to recognize a real nazi. Is your subject: - Waving a flag

I understand in these tumultuous times, life comes at you fast. Let me give you a quick guide on how to recognize a real nazi. Is your subject: - Waving a flag with symbols associated with nazi imagery? - Deliberately using the "heil"? - Chanting, "Jews will not replace us!" while making a salute? - Wearing a conical white hood, open or closed, and white (and possibly scarlet) robes at torchlit rallies? - Calling themselves neo-nazis? Who is actually confused? Are you?

shandor 9y ago
That's not the problem. The problem is that for many, the years and years of calling your run-of-the-mill Republicans and whatnot "nazis" has diluted the term, just like GP mentioned. So, now, when people try to get others to understand that the Nazis we now have are almost exactly the same we had in Germany way back then, people don't really make that connection (even if they say they do) on emotional level. Instead, they associate the self-professed Neo-Nazis with the "nazi Republicans" and the not-really-a-nazi-alt-righters that have been cried at in the 2000's. Source: many acquaintances who are clearly very, very confused on the matter.
- KirinDave 9y ago
  One would think the literal swastikas would clear that up. These people aren't being terribly subliminal anymore.
  - shandor 9y ago
    One would think that, for the people calling Republicans "nazis" in the 2000's, the absence of swastikas and Nazi Hails should have cleared things up. But they did it anyway. People are not simple creatures, and things like crying the wolf actually do confuse us pretty easily.
    - KirinDave 9y ago
      Welp, I guess there is no use calling people who self-identify as Nazis or say Nazis were right about race and sexuality by any name at all anymore. Shut it down, "alt-left." Shut it all down. Someone was not precise and we can't use words anymore.
      - shandor 9y ago
        Sure you can, no one even implied otherwise. The only thing I said was that the term you are talking about most probably does not inspire the loathing it should (and once did) after all the crying-the-wolf. And considering that, I tried to hint that maybe in the future it might be sensible to take this effect into account before going down the same rabbit hole again.
        KirinDave 9y ago
        > And considering that, I tried to hint that maybe in the future it might be usensible to take this effect into account before going down the same rabbit hole again. To who? Is it implicit that I've misused the term? That I am misusing it here? Who requires this admonition? If not me, then why are you burying this dire warning arm-deep in a comment thread on HN?
    - matt4077 9y ago
      So you're actually agreeing that someone waving a swastika and calling for the extermination of jews can be considered a Nazi, yet you choose not to do it, just to spite those lefties that annoyed you in the 2000s? And, specifically, they annoyed you with their use of slightly-hyperbolic rhetoric, used to underline their contention that the Republican strategy of racial division and incitement of culture wars may create fertile ground for a resurgence of staples of the fascist ideologies? And that, if we continue down this path, America may some day start electing strongmen playing on feelings such as xenophobia?
      - shandor 9y ago
        I am not doing any of that. I'm just pointing out that this is a very real case of "crying the wolf" effect working it's voodoo, and that maybe, in the future, something could be learned from all this. Personally, I'm not even from the US, and find many of the policies of the Republicans almost absurd. Where I'm from, your run-of-the-mill republican would be considered so deep into the right wing as to be completely niche. Almost alt-right, if you wish. Look, I see where you're coming from. But is it so hard to see that waving the nazi stamp around willy-nilly really will dilute the meaning and connotations of the term, no matter how much you think it was justified. Nazi's are probably the Satan of modern times, literally the thing people use to mean "the worst there can ever be". However Republican policies seem baffling to me, I see no reasonable way to stamp them with that kind of stamp. They're 50% responsible for running your country, for God's sake :)
        matt4077 9y ago
        I can see how that criticism isn't completely invalid. I just don't see how it connects to this case, considering the website in question chose to name itself after a well-known Nazi propaganda paper (as in the realest, 1930s Nazis in Germany: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Stürmer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Stürmer) There's also some confusion about terms, obviously. The meaning of Nazi has morphed and includes more than actual, card-carrying party members. The dictionary lists "a person with extreme racist or authoritarian views" as one of the definitions. It is also meant, and generally understood, as an insult, and a reference to a certain mindset (cf "Grammar Nazi"). And while neither Trump nor most other Republicans would be considered Nazis, there are some obvious tendency at play in the party that invite the comparison, such as the attempts to disenfranchise groups of voters, or, more recently, the Presidents' encouragement of police officers to "rough up" arrestees.
peteretep 9y ago
> - Chanting, "Jews will not replace > us!" while making a salute? Sounds like an idiot anti-semite to me > - Wearing a conical white hood, open > or closed, and white (and possibly > scarlet) robes at torchlit rallies? Sounds like a Klan member to me They're all deplorable, and I'm sure there's a great deal of overlap between groups, but why sacrifice accuracy by calling them Nazis?
- matt4077 9y ago
  They're calling themselves Nazis. They wave flags, with Swastikas. I do understand that GWB wasn't a Nazi. And maybe there was a bit too much wolf-crying. But even if the boy has had this annoying habit at crying "wolf" every day–does that render you unable to recognise a wolf when he's staring you in the eyes?
  - peteretep 9y ago
    Who is "they" in this sentence? The original comment was giving a hypothetical subject. Someone waving a flag with a Swastika, non-ironically, yes, they're a Nazi. Someone calling themself a Nazi? Yes, they're a Nazi. Holocaust-denier and notable anti-semite and crazy person David Icke? A delusional idiot, but not a nazi. KKK members who believed National Socialism was still socialism and battled Nazis in WWII? Racist fuckheads, but not Nazis. Francoist Faciscts? Probably not Nazis, although I'd forgive you for making a strong case for it. We have words and phrases like white supremacist, anti-semite, racists, and Nazi. They all mean things, and there's plenty of overlap. I'm not sure what we gain by mislabelling one group as another, other than opening ourselves up to accusations we're crying wolf.
- KirinDave 9y ago
  Wellll... I mean I gave a list of things to watch for in a collective group. If a collective group is doing all these things, on camera, proudly... you're probably safe calling them Neo-Nazis and "Nazi" for short. While the Klan has a long and inglorious tradition, it merges seamlessly with the pro-Nazi elements of the US in world war 2, for the most part. And Nazis are what folks had in mind when they say, "Anti-semite". So I'm curios if YOU were ever confused. Or if this is for the rhetorical masses (who by and large don't seem too confused once they see a picture, that I can discern).
fmueller 9y ago
The problem is that real Nazis will not do anything of the above. What you describe is just the behavior of the plebs and not of the leaders.

