What is bash the fash and why are people so against it?

[Cuppy]

Sure, if you're an infantile extremist who only sees the world in black and white. Grow the fuck up, smell the roses and graduate into the real world.

I'm not extremist at all, where did you dig that up? Are you a nazi or a fascist or some special oppressionistsnowflake or where did that butthurt came from!?

[chewie49]

When you dehumanize the "other" side by applying a derogatory label like 'nazi' or 'sub-human' and the like; you no longer need to debate or listen, you can just go straight to violence. Using violence (discounting self defense) instead of words is a confession that you have no argument to offer and only unintelligible emotion.

[Liftbrul]

I'm not extremist at all, where did you dig that up?

Oh sweet irony, I'm being slain.

[Cuppy]

Oh sweet irony, I'm being slain.

Ah, good old "bark and run off"

[Noogai131]

Baseline. The baseline of Nazism is.... R_CI__ HI__A_C_Y <- But to crack for y'all!
Communism is not based on anything above. It is not.
And communism had genocide, sure. All kind of fucked up shit happened, but was that the base idea? I mean I highly doubt the nazi's were pondering after 500 000 cooked jews that "Maybe Göring, maybe this isn't the way..." It was. It was the idea all along.

The inherent basis of Nazism is just that of superiority. This LED to genocide, just as the inherent basis of Communism being the seizure of the means of production and redistribution of wealth, which LED to genocide. One is much more distasteful, but the end results remain the same. Supporting communism in most major governments of the world in the last few centuries has led to MUCH worse outcomes than what happen with the National Socialists. That's purely indisputable.

Think of it like this.
Person A is all about football. He wants to play football every day. FOOTBALL!!!
Person B doesn't like football. Not a one bit. He hates football.

Which person you'd play, or chat about football with? Person A I guess?
Same goes with assaulting fascsists, they are all about violence against certain group of people so I bet they like violence then. Ready to be served, right where you asked.

But until they become violent, YOU are the violent one. You don't get to shoot somebody in America, for example, just because they called out nasty names. You have to be in fear of your life or another life. That could come from anywhere from a legitimate threat (man holding a knife) to actual violence. Until such a state, all you are doing is pre-emptive violence. Would you be OK with Trump or the US nuking a country as a pre-emptive strike, like north korea? After all, they suppress and murder their own populace, enforce dictatorial and draconian laws and starve them, AND even have gone so far as to threaten the world multiple times over.

This is taking YOUR ideology and expanding it to the bigger picture. Do you understand why your stance doesn't work? You cannot convict people of thought crimes and leap to violence for DIFFERENCE OF OPINIONS, no matter HOW different the opinion.

And please, no "peaceful discrimination" or some bullshit about "Make them all go back to their OWN country". Fuck you, YOU go there if you enjoy the view or some shit, we'll just live along right here.

You are free to disagree with them. I certainly do, and have done so within my own country of Australia multiple times. In public, I have had these arguments with vile bigots, and have, while without elegance, shut them down in front of a small scale audience, showing that reason can win against hateful ignorance. You are, however, NOT FREE, to assault them.

This has worked quite well in my life. But going with "You get what you wish" goes along aswell. Discrimination and violence is something you dig, I sure want you to have things you like in that case, I can deliver some.

Please show where I have supported discrimination and violence. Don't bullshit, don't try to mince words, quote me DIRECTLY and show where I have DIRECTLY supported discrimination and violence. Do it.

You can't, because I don't. What I support is the freedom of each and every person to hold their own opinions, views and thoughts, no matter how vile. That support STOPS the moment that person becomes violent, threatens violence, or could give reasonable suspicion as to their motives towards committing violence. This is not support of their views, this is not even implicit, I am directly stating that I oppose their views but support their RIGHTS to hold them.

[Liftbrul]

Ah, good old "bark and run off"

If you honestly fail to see how equating a position where you don't oversimplify your opponent's stance and don't paint people in wide strokes with a childishly monochrome worldview as being somehow pro-fascist or pro-nazi is not an extremist position, then you are beyond help. But more likely than not, just a child.

[Cuppy]

The inherent basis of Nazism is just that of superiority. This LED to genocide, just as the inherent basis of Communism being the seizure of the means of production and redistribution of wealth, which LED to genocide. One is much more distasteful, but the end results remain the same. Supporting communism in most major governments of the world in the last few centuries has led to MUCH worse outcomes than what happen with the National Socialists. That's purely indisputable.

So which one is more venomous and toxic:
The inherent basis of nazism thinking of being superior to someone else?
or
The inherent basis of communism thinking of distributing wealth?

IMO the first.
If we're starting to turn the conversation into things that led to other things, it's gonna be a long and quite fruitless conversation. I leads to discussions like "Which one is more dangerous, car or a gun" Cars sure kill more people than guns but base idea of a car is to take you somewhere, instead of taking your life. But that's that I hope.

But until they become violent, YOU are the violent one. You don't get to shoot somebody in America, for example, just because they called out nasty names. You have to be in fear of your life or another life. That could come from anywhere from a legitimate threat (man holding a knife) to actual violence. Until such a state, all you are doing is pre-emptive violence. Would you be OK with Trump or the US nuking a country as a pre-emptive strike, like north korea? After all, they suppress and murder their own populace, enforce dictatorial and draconian laws and starve them, AND even have gone so far as to threaten the world multiple times over.

I am not promoting or saying people should punch anyone. Ok?
All I'm saying is that if you feel punching people is ok, I feel way less bad(Not at all) when you get punched in the face.
It's very hypocritic to hope for misery for others, yet cry and whine when it comes to you.
I don't hit people, I don't get hit by people.

This is taking YOUR ideology and expanding it to the bigger picture. Do you understand why your stance doesn't work? You cannot convict people of thought crimes and leap to violence for DIFFERENCE OF OPINIONS, no matter HOW different the opinion.

I could talk with a fascist all day and just laugh. Laugh and cry without any need to punch them. I find it very hilarious for people to be so dumb, it doesn't threaten me at all. Same goes for people who say flat-earth is real. Instead of maddening, I find it hilarious! 2017 now and we have quite_goddddddamn_ a_lot of information available, if people choose not to think, it's fine with me.

You are free to disagree with them. I certainly do, and have done so within my own country of Australia multiple times. In public, I have had these arguments with vile bigots, and have, while without elegance, shut them down in front of a small scale audience, showing that reason can win against hateful ignorance. You are, however, NOT FREE, to assault them.

Exactly. Well played altogether!

Please show where I have supported discrimination and violence. Don't bullshit, don't try to mince words, quote me DIRECTLY and show where I have DIRECTLY supported discrimination and violence. Do it.

You can't, because I don't. What I support is the freedom of each and every person to hold their own opinions, views and thoughts, no matter how vile. That support STOPS the moment that person becomes violent, threatens violence, or could give reasonable suspicion as to their motives towards committing violence. This is not support of their views, this is not even implicit, I am directly stating that I oppose their views but support their RIGHTS to hold them.

I'm not saying that, you read it wrong pal I'm just writing "you" so that any reader can relate to my point. Sorry :3

- - - Updated - - -

If you honestly fail to see how equating a position where you don't oversimplify your opponent's stance and don't paint people in wide strokes with a childishly monochrome worldview as being somehow pro-fascist or pro-nazi is not an extremist position, then you are beyond help. But more likely than not, just a child.

Oversimplify? Says the guy with 90% of all posts being a simple, yet "intellectual" proverb written in latin with rolleyes emoji, instead of actual discussion.

[Liftbrul]

[/COLOR]Oversimplify? Says the guy with 90% of all posts being a simple, yet "intellectual" proverb written in latin with rolleyes emoji, instead of actual discussion.

I'll wait here while you go back to my post history to dig up all the latin proverbs I've posted, while simultaneously trying to avoid a discussion yourself. Did I mention irony already?

[Noogai131]

So which one is more venomous and toxic:
The inherent basis of nazism thinking of being superior to someone else?
or
The inherent basis of communism thinking of distributing wealth?

IMO the first.
If we're starting to turn the conversation into things that led to other things, it's gonna be a long and quite fruitless conversation. I leads to discussions like "Which one is more dangerous, car or a gun" Cars sure kill more people than guns but base idea of a car is to take you somewhere, instead of taking your life. But that's that I hope.

Agreed, it's a tricky subject to walk down, but in my opinion anybody supporting either ideologies in this current day obviously only care for what it WAS like, that goes for both Neo-nazis and communists. They can have their opinions, but at the end of the day they both support mass-murdering ideologies and while that isn't ok, I won't attempt to stop them from having those opinions, at least not violently.

I am not promoting or saying people should punch anyone. Ok?
All I'm saying is that if you feel punching people is ok, I feel way less bad(Not at all) when you get punched in the face.
It's very hypocritic to hope for misery for others, yet cry and whine when it comes to you.
I don't hit people, I don't get hit by people.

No I definitely understand your position much more clearly now. The way you write leaves a lot up to interpretation, but here you're very clear, and I can respect the "I'm not violent but if you're hateful and a scumbag I don't really care what happens to you". It's not how I work, as I attempt to help anybody I can, but I can understand your point.

I could talk with a fascist all day and just laugh. Laugh and cry without any need to punch them. I find it very hilarious for people to be so dumb, it doesn't threaten me at all. Same goes for people who say flat-earth is real. Instead of maddening, I find it hilarious! 2017 now and we have quite_goddddddamn_ a_lot of information available, if people choose not to think, it's fine with me.

This is basically my approach. 9/10 people despise fascism, in all kinds of forms, and those on the fence are more easily swayed by the voice of reason than the person called for "peaceful ethnic cleansing", and less swayed by the Antifa dipshits that swing bike-locks at people.

Exactly. Well played altogether!

I don't like to talk about that stuff all that often because It kinda seems cringy when people write about it, but it happens a lot in my small town, and while they can make SOME points I can agree with, overall I can walk away showing whatever audience there is that bigotry and vile attitudes aren't acceptable and can be handled with much less violent methods.

I'm not saying that, you read it wrong pal I'm just writing "you" so that any reader can relate to my point. Sorry :3

AH, it appears text has obscured intent, happens all the time, my bad. A lot of posters on here that twist your words around to make you out to be something you're not.

[Kalis]

In your fervour for white-knighting fascists you maybe missed the irony of implying that white supremacists are sub-human.

But back to the topic at hand, no you're completely wrong, fascism is absolute by its very nature. That's what fascism is.

Don't let me interrupt your usual virtue signalling display of fellating neo-Nazis under the guise of neutrality though. Kek.

Today I learnt that saying violent suppression of political belief has no place in society is white knighting fascism, even though my stance holds true of violence towards any political groups, so I am also white knighting socialists, liberals, libertarians, etc.

I don't really care whether it is different or not. This isn't a fucking philosophy seminar.

If there is some grouping that espouses a specific ideology where they want to commit genocide against me or my family, then they can expect a fight.

And you can spend your time in prison for initiating violence. I would not want the fascists to beat the crap out of you either and if they initiate violence, then off to gaol they go.

You may think your brand of extremism is somehow not as bad as their brand extremism, but all extremists tend to believe they are justified.

[Deleted]

Baseline. The baseline of Nazism is.... R_CI__ HI__A_C_Y <- But to crack for y'all!
Communism is not based on anything above. It is not.

No its based on shitty economics, and mass murder.

[Liftbrul]

Today I learnt that saying violent suppression of political belief has no place in society is white knighting fascism, even though my stance holds true of violence towards any political groups, so I am also white knighting socialists, liberals, libertarians, etc.

Don't you know? All moderate positions are just smoke screens for authoritarian and fascist opinions. You're worse than Hitler, you monster you!

[Cuppy]

I'll wait here while you go back to my post history to dig up all the latin proverbs I've posted, while simultaneously trying to avoid a discussion yourself. Did I mention irony already?

ALL of them?
Here's one: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post45688971

What are we discussing about? Black&white worldview or something?
Do you vote for racial hierarchy? What's up fam?

[stabetha]

If Hamas came to the US would their BS be tolerated?

if? Look at the history of CAIR.

[Liftbrul]

ALL of them?
Here's one: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post45688971

You'd think if my post history was 90% of latin proverbs and witticisms, you could find more than the one I posted last week.

What are we discussing about? Black&white worldview or something?

I think we already covered that. The implication that my post (where I posit that painting your opponent as a nazi based on no real evidence of any kind) is just a cover up for what you think are my true opinions (nazism in this case), is itself an extremist position to take. I pointed out the irony, but it was either lost on you or you chose to ignore it.

[Cuppy]

Agreed, it's a tricky subject to walk down, but in my opinion anybody supporting either ideologies in this current day obviously only care for what it WAS like, that goes for both Neo-nazis and communists. They can have their opinions, but at the end of the day they both support mass-murdering ideologies and while that isn't ok, I won't attempt to stop them from having those opinions, at least not violently.

Yeah it is tricky. I'm not a fan of ideologies either, I just want to live a nice life without ruining anyone elses.

No I definitely understand your position much more clearly now. The way you write leaves a lot up to interpretation, but here you're very clear, and I can respect the "I'm not violent but if you're hateful and a scumbag I don't really care what happens to you". It's not how I work, as I attempt to help anybody I can, but I can understand your point.

I get your point too, and actually if the case would be about helping a nazi individual who is willing to learn, discuss, change their opinion based on presented facts and critically thinking their moral and ethics, I'd help one too.
But it might be that I'm just way too sceptical. I don't think nazi's don't have that problem, I think they just think themselves better than someone else. But what you do is what saves the world eventually. The good in us.

I don't like to talk about that stuff all that often because It kinda seems cringy when people write about it, but it happens a lot in my small town, and while they can make SOME points I can agree with, overall I can walk away showing whatever audience there is that bigotry and vile attitudes aren't acceptable and can be handled with much less violent methods.

They DO have points, yes. Most used phrase what I hear is "This will cost us a lot of money", while I know it is true, I also tend to think that money is something we generate ourselves, and it shouldn't be a measurement of a human life. Meh, what a mess anycase.

AH, it appears text has obscured intent, happens all the time, my bad. A lot of posters on here that twist your words around to make you out to be something you're not.

It happens to all of us once in a while, it's pretty hard to make a whole picture out of a few lines of text x)

- - - Updated - - -

You'd think if my post history was 90% of latin proverbs and witticisms, you could find more than the one I posted last week.

e pluribus unum

I think we already covered that. The implication that my post (where I posit that painting your opponent as a nazi based on no real evidence of any kind) is just a cover up for what you think are my true opinions (nazism in this case), is itself an extremist position to take. I pointed out the irony, but it was either lost on you or you chose to ignore it.

Oh so nazism is something else than racial supremacy? Please share some more. Why we play this game of horse here?
It's very simple when you break it down to this sencence: "Do you think you are better than human with X-trait?"

[Liftbrul]

Oh so nazism is something else than racial supremacy? Please share some more. Why we play this game of horse here?
It's very simple when you break it down to this sencence: "Do you think you are better than human with X-trait?"

That was, at no point, the argument. I don't even know where you got that from. Nazism is what nazism is. The argument is throwing the term around loosely, branding people arbitrarily as nazis when what they say collides with what you believe in, and are socially even slightly unpalatable. Are you anti-immigration? You're a nazi. Do you believe in traditional gender roles? You're a nazi. It's nothing but deflection and a way for someone to claim moral victory without having to argue back. Just shout "nazi", and look at the shock writ on everybody's face. Fuck the facts.

When you run into an honest to God, swastika-on-forehead, "gas the kikes race war now" -nazi, wearing jackboots and all, and you're going to call him out, nobody's going to argue back. But if a guy in a MAGA hat gets attacked by a 20-something college dropout equating him with an ideology and a regime responsible for the deaths of millions, you know something's wrong.

[Cuppy]

That was, at no point, the argument. I don't even know where you got that from. Nazism is what nazism is. The argument is throwing the term around loosely, branding people arbitrarily as nazis when what they say collides with what you believe in, and are socially even slightly unpalatable. Are you anti-immigration? You're a nazi. Do you believe in traditional gender roles? You're a nazi. It's nothing but deflection and a way for someone to claim moral victory without having to argue back. Just shout "nazi", and look at the shock writ on everybody's face. Fuck the facts.

When you run into an honest to God, swastika-on-forehead, "gas the kikes race war now" -nazi, wearing jackboots and all, and you're going to call him out, nobody's going to argue back. But if a guy in a MAGA hat gets attacked by a 20-something college dropout equating him with an ideology and a regime responsible for the deaths of millions, you know something's wrong.

What's your point? I can tell you can twist and turn shit around to make it look and sound something very different. That's cool, but what's your initial point?
I already stated that I don't promote violence, yet you start yappin' about some MAGA hat guy who got some boots to face. The hell dude, what you on about?? Fuck facts, are you trying to prove a point of some sort, let it be a about me personally, nazis or just fascism. Say and write it please so that we can discuss about it like two fucking adults(Not two sex-having-adults).
Pick a side and let's roll!

[Spectral]

What's your point? I can tell you can twist and turn shit around to make it look and sound something very different. That's cool, but what's your initial point?
I already stated that I don't promote violence, yet you start yappin' about some MAGA hat guy who got some boots to face. The hell dude, what you on about?? Fuck facts, are you trying to prove a point of some sort, let it be a about me personally, nazis or just fascism. Say and write it please so that we can discuss about it like two fucking adults(Not two sex-having-adults).
Pick a side and let's roll!

You really don't see that @Liftbrul is trying to arrive at an agreed upon definition of "Nazi" as a necessary groundwork for any further discussion? Violence aside, calling people "Nazis" that aren't German national socialists, don't sport Nazi imagery, haven't promoted Nazi policies, and don't seem to have an affinity for Eichmann, and explicitly say they're not Nazis is just an example of a really extreme version of the noncentral fallacy.

[Cuppy]

You really don't see that @Liftbrul is trying to arrive at an agreed upon definition of "Nazi" as a necessary groundwork for any further discussion? Violence aside, calling people "Nazis" that aren't German national socialists, don't sport Nazi imagery, haven't promoted Nazi policies, and don't seem to have an affinity for Eichmann, and explicitly say they're not Nazis is just an example of a really extreme version of the noncentral fallacy.

Wait... Waitwaitwait! So the problem was the usage of the word 'nazi'??
Is this like one of those discussions where someone just says 'their' instead of 'they're' and some very, very bright and intellectual individual takes the whole 20 pages of discussing into a mindless wrestling on the word 'they're', even tho each_and_everyone knew what the person who said it in the first place was trying to say?
Wow.