60,000 Nazis Marched in Poland this weekend

[Ten oz]

27 minutes ago, iNow said:

I have mixed feelings about this, and suspect in the long-run this is a net good for us.

Let people express their views. Let those views be challenged openly. Pushing hateful ideas into hiding doesn’t neutralize them, it just prevents us from engaging them and making our own counter messages stronger and better refined. Alowing them to be shared openly also allows social punishments to be levied (loss of friends, fewer job opportunities, not as many potential mates, etc.).

I wonder if local school policies or expulsion may be the right path on this stuff. Again, though. I have mixed feelings

I disagree. If they all held up the middle finger they would all be getting punished. No amount of minutiae about first amendment or claiming the middle finger was just their way of holding up the number one would matter. Obscene gestures are obscene gestures. Codification of a Nazi salute as speech rather a obscene gesture is a mistake.  Not tolerating teenage kids to publicly misbehave isn't equal to pushing hateful ideas into hiding. In grade school there are any number of things kids aren't allowed to say or do. Creating hostile environments, intimidating other students, obscenities, and etc are all things any normal student at any normal school would get in trouble for. Treating their rudeness as political speech accomplishes nothing. If this were a group of friends taking a picture at a party on their own I could sympathize with your position. People can be hateful all they want at their own homes or on their own social media accounts. This wasn't at a private home or among a group of friends. This was a school event and misbehavior is misbehavior.

[iNow]

A very strong response that has swayed me. The only open question is whether Raiders charitable interpretation is the best one

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, koti said:

I'm not a particular fan of Jordan Peterson's rhetoric in general but I think this time he perfectly grasped the psychological mechanisms of how Hitler came into power. It's like cancer and it I can't stop noticing that it takes a tiny little mutation for it to spread again into unstoppable proportions:

I think history, or at least the way Hilter is discussed in popular culture,  has distorted how unique and significant to world events as a whole Hilter was. Joseph Stalin killed upwards of 10 million people during his era which included WW2, The Japanese Empire Killed up to 10 million Chinese (estimates vary) during WW2, and Mussolini was around murdering people as well. The world was a very dark place. In the United States segregation was still in effect and people were openly lynched. Hilter rose to power during a hateful and violent time. Hilter himself was not catalyst for the hatred and anger. It was a global phenomenon. Jordan address that a bit pointing out that Hilter said whatever people wanted to hear but fails to point out that perhaps had Hilter never came along someone else would have. Hilter was more a Canary than he was the fumes. Germany invaded Poland in September of 1939. Mein Kampf had already been on bookstore shelves a decade. The events of WW1 well know. The U.S. stayed of it for almost 2 full years till Pearl Harbor in Dec. of 1941. WW2 was a global error and a lot of parties share a lot of blame. For the sake of brevity it is easiest to just point the finger at Hilter but had Hilter never lived the world would have still be a powder keg. I don't think jumping in a time machine and killing baby Hitler alone would have prevented WW2. 

[koti]

12 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

...I don't think jumping in a time machine and killing baby Hitler alone would have prevented WW2. 

I agree, someone else could have taken advantage of the same mechanisms back in the 30s. I think Peterson accurately noticed that the Germans were in a very bad place after WW1 and Hitler took advantage of this by leading them into the „shiny bright future” Mussolinini and Stalin have obviously been contributors. I read a paper somewhere that communism took ~100 million lives globaly invluding Stalin, Polpot an others. Btw, Stalin invaded Poland 16 days after Hitler did.

[Ten oz]

14 minutes ago, koti said:

I agree, someone else could have taken advantage of the same mechanisms back in the 30s. I think Peterson accurately noticed that the Germans were in a very bad place after WW1 and Hitler took advantage of this by leading them into the „shiny bright future” Mussolinini and Stalin have obviously been contributors. I read a paper somewhere that communism took ~100 million lives globaly invluding Stalin, Polpot an others. Btw, Stalin invaded Poland 16 days after Hitler did.

I agree but feel what Hilter did gets overstated to proportions which make him seem far more intelligent than he was. Meanwhile many Nazi scientist who had design weapons and chemicals that killed millions were given jobs in Russia and the U.S. and lived their lives out comfortably into old age. 

[koti]

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

I agree but feel what Hilter did gets overstated to proportions which make him seem far more intelligent than he was. Meanwhile many Nazi scientist who had design weapons and chemicals that killed millions were given jobs in Russia and the U.S. and lived their lives out comfortably into old age. 

Hitler was a multiple drug junkie, full of insecurities which drove his sociopathic agendas but you can’t take away from him the way he was able to capture the crowds. Its probably some form of well developed emotional intelligence which let him play people into his hate driven plans. He wasn’t an idiot that Im fairly sure of. 

[Raider5678]

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

I disagree. If they all held up the middle finger they would all be getting punished. No amount of minutiae about first amendment or claiming the middle finger was just their way of holding up the number one would matter. Obscene gestures are obscene gestures. Codification of a Nazi salute as speech rather a obscene gesture is a mistake.  Not tolerating teenage kids to publicly misbehave isn't equal to pushing hateful ideas into hiding. In grade school there are any number of things kids aren't allowed to say or do. Creating hostile environments, intimidating other students, obscenities, and etc are all things any normal student at any normal school would get in trouble for. Treating their rudeness as political speech accomplishes nothing. If this were a group of friends taking a picture at a party on their own I could sympathize with your position. People can be hateful all they want at their own homes or on their own social media accounts. This wasn't at a private home or among a group of friends. This was a school event and misbehavior is misbehavior.

Alright, I changed my mind. I agree with your position now about kids doing those types of salutes at school.

 

However, again, I still maintain my position that I don't really think that's what they were doing. 

[iNow]

2 hours ago, koti said:

I agree, someone else could have taken advantage of the same mechanisms back in the 30s. I think Peterson accurately noticed that the Germans were in a very bad place after WW1 and Hitler took advantage of this by leading them into the „shiny bright future”

 

1 hour ago, koti said:

but you can’t take away from him the way he was able to capture the crowds. Its probably some form of well developed emotional intelligence which let him play people into his hate driven plans. He wasn’t an idiot that Im fairly sure of. 

Much like our current POTUS

[koti]

36 minutes ago, iNow said:

 

Much like our current POTUS

Undoubtedly there are certain similarities but I wouldn’t go all the way in comparing the two. For all our sake. 

Edit: Besides, the curent POTUS wouldn’t know how to start a camp fire let alone a war. I think we can sleep safely.

Edited November 25, 2018 by koti

[iNow]

1 hour ago, koti said:

the curent POTUS wouldn’t know how to start a camp fire let alone a war. I think we can sleep safely

Try not to forget how many fire starters surround him, nor the vast machinery they control to spread and blast the embers as if in a furnace. 

He’s not an idiot. That I’m quite sure of. 

[Raider5678]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Much like our current POTUS

I'd say not. The German economy, social life, and government structure was much much much worse then what we have today. That opened it up to Hitler swaying the masses and literally establishing himself as a supreme ruler, with relatively little pushback. There was pushback. There was a lot of it. But it was nowhere near what you'd see if Trump tried to do the same thing.

Doom and gloom get parties votes, but it isn't reality. As a country, we're doing quite well.

Edited November 25, 2018 by Raider5678

[iNow]

38 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

The German economy, social life, and government structure was much much much worse then what we have today

You’re far too quick to dismiss a valid point I’m making. 

Relative to the German economy of post WWI, sure. We’re doing spectacularly, but that’s not how millions of people feel.

People are working multiple jobs and still can’t pay rent. Can’t feed their kids. People are saddled with student loan debt and living in their parents basement into their 40s. Can’t afdird their own house or to start their own family.

Parents are spending retirement savings on helping their kids survive. Millions of kids can’t even afford school. Many folks aren’t surviving at all and (as I’m sure you’re aware) are turning to opioids to battle the despair. We can barely keep track of the ODs there are so many.

I could go on, but my point remains. When people view their current situation and the economic pains they feel, they’re not comparing it to Germany decades ago.

This isn’t some rational cognition calculation. It’s about gut feelings, and people feel like they’re being punched in the gut then kicked in the nuts. 

They’re comparing their situation not to post WWI Germany, but to what it feels like to be happy, and they’re not generally feeling that today.

Hence, turning to someone promising to make America great again when they vote... a modern day PT Barnum. 

