Social No Nazi bulls--t

[KAZSoliloquy]

Yeah, 13th century is "near prehistoric". Keep showing me how smart you are.

do you think attila the hun is a contemporary of genghis khan? they're almost a millennium apart lmao

 

[shunyata]

I'll do (and think) whatever the fuck I want, thank you.

It's ironic we don't hear Armenians whine so much about their genocide, or the Rwandans, or the Sudanese or the Uyghurs or the Ethiopians or the Iraqis or the Congolese or the Ukranians or the Russians etc...

It's interesting many in here don't call Israel out on their hypocrisy.

Hol up.

Armenians in the USA have been fighting for simple recognition of their genocide for years, and I've had tons of conversations with Armenians, Palestinians, and Israelis in California where they discussed genocide and the hypocrisy of the IDF for years. We fucking watched movies together about the hypocrisy like Waltz with Bashir.

I've got Ukrainian neighbors and we talk about US politics and the genocide they are experiencing right now comes up frequently, from them.

I'm not sure about your choice of the word "whine" here, but if you hang out with people from those communities and engage in deep conversation it comes up ALOT.

 

[Koro_11]

do you think attila the hun is a contemporary of genghis khan? they're almost a millennium apart lmao

You said different part of the world lying sack of shit, you didn't mention timeline so don't move the goalpost you dishonest twink.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

Actually both came from the Eurasian steppe, so same part of the world actually you illiterate twink. Keep showing your lack of knowledge, tell us again how East Germany wasn't Germany lol.

the fact you are calling east germany "east germany" and germany "germany" is proof enough lol

the huns initially came from the eurasian steppe. attilla didn't. they were in europe already by the time he was born.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

You said different part of the world lying sack of shit, you didn't mention timeline so don't move the goalpost you dishonest twink.

they quite literally were born and operated in different parts of the world. where do you think attila the hun was? he fought the romans, dickhead. not china. attilla is literally a near prehistoric figure. the 5th century is hardly a modern time period.

 

[Koro_11]

they quite literally were born and operated in different parts of the world. where do you think attila the hun was? he fought the romans, dickhead. not china.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

retard finds out attilla the hun was european in real time. i can't blame you, "hun" sounds kinda chinese doesn't it?

 

[Koro_11]

retard finds out attilla the hun was european in real time. i can't blame you, "hun" sounds kinda chinese doesn't it?

 

[Rational Poster]

Not only are you defending Hitler and trying to normalize him by comparing him to prehistoric leaders, you're getting emotional about it.

Nice emotional defense of Hitler you weirdo.

 

[kflo]

It's just basic tribalism, that dates back thousands of years. Like I said, go read a history book you clueless little twink.

hitler and the nazis and the holocaust is just "basic tribalism"?

and as evidence you point to figures from 900-1500 years ago????

 

[Koro_11]

hitler and the nazis and the holocaust is just "basic tribalism"?

and as evidence you point to figures from 900-1500 years ago????

Holy shit, who chimes in but the only guy on the forum whose opinion is worth even less than the other two bozos trying to argue with me.

You're the guy who claims there's infinite genders, any time you're disagreeing with me it just solidifies my argument.

 

[kflo]

Holy shit, who chimes in but the only guy on the forum whose opinion is worth even less than the other two bozos trying to argue with me.

You're the guy who claims there's infinite genders, any time you're disagreeing with me it just solidifies my argument.

lol. You either disappear from discussion or you try to dick tuck out of discussion by simply lying about past discussions. That’s how little conviction you have. And character.

And is there any thread you can’t bring trans into?

 

[Koro_11]

lol. You either disappear from discussion or you try to dick tuck out of discussion by simply lying about past discussions. That’s how little conviction you have. And character.

And is there any thread you can’t bring trans into?

What discussion, you’re Just another dishonest bad faith actor who is never trying to have an honest discussion, all you do is try to make a caricature and strawman my argument like you did here so I treat you with the exact same courtesy.

 

[kflo]

What discussion, you’re Just another dishonest bad faith actor who is never trying to have an honest discussion, all you do is try to make a caricature and strawman my argument like you did here so I treat you with the exact same courtesy.

I asked you basic questions on your own specific words and you went into instant deflect and attack mode and of course brought up trans. Instead of just defending your own words.

 

[HNIC215]

Hol up.

Armenians in the USA have been fighting for simple recognition of their genocide for years, and I've had tons of conversations with Armenians, Palestinians, and Israelis in California where they discussed genocide and the hypocrisy of the IDF for years. We fucking watched movies together about the hypocrisy like Waltz with Bashir.

I've got Ukrainian neighbors and we talk about US politics and the genocide they are experiencing right now comes up frequently, from them.

I'm not sure about your choice of the word "whine" here, but if you hang out with people from those communities and engage in deep conversation it comes up ALOT.

I meant on a larger global scale, not anecdotes or convos from friends and family but you're right - people care about ALL genocides.

 

[Koro_11]

I asked you basic questions on your own specific words and you went into instant deflect and attack mode and of course brought up trans. Instead of just defending your own words.

Yes I said one tribe waging war and claiming some racial, religious or cultural superiority over their enemies was not a phenomenon unique to Nazi Germany.

I didn’t need to point to any specific time period, but when uneducated morons tried to portray them as the worst ever, I listed examples of human cruelty that made the Nazis look humanitarian in comparison.

Do you have a counter argument to that?

 

[kflo]

Yes I said one tribe waging war and claiming some racial, religious or cultural superiority over their enemies was not a phenomenon unique to Nazi Germany.

I didn’t need to point to any specific time period, but when uneducated morons tried to portray them as the worst ever, I listed examples of human cruelty that made the Nazis look humanitarian in comparison.

Do you have a counter argument to that?

I mean, taking a position that the nazis weren’t that bad because Attila the Hun may have been worse 1500 years ago isn’t exactly a hill I’d want to die on.

The lack of humanity of the nazis towards their own citizens who weren’t their “enemy” is among the worst versions of mankind, on a mass scale, that’s been documented. And I can’t imagine wanting to shrug it off with but genghis…..

This was modern history, not the dark ages.

 

[Koro_11]

I mean, taking a position that the nazis weren’t that bad because Attila the Hun may have been worse 1500 years ago isn’t exactly a hill I’d want to die on.

The lack of humanity of the nazis towards their own citizens who weren’t their “enemy” is among the worst versions of mankind, on a mass scale, that’s been documented. And I can’t imagine wanting to shrug it off with but genghis…..

This was modern history, not the dark ages.

Show me the part where I try to make the case that the "Nazis weren't that bad."

This is what I'm talking about, you wont engage with what I'm actually saying, instead you'll just make the least charitable strawman and try to spin it as if I'm apologizing for the third fucken reich.

Yes, the Nazis were pretty bad, especially as you say in the context of modern history.

But this narrative that they were somehow some unique evil entity is mostly hyperbole.

If you wanna talk about evil committed against one's own citizens, I would argue that Hitler pales in comparison to someone like Pol Pot.

If you wanna talk about unspeakable cruelty, I would argue that Hitler was far less cruel than your average African warlord.

If you wanna talk about rabid blood lust, I would argue that the Nazis had nothing on their allies the Japanese.

If you wanna talk about eradicating those you see as less than, I would argue that Osama Bin Laden would have done much worse if he had the power to do so.

But none of that is to say the Nazis weren't bad, or that Hitler wasn't bad. My whole point was simply that Hitler was not some extreme genocidal outlier, it's just that he was actually able to accomplish a lot of the evil deeds he set out to do because he had the war machine that he had in the time that he had it. But there had been much worse men in power than Hitler throughout history, but most are not nearly as notorious because as you say they just weren't able to pull it off on that scale.

I mention Genghis Khan because he is a rare exception, he was actually able to exterminate about 10% of the world's population, which for the time period was mind boggling. But most who hear the name Genghis Khan are somewhat dismissive, or even have a romantic view of him, but in reality he was a ruthless genocidal killer. Does it count less because we are further removed from the people who suffered under his tyranny? I don't think it should. Is he judged differently because he was from another time period? Probably. But remove all that and just compare oranges to oranges, and a guy like Genghis would look at a guy like Hitler as a soft pacifist who didn't kill nearly as many people as he should have. Just facts.

 

[kflo]

Show me the part where I try to make the case that the "Nazis weren't that bad."

This is what I'm talking about, you wont engage with what I'm actually saying, instead you'll just make the least charitable strawman and try to spin it as if I'm apologizing for the third fucken reich.

Yes, the Nazis were pretty bad, especially as you say in the context of modern history.

But this narrative that they were somehow some unique evil entity is mostly hyperbole.

If you wanna talk about evil committed against one's own citizens, I would argue that Hitler pales in comparison to someone like Pol Pot.

If you wanna talk about unspeakable cruelty, I would argue that Hitler was far less cruel than your average African warlord.

If you wanna talk about rabid blood lust, I would argue that the Nazis had nothing on their allies the Japanese.

If you wanna talk about eradicating those you see as less than, I would argue that Osama Bin Laden would have done much worse if he had the power to do so.

But none of that is to say the Nazis weren't bad, or that Hitler wasn't bad. My whole point was simply that Hitler was not some extreme genocidal outlier, it's just that he was actually able to accomplish a lot of the evil deeds he set out to do because he had the war machine that he had in the time that he had it. But there had been much worse men in power than Hitler throughout history, but most are not nearly as notorious because as you say they just weren't able to pull it off on that scale.

I mention Genghis Khan because he is a rare exception, he was actually able to exterminate about 10% of the world's population, which for the time period was mind boggling. But most who hear the name Genghis Khan are somewhat dismissive, or even have a romantic view of him, but in reality he was a ruthless genocidal killer. Does it count less because we are further removed from the people who suffered under his tyranny? I don't think it should. Is he judged differently because he was from another time period? Probably. But remove all that and just compare oranges to oranges, and a guy like Genghis would look at a guy like Hitler as a soft pacifist who didn't kill nearly as many people as he should have. Just facts.

You have to look at brutality and atrocities in context. Genghis and Attila lived in a different time. They would likely look at Hitler and see how uniquely horrific and humongous his regime’s actions were relative to the emerging modern world.

Again, you’re taking bits and pieces of other horrible contemporaries but the reality is there’s no real comparable horror to the holocaust and it shouldn’t exactly be controversial to say so. Yes, there have been other brutal regimes, but like you said, nothing of the combined scale and intention of the holocaust. So while genghis was a brutal conqueror 900 years ago, he had scale for his era. At a time where conquering and brutality was not unique. And 900 years ago we don’t exactly have the same historical record. It’s sometimes hard to separate the mythology from the historical facts.

So I don’t see ANY value to bring up a genghis or Attila when referencing how horrific hitler was. There’s nothing to gain, little to learn. The nazi regime has living survivors. Witnesses. Scars. We know the fact pattern leading up. They weren’t conquering the next “tribe” in their path. They weren’t fighting an “enemy”. We can learn from the holocaust. You don’t see how characterizing the holocaust as “basic tribalism” (and yes, those are your words) is really nonsense? There’s nothing basic about it. Thankfully.

 

[Strychnine]

ZERO TOLERANCE.

End of.