There Will be Blood: Boston's Straight Pride Parade.

[Cavemonster]

Yeah, but your grandmother was probably not one of the mud people. If Mexican's were white conservatives, people like Baylor would have no objection to them entering the country.

One of the weirdest things is that if the right wing of the US hadn't really embraced racism, they could have had massive allies in Mexican immigrants. Most are Catholic and most would buy in hard for the old GOPs anti abortion, "family values" stances.

 

[smartcooky]

One of the weirdest things is that if the right wing of the US hadn't really embraced racism, they could have had massive allies in Mexican immigrants. Most are Catholic and most would buy in hard for the old GOPs anti abortion, "family values" stances.

100%, but they just can't get over their irrational, childish fear of "the other"!

 

[Darat]

One of the weirdest things is that if the right wing of the US hadn't really embraced racism, they could have had massive allies in Mexican immigrants. Most are Catholic and most would buy in hard for the old GOPs anti abortion, "family values" stances.

You are forgetting that to the extreme protestant Christian churches Roman Catholics are the devil's servants. And I'm not exaggerating. Immigrants, brown and RC, lucky Trump isn't nuking them!

 

[Thermal]

Richard Spencer wants "peaceful ethnic cleansing" That's good, right?

No. But it is not advocating genocide, which was the topic.

I thought it was his beliefs we were going to analyze, not the fact that he's jumped ship. Was he or was he not a proper Nazi? He says he was. What do you think?

(Please note that we're not talking a distant past here, but less than a year.)

As the former leader of the largest (snicker) American neo-nazi group...er, collapsing neo-nazi group, sure. I guess you could call him a proper nazi. In fact, you could probably assume he is the most extreme of them all. Presumably his views on genocide would be over-the-top. I didn't see any on his SPLC page or elsewhere, perhaps you are familiar?

Nope.

Great, thanks. Much clearer.

Then why do you?

So that that poster gets a little taste of what their pissiness adds to the discussion.

 

[uke2se]

No. But it is not advocating genocide, which was the topic.

I get a bit worried whenever Spencer discusses the Jewish Question, but I suppose as long as he doesn't outright state that all Jews should be killed it's nothing to bother with.

As the former leader of the largest (snicker) American neo-nazi group...er, collapsing neo-nazi group, sure. I guess you could call him a proper nazi. In fact, you could probably assume he is the most extreme of them all. Presumably his views on genocide would be over-the-top. I didn't see any on his SPLC page or elsewhere, perhaps you are familiar?

Ok, so there's one who you would admit was a proper Nazi. Should we try to find another one?

Andrew Anglin? Nazi or not?

 

[Thermal]

I get a bit worried whenever Spencer discusses the Jewish Question, but I suppose as long as he doesn't outright state that all Jews should be killed it's nothing to bother with.

That's fair. These guys can be assumed to be less than honest.But the flip side is, how else do we evaluate them? Innuendo? Projection? Assumption?

Ok, so there's one who you would admit was a proper Nazi. Should we try to find another one?

Andrew Anglin? Nazi or not?

Whoa whoa whoa, where you goin? We're not making a Who's Who list; you chose one to scrutinize their claims. Ok, you freely picked Schoep, so I guess this guy is your slam-dunk knock-it-out-of-the park genocidal maniac. So. What are his claims on the subject of genocide?

 

[uke2se]

Whoa whoa whoa, where you goin? We're not making a Who's Who list; you chose one to scrutinize their claims. Ok, you freely picked Schoep, so I guess this guy is your slam-dunk knock-it-out-of-the park genocidal maniac. So. What are his claims on the subject of genocide?

I wasn't working that angle. I was working the "Nazi or not" angle. And I picked Shoepp at random from the SPLC list of prominent Nazis. Can I assume that you agree that everyone on that list is a proper Nazi?


His views on genocide are presumably the same as all other Nazis. It's embedded in the ideology.

 

[Thermal]

I wasn't working that angle. I was working the "Nazi or not" angle. And I picked Shoepp at random from the SPLC list of prominent Nazis. Can I assume that you agree that everyone on that list is a proper Nazi?


His views on genocide are presumably the same as all other Nazis. It's embedded in the ideology.

FFS, that's exactly what we are arguing about!

I asked that we stop theorizing what modern nazis think, and actually pick one to analyze their claims.

You offered Schoep.

Now you say 'JK, I'm just making lists!"

Come on, man

 

[uke2se]

FFS, that's exactly what we are arguing about!

I asked that we stop theorizing what modern nazis think, and actually pick one to analyze their claims.

You offered Schoep.

Now you say 'JK, I'm just making lists!"

Come on, man

Ok, let's do it then. I'll let you find a Nazi that doesn't espouse genocide. That is, a self-described Nazi that is against genocide.

Remember, the default position for everyone - but you, seemingly - is that it is part of Nazi ideology to be pro-genocide.

Because I tried to find a Nazi that was against genocide and I failed.

 

[dann]

No. But it is not advocating genocide, which was the topic.

Hitler's Endlösung didn't really start till 1941:

Between 1941 and 1945, across German-occupied Europe, Nazi Germany and its collaborators systematically murdered some six million Jews, around two-thirds of Europe's Jewish population. The murders were carried out in pogroms and mass shootings; by a policy of extermination through labour in concentration camps; and in gas chambers and gas vans in German extermination camps, chiefly Auschwitz, Bełżec, Chełmno, Majdanek, Sobibór, and Treblinka in occupied Poland.
Germany implemented the persecution in stages. Following Adolf Hitler's appointment as Chancellor on 30 January 1933, the regime built a network of concentration camps in Germany for political opponents and those deemed "undesirable", starting with Dachau on 22 March 1933.
The Holocaust (Wikipedia)

And I don't think that he ever openly committed to genocide, which is why even some Jews were able to convince themselves that it was never going to happen, and some Germans could remain in denial about it - just like you now.
You are digging your own grave with this argument. Be grateful that it's just metaphorically.

 

[dann]

Because I tried to find a Nazi that was against genocide and I failed.

Let me help you with that:

Neo-Nazis Against 'Genocide'
Led by neo-Nazi webmaster Alex Linder, a group of about 30 neo-Nazis gathered in Knoxville May 26 for a "Rally Against Genocide" organized in the names of Christian and Newsom. At least one of the demonstrators wore a swastika T-shirt.
KILLING OF KNOXVILLE, TENN. COUPLE EXPLOITED TO ATTACK BLACKS (SPLC, Oct. 01, 2007)

Of course, they are obviously insincere. What they mean is that they, i.e. in their ****** up brains, the white race, are the victims of genocide.

 

[uke2se]

Let me help you with that:




Of course, they are obviously insincere. What they mean is that they, i.e. in their ****** up brains, the white race, are the victims of genocide.

That's why it was so tedious to look for Nazis who are against genocide. I kept finding this kind of ****.

That said, I didn't actually expect to find anything.

 

[ponderingturtle]

No. But it is not advocating genocide, which was the topic.

Like with the Rohingya. Not genocide just ethnic cleansing and people need to stop being so hyperbolic that there is really anything wrong with that.

 

[Thermal]

Ok, let's do it then. I'll let you find a Nazi that doesn't espouse genocide. That is, a self-described Nazi that is against genocide.

You're bobbing and weaving again. I already conceded that it would be time consuming for me to prove the negative, although we both know they do openly oppose it, but as you just said to dann, you simply handwave it. Saves me the trouble, I guess. But I think we can agree that anyone endorsing genocide is going to be less than forthright about it publicly?

Remember, the default position for everyone - but you, seemingly - is that it is part of Nazi ideology to be pro-genocide.

Because I tried to find a Nazi that was against genocide and I failed.

Oh for christs sake. Even SLPC in their definition acknowledges that they are inconsistent in their core beliefs. That's what we are arguing about. You can't just declare your opinion correct without evidence. There is a term for that.

Spencer is a neo-nazi. Agreed? Spencer publicly advocates against violence. Agreed? So your statement is factually false, unless you handwave it.

Now back to Schoep, who you offered. What are...er, were... his public opinions on genocide?

 

[Thermal]

Hitler's Endlösung didn't really start till 1941:




And I don't think that he ever openly committed to genocide, which is why even some Jews were able to convince themselves that it was never going to happen, and some Germans could remain in denial about it - just like you now.
You are digging your own grave with this argument. Be grateful that it's just metaphorically.

You are still begging the question. Your argument assumes unbroken ideology identical to the Germans.

My argument, and that of SPLC, is that they are not consistent.

 

[dann]

Spencer publicly advocates against violence.

He does? And what does he do privately?

Colin Liddell, who was a prime blogger for AlternativeRight.com that was created by Richard Spencer, was known for his controversial articles. This included ones that questioned the history of the Holocaust, as well as bluntly put his belief that black people were barely better than animals. While Spencer was still the editor of the website, he published an article by Liddell called “Is Black Genocide Right?”

Instead of asking how we can make reparations for slavery, colonialism, and Apartheid or how we can equalize academic scores and incomes, we should instead be asking questions like, “Does human civilization actually need the Black race?” “Is Black genocide right?” and, if it is, “What would be the best and easiest way to dispose of them?” With starting points like this, wisdom is sure to flourish, enlightenment to dawn.
…
As we know, the world is becoming increasingly over-populated, while at the same time vital resources are being rapidly depleted. The world will be unable to support much of its future projected population growth. In fact we are probably heading for a great ‘die off’ in which hundreds of millions of our kind will cease to be.
With Europeans and some Asians having much less children, most of the population growth leading to this future crisis is projected to come from Africans. This is the race that history and the present example of South Africa proves is least able to take care of itself; a race that has contributed almost nothing to the pool of civilization and which even shows little inclination to stay within the bounds of that civilization; a race that also seems to harbor a potent inferiority complex and savage hatred towards the creators of that civilization.

The Alt-Right Goes Full Genocide (Anti-Fascist News, April 2017)

 

[dann]

You are still begging the question. Your argument assumes unbroken ideology identical to the Germans.

No, it assumes no such thing. Your argument assumes that if people don't outright say that they want genocide and even if they say it, but they don't have an actual plan, then they can't possibly want racist genocide.

My argument, and that of SPLC, is that they are not consistent.

Nobody has claimed "unbroken ideology", and I have several times mentioned why American Nazis don't want to annex the Sudetenland, for instance, and how some them would like to replace the persecution of Jews with the persecution of Muslims (or blacks).
Your "unbroken ideology" idea is a childish attempt to defend your argument.

 

[Thermal]

No, it assumes no such thing. Your argument assumes that if people don't outright say that they want genocide and even if they say it, but they don't have an actual plan, then they can't possibly want racist genocide.

dann, our opinions on these guys are almost identical, except that I think it's important not to drown the arguments in hyperbole.

The SPLC agrees with me, that neo-nazis are inconsistent with their beliefs. Just based on what I believe about human nature, I don't assume they are genocidal, or even wannabe genocidal, without a pretty slam-dunk reason. You do. I guess that's an agree to disagree impasse.

Nobody has claimed "unbroken ideology", and I have several times mentioned why American Nazis don't want to annex the Sudetenland, for instance, and how some them would like to replace the persecution of Jews with the persecution of Muslims (or blacks).
Your "unbroken ideology" idea is a childish attempt to defend your argument.

And...yet again...you handwave away my own description of them, which intentionally divorces modern nazis from their German forerunners.

But you still see genocide as a core belief, unbroken in ideology from the Germans. I don't. I think they pick and choose their hate, just like the SLPC claims. Again, I think that is an impasse to this discussion. You handwave it all away and twist my argument to one you are more comfortable arguing. See ya on the next one.

 

[ponderingturtle]

You are still begging the question. Your argument assumes unbroken ideology identical to the Germans.

My argument, and that of SPLC, is that they are not consistent.

To be fair neither were the german nazis.

 

[ponderingturtle]

dann, our opinions on these guys are almost identical, except that I think it's important not to drown the arguments in hyperbole.

The SPLC agrees with me, that neo-nazis are inconsistent with their beliefs. Just based on what I believe about human nature, I don't assume they are genocidal, or even wannabe genocidal, without a pretty slam-dunk reason. You do. I guess that's an agree to disagree impasse.

Just like the national socialist german workers party see this article

https://www.nytimes.com/1922/11/21/archives/new-popular-idol-rises-in-bavaria-hitler-credited-with.html