Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Nazis

  1. #1
    sound and vision coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Æther of 'Arel
    Posts
    208
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Nazis

    I'm pretty sure Nazis and Communists (which are the same even if it's not hip to say so) are just regular working-class people. Regular working class people are most people even if people like to say "middle class" nowadays, so most people just suck. I mean you have villain coming from the word for a farm servant and mediocre meaning bad for a reason.

    Discuss.

  2. #2
    Video Game Pilot Capitalist Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,124
    Mentioned
    141 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Godwin's law dictates this argument was lost before it began

  3. #3
    sound and vision coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Æther of 'Arel
    Posts
    208
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Capitalist Pig View Post
    Godwin's law dictates this argument was lost before it began
    I never lose an argument.

    Also, if anyone needs a sedative for any reason, just get a copy of Hannah Arendt instead.

  4. #4
    Bastard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    34
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No. Most people who think that much about political philosophy are middle class. Poor people don't have the luxury.

  5. #5
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    In the Trash
    TIM
    Bold and Brash
    Posts
    1,826
    Mentioned
    98 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default


  6. #6
    Robot Unicorn BOT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Real Life
    TIM
    ISTp 0-D sx/sp
    Posts
    2,228
    Mentioned
    275 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Social class have nothing to do with evil. Evil is in the nature of mankind. According Zimbardo, evil is a social process, where institutions and power have a strong influence in the behavior of individuals. The Standford Prision Experiment is a small representation of how easily is for "good" people turn bad.

    Last edited by BOT; 11-07-2018 at 03:00 AM.

  7. #7
    Dalek Caan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default


  8. #8
    silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    TIM
    Ni-IEI sx/sp
    Posts
    4,555
    Mentioned
    380 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum View Post
    I'm pretty sure Nazis and Communists (which are the same even if it's not hip to say so) are just regular working-class people. Regular working class people are most people even if people like to say "middle class" nowadays, so most people just suck. I mean you have villain coming from the word for a farm servant and mediocre meaning bad for a reason.

    Discuss.
    Apparently most of the benign citizens and people supporting the regime had no awareness of the atrocities that have been committed.

    In the mean time, they didn't bother to question the regime and rather went along with all the status/benefits that it had to offer.



  9. #9
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,184
    Mentioned
    138 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    In war there usually is no good or evil side, just two evil sides believing they are the good side. The allies even had a nation on their side that committed an atrocity roughly equivalent to the holocaust in the case of the Soviet Union with Stalin and holomodor:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

    The victor makes themselves out to be the good guy and the opposing side as the bad guy, but they're just two sides of the same coin. The U.S. has been pretty horrendous when it comes to wars and their atrocities not even including covert indirect atrocities done by the CIA (nuked Japan twice as one example of a direct atrocity out of many), but it's human nature for the strongest nation or power to commit egregious crimes when they have the power to do so.

    I suppose the only difference between nations and powers is the extent of the severity of their crimes, but no empire has their hands clean because to get power you must first get your hands dirty. Then once they get power, it corrupts the nation or empire. History has proven time and time again for this to be true for nearly every country and empire to have existed. So all you really have in the end is that X nation or empire is the lesser of the two evils compared to Y nation or empire.

    The public just goes along with what their nation or empire does out of either ignorance of what their country has done (U.S. is a great example of that) or from propaganda that has convinced them that their country is fair and just. To think Germany in WWII is exempt from this rule because of the allies' account of WWII history is laughable. It all stems down to human nature being corrupted by power because society is just a macro extension of human nature.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  10. #10
    Imperial XerX xerxes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,774
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No. Fascism is NOT like Communism. Communism has traditionally appealed to working-class people, whereas Fascism has been a mostly middle-class phenomenon. It isn't a good record by any stretch of the imagination, but Communism at least aspires to be egalitarian, whereas Fascism openly espouses hierarchy in its stated aims. Communism is internationalist in outlook, whereas Fascism is unambiguously tribalistic and sectarian. Communism builds on enlightenment reason by embracing secularism (even atheism), whereas Fascism dabbles in quasi-spirituality and magical thinking.


    Umberto Eco grew up in a Fascist dictatorship and wrote one of the most concise and illuminating descriptions of Fascism I've come across. He draws from his experience in Facsist Italy, but I imagine that much of it is transferrable to Nazi Germany.

    The article is worth reading (again and again) if you want to understand the emotional appeal of Fascism and the fact that tyranny can emerge just as much from the grassroots as from the barrel of a gun.

    https://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/eco_ur-fascism.pdf


    Quote Originally Posted by Fourteen point summary
    - The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”

    - The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”

    - The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”

    - Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”

    - Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”

    - Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”

    - The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”

    - The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”

    - Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”

    - Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”

    - Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”

    - Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”

    - Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”

    - Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”


    Note point #2. Contrast with Marxism, which is Modernistic to its core and believes in a grand narrative. Unlike what that idiot Jordan Peterson says, it is illogical to associate Marxism with Postmodernism in any way that doesn't contradict either theory.
    Last edited by xerxes; 11-08-2018 at 01:05 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Alexis de Tocqueville
    What is most important for democracy is not that great fortunes should not exist, but that great fortunes should not remain in the same hands. In that way there are rich men, but they do not form a class.

  11. #11
    fka Avebury
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,131
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fascism and communism have parallels and differences, what they do have in common is the fact they are both collectivistic, and have killed millions as a result of that collectivism.

    Of course they have differences too, I don't think anyone is arguing that they are identical, but people who emphasize that they are different are basically making the hypocritical assertion that "Communism good because cares about humanity, fascism bad because killed people". Lol. In fact, they both both killed millions of people in the name of some collective, so saying one is good and the other bad is hypocritcal.


  12. #12
    Imperial XerX xerxes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,774
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheUltimateEmcee View Post
    Of course they have differences too, I don't think anyone is arguing that they are identical, but people who emphasize that they are different are basically making the hypocritical assertion that "Communism good because cares about humanity, fascism bad because killed people".
    No, it's because Communism and Fascism are objectively different.

    Lol. In fact, they both both killed millions of people in the name of some collective, so saying one is good and the other bad is hypocritcal.

    ...

    Fascism and communism have parallels and differences, what they do have in common is the fact they are both collectivistic, and have killed millions as a result of that collectivism.
    If we're going to play that game, then there are also similarities between Capitalism and Stalin's shenanigans. Capitalist corporations are able to kill people and act with impunity (see exploitation of the third world) for the same reason Stalin did: absence of democratic checks and balances that contain the abuse of authority.
    Quote Originally Posted by Alexis de Tocqueville
    What is most important for democracy is not that great fortunes should not exist, but that great fortunes should not remain in the same hands. In that way there are rich men, but they do not form a class.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    10,381
    Mentioned
    255 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Uh kind of... that's how a lot of anti-semitism got started anyway. Working Class Goy Joe saw the Rich Jew get everything they wanted out of life while they slaved away for a lot less... and envy/hatred ensued. And it became way easier to justify treating them inhumanely to make them pay for their arrogance and being too rich/snobby... but of course it was the wrong way to go about it. Many Jews also view themselves as above humanity "You (goy) are the humans, we are the something more." Also "Jews are the sun/goyim are the moon." When people talk down on you enough, you can snap back at them.

    It's not like Jews are exempt from consequences or the law. Pedo Jared Fogle was jewish... and is now in prison. Roseanne is Jewish and got in huge trouble for comments she made on twitter etc. A Jew explained to me once that when they do something bad they're actually held to a much higher standard than a goy.

  14. #14
    fka Avebury
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,131
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xerx View Post
    If we're going to play that game, then there are also similarities between Capitalism and Stalin's shenanigans. Capitalist corporations are able to kill people and act with impunity (see exploitation of the third world) for the same reason Stalin did: absence of democratic checks and balances that contain the abuse of authority.
    We don't disagree here.


  15. #15
    Dalek Caan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    In war there usually is no good or evil side, just two evil sides believing they are the good side. The allies even had a nation on their side that committed an atrocity roughly equivalent to the holocaust in the case of the Soviet Union with Stalin and holomodor:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

    The victor makes themselves out to be the good guy and the opposing side as the bad guy, but they're just two sides of the same coin. The U.S. has been pretty horrendous when it comes to wars and their atrocities not even including covert indirect atrocities done by the CIA (nuked Japan twice as one example of a direct atrocity out of many), but it's human nature for the strongest nation or power to commit egregious crimes when they have the power to do so.

    I suppose the only difference between nations and powers is the extent of the severity of their crimes, but no empire has their hands clean because to get power you must first get your hands dirty. Then once they get power, it corrupts the nation or empire. History has proven time and time again for this to be true for nearly every country and empire to have existed. So all you really have in the end is that X nation or empire is the lesser of the two evils compared to Y nation or empire.

    The public just goes along with what their nation or empire does out of either ignorance of what their country has done (U.S. is a great example of that) or from propaganda that has convinced them that their country is fair and just. To think Germany in WWII is exempt from this rule because of the allies' account of WWII history is laughable. It all stems down to human nature being corrupted by power because society is just a macro extension of human nature.
    The US Daleks reign supreme!


