[PASSED] Liberate Nazi Europa

[Re-Unified Russia]

We decide if it exists (unless it breaks site rules). If we condemn speech that abides by rules (AKA their nazi jokes) then we decide that we block certain kinds of speech. The moderators only control speech that breaks the rules or is malicious. We control whether nazi's and communists are aloud to voice their opinions

Does this resolution stop Nazis from expressing their opinions? How?

By attempting to set up a way to easily take over their region and kick them out because of their ideology. This is a string of attacks on fascist regions to make it easy to destroy them because you disagree with their ideologies.

[Kavagrad]

Raiding falls under condemnations for raiders, liberating is meant for saving regions. Why would we liberate a free region. It goes against the purpose of the "liberation" system.

Thank you.
I don’t care if this form debunked the reason(considering that it’s pretty one sided), there are still cite-wide rules.

Mods have ruled on this, it's well within the rules.

Does this resolution stop Nazis from expressing their opinions? How?

By attempting to set up a way to easily take over their region and kick them out because of their ideology. This is a string of attacks on fascist regions to make it easy to destroy them because you disagree with their ideologies.

That doesn't stop them from speaking. We have forums, only the Mods control who speaks there.

[Freezic Vast]

Let’s start with basics such as that freedom of speech is guaranteed by the USA constitution, meaning that you cannot ban someone because they say they are Nazis

What free speech?

1): there is no such thing as "free speech" on this website
2): this is a privately owned and hosted website
3): this not run by the United States government
4): Max Barry is Australian, not American
5): the Security Council does not care about "free speech"

Stop touting the "free speech exists on NS" argument.

1. The idea of freedom of speech is considered universal in democratic societies to speak out against others, like what you are doing right now. Without it, we would not have access to the internet and say what we want.
2. That is Irrelevant
3. That is Irrelevant
4. I didn't know Australians had no free speech, I guess that means they're atheistic, Marxist, card-carrying, Bolsheviks now.
5. You're just proving mine and many other people's point that the basic right to say what we think is wrong should be oppressed.

Free speech exists so people can speak out against tyranny or injustice, I say let them. (btw I am in support of this bill mind you)

[Re-Unified Russia]

Thank you.
I don’t care if this form debunked the reason(considering that it’s pretty one sided), there are still cite-wide rules.

Mods have ruled on this, it's well within the rules.

By attempting to set up a way to easily take over their region and kick them out because of their ideology. This is a string of attacks on fascist regions to make it easy to destroy them because you disagree with their ideologies.

That doesn't stop them from speaking. We have forums, only the Mods control who speaks there.

It doesn't stop them from speaking, but it dissipates their group of like minded people and sets up the precedent that fascist regions will be destroyed, so fascists are forced to hide their ideas offsite or in forums so that their region isn't raided, basically locking them to hiding their ideology so that their region isn't liberated for their ideology. Why should we liberate their region, they aren't messing with you. If they are raiders condemn them. Liberating them for being fascist, while not against the rules, is abuse of the system

[Caracasus]

Actually, Australian legislation around freedom of speech only really covers political speech. There's precedent that broadly covers freedom of speech (although I believe that the rules governing hate speech are more in line with Europe than the US) but there's no constitutional freedom of speech like the American constitution has. It's actually a really fascinating topic if you're interested in that sort of thing.

Not that this matters in the slightest. No-one is imprisoning or in any other way infringing freedom of speech. Freedom of speech merely means you cannot be imprisoned for saying something (and every nation applies some caveats to that). It is absolutely not the freedom to say what you want without consequence.

Relevant:

https://xkcd.com/1357/

[Soviet Mill Creek]

They have a long history of raiding, what the actual hell are you talking about?

Other regions also have long histories of raiding, what's your point?

What raiding? I have seen them for almost 5 years and never once seen them raid

[Freezic Vast]

Other regions also have long histories of raiding, what's your point?

What raiding? I have seen them for almost 5 years and never once seen them raid

Founded: Feb 13, 2017

[Kavagrad]

Mods have ruled on this, it's well within the rules.


That doesn't stop them from speaking. We have forums, only the Mods control who speaks there.

It doesn't stop them from speaking, but it dissipates their group of like minded people and sets up the precedent that fascist regions will be destroyed, so fascists are forced to hide their ideas offsite or in forums so that their region isn't raided, basically locking them to hiding their ideology so that their region isn't liberated for their ideology. Why should we liberate their region, they aren't messing with you. If they are raiders condemn them. Liberating them for being fascist, while not against the rules, is abuse of the system

Poor, innocent Nazis. Being forced to hide their hate-mongering, genocidal beliefs from the world at large for fear of being treated in a manner that might be considered "oppression". And what have they done to deserve it? Only supported the systematic destruction of minority groups and sown hate across the world. That's not reason to be mean to them, is it?

For Christ's sake.

[Re-Unified Russia]

It doesn't stop them from speaking, but it dissipates their group of like minded people and sets up the precedent that fascist regions will be destroyed, so fascists are forced to hide their ideas offsite or in forums so that their region isn't raided, basically locking them to hiding their ideology so that their region isn't liberated for their ideology. Why should we liberate their region, they aren't messing with you. If they are raiders condemn them. Liberating them for being fascist, while not against the rules, is abuse of the system

Poor, innocent Nazis. Being forced to hide their hate-mongering, genocidal beliefs from the world at large for fear of being treated in a manner that might be considered "oppression". And what have they done to deserve it? Only supported the systematic destruction of minority groups and sown hate across the world. That's not reason to be mean to them, is it?

For Christ's sake.

Have you seen their rules, hate mongering, discrimination, and holocaust denial warrant bans. While I don't agree with them and hate Nazis, they seem to be fascists and wehraboos more than genuine Hitler lovers. I would agree to condemn them, but I will not agree to liberate them so that you can destroy their region because you disagree with their ideology.

[Freezic Vast]

It doesn't stop them from speaking, but it dissipates their group of like minded people and sets up the precedent that fascist regions will be destroyed, so fascists are forced to hide their ideas offsite or in forums so that their region isn't raided, basically locking them to hiding their ideology so that their region isn't liberated for their ideology. Why should we liberate their region, they aren't messing with you. If they are raiders condemn them. Liberating them for being fascist, while not against the rules, is abuse of the system

Poor, innocent Nazis. Being forced to hide their hate-mongering, genocidal beliefs from the world at large for fear of being treated in a manner that might be considered "oppression". And what have they done to deserve it? Only supported the systematic destruction of minority groups and sown hate across the world. That's not reason to be mean to them, is it?

For Christ's sake.

Because communists weren't hateful, oppressionists who killed and oppressed millions and millions like Hitler did. Isn't that right, Stalin, Mao, Kim, and Fidel?

[Cinistra]

Liberate Nazi Europa? What the irony.

[Prydania]

Poor, innocent Nazis. Being forced to hide their hate-mongering, genocidal beliefs from the world at large for fear of being treated in a manner that might be considered "oppression". And what have they done to deserve it? Only supported the systematic destruction of minority groups and sown hate across the world. That's not reason to be mean to them, is it?

For Christ's sake.

Because communists weren't hateful, oppressionists who killed and oppressed millions and millions like Hitler did. Isn't that right, Stalin, Mao, Kim, and Fidel?

It’s so disheartening to see fellow conservatives hand wringing over taking a stand against Nazis. Doing so should be a conservative virtue.
And yet it seems a member of an all-conservative region can’t post in one of these threads without playing the “communists were worse!” card.

Genocide is not an olympic sport. The crimes of communist regimes does not absolve Hitler’s regime of its crimes. Further? Nazism is the topic of this resolution. Go draft a condemnation of a communist region if you want to talk about the harm communist regimes have caused.

[Soviet Mill Creek 2]

It doesn't stop them from speaking, but it dissipates their group of like minded people and sets up the precedent that fascist regions will be destroyed, so fascists are forced to hide their ideas offsite or in forums so that their region isn't raided, basically locking them to hiding their ideology so that their region isn't liberated for their ideology. Why should we liberate their region, they aren't messing with you. If they are raiders condemn them. Liberating them for being fascist, while not against the rules, is abuse of the system

Poor, innocent Nazis. Being forced to hide their hate-mongering, genocidal beliefs from the world at large for fear of being treated in a manner that might be considered "oppression". And what have they done to deserve it? Only supported the systematic destruction of minority groups and sown hate across the world. That's not reason to be mean to them, is it?

For Christ's sake.

I’m not a Nazi, I just believe that a region shouldn’t cease to exists because of their ideology. They don’t seem to be Nazis as the other guy stated and are just fascists. So what.
And with literal Nazis supporting them doesn’t mean that they are Nazis just because of the support. This is an abuse of power according to the rules that were enstated ever since the creation of these bloody councils

[Northostan]

Femdom is irony, no ?

[Caracasus]

I'm gonna save everyone a lot of trouble and stick this up:

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=437873&start=1325

Generally speaking, if you've got an argument about 1) Communists 2) Frozen nazi peaches or 3) Slippery slope liberations, check out these 54 pages and I can garuntee you'll find it debated to hell and back.

[Kavagrad]

Poor, innocent Nazis. Being forced to hide their hate-mongering, genocidal beliefs from the world at large for fear of being treated in a manner that might be considered "oppression". And what have they done to deserve it? Only supported the systematic destruction of minority groups and sown hate across the world. That's not reason to be mean to them, is it?

For Christ's sake.

Because communists weren't hateful, oppressionists who killed and oppressed millions and millions like Hitler did. Isn't that right, Stalin, Mao, Kim, and Fidel?

Deflection and Strawman, what a double-whammy.

Poor, innocent Nazis. Being forced to hide their hate-mongering, genocidal beliefs from the world at large for fear of being treated in a manner that might be considered "oppression". And what have they done to deserve it? Only supported the systematic destruction of minority groups and sown hate across the world. That's not reason to be mean to them, is it?

For Christ's sake.

Have you seen their rules, hate mongering, discrimination, and holocaust denial warrant bans. While I don't agree with them and hate Nazis, they seem to be fascists and wehraboos more than genuine Hitler lovers. I would agree to condemn them, but I will not agree to liberate them so that you can destroy their region because you disagree with their ideology.

I took your advice and read through the relevant section of the One-Stop Rules Shop, since I was curious as to why I'd seen holocaust deniers avoid bans on this forum before. Oddly enough, holocaust denial is not listed as a ban-able offence, nor is discrimination. So please, read the rules yourself before you decide to use them in an argument.

[USS Monitor]

Go draft a condemnation of a communist region if you want to talk about the harm communist regimes have caused.

Or better yet, go to NSG and discuss communist atrocities there.

[Reploid Productions]

This is an abuse of power according to the rules that were enstated ever since the creation of these bloody councils

These proposals do not violate the site rules. It is politicking in a political simulator. If they were in violation of the site rules, they would have been pulled down already and the appropriate warnings issued.

The Security Council proposal rules do not state anywhere that liberations are "only" for invaded regions. That expectation is a community standard, and community standards can change over time.

Can we please put the various "it's against the rules!" arguments to bed and focus on the region being targeted and the proposal itself? The rules are not a factor here.


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Against.

That's all I'm going to say. NE is not worth my time arguing.

[Fauxia]

Against.

That's all I'm going to say. NE is not worth my time arguing.

Yeah, it's a waste of time trying to say that a nazi region isn't a nazi region

[Azurius]

Then you’re not a very good Nazi, because National Socialim advocates genocide as the central tenant.

I don't think this is accurate--it's not 'the central tenet'. I think they advocated genocide because it was convenient to scapegoat minority groups to create an 'other' to oppose and unite 'against'. What they wanted, centrally, was for the majority of the population to be working together as part of a great machine with a common interest. Creating that machine, maintaining it, and expanding its power, was more important than extermination. They used some groups as slave labour in factories, which they wouldn't have done if genocide was their first priority.

This doesn't really absolve them at all, but it helps understand that they weren't purely destructive, they had some values that had to do with their pride and the national welfare, which they pursued even when it would have been easier to conduct mayhem, in some cases. That doesn't excuse their blaming minority groups for everything, even when they weren't at fault... but they had to fight back against someone in response to the overly punitive Versailles treaty. Rather than contest it diplomatically, or overtly, they chose to fight back against weaker groups that were relatively innocent, and that--combined with their horrific success and methods--is why it's so easy to villainize them today.

Sorry to say but this is a typical false belief, an old propaganda by nazis that never really got debunked on a widescale as it seems, even until this day, since I read it again and again.

Their "national welfare" really only went as far as their social status in the end. In fact, this was very much present on the first day Hitler gained power, by exterminating the SA, an in short: Lowerclass militia, and in his favor installing the SS, an upperclass "militia" under direct controll of Hitlers henchmen, coming either from selected families(where "inappropiate traits" like glasses or the fact that you are less then 1,75cm tall etc. where sometimes "overlooked", there were requirements to be accepted into the SS, alongside other qualities too) or strongly enough bearing the "genetic traits" that Hitler wanted. Only those where let into the SS, it was meant to be an elite, nationalized unit after all. Even if the rules were as mentioned sometimes bended.

Another direct debunkal of this argument includes the fact that Hitler at some point exterminated literally anyone "undesirable", and in his view undesirable where: Germans that had "too much jewish blood" in them, and also physicaly and mentaly retarded people amongst other groups which where all slowly added by more and more reforms. He exterminated them nearly all, well those few that survived the ordeal of his regime anyway, the last ones remaining that were been taken care by their family etc. where ultimately often also exterminated in raids or what he called "checks". Which also touches the next point i´ll explain more in detail below. This itself goes back to a law that was meant to ban something like quote... "Jews, niggers retards and their scum offspring" or something like that... Let my try to google it... There we go, but a bit more detailed...:

"Rassenschande (auch Blutschande genannt) war im nationalsozialistischen Deutschen Reich ein verbreiteter Propagandabegriff, mit dem sexuelle Beziehungen zwischen Juden – nach der Definition der NS-Rassegesetze – und Staatsangehörigen „deutschen oder artverwandten Blutes“ verunglimpft wurden. Ehen zwischen Juden und „Deutschblütigen“ wurden als Rassenverrat bezeichnet. 1935 wurden Eheschließungen und sexuelle Kontakte dieser Art verboten und mit Haftstrafen bedroht.

Eine wenig später erlassene Verordnung weitete das Eheverbot auf andere Gruppen aus: Es sollten grundsätzlich alle Ehen unterbleiben, die die „Reinerhaltung des deutschen Blutes“ gefährdeten. Ein Rundschreiben zählte dazu „Zigeuner, Neger und ihre Bastarde“ auf.[1] "

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%BCrnberger_Gesetze

Which basically reads: Raceshame(or also called "blood shame"), something that happens when "german blooded" sexually mate with "non german blooded" people, especially jews. This is part of the long list of the so called "Nürnberger Gesetze", which started pretty simple and mostly aimed at jews, which was later extended, to also include quote: "Niggers, gipsies and their bastards" and later on even retarded people(or slavic people too as you may know), where we come to in this section:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationals ... Behinderte

"Besonders stark betroffen von der „Aufartungspolitik“ der Nationalsozialisten waren physisch, psychisch und geistig behinderte Anstaltsinsassen. Ihre Krankheit konnte für sie unter anderem Sterilisation, Misshandlung durch Vernachlässigung und medizinische Versuche sowie (fälschlich so genannte) Euthanasie bedeuten. Aber auch Menschen mit Behinderungen außerhalb der Anstalten waren nicht sicher vor der nationalsozialistischen Politik. Der Begriff von geistig und seelisch Kranken in der NS-Zeit war sehr weit gefasst. Das Zeugnis von Nachbarn und Polizisten, familiäre Hintergründe, der Schulabschluss und dubiose Fragebögen, in denen vor allem Kulturwissen abgefragt wurde, konnten zur Einordnung als „Schwachsinnige(r)“, und somit zur Sterilisation führen. Außerdem gab es die Kategorie der „moralischen Schwachsinnigkeit“, was bedeutete, dass der diagnostischen Subjektivität alle Türen offen standen. Der Übergang von „schwachsinnig“ zu „asozial“ war fließend."

Part of the "national socialist race hygiene", which in turn as you can read at the top of the article is also part of the "Nürnberger Rassengesetze"(Nürnbergian race laws).

The quoted part itself summarized says that: Especially mentaly and physicaly retarded people of mental institutions where hit very hard by this policy. This also included people outside of mental institutions which weren´t always safe either. The term mentaly or physicaly retarded was a very lose term in the NS-regime. Simple and also false testimonies by neigbours, work colleauges, police etc. but also questionings and question sheets by dubios groups or also insitutions for instance when you get your 10th grade, could easily lead to a labeling as "nutcase"(schwachsinniger) which had dire conequences. Which include incarceration, sterilization, euthanasia(death), and abuse by maltreatment or also medical research, lab rats in short.

That plus our next point: Hitler at some point removed poor houses(armenhäuser), and replaced them with "work houses"(arbeitshäuser), which ran essentially like before with the only differences...: Nothing was free in a work house, no matter how sick, old or whatever or not you had to work to get your shelter and food. Costs were cut for them, as a result there was lack of food, hygiene and medicine which led to widespread epidemics and the death of many, if not by malnutrition then by simple disease or more epidemic germs such as the somewhat well known thyphus(or typhiod fever, which by today for instance is practicaly eradicated in Germany). But who cares about a few "undesirables" eh? While the poor houses where shelter and a meal for the unfortunate even if albeit not a proper one given Germanies economic situation in those times, these "work houses" where practicaly slavery, and of course the result of that were a lof of deaths too, which also includes germans as germans were not excempted from work houses, though of course albeit much less likely to end up in one. Anyone in a "work house" though officially not employed, was dubbed an "employed" person in the statistics. This helped Hitler to falsify his unemployment statistics to more desirable levels.

Unfortunately I cannot find the article nor any other appropriate link, only some references, for example on a book that deals with education on nazism after the war(during the 70s more precisely) which mentions a homework by a student that mentions these "arbeitshäuser". So sadly I cannot add a proper source for this one, my bad.

