Umm... the Nazis believed that Jews had caused their problems. However, they decided to kill them because of it, meaning it wasn't just "merely", they WERE out to kill the Jews.
Not at first. If you'll remember, they first made the Jews wear the star patches so that they could be identified and their shops would have no customers. THEN, Hitler kicked it up and notch and started to force them into the ghettoes. THEN, Hitler kicked it up the final notch and began the death camps.
Hitler spearheaded the Nazi movement in Germany, yes. By the time he killed himself Germany was a shadow of what Nazism was all about.
Ummm... Crusades did not kill 13,000,000. Also, the reasoning for the Crusades was flawed in the first place. Also, Stalin killed even more people than that.
All of that is obviously true, I was merely making the point that Christians have killed others en masse before. Holy wars weren't very uncommon back in those days.
We can't prevent them from displaying their idealologies. However, you could ask politely if they would stop. Renember, if they harm you, tada, you've got evidence.
That's exactly what this argument is about, seems like. Where do we draw the line at "harm?" These people think the Jews, blacks, and many others are less worthy humans than they are. This upsets people of those groups, yes, but is it causing direct harm to merely share these points of view? According to the law, no, and I agree with the law.
In all fairness, it should be said that the event happened in Canada; therefore quoting the constitution of America really doesn't mean anything.
HeYsUp also mentioned this, and I apologize. I've been arguing about this from the wrong perspective.
Calling me a Child does not change the fact that im right. If you like being insensative to the families of the 13 000 000 then be my guest, but take it out of smogon, and go post it on the neo-nazi websites, they will be glad to here that people like you exist.
Defending freedom of speech isn't being insensitive to the victims of the Holocaust, it's being patriotic. I understand that you have a personal stake in what you felt the paraders were doing, but you have to take off the rose-colored glasses and look at it objectively for once.
No Im not. Seriously stop pretending you know more about Nazism and its history, when you clearly dont. Neo-Nazism are MODERN day nazis, that doesnt mean they want to kill me any less, it just means modern government and people are stopping them.
And since they haven't taken any steps towards killing you or any other Jews/minorities, they have not broken the law.
First of all, you are putting words in my mouth, or just fail to see my point (whether you are pretending for the sake of argument, or not). My POINT, is that they are promoting (not saying) the Ideals in the book Mien Kampf, which you obviously have never heard of.
Read this and stop insulting my, and everyone who reads this threads intelligence with your definition of nazism, its really frusterating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mein_Kampf
This is what the nazis and neo nazis supported. Those are their ideals. The books is considered their "Bible". The article on Nazism is an analysis of Nazism, meaning they believe it was a scheme because they needed a scapegoat, which is likely true but thats not the reason Nazis
beleived they were out to kill Jews. They beleived it was because of the reasons stated in the book.
Hitler's original intent was to remove the Jews from Germany, not kill them. As he descended into crazed lunacy, only then did he begin the extermination.
Apparently some one on the internet thinks they know more then someone who has seen and researched things involving Nazism for his whole life. And also seems to think they are right. Newsflash: You are wrong, not me. Please stop trying to prove this and failing, its a waste of time. I am clearly more educated in this subject as you have demonstrated the lack of understanding for what Nazis did and what neo-nazis want to do (not that anyone can actually understand why they did such terrible things).
Oh, what they
want to do. You're going to prosecute them not on their actions, but what's in their head? That's no better than anything Hitler ever did.
Well Im sure you would call it that, but luckily most people call it self defense. When someone threatens you have have a right to defend yourself, thats not even exlusive to Canada I dont think?
You said they spit on you, right? Unless they were posing a physical threat to you when you attacked you'd be hardpressed to prove self defense in a court of law. I'm not trying to nitpick, I just know criminal law.
Second, as I said before, there is a difference between sharing views on political standpoints, and sharing ideals of killing innocent people.
According to the law, no, there isn't. You could sit there all day and say, "Man, I really want to kill that DM. He's a worthless human being, I need to put him down." No big deal. Until you take a single action that shows intent towards that goal, you've done nothing wrong.
If you actually beleive that the Holocaust was a bad thing, you must look at the whole picture, it started with parades and rallies. Its to much to allow people to attempt to repeat history, which is why it is in fact illegal.
No, it
isn't, and if you honestly believe there is a possibility in North America of another event like the Holocaust you're more crazed and deluded than I thought.
Wrong, it is illegal to threaten peoples lives, as i said before.
They werent out there to commit those things that day (thankfully), they are out there to try to convince the world that Nazism is correct, and that they are superior and that everyone else can be exterminated. That is a threat on my life as a Jew, right there.
You still haven't proven that anyone said anything like that during that parade. Maybe they
were thinking, but they weren't saying it or doing it, and therefore none of those paraders broke the law.
Not to this argument, no. It is relevant in general, but it does not hold any weight here. You cant compare the two. And why is it NOW that you think mass killing is relevant, when you are dismissing the holocaust as a regular event that happened. It is uncomparable.
Holy shit, when did I ever dismiss the Holocaust? And all you've done is say "it holds no weight" and "it is uncomparable" without explaining why.
Do you want me to do this? You can use Google too, so i only got one example, and its sick enough to prove my point.
http://www.adl.org/learn/extremism_...=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_the_News
This was one example out of thousands. They dont have the power at the moment to do the same mass killings as they did, but why give them the chance to get that power?
What that one man did is terrible. He acted on his amoral thoughts and took lives, but you can't confuse one man's actions with the entire group. That's like saying a Christian who kills an abortion doctor is acting on behalf of his religion.
Once again, the Holocaust will never repeat itself in North America. Ever. There are enough people in this country with a good head on their shoulders to not buy into the white supremacy nonsense. Do you really think there are MORE white supremacists in North America than there were, say, 40 years ago during the Civil Rights Movement? These people are a dying breed: let them go down screaming.
You are defending their right to promote their ideology. You are those countries that stood by as millions of people were brutally slaughtered, just because they had the right to do it by their laws in Nazi Germany, happy?
THOUGHTS != ACTIONS.
Ok, thats quite easy. Neo-nazism worships Hitler, and his ideals made in the book Mein Kampf. Mein Kampf explains that the inferior races should be exterminated. Do you understand yet?
Mein Kampf said nothing of the sort. Hitler wrote the book to explain his hatred of A. Communism, and B. Judaism. He laid out how he saw both as the evils that plagued Germany and how he wanted them out of his country. To be honest, most of the book is about the steps he wanted to take to attack the countries surrounding him.
Show me the passage in the book where he says he wants to kill people, and I'll repent. There is just no way he would have been able to garner such a following if he had been promoting mass murder in his book.
I also said I didnt mind the bad names, I minded that these people exist.
They aren't exactly my best friends either. You keep confusing the fact that I'm defending their rights, taking it as me defending
them. That's just not true.
RE anything to do with Christian monstrosities:
The Crusades: Really? You're going to condemn Christians today for holy wars that occurred before all of the following:
You misunderstand, my intent wasn't to damn Christians, I was just responding to HeYsUp saying they had never killed anyone when the history of the religion is full of examples. Obviously those have no relevance today, they're just examples.
So its ok to promote Nazi idealism because its White Supremacy Day?
Next why dont they make a violence day, where we can promote violence because it has its own day!
Funny, you could actually do that if you wanted to, as long as you weren't overtly threatening individuals.
However, I did not say they worshipped the book, they worshipped their Furor (Leader, almost god) who was Hitler, who wrote the book which is their "Bible". The principals of the book are still relevant today, the reasons for him writing the Book are not. Let me explain, the reason for him blaming Jews, was because he thought the German people wanted a scapegoat, and because there were alot of Jewish people that had better jobs then them. What Hitler did in Mein Kampf was lie about Jews trying to take over the world and that they are "rats", and then pointed out the fact that Jewish people had better jobs then them. Hitler unfortunately was a very smart man politically, because this worked to near perfection by dehumanizing Jews, and simply "forcing" people to hate them. These concepts remain relevant. For example the fact that it says "Exterminate the Jewish Rats" is still relevant today.
1. Not to be a dick, but for someone who claims to have studied the Holocaust and Nazism you should know it's spelled "Führer."
2. This was a very good paragraph, until that last sentence. Take a look at
this. Hitler might have written the book with extermination in mind, but it wasn't in the damn book. Goebbels could actually be described as the main catalyst for the Holocaust, rather than Hitler or
Mein Kampf.
No, because a certain people breaking the Law, and attempting to infringe upon peoples human rights, including the right to live. I feel its SAD that this heartless people (if you can call them people) exist, not that they dont have a right to.
All they did was march and yell. I don't see any explicit infringing in those actions.
They DONT have a right to promote their hatred and goal of exterminating all other races. They dont have that right morally or legally.
Yes, they do. To both. (Moral relativism.)
Parading leads to worse things, thats proven in history.
That's a silly statement. That's like saying gay parades lead to more people turning gay.
yeah, im not saying that they are right on a moral sense, im saying that legally, they did nothing wrong.
i too have a conscience and it tells me the same thing, but reading this law book next to me tells me that the Aryan Guard was on the side of the law, and no court will convict someone who is morally wrong but legally protected. i am not here to argue morals, as i agree with the protesters morally, but legally, the Aryan guard had a right to parade there, and that right was infringed upon by the anti racist protesters.
Thank you, you just summed up my thoughts on this subject in that one paragraph.
Second, I think the Gaurd is abusing their rights. Maybe they aren't standing for the death of other minorities. But they are still promoting the hatred of other groups. I think the Chinese would have something to say about their "majority" position.
What exactly does this mean? Are you implying that we should be more like Communist China, what with their repression of alternate viewpoints?
