623
submitted 6 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

The white supremacist right is penetrating the mainstream right with increasing ease.

The Conservative Political Action Conference is the premier gathering of right-wing activists and politicians in America every year, and it serves as a bellwether for the direction of the conservative movement. This year Nazis showed up.

According to an NBC News report, “a group of Nazis who openly identified as national socialists mingled with mainstream conservative personalities, including some from Turning Point USA, and discussed ‘race science’ and antisemitic conspiracy theories.” (Hitler’s Nazi Party was officially called the “National Socialist German Workers’ Party.”) The reporter of the article has video of one of them giving a “heil Hitler”-style salute in the lobby of the hotel where the conference took place and of other members of the group reportedly used the N-word.

This is a critical frog-in-boiling-water moment for the right: The mainstream organs of American conservatism are apparently acclimating to Nazis in their pot. That this group was able to mingle with participants at a high-profile conference, wasn't kicked out of CPAC, and wasn't appropriately condemned is a sign of how contiguous mainstream conservatism has become with white supremacist politics today.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MrJameGumb@lemmy.world 135 points 6 months ago

I'm old enough to remember when Republicans and Democrats weren't that different... There were always key issues that they disagreed on but at the end of the day the majority of both parties just wanted what was best for the country, and they would even WORK TOGETHER from time to time when it was for the common good... How did the GOP go from that to this white trash hillbilly Nazi bullshit? Are they ever going to recognize that the enemies of democracy have taken over their party? When did they become so complacent?

[-] Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works 134 points 6 months ago

I remember a clip from a McCain rally and he was going around, asking people questions, letting them talk to the microphone, etc. One lady said she didn't like Obama because he was Muslim. McCain shut her down and said something to the effect of "he's a good man, we just have different opinions on how to run the country". That stands out a lot to me in hindsight.

[-] pelotron@midwest.social 111 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

McCain is one of the old guard Republicans that went down fighting. His final vote thumbs down for the repeal of the ACA was legendary. I didn't vote for him but I do have great respect for him.

Contrast that against all the limp dicks who are silently retiring instead of speaking out and trying to right the ship.

[-] Nougat@kbin.social 62 points 6 months ago

He slipped real hard during his presidential bid. Remember how his VP pick was Sarah Palin, for example.

[-] grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world 45 points 6 months ago

The beginning of backroom concessions to the crazy wing of the party that are so very, very obvious.

[-] astronaut_sloth@mander.xyz 14 points 6 months ago

If I remember correctly, he didn't want to nominate her. He wanted Liebermann and didn't even like Palin that much. She was just sort of forced on him.

[-] grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago

Yes, that's what I mean. Noone in their right mind would choose her. This was a forced choice and an indication that the lunatics were if not running the asylum, at least in charge of a big part of it.

[-] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

Lieberman is entirely awful in different ways, though. Come to think of it, I’d forgotten he was Gore’s running mate.

[-] jballs@sh.itjust.works 18 points 6 months ago

I think that wasn't quite the beginning of the end, but it was definitely a warning sign for what was to become of the Republican party. I think they saw how Dubya was a moron and that was appealing to a lot of voters, so they thought "there's a recipe for success here."

On a random note, that just led me to this video where the guy who floated Palin's name to McCain said it was "the biggest fucking mistake of his life".

https://youtu.be/ihrCtRCGTro

[-] pelotron@midwest.social 3 points 6 months ago

epic link, damn

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 16 points 6 months ago

She looks like a damned Rhodes scholar compared to what the GOP is putting up these days.

I'm not disagreeing with you, just a comment on how much farther they've fallen.

[-] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 8 points 6 months ago

I think if you go back and watch her speaking she has a lot of gibberish with buzzwords as well. The only difference between her and Lauren Booblejuice or margery klanma is palin's racism and conspiracy theories weren't on full display.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago

Oh, I remember. She thought "which magazines and newspapers do you read" was a trick question. But Bobo and the Tuber are new levels of stupid.

[-] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

She and other “tea party” imbeciles were very much the predecessor of the MAGA horror show.

[-] WaxiestSteam69@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

That was an attempt to appeal to the crazies without directly appealing to the crazies. That never works.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago

McCain might have thought of himself as a responsible conservative, but he was still a part of the machine that has been a regressive force in America over the last 60 years. He did not fight for the heart or soul of the party, and this moment was an example of the flimsy lip service he paid to being a reasonable person.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Exactly. I just disagreed with him on how to run the country.

[-] AllYourSmurf@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

Watch just the first minute of McCain’s concession speech. (Watch the whole thing if you like. It’s pretty good.)

I watched him shut down the boos about Obama at the beginning. He took this very seriously and wouldn’t allow the crowd to get out of line. It was well done, and a great example of statesmanship and fair play.

For just a moment then, I wondered if I had voted for the wrong man in voting for Obama, who was more of an unknown for me at the time. McCain acted very differently in the middle of good campaign, compared to the beginning and the end. I couldn’t support the policies, the attitude, or the man that I saw during the national campaign. Listening to John McCain’s concession speech that night, I remember thinking, "where was this person—this attitude—for the last few months? I might have voted for this person.” The party and the campaign forced him to become something that he wasn’t. If he had been allowed to be more authentic, I think that Obama would have had a narrower victory, if he had won at all.

load more comments (45 replies)
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
623 points (98.7% liked)

politics

18821 readers
4696 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS