5 ms·

Why should anyone remain politically neutral no matter what? What if the Nazi party came into power? Impartiality can impart political bias if the facts happen

Why should anyone remain politically neutral no matter what? What if the Nazi party came into power? Impartiality can impart political bias if the facts happen to lean one way or the other, as they will from time to time.

Cuuugi 9y ago
Nazi's came to power because a strong feeling of victimization of a group of Germans. Most of the atrocities around the world are justified because of a feeling of victimization. I think both sides of the political spectrum feel victimized by each other, and that scares me. When GP asks for impartiality, think GP would settle for reasonableness, which i think both sides have lost track of years ago. All i say, is think inwardly, question your beliefs, and most importantly don't question other peoples motives.
zeth__ 9y ago
The Nazi came to power largely because the communists would constantly fight them in the streets and "no-platform" them. You'd think someone would have read a history book. Downvoting does not change facts. The constant street battles between the Communists and Nazis helped the Nazi far more than the Communists.
- vidarh 9y ago
  While the KPD made many stupid mistakes, and frankly given their Stalinist policies at the time were not much better than the NSDAP in most respect, it was the power hungry right wing parties that entered into a coalition government with Hitler and voted for the Enabling Act.
  - zeth__ 9y ago
    Which has nothing to do with the fact that the street battles between communists and nazis allowed Hitler to take 30% of the vote in two consecutive elections. The left wins elections when it is the victim of violence, it loses when it tries to use violence itself.
    - vidarh 9y ago
      You're changing goalposts. If the right had not been willing to suspend democracy in the name of their own hunger for power, 30% or not Hitler would not have gained power.
      - zeth__ 9y ago
        That's not how a multi party parliamentary democracy works. The Nazi were by far the largest party, it would have not been possible to make a parliament without them. That's the whole reason why there were two elections in 1932 and rule by decree from von Papen. Germany was headed for a third election in 8 months until the deal with Hitler.
- H99189 9y ago
  Well said. I think the left in America today are closer to the true Nazi's than they realize. The campuses of today are churning out SJW's who are often racist (against white/europeans), fine with violence against their opponents and have quite simply been radicalized in some ways to hate the first and second amendment.
  - zeth__ 9y ago
    Universities are tools of capital. That their products are the finest specimens of bourgeoisie sensibilities is not a bug, it is a feature. The world view people leave with is designed to destroy worker solidarity in the most efficient way possible.
nilkn 9y ago
Open platforms for discussion are actually one of the best ways to prevent something like the Nazi party from coming into power. And if the Nazi party did come into power, you would not expect there to be impartiality in any major discussion forums in the nation. Example: A lot of folks are flabbergasted at /r/The_Donald, but I've always contended that that subreddit exists and developed into its current culture precisely because right-leaning opinions are treated so harshly on most of the rest of reddit. In other words, there was a feeling of suppression and censorship, which leads to the sort of high-energy, irreverent "shit-posting" that is the mainstay of /r/The_Donald.
- anon1385 9y ago
  I'm not at all convinced that this actually works. It's a nice liberal idea and it would be great if it worked but the evidence doesn't look good. The US media thought they were doing everybody a favour by giving Trump loads of airtime to expose his awful views. It backfired massively. I think the biggest problem is that it only works when the other side is willing to play by the rules of the game. If the opposition is willing to blatantly lie even in the face of direct evidence then the normal rules of debate just break down. (I know all politicians lie, but Trump's disregard for political norms is completely different from what you got from candidates like McCain, Obama, Romney or Bush). Similarly from a UK perspective giving disproportionate coverage to UKIP and Farage just increased their popularity.
  - nilkn 9y ago
    > The US media thought they were doing everybody a favour by giving Trump loads of airtime to expose his awful views. Isn't this just an example of the same phenomenon I was describing? Sure, they gave him airtime, but it was virtually never positive. There was a tremendous lack of impartiality in the media's coverage of the two candidates. This led to the idea of "fake news" and ended up boosting his supporters even more, giving them reason to band together. I dare say the outcome of the election could have been different if the media had spent less time trying to demonize Trump and simply reported equally on the two candidates with minimal editorializing.
Ralfp 9y ago
> What if the Nazi party came into power? What people tend to forget is that all totalitarian systems that came to power, have their origins form reactive movements acting to ineffectiveness or oppressiveness of existing systems. NSDAP was formed in response to worsening national situation. Reds and Whites were formed in response to worsening national situation. Italian fascism was response to political turmoil in post-war Italy. Quite a few European countries romanced with authoritarian rule (or went borderline fascist) in inter-war period. Let me turn this question around: what if anti-nazi party came into power, and then to assure that no nazi party would ever come into power, it would implement its own authoritarian system? After all a lot of those governments enjoyed popular support during their rise to power, with people willing to give up their freedoms for sake of perceived security. Back in McCarthyism it was better "dead than red". What if "its good to throw the nazi off the copter" is just a sign of our societies marching to new era of scare?
- anon1385 9y ago
  >what if anti-nazi party came into power I would hope that describes virtually every post war western government. And many of them have implemented various levels of 'authoritarian' systems to prevent the (re)rise of Nazis. Ranging from the banning of books in Germany to more mundane things like the British police spending a lot of time and money infiltrating neo-nazi groups and banning them. In the latter case exactly the kind of thing you are worried about happened - the powers granted to the police were also used to target other non-nazi groups like environmental protestors. Despite being very critical of police tactics in the latter cases, I still have no problem with the police targeting Nazis. Anyway, western governments don't need to raise the spectre of Nazis to gain support for increased police and surveillance powers. They have plenty of more recent things to talk about (from Irish terrorists to ETA to Islamic terrorists). This comment thread is evidence enough for that - there wouldn't have been nearly the same emotional reaction to somebody talking about bombing ISIS.
  - stale2002 9y ago
    > no problem with the police targeting Nazis So what you are saying is, that all the police have to do is label someone a Nazi, and you'll give them a free pass for whatever it is that they do?

Cuuugi 9y ago

Nazi's came to power because a strong feeling of victimization of a group of Germans. Most of the atrocities around the world are justified because of a feeling of victimization. I think both sides of the political spectrum feel victimized by each other, and that scares me. When GP asks for impartiality, think GP would settle for reasonableness, which i think both sides have lost track of years ago. All i say, is think inwardly, question your beliefs, and most importantly don't question other peoples motives.

zeth__ 9y ago

The Nazi came to power largely because the communists would constantly fight them in the streets and "no-platform" them. You'd think someone would have read a history book. Downvoting does not change facts. The constant street battles between the Communists and Nazis helped the Nazi far more than the Communists.

vidarh 9y ago
While the KPD made many stupid mistakes, and frankly given their Stalinist policies at the time were not much better than the NSDAP in most respect, it was the power hungry right wing parties that entered into a coalition government with Hitler and voted for the Enabling Act.
- zeth__ 9y ago
  Which has nothing to do with the fact that the street battles between communists and nazis allowed Hitler to take 30% of the vote in two consecutive elections. The left wins elections when it is the victim of violence, it loses when it tries to use violence itself.
  - vidarh 9y ago
    You're changing goalposts. If the right had not been willing to suspend democracy in the name of their own hunger for power, 30% or not Hitler would not have gained power.
    - zeth__ 9y ago
      That's not how a multi party parliamentary democracy works. The Nazi were by far the largest party, it would have not been possible to make a parliament without them. That's the whole reason why there were two elections in 1932 and rule by decree from von Papen. Germany was headed for a third election in 8 months until the deal with Hitler.
H99189 9y ago
Well said. I think the left in America today are closer to the true Nazi's than they realize. The campuses of today are churning out SJW's who are often racist (against white/europeans), fine with violence against their opponents and have quite simply been radicalized in some ways to hate the first and second amendment.
- zeth__ 9y ago
  Universities are tools of capital. That their products are the finest specimens of bourgeoisie sensibilities is not a bug, it is a feature. The world view people leave with is designed to destroy worker solidarity in the most efficient way possible.

