For example, it’s very common for radical left wingers to call a person a “Nazi” for any little thing that usually has nothing to do with nazism. If a person likes listening to the German military march called “Erika”, a bunch of Radical left wingers (SocJus and Neo commies) will get offended by the march. The march has nothing to do with politics, it’s just a song about a flower and a woman named Erika. So there really is no reason why anyone should be offended by such songs.
This kind of reasoning is guilt by association, false equivalence and generalization fallacies all in one. I think these radical left wingers judge books by their covers, they don’t care about getting to know all the details. They assume the book cover is all there is to know and that’s why they resort to nitpicking and distorting facts about a subject to suit their narratives.How dare you listen to “Erika”!Some ignoramus recently commented stupid remarks on one of my posts where he pretty much called me a “nazi” just because I like to listen to traditional German military songs that are apolitical. It’s obvious he didn’t read the post and he is also oblivious to the fact that I’m actually mixed (half East Asian/half Hispanic). So him calling me a “Nazi” is pretty stupid on his part.
So in your opinion, why do do these people like using such fallacious arguments?
Why do radical left wingers (SocJus, Neo commies etc) tend to use guilt by association, false equivalence and generalization fallacies?
Goodwin's law asserts that if any discussion goes on long enough then at some point one will use a comparison to the Nazis or any facist group.
It usually happens because those making the comparison do so because they have nothing left to argue with, also while they have nothing else to argue with, no facts etc, they have been challenged in all of the arguments they have out forward or had all of their arguments countered by facts.
This causes them to experience cognitive dissonance, the internal response is to double down, or change the belief, since many people tie their identity to their argument, they have no choice but to double down.
Changing their beliefs means changing their entire identity, most people cannot comprehend doing that so double down to the point of ingoring the facts or rely on slurs against others such that they can't use any facts to counter, it worked as an effective shut down tactic, calling somebody racist or a Nazi, something nobody wants to live under the label of used to make people stop talking and leave the argument, the one calling others Nazis can then claim they have won or claim a victory because the other either left the argument or stopped talking. It is of course guilt by association but nobody wants that association.
There is a very easy way to counter it which is to say I want proof of the claim. It's actually that simple.
For example, you say all police are rasict and I argue that they aren't because you're ignoring many factors, such as black police chiefs, exist that wouldn't happen in a systemically racist organisation.
You then say I'm a Nazi and support racism, usually I'd have no counter, saying I'm not means I have to either say I lots of black friends, which looks ridiculous a token black friend, or saying nothing, you could then claim nobody should listen to me as I'm rasict.
Instead I'll say prove the charge, prove it, where's your evidence for that claim. Now you have to give proof to what you say. The moral victory lies then with me because I didn't trot out a black friend to defend me, I didn't back down. It makes you look childish making false claims that you can't back up.
It's Godwin's law, and he's pointed out that it shouldn't be allowed to be a shield for people who are genuinely fascists. For example, presidents that order their minions to violently clear out peaceful protesters and even the priests belonging to the church he wants to have his photo taken outside of.
"In December 2015, Godwin commented on the Nazi and fascist comparisons being made by several articles about Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, saying: "If you're thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler when you talk about Trump, or any other politician."[12] In August 2017, Godwin made similar remarks on social networking websites Facebook and Twitter with respect to the two previous days' Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, endorsing and encouraging efforts to compare its alt-right organizers to Nazis.[13][14][15][16]
In October 2018, Godwin said on Twitter that it was acceptable to call Brazilian politician Jair Bolsonaro, who had won the first round and later the second round of the presidential election, a "Nazi".[17][18]
In June 2019, after Chris Hayes invoked Godwin's Law in a discussion of whether it was appropriate to call the United States's refugee detention centers "concentration camps," Godwin explicitly stated his belief that the term "concentration camps" was appropriate.[19] "
That is true but can only apply to arguments made which are clearly facist in nature, facism being that I think one way and anybody who thinks differently is wrong.
When an argument made that disagrees with your opinion or perspective, then making the statement that the other person is a facist, Nazi, bigot etc proves the law applies.
What Goodwin asserts is that a comparison is just if and only if the comparison echoes facism, facist rhetoric, not to be applied to cases where one disagrees and the other had neither argument nor fact to back up their claim.
What Goodwin asserts then is that where a comparison is made as long as it's made with just argument then its fair and right, where the comparison is made as a way to stifle discussion or even shut down the argument the one making the comparison proves themselves to be the facist, lacking in argument, facts or logical processing and firm in their beliefs that everyone should think in exactly the same way.
Godwin's law. I expect you don't mean that only fascists can call people fascists? Oh, and the asker brought up the Nazis.
Just out of interest, do you not see a problem with the title of this question? It seems to me that the asker was trying to get an excessive reaction by deliberately talking about things right on the cusp of being Nazi songs, and asking questions like this to paint the left wing in a bad light (while calling people SocJus, Neo commies etc.)
I don't know if you saw the video I posted called "How to radicalise a Normie"?
No and I would have thought given you'd quoted him yourself would have understood that if the argument is well thought out with clear objectivtity then the comparison is ok and the argument is not lost, however if the argument is made because the one using the slur is doing it for no other reason than to stifle speech or debate then the argument is lost and all previous claims invalidated.
What the purpose behind the question was, I frankly could not care less, as for your video no I have zero interest in your video and as far as I'm concerned all that I know about feminism was taught to me by feminists, all I know about the left was taught to me by the left, so you'll have to do much better than you have so far if you want to convince me that rioting and burning shops, houses etc is justifiable for any injustice done by the state.
Traditional German military music is pretty damn obscure...
And there are a lot of people who glorify the Wehrmacht... I don't think that necessarily makes people anti semitic or bigoted.
But the lefties like to demonize the right in any way they can because their beliefs are stupid and they'd rather write all of us off as hillbillies and Nazis than talk things out.
90% of the left don't even know what the right believes in.
Don't like affirmative action? You must be a racist sexist. Don't like immigration? What a xenophobic bigot. Don't like the welfare state? Another corporate shill benefitting from an oppressive system.
How many lefties do you think could produce an argument in support of each of the things listed above? A minority, that's for sure.
@Madhatter920 Yeah yeah, I get it. The difference is I'll admit the lefty point of view has reason in it, and it just doesn't hold water in the end or isn't pragmatic. You people just call names and write off the opposition as dumb racist nazis. There isn't even an assumption that the opposition has good intentions.
In the end the left winds up with the attitude of "I'm right because the opposition and their beliefs are evil and bad," rather than "I'm right because what I advocate works."
When people dislike something, justly or not, and either can't be bothered to articulate a reason why or simply don't think they need to, they'll often label it with something they find demeaning. And that's a human failing that transcends any and all ideological allegiances. I grew up in a very conservative part of the US and if I had a dollar for every time something was dismissed as "liberal", "socialist", "communist", "feminist", "godless" and/or various combinations no matter how ridiculous, I'd have been a wealthy woman at 20. Conversely, I'm not a Trump supporter at all, but I'm sick to death of people calling him a "fascist" or a "Nazi" when he's neither.
Because they are irrational, ignorant of the facts and usually of below-average intelligence. A person has to be that way to be stupid enough to support an ideology that is anti human; contrary to science; has failed every time that it has been tried; and has caused more misery, poverty and death than any other ideology in recorded history. Fun fact: Marxism is the only system of government in recorded history that built fences to keep people in. Everyone else built fences and walls and had border guards to keep the barbarians out. No version of Marxism (which includes Feminism) can survive a fact-based argument, which is why reds screech scripted lies, rather than engage in rational discussion.
@goaded I think you have more skills and experience than me when it comes to tearing the „apolitical“ claim apart. Try this: https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erika_(Lied) Vor allem: „bis heute meistens untrennbar mit der deutschen Wehrmacht verbunden; so gehörte es zum Beispiel 1983 beim Zehn-Jahres-Jubiläum der Junta in Chile zum Repertoire des Musikzugeseines chilenischen Militärbataillons in „vertrautem Feldgrau mit original Wehrmachts-Stahlhelm“, das noch in der Tradition „einstiger deutscher Militärhilfe“ stand“
Is it me? Is it us? Do people not living here really think it’s okay to ignore the origins of songs like these? And why would @ADFSDF1996 claim that only left-wing people don’t support Songs with a troubled and dark history?
Slavery played an important role in American history, does that mean all Americans are bad?
Herms Niel may have been a “Nazi” but he never committed war crimes. All he did was compose songs. So assuming the song Erika is inherently evil just because of it’s faint association with Nazism, are both guilt by association and false equivalence fallacies.
Example: Hitler was a a vegetarian, therefore all vegetarians must be Nazis as well.
@tallandsweet Yes, you are right that origins are important, but (as argued by @ADFSDF1996) it can't be everything. Substance is also important. Or should we condemn everyone who has ever bought a B. M. W., Hugo Boss, I. B. M., Mitsubishi, BAYER, etc? Are you aware of the human-sacrifices involved in the original Irish Halloween? Should current nations even exist, given their atrocities (ex. mess-genocide by U. S., Opium Wars by U. K., etc.)? Should Latin America's jurisdictions be mass-punished for becoming a safe-haven for the Nazis poet-W. W.Ⅱ? www.history.com/.../how-south-america-became-a-nazi-haven
If we must look into the past of everything older than a decade, could we be using anything at all? Should we also abolish innovations originally based upon a 'cursed' thing? How much fewer stuff can we use?
Sure, knowledge of the dark past should be known, but (in the end), a song is a song, a car's a car, computers are computers, etc., and time moves-on. If something excels in its function, pragmatism demands that it be used. Yes, out of respect for the casualties, we note the past.
But (in terms of songs), who can disagree that the Soviet-occupation era anthem of Germany's east sounds inspiring, truly well-composed, and instilled with great meaning? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1CyPjQQTAM If you're an American, you've celebrated Halloween, haven't you? And anyone who's ridden/driven a new Mitsubishi or B. M. W. knows they're good cars worth buying.
He's just trying to goad you into saying something that he can point to as an example of the left wing being unreasonable, in order to "red pill" converts. (Same with the insults.)
I mean, if we blow up about a few great military songs, only a couple of which were written and/or used during the Nazi era, what else might we be exaggerating?
Just in case we might not react, he had to mention that they totally weren't NAZI songs, pay no attention to their NAZI-era writing, etc.
@goaded Haven’t you learned your lesson already? How many times do I have to refute your arguments? How many times do I have to say I’m not a fascist or a Nazi? I even mentioned that I’m mixed (half Asian half Hispanic) so I can’t be a “Nazi” even if I wanted to.
Furthermore you just proved my point of how you people like to call everything that’s German “nazi” by using the guilt by association and false equivalence fallacies. Who gives a damn if they were written during the Nazi era, a lot of things we use today had their origins in the third reich. But context is important. The composers of the Nazi apolitical songs may have been members of the nazi party but they never committed any war crimes. So assuming that their songs are bad just because of their faint association with the third reich is as fallacious as assuming all vegetarians are like Hitler just because Hitler was a vegetarian.
Funny how I don’t here you folks complain about people still seeing Soviet Era memorabilia and playing Soviet era songs out in the open despite the Soviet Union being just as oppressive as the Nazi regime.
Aw, so you couldn't make it into the club, but you're a hanger-on? Assuming you're not lying your ass off, which seems likely.
Funnily enough, I don't call my family Nazis (although I'm not too sure about my aunt, who was captured by the Russians). I even wrote a take: Why I might call someone a Nazi. ↗
As to Stalin, etc., I've covered that elsewhere, but suffice to say, he's only brought up to defend Hitler from being the worst person of the 20th century.
And I don’t meet any of the criteria on your list. But it seems you are breaking your own rules by calling people Nazis for other trivial reasons that aren’t valid reasons to call someone a “Nazi”.
What I said was that you seem to be trying to radicalise people away from anything left-wing. I don't know why.
Just claiming without proof that you're not something, or you are something else isn't a refutation of an argument, even if I were saying you're a Nazi, which I'm not. You could just be trolling, but I don't see that as an excuse.
@goaded You didn’t explicitly call me one but you did imply that you think I’m one just because I like traditional German military songs. That’s a false equivalence fallacy on your part.
I’ve literally explained why Erika can’t be considered a “Nazi” song, your only counter argument was using the guilt by association fallacy, which is an invalid argument on your part. So yes I successfully refuted your narrative.
I actually had a picture of myself on this website for a while. And a couple people from this website who I get along with very well follow my social media accounts. They know I’m half Japanese/half Mexican.
@goaded So again I say, just cause a song is German or was composed by a “Nazi” composer, doesn’t mean it’s a “Nazi” song. Knowing the context is important before unjustly attaching labels onto something.
Assuming something is “Nazi” just cause it’s German, is a false equivalence and guilt by association fallacy. Thus making your argument invalid.
@goaded Your initial argument was you calling Erika a “Nazi” song just because it was composed by a “Nazi” composer. All while you disregard the fact that Erika makes no mention to politics or the third reich. And you also disregard the fact that the composer never committed any war crimes. Which completely refutes your argument.
You also seem to have missed the points of my recent articles/takes since you linked them for no apparent reason. Not to mention that you also linked a video about the “alt right” despite the alt right being irrelevant to this discussion.
So no it’s not a strawman because even though you didn’t explicitly call me a “Nazi” you still implied that you think I’m a “nazi”, even though I explained to you why I’m not a Nazi.
You can't, because I didn't. (That's what a refutation of an argument looks like.)
The video is not irrelevant to this discussion, because your actions appear to match aspects of the tactics described in it. It doesn't matter what exact label you want to attach to yourself, your actions are clearly intended to move people away from the left, which is all I've accused you of.
In what way is saying that you made a point of mentioning possible Nazi involvement in the songs saying that they were Nazi songs? I said you were trying to get that reaction.
Remember, I said: "Quote me saying it is a Nazi song.
You can't, because I didn't. (That's what a refutation of an argument looks like.)
The video is not irrelevant to this discussion, because your actions appear to match aspects of the tactics described in it. It doesn't matter what exact label you want to attach to yourself, your actions are clearly intended to move people away from the left, which is all I've accused you of. "
@goaded I see critical thinking isn’t one of your strengths.
You didn’t blatantly say it is a “Nazi” song, you heavily implied that you think they are Nazi songs with what I quote above. Now you’re just trying to change the narrative to make yourself seem more credible.
And the video is irrelevant because for starters I’m not part of the alt right and second of all I could care less what your political views are. As long as you aren’t a proto totalitarian that’s trying to infringe on people’s rights, you can be either left wing or right wing and there’s nothing wrong with that.
So you just made more faulty assumptions and a strawman fallacy. This is the 4th time I’ve refuted your points on this thread.
But if you don’t actually think Erika is a Nazi song, then there’s nothing to argue about. Because we can both agree that just because something is German and military related doesn’t mean it’s synonymous with “Nazism”.
Nope, I didn't imply anything about the song, I stated outright that you chose songs on the cusp of being Nazi songs, and explicitly planted the idea that they might actually be Nazi songs in the hopes of producing an excessive reaction you could point to and say, "see how unreasonable the left are". Oh, and Erika gets a link, and Panzerlied a section on this Wikipedia page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_songs#%22Panzerlied%22 so it wouldn't even be that unreasonable.
The video is incredibly relevant, because it makes it clear that there's intentional use of a ratcheting of ideas that radicalise people further and further right; it doesn't matter whether you're at the beginning of that process with your attempt to "prove" how ridiculous/unreasonable the left wing can be, or at the end "This is obviously a ploy and I actually do want to gas...", you're part of the problem, and I think it's intentional.
That's what I'm arguing with you about. There's no way you can say this question is apolitical, even if you can make a case about this particular song.
@goaded You pretty much just admitted that you think Erika is a Nazi song just because a Wikipedia article says so. You do realize anyone can go on Wikipedia and put whatever they want right?
Sorry pal but that’s a guilt by association fallacy. Erika and panzerlied are not Nazi songs since they make no references to politics nor the third reich.
And the video is irrelevant because you are making more faulty assumptions, not to mention that you are using a politically biased YouTube channel as a source.
Did I forget to answer this, or did you just delete it? It wouldn't be the first time someone "won" an argument against me that way.
I didn't say Erika was a Nazi song, I said you could make an argument either way. Nobody has to accept your definition for what makes a Nazi song.
But that's irrelevant; my argument is that you're trying to provoke an excessive response to something you can claim is innocent, in order to radicalise people towards the right, as explained in the video; it doesn't matter whether you're at the beginning of that process with your attempt to "prove" how ridiculous/unreasonable the left wing can be, or at the end "This is obviously a ploy and I actually do want to gas...", you're part of the problem, and I think it's intentional. There's no way you can say this question is apolitical, even if you can make a case about this particular song.
@goaded thanks for coming through, I feel like he genuinely doesn’t understand how we feel about this subject because he didn’t grow up with the dark legacy of Nationalsozialismus.
@tallandsweet You do realize that Mr. Goaded isn’t an ethnic German right? He’s actually an Englishman residing in Germany. He even said so himself. You also don’t seem to understand the fallacies you are using which are the “guilt by association” and “false equivalence”. If you actually read the lyrics of Erika, you’d realize that the song’s lyrics are completely apolitical. Plus the composer never committed any war crimes.
“ he didn’t grow up with the dark legacy of Nationalsozialismus.” appeal to pity fallacy, besides according to your profile you are only 18 and you are Austrian. So the legacy of the NSDAP shouldn’t affect you as much as it affects present day Germans who still get unfairly associated with the third reich.
@goaded The definition of what makes a Nazi song is self evident, it’s not my definition because I didn’t come up with it, I’m just telling it how it is. If you don’t want to accept the definition of what makes a “Nazi song” then you are distorting facts. As someone who resides here n Germany, you should know that playing a Nazi song in Germany is illegal. you want a list of some actual Nazi songs, here it is. Songs Banned in Germany (for Educational Purposes Only) ↗
But none of the songs on my apolitical German military marches take/article meet the criteria to be classified as “Nazi songs” and none of them are illegal to play in Germany.
I never said that all left wingers are bad, my point isn’t to make left wingers to become right wingers. All I did was offer some simple criticism So your point is once again invalid.
And here you are trying to drag the conversation from you trying to radicalise people to the right in this clearly political question back to the non-issue of whether the particular song written by a Nazi was a Nazi song (and, apparently, suggesting you're not a Nazi unless you personally commit war crimes).
@ADFSDF1996 Yes, I realise that, but I don’t think that you can understand what’s nazi and what isn’t, simply because you’ve never lived in Germany/Austria/Switzerland to my knowledge. Being Austrian involves facing history. Hitler was Austrian and outside of America, enough people know this for my „heritage“ to be important. I don’t care about ethnicity. I’m an „ethnic Austrian“ with Hungarian and Danish roots - but I also have people in my family who were killed in concentration camps. Not because they were Jews, but because they spoke out against Hitlers regime. I appreciate that you know a lot about life in Germany, but you will never understand it fully and I feel like you need to become much more aware of that. I‘ve been to the states, I had so many questions, the same ones that my Austrian friends had, that just shows how much we‘re influenced by the place we grow up in. To me, the FPÖ is a right-Wing party. To me, Sebastian Kurz is a very conservative politician that I don’t support. However, he represents the country I currently reside in fairly well and I deal with that on a daily basis. I support opening borders for refugees. I‘ve met so many elderly people who never outgrew what Nazi propaganda had instilled in them - I can’t blame them, but I can still despise the fact that these people make up 1/3 of Austrians and thus hold much more power (constitutional democracy) than they would in the states.
I don’t laugh when someone makes a joke about das Dritte Reich, I don’t laugh when someone says that Hitler should have been aborted. History happened, Erika is a nazi song to me (because it was composed FOR propaganda), the Nibelungenlied will always be something that was used for propaganda by Nazis but since it was written ages ago, it’s not something I consider Nazi propaganda.
I don’t understand why you romanticise Nazi songs. Calling them Nazi songs isn’t something I do to attack you, it’s just so clear to me that they are because I grew up with this legacy. I may only he 18, but at least I’ve had extensive history lessons to know that what you’re doing isn’t okay.
And just to be precise: saying that Erika is a Nazi song is a very neutral thing to me, it is the way it is, I don’t like that you’re promoting it and it honestly confuses me a lot. But it’s your choice. I‘m about as non-traditionally Austrian as it gets, but my friends are all very traditional Austrians, we often have conversations about the topics this discussion entails, and I can say that I appreciate their input more than that of the people I’ve encountered on this site so far. It hurts me to see you denying that these songs aren’t exactly things you’d want to promote.
@goaded Way to go ignoring what I just said by continuing to repeat the same old nonsense. You once again assume that I’m trying to turn people into right wingers just because I’m offering some simple criticism of the political left. Even though I’m neither a left winger or right winger. But that’s besides the point.
Let me ask you this, if you don’t actually think that Erika is a Nazi song then why did you actually bother to comment here?
@tallandsweet Again, Erika is not a Nazi propaganda song because it has non political lyrics and is more of a love song. And none of my other favorite Germans military songs are “Nazi songs” either. Don’t tell me you also think Lili Marleen is a “Nazi song” despite the fact that the Nazis tried to ban Lili Marleen for being anti war and it was gradually translated to in 80 languages including Yiddish. So no, Lili Marleen is not a Nazi song either.
You want examples of actual Nazi propaganda songs then listen to “kampflied der nationalsozialisten” “volk ans gewehr” or “vörwarts vörwarts”. Those three songs are actual Nazi songs which are illegal to play in Germany.
"Let me ask you this, if you don’t actually think that Erika is a Nazi song then why did you actually bother to comment here?"
Because that's not what this question is about. This question is about trying to create an example of how the left is supposedly unreasonable (which your post about German military music also failed to achieve).
OK, then this question is about trying to create an example of how the radical left is supposedly unreasonable (which your post about German military music also failed to achieve).
@goaded More faulty assumptions on your part. And I’m pretty sure most people understood my post on traditional German military music. And not to mention that two radical left wingers used the reductio ad Hitlerum on the comments of that post. So to me it seems like you are arguing just for the sake of arguing because you know your points have been refuted but since you are too opinionated, you still continue to change your narrative.
Although I find it odd how you seem so bothered about my simple criticism of the radical left (communists, anarchists, SJWs).
Here's the problem, you're unlikely to admit to what you're doing, so I'll just keep pointing it out.
Most people did take your post at face value, Greatest German military songs composed so far ↗ , which was not helpful to you. Perhaps you can point me to the "reductio ad Hitlerum" comments, and while you're at it, explain why it looks suspiciously like at least one very pro-Nazi comment has been deleted from it? Because simply deleting Nazi-related posts would have kept that post on topic, without having to write about how terrible the far left is. Twice.
You wrote a Take, a week before your German Military music post, then this one afterwards, both saying pretty much the same thing. It seems unlikely the music question was completely unrelated.
As to changing my narative, I haven't. Anyone reading this conversation can see for themselves. My first comment started: "He's just trying to goad you into saying something that he can point to as an example of the left wing being unreasonable, in order to "red pill" converts."
@goaded There you go again making faulty assumptions and distorting things to suit your narrative. Yeah many people agreed with my post but there is one radical left winger who threw a temper tantrum in comments, odd how you didn’t mention that.
On my post where I point out fallacies, I was talking about how SJWs use those fallacies. If you seem bothered by that because you think I’m referring to all left wingers rather than just radical left wingers (Neo-commies, anarchists, SJWs) then that says a lot about your true political views. Again I never said all radical left wingers are bad, you are just putting words into my mouth in order to suit your skewed narrative which I’ve debunked over and over.
I asked you to quote them, but yes, there was one, but what was he responding to? That seems to have been deleted, because otherwise the context doesn't make sense. I also note you said: "two radical left wingers used the reductio ad Hitlerum", was the other something like "lol Nazis"? Gosh!
I'm sorry it upsets you when I point out how you are using right-wing tactics, with examples. Keep pretending I'm doing what you're so obviously attempting.
@goaded “I asked you to quote them, but yes, there was one, but what was he responding to? That seems to have been deleted, because otherwise the context doesn't make sense. I also note you said: "two radical left wingers used the reductio ad Hitlerum", was the other something like "lol Nazis"? Gosh!”
I can’t quote them because they blocked me.
“ I'm sorry it upsets you when I point out how you are using right-wing tactics, with examples. Keep pretending I'm doing what you're so obviously attempting.”
Nope, all you are doing is distorting what I’m saying to suit your skewed narrative. And yes you are changing your narrative, first you say that I’m trying turn left wingers into right wingers. And then I pointed out how that’s not the point because I’m not referring to all left wingers. Now you backpedal by trying to defend the radical left.
But again, what I find odd is how you are trying to defend the radical left. The way you keep evading this point shows that perhaps you are part of the radical left.
"I can’t quote them because they blocked me." Bullshit. I know, because I've been blocked by lots of idiots, and I can still see their posts from before they blocked me.
@goaded With the new update all posts by people who’ve blocked you or vice versa are hidden but here’s a paraphrased quote of one of those comments, hopefully it doesn’t count as a “member post”.
For example: "Good grief. Time for the culture to get some perspective and - most of all - grow up!!
The hair pulling hysterics in the media as amplified by political and government leaders suggests a society utterly lacking in historical perspective and emotional self-control. As one wag put it - "There is no point in planning for the end of the world because it will only happen once." "
@goaded You don’t get it because this guy had previously associated me with the “alt right”. If you read the rest of his comments you’d see how he pretty much called me a “Nazi” right before he blocked me just because I refuted his points.
No, I do get it, because I can see bad faith arguments. I certainly don't see any refutation of his (@MountAverage) points. I also know that your idea of refuting a point doesn't stand up to scrutiny; remember when I said:
"Quote me saying it is a Nazi song.
You can't, because I didn't. (That's what a refutation of an argument looks like.)"?
@goaded It really is hard for me to consider you an intellectual after you just called me an “a**hole” on my other post. You just showed that you are a two face.
And this guy deleted our conversation after he blocked me, so of course you won’t see what we were arguing about. But as you can see, he blatantly called me a “Nazi pig” yet here you are still trying to defend him. Just shows how deluded you are. And he pretty much embarrassed himself with his typical incoherent rant, so I don’t need to refute anything on his comment.
Oh, when I asked @MountAverage "Hi! Did you block this asshole? He's claiming you did."? :) Still no reply.
Of course, you've just admitted that there was more to the conversation than the one heated comment that you left there so you could point to it and say: "he blatantly called me a “Nazi pig”" and lie that I am "still trying to defend him".
Which brings us back around to the fact that you were and still are trying to get a reaction to use to radicalise people towards the right.
Looking back at your music bait question; your "two radical left wingers [who] used the reductio ad Hitlerum" turn out to be one person who said "Lol Nazis", and someone you clearly censored to leave a concluding comment that looks bad, by itself.
If you have to lie and cheat to make someone look bad, there's a very good chance they're not as bad as you're trying to paint them, and you're being an asshole.
@goaded There you go again only reading what you want to read in order to suit your skewed narrative.
“ Of course, you've just admitted that there was more to the conversation than the one heated comment that you left there so you could point to it and say: "he blatantly called me a “Nazi pig”" and lie that I am "still trying to defend him"”
Are you kidding right now? Read his long reply in that comment and you’ll see where he blatantly called me a “Nazi pig”. Again you are only reading what you want to see. And you are defending him by calling me an “a**hole” on that same comment. Don’t backpedal.
“ Which brings us back around to the fact that you were and still are trying to get a reaction to use to radicalise people towards the right. Looking back at your music bait question; your "two radical left wingers [who] used the reductio ad Hitlerum" turn out to be one person who said "Lol Nazis", and someone you clearly censored to leave a concluding comment that looks bad, by itself.”
*Sighs* Seriously? How many times do I have to tell you that I’m not trying to bait anyone? And good job picking a comment that I wasn’t even talking about. Talk about a strawman fallacy. I also never censored anyone, you’re just purposefully misinterpreting things so you can spout off nonsense.
It seems like you are just arguing for the sake of arguing by continuing to change the subject every time I refute your bogus narrative.
I see that he called you a Nazi, but I also see that that one comment is the only thing from that conversation you want anyone to see. I have to wonder, why? He couldn't have removed your postings (or even his own) from your question. Pointing out how you're behaving has no bearing on what anyone else is saying.
"I also never censored anyone", you just deleted most of a conversation, leaving a single comment you can point to, to "prove" the point you've tried to make over four questions and takes, so far. Why didn't you delete that comment, too?
Finally, I haven't changed the subject, you keep trying to, and like I said before, refutation takes more than just denial.
@goaded *facepalm* Still making faulty assumptions?
You really think I’m going to delete his comments, knowing that they make him look bad? The reason his other comments aren’t visible may have to do with them being deleted by mod bots for being too rude. But once again you try to defend him by assuming that I’m the one who insulted him.
And yes you keep jumping all over the place instead of staying on topic.
Funny, but I don't believe you. Especially as I strongly suspect you tried it on me in this conversation. The topic of this conversation is how you're trying very hard to push an idea with almost nothing to back it up, despite your best attempts to encourage an over-reaction.
@goaded I’ve backed everything up with logical explanations, at least I’m using ad hominems unlike you, not to mention that you also keep making faulty assumptions. So your skepticism is invalid.
No, you've made denials, and four postings along the same lines, with the second designed to provoke the reaction you so desparately wanted to paint an entire political movement with the statement of one anonymous person on the internet. It's been a total flop.
"I quoted the part where you implied that you think “Erika” is a Nazi song." No, you quoted me saying: "Just in case we might not react, he had to mention that they totally weren't NAZI songs, pay no attention to their NAZI-era writing, etc.”, to which I replied: "In what way is saying that you made a point of mentioning possible Nazi involvement in the songs saying that they were Nazi songs? I said you were trying to get that reaction."
Again, a refutation looks like this: "Quote me saying it is a Nazi song." (with no reasonable response).
A denial looks like this: "I haven’t made denials only refutations of your narrative."
Extreme left wingers and SJWs are some of the most insufferable ideologues I've had to deal with on the internet especially for that reason. They just want to shut down all inquiry and discussion by guilt tripping, even when it's completely illogical or entitled. They demand that white people or men dont deserve opinions just because they are or white or male. Its hypocrisy. They want you to be like that though. They often just want you to be as insane and presumptuous as them. I dont let them manipulate me and neither should you either.
Leftists are BULLIES!! They don't seem so, outright, and they pretend to be your friend, and they care about you! THEN, they start to take away your rights, 'to protect' you!! They tell you, "we need to ban guns, because children get them, and kill other children!" and play on those fears, and emotions, and show images of school shootings! What they don't tell you is that there agenda is to TOTALLY CONTROL EVERYTHING IN YOUR LIFE, but they are your 'Friend', and they 'care' about you! If you disagree, or question, you are WRONG!! They will tell you all the ways you are wrong and beat you into submission, or if you don't, then you are branded as a "RIGHT-WING Puppet!" Sad, twisted manipulation!!
Its called attention seeking. These people simply think that by saying there things they are "voicing" their dissaproval. They believe they'll be the next MLK Jr. Or Nelson Mandela or even Lenin. They have no idea how pathetic it all sounds since people are individual entities not a hive mind and one person's deeds do not condemn the whole population.
Most likely for the same reasons why Radical Right Wingers dismiss something they don't agree with as "stupid", "Liberal", "Socialist", "Communist", "Marxist", "Globalist", "Leftist" and a whole ton of other misnomers, even when the specific idea isn't one of these. This is simply due to the fact they either know they can't back something up in a credible manner, or don't think they have to so they just throw insults. This ain't anywhere near a one-sided thing. It's because many people regardless of political alignment have inflamed biases and a lack of logical thinking.
I think it’s strategic. If you can get away from facts and brand someone as racist or any negative attack at their character you can vilify them and win any argument. In addition to winning a discussion you can influence others because who wants to side with the racist publicly?
Even though "Ein Heller und ein Batzen" and "Erika" aren't my music favorites, there is nothing reprehensible or even related to war in lyrics of those songs. Maybe "Panzer Rollen In Afrika Vor" is a real nazi song, but most of those songs are harmless. Left radicals aren't better than nazis, they both are same extremist trash.
you sir are an internet troll. All one has to do is look at your posted questions to realize that you only post questions baiting "left" leaning individuals to respond with anger.
I am all for a debate. But you clearly are not interested in any response that does not sound really stupid. Facebook is the right place to get what you want. Maybe even twitter.
@JinRavage Of course call anyone you disagree with a “troll” simple way to avoid debates.
I’m no troll, if you actually read some of my other posts you’d see that I actually have debates with other people. But since you can’t put your biased aside you make assumptions.
I like how you looked at another recent post of mine and only read the joke part of it. But hey, I try to make a habit of when I do that to give an actual response after. I failed to do that here and I honestly apologize for my lapse in manners. To be honest, I thought you were the one who posted another far left attacking (as if they needed it) post i responded to earlier. And so I will give you a real response now.
No, Erika is not a Nazi song. the song came out before the 3rd Reich. However I can understand peoples' knee jerk reaction to the song. Pretty much anything from the start of WW1 to the end of WW2 from Germany is viewed negatively, at least in the U. S. A. A lot of American soldiers died in those wars. plus there is a bit of a bad habit of associating anything German from the era with Nazis. Although, why would you be listening to a 1930 German military march in public in the first place. There has been better music in the 90 years since then.
by the way, my last name is Zimmerman and I work for a German automotive company. So the idea of me being anti-german does not work here.
I like traditional music that is frequently played with traditional instruments. But many of these old songs have modern versions as well. Like the westerwald song https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx-a5NrcigA
TBH, still not sure if interest in traditional music quite covers why you listen to so many German marches. But you know what? you do you. Im just saying, dont be so surprised when people dont quite get it.
It baffles me too. It also puzzles me how state government-ordered measures during a public health emergency gets equated to loading Jews in trains headed for concentration camps, but there sure are a lot of memes out there that do that. There sure are a lot of people who stretch pretty far with equivalencies and don’t realize how absurd they are. Now if you’ll pardon me, I’m going to relax, enjoy a glass of wine and listen to Marlene Dietrich sing Lili Marlene.
The reason is they could be poor argument makers. To make an effective argument takes time, research, the ability to accept your original viewpoint may be wrong. Radical Left wingers may not have learned all the skills for effective argument making. By argument, I don't me shouting at each other. That is an emotional response. Feelings could be factored into the Radical Left winger argument techniques instead of logical, researched truths. Debate isn't about yelling, but can be about passionate energy used to craft and research strong points of view.
They want to win a debate without ever having one. They want influence, power and control without earning it by putting forth ideas and showing your ideas are best. They want to just win by declaring anyone who doesn't agree with all of their concepts are just pure evil human beings... all who oppose them are just evil.
because Evil hides, disguises itself as Good, obfuscates the truth with waterfalls of misinformation, and accuses Good of being Evil with confusing allegations too strange to be fiction.
"I didn't do it. He did it! and then he said he'd blame me and never admit he lied! See! He's doing it right now by saying I'm lying!"
If you are right then you argue the truth, if your wrong you argue lies and feelings. They do guilt by association or any other argument to use feelings to silence those they hate because they know that if they spoke the truth that it would only serve to prove that they were the ones in the wrong.
Yes, you just happen to like a song created by a Nazi, during WW2, whose job in the Nazi party was to compose and conduct music, for the Nazi party. A song that enjoyed no relevancy outside of it being employed by Wehrmacht and the NSDAP propaganda materials.
cause it has proven efficient and people tend not to be able to deal with that without making an idiot of themselves. because if someone publicly sticks a negative label on you, it is almost impossible to get it off. because either you're getting defensive, which will just dig your hole even deeper or you're getting aggressive and then they can play the victim.
People often stick negative labels on me out of total misunderstanding. It happens. You're either social or individualistic and individualists are shit on for their honest as much as they are commended for it.
@existential_laments you're not running for office. Also I think the social vs individualistic thing is a false dichotomy cause you can certainly be both.
Really? Can you actually be both? Can you really be yourself and appease everyone at once without abandoning your ideals in the process to 'keep the peace'?
Because conservatives never call someone who merely wants a single payer healthcare system a communist right? I've seen pundits on fox news ask if Warren Buffet is a socialist because he said the rich should be taxed a higher rate.
Please dude. The right is just as, if not more guilty of this.
I really, truly hope you see the irony in claiming several entire groups of people regularly make use of the Generalization Fallacy... based on one encounter.
It’s quite human and a normal heuristic to do that. Generalizations is really common in all parts of society, just like generally “irrational thinking”, such as simplifying probabilities and outcomes, not thinking about stuff thoroughly.
It’s all just very common and not special to the radical left at all.
I mean, strictly speaking basically all decisions we make are not that rational.
Predictions about the rational choice model, that we thoroughly think about our choices, that we take in account the probability of events, that there is no aspect of other forms of happiness than solely from that single good, tend to all fall flat in behavioral experiments.
In spite of what a lot of people think, humans are very prone to heuristics and biases to make decisions a bit easier to understand, and nobody’s decision making about what they think, about what they belief, their choices in life are strictly rational.
Home > Society & Politics > Questions > Why do radical left wingers (SocJus, Neo commies etc) tend to use guilt by association, false equivalence and generalization fallacies?
Most Helpful Opinions