6 ms·

Nazi is not a precise word in 2024. A Nazi can refer to any of the following * Militant anti semites. * American anti-immigration Republicans. * Non violent, w

Nazi is not a precise word in 2024. A Nazi can refer to any of the following * Militant anti semites. * American anti-immigration Republicans. * Non violent, white supremacist groups. But really what we want to do is kick violent extremists off the platform. There are many violent extremists who should be banned who are not Nazis. For example * Calls for the genocide of anyone (Jewish or otherwise) * Calls for political violence. Deplatform all the "bad guys" but we shouldn't pretend "deplatform Nazis" is a precise call.

anonym29 3y ago
What on earth are you talking about? Nazi means national socialist and clearly refers to the despicable values espoused by Adolf Hitler during the third reich of Nazi Germany prior to WW2. These "values" are eugenics, concentration camps, genocide, and the belief that Jewish people were insidiously and deliberately attempting to weaken Germany from the inside through executive control of media, financial, and cultural institutions. It wasn't even a white-supremacist movement, it espoused belief in the idea of the supremacy of the German people quite specifically, which is why Hitler had no qualms invading so many other white-supeajority countries and killing so many non-Jewish white people. Anyone using the term "Nazi" to refer to 21st century Americans who are nonviolently opposed to immigration or generic WN's needs to read a history book. Or two. Or ten. Or maybe visit a Holocaust museum. Also why single out calls for "political violence"? Initiating any kind of violence is always wrong, period. All calls for violence should be scrutinized for legitimacy (as opposed to poor-taste parody/satire) and fiercely opposed if serious, not only political violence. The mere act of suggesting that the term "Nazi" is ambiguous and conflating it with nonviolent groups is ignorant and antisemitic in and of itself. It completely downplays, obscures, and minimizes the horrific and brutal conditions the Jewish people suffered in the 20th century, before over 7 million of them were systematically killed at the hands of the Nazis, a very specific group holding political power in Germany from the 1930s through the end of WW2 in 1945. I hope for your sake you never make such an offensive and patently absurd remark in front a Jewish coworker. What you're insinuating is genuinely offensive and insulting to the uniquely terrible hardships they've suffered. Seriously, go visit a Holocaust memorial before you confuse anyone else.
- anonym29 3y ago
  I missed this earlier, and can no longer edit, but please note that "supeajority" should read "supermajority".
- LargeTomato 3y ago
  First, calm down. Deep breaths. Second, your definition is the textbook definition but it's not the colloquial definition. That was my point.
  - anonym29 3y ago
    There are circumstances where colloquialisms are appropriate, like using "y'all" instead of "you all". There are circumstances where colloquialisms are inappropriate, like a caucasian person repeating a racial slur in a song that was originally sung by a person of color. Equating literal genocide with immigration policy preferences, however despicable they may be, leans heavily towards the latter. I have ancestors who were victims of systematic genocide at the hands of Nazis. Let me know when the Republicans start gassing people and throwing them in ovens, I'll be the first one to call them Nazis and exercise force to defend the innocent. Until that happens, respectfully, please stop doing the antisemitic equivalent of shouting the N word in public and insisting that it's okay to do so on the basis that you're only citing other people's words. It's hurtful, but more importantly than that, as Anthony-G pointed out, it's dangerous. It's like crying wolf, only, instead of the threat being a wolf, it's an entire industrialized society engaged in organized genocide.
    - LargeTomato 3y ago
      You are attacking points I have not made and arguments I do not believe in. I'm not sure why you're upset or why you expect crocodile tears to buy you sympathy on the internet. Randomly slinging shit at others isn't going to win you friends.
Anthony-G 3y ago
anonym29 clearly articulated (better than I could) how the term Nazi has a historically well-defined meaning – and still does today. The rise of the Nazis within the Weimar Republic and how they gradually accumulated sufficient power to carry out the holocaust is the classic lesson from history that we should never allow to happen again. Over the past couple of decades (possibly longer), I’ve noticed people – both on the left (point-scoring and attempting to generate outrage) and the right (holocaust deniers and fellow travellers) – water down the meanings of political terms such as Nazism. These attempts serve the interests of actual neo-Nazis. The problem with labelling ordinary “American anti-immigration Republicans” as “Nazis” is that when genuine neo-Nazis advocate the use violence to resist the “Zionist occupational government”, referring to them as Nazis no longer carries the weight that it should have.
- egberts1 3y ago
  Ummmm, read "War Against the Weak" by Edwin Black. You are a bit incorrect, no, a lot incorrect. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Black https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Black
- LargeTomato 3y ago
  You just made my point for me. There's a historical definition and then there's a colloquial definition.

anonym29 3y ago

What on earth are you talking about? Nazi means national socialist and clearly refers to the despicable values espoused by Adolf Hitler during the third reich of Nazi Germany prior to WW2. These "values" are eugenics, concentration camps, genocide, and the belief that Jewish people were insidiously and deliberately attempting to weaken Germany from the inside through executive control of media, financial, and cultural institutions. It wasn't even a white-supremacist movement, it espoused belief in the idea of the supremacy of the German people quite specifically, which is why Hitler had no qualms invading so many other white-supeajority countries and killing so many non-Jewish white people. Anyone using the term "Nazi" to refer to 21st century Americans who are nonviolently opposed to immigration or generic WN's needs to read a history book. Or two. Or ten. Or maybe visit a Holocaust museum. Also why single out calls for "political violence"? Initiating any kind of violence is always wrong, period. All calls for violence should be scrutinized for legitimacy (as opposed to poor-taste parody/satire) and fiercely opposed if serious, not only political violence. The mere act of suggesting that the term "Nazi" is ambiguous and conflating it with nonviolent groups is ignorant and antisemitic in and of itself. It completely downplays, obscures, and minimizes the horrific and brutal conditions the Jewish people suffered in the 20th century, before over 7 million of them were systematically killed at the hands of the Nazis, a very specific group holding political power in Germany from the 1930s through the end of WW2 in 1945. I hope for your sake you never make such an offensive and patently absurd remark in front a Jewish coworker. What you're insinuating is genuinely offensive and insulting to the uniquely terrible hardships they've suffered. Seriously, go visit a Holocaust memorial before you confuse anyone else.

anonym29 3y ago
I missed this earlier, and can no longer edit, but please note that "supeajority" should read "supermajority".
LargeTomato 3y ago
First, calm down. Deep breaths. Second, your definition is the textbook definition but it's not the colloquial definition. That was my point.
- anonym29 3y ago
  There are circumstances where colloquialisms are appropriate, like using "y'all" instead of "you all". There are circumstances where colloquialisms are inappropriate, like a caucasian person repeating a racial slur in a song that was originally sung by a person of color. Equating literal genocide with immigration policy preferences, however despicable they may be, leans heavily towards the latter. I have ancestors who were victims of systematic genocide at the hands of Nazis. Let me know when the Republicans start gassing people and throwing them in ovens, I'll be the first one to call them Nazis and exercise force to defend the innocent. Until that happens, respectfully, please stop doing the antisemitic equivalent of shouting the N word in public and insisting that it's okay to do so on the basis that you're only citing other people's words. It's hurtful, but more importantly than that, as Anthony-G pointed out, it's dangerous. It's like crying wolf, only, instead of the threat being a wolf, it's an entire industrialized society engaged in organized genocide.
  - LargeTomato 3y ago
    You are attacking points I have not made and arguments I do not believe in. I'm not sure why you're upset or why you expect crocodile tears to buy you sympathy on the internet. Randomly slinging shit at others isn't going to win you friends.

Anthony-G 3y ago

anonym29 clearly articulated (better than I could) how the term Nazi has a historically well-defined meaning – and still does today. The rise of the Nazis within the Weimar Republic and how they gradually accumulated sufficient power to carry out the holocaust is the classic lesson from history that we should never allow to happen again. Over the past couple of decades (possibly longer), I’ve noticed people – both on the left (point-scoring and attempting to generate outrage) and the right (holocaust deniers and fellow travellers) – water down the meanings of political terms such as Nazism. These attempts serve the interests of actual neo-Nazis. The problem with labelling ordinary “American anti-immigration Republicans” as “Nazis” is that when genuine neo-Nazis advocate the use violence to resist the “Zionist occupational government”, referring to them as Nazis no longer carries the weight that it should have.

egberts1 3y ago
Ummmm, read "War Against the Weak" by Edwin Black. You are a bit incorrect, no, a lot incorrect. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Black https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Black
LargeTomato 3y ago
You just made my point for me. There's a historical definition and then there's a colloquial definition.