It has been 4... 0 days since the last mass shooting official shooting thread

[VomKriege]

Yeah you could use a lot of those arguments to disqualify many Daech endorsed attacks : that the perpetrators are young and somehow mentally unsound. That they had little to no contact with an organisation.

All those Breivik-types and a few others are shouting they're doing it on account of racist and nationalist motives. And it's not run of the mill racism, they are referencing racist myths that are very much specific to political far right organisations (the Great Replacement yadda yadda). The American dissonance on this is astounding.

Better mental health and better gun regulation ? Well, yeah, of course it is needed.

[Human Snorenado]

Two shootings with over 5 casualties each within 24 hours? Gold star on the calendar for you, America!

[Mandark]

Also think it's tough to paint this as a metastasis of the suicide issue the day after the El Paso shooter is taken alive after surrendering.

[ToxicAdam]

You think he went into that situation expecting to live? That’s part of why they do these things because they can’t pull the trigger on themselves.

[Dickie Dee]

You think he went into that situation expecting to live? That’s part of why they do these things because they can’t pull the trigger on themselves.

He surrendered, he wasn't subdued.

FFS he was wearing safety glasses and hearing protection

[Mandark]

The men who publicly murdered people at the Pittsburgh synagogue, the Poway synagogue, the black church in Charleston, the counter-rally at Charlottesville, and the Christchurch mosque (this one who the El Paso shooter apparently singles out as an inspiration) were all taken alive, so I don't think it's at all obvious he wanted to commit murder-suicide, much less that the suicide half of the equation was the real motivating force.

[CatsCatsCats]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Kinda just playing DA for TA here, but it doesn’t really matter what you label it, a pattern needs to be recognized and traced to its source and holistically fixed. Calling these white supremacist terrorist attacks doesn’t make them stop. And people tend to stop trying to treat you as human with factors that led you down that path once you’re labeled “terrorist”

[Mandark]

I'd say the people who suffered from not being treated as human are the ones who got murdered for not being anglo, but reasonable people can disagree.

[CatsCatsCats]

Nice zing, but I’m not trying to say the real victims are the murderers. I’m saying just walling them off from humanity as though they aren’t a symptom of our own demons by othering them will not allow us to face the reality of the situation. Unless we’re prepared to kill off all the white bois with maga hats, we need to figure out why this vision of hate is being bought by them. Maybe it’s naive, but I don’t think a human who isn’t in some kind of survival mode would buy into that kind of hate. 

[Mandark]

Esch already posted a pretty plausible accounting of "root causes," but it sounds like you're looking for a narrative of personal, internal pain because you want to believe that this level of cruelty has to be the result of some really severe stressors.

Except we've got plenty of history in this country alone of astounding levels of violence that were justified along racial and ethnic lines, committed by many people and readily accepted by even more. Not seriously considering this isn't looking for answers, it's looking away from one.

[Boredfrom]

I agree that call them terrorist will not make them stop, but at this point is probably a better term than just murder-suicide. That El Paso scumbag just surrendered himself at least implies that he wants to send a message.

Esch already posted a pretty plausible accounting of "root causes," but it sounds like you're looking for a narrative of personal, internal pain because you want to believe that this level of cruelty has to be the result of some really severe stressors.

I don’t necessarily think that is incorrect. This shooter will still be racist scumbags regardless.

[VomKriege]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Kinda just playing DA for TA here, but it doesn’t really matter what you label it, a pattern needs to be recognized and traced to its source and holistically fixed. Calling these white supremacist terrorist attacks doesn’t make them stop. And people tend to stop trying to treat you as human with factors that led you down that path once you’re labeled “terrorist”

It's not a magic answer to the problem but applying the label and recognizing it might open some discussions on possible avenues to fix that are currently closed. That's probably why some politicians are fighting so hard against it, because "terrorism" makes it political and suddenly would shed some raw exposure on how charged some of the rhetoric is (especially in one of the two major US political party).

[Madrun Badrun]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Kinda just playing DA for TA here, but it doesn’t really matter what you label it, a pattern needs to be recognized and traced to its source and holistically fixed. Calling these white supremacist terrorist attacks doesn’t make them stop. And people tend to stop trying to treat you as human with factors that led you down that path once you’re labeled “terrorist”

I see your point but disagree.  1)  Terrorist is the appropriate label for these actions - it's not meant to make them stop.  Identifying them as terrorist attacks is important so that police and government agencies can use anti-terror laws to fight them.  2)  Concerning fighting the cause not the symptom - the same can be said about any terrorist act in general: there is always an underlying cause.  People are not born terrorists.   Islamic terrorists are just as likely to be mentally unsound as a nazi.  However, the US and really all countries don't really have a mental health system capable of solving this.  The underlying cause doesn't even need to be mental health,  as racism, misinformation, and geopolitics are causes as a well and those can't really be solved.  3) It's more important to stop people from becoming nazis in the first place than to bring in people in from the cold.  And when you can say this is the end result of white nationalism and link that back to more moderate white nationalist views it should stop people from having those views in the first place.  And that is a lot different than saying this was a just a crazy guy but then go on talking about how brown people are going to take over America in 20 years while quietly forgetting that this guy did this because of that same fear. 

I do think it a valid point that we lose all empathy when labeling someone a terrorist and that is not right.  It seems like terrorists are just pure evil ... unless they are Irish.  I can't think of any other example where we when 'ya they are terrorists, and what they are doing is bad, but ...' and took a more nuanced stance after using the terrorist label.

[Boredfrom]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Kinda just playing DA for TA here, but it doesn’t really matter what you label it, a pattern needs to be recognized and traced to its source and holistically fixed. Calling these white supremacist terrorist attacks doesn’t make them stop. And people tend to stop trying to treat you as human with factors that led you down that path once you’re labeled “terrorist”

I see your point but disagree.  1)  Terrorist is the appropriate label for these actions - it's not meant to make them stop.  Identifying them as terrorist attacks is important so that police and government agencies can use anti-terror laws to fight them.  2)  Concerning fighting the cause not the symptom - the same can be said about any terrorist act in general: there is always an underlying cause.  People are not born terrorists.   Islamic terrorists are just as likely to be mentally unsound as a nazi.  However, the US and really all countries don't really have a mental health system capable of solving this.  The underlying cause doesn't even need to be mental health,  as racism, misinformation, and geopolitics are causes as a well and those can't really be solved.  3) It's more important to stop people from becoming nazis in the first place than to bring in people in from the cold.  And when you can say this is the end result of white nationalism and link that back to more moderate white nationalist views it should stop people from having those views in the first place.  And that is a lot different than saying this was a just a crazy guy but then go on talking about how brown people are going to take over America in 20 years while quietly forgetting that this guy did this because of that same fear.

I don’t exactly disagree with you, but I will point out you want to use the correct label (terrorist) while using the wrong one (nazi). That guy sounds like distinguished mentally-challenged  white supremacist. I don’t think namedropping Nazi for every single racist redneck scumbag will help.

[ToxicAdam]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Why do you not want to label it a hate crime? That label already exists and has a very specific meaning.
 

[Mandark]

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/what-do-you-think-about-the-term-hate-crimes.153464/

[Boredfrom]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Why do you not want to label it a hate crime? That label already exists and has a very specific meaning.

The terrorist meaning fits.

[Boredfrom]

TBH the shooters manifesto that blends aspects of left rhetoric (environment, animus against corporate elites) with far right causation and praxis is some of the closest to Nazi 2k19 we've seen yet.

And the Lorax.

 

[TVC15]

TBH the shooters manifesto that blends aspects of left rhetoric (environment, animus against corporate elites) with far right causation and praxis is some of the closest to Nazi 2k19 we've seen yet. Expect more as America descends farther and farther into fascism.

The recession we’re due for is going to be nail-bitingly interesting to live through.

[CatsCatsCats]

Yeah okay they’re terrorists, I just want something done that will work

[Madrun Badrun]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Kinda just playing DA for TA here, but it doesn’t really matter what you label it, a pattern needs to be recognized and traced to its source and holistically fixed. Calling these white supremacist terrorist attacks doesn’t make them stop. And people tend to stop trying to treat you as human with factors that led you down that path once you’re labeled “terrorist”

I see your point but disagree.  1)  Terrorist is the appropriate label for these actions - it's not meant to make them stop.  Identifying them as terrorist attacks is important so that police and government agencies can use anti-terror laws to fight them.  2)  Concerning fighting the cause not the symptom - the same can be said about any terrorist act in general: there is always an underlying cause.  People are not born terrorists.   Islamic terrorists are just as likely to be mentally unsound as a nazi.  However, the US and really all countries don't really have a mental health system capable of solving this.  The underlying cause doesn't even need to be mental health,  as racism, misinformation, and geopolitics are causes as a well and those can't really be solved.  3) It's more important to stop people from becoming nazis in the first place than to bring in people in from the cold.  And when you can say this is the end result of white nationalism and link that back to more moderate white nationalist views it should stop people from having those views in the first place.  And that is a lot different than saying this was a just a crazy guy but then go on talking about how brown people are going to take over America in 20 years while quietly forgetting that this guy did this because of that same fear.

I don’t exactly disagree with you, but I will point out you want to use the correct label (terrorist) while using the wrong one (nazi). That guy sounds like distinguished mentally-challenged  white supremacist. I don’t think namedropping Nazi for every single racist redneck scumbag will help.

No neo-nazi or just nazi is totally appropriate; you don't need a shaved head and a 88 tat to be one.

[Mandark]

On a different tangent, the Ohio shooter apparently got taken down after one minute and still killed nine people.