  16. #16
    Communist Nazi Jew Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    bepis
    Posts
    980
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Every incarnation of statist-communism we've witnessed was transformed by the host-country to be centered around the needs of that state or empire, rather than the globe. The USSR became sort of a new Russian empire, and in a similar way, China after Mao came to greatly value its own national needs over those of others. The only instances of Communism that haven't done this in some capacity, or have even succeeded in any capacity, were closer to Anarcho-communes in places like islands or other areas of the third world, which only collapsed due to external colonialism and never truly became corrupt from within.

    When you hear a leftist warning of the evils of fascism and """"racism,"""" he'll usually sound the alarms of how crafty the "fascist" is in wrapping his clearly fascist policies in covert signalling and a not-explicitly-racist kind of appeal, even if the accused "fascist" says nothing explicitly fascist and mainly relies on moderate talking points of which some people are in fact true believers. So when an ethno-nationalist says something like he doesn't want to exterminate another ethnicity, just physically move them, you're meant to interpret everything he says as un-generously as possible, meant to assume that he's lying out his ass about his platform and psychically signalling to his followers to slowly take more radical actions; meanwhile, you're meant to believe that the equivalent leftist is being totally honest with his plans and visions for society, meant to believe he isn't lying out his ass when he says that you and your society don't deserve to be steamrolled over.

    I don't like ethno-nationalism any more than the next guy, but there's clearly a double standard here in how one extreme is allowed to be portrayed versus the other. If you're to believe the left-wing claim that Rightists are either all explicitly racist or just racist dogwhistlers, you HAVE to be allowed to apply that same kind of standard to Leftist thinkers. I think this all ties well into an idea that a lot of Left-wing individuals have expressed that I can respect and agree with called the Death of the Author, that we can only evaluate these ideologies based upon the historical outcomes of testing them, rather than what they claim. Mein Kampf's claims of restoring one's people to a healthier state is as dubious a claim as one that Socialism with actually optimize resource allocation, rather than causing starvation. It doesn't matter what's on paper. We have results that show Stato-Communism has a death toll as high as Fascism, if not higher.


    "Modernism" is just part of the new academic cult thinking that's become so predominant in our society, we think of it as odd when something contradicts it. Humanity sciences are nowhere near as rigorously operationalized as harder sciences and are far more vulnerable to bad data. While I don't fundamentally reject Modernism in all incarnations, you do have to acknowledge that the egalitarian, humanistic approach has led us to cognitively avoid certain foundational elements that determine if and how a modernist society can function, elements that won't go away and will continue to cause damage even if ignored, but that our devotion to Humanism makes us fail to address.
    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Shut the fuck up, dumbass.

  17. #17
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    LIE ENTj
    Posts
    386
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes and no. Every so often, a philosopher based in Hegel adopts the label. This is of it's nature, as communism is deeply rooted in Hegal's critiques of society, which directly influence Karl Marx, who wrote the manifesto. People like Marx gravitate to Marx's book, critique it, and move on their merry way.

    Yes, I agree, which is why I consider Trump's supporters along that line, the third of his base who likes him pretty unilaterally. It's why I have type him, my father, my friend, and so on and so forth as the infamous INFp. Again, compare Vladimir Lennin to Trump, and you'll see a different side of things, a more intellectualist elitist basis.

    And then there is Stalinism, and their decendents, my least favorite, and absolutely most loathed form. They lead to famine, violence, and tyranny, exactly the sort of thing communism was supposed to solve. Sadly, Lenninism has had one actual attempt, which really never lasted, and Stalinism kind of took over what is percieved as Communism. I will not disagree that Lennin executed people much in the same way Stalin did, but not on that scale and definitely not for reason of tightening up control, Lennin was much more moderate to Stalin, who I could definitely state is a psychopath. Sadly, he was really good at exporting Stalinism, so we suffer it today in the form of North Korea, who even aknowleges that they aren't communist, but Juche, their own thing. But yeah, if there ever was a more brilliant psychopath, it is that man, who successfully took an inneffective and inefficient system, and exported it to several different countries, many of them at least regional powers. It still impresses me today how well it worked.
    If I stop responding or posting, I've probably taken a break from posting stuff. This really taxes me for whatever reason. Said break could last anywhere from a month to a year. I will likely be back, as socionics is one of my interests. If I'm not on here, you can contact me on steam.

    I got a new computer, so I'll not type on mobile as much any more.

  18. #18
    Aramas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    United States
    TIM
    ESI-Se
    Posts
    996
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bastard View Post
    No. Most people who think that much about political philosophy are middle class. Poor people don't have the luxury.
    False. Working class intellectuals exist and have existed for a long time.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •