[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx4BVGPkdzk[/media]
Only the most balls to the wall clickbaity thumbnail will do. Don't let it put you off.
Good watch for anyone asking "Why shouldn't we preserve the white race?" or "Why don't whites deserve their own country?"
This video has an amazing aesthetic, visual tone, and things actually happen in it. Definitely not a boring talking head like what you're used to.
Interesting video, and damn you are right that's one of the most clickbait-ass thumbnails I've ever seen.
This entire video pretty much sums up: How to look for fringe/radical groups and how to look like a paranoid schizo while doing so!
:v:
This video is also skipping a lot of things that fascist actually do. Lots of "propaganda" isn't so much propaganda as it is creating a mind share. Create seeds of doubt, and through a person becoming active in the subject being discussed, you let them reinforce ideas that they "discover" and therefore slowly become converted further to the right in their beliefs.
Another thing which is worth noting is that the left is not doing any favors for itself with it's identity politics crap, if anything it's tearing apart any form of united front against fascism. We saw this happening with the recent Antifa vs. BLM fiascos that were breaking out near Confederate statues. These groups realistically speaking are willing to destroy each other, and any damage that they attempt to inflict on far-right groups will most likely backfire as the "normies" tend to see the united front against fascism, as appearing as nothing more then left-winger thugs.
Think of things like the Occupy Movement. When it was a united front, loads of people were really supportive of it, but the second people started to try and make sub-movements, it splintered and fell apart. That is the kind of thing we'll most likely see with the groups opposing fascist groups in this country.
I thought this was a good watch. Important to know all of this.
I think it's a good video for people who are just sort of wading into this political shitstorm, and especially those who are afraid of accidentally or unknowingly supportive white supremacists.
That being said, I do have two problems with the video, one is purely a language thing, and the other is utterly petty:
Firstly, she keeps equivocating "fascism" with "Nazism", or honestly even more specifically, white supremacy. To say something like "All fascists are Nazis" would be the equivalent of saying "all animals are cats." Nazis and white supremacists are a [b]type[/b] of fascist, but not all fascists are Nazis or white supremacists. It is perfectly possible for there to be, for example, black supremacists, Jewish supremacists, or even Moroccan supremacists - all of whom would fall snugly under the same umbrella of "fascist."
Secondly, there's a white speck in the lower-center-right of her camera lens, and it drove me crazy, because I kept thinking it was my monitor being dirty there. Told you this a petty problem I had with the video. :v:
fascism and nazism are not the same thing (regardless of the current american political climate) and she uses the two terms interchangeably, which is flat out incorrect
[QUOTE=Egevened;52639039]fascism and nazism are not the same thing (regardless of the current american political climate) and she uses the two terms interchangeably, which is flat out incorrect[/QUOTE]
ikr, I've never felt so insulted.
ironic that the video made a big point to not get wrapped up in semantics that detract from real discussion, but thats exactly what yall are doing
it really doesnt matter in this instance because it's clear that the video refers explicitly to the white nationlist nazi bullshit brand of fascism. within that context its fine to use them interchangeably. if it were in a broader context it would be conflating things.
[QUOTE=Egevened;52639039]fascism and nazism are not the same thing (regardless of the current american political climate) and she uses the two terms interchangeably, which is flat out incorrect[/QUOTE]
ya true
Guess the super important distinction between being a piece of shit, and being a Hitler-level piece of shit is what's important here, not everything else she's talking about
[QUOTE=LuaChobo;52639186]feel free to shitpost about it but hes not wrong
nazism is a form of facism, not the other way around
regardless of if you think its important to distinguish them, its a valid point against the video when she is using two separate terms interchangeably[/QUOTE]
I in no way meant my post to insinuate there exists no distinction between these two forms of government.
I do believe it's important to distinguish between them and I think that the video suffers for failing to recognize the differences that are imperative to understanding the context and history of them.
That being said: I was joking.
fun fact: I took three whole years of political science in college and transferred to a university with an AA-T in the damn thing, believe me, we heard all about the subtle differences between every form of government imaginable.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;52639211]ironic that the video made a big point to not get wrapped up in semantics that detract from real discussion, but thats exactly what yall are doing
it really doesnt matter in this instance because it's clear that the video refers explicitly to the white nationlist nazi bullshit brand of fascism. within that context its fine to use them interchangeably. if it were in a broader context it would be conflating things.[/QUOTE]
Honestly, if we were to stick to that "not get wrapped up in semantics", then there'd be no reason for any discussion to this thread.
There's honestly nothing else to really discuss about the video - it's very solid and hits pretty much everything worth discussing square on the head. It doesn't really leave any points open for discussion, since it explains all of its ideas thoroughly, clearly, and precisely.
Those semantics are the only real things to talk about.
Between you and me, I'd much rather we discuss semantics, and in doing so not only boost this thread to the top of this subforum, but also increase its post-count, to incentivize otherwise skeptical users to check the thread (I don't know about anyone else, but I am always skeptical about threads with 0 posts, "Oh no one's commented the video probably isn't any good").
But I mean, if you'd rather we "not get wrapped up in semantics", and just let this thread slide off the front page and preventing any curious users who aren't otherwise exposed to videos like this from ever seeing it, then we can do that, too.
Great informative video from a relatively small channel.
Giving this a bump so everyone can see it.
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52639004]I think it's a good video for people who are just sort of wading into this political shitstorm, and especially those who are afraid of accidentally or unknowingly supportive white supremacists.
That being said, I do have two problems with the video, one is purely a language thing, and the other is utterly petty:
Firstly, she keeps equivocating "fascism" with "Nazism", or honestly even more specifically, white supremacy. To say something like "All fascists are Nazis" would be the equivalent of saying "all animals are cats." Nazis and white supremacists are a [B]type[/B] of fascist, but not all fascists are Nazis or white supremacists. It is perfectly possible for there to be, for example, black supremacists, Jewish supremacists, or even Moroccan supremacists - all of whom would fall snugly under the same umbrella of "fascist."
Secondly, there's a white speck in the lower-center-right of her camera lens, and it drove me crazy, because I kept thinking it was my monitor being dirty there. Told you this a petty problem I had with the video. :v:[/QUOTE]
i am pretty sure she was just using nazism as a specific example of facism - it's the most relevant to discuss currently. i don't think she's saying they're all the same thing, but using this branch of fascism to discuss it is as good as any, considering they share similar tactics and this is the most quickly growing form of it.
[QUOTE=Rusty100;52645231]i am pretty sure she was just using nazism as a specific example of facism - it's the most relevant to discuss currently. i don't think she's saying they're all the same thing, but using this branch of fascism to discuss it is as good as any, considering they share similar tactics and this is the most quickly growing form of it.[/QUOTE]
Oh, I'm sure she [b]meant[/b] to say Nazism every time she said fascism. I'm sure it was just an honest slip-up, with no mischievous intentions.
But at the end of the day, it's still wrong to equate them.
[quote] Good watch for anyone asking "Why shouldn't we preserve the white race?" or "Why don't whites deserve their own country?"[/quote]
This video doesn't address that at all? It doesn't say "here's why whites don't deserve Europe" but just "here's out that neckbeard saying he's not a fascist is actually a fascist" and "antifa is good" and "there's zero difference between fascism, nazism, and white identity"
I meant in the sense that it explains those phrases as being part of dogwhistling and that there are hidden intentions behind it and that it's not something someone should address as a straight faced argument. If you want to know about how the great replacement isn't real then there's a video mentioned insode this video.
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52645361]Oh, I'm sure she [B]meant[/B] to say Nazism every time she said fascism. I'm sure it was just an honest slip-up, with no mischievous intentions.
But at the end of the day, it's still wrong to equate them.[/QUOTE]
Are you trying to say that Fascism is an innocent ideology right now? Are you for real?
I'm sorry but Mussolini was no angel my friend, and it's no coincidence that virtually every Fascist movement lead to death or extreme persecution - [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ustaše"]Ustase[/URL], [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vichy_France#Purification"]Vichy France[/URL], [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_of_August_Regime#Greek_authoritarianism"]4th of August Regime(read the parts on Social Control and Nationalism)[/URL], [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francoist_Spain#Francoism"]Francoist Spain(Crushed all political opposition, as well as the culture and languages of minorities within Spain)[/URL], the list goes on and on dude.
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52645361]But at the end of the day, it's still wrong to equate them.[/QUOTE]
That line right there is just gross
[QUOTE=Wafflemonstr;52645558]Are you trying to say that Fascism is an innocent ideology right now? Are you for real?
I'm sorry but Mussolini was no angel my friend, and it's no coincidence that virtually every Fascist movement lead to death or extreme persecution - [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ustaše"]Ustase[/URL], [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vichy_France#Purification"]Vichy France[/URL], [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_of_August_Regime#Greek_authoritarianism"]4th of August Regime(read the parts on Social Control and Nationalism)[/URL], [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francoist_Spain#Francoism"]Francoist Spain(Crushed all political opposition, as well as the culture and languages of minorities within Spain)[/URL], the list goes on and on dude.
That line right there is just gross[/QUOTE]
What the fuck are you on about?
I am saying it is literally, definitively wrong to equate fascism and Nazism.
Nazism is not [b]equivalent[/b] to fascism. Nazism is a [b]kind[/b] of fascism.
