No Voice For Nazis

[Picairn]

"Violence is never the answer! All conflict can be resolved through peaceful civil discourse and diplomacy!"

History: "Uh..."

When some people have consistently refused to hear reason, it is every person's job to knock some sense into them, by tanks, aircrafts and artilleries if necessary.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

"Violence is never the answer! All conflict can be resolved through peaceful civil discourse and diplomacy!"

History: "Uh..."

When some people have consistently refused to hear reason, it is every person's job to knock some sense into them, by tanks, aircrafts and artilleries if necessary.

No, you don't understand. Violence was invented by Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler in 1933 when they used it to beat up everybody they didn't like and shortly after invented warfare. If you engage in or support any kind of violence you're literally a Fascist Nazi and want a totalitarian dictatorship and support imperialism and genocide, see?

/s

[Imperium of Dragonia]

As painful as it might be, this is a pill that only sensible people will swallow: Hate speech is (unfortunately) technically free speech. Wanting to suppress hate speech because of what it might do is suppressing free speech because of what it technically allows. So yes, silencing the nazis does put you at the same level as the nazis, much like silencing the communists (as much as I abhor them) puts you at the same level as the communists. So you can take your willful ignorance to justify furthering the suppression of free speech and kick it to the curb. We have no need for narrow-minded authoritarians.

Read my above post and take the L, mate.

Again, your ignorance to reality is showing. Banning one form of speech threatens the rest of free speech. Only an authoritarian (i.e. a nazi) would advocate for the suppression of speech for petty reasons as "my feelings were hurt slighty" and "I don't like what he is saying". Few sensible people want censorship, and those that do only want an excuse to eventually curb criticism itself, which is what's been happening when criticizing Biden and BLM.

Actually, now that I think about it, what is your definition of hate speech? I say "your" because apparently there is no concrete definition and dictionaries that show what it means changes the meaning by the season, so the definition of hate speech seems to be subjective at this point, much like what the definition of "fascist" is in 2020. At this point, "hate speech" seems to be nothing more than an increasingly vague buzzword used to justify ruining the lives of innocent people who "stepped out of place".

And yes, I think one does have the right to shout "fire!" in a crowded theater, much like what many fallacies like to push. I also think one should be held responsible for causing such unnecessary panic. When someone says something abhorrent, they should be allowed to say it. If they are openly trying to carry out that abhorrent statement they made, they should be dealt with. A nazi can say "fuck the Jews, the faggots, and the blacks" all they want, it only should become a problem when they actively seek those people out and say it. Or worse, carry out what they are saying and harm the people they don't like.

[Labbos]

Just like the Nazis. But communists do rise to power periodically, and there are a several countries today run by communist parties.

Communists haven't won any elections in any Western countries since 1991. The last five remaining countries ruled by communist parties have all abandoned the doctrine of spreading communism and either 1) closed off to the world (North Korea), 2) embrace economic reforms (China, Vietnam and Laos), or 3) slowly opening up (Cuba). None of them have neither the interest nor capital to fund communist movements. It's sufficient to say the communist movement effectively ended with the death of the Soviet Union.

Antifa and other socialist parties in the US are a joke compared to actual communist movements in the past.

Nazis have never won a national election anywhere. There hasn't been a Nazi country for 75 years. Are there any Nazi parties anywhere that stand a chance of winning an election anywhere any time soon?

Its original creator, Fascism, also rose to power in Italy, Japan and other Eastern European countries west of the Soviet Union in WW2. After the migrant crisis, it was reborn and revitalized, with considerable influence in Europe and the US. Bolsonaro, Orban, Xi Jinping, Trump, etc. have all professed some fascist beliefs. Fascist and extreme right-wing groups are also more emboldened than ever, with 329 victims fallen to their attacks for the last 25 years. https://www.businessinsider.com/right-w ... one-2020-7

I'm no fan of fascism or extreme right-wing groups, but this is a thread about banning pro-Nazism speech. Also, if we're to ban all such groups because of 329 victims, would you be happy to see all mosques closed down for the same reason? Because that's the slippery slope once you start banning free speech.

I despise both ideologies, but I see communism as the bigger threat at the moment.

Why? Fascist and far right groups have killed more.

Have they? I'm curious, what do you think that communism's death count is? If you're looking for present day genocide and concentration camps, you're best off looking for a certain country run by a communist party. And once more, this is not a discussion about fascism or the far-right in general.

And any attempt to silence Nazis would be seized upon by communists to silence anybody right of centre, then anybody right of socialism, then anybody right of communism.

I didn't realize Germany was a bastion of communism.[/quote]

Germany hasn't banned pro-Nazi speech.

In your post, you've gone from just banning pro-Nazi speech, to including fascists and extreme right-wing groups, and even tried to include the POTUS in that group. Do you see that creep already happening?

[Genivaria]

The world according to people who say opposing nazis makes you a fascist: https://youtu.be/O_q12qYrCN0

"Get him!" "REEE REEE REEE"
Fucking lol.

[Saiwania]

Currently the governments which still exist that are the most Nazi like are either China or North Korea. Both countries aren't half bad. Philosophically it isn't my cup of tea, but they do have the prerequisite nationalism and devotion to building up strong militaries, and have free reign to micromanage their citizenry much as a Fascist would like to.

I can't argue with the results which is that the Chinese system has prevailed against liberal democracies in terms of might and progress.

[Rusozak]

Currently the governments which still exist that are the most Nazi like are either China or North Korea. Both countries aren't half bad. Philosophically it isn't my cup of tea, but they do have the prerequisite nationalism and devotion to building up strong militaries, and have free reign to micromanage their citizenry much as a Fascist would like to.

I can't argue with the results which is that the Chinese system has prevailed against liberal democracies in terms of might and progress.

Why do you keep trying to make Nazism work? They tried it, millions of people died, they lost, and Hitler's inner circle became the original suicide squad. The end.

[Imperium of Dragonia]

Currently the governments which still exist that are the most Nazi like are either China or North Korea. Both countries aren't half bad. Philosophically it isn't my cup of tea, but they do have the prerequisite nationalism and devotion to building up strong militaries, and have free reign to micromanage their citizenry much as a Fascist would like to.

I can't argue with the results which is that the Chinese system has prevailed against liberal democracies in terms of might and progress.

Why do you keep trying to make Nazism work? They tried it, millions of people died, they lost, and Hitler's inner circle became the original suicide squad. The end.

I will defend free speech to the bitter end. However, that doesn't mean that people can't be criticized if what they're saying is bullshit. The very notion of Nazism somehow working, regardless of how unrealistic that is, is borderline insanity. It's just as much of a failed system as communism, only difference is that people insist that the latter has never been tried despite history saying otherwise.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Currently the governments which still exist that are the most Nazi like are either China or North Korea. Both countries aren't half bad. Philosophically it isn't my cup of tea, but they do have the prerequisite nationalism and devotion to building up strong militaries, and have free reign to micromanage their citizenry much as a Fascist would like to.

I can't argue with the results which is that the Chinese system has prevailed against liberal democracies in terms of might and progress.

Why do you keep trying to make Nazism work? They tried it, millions of people died, they lost, and Hitler's inner circle became the original suicide squad. The end.

Why anyone would keep trying to make a system work that led to the deadliest and most destructive conflict in human history and genocided millions in a planned, calculated and industrialized fashion is the 75 million dollar question that we'll probably never get an answer to, and if we do it'll be some wishy washy "be it'll work this time with less death and destruction, pinky promise!" nonsense.

[Picairn]

Again, your ignorance to reality is showing.

----> The go-to statement of any condescending person who doesn't know what they're talking about.

Banning one form of speech threatens the rest of free speech.

How? Germany hasn't lost its free speech. Or is this an attempt at the Slippery Slope?

Only an authoritarian (i.e. a nazi) would advocate for the suppression of speech for petty reasons as "my feelings were hurt slighty" and "I don't like what he is saying".

No one is making reasons like that in this thread. Stop imagining and pulling quotes out of thin air. And consult a history book on how Fascists got to power through manipulation and intimidation in the past.

Few sensible people want censorship, and those that do only want an excuse to eventually curb criticism itself, which is what's been happening when criticizing Biden and BLM.

Ah yes, another Slippery Slope and fearmongering. Do you know you can still criticize Biden and the BLM? Just don't expect to be taken seriously if you pull out conspiracy theories or disingenuous claims.

Actually, now that I think about it, what is your definition of hate speech? I say "your" because apparently there is no concrete definition and dictionaries that show what it means changes the meaning by the season, so the definition of hate speech seems to be subjective at this point, much like what the definition of "fascist" is in 2020. At this point, "hate speech" seems to be nothing more than an increasingly vague buzzword used to justify ruining the lives of innocent people who "stepped out of place".

