The Nazis over-generalising Jews was secondary as a simple means to an end of removing a faction that disagrees with Nazis. The correct way to say it was that, to gain and maintain power, the conservatives scapegoated Jews, socialists, and dissidents, to help generate hatred and genocidal tendencies to ultimately overthrow democracy and remove threats to capitalist power. Jews, socialists, and dissidents in general were framed using any random words that sounded good and then killed off. Conservative values are based on using power in any way to achieve their goal; If you think that their contradictory, scapegoating, culture wars make no sense, its because you aren’t looking at it simply enough. they lie and get what they want each step of the way.
I’m going to go out on a limb and assume you trust the conservative lies about what a communism and socialism is.
I think i misunderstood you. I assumed you were acting in bad faith. Your grammar is making this a bit more difficult(mine eyes doth protest).
I’m trying to argue in good faith but will admit i assumed you weren’t from previous experiences and half-assed things.
The Nazi ideology to me, is the same as the conservative ideology, and both are simply reduced to tribalism/totalitarianism. Nazi/conservative values are just the truth of ANYTHING for the sake of gaining and maintaining power for the self first, then the tribe(as a means for more self power). The rest is a cover.
If you would like to single out anything we can swap to discussing that so i can show you what i mean. Originally i was talking about you going into minutia about generalising Jews, but the dislike for them was always just fabricated. Generalising or not makes no real difference, same with labeling your enemies as some simple thing you don like to delegitimise them. It’s standard conservative practice to use words in reduced good/bad form. For example, when a conservative talks, they can use socialist, communist, liberal, fascist to describe the same person in the same conversation. The conservative means “I don’t like you” but calls you a name, not realising they have no idea what it means, and you may know it properly and be annoyed with its misuse.
My final point was based around the standard opinions being the conservative lies. How you mentioned soviets as an example of socialism is a standard misunderstanding. They got co-opted the same way Nazis originally did. Both had some socialists attracted and in both cases they seemed to have been purged in favour of the totalitarians.
I’m going out for an hour and wanted to reply, but felt this reply should be deleted as it’s pretty meh. I sent the reply either way thinking you’d prefer one, sorry for the mess.
As for my grammar: Sometimes I have trouble putting my thoughts on paper. I half blame it on being “noschooled” where I was given a lot less writing assignments (I will note that it wasn’t all bad, as I channeled all that time into programming and computers. Thus making me better in my field than my peers. I think it has pros and cons, I plan to better explain my thoughts in a later comment). I also heavily use autocomplete. However I’m normally a better writer if I give myself time to review my work (I have gone through and made multiple edits on my comments). The other half I blame on me rushing to explain my ideas. I’m not used to the forum format and I was rushing myself before the post became irrelevant. I plan to take more time in the future when commenting on forums regardless of whether my comment becomes irrelevant. As I now see that harm it causes, and how I appear to others.
Thanks for the effort, It’s hard to put text down how we want, which is why I wanted to delete my last comment and rewrite it later haha. I was a bit the same and am learning as I go too. :) As long as you have paragraphs and the ideas come out how you want them then I’m happy.
As to Nazis using their ideology as a cover. It is fully plausible and I do not have any retorts to that statement.
I used to hear people from your POV before, and thought they were exaggerating, but the more I thought about it, the more I will noticed it’s not hyperbolic.
I have a habit of avoiding good/bad words such as Nazi/Woke/Socalist/Etc unless I can prove your arguments line up. I find that most people will shutdown around these words. Most republicans I speak with will ignore everything you have to say, if they hear a phrase like “Republicans are Nazis”. It’s also why it is so hard to talk with them.
I completely agree. I’ve had some scary experiences, easily breaking through conservatives defences, if I just use neutral language. The downside is that skilled people can make fast progress if they explain and agree on terminology, which on the internet is probably best avoided most of the time.
I still think it is wise to not address republicans as Nazis, as this often rings as a generalization that causes the conversation to be unproductive. I still think it is best to address their beliefs on their own merit; as I believe the best way to expose an idiot, is to explain how they are an idiot in a calm manner. Only describing the nature of Nazism and how it effects their voter base, emphasizing that not all republicans are necessarily Nazis. However, I have both learned from your comment and realized how I was not following my own beliefs in fear of being ignored. Thank you for taking the time to talk with me.
You are wiser than I am lol. I know it leads to nothing of value, but feel it needs to be associated as hard as we can, as most of their actions are based on conformity and Pavlovian conditioning(they do the inverse to an enemy I guess. I should stop).
The problem with the latter half of your paragraph, is that most conservatives don’t really believe what they say. They conform to their tribal values. It’s partly due to them having a bad foundation, leading to any thoughts ending in cognitive dissonance, then frustration, then anger, then either changing subjects or abuse.
Underneath the average conservative is an insecure, submissive, desperate for attention person that needs a better tribe to defect to, and the best way to win one, is to invite them to a friendly group of anti-conservatives. Some stealth might be required.
Conservatives tend to learn through direct actions, not rational discussion, so talking with them is only beneficial when dealing with an audience unless you know specific tactics.
Nighty night, thanks for the chat.
note: Most of what I say, such as “conservatives” is meant to be a generalisation and not an absolute thing for all. Sometimes I will clear it up and sometimes not. Sometimes I don’t even know I did it. I try to use “-ism” terminology to talk about the actual ideology.
Calling the NAZIs conservatives doesn’t quite fit the history of Germany. Conservative is an ideology that depends on time and place. For example conservatives in Russia are pro-communism.
In the case of the NAZIs they were progressive nationalist socialists advocating for a “third way" that was not liberalism or communism, which is why they campaigned hard as anti-marxists and anti-capitalists. Anti-semitistm was of course a major part of this as well and part of the reason Jewish conspiracy theories seem to simultaneously be associated with both marxism and capitalism.
The key overlap between Fascism, Nazism , and conservatism is that they are all exactly the correct definition on recent conservatism which is best described by the following quote from Frank Wilhoit:
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:
There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
Conservative values in the modern sense is taking power, while saying whatever the hell helps you take power. It applies perfectly to Nazis and Fascists historically.
If you zoom in on Nazi actions, you see clearly they have the same style as modern conservatives. I hope you don’t misunderstand, I’m not calling Nazis conservatives, I’m calling conservatives NAZIS; And by that I mean the way they use power. ANYTHING to gain and maintain power, the rest is an illusion.
In the case of the NAZIs they were progressive nationalist socialists advocating for a “third way" that was not liberalism or communism, which is why they campaigned hard as anti-marxists and anti-capitalists. Anti-semitistm was of course a major part of this as well and part of the reason Jewish conspiracy theories seem to simultaneously be associated with both marxism and capitalism.
Nazis acted as standard capitalists. They busted unions, they worked alongside corporations without really controlling them in a bad way for them etc. We have tons of jokes about old Nazi companies like Hugo boss that just mysteriously got overlooked and thrived for some time after WW2. They never lost their identity or profits, they gained a lot. It’s the people that lost, as always. Fascist(as we call it today) actions are really just capitalist democracies, that throw away the illusion of democracy, more specifically, they can no longer maintain the illusion - see conservatism.
As for Russians, I’ve been saying this a lot but… I don’t speak Russian, I don’t speak Mandarin, Haven’t visited them, I haven’t done the levels of research needed for me to have an opinion on this matter. There is also a wall of massive propaganda making it 10x harder to validate information. When people talk about modern Russia or China they are talking out their asses and the conversation devolves into shit-flinging. So I shut it down in my very first response. It’s a start of a bad-faith conversation at least 90% of the time. I’m not saying you would be in the 90%, just that I’m opting out of that part of the convo.
deleted by creator
The Nazis over-generalising Jews was secondary as a simple means to an end of removing a faction that disagrees with Nazis. The correct way to say it was that, to gain and maintain power, the conservatives scapegoated Jews, socialists, and dissidents, to help generate hatred and genocidal tendencies to ultimately overthrow democracy and remove threats to capitalist power. Jews, socialists, and dissidents in general were framed using any random words that sounded good and then killed off. Conservative values are based on using power in any way to achieve their goal; If you think that their contradictory, scapegoating, culture wars make no sense, its because you aren’t looking at it simply enough. they lie and get what they want each step of the way.
I’m going to go out on a limb and assume you trust the conservative lies about what a communism and socialism is.
Wikipedia has a correct definition - Communism - Socialism
deleted by creator
I think i misunderstood you. I assumed you were acting in bad faith. Your grammar is making this a bit more difficult(mine eyes doth protest).
I’m trying to argue in good faith but will admit i assumed you weren’t from previous experiences and half-assed things.
The Nazi ideology to me, is the same as the conservative ideology, and both are simply reduced to tribalism/totalitarianism. Nazi/conservative values are just the truth of ANYTHING for the sake of gaining and maintaining power for the self first, then the tribe(as a means for more self power). The rest is a cover.
If you would like to single out anything we can swap to discussing that so i can show you what i mean. Originally i was talking about you going into minutia about generalising Jews, but the dislike for them was always just fabricated. Generalising or not makes no real difference, same with labeling your enemies as some simple thing you don like to delegitimise them. It’s standard conservative practice to use words in reduced good/bad form. For example, when a conservative talks, they can use socialist, communist, liberal, fascist to describe the same person in the same conversation. The conservative means “I don’t like you” but calls you a name, not realising they have no idea what it means, and you may know it properly and be annoyed with its misuse.
My final point was based around the standard opinions being the conservative lies. How you mentioned soviets as an example of socialism is a standard misunderstanding. They got co-opted the same way Nazis originally did. Both had some socialists attracted and in both cases they seemed to have been purged in favour of the totalitarians.
I’m going out for an hour and wanted to reply, but felt this reply should be deleted as it’s pretty meh. I sent the reply either way thinking you’d prefer one, sorry for the mess.
deleted by creator
Thanks for the effort, It’s hard to put text down how we want, which is why I wanted to delete my last comment and rewrite it later haha. I was a bit the same and am learning as I go too. :) As long as you have paragraphs and the ideas come out how you want them then I’m happy.
I used to hear people from your POV before, and thought they were exaggerating, but the more I thought about it, the more I will noticed it’s not hyperbolic.
I completely agree. I’ve had some scary experiences, easily breaking through conservatives defences, if I just use neutral language. The downside is that skilled people can make fast progress if they explain and agree on terminology, which on the internet is probably best avoided most of the time.
You are wiser than I am lol. I know it leads to nothing of value, but feel it needs to be associated as hard as we can, as most of their actions are based on conformity and Pavlovian conditioning(they do the inverse to an enemy I guess. I should stop).
The problem with the latter half of your paragraph, is that most conservatives don’t really believe what they say. They conform to their tribal values. It’s partly due to them having a bad foundation, leading to any thoughts ending in cognitive dissonance, then frustration, then anger, then either changing subjects or abuse.
Underneath the average conservative is an insecure, submissive, desperate for attention person that needs a better tribe to defect to, and the best way to win one, is to invite them to a friendly group of anti-conservatives. Some stealth might be required.
Conservatives tend to learn through direct actions, not rational discussion, so talking with them is only beneficial when dealing with an audience unless you know specific tactics.
Nighty night, thanks for the chat.
note: Most of what I say, such as “conservatives” is meant to be a generalisation and not an absolute thing for all. Sometimes I will clear it up and sometimes not. Sometimes I don’t even know I did it. I try to use “-ism” terminology to talk about the actual ideology.
deleted by creator
Calling the NAZIs conservatives doesn’t quite fit the history of Germany. Conservative is an ideology that depends on time and place. For example conservatives in Russia are pro-communism.
In the case of the NAZIs they were progressive nationalist socialists advocating for a “third way" that was not liberalism or communism, which is why they campaigned hard as anti-marxists and anti-capitalists. Anti-semitistm was of course a major part of this as well and part of the reason Jewish conspiracy theories seem to simultaneously be associated with both marxism and capitalism.
The key overlap between Fascism, Nazism , and conservatism is that they are all exactly the correct definition on recent conservatism which is best described by the following quote from Frank Wilhoit:
Conservative values in the modern sense is
taking power, while saying whatever the hell helps you take power. It applies perfectly to Nazis and Fascists historically.If you zoom in on Nazi actions, you see clearly they have the same style as modern conservatives. I hope you don’t misunderstand, I’m not calling Nazis conservatives, I’m calling conservatives NAZIS; And by that I mean the way they use power. ANYTHING to gain and maintain power, the rest is an illusion.
Nazis acted as standard capitalists. They busted unions, they worked alongside corporations without really controlling them in a bad way for them etc. We have tons of jokes about old Nazi companies like Hugo boss that just mysteriously got overlooked and thrived for some time after WW2. They never lost their identity or profits, they gained a lot. It’s the people that lost, as always. Fascist(as we call it today) actions are really just capitalist democracies, that throw away the illusion of democracy, more specifically, they can no longer maintain the illusion - see conservatism.
As for Russians, I’ve been saying this a lot but… I don’t speak Russian, I don’t speak Mandarin, Haven’t visited them, I haven’t done the levels of research needed for me to have an opinion on this matter. There is also a wall of massive propaganda making it 10x harder to validate information. When people talk about modern Russia or China they are talking out their asses and the conversation devolves into shit-flinging. So I shut it down in my very first response. It’s a start of a bad-faith conversation at least 90% of the time. I’m not saying you would be in the 90%, just that I’m opting out of that part of the convo.
I don’t really know how to respond to this other than to say your worldview is firmly grounded in ideology.