# Do you find nazi imagery offensive?



## Deleted member 568892 (Sep 30, 2021)

I do not. I've learned about world war 2 and the injustices but I don't find political propaganda from something which ended decades before I was born offensive.


----------



## Alexander1970 (Sep 30, 2021)

> Do you find nazi imagery offensive?​



of Course....


----------



## spoggi (Sep 30, 2021)

...


----------



## bazamuffin (Sep 30, 2021)

Not at all


----------



## Acid_Snake (Sep 30, 2021)

If it's for historical or collection purposes then I guess it's cool. People nowadays don't even know what national-socialism is or the implications of that radical anticapitalist ideology. Also lots of people go around waving communist flags and nobody bats an eye, which is weird considering the latter has a shitton more dead people on their back.


----------



## Localhorst86 (Sep 30, 2021)

In historical context: no.

If used without historical context or as a means of propagating/condoning it: yes.


----------



## Xzi (Sep 30, 2021)

I mean in general, yeah.  Like so many other things, it depends on the context, though.



Mike_Hunt said:


> I don't find political propaganda from something which ended decades before I was born offensive.


You act as if there aren't plenty of modern political movements which use the imagery for the exact same purposes that the Nazis did.  Neo-Nazis are very much a thing, unfortunately.


----------



## bazamuffin (Sep 30, 2021)

I find it more offensive that Hitler gets so much spotlight as if he was the only person in history to kill millions.  What about Stalin, Mao, King Leopold II of Belgium?


----------



## Jayro (Sep 30, 2021)

I don't, unless they are actively trying to use it to spread hate. Like the white rage of the MAGA crowd. Those are Nazis that need punched.


----------



## Xzi (Sep 30, 2021)

bazamuffin said:


> I find it more offensive that Hitler gets so much spotlight as if he was the only person in history to kill millions.  What about Stalin, Mao, King Leopold II of Belgium?


What about them?  Everybody knows they were monsters, but that doesn't make Hitler any less of a monster himself.  Most likely the only reason the Nazis get so much attention from a historical perspective is that their goal was world domination.  Leaders/nations committing atrocities against their own people is sadly an all-too-common theme throughout human history, therefore it doesn't stand out as much.


----------



## duwen (Sep 30, 2021)

I find contemporary Nazi ideology offensive, and historical imagery used for shock value and edgelord goading is offensive, but I'm not offended by swastikas and/or military uniforms or Nazi's represented in entertainment like movies and games.


----------



## gohan123 (Sep 30, 2021)

Nein.


----------



## ClancyDaEnlightened (Sep 30, 2021)

Y'all know Nazis would send a good portion of the user base here to the gas chamber


Irony


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Sep 30, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> If it's for historical or collection purposes then I guess it's cool. People nowadays don't even know what national-socialism is or the implications of that radical anticapitalist ideology. Also lots of people go around waving communist flags and nobody bats an eye, which is weird considering the latter has a shitton more dead people on their back.


It had a lot more to do with capitalism then not. Very industry friendly was the Nazi's. They were backed by industrialists and ended up having ties with everyone from IBM to Hugo Boss. One of the functions of Auschwitz was to provide slave labor for IB Farben. More then one reason Hitler admired Henry Ford apart from the antisemitism.


----------



## Acid_Snake (Sep 30, 2021)

williamrubin69 said:


> It had a lot more to do with capitalism then not. Very industry friendly was the Nazi's. They were backed by industrialists and ended up having ties with everyone from IBM to Hugo Boss. One of the functions of Auschwitz was to provide slave labor for IB Farben. More then one reason Hitler admired Henry Ford apart from the antisemitism.


Like you said, they had ties with companies that were on their good side, that's the total opposite of a free market capitalism where the best one wins regardless of political intervention and regardless of whoever is in charge.


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Sep 30, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> Like you said, they had ties with companies that were on their good side, that's the total opposite of a free market capitalism where the best one wins regardless of political intervention and regardless of whoever is in charge.


The term 'best' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there! Every company needs political intervention where its States that regulates the conditions for the market to exist. Its the contradiction with capitalism where it wants to remove regulation yet requires the State to regulate conditions in order for it to exist. The Nazis had the whole economy harnessed for one reason: war, and its armed forces. If youre on about specific party based intervention, TBH the only companies they specifically acted against were anything owned by Jewish people. I didnt say they were the same, its just not the opposite.


----------



## MORSHU8KRTXON (Sep 30, 2021)

No. The nazi find my imagery offensive


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Sep 30, 2021)

Localhorst86 said:


> In historical context: no.
> 
> If used without historical context or as a means of propagating/condoning it: yes.


This.


----------



## subcon959 (Sep 30, 2021)

It depends what it is. For example, I lived in India for a while when I was young and swastikas were everywhere. I remember them on the walls at home and even playing with fireworks in that shape.


----------



## Localhorst86 (Sep 30, 2021)

subcon959 said:


> It depends what it is. For example, I lived in India for a while when I was young and swastikas were everywhere. I remember them on the walls at home and even playing with fireworks in that shape.


not all swastikas are nazi imagery.
Heck, even the finish air force still uses it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelia_Air_Command


----------



## ClancyDaEnlightened (Sep 30, 2021)




----------



## bazamuffin (Sep 30, 2021)

Swastika dates back 15,000 years and its original meaning/representation was "well being".  Used by Hindus among others before Mr Hitler ruined it


----------



## DinohScene (Sep 30, 2021)

Localhorst86 said:


> In historical context: no.
> 
> If used without historical context or as a means of propagating/condoning it: yes.



