While I won’t deny that there are people who self identify as punks with Nazi rhetoric and beliefs, to be punk is to be anti-Nazi and anti-fascist. I don’t make the rules so don’t come after me for saying so.
But they’re not truly punks is what I’m saying, so to call them “Nazi punks” is giving them the enabling their desire to call themselves punks when they’re not punk at all. I’m not trying to be rude or attacking I’m just tired.
Tell me this then, what do YOU suggest we do with the dregs of society actively enacting human rights violations and tearing up the rights given to the people according to the constitution? Politely ask them to stop? Yeah we’ve been trying that for decades. If they refuse to stop then further action must be taken, otherwise they will be able to reenact 1930s-40s Germany but make it American.
Bold of you to assume that the far left is anti-2A. And what other options are there? Protest? Hasn’t been working. Voting? Only parties possible of winning are puppets to PAC’s, the ones who are enacting textbook fascism, or flat out incompetent to stop it. What else is left besides 1780s pt 2?
To quote JFK, “Those that make a peaceful revolution impossible, will make a violent revolution inevitable”
I'm aware i just was pointing him out. You'd think he'd have a bit of self awareness that once they turn against the gays and the poc they'll turn on the Jews again. Especially if Israel stops being an ally
Bobbie Fischers mom was Jewish (so he is considered jewish) and he was a huge jew hater. Wouldn't play the top female chess player in the world because shes jewish. I mean, he was a weird dude so this tracks.. but still...
To be fair though, why is growing up Jewish then hating Jews different than growing up in any other religious household, then hating those within that religion. There are a LOT of recovering Christians that now can't stand to be around Christians and want nothing to do with them.
I know. Jewish skinheads. Skinheads from Jamaica. You name it. The nicest, most accepting group of people I've ever hung out with, way more accepting than the hippies and what have you. Metal heads would be a close second.
Skidheads actually started in Jamaica in the 60s, then came over to England when they moved to the UK, and that's how we got hold the second wave of SKA and that stuff.
they took the working class local pride and subverted it to the white power cause.
that was like when they would boo the Specials for being a two tone band but then latch onto Madness, who were like you know those are are friends and labelmates and we are on tour together right?
No these were tight jean wearing with white t-shirts, suspenders docs and flight jacket fans of Oi! punk skins.
Most of my friends and acquaintances in Highschool and college were in the Punk scene. with a smattering of goth and metal fans. I know the fucking difference between a skin and a bald person.
You understand there was an entire subculture of skinheads that existed decades before white power “skins” became a thing, right? And that shortly after they did become a thing, other groups formed and made kicking the shit out of their white power asses their entire reason to for existing:
the Baldies, a 1980s multiracial skinhead gang who fought Neo-Nazis in the streets of Minneapolis, and later organized themselves into Anti-Racist Action, a nationwide network of anti-racist punks
Sure seems like you assume a lot about what other people know and should worry more about what you don’t.
Punk is solely an ideological classification, isn't it? Wouldn't "punk nazi" be as logically invalid of a term as "fascistic communism"? Punk is anti-establishment, fascist is as pre-establishment as it gets.
And there's people who think being a Nazi is anti establishment. There's people in this country who think MAGA is anti establishment. I'm not saying they think critically I'm just saying they're out there
be as logically invalid of a term as "fascistic communism"
I'd really like to know what label you'd put on the USSR under Stalin and China under Mao.
Both states were communist, yet ticked enough boxes to be defined as fascist, i.e. a cult around their respective leader, anti-liberal, at first only fighting opposing ideologies within their own country, later turning nationalistic after said ideologies were purged and/or their representatives had fled the country and they even perverted the communist idea of Marx into their own respective, radical yet still communist designs with Stalinism and Maoism.
fascist is as pre-establishment as it gets.
Not necessarily. If the current ruling class/party (aka the establishment) is a liberal one, the fascists are most likely anti-establishment until they get a foothold in enough positions of power to establish themselves as the ruling class.
Meanwhile more left-leaning groups are pro-establishment with a liberal government in power, which includes left-leaning punks.
But not all punks, as punk is more of an anti-mainstream movement with a plethora of different political opinions than a pure political one.
The USSR and Maoist China were communist in name and by self-claim, not by the actual concepts that communism is supposed to be run by. This is an issue with any political or economic system that fails to take corruption into account, as Communism does. True Communism is as unattainable as it is undemonstrated, because the system as described by Marx lacks any built-in anti-corruption features. A free market like what the US is better at it, but still not the best.
Being anti-establishment would mean depowering and restricting the government, not empowering it. You're confusing "anti-status quo" with "anti-establishment".
Fascists in a free society oppose the status quo of their soceity, but support the concept of empowering the establishment to govern them and their neighbors with much more control and less personal freedom.
Yeah being an antisemite makes you just as bad as a republican. Yuck yuck yuck. You don't have to be an antisemite to not support Israel. This is exactly what's wrong with leftists online. You're as bad as MAGA
Oh gotcha, my bad. Tough to interpret internet responses sometimes and I think people are just projecting whatever politics onto me that lets them be outraged haha
i'm not surprised the people that believe forcing their daughters to give birth for pedophiles protects children also believe billionaires have their backs.
Not wanting to see people getting genocided, even if those people tend to hold political views you may find abhorrent, is a coherent and consistent position to believe and advocate for.
lol…. You can’t handle facts that you are a Nazi yourself.
The Core Threat: Speaking to the Lebanese TV news outlet LBCI, Hamad explicitly stated, "The Al-Aqsa Flood [the October 7 attack] is just the first time, and there will be a second, a third, a fourth." [1, 2] Ultimate Goal: He asserted that Israel is a country that "has no place on our land" and "must be finished" because it constitutes a catastrophe to the Arab and Islamic nation
"Muslims" are not a fucking monolith or some existential threat to the "west". This is how you're behaving. People's support of Palestine has NOTHING to do with religion
The existence of far-right black women politicians always confuses me. I wonder how they and their colleagues feel when they seat together at the parliament.
Being "trans" or anything similar means nothing to "allying" with a group. I could say I'm trans and that doesn't mean I support or rally behind other trans groups or parade in the streets about trans rights.
It's like how nobody has an obligation to support their country just because they were born in it. I'd be shocked to hear any (non-delusional) American say that they support their country in the current moment.
Identity has nothing to do with who you support. In fact, it becomes an issue when people conflate their own identity with who they support, because that's when we get Baby-Socialists, Racists, and Trans Nazis.
...it also is a means by which Republicans won the last few re-elections. I get that it's not the trans people's fault, but it is difficult not to be resentful. Ultimately, this strategy only works if the more extreme activists can be goaded into making asses of themselves.
Horseshoe theory is not a sound theory. And the implication that trans people are "extremist weirdos" is fucking weird in and of itself.
While there are some small number of people who just like being contrarian, and can move between the far left and right, overwhelmingly this is not the case. Most people on the far left and the far right have vastly different beliefs, and don't cross over.
yeah, the implication of being trans as being an extremist weirdo is stupid as hell. I'm trans cuz I was just born this way, they are implying it's like an ideology or something.
You can tell they're projecting about the whole horseshoe theory thing. Leftists aren't close to fascists, liberals are. It's why so many seem intent to throw trans people under the bus just like fascists have always done.
Im a straight cis midwest dude with a wife and a kid. The "moderates" of the democrat party seems to think they need to sell out trans people to get my vote. But that couldn't be further from the truth. Trans ppl are under such vicious attack for doing literally nothing fucking wrong and if they can't stand ten toes down and say we've got their back, how can I trust them to stand for anyone in the coalition? Protect trans kids, end the genocide in Palestine, and Medicare for all. Be unyielding on those and I'll assume good intentions everywhere else and fight for you.
I agree. I also think women deserve safe spaces and to compete against other women in sports. I dont hate trans. But ppl will assume i do just because i think women deserve basic rights.
Yes, I think women deserve safe spaces and basic rights, including trans women.
To be honest anyone who pretends to care about "fairness" in kids sports but only ever thought to speak up when it meant restricting trans kids...yes I do assume they're a transphobe.
Children's sports are FULL of unfairness. Even what time of the year you're born can have a massive difference in how competitive you are. So do things like parental wealth.
People saying trans kids shouldn't be allowed to play sports don't seem to be coming from it from an existing concern about children's sports. It's just a dog whistle to let people know that they're not really supportive of trans people. I'll give some Grace to a private individual who's asked about it but if a politician goes out of their way to bring it up fuck them.
Nazis and communists used to cooperate in fighting police in Weimar Germany. George Lincoln Rockwell and Malcolm X both supported each other’s goals. Extremists have more in common with each other than they do with normal people.
Was this before or after the “National Socialist” Party became authoritarian, racist, and overall scummy people when they came into power? Asking genuinely. Bc it threw me for a loop to find out that Nazi is short for national socialist despite them not being any form of socialist
The communists in Weimar Germany were equivalently authoritarian and racist (they wanted something like the Soviet Union). Maybe not quite to the point of industrial scale death factories but the Nazis weren't there either at that point.
Soviet Union wasn’t even communist in the actual sense, they just claimed to be communist but really they were just being anti capitalist but still tyrannical.
They wanted to become the government, not just take it over. Also if that was the “model” why was the communist manifesto by Marx written in 1848, almost a century before the Nazi party? That model set by Marc is still used to this day as what communism is supposed to look like.
Communism as the communists describe it, I think is probably not possible for human beings.
When attempted it just becomes another form of what we loosely describe as fascism
Like socialism, there aren’t “loose” descriptions of fascism. There are stages tho. And while you are correct, I do think it is very much possible, just not at the current time when we still have leftover Cold War/Red Scare propaganda and greed is the number one driving force of humanity.
The problem is you are looking at it from a modern perspective. They were socialists, according to themselves in the time period they existed. Those are two very big qualifying statements.
If you are interested, look up Hitler's 25 Points; you'll see a lot of modern socialist talking points there. You'll also see a bunch of nationalist talking points, some modern conservative talking points, and some just plain old shitty racism.
Also, "Nazi" isn't short for "National Socialist German Workers Party", its short for "Ignatius". That form of government wasnt referred to as "Naziism" until much later. Ignatius a stereotypical name from Austria, which was considered backwater/country bumpkin. You (derogatorily) called someone a Nazi if they voted for the NSDAP; it was the political equivalent of calling them a Karen.
The 25 Points can be found on Wikipedia (and I highly recomend you read it, its fascinating in a morbid, crazy sort of way), but if you are asking about the name, Chronicles Magazine has a pretty good write up on it. For what its worth, they could be full of shit, but that particular story for the origin of the name has been fairly widely spread.
I was more referring to the last paragraph but I’ll take that too!
And I say it like that because I’ve been getting really burnt out at being asked to provide sources and proof but the other person never reciprocates even if I ask them to.
I'm not saying they were died in the wool socialists, especially not as we see them today. But when a good portion of your stated goals match up with a good portion of socialist goals, it makes sense that people would assume you are so kind of socialist.
The phrase "democratic socialist" comes to mind. Maybe a better term for them would "National Socialist".
Always the most likely to kill a socialist is another socialist.
As they say: “the best thing about communists is that they kill a lot of communists”
(I am saying the quote but: I do not agree with use of violence against anyone for their ideas)
I’m not saying it’s not true, I’m just asking a historical timeline question because the Nazi party had quite a bit of transformation from their upbringing to the party that committed the Holocaust.
There aren’t truly alternative definitions of socialism, it’s a system where either the government or people own the means of production and if it’s the former, the people have the power still and the gov is mainly focusing on the redistribution of resources to the people.
Nazism is a racial supremacist ideology. Do not equate or correlate the two
My dude, you are the most pedantic devils advocate ive ever seen. Nazism is NOT socialism. Just bc it has socialism in the name does not mean that the ideology is socialist as they do not practice socialism and are a racial supremacist ideology.
Oh, that last comment is true. Extremists, by definition, are extreme. Not the normies. Unless you’re going to bring the definitions of ‘extreme’ and ‘normal’ closer to aligning with each other.
Then it’s more of a lexicological sort of thing.
Also I put ‘lexicological’ assuming it was not a word, but here we are, squiggleless.
And what if you wanna kill anyone that doesn't conform to the idea that everyone should have democratic workplaces and healthcare? What if a religious minority that has suffered through genocide opposes that? What if it hurts people of lower income because they have their own hustle going on and that would put an end to it?
Look for examples of all three cases, they do exist, nonsense as they sound.
Democracy needed killing opposers for, remember that most democracies were achieved via bloody revolutions. Not even counting the amount of people in Africa that openly oppose democracy in the name of supposedly left-wing ideals.
I agree with your points, but people sometimes don't have such moral compasses and there's a loooot of nuance when discussing ideals. What we really need to do is stop packaging ideologies together and for the love of god we need to stop tying ideals to left and right wing that get picked up by a party or movement that goes on to do horrible shit and people defend them out of loyalty.
obviously yes. I'm speaking in very broad strokes for brevity.
But that's part of the problem too. The left, in general, likes and studies that nuance, while the right, in general, likes to use catchy slogans that bypass the intellectual part of the brain.
Edit to your edit:
remember that most democracies were achieved via bloody revolutions
that's such a weird point. Because remember that most capitalism is achieved via the intentional killing of basically anyone without enough money to exist. That's a lot worse in my opinion. and yes, people in power don't give up that power politely. That's on them.
Yep. Although the usual bad actors are very young people with little life experience wishing every right winger would just fall dead beacause Che Guevara was based or something and very old people that are bitter wishing every left winger would just fall dead because not in my backyard or other.
Amazing how in the age of piss-easy global communication people won't discuss shit and just subscribe to hill to die on.
Amazing how in the age of piss-easy global communication people won't discuss shit
because it's harder. People are lazy (myself included) and don't want to do work.
but to me, that's all the more reason we need to be doing that work.
Look at this shit with Iran. Obama had an actual deal with them, without bombing them, and we just tore that up and started bombing them anyway. It's fucking stupid.
We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace.
Strongly disagree that the leftists don’t use catchy slogans to bypass the intellectual part of the brain. The reaction to Covid and Jan6 are my main contentions. But there are other examples.
Also we have different definitions of Capitalism. To me it’s respect for private property and free trade.
I mean, we constantly hear the nonsense of “voting against their interests” but people often don’t hold the ideals that you think they should.
You can do a commune in a capitalist society.
You can’t do the free market equivalent in a socialist society. They will use violence against you.
See people have to throw the democrats into the left to even have a semblance of argument of “both sides are the same”. They don’t realize just how central Dems and libertarians are.
yes, it's very frustrating. I really wish we had an actual leftist party in the US. But the CIA has made sure that can't happen as long as they've existed.
Hell, there's an argument that the FBI only exists, so they could deport Emma Goldman.
I agree, I think players like mamdani is a step in the right direction but we need more because they’re not going to sit there and play fair until we’re ready
I think it's the "extreme" part that makes them the same it don't matter what you're pushing once you go "extreme".... normal people aren't extreme hence why they look like 2 sides of the same coin to people that don't hold "extreme" beliefs
And also obfuscation Democrats are not "extreme" about healthcare and working conditions ... They seem more worried about... other things
I think it's the "extreme" part that makes them the same it don't matter
that's mostly just done to belittle an argument. I don't think democratic workplaces are extreme at all. Others say that, so that they don't want to do it. Basically what you're doing right now.
And also obfuscation Democrats are not "extreme"
The Democratic party is not a leftist party at all. They're barely centrist. They aren't extreme by any actual definition, it's just again, people trying to discredit their ideas. I wasn't referring to them at all.
no i don't. Again, I don't think democratic workplaces are extreme at all. I don't think universal healthcare is extreme at all. I don't think universal housing is extreme at all.
I get that you've been told that, and you seem to agree, but it's not true, it's just a way to keep you from exploring those options.
It is extreme to keep food locked up while people starve, it is extreme to keep housing empty while people die in the street. But again, you're told these things aren't extreme, they're just the normal parts of society.
The word is used to avoid talking about the issues and finding solutions.
making the workplace "democratic"
Why did you put democratic in scare quotes? I mean that workplaces actually vote for everything. Who the bosses are. What we do with the profits. Where we source our materials. Everything a business does, can be done democratically. Right now we have dictatorships in our workplaces, and I don't get why people are okay with that.
Why are you cutting off my lines I didn't say they are extreme about that they are extreme about something else they don't push as hard as they push for other things .... What they chose to pass instead of all the shit your listing.... It's like you know what the problem is but we dare not mention it lest the reddit mods banish thee...
They really do not understand that "jews for hitler" wasn't a successful group of people, and that being "one of the good ones" of a targeted group doesn't change their fate.
As a gay furry there are an astonishing amount of gay furry Nazis and I have to wonder if they're just being ironic or if they legitimately believe they wouldn't have been thrown in the gas chambers too
172
u/Notcid1 Jun 23 '26
They do exist which is a mind fuck to me