What's new
Frozen in Carbonite

Welcome to FiC! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Should Open Nazis be allowed on Carbonite?

Should those who openly identify as Neo Nazis be allowed to participate if they respect our rules


  • Total voters
    28
Status
Not open for further replies.
So I've been thinking about the whole 'Free Speech for Fascists' issue.

The main problem is that fascists in control of government will immediately use the government to attack everyone else regardless of the laws, but making the laws such that you can suppress the fascists also lets other political groups use the government as a weapon against their enemies.

The solution is clear, governments shouldn't be setup to be able to oppose political enemies, but governments shouldn't lift a finger to stop non-government groups from just murdering fascists.

Therefore fuck Nazis.
 
I never said Stalin, I said Communists. Compare Nazi Germany to the People's Republic of Chine under Mao and you'll see a very different picture.
I have. I think you'll find that intent actually mattering when assigning guilt is a long settled debate.

I don't see how it's bullshit. ISIS and other Islamic terror groups have been using the Internet to great effect to recruit for their cause. If we're going to ban nazis because they might radicalize forum members to their cause there's a very good argument that we might also need to ban muslims because some of them are doing just that all over the internet with great success.
It absolutely is because you're equivocating a political ideology which explicitly calls for the murder of minorities for arbitrary reasons to a religion that some people cherry pick like everyone does.
 
No he doesn't, again it's literally Nazi propaganda that requires you to believe the civilians killed by the Nazis intentionally are the fault of the Soviets or that unforeseen consequences of Chinese Communist action are equivalent to intentionally setting up industrialized death camps, by the same measure Capitalism has a much higher death count than either of them from the at minimum 26M dead from famine in India alone.
Chessia I'm going to give you the benifit of the doubt and not assume you're a Mao apologist for trying to play off the mass deaths of the great leap forward as "unforeseen consequences".

When Mao returned from Moscow and began formulating the polices that would become the great leap forward he had had everyone who spoke out against him branded a traitor and silenced.

A year later in 1959 when people were actually starving to death in mass because of Mao a party conference was held. There anyone who dared to take issue with Mao's policies causing mass starvations was shot.

That man knew exactly what he was doing and happily threw away 30 million lives to accomplish it.


It absolutely is because you're equivocating a political ideology which explicitly calls for the murder of minorities for arbitrary reasons to a religion that some people cherry pick like everyone does.
The Koran explicitly calls for the murder of plenty of minorities, guess what 11 countries in 2018 have the death penalty for homosexuality? Guess what religion they all based that law off of?

Communists and islamists have killed more innocents then the nazis ever did and they're still doing it at rates that neo-nazis could only dream of.

So tell me again why you just want to ban Nazis?

P.S. I'm really enjoying this conversation Chessia.
 
So I've been thinking about the whole 'Free Speech for Fascists' issue.

The main problem is that fascists in control of government will immediately use the government to attack everyone else regardless of the laws, but making the laws such that you can suppress the fascists also lets other political groups use the government as a weapon against their enemies.

The solution is clear, governments shouldn't be setup to be able to oppose political enemies, but governments shouldn't lift a finger to stop non-government groups from just murdering fascists.

Therefore fuck Nazis.
I don't see how a government relinquishing their Monopoly on violence would help anyone. Sure you'll get rid of some legitimate despicable Neo-Nazis, but then criminal groups like like gangs and cartels will aquire legitimate means of terrorizing the populous by planting swastika patches and emailing copies of mine Kampf to innocents they're going to kill.
 
Chessia I'm going to give you the benifit of the doubt and not assume you're a Mao apologist for trying to play off the mass deaths of the great leap forward as "unforeseen consequences".

When Mao returned from Moscow and began formulating the polices that would become the great leap forward he had had everyone who spoke out against him branded a traitor and silenced.

A year later in 1959 when people were actually starving to death in mass because of Mao a party conference was held. There anyone who dared to take issue with Mao's policies causing mass starvations was shot.

That man knew exactly what he was doing and happily threw away 30 million lives to accomplish it.
And how many exactly of those were intentional deaths and how many of those were famine, eh?



The Koran explicitly calls for the murder of plenty of minorities, guess what 11 countries in 2018 have the death penalty for homosexuality? Guess what religion they all based that law off of?
You realize lots of Christian countries have had the death penalty for homosexuality right? And please name me one minority directed to death that I can't find in the Bible or the Torah.

