In the 1940s...

[iceberg]

Ninety percent of ALL politics is emotive, all one has to do is pay close attention to the advertising, pundits and debates to figure that one out so of course Trump won on emotion. As for nationalism not all nationalistic movements are the same or have the same outcome, again the US is not early 1900s Germany in mindset or culture (that's the key) nor has been hit the worse by the Great Recession like Germany was in the Great Depression with similar existing political upheaval on all sides.
Is the scenario you laid out possible? Yes. Is it probable anywhere in our lifetime? No. We as a people would have to undergo a fundamental change in culture and mindset overnight for that to happen and fundamental changes in culture take generations to occur.

Well I'm not sure whether it's 90% or however much. The reality is, yes, Trump won on being emotive and saying whatever people wanted to hear.

No, not all nationalistic movements are the same. What I'm saying is that in the US it is possible, I didn't say it would happen.

Once again, for the umpteenth time, Trump won for one reason and her name is Hillary.

No, I disagree. You can have whatever opinion you like and you can say it for the umpteenth time, but the umpteenth times doesn't make it correct.

Did you vote for Trump? I did, so I would think I would know more then you, no, I know I know more then you.

Oh, oh, I love this argument. One of my favorites. Because you voted for Trump, therefore you know EVERYTHING about EVERY SINGLE FUCKING TRUMP VOTER in the USA. Wow.

Based on this, a person who wasn't in WW2 wouldn't know shit about WW2, if you fired a bullet at a German on D-Day, you'd know all about Iwo Jima, more so that the best historians out there. Yeah, that's your fucking crap argument.

never seen you get upset when the left stereotypes trump supporters… wonder why.

 

[frigidweirdo]

It appears does it? How is that? What in what I have written gives you any hint that I think all or most conservatives are racists?

Considering it's only the written word and I can't see your facial inflections and body language (easy to confuse/misinterpret peoples meanings) plus it almost looks like you are possibly comparing Trump with Hitler............ That's why I phrased it the way I did; "here's what it may look like, is that correct or not?" A simple yes or no would have sufficed.

Well I a simple yes or no might have sufficed, but then I couldn't see your facial inflections and body language....

Or perhaps you can just take me on what I said. I do try, unless I'm being heavily sarcastic, to get my meaning across as much as possible.

Trump has run his election on emotion and Nationalism. So too did Hitler. However I did say if someone more racist, but doing what Trump has done, then you never really know what you could get. Am I comparing Hitler to Trump? A little. Am I saying Trump is Hitler? No, I'm not. Though I do think Trump is dangerous, Hitler was a completely different matter.

Ninety percent of ALL politics is emotive, all one has to do is pay close attention to the advertising, pundits and debates to figure that one out so of course Trump won on emotion. As for nationalism not all nationalistic movements are the same or have the same outcome, again the US is not early 1900s Germany in mindset or culture (that's the key) nor has been hit the worse by the Great Recession like Germany was in the Great Depression with similar existing political upheaval on all sides.
Is the scenario you laid out possible? Yes. Is it probable anywhere in our lifetime? No. We as a people would have to undergo a fundamental change in culture and mindset overnight for that to happen and fundamental changes in culture take generations to occur.

Well I'm not sure whether it's 90% or however much. The reality is, yes, Trump won on being emotive and saying whatever people wanted to hear.

No, not all nationalistic movements are the same. What I'm saying is that in the US it is possible, I didn't say it would happen.

I know it would not happen anytime soon but none of us are prophets/seers so we have no idea what the future will bring. Oh we can make generalized predictions based on past history and cultural understanding but nothing definite. Looking at your OP you appear to be saying it's imminent if we don't do something now and that it's okay to use violence as a first resort to prevent that from happening. If it was imminent I would agree with using violence but it's not even close.

Well, you read into my OP what you wanted to read into my OP. I can't stop you reading into what wasn't written.

I merely suggested that Nazism isn't good, and that the US fought Nazism, and now fighting Nazism is considered bad by some.... that's it. I said that. You read something else.

Seems to happen a lot on here, so forgive me if I don't cry.

 

[iceberg]

Considering it's only the written word and I can't see your facial inflections and body language (easy to confuse/misinterpret peoples meanings) plus it almost looks like you are possibly comparing Trump with Hitler............ That's why I phrased it the way I did; "here's what it may look like, is that correct or not?" A simple yes or no would have sufficed.

Well I a simple yes or no might have sufficed, but then I couldn't see your facial inflections and body language....

Or perhaps you can just take me on what I said. I do try, unless I'm being heavily sarcastic, to get my meaning across as much as possible.

Trump has run his election on emotion and Nationalism. So too did Hitler. However I did say if someone more racist, but doing what Trump has done, then you never really know what you could get. Am I comparing Hitler to Trump? A little. Am I saying Trump is Hitler? No, I'm not. Though I do think Trump is dangerous, Hitler was a completely different matter.

Ninety percent of ALL politics is emotive, all one has to do is pay close attention to the advertising, pundits and debates to figure that one out so of course Trump won on emotion. As for nationalism not all nationalistic movements are the same or have the same outcome, again the US is not early 1900s Germany in mindset or culture (that's the key) nor has been hit the worse by the Great Recession like Germany was in the Great Depression with similar existing political upheaval on all sides.
Is the scenario you laid out possible? Yes. Is it probable anywhere in our lifetime? No. We as a people would have to undergo a fundamental change in culture and mindset overnight for that to happen and fundamental changes in culture take generations to occur.

Well I'm not sure whether it's 90% or however much. The reality is, yes, Trump won on being emotive and saying whatever people wanted to hear.

No, not all nationalistic movements are the same. What I'm saying is that in the US it is possible, I didn't say it would happen.

I know it would not happen anytime soon but none of us are prophets/seers so we have no idea what the future will bring. Oh we can make generalized predictions based on past history and cultural understanding but nothing definite. Looking at your OP you appear to be saying it's imminent if we don't do something now and that it's okay to use violence as a first resort to prevent that from happening. If it was imminent I would agree with using violence but it's not even close.

Well, you read into my OP what you wanted to read into my OP. I can't stop you reading into what wasn't written.

I merely suggested that Nazism isn't good, and that the US fought Nazism, and now fighting Nazism is considered bad by some.... that's it. I said that. You read something else.

Seems to happen a lot on here, so forgive me if I don't cry.

fighting nazism is fine.

calling people nazis JUST SO you can fight them, is not.

 

[whitehall]

Hitler rose to power about the same time FDR was elected. During the 30's FDR did nothing to stop the Nazi regime and all of a sudden the U.S. seemed surprised when Germany invaded Poland. If you read anything else but left wing blogs you might try "In the Garden of the Beasts" about the family of the U.S. ambassador to Germany during the 30's. The ambassador reported to the FDR government about Nazi atrocities and FDR badgered him to demand reparations for WW1. After the war the U.S. Martial Plan (that we couldn't afford) went to rebuild Germany. After the Civil War the South was plagued by carpetbagger yankees out to steal the last dollar while the South had to contend with burned farms and cities and murdered civilians.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In the 1940s the US went to war to fight people who shouted down Jews, who marched through the streets with Swastikas, Nazis essentially. And they made memorials for people who would stand up to such intolerance with a gun in their hand and shoot that those fucking Nazis.

Here's one.

Now if you stand up and use violence against people who believe almost the same thing, what does the right say? Well, probably what the right said before WW2.

American supporters of the European Fascists

"Hitler is recognized by the whole of the political and official intelligentsia as an exceedingly able man. As of the militarist question: One may say with complete certainty that what Hitler said in his Reichstag speech on May 17 was exactly what he meant and accurately represents the policy that he will pursue."

The far left in the US loved Hitler.....until he attacked Russia.

So.... where's the evidence this was the case?

On September 17 the Soviet Union invaded eastern Poland and occupied the Polish territory assigned to it by the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, followed by co-ordination with German forces in Poland.[19][20]

The British, French, and German Communist parties, all originally war supporters, abandoned their anti-Fascist crusades, demanded peace, and denounced Allied governments.[21] The CPUSA turned the focus of its public activities from anti-fascism to advocating peace, not only opposing military preparations but also condemning those opposed to Hitler. The CPUSA attacked British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and French leader Édouard Daladier, but did not at first attack President Roosevelt, reasoning that this could devastate American Communism, blaming instead Roosevelt's advisors.[21]

In October and November, after the Soviets invaded Finland and forced mutual assistance pacts from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, the CPUSA considered Russian security sufficient justification to support the actions.[22] Secret short wave radio broadcasts in October from Comintern leader Georgi Dimitrov ordered Stalinist Browder to change the CPUSA's support for Roosevelt.[22] On October 23, the CPUSA began attacking Roosevelt.[23]

The CPUSA dropped its boycott of Nazi goods, spread the slogans "The Yanks Are Not Coming" and "Hands Off", set up a "perpetual peace vigil" across the street from the White House and announced that Roosevelt was the head of the "war party of the American bourgeoisie".[23] By April 1940, the CPUSA Daily Worker's line seemed not so much antiwar as simply pro-German.[24] A pamphlet stated the Jews had just as much to fear from Britain and France as they did Germany.[24] In August 1940, after NKVD agent Ramón Mercader killed Leon Trotsky with an ice axe, Browder perpetuated Moscow's fiction that the killer, who had been dating one of Trotsky's secretaries, was a disillusioned follower.[25]

In allegiance to the Soviet Union, the party changed this policy again after Adolf Hitler broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact by attacking the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941.

History of the Communist Party USA - Wikipedia

Well done for copying and pasting wikipedia. Not many people have the skill to do that you know.

As long as you follow Uncle Joe's orders, you'll be okay.

 

[Ringel05]

Considering it's only the written word and I can't see your facial inflections and body language (easy to confuse/misinterpret peoples meanings) plus it almost looks like you are possibly comparing Trump with Hitler............ That's why I phrased it the way I did; "here's what it may look like, is that correct or not?" A simple yes or no would have sufficed.

Well I a simple yes or no might have sufficed, but then I couldn't see your facial inflections and body language....

Or perhaps you can just take me on what I said. I do try, unless I'm being heavily sarcastic, to get my meaning across as much as possible.

Trump has run his election on emotion and Nationalism. So too did Hitler. However I did say if someone more racist, but doing what Trump has done, then you never really know what you could get. Am I comparing Hitler to Trump? A little. Am I saying Trump is Hitler? No, I'm not. Though I do think Trump is dangerous, Hitler was a completely different matter.

Ninety percent of ALL politics is emotive, all one has to do is pay close attention to the advertising, pundits and debates to figure that one out so of course Trump won on emotion. As for nationalism not all nationalistic movements are the same or have the same outcome, again the US is not early 1900s Germany in mindset or culture (that's the key) nor has been hit the worse by the Great Recession like Germany was in the Great Depression with similar existing political upheaval on all sides.
Is the scenario you laid out possible? Yes. Is it probable anywhere in our lifetime? No. We as a people would have to undergo a fundamental change in culture and mindset overnight for that to happen and fundamental changes in culture take generations to occur.

Well I'm not sure whether it's 90% or however much. The reality is, yes, Trump won on being emotive and saying whatever people wanted to hear.

No, not all nationalistic movements are the same. What I'm saying is that in the US it is possible, I didn't say it would happen.

I know it would not happen anytime soon but none of us are prophets/seers so we have no idea what the future will bring. Oh we can make generalized predictions based on past history and cultural understanding but nothing definite. Looking at your OP you appear to be saying it's imminent if we don't do something now and that it's okay to use violence as a first resort to prevent that from happening. If it was imminent I would agree with using violence but it's not even close.

Well, you read into my OP what you wanted to read into my OP. I can't stop you reading into what wasn't written.

I merely suggested that Nazism isn't good, and that the US fought Nazism, and now fighting Nazism is considered bad by some.... that's it. I said that. You read something else.

Seems to happen a lot on here, so forgive me if I don't cry.

Perhaps it's because you aren't being succinct enough in your presentation assuming that everyone will understand what your point is, happens a lot here. Again the written word alone has some severe limitations so yes you can help what people read into. So forgive me if I don't find you completely blameless.........

 

[Avatar4321]

Try that with out the logical fallacy next time. Think about it before you respond. Is the US now or ever been Germany in mindset and culture? Are the neo-nazis in this country marching into other countries and taking over? Are the neo-nazis in this country a small, loud but insignificant fringe group? (I'll answer that for you, yes they are). Are we a country of laws or just mob rule?

The point isn't whether they're marching into other countries and taking over. The Nazis in the 1920s weren't marching into other countries and taking over. They wanted to, but they didn't have the power to do so. It required effort. The conditions were right for such a thing by the late 1930s, they needed to get power, they got that.

In the US what do the Nazis want? Just because they can't get it, doesn't mean they don't want this.

Never said they didn't which means you completely missed the point. You're worried about a fringe element in this country who's heyday is thankfully long past, not growing. Of course confronting them especially with violence gives them the national attention they crave, a self validation they attempt to employ as propaganda. So if you want to strengthen their propaganda and national attention then by all means go ahead and clash with them, if you want to marginalize them even more then let them have their rallies and ignore them, they will then become a mere postscript on local news reports.
They do not have the sway in this country (nor never will at this stage in our history) that the Nazis ultimately had in Germany, we're not Germans and we don't think like the Germans of the 20s, 30s and 40s. The vast majority of Americans despise at least their message of hate and are not looking for racial scapegoats though some are obviously looking for political scapegoats.

The problem is, if people don't worry about it, then it grows. What those on the left did was use violence and get the message out there. The media has therefore been full of the message that might otherwise have been ignored.

The discussion is out there and kids are seeing this discussion, and it's mostly anti-Nazi.

If people don't worry about it, it grows? That is like a recipe for running around frantic about problems that most likely will never actually be serious.

Even if true, how does gathering another violent group of protesters on the streets to fight them really make the problem better?

These guys aren't the problem. Just symptoms of the problem. Stop worrying about them and letting fear and anger chase wisdom away.

But why aren't they a problem? Could it be because the media and others have managed to keep them in check. They're certainly become a little bolder since Trump became president, that's for sure. But they're still being kept in check.

Now, your solution is to wait for them to become a big problem, and then try and deal with it. Oh, great.

How does fighting them in the streets fix the problem?

And quite honestly I don't expect to ever deal with the problem because don't think America will ever embrace them

 

[Avatar4321]

However trite it’s nonetheless true: those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Indeed, much of the impetus of rightwing bigotry and hate is ignorance.

Unfortunately the rest of us who do learn from history have to watch you fools make the same mistakes again

 

[Avatar4321]

However trite it’s nonetheless true: those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Indeed, much of the impetus of rightwing bigotry and hate is ignorance.

Unfortunately the rest of us who do learn from history have to watch you fools make the same mistakes again

 

[Avatar4321]

You're worried about nazis? Then lets learn from history and limit the powers of the federal government. If we decentralize power and return it to the states and the people, even if someone supporting nazis got into office they couldn't get an agenda accomplished

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well I a simple yes or no might have sufficed, but then I couldn't see your facial inflections and body language....

Or perhaps you can just take me on what I said. I do try, unless I'm being heavily sarcastic, to get my meaning across as much as possible.

Trump has run his election on emotion and Nationalism. So too did Hitler. However I did say if someone more racist, but doing what Trump has done, then you never really know what you could get. Am I comparing Hitler to Trump? A little. Am I saying Trump is Hitler? No, I'm not. Though I do think Trump is dangerous, Hitler was a completely different matter.

Ninety percent of ALL politics is emotive, all one has to do is pay close attention to the advertising, pundits and debates to figure that one out so of course Trump won on emotion. As for nationalism not all nationalistic movements are the same or have the same outcome, again the US is not early 1900s Germany in mindset or culture (that's the key) nor has been hit the worse by the Great Recession like Germany was in the Great Depression with similar existing political upheaval on all sides.
Is the scenario you laid out possible? Yes. Is it probable anywhere in our lifetime? No. We as a people would have to undergo a fundamental change in culture and mindset overnight for that to happen and fundamental changes in culture take generations to occur.

Well I'm not sure whether it's 90% or however much. The reality is, yes, Trump won on being emotive and saying whatever people wanted to hear.

No, not all nationalistic movements are the same. What I'm saying is that in the US it is possible, I didn't say it would happen.

I know it would not happen anytime soon but none of us are prophets/seers so we have no idea what the future will bring. Oh we can make generalized predictions based on past history and cultural understanding but nothing definite. Looking at your OP you appear to be saying it's imminent if we don't do something now and that it's okay to use violence as a first resort to prevent that from happening. If it was imminent I would agree with using violence but it's not even close.

Well, you read into my OP what you wanted to read into my OP. I can't stop you reading into what wasn't written.

I merely suggested that Nazism isn't good, and that the US fought Nazism, and now fighting Nazism is considered bad by some.... that's it. I said that. You read something else.

Seems to happen a lot on here, so forgive me if I don't cry.

Perhaps it's because you aren't being succinct enough in your presentation assuming that everyone will understand what your point is, happens a lot here. Again the written word alone has some severe limitations so yes you can help what people read into. So forgive me if I don't find you completely blameless.........

Perhaps. And perhaps I've found that too many people on these forums can't concentrate enough to read more than one or two sentences.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The point isn't whether they're marching into other countries and taking over. The Nazis in the 1920s weren't marching into other countries and taking over. They wanted to, but they didn't have the power to do so. It required effort. The conditions were right for such a thing by the late 1930s, they needed to get power, they got that.

In the US what do the Nazis want? Just because they can't get it, doesn't mean they don't want this.

Never said they didn't which means you completely missed the point. You're worried about a fringe element in this country who's heyday is thankfully long past, not growing. Of course confronting them especially with violence gives them the national attention they crave, a self validation they attempt to employ as propaganda. So if you want to strengthen their propaganda and national attention then by all means go ahead and clash with them, if you want to marginalize them even more then let them have their rallies and ignore them, they will then become a mere postscript on local news reports.
They do not have the sway in this country (nor never will at this stage in our history) that the Nazis ultimately had in Germany, we're not Germans and we don't think like the Germans of the 20s, 30s and 40s. The vast majority of Americans despise at least their message of hate and are not looking for racial scapegoats though some are obviously looking for political scapegoats.

The problem is, if people don't worry about it, then it grows. What those on the left did was use violence and get the message out there. The media has therefore been full of the message that might otherwise have been ignored.

The discussion is out there and kids are seeing this discussion, and it's mostly anti-Nazi.

If people don't worry about it, it grows? That is like a recipe for running around frantic about problems that most likely will never actually be serious.

Even if true, how does gathering another violent group of protesters on the streets to fight them really make the problem better?

These guys aren't the problem. Just symptoms of the problem. Stop worrying about them and letting fear and anger chase wisdom away.

But why aren't they a problem? Could it be because the media and others have managed to keep them in check. They're certainly become a little bolder since Trump became president, that's for sure. But they're still being kept in check.

Now, your solution is to wait for them to become a big problem, and then try and deal with it. Oh, great.

How does fighting them in the streets fix the problem?

And quite honestly I don't expect to ever deal with the problem because don't think America will ever embrace them

I didn't say it fixed the problem. However, this protest got the media's attention who then went and wrote a lot about it. The US is currently taking a look at itself and the Nazis were getting confident, but will probably be a lot less confident now.

How any kids watching this will be turned off Nazism and White Supremacy? You don't know, you can't see the tangible effects of such a thing, it just happens.

 

[Snouter]

In the 1940s the US went to war to fight people who shouted down Jews, who marched through the streets with Swastikas, Nazis essentially.

No the didn't. In fact my Encyclopedia from the early 60's doesn't even mention the modern Jewish narrative in its WWII section. It just says Hitler was brutal to "minorities."

And they made memorials for people who would stand up to such intolerance with a gun in their hand and shoot that those fucking Nazis.

Is that real? Looks like a mini-football field. Do they play a game there? Or do they play a game in the minds of folks who don't question their narrative?

 

[frigidweirdo]

In the 1940s the US went to war to fight people who shouted down Jews, who marched through the streets with Swastikas, Nazis essentially.

No the didn't. In fact my Encyclopedia from the early 60's doesn't even mention the modern Jewish narrative in its WWII section. It just says Hitler was brutal to "minorities."

And they made memorials for people who would stand up to such intolerance with a gun in their hand and shoot that those fucking Nazis.

Is that real? Looks like a mini-football field.

So, basically, you have nothing to say.