6 ms·

The Nazi doth protest too much?

by Festro 10mo ago

rijoja 10mo ago
[flagged]
- Festro 10mo ago
  The Nazi Party used the term "Socialist" in its name primarily for propaganda purposes to attract votes from the working class and to co-opt a popular political term in post-World War I Germany. In practice and ideology, Nazism was a far-right, racist, and anti-Marxist movement that brutally suppressed actual socialists and communists once in power. But lets not let facts get in the way of things shall we?
  - rijoja 10mo ago
    The Nazi doth protest too much?
  - _urzu 10mo ago
    I always cringe when I hear the word "Nazism." Because the first time I heard it, it was when Putin said it in a speech after invading Ukraine. And indeed, if you check Google Trends, you'll see that the term had its peak around that time and has had an increased usage ever since. Nazism is not a word known in German either. We purposefully call it national socialism. And to be honest, I think it makes sense to be national socialism. Because it is nationally socialist. Meaning it is social towards the nation. Which is also a reason why there is the "Internationale." Because to me socialism that is constraint to a nation is inevitably nationalist, I mean how else could it not be?
    - yawpitch 10mo ago
      “Nazism” with the capital N represents a specifically German instance of “national socialism”; to whit, the instance that reflexively called Adolf Hitler’s assassin “Mein Fuhrer”. Nazism modeled itself, in turn, on a specific instance of “fascism” which took its class name from its basal instantiation, Italian “Fascismo”, to whit the instance that reflexively called the man ultimately responsible for the death of Benito Mussolini “Il Duce”. The main lesson of history is that personality cults are a very bad idea.
- yawpitch 10mo ago
  Notice your own use of the German word “Nationalsozialistische” and not the word “Sozialistische”? They are two different words coined with intent to have two very different — in fact pretty much opposite — meanings. That’s a fact Hitler and his other very-definitely conservative friends knew and understood well, just like they’d have known that “Ich bein ein Berliner Pfannkuchen” is not the same as “Ich bein ein Berliner”… as often seems to be the case the actual facts directly contradict the alt-facts you seem to think you know.
nis0s 10mo ago
I abhor ideologies related to racial or ethnic supremacy, how am I a Nazi?
- jfengel 10mo ago
  If your ideology has differential effects on people by race, then you may well be participating in a racist ideology even if you detest it. Most notably: current policies are addressed at punishing illegal immigrants, but it's clear that it's being targeted at non-white and mostly Spanish-speaking people. There are numerous incidents of people being racially profiled despite being American citizens, and no steps are being taken to minimize that. The policy is popular with those who are explicit about their racial supremacy. If you support programs that hurt people of a different race, then calling you a "Nazi" is not inapt, regardless of what you think of the actual Nazis.
  - nis0s 10mo ago
    > If your ideology has differential effects on people by race, then you may well be participating in a racist ideology even if you detest it. Mine don’t, I don’t like that people are being unfairly targeted if they’re citizens or have legal rights to be in the country. That said, I don’t want illegal immigrants to be harmed or mistreated. And it’s not just me, many Americans feel the same way. The issue is more complex than simply a humanitarian cause. The effect of letting in hundreds of people is something you can balance over time, but letting in millions over a relatively short period has both economic and geopolitical ramifications. Besides that, borders exist for more than security, their permeability has implications for national sovereignty as well. For Americans who aren’t racist, the issue is multifaceted and just as important as the plight of an economic immigrant or asylum seeker. If you look at who is entering the U.S. illegally, it includes people from strong economic powerhouses with healthy growth projections and competitive GDP, like Brazil, Mexico, China, India and so on. When you just absorb the economic or political issues of other countries by taking in their poor, then you don’t ever let those societies reflect on what they’re doing wrong or right for their people. Countries should be responsible for their people, and if they’re unable to be that way for one reason or another, their people need to examine why and ask their leaders some tough questions. Immigrating to other countries, for jobs, safety, or education, is not a good or sustainable way of doing things, which is why we’re currently having the issues that we’re having. I also think asylum seekers should be sent to countries that most match their cultural backgrounds, and repatriated when conflict is resolved, or sent somewhere where they have family ties. There needs to be a better way to bring normalcy into the lives of people affected by war or conflict other than turning them away, or indefinitely opening your doors to anyone who claims asylum, where there is a non-zero occurrence of fraud. Good and responsible governance is the only way to ensure better outcomes for people. Political extremism isn’t going to enable good governance.

The Nazi doth protest too much?

by Festro 10mo ago

The Nazi doth protest too much?

rijoja 10mo ago

[flagged]

Festro 10mo ago
The Nazi Party used the term "Socialist" in its name primarily for propaganda purposes to attract votes from the working class and to co-opt a popular political term in post-World War I Germany. In practice and ideology, Nazism was a far-right, racist, and anti-Marxist movement that brutally suppressed actual socialists and communists once in power. But lets not let facts get in the way of things shall we?
- rijoja 10mo ago
  The Nazi doth protest too much?
- _urzu 10mo ago
  I always cringe when I hear the word "Nazism." Because the first time I heard it, it was when Putin said it in a speech after invading Ukraine. And indeed, if you check Google Trends, you'll see that the term had its peak around that time and has had an increased usage ever since. Nazism is not a word known in German either. We purposefully call it national socialism. And to be honest, I think it makes sense to be national socialism. Because it is nationally socialist. Meaning it is social towards the nation. Which is also a reason why there is the "Internationale." Because to me socialism that is constraint to a nation is inevitably nationalist, I mean how else could it not be?
  - yawpitch 10mo ago
    “Nazism” with the capital N represents a specifically German instance of “national socialism”; to whit, the instance that reflexively called Adolf Hitler’s assassin “Mein Fuhrer”. Nazism modeled itself, in turn, on a specific instance of “fascism” which took its class name from its basal instantiation, Italian “Fascismo”, to whit the instance that reflexively called the man ultimately responsible for the death of Benito Mussolini “Il Duce”. The main lesson of history is that personality cults are a very bad idea.
yawpitch 10mo ago
Notice your own use of the German word “Nationalsozialistische” and not the word “Sozialistische”? They are two different words coined with intent to have two very different — in fact pretty much opposite — meanings. That’s a fact Hitler and his other very-definitely conservative friends knew and understood well, just like they’d have known that “Ich bein ein Berliner Pfannkuchen” is not the same as “Ich bein ein Berliner”… as often seems to be the case the actual facts directly contradict the alt-facts you seem to think you know.

nis0s 10mo ago

I abhor ideologies related to racial or ethnic supremacy, how am I a Nazi?

jfengel 10mo ago
If your ideology has differential effects on people by race, then you may well be participating in a racist ideology even if you detest it. Most notably: current policies are addressed at punishing illegal immigrants, but it's clear that it's being targeted at non-white and mostly Spanish-speaking people. There are numerous incidents of people being racially profiled despite being American citizens, and no steps are being taken to minimize that. The policy is popular with those who are explicit about their racial supremacy. If you support programs that hurt people of a different race, then calling you a "Nazi" is not inapt, regardless of what you think of the actual Nazis.
- nis0s 10mo ago
  > If your ideology has differential effects on people by race, then you may well be participating in a racist ideology even if you detest it. Mine don’t, I don’t like that people are being unfairly targeted if they’re citizens or have legal rights to be in the country. That said, I don’t want illegal immigrants to be harmed or mistreated. And it’s not just me, many Americans feel the same way. The issue is more complex than simply a humanitarian cause. The effect of letting in hundreds of people is something you can balance over time, but letting in millions over a relatively short period has both economic and geopolitical ramifications. Besides that, borders exist for more than security, their permeability has implications for national sovereignty as well. For Americans who aren’t racist, the issue is multifaceted and just as important as the plight of an economic immigrant or asylum seeker. If you look at who is entering the U.S. illegally, it includes people from strong economic powerhouses with healthy growth projections and competitive GDP, like Brazil, Mexico, China, India and so on. When you just absorb the economic or political issues of other countries by taking in their poor, then you don’t ever let those societies reflect on what they’re doing wrong or right for their people. Countries should be responsible for their people, and if they’re unable to be that way for one reason or another, their people need to examine why and ask their leaders some tough questions. Immigrating to other countries, for jobs, safety, or education, is not a good or sustainable way of doing things, which is why we’re currently having the issues that we’re having. I also think asylum seekers should be sent to countries that most match their cultural backgrounds, and repatriated when conflict is resolved, or sent somewhere where they have family ties. There needs to be a better way to bring normalcy into the lives of people affected by war or conflict other than turning them away, or indefinitely opening your doors to anyone who claims asylum, where there is a non-zero occurrence of fraud. Good and responsible governance is the only way to ensure better outcomes for people. Political extremism isn’t going to enable good governance.