shandor 9y ago

That's not the problem. The problem is that for many, the years and years of calling your run-of-the-mill Republicans and whatnot "nazis" has diluted the term, just like GP mentioned. So, now, when people try to get others to understand that the Nazis we now have are almost exactly the same we had in Germany way back then, people don't really make that connection (even if they say they do) on emotional level. Instead, they associate the self-professed Neo-Nazis with the "nazi Republicans" and the not-really-a-nazi-alt-righters that have been cried at in the 2000's. Source: many acquaintances who are clearly very, very confused on the matter.

KirinDave 9y ago
One would think the literal swastikas would clear that up. These people aren't being terribly subliminal anymore.
- shandor 9y ago
  One would think that, for the people calling Republicans "nazis" in the 2000's, the absence of swastikas and Nazi Hails should have cleared things up. But they did it anyway. People are not simple creatures, and things like crying the wolf actually do confuse us pretty easily.
  - KirinDave 9y ago
    Welp, I guess there is no use calling people who self-identify as Nazis or say Nazis were right about race and sexuality by any name at all anymore. Shut it down, "alt-left." Shut it all down. Someone was not precise and we can't use words anymore.
    - shandor 9y ago
      Sure you can, no one even implied otherwise. The only thing I said was that the term you are talking about most probably does not inspire the loathing it should (and once did) after all the crying-the-wolf. And considering that, I tried to hint that maybe in the future it might be sensible to take this effect into account before going down the same rabbit hole again.
      - KirinDave 9y ago
        > And considering that, I tried to hint that maybe in the future it might be usensible to take this effect into account before going down the same rabbit hole again. To who? Is it implicit that I've misused the term? That I am misusing it here? Who requires this admonition? If not me, then why are you burying this dire warning arm-deep in a comment thread on HN?
  - matt4077 9y ago
    So you're actually agreeing that someone waving a swastika and calling for the extermination of jews can be considered a Nazi, yet you choose not to do it, just to spite those lefties that annoyed you in the 2000s? And, specifically, they annoyed you with their use of slightly-hyperbolic rhetoric, used to underline their contention that the Republican strategy of racial division and incitement of culture wars may create fertile ground for a resurgence of staples of the fascist ideologies? And that, if we continue down this path, America may some day start electing strongmen playing on feelings such as xenophobia?
    - shandor 9y ago
      I am not doing any of that. I'm just pointing out that this is a very real case of "crying the wolf" effect working it's voodoo, and that maybe, in the future, something could be learned from all this. Personally, I'm not even from the US, and find many of the policies of the Republicans almost absurd. Where I'm from, your run-of-the-mill republican would be considered so deep into the right wing as to be completely niche. Almost alt-right, if you wish. Look, I see where you're coming from. But is it so hard to see that waving the nazi stamp around willy-nilly really will dilute the meaning and connotations of the term, no matter how much you think it was justified. Nazi's are probably the Satan of modern times, literally the thing people use to mean "the worst there can ever be". However Republican policies seem baffling to me, I see no reasonable way to stamp them with that kind of stamp. They're 50% responsible for running your country, for God's sake :)
      - matt4077 9y ago
        I can see how that criticism isn't completely invalid. I just don't see how it connects to this case, considering the website in question chose to name itself after a well-known Nazi propaganda paper (as in the realest, 1930s Nazis in Germany: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Stürmer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Stürmer) There's also some confusion about terms, obviously. The meaning of Nazi has morphed and includes more than actual, card-carrying party members. The dictionary lists "a person with extreme racist or authoritarian views" as one of the definitions. It is also meant, and generally understood, as an insult, and a reference to a certain mindset (cf "Grammar Nazi"). And while neither Trump nor most other Republicans would be considered Nazis, there are some obvious tendency at play in the party that invite the comparison, such as the attempts to disenfranchise groups of voters, or, more recently, the Presidents' encouragement of police officers to "rough up" arrestees.

peteretep 9y ago

> - Chanting, "Jews will not replace > us!" while making a salute? Sounds like an idiot anti-semite to me > - Wearing a conical white hood, open > or closed, and white (and possibly > scarlet) robes at torchlit rallies? Sounds like a Klan member to me They're all deplorable, and I'm sure there's a great deal of overlap between groups, but why sacrifice accuracy by calling them Nazis?

matt4077 9y ago
They're calling themselves Nazis. They wave flags, with Swastikas. I do understand that GWB wasn't a Nazi. And maybe there was a bit too much wolf-crying. But even if the boy has had this annoying habit at crying "wolf" every day–does that render you unable to recognise a wolf when he's staring you in the eyes?
- peteretep 9y ago
  Who is "they" in this sentence? The original comment was giving a hypothetical subject. Someone waving a flag with a Swastika, non-ironically, yes, they're a Nazi. Someone calling themself a Nazi? Yes, they're a Nazi. Holocaust-denier and notable anti-semite and crazy person David Icke? A delusional idiot, but not a nazi. KKK members who believed National Socialism was still socialism and battled Nazis in WWII? Racist fuckheads, but not Nazis. Francoist Faciscts? Probably not Nazis, although I'd forgive you for making a strong case for it. We have words and phrases like white supremacist, anti-semite, racists, and Nazi. They all mean things, and there's plenty of overlap. I'm not sure what we gain by mislabelling one group as another, other than opening ourselves up to accusations we're crying wolf.
KirinDave 9y ago
Wellll... I mean I gave a list of things to watch for in a collective group. If a collective group is doing all these things, on camera, proudly... you're probably safe calling them Neo-Nazis and "Nazi" for short. While the Klan has a long and inglorious tradition, it merges seamlessly with the pro-Nazi elements of the US in world war 2, for the most part. And Nazis are what folks had in mind when they say, "Anti-semite". So I'm curios if YOU were ever confused. Or if this is for the rhetorical masses (who by and large don't seem too confused once they see a picture, that I can discern).

fmueller 9y ago

The problem is that real Nazis will not do anything of the above. What you describe is just the behavior of the plebs and not of the leaders.