[Politics] Nazis Attack LGBT Pride Parade

Eacaraxe_v1legacy

New member
Mar 28, 2010
1,028
0
0
Gethsemani said:
Representative snip of the last few posts.
Okay, let me ask you something. What exactly do you think it is the Weimar Republic could have done that they weren't already doing? That is, after all, the predominant logic being expressed here and elsewhere; the Weimar Republic simply didn't "do enough" or "didn't try", and that if efforts to suppress the Nazi party had been borne out to some hypothetical and unstated arbitrary extent, the Nazi party simply would never have risen to power.

Identify it. What could the Weimar Republic have done? Not rhetorical; identify what policy positions the Weimar Republic could have taken that weren't pursued, least of all to the extent you think might have kept the Nazis out of power.

The party was banned. People joined and turned out anyways.

Leaders were thrown in jail. They were out in months. Some of them were in and out of jail repeatedly.

Headquarters were raided and assets liquidated. Multiple times; some as late as March, 1932 [http://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/651512]. They still assembled and planned in private, and printed in the underground.

When you say the Weimar Republic "didn't do enough", I don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

They might have suspended due process and started summarily executing known and suspected Nazis in the street? They might have declared martial law with the army and money they didn't have thanks to the Treaty of Versailles? Perhaps they might have pulled it off by legalizing vigilante and paramilitary justice? They might have confiscated and destroyed the property of known or suspected Nazis? Smashed printing presses and burned books?

I mean, all of the above is what worked for the Nazis. Perhaps you mean to say "they should have done what the Nazis did, before the Nazis had the chance to do it to anyone else"? That's what it boils down to, and I'd like to see someone advocating this point of view exercise an iota of honesty for a change and admit it. But you're not, because you don't have the fortitude to admit the only way you see to stop totalitarianism is to become totalitarian.

So, at this point it really behooves me to discuss the relevancy of this to now vis-a-vis potential responses by the American government. After all, this is about what the Weimar government might have done, versus what it did do and what it was capable of doing, and how this might inform us to how the federal and state governments might act now. Other than the fact Trump's President and at this rate will be until 2024, we have a Republican Senate, Republican-stacked SCOTUS, and over half the states in the country have Republican governors and state legislatures, anyhow. And since you seem to be quite learned about the socioeconomic state of the Weimar government during the '20s and early '30s, I believe I can more than make my point with a single, non-hypothetical question.

What's the current state of the US debt ceiling?

altnameJag said:
I can show you the exact same propaganda with modern alt right leaders that constantly decry the vile censorship they endure TO THEIR AUDIENCE OF LITERAL MILLIONS.
And I can show you three weeks ago, a Comcast employee waged a one-man war against an obnoxious, comedian-wannabe, jackass in an attempt to get him deplatformed for his dubious behavior and political statements. Not only did Maza fail to achieve his goal [https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/3k3jj5/youtubes-bungled-crackdown-on-steven-crowder-only-made-him-stronger], his efforts backfired so catastrophically that not only is Crowder bigger than ever, but the people who bore the collateral damage were progressive and history Youtubers [https://www.newsweek.com/vox-adpocalypse-twitter-youtube-steven-crowder-1442652].

That is, if you accept Maza as a good-faith actor whose goal was simply to deplatform right-wing extremists. In which case, he's merely stupid. Clearly I do not, because I recognize Vox is a Comcast subsidiary, and take note that which each successive "adpocalypse" algorithmic and recommendation preference, and accordingly ad revenue, shifts away from smaller and independent creators (left and right) and towards highly-consolidated, multi-national, oligopolist corporate media. Which means he's stupid enough to be a useful idiot, and a useful idiot he is.

And, before you invariably begin vomiting Republican talking points about free markets, the right to contract, and how corporations can do whatever they like, while ignoring the obvious cognitive dissonance inherent in that position, I'd ask you to consider if Hollywood blacklists during the Lavender scare were censorious. I'm more than happy to bring that fight in a thread about LGBTQ rights, and you don't want to go there.

