Overuse of Nazi comparisons

Post Reply New Topic

I respect the hard work that the mods do here. They are constantly keeping an eye on at least 50 very unique people.

Last edited by ASPartOfMe on 23 Nov 2020, 9:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

You'd be surprised. There have been fire breathing white nationalists and Anti-Semites who have logged on from time to time. Thankfully, they usually don't last that long.

You haven't seen the SJW takeover? You must be one of them! /humor

Frankly I don't think anyone on here is an actual nazi or fascist either. But that's why it seems so weird when people almost seem to take it personally when someone says anything about nazis or fascists at all. Even if there are none on here, there ARE those who do deservingly wear the label out in the real world.

Things like racism, sexism, and general bigotry can be trickier. Sometimes the person genuinely believes the thing they think they "know" about one group or another. Some people genuinely believe that black people are less intelligent and more violent in general, and that any that are smart or aren't violent are the exception rather than the rule. To them, there's nothing racist about assuming a black person is stupid and violent, cos to them, they usually are stupid and violent, so it's a fair assumption. Sometimes the only thing that makes a racist a racist is believing in a stereotype.

"But stereotypes are usually based on truth! If the shoe fits...!"

Stereotypes are based on just enough "truth" to make them look valid and drag the rest of the assumptions along with it, and often times, they're forced or contrived. That's why black-face existed. You could make black people look as stupid as you wanted by acting like a fool, and claiming it was a realistic portrayal. If you put a REAL black person on stage, and they actually happened to be SMART, and people SAW that, it would ruin the whole narrative. Same goes for cartoons. Make them look like ignorant savages. Don't teach them to read or write, punish them if they try, then claim they're stupid cos they "can't" read or write. Point out that black-on-black crime happens more than black-on-white crime, but ignore the fact that white on white crime happens just as much as black-on-black crime, and also ignore that that's because we still live in heavily segregated neighborhoods.

When you grow up seeing people portrayed a certain way, real or not, if you ever do see someone who happens to fit that profile, confirmation bias kicks in, and of course they're all like that, everyone knows they're like that. That's why some people see racism and sexism as merely a matter of "political correctness" - "oh, you cant call the lazy criminals 'lazy' or 'criminals' anymore" is how they'd see it. But they wouldn't see how their view of the world might have been distorted in the first place.

People don't like to have to correct their worldview. Once they "know" the world around them, they don't like that to change. This applies to people in general, not just "liberals" or "conservatives". People don't like to admit that they mighta had a racist thought or idea, cos one, if someone finds out they might judge you for it, and two, if there's one racist thought, maybe there's more than one, maybe they really ARE a racist and didn't even know it...

I used to believe a lot of untrue things myself. I still catch remnants of it sneaking out. I do my best to undo them, and see past them. I am not special, I have my own biases. It's part of having a subjective existence. But I do try to at least know when and where I'm biased, and not conflate MY "truth" with THE TRUTH.

F---, you uncovered my secret.



This is one of the best posts ever here.

Any reasonable person would see things this way.

Correct.

What do you think?

Rulz are rulz.
Adhere to them.



Neither did I, hence, "The rulz are rulz" line.

A very bold statement.

You've been working on the old ESP then, eh?

All we see is what people want us to see, on these pages.

That in itself is quite a frightening statement, now I come to think about it, but the truth is we've got no idea what the actual people behind the keyboards REALLY think.

I could be the reincarnation of Ghengis Khan for all you know

We here, in Australia, we are on the doorstep of communist China*.
I have a greater fear of communism than fascism, "don't you worry about that!"

Yep, Stalin was a cute and cuddly kitten who wouldn't hurt a fly, aslo.

Careful now. The alternative to fascism isn't communism, it's everything except fascism.

Lots of options there, no need to be binary, unless you're spoiling for a fight?

You may have to have a chat with funeralxempire, also.
He seems to agree with KraftieKortie and me.



Note that the term "sympathy" is debatable.
There are political systems that have interchangeable components.

The Nazis believe in a good work ethic.
That, in itself, is hardly fascist ideology.

You are projecting.
I don't do binary.
I was saying fascism isn't the sole evil in the world.

Indeed, it seems that you, yourself, are being one-eyed.

By using one very specific example that just happens to lie at the "opposite" end of the political spectrum from fascism?

In a thread titled "Overuse of Nazi Comparisons"?

My point here is that polarized ideas - extremes - are nearly always more dangerous than compromise positions. And also much easier to wheel out in the form of stereotypes.

Stalin was a dictator who killed huge numbers of his own people. Does that mean Hitler is suddenly ok? It's not a competition, is it? What about Pol Pot, Idi Amin?

That's not the same debate as "reasonable" versus "unreasonable". Having two mass murderers in the debate doesn't necessarily provide a greater degree of sensible balance, overall. So why start?