No Voice For Nazis

[Borderlands of Rojava]

That time America avoided thousands of deaths because suddenly Hitler decided that facts and logic had spoken and his ideas had to change.

Ben Shapiro DESTROYS Hitler in debate!

Hitler: "Right. I'm sending you to a deathcamp."

Ben Shapiro: "What if, for the sake of argument, I say that Nazism isn't a good idea. Your budget will be depleted from endless war, the resources in much of Eastern Europe will not balance the cost of war and your deficit will increase. Eventually you'll rack up massive amounts of debt that will cripple your economy, potentially leading to your overthrow."

Hitler: "You know what? You're right, let's just stop the holocaust and end the war and become a liberal democracy."

[Kexholm Karelia]

If we ban Nazis, we should also ban communists

I see no fundamental difference between the holocaust and what is happening to the Uyghur people of East Turkestan right now

[Greater Malegron]

If we ban Nazis, we should also ban communists

I see no fundamental difference between the holocaust and what is happening to the Uyghur people of East Turkestan right now

The difference is that the Nazis were operating from a position of privilege and supremacy. That said, yes, we should ban communists.

[Kowani]

If we ban Nazis, we should also ban communists

Nazism: Jews, Slavs, gays, and other "undesirables" should be violently purged
Communism: "hey maybe production shouldn't be exploitative"
Seriously, get a new false equivalence.

I see no fundamental difference between the holocaust and what is happening to the Uyghur people of East Turkestan right now

Missing element #1: The gas chambers

If we ban Nazis, we should also ban communists

I see no fundamental difference between the holocaust and what is happening to the Uyghur people of East Turkestan right now

The difference is that the Nazis were operating from a position of privilege and supremacy.

Within China, the Han Chinese are the ones with privilege. Do not assume universalism of western concepts.

That said, yes, we should ban communists.

No.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Like for real I am a rabid anti-communist but if you genuinely think that Nazism and Communism are even remotely comparable then you must not be well versed in what either ideology stands for.

Nationalism Socialism is, by it's nature, hellbent on ethnic cleansing, totalitarianism, warmongering imperialism, and racial supremacy. Communism's worst flaw is how unrealistic and easily susceptible to authoritarian subversion it is. There have been many of heinous crimes committed in the name of Communism, yet never by actual Communists (except maybe Lenin) and Communism is by it's nature not necessarily warmongering, autocratic, or bigoted. Nazism on the other hand is purebred evil. The Nazi Party were actual Nazis. They followed their own beliefs to the letter. The same cannot be said for the vast majority of "Communist" Parties, including those of the Soviet Union, North Korea, the People's Republic of China, Ethiopia, Angola, Cuba, etc.

Communism is naive and fantastical, but it's not bound by evil. National Socialism is.

[Greed and Death]

The general problem I have with the no voice for Nazi's concept is in time you just call everyone who disagrees with you a Nazi.

See here.
https://abc7news.com/society/tensions-r ... f/7104894/
Best Quote

Yeah! It's not like there's a definition for Nazism we can use to identify Nazis- oh, wait.

It looks like she is waiving to people that are around her on three sides.

I remember when Hitler accidentally shot himself in the head trying to wave to his wife. What a silly accident.

Please provide the definition of Nazi, and explain how it applies to man who had his teeth knocked out ?


First it was not a Bellamy salute because she was in the Parthian shot type position and she did not return her hand to the side. Salutes are rendered from the position of attention and the arm is returned to the position of attention at the end of the salute.
It is the the whole motion that makes it a salute vs a wave that maybe looks like a particular salute when viewed from 30 degrees to the left.

So since the premise that she did a Bellamy is false, maybe this highlights the problem. That those insistent on deplatforming Nazis tend to be the same people who see Nazis everywhere.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

The general problem I have with the no voice for Nazi's concept is in time you just call everyone who disagrees with you a Nazi.

See here.
https://abc7news.com/society/tensions-r ... f/7104894/
Best Quote

Yeah! It's not like there's a definition for Nazism we can use to identify Nazis- oh, wait.

It looks like she is waiving to people that are around her on three sides.

I remember when Hitler accidentally shot himself in the head trying to wave to his wife. What a silly accident.

He found his dad's gun closet unlocked and started messing around with the gun. He later was rushed to the hospital with an accidentally gunshot would and later perished.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Please provide the definition of Nazi,

Sure.

Nazism is a form of fascism, with disdain for liberal democracy and the parliamentary system. It incorporates fervent antisemitism, anti-communism, scientific racism, and the use of eugenics into its creed.

If this sounds appealing to you: congratulations, you're a Nazi.

and explain how it applies to man who had his teeth knocked out ?

I have no idea who you're talking about. People get their teeth knocked out all the time. Be specific.

First it was not a Bellamy salute because she was in the Parthian shot type position and she did not return her hand to the side. Salutes are rendered from the position of attention and the arm is returned to the position of attention at the end of the salute.
It is the the whole motion that makes it a salute vs a wave that maybe looks like a particular salute when viewed from 30 degrees to the left.

So since the premise that she did a Bellamy is false, maybe this highlights the problem.

The Bellamy salute is not the Nazi salute. I never identified it as the Bellamy salute. Not sure where this is coming from.

That those insistent on deplatforming Nazis tend to be the same people who see Nazis everywhere.

Interesting theory. Wrong, of course, but still interesting.

[Greed and Death]

Please provide the definition of Nazi,

Sure.

Nazism is a form of fascism, with disdain for liberal democracy and the parliamentary system. It incorporates fervent antisemitism, anti-communism, scientific racism, and the use of eugenics into its creed.

If this sounds appealing to you: congratulations, you're a Nazi.

and explain how it applies to man who had his teeth knocked out ?

I have no idea who you're talking about. People get their teeth knocked out all the time. Be specific.

The dude who organized the free speech rally in the video I linked.

[The Marlborough]

I believe that Nazis should be given a platform and allowed for speak freely and openly. Then after they've outed themselves over a period of, say, two years or so, we can swoop in and send them packing to katorgas to mine uranium and plutonium.

[Saiwania]

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

Eugenics was popular back then- even in the US, if anything it is a product of the late 19th to early 20th century. If Nazism arose during a different decade, it'd have been different culturally or ideologically in a way we can't accurately predict.

It is fact however, that clear majorities in the Sudentenland and Austria wanted to be annexed to Germany and only the Treaty of Versailles was standing in the way of that practically speaking. Hitler permanently annexing the rest of Czechoslovakia I'd call illegitimate, but again the Czechs wouldn't quit agitating Germany with regards to the Sudentenland. Germany using its military might to get a protectorate is legitimate provided they won in a fair fight. Like it or not the Czechs lost.

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

France and the UK declared war on Germany, so were fair game.

The UK is to blame for Denmark and Norway getting invaded, it was to protect Germany's iron ore shipments and their northern flank from blockade by the Royal Navy.

Belgium and the Netherlands? Those countries were going to align with France anyways and were geographically the best route to invade France from, if the Ardennes route is unsuccessful or blocked.

Austria wanted the Anschluss to happen and they got what they wished for, same for the Sudentenland.

Czechoslovakia proper getting permanently annexed was unjustified but they lost fair and square against Nazi Germany after picking a fight with them over the Sudentenland or trying to goad the UK into intervening on their behalf.

Yugoslavia was invaded by the Axis for violating treaty obligations that they had agreed to. Germany was the primary nation behind the Axis militarily and hence, lead that alliance.

[Aclion]

Like for real I am a rabid anti-communist but if you genuinely think that Nazism and Communism are even remotely comparable then you must not be well versed in what either ideology stands for.

Nationalism Socialism is, by it's nature, hellbent on ethnic cleansing, totalitarianism, warmongering imperialism, and racial supremacy. Communism's worst flaw is how unrealistic and easily susceptible to authoritarian subversion it is. There have been many of heinous crimes committed in the name of Communism, yet never by actual Communists (except maybe Lenin) and Communism is by it's nature not necessarily warmongering, autocratic, or bigoted. Nazism on the other hand is purebred evil. The Nazi Party were actual Nazis. They followed their own beliefs to the letter. The same cannot be said for the vast majority of "Communist" Parties, including those of the Soviet Union, North Korea, the People's Republic of China, Ethiopia, Angola, Cuba, etc.

Communism is naive and fantastical, but it's not bound by evil. National Socialism is.

What difference does it make if people are being mistreated whether its an explicit part of the ideology or just a consequence of trying to implement it.

[Picairn]

What difference does it make if people are being mistreated whether its an explicit part of the ideology or just a consequence of trying to implement it.

Pretty sure industrialized genocide is different from malicious mismanagement or spontaneous executions. Just like how we have varying degrees of homicide.

[CoraSpia]

What difference does it make if people are being mistreated whether its an explicit part of the ideology or just a consequence of trying to implement it.

Pretty sure industrialized genocide is different from malicious mismanagement or spontaneous executions. Just like how we have varying degrees of homicide.

If you start something that's been proven time and time again to lead to millions of deaths, it's on you when it leads to millions of deaths. Nobody has quite worked out the way of making communism nice and friendly yet.

[Picairn]

If you start something that's been proven time and time again to lead to millions of deaths, it's on you when it leads to millions of deaths. Nobody has quite worked out the way of making communism nice and friendly yet.

Does that excuse the Nazis' industrialized genocide?

[CoraSpia]

If you start something that's been proven time and time again to lead to millions of deaths, it's on you when it leads to millions of deaths. Nobody has quite worked out the way of making communism nice and friendly yet.

Does that excuse the Nazis' industrialized genocide?

Nope, it exposes double standards though. I believe all people of all political preferences should be allowed to speak.

[Picairn]

Nope, it exposes double standards though. I believe all people of all political preferences should be allowed to speak.

You also advocated for herd immunity and letting old people die. I don't think I can take your opinions seriously.

[CoraSpia]

Nope, it exposes double standards though. I believe all people of all political preferences should be allowed to speak.

You also advocated for herd immunity and letting old people die. I don't think I can take your opinions seriously.

Unrestrained freedom and fuck the consequences is kind of my idea of utopia.

[Greater Miami Shores]

Pretty sure industrialized genocide is different from malicious mismanagement or spontaneous executions. Just like how we have varying degrees of homicide.

If you start something that's been proven time and time again to lead to millions of deaths, it's on you when it leads to millions of deaths. Nobody has quite worked out the way of making communism nice and friendly yet.

I strongly agree with you on this post above. I strongly agree with you on your, I believe all people of all political preferences should be allowed to speak.

Without being told directly or indirectly, I am right and you are wrong, and there is no discussion or argument about it. It is freedom of Speech. If you advocated for herd immunity, you advocated for herd immunity, it is freedom of Speech.

[Albrenia]

If you start something that's been proven time and time again to lead to millions of deaths, it's on you when it leads to millions of deaths. Nobody has quite worked out the way of making communism nice and friendly yet.

I strongly agree with you on this post above. I strongly agree with you on your, I believe all people of all political preferences should be allowed to speak.

Without being told directly or indirectly, I am right and you are wrong, and there is no discussion or argument about it. It is freedom of Speech. If you advocated for herd immunity, you advocated for herd immunity, it is freedom of Speech.

Aye, you have the right to say whatever you want with the sole exception of outright death threats... and I guess 'pure' free speech advocates wouldn't even bar that particular caveat, but I'm fine with it.

Although as said before, people do have the right to tell you that you are wrong, since that's free speech too.

[Greater Miami Shores]

I strongly agree with you on this post above. I strongly agree with you on your, I believe all people of all political preferences should be allowed to speak.

Without being told directly or indirectly, I am right and you are wrong, and there is no discussion or argument about it. It is freedom of Speech. If you advocated for herd immunity, you advocated for herd immunity, it is freedom of Speech.

Aye, you have the right to say whatever you want with the sole exception of outright death threats... and I guess 'pure' free speech advocates wouldn't even bar that particular caveat, but I'm fine with it.

Although as said before, people do have the right to tell you that you are wrong, since that's free speech too.

Well, I don't do so, because it cuts all discussion, arguments and disagreements, when you are discussing, arguing and disagreeing, like we do on NS, and you say it to the other person, directly or indirectly, you are wrong and I am right based on Facts, there is nothing to discuss, argue about and disagree on. It is like saying to them, you are entitled to your opinions, as long as you know you are wrong. I respect your opinions as long as you know you are wrong.

This happened to 10 of us Republicans Sunday, we were 8 guys, a Cuban Lady and An American Lady, after the Trump rally, talking to a Lady Democrat Biden supporter at the restaurant we ate and drank 2 or 3 beers, I had 2.

I Rest My Case.

GMS.

[Risottia]

Czechoslovakia proper getting permanently annexed was unjustified but they lost fair and square against Nazi Germany after picking a fight with them over the Sudentenland or trying to goad the UK into intervening on their behalf.

Ok, so, according to Saiwania,
if Turkey invades Greece, the Greeks were picking a fight with Turkey over Thrace. And if Greece asks its NATO allies to protect them, Greece is "trying to goad NATO into intervening on their behalf".
if PR China invades Taiwan, the Taiwanese were picking a fight with PR China over the South China Sea.

Didn't know you were so supportive of Turkey and PR China, Sai.

[Phaenix]

As much as I like freedom of speech, Nazism does not bring anything worthwhile to the table. It encourages ultranationalism, xenophobia, and genocide, while not having any actual benefits besides an abhorrent sense of racial superiority. Nazis, if allowed to fester, will cause instability and racial tension in any civilized nation, and therefore forfeit any right to be heard.

[West Leas Oros 2]

If we ban Nazis, we should also ban communists

Nazism: Jews, Slavs, gays, and other "undesirables" should be violently purged
Communism: "hey maybe production shouldn't be exploitative"
Seriously, get a new false equivalence.

I see no fundamental difference between the holocaust and what is happening to the Uyghur people of East Turkestan right now

Missing element #1: The gas chambers

The difference is that the Nazis were operating from a position of privilege and supremacy.

Within China, the Han Chinese are the ones with privilege. Do not assume universalism of western concepts.

That said, yes, we should ban communists.

No.

GM has in the past excused all sorts of shitty things with the excuse of white supremacy before. Half of their arguments look like recycled posts from /pol/ but with words and numbers rearranged.

[Greater Miami Shores]

If we ban Nazis, we should also ban communists

I see no fundamental difference between the holocaust and what is happening to the Uyghur people of East Turkestan right now

The difference is that the Nazis were operating from a position of privilege and supremacy. That said, yes, we should ban communists.

I agree with my Republican friend Karelia, there is no fundamental reason between the Holocaust of the Nazis and what is happening to the Uyghur people of East Turkestan and other ethnic groups around the world. But I disagree with Karelia, we should not ban communists or Nazis, if this is what he argued for.

I disagree with Malegron, the Nazis and communists in communists nations, as it is practiced and has been practiced all over the world, are operating from a position of privilege, disrespecting the rights of their people to disagree with their governments, which is not freedom of speech and democracy.

Like in my native Cuba, the Cuban regime has been responsible, for at least 10 s of thousands of deaths for disagreeing with their government. They live like rich upper class capitalists, while my family still in Cuba lives like poor people, as these Pics prove,
https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=844667
Will I change anyone's views on the Castro's and Cuba, no matter what I say, link to, and the true stories I have shared in the past, and I can link to even better links than this? No

GMS.