AcademyofDrX wrote:"First, those who identify themselves as "Nazi" do so in order to "trigger" oversensitive people. The ones who are genuine are rare like a needle in a haystack. Almost like mythical creatures."
Christchurch, El Paso, Tree of Life, Louisville Kroger, Quebec Islamist Cultural Center, Mother Emanuel, the list goes on. I don't know how many self-identified as Nazis versus "regular" white supremacists, but they all have the ideology of racial hatred. They're not unicorns. For every one of them, I'm confident there are dozens more being radicalized on the forums for hatemongers, working up the nerve to act out.
There are no ironic Nazis, and there are no ironic Nazi defenders. Allying with white supremacists is evil.
There's no value in debating people like this, their words offer no insight, they are not responsive to a genuine effort to find moral common ground. This has crossed the line well past political debate and become a defense of the indefensible. I hope someday they recognize this and change.
AcademyofDrX wrote:Christchurch, El Paso, Tree of Life, Louisville Kroger, Quebec Islamist Cultural Center, Mother Emanuel, the list goes on. I don't know how many self-identified as Nazis versus "regular" white supremacists, but they all have the ideology of racial hatred. They're not unicorns. For every one of them, I'm confident there are dozens more being radicalized on the forums for hatemongers, working up the nerve to act out
ShadowKatt wrote:I'm not on board for punching nazis, I'm up for shooting them.
Burn wrote:I'm never clicking any of your links ever again.
Burn wrote:High Command is an arsehat.
High Command wrote:If we agree that debating with nazis is pointless then what precisely should one do?
High Command wrote:
I am on the side of antifa, being set up precisely as a counter-protest movement with the primary purpose to not let neo-nazi and other white supremacist groups march unchallenged. Sometimes you have to draw a line in the sand and say 'no more.'
-Kanrabat- wrote:High Command wrote:
I am on the side of antifa, being set up precisely as a counter-protest movement with the primary purpose to not let neo-nazi and other white supremacist groups march unchallenged. Sometimes you have to draw a line in the sand and say 'no more.'
You really are one hell of a psycho and the FBI should put you on their watch list.
After all ANIFA have done, including killing a 8 year old child in a car and a young mother that dared say "all lives matter", there's no redemption for you.
I do hope you're just a "keyboard warrior" because if you act on what you advocate, may God have mercy on your soul.
ShadowKatt wrote:Dude, how is that helpful right now?
-Kanrabat- wrote:ShadowKatt wrote:Dude, how is that helpful right now?
I know it's not. At all. A cultist zealot will never change his mind.
But after all ANTIFA have done, all the murders, destruction, and carnage, how the hell can someone still claim to be "on the side of ANTIFA" as if it's perfectly normal?
It's as if to say you're on the side of the Talibans as the dust on the 9/11 site was still not settled.
-Kanrabat- wrote:You really are one hell of a psycho and the FBI should put you on their watch list.
Okay, that's a very, very fine line. If a person labels him-/herself a Nazi anytime after May 1945, that person is showing belief in and support for the atrocities committed by the Nazi regime, and just the approval of mass murder and destruction caused by them makes ANYONE in support of it a scumbag. Until all of their horrific actions came to light, it might have been possible for a person to claim to be a Nazi and be a decent person. After all, the Nazi party came to power on the suffering of the German people due to the oppression caused by Germany's acceptance of the terms of unconditional surrender at the end of World War 1. Like you said, Hitler claimed to have wanted to make life better for Germans. That's why he rose to power as swiftly and totally as he did. But then he stepped over the line, in a big way. So if today someone claims to support Nazis, that person cannot claim ignorance of how horrible they were, because of all we know about them. I understand that history is written by the winners and some things can be somewhat skewed in order to make those writing it look more favorable. But if BEING a Nazi is not a crime, it's still a damn shameful stance to take.ShadowKatt wrote: Hitler was trying to make a better world for his country and people...BEING a nazi isn't a crime... that means that Nazis can be innocent too, until the minute they break the non agression principle.
ShadowKatt wrote:Antifa are terrorists. Literally, by definition. I don't care what lofty goals they have. Hitler was trying to make a better world for his country and people,
merriam-webster wrote:antifa noun
1: a person or group actively opposing fascism
2: an anti-fascist movement
Burn wrote:I'm never clicking any of your links ever again.
Burn wrote:High Command is an arsehat.
Rodimus Prime wrote:If a person labels him-/herself a Nazi anytime after May 1945, that person is showing belief in and support for the atrocities committed by the Nazi regime, and just the approval of mass murder and destruction caused by them makes ANYONE in support of it a scumbag...But if BEING a Nazi is not a crime, it's still a damn shameful stance to take...I think I understand what you're trying to say. If 1 label becomes criminal (in this case being a Nazi) then it's a slippery slope to George Orwell's 1984, where any dissenting thought is punishable. It's a slope the US is at the precipice of, and if extremist views and those espousing them are allowed to gain control in government without measures to limit them, then we'll be sliding all the way down in a big hurry.
High Command wrote:merriam-webster quote wrote:
Also Merriam-Webster wrote:ter·ror·ism | \ ˈter-ər-ˌi-zəm \
Definition of terrorism
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
High Command wrote:Incidentally you say that being a nazi isn't against the law. Well in some places, such as the UK it is. Neo-Nazi group National Action is an illegal group here.
Here's an article from only a few days ago about a police officer being prosecuted after being found to be a member:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... rror-group
-Kanrabat- wrote:Violence is unjustifiable no matter the cause.
ShadowKatt wrote:-Kanrabat- wrote:Violence is unjustifiable no matter the cause.
This might be the only time I actually agree with HC against you, because I'm pretty sure that both of us believe that violence IS justifiable. The only difference is that HC seems to believe in violence without provocation, while I believe in violence only in response to violence.
ShadowKatt wrote:-Kanrabat- wrote:Violence is unjustifiable no matter the cause.
This might be the only time I actually agree with HC against you, because I'm pretty sure that both of us believe that violence IS justifiable. The only difference is that HC seems to believe in violence without provocation, while I believe in violence only in response to violence.
Burn wrote:I'm never clicking any of your links ever again.
Burn wrote:High Command is an arsehat.
Burn wrote:I'm never clicking any of your links ever again.
Burn wrote:High Command is an arsehat.
High Command wrote:Again with the anti-racism people are the real racists argument?
We've had that one along with anti-fascists are the real fascists.
Can we at least have a new and exciting one like skint people are the real billionaires or cats are the real dogs?
Burn wrote:I'm never clicking any of your links ever again.
Burn wrote:High Command is an arsehat.
Burn wrote:I'm never clicking any of your links ever again.
Burn wrote:High Command is an arsehat.
High Command wrote:As for the pamphlet you linked to, I don't see it as being overtly racist on first inspection but I hypothesise that objections were raised particularly towards the section describing protestant work ethics.
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Geminii, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Jelze Bunnycat, masterX244, TigrisEye