It's almost like propaganda is LIES.
No. Propaganda -- well, effective propaganda -- is half truth distorted to fit a narrative and persuade listeners. That's what made the Nazis so fucking good at it. What you don't do, and what the Weimar Republic did do, is empower the propaganda by feeding delusions of oppression and victimhood. Nazis and neo-Nazis need controversy, violence, and censorship like fish need water.

Don't give it to them. Right-wing extremism -- actual right-wing extremism, not what glorified salespersons on idiot boxes like to pretend is right-wing extremism in order to sell your attention span to advertisers -- in this country was completely flatlined between Skokie and Ruby Ridge for a reason, and that reason was because we let them speak.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,029
5,796
118
Country
United Kingdom
Eacaraxe said:
They might have suspended due process and started summarily executing known and suspected Nazis in the street? They might have declared martial law with the army and money they didn't have thanks to the Treaty of Versailles? Perhaps they might have pulled it off by legalizing vigilante and paramilitary justice? They might have confiscated and destroyed the property of known or suspected Nazis? Smashed printing presses and burned books?

I mean, all of the above is what worked for the Nazis. Perhaps you mean to say "they should have done what the Nazis did, before the Nazis had the chance to do it to anyone else"? That's what it boils down to, and I'd like to see someone advocating this point of view exercise an iota of honesty for a change and admit it. But you're not, because you don't have the fortitude to admit the only way you see to stop totalitarianism is to become totalitarian.
Perhaps, when you ask a question, you should let the other party respond before filling in the blanks with what you reckon they believe.
 

Eacaraxe_v1legacy

New member
Mar 28, 2010
1,028
0
0
Silvanus said:
Perhaps, when you ask a question, you should let the other party respond before filling in the blanks with what you reckon they believe.
That'll happen when I stop being accused of Nazism for advocating against what allowed the Nazis to come to power in the first place, and advocating for what actually did stop neo-Nazism dead in its tracks for nearly twenty years in this country.
 

Armadox

Mandatory Madness!
Aug 31, 2010
1,120
0
0
The problem, is that we've set up a system where one side can abuse the system to create a means to punish the other side regardless of the terms. Ignore them, and they grow stronger until they can dismantle the rights of others. Build laws against them, and they'll add you to the law to criminalize both sides. And, I do not think there is or can be a work around for this. I think, for this system to work, for there to be no rabbit hole to go down, the government itself has to unfortunately stand aside and do nothing. The alt right, Nazism, whatever... As long as it's not branded terrorism, it's allowed to fester. But those groups are useful idiots, a small cog in a bigger hate machine. As long as their views aid in voting for the desires of other, lesser problematic forces. They're allowed to juuuuust skirt the law. To bloom up in opposition, to cause trouble and oppress by show of force, by threat, by malice.

Free speech is a tenuous thing. It's got it's limits, and the people here who try to justify it by saying the only way to truly have it is by having no limits on it. Also are advocating non-violence. That the law'll do the job, but the law can't in this situation. It's reactionary , and the police know if they step up they're only reinforcing the problem. Giving the Nazi the means to declare the police the enemy, their rights being stepped on, etc etc...

By now we've went round the circle a few times.

But, when is speech a violence? Those that advocate on free speech as such separate it from physical violence. So, where is your line in the sand? When does what you say become hate speech? When does it become racist? When does the words become coercion? At what point is it psychological abuse? The whole argument comes down to the sticks and stones defense, and we're passed that nonsense. We're passed the point where people have to "man up" cause it's only words. Right? Fucking right? We understand that words have power, and can cut. That the LGBT community has an unusually high suicide rate. That when it comes to the LGBT community, there is way to many of them that spend their lives being talked down to, insulted, raged at, pushed out of homes, out of communities. Discriminated against and washed out out of the conversation as a means to cripple their rights. Fucking DeSantis omitted the LGBT when discussing PULSE originally. That was on purpose. If you don't recognize them, you don't have to defend them.

We can't do this anymore. We can't. And shit, you can't just arm the gays, everyone gets guns and make it a stalemate, because what do you think the news will do? What do you think the headlines will read if that happens. Do you think for a god damn moment that the LGBT community would be allowed to stand up like that without it becoming a, at the least, political bloodbath? Without the other using it as a means to say that they're terrorists themselves, and just make things so much worse?