This sums it up pretty well.


----------



## Acid_Snake (Sep 30, 2021)

williamrubin69 said:


> The term 'best' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there! Every company needs political intervention where its States that regulates the conditions for the market to exist. Its the contradiction with capitalism where it wants to remove regulation yet requires the State to regulate conditions in order for it to exist. The Nazis had the whole economy harnessed for one reason: war, and its armed forces. If youre on about specific party based intervention, TBH the only companies they specifically acted against were anything owned by Jewish people. I didnt say they were the same, its just not the opposite.


The main aspects of national-socialism is a hatred against capitalism and race warfare (as opposed to class warfare in communism, everything else was pretty much the same). Most of their economic policies where interventionist and purely socialist (expropriation without compensation, price topping, deciding who does business where, nationalized industries, etc).
Doesn't matter if they only applied these policies onto jews and foreign companies, these policies are still anticapitalist in their nature.


----------



## Tomato123 (Sep 30, 2021)

I don't at all simply because it's not my place to be offended by it. I wasn't born during WW2 and any uses of it during that time period don't offend me. I also can't be offended by it based on the modern usage because they are not targeting me. I do understand people who were/are targeted by it being offended though as they should be.


----------



## Glyptofane (Sep 30, 2021)

Not really. I used to collect and display flags of a certain theme, but they're all folded up in a box since a few years and two moves ago. I have a Nazi flag, Palestine, Iran, and the centerpiece was Hezbollah.


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Sep 30, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> The main aspects of national-socialism is a hatred against capitalism and race warfare (as opposed to class warfare in communism, everything else was pretty much the same). Most of their economic policies where interventionist and purely socialist (expropriation without compensation, price topping, deciding who does business where, nationalized industries, etc).
> Doesn't matter if they only applied these policies onto jews and foreign companies, these policies are still anticapitalist in their nature.


The main aspect of Nazism was race and attempting to establish a 'racial' state with Jewish people at the bottom of the hierarchy. In terms of its relationship with capitalism, it said one thing while performing the other basically. Your definition of what constitutes socialism needs reworking tbh. If the point your making was that the Nazis were somehow socialist a la their full title, its an old trope and in general its not a good idea to put a lot of faith in the words of Nazi's! They were populist and the 'socialist' was put in there as a means of mass appeal i.e. pro union etc and they claimed to be the party for workers when they were anything but. Once they got into power, socialists and unions were the very first to be targeted as they provided the most meaningful resistance. All unions was banned apart from the official organization for workers. They were also the first inmates in the concentration camps in the 1930's.

Im actually going to leave the topic here, best of luck!


----------



## VictorMoreno015 (Sep 30, 2021)

only depends on the context honestly
If used in history no
If used by racists yes
If used in Buddhism no


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 30, 2021)

MORSHU8KRTXON said:


> No. The nazi find my imagery offensive


^this
I actually keep Nazi coins to preserve the imagery on them. The historic symbols of Nazi Germany do not offend me. I am also not upset over the cultures that still use many of symbols the Nazi plagiarized from them. I am not “offended” by neo-nazis and other groups or them using the symbols, I am disgusted by them.


----------



## Hayato213 (Sep 30, 2021)

Mike_Hunt said:


> I do not. I've learned about world war 2 and the injustices but I don't find political propaganda from something which ended decades before I was born offensive.



Depending where you live, if you were living in Germany, then obvious the answer is yes, people will find it offensive, one of my friends told me you can't even mention Hitler in public without getting in trouble.


----------



## Ottoclav (Sep 30, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> If it's for historical or collection purposes then I guess it's cool. People nowadays don't even know what national-socialism is or the implications of that radical anticapitalist ideology. Also lots of people go around waving communist flags and nobody bats an eye, which is weird considering the latter has a shitton more dead people on their back.


And those neo-communists keep saying, "Well, America kept interfering with those countries trying to practice communism, so they never got a fair chance!" F*%($*ing Morons. Those communists COULD have tried to do all those wonderful things that was supposed to make communism great even while America was trying to interfere. Those communists chose tyranny, wealth and power, instead.


----------



## BlackAstro20 (Sep 30, 2021)

Localhorst86 said:


> In historical context: no.
> 
> If used without historical context or as a means of propagating/condoning it: yes.


like every dictator, if you use them out of their context, it becomes offensive.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Sep 30, 2021)

Offensive? That depends on the context, here. If I'm at a museum or seeing historical photos? No. 

If I'm at a friend's house and he has a shrine to literally Hitler? Yeah.


----------



## Viri (Sep 30, 2021)

Depends on the context. If it's used for art, video games, movies, and historical reasons, then nope. If anything, I get annoyed when the Swastika gets censored, since it's pretty stupid. When video games/movies censor the swastika in WW2 games, it kills the immersion for me.

Nazi Museums should exist, and we shouldn't destroy history, just because that part of history isn't a nice time. All history should be preserved, so we don't repeat our mistakes, and so we can see our past, no matter how awful it was.

As for the Swastika, don't let Nazis steal an ancient symbol that has been used for thousands of years. I thought it was dumb that the US stopped doing the "Bellamy salute", once they did that, they pretty much allowed the "Roman salute" to be claimed by Nazis. If the US didn't stop doing the Bellamy salute, it would probably be seen in a better light imo, and not just seen as a "Nazi salute".


