4 ms·

"People can say anything they like to me or about me. What they cannot do is vandalise my property, take my property or assault me." So can "they" openly say,

"People can say anything they like to me or about me. What they cannot do is vandalise my property, take my property or assault me." So can "they" openly say, that they think, you deserve to be robbed and assaulted? And for the sake of it, let "them" be a famous antifa influencer, so you can expect that other people do as their influencer told them is the right thing? I don't think so. This is the line I mean, which is not at all clear. "The communists killed and imprisoned a huge number of people." You claimed they killed more than the nazis. Which is a claim, I heard before quite often, but usually without proper sources. But you do not have to tell me about pol pot, gulags and co. I am certainly no fan of them either. And like I said, I am not in favor of banning swastikas. Not so much, because some poor nazis are then not free to express their ideology, but because the symbol is way older and was not invented by the nazis, just missused. So I agree, that by the same logic, you would have to ban the hammer and the christian cross with it. Still, the death chambers and the holocaust was very unique in its quantity and quality, so I cannot really stand nazis whining about oppression. I live in a hotspot of them.I know they do it a lot. I also know, they are the first, to supress anything they do not like, if they are in a position of power.

YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
> So can "they" openly say, that they think, you deserve to be robbed and assaulted? Yes > And for the sake of it, let "them" be a famous antifa influencer, so you can expect that other people do as their influencer told them is the right thing? If people are likely to assault someone because someone else told them over social media. They would have probably done it anyway. > You claimed they killed more than the nazis. Which is a claim, I heard before quite often, but usually without proper sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_... It is literally like the second or third result on DDG.
- ailef 5y ago
  That page is what I would definitely not characterize as a proper source. From the page itself: > Any attempt to estimate a total number of killings under communist regimes depends greatly on definitions, and the idea to group together different countries such as Afghanistan and Hungary has no adequate explanation. There doesn't seem to be a real consensus on what actually should be counted or not. But I'm ok with taking the widest, most encompassing definition. One should wonder then, what number would we get if we apply the same definition to pro-Western/capitalist countries?
  - YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
    > That page is what I would definitely not characterize as a proper source Obfuscate the discussion with numbers when it entirely misses the point I was making. So I will spell it out for you. It is totally okay to bring into question the numbers and whether it happened when it comes to the crimes of the communist regimes. However if you deny the holocaust that is too much and must be criminalised. That is a double standard. Either let everyone deny any event occurred or don't let them deny any genocide. If you are going to denounce Nazism and essentially make it illegal, you must also do the same for Communist, Jihadism or any other extremist group. But it is only done for Nazis because they must justify curtailing your freedoms by pointing to the very small amount of people that still think the Failed Austrian Artist with a Charlie Chaplin moustache might have had some good ideas. > There doesn't seem to be a real consensus on what actually should be counted or not. But I'm ok with taking the widest, most encompassing definition. Whether or not the Communists regimes killed more or not doesn't really matter. The problem is that there is a double standard. That wearing a Nazi Swastika is somehow beyond the pale, but waving a communist flag with Che T-Shirt is somehow acceptable. Both the Nazi and Communist regimes committed atrocities. BTW Far-right apologists do the same. Try to obfuscate the issue by talking about numbers and whether the numbers were true. I've been to the Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum in Cambodia. I know what I saw there. > One should wonder then, what number would we get if we apply the same definition to pro-Western/capitalist countries? I am essentially a Anarchist (I don't like putting labels on myself, but for most intents and purposes that is what I am). So I am completely on board with criticising the state's wars done in the name of "spreading democracy and freedom". I was against the Iraq War, The War in Afghanistan, Drone Strikes. People bring this up as some sort of gotcha. I don't support any War other than one of purely defence.
    - hutzlibu 5y ago
      "the very small amount of people that still think the Failed Austrian Artist with a Charlie Chaplin moustache might have had some good ideas." Small amount? He is still admired worldwide. Just not so much openly in most places. Just look, how many Hitler documentaries are still made and that you can still buy Mein Kampf worldwide. In either case, communist organisations do regulary face prosecution in the west, as well as islamist groups. The only "unfair" thing would maybe be, that way more symbols of nacism are forbidden and so more possibilities to prosecute - but they just have substitutes and nothing really changes. But - the difference between communist and nazi ideology is, that communist want a better world for everyone. Nazis only for a certain race, while enslaving the "lower" races. This might be a reason, why che is more accepted (despite being a sociopath on closer look) and hitler is not. And the holocaust is still very unique in its significance. So they quite earned their special treatment. And they are still very much alive and organizing in the underground. This is why the rules will not soften in the foreseeable future. And I do not really feel like fighting for nazi freedom, despite being more tolerant in theory. But just for the reason alone, that those hypocrites can no longer present themself as victims, I would let them legally have all their symbols, flags and conspiracy theories.