38 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

That opened it up to Hitler swaying the masses and literally establishing himself as a supreme ruler, with relatively little pushback.

Do me a favor and look at the most recent midterm election. Tell me again what happened to those GOP candidates that spoke out against Trump. ALL of them lost. The only ones who won were those who treated his leadership as supreme. 

Trump has captured the Republican Party. It was a hostile takeover, and now anyone who disagrees is shouted down by the masses and trampled by his Twitter.

We went from a country that hated Saudi Arabia for their role in 9/11 to a country who lets Saudi Arabia get away with chopping up one of our journalists with a bone saw for calling attention to their corruption. 

But hey... The kingdom of Saud does give us lots of money and, as a country, we’re doing quite well!! (until you compare us to China, that is).

Edited November 25, 2018 by iNow

[Ten oz]

9 hours ago, iNow said:

 

Much like our current POTUS

I think people often assume a direct connection between success and intelligence (of any type). I don't think the two are always connected. Sometimes one becomes successful through a series of events beyond their understanding or influence. Other times through low levels of integrity. For example Giorgio Tsoukalos has no background in history, archaeology, or religion yet has flown all over the world to different historical sights as part of the Ancient Aliens show gaining access and exposure true experts ever do. Same goes for the folks on shows like Finding Bigfoot and Ghost Haunters. These individuals don't have some special talent or ability which drives their success. Rather they are just filling a niche which exists in society in-spite of them that educated people in the associated fields have too much integrity for. The Kardashian family draw crowds. Alex Jones draws crowds. Bringing such people onstage at a political rally would earn a politician far more attention than any well written speech or policy idea yet I don't think such is a sign of greater "emotional intelligence" as @koti put it. 

FoxNews ,Talk Radio, and Faux print journalism built the audience Trump speaks to. Trump just parrots what has already been broadcast for decades. I think people like Rupert Murdoch deserves more credit for the current state of affairs in the U.S. and UK than any current Politician. They pushed and pushed until a Trump and or a Brexit emerged. Here in the U.S. lets not forget that Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Ted Curz, Sarah Palin, Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Rudy Giuliani, and etc all had serious Presidential bids in recent years. Donald Trump is not magnitudes worse than that lot. Had Trump lost the GOP nomination in 2016 Ted Cruz/Carly Fiorina would have gotten it and not some combo of Romeny, McCain, Corker, Rice, or any other sane Republican. Trump isn't responsible for driving U.S. conservatives off the rails. They were already turned toward the cliff with the pedal all the way down when Trump jump on board. 

[iNow]

^All excellent points with which I agree, Ten Oz.

And while I acknowledge he’s not the type to play three dimensional chess or solve Rubics cubes while reading about black hole physics or the deeper implications of our primate ancestry, I still don’t feel Trump is an idiot. He’s actually quite good at what he’s good at.

EDIT: And he’s not operating in a vacuum, but is instead surrounded by people with often questionable intent and ethics coupled with great power to implement their wishes

Edited November 25, 2018 by iNow

[Ten oz]

34 minutes ago, iNow said:

^All excellent points with which I agree, Ten Oz.

And while I acknowledge he’s not the type to play three dimensional chess or solve Rubics cubes while reading about black hole physics or the deeper implications of our primate ancestry, I still don’t feel Trump is an idiot. He’s actually quite good at what he’s good at. 

I don't mean this argumentatively but I don't know we can be quantified how good Trump is at what he does. I don't think Trump planned on being President. I am sure you have read the same stories from people around him that he, his family, and his campaign expected to lose. His Presidency is a media stunt gone wrong. Moreover there is reason to believe Trump has damaged his family's brand long term and put his children's future jeopardy.  The temporary high of office will almost certainly have long term negative impacts especially if or when some combo of Kushner, Don Jr., Ivanka, and Eric get indicted.  Can we say Trump is quite good at what he does if this has been by accident? 

[dimreepr]

34 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

I don't mean this argumentatively but I don't know we can be quantified how good Trump is at what he does. I don't think Trump planned on being President. I am sure you have read the same stories from people around him that he, his family, and his campaign expected to lose.

 

but he didn't plan to lose, it wasn't a "none of the above " campaign.

Edited November 25, 2018 by dimreepr

[iNow]

We’re all off topic. This thread is about the rise of anti Semitic and neo nazi groups, and while trump is clearly liked by those groups, he’s not the subject of the thread. 