----------



## osaka35 (Sep 30, 2021)

As everyone is saying, it's all about context.

-If it's presented in a way of "you're learning about these horrible people and how/why these horrible things happened and how we can avoid this evil", then yes of course it's acceptable.

-If it's presented in a way of "this stuff is acceptable/inoffensive", "there's nothing wrong with this", or "maybe they weren't wrong" then it is highly unacceptable.

Same with representations of slavery, or any other horrific evil of the past.

In video games, it's presented as "these are the bad guys", which for me falls into the first category. 

As far as using use similar imagery, it can be difficult. Even though it isn't exactly the same, it is usually taken that way. Mainly because evil people try and use it as a backdoor way of presenting the issue the second way, and so you have to stay vigilant you are not accidentally endorsing that way of thinking. Which is difficult if you're unaware of it. So as a rule of thumb, try and avoid similar iconography because you just know that evil people are using it to endorse crazy stuff.

The fact nazi propaganda is *still* an issue, is so bizarre. It's such a terrible and anti-scientific viewpoint.  Though I suppose we have people who think the earth is flat, among other misunderstandings of how the universe works, but still.


----------



## pwjpssdfvqyuhweuxx (Sep 30, 2021)

No, I am not a Twitter user so I don't consider most things I see, be it racist or even just black humor, offensive.


----------



## Windaga (Sep 30, 2021)

When I did my history stint during GD, I taught 2 units on World War 2. One of the students walked out of the lecture because she was offended at some of the imagery used. I had another student try to usurp the lesson and say the Holocaust didn't happen. It was a nightmare.


----------



## JuanBaNaNa (Sep 30, 2021)

Mike_Hunt said:


> I do not. I've learned about world war 2 and the injustices but I don't find political propaganda from something which ended decades before I was born offensive.


From my perspective, nazi propaganda actually made good things implicitly.

For instance, British counter-attacked Nazi propaganda with good pieces of art.
The now meme *"*KEEP CALM AND..." (originally being CARRY ON)






 was made to inspire bravery and acceptance amidst German invasion.
Don't misunderstand, but *that poster was just the begging of many important movements around the world.*

After that poster got popular, all men went to the war limiting industrial production.

That led to the use of *femenine power in factories and other important production jobs.*
After that, this poster emerged:





This poster didn't just empowered women.
It was the start for women pursuing equality in obligations and rights.

Nazi propaganda wasn't just bad stuff, but to me, "Keep calm" and "We can do it" are too Nazi propaganda (given the period this came out to counter german nationalism ).

After this period, we have the movements that led to women being able to vote for the first time, to get equal jobs as men, more education, and that feminine movement, also inspired the civil war to fight against slavery in the US.

Everything is tied together, implicitly, but it's a connection we can't deny.


----------



## Ottoclav (Oct 1, 2021)

Viri said:


> When video games/movies censor the swastika in WW2 games, it kills the immersion for me.


Kills the immersion? You mean, "makes the enemy look less evil than it truly was!"


----------



## Acid_Snake (Oct 1, 2021)

Ottoclav said:


> And those neo-communists keep saying, "Well, America kept interfering with those countries trying to practice communism, so they never got a fair chance!" F*%($*ing Morons. Those communists COULD have tried to do all those wonderful things that was supposed to make communism great even while America was trying to interfere. Those communists chose tyranny, wealth and power, instead.


All politicians want is wealth and power regardless of the economic or political system in place. The dangers of all forms of socialism (be it national-socialism, fascism, communism or cultural marxism) is that these ideologies give a golden ticket for politicians to do whatever they want while claiming to be doing it "for the greater good of the society". This gives them way more power than normal, a false sensation of legitimacy and a wildcard to attack anyone that opposes them (if you're against me, you're against the common folk). This is why the nazis would send people to gas chambers: because those people are enemies of the society we want to build for the better of the rest of us. It's also why communists would happily send homosexuals (and businessmen, clerics and intellectuals) to concentration camps: we want to build a new society with nothing but hard workers, so there's no place for "bourgeois degenerates", only tough and manly workers.


----------



## Stepperer (Oct 1, 2021)

I find nazis offensive. Images aside


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Oct 1, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> All politicians want is wealth and power regardless of the economic or political system in place. The dangers of all forms of socialism (be it national-socialism, fascism, communism or cultural marxism) is that these ideologies give a golden ticket for politicians to do whatever they want while claiming to be doing it "for the greater good of the society". This gives them way more power than normal, a false sensation of legitimacy and a wildcard to attack anyone that opposes them (if you're against me, you're against the common folk). This is why the nazis would send people to gas chambers: because those people are enemies of the society we want to build for the better of the rest of us. It's also why communists would happily send homosexuals (and businessmen, clerics and intellectuals) to concentration camps: we want to build a new society with nothing but hard workers, so there's no place for "bourgeois degenerates", only tough and manly workers.


'Cultural marxism' is an antisemitic trope, ironic you use that in the context in this thread with its origins in Nazi propaganda. Wherever you picked that up, you'd want to cut it out of your life. The Wikipedia page is actually decent at outlining it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory. As Ive already said, National-Socialism was nothing to do with socialism, it took the name for propaganda reasons. Youre going to have to do a good bit of critical self reflection for your own sake.


----------



## linuxares (Oct 1, 2021)

For using it in historical and deceptions in fiction etc. No.
For hate? Yeah.

But do you know what I hate even more? When the braindead Nazi's can't even make the Swastika properly!


