• masquenox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    White supremacism is as American as it gets… so yes - these people are perfectly in line with “proud American values”.

    Fascists love Trump because he says the quiet parts out loud.

    Liberals hate Trump because he says the quiet part out loud.

    But neither one actually has a problem with what the quiet part really is.

    • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Correction:

      Liberals hate Trump because he says the quiet part out loud and he is popular for it.

      It’s absolutely vexing

      • masquenox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        It’s absolutely vexing

        There’s absolutely nothing vexing about it at all - not if you understand the true nature of the relationship between liberalism, capitalism and fascism… which, of course, is yet another aspect of the part which shouldn’t be talked about (and I have the angry liberal downvotes to prove it, too)

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      A lot of projecting there from someone who probably doesn’t have enough of a problem with Trump to vote against him.

      • masquenox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        So which part of this did you think qualifies as “projecting,” liberal?

        The part where you and your fellow libs have always been fine with white supremacism as long as it’s the “nice” kind?

        Or the part where you won’t lift a finger to stop the overt white supremacist fascists because you know who it is that will be protecting your precious status quo when the poor start revolting?

        • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 days ago

          The part where liberals are right now on phones and going door to door to try to stop Trump while you’re doing nothing except typing some inane “both sides” bullshit which does nothing to stop fascism or white supremacy.

          You just want to be so holier than thou that you won’t do anything in the real world to oppose the things you claim to be against on the internet. You’re not more pure than liberals, you’re just lazy.

          • masquenox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 days ago

            The part where liberals are right now on phones and going door to door to try to stop Trump

            And what have they done to stop Biden?

            does nothing to stop fascism or white supremacy.

            And what has these self-same liberals done to stop fascism or white supremacy? Where were these liberals when antifa hit the streets in 2016 to do some actual fascism-stopping? Were they around to help BLM burn down pig-shops? No… they weren’t around - they were too busy heckling the actual left from the sidelines. Only now, when they are faced with the prospect of a fascist cosplayer who says the quiet part out loud, do they want to hysterically “do something” about it… by doing the exact same thing that got them into this mess in the first place.

            Tell me, liberal… if your attempt to kick the can down the road for yet another four years come November (somehow) succeeds, what’s the plan then? If the last four years showed anything, it’s that liberal ideology has absolutely no mechanism with which to resist fascism - but it does have quite a few that allows it to ally itself with fascism… as the ongoing genocide in Gaza demonstrates.

            So what then?

  • wieson@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    There were also wars of “being a Native American and being allowed to live” Vs “fucking dying”.

    I guess wars aren’t always a good metric.

    • UrbonMaximus@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Don’t think I’ve seen a bigger oxymoron before… The definition of punk is being anti-authoritarian.

      • ettyblatant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        It’s in reference to the Dead Kennedys’ song with that same title. There was a rise in far right “punk music” along with early skinhead (neo-nazi) movement when the song was written. Nazi punks were trying to flood the scene and people were not letting them.

        “Nazi punks” beat the oxymoron by being anti-authoritarian, just depending on who’s authority they reject.

          • xspurnx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 days ago

            Did you think this through? Seems pretty authoritarian to me (sounds like “nobody should rule but me”)… maybe it’s a quote so I don’t get it.

            I like this bettrr: Und weil der Mensch ein Mensch ist, drum hat er Stiefel im Gesicht nicht gern! Er will unter sich keinen Sklaven seh’n und über sich keinen Herr’n.

            (And because a human is a human, he doesn’t want a boot to the face! He wants no slaves under him, and no masters above!) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einheitsfrontlied

  • duderium2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    You don’t get to be a proud american period, since the Confederacy lost the battle but won the war (see the thirteenth amendment) and the USA inspired and created the Nazis (Ford/Rockefeller funding for instance) and then rescued thousands of their leaders after WW2 (Operation Paperclip, Operation Bloodstone). What’s the difference between Nazis and a society that rescues them?

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 days ago

          There’s absolutely no difference between a Nazi and a society which rescues them. This is why the Soviets and the US immediately started shuttling Jews into death camps post-WW2.

          • duderium2@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 days ago

            More Jews fought for the Soviets than for any of the other allied powers. Most of the founders of the USSR were also Jewish! Try again, nazi!

            • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              9 days ago

              More Jews fought for the Soviets than for any of the other allied powers. Most of the founders of the USSR were also Jewish! Try again, nazi!

              lol

              • duderium2@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 days ago

                From your source, CIApedia:

                After this period of intellectual quarantine had passed, the specialists returned to Germany between 1950 and 1958, with the majority of them until 1954.

                When did the Nazis rescued by the USA return to Germany? When was the CIA punished for rescuing Nazis?

            • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 days ago

              Remind me, what was the USSRs role in Poland ca. WW2? How about the Balkans? The US is awful in a number of ways and are guilty of the same crimes as many other world powers; but don’t pretend your precious Soviet state wasn’t amenable to ethnic cleansings and pogroms either. You’re delusional if if you think the half dead twat currently in the oval office is even close to Hitler

              • duderium2@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 days ago

                It wasn’t amenable to ethnic cleansing or pogroms because it was founded by the people who were the victims of ethnic cleansing and pogroms. Maybe it’s time to take a break from CIApedia?

                • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  8 days ago

                  Two words: Lavrentiy Beria

                  Care to explain the entirety of that mans rise to power and how it didn’t involve ethnic cleansings of any sort?

    • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Infused brain rot.

      “Which would you rather believe? That you belong to a community of warriors battling a secret evil, or that you’re a lonely, inconsequential nobody that no one will remember?”

  • danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Honest question, did we fight the Nazis because they were Nazis as we know them today (genocidal/racist/fascist)? Or did we fight the Nazis because they were attacking our allies?

    • Wanderer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Because you got invaded. Nothing else.

      Churchill (part American) always thought the Americans would join the war but they didn’t.

      Germany was getting held up in Russia and Japan attacked America. Hitler thought if he declared war on America then Japan would declare war on Russia. Hitler was more worried about Russia so it was a good trade. Unfortunately for him Japan kept they pact of non aggression with Russia so it just caused him another enemy.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      That’s a complicated question without a clear answer. It’s hard to establish the motivations of an individual person, but much harder when you’re talking about the entire country. Generally, people were united in the war effort, but for a variety of reasons. The NYT downplayed the Holocaust and specifically tried to avoid focusing on antisemitism, in part because they were worried that people wouldn’t like the idea of fighting a war to protect Jewish people, as racism and antisemitism were very much present. On the other hand, you had people like folk singer Woody Guthrie who explicitly connected the war to anti-fascism in his songs. But there were also plenty of people and media who had been praising Hitler, before he started invading everywhere.

      Basically there were lots of reasons for lots of people to dislike the Nazis, so it’s kind of hard to detangle who was motivated by what and to what degree. Generally though, if they had kept to their own borders, it’s unlikely that any other country would have invaded them just for being fascists, and many countries went through great lengths not to go to war with them, because nobody wanted to recreate the devastation of WWI. Even then the US wasn’t willing to get directly involved until it was directly attacked.

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 days ago

          Yes, that’s what I said at the end. The US didn’t get involved until directly attacked.

          It’s notable that the US decided to get involved and to focus on the European theater, despite being attacked by Japan. But that doesn’t really tell us about motivations. It could be that the US considered Nazi ideology more dangerous than Japan’s ideology, or it’s possible they were more interested in Europe for the sake of their allies, or it could’ve been a purely strategic decision.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      The US government under Roosevelt was opposed to the Nazis from the start, before WW2 began, on account of its fascist character.

      While America was deeply racist at the time, it was also very unevenly racist, and even prominent Nazi fellow-travelers like Charles Lindbergh expressed revulsion at the level of Nazi racism displayed.

      The genocide proper didn’t begin until WW2, and by the time we were already, for all practical purposes, ‘in the game’, so to speak.

    • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Uhh…yes, because yes. They didn’t just burst onto the scene after Kristallnacht but once the regular folk see the pogroms it’s suddenly a war crime

      If you grab a book on Henry ford and his ilk then you’ll need a book on Reconstruction and then a book on plantations, etc. This is a country by and for land owning white men so there was a lot of stern words before the Infamous day, after that it was a mix of actual Steve Rogers and the same robber barons getting richer but we mostly agreed with the Reich until it hit our shores.

      If Japan stuck to their close neighbors and ze Germans just annexed Western Europe…we probably wouldn’t have all the beach landings and such, see again Ford and his friend list.

    • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Both. The autocratic bend that was already known of provided plenty of fuel for the pro-war camp, and it was a lot of what motivated Roosevelt to want to back the Allies as much as he was legally allowed.

      Pearl Harbor was a tragedy, but as Churchill is attributed to have said, never let a good crisis go to waste.

      Japan basically provided all the excuse the pro war camp needed to leeroy jenkins themselves at Hitler’s face.

      We built the bomb with the intention of using them on Germany, that is the kind of axe you’ve got to grind with someone who you hate for a lot more reasons than just that they socked your best mate.

    • mctoasterson@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Read Eisenhowers D-Day remarks. Most Americans believed the Nazis were a genuinely dangerous, oppressive evil that, left unchecked, were likely to subjugate the whole of Europe. Both their ideology and methods had to be rebuked on a moral level.

  • Allero@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    Well, Nazi endgame is a neverending militarism and violent ethnic cleansings, so I’d say any amount of wars is objectively better.

  • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    How are these people not named and shamed? They are just standing there in public with no mask on wearing a swastika and giving a nazi salute? And then, what, they go back to selling real estate or what…? When is this even from?

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      Because most of them have no jobs and live off the gov. While talking shit about people who aren’t racist cock wagons, that use gov support. So they have nothing to lose.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        I wonder if she knows the Jan 6 girl from knoxville. Who was upset the cops pushed her out of the capitol and she got maced

      • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        Thanks for the Snopes link, that gave some more context. I still can’t believe no one figured out who she and the others are. It’s just mind boggling to me, maybe because she’s young-ish, that no one was like oh my god is that Sharon??

        I mean, that someone can live and do whatever they do, show up to this event with no mask and do this, and then go back to living a normal life is crazy to me. People lose their jobs for saying something racist on camera, and this person is full nazi-ing it up seemingly with no social consequences.