nilkn 9y ago

Open platforms for discussion are actually one of the best ways to prevent something like the Nazi party from coming into power. And if the Nazi party did come into power, you would not expect there to be impartiality in any major discussion forums in the nation. Example: A lot of folks are flabbergasted at /r/The_Donald, but I've always contended that that subreddit exists and developed into its current culture precisely because right-leaning opinions are treated so harshly on most of the rest of reddit. In other words, there was a feeling of suppression and censorship, which leads to the sort of high-energy, irreverent "shit-posting" that is the mainstay of /r/The_Donald.

anon1385 9y ago
I'm not at all convinced that this actually works. It's a nice liberal idea and it would be great if it worked but the evidence doesn't look good. The US media thought they were doing everybody a favour by giving Trump loads of airtime to expose his awful views. It backfired massively. I think the biggest problem is that it only works when the other side is willing to play by the rules of the game. If the opposition is willing to blatantly lie even in the face of direct evidence then the normal rules of debate just break down. (I know all politicians lie, but Trump's disregard for political norms is completely different from what you got from candidates like McCain, Obama, Romney or Bush). Similarly from a UK perspective giving disproportionate coverage to UKIP and Farage just increased their popularity.
- nilkn 9y ago
  > The US media thought they were doing everybody a favour by giving Trump loads of airtime to expose his awful views. Isn't this just an example of the same phenomenon I was describing? Sure, they gave him airtime, but it was virtually never positive. There was a tremendous lack of impartiality in the media's coverage of the two candidates. This led to the idea of "fake news" and ended up boosting his supporters even more, giving them reason to band together. I dare say the outcome of the election could have been different if the media had spent less time trying to demonize Trump and simply reported equally on the two candidates with minimal editorializing.

Ralfp 9y ago

> What if the Nazi party came into power? What people tend to forget is that all totalitarian systems that came to power, have their origins form reactive movements acting to ineffectiveness or oppressiveness of existing systems. NSDAP was formed in response to worsening national situation. Reds and Whites were formed in response to worsening national situation. Italian fascism was response to political turmoil in post-war Italy. Quite a few European countries romanced with authoritarian rule (or went borderline fascist) in inter-war period. Let me turn this question around: what if anti-nazi party came into power, and then to assure that no nazi party would ever come into power, it would implement its own authoritarian system? After all a lot of those governments enjoyed popular support during their rise to power, with people willing to give up their freedoms for sake of perceived security. Back in McCarthyism it was better "dead than red". What if "its good to throw the nazi off the copter" is just a sign of our societies marching to new era of scare?

anon1385 9y ago
>what if anti-nazi party came into power I would hope that describes virtually every post war western government. And many of them have implemented various levels of 'authoritarian' systems to prevent the (re)rise of Nazis. Ranging from the banning of books in Germany to more mundane things like the British police spending a lot of time and money infiltrating neo-nazi groups and banning them. In the latter case exactly the kind of thing you are worried about happened - the powers granted to the police were also used to target other non-nazi groups like environmental protestors. Despite being very critical of police tactics in the latter cases, I still have no problem with the police targeting Nazis. Anyway, western governments don't need to raise the spectre of Nazis to gain support for increased police and surveillance powers. They have plenty of more recent things to talk about (from Irish terrorists to ETA to Islamic terrorists). This comment thread is evidence enough for that - there wouldn't have been nearly the same emotional reaction to somebody talking about bombing ISIS.
- stale2002 9y ago
  > no problem with the police targeting Nazis So what you are saying is, that all the police have to do is label someone a Nazi, and you'll give them a free pass for whatever it is that they do?