Coalition Against the Ideology of Nazism

[LollerLand]

.
In response, many have accused CAIN of being a puppet, used by the Far-Left, or "Stalin-ists".

Already proved that this is not true.

claim that "most" of this website is filled with the Far-Left, Communists.

I wouldn't say that. Majority of NS is moderates actually..

Just a suggestion, for you: start the Alliance Berating Evil Leftists. I'll be honest, due to a couple regions loudness, this does seem a bit lefty. I'm pretty sure it's independent, though.

I will admit that communists are not exactly good either though, but they usually aren't the genocidal ones. Except Stalin and Pol Pot, it was standard fascist or stupid leader of violently suppressing dissent and not being good at planning. Bad, but lesser than the Holocaust (again excluding Stalin's holodromor and the Khmer Rouge's everything.) Sorry for potentially threadjacking.

Yes, I agree the leaders of a few signatories are a bit more vocal, especially in this thread, than the others. But the thing is each decision taken by CAIN is first voted on by the signatories that includes regions with a wide variety of ideologies and alignments. And looking at how few far left regions are there in CAIN, it is absurd to call CAIN a puppet of the leftist regions.

[Guy]

as someone who has been personally affected by Nazism

I didn't realize that you're more than 70 years old.

jfc

[Brunhizzle]

Not really. You don't need a Ph.D. in mathematics to see, for example, that Brunhizzle undercounted communist regions. Also, pure tallying is insufficient to refute the claim that CAIN is being controlled by NationStates' far left (the man behind the curtain).

Evidently you don't need a Ph.D. in mathematics to be incapable of common sense, either.

TCB's government structure is that of a Republic and they have been an Independent-Imperialist leaning region for two years. They are not, in any way, a communist region.

[Sandaoguo]

Where can a public archive of CAIN's debate and voting threads be found?

[Brunhizzle]

Where can a public archive of CAIN's debate and voting threads be found?

Voting records will be posted with future announcements but the Coalition doesn't currently release internal debates and drafting for public consumption.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Is there a way for officials in a signatory region to share those discussions with their own region?

[LollerLand]

Is there a way for officials in a signatory region to share those discussions with their own region?

Yes. Each representative is responsible for informing the citizens of their region regarding CAIN's actions.

[Brunhizzle]

Is there a way for officials in a signatory region to share those discussions with their own region?

I'll discuss making the forum side debate and drafting stages public with the signatories.

[Lord Ravenclaw]

as someone who has been personally affected by Nazism

I didn't realize that you're more than 70 years old.

For shame!

Reprehensible comments that detract the struggles of Brunhilde's family and upbringing following that unspeakable event. You do yourself no credit with that line of attack and a great disservice to those who saw their families destroyed, torn apart or brutally annihilated during the Holocaust.

There is a line in the sand for acceptable behaviour, and I feel your comment is starting to edge across it. It is not okay to diminish Brunhilde's personal connection with that event.

You may feel that her response and indeed CAIN is an extreme response to the issue of Nazism but diminishing her values and personal beliefs is not the way to address that.

[Zaolat]

Personally I found the most disrespectful thing in this thread so far was the way USSD members handled themselves.

I also think, despite claims to the contrary, that it's really a bit too convenient to say that USSD's members deployed independently. That's the kind of ridiculous excuse I'd use if I wanted everyone to know they actually weren't acting independently at all.

And if they were being truthful, then that said "excuse" would be exactly what they were doing and that "excuse" would be an equally valid way to answer.

I think the problem here is that you want to see them get on their knees and kowtow while apologizing over and over.

[Phydios]

I didn't realize that you're more than 70 years old.

For shame!

Reprehensible comments that detract the struggles of Brunhilde's family and upbringing following that unspeakable event. You do yourself no credit with that line of attack and a great disservice to those who saw their families destroyed, torn apart or brutally annihilated during the Holocaust.

There is a line in the sand for acceptable behaviour, and I feel your comment is starting to edge across it. It is not okay to diminish Brunhilde's personal connection with that event.

You may feel that her response and indeed CAIN is an extreme response to the issue of Nazism but diminishing her values and personal beliefs is not the way to address that.

Unless Brunhilde is over 70 years old, they haven't been personally affected by Nazism. They can be affected by neo-Nazism, but that is different from being personally affected by the Third Reich. And in any case, I doubt we have a lot of people who have been personally affected by neo-Nazis.

[Stellonia]

I didn't realize that you're more than 70 years old.

For shame!

Reprehensible comments that detract the struggles of Brunhilde's family and upbringing following that unspeakable event. You do yourself no credit with that line of attack and a great disservice to those who saw their families destroyed, torn apart or brutally annihilated during the Holocaust.

There is a line in the sand for acceptable behaviour, and I feel your comment is starting to edge across it. It is not okay to diminish Brunhilde's personal connection with that event.

You may feel that her response and indeed CAIN is an extreme response to the issue of Nazism but diminishing her values and personal beliefs is not the way to address that.

In all honesty, that is an overreaction on your part. No offense to Brunhizzle, but it is a bit odd for someone to say that they have been affected by Nazism unless they were alive in the 1940's. I say this without seeking to deny or downplay the fact that Nazism adversely affected millions of people. I hope that clarifies things.

[Ikania]

For shame!

Reprehensible comments that detract the struggles of Brunhilde's family and upbringing following that unspeakable event. You do yourself no credit with that line of attack and a great disservice to those who saw their families destroyed, torn apart or brutally annihilated during the Holocaust.

There is a line in the sand for acceptable behaviour, and I feel your comment is starting to edge across it. It is not okay to diminish Brunhilde's personal connection with that event.

You may feel that her response and indeed CAIN is an extreme response to the issue of Nazism but diminishing her values and personal beliefs is not the way to address that.

Unless Brunhilde is over 70 years old, they haven't been personally affected by Nazism. They can be affected by neo-Nazism, but that is different from being personally affected by the Third Reich. And in any case, I doubt we have a lot of people who have been personally affected by neo-Nazis.

Fun fact, Nazism doesn't stop affecting the world because Nazi superpowers aren't empowered anymore. The effects are direct, personal and lasting. She, and many of us, weren't affected during the Reich, but by it nonetheless.

[Guy]

For shame!

Reprehensible comments that detract the struggles of Brunhilde's family and upbringing following that unspeakable event. You do yourself no credit with that line of attack and a great disservice to those who saw their families destroyed, torn apart or brutally annihilated during the Holocaust.

There is a line in the sand for acceptable behaviour, and I feel your comment is starting to edge across it. It is not okay to diminish Brunhilde's personal connection with that event.

You may feel that her response and indeed CAIN is an extreme response to the issue of Nazism but diminishing her values and personal beliefs is not the way to address that.

In all honesty, that is an overreaction on your part. No offense to Brunhizzle, but it is a bit odd for someone to say that they have been affected by Nazism unless they were alive in the 1940's. I say this without seeking to deny or downplay the fact that Nazism adversely affected millions of people. I hope that clarifies things.

... No, no it's not. If you don't understand how a genocide can have ongoing impact on a people 70 years after it had occurred, I suggest asking around. And yes, that impact is deeply personal.

Also, the distinction some have attempted to draw between being impacted by neo-Nazism and being impacted by Nazism is rather stupid, even if we don't categorise neo-Nazism as a species of Nazism. There would be no neo-Nazism without Nazism.

I'm Jewish, and as I've made clear, I think CAIN is a bloody stupid idea. Unless your issues with CAIN are predicated on the fact that RL Nazism does not have an ongoing affect on people (in which case you should just leave this website permanently), don't make this point again, because it's wrong, diminishes (a) people's experience(s), and rather stupid.

[The Gipper]

Unless Brunhilde is over 70 years old, they haven't been personally affected by Nazism. They can be affected by neo-Nazism, but that is different from being personally affected by the Third Reich. And in any case, I doubt we have a lot of people who have been personally affected by neo-Nazis.

Fun fact, Nazism doesn't stop affecting the world because Nazi superpowers aren't empowered anymore. The effects are direct, personal and lasting. She, and many of us, weren't affected during the Reich, but by it nonetheless.

That's an easier argument to make when you aren't working with folks that throw up the hammer and sickle and flirt with equally dangerous ideologies. Not everyone that lost grandparents or great grandparents did so to Nazis. But somehow, unlike NS Nazis, NS communists can be "not like those communists." That defense either works or it doesn't, and IMO it doesn't.

[LollerLand]

That's an easier argument to make when you aren't working with folks that throw up the hammer and sickle and flirt with equally dangerous ideologies. Not everyone that lost grandparents or great grandparents did so to Nazis. But somehow, unlike NS Nazis, NS communists can be "not like those communists." That defense either works or it doesn't, and IMO it doesn't.

Communism itself doesn't promote hatred or bigotry, The thing is if a communist says "the death of millions under communist governments is okay", that is not okay. But being a communist doesn't have to mean that they were okay with death of the people but only that they support the ideas of communism, which doesn't promote any form of hatred. That is not the case with Nazism since the ideology itself promote racism and hatred. By supporting Nazism, you are also promoting the racist ideals associated with it.
Millions of people has also died under democratic governments due to wars etc, bu that doesn't make democracy itself evil.

[Drittes Deutsches Reich]

Communism itself doesn't promote hatred or bigotry, [..] they support the ideas of communism, which doesn't promote any form of hatred.

The similarities between neo-Nazism and Communism are much more than you let yourself believe. Fundamentally, they preach the exact same thing - this becomes obvious once you take a look at the essence of their rhetoric:

Communism: The innocent, hard-working proletariat is being repressed by the bourgeoisie - by the (forceful, violent, "hateful") removal of the latter (class war), a prosperous society for the former can be established.

Neo-Nazism: The innocent, hard-working natives/"whites" are being repressed by the immigrants/"blacks" - by the (forceful, violent, "hateful") removal of the latter (race war), a prosperous society for the former can be established.

Stating that an ideology whose main goal is to start a class war (innocents die) is less "hateful" than a (pseudo-)ideology whose main goal is to start a race war (innocents die) is an intellectual fallacy and makes no sense. And it is not accidental, or unintentional, that most every instance of Communism on the planet has led to millions dying - millions dying is a fundamental part of the ideology.

By supporting Nazism, you are also promoting the racist ideals associated with it.

"Racist ideals" is an oxymoron.

Millions of people has also died under democratic governments due to wars etc, bu that doesn't make democracy itself evil.

That's right. An ideology's/person's death toll means nothing in determining whether or not it is evil - as the number of people it managed to kill off depends on circumstances. Not to mention the fact that, even if you could objectively determine "evilness" by comparing (something as arbitrary as) two numbers (death count of people, in this case), you'd need to ensure that the two numbers were produced under the exact same circumstances (so as to be sure that not circumstances, but "evilness" accounts for the difference in the two numbers you want to compare...), which is never the case with these things.

"Evil" is a personal quality and exists independent of any circumstances, therefore you can't use circumstantial evidence to prove or disprove it in someone/something.

That said, democracy is evil for reasons other than the amount of people such governments have killed.

[LollerLand]

That's right. An ideology's/person's death toll means nothing in determining whether or not it is evil - as the number of people it managed to kill off depends on circumstances. Not to mention the fact that, even if you could objectively determine "evilness" by comparing (something as arbitrary as) two numbers (death count of people, in this case), you'd need to ensure that the two numbers were produced under the exact same circumstances (so as to be sure that not circumstances, but "evilness" accounts for the difference in the two numbers you want to compare...), which is never the case with these things.

"Evil" is a personal quality and exists independent of any circumstances, therefore you can't use circumstantial evidence to prove or disprove it in someone/something.

That said, democracy is evil for reasons other than the amount of people such governments have killed.

If an ideology calls for the 'purification' of society by killing millions, it is evil. Nazism is evil.

[Drittes Deutsches Reich]

That's right. An ideology's/person's death toll means nothing in determining whether or not it is evil - as the number of people it managed to kill off depends on circumstances. Not to mention the fact that, even if you could objectively determine "evilness" by comparing (something as arbitrary as) two numbers (death count of people, in this case), you'd need to ensure that the two numbers were produced under the exact same circumstances (so as to be sure that not circumstances, but "evilness" accounts for the difference in the two numbers you want to compare...), which is never the case with these things.

"Evil" is a personal quality and exists independent of any circumstances, therefore you can't use circumstantial evidence to prove or disprove it in someone/something.

That said, democracy is evil for reasons other than the amount of people such governments have killed.

If an ideology calls for the 'purification' of society by killing millions, it is evil. Nazism is evil.

Nowhere have I said that it is not. Read my post again, more carefully. I merely say that it is evil not because it has killed people, but rather because it wants to kill people - over something as arbitrary as their ethnicity. By that same token, so is Communism (wanting to kill people over something as arbitrary as their income level). Note how I do not use circumstantial evidence to back my claims.

[Ikania]

Perhaps we should get back on track about CAIN instead of derailing the thread with pointless debates about communism.

The coalition is not communist. Period.

[Stellonia]

In all honesty, that is an overreaction on your part. No offense to Brunhizzle, but it is a bit odd for someone to say that they have been affected by Nazism unless they were alive in the 1940's. I say this without seeking to deny or downplay the fact that Nazism adversely affected millions of people. I hope that clarifies things.

... No, no it's not. If you don't understand how a genocide can have ongoing impact on a people 70 years after it had occurred, I suggest asking around. And yes, that impact is deeply personal.

Also, the distinction some have attempted to draw between being impacted by neo-Nazism and being impacted by Nazism is rather stupid, even if we don't categorise neo-Nazism as a species of Nazism. There would be no neo-Nazism without Nazism.

I'm Jewish, and as I've made clear, I think CAIN is a bloody stupid idea. Unless your issues with CAIN are predicated on the fact that RL Nazism does not have an ongoing affect on people (in which case you should just leave this website permanently), don't make this point again, because it's wrong, diminishes (a) people's experience(s), and rather stupid.

I think I see where this is going. When Brunhizzle said she was affected "personally," we mistakenly assumed that she meant "personal" in the sense that she actually witnessed the Holocaust, without taking into account the other meanings of the word "personal." We did not seek to deny the damaging effects of Nazism, but this confusion is our fault nonetheless.

[Jumalariik]

CAIN makes me more inclined to have diplomatic relations with regions of all political ideologies from the far right to the far left. Freedom of conscience should be a great goal, not its eradication.

[Christian Democrats]

I didn't realize that you're more than 70 years old.

For shame!

Reprehensible comments that detract the struggles of Brunhilde's family and upbringing following that unspeakable event. You do yourself no credit with that line of attack and a great disservice to those who saw their families destroyed, torn apart or brutally annihilated during the Holocaust.

I don't think Brunhizzle saw her family destroyed, torn apart, or brutally annihilated. Again, she's said that she's dedicated to stamping out Nazism because she has "ancestors" (I assume grandparents) who lost people in the Holocaust or were otherwise victimized by Nazism.

There is a line in the sand for acceptable behaviour, and I feel your comment is starting to edge across it. It is not okay to diminish Brunhilde's personal connection with that event.

She has a biological and cultural connection with the event. She hasn't said that she has a personal connection; and, even if she did have a personal connection (she was there; people whom she knew were killed), I don't think that would place her determinations "you're a Nazi" and "you're not a Nazi" above question.

You may feel that her response and indeed CAIN is an extreme response to the issue of Nazism but diminishing her values and personal beliefs is not the way to address that.

I'm not diminishing her values or beliefs -- values and beliefs that I share. I'm questioning her methods. She's declaring certain people "Nazis." Then, she's using her ethnicity and emotional appeals (I was personally affected) as justifications for her declarations.* My response: Show me more. We share a set of foundational beliefs. Make an argument based on reason that I'll find persuasive.

* And this isn't speculation. She's called her own moral crusade a "passion."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/passion

Fun fact, Nazism doesn't stop affecting the world because Nazi superpowers aren't empowered anymore. The effects are direct, personal and lasting. She, and many of us, weren't affected during the Reich, but by it nonetheless.

I know people who have been sexually assaulted, but I have never been sexually assaulted myself. I'm affected by sexual assault, but I'm not personally affected. My suffering isn't comparable to the suffering of a victim of sexual assault. If I were to use my suffering to declare other people "rapists," people would be right to question my determinations.

Also, the distinction some have attempted to draw between being impacted by neo-Nazism and being impacted by Nazism is rather stupid, even if we don't categorise neo-Nazism as a species of Nazism. There would be no neo-Nazism without Nazism.

Have you ever talked with a neo-Nazi or somebody who knows a neo-Nazi?

Neo-Nazis are not normally genocidal. They're losers who dress up in military uniforms on the weekends and who keep pictures of Hitler on their walls. They have no true sense of purpose in their lives, and they think they've found meaning in the cause of their "race." Consequently, they're racists; and a significant portion of them commit vandalism, battery, and other crimes. They're bad people, and they ought to be taken seriously. That said, they're not Nazis. They're not shipping people to the gas chambers. Like slavery and segregation, Nazism and neo-Nazism are related; but they're not identical. Suffering under one is not the same as suffering under the other.

I think most neo-Nazis are salvageable. A coalition to reach out to them would be much more admirable than a coalition to suppress them. If anything, CAIN is ingraining their nihilistic views; it's not getting rid of them.

(Again, to clarify, I don't dispute that people can be deeply affected by events that they did not personally experience.)

Communism itself doesn't promote hatred or bigotry

Nazism promotes race hate. "I hate you because you're not Nordic."

Communism promotes class hate. "I hate you because you're from a certain social/economic group."

It is highly questionable that CAIN is associating with one group of "haters" in order to "fight" another. Fighting hate with hate is a questionable strategy.

[Caelapes]

I think most neo-Nazis are salvageable. A coalition to reach out to them would be much more admirable than a coalition to suppress them. If anything, CAIN is ingraining their nihilistic views; it's not getting rid of them.

I'm pretty sure actual Nazis aren't going to have their minds changed on an internet browser game.

Communism promotes class hate. "I hate you because you're from a certain social/economic group."

No, it doesn't. You don't know what you're talking about. Go read the Manifesto and tell me where it promotes hate of any group of people.

If we could win a world revolution without spilling a drop of blood, communists would jump at the chance.

[Christian Democrats]

I think most neo-Nazis are salvageable. A coalition to reach out to them would be much more admirable than a coalition to suppress them. If anything, CAIN is ingraining their nihilistic views; it's not getting rid of them.

I'm pretty sure actual Nazis aren't going to have their minds changed on an internet browser game.

Many people become neo-Nazis, jihadists, etc. through internet recruitment. Surely, the internet can change such a person back.

Communism promotes class hate. "I hate you because you're from a certain social/economic group."

No, it doesn't. You don't know what you're talking about. Go read the Manifesto and tell me where it promotes hate of any group of people.

I've read it three or four times; I'd rather not read it again.

If we could win a world revolution without spilling a drop of blood, communists would jump at the chance.

Could. Your use of the subjunctive is notable.

That's the thing. Communists have never been convinced that they can "win a world revolution without spilling a drop of blood." Thus, spilling blood is a feature of the ideology. It's not a defect.