----------



## Ottoclav (Oct 1, 2021)

JuanMena said:


> From my perspective, nazi propaganda actually made good things implicitly.
> 
> For instance, British counter-attacked Nazi propaganda with good pieces of art.
> The now meme *"*KEEP CALM AND..." (originally being CARRY ON)
> ...


Women in the States were voting as far back as 1870, and the 19th Amendment was added to the US Constitution in 1920. Women in Ireland were voting (with caveats) in 1918. These came about at the end of the First Great War, not the Second. Slavery was ended in the US in 1865. The earliest signs of the Women's Rights movement was in Seneca Falls in the summer of 1848, this may have had an impact in ending slavery, but it all happened before the Second Great War, without the help of counter-Nazi-Propaganda.


----------



## Subtle Demise (Oct 1, 2021)

Hard for me to be offended by something I've been exposed to since early childhood through things like Wolfenstein 3D, Indiana Jones, etc. Such imagery can also be used ironically as a social commentary of sorts. For instance, the band Throbbing Gristle often used the imagery and Holocaust themes in their music, album art, and live shows, partly for shock value, but mostly as a sort of exposé of the industrialization of mankind itself, which is how the genre of industrial music started. The logo of their short-lived underground record label, Industrial Records, was a grainy image of an Auschwitz crematorium.

Again, such images were meant as a protest against the movements, and not an endorsement of them. There were later industrial acts that would glorify Nazis, (i.e. Death in June, Boyd Rice, Whitehouse, etc.) but those are a different story.


----------



## Ottoclav (Oct 1, 2021)

williamrubin69 said:


> 'Cultural marxism' is an antisemitic trope, ironic you use that in the context in this thread with its origins in Nazi propaganda. Wherever you picked that up, you'd want to cut it out of your life. The Wikipedia page is actually decent at outlining it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory. As Ive already said, National-Socialism was nothing to do with socialism, it took the name for propaganda reasons. Youre going to have to do a good bit of critical self reflection for your own sake.


National-Socialism was socialism, using race theory at its core instead of the class system. There were definitely a lot of quirks to this, since Hitler couldn't erase the idea of "individualism" from his form of rhetoric, as opposed to the "traditional" class system that communists like to pursue, where individualism is tightly controlled, if not discouraged. You forget that Socialism is in fact the "governing entity controlling all forms of production." Nazi Germany was very much a Socialist State. Hitler's writings are soaked in socialism. But if we are to compare apples to apples, the "Real" Socialists, i.e. C.C.C.R., killed far more people (including sooo many of its own people) than the Nazi's did, it puts a real good spotlight on what socialism is really capable of.


----------



## Acid_Snake (Oct 1, 2021)

williamrubin69 said:


> 'Cultural marxism' is an antisemitic trope, ironic you use that in the context in this thread with its origins in Nazi propaganda. Wherever you picked that up, you'd want to cut it out of your life. The Wikipedia page is actually decent at outlining it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory. As Ive already said, National-Socialism was nothing to do with socialism, it took the name for propaganda reasons. Youre going to have to do a good bit of critical self reflection for your own sake.


Propaganda is saying that fascism has anything to do with right wing ideology which is false from the point of view of the french revolution where right wing was basically absolute monarchy or mercantilism at best (take note that this is the basis of our modern day democracies where right-wing means less people have power while left wing means that power is spread across more people). Marxism, fascism and national-socialism are left wing in regards of those political coordinates that we inherited from the french revolution.

- The very first ally of nazi germany and number one commercial partner was the USSR. It was in fact the Kaiser who sent Lennin to Russia to create the Soviet Union so that Russia would drop out of WWI and allied with Germany.

- The ultimate enemy of nazism was Capitalist America and their allies (France, UK, etc).

As socialists, we are opponents of the Jews, because we see in the Hebrews the incarnation of capitalism, of the misuse of the nation's goods. 


Joseph Goebbels


----------



## Ottoclav (Oct 1, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> Propaganda is saying that fascism has anything to do with right wing ideology which is false from the point of view of the french revolution where right wing was basically absolute monarchy or mercantilism at best (take note that this is the basis of our modern day democracies where right-wing means less people have power while left wing means that power is spread across more people). Marxism, fascism and national-socialism are left wing in regards of those political coordinates that we inherited from the french revolution.
> 
> - The very first ally of nazi germany and number one commercial partner was the USSR. It was in fact the Kaiser who sent Lennin to Russia to create the Soviet Union so that Russia would drop out of WWI and allied with Germany.
> 
> ...


Well said. It's all about perspective and frame-of-reference.


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Oct 1, 2021)

Ottoclav said:


> National-Socialism was socialism, using race theory at its core instead of the class system. There were definitely a lot of quirks to this, since Hitler couldn't erase the idea of "individualism" from his form of rhetoric, as opposed to the "traditional" class system that communists like to pursue, where individualism is tightly controlled, if not discouraged. You forget that Socialism is in fact the "governing entity controlling all forms of production." Nazi Germany was very much a Socialist State. Hitler's writings are soaked in socialism. But if we are to compare apples to apples, the "Real" Socialists, i.e. C.C.C.R., killed far more people (including sooo many of its own people) than the Nazi's did, it puts a real good spotlight on what socialism is really capable of.


I answered that earlier, but in short the Nazis wanted to establish a 'racial' state with Jewish people at the very bottom of the hierarchy. The claim that the Nazis were socialist is a recent invention by different US based commentators and has no basis in historical accuracy. They were a populist based movement. The socialist in the title was there at the time for mass appeal, to claim that they were the real ones fighting for the workers against 'industrialists' ie Jewish people. Their early days were spent fighting socialists, communists etc on the streets which is why they established the SA (the paramilitary wing). Immediately after taking power, socialists were the first group sent to concentration camps while all unions were banned save the 'official' Party union which was no union at all.. The war against the USSR was against 'Jewish-Bolshevism' as they put it. The Nazis had nothing to do with socialism bar propaganda and trying to subvert their fanbase.


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Oct 1, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> Propaganda is saying that fascism has anything to do with right wing ideology which is false from the point of view of the french revolution where right wing was basically absolute monarchy or mercantilism at best (take note that this is the basis of our modern day democracies where right-wing means less people have power while left wing means that power is spread across more people). Marxism, fascism and national-socialism are left wing in regards of those political coordinates that we inherited from the french revolution.
> 
> - The very first ally of nazi germany and number one commercial partner was the USSR. It was in fact the Kaiser who sent Lennin to Russia to create the Soviet Union so that Russia would drop out of WWI and allied with Germany.
> 
> ...


And as I said before, youre putting a lot of faith in the words of Nazi's and again ironically their Propaganda Minister. The fact you (unknowingly Im sure) made reference to antisemitic conspiracy theories should in itself be causing you not to be going further down this road. I also never mentioned 'left' 'right' or any other wing, its not relevant to this ie whether National Socialism is in fact Socialism. Its not. Socialism is Jewish in origin, Marx was Jewish.

Also the Kaiser had nothing to do with the Nazi's so Im not sure why you're bringing him up. You might have mentioned the Non Aggression Pact between Nazi Germany and the USSR in 1938 if you were trying to cite 'proof' of such a connection but it was a pact of convenience to buy Stalin time to rearm. The Nazis broke the pact with the invasion in 42.


----------



## Acid_Snake (Oct 1, 2021)

williamrubin69 said:


> I answered that earlier, but in short the Nazis wanted to establish a 'racial' state with Jewish people at the very bottom of the hierarchy. The claim that the Nazis were socialist is a recent invention by different US based commentators and has no basis in historical accuracy. They were a populist based movement. The socialist in the title was there at the time for mass appeal, to claim that they were the real ones fighting for the workers against 'industrialists' ie Jewish people. Their early days were spent fighting socialists, communists etc on the streets which is why they established the SA (the paramilitary wing). Immediately after taking power, socialists were the first group sent to concentration camps while all unions were banned save the 'official' Party union which was no union at all.. The war against the USSR was against 'Jewish-Bolshevism' as they put it. The Nazis had nothing to do with socialism bar propaganda and trying to subvert their fanbase.


Maybe you should learn to read and search for actual historical quotes and sources (like anything ever said or written by Hitler and company). Nobody in America says that the Nazis are socialists mainly because Americans have absolutely no clue what nazism is (it happened thousands of miles away from the US almost 100 years ago, americans only got in contact with a decaying and almost dead Nazi Germany).
Socialism has many faces and interpretations, it's not just incorrect but outright false to claim that marxism is the one and only socialist ideology; socialism is older than Marx himself.


----------



## Acid_Snake (Oct 1, 2021)

williamrubin69 said:


> And as I said before, youre putting a lot of faith in the words of Nazi's and again ironically their Propaganda Minister. The fact you (unknowingly Im sure) made reference to antisemitic conspiracy theories should in itself be causing you not to be going further down this road. I also never mentioned 'left' 'right' or any other wing, its not relevant to this ie whether National Socialism is in fact Socialism. Its not. Socialism is Jewish in origin, Marx was Jewish.


And you put a lot of faith in Marx' interpretation of socialism since you believe he was the first and only socialist ever.


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Oct 1, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> Maybe you should learn to read and search for actual historical quotes and sources (like anything ever said or written by Hitler and company). Nobody in America says that the Nazis are socialists mainly because Americans have absolutely no clue what nazism is (it happened thousands of miles away from the US almost 100 years ago, americans only got in contact with a decaying and almost dead Nazi Germany).
> Socialism has many faces and interpretations, it's not just incorrect but outright false to claim that marxism is the one and only socialist ideology; socialism is older than Marx himself.


I never said Marx was the 'first and only' socialist, I put him forward as the best known name to show why the Nazis in fact hated socialism. It is in fact Jewish in origin and my source is the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Israel, I was lucky enough to study there. I strongly recommend you park your preconceptions, get in contact with them and run your narrative with them if you dont believe me. Youve already been blind to the fact you were using antisemitic tropes and tbh theres no good place to go with that narrative you're digging yourself into. Best of luck.


----------



## Soraiko (Oct 1, 2021)

i hate Nazis.....i may live in Germany but offended not really only if ppl make jokes about that. My origin is Turkey.


----------



## MockyLock (Oct 1, 2021)

Such a picky thread for a newcomer...


----------



## Acid_Snake (Oct 1, 2021)

williamrubin69 said:


> I never said Marx was the 'first and only' socialist, I put him forward as the best known name to show why the Nazis in fact hated socialism. It is in fact Jewish in origin and my source is the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Israel, I was lucky enough to study there. I strongly recommend you park your preconceptions, get in contact with them and run your narrative with them if you dont believe me. Youve already been blind to the fact you were using antisemitic tropes and tbh theres no good place to go with that narrative you're digging yourself into. Best of luck.


