Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 21:34:50


Post by: Elemental


Well, the resident fascist apologists successfully managed to drag the first thread off track with their whatboutisms and shoddy science and rewriting of history, just like they did the two threads that prompted it. And the mods reacted the usual way--lock the thread for being "heated", and choose not to address the underlying issues, or ban the apologists.

But this isn't going away. There is something rotten on your site. There are users who feel compelled to defend and whatabout actual Nazis. And for some reason, they are still posting. This is not a disagreement about toy soldiers that people are getting all overwrought over, this is people on your site attempting to normalise and make excuses for fascism, and (like Games Workshop did), you need to make an unambiguous statement that this is not acceptable in this house.

I've often been frustrated that the mods seem so reluctant to take on bad actors within their site, but this reaction--

I'm locking this thread for review. If someone wants to make a new thread with some direct feedback points (e.g. "locking threads only encourages disruption", "rules aren't enforced often enough", etc), and can do so in a clear and concise manner without going to derpsville, have at it, I'll check in periodically to police things. Keep it on topic and we'll hear you out on whatever you have to say, but leave the commentary and history lessons out or people will be getting time-outs.


--is at best, tone-deaf, with no recognition of the very real fear and anger behind the "heat" in the thread. You also seem entirely unbothered that a lot of people did stay very much on topic (I've copied their points below, points you need to be reading and understanding), but instead, chose to use the skilful provocations of the bad actors as an excuse to close the thread because people were daring to tell Formosa that his revisionist claptrap was revisionist claptrap, and showed no recognition of why several people are very alarmed at the kind of talk you're tacitly approving on your site.


We've had a thread shut down for being contentious when a Nazi showed up to a tourney and wasn't booted. Somehow, this is contentious.

We've had threads shut down in response to GW's statement on how the fascist Imperium is terrible because, uh, *whataboutthecommunistsorsomething* at the precise same time the neo-Nazi Christopher Cantwell was testifying that this is precisely the strategy the white nationalist movement use to fabricate their casus belli (Sines v. Kessler)

We keep having threads shut down for pushing back on racist, sexist and nationalist content in wargames without any sanction for the people bringing this noxious bs into out community (see the recent thread re Arch and it's peaceable closure without citing anyone for denying his racism and antisemitism,)

Is it, then, DakkaDakka's editorial position that Nazi and far-far-right positions are acceptable here, and that the only issue with ex'ressing agreement with antisemitic racism and sexist is the degree to which it will cause the moderators work, rather than any ethical or moral imperative?


While I understand the mods can't be present for *every* incident as and when it happens, I still don't understand how certain users are still permitted on this site, or the sanctions held against them (if any) are upheld.


It's the usual whattaboutism tactic of not-agreeing but also doing all in their power to shift the topic that makes it hard to do anything about the issue because the rules are made to deal with explicit situation, not the favorite tactic of blurring lines. In the case of the tournament thread it was basically all hinging on the incredibly threadbare argument of "well it's not actually a swastika, and there were plenty of austrian painters so we can never know".

Anyway, nothing will be done about it because no one here is stupid enough to come out and say without subtext that they think white supremacists are right, we'll just enjoy the occasional bouts of "hur hur Arch owned the sjws durr" followed by strawmen of "you said anyone that enjoys arch videos is a nazi". Dakka is basically Facebook of wargaming, except hopefully with a little less horse paste gourmets.


Of course it will work. I do love the "you just want an echo chamber" argument when what's happening is basically "I don't want any of my views or statements challenged"
Basically, since dakka is apolitical, everyone should be able to say whatever they want, and no one should be able to disagree. Cause disagreement is the worst sin. If I were to say "we should skin all rich alive" it's apolitical, if you write "actually that's effd up" then it's dragging politics into it.
Wearing a funny swastika to a tournament is not political, saying "hey, maybe we shouldn't let people bring in hate symbols to tournaments" is political.


I can only assume that people in c) aren't actual fascist sympathizers and instead buy into the argument that if we ban people who outright argue for racial segregation, removal of democracy and physical violence towards minorities, then soon "they" will come to ban anyone who isn't following the current zeitgeist of tolerance and acceptance of others. Which is a bit silly, because as people noted, this is a wargaming forum, unless you go out of your way to harass people, no one is likely to bring up any of those topics in the first place.

We loop back to my argument that this centers on the fact that people who whatabout-ed the thread don't want to have their right to voice politically charged opinions pointed out or argued with in topics like "female space marines" or "black marines", whenever they crop up.


It's really just a microcosm of the situation we see today - the far right noise machine is finally loud enough and brazen enough that no real enforcement can be done because "both sides, what about commies etc etc".

And so it keeps getting worse, from white supremacist aligned terror attacks (notice no communist aligned terror attacks) to people strutting in their swastika clad best.

It's Weimar all over again and the goosesteppers are playing the exact same tricks.

Maybe the mods could actually do something about the fascist aligned folks, but nah. Dakka can't have any sort of ban process or anything.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 22:00:31


Post by: Jerram


NAZIs are scum that's why people like you use the term to dehumanize and other people who don't toe the party line.

You are correct that there is something rotten and its that bad actors like you and the original OP are allowed to continually attack people with no apparent repercussion.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 22:01:45


Post by: Polonius


I’ve been on dakka a long time, and I have some insight into the overall philosophy behind how the site sees itself, as well as some of the realities behind how it works. Generally, the goal is to allow the broadest range of topics and viewpoints. I think there’s some old school early internet Utopianism mixed with a touch of free speech idealism. That’s tempered by the somewhat arbitrary “family friendly” restrictions on language, but whatever.

I also think that in practice, very few posters, even highly disruptive ones, are actually permanently banned. That’s clearly a top down view. I think if we saw behind the curtain, we’d see more positive cases of posters who start disruptive but calm down, but from our end we only see the people who seem to benefit from the long leash.

That combined to form a community that stays pretty vibrant, but also means that the onus to avoiding obnoxious posts moves to the reader. I do highly encourage people to curate their own experience here.

Now... that all said, the OP sort of has his answer, right? The moderators clearly don’t see persistent posting from a hard right view point, often as apologists for even worse behavior, as anathema to the site. I’m sympathetic to the idea that the modern far right is increasingly authoritarian and nationalist, and if I ran my own site I’d show some of those folks the door. OTOH, if someone accused me of being pro nazi because I allowed some these discussions I’d probably have some words about that, since the prior thread was so inflammatory as to be obnoxious. The idea that large chunks of our hobby are, at best open to increased authoritarian rule with far less concern for minorities of all stripes and at worst literal fascists is not really a consensus. Enacting such a rule would be a profound political statement that a large and successful hobby community would be loath to make.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 22:08:07


Post by: BertBert


Quoted from Insaniak in the last thread:

Insaniak wrote:

To address a few of the points raised here:

First off, Dakka's official position is that Nazis are bad, and not welcome.

Based on that position we can, and have, suspended accounts where we felt there was sufficient evidence to warrant it. What we will not do is suspend someone's account just because they disagreed with you and you feel this means they are obviously a Nazi.


Since there seems to be still some confusion over political discussion - The specific ban on political and religious discussion applies to the Off Topic section of the site. In other words, it applies to political and religious discussion that is nothing to do with the wargaming hobby. Wargaming-related discussion that has a political nature, such as the recent Spanish tournament situation, is on-topic because it relates specifically to wargaming. These sorts of topics are generally allowed so long as they stay on track, although we will from time to time shut down specific topics if they prove to cause too much friction. There is not, and has never been, a complete ban on wargaming-related political discussion.

As always, we welcome reports where you feel a given topic or someone's behaviour in a thread is questionable. And also as always, reporting that behaviour is the appropriate way of dealing with it, rather than dragging threads off topic by starting fights over your perception of that person. The snapshot of a person that you see in an online discussion is rarely representative of that person's entire character.

While we will stomp on the expression of hateful ideologies, posters on Dakka come from a huge range of different backgrounds, views and experiences, and that's always been one of this site's main strengths. To steal a line someone said recently - Wargaming is for everyone.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 22:29:27


Post by: insaniak


 Elemental wrote:

I've often been frustrated that the mods seem so reluctant to take on bad actors within their site, but this reaction--

I'm locking this thread for review. If someone wants to make a new thread with some direct feedback points (e.g. "locking threads only encourages disruption", "rules aren't enforced often enough", etc), and can do so in a clear and concise manner without going to derpsville, have at it, I'll check in periodically to police things. Keep it on topic and we'll hear you out on whatever you have to say, but leave the commentary and history lessons out or people will be getting time-outs.


--is at best, tone-deaf, with no recognition of the very real fear and anger behind the "heat" in the thread.

Then I'll make it clear here: We totally acknowledge that there is a very real fear and anger behind this discussion. However, we also realise that there is a huge polarisation in discussion these days (and not just online), where people just assume that if someone else's views don't align 100% with theirs, that they are an awful person. This can make navigating discussion on certain topics extremely problematic, and is what led to the politics ban in OT.

We most certainly don't want to encourage actual Nazis to hang out here. But we also don't want to create an echo chamber where people are afraid to share opinions because they fear being branded something they are not by those who disagree on that specific issue.





Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 22:48:53


Post by: Formosa


Mate I can't take you seriously when you accuse the whole site of being Nazis, that alone should be a bannable offence, go out and touch grass, get off the internet as it's clearly not doing you any good.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 23:11:21


Post by: Polonius


 insaniak wrote:
Then I'll make it clear here: We totally acknowledge that there is a very real fear and anger behind this discussion. However, we also realise that there is a huge polarisation in discussion these days (and not just online), where people just assume that if someone else's views don't align 100% with theirs, that they are an awful person. This can make navigating discussion on certain topics extremely problematic, and is what led to the politics ban in OT.

We most certainly don't want to encourage actual Nazis to hang out here. But we also don't want to create an echo chamber where people are afraid to share opinions because they fear being branded something they are not by those who disagree on that specific issue.


I think is fairly well intentioned, but only superficially even view of things. One of the classic ways that right wing authoritarianism has flourished over the centuries has been to limit debates about identity, race, class, and power to that ways that don't make people higher up on hierarchies uncomfortable, which of course ignores how deeply uncomfortable people at the bottom of those hierarchies are all the time. In short, we say, "well, racism is bad, but it's also terrible to accuse people of being racists."

I don't expect Dakka to be at the forefront of changing such a massive aspect of our culture, but it's important to know that protecting people from being accused of having terrible views is a form of protecting those people. Forgive my bluntness, but it is the site saying, "we hate Nazi's, but we're sympathetic to the people who are sympathetic to them."


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 23:20:51


Post by: insaniak


It's really, really not.

What it's saying is 'We hate Nazis, but you can't go around accusing people of being Nazis just because they disagree with you.'

It's not about protecting those sympathetic to Nazis. It's asking people to not leap to the conclusion that a contrary opinion automatically means that someone is sympathetic to Nazis.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 23:28:36


Post by: Da Boss


People don't accuse people of being nazis because they disagree with them though. They use terms like 'fascism apologist' and so on. That seems to be an accurate description of what is going on in some of those discussions, where people try to explain away or deflect from criticism of, for example, the spanish neo nazi. This lazy language is present in this thread all over the place, though probably because the title and OP were pretty provocative.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 23:31:41


Post by: Polonius


Loading...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 insaniak wrote:
It's really, really not.

What it's saying is 'We hate Nazis, but you can't go around accusing people of being Nazis just because they disagree with you.'

It's not about protecting those sympathetic to Nazis. It's asking people to not leap to the conclusion that a contrary opinion automatically means that someone is sympathetic to Nazis.


I hate people who misuse the term, but I learned about Godwin's law on Usenet. I use different language, because I hate some neckbeard telling me that "It's only national socialism if it comes from the Munich region, otherwise it's sparkling right wing authoritarianism." or, if the person is unusually thick, that's it's actually a far left wing idea because the word "socialist" is in the name. (Wait until they learn about the Holy Roman Empire!)

But that's not really what's I am opposed to. there are poster on here who have far right wing views, a deep suspicion of minorities, and a hatred of some vague left wing threat. I'm not a teenager calling my mom a fascist for making me clean my room, I'm a person who sees a person with fascist sympathies.
As a person with a keen interest in liberal democracy, I'm not troubled by calling fascists fascists.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 23:44:14


Post by: Formosa


 Da Boss wrote:
People don't accuse people of being nazis because they disagree with them though. They use terms like 'fascism apologist' and so on. That seems to be an accurate description of what is going on in some of those discussions, where people try to explain away or deflect from criticism of, for example, the spanish neo nazi. This lazy language is present in this thread all over the place, though probably because the title and OP were pretty provocative.



That is not true, we have repeatedly stated that person was wrong, but also called for other radical extremists ideologies to be proscribed, blanket ban.

The problem is we have members who are openly parts of those extremist ideologies and want to espouse them, so when we say no, you do not get a pass to spread your hateful rhetoric, they falsely accuse us of being sympathetic to Nazis, it's such a predictable thing at this point.

Everyone
"Nazis are evil and should be banned"

Liberals
"Yes we agree, but we also want other evil ideologies and hate groups banned, like communists/socialist derived groups"

Socialists/communists
"No, you can't ban those because they never did nothing wrong ever and I like them, but the evil Nazis should be banned still"

Liberals
"We can literally see the mountains of corpses caused by your ideology and have first hand experience of your actions"

Socialists/communists
"Ah so your a Nazi!!!!! Because only a Nazi would oppose communists, liberals get the bullet too"

Liberals
"Sigh.... Can you just go away"


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 23:47:05


Post by: Da Boss


Formosa, I am a democratic socialist and you are equating me to a Nazi. Or even to a stalinist communist. Are you doing that on purpose or making a mistake?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/27 23:56:45


Post by: Formosa


If you are a socialist you have some ideological crossover with national socialism but that does not make you a national socialist as you do not adhere to race based socialist frameworks, however as a democratic socialist you are willing to engage with the democratic process which is antithetical to standard socialist frameworks, Fascistic ones and national socialism as all are authoritarian by nature.

As for a stalinsist, not that I'm aware of no, I do believe your political beliefs are utterly ridiculous but that is it, you have not done anything for me to think badly of you, we just disagree on our philosophy is all.

Funnily enough this is what tolerance is.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 00:01:28


Post by: Da Boss


Well, do you think you could be a bit more careful with how you word things then? Since you don't like being linked in any way to nazis yourself.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 00:08:54


Post by: Formosa


I have been, you inferred I did not imply you were nor did any of my language, I have assumed due to everyone here claiming to be well versed on the subject they would understand the distinctions and terminology used without me having to constantly explain.

But I should not just assume as you say.

Last message for now, night shift is kicking off, night everyone.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 00:16:21


Post by: Kanluwen


 insaniak wrote:
It's really, really not.

What it's saying is 'We hate Nazis, but you can't go around accusing people of being Nazis just because they disagree with you.'

It's not about protecting those sympathetic to Nazis. It's asking people to not leap to the conclusion that a contrary opinion automatically means that someone is sympathetic to Nazis.

If someone keeps posting videos or links to videos from known crummy people, is it really that big of a leap?

If someone keeps referring to things using shorthand vernacular that is extremely common to those kinds of crummy people, is it really that big of a leap?

I say this not as wanting carte blanche to call someone names, but there really does come a point where things should have been clear.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 00:41:14


Post by: insaniak


 Kanluwen wrote:

If someone keeps posting videos or links to videos from known crummy people, is it really that big of a leap?

If someone keeps referring to things using shorthand vernacular that is extremely common to those kinds of crummy people, is it really that big of a leap?

Yes, making those sorts of judgements based on nothing more than a couple of forum posts is absolutely a bit of a leap.

I mean, it would be handy if the world was as simple as 'Likes Arch videos therefore is Nazi sympathiser'... but from my experience people are rarely actually that easily categorised.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 01:30:12


Post by: Elemental


 insaniak wrote:

We most certainly don't want to encourage actual Nazis to hang out here. But we also don't want to create an echo chamber where people are afraid to share opinions because they fear being branded something they are not by those who disagree on that specific issue.


 insaniak wrote:
It's really, really not.

What it's saying is 'We hate Nazis, but you can't go around accusing people of being Nazis just because they disagree with you.'

It's not about protecting those sympathetic to Nazis. It's asking people to not leap to the conclusion that a contrary opinion automatically means that someone is sympathetic to Nazis.


Here's the thing, I was restrained in the original thread and tried to avoid assuming the worst. But after a whole lot of whataboutisms over three threads about communism, antifa and censorship from those mean ol' liberals, arguments that we should give those poor lil' swastika wearering Austrian painters the benefit of the doubt and that lefty censorship is the real threat to civilisation.....

That's way beyond a "contrary opinion", and looks increasingly like the familiar old apologist dance. Especially when the subject is, to sane and civilised people, not controversial in the slightest. Nazis are bad, and whenever anyone fails to agree with that statement and starts breaking out the same old whataboutisms regarding communism and antifa, that's a bright red flag.


 Da Boss wrote:
Formosa, I am a democratic socialist and you are equating me to a Nazi. Or even to a stalinist communist. Are you doing that on purpose or making a mistake?


Neither. Formosa is doing the standard bad-actor dance where he baits people into arguing with him, then counts on the mods locking the thread for being "heated". He's already successfully done it once, the question is if he will be allowed to do it again.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 01:42:50


Post by: Formosa


Talk about projecting wow, come on elemental you go around in the last thread calling people Nazis.

You then created this thread doing the same, you are the epitome of a bad faith actor, I also think you are doing it deliberately.

If you cannot be polite and keep your radical views to yourself then take yourself to some other forum that suits your views better


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 02:09:39


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


As I said before, can you cite an instance of actual support of Nazis?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 02:36:02


Post by: Polonius


 insaniak wrote:
Yes, making those sorts of judgements based on nothing more than a couple of forum posts is absolutely a bit of a leap.

I mean, it would be handy if the world was as simple as 'Likes Arch videos therefore is Nazi sympathiser'... but from my experience people are rarely actually that easily categorised.


There is a very charming aspect to centrism in that they do see that people are rarely cartoonish in their views, and that political views, like anything else, can be nuanced. Few liberals are trying to cancel sushi for being cultural appropriation, and few conservatives are ready to fire up the gas chambers. this is true.

What's also true is that right wing authoritarianism doesn't spring from revolution. After all, more or less by definition, the right wing in any given society has a great deal of money, power, and influence. Right wing authoritarianism usually stems from either a military coup, usually to "protect" the society from some danger, or through electoral politics followed by a weakening of electoral systems. For the latter, you convince the center right that the left is a bigger threat, and they vote to give more and more power to the authoritarians. Either way, they succeed because the business interests, both large and small, go along with the change.

What this means is that, for any true hard right regime to take over a western democracy, it needs all the good, fair minded people in the middle to see them as the lesser of two evils. Which is why the role of policing what is, and is not, an acceptable view falls, not to the left, who have no control over the people that will make this decision, but to the center-right.

So no, not every fan of Arch is a Nazi, it is not that simple. and I'm not even saying not to watch his stuff, as I think adults can separate the art from the artist. But... when the actions of the center right to well documented wide spectrum bigots like Arch is to wring their hands over fans being called racist, it shows where their priorities are. and that is to keep things orderly, and polite, and respectful, and if women or people of color feel marginalized by his videos, they should get over it.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 02:54:23


Post by: Jerram


I don't want to go to far into modern day politics but I don't see how anyone living in the US right now can say what you just did with a straight face.




Life is not two dimensional and neither is political philosophies


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 03:02:24


Post by: Polonius


Jerram wrote:
I don't want to go to far into modern day politics but I don't see how anyone living in the US right now can say what you just did with a straight face.




Life is not two dimensional and neither is political philosophies


A quick view of your posts show that you use the term "left wing" disparagingly multiple times, which suggests that you might not mean that sincerely.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 03:21:27


Post by: BertBert


 Polonius wrote:
But... when the actions of the center right to well documented wide spectrum bigots like Arch is to wring their hands over fans being called racist, it shows where their priorities are. and that is to keep things orderly, and polite, and respectful, and if women or people of color feel marginalized by his videos, they should get over it.


Interesting analysis, but what would be the conclusion Dakka (or any online community) should draw from this insight?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 03:23:08


Post by: Jerram


 Polonius wrote:
Jerram wrote:
I don't want to go to far into modern day politics but I don't see how anyone living in the US right now can say what you just did with a straight face.




Life is not two dimensional and neither is political philosophies


A quick view of your posts show that you use the term "left wing" disparagingly multiple times, which suggests that you might not mean that sincerely.


Touche, but no I actually do and I should have said one dimensional. I've seen some decent 2d and 3d political maps that I find interesting but I'm drifting off topic. And yes you caught me getting annoyed and using shorthand congratulations.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 03:46:19


Post by: trexmeyer


How TF do you go from Insaniak saying essentially that we can't ban fans of Arch outright to DakkaDakka is oppressing women of color?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 03:55:00


Post by: posermcbogus


God almighty this thread is heading for lock hell so fast it's unreal.

If there are any things to be discussed it's these.

1. Nazis are bad.
2. Recent events, caused by nazis, have forced GW to take a harder stance on creating an unwelcoming environment for nazis. Whenever we have tried to discuss this, we have people brigading threads, trying to turn the conversation around, draw other users into fights, and signpost and dogwhistle about their politics, when we should all be saying "wow, nazis are terrorists they are and bad, glad they aren't welcome, it's so sad that they're trying to worm their way in." I think, therein, may be a sign that the moderation team need to discuss this, and consider their policy going forward.

As GW pushes more of these guys off of their plate, and as various social media networks try to get that kind of rhetoric off of their product, smaller indie forums like Dakkadakka become more at-risk of unwittingly taking in these fugitives.

I talked with Viterbi about my concerns about all of this a few months back, after the raging dumpster fire that was the "State of the Community" thread.
He gave me some really good responses, and talked through the moderation team's approach, which I must say, is very fair, logical, and really gives us all a lot of space to occasionally make mistakes.
I like the mods here. I think they mostly do a good job, especially when certain users are clearly on this forum looking to cause trouble and start drama. I've definitely not always stayed on their good side, and have had my fair share of deleted posts &c.

However, I've said in previous threads. I'm a civil servant. When I see people posting their swastika dice, or trying to make Arch socially acceptable here, I get nervous, because that's the sort of gak that, if it were to become normalized, would make this the kind of site I cannot be a member of for professional reasons.
Because of the extent of this bizarre agitation that keeps popping up, I'm not entirely sure the moderation team is able to provide an atmosphere on this site that is safe for me, and indeed, hostile enough to the espousing of nazi terrorist ideas. I think maybe, and I'm sure I'm not alone here, that it might be an idea for the mods to have a more in-depth review of what they think of this, especially given the hard stance GW has taken lately, and with regards to being able to better identify dog-whistle signpost-y crap, and make it clear that racist exterminationist extremism is not something to be tolerated here. Because it shouldn't.

It is not a political statement to say that Dakkadakka users should never have to be concerned that their race is something that would allow other dakkadakka users to diminish their humanity. It is not a political statement to say that terrorists should not be welcome on a board for little plastic space men.

Nazis are awful, and no one should put up with them trying to colonize their hobby space. IDK why this is so hard for some of you.





Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 04:05:11


Post by: LordofHats


 Polonius wrote:
A quick view of your posts show that you use the term "left wing" disparagingly multiple times, which suggests that you might not mean that sincerely.


I applaud you for taking the high road, and lament that the high road here is so damn low.

 BertBert wrote:
Interesting analysis, but what would be the conclusion Dakka (or any online community) should draw from this insight?


The TLDR there is that a problem doesn't go away just because people would prefer to ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist (on the contrary, ignoring problems tends to make the problem worse). For an even longer explanation, see the Letter from Birmingham Jail. Particularly, this section;

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.


Which I think expresses a very applicable and border sentiment that is relevant to this topic.

In many ways, the only issue is that the status quo of moderation tends to result in hand wringing being protected, while those who are offended, concerned, or worried about <insert hot button topic> are generally forced into the position of 'being the problem.' This isn't just a DakkaDakka issue. I've experienced and seen this sentiment elsewhere in many contexts. To be upset is treated as wrong and whether or not there is any merit to being upset is treated as an irrelevancy. The status quo favors (shockingly) the status quo, whether the mods intend it to seem that way or not. In many ways, the issue is a communication problem. Someone sees something that they think is offensive, and instead of that being taken with any sort of consideration, it instead becomes an immediate and bitter back and forth over whether or not their reaction is legitimate. Usually ending in a heated exchange, a thread lock, and a sense that they were dismissed out of hand and with no consideration. Which is how you get a part 2 thread that will go about as nowhere as part 1 did.

Of course, in my experience talking about complex social issues is hard and most people would rather fall back on stock dismissals in the mistaken notion that a phrase like 'two dimensional' will in itself washes their hands of having to deal with the issue at all. And that just goes back to Polonius' point that 'centrism' often feels like its only goal is to avoid conflict and dismiss apparent sources of discord, rather than resolve issues. That's kind of the place the moderators on DakkaDakka have ended up (though I don't think that's really their fault, it's a byproduct of the times and the moderation approach of the board).

So, to return to your question about what people could do about it; It's possible to disagree with X while not dismissing it and belittling whoever brought it up or going on some ranting tangent that doesn't actually address X at all and instead just feels like a veiled attack rather than an insightful response. Yes. Ironically, the answer is to stay on topic and be nice. Whodathunkit.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 04:10:24


Post by: trexmeyer


This is a forum for wargaming. Not politics. If you're looking for social revolution here then you are looking in the wrong place. You can't expect moderators to go full Minority Report and start preemptively banning people for what they might say or do.

No one is in the wrong for being upset about Nazis. You're not even in the wrong for wanting Nazis banned. That is reasonable. Those people are sick. Wanting someone banned for being the fan of some POS like Arch is a bridge too far. What is so difficult about that?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 04:35:45


Post by: BertBert


 LordofHats wrote:
...

Of course, in my experience talking about complex social issues is hard and most people would rather fall back on stock dismissals in the mistaken notion that a phrase like 'two dimensional' will in itself washes their hands of having to deal with the issue at all. And that just goes back to Polonius' point that 'centrism' often feels like its only goal is to avoid conflict and dismiss apparent sources of discord, rather than resolve issues. That's kind of the place the moderators on DakkaDakka have ended up (though I don't think that's really their fault, it's a byproduct of the times and the moderation approach of the board).


Thanks for this elaborate answer, it's not often you get to this level of analysis at 5 AM.

I agree it's hard for people to tackle complex social issues, especially in online spaces. Most users likely see this as a recreational space and simply don't want to bother with this kind of complexity and stress in the first place, which may prompt negative reactions or outright dismissal of what might be a genuine concern. Having one's principles challenged can be pretty stressful, so this reaction is understandable in my view. Now, if we are talking about mods, I'm not sure how to gauge their "centrist" approach. I constantly see red text in places where people got a little too excited, so mods do seem to deliver on reports fairly reliably. There is a human element as well, where all mods may be enforcing the same set of rules, but still have a different threshold on what they would deem offensive (and a rules violation as a result).

My original question had a different point, though. Polonius correctly surmised that different people may have a different set of priorities and I was wondering how that should inform the moderation approach, which seems to be the core issue of this topic.






Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 04:37:27


Post by: Formosa


It amazes me that not a one of you sees it, you can read each others comments and still not see the check list of grievances, the repressive tolerance, the exaggeration and hyperbole, the fake outrage and attempt to garner sympathy through emotional manipulation, the appeals to authority and attempts to appeal to the bogey man you lot have created in your own heads.

All for what, because you want to control this space with your political views, that's it, everything else is a lie and a means to that end, you all act like we haven't been here before, seen this exact thing before many times, even on this very forum, it's always the same agitators, the same false arguments and the same excuses, same lies and pretend like we all do not know exactly that all your political views align one way, progs, socialists, etc.

"My politics is not political"
"Don't you care about -group-"
"It's the evil alt right Nazi trolls"
"Arch blah blah blah"
"Communism is not evil, Nazis are worse... Whatabout whatabout whatabout"

Etc. Etc.

I will keep saying it, this is a liberal space, not a socialist one, this is not sigmarxism where you can crush any disenting view by lying and calling us Nazis, this is not Reddit where your echo chamber is promoted and rewarded, if you cannot handle that Dakka has a blanket ban on Nazism and politics, but not what you people label as a Nazi, then leave, set up a new site, invite like minded people and police it with an iron fist as you are want to do, but you won't, because this site is fairly popular and that is why you want to control this space.

I don't hate any of your for doing what is in your nature, I just wish you had some self control, but hey, that's part of the ideology isn't it, the personal is political and any interaction must be seen as a political one.... Sad.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 04:43:49


Post by: RaptorusRex


Formosa, it is 10:43 at night here. So I'm tired, and I think you're acting childish. But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 04:46:12


Post by: BlackoCatto


 RaptorusRex wrote:
Formosa, it is 10:43 at night here. So I'm tired, and I think you're acting childish. But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.


What did he say that was childish? This is just some dumb cope thread from someone crying about the mods enforcing their policy.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 04:51:06


Post by: LordofHats


 BertBert wrote:
Thanks for this elaborate answer, it's not often you get to this level of analysis at 5 AM. :thumbs-up:


To be fair, it's only 1130 for me XD

Most users likely see this as a recreational space and simply don't want to bother with this kind of complexity and stress in the first place, which may prompt negative reactions or outright dismissal of what might be a genuine concern. Having one's principles challenged can be pretty stressful, so this reaction is understandable in my view. Now, if we are talking about mods, I'm not sure how to gauge their "centrist" approach. I constantly see red text in places where people got a little too excited, so mods do seem to deliver on reports fairly reliably. There is a human element as well, where all mods may be enforcing the same set of rules, but still have a different threshold on what they would deem offensive (and a rules violation as a result).


My conclusion after years is that this isn't really a problem the moderation team can solve... Well I mean they could 'solve' it in a blunt hammer sort of way but they obviously don't want to do that and that is itself probably just a more extreme form of avoiding the problem. especially when the problem is... What's the word I want here. Non-native to the wargaming space? I mean that in the direct sense. Someone being a fan of the Black Templars is just another Black Templar fan. They're pscyho-crusaders in a universe full of psycho-crusaders and they're the most crusadery of them all! It doesn't raise eyebrows until you show up in a black and red jacket with sig runes on the shoulder, which is when someone might take a double-take and start wondering. It makes its way into this space from the outside and yeah, a lot of people prefer it to stay outside.

But it's not going to stay outside. You might as well expect to never see the color red ever again (sorry Blood Angels fans, but the red has to go ). So this kind of stuff is going to come up whether people like it or not.

I do think the moderation team is very much trapped in an early-90s attitude about speech and the internet that is rapidly becoming unworkable in the present social landscape. The issue is less in whether or not mods respond and more in that moderation on DakkaDakka prefers to be hands-off and make stated no direct opinions about the whats of what posters say and focus on the hows they employ to say it. That can at times feel impersonal and as is often levied against them, tone-deaf. But I doubt that they could resolve these problems even if they took more proactive stances and I doubt they really want to spend all their time navigating an issue that comes here from the outside. The best they could possibly do is adopt a response that feels less dismissive but I'm not even sure that would really work. Perception is a fickle mistress.

The problem comes here from the outside and it'll keep coming. Posters could improve how that problem is tackled by adjusting their own behaviors and expectations, but they probably won't.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 04:51:47


Post by: RaptorusRex


 BlackoCatto wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
Formosa, it is 10:43 at night here. So I'm tired, and I think you're acting childish. But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.


What did he say that was childish? This is just some dumb cope threat from someone crying about the mods enforcing their policy.


w/e, man. I think that reading that post as a "threat" or "cope" shows you're determined to read something into it.

At the end of the day, I want a safer community. It's Formosa's right to spout ahistorical crap, but his right to swing his fist ends where it meets my face.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 04:56:59


Post by: BlackoCatto


 RaptorusRex wrote:
 BlackoCatto wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
Formosa, it is 10:43 at night here. So I'm tired, and I think you're acting childish. But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.


What did he say that was childish? This is just some dumb cope threat from someone crying about the mods enforcing their policy.


w/e, man. I think that reading that post as a "threat" or "cope" shows you're determined to read something into it.

At the end of the day, I want a safer community. It's Formosa's right to spout ahistorical crap, but his right to swing his fist ends where it meets my face.


I mean if you are going to be stupid go ahead. There is a forum called ETC for people that want that. Bunch of banned folk over there to take another whiner.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:02:17


Post by: Polonius


BertBert wrote:
 Polonius wrote:
But... when the actions of the center right to well documented wide spectrum bigots like Arch is to wring their hands over fans being called racist, it shows where their priorities are. and that is to keep things orderly, and polite, and respectful, and if women or people of color feel marginalized by his videos, they should get over it.


Interesting analysis, but what would be the conclusion Dakka (or any online community) should draw from this insight?


That's the rub, right? I think what I would propose would be to focus on behaviors. Not hyperspecific ones, because we all know we're all creative enough to skirt those issues. I think that allowing gaming centric political discussions is both wise and probably inevitiable, but if I were to counsel the moderation team it would be to tighten moderation of those topics going broader. I think we can have a conversation about, say, the insignia worn by a player, but avoid terms like "far right" or "SJW." This is an area were "both sides" can be pretty quick on the draw. I think what surprised me looking through some posting histories is how many thinly veiled, or even overt, comments were made denigrating a political view or "side."

It might be untenable, as it's human nature to draw on the larger political world to make these arguments, but it's also not impossible.

Jerram wrote:Touche, but no I actually do and I should have said one dimensional. I've seen some decent 2d and 3d political maps that I find interesting but I'm drifting off topic. And yes you caught me getting annoyed and using shorthand congratulations.


I wasn't trying to just catch you in a "gotcha," I was making the broader point than when the chips are down, politics is often fairly linear. When it's a question of who has power, that's usually a straight line.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
trexmeyer wrote:
How TF do you go from Insaniak saying essentially that we can't ban fans of Arch outright to DakkaDakka is oppressing women of color?


In a way, this post supports my point. Rather than engage in a nuanced distinction, the instinct is shut down the discussion, by pointing out that it is disruptive, or if that doesn't work, make it so disruptive that the people pointing out the issue are the problem.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:09:25


Post by: RaptorusRex


Yeah, I'm out. Have fun with this, DakkaDakka. I'm not going to associate with people who think I should be dead or people who think those people are "entitled to their opinion".

The "no politics" rules on forums like this serve only to bottle up the emotions and lets them fester. Sufficient Velocity does just fine.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:10:28


Post by: Polonius


 LordofHats wrote:
Of course, in my experience talking about complex social issues is hard and most people would rather fall back on stock dismissals in the mistaken notion that a phrase like 'two dimensional' will in itself washes their hands of having to deal with the issue at all. And that just goes back to Polonius' point that 'centrism' often feels like its only goal is to avoid conflict and dismiss apparent sources of discord, rather than resolve issues. That's kind of the place the moderators on DakkaDakka have ended up (though I don't think that's really their fault, it's a byproduct of the times and the moderation approach of the board).


And honestly... it's a wargaming forum, right? For Dakka, keeping things civil is more important than addressing entrench power inequities.

I don't even think the site's approach is wrong. The effort it would take to root out the problem might not be worth it, or it might hurt the community in the long run.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:12:06


Post by: Formosa


 RaptorusRex wrote:
 BlackoCatto wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
Formosa, it is 10:43 at night here. So I'm tired, and I think you're acting childish. But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.


What did he say that was childish? This is just some dumb cope threat from someone crying about the mods enforcing their policy.


w/e, man. I think that reading that post as a "threat" or "cope" shows you're determined to read something into it.

At the end of the day, I want a safer community. It's Formosa's right to spout ahistorical crap, but his right to swing his fist ends where it meets my face.



Everything I have said is rooted in historical fact, but inconvenient for certain ideological slanted people to hear, but feel free to PM me with citations proving my comments incorrect so you lot do not derail the thread.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:17:52


Post by: Polonius


 LordofHats wrote:
I do think the moderation team is very much trapped in an early-90s attitude about speech and the internet that is rapidly becoming unworkable in the present social landscape. The issue is less in whether or not mods respond and more in that moderation on DakkaDakka prefers to be hands-off and make stated no direct opinions about the whats of what posters say and focus on the hows they employ to say it. That can at times feel impersonal and as is often levied against them, tone-deaf. But I doubt that they could resolve these problems even if they took more proactive stances and I doubt they really want to spend all their time navigating an issue that comes here from the outside. The best they could possibly do is adopt a response that feels less dismissive but I'm not even sure that would really work. Perception is a fickle mistress.


I don't want to trivialize the behavior, but one of the things that Dakka's rules, and moderators, allow pretty carte blanche on is the right to be supremely annoying. Outside of spam or completely off topic stuff, you can spout obvious nonsense and blatantly inflammatory things in ways that do often trigger responses. And that is very difficult to moderate without just banning people you find annoying.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:22:23


Post by: LordofHats


 Polonius wrote:
And honestly... it's a wargaming forum, right? For Dakka, keeping things civil is more important than addressing entrench power inequities.


There's the argument that the mod team has simply taken the most pragmatic approach to the problem.

It's not going to stay off the board no matter how much anyone wishes it, and my bet is that these topics will only become ubiquitous in their absence if they tried to keep it off the board. It makes sense to toss the general politics threads. They were bitter, regularly derailed by the political equivalent TFGs and still fairly toxic even when that wasn't happening, and didn't really relate to wargaming at all. Some people might enjoy dismissing ETC, but it's shocking learning from the mods there how many reports a very small community can generate when politics are involved (really shocking actually). I can only imagine how flooded the old political megathreads made the mods dashboard or whatever it is they have. Probably a lot, and it was more effort than was worth for something unrelated to wargaming.

But we have memes about female space marines for a reason (and I think they might actually be older than I am?) and we're gonna keep having them, and acting like those questions are the same as broader politics is some rather wishful thinking.

I don't even think the site's approach is wrong.


I think that would depend on what we mean by the site. The mods could take a stricter approach to being on topic, especially as a means of keeping things from spirally into offtopic bitter rants. I think that would also require posters to adjust their approach though and that is so untenable that it is probably impossible. It's kind of like the old 'why can't we all just get along.' We could totally get along, but some people seem really committed to not getting along or in only getting along if it's on their terms (which isn't really getting along, is it?).


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:26:37


Post by: BertBert


 Polonius wrote:

I don't want to trivialize the behavior, but one of the things that Dakka's rules, and moderators, allow pretty carte blanche on is the right to be supremely annoying. Outside of spam or completely off topic stuff, you can spout obvious nonsense and blatantly inflammatory things in ways that do often trigger responses. And that is very difficult to moderate without just banning people you find annoying.


And this is the crux of the issue. When you base your moderation on subjective concepts such as "annoying", it's near impossible to remain consistent. Yes, there are some rather obvious agitators around that could be easily identified and dealt with, but those aside it's all a matter of temperament. Just disallowing certain buzzwords would make things a little easier without changing their approach in a fundamental way.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:33:08


Post by: Polonius


 LordofHats wrote:
But we have memes about female space marines for a reason (and I think they might actually be older than I am?) and we're gonna keep having them, and acting like those questions are the same as broader politics is some rather wishful thinking.


Good lord. My hot take on FSM is that if you have a strong opinion on them, I'm not listening to it.

I don't even think the site's approach is wrong.
I think that would depend on what we mean by the site. The mods could take a stricter approach to being on topic, especially as a means of keeping things from spirally into offtopic bitter rants. I think that would also require posters to adjust their approach though and that is so untenable that it is probably impossible. It's kind of like the old 'why can't we all just get along.' We could totally get along, but some people seem really committed to not getting along or in only getting along if it's on their terms (which isn't really getting along, is it?).


I mean, I'm pretty cynical. I guess I'm supposed to think that allowing threads about what I'll broadly call "Wargaming politics" have some value, in that they're valid topics, but really, how long do they stay productive? For that matter, how often does any conversation have a lot of value after a few pages? I think letting people post their takes, and then shutting it down when the inevitable happens allows everybody to feel better. I guess to put this more directly: what can anybody hope to add to a discussion about a stupid hoodie after the first hour or two?

In a perfect world, maybe people would post about their views in ways that actually change how people think, but people see culture war flashpoints and they are loaded for bear, man.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:36:39


Post by: LordofHats


 Polonius wrote:
 LordofHats wrote:
I do think the moderation team is very much trapped in an early-90s attitude about speech and the internet that is rapidly becoming unworkable in the present social landscape. The issue is less in whether or not mods respond and more in that moderation on DakkaDakka prefers to be hands-off and make stated no direct opinions about the whats of what posters say and focus on the hows they employ to say it. That can at times feel impersonal and as is often levied against them, tone-deaf. But I doubt that they could resolve these problems even if they took more proactive stances and I doubt they really want to spend all their time navigating an issue that comes here from the outside. The best they could possibly do is adopt a response that feels less dismissive but I'm not even sure that would really work. Perception is a fickle mistress.


I don't want to trivialize the behavior, but one of the things that Dakka's rules, and moderators, allow pretty carte blanche on is the right to be supremely annoying. Outside of spam or completely off topic stuff, you can spout obvious nonsense and blatantly inflammatory things in ways that do often trigger responses. And that is very difficult to moderate without just banning people you find annoying.


I mean, I don't think it's that hard but I'm a broken record on the problem poster topic and still baffled why it's actually a challenge. There's not that many of them, a lot of them bailed of their own volition years ago when the politics megathreads got canned or became way less highstrung (myself included), and at this point if someone is still a consistent source of thread-locks enough that I notice them and remember their names as a lurker on most of the board I don't know why it's that hard to just say this particular person is someone we're better off without. 5 years ago me would almost certainly be in that category admittedly, but yeah. Broken record over here *shrug*


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:36:59


Post by: Polonius


 BertBert wrote:
 Polonius wrote:

I don't want to trivialize the behavior, but one of the things that Dakka's rules, and moderators, allow pretty carte blanche on is the right to be supremely annoying. Outside of spam or completely off topic stuff, you can spout obvious nonsense and blatantly inflammatory things in ways that do often trigger responses. And that is very difficult to moderate without just banning people you find annoying.


And this is the crux of the issue. When you base your moderation on subjective concepts such as "annoying", it's near impossible to remain consistent. Yes, there are some rather obvious agitators around that could be easily identified and dealt with, but those aside it's all a matter of temperament. Just disallowing certain buzzwords would make things a little easier without changing their approach in a fundamental way.


Wargaming also attracts more than it's share of people that are very concrete, or black and white in their thinking. they expect rules to be clear, and that something 1/8" off the line from disallowed is completely fine. That's not how most people interact, and I do think that most of the really obnoxious posters I've seen in my time here have been people with very strong personality traits that make following vaguer social norms very difficult.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 LordofHats wrote:
I mean, I don't think it's that hard but I'm a broken record on the problem poster topic and still baffled why it's actually a challenge. There's not that many of them, a lot of them bailed of their own volition years ago when the politics megathreads got canned or became way less highstrung (myself included), and at this point if someone is still a consistent source of thread-locks enough that I notice them and remember their names as a lurker on most of the board I don't know why it's that hard to just say this particular person is someone we're better off without. 5 years ago me would almost certainly be in that category admittedly, but yeah. Broken record over here *shrug*


I think it's a combination of commitment to free speech ideals, a belief that all people can be rehabilitated, and a reluctance to use that level of authority. It's really hard to see how they're good for the community, although they do drive up post counts.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:48:13


Post by: LordofHats


 Polonius wrote:
Good lord. My hot take on FSM is that if you have a strong opinion on them, I'm not listening to it.


Ironically, the topic would probably be less of a minefield if more people just decided not to engage it at all. A lot of topics would. I think a lot of 'strong opinions' on these goofier topics is the byproduct of certain people taking them way too seriously and getting way too worked up. They take something that should be a small one-two hour back and forth and turn it into a life or death struggle that is far more intense than it has any reason to be. If more people simply decided to not engage in a discussion they don't want to deal with (the only time I'm going to agree with the mods on that approach!) they would paradoxically not have to deal with the things they don't want to deal with.

I guess to put this more directly: what can anybody hope to add to a discussion about a stupid hoodie after the first hour or two?


Probably not much, but I think that we have to ask the question is kind of the problem. People don't let these things go easily and I think threads like this one come up because the topic usually doesn't resolve itself after a thread lock. It just sits and lingers until it comes up again. Which I think is unavoidable, but could be handled more tactfully than it is from a moderation perspective and more considerately from the POV of the average poster.

In a perfect world, maybe people would post about their views in ways that actually change how people think


I'd honestly settle for a so-so world where people post in a way that develops a topic rather than tries to shut it down. That would be nice


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:52:51


Post by: trexmeyer


 Polonius wrote:

In a way, this post supports my point. Rather than engage in a nuanced distinction, the instinct is shut down the discussion, by pointing out that it is disruptive, or if that doesn't work, make it so disruptive that the people pointing out the issue are the problem.


Yes, because this is quite literally not the place for nuanced discussion. That was banned years ago when politics was banned from the OT. There are thousands of other places for you to discuss that. You are actively engaging in that same sort of bad faith arguments that you accuse others of using.

Is it a stupid policy for Dakka? I would say yes. There is a host of issues with just 40K and WHFB when it comes to issues of racism and sexism and I'm not referring to the community, I'm referring to the actual product. Nearly every single example of female characters within both settings was originally hyper-sexualized to a degree that is completely unacceptable in modern western society. That is all irrelevant. If the site owner and mod team decide that politics are a no go then they are no go. You can piss and moan about it or you can move on with your life.

Again, because apparently it needs to be spelled out for you. Nazism is EVIL. Racism is EVIL. Sexism is EVIL. No one is against you on that save a few nutters lurking in the shadows. When they surface, they should be banned.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 05:57:50


Post by: Polonius


trexmeyer wrote:
 Polonius wrote:

In a way, this post supports my point. Rather than engage in a nuanced distinction, the instinct is shut down the discussion, by pointing out that it is disruptive, or if that doesn't work, make it so disruptive that the people pointing out the issue are the problem.


Yes, because this is quite literally not the place for nuanced discussion. That was banned years ago when politics was banned from the OT. There are thousands of other places for you to discuss that. You are actively engaging in that same sort of bad faith arguments that you accuse others of using.

Is it a stupid policy for Dakka? I would say yes. There is a host of issues with just 40K and WHFB when it comes to issues of racism and sexism and I'm not referring to the community, I'm referring to the actual product. Nearly every single example of female characters within both settings was originally hyper-sexualized to a degree that is completely unacceptable in modern western society. That is all irrelevant. If the site owner and mod team decide that politics are a no go then they are no go. You can piss and moan about it or you can move on with your life.

Again, because apparently it needs to be spelled out for you. Nazism is EVIL. Racism is EVIL. Sexism is EVIL. No one is against you on that save a few nutters lurking in the shadows. When they surface, they should be banned.


I.... genuinely do not understand how even the most motivated reasoning can come up with that reaction to my post. I have literally said that I do not even think Dakka is doing anything wrong.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 06:12:07


Post by: trexmeyer


I appreciate that you've shown your true colors. You are either being willfully obtuse or much, much worse.

You accuse me of shutting down the discussion. I offer a defense and your response is, "Well, I don't know how I triggered that."

Really? Are you really going to play that game?

You accused me of being a fascist supporter and you are surprised I responded to you?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 06:16:11


Post by: insaniak


 Polonius wrote:

There is a very charming aspect to centrism in that they do see that people are rarely cartoonish in their views, and that political views, like anything else, can be nuanced...

This is actually quite a good illustration of the difficulty of discerning someone's political leanings from their behaviour online. In the past few weeks, I've had two separate posters accuse me of being inexcusably woke due to over-moderating right-wing posters, a post accusing me of being a Nazi sympathiser due to not doing enough to moderate right wing posters, and now a post labelling me a centrist for same.


 posermcbogus wrote:
I think maybe, and I'm sure I'm not alone here, that it might be an idea for the mods to have a more in-depth review of what they think of this, especially given the hard stance GW has taken lately, and with regards to being able to better identify dog-whistle signpost-y crap, and make it clear that racist exterminationist extremism is not something to be tolerated here.

It's something that we've discussed behind the scenes before, and in light of the current conversations and general state of the world is certainly something that is worth more discussion. The problem that is being highlighted here though isn't just that Nazis should be kicked out, but that some posters feel that more should be done about people they perceive as Nazi-adjacent... which is much more difficult to police effectively and fairly.

The other issue raised in here was about threads being 'allowed' to wander off topic, and in an ideal world that would certainly be watched over more closely... But it relies on posters doing the right thing and not continuing to respond to off-topic tangents. However large and active the moderation team is, they can't be watching every thread in real time. Hot button topics in particular can move very quickly, and if by the time a moderator sees a report people have dog-piled on each other for four pages, unless it's a really worthwhile topic of conversation there's a very good chance we're just going to lock it rather than work through multiple pages of people acting out to figure out how much of it needs to be deleted or who was actually responsible for the whole mess. So if you (general forum 'you', not anyone specifically) want to improve the chances of 'agitators' being dealt with effectively, stop spending multiple pages screaming at them and then complaining that the thread was locked. Report the problem post and leave it for us to deal with it instead of responding to it.

Note that the above is not intended to dismiss anyone's concerns with certain behaviours or attitudes. I absolutely understand why some posters in particular feel very strongly about this topic, and how that informs their reaction to perceived issues. But you can't fix those issues by calling people names and participating in the derailment of threads.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 06:26:54


Post by: Polonius



 insaniak wrote:
Note that the above is not intended to dismiss anyone's concerns with certain behaviours or attitudes. I absolutely understand why some posters in particular feel very strongly about this topic, and how that informs their reaction to perceived issues. But you can't fix those issues by calling people names and participating in the derailment of threads.


I took a look at the initial Spanish Tournament discussion, much of the early pages seem to discuss what symbols, exactly, were present (the consensus seems to be Franco era stuff), and how they would handle having to play such a player. Soon, several posters did weigh in very quickly to point out that they'd like to see all political shirts banned, specifically citing Che Guevara and Soviet symbols. Another poster flew in off the top rope making a bunch of straw man arguments and helpfully pointed out that maybe they should also ban Islamic clothing due to 9/11. Then some comments started to basically say, "hey, maybe defending this guy says something about you" Other posters kept repeatedly pointing out "communist countries killed lots of people too!" Some people pointed out that fascist overlap with BT, and that drew a slew of "now we're banning BT too!" type posts. One person asked why people keep bringing up communists, and the next response was "people keep calling everybody Nazis" even though nobody had (although the thread had been moderated, so maybe those posts were deleted). By page five people were openly citing Antifa as a hate group. One person pointed out that whaboutism is just being too intellectually weak to accept that, apparently, communists were bad too? I'm not sure I followed that one. Lots of people saying "People are calling me a Nazi," not a lot of actually, you know, calling anybody a Nazi, aside from the dude who showed up wearing a Franco shirt, who is apparently a known neo-fascist.

the thread is still up if anybody wants to check my work, but there were a LOT of people who seemed offended that only Nazi stuff is banned, some people with, let's just tactfully say "hardline" views of Islam and Antifa, an enormous amount of strawmen, and grandstanding, and an extremely high "complaining about accusations of being a Nazi" to "actual accusations of being a Nazi" ratio.

So, the thread was, in many ways, productive. I think there were some good points about how to handle it, what the responsibilities of the TO were, if a person who felt offended should concede rather than play. And then... a steady stream of derailment, virtually all from a position of at least mild sympathy towards Facism, either in it being singled out (even though the reasons are extremely obvious) or becaue there was a lot of concern about people just saying "you're a Nazi" when that, at least that I saw, didn't happen.

So, what I saw, at least in that thread, so a concerted effort to drown out discussion of if Wearing Fascist gear to a tournament is okay by swamping it with a referendum on, I guess, communist dictatorships. I think that if the efforts to derail conversations are so strongly one sided, and that derailment is allowed, than, the OP does have a point.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 06:31:07


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 RaptorusRex wrote:
Sufficient Velocity does just fine.
Go an express any non-left wing opinion at SV and see how far you get, but that's drifting way off topic, so I'll walk away from that...



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 06:33:16


Post by: Polonius


 insaniak wrote:
 Polonius wrote:

There is a very charming aspect to centrism in that they do see that people are rarely cartoonish in their views, and that political views, like anything else, can be nuanced...

This is actually quite a good illustration of the difficulty of discerning someone's political leanings from their behaviour online. In the past few weeks, I've had two separate posters accuse me of being inexcusably woke due to over-moderating right-wing posters, a post accusing me of being a Nazi sympathiser due to not doing enough to moderate right wing posters, and now a post labelling me a centrist for same.


I should have been clearer. I wasn't really assessing you as being centrist, but rather stating that I think the ideal that both sides are closer, or have more in common, is a centrist one, as opposed to the more toxic views of the other extremes which tend to demonize their foes. It's a genuinely good thing, because humanizing people you disagree with is essential to working with them. The flip side to that is to understand that the worst evils done, in any society, at any time, weren't done only by the monsters. They were mostly done by normal people who just accepted it.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 06:39:32


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 RaptorusRex wrote:
But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.
Do keep in mind that this whole kerfuffle began when a certain member of Dakka - one who seems to see imaginary Nazis everywhere he goes - ended his post with "Sent to a journalist". That's basically a threat against the website as a whole; "Enact my will, or I will make this into a bigger deal!". That's one step away from "I will contact your employer!".

That's attempting to gain a position of power to dictate moderation. And it's a very dangerous one.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 06:56:51


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 posermcbogus wrote:
Nazis are awful, and no one should put up with them trying to colonize their hobby space. IDK why this is so hard for some of you.


I tend to think the numbers of actual problematic Nazis are small, like, next to none, and the number of people who get labelled Nazis for simply disagreeing with a particular viewpoint is far greater. Ironically, it's become a way of dehumanising people by some.

I'm happy to say "Nazis are bad, lets not support Nazis", but I become cautious when we start talking about how we should deal with Nazis because of how easily someone can become labelled as one.

I think the smarter approach is to address behaviours and actions, rather than trying to address Nazis and then trying to figure out who is a Nazi.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 07:07:51


Post by: hotsauceman1


Im not sure if im adding much but.
Over the past couple of years, alot of geek spaces have come to be known to be outright hostile to anyone that isnt, well, a Cis/Het/Male.
Its been swept under the rug for quite too long. And the reason alot of us, including me, are passionate is because we want to enjoy the hobby too, but when people who are outright hostle to you existence and want you dead are given the ability to participate in it aswell and are allowed to express their views,it becomes unappealing to be in the hobby.
and with the radicalization pipeline in full effect, mods have to be very vigilant IMO of spotting these people pretty fast and banning.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 07:31:10


Post by: Da Boss


I hardly ever see people labelled as nazis on this board.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 07:37:31


Post by: Formosa


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.
Do keep in mind that this whole kerfuffle began when a certain member of Dakka - one who seems to see imaginary Nazis everywhere he goes - ended his post with "Sent to a journalist". That's basically a threat against the website as a whole; "Enact my will, or I will make this into a bigger deal!". That's one step away from "I will contact your employer!".

That's attempting to gain a position of power to dictate moderation. And it's a very dangerous one.



Glad I wasn't the only one that noticed that


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
Formosa, it is 10:43 at night here. So I'm tired, and I think you're acting childish. But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.


I'm talking to the members, not the mods, also this isn't power dynamics 101, I have a voice and as long as I adhere to the rules I can use it, not everything is about "power" old chap.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 08:35:31


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Formosa wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.
Do keep in mind that this whole kerfuffle began when a certain member of Dakka - one who seems to see imaginary Nazis everywhere he goes - ended his post with "Sent to a journalist". That's basically a threat against the website as a whole; "Enact my will, or I will make this into a bigger deal!". That's one step away from "I will contact your employer!".

That's attempting to gain a position of power to dictate moderation. And it's a very dangerous one.



Glad I wasn't the only one that noticed that


I'm surprised the thread didn't just get locked and deleted at that point, and a message to the OP sent saying if any journalists want a discussion with the administration team they're welcome to contact them directly, but the opinions of posters within the forum does not represent the stance of the site administrators any more than an anonymous youtube video represents the stance of google.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 09:29:02


Post by: Peterhausenn


 Formosa wrote:


I will keep saying it, this is a liberal space, not a socialist one, this is not sigmarxism where you can crush any disenting view by lying and calling us Nazis, this is not Reddit where your echo chamber is promoted and rewarded, if you cannot handle that Dakka has a blanket ban on Nazism and politics, but not what you people label as a Nazi, then leave, set up a new site, invite like minded people and police it with an iron fist as you are want to do, but you won't, because this site is fairly popular and that is why you want to control this space.

.


i am probably foolish for even wading into this topic and i might be misunderstanding your intent as different nations and cultures have different terminologies, but are you saying that if you dont have a liberal view point you arent welcome here? that conservatives, moderates or even those that dont care about politics arent welcome at dakka? that doesnt seem to be inclusive or tolerant in the least.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 09:48:56


Post by: Formosa


 Peterhausenn wrote:
 Formosa wrote:


I will keep saying it, this is a liberal space, not a socialist one, this is not sigmarxism where you can crush any disenting view by lying and calling us Nazis, this is not Reddit where your echo chamber is promoted and rewarded, if you cannot handle that Dakka has a blanket ban on Nazism and politics, but not what you people label as a Nazi, then leave, set up a new site, invite like minded people and police it with an iron fist as you are want to do, but you won't, because this site is fairly popular and that is why you want to control this space.

.


i am probably foolish for even wading into this topic and i might be misunderstanding your intent as different nations and cultures have different terminologies, but are you saying that if you dont have a liberal view point you arent welcome here? that conservatives, moderates or even those that dont care about politics arent welcome at dakka? that doesnt seem to be inclusive or tolerant in the least.


Liberalism in the UK basically means all perspectives are to be considered on their own merits and if any break the social contract of non violent actions (actions being the key point), so if a space is liberal it means that all can be here, with key exceptions being those who would commit acts of violence on others to get their ideological views front and centre, this is completely different from the American version which has become a synonym for socialism for some stupid reason and is not the same as continental liberalism which is top down rule, rights come from the state as opposed to being representatives of the people borrowing their power, bottom up rule, rights are inalienable and intrinsic to the person (English liberalism), this is the antithesis of the personal is political neo socialist view (all human interaction is political and should be judged as such)

TLDR/ English liberalism is everyone can choose to participate or not on their own terms with their own views so long as they are not committing acts of violence, live and let live, you leave me alone and I leave you alone.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 09:59:34


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


I think now "liberal" is more commonly used in the modern US sense than any traditional English sense. A few of your posts I read and wondered WTH you were talking about when you said "liberal" because it's rare to see it used with that connotation these days.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 10:15:22


Post by: Blackie


Well in Europe "liberal" is a positive term, even conservatives and right wing people don't use it to refer to the rivals. Conservative and liberal aren't opposites here, it's perfectly fine being conservative and liberal and in fact most of the conservatives are actually liberal and have no problem identifying themselves as such.

In the US, and maybe in some other anglosaxon countries, it's widely used as dispregiative though, we know that.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 10:47:03


Post by: Flipsiders


An obvious issue here is that there are two points of discussion that get conflated in every single one of these threads.

First is the nominal: Some users here believe that there are Dakka members with far-right or even fascist sympathies which have been graciously ignored by the moderators. While I'm very clearly anti-Nazi (I was the one who regrettably brought up the BTs in the Spanish Nazi thread), I still feel the need to mention that it's generally next to impossible to tell who does or does not have these political leanings, especially when online. Nowadays, a lot of conservatives genuinely believe that the far left is out to get them, or that there is in fact a group of antifa goons which want them publicly lynched for supporting right-wing politicians. However, those same talking points are also used as smokescreens by actual Nazis, to the extent that they often outright admit to doing so. It may sound insane to some people here that there are groups of non-fascist internet users who live in fear of being either metaphorically or literally bludgeoned by the far left, but it's true, and some of them probably use this site. As Insaniak mentioned, it's difficult to tell which group is which, and without exception I do not fault the moderators for not taking action on these lines. To repeat: Currently, there is (to my knowledge) not a single user on Dakkadakka who has displayed enough fascist/white supremacist/etc. sympathies to warrant any sort of banning.

However, the second issue is a lot more cut-and-dry: Rule 1 violations. There are a few users on Dakka currently who —regardless of their political beliefs— regularly derail threads, intentionally agitate other users, and act in a fashion which is altogether incompatible with intelligent discussion. For reasons beyond my ken, these users have somehow not been banned, and continue to ruin perfectly constructive conversations to their hearts' content. Of course, for reasons which are best left to the sociologists, the users who most regularly exhibit this behavior also hold strong right-wing beliefs, but acknowledging this fact in and of itself serves to muddle the greater point that these people regularly break Dakka's Rule 1 and get away with it scot-free. Part of the problem is that whenever these users are held to task, they seem to hold their arms behind their backs like a child who knocked over their mother's vase and cry about their horrific mistreatment, which of course is no doubt politically motivated and the fault of the horrific Radical Left. This, of course, is false, as there are plenty of conservative users on this site who don't act like easily-amused preteens at any given opportunity. To reiterate, this issue is entirely separate from any political discourse, no matter what certain people may have you believe, and should in my humble opinion be treated thusly.

Of course, the other facet of this problem is that there are a number of people on Dakka who insist on feeding the trolls at every single opportunity. For the sake of my own mental health, please remember: If you believe someone is arguing in bad faith, the best thing to do is not argue with them. It only exacerbates the situation. Just ignore them, and move on with your lives. Do it for me, if nothing else.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 10:51:04


Post by: Overread


All I can say is that at present this whole element seems to be only on Dakka of the hobby groups I'm on. Only Dakka seems to be having a core issue (granted I don't step into 4Chan or Reddit). This suggests to me that this is a community issue and action of a few Dakka users in particular - most likely striking off each other - rather than something endemic in the modern wargaming scene at large. At least online


Other social groups seem able to operate without this continual political hotbed erupting; and without insane draconian moderation. Then again Dakka did allow political debate at one stage and now it does not; it might just be that for some Dakka became a political debate community for them alongside their wargaming. It's not about gaining a certain type of user but a certain attitude of users when they are present on Dakka.



Heck look at this thread and the last one, both veered off topic super fast and shifted from simply debating the "point" of the opening post into debating hotly with the subject of politics, political viewpoints, meaning of words and more. We've left behind moderation of the site and fast entered a back and forth of political debate.

Perhaps all that is required is swifter "stop that" and "back on subject" and "that subject is not allowed" moderation. Yes that is shutting it down, and by doing so moves that debate off-site or at least into private between interested parties. I don't think we can expect Dakka's moderation team to lead a one-forum crusade against political viewpoints and politics within the community; that's a community level thing that needs an entirely different approach.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 10:56:00


Post by: posermcbogus


insaniak wrote:

 posermcbogus wrote:
I think maybe, and I'm sure I'm not alone here, that it might be an idea for the mods to have a more in-depth review of what they think of this, especially given the hard stance GW has taken lately, and with regards to being able to better identify dog-whistle signpost-y crap, and make it clear that racist exterminationist extremism is not something to be tolerated here.

It's something that we've discussed behind the scenes before, and in light of the current conversations and general state of the world is certainly something that is worth more discussion. The problem that is being highlighted here though isn't just that Nazis should be kicked out, but that some posters feel that more should be done about people they perceive as Nazi-adjacent... which is much more difficult to police effectively and fairly.

The other issue raised in here was about threads being 'allowed' to wander off topic, and in an ideal world that would certainly be watched over more closely... But it relies on posters doing the right thing and not continuing to respond to off-topic tangents. However large and active the moderation team is, they can't be watching every thread in real time. Hot button topics in particular can move very quickly, and if by the time a moderator sees a report people have dog-piled on each other for four pages, unless it's a really worthwhile topic of conversation there's a very good chance we're just going to lock it rather than work through multiple pages of people acting out to figure out how much of it needs to be deleted or who was actually responsible for the whole mess. So if you (general forum 'you', not anyone specifically) want to improve the chances of 'agitators' being dealt with effectively, stop spending multiple pages screaming at them and then complaining that the thread was locked. Report the problem post and leave it for us to deal with it instead of responding to it.

Note that the above is not intended to dismiss anyone's concerns with certain behaviours or attitudes. I absolutely understand why some posters in particular feel very strongly about this topic, and how that informs their reaction to perceived issues. But you can't fix those issues by calling people names and participating in the derailment of threads.



This is a really well-worded, well thought out reply. Cheers very much for it, appreciate the time that you and the rest of the team have been spending on all of this stuff.
For what it's worth, I really dislike the title, and the premise of the first thread, because I think that it's broadly very unfair. That said, I don't disagree with the sentiment that nazis are unwelcome here, nor making it known that I am very hostile to them.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
 posermcbogus wrote:
Nazis are awful, and no one should put up with them trying to colonize their hobby space. IDK why this is so hard for some of you.


I tend to think the numbers of actual problematic Nazis are small, like, next to none, and the number of people who get labelled Nazis for simply disagreeing with a particular viewpoint is far greater. Ironically, it's become a way of dehumanising people by some.

I'm happy to say "Nazis are bad, lets not support Nazis", but I become cautious when we start talking about how we should deal with Nazis because of how easily someone can become labelled as one.

I think the smarter approach is to address behaviours and actions, rather than trying to address Nazis and then trying to figure out who is a Nazi.


Honestly, I agree with you on this. I think there are probably almost no nazis on dakka, but at the same time, I don't want them to ever feel like this could be an environment where they might be welcome. I understand that "nazi" is an insult that gets thrown around by certain people very freely, and I dislike that, because it really detracts from just how awful the actual nazis were, and trivializes the crimes they committed. It's not something I ever condone.
As much as it may feel dehumanizing for some to get called nazis, I think it also bears repeating that it's also dehumanizing to be a victim of racism, to have to try and stand and stake out space for yourself in an environment where any critical discussion of recent events quickly gets drowned out in moral grandstanding about how some users here really hate socialists, or the "woke" or antifa or civil rights activists.

That said, the dude with the sweatshirt was really putting himself out there, and I am glad to be part of the community who thinks that broadcasting support for exterminationist terrorists is not acceptable. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. If it walks like a goose, and thinks that humanity is a sliding scale, it's probably a fascist.

For what it's worth, what my post was advocating for was not
instant-ban for anyone who gets accused of being a Nazi, but more
I feel like there has been a recent trend towards suspicious behaviors, people trying to signpost certain allegiances subtly, which concerns me, as the catalyst has been the Spanish Nazi guy. I hope the mods will think about this more.

Also feth me is it ever tiresome watching people try to derail this gak. We get it. You're comfortable with this garbage in your social spaces. Someone posted one of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's best writings on the poison of inaction in the face of prejudice, and you have your whole asses out with the "yes, but if we disregard the nazi guy in spain, and instead focus on my personal boogeymen..." act.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 10:56:17


Post by: Flinty


It works both ways though. The mods can’t be everywhere, so if you’re concerned, hit the yellow triangle.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 11:03:32


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Overread wrote:
Other social groups seem able to operate without this continual political hotbed erupting; and without insane draconian moderation.


Specifically what other social groups are you talking about? It seems pretty common for anonymous online groups these days to be easily derailed, but I'm not a member of many different groups these days.

Some car forums I found less tumultuous from a political standpoint, perhaps the member base is maybe less diverse, but it seems topics don't generally get dragged in a political direction to begin with. Though those folks sometimes treat the cars themselves as a religion, and I've been on several that aren't very pleasant, though for non-political reasons.

I don't really even find Dakka to be that tumultuous politically if you just avoid the obvious dumpster fire topics.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 11:21:20


Post by: Overread


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
 Overread wrote:
Other social groups seem able to operate without this continual political hotbed erupting; and without insane draconian moderation.


Specifically what other social groups are you talking about? It seems pretty common for anonymous online groups these days to be easily derailed, but I'm not a member of many different groups these days.


The line between de-railing a topic and a topic evolving/changing is a subtle line but its been happening for years and years. It's perhaps more noticed by some today on forums because the number of forum users is in general much smaller which makes for fewer overall threads. So topics are more easily focused on by a smaller group of people. As a result its much easier for people to start conducting more general interactions within threads; whilst with a bigger community that kind of action gets spreads out and watered down because more threads are active.

That said I wasn't meaning that other forums/groups don't have drifting subjects, that happens. I meant that the specific hotbed of political issues that seem to be a factor on Dakka isn't something I see happening as much/on other sites. It's not that it doesn't happen, but that Dakka seems to have more of it. It certainly spiked over the last 5 years on many sites (esp any site with an active American population). But in broad terms Dakka seems to be fairing worse. Again its one of the fewer that had politics allowed before that 5 year (or so) period and it seems harder to shake it off the site.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 11:41:15


Post by: stratigo


 insaniak wrote:
 Elemental wrote:

I've often been frustrated that the mods seem so reluctant to take on bad actors within their site, but this reaction--

I'm locking this thread for review. If someone wants to make a new thread with some direct feedback points (e.g. "locking threads only encourages disruption", "rules aren't enforced often enough", etc), and can do so in a clear and concise manner without going to derpsville, have at it, I'll check in periodically to police things. Keep it on topic and we'll hear you out on whatever you have to say, but leave the commentary and history lessons out or people will be getting time-outs.


--is at best, tone-deaf, with no recognition of the very real fear and anger behind the "heat" in the thread.

Then I'll make it clear here: We totally acknowledge that there is a very real fear and anger behind this discussion. However, we also realise that there is a huge polarisation in discussion these days (and not just online), where people just assume that if someone else's views don't align 100% with theirs, that they are an awful person. This can make navigating discussion on certain topics extremely problematic, and is what led to the politics ban in OT.

We most certainly don't want to encourage actual Nazis to hang out here. But we also don't want to create an echo chamber where people are afraid to share opinions because they fear being branded something they are not by those who disagree on that specific issue.





Yo dawg, Formosa is using actual nazi talking points to defend nazis. You really should do something about that.
trexmeyer wrote:
This is a forum for wargaming. Not politics. If you're looking for social revolution here then you are looking in the wrong place. You can't expect moderators to go full Minority Report and start preemptively banning people for what they might say or do.

No one is in the wrong for being upset about Nazis. You're not even in the wrong for wanting Nazis banned. That is reasonable. Those people are sick. Wanting someone banned for being the fan of some POS like Arch is a bridge too far. What is so difficult about that?



Most of us just don't want to deal with nazis in the community. The less welcome you make them anywhere, the less welcome they are everywhere.
 RaptorusRex wrote:
Yeah, I'm out. Have fun with this, DakkaDakka. I'm not going to associate with people who think I should be dead or people who think those people are "entitled to their opinion".

The "no politics" rules on forums like this serve only to bottle up the emotions and lets them fester. Sufficient Velocity does just fine.


SV has a strictly superior moderating culture, in part because its admin are lawyers really enamored with lawyering. Sadly, the staff here almost certainly doesn't have the same skillset.
 Formosa wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
 BlackoCatto wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
Formosa, it is 10:43 at night here. So I'm tired, and I think you're acting childish. But what position of power do you have to dictate moderation? None. You can only suggest. Same as the rest of us.


What did he say that was childish? This is just some dumb cope threat from someone crying about the mods enforcing their policy.


w/e, man. I think that reading that post as a "threat" or "cope" shows you're determined to read something into it.

At the end of the day, I want a safer community. It's Formosa's right to spout ahistorical crap, but his right to swing his fist ends where it meets my face.



Everything I have said is rooted in historical fact, but inconvenient for certain ideological slanted people to hear, but feel free to PM me with citations proving my comments incorrect so you lot do not derail the thread.


You are no historian.
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
Sufficient Velocity does just fine.
Go an express any non-left wing opinion at SV and see how far you get, but that's drifting way off topic, so I'll walk away from that...



I mean, maybe if the political opinions you express didn't involve stripping people's rights?
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
 posermcbogus wrote:
Nazis are awful, and no one should put up with them trying to colonize their hobby space. IDK why this is so hard for some of you.


I tend to think the numbers of actual problematic Nazis are small, like, next to none, and the number of people who get labelled Nazis for simply disagreeing with a particular viewpoint is far greater. Ironically, it's become a way of dehumanising people by some.

I'm happy to say "Nazis are bad, lets not support Nazis", but I become cautious when we start talking about how we should deal with Nazis because of how easily someone can become labelled as one.

I think the smarter approach is to address behaviours and actions, rather than trying to address Nazis and then trying to figure out who is a Nazi.


You ever sit in a hobby shop and listen to a collection of jerkoffs crack jokes about a trap? I have. Know a guy and his friend group who uses gay as a slur all the time? I do.

Are these people nazis? Eh? Probably not (maybe one or two). Would they be absolutely okay if fascists took over and started oppressing people they hate? You betchya.
 Flipsiders wrote:
An obvious issue here is that there are two points of discussion that get conflated in every single one of these threads.

First is the nominal: Some users here believe that there are Dakka members with far-right or even fascist sympathies which have been graciously ignored by the moderators. While I'm very clearly anti-Nazi (I was the one who regrettably brought up the BTs in the Spanish Nazi thread), I still feel the need to mention that it's generally next to impossible to tell who does or does not have these political leanings, especially when online. Nowadays, a lot of conservatives genuinely believe that the far left is out to get them, or that there is in fact a group of antifa goons which want them publicly lynched for supporting right-wing politicians. However, those same talking points are also used as smokescreens by actual Nazis, to the extent that they often outright admit to doing so. It may sound insane to some people here that there are groups of non-fascist internet users who live in fear of being either metaphorically or literally bludgeoned by the far left, but it's true, and some of them probably use this site. As Insaniak mentioned, it's difficult to tell which group is which, and without exception I do not fault the moderators for not taking action on these lines. To repeat: Currently, there is (to my knowledge) not a single user on Dakkadakka who has displayed enough fascist/white supremacist/etc. sympathies to warrant any sort of banning.

However, the second issue is a lot more cut-and-dry: Rule 1 violations. There are a few users on Dakka currently who —regardless of their political beliefs— regularly derail threads, intentionally agitate other users, and act in a fashion which is altogether incompatible with intelligent discussion. For reasons beyond my ken, these users have somehow not been banned, and continue to ruin perfectly constructive conversations to their hearts' content. Of course, for reasons which are best left to the sociologists, the users who most regularly exhibit this behavior also hold strong right-wing beliefs, but acknowledging this fact in and of itself serves to muddle the greater point that these people regularly break Dakka's Rule 1 and get away with it scot-free. Part of the problem is that whenever these users are held to task, they seem to hold their arms behind their backs like a child who knocked over their mother's vase and cry about their horrific mistreatment, which of course is no doubt politically motivated and the fault of the horrific Radical Left. This, of course, is false, as there are plenty of conservative users on this site who don't act like easily-amused preteens at any given opportunity. To reiterate, this issue is entirely separate from any political discourse, no matter what certain people may have you believe, and should in my humble opinion be treated thusly.

Of course, the other facet of this problem is that there are a number of people on Dakka who insist on feeding the trolls at every single opportunity. For the sake of my own mental health, please remember: If you believe someone is arguing in bad faith, the best thing to do is not argue with them. It only exacerbates the situation. Just ignore them, and move on with your lives. Do it for me, if nothing else.


You are making the mistake that nazis are insincere and cynical in their beliefs here I think

A person who supports a fascist strongman taking over the state to protect them from the far left is still a fascist even if they really feel that fear. Indeed, getting people to feel that fear and truning them to fascist ideology is one of the key points of fascism. It's on Eco's list even.

 Overread wrote:
All I can say is that at present this whole element seems to be only on Dakka of the hobby groups I'm on. Only Dakka seems to be having a core issue (granted I don't step into 4Chan or Reddit). This suggests to me that this is a community issue and action of a few Dakka users in particular - most likely striking off each other - rather than something endemic in the modern wargaming scene at large. At least online


Other social groups seem able to operate without this continual political hotbed erupting; and without insane draconian moderation. Then again Dakka did allow political debate at one stage and now it does not; it might just be that for some Dakka became a political debate community for them alongside their wargaming. It's not about gaining a certain type of user but a certain attitude of users when they are present on Dakka.



Heck look at this thread and the last one, both veered off topic super fast and shifted from simply debating the "point" of the opening post into debating hotly with the subject of politics, political viewpoints, meaning of words and more. We've left behind moderation of the site and fast entered a back and forth of political debate.

Perhaps all that is required is swifter "stop that" and "back on subject" and "that subject is not allowed" moderation. Yes that is shutting it down, and by doing so moves that debate off-site or at least into private between interested parties. I don't think we can expect Dakka's moderation team to lead a one-forum crusade against political viewpoints and politics within the community; that's a community level thing that needs an entirely different approach.


That's a large number of right wing members of my local wargaming community.

Looking like a boring white guy I have been able to access their spaces and their online comminiques and, well, gak's vile. I mean, how do they even have that many monkey pictures on their computers?

 Flinty wrote:
It works both ways though. The mods can’t be everywhere, so if you’re concerned, hit the yellow triangle.


I mean the biggest of the problem posters hasn't been ejected yet.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 11:47:34


Post by: Flipsiders


stratigo wrote:

You are making the mistake that nazis are insincere and cynical in their beliefs here I think

A person who supports a fascist strongman taking over the state to protect them from the far left is still a fascist even if they really feel that fear. Indeed, getting people to feel that fear and truning them to fascist ideology is one of the key points of fascism. It's on Eco's list even.


This is certainly true, but it doesn't mean that all people who feel that fear are in favor of a fascist strongman. If A and C are both contained in B, that doesn't necessitate that A = C.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 13:23:25


Post by: Jerram


 Flipsiders wrote:
An obvious issue here is that there are two points of discussion that get conflated in every single one of these threads.


However, the second issue is a lot more cut-and-dry: Rule 1 violations. There are a few users on Dakka currently who —regardless of their political beliefs— regularly derail threads, intentionally agitate other users, and act in a fashion which is altogether incompatible with intelligent discussion. For reasons beyond my ken, these users have somehow not been banned, and continue to ruin perfectly constructive conversations to their hearts' content. Of course, for reasons which are best left to the sociologists, the users who most regularly exhibit this behavior also hold strong right-wing beliefs, but acknowledging this fact in and of itself serves to muddle the greater point that these people regularly break Dakka's Rule 1 and get away with it scot-free. Part of the problem is that whenever these users are held to task, they seem to hold their arms behind their backs like a child who knocked over their mother's vase and cry about their horrific mistreatment, which of course is no doubt politically motivated and the fault of the horrific Radical Left. This, of course, is false, as there are plenty of conservative users on this site who don't act like easily-amused preteens at any given opportunity. To reiterate, this issue is entirely separate from any political discourse, no matter what certain people may have you believe, and should in my humble opinion be treated thusly.



Pointing out that this is BS is not a Rule 1 violation, the continued Rule 1 Violations that seem to go unpunished are name calling from your side that gets threads shut down. This very thread started with a Rule 1 Violation.


Im going to bring back a scenario from earlier in the thread to demonstrate.

Everyone
"Nazis are evil and should be banned"

Liberals
"Yes we agree, but we also want other evil ideologies and hate groups banned, like communists/socialist derived groups"

Socialists/communists
"No, you can't ban those because they never did nothing wrong ever and I like them, but the evil Nazis should be banned still"

Liberals
"We can literally see the mountains of corpses caused by your ideology and have first hand experience of your actions"

Socialists/communists
"Ah so your a Nazi!!!!! Because only a Nazi would oppose communists, liberals get the bullet too"

Mod
Thread Closed

Socialists/communists
"See what you did, you got another thread closed you Nazi"


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 13:45:12


Post by: Da Boss


As a clarification for americans and others with a different understanding of the term liberal, in Europe and elsewhere it means something like a libertarian rather than someone left wing.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 13:53:00


Post by: Lord Damocles


I'm surprised that the public response from Dakka/the mods to being threatened and accused of being pro-Nazi has been so tepid thus far.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 13:58:02


Post by: Da Boss


A journalist that looks into this is not gonna find anything worth reporting on. I agree though, ending the post with that was poor form, as was the provocative title.

But what kind of response would you expect? They ban the poster in question, it just feeds the perception the poster already had, doesn't it?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 14:00:18


Post by: posermcbogus


tbh like that part was a bit much hahaha, like what journalist? BoLS? Spikeybits?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 14:25:13


Post by: endlesswaltz123


I think there is an issue in the forum, and I appreciate the discussion about consistent behaviours, as opposed to direct statements. It isn't a huge problem, there aren't that many posters, but there are posters that absolutely are far-right if not fascists in full, and if they are not they are just here to disrupt.

Pivoting back to something a previous poster said though about direct rule violations... Seriously, what does a poster like Goldenhorn for example actually bring to the forum as a whole? Why does someone with such evident behaviours of trolling (and that is putting it lightly) get so much leeway to disrupt?

Also, wholesale shutting down threads absolutely does not help things to come to a resolution, it is just passing the book to another thread.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 14:33:45


Post by: LordofHats


 Lord Damocles wrote:
I'm surprised that the public response from Dakka/the mods to being threatened and accused of being pro-Nazi has been so tepid thus far.


The mods on DakkaDakka have pretty thick skins, which is much to their credit and often underappreciated. Or at least, if they have thin skins they don't let us see it which is still to their credit

 Da Boss wrote:
As a clarification for Americans and others with a different understanding of the term liberal, in Europe and elsewhere it means something like a libertarian rather than someone left wing.


Part of the issue is that a lot of these words have a lot of meanings and insistent arguments based in simple/self-serving categories are usually just an exercise in pointless semantics and not an honest discussion.

Especially when a topic moves past the actual topic and becomes an argument over broader political ideologies. I've long given up expecting people to get this, let alone the convolutedly confusing evolution of the word 'socialism' and its varied meanings. Libertarian doesn't even mean the same thing in Europe that it does over here. Here it's more often than not shorthand for being a fan of Ayn Rand. In Europe it still seems to have some of its older classical liberal connotations that have mostly been swept aside this side of the pond after it was captured to mean something almost entirely the opposite.

It's one reason why spiraling tangents born of off-topic political rants are a problem. People aren't working from the same vocabulary, and in a desperate ignorant certainty, they invent entire histories based on their limited basis of knowledge that involves filling a lot of gaps with things they think they know (see the Dunning-Kruger Effect) and it just becomes extremely angry white noise that doesn't go anywhere useful, but does inevitably get a vitriolic response from someone else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Overread wrote:
All I can say is that at present this whole element seems to be only on Dakka of the hobby groups I'm on. Only Dakka seems to be having a core issue (granted I don't step into 4Chan or Reddit). This suggests to me that this is a community issue and action of a few Dakka users in particular - most likely striking off each other - rather than something endemic in the modern wargaming scene at large. At least online.


4Chan is weird, because twice now people have brought it up like it's some place to go to have politically charged discussions.

Here is how this thread would go if it were on 4Chan:

Poster: Do you guys ever get angry that there seem to be a lot of people weirdly okay with Nazism around here?
4Chan: Have you ever shat a pee and then wondered if dogs dream of electric sheep?
4Chan: Of course not, OP is too busy <explicitly descriptions of sex acts with ones own mother followed by an animal gif that doesn't seem related>

I kid of course but I'm baffled that this has been expressed in this thread twice now.

4Chan is not a discussion board. 4Chan is 4Chan. It's it's own bizarre internet entity that has very little to almost nothing in common with any other place on the net. While it's commonly presumed by righty's and lefty's (paradoxically) to be a bastion for the other side, I'd say the only thing that is consistent about 4Chan's site-wide political ideology is that it doesn't give a gak about your political ideology, it'll spend all its time churning out insane memes and nonsense responses because that's what 4Chan does. There's really no comparison between 4Chan and Dakka on this topic that probably goes anywhere.

Reddit, and I browse my topic spaces on Reddit, does have this problem as much as Dakka does. The thing there is that a subreddit is basically just one super long board. Imagine if DakkaDakka had no subboards and everything was just slapped on the front page. Which topics do you think would be consistently at the top? If you guessed showcases you'd be right! The front page of a lot of hobby subreddits are generally dominated by pictures and advice for painting with frequent rules discussions and bashing the parent company for not knowing their audience (and yeah that sounds like Dakka) but because it's all on one page other stuff that isn't that tends to be pushed down and out of sight.

Even then I just looked and this thread is at the top of the 40k subreddit right now: https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer40k/comments/qxev9v/the_imperium_is_driven_by_hate_warhammer_is_not/ so this dude's hoody sparking discussion over the space is not limited to just DakkaDakka. Though funnily enough, the convo over on the Reddit was a bit tamer than it was here, but that probably owes to Reddit's formating which is good for shooting off short and quick responses but bad for long-form discussion. You kind of have to dig into a reddit thread to find the usual 'no you're evil' nonsense cause it gets hidden from view by the way the website displays. All of this same behavior is still over there, but it's easier to not notice it because of how Reddit works.

DakkaDakka probably does have more protracted debates than Reddit, but that too owes itself to Dakka's format. Discussions are less fire and forget here, and if someone gets really really pissy about moderation or certain users on DakkaDakka, it's not as easy to just say "We'll then I'll go make my own DakkaDakka, with blackjack, and hookers!" Subreddits splitting is a common thing on Reddit cause making a new subreddit is pretty easy. That serves itself as a sort of pressure valve for communities there. It's a lot harder for someone to just make their own version of DakkaDakka but with a different approach to handling X problem.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 15:27:33


Post by: Formosa


Yo dawg, Formosa is using actual nazi talking points to defend nazis. You really should do something about that.


oh look another lie, you are so far gone down the radical rabbit hole you cannot tell a liberal arguing from the liberal standpoint and a Nazi, that is it YOU that is issue here, not I.



Most of us just don't want to deal with nazis in the community.


"perceived" Nazi, the bogey man, the "other" you need to feel validated in persecuting, problem is there is a really bad supply problem for the demand you all have, there are no Nazis here, just people you call Nazis




You are no historian


How do you know and not that it matters, I am still right


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 16:26:21


Post by: trexmeyer


 Da Boss wrote:
A journalist that looks into this is not gonna find anything worth reporting on. I agree though, ending the post with that was poor form, as was the provocative title.

But what kind of response would you expect? They ban the poster in question, it just feeds the perception the poster already had, doesn't it?


You must not have seen the same clickbait that I have. You could easily do a couple of articles on how DakkaDakka is harboring Nazis and Fascists based on a few recently locked threads.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 16:43:40


Post by: SlaveToDorkness


Hmmmm... No? Not in the slightest!?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 22:33:06


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Da Boss wrote:
A journalist that looks into this is not gonna find anything worth reporting on. I agree though, ending the post with that was poor form, as was the provocative title.


I dunno, journalists these days love their clickbaity articles where they throw people or groups of people under the bus for very little reason.

A few out of context posts and a title of "Have neo nazis found a new home in wargaming?" seems like just the sort of thing some "journalists" would do an article on.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 23:54:38


Post by: totalfailure


Totalitarian ‘progressives’ need to see ‘Nazis’ behind every bush, to validate their own extremist views…


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/28 23:58:08


Post by: Polonius


I've been thinking about this, off and on, and I do think I've come up with a practical solution that could be worth trying, as there seems to be one broad behavior that most triggers derailment.

While it is fine to discuss politics adjacent to wargaming, bringing in wider political labels, especially when used pejoratively, should not be allowed. Simply don't allow use of the term fascisms, communism, "wokeism," SJW, alt-right, none of it.

So, if we need to discuss, say, shipping delays, we can do that, but stick to the issues and the facts, and no potshots or asides about other political groups. This would, by inclusion, eliminate the "whataboutism" that is, ironically, a classic tactic of authoritarians.

For example, if you look at this very thread, has several posters making swipes, both veiled and overt, at various left wide groups (even more, if you count the "media.") At some point, that is simply de facto general political discussion. It's not about the topic, it's just people vomiting rhetoric at political groups and movements they don't like {edited due to overstatement}


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 00:09:39


Post by: Jerram


 Polonius wrote:
I've been thinking about this, off and on, and I do think I've come up with a practical solution that could be worth trying, as there seems to be one broad behavior that most triggers derailment.

While it is fine to discuss politics adjacent to wargaming, bringing in wider political labels, especially when used pejoratively, should not be allowed. Simply don't allow use of the term fascisms, communism, "wokeism," SJW, alt-right, none of it.

So, if we need to discuss, say, shipping delays, we can do that, but stick to the issues and the facts, and no potshots or asides about other political groups. This would, by inclusion, eliminate the "whataboutism" that is, ironically, a classic tactic of authoritarians.


This, this is the Polonius we need.

 Polonius wrote:
For example, if you look at this very thread, it's full of people making all kinds of swipes, from veiled to overt, at various left wide groups (even more, if you count the "media.") At some point, that is simply de facto general political discussion. It's not about the topic, it's just people vomiting rhetoric at political groups and movements they don't like


This, on the other hand just boggles my mind, in a second thread that is basically an attack on various right side individuals as its basis, the fact that you would post this just makes me shake my head in awe and be wonderment.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 00:50:38


Post by: Polonius


This, on the other hand just boggles my mind, in a second thread that is basically an attack on various right side individuals as its basis, the fact that you would post this just makes me shake my head in awe and be wonderment.


Okay, I overstated it. It's not full. I amended my post. That said:

Formosa wrote:Socialists/communists
"Ah so your a Nazi!!!!! Because only a Nazi would oppose communists, liberals get the bullet too"


H.B.M.C. wrote:
 RaptorusRex wrote:
Sufficient Velocity does just fine.
Go an express any non-left wing opinion at SV and see how far you get, but that's drifting way off topic, so I'll walk away from that..


totalfailure wrote:Totalitarian ‘progressives’ need to see ‘Nazis’ behind every bush, to validate their own extremist views…







Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 01:04:48


Post by: Flipsiders


Jerram wrote:
 Flipsiders wrote:
An obvious issue here is that there are two points of discussion that get conflated in every single one of these threads.


However, the second issue is a lot more cut-and-dry: Rule 1 violations. There are a few users on Dakka currently who —regardless of their political beliefs— regularly derail threads, intentionally agitate other users, and act in a fashion which is altogether incompatible with intelligent discussion. For reasons beyond my ken, these users have somehow not been banned, and continue to ruin perfectly constructive conversations to their hearts' content. Of course, for reasons which are best left to the sociologists, the users who most regularly exhibit this behavior also hold strong right-wing beliefs, but acknowledging this fact in and of itself serves to muddle the greater point that these people regularly break Dakka's Rule 1 and get away with it scot-free. Part of the problem is that whenever these users are held to task, they seem to hold their arms behind their backs like a child who knocked over their mother's vase and cry about their horrific mistreatment, which of course is no doubt politically motivated and the fault of the horrific Radical Left. This, of course, is false, as there are plenty of conservative users on this site who don't act like easily-amused preteens at any given opportunity. To reiterate, this issue is entirely separate from any political discourse, no matter what certain people may have you believe, and should in my humble opinion be treated thusly.



Pointing out that this is BS is not a Rule 1 violation, the continued Rule 1 Violations that seem to go unpunished are name calling from your side that gets threads shut down. This very thread started with a Rule 1 Violation.


Im going to bring back a scenario from earlier in the thread to demonstrate.

Everyone
"Nazis are evil and should be banned"

Liberals
"Yes we agree, but we also want other evil ideologies and hate groups banned, like communists/socialist derived groups"

Socialists/communists
"No, you can't ban those because they never did nothing wrong ever and I like them, but the evil Nazis should be banned still"

Liberals
"We can literally see the mountains of corpses caused by your ideology and have first hand experience of your actions"

Socialists/communists
"Ah so your a Nazi!!!!! Because only a Nazi would oppose communists, liberals get the bullet too"

Mod
Thread Closed

Socialists/communists
"See what you did, you got another thread closed you Nazi"


Yes, I'm sure implying that I support "mountains of corpses" for disagreeing with you is definitely a hallmark of civil political discussion.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 01:12:21


Post by: Jerram


Polonius, Cmon you can be better than this, in a thread where the OP started by calling specific people NAZI sympathizers (Before someone edited it) Complaining about those evil people insulting innocent left side groups while pretending to be an honest broker is dishonest as all get up. It's like a referee calling a roughing penalty on the guy who has blood pouring from an intentional slash in the face because you have money on the other team.


Flipsiders how about

Everyone
"Nazis are evil and should be banned"

Liberals
"Yes we agree, but we also want other evil ideologies and hate groups banned, like communists/socialist derived groups"

Socialists/communists
"No, you can't ban those because they never did nothing wrong ever and I like them, but the evil Nazis should be banned still"

Liberals
"We can literally see the mountains of corpses caused by that ideology""

Socialists/communists
"Ah so your a Nazi!!!!! Because only a Nazi would oppose communists"

Mod
Thread Closed

Socialists/communists
"See what you did, you got another thread closed you Nazi"

Thats actually much closer to what actually happened anyways.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 11:28:21


Post by: beast_gts


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
 Da Boss wrote:
A journalist that looks into this is not gonna find anything worth reporting on. I agree though, ending the post with that was poor form, as was the provocative title.


I dunno, journalists these days love their clickbaity articles where they throw people or groups of people under the bus for very little reason.

A few out of context posts and a title of "Have neo nazis found a new home in wargaming?" seems like just the sort of thing some "journalists" would do an article on.


They've been churning out those articles for a while now - this one from CBC.ca popped up on my FB feed this morning.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 12:40:15


Post by: Not Online!!!


 posermcbogus wrote:
God almighty this thread is heading for lock hell so fast it's unreal.

Snip.


Or atleast for a lot of warnings in a short time span.


Anyways:
Attempting to repress and isolate it as an ideology is contraproductive i think though.
The best protection against the big 2 totalitarian ideologies is an ardent democratic tradition, has always been and will always be. (because as many other forget it's the OG totalitarianism in its extentsion of transformation of private and public live, governance and system.)

To the contrary, i think exclusion and repression is part of the reason in europe as to why parties that have ardent f.e Völkische ideologies within them is part of the course of a cycle of repression and lackluster democratisation. In germany there is still the myth going around that the people voted wrong during the Weimar republic, especially in the politcal sphere and that therefore should be a reason against direct democratic rights, despite it being the politcal party of the old elite that brought the Nazis into power.

Further, like most mass movements they rely upon hatred as the core tenant of motivation and unification, isolating them is insofar contraproductive when the political atmossphere is highly polarised as it leads to wrong accusations and forces normal wings of a democratic parliament outside into these ideologies, afterall they are already regarded as x. Further it loves to highjack authoritharian systems like the other 20th century one.

Japan is a parade exemple for that considering that the current and mostly ruling party is in direct line with the monarcho-fascist imperialist personell, with a bluntly formulated heavily lackluster democratic tradition, and a neighbourhood for which it is partially responsible that is very hostile. And who could blame it?
A lot of people also forget that collective memories can be extremely long lived, personel studies of mine have brought forth that there are cases of over 150 year old incidents being brought up against actions by individuals and governments locally, repeatadly and visciously.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 13:13:26


Post by: GoldenHorde


 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
I think there is an issue in the forum, and I appreciate the discussion about consistent behaviours, as opposed to direct statements. It isn't a huge problem, there aren't that many posters, but there are posters that absolutely are far-right if not fascists in full, and if they are not they are just here to disrupt.

Pivoting back to something a previous poster said though about direct rule violations... Seriously, what does a poster like Goldenhorn for example actually bring to the forum as a whole? Why does someone with such evident behaviours of trolling (and that is putting it lightly) get so much leeway to disrupt?


For a start, pay attention - it's GoldenHorde

I opened what is currently the most popular thread in 40k general discussion,: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/801877.page

What have you done bar namecalling? What have you done except call people nazis? What have you done bar insult and libel? How is your conduct anything but abusive?

Can you explain why you have the leeway to call people fascist and far right based on nothing but a desperate and pathetic desire to virtue signal?

I mean, you called me a nazis this that, how about you back it up with substance instead of snot?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 13:27:31


Post by: Not Online!!!


You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 13:36:39


Post by: GoldenHorde


Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.




Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 13:47:56


Post by: Cronch



The best protection against the big 2 totalitarian ideologies is an ardent democratic tradition

Is people's existence up to vote? Should gays be stoned? Should jews be gassed? Should women be forced to breed for the vaterland? Vote now, if the SA doesn't beat you up before you get to the voting booth that is.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 13:51:53


Post by: GoldenHorde


Cronch wrote:

The best protection against the big 2 totalitarian ideologies is an ardent democratic tradition

Is people's existence up to vote? Should gays be stoned? Should jews be gassed? Should women be forced to breed for the vaterland? Vote now, if the SA doesn't beat you up before you get to the voting booth that is.


Whataboutism


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 13:54:30


Post by: Kanluwen


 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.



Frankly, your avatar says everything one needs to know about the level of conversation you bring to this site...which is to say "basically none".


For those not recognizing it, that's the prosecutor in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. Rightwingers have been going nuts of late using him as some kind of posterchild for "leftist incompetence".


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 13:55:11


Post by: Not Online!!!


Cronch wrote:

The best protection against the big 2 totalitarian ideologies is an ardent democratic tradition

Is people's existence up to vote? Should gays be stoned? Should jews be gassed? Should women be forced to breed for the vaterland? Vote now, if the SA doesn't beat you up before you get to the voting booth that is.


I fail to see what that has to do with what i have stated`?
an ardent democratic tradition entails more than yes and no votes, it implies a culture of decision making, legitimacy, and even legality.




Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:00:20


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Kanluwen wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.



Frankly, your avatar says everything one needs to know about the level of conversation you bring to this site...which is to say "basically none".


For those not recognizing it, that's the prosecutor in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. Rightwingers have been going nuts of late using him as some kind of posterchild for "leftist incompetence".


Nice whataboutism,
In reality you know none of these people can back up their fascist/nazi allegations.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:04:09


Post by: Overread


 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.




Its nice to be polite when engaging in discourse online (or in person) because its part of your basic manners and common decent behaviour. A basic standard that most should aim to uphold in most situations. Especially online where your words remain in the long term. Even if you're being insulted, if you are polite that has an impact on how others read your posts and build their impression of your character and who you are.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:04:41


Post by: Not Online!!!


Spoiler:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.



Frankly, your avatar says everything one needs to know about the level of conversation you bring to this site...which is to say "basically none".


For those not recognizing it, that's the prosecutor in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. Rightwingers have been going nuts of late using him as some kind of posterchild for "leftist incompetence".


Nice whataboutism,
In reality you know none of these people can back up their fascist/nazi allegations.




Sure, at the end of the day giving them fire for their ammunition via taking a written approach that reminds me of Kindergarteners having a temper tantrum over the nice red ball and who's playing with it is .... not productive or conductive.

Edit: Overread has put that far better than i could.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:05:40


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Overread wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.




Its nice to be polite when engaging in discourse online (or in person) because its part of your basic manners and common decent behaviour. A basic standard that most should aim to uphold in most situations. Especially online where your words remain in the long term. Even if you're being insulted, if you are polite that has an impact on how others read your posts and build their impression of your character and who you are.


I have the manners to take them at their allegation.
It is time for them to back up their words or retract.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:12:17


Post by: Jerram


 Kanluwen wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.



Frankly, your avatar says everything one needs to know about the level of conversation you bring to this site...which is to say "basically none".


For those not recognizing it, that's the prosecutor in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. Rightwingers have been going nuts of late using him as some kind of posterchild for "leftist incompetence".


That's a dishonest take, I could drag this thread further political and off topic by listing out why, but instead I'll just request that for once you don't needlessly politicize and raise the temperature of the thread.

"For those not recognizing it, that's the prosecutor in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial" That's a non political statement if you just could have left it there.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:12:51


Post by: Gert


Hard to find it when the mods have had to remove so many of your posts. How many warnings have you been given now considering you've been one of the main agitators in the many threads that have been derailed by fascist/nazi apologism Golden? How many posts of yours have been deleted because they contained many rules violations?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:14:57


Post by: posermcbogus


Edit: not worth the effort, this thread sucks.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:15:14


Post by: GoldenHorde


Snip - ingtær.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:30:58


Post by: Cronch


Not Online!!! wrote:
Cronch wrote:

The best protection against the big 2 totalitarian ideologies is an ardent democratic tradition

Is people's existence up to vote? Should gays be stoned? Should jews be gassed? Should women be forced to breed for the vaterland? Vote now, if the SA doesn't beat you up before you get to the voting booth that is.


I fail to see what that has to do with what i have stated`?
an ardent democratic tradition entails more than yes and no votes, it implies a culture of decision making, legitimacy, and even legality.



Which can be easily taken over step by step by bad faith actors. Democracy isn't magically resistant to radicalization. Even the actual nazis realized that very few people will but into brutal authoritarian rule they wanted, so they "moderated" their demands and then as they took over political positions of power, they escalated. The threat of "discussing" anything with them is that they aren't interested in democracy except as means to removing it.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:35:24


Post by: Not Online!!!


Cronch wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Cronch wrote:

The best protection against the big 2 totalitarian ideologies is an ardent democratic tradition

Is people's existence up to vote? Should gays be stoned? Should jews be gassed? Should women be forced to breed for the vaterland? Vote now, if the SA doesn't beat you up before you get to the voting booth that is.


I fail to see what that has to do with what i have stated`?
an ardent democratic tradition entails more than yes and no votes, it implies a culture of decision making, legitimacy, and even legality.



Which can be easily taken over step by step by bad faith actors. Democracy isn't magically resistant to radicalization. Even the actual nazis realized that very few people will but into brutal authoritarian rule they wanted, so they "moderated" their demands and then as they took over political positions of power, they escalated. The threat of "discussing" anything with them is that they aren't interested in democracy except as means to removing it.


And in which countries did they actually manage to do that?
Italy? Authoritharian government typus.
Germany? Authoritharian government typus, especially the late weimar Republic.
Romania? -""-
Hungary-""-
Yugoslavia-""-

What have they in common, no traditions more or less at the time and even comparably today with democracy.
Banning them will not facilitate anything, beyond forcing them underground and becoming smart.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:44:28


Post by: Gert


For a historical sidenote, Mussolini took over Italy because Victor Emmanuel, the king of Italy, thought he could use Mussolini to restore order and prevent a civil war. Mussolini's fascists were still a minority in the early years with nationalist, liberal, and two members of a Catholic-democratic party supporting the fascists in a coalition. When the 1924 elections rolled around, there were irregularities all over the place, and a socialist, Giacomo Matteotti, proposed a recount. Mussolini then had him assassinated because he genuinely believed that a few people would be fully capable of toppling his government and party. Less than a year later Mussolini was essentially a dictator, with only the king able to remove him from power.
Because the nationalists, liberals, and others facilitated and co-operated with Mussolini's fascists, Italy became an authoritarian semi-dictatorship. That's what discussion gets you, by legitimising the views and opinions of fascists and nazis, they come into the wider political sphere and then shatter any opposition to them.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:44:41


Post by: Lance845


I probably come across far more left leaning then right, but the 2 extremes are both bad, equally.

The left cooks up insane plans to rectify problems that are either impractical and blind to resources and the way people and society actually function.

But the right pretends the problems don't even exist.


Case in point, fascism is a problem and supremacists do exist and the paradox of tolerance does say we have a right to protect ourselves from their destructive ideologies.

But blanket calling everyone who disagrees with you or does anything wrong on any level at any point in thier life a nazi/sexist/whatever. "Canceling" them. And creating a system in which people who made mistakes 10 years ago can today find their ability to live their life completely taken away. The loss of jobs and friends and opportunities with no limitations, no recuperation, no way back is just as destructive to society. It's a witch hunt.

While the right is whatabouting and changing the subject and pretending the problem doesn't need addressing the left is creating a whole new problem in their crusade to persecute.


Both sides need to get their gak together. If the lefts solutions don't work then the right should bring some solutions to the table. And the left should be working with them to get something that actually benefits society instead of being knee jerk reactions with no thought towards end result or impact.


In terms of this forum, it's not supporting the right by not allowing the left to run rampant. They are attempting to be the reasonable middle ground between 2 groups of morons, neither of which are helping anyone in the long run.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:51:28


Post by: Cronch


Ok, so you agree that in modern germany, whose "strong" democracy is barely 70 years old and half of the country was a communist dictatorship until 30 years ago, its probably not a good idea to let them freely advertise? What's the cut off point?

You can't stop someone from being a nazi, but making it a social suicide to announce yourself as one ensures that the nazis reach is limited to well, themselves and other people who already have nazi-like beliefs. Which is the desired effect. If you allow nazis to debate their views publically, you just announced their views are as valid an option as any other.

If someone comes up to you and says "let's cut your hand off", will you start debating the merits of having your hand cut? Cause remember, the goal of alt-right movements isn't to make taxes low or high, it's physical elimination of certain groups from the society, be it via expulsion, removal of rights or actual elimination of your country's citizens.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:52:41


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Gert wrote:
For a historical sidenote, Mussolini took over Italy because Victor Emmanuel, the king of Italy, thought he could use Mussolini to restore order and prevent a civil war. Mussolini's fascists were still a minority in the early years with nationalist, liberal, and two members of a Catholic-democratic party supporting the fascists in a coalition. When the 1924 elections rolled around, there were irregularities all over the place, and a socialist, Giacomo Matteotti, proposed a recount. Mussolini then had him assassinated because he genuinely believed that a few people would be fully capable of toppling his government and party. Less than a year later Mussolini was essentially a dictator, with only the king able to remove him from power.
Because the nationalists, liberals, and others facilitated and co-operated with Mussolini's fascists, Italy became an authoritarian semi-dictatorship. That's what discussion gets you, by legitimising the views and opinions of fascists and nazis, they come into the wider political sphere and then shatter any opposition to them.


First and foremost mussolini was legitimised by the king, which still had far more authorithy and legitimacy than most political parties in italy left after the desaterous disarmament efforts.
Also that stunt nearly cost him his position and i rekon he would've gotten removed if the king had the balls, alas like most authoritharian systems relying upon a single person at the head, that person easily is manipulated and freightened.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:56:06


Post by: Lance845


Cronch wrote:
Ok, so you agree that in modern germany, whose "strong" democracy is barely 70 years old and half of the country was a communist dictatorship until 30 years ago, its probably not a good idea to let them freely advertise? What's the cut off point?

You can't stop someone from being a nazi, but making it a social suicide to announce yourself as one ensures that the nazis reach is limited to well, themselves and other people who already have nazi-like beliefs. Which is the desired effect. If you allow nazis to debate their views publically, you just announced their views are as valid an option as any other.


Is it good to put people into an echo chamber where they can foster their beliefs and bring in more people slowly? Indoctrinate their kids?

What your talking about is basically Flat Earthers and Scientologists.

You don't fix ignorance with isolation. You fix it with education.

And make no mistake, Nazi's are ignorant.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 14:56:35


Post by: Not Online!!!


Cronch wrote:
Ok, so you agree that in modern germany, whose "strong" democracy is barely 70 years old and half of the country was a communist dictatorship until 30 years ago, its probably not a good idea to let them freely advertise? What's the cut off point?

You can't stop someone from being a nazi, but making it a social suicide to announce yourself as one ensures that the nazis reach is limited to well, themselves and other people who already have nazi-like beliefs. Which is the desired effect. If you allow nazis to debate their views publically, you just announced their views are as valid an option as any other.


If you make it to be social suicide you burn the bridges people need to cross out of the scene.
also only a 3rd realistically, the most important bits of germany were not a dictatorship. (and yes southern-germany was always more important than Berlin and saxony.)

And just because someone can and has broadcasted their oppinion doesn't make it valid or more accurately legitimate, cue flat earthers, their views are easily disprovable and should be done so by everyone.
And if they want to use their normal strategies of violence, well, there's the police force and the monopoly of power no?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:09:03


Post by: Cronch



And just because someone can and has broadcasted their oppinion doesn't make it valid

It's valid enough that people follow alt-right/fascist/neonazi ideologies.

And flat-earthers, stupid as their beliefs may be, are not quite on the same level as "let's remove all the disabled people, they're parasites on our nation".
And if they want to use their normal strategies of violence, well, there's the police force and the monopoly of power no?

https://www.dw.com/en/neo-nazi-scandal-hits-german-elite-military-unit/a-51490089
Would be a pity if someone took over your force structures from within. (no, i'm not saying german bundeswehr is on the brink of donning the sigrune)

If you allow neo-nazis to openly proclaim their beliefs, all you do is legitimize them. After all, if they're allowed to publicly voice them, they must not be that bad. Inciting to crime is illegal, so they'd be stopped if it was THAT bad.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:14:11


Post by: Gert


 Lance845 wrote:

Is it good to put people into an echo chamber where they can foster their beliefs and bring in more people slowly? Indoctrinate their kids?

What your talking about is basically Flat Earthers and Scientologists.

You don't fix ignorance with isolation. You fix it with education.

And make no mistake, Nazi's are ignorant.

Removing fascists and nazis from public discourse doesn't create an echo chamber though, it just removes fascists and nazis from being allowed to spread their ideology. Just because the maniacs have been told "No" doesn't mean all the other parties are going to start magically working together.

Not Online!!! wrote:

First and foremost mussolini was legitimised by the king, which still had far more authorithy and legitimacy than most political parties in italy left after the desaterous disarmament efforts.
Also that stunt nearly cost him his position and i rekon he would've gotten removed if the king had the balls, alas like most authoritharian systems relying upon a single person at the head, that person easily is manipulated and freightened.

Yes, I did say that Victor Emmanuel put Mussolini in power but that didn't automatically mean that every single person had to cooperate with the fascists. The king and the establishment thought they could control Mussolini and use him, instead Mussolini used the system they gave him to essentially remove the people that put him into power from being a threat to the fascists.
The king had a large degree of power but not enough that he could entirely subvert parliament and the will of the people. Those that helped Mussolini into power by legitimising his party and cooperating with them didn't matter when a year into his takeover, Mussolini flat out abolished parliament and outlawed all other parties.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not Online!!! wrote:

And just because someone can and has broadcasted their oppinion doesn't make it valid or more accurately legitimate, cue flat earthers, their views are easily disprovable and should be done so by everyone.
And if they want to use their normal strategies of violence, well, there's the police force and the monopoly of power no?

Flat Earthers don't want to remove the democratic system or enact genocide though do they? There's no Flat Earther Party in the UK parliamentary system, there are fascists.
And as for the police/armed forces, they have always been hotbeds for conservative views and are often the first port of call for fascists and neo-nazis looking to garner support. The British Army got in some hot water recently when one of its barracks hosted a well-known Islamaphobe fascist and all the recruits had pictures with them.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:26:28


Post by: Formosa


Cronch wrote:

And just because someone can and has broadcasted their oppinion doesn't make it valid

It's valid enough that people follow alt-right/fascist/neonazi ideologies.

And flat-earthers, stupid as their beliefs may be, are not quite on the same level as "let's remove all the disabled people, they're parasites on our nation".
And if they want to use their normal strategies of violence, well, there's the police force and the monopoly of power no?

https://www.dw.com/en/neo-nazi-scandal-hits-german-elite-military-unit/a-51490089
Would be a pity if someone took over your force structures from within. (no, i'm not saying german bundeswehr is on the brink of donning the sigrune)

If you allow neo-nazis to openly proclaim their beliefs, all you do is legitimize them. After all, if they're allowed to publicly voice them, they must not be that bad. Inciting to crime is illegal, so they'd be stopped if it was THAT bad.



If you persecute nazis who are doing nothing bar vomit out their vile ideology, guess what happens, they get to play victim and you increase the chances people will listen to them, like exactly what happened in Wiemar, if you directly challenge them on their views, engage them in debate and show them to be utter utter idiots guess what happens, you de legitimise them, exactly what happened in the UK when the BNP lost all support overnight after being on question time and people saw what they really were, prior to that they had been barred from being on TV, were able to pretend to care about key issues and even won some local seats.

So the liberal answer was the correct one in this case, where as the socialist censorship one is the one that allowed them to gain a small amount of support.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:27:06


Post by: SkavenLord


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Overread wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.




Its nice to be polite when engaging in discourse online (or in person) because its part of your basic manners and common decent behaviour. A basic standard that most should aim to uphold in most situations. Especially online where your words remain in the long term. Even if you're being insulted, if you are polite that has an impact on how others read your posts and build their impression of your character and who you are.


I have the manners to take them at their allegation.
It is time for them to back up their words or retract.


At a curiosity, what kind of material specifically are you looking for as proof when someone is trying to back up their statements? I ask only to get an understanding for future reference.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:28:23


Post by: Not Online!!!


Cronch wrote:

And just because someone can and has broadcasted their oppinion doesn't make it valid

It's valid enough that people follow alt-right/fascist/neonazi ideologies.

And flat-earthers, stupid as their beliefs may be, are not quite on the same level as "let's remove all the disabled people, they're parasites on our nation".
And if they want to use their normal strategies of violence, well, there's the police force and the monopoly of power no?

https://www.dw.com/en/neo-nazi-scandal-hits-german-elite-military-unit/a-51490089
Would be a pity if someone took over your force structures from within. (no, i'm not saying german bundeswehr is on the brink of donning the sigrune)

If you allow neo-nazis to openly proclaim their beliefs, all you do is legitimize them. After all, if they're allowed to publicly voice them, they must not be that bad. Inciting to crime is illegal, so they'd be stopped if it was THAT bad.


bringing up a failed system (democracies without conscription lead to an institution which is easily infiltrateable) proves not much tbh. And yes laws against incitement to crimes prevent the worst or should if handled propperly.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:35:39


Post by: GoldenHorde


 SkavenLord wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Overread wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.




Its nice to be polite when engaging in discourse online (or in person) because its part of your basic manners and common decent behaviour. A basic standard that most should aim to uphold in most situations. Especially online where your words remain in the long term. Even if you're being insulted, if you are polite that has an impact on how others read your posts and build their impression of your character and who you are.


I have the manners to take them at their allegation.
It is time for them to back up their words or retract.


At a curiosity, what kind of material specifically are you looking for as proof when someone is trying to back up their statements? I ask only to get an understanding for future reference.


It's their premise of allegation not mine. They can produce anything they want

Right now its fairy dust.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:38:38


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Gert wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

First and foremost mussolini was legitimised by the king, which still had far more authorithy and legitimacy than most political parties in italy left after the desaterous disarmament efforts.
Also that stunt nearly cost him his position and i rekon he would've gotten removed if the king had the balls, alas like most authoritharian systems relying upon a single person at the head, that person easily is manipulated and freightened.

Yes, I did say that Victor Emmanuel put Mussolini in power but that didn't automatically mean that every single person had to cooperate with the fascists. The king and the establishment thought they could control Mussolini and use him, instead Mussolini used the system they gave him to essentially remove the people that put him into power from being a threat to the fascists.
The king had a large degree of power but not enough that he could entirely subvert parliament and the will of the people. Those that helped Mussolini into power by legitimising his party and cooperating with them didn't matter when a year into his takeover, Mussolini flat out abolished parliament and outlawed all other parties.

Power is irrelevant in crisis of political systems, Legitimacy is the currency you expend there and far more important. And the italian parliament was comparatively to modern understanding of democracy a joke as was its voting system. indeed it was even at the time a joke. cue Wolfgang Schieders nice book about italian fascims.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not Online!!! wrote:

And just because someone can and has broadcasted their oppinion doesn't make it valid or more accurately legitimate, cue flat earthers, their views are easily disprovable and should be done so by everyone.
And if they want to use their normal strategies of violence, well, there's the police force and the monopoly of power no?

Flat Earthers don't want to remove the democratic system or enact genocide though do they? There's no Flat Earther Party in the UK parliamentary system, there are fascists.
And as for the police/armed forces, they have always been hotbeds for conservative views and are often the first port of call for fascists and neo-nazis looking to garner support. The British Army got in some hot water recently when one of its barracks hosted a well-known Islamaphobe fascist and all the recruits had pictures with them.


A cult is a cult. ideologies are cults, and some of the flat earther theories are quite far reaching in consequence.
As for the later? Conservative =/= fascist, indeed some of the most vehement opposition to them were here conservatives and socialists. Secondly most ideologies have some institutions they dominate or attempt to gert.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:41:09


Post by: Cronch


engage them in debate and show them to be utter utter idiots guess what happens

People are shown time and time again that horse paste doesn't work. That earth isn't flat. And yet the number of guilible or voluntarily ignorant people stays the same or grows.

And not like the nazis don't, oh..idk, lie? constantly? Remember, Jews rule the world and German army in 1918 was backstabbed by them, that's the only reason Germany lost. And gypsies carry typhus and spread it to honest citizens.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:46:24


Post by: SkavenLord


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 SkavenLord wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Overread wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.




Its nice to be polite when engaging in discourse online (or in person) because its part of your basic manners and common decent behaviour. A basic standard that most should aim to uphold in most situations. Especially online where your words remain in the long term. Even if you're being insulted, if you are polite that has an impact on how others read your posts and build their impression of your character and who you are.


I have the manners to take them at their allegation.
It is time for them to back up their words or retract.


At a curiosity, what kind of material specifically are you looking for as proof when someone is trying to back up their statements? I ask only to get an understanding for future reference.


It's their premise of allegation not mine. They can produce anything they want

Right now its fairy dust.


Well, yes. They can produce anything. I’m just wondering what kinds of proof to produce, and at what quantity.

Apologies, but I see an opportunity to learn something new and would like to take it. Your call whether you will indulge my curiosity, but it never hurts to ask.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:50:20


Post by: Gert


Not Online!!! wrote:
A cult is a cult. ideologies are cults, and some of the flat earther theories are quite far reaching in consequence.

Yet there is not Flat Earther political party in power is there? There are people in certain political parties in certain nations who absolutely are fascist or neo-nazis.

As for the later? Conservative =/= fascist, indeed some of the most vehement opposition to them were here conservatives and socialists. Secondly most ideologies have some institutions they dominate or attempt to gert.

1 - I didn't say the Tories were fascists, I was actually referring to the fact that Britain First is now back as a registered political party.
2 - It's "Gert", big G


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:52:58


Post by: trexmeyer


Cronch wrote:
engage them in debate and show them to be utter utter idiots guess what happens

People are shown time and time again that horse paste doesn't work. That earth isn't flat. And yet the number of guilible or voluntarily ignorant people stays the same or grows.

And not like the nazis don't, oh..idk, lie? constantly? Remember, Jews rule the world and German army in 1918 was backstabbed by them, that's the only reason Germany lost. And gypsies carry typhus and spread it to honest citizens.


Ivermectin isn't simply horse paste. Calling it that is engaging in propaganda regardless as to whether or not it doesn't work. I'm not arguing that it does work or is not laughable to use. When you casually use propaganda such as that it directly impacts the respectability of the rest of your comments. Also, you're just reenforcing the beliefs of those who use it because instead of providing meaningful data and arguments as to why it doesn't work you're parroting talking points that they've already guarded themselves against.