Anyhow this should nonetheless be plenty enough to show that Hitlers "national welfare" is a joke. Not every German citizen, even those he would have considered "pureblooded", has seen this glorified "national welfare", in fact mostly only the upper and middle class saw any benefits of that national welfare, the rest kicked the bucket, or was even abused, killed or openly executed like in the examples above. As a result an estimated 1-3 million Germans died(lack a source at hand for that one too, sry) at the hands of the NS regime too(not counting those in that died by war, but by Hitlers reforms and death squads only directly or indirectly).

Jews and other minorities without a doubt suffered the most, however an often ignored fact is that many germans suffered under Hitlers regime too. Not all of them saw the glories of the NS regime, a huge portion of them in fact saw the opposite, poverty and hell, and not few met their death through it, and many many more germans may have survived but suffered a lot too.

It is really time we got rid of the notion that "Nationalsocialism was abhorent but you can argue that it benefited the germans overall", this is simply not true, as the majority like in all fascist regimes suffered at the lower end of the food chain. And even in so called "nationalsocialism" germans were not automaticaly priviliged and excempted from maltreatment and exploitation. Just like you are not automaticaly priviliged just because you´re white, while the majority or a certain percentage of course will be. It´s pretty much the same for the NS regime.

[Lenlyvit]

looks up holy Onderwall O.o

Edit: Looks down holy Onderwall O.o

[Azurius]

Typical. It’s saying that they did not kill just plain Germans (with a few exceptions). The communists did.

Pretty sure the jews were Germans, dude.

Exactly, german jews basically. You will find that most of them even had german or at least "germanized" first and last names, this goes back to a Weimarian reform, where more how´d you say... Call them "patriotic leftists" or maybe "more right wing leftists", call them what you want. Anyway, workers parties noticed that immigrant workers, despite an pinacle equality treatment compared to other nations, still isolated themselves socialy and at workplace. A simple experiment to swap their native first names to a "germanized" version of it, seemed to solve that problem effectively with good results. An for example slavic name like "bartosz" would now be "bartek", "jazna" would be "janina" or "jana" or any other german synonym name(the immigrant could basicaly choose from an appropiated list). The result of that simple change of first names was that they integrated extremely well, and even today you will find very well integrated "german" families but suddenly see a slavic sounding last name and wonder yourself why that is. Well, there´s your answer to that lol. If I am not mistaken it was also the DAP itself that actualy proposed that reform and got it through by majority approval. Of course this law was revoked after the war once west germany or today germany was formed.

You can still see remnants of that old law though as said. I really wonder why this was revoked... Yeah I know our constitution etc, equality, human rights... Nonetheless it was minimal invasive but hell of effective. Then again I guess that opens the gates to other shit... First it´s semi-dictating names and then you want to expand it to other(also ineffecient) measures... Meh. Then again Germany is doing exactly that right now(since by 2017 we are expecting immigrants to pass a german language and also culture test and score a certain grade, a grade you would not expect from any native german which is kinda sad when you think about it), so why not bring back that minimal invasive, old and effective law?

Anyway to the point... Those jews were indeed often just as or sometimes even more patriotic then any so called "pure blooded" german. Something that some right wingers in those times noticed, and many of those who noticed turned their back on Hitler and later the NSDAP exactly because of that(their goal was to successfully integrate immigrants and free Germany from the oppression of the Versailes treaty, whilst Hitler wanted outright purification, aka genocide, war too, whilst quite a lot of right wingers sought a diplomatic path, or at least more diplomatic then Hitler and his NSDAP for sure).

[Azurius]

And what is the term "Nazi" a shortened version of, Nazi?

English is short for 'Anglo-Saxon', but English people stereotypically drink tea and watch Doctor Who while living in town homes and mansions, while Anglo-Saxons stereotypically run around with axes, herd sheep, and live in wooden great halls.

Nazism is short for 'National Socialism', but that doesn't make it the same thing.

Correct, but since I know this trick from german neonazis in the past(seemed they dropped that ridicilous one at least, but just to make sure and for reference):

Nazi is a slang counterpart for the term "Sozi"(socialist), which itself is a short slangword for a socialist. For instance: "Na du oller Sozi?"(what´s up yer old sozi?) Since nazism emerged in the Weimarian Republic the counter to the(meant as demeaning) word "Sozi" was "Nazi" which originaly was meant in the same demeaningfull way. Today it´s just the "normal" term to refer to nationalsocialists.

[Reploid Productions]

Could we take the discussion of Germany under Hitler over to NSG and out of the Security Council, please? The proposal at vote concerns the Nationstates region "Nazi Europa", not WW2 era Germany.