@blatham,
blatham wrote:
Quote: the Left's ridiculous overuse of the term "Nazi"
Suddenly, this claim from McG and Finn and others and from, particularly, fringe RW media has emerged and become common. It's bogus. I've never used the term except in reference to the historical German instance or the more modern copy-cat groups. I don't know of anyone posting here who has used the term profligately and inappropriately. In the fairly broad reading I've done over decades, I've not seen what's being claimed.
This may come as a surprise to you but your anecdotal evidence based largely on a memory assisted by bias doesn't offer a compelling argument that the charge of
ridiculous overuse of "Nazi" by the Left is bogus. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, at least two of your fellow progressives acknowledged it to be true, and expressed regret that it is...while still presenting the required "however" portion of their argument. The creator of the video gave at least two examples of conservatives who are clearly not Nazis being called Nazis, and I suspect that if we were to do a deep dive into the A2K archives we would find a few examples of participants from the Left inaccurately accusing participants from the Right of being "Nazis" or "Neo-Nazis" (same difference). I believe you will agree with me on this because you were careful to include in your denial the term "profligately." Which leads me to ask if someone here inaccurately accuses only a
few people of being Nazis, is that somehow pardonable because in your estimation it doesn't rise to "overuse?" You also were careful to include "inaccurately" which is even more interesting because it suggests that there may have been Nazis posting comments in this forum. Do you believe that to be the case and how did you conclude that they were authentic Nazis deserving of being labeled as such? Do you recall who they were? I'm curious.
I've no problem stating that there is ridiculous overuse of "commie" as an epithet by the right and off the top of my head I can think of only one member who is guilty of it and he does it as part of his provocative schtick. Do you think that it's also a bogus claim that "commie" is overused?
You shouldn't be so defensive about it. You're correct in stating that you are not among those who overuse the term, but here's another perhaps illuminating revelation: You aren't actually the personification of Progressivism. Accusing progressives, in general, of overusing the term isn't accusing you and proof that you do not indulge in the behavior isn't proof that progressives, generally, don't either.
Other than it being offensive in the same way that calling someone an "idiot" is, I don't think it's that big a deal, because it
is ridiculous. There are, relatively speaking, very few Nazis or, for that matter, members of the KKK in America. Calling someone a Nazi or Klansman is , based on statistics alone, likely to be inaccurate and, if so, childish and ignorant as well. Unless there is a chorus of other childish fools cheering (read:
thumbing up) the fool who uses the terms, he or she, and not the target, is the only one who looks bad. Calling someone a racist is another matter, but that's not the subject at hand.
The practical effect of misuse of the terms is no more significant than the use of any insult. Crowder's
Cry Nazi theory wasn't applicable to Charlottesville and, frankly, I don't see it having much application in any circumstance. First of all people are not going to fail to detect authentic Nazis because of a history of repeated misuse by the sentinel who alerts them, and secondly no one on the right is listening to the sort of fools who overuse the term anyway, and they wouldn't be attended to the one time they were accurate for good reason other than their history of lying.
If I were the sort of person who called every liberal I encountered a "commie" you wouldn't ignore the waves of Red Chinese soldiers storming the beaches of California simply because I had displayed
Cry Commie tendencies in the past.
The behavior is a symptom not a cause. It happens all of the time whether you acknowledge it or not. Unfortunately no one is keeping a central record of all of the times some jackass misuses any of these terms so we'll just have to go our own merry ways: Me accepting reality and you imagining yet another dastardly
Big Lie plot by the dread
Movement Conservatives who hide under the beds of every decent man and woman in America.
Quote:As regards Charlottesville and RW groups marching there, Nazi symbols were easily evident. Hitler salutes were easily evident. Blatant anti-semitism was easily evident. Using the term Nazi in reference to these people and anyone else like them is entirely appropriate.
Has anyone here argued that there weren't actual Nazis, parading with Nazi symbols and chanting Nazi slogans? I guess folks like me, and McG should really just accept the fact that in this forum assertions that not every demonstrator in Charlottesville was a Nazi or KKK member are going to be interpreted and denounced as
a) A claim that there were no Nazis or Klansman in attendance
b) A revelation that we are in fact apologists for Nazis and Klansmen
c) Blaming the victims
d) Evidence of being closet racists
e) Evidence of being blatant racists, or, worse yet,
Nazis!
Similarly, any and all assertions that there were also left-wing thugs in attendance who engaged in violence that should also be condemned will be interpreted and denounced as:
a) Evidence of support for the right-wing thugs and their violence
b) Blaming the victims
c) The inability, willing or otherwise, to distinguish right from wrong
d) Ignorance of history
e) Evidence of being closet racists
f) Evidence of being blatant racists, or, worse yet,
Nazis!
Did I miss any? If I'm going to wear a hair shirt I want to be stylin' in it.