Innocent people don't wear Nazi armbands and wave Nazi flags in rallies.

And yes, I think one does have the right to shout "fire!" in a crowded theater, much like what many fallacies like to push. I also think one should be held responsible for causing such unnecessary panic. When someone says something abhorrent, they should be allowed to say it. If they are openly trying to carry out that abhorrent statement they made, they should be dealt with. A nazi can say "fuck the Jews, the faggots, and the blacks" all they want, it only should become a problem when they actively seek those people out and say it. Or worse, carry out what they are saying and harm the people they don't like.

That certainly has worked well in 1933, isn't it?

---

Nazis have never won a national election anywhere. There hasn't been a Nazi country for 75 years. Are there any Nazi parties anywhere that stand a chance of winning an election anywhere any time soon?

Nazism and Fascism seem to have infiltrated the mainstream political right, however.

I'm no fan of fascism or extreme right-wing groups, but this is a thread about banning pro-Nazism speech. Also, if we're to ban all such groups because of 329 victims, would you be happy to see all mosques closed down for the same reason? Because that's the slippery slope once you start banning free speech.

Why closing mosques? Aren't we already taking huge steps in curbing Islamic terrorism worldwide a.k.a the War on Terror?

Have they? I'm curious, what do you think that communism's death count is?

Re-read my above post on "Why don't you ban communists as well?". Unlike Fascists, communists aren't even an organized, monolithic bloc.

If you're looking for present day genocide and concentration camps, you're best off looking for a certain country run by a communist party.

If China is communist then North Korea is democratic and the Nazis were socialist because they had "Democratic" and "Socialist" in their name.

And once more, this is not a discussion about fascism or the far-right in general.

Pretty sure Nazism was born from Fascism.

Germany hasn't banned pro-Nazi speech.

They already banned Nazi flags, symbols and the "Sieg Heil" salutes. And they still haven't fallen to communism.

In your post, you've gone from just banning pro-Nazi speech, to including fascists and extreme right-wing groups, and even tried to include the POTUS in that group. Do you see that creep already happening?

Nazism is a form of fascism, unless you've been living under a rock since 1945. What is fascism? An extremist right wing ideology. And I didn't say Trump was out-right a Nazi, I said that Trump and other dictators possessed some fascist beliefs, in the context of how Fascism and Nazism infiltrated and influenced the mainstream right.

You need to work better on cheap gotchas.

[Saiwania]

Why anyone would keep trying to make a system work that led to the deadliest and most destructive conflict in human history and genocided millions in a planned, calculated and industrialized fashion is the 75 million dollar question that we'll probably never get an answer to, and if we do it'll be some wishy washy "be it'll work this time with less death and destruction, pinky promise!" nonsense.

A war which was half the fault of some of the nations of the Allied Powers such as France and the UK. Hitler only wanted a private war with Poland in the east and perhaps with the Soviet Union later. The UK was still hypocritical and did nothing against Soviet expansionism when Nazi Germany was the best buffer state against Bolshevism to be had back then.

[UniversalCommons]

Because if you let people speak you can identify them and arrest them for tax evasion and other things. It also leaves them open to attack by anti nazi groups. They are visible. It is much harder to attack and find the people like the KKK who wear hoods.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Why anyone would keep trying to make a system work that led to the deadliest and most destructive conflict in human history and genocided millions in a planned, calculated and industrialized fashion is the 75 million dollar question that we'll probably never get an answer to, and if we do it'll be some wishy washy "be it'll work this time with less death and destruction, pinky promise!" nonsense.

A war which was half the fault of some of the nations of the Allied Powers such as France and the UK. Hitler only wanted a private war with Poland in the east and perhaps with the Soviet Union later. The UK was still hypocritical and did nothing against Soviet expansionism when Nazi Germany was the best buffer state against Bolshevism to be had back then.

Nazism was as good a buffer against communism as having your neck broken is against neck pain.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Why anyone would keep trying to make a system work that led to the deadliest and most destructive conflict in human history and genocided millions in a planned, calculated and industrialized fashion is the 75 million dollar question that we'll probably never get an answer to, and if we do it'll be some wishy washy "be it'll work this time with less death and destruction, pinky promise!" nonsense.

A war which was half the fault of some of the nations of the Allied Powers such as France and the UK. Hitler only wanted a private war with Poland in the east and perhaps with the Soviet Union later. The UK was still hypocritical and did nothing against Soviet expansionism when Nazi Germany was the best buffer state against Bolshevism to be had back then.

No, that's not how that works, Nazi Germany and Hitler were solely at fault for the war, there's no such thing as a "private war". This also doesn't justify the millions genocided either.

[Albrenia]

Why anyone would keep trying to make a system work that led to the deadliest and most destructive conflict in human history and genocided millions in a planned, calculated and industrialized fashion is the 75 million dollar question that we'll probably never get an answer to, and if we do it'll be some wishy washy "be it'll work this time with less death and destruction, pinky promise!" nonsense.

A war which was half the fault of some of the nations of the Allied Powers such as France and the UK. Hitler only wanted a private war with Poland in the east and perhaps with the Soviet Union later. The UK was still hypocritical and did nothing against Soviet expansionism when Nazi Germany was the best buffer state against Bolshevism to be had back then.

Dude stop defending Hitler. He's literally Hitler.

[Kowani]

Why anyone would keep trying to make a system work that led to the deadliest and most destructive conflict in human history and genocided millions in a planned, calculated and industrialized fashion is the 75 million dollar question that we'll probably never get an answer to, and if we do it'll be some wishy washy "be it'll work this time with less death and destruction, pinky promise!" nonsense.

A war which was half the fault of some of the nations of the Allied Powers such as France and the UK. Hitler only wanted a private war with Poland in the east and perhaps with the Soviet Union later. The UK was still hypocritical and did nothing against Soviet expansionism when Nazi Germany was the best buffer state against Bolshevism to be had back then.

Hitler: Invades Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland
Sai: It's the Allies' fault, he only wanted a private war. Never mind the genocide and eugenics.

[Greater Cosmicium]

Hitler only wanted a private war with Poland in the east and perhaps with the Soviet Union later.

Congratulations, you've just won this for your efforts to deny the absolute, irrefutable fact that Hitler's (and his buddies') ambitions went way beyond "a private war". Y'know, things like... what happened during WWII, like, something along the lines of Holocaust as well.

[Picairn]

Saiwania: Hitler only wanted a private war with Poland and the Soviet Union.

Denmark, France, Norway, Yugoslavia, Britain, Belgium, the Netherlands, Czechslovakia, Austria: Bruh.

[Labbos]

Any attempt to silence Nazis would be seized upon by communists to silence anybody right of centre.

Nazism and Fascism seem to have infiltrated the mainstream political right.

[Baltenstein]

Why anyone would keep trying to make a system work that led to the deadliest and most destructive conflict in human history and genocided millions in a planned, calculated and industrialized fashion is the 75 million dollar question that we'll probably never get an answer to, and if we do it'll be some wishy washy "be it'll work this time with less death and destruction, pinky promise!" nonsense.

A war which was half the fault of some of the nations of the Allied Powers such as France and the UK. Hitler only wanted a private war with Poland in the east and perhaps with the Soviet Union later. The UK was still hypocritical and did nothing against Soviet expansionism when Nazi Germany was the best buffer state against Bolshevism to be had back then.

I know, right? Just what is the world coming to when a man can't even have his own little war of genocidal expansion in private? I mean, for God's sake!

*Hitler lets himself sink on the sofa in frustrated Al Bundy fashion*

[Kowani]

Any attempt to silence Nazis would be seized upon by communists to silence anybody right of centre.

Nazism and Fascism seem to have infiltrated the mainstream political right.

You can’t get mad at someone for being right because it’s inconvenient.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

You can’t get mad at someone for being right because it’s inconvenient.

Remember when Laura Ingraham flashed a Nazi salute and nobody batted an eyelash?

[Ifreann]

You can’t get mad at someone for being right because it’s inconvenient.

Remember when Laura Ingraham flashed a Nazi salute and nobody batted an eyelash?

No, see, it's okay because she "smoothly" turned it into a wave. Totally innocent.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Remember when Laura Ingraham flashed a Nazi salute and nobody batted an eyelash?

No, see, it's okay because she "smoothly" turned it into a wave. Totally innocent.

Never mind her whole family are outed Nazis...

[Kowani]

You can’t get mad at someone for being right because it’s inconvenient.

Remember when Laura Ingraham flashed a Nazi salute and nobody batted an eyelash?

Wait she what-