[Boredfrom]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Kinda just playing DA for TA here, but it doesn’t really matter what you label it, a pattern needs to be recognized and traced to its source and holistically fixed. Calling these white supremacist terrorist attacks doesn’t make them stop. And people tend to stop trying to treat you as human with factors that led you down that path once you’re labeled “terrorist”

I see your point but disagree.  1)  Terrorist is the appropriate label for these actions - it's not meant to make them stop.  Identifying them as terrorist attacks is important so that police and government agencies can use anti-terror laws to fight them.  2)  Concerning fighting the cause not the symptom - the same can be said about any terrorist act in general: there is always an underlying cause.  People are not born terrorists.   Islamic terrorists are just as likely to be mentally unsound as a nazi.  However, the US and really all countries don't really have a mental health system capable of solving this.  The underlying cause doesn't even need to be mental health,  as racism, misinformation, and geopolitics are causes as a well and those can't really be solved.  3) It's more important to stop people from becoming nazis in the first place than to bring in people in from the cold.  And when you can say this is the end result of white nationalism and link that back to more moderate white nationalist views it should stop people from having those views in the first place.  And that is a lot different than saying this was a just a crazy guy but then go on talking about how brown people are going to take over America in 20 years while quietly forgetting that this guy did this because of that same fear.

I don’t exactly disagree with you, but I will point out you want to use the correct label (terrorist) while using the wrong one (nazi). That guy sounds like distinguished mentally-challenged  white supremacist. I don’t think namedropping Nazi for every single racist redneck scumbag will help.

No neo-nazi or just nazi is totally appropriate; you don't need a shaved head and a 88 tat to be one.

No is not, you are not helping. You guys that name drop the term sound like idiots every time. Is fucking Goldwin law, wasting everyone time.

[ToxicAdam]

The label thing is pointless and only important to politically-minded people who want to use it as a wedge for future discussions.

It doesn’t get us any closer to providing free mental health care for people ages 16-24 as they transition off their serotonin-spiked, puberty cocktail nor does it keep weapons out of their hands so they don’t do anything stupid as they struggle.

Approach the issue from that angle and you will have better success.

[ToxicAdam]

It makes sense to me that they would investigate it because they would be better equipped at recognizing the signs that this was instigated by a larger group of people.

The people refusing to let a terrorist be called a terrorist are the politically motivated ones.

No one is preventing you from calling it whatever you like. It just means you’ll have less people that will listen to what you have to say.

[Madrun Badrun]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Kinda just playing DA for TA here, but it doesn’t really matter what you label it, a pattern needs to be recognized and traced to its source and holistically fixed. Calling these white supremacist terrorist attacks doesn’t make them stop. And people tend to stop trying to treat you as human with factors that led you down that path once you’re labeled “terrorist”

I see your point but disagree.  1)  Terrorist is the appropriate label for these actions - it's not meant to make them stop.  Identifying them as terrorist attacks is important so that police and government agencies can use anti-terror laws to fight them.  2)  Concerning fighting the cause not the symptom - the same can be said about any terrorist act in general: there is always an underlying cause.  People are not born terrorists.   Islamic terrorists are just as likely to be mentally unsound as a nazi.  However, the US and really all countries don't really have a mental health system capable of solving this.  The underlying cause doesn't even need to be mental health,  as racism, misinformation, and geopolitics are causes as a well and those can't really be solved.  3) It's more important to stop people from becoming nazis in the first place than to bring in people in from the cold.  And when you can say this is the end result of white nationalism and link that back to more moderate white nationalist views it should stop people from having those views in the first place.  And that is a lot different than saying this was a just a crazy guy but then go on talking about how brown people are going to take over America in 20 years while quietly forgetting that this guy did this because of that same fear.

I don’t exactly disagree with you, but I will point out you want to use the correct label (terrorist) while using the wrong one (nazi). That guy sounds like distinguished mentally-challenged  white supremacist. I don’t think namedropping Nazi for every single racist redneck scumbag will help.

No neo-nazi or just nazi is totally appropriate; you don't need a shaved head and a 88 tat to be one.

I disagree.

In an age where actual Nazis are walking around promoting literal Nazi rhetoric and getting interviews on CNN, I think it should be noted that both Nazism and White Supremacy are on the rise. It's very easily distinguishable and able to be pointed out.

The public at large seem to be quick on dismissing the rise of Nazis (and consequently that of White Supremacy) in the US as Leftist rhetoric due to its rather frequent usage.

He talked about 'Hispanic invasion of Texas' and wanted an ethnic white state - that is white nationalism and not just white supremacy of the 60's KKK.  A white ethnic state and the idea that its ok to use violence to achieve that is the core of neo nazism in America.  Neo-nazism is a set of beliefs that have different surface features depending on where it appears and in America it terns to focus on race aspects as opposed to the political aspect of being for a totalitarian state.  I also highly doubt that white nationalists in modern times are strongly pro-democracy, which makes any distinction really pointless.  If a true fascist movement came to America, would white nationalists not be first in line to sign up?   Also, people might also be less dismissive if fools didn't mention Goldwin law any time someone says the word nazi.

[toku]

https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/1158074774297468928

[ToxicAdam]

I can’t speak for others, but I didn’t call the Fort Hood shooter a terrorist. Just another troubled, socially-isolated  young person that fits the mold of most of these shooters.

[OnlyRegret]

I don't understand the splitting of hairs over "but it's not terrorism per se". Bizarre stance.

Anyway, yeah, guns are an aspect but not all there is to it. They make it easier to carry stuff out but the homocidal behaviour is still the big issue.

[Madrun Badrun]

When your subcultures overlap in terms of idea on race, violence, and actions, what aesthetic they identify with doesn't matter.  Nazi propaganda overlaps so much with white nationalist propaganda that the source doesn't actually matter.   Those with vested interests will continue to spin. PERIOD.  And if you give them the room to say 'that's not us, that's them' only based on the fact that one has a swastika tattoo and one has a confederate flag tattoo* then you play into their hands.  Your personal distinction is useless and harmful in that helps spread the ideology as it allows white nationalists to hide under the normality of American racism. 

*I'm not saying a confederate flag is a sign that someone is a white nationalist, though most white nationalist probably like the symbol. 

[OnlyRegret]

WN and Neo-Nazis are one and the same as far as I'm concerned. They tend to overlap in their love of Hitler.

[toku]

https://twitter.com/smashmouth/status/1158094341019058176

[Boredfrom]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Kinda just playing DA for TA here, but it doesn’t really matter what you label it, a pattern needs to be recognized and traced to its source and holistically fixed. Calling these white supremacist terrorist attacks doesn’t make them stop. And people tend to stop trying to treat you as human with factors that led you down that path once you’re labeled “terrorist”

I see your point but disagree.  1)  Terrorist is the appropriate label for these actions - it's not meant to make them stop.  Identifying them as terrorist attacks is important so that police and government agencies can use anti-terror laws to fight them.  2)  Concerning fighting the cause not the symptom - the same can be said about any terrorist act in general: there is always an underlying cause.  People are not born terrorists.   Islamic terrorists are just as likely to be mentally unsound as a nazi.  However, the US and really all countries don't really have a mental health system capable of solving this.  The underlying cause doesn't even need to be mental health,  as racism, misinformation, and geopolitics are causes as a well and those can't really be solved.  3) It's more important to stop people from becoming nazis in the first place than to bring in people in from the cold.  And when you can say this is the end result of white nationalism and link that back to more moderate white nationalist views it should stop people from having those views in the first place.  And that is a lot different than saying this was a just a crazy guy but then go on talking about how brown people are going to take over America in 20 years while quietly forgetting that this guy did this because of that same fear.

I don’t exactly disagree with you, but I will point out you want to use the correct label (terrorist) while using the wrong one (nazi). That guy sounds like distinguished mentally-challenged  white supremacist. I don’t think namedropping Nazi for every single racist redneck scumbag will help.

No neo-nazi or just nazi is totally appropriate; you don't need a shaved head and a 88 tat to be one.

I disagree.

In an age where actual Nazis are walking around promoting literal Nazi rhetoric and getting interviews on CNN, I think it should be noted that both Nazism and White Supremacy are on the rise. It's very easily distinguishable and able to be pointed out.

The public at large seem to be quick on dismissing the rise of Nazis (and consequently that of White Supremacy) in the US as Leftist rhetoric due to its rather frequent usage.

He talked about 'Hispanic invasion of Texas' and wanted an ethnic white state - that is white nationalism and not just white supremacy of the 60's KKK.  A white ethnic state and the idea that its ok to use violence to achieve that is the core of neo nazism in America.  Neo-nazism is a set of beliefs that have different surface features depending on where it appears and in America it terns to focus on race aspects as opposed to the political aspect of being for a totalitarian state.  I also highly doubt that white nationalists in modern times are strongly pro-democracy, which makes any distinction really pointless.  If a true fascist movement came to America, would white nationalists not be first in line to sign up?   Also, people might also be less dismissive if fools didn't mention Goldwin law any time someone says the word nazi.

 

People dismiss this stuff because a lot of idiots label Nazis to everything vaguely  felt as authoritarian. You guys really don’t know how stupid you sound even when people agree with you.

When your subcultures overlap in terms of idea on race, violence, and actions, what aesthetic they identify with doesn't matter.  Nazi propaganda overlaps so much with white nationalist propaganda that the source doesn't actually matter.   Those with vested interests will continue to spin. PERIOD.  And if you give them the room to say 'that's not us, that's them' only based on the fact that one has a swastika tattoo and one has a confederate flag tattoo* then you play into their hands.  Your personal distinction is useless and harmful in that helps spread the ideology as it allows white nationalists to hide under the normality of American racism. 

*I'm not saying a confederate flag is a sign that someone is a white nationalist, though most white nationalist probably like the symbol. 

Dude, I live in Mexico and I have heard stupid people throwing the word Nazi to the government, police, military.

[Madrun Badrun]

I get your point but the fact that people can say there is no direct link, therefore 'you said nazi lol you stupid lib' is because they are supported by people like you who want to make some kind of phony distinction between the two.  White nationalism is American nazism.  They are all just 'frustrated white boys' even if someone of them are not hillybilly dumb, like Richard Spencer is not.  Someone who openly calls themselves a nazi is just as evil as a white nationalist.  The latter is not just a mixed up old boy doing the old boy thing. 

The solution isn't to say there is a distinction between the two, and if you use a Hitler quote then we got you and we can peg you down as a bad guy and if not well then you pulled one over on us.  The solution is to get people to understand that they are the same thing. 

And when you say you have no real power you're just someone on the internet occasionally posting about ' frustrate white boys' being different from nazis.  Well isn't that the same as the majority of people that allow for a lack of accountability based on not having direct ties?


And just to be clear I know you saying both groups are evil and you are not advocating for white nationalists.  I also do get your point about if you use the word nazi some people won't take you seriously.  My point is that people who won't take you seriously do so because either 1) they won't take you seriously ever regardless of the word used or 2) because people have a gut reaction that they can't be the same thing because of superficial reasons.  It's this latter reason that is dangerous because it lets white nationists be viewed as something more ingrained into American society and somehow less harmful - which is the reason why I'm harping on the 'frustrated' quote. 

And I really shouldn't be framing it as a confrontation where 'you' are the one supporting these people.  That's wrong of me, sorry.  I am tired of people on the internet who go 'you said nazi lol you stupid lib' without thinking about what a real nazi movement in America would actually look like and I lumped you in with those people. 

[Himu]

(Image removed from quote.)

NRA lost like three board members mere days before this. NRA is dying.

https://thehill.com/regulation/lobbying/455862-three-nra-board-members-resign-from-organization

No one is coming to defend the NRA. Lol NRA invests mere peanuts in the political system compared to big pharma, media, fast food companies, and anti-gun groups like Everytown and now they (NRA) are dying. Lol check the deets yourself. Anti-gun groups far outspend NRA. This characterization of NRA is hilarious and in no way reality.

[Madrun Badrun]

Why do you not want to label it as terrorism

Kinda just playing DA for TA here, but it doesn’t really matter what you label it, a pattern needs to be recognized and traced to its source and holistically fixed. Calling these white supremacist terrorist attacks doesn’t make them stop. And people tend to stop trying to treat you as human with factors that led you down that path once you’re labeled “terrorist”

I see your point but disagree.  1)  Terrorist is the appropriate label for these actions - it's not meant to make them stop.  Identifying them as terrorist attacks is important so that police and government agencies can use anti-terror laws to fight them.  2)  Concerning fighting the cause not the symptom - the same can be said about any terrorist act in general: there is always an underlying cause.  People are not born terrorists.   Islamic terrorists are just as likely to be mentally unsound as a nazi.  However, the US and really all countries don't really have a mental health system capable of solving this.  The underlying cause doesn't even need to be mental health,  as racism, misinformation, and geopolitics are causes as a well and those can't really be solved.  3) It's more important to stop people from becoming nazis in the first place than to bring in people in from the cold.  And when you can say this is the end result of white nationalism and link that back to more moderate white nationalist views it should stop people from having those views in the first place.  And that is a lot different than saying this was a just a crazy guy but then go on talking about how brown people are going to take over America in 20 years while quietly forgetting that this guy did this because of that same fear.

I don’t exactly disagree with you, but I will point out you want to use the correct label (terrorist) while using the wrong one (nazi). That guy sounds like distinguished mentally-challenged  white supremacist. I don’t think namedropping Nazi for every single racist redneck scumbag will help.

No neo-nazi or just nazi is totally appropriate; you don't need a shaved head and a 88 tat to be one.

I disagree.

In an age where actual Nazis are walking around promoting literal Nazi rhetoric and getting interviews on CNN, I think it should be noted that both Nazism and White Supremacy are on the rise. It's very easily distinguishable and able to be pointed out.

The public at large seem to be quick on dismissing the rise of Nazis (and consequently that of White Supremacy) in the US as Leftist rhetoric due to its rather frequent usage.

He talked about 'Hispanic invasion of Texas' and wanted an ethnic white state - that is white nationalism and not just white supremacy of the 60's KKK.  A white ethnic state and the idea that its ok to use violence to achieve that is the core of neo nazism in America.  Neo-nazism is a set of beliefs that have different surface features depending on where it appears and in America it terns to focus on race aspects as opposed to the political aspect of being for a totalitarian state.  I also highly doubt that white nationalists in modern times are strongly pro-democracy, which makes any distinction really pointless.  If a true fascist movement came to America, would white nationalists not be first in line to sign up?   Also, people might also be less dismissive if fools didn't mention Goldwin law any time someone says the word nazi.

 

People dismiss this stuff because a lot of idiots label Nazis to everything vaguely  felt as authoritarian. You guys really don’t know how stupid you sound even when people agree with you.

When your subcultures overlap in terms of idea on race, violence, and actions, what aesthetic they identify with doesn't matter.  Nazi propaganda overlaps so much with white nationalist propaganda that the source doesn't actually matter.   Those with vested interests will continue to spin. PERIOD.  And if you give them the room to say 'that's not us, that's them' only based on the fact that one has a swastika tattoo and one has a confederate flag tattoo* then you play into their hands.  Your personal distinction is useless and harmful in that helps spread the ideology as it allows white nationalists to hide under the normality of American racism. 

*I'm not saying a confederate flag is a sign that someone is a white nationalist, though most white nationalist probably like the symbol. 

Dude, I live in Mexico and I have heard stupid people throwing the word Nazi to the government, police, military.

I called someone who killed people for the reason of perpetuating a white ethnic state a nazi.  I did not say anyone wearing a red hat is a nazi.  You seem to have lumped me into a group of people, based solely on the fact that I said 'nazi' without thinking about why I used that word.  Then you extended that by also lumping those people into the same group that you heard call the Mexican government Nazis.  Who sounds like an idiot again? 

[Himu]

TBH the shooters manifesto that blends aspects of left rhetoric (environment, animus against corporate elites) with far right causation and praxis is some of the closest to Nazi 2k19 we've seen yet. Expect more as America descends farther and farther into fascism.

It is arguable that he is like the Christchurch shooter. What you read from the manifesto is what you want for read. I see conservatives calling him progressive because of his left views and left people’s calling him a conservative because of his right views. In reality it could very well be intentional to cause more division in an divided time. So if you call him a Trumpist you’re likely showing your bias. This is why it’s best to label him a terrorist.

1. It erases from the American public the idea that a terrorist can only be an Arab, which is a good thing
2  it shows that these people are often not doing this for any one ideology but pure chaos

[Boredfrom]

I get your point but the fact that people can say there is no direct link, therefore 'you said nazi lol you stupid lib' is because they are supported by people like you who want to make some kind of phony distinction between the two.  White nationalism is American nazism.  They are all just 'frustrated white boys' even if someone of them are not hillybilly dumb, like Richard Spencer is not.  Someone who openly calls themselves a nazi is just as evil as a white nationalist.  The latter is not just a mixed up old boy doing the old boy thing. 

And when you say you have no real power you're just someone on the internet occasionally posting about ' frustrate white boys' being different from nazis.  Well isn't that the same as the majority of people that allow for a lack of accountability based on not having direct ties?

You want accountability but say distinguishing ideologies is a waste of time and just enabling others... here is the tip, dude: a lot of this scumbags will not even acknowledge being white supremacists, calling them nazis does not help when you have Trump being a openly racist scumbag but denying it because “fake news”. This guys openly disassociate with the news cycle in any case, the guys that you need to convince that these groups are organized racist scumbags are the ones that are connected to this media cycle. People can be stupid, but they are not that stupid to not differentiate between Nazis and general White Supremacy, and normal people in general can see both being horrible ideologies cut from the same root. Calling them Nazis is just muddling things off when is clear that they thrive on not being recognized as either and not accepting either. These assholes like the hyperbole and will prefer that the media amplify this.

I called someone who killed people for the reason of perpetuating a white ethnic state a nazi.  I did not say anyone wearing a red hat is a nazi.  You seem to have lumped me into a group of people, based solely on the fact that I said 'nazi' without thinking about why I used that word. Then you extended that by also lumping those people into the same group that you heard call the Mexican government Nazis.  Who sounds like an idiot again?

 

So this all BS and you just used the term without even thinking but decided to justify yourself with “actually you are in the wrong, enablers”.

[Himu]

Constantly calling people Nazis has indeed muddled waters. I said on Facebook the other day that US detained a little girl for two days on her walk to school and turned out to he an American citizen. I called them concentration camps not dissimilar to the camps Japanese were put in. Someone came in and had a problem with me labeling them concentration camps.

I’m not sure if the overuse of accusing people of Nazism is doing this or if these people care about “context” that damn much more than how it is affecting living, breathing people.

So I don’t really have an answer. I feel it is pertinent to call some of these people neo Nazis, but definitely not all.

[Madrun Badrun]

I don't say distinguishing ideologies is a waste of time I'm saying there is no reason to distinguish them.  They are the same thing and that is not hyperbole.  And your only reason you have for distinguishing them seems to be because it lets people laugh off the clam - which is the exact thing you are doing.  It's like 'You said nazi lol you idiot'.  and justifying that as 'You can't call people nazis because they will call you an idiot.  Idiot'

[Himu]

2  it shows that these people are often not doing this for any one ideology but pure chaos

He literally said he was doing it to fight off Hispanic 'invasions'. His modus operandi is to create a white ethnostate. He's a fascist.... Pretty straightforward.

I know that. I’m not talking about white supremacy. That is established. I’m talking about his political ideology that people can point fingers at. “See? He was a conservative.” “See? He was a progressive.” That shit takes away from the real discussion: his fascism and white supremacist views.

Kind of like how conservatives point to nazis labeling themselves national socialists. “See? Socialism is evil.” They say, as they support Richard fucking Spencer.

So yes, his goal is white supremacy. But it’s also to cause chaos, sew divisions. It’s why his manifesto has both left and right rhetoric in it.

[Madrun Badrun]

Ya the expectation that these terrorists will fall exactly on exactly the side of dems or gop is wrong, so is the expectation that they have some kind of cohesive non-contradicting political philosophy.  Instead, they hear X is bad so they write X is bad in their manifesto and they hear Y is bad so they write Y is bad regardless of how X and Y relate or which side X and Y came from.   I don't attribute this to some game plan of spreading confusion but rather just stupidity on their end. 

[OnlyRegret]

TBH the shooters manifesto that blends aspects of left rhetoric (environment, animus against corporate elites) with far right causation and praxis is some of the closest to Nazi 2k19 we've seen yet. Expect more as America descends farther and farther into fascism.

It is arguable that he is like the Christchurch shooter. What you read from the manifesto is what you want for read. I see conservatives calling him progressive because of his left views and left people’s calling him a conservative because of his right views. In reality it could very well be intentional to cause more division in an divided time. So if you call him a Trumpist you’re likely showing your bias. This is why it’s best to label him a terrorist.

1. It erases from the American public the idea that a terrorist can only be an Arab, which is a good thing
2  it shows that these people are often not doing this for any one ideology but pure chaos

Honestly, the my side vs your side shit is just awful. People rifling through the manifestos, which could be nonsense just to be inflammatory for all we know, just to affirm it was the "other side" which means you win. People have turned these into a sporting event of sorts.

If your biggest concern about terrorism is "giving ammo" to the other side or absolving your perceived political side/group of any complicity, you're a terrible person.

[Boredfrom]

I don't say distinguishing ideologies is a waste of time I'm saying there is no reason to distinguish them.  They are the same thing and that is not hyperbole.  And your only reason you have for distinguishing them seems to be because it lets people laugh off the clam - which is the exact thing you are doing.  It's like 'You said nazi lol you idiot'.  and justifying that as 'You can't call people nazis because they will call you an idiot.  Idiot'

Who is laughing about what? This was my first reply to you:

I don’t exactly disagree with you, but I will point out you want to use the correct label (terrorist) while using the wrong one (nazi). That guy sounds like distinguished mentally-challenged  white supremacist. I don’t think namedropping Nazi for every single racist redneck scumbag will help.

[ToxicAdam]

Federal agents arrested 19-year-old William Patrick Williams on Thursday after his discharge from a hospital. According to a criminal complaint, the Lubbock man had told his grandmother that he'd bought an AK-47 rifle recently, planned to "shoot up" a local hotel, then force police to kill him. Sensing that her grandson was both suicidal and homicidal, the woman persuaded him to be hospitalized instead.

Damn, that nazi propaganda is inspiring everybody. So powerful.


https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Feds-Texas-man-planning-mass-shooting-hit-with-weapons-charge-516260081.html

[OnlyRegret]

Fascism like any other ideology adapts based on the time and place, whether it is literally 'nazism' is whatever. Maybe in time we'll have a historical label for an emerging settler colonial, fascism that is (necessary) environmental in policy due to the reality of climate change. But we don't have one now.

The shooters talk against corporations will be something to keep tabs on. Perhaps it's a reaction to the diversity in workplace movement and social justice messaging from some corporations. As the conditions of this country deteriorate from an economic perspective, fueling farther left and right ideology, let's see if those corporations maintain that messaging.

It indicative of the status quo failing as people shift to further left/right/up/whatever positions as what is no longer suffices.

[Himu]

TBH the shooters manifesto that blends aspects of left rhetoric (environment, animus against corporate elites) with far right causation and praxis is some of the closest to Nazi 2k19 we've seen yet. Expect more as America descends farther and farther into fascism.

It is arguable that he is like the Christchurch shooter. What you read from the manifesto is what you want for read. I see conservatives calling him progressive because of his left views and left people’s calling him a conservative because of his right views. In reality it could very well be intentional to cause more division in an divided time. So if you call him a Trumpist you’re likely showing your bias. This is why it’s best to label him a terrorist.

1. It erases from the American public the idea that a terrorist can only be an Arab, which is a good thing
2  it shows that these people are often not doing this for any one ideology but pure chaos

Honestly, the my side vs your side shit is just awful. People rifling through the manifestos, which could be nonsense just to be inflammatory for all we know, just to affirm it was the "other side" which means you win. People have turned these into a sporting event of sorts.

If your biggest concern about terrorism is "giving ammo" to the other side or absolving your perceived political side/group of any complicity, you're a terrible person.

Precisely my point. When you talk about “the other side” besides white supremacy the terrorist wins.

[Madrun Badrun]

I don't say distinguishing ideologies is a waste of time I'm saying there is no reason to distinguish them.  They are the same thing and that is not hyperbole.  And your only reason you have for distinguishing them seems to be because it lets people laugh off the clam - which is the exact thing you are doing.  It's like 'You said nazi lol you idiot'.  and justifying that as 'You can't call people nazis because they will call you an idiot.  Idiot'

Who is laughing about what? This was my first reply to you:

I don’t exactly disagree with you, but I will point out you want to use the correct label (terrorist) while using the wrong one (nazi). That guy sounds like distinguished mentally-challenged  white supremacist. I don’t think namedropping Nazi for every single racist redneck scumbag will help.

"You guys really don’t know how stupid you sound even when people agree with you. " is "You said nazi lol you idiot"

[Boredfrom]

Fascism like any other ideology adapts based on the time and place, whether it is literally 'nazism' is whatever. Maybe in time we'll have a historical label for an emerging settler colonial, fascism that is (necessary) environmental in policy due to the reality of climate change. But we don't have one now.

The shooters talk against corporations will be something to keep tabs on. Perhaps it's a reaction to the diversity in workplace movement and social justice messaging from some corporations. As the conditions of this country deteriorate from an economic perspective, fueling farther left and right ideology, let's see if those corporations maintain that messaging.

Well, is good that I didn’t say it wasn’t fascist related (speaking for me personally).

Here the thing, you are perfectly able to distinguish terms. Why go in a hyper defensive rant about you right to use the term whatever you like?

[agrajag]

yeah, it would be something if the right wingers topple the corporate hegemony over racial sensitivity training instead of oppression of the working class...

[Boredfrom]

I don't say distinguishing ideologies is a waste of time I'm saying there is no reason to distinguish them.  They are the same thing and that is not hyperbole.  And your only reason you have for distinguishing them seems to be because it lets people laugh off the clam - which is the exact thing you are doing.  It's like 'You said nazi lol you idiot'.  and justifying that as 'You can't call people nazis because they will call you an idiot.  Idiot'

Who is laughing about what? This was my first reply to you:

I don’t exactly disagree with you, but I will point out you want to use the correct label (terrorist) while using the wrong one (nazi). That guy sounds like distinguished mentally-challenged  white supremacist. I don’t think namedropping Nazi for every single racist redneck scumbag will help.

"You guys really don’t know how stupid you sound even when people agree with you. " is "You said nazi lol you idiot"

[Himu]

I’m talking about his political ideology that people can point fingers at. “See? He was a conservative.” “See? He was a progressive.” That shit takes away from the real discussion: his fascism and white supremacist views.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

I know. Fascism is his actual political ideology. He’s using the others as a mask. I poorly worded myself there. It’s why people are poking through the manifesto to see if he was a lib or a con while ignoring that he intentionally wanted to kill minorities “invading” Texas. Texas Lt Governor Dan Patrick has gone on a rant talking about fuckign antifa in relation to him. So yes, fascism is his political ideology. This is obvious. But he’s given enough crumbs for people to fight over what his actual ideology *is*. They’re bread crumbs for chaos and further extremism.

[Himu]

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/texas/article/Asked-about-El-Paso-shooter-Lt-Gov-Dan-Patrick-14279387.php

[Boredfrom]

His actual ideology is being a stupid racist idiot that thinks killing old brown grandmas in a Walmart was a heroic act and supporting Trump while being worry of the environment.

The guys that Trump and Spencer thrive in conning about.

[Himu]

yeah, it would be something if the right wingers topple the corporate hegemony over racial sensitivity training instead of oppression of the working class...

Thats not what I'm getting at....My point is that the American MAGA - right dislikes the liberal multikulti hegemony coming from the Nikes of the world, and as the contradictions of the economy fuel more extreme ideology on both sides of the spectrum, corporations will drop those externally socially liberal views to back who upholds capital; the fascists.

This has been on my mind a lot lately.

I’ve seen all these minorities represented on tv and film lately and you know it’s impermanent. This diversity is  not done out of social progress but for money. And when it’s profitable to not cater to us darkies we’ll be dropped like an fresh iPhone on release day.

[agrajag]

thanks, Bernie

[Boredfrom]

Well, is good that I didn’t say it wasn’t fascist related (speaking for me personally).

Here the thing, you are perfectly able to distinguish terms. Why go in a hyper defensive rant about you right to use the term whatever you like?

I'm not feeling defensive at all, lol  . I just think it's fair to draw parallels between today's situation and those of the past. We're all doing it in here. If you think that it turns people off to call it Nazism as a tactic, fine. I didn't get bogged down in all that. Different people are receptive to different analyses. We have a stagnant global capitalism heading for a t-bone with climate change that'll have a devastating effect on growth-dependent economies, and the ideological prelude to those conditions are what we're seeing now. just my 2c

You could just say “I’m not feeling defensive at all and not insulted. I just think is a valid comparison.”

Point taken, anyway. Still feel is just justification, specially since the guy admitted he didn’t think that deep about it.

[OnlyRegret]

Calling something Nazi lost even more meaning when corporate conservatism launched a blistering rebuke of far left wing gatherings with "nuh-uh, you're the real nazis".
Which people eat up.

[Boredfrom]

Calling something Nazi lost even more meaning when corporate conservatism launched a blistering rebuke of far left wing gatherings with "nuh-uh, you're the real nazis".
Which people eat up.

“NO U”

[Himu]

Calling something Nazi lost even more meaning when corporate conservatism launched a blistering rebuke of far left wing gatherings with "nuh-uh, you're the real nazis".
Which people eat up.

Then you’ve got an entire half century of people turning Nazis into cartoon characters.

A lot of things has unfortunately contributed to this.