[Defeated] Condemn "The CAIN"

[Drittes Deutsches Reich]

This will soon be forgotten everyone will vote against it.

Thank you so much for your invaluable input, I don't know what we would've done without you.

[Northern Alwaincefalland]

This will soon be forgotten everyone will vote against it.

Thank you so much for your invaluable input, I don't know what we would've done without you.

IS he wrong tho?????

[Proctopeo]

Thank you so much for your invaluable input, I don't know what we would've done without you.

IS he wrong tho?????

On the losing part, he's not wrong. On the forgotten part, maybe not.
Either way, a point has been made.

[Drittes Deutsches Reich]

Thank you so much for your invaluable input, I don't know what we would've done without you.

IS he wrong tho?????

It's completely and utterly irrelevant to whether or not condemning CAIN is the right thing to do (aka the topic). Hence my reaction.

[Pretzelton]

Maybe CAIN and the accused can compromise? Maybe CAIN cannot accuse regions and Nations of being Nazist without full, undisputed evidence?

[Proctopeo]

Maybe CAIN and the accused can compromise? Maybe CAIN cannot accuse regions and Nations of being Nazist without full, undisputed evidence?

Unlikely to happen, because it turns out you can get away with a whole lot as long as you claim to be fighting Nazis.

[Pretzelton]

Maybe CAIN and the accused can compromise? Maybe CAIN cannot accuse regions and Nations of being Nazist without full, undisputed evidence?

Unlikely to happen, because it turns out you can get away with a whole lot as long as you claim to be fighting Nazis.

Exactly my point

[Cerian Quilor]

Maybe CAIN and the accused can compromise? Maybe CAIN cannot accuse regions and Nations of being Nazist without full, undisputed evidence?

Unlikely to happen, because it turns out you can get away with a whole lot as long as you claim to be fighting Nazis.

First of all, define 'full undisputed evidence'? I mean, in IRL, there's people who (with good reason) will call many voices in the so-called 'Alt Right' Neo-Nazi, but a lot of them would say they aren't. Obviously there are objective measures, but applying them is much easier said than done. There's not really a simple equation to plug a region into.

Secondly, yes, you can get away with a lot (though whether or not CAIN is getting away with a lot here remains to be seen), but that's because people, on both sides of this CAIN issue, seem to be shutting down their critical thinking skills the moment they hear the word Nazi - something I've seen in NS, but also IRL and on other websites.

This condemnation is not an effective means by which to address CAIN's actions, nor will it do anything about NS Nazism. It's the political equivalent of a headless chicken running around and yet somehow still screaming.

[Drittes Deutsches Reich]

Unlikely to happen, because it turns out you can get away with a whole lot as long as you claim to be fighting Nazis.

First of all, define 'full undisputed evidence'? I mean, in IRL, there's people who (with good reason) will call many voices in the so-called 'Alt Right' Neo-Nazi, but a lot of them would say they aren't. Obviously there are objective measures, but applying them is much easier said than done. There's not really a simple equation to plug a region into.

Neo-Nazism is incredibly simple and consistent in its positions, and therefore very easy to recognize. If it's racist, homophobic, Islamophobic et al., you can safely call it a neo-Nazi, no matter how much it might deny it afterwards. Recognizing such regions is as simple as it gets, really.

EDIT: Doing the above would be both more meaningful and less hypocritical than what CAIN is currently doing - i.e. opposing symbols, rather than attitudes (while claiming to be doing the latter, mind you).

Secondly, yes, you can get away with a lot (though whether or not CAIN is getting away with a lot here remains to be seen), but that's because people, on both sides of this CAIN issue, seem to be shutting down their critical thinking skills the moment they hear the word Nazi - something I've seen in NS, but also IRL and on other websites.

Indeed.

This condemnation is not an effective means by which to address CAIN's actions, nor will it do anything about NS Nazism. It's the political equivalent of a headless chicken running around and yet somehow still screaming.

We get it, you want no action against CAIN to be taken for fear of it being "misinterpreted". Thing is, that does even less to solve the problem than condemning them, so I'll take my chances with the latter.

[Indo-Malaysia]

IS he wrong tho?????

On the losing part, he's not wrong. On the forgotten part, maybe not.
Either way, a point has been made.

And I am glad it has.

[States of Glory]

"Even the devil can quote Scripture to suit his own purposes." - Shakespeare.

Even someone who criticises an organisation for pretending to fight for equality can quote an anti-Semitic character to suit their own purposes.

[Drittes Deutsches Reich]

"Even the devil can quote Scripture to suit his own purposes." - Shakespeare.

Even someone who criticises an organisation for pretending to fight for equality can quote an anti-Semitic character to suit their own purposes.

I think I saw an ad hominem whizzing throught the air. And I wasn't aware being anti-Semitic (this word doesn't mean what you think it does, by the way - it means opposing people who speak a language of the Semitic group, such as Arabic, or Hebrew) makes everything you say wrong by default.

[States of Glory]

Even someone who criticises an organisation for pretending to fight for equality can quote an anti-Semitic character to suit their own purposes.

I think I saw an ad hominem whizzing throught the air.

Call me out but don't call them out. Nice.

And I wasn't aware being anti-Semitic (this word doesn't mean what you think it does, by the way - it means opposing people who speak a language of the Semitic group, such as Arabic, or Hebrew) makes everything you say wrong by default.

I'm well aware that Semitic doesn't mean Jewish, but who actually gets confused by the term 'anti-Semitic'? Would you prefer it if I said 'anti-Jewish' instead?

Also, I never said that Mobile Task Force was wrong. I was just pointing out the irony of them quoting an anti-Semitic...I'm sorry, anti-Jewish character to support their argument.

[Drittes Deutsches Reich]

I think I saw an ad hominem whizzing throught the air.

Call me out but don't call them out. Nice.

In all honesty, I'm not even sure MTF knew Shakespeare was an anti-Zionist, so I wouldn't call him a hypocrite for quoting him.

And I wasn't aware being anti-Semitic (this word doesn't mean what you think it does, by the way - it means opposing people who speak a language of the Semitic group, such as Arabic, or Hebrew) makes everything you say wrong by default.

I'm well aware that Semitic doesn't mean Jewish, but who actually gets confused by the term 'anti-Semitic'? Would you prefer it if I said 'anti-Jewish' instead?

Just wanted to point it out. Accuracy helps, and given the abundance of words in the English language, it's not hard to achieve.

Also, I never said that Mobile Task Force was wrong. I was just pointing out the irony of them quoting an anti-Semitic...I'm sorry, anti-Jewish character to support their argument.

Yes, I got that. Again, I'm not sure he knew that Shakespeare was <whatever>, so I can't conclude that he's a hypocrite for quoting him.

[States of Glory]

Call me out but don't call them out. Nice.

In all honesty, I'm not even sure MTF knew Shakespeare was an anti-Zionist, so I wouldn't call him a hypocrite for quoting him.

I wasn't referring to Shakespeare. I doubt that Shakespeare met any Jews in his lifetime. I was actually referring to the character of Antonio.

I'm well aware that Semitic doesn't mean Jewish, but who actually gets confused by the term 'anti-Semitic'? Would you prefer it if I said 'anti-Jewish' instead?

Just wanted to point it out. Accuracy helps, and given the abundance of words in the English language, it's not hard to achieve.

I see your point, but then again, 'Islamophobia' and 'homophobia' aren't actually phobias so I guess we're even.

[Cerian Quilor]

This condemnation is not an effective means by which to address CAIN's actions, nor will it do anything about NS Nazism. It's the political equivalent of a headless chicken running around and yet somehow still screaming.

We get it, you want no action against CAIN to be taken for fear of it being "misinterpreted". Thing is, that does even less to solve the problem than condemning them, so I'll take my chances with the latter.

I haven't said that there should be no action against CAIN, and I don't believe I've brought up any sort of fears of it being 'misinterpreted'. I've said that this will do nothing to change CAIN's pattern of behavior.

Indeed, as I have said before in this thread and elsewhere, I think CAIN is a bad idea. I think it is an idea founded on a series of false assumptions about NS Nazism and will not in any meaningful way, have a long-term impact on the power, influence or existence of NS Nazis. Certainly not impacts that couldn't have been reached in other ways.

However, as someone who knows the mindset behind CAIN well (from the 'inside', as I have been in or been close to a number of regions inside CAIN) and understands why CAIN is doing what it is doing, I am telling you, this condemnation will accomplish nothing. Condemnations rarely accomplish a thing, and in the case of CAIN, that is especially true. How many raider regions have been condemned to no effect? They wear the damn things as badges of honor. Coupers have been condemned, to no meaningful effect - it's not a shiny red badge that does something, it's Gameplay community attitudes, which already existed before a couper is condemned.

Condemnations are, in probably at least 90% of cases, meaningless. If you really think CAIN is the real problem, there are still things you could be doing to counter it that would be vastly more effective than this condemnation, which is performative outrage. It will do nothing.

[SYG]

From the Osiris Fraternal Order
And the office of the Vizier of World Assembly Affairs

---

---

As Ra makes his way across the heavily sky, and the cycle of the universe continues, the people of Osiris and its prosperity of the Nile, after consulting with the community, and the gods Seshat and Ma’at, have determined to vote AGAINST the current resolution. The Pharaoh will vote according to the people, and according to Ma’at. His actions are necessary in maintaining the balance between order and chaos, truth and darkness, and Osiris will follow the Pharaoh’s direction. The government of the Osiris Fraternal Order will consider no proposal without the text meeting the requirements of Ma’at. We will continue to uphold our moral responsibilities to the people, maintaining and voting in favor of any proposals that will forward the truth and honor that is expected of all who call Osiris home. Cosmic harmony is only obtainable through expressing the will of Ma’at and the will of the Pharaoh. Although we have derived at this decision, the author of the proposal is welcome to present a case that would enlighten the Pharaoh and the community to the purpose of the proposal and perhaps change the will of the gods, the Pharaoh, and the community. If this interests you, please visit our kingdom and speak your knowledge there. All information is important, and will be presented to Seshat, the goddess of wisdom, knowledge, and writing to help direct the Pharaoh to make the right decision for the people of the fraternal order. If you have any questions about Osiris in the World Assembly, please direct them to the office of the Vizier of World Assembly Affairs by sending Syg a telegram. For more general questions regarding Osiris, please direct them to the Pharaoh, Neo Kervoskia. Thank you fellow ambassadors, and author of the current proposal at vote, for your time. Osiris, her people, and the office of the Vizier greatly appreciate your time and patience.

Best Regards,

Syg, Vizier of World Assembly Affairs

[Proctopeo]

Neo-Nazism is incredibly simple and consistent in its positions, and therefore very easy to recognize. If it's racist, homophobic, Islamophobic et al., you can safely call it a neo-Nazi, no matter how much it might deny it afterwards. Recognizing such regions is as simple as it gets, really.

EDIT: Doing the above would be both more meaningful and less hypocritical than what CAIN is currently doing - i.e. opposing symbols, rather than attitudes (while claiming to be doing the latter, mind you).

It's extremely important to note that something can be racist, homophobic, or Islamophobic, or something else without being a neo-Nazi, although I suppose under a personal definition - that is, one that a single person or a small group use despite it not being the actual definition - it could work. It would just be wrong.

[Cerian Quilor]

Neo-Nazism is incredibly simple and consistent in its positions, and therefore very easy to recognize. If it's racist, homophobic, Islamophobic et al., you can safely call it a neo-Nazi, no matter how much it might deny it afterwards. Recognizing such regions is as simple as it gets, really.

EDIT: Doing the above would be both more meaningful and less hypocritical than what CAIN is currently doing - i.e. opposing symbols, rather than attitudes (while claiming to be doing the latter, mind you).

It's extremely important to note that something can be racist, homophobic, or Islamophobic, or something else without being a neo-Nazi, although I suppose under a personal definition - that is, one that a single person or a small group use despite it not being the actual definition - it could work. It would just be wrong.

That's true. While anti-semitism and homophobia are pretty intrinsic to Nazism, Nazism also has other precepts.

[Proctopeo]

It's extremely important to note that something can be racist, homophobic, or Islamophobic, or something else without being a neo-Nazi, although I suppose under a personal definition - that is, one that a single person or a small group use despite it not being the actual definition - it could work. It would just be wrong.

That's true. While anti-semitism and homophobia are pretty intrinsic to Nazism, Nazism also has other precepts.

And other ideologies can be antisemitic and homophobic. I'll refrain from giving examples. For now.

[Consular]

IS he wrong tho?????

It's completely and utterly irrelevant to whether or not condemning CAIN is the right thing to do (aka the topic). Hence my reaction.

This thread isn't necessarily about whether or not condemning CAIN is the right thing to do. There's no rule that nations or regions have to vote according to what they, or anyone else, considers to be "right".

[Drittes Deutsches Reich]

Neo-Nazism is incredibly simple and consistent in its positions, and therefore very easy to recognize. If it's racist, homophobic, Islamophobic et al., you can safely call it a neo-Nazi, no matter how much it might deny it afterwards. Recognizing such regions is as simple as it gets, really.

EDIT: Doing the above would be both more meaningful and less hypocritical than what CAIN is currently doing - i.e. opposing symbols, rather than attitudes (while claiming to be doing the latter, mind you).

It's extremely important to note that something can be racist, homophobic, or Islamophobic, or something else without being a neo-Nazi, although I suppose under a personal definition - that is, one that a single person or a small group use despite it not being the actual definition - it could work. It would just be wrong.

Strictly speaking, neo-Nazism is nothing more than traditional Western bigotry decorated with anachronistic "Germanic" symbols, and perhaps the odd Third-Reich policy here and there, such as environmentalism.

What CAIN is doing - opposing the symbols.
What CAIN claims to be doing - opposing the attitudes.
What CAIN exemplifies - hypocrisy and dishonesty.

Even if someone sharing those attitudes doesn't use "Germanic" symbols and doesn't call himself a neo-Nazi (more often than not to avoid controversy and have an easier time of convincing people racism is "good"), why then would he not be just as bad as something who does the latter as well as the former? And why would it be justified to treat him any differently?

It's completely and utterly irrelevant to whether or not condemning CAIN is the right thing to do (aka the topic). Hence my reaction.

This thread isn't necessarily about whether or not condemning CAIN is the right thing to do. There's no rule that nations or regions have to vote according to what they, or anyone else, considers to be "right".

Generally speaking, people do vote according to what they think is right...

[Cerian Quilor]

The vast majority of voters in the SC vote based on what a well-crafted (or middling-quality-crafted) resolution makes them think is right.

[Cadilux]

It's extremely important to note that something can be racist, homophobic, or Islamophobic, or something else without being a neo-Nazi, although I suppose under a personal definition - that is, one that a single person or a small group use despite it not being the actual definition - it could work. It would just be wrong.

Strictly speaking, neo-Nazism is nothing more than traditional Western bigotry decorated with anachronistic "Germanic" symbols, and perhaps the odd Third-Reich policy here and there, such as environmentalism.

What CAIN is doing - opposing the symbols.
What CAIN claims to be doing - opposing the attitudes.
What CAIN exemplifies - hypocrisy and dishonesty.

Even if someone sharing those attitudes doesn't use "Germanic" symbols and doesn't call himself a neo-Nazi (more often than not to avoid controversy and have an easier time of convincing people racism is "good"), why then would he not be just as bad as something who does the latter as well as the former? And why would it be justified to treat him any differently?

This thread isn't necessarily about whether or not condemning CAIN is the right thing to do. There's no rule that nations or regions have to vote according to what they, or anyone else, considers to be "right".

Generally speaking, people do vote according to what they think is right...

reich are nazi

[Cadilux]

Im anti nazi im anti nazi