Laws can not be changed to help(save in the discrimination laws being built up now, that are always on the cusp of crumbling). Debates are meaningless to use, because the other side is not here, at all, in good faith. We have to accept that. So, it's not to the government to fix this, it's to the citizenry. When I said the only way to fix this is by not giving them a soapbox as individuals, I stand by that. There has to be a breaking point. I'm not one of them who things we should shoot Nazis in the street, because that only makes them martyrs. I've seen Fight Club. I know giving them a name to hold up to others is giving them power. And, think we should have a legit discussion on the merits of physical confrontations. Every time the Nazis show up, it's as a show of force. It's to hold up their shields, and show their guns, and proclaim that THEY hold the power and the others should crawl into the shadows. And the police walk with them because they know they're a threat and can't do a damn thing about it or they'll give them the chance to decry them as peacemakers. So, the only way, I think, to defang them is by giving them what they want. By getting in their face, letting them escalate it to an argument. Let them be recorded saying hate speech and death threats. Let them draw first, and have the police arrest them. And that sucks. It really, absolutely fucking does. It is putting people at risk, but they're already at risk. The god damn Nazi with a gun is ALREADY there. And for their platform to work, they NEED to be viewed as powerful. They need pictures taken of them with arm raised, and shield at the ready surrounded by the police so others can get the sense of their strength. And no, killing them. Killing them also gives them leverage and strength. But see...

Images of Nazis being kicked in by twenty twinks in rainbow thongs? That deflates every ounce of power from them. That makes them a laughingstock. That gets blown up and shown on late night funnyman shows where they have to defend how the gays beat their ass. And yes, there will be arrests on both sides. But standing up and showing you won't be the victims over and over again in this same stupid cycle. That's becoming more important every year. I'm really having a hard time seeing an alternative right now.

And... And I have to many dead friends to simply accept this is how the world will be.
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
Eacaraxe said:
Okay, let me ask you something. What exactly do you think it is the Weimar Republic could have done that they weren't already doing? That is, after all, the predominant logic being expressed here and elsewhere; the Weimar Republic simply didn't "do enough" or "didn't try", and that if efforts to suppress the Nazi party had been borne out to some hypothetical and unstated arbitrary extent, the Nazi party simply would never have risen to power.

Identify it. What could the Weimar Republic have done? Not rhetorical; identify what policy positions the Weimar Republic could have taken that weren't pursued, least of all to the extent you think might have kept the Nazis out of power.

The party was banned. People joined and turned out anyways.
Here's an easy one: Keep the leader of the NSDAP in prison for longer then 9 months after finding him guilty of an attempted coup and treason.
* A few other easy ones: Forbid the printing of Volkische Beobachter and Der Sturmer and bring printers to justice for doing so. Forbid the printing of Mein Kampf. Enforce these bans.
* Clamp down harder and more frequently on the SA (and other "free corps"), who were allowed to roam the streets quite freely a lot of the time because the prevailing attitude was that they weren't an issue as long as they beat up Communists and other people the aristocratic, conservative establishment labelled undesirable (such as Jewish people and Roma).

My main point, however, wasn't that Weimar didn't clamp down hard enough in a policiary or juridical fashion. My main point was that there was a naivete, especially in right wing circles in general and nationalist and conservative circles in particular, when it came to dealing with the Nazis. Franz von Papen was open with his belief that he could control Hitler and the NSDAP if they were in a coalition government with him, and ended up legitimizing Hitler (whom Hindenburg hated but was forced to recognize due to von Papen's play) and giving Hitler the in he needed to seize power. The right wing considered the Communists worse then the NSDAP and had a general attitude that all the talk of racial purification, revenge for WW1 and Drang Nach Osten was all just bluster and tough guy talk and not serious policy positions of the NSDAP.

That's the lesson we need to draw from the Weimar Republic. That condoning, excusing or ameliorating the beliefs, actions and intentions of Nazis ends up with the Nazis all the stronger for it, especially if all the hand wringing is done for real political gains. The best way to ensure that Nazis do not gain power is to mercilessly cordon them off from power and refute their rhetoric wherever it appears. This is what happened in Sweden, where the Nazi party never rose to any prominence, because no established party wanted to touch them, despite the Swedish conservative party being big fans of the NSDAP and Germany in general.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,300
6,798
118
Country
United States
Eacaraxe said:
altnameJag said:
I can show you the exact same propaganda with modern alt right leaders that constantly decry the vile censorship they endure TO THEIR AUDIENCE OF LITERAL MILLIONS.
And I can show you three weeks ago, a Comcast employee waged a one-man war against an obnoxious, comedian-wannabe, jackass in an attempt to get him deplatformed for his dubious behavior and political statements. Not only did Maza fail to achieve his goal [https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/3k3jj5/youtubes-bungled-crackdown-on-steven-crowder-only-made-him-stronger], his efforts backfired so catastrophically that not only is Crowder bigger than ever, but the people who bore the collateral damage were progressive and history Youtubers [https://www.newsweek.com/vox-adpocalypse-twitter-youtube-steven-crowder-1442652]
Yeah man, algorithms are shit and YouTube's attempt at enforcing its own TOS was pathetic. It's almost like when the Weimar Republic "banned" the Nazi party and then did jack and shit actually enforcing it, letting their CONVICTED TRAITOR, FAILED REBEL LEADER publish his manifesto instead of, I dunno, shooting the fucker for treason.

Crowder is a white supremacist who pals around with his white supremacist pals and flagrantly breaks the TOS of the website he publishes on. Maza is not at fault for pointing that out.
Weak reactions to this bullshit is the root of the problem, both now and 90 years ago.
Eacaraxe said:
It's almost like propaganda is LIES.
No. Propaganda -- well, effective propaganda -- is half truth distorted to fit a narrative and persuade listeners. That's what made the Nazis so fucking good at it. What you don't do, and what the Weimar Republic did do, is empower the propaganda by feeding delusions of oppression and victimhood. Nazis and neo-Nazis need controversy, violence, and censorship like fish need water.

Don't give it to them. Right-wing extremism -- actual right-wing extremism, not what glorified salespersons on idiot boxes like to pretend is right-wing extremism in order to sell your attention span to advertisers -- in this country was completely flatlined between Skokie and Ruby Ridge for a reason, and that reason was because we let them speak.
No, that reason was the leader of the American noe-Nazis was arrested for child pornography and the subsequent leader was arrested for gathering up a bunch of Nazi fuckwits to assault brown people in bars. The Gavin McInnes of the '90s. Turns out, actually arresting people for crimes and then not letting them constantly rant IN THE MEDIA about how CENSORED they are, actually works.
 

Eacaraxe_v1legacy

New member
Mar 28, 2010
1,028
0
0
Gethsemani said:
Here's an easy one: Keep the leader of the NSDAP in prison for longer then 9 months after finding him guilty of an attempted coup and treason.
* A few other easy ones: Forbid the printing of Volkische Beobachter and Der Sturmer and bring printers to justice for doing so. Forbid the printing of Mein Kampf. Enforce these bans.
* Clamp down harder and more frequently on the SA (and other "free corps"), who were allowed to roam the streets quite freely a lot of the time because the prevailing attitude was that they weren't an issue as long as they beat up Communists and other people the aristocratic, conservative establishment labelled undesirable (such as Jewish people and Roma).
Okay, once again, your second and third points are "well the Weimar didn't hard enough". To which, once again, I don't know what you're on about. Allow me to illustrate by playing devil's advocate one moment.

Let's talk about the first point, Hitler's trial [https://www.timesofisrael.com/the-1924-trial-of-adolf-hitler-that-made-the-nazi-party-a-household-name/]. An elaborate, sensationalist, global media circus enabled by the suspension of due process, trial by jury, and judicial review concocted for the sole purpose of giving Hitler a soap box for his ridiculous beliefs, that turned him from an international laughingstock to one of the most feared orators on the goddamn planet. A trial that was such a farce, the pro-Nazi lay judge panel had to be negotiated away from acquitting him outright.

Section 7, Article 105 of the Weimar Constitution [https://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php#Seventh%20Chapter] was pretty goddamn clear on the constitutionality of such a trial. So, why didn't the Weimar government's enforce its constitutional authority? Might this be because, in the midst of economic, political, and international crises, and crippled by the Treaty of Versailles, civil unrest, and a military of dubious loyalty, the Weimar government was in no position to assert its authority over a secessionist state which proved itself a breeding ground for right-wing and nationalist extremism?

Here's where I take exception with the claims being pressed. Even taking them at face value assumes the Weimar government was strong enough to do "what had to be done" in the first place. Which, frankly, would have been nothing short of invading Bavaria, placing it under martial law, and subjecting Bavarian political leadership to military tribunal. Exactly how well do you think the Reichswehr and Freikorps would have responded to that order?

My main point was that there was a naivete, especially in right wing circles in general and nationalist and conservative circles in particular, when it came to dealing with the Nazis.
I agree, but here's the problem. If you're looking at 1933, 1932, or even far back as 1929, you're looking at effects, not causes. The nails were in that coffin when the French occupied the Ruhr valley.
 

Armadox

Mandatory Madness!
Aug 31, 2010
1,120
0
0
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
I second that. That felt personal, considering the post they pinged. Though this thread is probably going to be the end of her.
 

Marik2

Phone Poster
Nov 10, 2009
5,462
0
0
SolidState said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
Certainly not 2 weeks. Maybe 2 hours, but not 2 weeks.
The first suspension is 3 -4 days. The second one is 2 weeks.

Armadox said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
I second that. That felt personal, considering the post they pinged. Though this thread is probably going to be the end of her.
One of the mods must be a nazi, bigot, and a racist! /joke

I do hope she will at least stick around for the 2020 election.
 

Dirty Hipsters

This is how we praise the sun!
Legacy
Feb 7, 2011
7,885
2,235
118
Country
'Merica
Gender
3 children in a trench coat
Marik2 said:
SolidState said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
Certainly not 2 weeks. Maybe 2 hours, but not 2 weeks.
The first suspension is 3 -4 days. The second one is 2 weeks.

Armadox said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
I second that. That felt personal, considering the post they pinged. Though this thread is probably going to be the end of her.
One of the mods must be a nazi, bigot, and a racist! /joke

I do hope she will at least stick around for the 2020 election.
So that she can scream at everyone that supporting any candidates other than Elizabeth Warren is giving your vote to Trump and that anyone who doesn't support her is a double secret republican shill.
 

Marik2

Phone Poster
Nov 10, 2009
5,462
0
0
Dirty Hipsters said:
Marik2 said:
SolidState said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
Certainly not 2 weeks. Maybe 2 hours, but not 2 weeks.
The first suspension is 3 -4 days. The second one is 2 weeks.

Armadox said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
I second that. That felt personal, considering the post they pinged. Though this thread is probably going to be the end of her.
One of the mods must be a nazi, bigot, and a racist! /joke

I do hope she will at least stick around for the 2020 election.
So that she can scream at everyone that supporting any candidates other than Elizabeth Warren is giving your vote to Trump and that anyone who doesn't support her is a double secret republican shill.
Exactly
 

Armadox

Mandatory Madness!
Aug 31, 2010
1,120
0
0
Marik2 said:
Armadox said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
I second that. That felt personal, considering the post they pinged. Though this thread is probably going to be the end of her.
One of the mods must be a nazi, bigot, and a racist! /joke

I do hope she will at least stick around for the 2020 election.
For me, I understand this thread is poisonous to a certain mindset. It's easy to get into a position where you want to make personal attacks. Telling someone to shut up is rude, but compared to what else Saelune would say during the resulting pages this might remain open, I don't think that was really necessary. I'm sure Saelune would dig a hole to deep eventually. Things are going to get worse in the lead up to 2020. Desperation makes strange bed fellows. We'll hit peak Saelune FAR before the election, and she'll be banned long before that tire fire even properly gets lit.

All considered. I'm sure there will be a lot of bans along the way.

Edit: https://twitter.com/arisroussinos/status/1142679526176112640

So, this was brought to my attention. And with comments like this:

Sorry, but you insisted on shoving gay shit in my kids' faces, so this is now extermination war.Btw, the Nazi movement was the first LGBT movement and started in gay bars. Horst Wessel predates Stonewall by like 30 years.

— Orb-Weaver (@No2Sovereignty) June 23, 2019 [https://twitter.com/No2Sovereignty/status/1142878094337794048?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw]

Another day, another Nazi.
 

CM156_v1legacy

Revelation 9:6
Mar 23, 2011
3,997
0
0
Dirty Hipsters said:
Marik2 said:
SolidState said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
Certainly not 2 weeks. Maybe 2 hours, but not 2 weeks.
The first suspension is 3 -4 days. The second one is 2 weeks.

Armadox said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
I second that. That felt personal, considering the post they pinged. Though this thread is probably going to be the end of her.
One of the mods must be a nazi, bigot, and a racist! /joke

I do hope she will at least stick around for the 2020 election.
So that she can scream at everyone that supporting any candidates other than Elizabeth Warren is giving your vote to Trump and that anyone who doesn't support her is a double secret republican shill.
What about people like me who are going to vote for Trump anyways?

Armadox said:
Marik2 said:
Armadox said:
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
I second that. That felt personal, considering the post they pinged. Though this thread is probably going to be the end of her.
One of the mods must be a nazi, bigot, and a racist! /joke

I do hope she will at least stick around for the 2020 election.
For me, I understand this thread is poisonous to a certain mindset. It's easy to get into a position where you want to make personal attacks. Telling someone to shut up is rude, but compared to what else Saelune would say during the resulting pages this might remain open, I don't think that was really necessary. I'm sure Saelune would dig a hole to deep eventually. Things are going to get worse in the lead up to 2020. Desperation makes strange bed fellows. We'll hit peak Saelune FAR before the election, and she'll be banned long before that tire fire even properly gets lit.

All considered. I'm sure there will be a lot of bans along the way.

Edit: https://twitter.com/arisroussinos/status/1142679526176112640

So, this was brought to my attention. And with comments like this:

Sorry, but you insisted on shoving gay shit in my kids' faces, so this is now extermination war.Btw, the Nazi movement was the first LGBT movement and started in gay bars. Horst Wessel predates Stonewall by like 30 years.

? Orb-Weaver (@No2Sovereignty) June 23, 2019 [https://twitter.com/No2Sovereignty/status/1142878094337794048?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw]

Another day, another Nazi.
Is he talking about Ernst R?hm and the leadership of the SA? Because to describe them as the first LGBT movement is a bit... inaccurate. That would also make Horst-Wessel-Lied a gay pride song.
 

Marik2

Phone Poster
Nov 10, 2009
5,462
0
0
Saelune, if you read this, please cool off until the 2020 election. I want you to stick around for next November at least.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,684
2,879
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Eacaraxe said:
Gethsemani said:
Here's an easy one: Keep the leader of the NSDAP in prison for longer then 9 months after finding him guilty of an attempted coup and treason.
* A few other easy ones: Forbid the printing of Volkische Beobachter and Der Sturmer and bring printers to justice for doing so. Forbid the printing of Mein Kampf. Enforce these bans.
* Clamp down harder and more frequently on the SA (and other "free corps"), who were allowed to roam the streets quite freely a lot of the time because the prevailing attitude was that they weren't an issue as long as they beat up Communists and other people the aristocratic, conservative establishment labelled undesirable (such as Jewish people and Roma).
Okay, once again, your second and third points are "well the Weimar didn't hard enough". To which, once again, I don't know what you're on about. Allow me to illustrate by playing devil's advocate one moment.

Let's talk about the first point, Hitler's trial [https://www.timesofisrael.com/the-1924-trial-of-adolf-hitler-that-made-the-nazi-party-a-household-name/]. An elaborate, sensationalist, global media circus enabled by the suspension of due process, trial by jury, and judicial review concocted for the sole purpose of giving Hitler a soap box for his ridiculous beliefs, that turned him from an international laughingstock to one of the most feared orators on the goddamn planet. A trial that was such a farce, the pro-Nazi lay judge panel had to be negotiated away from acquitting him outright.

Section 7, Article 105 of the Weimar Constitution [https://www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php#Seventh%20Chapter] was pretty goddamn clear on the constitutionality of such a trial. So, why didn't the Weimar government's enforce its constitutional authority? Might this be because, in the midst of economic, political, and international crises, and crippled by the Treaty of Versailles, civil unrest, and a military of dubious loyalty, the Weimar government was in no position to assert its authority over a secessionist state which proved itself a breeding ground for right-wing and nationalist extremism?

Here's where I take exception with the claims being pressed. Even taking them at face value assumes the Weimar government was strong enough to do "what had to be done" in the first place. Which, frankly, would have been nothing short of invading Bavaria, placing it under martial law, and subjecting Bavarian political leadership to military tribunal. Exactly how well do you think the Reichswehr and Freikorps would have responded to that order?

My main point was that there was a naivete, especially in right wing circles in general and nationalist and conservative circles in particular, when it came to dealing with the Nazis.
I agree, but here's the problem. If you're looking at 1933, 1932, or even far back as 1929, you're looking at effects, not causes. The nails were in that coffin when the French occupied the Ruhr valley.
I think your looking at only point of reference for suppression and its effectiveness. Take another form, the Red Scares in America. This has suppressed conversation in America so much that even today, 100 years on, any criticism of Capitalism is seen as Communism/ Socialism. The Overton window is significantly shifted so much that there is no Left party in America.

You could claim that Communists are still somewhat around. Some people call themselves Communist now, but it's more likely they call themselves Marxists becuase of the obvious link terrible Lenin-Stalin version of Communionism, This Marxism (pro Free speech, markets, worried more about owners being the employees which is rather entrepreneurial) is more palatable to the conservatives and they can still claim that they are for top down economics (somewhat true, some are very anti-government) becuase stereotyping.
 

Abomination

New member
Dec 17, 2012
2,939
0
0
Marik2 said:
I dont think that post was worth a suspension for saelune.
It was worth a suspension for anyone.

Telling someone it's their fault that there are Nazis and, let's be honest, being incapable of having a discussion without resorting to personal attacks when the topic being discussed has nuances are good grounds for suspension. Saelune has a bad habit of attacking would-be-allies because they have a differing opinion in how to combat their shared foe.
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
Eacaraxe said:
Okay, once again, your second and third points are "well the Weimar didn't hard enough". To which, once again, I don't know what you're on about. Allow me to illustrate by playing devil's advocate one moment.
They didn't try hard enough, that's a simple fact. They didn't even try hard enough to actually enforce court mandated punishments for some of the worst crimes in the German penal code. What you're talking about afterwards is the inherent and inescapable political instability of the Weimar Republic, which was a democracy forced onto a people who didn't want a democracy and run by the same aristocratic elite that had previously been the cause of Germany's belligerent foreign diplomacy and nascent ambitions to be a superpower. The people didn't want a democratic system, as seen by how many kept voting for nationalists, fascists and communists, and the old aristocracy kept doing their thing irregardless. That Weimar was forced to adopt an unwanted system of government and then quell the (totally expected) resistance to it without any support from either France, the UK or USA was where the political impotence and incompetence of the Weimar Republic was cemented, in that the Freikorp uprisings of 1919 and 1920 clearly showed that the Republic lacked the necessary political clout and violence capital to keep the constituent German states in line.

That, however, should not be confused with the leniency with which the Republic treated the extreme right wing of its politics. Hitler and the NSDAP got off easy because the hardcore conservative, nationalist aristocrats that were the de facto power of the Weimar Republic wanted a return to nationalistic policies and saw the NSDAP and other nationalist and fascist parties as useful tools to keep the communists in check (both by drawing malcontents away from communists and by using their paramilitary branches to fight and intimidate communists) and because they absolutely failed to see the threat that these violent, right wing extremists posed.

The root cause of the NSDAP's rise to power was always that the German establishment didn't see them as a political threat and as a much preferable alternative then Communism. This led to German politicians underestimating the NSDAP and not handling it with the diligence and concern it merited. As I said, the thing we can learn from the rise of the NSDAP is to never condone or compromise with extremists, even if those extremists are nominally are on our side and could, maybe, be politically useful to us. Much else is hard to learn, because the political system and landscape of the Weimar Republic is very much unlike any modern day Western democracy.