To say fascism and Nazism are literally the same thing, as in "every fascist is a Nazi" would be the same as saying that animals and cats are literally the same thing, as in "every animal is a cat."
It is, in a literal, definitive sense, incorrect.
How the flying fuck did you get me, in any way, saying that fascism is an "innocent ideology"? What verbage did I have that could have [b]possibly[/b] caused you to construe that meaning?
It's wrong to beat people. You can do it but it's wrong.
2+2=5 is wrong.
Tip wrong has multiple meanings.
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;52645689]It's wrong to beat people. You can do it but it's wrong.
2+2=5 is wrong.
Tip wrong has multiple meanings.[/QUOTE]
I mean, I [b]guess[/b] you could make an argument for that.
But even if you tried, it'd still come out to the same thing.
It's wrong in the sense of being factually incorrect to say that fascism is perfectly equivalent to Nazism. [b]And[/b] it's wrong in the sense of being intellectually dishonest to say that fascism is perfectly equivalent to Nazism.
Like, no matter how much you hate fascism and you hate Nazism, it still doesn't change the fact that they're not the same exact thing. Again, one is a subset of the other.
I, like most sane people, consider Nazism to be an absolute travesty and an abomination to have ever been conceived. Similarly, I consider fascism to be a terrible abuse of power and tragic that it ever exists.
But fascism is still not equivalent to Nazism. This isn't really something subjective, or that can be argued. They are, by definition, different things.
Fascism is a type of government where the state has absolute control over industry, economy, and the media, and opposition is strictly and brutally prohibited. Nazism is a type of government that uses fascism to establish an ethnostate and pursue ethnic cleansing of people that the state deems undesirable.
Wrong as in morally wrong, not as in factually.
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;52645709]Wrong as in morally wrong, not as in factually.[/QUOTE]
Yes, and it's [b]morally wrong[/b] to spread the misinformation that fascism and Nazism are equivalent.
To say that they are equivalent is a lie, and it's a morally wrong lie.
:v:
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52645656]What the fuck are you on about?
I am saying it is literally, definitively wrong to equate fascism and Nazism.
Nazism is not [B]equivalent[/B] to fascism. Nazism is a [B]kind[/B] of fascism.
To say fascism and Nazism are literally the same thing, as in "every fascist is a Nazi" would be the same as saying that animals and cats are literally the same thing, as in "every animal is a cat."
It is, in a literal, definitive sense, incorrect.
How the flying fuck did you get me, in any way, saying that fascism is an "innocent ideology"? What verbage did I have that could have [B]possibly[/B] caused you to construe that meaning?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52645361][B]I'm sure it was just an honest slip-up, with no mischievous intentions.[/B]
But at the end of the day, it's still wrong to equate them.[/QUOTE]
The bolded part implies that her calling Nazism, Fascism instead, was done to discredit Fascism, which in turn implies that you hold Fascism higher than Nazism. What's not to get?
Even objectively speaking, Nazism is literally a branch of Fascism, so unless she were specifically speaking about Hitler and Nazi's, she wasn't wrong. Every example of Fascism that I listed above, all of which were based on Mussolini's, not Hitler's Fascism, contained examples of some minority group being persecuted in some way. Some involved mass murder/genocide, while others were less extreme and focused on keeping those minorities out of politics or destroying their culture.
In the video above, she is informing viewers on how to spot people who may want to persecute, kill, or otherwise damage the rights of minorities, and that was not unique to Nazism. The distinction isn't necessary in this case.
[QUOTE=Wafflemonstr;52645712]The bolded part implies that her calling Nazism, Fascism instead, was done to discredit Fascism, which in turn implies that you hold Fascism higher than Nazism. What's not to get?
[/QUOTE]
No, it does not, in any way whatsoever.
I am simply saying that I am confident that she didn't intend to explicitly mix up the terms. [b]Once again[/b], fascism and Nazism [b]are not equivalent ideologies.[/b] [i]If they were, then both existing would be redundant, and only one would exist.[/i]
[b]Once again[/b], fascism is a form of government where the state has total control and brutally oppresses opposition. Nazism is a form of government that uses fascism to establish an ethnostate and purge what the state deems to be undesirables.
Both are absolutely terrible. [b][i]But they are still not the same thing.[/i][/b]
What's not to get?
[QUOTE=Wafflemonstr;52645712]The bolded part implies that her calling Nazism, Fascism instead, was done to discredit Fascism, which in turn implies that you hold Fascism higher than Nazism. What's not to get?[/QUOTE]
ooooor it could be to keep the idea that fascism comes in more flavors than just white supremacism and it is important to keep your eyes out for those other forms as well.
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52645719]No, it does not, in any way whatsoever.