In a beautiful mind, the character could see patterns everywhere without even trying. In good will hunting, the character could see answers to deeply complex equations that stymied all those who came before... it just came to them naturally like they had a mental decoder or filter...

In much the same way, Trump sees the fault lines of deep cultural wedge issues and divisions without much effort. He intuitively knows how to split us and change topics with strawman and nonsequiturs. It’s as if he has a heads up display for topics that mire is in tribalism and an unconscious ability to implement a swarm of bees strategy (we’re so busy swatting the swarm that no individual bee ever gets caught). He uses social media and the press as a natural extension of himself. He is good at appearing like a hero for extinguishing fires that he set himself (like some arsonist with a white knight complex)...

This is closer to what I meant when I said he’s very good at what he’s good at, but we’re still really off-topic. 

Edited November 25, 2018 by iNow

[dimreepr]

6 minutes ago, iNow said:

This is closer to what I meant when I said he’s very good at what he’s good at, but we’re still really off-topic.

I'm not so sure.

[CharonY]

12 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

That opened it up to Hitler swaying the masses and literally establishing himself as a supreme ruler, with relatively little pushback. There was pushback. There was a lot of it. But it was nowhere near what you'd see if Trump tried to do the same thing.

There was a huge pushback and open, often violent conflict between the various groups. While in the early days the Nazis were considered to be rabble that one should not associated with, they eventually got support from conservative groups, in an effort to oppose communist movements. Ultimate establishing the Nazi party as the leading fraction involved a lot of violence, purge of all internal and external opposition as well as full control of media and cooperation of the Industrial complex. In other words, there was nothing magic that made Hitler the supreme leader. It was the systematic dismantling of functions, oppositions and mechansism that could reign him in.

The main question really is whether the mechanisms we have as well as the historic lessons are sufficient to prevent such occurrences. Rather obviously Trump tries a different tack. Rather than outright dismantling media, he tries to convince folks not to listen to them. And for some folks that has been frighteningly efficient.

[Ten oz]

36 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

but he didn't plan to lose, it wasn't a "none of the above " campaign.

Michael Wolff was allowed access inside the WH early on and interviewed many people among Trump's campaign and inner circle. In the book Wolff claims Trump never thought he'd win and initially he and his family were "horrified" that he had won. If you choose to believe otherwise that is your choice. 

Back on topic I think the rise of Nazi sentiment among Western conservatives is related to the increases in advance education and technology. Younger Gen Xers and older millennials were raised on a philosophy of hard work, sweat from the brow, up from one's own bootstraps, and etc slogans of masculine Independence. The world changed however. Working hard is no longer enough to ensure success (not that it ever truly did for all). Today one must no know things. One must be proficient at desirable skills. For those who anticipated stubborn persistence to manifest richess failure has been humiliating and emasculating. In response they lash out at any number of things they blame. Fear of automation, fear of immigration, fear of education (liberal elitists), fear of science, and so on. They are anti anything they feel has deprived them of they birth right to Lord over the world. Hilter and Nazis were the last miltary rise of white dominace so that is what they migrate towards with only a surface level understand of what Nazi's were about. 

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Back on topic I think the rise of Nazi sentiment among Western conservatives is related to the increases in advance education and technology. Younger Gen Xers and older millennials were raised on a philosophy of hard work, sweat from the brow, up from one's own bootstraps, and etc slogans of masculine Independence. The world changed however. Working hard is no longer enough to ensure success (not that it ever truly did for all). Today one must no know things. One must be proficient at desirable skills. For those who anticipated stubborn persistence to manifest richess failure has been humiliating and emasculating. In response they lash out at any number of things they blame. Fear of automation, fear of immigration, fear of education (liberal elitists), fear of science, and so on. They are anti anything they feel has deprived them of depend birth right to Lord over the world. Hilter and Nazis were the last miltary rise of white dominace so that is what they migrate towards with only a surface level understand of what Nazi's were about. 

11

Fear is what they depend on to start the campaign. Thereafter, it's what we see today.

[Ten oz]

4 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Fear is what they depend on to start the campaign. Thereafter, it's what we see today.