The Nazis didn't hate socialism, they hated Marx' interpretation of socialism and considered their own ideology the one true form of socialism. One of the main reasons they hated the Jews was in fact that they have a very capitalist culture, which makes them very successful businessmen even on times of crisis.
If you ever wondered how the Nazis achieved the "economic miracle" of recovering from the disaster of the Weimar Republic, it was basically what any other socialist would do: stop paying WWI reparations and expropriating rich businesses (Jew-owned in this case). Marxists would do the same, but use class warfare instead of race warfare to justify their crimes.
The end result is the same, the fight between communism and fascism (totalitarian left-right) is not about what political or economic system to have (that will always be a socialist totalitarian state, there's no true choice here), but rather how to get there and which people can be allowed to form part of the system.

As for the antisemitic tropes, if you talk about the ocean you will have to talk about water. We are talking about Nazism and their similarities and differences with Communism, there's going to be lots of nasty words and phrases that come from those political coordinates. One must not ignore this or let emotions get in the way if doing an objective analysis. I don't care if cultural marxism comes from the communists or if it was invented by the fascists as propaganda, the point is those terms emanate from that political coordinate.


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Oct 1, 2021)

Dude, all I can say now is Ive given you the information and at some point youre going to have to accept it. Or not, its up to yourself. Theres nothing emotional in it. The 'economic miracle' you talk about was due to Weimar policies kicking in post crash and predated the Nazi's. The Nazis then poured everything into armaments and everything connected to gearing the country for war. All looked well on the outside but different sectors warned Hitler about an overheating economy. He ignored them, as territorial expansion and the resources that would bring would feed into the economy during 1930's and 40's expansion. VERY capitalist. Not paying reparations is not specifically a socialist move (nationalism fed into it for example along with the financial crash of the 1930's). Your arguments are based on selective fact picking and fitting them to a narrative, whoever taught you that was bulshitting you. As for your point about antisemitic tropes and water, you did not use it in the context of deconstructing it, you specifically identified it as an aspect of socialism. Just to be clear (and tbf you seem to be acknowledging it above): There is no such thing as 'cultural marxism' which was the point. Its an antisemitic conspiracy theory. I really have to go now!


----------



## Acid_Snake (Oct 1, 2021)

williamrubin69 said:


> Dude, all I can say now is Ive given you the information and at some point youre going to have to accept it.


What information did you give again? Other than mentioning Israel, one of the most anti-socialist (including anti-fascist and anti-communist) and pro-capitalist country ever.
I can keep quoting some of the top level nazi officials (including the mustache guy) and socialism (anti-capitalism) is always their excuse for their crimes.


----------



## caki883 (Oct 1, 2021)

Hitler made the Autobahn, recycling law . etc
The American slave trade caused 5 million deaths or more. Let´s just say more. And let´s just say there is still black hate in USA.

Holocaust around 6 million so I presume that the border is around 6 million?

Fun fact. Did you know that there where more Nazi supporters in USA then in Germany before the WWII ??

btw I am not german


----------



## Lamhirh (Oct 1, 2021)

Informative mostly.


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Oct 1, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> What information did you give again? Other than mentioning Israel, one of the most anti-socialist (including anti-fascist and anti-communist) and pro-capitalist country ever.
> I can keep quoting some of the top level nazi officials (including the mustache guy) and socialism (anti-capitalism) is always their excuse for their crimes.


Fair enough RE sources though again youre putting a lot of faith in the moustached guy's ability to tell the truth! Generally thats not a great way to go!  For Hitler/the Nazis: Ian Kershaws Hitler biography. Its two parts but theres a combined Volume. He goes into how the Nazi regime operated and the 'working towards the Fuhrer' thesis. Somewhere between monarchy and oligarchy. Richard Evans has a three part book series on the Third Reich in general and also deals with the economical side. Michael Burleigh's book on the Third Reich also worth reading. Burleighs book The Racial State very much recommended too. For the concentration camp system Wachmanns KL is worth reading as is Van Pelt and Dworks history of Auschwitz. In terms of antisemitism, Yad Vashem's website has a huuuge range of free resources and well worth going into. Im actually working on getting my account on this deleted so do take down the book references for yourselves and honestly very best of luck! Your PSP work was/is very much appreciated!


----------



## Acid_Snake (Oct 1, 2021)

williamrubin69 said:


> Fair enough RE sources though again youre putting a lot of faith in the moustached guy's ability to tell the truth! Generally thats not a great way to go!  For Hitler/the Nazis: Ian Kershaws Hitler biography. Its two parts but theres a combined Volume. He goes into how the Nazi regime operated and the 'working towards the Fuhrer' thesis. Somewhere between monarchy and oligarchy. Richard Evans has a three part book series on the Third Reich in general and also deals with the economical side. Michael Burleigh's book on the Third Reich also worth reading. For the concentration camp system Wachmanns KL is worth reading as is Van Pelt and Dworks history of Auschwitz. In terms of antisemitism, Yad Vashem's website has a huuuge range of free resources and well worth going into.


I know the funny mustache guy isn't exactly the best truth teller, but neither is the other mustache guy from russia, or the bird killer from china. You gotta see the facts, how they acted, how their "ideas" went into practice, and when you do that with communism and national-socialism it's very hard to see the difference (other than one guy puts you in a gas chamber, the other guy doesn't have any gas so you die of hypothermia).

I should also clear something out: there's a fair difference between national-socialism (Germany) and Fascism (Spain and Italy).
The latter is a lot more right-leaning than the former. But this is mostly because the socialists in Spain and Italy would side with the communists, who were opposed to religion so the Catholic Church would have none of that. Don't forget Mussolini started his career in the Socialist Party of Italy, where he became a prominent leader until he was kicked out for being too radical. Fascism is historically born out of the radicalization of a socialist leader. He then went on to write the Fascist Manifesto, which as the name implies attempts to be a "true socialist" opposition to Marx' Communist Manifesto. If you read Mussolini's book, he recognizes socialism  when it comes to being able to identify problems in society, but totally denies Marx' socialist solution (he talks a lot of sh*t about it).


----------



## Deleted member 397813 (Oct 1, 2021)

depends on the context


----------



## Deleted member 569431 (Oct 1, 2021)

Acid_Snake said:


> I know the funny mustache guy isn't exactly the best truth teller, but neither is the other mustache guy from russia, or the bird killer from china. You gotta see the facts, how they acted, how their "ideas" went into practice, and when you do that with communism and national-socialism it's very hard to see the difference (other than one guy puts you in a gas chamber, the other guy doesn't have any gas so you die of hypothermia).
> 
> I should also clear something out: there's a fair difference between national-socialism (Germany) and Fascism (Spain and Italy).
> The latter is a lot more right-leaning than the former. But this is mostly because the socialists in Spain and Italy would side with the communists, who were opposed to religion so the Catholic Church would have none of that. Don't forget Mussolini started his career in the Socialist Party of Italy, where he became a prominent leader until he was kicked out for being too radical. Fascism is historically born out of the radicalization of a socialist leader. He then went on to write the Fascist Manifesto, which as the name implies attempts to be a "true socialist" opposition to Marx' Communist Manifesto. If you read Mussolini's book, he recognizes socialism  when it comes to being able to identify problems in society, but totally denies Marx' socialist solution (he talks a lot of sh*t about it).


It can be difficult to tell all right when it comes to practice but I dont think generalizations help. In terms of atrocities etc the major difference between the Nazis and every other thing before it is that theirs was the first (and so far only) act of genocide carried out for PURELY ideological reasons: to kill every Jewish person. To go back to the original question of this thread, thats why the imagery is much more offensive then anything else. Theres ones with higher body counts etc but thats why theirs is the most disgusting of all. Every single act of genocide before it might have had some element of ideology but also other factors came into it (economics, nationalism etc). That was the case in Bosnia for example, Rwanda was concerned about property IIRC. In terms of Stalin, mass industrialization to compete with the West as well as sustaining his regime (with the Gulag system, they would round up random people off the street if they were running short of workers). I dont think Stalin had very much to do with ideology, it was more like a gangster regime. Communism and Sovietisation were just labels, the practice was different and on the surface as you say similar. With Hitler and the Nazi's though, all other considerations were secondary to that aim of murdering every Jew in Europe. There was a case in Greece on the island of Kos if I remember where they were rounding up the Jewish communities there and it turned out they missed on elderly man who had been away on another island. They turned the whole load of boats around to get this one person who would have been dead soon anyway. Eichmann was still running the trains as the Eastern Front was collapsing etc.


----------



## Darth Meteos (Oct 4, 2021)

Mike_Hunt said:


> I do not. I've learned about world war 2 and the injustices but I don't find political propaganda from something which ended decades before I was born offensive.


Offended is the wrong word. Nobody is offended by the design of a swastika. They're repulsed by the ideology of the people who fly swastika flags, who tattoo the lightning bolts on themselves.


----------



## Minox (Oct 5, 2021)

Same answer as I had for communism imagery - Offensive, no. Distasteful, yes.


----------



## chrisrlink (Oct 5, 2021)

say no I DARE YOU, you Nazi scumbags


----------



## Digital_Cheese (Jun 8, 2022)

I don’t really care about Nazi images. Why should I care that someone put a image of something that happened decades before I was born and is already hated by any sane person? I shouldn’t because it’s a waste of time getting mad at that and getting mad someone sends it.


----------



## Jayro (Jun 9, 2022)

chrisrlink said:


> say no I DARE YOU, you Nazi scumbags


I say no, when it comes to ports of Wolfenstein 3D. The censored versions offend me more.


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Jun 9, 2022)

It depends on the use, I find it offensive if used as a statement of support, but I don't find it offensive in art. Anytime there's a conversation of the kind, there's someone who needs to say they also find communism offensive. I think there's a difference: even though communist regimes committed atrocities, those atrocities aren't a part of the communist ideology; but in nazism, the violence and the slaughter are key components of the ideology.


----------



## JuanBaNaNa (Jun 9, 2022)

Holy shit, look at the gas bill.jpeg


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 9, 2022)

Dark_Phoras said:


> even though communist regimes committed atrocities, those atrocities aren't a part of the communist ideology


Control by the state to that degree might be said to be pretty atrocious (does rather clash with ideas of personal, ethnic, cultural and civilisational freedoms), and there is the further idea that everybody that went in for it, doubly so anybody that went big, has done some seriously unpleasant shit under its guise means even if such a thing is not spelled out (and if we are to go with the idea that there are non Marxist communists out there somewhere* then there would appear to be no central ideology to point at so consequences become even more important).

*even if they are generally about as a relevant to world history or history of such states as those that would have a hereditary monarchy there to crush the state.


----------



## Creamu (Jun 9, 2022)

FAST6191 said:


> Control by the state to that degree might be said to be pretty atrocious (does rather clash with ideas of personal, ethnic, cultural and civilisational freedoms), and there is the further idea that everybody that went in for it, doubly so anybody that went big, has done some seriously unpleasant shit under its guise means even if such a thing is not spelled out (and if we are to go with the idea that there are non Marxist communists out there somewhere* then there would appear to be no central ideology to point at so consequences become even more important).
> 
> *even if they are generally about as a relevant to world history or history of such states as those that would have a hereditary monarchy there to crush the state.


I think with the bolshevik kill count of 66.000.000 in a few years it is easy to assume that there is a connection of the ideology of these hyper criminals and the way they act. You don't just kill that many people as a side project.

An interesting question for me would be this:

Would you be offended by a game where the people of the manhattan project were depicted and positioned just like germans are in many games?

My answer is no not at all.


----------



## Viri (Jun 9, 2022)

chrisrlink said:


> say no I DARE YOU, you Nazi scumbags


No.


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Jun 9, 2022)

@FAST6191 the control by the state under communism isn't atrocious, it's a different approach to the ownership of the means of production and the distribution of goods. Instead of having a company selling their products in the market to the citizens, those products are distributed through the population according to need.

Nazi ideology is established on the social Darwinism concept of survival of the fittest, in which the society culls its weakest. The idea is that everyone must dedicate their lives to a uniformized society that functions as seamlessly as possible. To this end, violence and domination are incentivized in order to establish who's strong and who's weak.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 9, 2022)

Dark_Phoras said:


> @FAST6191 the control by the state under communism isn't atrocious, it's a different approach to the ownership of the means of production and the distribution of goods. Instead of having a company selling their products in the market to the citizens, those products are distributed through the population according to need.
> 
> Nazi ideology is established on the social Darwinism concept of survival of the fittest, in which the society culls its weakest. The idea is that everyone must dedicate their lives to a uniformized society that functions as seamlessly as possible. To this end, violence and domination are incentivized in order to establish who's strong and who's weak.


One that does not work and can not work unless we solve economics and human behaviour, neither of which (as apparently you say later in the post) are desirable to do.

Also not sure if that counts as no true scotsman socialist.


----------



## Valwinz (Jun 9, 2022)

Love the cool ass Army uniforms


----------



## Dark_Phoras (Jun 9, 2022)

FAST6191 said:


> One that does not work and can not work unless we solve economics and human behaviour, neither of which (as apparently you say later in the post) are desirable to do.



That's totally irrelevant to both my point and the subject of the thread.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 9, 2022)

Dark_Phoras said:


> That's totally irrelevant to both my point and the subject of the thread.


Not really. Being compelled into anything is itself tricky to justify and compelled into something that demonstrably does not work/produce good outcomes (you can not know the price of everything as the world is constantly changing and needs vary between people by the hour, and human psychology does not allow for too much cooperation) then becomes far worse still.


----------



## WG481 (Jun 9, 2022)

Localhorst86 said:


> not all swastikas are nazi imagery.
> Heck, even the finish air force still uses it:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelia_Air_Command


The swastika is actually a Buddhist, Hindu, and Jain symbol of luck. It has a deeper meaning than most people realize, but the western world only knows the swastika as the evil symbol

So in the west, yeah Nazi imagery is offensive as crap because it typically denotes one meaning: Nazis.
But if I was at a Buddhist temple in Kyoto, I wouldn't mind seeing a swastika chiseled into the thousand year old temple wall, unless of course it wasn't a part of the original structure and some dummy was being a vandal.


----------



## spoggi (Jun 9, 2022)

Women in uniform, sometimes they look so cold

Women in uniform, but, Oh! They feel so warm


----------



## Dr_Faustus (Jun 9, 2022)

Not really no. But I can understand why it could piss some people off. Honestly I find the modern concept of youths shouting "Nazi" at people somehow more offensive just because of the fact that they really do not seem to grasp the nature of what the Nazi's really were and the shit they did to various people and groups. A very short sighted offensive remark to call someone and completely throwing the entire umbrella of the history and crimes of the Nazi's on someone who may simply have a different opinion on things than you would. 

I mean how long would it go until you call a WWII veteran a "Nazi" because he has a different opinion of politics than you do? Hell if anyone did do that they would probably have their arses rightfully beaten just for the disrespect alone.



WG481 said:


> The swastika is actually a Buddhist, Hindu, and Jain symbol of luck. It has a deeper meaning than most people realize, but the western world only knows the swastika as the evil symbol
> 
> So in the west, yeah Nazi imagery is offensive as crap because it typically denotes one meaning: Nazis.
> But if I was at a Buddhist temple in Kyoto, I wouldn't mind seeing a swastika chiseled into the thousand year old temple wall, unless of course it wasn't a part of the original structure and some dummy was being a vandal.


Also this as well.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Jun 9, 2022)

No. It is part of history.
But I find it offensive how little Germans have learned with regards to Russia. The Germanic Anglo-Saxon desire to destroy Russia has never gone away. Germans would probably be enemies of Israel if they were American enemies. It is easy to forgive friends.


----------



## AncientBoi (Jun 9, 2022)

I'm at odds with this question. I despise the Swastika, as it meant the pain n suffering of non believers in the cult.

And yet, there are games about the era that I have and play.

Only in gratification of shooting these enemies, and even waste some of my ammo shooting at the symbol.



oui vey


----------



## Soraiko (Jun 9, 2022)

as a german i dont need to get asked that xD


----------