Aside from that you are correct in that discource doesn't necessarily change your direct opponent's viewpoint. However, and this is something that is strangely ignored, discourse does impact outsider's viewpoints. The debate isn't for the benefit of those engaged in it, but for those outside of it, who are either reading or listening to it. Calling flat-earthers morons achieves nothing. You, or someone else, actually need to spell out why they are wrong or at least point to a resource that does the same.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:57:37


Post by: Cronch


I'd think most people have history classes in school and don't need further elaborating why Nazis Are Bad. Apparently education is not enough and now we have to spend time arguing the obvious....the obvious that wouldn't need to be argued at all if the nazis weren't given platform to voice their beliefs.

As for ivermectin, I didn't know we have horse paste gourmets here in this thread that need convincing.
Should I also do a presentation on why Killing Jews is Bad in case we have a wavering nazi in this thread?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 15:59:03


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Gert wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
A cult is a cult. ideologies are cults, and some of the flat earther theories are quite far reaching in consequence.

Yet there is not Flat Earther political party in power is there? There are people in certain political parties in certain nations who absolutely are fascist or neo-nazis.

As for the later? Conservative =/= fascist, indeed some of the most vehement opposition to them were here conservatives and socialists. Secondly most ideologies have some institutions they dominate or attempt to gert.

1 - I didn't say the Tories were fascists, I was actually referring to the fact that Britain First is now back as a registered political party.
2 - It's "Gert", big G


you bri'ish you ain't got no big letters mate

edit: what they are back? No better way to put them on the pedestal for question time again


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:00:19


Post by: Formosa


trexmeyer wrote:
Cronch wrote:
engage them in debate and show them to be utter utter idiots guess what happens

People are shown time and time again that horse paste doesn't work. That earth isn't flat. And yet the number of guilible or voluntarily ignorant people stays the same or grows.

And not like the nazis don't, oh..idk, lie? constantly? Remember, Jews rule the world and German army in 1918 was backstabbed by them, that's the only reason Germany lost. And gypsies carry typhus and spread it to honest citizens.


Ivermectin isn't simply horse paste. Calling it that is engaging in propaganda regardless as to whether or not it doesn't work. I'm not arguing that it does work or is not laughable to use. When you casually use propaganda such as that it directly impacts the respectability of the rest of your comments. Also, you're just reenforcing the beliefs of those who use it because instead of providing meaningful data and arguments as to why it doesn't work you're parroting talking points that they've already guarded themselves against.

Aside from that you are correct in that discource doesn't necessarily change your direct opponent's viewpoint. However, and this is something that is strangely ignored, discourse does impact outsider's viewpoints. The debate isn't for the benefit of those engaged in it, but for those outside of it, who are either reading or listening to it. Calling flat-earthers morons achieves nothing. You, or someone else, actually need to spell out why they are wrong or at least point to a resource that does the same.



This is exactly correct, it is also what happened in the example I gave, the radicals will almost never change their stance be it Natsocs, Communists, Fascists or socialists and the myriad other cults and neo religions that have cropped up over the last 100 years, the discourse however while challenging them directly does de legitimise their beliefs, you shine a light on the BS and others see it then realise they were taken for a ride or lied to.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant and even believing that I still call for the bar on politics in this forum because as I said before I do not adhere to the fascistic "the personal is political" and some space are NOT political no matter how much the radical progs want it to be.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:02:15


Post by: GoldenHorde


 SkavenLord wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 SkavenLord wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Overread wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.




Its nice to be polite when engaging in discourse online (or in person) because its part of your basic manners and common decent behaviour. A basic standard that most should aim to uphold in most situations. Especially online where your words remain in the long term. Even if you're being insulted, if you are polite that has an impact on how others read your posts and build their impression of your character and who you are.


I have the manners to take them at their allegation.
It is time for them to back up their words or retract.


At a curiosity, what kind of material specifically are you looking for as proof when someone is trying to back up their statements? I ask only to get an understanding for future reference.


It's their premise of allegation not mine. They can produce anything they want

Right now its fairy dust.


Well, yes. They can produce anything. I’m just wondering what kinds of proof to produce, and at what quantity.

Apologies, but I see an opportunity to learn something new and would like to take it. Your call whether you will indulge my curiosity, but it never hurts to ask.


Bro, they need to produce at least one thing tied to reality.

Right now in their minds they are in keyboard warrior fantasy land where they are super duper mighty mighty nazi-fash fighters lvl'ing up on the daily



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:12:52


Post by: trexmeyer


Cronch wrote:
I'd think most people have history classes in school and don't need further elaborating why Nazis Are Bad. Apparently education is not enough and now we have to spend time arguing the obvious....the obvious that wouldn't need to be argued at all if the nazis weren't given platform to voice their beliefs.

As for ivermectin, I didn't know we have horse paste gourmets here in this thread that need convincing.
Should I also do a presentation on why Killing Jews is Bad in case we have a wavering nazi in this thread?


This is more evidence that the blanket ban on politics in OT should be expanded upon. The sheer amount of hatred and intellectual dishonesty that exists online now renders discussion largely moot if you, the forum in question, is unwilling to tolerate toxic diatribe. Edit: I don't have an issue with people being rude, but DakkaDakka as a site does. That's why politics in OT was shut down.

Edit2: Cronch is currently trying to get banned by trolling in OT.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:15:32


Post by: Cronch


Probably because the discussion is literally "should we let jews/roma/other ethnic groups/sexual minorities/disabled people live". Some people in this thread seem to think this is some sort of theoretical excercise in free speech, not an actual discussion on the (supposedly inalienable) right to live that these people are trying to have.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:19:04


Post by: trexmeyer


Cronch wrote:
Probably because the discussion is literally "should we let jews/roma/other ethnic groups/sexual minorities/disabled people live". Some people in this thread seem to think this is some sort of theoretical excercise in free speech, not an actual discussion on the (supposedly inalienable) right to live.


That's not the discussion. I don't know if you genuinely missed that or if you are willfully twisting facts to suit your agenda. The issue has been spelled out multiple times across the two threads. Go back and read Insaniak's responses.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:19:23


Post by: SkavenLord


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 SkavenLord wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 SkavenLord wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Overread wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.




Its nice to be polite when engaging in discourse online (or in person) because its part of your basic manners and common decent behaviour. A basic standard that most should aim to uphold in most situations. Especially online where your words remain in the long term. Even if you're being insulted, if you are polite that has an impact on how others read your posts and build their impression of your character and who you are.


I have the manners to take them at their allegation.
It is time for them to back up their words or retract.


At a curiosity, what kind of material specifically are you looking for as proof when someone is trying to back up their statements? I ask only to get an understanding for future reference.


It's their premise of allegation not mine. They can produce anything they want

Right now its fairy dust.


Well, yes. They can produce anything. I’m just wondering what kinds of proof to produce, and at what quantity.

Apologies, but I see an opportunity to learn something new and would like to take it. Your call whether you will indulge my curiosity, but it never hurts to ask.


Bro, they need to produce at least one thing tied to reality.

Right now in their minds they are in keyboard warrior fantasy land where they are super duper mighty mighty nazi-fash fighters lvl'ing up on the daily



Well of course it needs to be realistic. It’s just nice to know from what sources one should draw from. I guess past posts are the obvious source of proof that’s tied to reality, just thought there would be a bit more variety than that. I was surprised to read that it only needs to be at least one thing. For a second, I was expecting something at the minimum length of a textbook bibliography! Anyway, apologies for the thread tangent, and thanks for the response.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:21:37


Post by: Formosa


Cronch wrote:
"should we let jews/roma/other ethnic groups/sexual minorities/disabled people live"


yes, so we should bar any religion or ideology that engaged in such things yes?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:23:31


Post by: Gert


There's this nonsense idea that because discussion and debate are vital to democracy that all topics should be up for discussion and debate.
If someone were to say to me "I think we should spend less money on global aid and more money on fixing the social inequalities in our own country" I would have a discussion or a debate with them.
If someone were to say "I think that all LGBTQ+ people should be put to death", they're getting laughed at and then violently ejected from my home.
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to spew hateful bile and promote your ideology of genocide. It also does not mean freedom from consequences such as when I throw you out the door.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:24:17


Post by: GoldenHorde


 SkavenLord wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 SkavenLord wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 SkavenLord wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Overread wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
You could've made your point more polite. On many an occaision GoldenHorde.


Yeah I'm going to be polite to someone who views me as a complete write off.




Its nice to be polite when engaging in discourse online (or in person) because its part of your basic manners and common decent behaviour. A basic standard that most should aim to uphold in most situations. Especially online where your words remain in the long term. Even if you're being insulted, if you are polite that has an impact on how others read your posts and build their impression of your character and who you are.


I have the manners to take them at their allegation.
It is time for them to back up their words or retract.


At a curiosity, what kind of material specifically are you looking for as proof when someone is trying to back up their statements? I ask only to get an understanding for future reference.


It's their premise of allegation not mine. They can produce anything they want

Right now its fairy dust.


Well, yes. They can produce anything. I’m just wondering what kinds of proof to produce, and at what quantity.

Apologies, but I see an opportunity to learn something new and would like to take it. Your call whether you will indulge my curiosity, but it never hurts to ask.


Bro, they need to produce at least one thing tied to reality.

Right now in their minds they are in keyboard warrior fantasy land where they are super duper mighty mighty nazi-fash fighters lvl'ing up on the daily



Well of course it needs to be realistic. It’s just nice to know from what sources one should draw from. I guess past posts are the obvious source of proof that’s tied to reality, just thought there would be a bit more variety than that. I was surprised to read that it only needs to be at least one thing. That will certainly save me a lot of time going forward. For a second, I was expecting something at the length of a textbook bibliography! Anyway, apologies for the thread tangent, and thanks for the response.


You're taking these abusive people far too seriously. We are not talking about critical thinkers here.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:43:52


Post by: trexmeyer


Formosa wrote:
Cronch wrote:
"should we let jews/roma/other ethnic groups/sexual minorities/disabled people live"


yes, so we should bar any religion or ideology that engaged in such things yes?


Well, that would apply to all Abrahamic religions and many other ones. Also, racism against the Roma people is alive and well in atheist Europe and unless I am greatly mistaken, Poland is still highly homophobic.

Gert wrote:There's this nonsense idea that because discussion and debate are vital to democracy that all topics should be up for discussion and debate.


Why is it nonsense? What is wrong with discussion? People should be able to explain why Nazism is wrong beyond "They told me it was" or "killing Jews is wrong." Partly because anti-Semitism remaings a significant issue and the average person has zero knowledge of the history of anti-Semitism and how it shaped Europe. The modern perspective is that the Holocaust is solely the work of Nazis and compliant Germans, but I would argue that a millenia of intense hatred against Jews, throughout all of Christendom, paved the way for the Holocaust to even occur. If the discussion gets shut down then we don't reach the point of acknowledgement that a not insignificant portion of European opposition to Nazism stems from the fact Europe, as a whole, was complicit in both nationalism and anti-Semitism for a very long time. And before anyone attempts to paint this comment as being anti-European, the US has plethora of skeletons in its closet, to include the near-genocide of Native Americans.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:54:44


Post by: Gert


trexmeyer wrote:
Why is it nonsense? What is wrong with discussion? People should be able to explain why Nazism is wrong beyond "They told me it was" or "killing Jews is wrong." Partly because anti-Semitism remaings a significant issue and the average person has zero knowledge of the history of anti-Semitism and how it shaped Europe. The modern perspective is that the Holocaust is solely the work of Nazis and compliant Germans, but I would argue that a millenia of intense hatred against Jews, throughout all of Christendom, paved the way for the Holocaust to even occur. If the discussion gets shut down then we don't reach the point of acknowledgement that a not insignificant portion of European opposition to Nazism stems from the fact Europe, as a whole, was complicit in both nationalism and anti-Semitism for a very long time. And before anyone attempts to paint this comment as being anti-European, the US has plethora of skeletons in its closet, to include the near-genocide of Native Americans.

There is a difference between debating the origins of the Holocaust and debating whether or not Jewish people should be exterminated. If someone says to me that they genuinely believe that Jewish people should be exterminated, I'm not going to try to debate them and make them see the error of their ways because they're already too entrenched in the ideology to change.
I would happily agree to a historical discussion on the anti-semitism found throughout European history because that's an academic discussion where I can learn about a topic. If you want to bring someone into that discussion who says anti-semitism is a good thing and the nazis were right, then you're getting told to leave. I'm not talking about some edgelord 13 year old who thinks they're cool because they're controversial, I'm meaning a full-grown adult. If someone has gone through their life and reached adulthood still spouting off that "the nazis were good actually", then they're not getting the time of day.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 16:57:32


Post by: Elemental


Cronch wrote:
Probably because the discussion is literally "should we let jews/roma/other ethnic groups/sexual minorities/disabled people live". Some people in this thread seem to think this is some sort of theoretical excercise in free speech, not an actual discussion on the (supposedly inalienable) right to live that these people are trying to have.


That's exactly why this is so incomprehensible to me. People are suffering and dying RIGHT NOW because neo-Nazis have been given too much of a foot in the door already, and the kind of slimy apologism we're seeing in this very thread is how the infection starts in a community.

trexmeyer wrote:

Why is it nonsense? What is wrong with discussion? People should be able to explain why Nazism is wrong beyond "They told me it was" or "killing Jews is wrong." Partly because anti-Semitism remaings a significant issue and the average person has zero knowledge of the history of anti-Semitism and how it shaped Europe. The modern perspective is that the Holocaust is solely the work of Nazis and compliant Germans, but I would argue that a millenia of intense hatred against Jews, throughout all of Christendom, paved the way for the Holocaust to even occur. If the discussion gets shut down then we don't reach the point of acknowledgement that a not insignificant portion of European opposition to Nazism stems from the fact Europe, as a whole, was complicit in both nationalism and anti-Semitism for a very long time. And before anyone attempts to paint this comment as being anti-European, the US has plethora of skeletons in its closet, to include the near-genocide of Native Americans.


What's wrong is that "discussion" is exactly what we see from the fascist fanboys on here, a nauseating exercise in making excuses for actual self-confessed Nazis under the thin cover of "butbutbutcommunism!!!!!!" Saying "but what about those other guys?" is standard operating procedure for those seeking to pretend that Nazism is anything other than an ideology centered around suppression and ultimate extermination of those the Nazis don't like. It's how they got their foot in the door originally--hyping up the terrible menace of communism, painting a picture of liberals as being the real aggressors and themselves as fearless defenders of freedom.

Whenever the discussion starts with any attempt to say Nazis aren't that bad or that other guy was worse, the premise is faulty and can be safely dismissed.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 17:05:14


Post by: Cronch


trexmeyer wrote:
Cronch wrote:
Probably because the discussion is literally "should we let jews/roma/other ethnic groups/sexual minorities/disabled people live". Some people in this thread seem to think this is some sort of theoretical excercise in free speech, not an actual discussion on the (supposedly inalienable) right to live.


That's not the discussion. I don't know if you genuinely missed that or if you are willfully twisting facts to suit your agenda. The issue has been spelled out multiple times across the two threads. Go back and read Insaniak's responses.

It is. That's their policy. That's what it boils down to. If you allow nazis to discuss their policies, you accept that their position is worth discussing. I don't discuss with a dog that tries to bite me, because the dog's position is not worth discussing. Nazis position is not worth discussing either, and if you think it is, well, you're telling all those minorities that you think discussing their right to live is fair game.

The fascists' (and non-insignificant amount of "classic conservatives") position on my particular minority (the one with the rainbow flag) is that we're a threat to the unity of the People, we are agents of decay and destroy the morality of the nation, and most of us are also sexual predators, whose main occupation is raping and converting straight people into our perversion. I'm sorry, but it's a bit of a personal issue for me, not just theory of politics.
How much should the fashyboys be allowed to publicly say that I rape people and should be beaten to death?

And yes, Poland is a very conservative, very religious country that also, unsurprisingly, has a problem with neo-nazis and fascists, because the ruling socially conservative party dallied with them as a way to boost election numbers.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 17:06:11


Post by: Jerram


Why are you minimizing the evil of leaders whose death toll vastly outstrips Hitler's ? Whose modern day legacies are causing more suffering and dying RIGHT NOW than from any neo-nazis ?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 17:11:15


Post by: trexmeyer


 Gert wrote:

There is a difference between debating the origins of the Holocaust and debating whether or not Jewish people should be exterminated. If someone says to me that they genuinely believe that Jewish people should be exterminated, I'm not going to try to debate them and make them see the error of their ways because they're already too entrenched in the ideology to change.
I would happily agree to a historical discussion on the anti-semitism found throughout European history because that's an academic discussion where I can learn about a topic. If you want to bring someone into that discussion who says anti-semitism is a good thing and the nazis were right, then you're getting told to leave. I'm not talking about some edgelord 13 year old who thinks they're cool because they're controversial, I'm meaning a full-grown adult. If someone has gone through their life and reached adulthood still spouting off that "the nazis were good actually", then they're not getting the time of day.


We're going way, way, way OT, but I don't think you appreciate how widespread anti-Semitism is globally. It is far from being unique to neo-Nazi elements. Within the past year or two there was a big uproar over anti-Semitic comments made by some NFL/NBA athletes if I remember correctly. Shutting down that discussion is akin to shutting down education.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 17:16:28


Post by: Gert


trexmeyer wrote:

We're going way, way, way OT, but I don't think you appreciate how widespread anti-Semitism is globally. It is far from being unique to neo-Nazi elements. Within the past year or two there was a big uproar over anti-Semitic comments made by some NFL/NBA athletes if I remember correctly. Shutting down that discussion is akin to shutting down education.

Where have I said that antisemitism isn't a problem or that it shouldn't be discussed?
What I have said is that fascists and nazis should be removed from spaces of debate and discussion lest things like anti-semitism become fully normalised in the public eye. When an individual is outed as having made antisemitic remarks, they aren't praised or shrugged away, they're rightfully vilified and shunned although this may vary depending on your location.
But you seem to keep missing what I'm saying, discuss the causes and effects of antisemitism, don't allow those who promote and practise it to be part of those discussions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jerram wrote:
Why are you minimizing the evil of leaders whose death toll vastly outstrips Hitler's ? Whose modern day legacies are causing more suffering and dying RIGHT NOW than from any neo-nazis ?

Hey cool its that "whataboutism" we discussed earlier!


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 17:29:15


Post by: Jerram


 Gert wrote:
trexmeyer wrote:

We're going way, way, way OT, but I don't think you appreciate how widespread anti-Semitism is globally. It is far from being unique to neo-Nazi elements. Within the past year or two there was a big uproar over anti-Semitic comments made by some NFL/NBA athletes if I remember correctly. Shutting down that discussion is akin to shutting down education.

Where have I said that antisemitism isn't a problem or that it shouldn't be discussed?
What I have said is that fascists and nazis should be removed from spaces of debate and discussion lest things like anti-semitism become fully normalised in the public eye. When an individual is outed as having made antisemitic remarks, they aren't praised or shrugged away, they're rightfully vilified and shunned although this may vary depending on your location.
But you seem to keep missing what I'm saying, discuss the causes and effects of antisemitism, don't allow those who promote and practise it to be part of those discussions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jerram wrote:
Why are you minimizing the evil of leaders whose death toll vastly outstrips Hitler's ? Whose modern day legacies are causing more suffering and dying RIGHT NOW than from any neo-nazis ?

Hey cool its that "whataboutism" we discussed earlier!


Why are you being an apologist for evil ?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 17:42:07


Post by: trexmeyer


Since no one else wants to spell it out.

Nazism has racial superiority and anti-Semetism as core tenets of the faith.

Communism does not. You can argue that well, European Communism has historically been brutal, anti-Semetic, homophobic, etc, and that is indeed true. That's also true of various democracies and monarchies of the western world, to include the UK and US. Are we going to ban anyone that adheres to democratic thought as well due to the sins of the father? It's nonsense.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 17:50:47


Post by: Jerram


I'm not talking about communism or socialism for that matter in general. I'm specifically talking about the Soviet and Sino versions responsible for the death of 60-70 million apiece. Let me know when your false equivalencies get anywhere near that. (And if you don't think there's not an ethnic component to their philosophies you aren't paying attention.)


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 18:00:47


Post by: Cronch


"Nazis are wearing their symbols at tournaments, that's kinda bad"
WHY ARENT WE TALKING ABOUT STALIN AND MAO?!


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 18:05:06


Post by: dewd11


trexmeyer wrote:
Since no one else wants to spell it out.

Nazism has racial superiority and anti-Semetism as core tenets of the faith.

Communism does not. You can argue that well, European Communism has historically been brutal, anti-Semetic, homophobic, etc, and that is indeed true. That's also true of various democracies and monarchies of the western world, to include the UK and US. Are we going to ban anyone that adheres to democratic thought as well due to the sins of the father? It's nonsense.


Well said. Glad to see there a quite a few Dakkanauts firmly against fascism and their ilk. Not surprised it's the regular suspects defending nazi's rights to free speech.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 18:10:26


Post by: Grimskul


Cronch wrote:
"Nazis are wearing their symbols at tournaments, that's kinda bad"
WHY ARENT WE TALKING ABOUT STALIN AND MAO?!


Hmmmmm, given your recent locked post about slavery, I think it's pretty clear what you're really after tbh.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 18:11:17


Post by: Jerram


Cronch wrote:
"Nazis are wearing their symbols at tournaments, that's kinda bad"
WHY ARENT WE TALKING ABOUT STALIN AND MAO?!


No it was,

Let's craft an expansive policy on hate symbols instead of the simplistic BS you spewed earlier. Frankly the fact you're still currently posting after that stunt in OT is a perfect example of the problems with moderation, you should be on a multi day vacation from this board.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 18:11:44


Post by: ingtaer


To quote from the pt1 thread;
... someone wants to make a new thread with some direct feedback points (e.g. "locking threads only encourages disruption", "rules aren't enforced often enough", etc), and can do so in a clear and concise manner without going to derpsville, have at it, I'll check in periodically to police things. Keep it on topic and we'll hear you out on whatever you have to say, but leave the commentary and history lessons out or people will be getting time-outs.


Now please abide by this or you really will be taking a vacation.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 20:10:44


Post by: Formosa


think you forgot to lock the thread Ingtaer?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 20:13:40


Post by: ingtaer


Sorry for the confusion, I just copied from the close message from the last thread, I have no intention of having this one closed and will edit my previous message to remove that.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 21:12:01


Post by: Lance845


I want to repeat the thing I said before. You cannot fix ignorance with isolation. You fix it with education. There is nothing to be gained by shunting people off into a cancel corner. You're not fixing the problem. You're just giving it a space to fester.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 21:40:35


Post by: Da Boss


I don't think it's always ignorance. I think there's a fair bit of cynicism in many cases.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 21:46:54


Post by: Lance845


You cannot have racism/sexism/isms which are the bread and butter of things like Nazi's and facism without ignorance. The only way you look at another person and determine they are not a person is to be ignorant of their ability to have experiences in any way like your own. Maybe you could call that a lack of empathy as well?

Sure. A lack of empathy built on a foundation of ignorance.

How do you fix people raised in a household where they are taught that that group over there is less deserving than you because they are not you?

Education. Nobody has ever escaped that way of thinking without being shown facts to prove their ideologies wrong.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 21:51:17


Post by: jeff white


There is some spirited exchange of conflicting views concerning sensitive subjects in this thread. Dakka is one of the few places where such a thing is allowed to thrive, given contemporary thin skinnedness. This has been said better by others, in this thread too, I just want to say how much I appreciate that the discussion can be had here.

For my part, I guess if you find yourself attacking someone else because they have an outfit with symbols that offend you, then regardless of symbolism, it ain’t the dude in the offensive shirt who is the nazi…


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 22:10:02


Post by: Lance845


 jeff white wrote:

For my part, I guess if you find yourself attacking someone else because they have an outfit with symbols that offend you, then regardless of symbolism, it ain’t the dude in the offensive shirt who is the nazi…


I don't really agree with that either.

The paradox of tolerance is real. A society has a right to protect itself from destructive ideologies. When a guy shows up covered in the symbols of hate you don't have to welcome them in. The only way to FIX that person is to educate them. But in the meantime, nobody owes someone sporting the symbols of oppression and hate any kindness.

Individuals are judged by merits. Rocking Nazi symbolism is a choice you make that speaks to your merits. It is the only right and fair way to judge someone.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 22:11:04


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 jeff white wrote:
For my part, I guess if you find yourself attacking someone else because they have an outfit with symbols that offend you, then regardless of symbolism, it ain’t the dude in the offensive shirt who is the nazi…
"This person is dressed as a Nazi! That's a goddamn Nazi right there, who's core beliefs are centred on eradicating people like me. I think I'm allowed to be offended by the idea that someone wants me dead."
"Ah, but because you're offended by them, you're actually the real Nazi!"

Sorry, mods, you gonna let *that* slide?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 22:15:43


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
For my part, I guess if you find yourself attacking someone else because they have an outfit with symbols that offend you, then regardless of symbolism, it ain’t the dude in the offensive shirt who is the nazi…
"This person is dressed as a Nazi! That's a goddamn Nazi right there, who's core beliefs are centred on eradicating people like me. I think I'm allowed to be offended by the idea that someone wants me dead."
"Ah, but because you're offended by them, you're actually the real Nazi!"

Sorry, mods, you gonna let *that* slide?


Why not? They let users abusively call others fascists and nazis until the cows come home.

Why stop now?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 22:17:10


Post by: insaniak


I mean, 'If you're offended by someone self-identifying as a nazi, then you're a nazi' is a completely ridiculous thing to say, but beyond that it's not really a statement worthy of moderator attention.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 22:21:13


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 insaniak wrote:
I mean, 'If you're offended by someone self-identifying as a nazi, then you're a nazi' is a completely ridiculous thing to say, but beyond that it's not really a statement worthy of moderator attention.
I disagree. It's exactly the kind of tactics used to shut down actual criticism and identification of actual fascists or Nazis, which is what many posters here have been repeating over and over.
It's not about being able to openly do awful things - it's about obscuring them, and obfuscating them with these ridiculous sorts of "whataboutisms".

It's your site. I'm sorry, but for something which, as you say, is "completely ridiculous", you do have a responsibility to keep it straight. That includes shutting down things like that, such as the implication that "if you're offended by my clothes, you're a Nazi."


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 22:24:54


Post by: Ouze


Imagine volunteering to moderate a miniature wargaming website because you like tabletop wargaming, and then you have to deal with threads like "Should slavery be legal" and.... *gestures vaguely* whatever this is.





Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 22:48:35


Post by: BlackoCatto


Communism does hate those with capital and is just as willing to kill for its goal as fascism.

If only these folks can go to a certain subreddit where they can happily play tankie. Maybe we can throw the fascists there too, let em eat each other away.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 22:52:10


Post by: Irkjoe


You aren't going to be able to "educate" people who have an entirely different world view. We no longer agree on first principles, we aren't even watching the same movie.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 22:55:13


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 BlackoCatto wrote:
Communism does hate those with capital
Incorrect. It hates the *distribution* of capital in a certain way.

Unfortunately, for certain ethnicities, genders, and sexualities, such things cannot be removed from the person they are attached to.

And yet again - got to ask, why the need for "whatabout"-ry? Why the need to (incorrectly) say what other groups hate?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:01:39


Post by: insaniak


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
I mean, 'If you're offended by someone self-identifying as a nazi, then you're a nazi' is a completely ridiculous thing to say, but beyond that it's not really a statement worthy of moderator attention.
I disagree. It's exactly the kind of tactics used to shut down actual criticism and identification of actual fascists or Nazis, which is what many posters here have been repeating over and over.

It's also exactly the sort of statement made by someone who believes that any group dictating how people should think or behave is similar to any other group dictating how people should think or behave, because they lack the education, experience and/or empathy to understand the differences.

This comes back to what I said early on in this whole mess. The fact that someone uses something you see as a 'fascist talking point' doesn't prove that they are a fascist, or a fascist sympathiser. Nor does someone saying something ignorant. At worst, I'd say this specific comment could perhaps be considered spam on account of not adding anything productive to the discussion and being utterly absurd. At best, I would assume that he just didn't think through what he was typing.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:13:04


Post by: Kanluwen


You'd have more of a point if said poster didn't have a history of that kind of post.

Good to see that we're not doing anything about the trashy avatar on GoldenHorde too.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:19:16


Post by: LordofHats


 insaniak wrote:

This comes back to what I said early on in this whole mess. The fact that someone uses something you see as a 'fascist talking point' doesn't prove that they are a fascist, or a fascist sympathiser. Nor does someone saying something ignorant. At worst, I'd say this specific comment could perhaps be considered spam on account of not adding anything productive to the discussion and being utterly absurd. At best, I would assume that he just didn't think through what he was typing.


To add context to that;

It's been increasingly common in my experience that some people think Nordic runes look freaking cool. Look at them:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/CodexRunicus.jpeg

Slap that gak on a CGI wall and call it fantasy! It looks great!

Unfortunately, Nordic runes are the unwitting and helpless victims of Nazis also thinking they look freaking cool and slapping them on everything. Depending on context, a lot of people don't look at runes and assume 'Nazi.' We can paint runes on our Space Wolves (who so happen to be insane Human-supremicists who are okay with genociding non-humans when it suits them go figure) and I doubt most people will look at that and think Nazi. It might even be that someone really likes their Space Wolves and decided to go hunting for a slate gray hoodie with some Runes on them to wear so they can match their army. Probably still safe. But then they decided they just looked good in black and you know what let's make the runes red cause red and black are cliche but their cliche because they work and *red alarm*

Black and red with runes? Well that looks more than a bit Nazi.

I'll add to that in that yeah, actual Nazis totally love playing this 'maybe I am and maybe I'm not' game where they try to play off more obscure and common symbols as harmless. This is why we can't have nice things sometimes. It's possible to unwittingly fall into wearing something suspiciously Nazi without intending to and anyone who doubts the ability of a human being to do something by sheer ignorance is shocking optimistic about how well versed the average human is in 100 year old genocidal political movements. People are popular familiar with the Swastika. Definitely. Even the legit Nazis avoid wearing it overtly when they want to be incognito. The double sig rune? Yeah a lot of people probably know about that one two. The black sun icon and wolfsangle are so obscure, I doubt any typical person would ever even know about them without also knowing about their association with Nazism except maybe in Germany and the Nordic countries where this symbol is still used in mundane contexts.

The use of odal, algiz, and tyr runes are more obscure. Someone can totally stumble into them without realizing it and at that point someone might make an assumption.

Ironically, if your response to that assumption is 'well Stalin killed people too yah tankie' well... Way to achieve absolutely nothing but making a new hate-friend? Some people seem really eager to collect those immediately, rather than try to talk gak out and have serious broader conversations about the meaning and use of symbols in complex societies.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:20:37


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


insaniak wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
I mean, 'If you're offended by someone self-identifying as a nazi, then you're a nazi' is a completely ridiculous thing to say, but beyond that it's not really a statement worthy of moderator attention.
I disagree. It's exactly the kind of tactics used to shut down actual criticism and identification of actual fascists or Nazis, which is what many posters here have been repeating over and over.

It's also exactly the sort of statement made by someone who believes that any group dictating how people should think or behave is similar to any other group dictating how people should think or behave, because they lack the education, experience and/or empathy to understand the differences.
It really isn't, and you *know* this.

The only difference in "dictating how people should think or behave" going on is that in the example given above, one group of people are telling the others not to wear certain clothes that are calling cards for slaughter, and the other are wearing those clothes.

Of the two, I think only one of those could be called empathetic.

This comes back to what I said early on in this whole mess. The fact that someone uses something you see as a 'fascist talking point' doesn't prove that they are a fascist, or a fascist sympathiser.
I never claimed it proved anything.

All I did claim is that it's a goddamn ridiculous comment, and only *empowers* those who might genuine want to cause harm (whoever they may be) to do it.
I'm not calling anyone a Nazi. I'm saying that the *actions* of certain people are empowering them though, and that maybe you need to consider how to deal with that.
At worst, I'd say this specific comment could perhaps be considered spam on account of not adding anything productive to the discussion and being utterly absurd. At best, I would assume that he just didn't think through what he was typing.
At best, I'd call this take optimistic.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:22:01


Post by: Flipsiders


 Kanluwen wrote:
You'd have more of a point if said poster didn't have a history of that kind of post.

Good to see that we're not doing anything about the trashy avatar on GoldenHorde too.


To be fair, I think you could change your avatar to a panorama of naked Stormcast on Dakka and still not have anyone ask for it changed.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:25:02


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 LordofHats wrote:
I'll add to that in that yeah, actual Nazis totally love playing this 'maybe I am and maybe I'm not' game where they try to play off more obscure and common symbols as harmless. This is why we can't have nice things sometimes. It's possible to unwittingly fall into wearing something suspiciously Nazi without intending to and anyone who doubts the ability of a human being to do something by sheer ignorance is shocking optimistic about how well versed the average human is in 100 year old genocidal political movements. People are popular familiar with the Swastika. Definitely. Even the legit Nazis avoid wearing it overtly when they want to be incognito. The double sig rune? Yeah a lot of people probably know about that one two. The black sun icon and wolfsangle are so obscure, I doubt any typical person would ever even know about them without also knowing about their association with Nazism except maybe in Germany and the Nordic countries where this symbol is still used in mundane contexts.

The use of odal, algiz, and tyr runes are more obscure. Someone can totally stumble into them without realizing it and at that point someone might make an assumption.
This is all absolutely true. The only way to deal with it is to be *aware* of these kinds of dogwhistles. I'm not saying "ban on sight", but I am saying "when you see this, keep an eye on it, and see what other kinds of stuff creeps up around it", and certainly not "it might just be ignorance, let's ignore it and never speak of it again".

The trick is in identifying patterns around people, and that includes when people attempt to obfuscate those patterns repeatedly, and insistently, as many users here do.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:30:46


Post by: GoldenHorde


Whatabout those ethnicities in current day forced slave labour camps being co-opted into production?

Who cares.

I'm more worried about an isolated incident about someone's garb.

So much so, we'll crush any discussion of the former on dakkadakka.

Then we will beatstick you when you have frustrations about being censored and essentially strangled by rampant double standards.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:32:04


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 LordofHats wrote:
Black and red with runes? Well that looks more than a bit Nazi.
That's... superficial.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:36:58


Post by: Jerram


If people are advertising their beliefs on they're clothes, yeah I'm going to judge them. And if their wearing a swastika or a picture of Mao or the symbol of the red army, they're most likely douchebags I have no interest in being around them. If you don't like that I group those three together that's your problem.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:37:27


Post by: LordofHats


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 LordofHats wrote:
Black and red with runes? Well that looks more than a bit Nazi.
That's... superficial.


Welcome to humanity.

It's superficial species.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:37:37


Post by: Lance845


 Irkjoe wrote:
You aren't going to be able to "educate" people who have an entirely different world view. We no longer agree on first principles, we aren't even watching the same movie.


If thats true the only way for you to stop them is to exterminate them. So... enjoy that. Do what they do because they do it. That type of juvenile logic always ends well.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:46:29


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


GoldenHorde wrote:Whatabout those ethnicities in current day forced slave labour camps being co-opted into production?
Why do you act like those are mutually exclusive concerns?

Why the need to derail from this one?
Jerram wrote:If people are advertising their beliefs on they're clothes, yeah I'm going to judge them. And if their wearing a swastika or a picture of Mao or the symbol of the red army, they're most likely douchebags I have no interest in being around them. If you don't like that I group those three together that's your problem.
I have to ask, why did you feel the need to mention that you group them?
I've no love for any of the three you mentioned, but why mention them at all?

If I say "I don't like peanut butter sandwiches", and you say "ah, but I don't like jam sandwiches", I have to question what jam sandwiches have to do with peanut butter, and why one felt the need to mention they didn't like jam sandwiches.

There's nothing wrong with agreeing that Nazis are trash. I just gotta *ask* why the need for some folks to always throw in how much they also think XYZ is trash too?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:46:37


Post by: insaniak


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 LordofHats wrote:
Black and red with runes? Well that looks more than a bit Nazi.
That's... superficial.

Sure. but it's sadly the association lodged in people's minds, by this point. And why I don't wear this shirt outside the house.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:48:54


Post by: LordofHats


 insaniak wrote:

Sure. but it's sadly the association lodged in people's minds, by this point. And why I don't wear this shirt outside the house.


Shame too.

It's a sick shirt.

Unfortunately, people who know about Nazism but know little of 40k probably presume the former and not the latter on seeing it.

Though look at the bright side. You won't wear it out so you can keep wearing it to special occasions like your next tabletop convention


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:51:34


Post by: insaniak


 Irkjoe wrote:
You aren't going to be able to "educate" people who have an entirely different world view. We no longer agree on first principles, we aren't even watching the same movie.


Given how much my own worldview has changed since I was in my 20's through education and exposure to different ideas, I would have to disagree with this statement.

Here's the thing - 'normalising' a point of view by repeatedly exposing people to it works both ways. The way to get people to accept your differences isn't to shout at them until they realise they're wrong, it's to make them so used to seeing your differences that they no longer perceive them as in any way noteworthy. That can be a power for good as well as evil.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:51:57


Post by: Irkjoe


 Lance845 wrote:
 Irkjoe wrote:
You aren't going to be able to "educate" people who have an entirely different world view. We no longer agree on first principles, we aren't even watching the same movie.


If thats true the only way for you to stop them is to exterminate them. So... enjoy that. Do what they do because they do it. That type of juvenile logic always ends well.


So indoctrination and destruction are the only two answers? How did that work in the middle east?

@insaniak Does the point of view you're normalizing need to be contingent on facts? I read your post as forcing propaganda on people. For example, Nazis look at statistical biological differences between races; how do you educate them into egalitarianism when the data, while inconclusive, points toward a certain direction? How would you change Richard Spencer's mind about IQ differences?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:53:47


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
GoldenHorde wrote:Whatabout those ethnicities in current day forced slave labour camps being co-opted into production?
Why do you act like those are mutually exclusive concerns?


Because you're allowed to call people nazis and fascists here.

But have concerns about a products origin. Oh no no no no you're a whataboutist fashosauris-rex


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/29 23:54:15


Post by: Lance845


 Irkjoe wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
 Irkjoe wrote:
You aren't going to be able to "educate" people who have an entirely different world view. We no longer agree on first principles, we aren't even watching the same movie.


If thats true the only way for you to stop them is to exterminate them. So... enjoy that. Do what they do because they do it. That type of juvenile logic always ends well.


So indoctrination and destruction are the only two answers? How did that work in the middle east?


It's only indoctrination if the education comes without critical thinking.

Saying that person is a person because look at the evidence, and do the math isn't indoctrination.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Humanities greatest potential lies in our ability to assess the world around us and come to good conclusions. All of our great leaps forward come from that. People taught from an early age, not a list of facts with no evidence to support them, but how to assess the data and come to good conclusions, don't fall easily for indoctrination bs.

You don't educate people about another persons issues by telling them issues exist. You present the evidence, do the math, and come to good conclusions.

I could summarize pretty much every major issue between groups of people in the world right now as some group or another not even looking at the facts.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:03:44


Post by: Jerram


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
GoldenHorde wrote:Whatabout those ethnicities in current day forced slave labour camps being co-opted into production?
Why do you act like those are mutually exclusive concerns?

Why the need to derail from this one?
Jerram wrote:If people are advertising their beliefs on they're clothes, yeah I'm going to judge them. And if their wearing a swastika or a picture of Mao or the symbol of the red army, they're most likely douchebags I have no interest in being around them. If you don't like that I group those three together that's your problem.
I have to ask, why did you feel the need to mention that you group them?
I've no love for any of the three you mentioned, but why mention them at all?

If I say "I don't like peanut butter sandwiches", and you say "ah, but I don't like jam sandwiches", I have to question what jam sandwiches have to do with peanut butter, and why one felt the need to mention they didn't like jam sandwiches.

There's nothing wrong with agreeing that Nazis are trash. I just gotta *ask* why the need for some folks to always throw in how much they also think XYZ is trash too?


To use your analogy because they're both sandwiches its a natural part of the conversation, and heck peanut butter and jelly is a natural combination. Seriously I really do not understand the hesitancy to group those three together. Besides if you said you don't like peanut butter I'd have to question your taste


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:05:16


Post by: Gert


 GoldenHorde wrote:

Because you're allowed to call people nazis and fascists here.

But have concerns about a products origin. Oh no no no no you're a whataboutist fashosauris-rex

I mean the "GW uses slave labour" thing was utter tosh and the poster couldn't actually produce evidence to support their claims and all it attracted was people like you who use threads as an excuse to foghorn your ideological hatred.

As for the mods, you know exactly who the bad actors on this site are and the fact that some of them are still active despite posting some of the most atrocious and vicious bile says a lot.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:05:26


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
GoldenHorde wrote:Whatabout those ethnicities in current day forced slave labour camps being co-opted into production?
Why do you act like those are mutually exclusive concerns?


Because you're allowed to call people nazis and fascists here.

But have concerns about a products origin. Oh no no no no you're a whataboutist fashosauris-rex


There is no ethical consumption under capitalism as the owners of the capital are taking the excess value of the products which the workers produce.

And those capitalists will always seek to maximise the excess value they can take, which means finding workers they can get away with paying the absolute least that they can while still having a working product they can sell.

You don't want to support products of questionable origin? That is everything, you just pick and choose what the questionable origin you will accept is.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:11:50


Post by: GoldenHorde


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
GoldenHorde wrote:Whatabout those ethnicities in current day forced slave labour camps being co-opted into production?
Why do you act like those are mutually exclusive concerns?


Because you're allowed to call people nazis and fascists here.

But have concerns about a products origin. Oh no no no no you're a whataboutist fashosauris-rex


There is no ethical consumption under capitalism as the owners of the capital are taking the excess value of the products which the workers produce.


It's ethical because
A> it's contractual that workers agree to trade their time and labour for capital.
B> they're not in a damn gulag or forced labour camp.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:15:01


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Jerram wrote:
If I say "I don't like peanut butter sandwiches", and you say "ah, but I don't like jam sandwiches", I have to question what jam sandwiches have to do with peanut butter, and why one felt the need to mention they didn't like jam sandwiches.

There's nothing wrong with agreeing that Nazis are trash. I just gotta *ask* why the need for some folks to always throw in how much they also think XYZ is trash too?


To use your analogy because they're both sandwiches
But that's not what the conversation was about - it was about *peanut butter sandwiches*, not sandwiches in general. Why bring other sandwiches into it?

In an Ork tactics thread, do we bring in Space Marine tactics because they're both 40k factions?
Seriously I really do not understand the hesitancy to group those three together.
There is no hesitancy to bring them together when they're all present, except when they are brought together when there was no topic to do so.

Salt, pepper, and ketchup are all fine together, but why on earth do I care about that when I'm discussing how fine I want my salt to be? I'm talking about salt, and folks are in here trying to espouse about pepper and ketchup. Why?
Besides if you said you don't like peanut butter I'd have to question your taste
I don't actually like peanut butter.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:16:48


Post by: insaniak


 GoldenHorde wrote:

Because you're allowed to call people nazis and fascists here.

Since this keeps coming up, I'll point out that name-calling is against rule #1. So no, calling someone a nazi or a fascist does potentially land you a warning and/or suspension. That being said, we also look at the context and the discussion around it to determine whether an individual comment warrants a warning or if the whole thing just needs a lock or a reminder to get back on track.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:17:07


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism as the owners of the capital are taking the excess value of the products which the workers produce.


It's ethical because
A> it's contractual that workers agree to trade their time and labour for capital.
Working horrendous jobs to avoid homelessness and starvation isn't what I'd call an "agreement".

Not all contracts are made fairly. I'd have thought you knew that by now.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:20:12


Post by: insaniak


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism as the owners of the capital are taking the excess value of the products which the workers produce.


It's ethical because
A> it's contractual that workers agree to trade their time and labour for capital.
Working horrendous jobs to avoid homelessness and starvation isn't what I'd call an "agreement".

Not all contracts are made fairly. I'd have thought you knew that by now.

Getting a bit off track here...


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:23:05


Post by: Jerram


 insaniak wrote:
 Irkjoe wrote:
You aren't going to be able to "educate" people who have an entirely different world view. We no longer agree on first principles, we aren't even watching the same movie.


Given how much my own worldview has changed since I was in my 20's through education and exposure to different ideas, I would have to disagree with this statement.

Here's the thing - 'normalising' a point of view by repeatedly exposing people to it works both ways. The way to get people to accept your differences isn't to shout at them until they realise they're wrong, it's to make them so used to seeing your differences that they no longer perceive them as in any way noteworthy. That can be a power for good as well as evil.


I'm going to use a RL example that's slightly political but since I'm opening myself up maybe I'll be forgiven.

I'm old enough to where there was no serious discussion about allowing gay marriage and when it started being talked I was of course hell no.

Sometime later as I started to think about it I got to the point (even before main stream democrats) where I thought "well not marriage but maybe their should be a non religious equivalent."

That lasted for at least a decade until a couple things happened back to back, first I read an article arguing for gay marriage from a libertarian point of view that started the wheels turning, then a couple days later this young guy who worked for me comes up to me all excited to show me the wedding toppers for his cake because he was so happy to find a set that said Mr and Mr. and he was just beaming and I couldn't imagine wanting to deny that level of happiness to someone who deserved it as much as he did.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:30:03


Post by: Irkjoe


 Lance845 wrote:


Humanities greatest potential lies in our ability to assess the world around us and come to good conclusions. All of our great leaps forward come from that. People taught from an early age, not a list of facts with no evidence to support them, but how to assess the data and come to good conclusions, don't fall easily for indoctrination bs.

You don't educate people about another persons issues by telling them issues exist. You present the evidence, do the math, and come to good conclusions.

I could summarize pretty much every major issue between groups of people in the world right now as some group or another not even looking at the facts.


I like your optimism but I disagree, I don't think most people's views are evidence based and I don't see much evidence of good conclusions around. See my edited post above. If I showed you undeniable evidence that some races were strictly inferior would you change your views and become a Nazi? What if we assess the data and come to uncomfortable conclusions?



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:31:40


Post by: A Town Called Malus


Jerram wrote:

I'm old enough to where there was no serious discussion about allowing gay marriage and when it started being talked I was of course hell no.

Sometime later as I started to think about it I got to the point (even before main stream democrats) where I thought "well not marriage but maybe their should be a non religious equivalent."


But why were you "of course hell no"? Then why did you think "not marriage but maybe a non-religious equivalent" when straight people have been able to get married in non-religious ceremonies for centuries? Marriage is not innately religious.

And LGBT people had been seriously discussing being allowed to marry the people they love for a very long time. Recognition of same-sex relationships was one of the points in the platform of the march on Washington in 1987.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:40:12


Post by: Jerram


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jerram wrote:
If I say "I don't like peanut butter sandwiches", and you say "ah, but I don't like jam sandwiches", I have to question what jam sandwiches have to do with peanut butter, and why one felt the need to mention they didn't like jam sandwiches.

There's nothing wrong with agreeing that Nazis are trash. I just gotta *ask* why the need for some folks to always throw in how much they also think XYZ is trash too?


To use your analogy because they're both sandwiches
But that's not what the conversation was about - it was about *peanut butter sandwiches*, not sandwiches in general. Why bring other sandwiches into it?

In an Ork tactics thread, do we bring in Space Marine tactics because they're both 40k factions?
Seriously I really do not understand the hesitancy to group those three together.
There is no hesitancy to bring them together when they're all present, except when they are brought together when there was no topic to do so.

Salt, pepper, and ketchup are all fine together, but why on earth do I care about that when I'm discussing how fine I want my salt to be? I'm talking about salt, and folks are in here trying to espouse about pepper and ketchup. Why?
Besides if you said you don't like peanut butter I'd have to question your taste
I don't actually like peanut butter.


Its not a speech, Its a conversation that means the topic is as broad as the participants make it. If I'm talking to a friend who tells me he doesn't like creamy peanut butter and I say yeah and I don't like crunchy peanut butter either and he says that's not part of the topic, I'm going to wonder what he's on.

I think that's the basis of the problem, you see them as different as salt and ketchup because you focus on A and I see them as two brands of peanut butter because I'm more concerned with B

You don't like peanut butter ?????? That explains everything!!!!!


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:40:20


Post by: Flipsiders


 Irkjoe wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:


Humanities greatest potential lies in our ability to assess the world around us and come to good conclusions. All of our great leaps forward come from that. People taught from an early age, not a list of facts with no evidence to support them, but how to assess the data and come to good conclusions, don't fall easily for indoctrination bs.

You don't educate people about another persons issues by telling them issues exist. You present the evidence, do the math, and come to good conclusions.

I could summarize pretty much every major issue between groups of people in the world right now as some group or another not even looking at the facts.


I like your optimism but I disagree, I don't think most people's views are evidence based and I don't see much evidence of good conclusions around. See my edited post above. If I showed you undeniable evidence that some races were strictly inferior would you change your views and become a Nazi? What if we assess the data and come to uncomfortable conclusions?



It should be noted that purely logically speaking, even if certain races of people were somehow proven to be "genetically inferior," whatever that means, that wouldn't create a logical basis for those people to be oppressed. No normal human being is currently advocating for the oppression of people with physical and mental disabilities.

That being said, that fact actually supports your position. People in the real world don't become Nazis because they think they found scientific proof that certain people "deserve to be oppressed," because that claim is inherently not scientifically provable in the first place. Instead, people adopt racist talking-points because they want to believe that the things they already feel (e.g., "my group deserves special rights") is logically justified, even if it would never be the result of any coherent scientific narrative. The entire institution of American slavery and anti-black racism is spawned from a flimsy excuse used by white slaveowners to not feel bad about their actions.

However, I still do disagree with your claim that Nazis and racists can't be convinced that they're wrong. All it takes is to talk with them on an emotional or instinctual basis rather than a logical ones. There are countless stories of literal Klan members and Neo-Nazis who suddenly stopped being racist, just because they made friends with someone in a racial minority who they really liked. If you're fighting against an illogical belief, you fight against it on irrational grounds. Figure out why a person holds the prejudices they do, then combat the core cause (whether it be insecurity, jealosy, financial instability, a wish for belonging, etc.) instead of the symptoms. It's really that simple.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:43:56


Post by: Jerram


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Jerram wrote:

I'm old enough to where there was no serious discussion about allowing gay marriage and when it started being talked I was of course hell no.

Sometime later as I started to think about it I got to the point (even before main stream democrats) where I thought "well not marriage but maybe their should be a non religious equivalent."


But why were you "of course hell no"? Then why did you think "not marriage but maybe a non-religious equivalent" when straight people have been able to get married in non-religious ceremonies for centuries? Marriage is not innately religious.

And LGBT people had been seriously discussing being allowed to marry the people they love for a very long time. Recognition of same-sex relationships was one of the points in the platform of the march on Washington in 1987.


Yeah and I've been around longer than that. Between this and you ignoring Insaniak to argue with GH, its apparent you're not interested in doing anything but arguing with people, good bye.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:44:57


Post by: dewd11


I understand that some people believe these kinds of things can be "educated" away. But humans are not rational, and people are less likely to change their mind when presented with evidence


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:47:14


Post by: techsoldaten


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
But why were you "of course hell no"? Then why did you think "not marriage but maybe a non-religious equivalent" when straight people have been able to get married in non-religious ceremonies for centuries? Marriage is not innately religious.


State control of marriage is a dangerous form of eugenics used by autocratic regimes to control what populations are allowed to reproduce and confer them privileges. Never been anything but.

The entire point of civil unions is to remove that possibility, leave the religious part out and put the rules around marriage in the hands of the local community. That can include religion, but doesn't have to.

It can also not include marriage. The institution is not universal and no one should be entitled to it outside of a specific cultural / religious context.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:47:51


Post by: A Town Called Malus


Jerram wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Jerram wrote:

I'm old enough to where there was no serious discussion about allowing gay marriage and when it started being talked I was of course hell no.

Sometime later as I started to think about it I got to the point (even before main stream democrats) where I thought "well not marriage but maybe their should be a non religious equivalent."


But why were you "of course hell no"? Then why did you think "not marriage but maybe a non-religious equivalent" when straight people have been able to get married in non-religious ceremonies for centuries? Marriage is not innately religious.

And LGBT people had been seriously discussing being allowed to marry the people they love for a very long time. Recognition of same-sex relationships was one of the points in the platform of the march on Washington in 1987.


Yeah and I've been around longer than that. Between this and you ignoring Insaniak to argue with GH, its apparent you're not interested in doing anything but arguing with people, good bye.


You've been around longer than the centuries when straight people could get married in non-religious ceremonies and be recognised by non-religious governments, such as, say, the government of the United States?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 00:56:08


Post by: trexmeyer


Marriage existed in ancient Rome and Greece, did it not? Am I high? What about marriage in all the countries outside of Europe? What about the separation of church and state?



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:01:08


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Jerram wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Salt, pepper, and ketchup are all fine together, but why on earth do I care about that when I'm discussing how fine I want my salt to be? I'm talking about salt, and folks are in here trying to espouse about pepper and ketchup. Why?
Besides if you said you don't like peanut butter I'd have to question your taste
I don't actually like peanut butter.


Its not a speech, Its a conversation that means the topic is as broad as the participants make it.
And why do the participants want to make it about other stuff? Why is it not enough to talk about the undeniably awful stuff and simply leave it there? Why must it always be a "but what about XYZ"?
If I'm talking to a friend who tells me he doesn't like creamy peanut butter and I say yeah and I don't like crunchy peanut butter either and he says that's not part of the topic, I'm going to wonder what he's on.
If I tell my friend how much I love dogs, and they reply saying "oh, so you must hate cats then", then I'll also wonder what they're on.

I don't see why bringing a completely different entity into the conversation has to do with anything, or *why* it was even relevant.

I think that's the basis of the problem, you see them as different as salt and ketchup because you focus on A and I see them as two brands of peanut butter because I'm more concerned with B
I'm focusing on A because A is what the issue was about in the first place. Why the hell do I care about B in a discussion about A, and why are people so eager to bring B into a conversation about A, and change the entire focus away from the topic on A?

I'm just asking why, is all. *Why* is there a need to change topic, or bring other topics in? Why must there always be a "but what about XYZ"?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jerram wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
And LGBT people had been seriously discussing being allowed to marry the people they love for a very long time. Recognition of same-sex relationships was one of the points in the platform of the march on Washington in 1987.


Yeah and I've been around longer than that.
Longer than the concept of wanting same sex marriage? It ain't a new thing, by several dozen centuries.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:03:20


Post by: macluvin


Maybe, the most efficient and quickest and most pain free method would be to move the people that are capable of discussing how evil nazis are without whatabouting the entire spectrum of socialism into a different forum, and we can just let the rest have dakka? I think it's a win win. The mods won't even have to really moderate anything at that point and the rest of us don't have to deal with this gak.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:03:41


Post by: A Town Called Malus


trexmeyer wrote:
Marriage existed in ancient Rome and Greece, did it not? Am I high? What about marriage in all the countries outside of Europe? What about the separation of church and state?



Marriage probably existed as soon as Ugg's tribe wanted to bash Ogg's tribe but didn't have the numbers, but Ugg did have a daughter that Oog liked the look of and the combined strength of Ugg and Oog could bash Ogg.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:08:33


Post by: Jerram


Spoiler:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jerram wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jerram wrote:
If I say "I don't like peanut butter sandwiches", and you say "ah, but I don't like jam sandwiches", I have to question what jam sandwiches have to do with peanut butter, and why one felt the need to mention they didn't like jam sandwiches.

There's nothing wrong with agreeing that Nazis are trash. I just gotta *ask* why the need for some folks to always throw in how much they also think XYZ is trash too?


To use your analogy because they're both sandwiches
But that's not what the conversation was about - it was about *peanut butter sandwiches*, not sandwiches in general. Why bring other sandwiches into it?

In an Ork tactics thread, do we bring in Space Marine tactics because they're both 40k factions?
Seriously I really do not understand the hesitancy to group those three together.
There is no hesitancy to bring them together when they're all present, except when they are brought together when there was no topic to do so.

Salt, pepper, and ketchup are all fine together, but why on earth do I care about that when I'm discussing how fine I want my salt to be? I'm talking about salt, and folks are in here trying to espouse about pepper and ketchup. Why?
Besides if you said you don't like peanut butter I'd have to question your taste
I don't actually like peanut butter.


Its not a speech, Its a conversation that means the topic is as broad as the participants make it.
And why do the participants want to make it about other stuff? Why is it not enough to talk about the undeniably awful stuff and simply leave it there? Why must it always be a "but what about XYZ"?
If I'm talking to a friend who tells me he doesn't like creamy peanut butter and I say yeah and I don't like crunchy peanut butter either and he says that's not part of the topic, I'm going to wonder what he's on.
If I tell my friend how much I love dogs, and they reply saying "oh, so you must hate cats then", then I'll also wonder what they're on.

I don't see why bringing a completely different entity into the conversation has to do with anything, or *why* it was even relevant.

I think that's the basis of the problem, you see them as different as salt and ketchup because you focus on A and I see them as two brands of peanut butter because I'm more concerned with B
I'm focusing on A because A is what the issue was about in the first place. Why the hell do I care about B in a discussion about A, and why are people so eager to bring B into a conversation about A, and change the entire focus away from the topic on A?

I'm just asking why, is all. *Why* is there a need to change topic, or bring other topics in? Why must there always be a "but what about XYZ"?


Conversations flow and drift that's just their nature and its not a change of topic just a continuation. In your new analogy asking what about cats would be perfectly logical in that conversation. More I don't see them as different as dogs and cats I see it more as German Shepherds and Russian Wolfhounds.

And to address you other point, how old are you, do you remember life before the internet ? Sorry but despite what you may think it really wasn't some huge part of the national zeitgeist until late eighties early nineties.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:10:42


Post by: GoldenHorde


Imagine if this woman was as narrow minded and dehumanising as the irrational dakkadakka shoutdown mob




Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:14:32


Post by: insaniak


I feel like the marriage thing has missed the point that was actually being made. Regardless of whether or not you personally think that same-sex marriage should have been allowed in the '80s, the point being made was that some people didn't think that, but have since come to realise that they were wrong.

In other words, many people holding a specific worldview that was just 'the way things are' eventually came to realise that this was a poor reason to keep things this way, and that their preconceptions on the issue were incorrect.

Through exposure and education, a worldview can change. And no, that doesn't just mean presenting people with the facts, because if there's one thing that past two years or so have proved it's that facts just don't matter to a lot of people because they're incapable of separating fact from fiction... It means normalising the thing so that it stops being 'other' and starts just being a thing.

It's generally easier to hold irrational prejudices against a theoretical concept than against a friend or family member.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:21:08


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 insaniak wrote:
It means normalising the thing so that it stops being 'other' and starts just being a thing.


This goes both ways. Allowing people to repeatedly bring up racist/fascist talking points and try to deflect from the actions of fascists and derail criticism of fascism through bad faith argumentation can normalise fascism in the exact same way that people being exposed to other cultures can normalise those other cultures.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:28:28


Post by: insaniak


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
It means normalising the thing so that it stops being 'other' and starts just being a thing.


This goes both ways. Allowing people to repeatedly bring up racist/fascist talking points and try to deflect from the actions of fascists and derail criticism of fascism through bad faith argumentation can normalise fascism in the exact same way that people being exposed to other cultures can normalise those other cultures.

Yes, that's the exact point that you're responding to, from the start of this page.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:29:30


Post by: macluvin


 insaniak wrote:
I feel like the marriage thing has missed the point that was actually being made. Regardless of whether or not you personally think that same-sex marriage should have been allowed in the '80s, the point being made was that some people didn't think that, but have since come to realise that they were wrong.

In other words, many people holding a specific worldview that was just 'the way things are' eventually came to realise that this was a poor reason to keep things this way, and that their preconceptions on the issue were incorrect.

Through exposure and education, a worldview can change. And no, that doesn't just mean presenting people with the facts, because if there's one thing that past two years or so have proved it's that facts just don't matter to a lot of people because they're incapable of separating fact from fiction... It means normalising the thing so that it stops being 'other' and starts just being a thing.

It's generally easier to hold irrational prejudices against a theoretical concept than against a friend or family member.

Actually human beings are naturally terrible at logic and reasoning. We simply are not logical creatures. That's why prominent leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. adamantly discussed how important propaganda is towards any end, good or bad. Propaganda does not necessarily mean misinformation; it simply means the tying of a concept to emotion because emotions are stronger than logic in our minds.

Cultural transmission is a novel idea, but the issue is that you are actively protecting the right of nazi whataboutsits or whatever term you wish to use, to also culturally transmit knowing darn well that all they have to do is make a ruckus with their tucker carlsonisms (often cited by klansmen and neo-nazis as being better at making their argument than they are) and you will shut down any attempt to correct that, because any attempt is condemned to erupt in nazi apologists playing the victim and you having to shut the forum down. It's incredibly manipulative and you are letting them do it.

I don't live in Germany, so mayhaps a German may correct me, but I would wager that if this website was being run by Germans they probably would be shutting that gak down because they've been there and they are NOT doing that again.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:30:30


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Jerram wrote:
Spoiler:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jerram wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jerram wrote:
If I say "I don't like peanut butter sandwiches", and you say "ah, but I don't like jam sandwiches", I have to question what jam sandwiches have to do with peanut butter, and why one felt the need to mention they didn't like jam sandwiches.

There's nothing wrong with agreeing that Nazis are trash. I just gotta *ask* why the need for some folks to always throw in how much they also think XYZ is trash too?


To use your analogy because they're both sandwiches
But that's not what the conversation was about - it was about *peanut butter sandwiches*, not sandwiches in general. Why bring other sandwiches into it?

In an Ork tactics thread, do we bring in Space Marine tactics because they're both 40k factions?
Seriously I really do not understand the hesitancy to group those three together.
There is no hesitancy to bring them together when they're all present, except when they are brought together when there was no topic to do so.

Salt, pepper, and ketchup are all fine together, but why on earth do I care about that when I'm discussing how fine I want my salt to be? I'm talking about salt, and folks are in here trying to espouse about pepper and ketchup. Why?
Besides if you said you don't like peanut butter I'd have to question your taste
I don't actually like peanut butter.


Its not a speech, Its a conversation that means the topic is as broad as the participants make it.
And why do the participants want to make it about other stuff? Why is it not enough to talk about the undeniably awful stuff and simply leave it there? Why must it always be a "but what about XYZ"?
If I'm talking to a friend who tells me he doesn't like creamy peanut butter and I say yeah and I don't like crunchy peanut butter either and he says that's not part of the topic, I'm going to wonder what he's on.
If I tell my friend how much I love dogs, and they reply saying "oh, so you must hate cats then", then I'll also wonder what they're on.

I don't see why bringing a completely different entity into the conversation has to do with anything, or *why* it was even relevant.

I think that's the basis of the problem, you see them as different as salt and ketchup because you focus on A and I see them as two brands of peanut butter because I'm more concerned with B
I'm focusing on A because A is what the issue was about in the first place. Why the hell do I care about B in a discussion about A, and why are people so eager to bring B into a conversation about A, and change the entire focus away from the topic on A?

I'm just asking why, is all. *Why* is there a need to change topic, or bring other topics in? Why must there always be a "but what about XYZ"?


Conversations flow and drift that's just their nature and its not a change of topic just a continuation. In your new analogy asking what about cats would be perfectly logical in that conversation. More I don't see them as different as dogs and cats I see it more as German Shepherds and Russian Wolfhounds.
To jump to cats *immediately*? Nah, that's bizarre, as is the immediate jump to talking about anything other than the fascist regime in question.

Conversations flow and drift when they've had a chance to get moving, but when conversations are dammed up by "but what about XYZ" immediately? That's not natural. So why does that river get dammed up so quickly?

And to address you other point, how old are you, do you remember life before the internet ? Sorry but despite what you may think it really wasn't some huge part of the national zeitgeist until late eighties early nineties.
My point is that non-straight couples have wanted legitimacy for longer than either of us, our parents, our grandparents, or really any of our relatives in recordable history. The point is that non-straight couples were denied that (in most cultures) for unfathomably long.

Yes, I get the rest of your point, but let's just make it very clear that this wasn't a "new" desire from non-straight folks.

insaniak wrote:Through exposure and education, a worldview can change. And no, that doesn't just mean presenting people with the facts, because if there's one thing that past two years or so have proved it's that facts just don't matter to a lot of people because they're incapable of separating fact from fiction... It means normalising the thing so that it stops being 'other' and starts just being a thing.
A way to help that normalising is for people to police bad action and to stamp out voices that would threaten the chance to normalise it. Exposure only works if the environment allows for it, and that such cases of exposure aren't shot down and locked in place by certain "debate" tactics.

Aka, people should take action to stop the metaphorical baby getting smothered in the metaphorical crib, and use what powers they have to allow such things to become normalised, such as, for example, shutting down bad faith actors and actively standing up to ridiculous comments like "if you're offended by hate symbols, you're the real Nazi", for instance.

Hell, I've advocated for such an initiative for normalising gender expression on this site, a topic which was locked down by certain folks crying "politics" over my own existence. This is exactly my point - I can only normalise something if you create an environment that allows such a thing to exist without getting smothered in the crib.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:31:36


Post by: A Town Called Malus


Jerram wrote:

And to address you other point, how old are you, do you remember life before the internet ? Sorry but despite what you may think it really wasn't some huge part of the national zeitgeist until late eighties early nineties.


Maybe not for you but for a lot of people it was. Stonewall was in 1969, the first national march was in 1979 etc.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:34:40


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


macluvin wrote:
The issue is that you are actively protecting the right of nazi whataboutsits or whatever term you wish to use, to also culturally transmit knowing darn well that all they have to do is make a ruckus with their tucker carlsonisms (often cited by klansmen and neo-nazis as being better at making their argument than they are) and you will shut down any attempt to correct that, because any attempt is condemned to erupt in nazi apologists playing the victim and you having to shut the forum down. It's incredibly manipulative and you are letting them do it.
Exactly the issue.

Yes, we can say as much as we like about how "normalising things will solve everything", but without shutting down well known Nazi/fascist talking points, you also normalise their behaviour too. And what then? Will you let that happen?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:44:38


Post by: BertBert


Education can certainly change one's mind on these issues, but not everyone is open to new information in the first place, especially if said information drastically challenges their preconceptions or contradicts their personal experience. And even if they are open to it, interpretation is a whole issue in itself, since any given data does not necessarily lead to the same conclusions when viewed by different people. Each observer is always going to apply their own filter, their own reality if you will, to make sense of it.

In a similar sense, it's also not a matter of intelligence either. Many functioning sociopaths and psychopaths are highly intelligent and still mistreat and harm people for their own pleasure. It's easy to dismiss extremists as stupid or ignorant, but this is really just a deflection from the scary truth that there are people out there who genuinely don't care about their fellow humans or worse.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:50:17


Post by: GoldenHorde


The nazis wanted to prevent normalisation of topics. That's why they burned books and put people in concentration camps and worse.
Same thing with those other totalitarian regimes

Best not to copy their failed ideas


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 01:53:11


Post by: Lance845


 Irkjoe wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:


Humanities greatest potential lies in our ability to assess the world around us and come to good conclusions. All of our great leaps forward come from that. People taught from an early age, not a list of facts with no evidence to support them, but how to assess the data and come to good conclusions, don't fall easily for indoctrination bs.

You don't educate people about another persons issues by telling them issues exist. You present the evidence, do the math, and come to good conclusions.

I could summarize pretty much every major issue between groups of people in the world right now as some group or another not even looking at the facts.


I like your optimism but I disagree, I don't think most people's views are evidence based and I don't see much evidence of good conclusions around. See my edited post above. If I showed you undeniable evidence that some races were strictly inferior would you change your views and become a Nazi? What if we assess the data and come to uncomfortable conclusions?



I don't think most people are taught from an early age to assess the data. So there is that. Most people ARE indoctrinated into something in one way or another and that basically opens them up to be indoctrinated later by this, that, or another thing.

The Nazi stance isn't that people are just inferior, it's that they are not people. The 3rd Reich isn't just peak humanity. It's others are sub-human. There is a vast difference between "This person is objectively better at basket ball then that person" and "These people, based on skin tone are sub-human". One of them is based on merit and still recognizes others for being people, which is still deserving of a base level of rights, empathy, and respect (again based on their own merits). The other draws arbitrary lines around things that literally don't mater. Never have. And have only had pseudo scientific nonsense used to create and spread ignorance about people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Jerram wrote:

I'm old enough to where there was no serious discussion about allowing gay marriage and when it started being talked I was of course hell no.

Sometime later as I started to think about it I got to the point (even before main stream democrats) where I thought "well not marriage but maybe their should be a non religious equivalent."


But why were you "of course hell no"? Then why did you think "not marriage but maybe a non-religious equivalent" when straight people have been able to get married in non-religious ceremonies for centuries? Marriage is not innately religious.


Because RELIGIOUS indoctrination is very powerful and incredibly pervasive. People are born and raised in it so densely that it's a black hole few escape.

Of course everyones first knee jerk thought is that it's religious. How could it not be?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:11:05


Post by: Jerram


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jerram wrote:
Spoiler:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jerram wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jerram wrote:
If I say "I don't like peanut butter sandwiches", and you say "ah, but I don't like jam sandwiches", I have to question what jam sandwiches have to do with peanut butter, and why one felt the need to mention they didn't like jam sandwiches.

There's nothing wrong with agreeing that Nazis are trash. I just gotta *ask* why the need for some folks to always throw in how much they also think XYZ is trash too?


To use your analogy because they're both sandwiches
But that's not what the conversation was about - it was about *peanut butter sandwiches*, not sandwiches in general. Why bring other sandwiches into it?

In an Ork tactics thread, do we bring in Space Marine tactics because they're both 40k factions?
Seriously I really do not understand the hesitancy to group those three together.
There is no hesitancy to bring them together when they're all present, except when they are brought together when there was no topic to do so.

Salt, pepper, and ketchup are all fine together, but why on earth do I care about that when I'm discussing how fine I want my salt to be? I'm talking about salt, and folks are in here trying to espouse about pepper and ketchup. Why?
Besides if you said you don't like peanut butter I'd have to question your taste
I don't actually like peanut butter.


Its not a speech, Its a conversation that means the topic is as broad as the participants make it.
And why do the participants want to make it about other stuff? Why is it not enough to talk about the undeniably awful stuff and simply leave it there? Why must it always be a "but what about XYZ"?
If I'm talking to a friend who tells me he doesn't like creamy peanut butter and I say yeah and I don't like crunchy peanut butter either and he says that's not part of the topic, I'm going to wonder what he's on.
If I tell my friend how much I love dogs, and they reply saying "oh, so you must hate cats then", then I'll also wonder what they're on.

I don't see why bringing a completely different entity into the conversation has to do with anything, or *why* it was even relevant.

I think that's the basis of the problem, you see them as different as salt and ketchup because you focus on A and I see them as two brands of peanut butter because I'm more concerned with B
I'm focusing on A because A is what the issue was about in the first place. Why the hell do I care about B in a discussion about A, and why are people so eager to bring B into a conversation about A, and change the entire focus away from the topic on A?

I'm just asking why, is all. *Why* is there a need to change topic, or bring other topics in? Why must there always be a "but what about XYZ"?


Conversations flow and drift that's just their nature and its not a change of topic just a continuation. In your new analogy asking what about cats would be perfectly logical in that conversation. More I don't see them as different as dogs and cats I see it more as German Shepherds and Russian Wolfhounds.
To jump to cats *immediately*? Nah, that's bizarre, as is the immediate jump to talking about anything other than the fascist regime in question.

Conversations flow and drift when they've had a chance to get moving, but when conversations are dammed up by "but what about XYZ" immediately? That's not natural. So why does that river get dammed up so quickly?



It's not bizarre at all its and as I said and you ignored its a false analogy, you're creating a separation I disagree with. Its more two different dog breeds than different pet types.
To continue with the tortured analogy here's how the conversation goes.

Someone brought a German Shepard to the game store and it bit someone, German Shepards should be banned.
U'mmm both Rotweilers and Pit Bulls cause more deaths every year maybe the policy should take that into account.
Why are you a German Shepard apologist, stop your whataboutism and changing the subject, we arent talking about those.
Boggle


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:13:00


Post by: insaniak


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
A way to help that normalising is for people to police bad action and to stamp out voices that would threaten the chance to normalise it. Exposure only works if the environment allows for it, and that such cases of exposure aren't shot down and locked in place by certain "debate" tactics.

Aka, people should take action to stop the metaphorical baby getting smothered in the metaphorical crib, and use what powers they have to allow such things to become normalised, such as, for example, shutting down bad faith actors and actively standing up to ridiculous comments like "if you're offended by hate symbols, you're the real Nazi", for instance.

Hell, I've advocated for such an initiative for normalising gender expression on this site, a topic which was locked down by certain folks crying "politics" over my own existence. This is exactly my point - I can only normalise something if you create an environment that allows such a thing to exist without getting smothered in the crib.

For the record, your gender expression thread had one poster complain that it was political, and it was pointed out to them (by me) why this was not the case.

We've had numerous discussions in here before about the issues around policing 'bad faith' posting, and I fully realise that you disagree, but nothing has really changed there. We can intervene when something goes against the rules. We can intervene when someone is trying to drag a thread off track - provided it hasn't been dogpiled on for multiple pages after the original derail. But, ultimately it's not the job of volunteer moderators on a forum devoted to toy soldiers to serve as thought police.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:20:37


Post by: SkavenLord


Apologies if this has already been mentioned or if I’m missing context, but wasn’t there a separate forum made specifically for political discussion when the “no-politics” rule went up? I’m not up date to how it’s going or if it is even still a thing, but would it be helpful to direct conversations steering that direction to that forum if folks wish to discuss it further?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:28:18


Post by: insaniak


 SkavenLord wrote:
Apologies if this has already been mentioned or if I’m missing context, but wasn’t there a separate forum made specifically for political discussion when the “no-politics” rule went up? I’m not up date to how it’s going or if it is even still a thing, but would it be helpful to direct conversations steering that direction to that forum if folks wish to discuss it further?

There have been at least two over the years. The Phantom Lord's OT board was set up way back in the day before Dakka even had an Off-Topic section. As far as I know it still technically exists.

And a former Dakka moderator started a separate forum specifically for talking about politics back at the start of this year. No idea if that's still going.

Neither of these are actually affiliated with Dakka, beyond sharing some members.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:29:33


Post by: trexmeyer


https://www.etcforums.com/ is still active


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:31:57


Post by: SkavenLord


 insaniak wrote:
 SkavenLord wrote:
Apologies if this has already been mentioned or if I’m missing context, but wasn’t there a separate forum made specifically for political discussion when the “no-politics” rule went up? I’m not up date to how it’s going or if it is even still a thing, but would it be helpful to direct conversations steering that direction to that forum if folks wish to discuss it further?

There have been at least two over the years. The Phantom Lord's OT board was set up way back in the day before Dakka even had an Off-Topic section. As far as I know it still technically exists.

And a former Dakka moderator started a separate forum specifically for talking about politics back at the start of this year. No idea if that's still going.

Neither of these are actually affiliated with Dakka, beyond sharing some members.


Ah, that’s fair. I remember the second forum, but never really checked it out. I had assumed it was unofficially affiliated or something, though it might be a bit rude to redurect convos there without some kind of permission. Anyway, just throwing the idea out there in case.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:32:42


Post by: GoldenHorde


I'm not going to be speech policed by someone who attempts to mandate that I erroneously use a mass pronoun in place of a singular pronoun. just to tickle their fancy

I'm not going to be thought policed. Ever.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:36:51


Post by: insaniak


 GoldenHorde wrote:
I'm not going to be speech policed by someone who attempts to mandate that I erroneously use a mass pronoun in place of a singular pronoun. just to tickle their fancy

I think your understanding of pronouns might be slightly off. The use of 'They' as a singular has been common practice since at least the 1300s.

Moreover, referring to someone by their preferred method of address is nothing to do with 'speech policing'. It's common courtesy, and ultimately no different to referring to someone as 'David' because they don't like being called 'Dave'.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:45:11


Post by: SkavenLord


 GoldenHorde wrote:
I'm not going to be speech policed by someone who attempts to mandate that I erroneously use a mass pronoun in place of a singular pronoun. just to tickle their fancy

I'm not going to be thought policed. Ever.


Actually, that’s why I brought the idea up. Rather than closing a thread entirely, a redirect may create a new avenue with which to continue the conversation. Seems a bit softer than an outright closure. I’m no expert with this sort of thing, so perhaps you folks can think of a better solution. Just tossing an idea out there in case it is of any help.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:47:28


Post by: GoldenHorde


 insaniak wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
I'm not going to be speech policed by someone who attempts to mandate that I erroneously use a mass pronoun in place of a singular pronoun. just to tickle their fancy

I think your understanding of pronouns might be slightly off. The use of 'They' as a singular has been common practice since at least the 1300s.

Moreover, referring to someone by their preferred method of address is nothing to do with 'speech policing'. It's common courtesy, and ultimately no different to referring to someone as 'David' because they don't like being called 'Dave'.


It's not common courtesy. It is not common practice.
They is a third person plural pronoun. Insisting it be used as singular is evident that its not in use.

If you are a singular entity, I'm not calling you 'they'. Don't care. Find another. Choose one that's not intentionally confusing the language. They'll get over it.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:49:14


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
... and actively standing up to ridiculous comments like "if you're offended by hate symbols, you're the real Nazi", for instance.
I'm far more concerned with the opposite of that. The accusational side of this coin. The "You didn't immediately condemn this symbol/person/whatever, therefore you either tacitly or actively support their views, therefore Nazi!".

It doesn't happen here much that I've seen - thank God - but I know of places where people have been accused of being fascists, or having fascist sympathy because they thought Darth Vader was cool. He murdered children, and you think he's cool, therefore you're totally ok with child murder! It's the "Hitler breathed oxygen, and you breathe oxygen, therefore your just like Hitler!" joke, only done with completely seriousness and no sense of irony.

There's an entire site, the name of which I won't bring up but you should be able to figure it out, that obsesses over imaginary fascists, going so far as to claim that the Chaos Gods are actually the good guys, and represent all the marginalised people that "fascists" oppress. I've even seen a recent take where someone suggested that the Tyranids should be re-written to be a kind of universal anti-body that specifically exist to hunt down fascists governments, which is why they're attacking the Imperium*.

These. People. Are. Crazy.

But even if you ignore how nutso they are, the actual worst part is that disagreeing with them on any level (no, Slaanesh is not "Gay Coded", no, Tzeentch is not the God of trans people any more than Nurgle is the god of people suffering from disabilities**) has you instantly tarred and feathered with the mighty "You're a fascists" brush.

I come to this site because I see it as the best 40k related site out there. I stick to a few sub-forums (N&R, sometimes General Discussion, and then 40k General, my terrain blog and a few other places) and I have fun doing so. I don't want to have to fear being accused of having Nazi-sympathies because I think TIE Fighters are cooler than X-Wings, or because one of my fav aspects of the Imperium is the Inquisition.

D'ya geddit???


*And calling the Imperium fascists is reductive in the first place given just how diverse the Imperium actually is, but that's a whole other discussion.
**All arguments they have made.





Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:50:32


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 insaniak wrote:
But, ultimately it's not the job of volunteer moderators on a forum devoted to toy soldiers to serve as thought police.


As soon as the thought leaves their head, either by speech or written word, it is no longer just a thought but an action. There is no law against thinking "fire" in a crowded theatre, there are laws against saying it.

Moderating what people can and cannot say is not thought policing, you are not moderating their thoughts but their actions.

EDIT: For instance, it was obvious, based on all of their previous posts, that GoldenHorde wouldn't listen to you regarding pronouns. And what do you know, they didn't. Surely that is a rule 1 violation and you can ban them now?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:56:22


Post by: insaniak


 GoldenHorde wrote:

They is a third person plural pronoun. Insisting it be used as singular is evident that its not in use.

'They' is either a third person plural pronoun, or a singular pronoun where the gender of the person referred to is not known. That would include use as a singular pronoun where the person simply doesn't want to tell you their gender, or does not identify as a specific gender.

Regardless, even if this wasn't the case, words change. 'You' for example, was originally a plural pronoun... and yet I've never heard anyone complain about it being used to refer to a single person.

I'm reminded of the kerfuffle over the use of 'Ms' back when I was in high school. Or more recently people claiming women with PhDs were over-reacting by expecting to be called 'Doctor' instead of 'Miss'... It shouldn't be a big ask to respect the wishes of the person you're talking to.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:58:07


Post by: GoldenHorde


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
But, ultimately it's not the job of volunteer moderators on a forum devoted to toy soldiers to serve as thought police.


As soon as the thought leaves their head, either by speech or written word, it is no longer just a thought but an action. There is no law against thinking "fire" in a crowded theatre, there are laws against saying it.

Moderating what people can and cannot say is not thought policing, you are not moderating their thoughts but their actions.


Of course it is repugnant censorship style thought policing. The idea that one group can arbitrarily ban subjects or topics of discussion.




Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:59:46


Post by: trexmeyer


Wouldn't Slaanesh being gay-coded be incredibly offensive to the LBGTQ+ community? That doesn't make sense.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 02:59:55


Post by: Wolfblade


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
I'm not going to be speech policed by someone who attempts to mandate that I erroneously use a mass pronoun in place of a singular pronoun. just to tickle their fancy

I think your understanding of pronouns might be slightly off. The use of 'They' as a singular has been common practice since at least the 1300s.

Moreover, referring to someone by their preferred method of address is nothing to do with 'speech policing'. It's common courtesy, and ultimately no different to referring to someone as 'David' because they don't like being called 'Dave'.


It's not common courtesy. It is not common practice.
They is a third person plural pronoun. Insisting it be used as singular is evident that its not in use.

If you are a singular entity, I'm not calling you 'they'. Don't care. Find another. Choose one that's not intentionally confusing the language. They'll get over it.


It's Sgt_Smudge's choice to choose their pronouns. They are allowed to use they/them to refer to themself, and it's a basic courtesy to respect that, just as you might not want people to call you GoldenChode.

Plus, it's perfectly acceptable to us they/them/their/etc to refer to a singular entity, as was pointed out above.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:00:50


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
I'm not going to be speech policed by someone who attempts to mandate that I erroneously use a mass pronoun in place of a singular pronoun. just to tickle their fancy

I think your understanding of pronouns might be slightly off. The use of 'They' as a singular has been common practice since at least the 1300s.

Moreover, referring to someone by their preferred method of address is nothing to do with 'speech policing'. It's common courtesy, and ultimately no different to referring to someone as 'David' because they don't like being called 'Dave'.


It's not common courtesy. It is not common practice.
They is a third person plural pronoun. Insisting it be used as singular is evident that its not in use.

If you are a singular entity, I'm not calling you 'they'. Don't care. Find another. Choose one that's not intentionally confusing the language. They'll get over it.


I'm consistently amazed by people's refusal to go through the slightest inconvenience just to be civil to other persons. I mean, by literally changing one word, you are positively impacting another human's interaction with the world. I don't need you to go SuPER WoKe or anything, but is one simple phase or word REALLY that much to ask? It's like saying "I refuse to give pennies to poor people, I will never be supportive of free wealth." The person isn't asking you to change your life, but to help them change theirs.

And by the by, if you have such a pervasive need to declare your personal mind laws on the internets, you must be a TREAT to deal with at the Holidays.

Smudge is easily one of the most rational and intelligent persons here, and your desire to pick a fight with them over a WORD speaks volumes about your need for attention.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:05:35


Post by: A Town Called Malus


It just serves to demonstrate that if you want to have an inclusive community where many different people feel welcome you need to exclude certain other people.

Does the dakka moderation team think that GoldenHorde's right to participate here is more important to the site than the right of non-binary members of the board to be treated with respect?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:07:35


Post by: GoldenHorde


 insaniak wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:



Regardless, even if this wasn't the case, words change.



Words change via the natural use of the language, not by artificial alternate uses of pronouns.

The fact that you need to mandate language is absurd and disgustingly abhorrent


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:07:44


Post by: macluvin


 BertBert wrote:
Quoted from Insaniak in the last thread:

Insaniak wrote:

To steal a line someone said recently - Wargaming is for everyone.


The irony is that when GW said it, it was to firmly state that the ideologies we are arguing about in this forum have no place in wargaming. When GW said it, there was a "except for those with ideologies based on hate" in between the lines.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:09:44


Post by: insaniak


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
As soon as the thought leaves their head, either by speech or written word, it is no longer just a thought but an action. There is no law against thinking "fire" in a crowded theatre, there are laws against saying it.

Moderating what people can and cannot say is not thought policing, you are not moderating their thoughts but their actions.

The point about moderating 'bad faith' posting is that it assumes that the poster is making a claim based on a desire to derail the thread or push an agenda rather than out of a genuine belief that what they are saying is true. If we assume that the person using, for example, a 'fascist talking point' is doing so out of a desire to push that agenda, then we can call it bad faith and act accordingly. The problem is, it requires that assumption, rather than assuming that the poster is just ignorant, or mistaken, or has some other reason for thinking what they do.

By assuming that person is acting in bad faith and removing them from the discussion, you lose the opportunity to educate them, and you potentially just further entrench the idea that they are right in thinking what they do and are being victimised for it.

Is the possibility of removing an actual fascist apologist worth the risk of inadvertently removing someone whose only actual 'crime' is being from a sheltered background, or religious, or young and naive?

Maybe. I don't know. I make toy soldiers for a living and moderate a discussion forum in my spare time.



EDIT: For instance, it was obvious, based on all of their previous posts, that GoldenHorde wouldn't listen to you regarding pronouns. And what do you know, they didn't. Surely that is a rule 1 violation and you can ban them now?

To be clear - being wrong is not a rule 1 violation. Nor is refusing to accept that you are wrong when it is explained to you.

Going from there to actually continuing to be disrespectful to other forum members would, however, be actionable.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:10:17


Post by: Irkjoe


 GoldenHorde wrote:


It's not common courtesy. It is not common practice.
They is a third person plural pronoun. Insisting it be used as singular is evident that its not in use.

If you are a singular entity, I'm not calling you 'they'. Don't care. Find another. Choose one that's not intentionally confusing the language. They'll get over it.


You have to give them credit though, making forced language about courtesy and politeness is an impressive sleight of hand. Your mistake is to insist on dialectic, they don't care if it's correct or not.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:11:34


Post by: GoldenHorde


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
It just serves to demonstrate that if you want to have an inclusive community where many different people feel welcome you need to exclude certain other people.

Does the dakka moderation team think that GoldenHorde's right to participate here is more important to the site than the right of non-binary members of the board to be treated with respect?


I didn't disrespect them. i don't need to use a forced pronoun. If they don't like he or she, I'll use their name instead.

No one has the right to mandate my speech.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:14:26


Post by: insaniak


 GoldenHorde wrote:

The fact that you need to mandate language is absurd and disgustingly abhorrent

The fact that you feel a mandate is required to show some basic courtesy to another human being is more than a little sad, honestly.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:16:04


Post by: Flipsiders


trexmeyer wrote:
Wouldn't Slaanesh being gay-coded be incredibly offensive to the LBGTQ+ community? That doesn't make sense.


Don't worry, you're right, it is incredibly offensive. Some people just don't think things through too well.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:16:23


Post by: Azreal13


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
It just serves to demonstrate that if you want to have an inclusive community where many different people feel welcome you need to exclude certain other people.

Does the dakka moderation team think that GoldenHorde's right to participate here is more important to the site than the right of non-binary members of the board to be treated with respect?


I didn't disrespect them. i don't need to use a forced pronoun. If they don't like he or she, I'll use their name instead.

No one has the right to mandate my speech.


Go shout abuse at strangers in a public place, see whether or not the cops come and mandate you into a holding cell.

Please.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:17:18


Post by: GoldenHorde


 insaniak wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

The fact that you need to mandate language is absurd and disgustingly abhorrent

The fact that you feel a mandate is required to show some basic courtesy to another human being is more than a little sad, honestly.


What sad is the pathetic sophistry at play


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:19:25


Post by: trexmeyer


 Azreal13 wrote:
Go shout abuse at strangers in a public place, see whether or not the cops come and mandate you into a holding cell.

Please.


This is literally allowed in America. Westboro Baptist Church did it, various 'Christian' groups have done it outside abortion clinics, Black Hebrew Israelites do it, etc, etc. You'd have to go much farther than refusing to acknowledge pronouns in most of America to get arrested.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:22:10


Post by: Azreal13


Swearing is considered a public order offence in the UK and you can be locked up for it. It isn't often enforced, but somebody insisting they're entitled to do it is precisely the sort of times when it is.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:23:44


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Azreal13 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
It just serves to demonstrate that if you want to have an inclusive community where many different people feel welcome you need to exclude certain other people.

Does the dakka moderation team think that GoldenHorde's right to participate here is more important to the site than the right of non-binary members of the board to be treated with respect?


I didn't disrespect them. i don't need to use a forced pronoun. If they don't like he or she, I'll use their name instead.

No one has the right to mandate my speech.


Go shout abuse at strangers in a public place, see whether or not the cops come and mandate you into a holding cell.

Please.


You are comparing my agency as a language speaker in choosing not to use a single artificially placed word to an actual act of disturbing the peace because they're obviously the same thing.

Apples and oranges


Do you have an actual good argument as to why the word policing or not?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:26:19


Post by: H.B.M.C.


trexmeyer wrote:
Wouldn't Slaanesh being gay-coded be incredibly offensive to the LBGTQ+ community? That doesn't make sense.
It stems from the asinine misreading of Slaanesh being a "God of Sex", which isn't true.