The fear didn't start with a campaign anymore than perversion started with pornography. These things exist on their own within every society. As they naturally grow and the environment becomes increasingly  toxic  people exploit them. Sometimes it boils over and we end up with wars and atrocities. Other times sanity rises to meet it and order is restored. I personal don't think the will for either outcome exists inside of a single individual either way. I think when the people are ready a leader will rise and not vice versa. I believe it is as true for murderous leaders as it is for those who champion freedom.

[dimreepr]

8 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

The fear didn't start with a campaign anymore than perversion started with pornography. These things exist on their own within every society. As they naturally grow and the environment becomes increasingly  toxic  people exploit them. Sometimes it boils over and we end up with wars and atrocities. Other times sanity rises to meet it and order is restored. I personal don't think the will for either outcome exists inside of a single individual either way. I think when the people are ready a leader will rise and not vice versa. I believe it is as true for murderous leaders as it is for those who champion freedom.

5

Indeed, it depends on the swing of the (political) pendulum.

[Raider5678]

18 hours ago, iNow said:

You’re far too quick to dismiss a valid point I’m making. 

Relative to the German economy of post WWI, sure. We’re doing spectacularly, but that’s not how millions of people feel.

People are working multiple jobs and still can’t pay rent. Can’t feed their kids. People are saddled with student loan debt and living in their parents basement into their 40s. Can’t afdird their own house or to start their own family.

Parents are spending retirement savings on helping their kids survive. Millions of kids can’t even afford school. Many folks aren’t surviving at all and (as I’m sure you’re aware) are turning to opioids to battle the despair. We can barely keep track of the ODs there are so many.

I could go on, but my point remains. When people view their current situation and the economic pains they feel, they’re not comparing it to Germany decades ago.

Sure. Because millions of people walk into a coffee shop, and in the time that it takes them to order 2 cups of coffee, the price of the second one has jumped $4,000 more due to hyperinflation. Millions of people are starving because their last 10 years of savings are no longer enough to buy a piece of gum, let alone something to eat for the family. Etc, etc, etc.

You can portray life in America as so absolutely terrible, but there is no way even you believe they feel the same way the Germans did. 

5 hours ago, CharonY said:

There was a huge pushback and open, often violent conflict between the various groups. While in the early days the Nazis were considered to be rabble that one should not associated with, they eventually got support from conservative groups, in an effort to oppose communist movements. Ultimate establishing the Nazi party as the leading fraction involved a lot of violence, purge of all internal and external opposition as well as full control of media and cooperation of the Industrial complex. In other words, there was nothing magic that made Hitler the supreme leader. It was the systematic dismantling of functions, oppositions and mechansism that could reign him in.

Well, luckily I already pointed out there was a lot of pushback, but my point was it'd be nowhere near what would happen if Trump tried the same thing.

Again, you guys can believe Trump is the next Hitler but it doesn't make it true. The facts aren't supporting you unless you make leaps and bounds in logic and reasoning to assume so. Hitler's systematic dismantling of everything that could stop him is far worse than Trump telling people not to believe the media. 

5 hours ago, CharonY said:

The main question really is whether the mechanisms we have as well as the historic lessons are sufficient to prevent such occurrences. Rather obviously Trump tries a different tack. Rather than outright dismantling media, he tries to convince folks not to listen to them. And for some folks that has been frighteningly efficient.

This reminds me of people saying Obama was the next Hitler and using ridiculous assumptions to assume his real intentions, and comparing things he did to Hitler, etc. 

You provided a very clear and accurate picture of what Hitler did to secure power.

Your comparison to Trump is literally "he tries to convince folks not to listen to them."

There is a difference between shutting down media sources and then forcibly taking them over and making them pump out Propaganda, and telling people not to listen to the media.

Let's all use some logic and understanding here to overcome our hatred of Trump. Trump is no Hitler.

Edited November 25, 2018 by Raider5678

[CharonY]

29 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Your comparison to Trump is literally "he tries to convince folks not to listen to them."

There is a difference between shutting down media sources and then forcibly taking them over and making them pump out Propaganda, and telling people not to listen to the media.

Sure, however my overall point was that Hitler did not swoop into power with only little pushback because of the economic situation. What Trump tries to do, however, betrays an anti-democratic, authoritarian mindset, which is worrisome to many.