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.
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