Skip to content
Anarchia wrote:1: social-democracy isn't socialism.
2: the Nazi party weren't socialists.
3: "more people have been murdered by social democrats than were murdered by the nazis" True, but irrelevant.
Umm, what? Get your facts right. The Nakba saw between 600,000 and 1.4 million Palestinians (generally accepted figure is ~720,000) made into refugees, and far, far less than that killed (can't find figures, but certainly no more than 10,000, probably far, far less). The Shoah saw ~6 million Jews killed, not to mention leftists, unionists, communists, anarchists, queers, roma, disabled, etc etc. They aren't even remotely close in scale.
Calling a social-democratic individual with little-no political power a Nazi, however, completely diminishes the meaning of what a Nazi is.
There's no point leaping to hyperbole, especially when it proves offensive to people (for entirely legitimate reasons).
A Nazi is, strictly, someone who was a member (or perhaps supporter) of the Nazi party. A Neo-Nazi is one who supports similar goals, but after the destruction of the Nazi party.
Nazis are: in support of an all-powerful state (although arguments have been made that the organisation of the Nazi state means it ceases to be defined as a state as we know it. I disagree); believers in the existance of races (generally biologically, sometimes also mystically); believers in the supremacy of the "Aryan" race; full of hatred for Jews (often not considered human), blacks, left wingers, disabled people, queers, Asians (generally considered lower classes of human, and yes, some Nazis even have a ranking scale of who fits where); "conservative revolutionaries" - generally harking back (especially in Germany) to a historical tradition; believers in innate biological roles for men and women.
I'm sure you could find more on Wikipedia
that's all I can really be bothered to write up for now...
ambi wrote:it is a nice quote, but you should keep in mind the POV of the person who said it. he was a fabian socialist who was interested in replacing the old institutions (aristocratic states, churches, etc.) with authoritarian socialism, gradually attained.
just as the fabian society symbol shows, he was a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Maithuna69 wrote:I'd go along with that to an extent but I tend to seperate ideas frmo the people who put them forward, to avoid slipping into ad hominem nonsense.
Guest wrote:Maithuna69 wrote:I'd go along with that to an extent but I tend to seperate ideas frmo the people who put them forward, to avoid slipping into ad hominem nonsense.
sometimes "who said it" matters.
for example, bush recently chastised russia for attacking another nation.
now, it's true that nations shouldnt attack nations, but when bush says it, most of the world laughs because of a little thing called iraq - that, and the fact that georgia was the aggressor along with US/israel...
birthday pony wrote:Likewise if someone says "I'm a Democrat" though we might disagree with their beliefs, it's silly to jump to the conclusion that they supported bombings by Clinton and other such things. You'd find that a lot of Democrats don't even know about those.
Zazaban wrote:But the identity of the person saying it does not add to or detract from the value of the ideas being presented.
Francois Tremblay wrote:Don't the Fabians control British politics?
ambi wrote:and people wanna give me shit for referring to them as subhuman scum. amazing.
Humans have murdered each other for all history.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests