this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2025
1235 points (98.4% liked)

Murdered by Words

2283 readers
297 users here now

Responses that completely destroy the original argument in a way that leaves little to no room for reply - a targeted, well-placed response to another person, organization, or group of people.

The following things are not grounds for murder:

Rules:

  1. Be civil and remember the human. No name calling or insults. Swearing in general is fine, but not to insult someone else.
  2. Discussion is encouraged but arguments are not. Don’t be aggressive and don’t argue for arguments sake.
  3. No bigotry of any kind.
  4. Censor the person info of anyone not in the public eye.
  5. If you break the rules you’ll get one warning before you’re banned.
  6. Enjoy the community in the light hearted way it’s intended.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] calliope@retrolemmy.com 177 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Many of the true-blue Nazis didn’t really see the big deal after World War II.

When I asked Herr Wedekind, the baker, why he had believed in National Socialism, he said, “Because it promised to solve the unemployment problem. And it did. But I never imagined what it would lead to. Nobody did.”
I thought I had struck pay dirt, and I said, “What do you mean, ‘what it would lead to,’ Herr Wedekind?”
“War,” he said. “Nobody ever imagined it would lead to war.”

None of them ever heard anything bad about the Nazi regime except, as they believed, from Germany’s enemies, and Germany’s enemies were theirs. “Everything the Russians and the Americans said about us,” said Cabinetmaker Klingelhöfer, “they now say about each other.”

From They Thought They Were Free: The Germans 1933-45 by Milton Mayer.

Highly recommended.

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 69 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Every time I look a little closer, it gets worse.

[–] calliope@retrolemmy.com 85 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Reading that book really opened my eyes to how this kind of thing happens, how long it lasts, and how deep it goes.

The countries that think they’re safe are merely naive.

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's a really good point. It makes more sense to me to ask, "What would it take for me to do that? What would it look like?" rather than just tell myself, "I would never..."

[–] calliope@retrolemmy.com 35 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Vigilance and education (and vigilance in education) seem important, that’s all I got.

If anyone has the chance, I really do recommend reading the book. It looks academic but it’s really easy to read despite being written in 1953.

The author was Jewish, but kept that totally hidden while doing the interviews to avoid the obvious.

Which makes the above even more crazy. “I thought I’d hit paydirt” because someone was finally going to talk about killing his people. Nope.

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Thanks again. I just requested a copy from the library.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 126 points 1 week ago (4 children)

A disturbing amount of people seem to love fascism.

They don't like it to be called by name, but they do love it.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 66 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think there's a scene in a TV show recently where the modern day Nazi says something like "They like what I say. They just don't like the word Nazi"

Many people have a, let's say, shallow understanding of history. They believe Nazis are bad but just like axiomatically. They don't have a good definition of why, and so they don't really see it when their in-group behaves the same.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 53 points 1 week ago

The boys. They got pretty heavy handed because certain crowds weren't getting the idea.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago (1 children)

When I started dating my now wife, my now Father In Law got into a massive argument with my wife's uncle because the uncle's a pretty unhinged version of a leftist and was arguing that his ideal form of goverment was that of a benevolent dictatorship. My FIL was flabbergasted that anyone would think that that was a good idea, not just because he's politically opposed to my wife's Uncle's idea of what constitutes benevolence, but that he would think that a strong autocratic leader would fix anything, regardless of their politics.

8 years later, here we are with my Father In Law being so loudly and unrelentingly pro-Trump it has nearly caused permanent rifts in the family, including with my wife, and nearly destroyed his marriage too. He has zero problem with Trump taking as much power as needed to push his policies through. The fucking irony of it, supporting the most blatant autocratic shift in American political history after being furious at the idea from my wife's Uncle, and it's entirely lost on him.

[–] SparroHawc@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 week ago (5 children)

The original point about a benevolent dictatorship being the ideal form of government is, in my opinion, true. Having a single point of decision means that issues are dealt with quickly and efficiently, the 'benevolent' part means that the needs of the populace are heard and addressed, oppression is eliminated wherever it can be found. A truly benevolent dictatorship looks a lot like a well-run democracy.

The problem comes when the benevolent dictator dies peacefully in their sleep. Or when other parts of the government begin to realize that they can feed the dictator lies in order to get what they want. Or when the dear leader starts to get paranoid. A benevolent dictatorship only works briefly, after which the 'dictatorship' part starts to become a real problem.

Or if 'benevolence' includes religious extremism (although I would argue that a leader like that wouldn't count as truly benevolent).

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (5 children)

The problem comes when the benevolent dictator dies peacefully in their sleep.

The problems arise well before that. There's no such thing as a benevolent dictator because it's an oxymoron. Anyone who would seek to control everyone is not benevolent. And even if we agreed that unilaterally controlling everyone could still be benevolent, there is no means to gaining such control that is not inherently not benevolent short of nearly every one of your constituents collectively appointing you to that position.

[–] MummysLittleBloodSlut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah. George Washington is one of the only men in history who had a chance to be a benevolent dictator. And what did he do? He said "No, we're doing democracy now." And if he hadn't, he wouldn't have been benevolent.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] PrimeMinisterKeyes@leminal.space 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

The Roman dictators were unlike what we think of a dictator nowadays. From Wikipedia:

He received the full powers of the state, subordinating the other magistrates, consuls included, for the specific purpose of resolving that issue, and that issue only, and then dispensing with those powers immediately.

Worked out fairly well for the Roman Republic, until Julius Caesar became dictator-for-life which a lot of people didn't like. You can guess how that ended.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Not to get all "human nature", but there's a primal appeal of fascist rhetoric, particularly when it is couched within the urgency of media misinformation and real material economic decay.

People who are overworked, underfed, and deluged with propaganda are primed to accept the "evil foreigners have inflicted this upon you" rhetoric. The states where Republicans outperform tend to be states with large O&G based economies, with people who feel their livelihoods are predicated on petroleum production and export. Downturns in these economies are blamed on Muslims, who just happen to be the majority faith in rival oil exporting nations. The opioid crisis and its socio-economic impacts have very real material consequences to impoverished communities, but the domestic pharmaceutical industry employs and enriches a lot of people. So its easier to blame China than the Sackler Family, in the same way it was easier to blame Jimmy Carter and public housing policies from the 1970s than the Mega-Banks back during the '08 financial crash. High health care costs and housing / education / credit card debts are, similarly, problems that can be displaced onto migrants "stealing" limited resources and PoC getting special government subsidies offered by evil liberal socialists. And "crime" as an eternal bugaboo haunts every local news network and AM Talk Radio show in the country, justifying ever more draconian police and surveillance.

You don't even have to limit yourself to the Republican Party to find this compelling. How many liberals are fully sold on the idea that Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran are behind all of America's domestic failings? How many people were willing to throw Muslim and Transgender voters under the bus because Kamala Harris lost the 2024 election?

Fascist rhetoric is appealing because it offers a very simple, straightforward, and violently final solution to a host of perceived social problems. It promises immediate relief from your pain. It promises schadenfreude as a kind of restitution for accumulated injustices. And it promises to make you impervious to future harms, through the terror you invoke in your enemies.

It's an instinctual social response. One that aspiring politicians play on to build popular movements and seize power from sclerotic bureaucracies. And when you're feeling the impulse, it doesn't feel wicked or wrong. It feels justified and deeply satisfying.

[–] HurricaneLiz@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Learned a new word: sclerosis. Thanks!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Damage@feddit.it 9 points 1 week ago

Yeah but only when it's applied to others

[–] saltnotsugar@lemmy.world 86 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 61 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Nazi: But why skulls, though?

Hans: What?

N: Why skulls?

H: Well, maybe they're the skulls of our enemies.

N: Maybe, but is that how it comes across? It doesn't say next to the skull, you know, "Yeah, we killed him but trust us, this guy was horrid."

H: Well, no, but...

N: I mean, what skulls make you think of? Death, cannibals, beheading, erm pirates?

H: Pirates are fun!

N: I didn't say we weren't fun, but fun or not, pirates are still the baddies. I just can't think of anything good about a skull.

H: What about pure Aryan skull shape?

N: Even that is more usually depicted with the skin still on, whereas the allies-"

H: You haven't been listening to ally propaganda. Of course they're going to say we're bad guys.

N: But they didn't get to design our uniforms and their symbols are all, you know, quite nice, stars, stripes, lions, sickles.

H: What's so good about a sickle?

N: Well, nothing, and if there's one thing we've learnt in 1,000 miles of retreat, it's that Russian agriculture's in dire need of mechanisation.

H: Tell me about it.

N: You've got to say it's better than a skull. I really can't think of anything worse as a symbol than a skull.

