Fascist Talking Points · 3:59pm Jun 23rd, 2018
Last night I got in a fight on Reddit with Nazis.
Actual, factual Nazis.
I woke up to about 30 messages like this, of varying degrees of open-Naziness.
Meanwhile the head of the Department of Homeland Security gave a speech on the moral and legal right to put children in concentration camps while standing in front of a fasces, the symbol of fascism.
Ten years ago I had a very curious thought experiment: What would it have been like to have been in fascist Germany in the 30's, to see the rise of the Nazis? How did they believe what they believe? Was it only because they lacked the warning of history? Naively, I thought it couldn't happen again.
I think, from the sheer volume of bullshit I've seen on this, it's important to tackle a bit of the bullshit. If you see someone bring this up, here's some very basic fact checking to a lot of the common points raised.
They're not really in cages!
Snopes on "crying children orchestra"
A mural at the entrance of the Texas Walmart facility:
Comparing Trump's administration to Hitler's devalues what Hitler did, and is insulting to survivors of the Holocaust. He hasn't killed millions of people! and You can't just call everyone who disagrees with you a Nazi!
A rise to power that never won a majority vote, but enough to consolidate legislative and executive power. This rise was seen by a historical increase in racist movements and policies and backed by the scapegoating of an ethnic minority. There was a rise in monopolies, a lowering of taxes for the rich, austerity measures for the working class, the necessity of which was blamed on foreign countries.
An emphasis was put on nation-first policies, and an escalation of militarism.
Unions were eradicated, the left are portrayed as a force that is holding the nation back, 'fake news' is an expression pioneered by Goering -- as is 'if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear' -- Wealth for the top 1% rises in a time period where all other growth is stagnating or actively regressing.
Am I describing Trump or Hitler?
Unemployment is down! The economy is up! Trump can't be all bad!
In both Italy in the 1920s and Germany in the 1930s, old industrial evils, thought to have passed permanently into history, re-emerged as the conditions of labor deteriorated precipitously. In the name of saving society from the Red Menace, unions and strikes were outlawed. Union property and farm cooperatives were confiscated and handed over to rich private owners. Minimum-wage laws, overtime pay, and factory safety regulations were abolished. This is not to gainsay that cultural differences can lead to important variations. Consider, for instance, the horrific role played by anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany as compared to fascist Italy.
Speedups became commonplace. Dismissals or imprisonment awaited those workers who complained about unsafe or inhumane work conditions. Workers toiled longer hours for less pay. The already modest wages were severely cut, in Germany by 25 to 40 percent, in Italy by 50 percent. In Italy, child labor was reintroduced. To be sure, a few crumbs were thrown to the populace. There were free concerts and sporting events, some meager social programs, a dole for the unemployed financed mostly by contributions from working people, and showy public works projects designed to evoke civic pride.
Both Mussolini and Hitler showed their gratitude to their big business patrons by privatizing many perfectly solvent state-owned steel mills, power plants, banks, and steamship companies. Both regimes dipped heavily into the public treasury to refloat or subsidize heavy industry. Agribusiness farming was expanded and heavily subsidized. Both states guaranteed a return on the capital invested by giant corporations while assuming most of the risks and losses on investments. As is often the case with reactionary regimes, public capital was raided by private capital.
At the same time, taxes were increased for the general populace but lowered or eliminated for the rich and big business. Inheritance taxes on the wealthy were greatly reduced or abolished altogether.
The result of all this? In Italy during the 1930s the economy was gripped by recession, a staggering public debt, and widespread corruption. But industrial profits rose and the armaments factories busily rolled out weapons in preparation for the war to come. In Germany, unemployment was cut in half with the considerable expansion in armaments jobs, but overall poverty increased because of the drastic wage cuts. And from 1935 to 1943 industrial profits increased substantially while the net income of corporate leaders climbed 46 percent. During the radical 1930s, in the United States, Great Britain, and Scandanavia, upper-income groups experienced a modest decline in their share of the national income; but in Germany the top 5 percent enjoyed a 15 percent gain.
Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds
But Obama-
Committed atrocious warcrimes and expanded executive powers. I know. It sucked then too. This is still getting worse.
What, unless you think the Black Lives Matter movement didn't happen under a black president? This isn't just an 'our side, their side' issue, and that's speaking from someone on the outside.