YEwSdObPQT 5y ago

> So can "they" openly say, that they think, you deserve to be robbed and assaulted? Yes > And for the sake of it, let "them" be a famous antifa influencer, so you can expect that other people do as their influencer told them is the right thing? If people are likely to assault someone because someone else told them over social media. They would have probably done it anyway. > You claimed they killed more than the nazis. Which is a claim, I heard before quite often, but usually without proper sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_... It is literally like the second or third result on DDG.

ailef 5y ago
That page is what I would definitely not characterize as a proper source. From the page itself: > Any attempt to estimate a total number of killings under communist regimes depends greatly on definitions, and the idea to group together different countries such as Afghanistan and Hungary has no adequate explanation. There doesn't seem to be a real consensus on what actually should be counted or not. But I'm ok with taking the widest, most encompassing definition. One should wonder then, what number would we get if we apply the same definition to pro-Western/capitalist countries?
- YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
  > That page is what I would definitely not characterize as a proper source Obfuscate the discussion with numbers when it entirely misses the point I was making. So I will spell it out for you. It is totally okay to bring into question the numbers and whether it happened when it comes to the crimes of the communist regimes. However if you deny the holocaust that is too much and must be criminalised. That is a double standard. Either let everyone deny any event occurred or don't let them deny any genocide. If you are going to denounce Nazism and essentially make it illegal, you must also do the same for Communist, Jihadism or any other extremist group. But it is only done for Nazis because they must justify curtailing your freedoms by pointing to the very small amount of people that still think the Failed Austrian Artist with a Charlie Chaplin moustache might have had some good ideas. > There doesn't seem to be a real consensus on what actually should be counted or not. But I'm ok with taking the widest, most encompassing definition. Whether or not the Communists regimes killed more or not doesn't really matter. The problem is that there is a double standard. That wearing a Nazi Swastika is somehow beyond the pale, but waving a communist flag with Che T-Shirt is somehow acceptable. Both the Nazi and Communist regimes committed atrocities. BTW Far-right apologists do the same. Try to obfuscate the issue by talking about numbers and whether the numbers were true. I've been to the Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum in Cambodia. I know what I saw there. > One should wonder then, what number would we get if we apply the same definition to pro-Western/capitalist countries? I am essentially a Anarchist (I don't like putting labels on myself, but for most intents and purposes that is what I am). So I am completely on board with criticising the state's wars done in the name of "spreading democracy and freedom". I was against the Iraq War, The War in Afghanistan, Drone Strikes. People bring this up as some sort of gotcha. I don't support any War other than one of purely defence.
  - hutzlibu 5y ago
    "the very small amount of people that still think the Failed Austrian Artist with a Charlie Chaplin moustache might have had some good ideas." Small amount? He is still admired worldwide. Just not so much openly in most places. Just look, how many Hitler documentaries are still made and that you can still buy Mein Kampf worldwide. In either case, communist organisations do regulary face prosecution in the west, as well as islamist groups. The only "unfair" thing would maybe be, that way more symbols of nacism are forbidden and so more possibilities to prosecute - but they just have substitutes and nothing really changes. But - the difference between communist and nazi ideology is, that communist want a better world for everyone. Nazis only for a certain race, while enslaving the "lower" races. This might be a reason, why che is more accepted (despite being a sociopath on closer look) and hitler is not. And the holocaust is still very unique in its significance. So they quite earned their special treatment. And they are still very much alive and organizing in the underground. This is why the rules will not soften in the foreseeable future. And I do not really feel like fighting for nazi freedom, despite being more tolerant in theory. But just for the reason alone, that those hypocrites can no longer present themself as victims, I would let them legally have all their symbols, flags and conspiracy theories.