H: A rat's anus?

N: Yeah, and if we were fighting an army, marching under the banner of a rat's anus I'd probably be a lot less worried, Hans.

Edit: thanks to ltxrtquq for the corrections.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

N: Maybe, but is that how it comes across? It doesn’t say next to the skull, you know, “Yeah, we killed him but trust us, this guy was horrid.”

I mean, its a comedy sketch. But it should be noted that this is exactly what the Germans were saying of their victims in the 1930s and 40s.

Might also be worth noting that, for all the shit German Nazis (justifiably) get, the English and the French and the Americans and Chinese and Turks and the various Eastern European powers were also engaged in these horrifying industrialized holocausts within their own spheres of influence. And they were also insisting the genocides of American Native Peoples, Hindu Nationalists, assorted African and Middle Eastern Nationalists, Koreans, Filipinos, Communist and Socialist civil reformers and union organizers, Jews, Roma, Disabled Peoples, and anyone else who didn't fit their trending eugenics theories were justified because the people being killed were "horrid".

Germany and Japan (and Italy kinda when they didn't suck at it) just polarized the politics of industrial genocide in an effort to build fresh new empires over the carcasses of the old Colonial Powers. And that's what had The Allies so upset. They were generally fine with The Holocausts within Germany and Japan, so long as they stayed on their own sides of the imaginary lines.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

also engaged in these horrifying industrialized holocausts within their own spheres of influence

Makes me think of Eddie Izzard's bit on this:

The reason we let them get away with it because they were killing their own people. And we're sort of fine with that. "Help yourself, we've been trying to kill you people for ages, so you start killing your own people..." But Hitler killed people next door...the stupid man. After a couple of years we won't stand for that now will we?!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] LumiNocta@lemmy.zip 55 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck...

[–] The_Helmet_Stays_On@lemmy.dbzer0.com 62 points 1 week ago (6 children)
[–] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Salute? That's an "odd hand gesture" obviously. "My heart goes out to you!"

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 47 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This made me think of Jeff Foxworthy, except he's telling "You might be a Nazi if" jokes instead.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If you've EVER had to look around to see if you need to self censor the comment you're about to make......

You might be a Nazi!

[–] sanguinepar@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

If you then just say it anyway, without any censorship...

You might be a Nazi!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You see, in my imagination, the nazis were absolute evils, doing evil thing for the sake of evil, like some saturday morning cartoon villain. I, on the other hand, always present evidence, such as certain groups being overrepresented in crime, and I even make up statistics about race and IQ. The nazis didn't, they just killed Jews and the Roma, so they could be the most evil in history.

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 51 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I sometimes fear that
people think that fascism arrives in fancy dress
worn by grotesques and monsters
as played out in endless re-runs of the Nazis.

Fascism arrives as your friend.
It will restore your honour,
make you feel proud,
protect your house,
give you a job,
clean up the neighbourhood,
remind you of how great you once were,
clear out the venal and the corrupt,
remove anything you feel is unlike you...

It doesn't walk in saying,
"Our programme means militias, mass imprisonments, transportations, war and persecution."

  • Michael Rosen

https://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/fascism-i-sometimes-fear.html?m=1

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

2014.05

Damn, he was way ahead of the curve. I tried to tell those exact words to my skeptic and atheist friends, only to liken me to those conspiracy theorists, who thought the nazis secretly control everything.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 1 week ago

Turns out, the billionaire neo-nazis openly control everything instead

[–] OwlVurdy@lemmy.wtf 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

So magats are like Nazis, but without the good job market. Magats slid into what they are for less than what the Nazis got. Gross.

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 18 points 1 week ago

Less than what the Nazis got, with all the knowledge and history about Nazis at their fingertips, and with their ancestors having fought Nazis. Disgusting, pathetic, losers.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 13 points 1 week ago

"They're not hurting the right people"

Magats are worse because they are in it for the evil.

[–] Alwaysnownevernotme@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

A good portion of our populace has had their empathy removed, short circuited, or simply bypassed.

And they can't even seem to fathom the idea, that once the weapons built it can be aimed anywhere the wielder likes.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So a nazi can't admit he is a nazi and no one is putting up with his obtuse bullshit.

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

Seems like an attention whore that would love to be seen as a nazi.

[–] bizzle@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

No one has ever accused me of being a Nazi or a fascist so maybe this guy is the problem and not "the libs" 🤔

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›