4 ms·

Here's what the book says, "Sometimes they're called Nazis. Other times, they're the far-right or alt-right. White Nationalists. No matter the name, hateful gr

Here's what the book says, "Sometimes they're called Nazis. Other times, they're the far-right or alt-right. White Nationalists. No matter the name, hateful groups are spewing vile, racist, anti-immigrant, anti-POC, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-anything-but-white-Christian-views ideologies. SCREW THAT. ALWAYS PUNCH NAZIS".

slg 4y ago
What is your objection to that passage? Most Nazis today do not call themselves "Nazis" because almost everyone agrees the Nazis were the bad guys. That is all that passage is saying. Saying sometimes Nazis go by "the far-right" is not the saying all far-right people are Nazis. You are the one reading "hateful groups are spewing vile, racist, anti-immigrant, anti-POC, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-anything-but-white-Christian-views ideologies" and immediately equating that to all conservatives.
- gorwell 4y ago
  I was just quoting from the book to provide missing context. My read is that they are casting a larger net than the traditional definition to include anyone that disagrees with their ideology.
  - slg 4y ago
    >My read is that they are casting a larger net than the traditional definition I doubt the book is about punching near centenarians who were members of a specific political party in the 1930s and 1940s. "Nazi" is now colloquially used as a general term to describe fascists and bigots. Here is the Merriam-Webster definition for the word[1]. The traditional definition is definition 1. The definition the book is using is definition 2. You don't need to wear a swastika to be fairly categorized as a Nazi according to that second definition. Some people espouse Nazi and Nazi-like ideals without self-identifying as Nazis. That seems to be the underlying meaning of the above passage. [1] - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Nazi https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Nazi
- BitwiseFool 4y ago
  The way I read the passage, merely holding any position perceived by them as "racist, anti-immigrant, anti-POC, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-anything-but-white-Christian-views ideologies" constitutes Nazism - regardless of whatever term you may choose. Therefore, holding such views rightfully subjects you to well-deserved violence. Given that most conservatives hold positions that are perceived by the nazi punching crowd as one or more of those evil stances above, I feel like the concern is genuine. Emphasis on perceived, because there is a tendency to exaggerate just how "anti" such stances are.
  - slg 4y ago
    You edited "hateful groups are spewing vile..." out of the beginning of that quote which is important because even if people "exaggerate just how "anti" such stances are", there is still a difference between an anti stance and a hateful and vile stance. It isn't talking about opposing affirmative action, being against more immigration, or disagreeing with gay marriage. If you hear words like "Nazi", "White Nationalist" "hateful", and "vile" only to immediately think "they are talking about me" that is a problem on your end.
    - BitwiseFool 4y ago
      >"If you hear words like "Nazi", "White Nationalist" "hateful", and "vile" only to immediately think "they are talking about me" that is a problem on your end." And there's the issue, front and center. If someone like me is worried that labels are getting thrown around in a wanton and haphazard manner, and such labels are used as justification for violence, why is it seen as a character flaw for me to worry that such labels might be foisted upon myself in the future? >"only to immediately think "they are talking about me" that is a problem on your end." Honestly, part of why I'm so concerned is that I can't read this as anything other than an insinuation.
      - slg 4y ago
        The character flaw isn't worrying about the labels being foisted wrongly upon someone. The character flaw is someone worrying that their personal politics can't clearly be distinguished as not being motivated by hate. Odds are that is a marker of a bad and unjust political opinion.

slg 4y ago

What is your objection to that passage? Most Nazis today do not call themselves "Nazis" because almost everyone agrees the Nazis were the bad guys. That is all that passage is saying. Saying sometimes Nazis go by "the far-right" is not the saying all far-right people are Nazis. You are the one reading "hateful groups are spewing vile, racist, anti-immigrant, anti-POC, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-anything-but-white-Christian-views ideologies" and immediately equating that to all conservatives.

gorwell 4y ago
I was just quoting from the book to provide missing context. My read is that they are casting a larger net than the traditional definition to include anyone that disagrees with their ideology.
- slg 4y ago
  >My read is that they are casting a larger net than the traditional definition I doubt the book is about punching near centenarians who were members of a specific political party in the 1930s and 1940s. "Nazi" is now colloquially used as a general term to describe fascists and bigots. Here is the Merriam-Webster definition for the word[1]. The traditional definition is definition 1. The definition the book is using is definition 2. You don't need to wear a swastika to be fairly categorized as a Nazi according to that second definition. Some people espouse Nazi and Nazi-like ideals without self-identifying as Nazis. That seems to be the underlying meaning of the above passage. [1] - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Nazi https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Nazi
BitwiseFool 4y ago
The way I read the passage, merely holding any position perceived by them as "racist, anti-immigrant, anti-POC, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-anything-but-white-Christian-views ideologies" constitutes Nazism - regardless of whatever term you may choose. Therefore, holding such views rightfully subjects you to well-deserved violence. Given that most conservatives hold positions that are perceived by the nazi punching crowd as one or more of those evil stances above, I feel like the concern is genuine. Emphasis on perceived, because there is a tendency to exaggerate just how "anti" such stances are.
- slg 4y ago
  You edited "hateful groups are spewing vile..." out of the beginning of that quote which is important because even if people "exaggerate just how "anti" such stances are", there is still a difference between an anti stance and a hateful and vile stance. It isn't talking about opposing affirmative action, being against more immigration, or disagreeing with gay marriage. If you hear words like "Nazi", "White Nationalist" "hateful", and "vile" only to immediately think "they are talking about me" that is a problem on your end.
  - BitwiseFool 4y ago
    >"If you hear words like "Nazi", "White Nationalist" "hateful", and "vile" only to immediately think "they are talking about me" that is a problem on your end." And there's the issue, front and center. If someone like me is worried that labels are getting thrown around in a wanton and haphazard manner, and such labels are used as justification for violence, why is it seen as a character flaw for me to worry that such labels might be foisted upon myself in the future? >"only to immediately think "they are talking about me" that is a problem on your end." Honestly, part of why I'm so concerned is that I can't read this as anything other than an insinuation.
    - slg 4y ago
      The character flaw isn't worrying about the labels being foisted wrongly upon someone. The character flaw is someone worrying that their personal politics can't clearly be distinguished as not being motivated by hate. Odds are that is a marker of a bad and unjust political opinion.