I'd like to end on one final exchange:
Then
In the December 1932 election, three candidates ran for president: the conservative incumbent Field Marshal von Hindenburg, the Nazi candidate Adolph Hitler, and the Communist party candidate Ernst Thaelmann. In his campaign, Thaelmann argued that a vote for Hindenburg
amounted to a vote for Hitler and that Hitler would lead Germany into war. The bourgeois press, including the Social Democrats, denounced this view as "Moscow inspired." Hindenburg was re-elected while the Nazis dropped approximately two million votes in the Reichstag election as compared to their peak of over 13.7 million. True to form, the Social Democrat leaders refused the Communist party's proposal to form an eleventh-hour coalition against Nazism. As in many other countries past and present, so in Germany, the Social Democrats would sooner ally themselves with the reactionary Right than make common cause with the Reds. Meanwhile a number of right-wing parties coalesced behind the Nazis and in January 1933, just weeks after the election, Hindenburg invited Hitler to become chancellor.
“And so, I established in 1919 a programme and tendency that was a conscious slap in the face of the democratic-pacifist world (…) [We knew] it might take five or ten or twenty years, yet gradually an authoritarian state arose within the democratic state, and a nucleus of fanatical devotion and ruthless determination formed in a wretched world that lacked basic convictions.
Only one danger could have jeopardised this development – if our adversaries had understood its principle, established a clear understanding of our ideas, and not offered any resistance. Or, alternatively, if they had from the first day annihilated with the utmost brutality the nucleus of our new movement.
Neither was done. The times were such that our adversaries were no longer capable of accomplishing our annihilation, nor did they have the nerve. Arguably, they furthermore lacked the understanding to assume a wholly appropriate attitude. Instead, they began to tyrannise our young movement by bourgeois means, and, by doing so, they assisted the process of natural selection in a very fortunate manner. From there on, it was only a question of time until the leadership of the nation would fall to our hardened human material. (…)
The more our adversaries believe they can obstruct our development by employing a degree of terror that is characteristic of their nature, the more they encourage it. Nietzsche said that a blow which does not kill a strong man only makes him stronger, and his words are confirmed a thousand times. Every blow strengthens our defiance, every persecution reinforces our single-minded determination, and the elements that do fall are good riddance to the movement.”
~ Adolf Hitler
EDIT: The comment section below provides some fantastic examples of these in action, and how they're used in real-world situations. I highly recommend reading through.
Well.
People wonder why I'm paranoid all the time.
No really.
You have a more capable head on your shoulders than most people I know.
I even think comparing their treatment to that of citizen's kids is missing the point. No one should be separated from their family unless for their own safety. This is not a cost issue (See, Space Force and tax cuts). People should not be punished for their parent's crimes. The crimes are a misdemeanor if they're applying for asylum.
But nothing matters, he made us mad so his base is happy.
Trump 2020
You're trying to bring reason to something that attracts unreasonable people. It's a nice sentiment, but in the end you merely lose hope in the common person's mental acuity.
Personally I wouldn’t compare Trump to Hitler because I think he is a different kind of evil. I think the main problem with Trump is that he is an egomaniac who is suffering from some kind of mental degradation. He is first and foremost a businessman, not a particularly good one mind you but I think he is more an evil of capitalism than nationalism. The parallels to the situation are staggering though.
4888164
My favourite is actually:
My grandfather had more than a few disagreements with Nazis. He survived, so I'm assuming they didn't.
This is why we have to say screw tolerance when it comes to these people. Thanks for standing up, and doing so eloquently.
Really, actual Nazis. How interesting. There is an apparent lack of knowledge regarding the legal basis for what is happening, how long it’s been going on, the statistics involved, etc. Most importantly, Trump can’t make new laws and has to enforce ones on the books. Yeah, policies can be altered but the laws themselves can’t without congress doing their thing. The President isn’t all powerful and all.
Hell, the extreme majority of photos attributed to Trump have been debunked as fake or verified as taken under previous administrations.
But hey, it’s not like in the last few years border crossings are up over 5000% and people crossing illegally with their ‘kids’ (proven false via dna testing) are up 314%. Nearly 80% of women crossing the border illegally are raped at least once by people in their party. Let alone the fatalities, injuries, etc.
But yeah, Trump is a Nazi for having policies that have caused the most arrests for human trafficking, smuggling, and trafficking for sexual purposes, out of any previous President. Over 1900 alone this year btw. It’s almost as if laws weren’t being enforced on all sorts of things. The US government wouldn’t do underhanded or evil things to gain power, I swear. <laughs in crimes against humanity, patriot act, corruption, etc>
It’s amazing what data is out there and isn’t put out by the mainstream news. Almost as if there’s an agenda or something. Deportations of this style have been going on since the mid 90’s, and actually peaked under Obama. He has the highest inprisonment and deportation rate of any President, as well as the worst humanitarian conditions.