I am simply saying that I am confident that she didn't intend to explicitly mix up the terms. [b]Once again[/b], fascism and Nazism [b]are not equivalent ideologies.[/b] [i]If they were, then both existing would be redundant, and only one would exist.[/i]
[b]Once again[/b], fascism is a form of government where the state has total control and brutally oppresses opposition. Nazism is a form of government that uses fascism to establish an ethnostate and purge what the state deems to be undesirables.
Both are absolutely terrible. [b][i]But they are still not the same thing.[/i][/b]
What's not to get?[/QUOTE]
In the video, at 1:01, she says "Contemporary fascists share 3 core beliefs: People [...] ought to constitute [...] the white race; Jews are masterminding the destruction of the white race; the only way to save the white race is to [...] establish an ethnostate"
These are [b]not[/b] tenets of fascism. Those are tenets of [b]Nazism[/b].
Fascism is [b]not[/b] inherently white supremacist. It is absolutely feasible for there to be pro-black fascism, pro-Asian fascism, or even pro-Moroccan fascism. All of these are perfectly valid applications of fascism.
It is [b]not[/b] feasible for there to be pro-black Nazism, pro-Asian Nazism, or pro-Moroccan Nazism. These all fundamentally oppose the core tenets of Nazism, those tenets being [b]white supremacy[/b], which is violated because [b]these peoples are not white[/b].
(Replied since Ninja Gnome got a post wedged in)
There's also a valid stance for wanting to preserve 'western culture' or 'western society' that doesn't have to be about race. You can value the cultural/ideological contributions of a group or society without tying that to their genetics.
[QUOTE=Krumbumpus;52645786]There's also a valid stance for wanting to preserve 'western culture' or 'western society' that doesn't have to be about race. You can value the cultural/ideological contributions of a group or society without tying that to their genetics.[/QUOTE]
I don't understand anybody who talks of "preserving culture." Sure, we should preserve it for history - document it, write it down, everything. But 1940s "western culture" is very, [I]very[/I] different from 1970s western culture, and that is different from 2010s western culture.
The Beatles were once the musical and cultural icon of the west. They took the sitar from India and plastered it on their music. Dozens of famous American musicians stole or repurposed the music of non-white musicians and re-marketed it to the (wealthier) white audience. There would be no modern "western culture" without the influence of non-westerners or racial minorities.
It's funny how we see different groups talk about this, too. We have "cultural appropriation," which implies that culture needs to be preserved from "culture vultures" and so on. But then we have right-wing people using the same talking points - western culture needs to be "preserved" from being "replaced" by other cultures (which are always minorities what a surprise). Everyone who wants to "preserve western culture" needs to stop watching anime immediately. No listening to K-Pop - it's an eastern corruption of western songwriting traditions. "Preserve western culture" is a dogwhistle for "keep the blacks and spics out of my music and movies."
[B]There is no such thing as preserving a culture[/B]. You cannot freeze culture in place. Culture is an organically-developing network of millions of people interacting and inspiring each other and influencing each other. There is no way to "preserve" it, and there should be no reason to. Note it down in history, then cannibalize your influences and make more art.
I'll be honest, I wasn't partial to the format.
It's fukken nuts how much the world has changed in just two decades, though.
Yeah the video was evidently made in good heart with the intent to inform but the constant mixing up of fascim and nazism was odd.
On a basic level the mixup is not a problem at all but when she starts talking about the core ideologies it starts to make her look a bit incompetent.
Not to mention that it's a bit of a missed opportunity to talk about the differences between the two since she made a point about euphemisms.
[editline]4th September 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=.Isak.;52645817][B]There is no such thing as preserving a culture[/B]. You cannot freeze culture in place. Culture is an organically-developing network of millions of people interacting and inspiring each other and influencing each other. There is no way to "preserve" it, and there should be no reason to. Note it down in history, then cannibalize your influences and make more art.[/QUOTE]
Putting culture in a museum is effectively preserving it though.
You're essentially putting chunks of culture in a vacuum and give them context so they remain understandable decades if not centuries away from the point they were relevant.
And the sad truth is that culture tends to die when it's not put in a vacuum this way. The whole cultural appropriation thing is overdone stupidity in many ways but it has a good point in the fact that not everything can be relevant at once, and when a culture changes, either on its own or by contact with another culture, some of its older aspects can and will fade away. Again, that's why we have museums to make sure those older, now irrelevant aspects of culture don't just fade away.
If you want an example of cultural appropriation actually causing damage to the preservation of defunct, ancient cultures you need not look further than western and the United Kingdom and Northern Europe, where people have mixed up Celtic and Gaelic culture so much it's legitimately become difficult to establish which is which in some cases. It's harmless in the grand scheme of things but it also means people aren't as aware of their own history as they could be and to me that's a bit sad.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
