Are users who openly parrot literal Nazi talking points allowed here? : meta

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 17 points 1 week ago (3 children)

We're missing a bit of information here. I got your report, went to the thread to get the context.

Firstly, I saw that you had literally screen-capped the comment in question and included it in a new reply. So, removing the comment would have achieved nothing - it would have still been there.
Secondly, the comment was Zionistic in nature, which while especially unpopular in nature is not against instance rules.
Thirdly, I wasn't aware that the comment in question was similar to something Nazis said. I don't even know if the user who made the comment knew that. So, leaving it there and letting downvotes do their thing allowed for education as well.
Lastly, the comment was in the Australian Politics community - which is intentionally the lightest-touch moderated community because there's a difference between political discussion where parties disagree quite vehemently and an outright echo-chamber. If you delete all the users from your politics community that you don't agree with, what is the point of the community?

To answer your question: No, we don't allow Nazis here. It is literally one of the questions we ask on the application screen. "Nazi talking points" is not on its own a good metric of what is acceptable today. We basically have a whole community in support of Reichsnaturschutzgesetz. I don't especially take issue with Tierschutz, either. One of the reasons the Third Reich gained actual popular support was some of their early policies were in fact in the best interest of the German people. There is still a Kindergeld today, though giving full credit to the Nazis to that one wouldn't really be genuine. It is fair to say they supported this policy. So I guess our stance on "literal Nazi talking points" will boil down to other factors and get taken on a case-by-case basis.

Finally: If there's a user you genuinely don't wish to see around here any longer, you can hit the little down arrow on any of their comments and block them.

[–] eureka@aussie.zone 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I want to raise a point on the "Nazi talking points" response:

On one hand, it's certainly more useful when a report is more specific, yes. I know plenty of fascist talking points which aren't common knowledge or obvious.
On the other, it sounds like they're talking about Lebensraum - "living space". If we look at it technically, it was a common concept in German politics decades before the Nazi Party was formed. And it's a far cry away from the various social reforms implemented in the Third Reich you mentioned. But in context, I think it's clear that someone on aussie.zone reporting a post for "Nazi talking points" is reporting that a post is fascistic, supporting the supremacist aspects Nazism is famous for. People surely aren't going to report pro-vegetarian posts for this reason, or even anti-union posts (despite the crushing of worker's organisations being core to fascism).

Lebensraum is a relatively infamous policy, and one which neo-Nazis like the NSN explicitly invoke. They're never holding up banners saying "protect the wildlife", "support animal rights" or "fast roadways now!", this is the bigoted supremacy generally associated with Nazism and carried on by neo-Nazism.

If you delete all the users from your politics community that you don’t agree with, what is the point of the community?

But this isn't just "all the users you disagree with", or even just disagreement - if someone, when discussing an expansionist regime, tries to justify "living space", that makes me think that person might well want me thrown in a camp and killed. It's no smoking gun, but it's a loud wolfwhistle.

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Lebensraum is a relatively infamous policy, and one which neo-Nazis like the NSN explicitly invoke.

Sorry. While I readily acknowledge that I don't hang out in those circles, nor really scrutinise their rhetoric, I have honestly never heard that phrase before. In English or German. This does paint the comment in a brighter light, and I probably would have been more inclined to remove it had I been familiar with the term.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

That's good to see, but as of right now the Nazi's explicit mask-off comment is still up, and they are still not prevented from commenting further in the future.

Fwiw, I didn't learn the phrase from online discourse about neonazis, I learnt it from education about WWII in its original comment. Until reading other comments in this thread I was not even aware that it was popular among neonazis as a dogwhistle. So we both learnt something unfortunate here today.

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That’s good to see, but as of right now the Nazi’s explicit mask-off comment is still up, and they are still not prevented from commenting further in the future.

Which you're clearly good with, since your screen-capped version of the comment is also still up. The purpose of moderation is to prevent people from being exposed abhorrent content, spam, unsolicited nudity, scams and other harmful content. I'm reluctant to step into discussions that are clearly between actual humans as a general rule, unless they are being abusive or derailing threads. I could also count on my fingers the number of human user accounts I've needed to actually ban from the site. Whatever a power-tripping mod is, I am not.

The next time you think a comment should be removed, I would recommend that you don't go out of your way to be sure more people see it as you report it. As things stand, I see more value in this moment as a learning point. Yours is still the only report that particular comment received. The truly offensive stuff, I can be pinged by half a dozen reports within 30 minutes of the comment being posted. I also remain unconvinced that the user who made that comment would self-identify as a Nazi. Zionist, sure - though that is apparent more from other comments than this example.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The purpose of moderation is to prevent people from being exposed abhorrent content

That may be one purpose. But it isn't the only one. Another is shaping the norms of a community and what is acceptable. I'll share the parable of the Nazi Bar, but put it behind a collapsible spoiler in case you or anyone else is already familiar:

The Parable of the Nazi Bar, by Michael B. Tager

I was at a shitty crustpunk bar once getting an after-work beer. One of those shitholes where the bartenders clearly hate you. So the bartender and I were ignoring one another when someone sits next to me and he immediately says, “no. get out.”

And the dude next to me says, “hey i’m not doing anything, i’m a paying customer.” and the bartender reaches under the counter for a bat or something and says, “out. now.” and the dude leaves, kind of yelling. And he was dressed in a punk uniform, I noticed

Anyway, I asked what that was about and the bartender was like, “you didn't see his vest but it was all nazi shit. Iron crosses and stuff. You get to recognize them.” And i was like, oh ok and he continues.

“you have to nip it in the bud immediately. These guys come in and it's always a nice, polite one. And you serve them because you don't want to cause a scene. And then they become a regular and after awhile they bring a friend. And that dude is cool too.”

“And then THEY bring friends and the friends bring friends and they stop being cool and then you realize, oh shit, this is a Nazi bar now. And it's too late because they're entrenched and if you try to kick them out, they cause a PROBLEM. So you have to shut them down.”

I've shared my thoughts on why this particular user deserves the label Nazi elsewhere in the thread, and my reply to Lodion in particular also includes some of the justification for including the screenshot. But I'll elaborate on that particular point here.

I don't think mere exposure to that kind of Nazi rhetoric causes direct harm. Which is why I did not think it was causing harm to screencap the comment. Instead, it is the long-term permissibility of that content which causes harm. The Nazi Bar. If Nazis' views are permitted, you get more Nazis.

I shared the comment first of all to highlight that user in particular to anyone viewing the thread to warn them off from engaging. And also to highlight that same parallel that I made in the reply to Lodion. That even if one person may not themselves be a Nazi, they are engaging in some ideology that is dangerously close to that of Nazis. Highlighting an actual Nazi whose views they would agree with was supposed to serve to emphasise that parallel, while serving as a dis-endorsement of the Nazi's own view. I think that sharing harmful views in the specific context of highlighting both that and why they are harmful is not at all similar to simply having those views and sharing them sincerely.

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 2 points 6 days ago

Another is shaping the norms of a community and what is acceptable.

This is incorrect. The community shapes itself. The community is lovely. We are not it's shapers.

You've been here about as long as the instance has existed. In the almost three years we've been at this, have you ever seen us shaping discussion? Who the hell am I to dictate to everyone what the norm is, anyway? I'm just some guy on the Internet.

I was reluctant to remove a reported post on /c/worldnews the other day, despite it being in clear violation of the sidebar rules.

One neat thing about Lemmy is moderation is all transparent. The modlog is just down there on the bottom of every page. You'll see that just about all the accounts I ban are for spam with a smattering of troll accounts. We are accountable to the users and not some secret group manipulating discussion out of sight.

[–] lodion@aussie.zone 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I took Seagoon_'s comment to be in support of the ban on particular phrases, by highlighting another dog whistle for nazis. Before this, I (like Nath) did not know this was a nazi dog whistle.

I don't believe Seagoon_ is a nazi. I do believe they're a zionist. In Australia as it stands... one is illegal, the other is practically government policy.

To say anyone in support of the new legislation in QLD is a nazi, as you have implied, is an extreme take on the situation. I have many issues with the legislation as it has been passed, but do not believe supporters of it are automatically nazis.

As Nath has commented, as a rule we let human to human discussions run their course... unless they're going off the rails. Simply posting something you do not believe, or you do not agree with is not grounds for a comment to be removed.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

To be clear, I fully believe that the user in question is a Nazi. There is no other rational explanation for their behaviour. Any space that allows that user is a Nazi bar.

The legislation itself I do not believe is only supported by literal Nazis. But that the ideology in support of them is a similar far-right reactionary one. It necessarily involves gleeful support at the slaughter of thousands of innocent people, including the deliberate killing of medics and journalists whose only job is to reduce suffering and expose how awful the regime inflicting this is. It also necessarily involves support for the restriction on civil rights including freedom of expression. It may not be capital-N Nazi necessarily, but it is certainly far-right authoritarian, of the sort that might have attracted a less formal lower-case-n "nazi" label a decade ago, when actual Nazis were more closeted. But that shouldn't be surprising. My point was to demonstrate that being a Zionist, in 2026, necessarily puts you ideologically very close to Nazis, even if you don't necessarily cross the line into actually being a Nazi, like this particular user obviously does.

[–] lodion@aussie.zone 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I fully believe that the user in question is a Nazi. There is no other rational explanation for their behaviour .

There are other explanations, such the one from my comment you replied to. You may not agree with my interpretation, and Seagoon has not posted to clarify the thinking behind their comment. If it becomes clear that a user is a nazi, I'll take appropriate action, as I have done with previous users.

Any space that allows that user is a Nazi bar.

I disagree with your characterization of Seagoon as a nazi, this is categorically not the case.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Seagoon has not posted to clarify the thinking behind their comment.

You see how that's a bad thing, right? Surely. If they don't clarify their stance is anti-genocide in very unmistakeable terms, one must conclude that they are, in fact, a Nazi. Choosing to remain silent should not be allowed to give someone ranting about lebensraum the benefit of the doubt during an active genocide.

[–] lodion@aussie.zone 1 points 6 days ago

You see how that’s a bad thing, right?

See Nath's comment about us not being the shapers of the community or its discussions. Users are free to reply or ignore as they see fit to other user posts/comments.

Choosing to remain silent should not be allowed to give someone ranting about lebensraum

As I previously posted, (twice now), that is not my interpretation of the comment on the article you posted. Only if you view the comment in a vaccum could you come to the conclusion you have. It seems you've either ignored my interpretation, or don't understand it.

If I were jewish and posted in support of legislation put in place to protect fellow jews, and someone on the internet leapt to the conclusion I was a nazi because the legislation in question is right leaning... I'd probably do my best to ignore them too. Seagoon doesn't owe you an explanation for your misunderstanding.

I'm done posting on this topic unless you have something new to say.

[–] eureka@aussie.zone 5 points 1 week ago

Yep, exactly, and that's why I say it's more useful when a report is more specific - most people are lucky enough that they aren't exposed to online neo-Nazism enough to know their rhetoric, euphemisms, codes and symbols (beyond the swastika).

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 8 points 1 week ago (15 children)

To suggest that lebensraum is just some random policy that Germany happened to have in the '30s and '40s, and wasn't one of the core things that made the Nazis the Nazis (as in, the personification of and byword for evil itself that they have since become) is an absolutely wild take to have, in my view.

I screen capped it because I did not want to engage directly with a Nazi. But it was nevertheless important to publically call out that behaviour for what it was. I don't believe it has no effect to ban Nazis while also, in the relevant context, to use Nazis' words as examples of what to look out for with other Nazis. If others disagree with me there I would be happy to have a respectful conversation on the topic of whether my comment should have been removed or edited. But I do not believe that there is that nuance to be had with whether the Nazis themselves should be welcome.

load more comments (15 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] mech@feddit.org 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Is there a particular reason why you're dancing around saying what they actually wrote, or naming the "foreign genocidal regime"?

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Because I don't want to bring attention to an actual Nazi. The admins have received a report on the comment in question and I'll happily provide more details if they request.

The comment in question was justifying Israel's invasions with reference to "living space"—exact words.

If you really want to, you can go back through my comment history. It's only about 3 or 4 days ago and I called out their behaviour at the time.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't see this as, as much of an acceptance of Nazis problem than a lack of moderator problem. There is one active moderator for that community, that moderator also happens to be a rather busy bloody bee, seeing as they are the AZ admin/owner, and they've stated their personal life business before.

This is a problem I'm actively concerned about with communities I moderate. I advocate for more moderators per community, and to ensure those moderators are still somewhat active.

If @lodion@aussie.zone wants help with moderation I can jump on board with the community in question.

I'd also advocate lodion inviting by P.M. another one or two people to help out with moderation as well. Because many hands = light work. And a bank of moderators could help smooth things when issues such as inactivity of mod accounts arise.

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I get every report about every community on the instance, even if I'm not listed on the Community. They come as notifications to my phone. It's pretty rare for any report to take longer than an hour or so to be looked at.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] SaneMartigan@aussie.zone 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

FWIW I'm not okay with Nazis and their Nazi bullshit. I can be a dickhead online for sure, but I'm pro-peace and anti-genocide.

[–] GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago

Awesome name, on the kinda dickhead we need!

[–] eureka@aussie.zone 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't see the point in beating around the bush.

A glance at the homepage tells us that Nazism would break the first 3 instance rules, there's no reason to expect it to be allowed. The difficulty comes when bigoted rhetoric is subtle enough to go unrecognised, or has been normalised. So it would help to know which comment is repeating which talking points.

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The "Nazi talking points" that aren't mentioned could be a bait, and be something as simple as anti communism or economic reforms that stimulate production/employment through public works (e.g. the autobahn)

They may not be the things the Nazis are hated for...

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 7 points 1 week ago (8 children)

It was a user suggesting that Jews need "living space" (exact words) and that this justifies Israel's multiple invasions of its neighbours.

load more comments (8 replies)

Meta