• Croquette@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’d say that the nazi salute on live tv sealed the deal.

      If it looks like a Nazi and squeak like a Nazi, it’s a fucking Nazi.

        • Senal@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Taxonomy.

          • A cat is [animal]
          • A dog is an [animal]

          The nazi’s did such a good job of distinguishing themselves they created their own (colloquial) taxonomic branch.

          So [nazi] could be considered a parent grouping of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party and also potentially a parent grouping for the republicans.

          I think they key here is separating the nazi party from the [nazi] category

          As you pointed out all [nazi]'s are [fascist]'s but not all [fascist]'s are [nazi]'s

          • National Socialist German Workers’ Party were [nazi]'s
          • The American Republican Party are subjectively showing enough similarities (both in type and progression) that they get the provisional label of [nazi] as it’s the closest existing definition.

          Might turn out that they don’t quite fall in the same branch, might turn out they do. Until then [nazi] is an easy shortcut for describing the types of behaviour displayed.

          Even if they were just a direct descendent ( taxonomically ) rather than a sibling of the original nazi party there would still be an argument to claim they were nazi’s

          Like :

          • animal -> mammal -> cat
          • nazi -> nazi party -> republican

          Come back in a few years and you’ll probably get your definitive answer either way.

          You don’t have to agree with any of that of course, but it does demonstrate how someone might have an opposing opinion to your own.

        • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          That’s an extremely narrow point that isn’t worth bothering with, because nobody is confused about what you mean when you call them “nazis”.

          Also it’s not one guy doing a zeig heil, it’s become a trend amongst them now. They have invited the comparison openly, and anybody getting all pissy about “you just call everything you don’t like nazi” is just a crybully who’s deliberately wasting your time. At this point anybody turned off of your cause by your use of the word “nazi” isn’t your ally in the first place.

          Like sure they’re not exactly the same as the NSDAP, but the category still applies, and it’s not worth anybody’s time splitting hairs over the exact nature of the type of fascism they have, because “nazi” does the job and again, nobody is confused by it, because the original nazis are all resting in piss.

          Do you have any argument as to why this matters, in any way, at all?

            • Senal@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              the majority of the population doesn’t identify this as being nazism.

              That’s a big claim for no citation.

            • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              So your argument rests not on truth but on populism.

              Even if you’re right in your wholly unsubstantiated claim, the way to get more people on your side is by persuading them, not by capitulating to their ill-informed beliefs. Giving in to their bullshit is how you join their side.

              I would love to know what your media diet is.