But yeah it’s an issue that’s magically popping up now. Right. Now if we want to talk ‘Hitler style’ camps, let’s take a look at FDR.
4888128
The choices are take the kids away, put them in gen pop with the parents or those pretending to be their parents, or construct new facilities for both.
New facilities are under construction already to keep families together, but the news doesn't say that. Or that it’s been a policy since the 90’s that Clinton, Bush, and Obama have all enforced.
As for money, oddly enough since the tax cuts, the treasury has been taking in nearly record amounts of money. You can’t tax people to prosperity.
Well...
a)I don't think comparing Trump to Hitler is in any way reasonable. Hitler was the cause and he believed (mostly) in what he was selling. Trump is symptom of a similar process, for sure, but he's hardly ideologically coherent, much less ideologically driven. He's in this for popularity, quick buck, and maybe some belief in some nebulous "common sense" solutions to some mostly thought-up problems.
There is no point fighting Trump unless there is a solution to a systematic issue that caused him, which is why I think the whole "Russia probe" and "impeach" movements are stupid, harmful and perhaps even dangerous.
And the issue cannot be easily solved because it stems, ultimately, from economics.
b)I'm not entirely convinced that this whole thing with the children is really wrong.
The people crossed the border illegally. Therefore they broke the law, therefore they should be imprisoned. Kids cannot be imprisoned, therefore they have to be separated from their parents, if temporarily. Sure, the conditions the kids are contained in should be humane and the kids should not come to harm, but the separation itself is necessary and justified.
We don't let thieves free because they have a kid, and we don't let a, I dunno, someone who gives out bribes to stay at home if they happen to be a single mother/father. That stuff is taken into account, but ultimately it's not nor should it be a deciding factor.
4888181
[citation needed]
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2017-Dec/BP%20Total%20Monthly%20Apps%20by%20Sector%20and%20Area%2C%20FY2000-FY2017.pdf
says that yearly border apprehensions have fallen about five times since 2000
4888181
Let's start here. How about I get you to provide a citation for everything you just said?
EDIT: He did. Here's a link to me breaking down his explanation. Basically, everything up there is transparent lies or dishonest framing techniques.
4888181
[Citation Needed]
Sorry, I felt like your post was missing something.
(Seriously this is not that hard to do you can actually include links to online source data, for instance, unless you're worried that the sources you cite are going to be dismissed.)
4888189
Actually by virtue of them not being US Citizens, we usually don't imprison people who cross the border illegally. That's what deportation is for. You do that when people have committed actual crimes on US Soil.
And there's literally no reason to separate these kids from their parents during the process. We don't separate kids from parents during trials, even. What's happened here is actually pretty fucked up, and kids who aren't to blame are getting hurt for it.
But hey I mean if your issue is more about the c r i m e of ignoring sovereign borders because you're scared of being shot by criminals or dying because you can't find a job and you're under a lot of pressure and have only bad decisions in front of you than it is about being a decent goddamn human being I'd see how this confuses you o.o
4888189
Pick which one you want citations for and I’ll link it when I get to my PC.
4888192
4888193
They’ll be supplied when I get to my PC. I’d recommend starting with FBI and DHS statistics, DOJ reports, etc.
To be blunt, not that I expect them to be listened to. I’m here for my own amusement, but on the minuscule chance of changing minds, I’ll do it.
And before I get called a racist Nazi, I’m a libertarian 1st generation double minority child of Hispanic and mixed immigrants.
4888193
ok, ouch. That hurt. No need to get personal.
As far as I know "improper entry" is actually a crime under US law.
http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/crime-enter-illegally.htm
According to the above, people can be detained, pending trial and can be imprisoned for up to six months (more if they are repeated offenders).
If I am mistaken, then please by all means, correct me.
Finally, no, my issue is not so much a fear of scary Mexican men. I do, however, believe that sovereign borders are still a thing, and there is, in fact a right of the people of a country to decide who gets to get in and who does not (within some rather nebulous borders of what constitutes a natural right to citizenship), and that entering against said decisions is in fact wrong. Even if the way they decide it, and their reasons for it, is very stupid.
4888181
i.imgflip.com/21aqbc.jpg
4888144
I fail to understand the relevancy of this picture.
4888172
Ah yes the ‘I’m embracing the exact same thing I’m accusing the other side of doing’ strategy.
4888189
I'd never thought about it that way, but it's a really good point.
Also, hey man! Good to see you again.
4888208
No the "be tolerant of everything except intolerance" strategy. Because tolerance for evil is just complicity.
4888206
They're in my server, I mentioned how much I hated people who use the Spike emote. It's a jab at me. They're good people.
4888208
The "Not being an asshole, but still standing up to other people who are assholes," strategy.
...You are part of the assholes in this example. I'm not sure if that came through.
4888208
pre00.deviantart.net/3466/th/pre/i/2016/005/d/7/the_paradox_of_tolerance_by_americandreaming-d9mluz5.jpg
But, again, I'm waiting on the source citations, regardless.
4888187
The other option is open borders, to simply welcome them into the states and absorb them just like Arizona would welcome a bunch of people moving in from Texas.
4888212
4888213
pre00.deviantart.net/a679/th/pre/i/2012/042/8/e/super_spike_io__with_awesome_stache__by_krzykelly-d4pbwhn.png
Call and raise, gentlemen. Call and raise.
Hey, can I get a link to the woman justifying the child concentration camps?
4888219
Here you go
4888211
Ah, reductio ad adsurdum in practice.
If you’re intolerant for evil, where is the screeching about literally everything else wrong with the situation? Where were you years ago about this same subject? Hell, where were you with Bill Clinton sent armed police to rip a child out of a closet and deport him after his mother died to get him to America?
Or is it you’re angry because the media says you need to be angry about it without supplying enough facts to let someone make up their own mind. Just enough to imply they are correct and moral when their stances are iffy.
And yes, I should be at my PC in the next hour or two and can supply citations to my previous post comments.
4888217
Which is not only the moral thing to do but also will be good for the country in the long term. Its not like this country is entirely made of immigrants or anything...
Just for some context here, my great-opa was an illegal immigrant from Germany.
4888216
It’ll be a while before I get to my PC but they’ll be posted. I’m just on a short break from real life and then back to the grindstone.
Hour or two likely. Sooner if I finish prep work for tonight faster than expected.
4888202
Sorry, I'm just
I'm not actually as sorry for hurting your feelings as I am annoyed at your criminal inability to understand that maybe children getting separated from their parents in a foreign land as a result of enforcing the rule of law - even if the rule of law called for that, which it doesn't in some of these cases - may in fact be evidence that our current method of enforcing that law should change because it is cruel?
Like, we don't need to be cruel to have border security. These are not goals that are in opposition. The method of enforcement here is cruel, and frankly counterproductive (congratulations, USA, you just stole a bunch of kids from their parents and will likely have to move them into foster care. Great job securing your borders! These rules are smart and consistent).
I'd also notice this border conversation in the US always seems to focus on our southern border, and not those godless, liberal Canadians up north coming to take our jobs and peddle maple syrup and superior internet sketch comedy troupes. Or how we have one of the absolute least secure borders in the world up there.
Man my dude it'd take literal forever for you to find all of that. I know it would for me, half those statistics you cited didn't seem to be accessible from the DHS's homepage, such as the number-of-women-raped-per-party thing, or the fake-kids thing, which I'm wondering how the hell we would have hard data on since so far as I can tell border patrol and ICE are more concerned about number of illegal aliens, etc. etc.
@_@
In this little debate I am on the side of Arxsys.
I can provide a video about this topic.
Also don't compare Trump with Hitler, the policies are different, Hitler created policies that made Jews as second class citizens and then PREVENTED the flight of the Jews from Germany. I should know I am a Slav aka the third in line after Jews and Gipsies that where supposed to be exterminated by the Nazis in order to create the so called Lebensraum.
I just want to take a moment to appreciate that Arxsys is systematically working down, in point form, everything I said in the blog as an example of the alt-right rhetoric without irony.
Consider this a live demonstration, amigos.
4888224
Ah, what-aboutism in practice. And it's not reductio ad absurdum either, if I'm doing anything it's argumentum ad lapidum because I chose to be pithy.
4888229
Oh don't worry I am.
4888227
You didn't link the other guy into this comment.
Also, CJ said
And while I'm more than a little bothered by the notion of children being separated under any circumstances, he's a nice guy and generally reasonable.
The only good Nazi is a fucking dead Nazi. Thank you as always for the good work you do, Comrade.
4888214
‘Feels’ and personal morality have zero impact on the current legal system’s function or fact. If I’m an asshole for pointing out harsh realities of things, so be it.
Citations will be supplied. If I’m proven wrong, I can accept it. But emotions have no place in a debate about legalities.
4888229
I’m doing this for my own amusement. Btw, I’m a centrist libertarian.
But I’ll stop being irritating for a while so I can finish things up and supply citations.
4888234
You're not allowed to unilaterally set the terms of the debate, sorry.
You're also missing the point, which is that regardless of the legality of the arguments the fact remains that it's immoral and the "laws" (note sarcastic quote marks) should be changed.
And I'm hearing alot of talk about incoming citations, but nothing yet. So kindly put up or shut up.
4888227
TLDR version of my answer: I spend a lot of time in .gov statistical databases and reports. Usually referencing other things, but once you know their insane system, it’s a lot easier to navigate.
Not all answers will be from those records though.
Edit: apparently people are getting pissy, so I’ll get back to work, so I can get to my PC and link stuff. $$$ comes before fun and all.
4888227
There is always a need to balance justice, practicality and mercy, for sure.
In this case, the balance is far from perfect, in a lot of ways because the law was very poorly thought out (same as "Muslim ban" for example). There was, I think, simply no thought put into where would the children go, hence the crude makeshift cages.
However, that being said:
a)It's fair if you think the law is cruel. That is a good reason to change the law, but not a very good reason to just ignore it, or even worse, fault people for enforcing it. Again, not something I would defend on all points -- there are laws that are beyond the pale, but I do not think this is one of those quite yet. The fault, again, should lie on people who wrote a law, assuming it would not actually be fully enforced, and in a way that should it be actually enforced it becomes stupid and cruel.
b)Even under the best of circumstance, there would be a period of time before those who were caught crossing the border illegally are processed and deported back (or let in). They broke the law, they (I assume, I may be wrong) have nowhere to live, and they most probably represent a not-insignificant flight risk. That would indicate that they need to be detained. Putting the children separately from the adults strikes me as much better alternative than putting them in an adult detention facility.
Again, if this policy shift weren't so sudden and poorly thought out, there would be better ways to do it (e.g. German model, where the border-crossers are put in flats that much more resemble actual houses, and where keeping kids with the adults does not pose danger to either), but it'd be expensive, time-consuming, and in the final account not strictly necessary: We owe those people (as we do to all people) a duty of making sure they are held in conditions that pose no danger to their lives and health, and allow them the basic human dignity, everything else, while commendable, cannot be obligatory. They were not invited, they, in fact, came explicitly despite not being asked to enter, or being asked not to enter, and as such it's not really fair of them to expect a lot of hospitality.
The way I understand it, the kids are not in any danger, come to no harm, and detention is intended to be short term while their parents are processed. In the final account, the fault lies very much in either the parents who attempted illegal (and I do want to stress this part) border crossing, or with those who made said parents have to run to another country with their kids.
Again, I have a rather superfluous knowledge of this specific issue, and as such I may be wrong. If I am - I will change my mind.
4888238
Also: Gee, people getting "pissy" about a serious issue that affects thousands of people's lives and is emblematic of our fears of where the country is headed? And that's spoiling your fun? My heart bleeds for you.
4888238
Okay, it's been an hour; are you holding off on linking things so you can look smugger when you finally provide this evidence because you've been pretty active in this debate the whole time and you've given us no reason to believe you. If so, that's pretty bad form.
(Tangily related sidenote: Can you link to were you got your profile picture as well because it looks cool.)
4888243
Here you go
10 comments in the last hour, one makes a bunch of unsubstantiated claims, and the rest are talking about how proof is totally going to come later, while still dismissing opposition the entire time.
Pay attention to this technique: Insist the information is there without providing it or linking to it, while still arguing as if your point is already proven. It's a classic.
4888252
Yep, they also tried redefining the debate. And, as you said, a paint by numbers reiteration of what you said earlier. Some Gish Gallop too, though not as much.
4888234
By the way, you say you're a libertarian. What the heck are YOU doing making an argument from legality?
So what do we do? Open borders? If you don't detain people, and you don't prevent entry, that's open borders. I'm not actually 100% opposed to it, but there are good arguments against that policy. For instance, it would make the millitary pointless since a foreign country could send a few hundred million people, conquering the country is easy if you have a majority and can write the laws. (And no, you can't deny the vote - birthright citizenship make any resident a voting resident, just wait a decade or two.) Until we live in a post-scarity utopia with no major conflicts, I don't see open borders being viable. But then... what do you do? What kind of closed border policy doesn't involve preventing entry?
4888272
Well, logistically sending "couple hundred million" civilians across the border, is a logistic operation that is WAY harder than any war. Doing so without anyone noticing, even more so. Not to mention that not that many countries can just willy-nilly spare hundred million people for twenty yeards.
I'd say that this scenario is a bit beyond what is reasonable.
4888272
A long-ass summary