Much like saying "The Imperium is fascist" is a complete misreading of what the Imperium represents.



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:27:48


Post by: Azreal13


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Azreal13 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
It just serves to demonstrate that if you want to have an inclusive community where many different people feel welcome you need to exclude certain other people.

Does the dakka moderation team think that GoldenHorde's right to participate here is more important to the site than the right of non-binary members of the board to be treated with respect?


I didn't disrespect them. i don't need to use a forced pronoun. If they don't like he or she, I'll use their name instead.

No one has the right to mandate my speech.


Go shout abuse at strangers in a public place, see whether or not the cops come and mandate you into a holding cell.

Please.


You are comparing my agency as a language speaker in choosing not to use a single artificially placed word to an actual act of disturbing the peace because they're obviously the same thing.

Apples and oranges


Do you have an actual good argument as to why the word policing or not?


No, I'm saying that your assertion that noone has the right to mandate your speech is patently false.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:29:16


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Azreal13 wrote:
Swearing is considered a public order offence in the UK and you can be locked up for it. It isn't often enforced, but somebody insisting they're entitled to do it is precisely the sort of times when it is.


So what?
UK law is at odds with conventions on human rights.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:30:43


Post by: Azreal13


No, it protects the rights of people not to be abused by total strangers who clearly have so little authority in their own lives that they think this is a hill worth dying on.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:31:46


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Azreal13 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Azreal13 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
It just serves to demonstrate that if you want to have an inclusive community where many different people feel welcome you need to exclude certain other people.

Does the dakka moderation team think that GoldenHorde's right to participate here is more important to the site than the right of non-binary members of the board to be treated with respect?


I didn't disrespect them. i don't need to use a forced pronoun. If they don't like he or she, I'll use their name instead.

No one has the right to mandate my speech.


Go shout abuse at strangers in a public place, see whether or not the cops come and mandate you into a holding cell.

Please.


You are comparing my agency as a language speaker in choosing not to use a single artificially placed word to an actual act of disturbing the peace because they're obviously the same thing.

Apples and oranges


Do you have an actual good argument as to why the word policing or not?


No, I'm saying that your assertion that noone has the right to mandate your speech is patently false.


When you have so little of an argument, your rely on conflating a strawman example of disturbing the peace with mandated speech which are completely different things.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:32:11


Post by: Voss


 insaniak wrote:

EDIT: For instance, it was obvious, based on all of their previous posts, that GoldenHorde wouldn't listen to you regarding pronouns. And what do you know, they didn't. Surely that is a rule 1 violation and you can ban them now?

To be clear - being wrong is not a rule 1 violation. Nor is refusing to accept that you are wrong when it is explained to you.

Going from there to actually continuing to be disrespectful to other forum members would, however, be actionable.

Well, its continuing, so...


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:32:32


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Azreal13 wrote:
No, it protects the rights of people not to be abused by total strangers who clearly have so little authority in their own lives that they think this is a hill worth dying on.


No, it allows a government or state to police speech and attack human rights, enjoy
It's a nice slippery slope to enjoy


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:32:41


Post by: Lance845


Nobody is saying it's mandated.

Nobody is taking away your freedoms. Everyone is 100% allowed to be a dick if they want to.

And lets be clear, that is what you are fighting for right now. Your right to be a dick to someone else because you don't feel like accommodating them on something that costs you nothing.

100%. Your free speech is protected. It's not free of all consequence though. You are judged by your own merits. And the merits of your current position is your deserving of very little respect yourself. You have nothing to gain by digging in your heels on this. You lose nothing by conceding. Even if the cost isn't the forum itself cracking down on you (and in general I agree it shouldn't) you still pay the price of your merits. Your opinions lose value. Your standing in the general community should go with it. And you probably don't care. Cool. But there it is.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:33:20


Post by: Azreal13


 GoldenHorde wrote:
Spoiler:
 Azreal13 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Azreal13 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
It just serves to demonstrate that if you want to have an inclusive community where many different people feel welcome you need to exclude certain other people.

Does the dakka moderation team think that GoldenHorde's right to participate here is more important to the site than the right of non-binary members of the board to be treated with respect?


I didn't disrespect them. i don't need to use a forced pronoun. If they don't like he or she, I'll use their name instead.

No one has the right to mandate my speech.


Go shout abuse at strangers in a public place, see whether or not the cops come and mandate you into a holding cell.

Please.


You are comparing my agency as a language speaker in choosing not to use a single artificially placed word to an actual act of disturbing the peace because they're obviously the same thing.

Apples and oranges


Do you have an actual good argument as to why the word policing or not?


No, I'm saying that your assertion that noone has the right to mandate your speech is patently false.


When you have so little of an argument, your rely on conflating a strawman example of disturbing the peace with mandated speech which are completely different things.



Ok, I'll strawman, you attack my ability to argue rather than my argument.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:36:09


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Azreal13 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
Spoiler:
 Azreal13 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Azreal13 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
It just serves to demonstrate that if you want to have an inclusive community where many different people feel welcome you need to exclude certain other people.

Does the dakka moderation team think that GoldenHorde's right to participate here is more important to the site than the right of non-binary members of the board to be treated with respect?


I didn't disrespect them. i don't need to use a forced pronoun. If they don't like he or she, I'll use their name instead.

No one has the right to mandate my speech.


Go shout abuse at strangers in a public place, see whether or not the cops come and mandate you into a holding cell.

Please.


You are comparing my agency as a language speaker in choosing not to use a single artificially placed word to an actual act of disturbing the peace because they're obviously the same thing.

Apples and oranges


Do you have an actual good argument as to why the word policing or not?


No, I'm saying that your assertion that noone has the right to mandate your speech is patently false.


When you have so little of an argument, your rely on conflating a strawman example of disturbing the peace with mandated speech which are completely different things.



Ok, I'll strawman, you attack my ability to argue rather than my argument.


Make a point other than police exist?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:37:16


Post by: Azreal13


Why? That was my intent, your arguments aren't the unassailable monoliths you seem to think.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:38:44


Post by: insaniak


Getting back to the actual topic or moving on would be a good idea at this point, folks.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 03:54:56


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 insaniak wrote:
Getting back to the actual topic or moving on would be a good idea at this point, folks.
The actual topic is something I brought up in the big post before my last one. The entire impetus of this thread, or specifically the one that spawned this thread, is that "threat" I mentioned. It's not "guilt by association", it's "guilt by lack of disassociation".

"Sent to journalist" means "Do what I say or I will make this into a bigger deal - I will tar this site with the 'Nazi' brush and you'll never be able to recover, as public perception of you will be forever tainted. Dakka will be cancelled unless you do what I say".

To bring it back to something closer with this board's main thrust, take GW's laughable "anti-hate" statement from a couple of weeks ago. Some people have called it "virtue signalling", but I don't think that's true at all. Virtue signalling, in the corporate sphere, is most often a cynical and craven attempt to appeal to very loud groups on Twitter so that they sell more stuff (READ: See changes to Twitter and Facebook pics during 'Pride Month', or, more specifically, where those changes don't occur with companies that have lots of international audiences ). In the case of GW's laughable statement - and I'll explain in a moment why I keep referring to it as 'laughable' - wasn't done for any specific "let's look good to sell more stuff" reason. Rather, it was done out of fear. Fear of being banded for lack of disassociation.

I call the statement laughable because a statement "against hate" shouldn't need to be said out loud. Coming out against "hatred" is like coming out in favour of breathing. GW doesn't need to come out and stand up against "hatred" because it would be laughable to assume that they are in any way in favour of "hatred".

Unfortunately, because of people like the previous thread's OP, companies, groups, and people now have to make fething redundant and obvious public statements against exceptionally fundamental things precisely because of the fear of being labelled equal-to-or-worse than the thing they're condemning for simply not condemning it.

An actual genuine Neo-Nazi rocked up to a tournament. Ok. Whatever. The world spins on. People decided not to play against the guy. Ok great. That's their choice. Good on them. Had I known what those symbols were (and I didn't when the pics first showed up) I would have likely done the same. The result of this was the Neo-Nazi getting full points due to game forfeiture... ok, here's where the TOs probably should have stepped in, as now the Neo-Nazi is being rewarded for the choices other people are making. And that's where the story should have ended, except maybe with a statement from the TOs explaining the (actual) lack of action given the unforeseen circumstances of letting the guy continue to rack up points when no one wanted to play him.

But for fear of being labelled as supporting a Neo-Nazi, GW has to come out and state that they are not Neo-Nazis. And that's crazy. It's so fething crazy that it boggles the mind. No one with half a brain cell would ever actually believe that, if they had remained silent, GW would actually be supporting Neo-Nazis... which, really, just means we have a small and exceptionally vocal group of Dakkanauts who don't have half half a brain cell. Sad, but I can draw no other conclusions...

The Dark Eldar (and the Dark Elves before them) have slaves. Does GW need to put out a statement saying that they don't actually support slavery, or can we just be adults about it and assume that they don't? I've never heard the folks from Nottingham specifically state that they think the Earth is round, so maybe they should issue a statement that they think Flat Earther's are nuts, even though that's mostly assumed as well. Last I checked, Kirby never mentioned in an annual report that he doesn't think the moon landings were faked, so are we to assume that GW, as a corporation, supports the theory that the moon landings were faked?

And on and on it goes. Guilt by lack of disassociation is horrific, and this entire - what we we on, 9 pages now, plus the last thread? - exercise stems from this very real and very insidious threat (unlike imaginary fascists hiding under every gaming table and inside every miniatures case).






Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:01:30


Post by: trexmeyer


Damn. HBMC nailed it.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:06:24


Post by: Grimskul


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
Getting back to the actual topic or moving on would be a good idea at this point, folks.
The actual topic is something I brought up in the big post before my last one. The entire impetus of this thread, or specifically the one that spawned this thread, is that "threat" I mentioned. It's not "guilt by association", it's "guilt by lack of disassociation".

"Sent to journalist" means "Do what I say or I will make this into a bigger deal - I will tar this site with the 'Nazi' brush and you'll never be able to recover, as public perception of you will be forever tainted. Dakka will be cancelled unless you do what I say".

To bring it back to something closer with this board's main thrust, take GW's laughable "anti-hate" statement from a couple of weeks ago. Some people have called it "virtue signalling", but I don't think that's true at all. Virtue signalling, in the corporate sphere, is most often a cynical and craven attempt to appeal to very loud groups on Twitter so that they sell more stuff (READ: See changes to Twitter and Facebook pics during 'Pride Month', or, more specifically, where those changes don't occur with companies that have lots of international audiences ). In the case of GW's laughable statement - and I'll explain in a moment why I keep referring to it as 'laughable' - wasn't done for any specific "let's look good to sell more stuff" reason. Rather, it was done out of fear. Fear of being banded for lack of disassociation.

I call the statement laughable because a statement "against hate" shouldn't need to be said out loud. Coming out against "hatred" is like coming out in favour of breathing. GW doesn't need to come out and stand up against "hatred" because it would be laughable to assume that they are in any way in favour of "hatred".

Unfortunately, because of people like the previous thread's OP, companies, groups, and people now have to make fething redundant and obvious public statements against exceptionally fundamental things precisely because of the fear of being labelled equal-to-or-worse than the thing they're condemning for simply not condemning it.

An actual genuine Neo-Nazi rocked up to a tournament. Ok. Whatever. The world spins on. People decided not to play against the guy. Ok great. That's their choice. Good on them. Had I known what those symbols were (and I didn't when the pics first showed up) I would have likely done the same. The result of this was the Neo-Nazi getting full points due to game forfeiture... ok, here's where the TOs probably should have stepped in, as now the Neo-Nazi is being rewarded for the choices other people are making. And that's where the story should have ended, except maybe with a statement from the TOs explaining the (actual) lack of action given the unforeseen circumstances of letting the guy continue to rack up points when no one wanted to play him.

But for fear of being labelled as supporting a Neo-Nazi, GW has to come out and state that they are not Neo-Nazis. And that's crazy. It's so fething crazy that it boggles the mind. No one with half a brain cell would ever actually believe that, if they had remained silent, GW would actually be supporting Neo-Nazis... which, really, just means we have a small and exceptionally vocal group of Dakkanauts who don't have half half a brain cell. Sad, but I can draw no other conclusions...

The Dark Eldar (and the Dark Elves before them) have slaves. Does GW need to put out a statement saying that they don't actually support slavery, or can we just be adults about it and assume that they don't? I've never heard the folks from Nottingham specifically state that they think the Earth is round, so maybe they should issue a statement that they think Flat Earther's are nuts, even though that's mostly assumed as well. Last I checked, Kirby never mentioned in an annual report that he doesn't think the moon landings were faked, so are we to assume that GW, as a corporation, supports the theory that the moon landings were faked?

And on and on it goes. Guilt by lack of disassociation is horrific, and this entire - what we we on, 9 pages now, plus the last thread? - exercise stems from this very real and very insidious threat (unlike imaginary fascists hiding under every gaming table and inside every miniatures case).






10/10, would exalt again. Pretty much sums up the entire madness that has been going on in this thread by the self-proclaimed anti-nazi groups.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:07:42


Post by: Voss


Going to disagree with you, HBMC, GW's statement was very necessary. Particularly in Europe and the US, a statement against hatred is sadly necessary.

Maybe you're In a unique place of privilege, but the idea that people aren't in favor of hatred is... not an experience I share. Hell, just tonight someone told me that the 'Off white' fashion designer who died deserved it because he was obviously doing drugs, and Epsteen/Maxwell's victims knew what they were signing up for.

This isn't a rare experience. So no, it isn't laughable at all.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:17:00


Post by: GoldenHorde


Voss wrote:
Going to disagree with you, HBMC, GW's statement was very necessary. Particularly in Europe and the US, a statement against hatred is sadly necessary.

Maybe you're In a unique place of privilege, but the idea that people aren't in favor of hatred is... not an experience I share. Hell, just tonight someone told me that the 'Off white' fashion designer who died deserved it because he was obviously doing drugs, and Epsteen/Maxwell's victims knew what they were signing up for.

This isn't a rare experience. So no, it isn't laughable at all.


and how is GW's statement going to have a bearing on that person exactly?


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:22:18


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Voss wrote:
Going to disagree with you, HBMC, GW's statement was very necessary.
It's only necessary in a world where the fear of being branded 'that thing' for not speaking out against it exists.

That's the world we live in.

So, in light of that, HBMC stands against:

Slavery
Terrorism
Murder
Theft
Socialism
Communism
Fascism
Theocracies
Fundamental Religions
Flat Earthers
Anti-Vaxxers
Fake Moon Landing People (whatever they're called)
Twitter (which is just an easily accessible form of electronic extortion and intimidation)




[EDIT]: Oh no! I didn't specifically list 'racism' in the long list above. That must mean I support racism! *clutches pearls*



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:23:06


Post by: Voss


'We don't support your ideology' is a pretty meaningful statement.

I'm not so worried about performative aspects HBMC is worried about. Or coercion. Or lack of disassociation.

The folks who are rightfully getting criticism are the ones that voluntarily, of their own free will, showed up an anti-Neo Nazi talk to say they weren't so bad. So feth them.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:24:59


Post by: Lance845


There is a difference between a statement and action. I agree with HBMC. Right up until GW hosts a tourney and this guy or one of his ilk rocks up. Does GW act, or do they sit idly by?

Thats going to be the part that maters.

And this thread is more or less about dakkaites trying to wrap their heads around the mods line for when the statement becomes the action.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:25:13


Post by: Grimskul


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Voss wrote:
Going to disagree with you, HBMC, GW's statement was very necessary.
It's only necessary in a world where the fear of being branded 'that thing' for not speaking out against it exists.

That's the world we live in.

So, in light of that, HBMC stands against:

Slavery
Terrorism
Murder
Theft
Socialism
Communism
Fascism
Theocracies
Fundamental Religions
Flat Earthers
Anti-Vaxxers
Fake Moon Landing People (whatever they're called)
Twitter (which is just an easily accessible form of electronic extortion and intimidation)




[EDIT]: Oh no! I didn't specifically list 'racism' in the long list above. That must mean I support racism! *clutches pearls*



You forgot climate change/global warming deniers you earth hating bigot, how dare you besmirch mother gaia and her vast blue booty /s



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:25:33


Post by: GoldenHorde


Voss wrote:

The folks who are rightfully getting criticism are the ones that voluntarily, of their own free will, showed up an anti-Neo Nazi talk to say they weren't so bad. So feth them.


Except that I didn't, but okay.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:25:53


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Voss wrote:
'We don't support your ideology' is a pretty meaningful statement.
Not when such things are assumed.

Like I said, GW hasn't made any specific statements regarding Pol Pot, so let's assume they're pro-Khmer Rouge. They've never put up a WarComm article showing that they're not in favour of drowning babies either. Guess that means that they tacitly support such things, even though they've never said anything of the sort and shouldn't need to if not for the fear of disassociation.

The only way they can show that they are against something is to make a statement condemning it.

Oh, I'm against Pol Pot and drowning babies as well, before any of you label me pro-Khmer Rouge or pro-infanticide via aquatic asphyxiation.





Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:29:42


Post by: Arcanis161


 H.B.M.C. wrote:


The Dark Eldar (and the Dark Elves before them) have slaves. Does GW need to put out a statement saying that they don't actually support slavery, or can we just be adults about it and assume that they don't?


Apparently Star Wars thinks it still needs to remove the name "Slave 1" from it's marketing despite showing slavery and how awful it is


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:29:46


Post by: GoldenHorde


No the pretty dumb and unnecessary statement is "We are not the fascists in our game universe"

I mean this common sense stuff needs to be spoon fed to the woke crowd, considering the reality disconnect that they currently suffer from.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:30:04


Post by: insaniak


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Voss wrote:
'We don't support your ideology' is a pretty meaningful statement.
Not when such things are assumed.

Like I said, GW hasn't made any specific statements regarding Pol Pot, so let's assume they're pro-Khmer Rouge.


For the most part, I agree with your big post above. However, when there's a perception that your product is possibly attracting nazis, I would think there's a value in pointing out that your product is being misconstrued by those people and isn't intended for them at all.

Whether or not that perception is reality, and whether or not it's a big enough problem at this point in time to warrant this action on their behalf ... I don't know if any of us actually have sufficient data to make that call, but in this day and age of social media they obviously felt it was the wisest course.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:30:51


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Arcanis161 wrote:
Apparently Star Wars thinks it still needs to remove the name "Slave 1" from it's marketing despite showing slavery and how awful it is
Precisely my point. Thank you!

And for anyone paying attention, I fully admit that, yes, I am engaging in a level of mass reductio ad absurdum BECAUSE THIS WHOLE TOPIC IS ABSURD!!!




Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:36:04


Post by: insaniak


Arcanis161 wrote:

Apparently Star Wars thinks it still needs to remove the name "Slave 1" from it's marketing despite showing slavery and how awful it is

That was Lego. The Star Wars site still has it listed as Slave 1.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:36:26


Post by: Arcanis161


Voss wrote:
Going to disagree with you, HBMC, GW's statement was very necessary. Particularly in Europe and the US, a statement against hatred is sadly necessary.

Maybe you're In a unique place of privilege, but the idea that people aren't in favor of hatred is... not an experience I share. Hell, just tonight someone told me that the 'Off white' fashion designer who died deserved it because he was obviously doing drugs, and Epsteen/Maxwell's victims knew what they were signing up for.

This isn't a rare experience. So no, it isn't laughable at all.


Actually curious as to what section of the country you're at. Lived and traveled coast to coast and never saw anything like you describe.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:37:26


Post by: Lance845


 GoldenHorde wrote:
No the pretty dumb and unnecessary statement is "We are not the fascists in our game universe"

I mean this common sense stuff needs to be spoon fed to the woke crowd, considering the reality disconnect that they currently suffer from.


That statement wasn't being made to the "woke crowd". It was being made to the nazi that went to the tourny. And the groups that defended him being there.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:38:52


Post by: Arcanis161


 insaniak wrote:
Arcanis161 wrote:

Apparently Star Wars thinks it still needs to remove the name "Slave 1" from it's marketing despite showing slavery and how awful it is

That was Lego. The Star Wars site still has it listed as Slave 1.


And some collector's sets of some comics. We'll see how Book of Boba Fett handles it.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:38:58


Post by: Lance845


Arcanis161 wrote:
Voss wrote:
Going to disagree with you, HBMC, GW's statement was very necessary. Particularly in Europe and the US, a statement against hatred is sadly necessary.

Maybe you're In a unique place of privilege, but the idea that people aren't in favor of hatred is... not an experience I share. Hell, just tonight someone told me that the 'Off white' fashion designer who died deserved it because he was obviously doing drugs, and Epsteen/Maxwell's victims knew what they were signing up for.

This isn't a rare experience. So no, it isn't laughable at all.


Actually curious as to what section of the country you're at. Lived and traveled coast to coast and never saw anything like you describe.


From NJ, been all up and down the east coast, lived in Texas and WA. I've seen it.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:39:06


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Da Boss wrote:
People don't accuse people of being nazis because they disagree with them though.


Yes, they do.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:44:09


Post by: SkavenLord


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Arcanis161 wrote:
Apparently Star Wars thinks it still needs to remove the name "Slave 1" from it's marketing despite showing slavery and how awful it is
Precisely my point. Thank you!

And for anyone paying attention, I fully admit that, yes, I am engaging in a level of mass reductio ad absurdum BECAUSE THIS WHOLE TOPIC IS ABSURD!!!




I’m still trying to divine what the current goal is supposed to be. Come take a break and join the audience. MJ and I made popcorn.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:45:20


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Lance845 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
No the pretty dumb and unnecessary statement is "We are not the fascists in our game universe"

I mean this common sense stuff needs to be spoon fed to the woke crowd, considering the reality disconnect that they currently suffer from.


That statement wasn't being made to the "woke crowd". It was being made to the nazi that went to the tourny. And the groups that defended him being there.


You've obviously never seen the hystericals here call people who simply play imperium factions as being wholesale fascist endorsers.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:46:10


Post by: Arcanis161


 Lance845 wrote:
Arcanis161 wrote:
Voss wrote:
Going to disagree with you, HBMC, GW's statement was very necessary. Particularly in Europe and the US, a statement against hatred is sadly necessary.

Maybe you're In a unique place of privilege, but the idea that people aren't in favor of hatred is... not an experience I share. Hell, just tonight someone told me that the 'Off white' fashion designer who died deserved it because he was obviously doing drugs, and Epsteen/Maxwell's victims knew what they were signing up for.

This isn't a rare experience. So no, it isn't laughable at all.


Actually curious as to what section of the country you're at. Lived and traveled coast to coast and never saw anything like you describe.


From NJ, been all up and down the east coast, lived in Texas and WA. I've seen it.


Ohio, Arkansas, NYC, Texas (Dallas/Fort Worth and Amarillo), Oklahoma, New Mexico, Northern Arizona, currently California and soon Eastern Arizona. Maybe we passed each other? Fortunately, I have no intention of traveling to the other areas you said.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:49:14


Post by: H.B.M.C.


But, to be clear, Arcanis161 isn't specifically against the territories is hasn't travelled to or lived in, so please don't accuse him of being anti-[insert state here].

Maybe he should release a statement saying he's pro-all states, just to be on the safe side?



Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:51:36


Post by: Arcanis161


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
But, to be clear, Arcanis161 isn't specifically against the territories is hasn't travelled to or lived in, so please don't accuse him of being anti-[insert state here].

Maybe he should release a statement saying he's pro-all states, just to be on the safe side?



Everything but Oregon. Besides Tillamook, it's just a filter for all but the most determined Californians.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 04:59:53


Post by: Lance845


 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
No the pretty dumb and unnecessary statement is "We are not the fascists in our game universe"

I mean this common sense stuff needs to be spoon fed to the woke crowd, considering the reality disconnect that they currently suffer from.


That statement wasn't being made to the "woke crowd". It was being made to the nazi that went to the tourny. And the groups that defended him being there.


You've obviously never seen the hystericals here call people who simply play imperium factions as being wholesale fascist endorsers.


I have seen them. And further, I have been condemning that tactic since my first post in this thread. Just like I have been condemning yours and HBMCs disregard for the fact of the actual issue that needs fixing.

Once again, the left create new problems with their impractical solutions to the issues. But the right doesn't even acknowledge that the issue exists.

This prancing around you are doing, this misdirect by pointing at the "big bad" that is the left extremism and going "but what about them!" doesn't in any way take away the fact of the problem or absolve "your side" from doing anything, ANYTHING, to avoid having to admit that there is a problem that needs fixing.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 05:07:19


Post by: GoldenHorde


 Lance845 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
No the pretty dumb and unnecessary statement is "We are not the fascists in our game universe"

I mean this common sense stuff needs to be spoon fed to the woke crowd, considering the reality disconnect that they currently suffer from.


That statement wasn't being made to the "woke crowd". It was being made to the nazi that went to the tourny. And the groups that defended him being there.


You've obviously never seen the hystericals here call people who simply play imperium factions as being wholesale fascist endorsers.


I have seen them. And further, I have been condemning that tactic since my first post in this thread. Just like I have been condemning yours and HBMCs disregard for the fact of the actual issue that needs fixing.

Once again, the left create new problems with their impractical solutions to the issues. But the right doesn't even acknowledge that the issue exists.

This prancing around you are doing, this misdirect by pointing at the "big bad" that is the left extremism and going "but what about them!" doesn't in any way take away the fact of the problem or absolve "your side" from doing anything, ANYTHING, to avoid having to admit that there is a problem that needs fixing.


I'm not prancing around. I told you there's distinctly different elements aimed at different audiences.
Then you turn around and claim interpolated nonsense such as the above.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 05:09:38


Post by: Arcanis161


 Lance845 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
No the pretty dumb and unnecessary statement is "We are not the fascists in our game universe"

I mean this common sense stuff needs to be spoon fed to the woke crowd, considering the reality disconnect that they currently suffer from.


That statement wasn't being made to the "woke crowd". It was being made to the nazi that went to the tourny. And the groups that defended him being there.


You've obviously never seen the hystericals here call people who simply play imperium factions as being wholesale fascist endorsers.


I have seen them. And further, I have been condemning that tactic since my first post in this thread. Just like I have been condemning yours and HBMCs disregard for the fact of the actual issue that needs fixing.

Once again, the left create new problems with their impractical solutions to the issues. But the right doesn't even acknowledge that the issue exists.

This prancing around you are doing, this misdirect by pointing at the "big bad" that is the left extremism and going "but what about them!" doesn't in any way take away the fact of the problem or absolve "your side" from doing anything, ANYTHING, to avoid having to admit that there is a problem that needs fixing.


I think it's a matter of scale and who's more vocal. Online, I've only seen....maybe...one bona fide and verified fascist, and dozens of people, generally of more "left" leanings, accusing other wargamers of being fascists. IRL, that's a whopping 0-2.

Not saying it doesn't exist, but, based on my own experiences, it seems far more rare than what's being implied.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 05:22:12


Post by: Scrabb


Copy sent to journalists.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 05:22:45


Post by: Arcanis161


 Scrabb wrote:
Copy sent to journalists.


K, link us the article when it's done.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 05:22:57


Post by: Lance845


 GoldenHorde wrote:
Spoiler:
 Lance845 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
 Lance845 wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
No the pretty dumb and unnecessary statement is "We are not the fascists in our game universe"

I mean this common sense stuff needs to be spoon fed to the woke crowd, considering the reality disconnect that they currently suffer from.


That statement wasn't being made to the "woke crowd". It was being made to the nazi that went to the tourny. And the groups that defended him being there.


You've obviously never seen the hystericals here call people who simply play imperium factions as being wholesale fascist endorsers.


I have seen them. And further, I have been condemning that tactic since my first post in this thread. Just like I have been condemning yours and HBMCs disregard for the fact of the actual issue that needs fixing.

Once again, the left create new problems with their impractical solutions to the issues. But the right doesn't even acknowledge that the issue exists.

This prancing around you are doing, this misdirect by pointing at the "big bad" that is the left extremism and going "but what about them!" doesn't in any way take away the fact of the problem or absolve "your side" from doing anything, ANYTHING, to avoid having to admit that there is a problem that needs fixing.


I'm not prancing around. I told you there's distinctly different elements aimed at different audiences.
Then you turn around and claim interpolated nonsense such as the above.


Really? Because I just watched you spend an entire page of the thread playing the victim about thought police because someone else was talking about disrespecting members of the forum community. You decided to fight for a hill about your right to be disrespectful by arguing about something that wasn't actually happening to you.

And here HBMC makes a big statement about how it shouldn't be necessary for companies to say FU to Nazis, while disregarding that a Nazi very much thinks 40k is a nice place to be for them. You're arguing that the statement shouldn't need to be made, which I agree with when the word SHOULDN'T is being paid attention to. Sometimes it is. The statement doesn't need to be made to the regular public. It doesn't need to be made to people to placate them. It DOES need to be made to the groups who want to take 40k as a place where their BS can fester.

Which is what I said to you. The statement isn't for the woke crowd. It's for the Nazis who need to be told that their money isn't needed and not wanted.

And again, even that is just words. What happens when the rubber meets the road? What does GW do when one actually shows up in their building? Thats the test that maters.


You didn't have to agree. You didn't have to say anything. But you did CHOOSE to engage my statement by shifting my point to being about how you were being attacked by the extreme left instead of acknowledging the need for the statement to be made to the alt-right.

I am not calling you a nazi or a nazi sympathizer. I am calling you a symptom of a political ideology that poisons discourse by actively stalling it.


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 05:30:59


Post by: posermcbogus


Well said


Why are we so pro-Nazi? Pt2. @ 2021/11/30 05:39:16


Post by: insaniak


After 10 pages, I think this thread has really said all that is going to be productively said here.

There have been some good points made, and we will consider this when looking at moderation strategy moving forwards, but right now it largely seems to be just generating a lot of ill will from either side, so best to let it rest.