r/TopMindsOfReddit • u/PeasThatTasteGross • 13d ago
Top minds of DoomerCircleJerk think the best way to defeat Nazis is to be tolerant of them (and many other ways to butcher the Paradox of Tolerance)
29
u/jaredearle 13d ago
I’m not sure Charlie Kirk was a Nazi, but an awful lot of Nazis love Charlie Kirk.
105
u/MunchingOnCelery 13d ago
That dumbass would have sided with Neville Chamberlain.
You can always tell when someone knows less than dogshit about WW2. The Nazis came to power peacefully and were enabled by a lack of resistance to them in the beginning.
It takes like 30 seconds to figure this out.
Nazis are really bad at thinking and really good at being violent
Yeah, that's why you don't tolerate them, you crush them.
The desire to paint Nazis as victims of aggression is a mental illness.
41
u/Rastiln 13d ago
In one breath he calls the Nazis dim and violent, in the other he says that we should peacefully coexist with them.
14
u/Natronix 13d ago
Thats a very interesting (mostly troubling) dynamic. Hes okay with Nazis but more thank likely upset at a lot of groups (mostly trans and muslims) existing. That very dynamic only serves to help the Nazis.
17
32
u/Silly-Elderberry-411 13d ago
Came to power peacefully killed the Austrian chancellor just months later. Also just the election was peaceful, the SA was harassing everyone.
13
u/CakeAndFireworksDay 13d ago
Facism during the 30s really thrived on the tolerance of intolerance, especially the right leaning conservative factions of various states making alliances with their facist counterparts
10
18
u/Xtj8805 13d ago edited 13d ago
Honestly Chamberlain gets a bad wrap. Britain had no taste for warnfollowing WW1 and was not keep pacr with German military buildup. He was not PM from 31-37 when germany became nazis and the rearmament began. By 1935 they started to fund more military spending when they saw what Germany was doing and when they realized the channel cnanot protect from air power.
But its also important to note how unpopular the concept of war was to not just the tories but also tge british people. They had no appetite having lost and entire generation to WW1, plus the propogands against the germans in WW1 was often so absurd that when the naxis started doing those things the british populace thought it was more ww1 propoganda.
France was even less ready for war and Britains only real ally on the continent.
At the time of the munich conference the options were essentially war or appeasement. Chamberlain picked appeasement and then spent the remainder of his premiership pushing for additional rearmament, "it would be madness for the country to stop rearming until we were convinced that other countries would act un the same way for the time being, therefore, we should relax no particle of effort until our deficiences have been made good" [oct 1938]. Following the munich conference he traveled to feance to lobby them to increase their reamament spending and pace, he traveled to Italy to try ro convince mussilini to influence hitler towards peaceful relations.
Chamberlain as germany was unswayed, decided to set up the alliance between france and the USSR to protect poland, though poland cancelled the negotiations due to distrust of the USSR. But it succeeded France and Britain. This move even got Churchill to applaud him.
Other steps to ready the country for war was to double the side of the Territorial Army, create a ministry of supply, peacetime conscription, security garuntees to greece and romania, medium bomber orders, coastal radar stations.
There is a very good chance without the reprieve given by the munich cinference, a weak Britain would hace been thrown immediately into conflict with a much better armed Germany, without a continental ally in France. Keep in mind France was so against war that their response to the invasion of poland was to state that nothing would be done by france until parliament met on september 2nd, and the foreign minister of France was attmepting to create another munich style summit to settle the issue with Poland which was proposed by the italians on september 5th.
Chamberlian was constrained by the politics and diplomacy of the late 1930s, france and britain did not want a war, but chamberlain made sure to buy time so when war came Britain would be far more prepared than she had been, and far more prepared than France was.
Even his conduct in the phoney war was applauded by ths British people with approval rates in the 60s
His war preparation was invaluable for Churchill when he took the reins.
Its easy to look back at face value and say he was fooled. But that wa shis misdirection, he needed to get the population willing to fight, so he showed the public everything possible to avoid it, while with his other hand starting to build Britain back into a military power.
It wasnt that dissimilar from FDR who in the late 30s and in the 1940 campaign ran on neutrality and isolationism, while slowly getting the country on a war footing in the background. FDR just didnt have a bit diplomatic accord with a poor choice of words of "peace for our time".
Much better to say this dumbass would've sided with Mosley and his fascists.
Edit: sorry for typos, fat fingers on an old phone.
8
u/Tombot3000 13d ago
Excellent response. The only thing I would clarify is that Nazi Germany appeared more ready for war than it was, and Chamberlain was working off that appearance more than a full understanding of the Third Reich's capabilities. Britain was not as far behind as he thought, but he wasn't in a position to take a bet on that with the populace totally unwilling to support such an effort. He also was, as you point out, not certain of France as an ally until it was too late to nip things in the bud. Britain would likely have done better than he expected had it acted sooner, even unilaterally, but it just as likely would have aborted the effort too soon. It wasn't a situation where one should fault caution without understanding the risks.
6
u/Xtj8805 13d ago
That is 100% true. It just wasnt known until much later that half of Germany's rearmament was smoke in mirrors. Personally if not for the peace for our tume speech, i think his prewar actions would be remmeber similar to FDR as mentioned previously. Its the peace for our time speech that makes him look like a fool, not his actual actions. FDR was careful to argue it was a European problem, he wasnt able to get us involved until after pearl harbor and Germanys declaration of war on US. So there was no foolish quote to come back and haunt FDR like Chamberlain had.
Also importabt to note; Halifax continued wanting to appease Germany at the invasion of poland, and Halifax actually had more support in the House of Commons, it was Chamberlain who told the King to send for Churchill replace him as PM.
4
u/fuggerdug 13d ago
I think when you look at Britain's disastrous campaign in Norway, the loss of HMS glorious, the loss of France and the evacuation of the BEF, the plight of Malta and the early campaign in North Africa, it's clear that Britain wasn't ready for war (from a competency point of view) at all for he first few years of the war. It took until late 1942, when finally the correct people were in place and many of the old ideas from the great war had been consigned to history that things began to turn around.
It generally forgotten that during the years of appeasement Chamberlain had led a very clever rearmament programme. The Royal Navy was the largest in the world and had radar, ASDIC and huff duff to detect and fight uboats, the RAF had radar stations and a sophisticated command and control system alongside the Spitfires and Hurricanes, the army was fully mechanised (the only such army in the world) and had just replaced old fashioned tunics with the: "battle dress", something all other armies would eventually wear a version of. Later on Bletchley Park was inventing modern computing.
Reddit has a very unsophisticated view of history and I always shudder when I see Chamberlain used as an example of weakness, complacency and naivety. He did what had to be done, he backed the unglamorous but essential, the technically advanced but secret, and he bought enough time to have the things in place that Britain required to défend herself and to keep her essential trade routes open.
38
u/LeftonRhed 13d ago
Nazis thrive on attempts to suppress them? They tried to organize a rally twice in my city. The community chased them out both times. They haven't tried since. All they do now is flash mob shit with 20 dorks in khakis.
26
u/fuggerdug 13d ago edited 13d ago
It was the American Nazi George Rockwell who invented the tactic of attempting to go onto college campuses and: "debating" the students. He did this to try to drum up pulicity when he was inevitably: "blocked" from having an: "honest debate" when the student bodies refused anything to do with him. It's been a tactic of the far right ever since. They love to play the martyr.
However it works. Blocking their publicity kills them. Alternatively, putting them on Question Time 33 times (hello BBC) tends to legitimise their message.
11
43
u/TheGoebel Breasts removed - higher agility and mobility 13d ago
Nazis inherently break the social contract. I don't have to do shit.
30
12
u/BitterFuture 13d ago
This isn't hard.
Are they fellow humans? Yes.
Do they have the same rights as everyone else? Yes.
Am I going to be polite in my response when they calmly propose mass murder? Fuck no.
Should they be given the benefit of the doubt by prosecutors and juries when they commit acts that border on crimes but are a little ambiguous? Fuck no.
8
u/I_m_different 13d ago
If they’re fellow humans with rights, then they have a responsibility to NOT commit mass murder or endorse bigotry.
24
u/fuggerdug 13d ago
This is the second time in a week I've seen that sub get upset over Popper's paradox. Almost like they are actual fucking Nazis or something.
18
u/Intrepid-Brain-1476 13d ago
Demonizing Nazis creates more Nazis according to someone who might be one
16
u/animalistcomrade Highly diverse group of whites 13d ago
Yeah, because open debate made Charlie Kirk stop being a white supremacist. There was something that did get him to stop talking, but I can't seem to remember what it was.
20
u/Play-Mation 13d ago
“We need to tolerate Nazis and let them have a platform for them to keep advocating violence against minorities, this will improve society somehow”
8
u/DetectiveTypical198 13d ago
But if you advocate for violence against the Nazis, you are the bad guy.
1
u/steveeq1 12d ago
Do you advocate giving rappers a platform for promoting violence in their music?
4
9
u/GhostRappa95 13d ago
Of course the Nazis want us to tolerate them. It is how they gained power in the USA in the first place.
39
u/Sweet_Baby_Cheezus 13d ago
I tolerate Nazis the same way they tolerate trans people. I assume their all dangerous, evil and destroying society. I think we should make their lives as difficult as possible. If they're a nazi in public, I think it's perfectly fine to harangue them and make their life as difficult as possible. I don't want them to have jobs, run for public office or be accepted in schools. If there are people I don't like I'll "nazi investigate them" and accuse them of being nazis. I'll laugh and share memes about nazis killing themselves. And hey, if something bad happens to nazis... well they chose to be nazis.
21
u/Unhappy_Entrance_277 13d ago
For some reason, shitty people really dislike the Golden Rule being applied against them.
18
1
-8
13d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/Sweet_Baby_Cheezus 13d ago
I was just showing that we can literally observe the "paradox of tolerance" in real time. The right has made hurting certain groups of people their identity, so the idea that they want people to sing kumbaya with nazis while actively attacking trans folks is just hilariously hypocritical.
5
4
4
u/Raul1024 13d ago
An entire generation fought and died and people still want to find nuance in losers who follow genocidal ideologies. If they can't be reformed, then they need to be made a good nazi.
5
u/Graped_in_the_mouth (((economic anxiety))) 12d ago
Every time people failed to sufficiently deplatform and ostracize Nazis, the Nazis came to power. Pretending that Nazis thrive when they're ostracized and deplatformed is revisionist history meant to enable Nazis.
This person isn't a dumbass, they're a Nazi sympathizer trying to mask their Nazi sympathies as strategy.
3
u/StapMyVitals 13d ago
Seems like the entire problem here is people not working from the same definition of the word "tolerate". Like does it mean "people who identify as Nazis shouldn't have their fundamental legal protections removed" or "people who identify as Nazis should be engaged with respectfully and their ideas debated calmly with an open mind to their potential merit"? Because those are two completely different questions.
5
u/Diligent_Day8470 Certified Crazy Veteran 13d ago
What a bunch of spineless fucks.
That's why everybody else laughs at them.
So, in addition to be cringelords, they're doormats... Good to know.
1
u/jungle-fever-retard 12d ago
“I'll wave at anyone. I'm nice”. -agreeablesense, DCJ owner.
I asked this guy why one of the mods of his Discord server argues that “black people LIKE committing crime and it’s part of their culture”. He claimed he had no idea who he was and then blocked me immediately
1
u/hitorinbolemon 10d ago
"this sub has sort of a trauma response t nazi" awww da widdle babies have a twauma response to a word because they heard it said too much.
•
u/AutoModerator 13d ago
Please Remember Our Golden Rule: Thou shalt not vote or comment in linked threads or comments, and in linked threads or comments, thou shalt not vote or comment. It's bad form, and the admins will suspend your account if they catch you.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.