Communists and islamists have killed more innocents then the nazis ever did and they're still doing it at rates that neo-nazis could only dream of.
Yeah, no, the Communists and Islamists only have a higher death toll because they've been allowed to stay in power longer, meanwhile in reality if the Nazis had had their way every single slav, every single Jew at bare minimum, would be dead.

P.S. I'm really enjoying this conversation Chessia.
Me too, Reichskriminaldirektor Rush.
 
And how many exactly of those were intentional deaths and how many of those were famine, eh?
Considering Nazi Germany killed plenty of those 11 million people your article sited by starving them ala famine I don't think it's very intellectually honest of you to try and make that this distinction.


You realize lots of Christian countries have had the death penalty for homosexuality right? And please name me one minority directed to death that I can't find in the Bible or the Torah.
That's a good point, we need to ban all the abrahamic faiths from our board. They could radicize our members and have them slaughter innocent people.


Yeah, no, the Communists and Islamists only have a higher death toll because they've been allowed to stay in power longer, meanwhile in reality if the Nazis had had their way every single slav, every single Jew at bare minimum, would be dead.
So what you're saying is you'd shun neo-nazis because they're a potential threat, but not Muslims and Communists even though they're an actual threat?

Again how about we just let everyone participate as long as they can remain civil and not call for the slaughter of innocents?


Me too, Reichskriminaldirektor Rush.
I noticed that in my quote text, legitimately laughed out loud. Wish I knew what it meant though.
 
Considering Nazi Germany killed plenty of those 11 million people your article sited by starving them ala famine I don't think it's very intellectually honest of you to try and make that this distinction.
Intentionally staved, again, like I said intent matters.

That's a good point, we need to ban all the abrahamic faiths from our board. They could radicize our members and have them slaughter innocent people.
Except they're not fundamental parts of Abrahamic faiths, they cherry pick all the time.

So what you're saying is you'd shun neo-nazis because they're a potential threat, but not Muslims and Communists even though they're an actual threat?
Nazis yes, because a white supremacist Fascist is the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth. Muslims no, because ISIS and the Taliban are no more representative of all Muslims anymore than Boko Haram or most Nazis are of Christianity. And Communists, no because there's no actual Communists in a major seat of power in the world.

Again how about we just let everyone participate as long as they can remain civil and not call for the slaughter of innocents?
Sure. Nazism and Reactionary ideologies inherently call for the slaughter and oppression of innocents, Communism and Islam do not.

I noticed that in my quote text, legitimately laughed out loud. Wish I knew what it meant though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestapo#Pay_grades
 
Intentionally staved, again, like I said intent matters.
How is forcing farmers to give the government all their crops at gun point not intentional?

Except they're not fundamental parts of Abrahamic faiths, they cherry pick all the time.
Sounds like a no true scottsmen fallacy, "those aren't REAL Muslims. We can totally let REAL Muslims who don't cherry pick the Koran to justify their actions in our forum."

Nazis yes, because a white supremacist Fascist is the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth.
You give our senile orange fool too much credit Chessia. He couldn't spell fascist if his life depended on it and you bought him all the vowels and consonants.


And Communists, no because there's no actual Communists in a major seat of power in the world.
What? The second most powerful country in the world is communist Chessia.


Sure. Nazism and Reactionary ideologies inherently call for the slaughter and oppression of innocents, Communism and Islam do not.
Find me a communist country that hasn't slaughtered ans oppressed innocents and I'll show you a short lived marxist revolution.

Also the koran does call for the slaughter of innocents and as I've already stated every country with Sharia law kills gay people for being gay.

I don't know how you claim somthing isn't inherent in one ideology when we've seen it in every single one of a dozen plus incarnations, but at the same time claim another phenomenon is totally inherent to a second ideology based off of it's single incarnation.

Have you read mine Kampf? The Koran? I'd assuming you've read some Marxist materal based off how adamantly you defend communist states, but I admit I don't know you outside of this conversation so I could be totally wrong.

Anyway i don't think you've read either becouse if you had you wouldn't be so ready to cast one out in the name of protecting jews and gays, but not the other. Mine Kampf isn't just 700 pages of "gas the kiks" pasted over and over again.

Yeah It's pretty reprehensible in a lot of places, but the book was writen as Hitlers autobiography a good chunk of it is fairly innocuous.

Overall I get the impression you regard Nazis as some sort of mystic boogeymen who are all just mematicly super ultra evil and totally a billion times worse then any other kind of person in existance.

The true of the matter is that they're no more dangerous then the kkk is today and the key to them obtaining world domination isn't their ability to converse online with a bunch of nerds on an obscure sci-fi forum.

Intentionally staved, again, like I said intent matters.


Except they're not fundamental parts of Abrahamic faiths, they cherry pick all the time.

Nazis yes, because a white supremacist Fascist is the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth. Muslims no, because ISIS and the Taliban are no more representative of all Muslims anymore than Boko Haram or most Nazis are of Christianity. And Communists, no because there's no actual Communists in a major seat of power in the world.


Sure. Nazism and Reactionary ideologies inherently call for the slaughter and oppression of innocents, Communism and Islam do not.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestapo#Pay_grades
 
How is forcing farmers to give the government all their crops at gun point not intentional?
Did they intend to starve the farmer?

Sounds like a no true scottsmen fallacy, "those aren't REAL Muslims. We can totally let REAL Muslims who don't cherry pick the Koran to justify their actions in our forum."
I didn't say they weren't Muslim, I said they're not representative of Muslims, as evidenced by the millions of Muslims Americans who aren't killing all the infidels in the street.

You give our senile orange fool too much credit Chessia. He couldn't spell fascist if his life depended on it and you bought him all the vowels and consonants.
You don't have to believe you're a Fascist to be a Fascist.

What? The second most powerful country in the world is communist Chessia.
Sorry to inform you, but 70% of China's economy is privately operated.... that's not Communist. They can claim to be Communists, but they're not anymore.

Find me a communist country that hasn't slaughtered ans oppressed innocents and I'll show you a short lived marxist revolution.
Have you considered which nations are the ones who have traditionally have successful revolutions were ones that were already authoritarian and brutal in nature before the Communists and maybe that culture influences the nature of that Communist society?

Also the koran does call for the slaughter of innocents and as I've already stated every country with Sharia law kills gay people for being gay.
So do the Bible and the Torah, again, religious people cherry pick all the time.

I don't know how you claim somthing isn't inherent in one ideology when we've seen it in every single one of a dozen plus incarnations, but at the same time claim another phenomenon is totally inherent to a second ideology based off of it's single incarnation.
Have you read mine Kampf? The Koran? I'd assuming you've read some Marxist materal based off how adamantly you defend communist states, but I admit I don't know you outside of this conversation so I could be totally wrong.

Anyway i don't think you've read either becouse if you had you wouldn't be so ready to cast one out in the name of protecting jews and gays, but not the other. Mine Kampf isn't just 700 pages of "gas the kiks" pasted over and over again.

Yeah It's pretty reprehensible in a lot of places, but the book was writen as Hitlers autobiography a good chunk of it is fairly innocuous.

Overall I get the impression you regard Nazis as some sort of mystic boogeymen who are all just mematicly super ultra evil and totally a billion times worse then any other kind of person in existance.

The true of the matter is that they're no more dangerous then the kkk is today and the key to them obtaining world domination isn't their ability to converse online with a bunch of nerds on an obscure sci-fi forum.
I haven't adamantly defended Communist states, I've simply said that the "Communist killed more than Fascism" is Fascist propaganda, because, it is. The idea that people who die from a famine unintentionally through mismanagement are the same as people who round people up into literal death camps, is sophistry. Nor is there anything inherently violent about Muslims or Communists. Like yeah, if you want to criminalize Posadists, MLM, Stalinist, sure, but broadly Marxism doesn't call for a violent revolution, I mean look at the LeftComs who can't even be arsed to get out of their armchairs and advocate for revolution. And sure, if you want to criminalize Islamic extremism, sure, but that's not Islam it's just Islamic extremism. Meanwhile the anti-semitism, hatred of minorities, etc. are intrinsically part of Nazism and White Supremacism.

They're not a boogeyman, they're all too real and on the matter of the KKK I generally lump them in with the rest of the Fash as deserving of being criminalized and deserving of removing from any venue.
 
Last edited:
You people are honestly somewhat underestimating sincere internet nazis. As a lurker on /pol/ I can say that mocking them and trolling them would not be as enjoyable of an experiance as you might first think. The way people talk about them non-materialist far-right ideologues such as Salafists and Nazis would blow away like smoke on contact with a witty quip.
 
I've simply said that the "Communist killed more than Fascism" is Fascist propaganda, because, it is. The idea that people who die from a famine unintentionally through mismanagement are the same as people who round people up into literal death camps, is sophistry.

They're just salty we bodied them in WW2, and the western world believed them because literally everyone in power had a vested interest in communism not spreading here as well
 
How about a poll?
 
How about no.
OMG!!!!!! I agree with Chessia!!!!
Check with the observatory! I think the Milky Way Galaxy just shifted about 5 degrees!!!!!!!
This is how cease fires are agreed upon, armisteads signed, peace treaties negotiated, and alliances formed.

Common ground units us a...

You only agree because society has told you Nazis are bad, you don't really understand why.
Well never mind then...:cautious:
 
I'd want them here so they can be debated and hopefully converted in a Daryl Davis fashion. However, I understand the arguments for not bringing them in. It's like owning a pitbull. A Nazi is just a person like a pitbull is just a dog. But Nazis have killed people, and often continue to do so. Pits have been known to snap for the little of reasons and maul more viciously than other dogs who are known to attack.

I don't want Pits banned, so.......
 
If Communists are allowed then Nazis should be too.

Also, who determines who a Nazi is? A person on SB said that he thinks Nazis are bad but the death toll usually attributed to them is exaggerated and he was immediately permabanned for "defending Nazis". Then you look at most social media and anyone left of Stalin seems to be called a Nazi so should they be banned to?

Nazis and Communists are both evil mass murderous ideas and they shouldn't be banned. Instead lets try to point out the flaws in their beliefs and only ban them if they start advocating violence.

I understand that even if they say they don't support violence, when put into practice their ideas lead to violence because it is impossible to implement those ideas without violence. In the first part of the video Richard Spencer says that he doesn't support violence and would like to create a white ethnostate non-violently and proposes a few ideas (stupid ones that wouldn't work in my opinion) on how to accomplish this peacefully. However, it is clear that his ideas are impossible to implement without violence and he doesn't seem to realize it. Similar situation with Communists. They want to take everything from everybody and redistribute it so everyone would be equal and many of them want to do it non-violently. The problem is that it is impossible to do that without extremely large amounts of violence and mass murder. A problem Communists share with white-nationalists is that a Communists community can only work if everybody in it is a Communist. This is why small communes have functioned all across the world for all of human history but fail whenever they are tried on a larger scale. It is impossible to have a large community of people and have everyone agree with everyone else. Dissenters must be gotten rid of one way or another or else it all falls apart. White-nationalists like Richard Spencer say they will do it by paying people to leave, but that will only work to a very limited degree. Communists use mass murder because mass murder is a far more effective and affordable solution.
 
If Communists are allowed then Nazis should be too.

Also, who determines who a Nazi is? A person on SB said that he thinks Nazis are bad but the death toll usually attributed to them is exaggerated and he was immediately permabanned for "defending Nazis". Then you look at most social media and anyone left of Stalin seems to be called a Nazi so should they be banned to?

Nazis and Communists are both evil mass murderous ideas and they shouldn't be banned. Instead lets try to point out the flaws in their beliefs and only ban them if they start advocating violence.

I understand that even if they say they don't support violence, when put into practice their ideas lead to violence because it is impossible to implement those ideas without violence. In the first part of the video Richard Spencer says that he doesn't support violence and would like to create a white ethnostate non-violently and proposes a few ideas (stupid ones that wouldn't work in my opinion) on how to accomplish this peacefully. However, it is clear that his ideas are impossible to implement without violence and he doesn't seem to realize it. Similar situation with Communists. They want to take everything from everybody and redistribute it so everyone would be equal and many of them want to do it non-violently. The problem is that it is impossible to do that without extremely large amounts of violence and mass murder. A problem Communists share with white-nationalists is that a Communists community can only work if everybody in it is a Communist. This is why small communes have functioned all across the world for all of human history but fail whenever they are tried on a larger scale. It is impossible to have a large community of people and have everyone agree with everyone else. Dissenters must be gotten rid of one way or another or else it all falls apart. White-nationalists like Richard Spencer say they will do it by paying people to leave, but that will only work to a very limited degree. Communists use mass murder because mass murder is a far more effective and affordable solution.

Anyone who thinks Richard Spencer has a good point is probably a good way to define "nazi".
 
Anyone who thinks Richard Spencer has a good point is probably a good way to define "nazi".
According to that logic everyone who opposes beating up black people for being black is a Nazi. Seems to me like a terrible way to define "Nazi". Remember, a broken clock is right twice a day. Richard Spencer is an idiot with bad ideas but every once in while he accidentally says things that are not wrong. I just used him as an example of someone who has evil ideas but is also anti-violence, similar to many Communists who are allowed on FiC.
 
Nah, fuck 'em. Ban gommies too if you wan't.

They bring nothing to the table save for shitposts and there's numerous other sites on the web to debate their points.

Though if they aren't a bunch of brainlets, they'll hide their powerlevel. So they won't even be seen.
Works just as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom