Stochastic Terrorism and Edgelord Humour

[CaptainHowdy]

Anyone who hasn't read at least Mein Kampf has no business trying to dictate to others what Nazi ideology "actually standards for". If someone feels they want to talk authoritatively on the subject, then there's also a myriad of other foundational writings that need to be considered, particularly those of Jakob Graf, Eugen Fischer, Hans F. K. Günther, and of course the Nazi's inner circle (Goebbels, Goering, Rosenberg, Himmler, etc.). And, of course, they should research the volkisch movements that spawned the Nazi party.

Anyone who says that the Holocaust wasn't presaged in their writings is either profoundly ignorant, or a flat-out denialist.

Have YOU read Mein Kampf? Do you have any pull quotes from that book or any of these sources that support your understanding of Nazi ideology? If the murder of millions is as much a part of Nazi ideology as you say it is, it shouldn't be too difficult to find explicit references. Or references to passages that you believe can be interpreted as calling for mass murder.

 

[Puppycow]

No, I don't remember. I wasn't born yet. I don't even remember the Kennedy assassination.

In the grand scheme of things, the holocaust was one of many genocides that have been perpetrated throughout history. The fact that it happened doesn't prove that the nazi ideology explicitly calls for the genocidal murder of millions of my fellow citizens. I have read the Platform of the National-Sopcialist German Workers' Party and the Twelve Theses and don't see any explicit calls for the death of any particular ethnic, racial, or religious group of people as such. I haven't read Mein Kampf, The Myth of the Twentieth Century or This Time the World any other book that promotes the nazi ideology. So my knowledge is incomplete.

I'm not saying that the holocaust was not intentional or that the nazis are not responsible for the holocaust. But the holocaust isn't proof that nazi ideology explicitly calls for the murder of millions of my fellow citizens any more than the holodomor is proof that mass murder is part and parcel of the socialist ideology.

Oh my. I guess the word "explicitly" is doing most of your heavy lifting for you.
But you need to look a little more closely and also think through the practical implications of this ideology from the stated goals.

I could mention The Final Solution or Generalplan Ost as very explicit and specific plans to commit genocide, but even your own links have statements that, while not "explicitly" calling for genocide, imply that genocide might be a logical or necessary or expedient means to achieve the stated goals.

4. Our most dangerous enemy is the Jew and those who are his slaves.

By defining Jews as "our most dangerous enemy", genocide becomes a logical policy.

4. Only Nationals (Volksgenossen) can be Citizens of the State. Only persons of German blood can be Nationals, regardless of religious affiliation. No Jew can therefore be a German National.

You can see how this sort of thing provided the ideological basis for later concrete plans for genocide like the Final Solution and Generalplan Ost.

 

[dann]

There is also the Blut und Boden ideology of National Socialism and the books by guys like Richard Walther Darré, but I guess they also wouldn't be explicit enough for CaptainHowdy.

 

[Darat]

It really doesn't matter one iota what was written a hundred years ago. The Nazis today celebrate the Nazis that got into power and what they did so of course any Nazi today is for the killing of millions of their fellow citizens. They wouldn't have chosen to be Nazis if they weren't.

 

[Darat]

Interesting that CaptainHowdy's posts in this thread show the exact tactics that are at the heart of the topic of this thread.

 

[jimbob]

Well, you're going to have to tell me what you think is equivalent. The Pittsburgh Synagogue shooting killed 11 last year. No congresspeople were wounded, however. How does that compare in your book?

How does one do the arithmetic if one considers the victims subhuman?

 

[luchog]

Do universities do it, though? Is it actually de rigeur for the Harvard admissions process? Aside from this one report of this one kid getting denied, is there any evidence that this is a standard practice that Harvard applies to every applicant?

Well, since people insist on being spoon-fed, instead of spending 15 seconds searching on Google, yes, the practice is widespread and de rigeur in many cases. It also seems to depend on the university and applicant pool.

The first two results:

https://www.usnews.com/education/be...lly-are-looking-at-your-social-media-accounts
https://www.insidehighered.com/admi...issions-officers-view-social-media-applicants

It looks like the practice may actually be declining, but it's still very common.

It's still very common for employers, however.

https://www.careerbuilder.com/advice/social-media-survey-2017
https://www.glassdoor.com/blog/what-recruiters-look-at-social-media/

 

[luchog]

There's also this post here that qualifies as this type of terrorism with the bonus that when it was called out it was written off as some type of edgelord humour.

Apparently Canadians are just as incapable of understanding satire as Americans are.

Of course there's always the alternative that maybe, just maybe the term "Stochasctic Terrorism" is a little bit stupid.

Those with actual expertise in the field don't seem to think so. I'll stick with what the experts say, rather than some random anonymous denialist trying to play schoolyard gotcha games.

 

[Stout]

Apparently Canadians are just as incapable of understanding satire as Americans are.

Oh....so it's "satire" now that it's coming from the left. Screw that, it's terrorism, the OP says so.

gotcha.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Oh....so it's "satire" now that it's coming from the left. Screw that, it's terrorism, the OP says so.

gotcha.

Are you doing the strawman act on accident, or on purpose?

Luchog is an effective communicator. If you think they're saying, "The left is always innocent in these cases," then work on your listening skills.

 

[jimbob]

There's also this post here that qualifies as this type of terrorism with the bonus that when it was called out it was written off as some type of edgelord humour.

Of course there's always the alternative that maybe, just maybe the term "Stochasctic Terrorism" is a little bit stupid.

Really? What about the model of ISIS websites encouraging supporters to commit acts of terror but with no coordination, just information on techniques and encouragement?

 

[Stout]

Are you doing the strawman act on accident, or on purpose?

Luchog is an effective communicator. If you think they're saying, "The left is always innocent in these cases," then work on your listening skills.

Can you think of any reason, any reason at all why someone would go down the it's only satire road on a thread that's trying to equate satire with terrorism ?

Just suck it up and admit it, the post is what's described in the OP.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Okay this is becoming an on-going thing is a lot of different discussion.

It's not satire/parody/Poe/trolling/whatever if it's functionally identical to doing the thing sincerely and leads to the same outcome.

 

[Stout]

Really? What about the model of ISIS websites encouraging supporters to commit acts of terror but with no coordination, just information on techniques and encouragement?

What about them ? ISIS is a designated terrorist group, right ?

ETA Are these sites trying to pass themselves off as edgelord humour ?

 

[d4m10n]

NSFW meme

NSFW - swearing

Came across this text-based meme credited to Josh Wheeler on a social networking website just a couple weeks back.

Laughed a bit, thought about reposting, then wondered whether we might be doing stochastic terrorism or not.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Can you think of any reason, any reason at all why someone would go down the it's only satire road on a thread that's trying to equate satire with terrorism ?

Just suck it up and admit it, the post is what's described in the OP.

Because sometimes it's satire, and sometimes it's not. Anyone who tries to treat it as all-or-nothing is an idiot.

Do you really believe that this sketch is the type of thing that Luchog is warning about in the OP, or would Luchog call that satire?

 

[Stout]

Because sometimes it's satire, and sometimes it's not. Anyone who tries to treat it as all-or-nothing is an idiot.

Who gets to make that call ?

 

[JoeMorgue]

Who gets to make that call ?

This is such a thought terminating cliche. It's meaningless.

Every change, every rule, every maintaining of the status quo, every change of the status quo is someone "making a call." It's not a new or terrifying concept. The entire point of "society" is to organize who gets to make calls and how we make them.

"Okay but look... I can still hangwring some more!" is not the answer to everything, or indeed anything.

 

[sphenisc]

The phenomenon was first comprehensively defined and explained in an article in DailyKos. Stochastic Terrorism: Triggering the shooters.

The definition of stochastic terrorism is, in brief, "The use of mass public communication, usually against a particular individual or group, which incites or inspires acts of terrorism which are statistically probable but happen seemingly at random."

.

The quoted definition doesn't appear in the article you link to. The defining property of terrorism is surely that it is intended to generate fear in a large group. Targeting a specific individual seems to run counter to that aim, so, while it may be described as incitement to murder or some such, calling it "stochastic terrorism" makes as much sense as "dwarf planet".

 

[Mumbles]

Oh....so it's "satire" now that it's coming from the left. Screw that, it's terrorism, the OP says so.

gotcha.

A classic example of someone simply ignoring open hatred, because "memes" or whatever.

Thank you, Stout, you have demonstrated the problem perfectly, please leave the stage.