NYT's Nazi Next Door lost job, fled home

[Admiral X]

While I am no friend of Nazism, I don't think this is exactly good news. As a 'polite society', as another poster so put it, we should not support or justify putting people on the street just because we disagree with their opinions. This guy is still a human being, and should still be treated with respect. If he starts to actively threaten people or become a legitimate danger, then I could understand taking action. But this 'vigilante justice' shouldn't be encouraged.

I just read the NYT article this is based upon, and I really don't see the real basis for the claims that the NYT are pro-Nazi or something. But regardless, the "They are people too" argument is pretty weak. Of course Nazis are people, that doesn't make them morally righteous. This reminds me of an NPR story a few months back, where they tried to defend Antifa by claiming it's followers were just normal people 95% of the time. Either way, that argument doesn't justify any ideology.

Anyone find it ironic that the term Nazi is used to dehumanize people?

Maybe in the historical sense. Otherwise, I really don't care if people look down on actual Nazis; my beef is how loosely the term tends be be applied, as demonstrated by some of the other posts in this thread.

If he will judge me for the color of my skin, I will judge him for the content of his character.

I'd say that's fair, and I do the same.

If potential for violence is enough, then a man from an ideology that killed over 20 million people, and views ethnic cleansings as desirable is inherently suspect.

Someone to keep an eye on, but not to threaten or try to do violence against. And frankly, I'd rather these people be vocal so we can know who they are and what they're doing.

His predicament has nothing to do with vigilante justice and everything to do with the free market.

Them moving because they feel unsafe would have something to do with vigilante justice, though.

Being a Nazi IS an active threat.

No it isn't. If it was, he'd be in jail right now. He and anyone else can hold whatever vile beliefs they want as long as they don't act on any of it.

He lost his job because, guess what, a lot of companies have codes of conduct that exclude violent ideologies like "Kill all the jews". That's free market for you.

Or maybe people are harassing the business, or threatening the people who run it.

He's fleeing because suddenly he realizes his black, brown, non-christian, non-straight neighbors know that he wants to kill them.

Or because people have threatened violence against him.

This is the topsy-turvy world of modern American "politeness". Calling somebody a racist is worse than holding racist ideas. Calling somebody homophobic is worse than being homophobic.

It's more about abuse of the accusation for the vast majority of the time, not to mention the double standards when it comes to the "progressive" camp. As for the genuine article, as I've already said, I'd rather these people not be afraid to spew their shit, not because I agree with any of it, but because I want them in the open so we know who they are and what they're doing. If you make them afraid, they'll still keep spewing their shit, but where they can't be seen and heard. I find that much more concerning, personally.

Well for one, unlike Nazism, Islam and Communism don't have mass murder as an end unto itself.

Actually, yes, they do. With Islam, it's literally in their holy book, and with communism, this has been shown through the actions of actual communists, repeatedly throughout history.

For another black balling people because they are communists and/or communist sympathizers is a proud American tradition.

Communism has claimed far more lives than the Nazis ever did, and it was often against the very people they claimed to be fighting their glorious revolutions for. And say what you will about fascists, they don't go around claiming that, "oh, well that wasn't real fascism," or otherwise making excuses for all the mass murders they've caused throughout history.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

(if you think words are violence then there is no helping you), but him, his family, and any place he is associated with gets to be dragged through the mud and potentially have real violence acted upon them.

As you say words are not violence, he and his have not had violence acted against them. If potential for violence is enough, then a man from an ideology that killed over 20 million people, and views ethnic cleansings as desirable is inherently suspect.

You seem to be operating on the basis of predictive justice, that possessing a possibly dangerous ideology warrants actions against you. There is a reason that developed nations don't used predictive justice; its ineffective, discriminatory, and infringes on many basic rights. This is basically 1984 stuff, silencing people that have differing ideologies, under the banner of protecting others.

But let's go on that for a second. You, from what I am getting, believe that if someone ascribes to an ideology that has supported horrific acts, then that person has enough "potential for violence" to warrant action against them. What about Muslims then? Studies and polls have indicated that over 50% of Western Muslims support an establishment of Sharia Law, which has been used to justify ethnic cleansing and genocide throughout history. Is that enough "potential for violence" to warrant action? What about hardcore, Stalin-loving communists, who want to topple our democracy and replace it with a communist state? Should we be going around kicking them into the streets as well?

While I am no friend of Nazism

You are when you say "being pro-genocide is just his opinion and we have to respect that."

Seriously, has nobody on this forum ever even heard the legal definition of "fighting words"?

I'm 1/4 ethnically Jew, my Jewish great-grandparents fled Nazi Germany in the 1930s to escape persecution, so I really don't appreciate the insinuation that I am sympathetic towards Nazism.

Yes, I am aware of the definition of "fighting words" as to US legal law. Would you mind explaining to me how that is relevant here?

This isn't "Predictive justice". This is open declaration of hostility.

He wants the Jews dead. He says that hitler was "a pretty chill guy".

Whether you appreciate it or not, people like you who defend the genocidal attitudes allow Nazis to gain political power.

This is not an "opinion" like pineapple on pizza. This is about whether human rights extend to every human, or just the non-jewish non-muslim white ones.

You wanna cite some of these sources that claim half of all Western Muslims are just biding their time to enforce Shariah law on all of us?


He is a NAZI. Not a soup nazi, not a grammar nazi, not a feminazi. He is a 14 words, Heil Hitler, dyed-in-the-wool white supremecist.

Nazis, like pirates, Videans, the Borg, and Daleks, are Enemies of Mankind.

Saying "I am a Nazi" is fighting words because you are effectively declaring war on every single non-white, non-native-born, non-straight person who belongs to a religion other than Christianity, Atheism, or Norse Paganism within earshot.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

I'm 1/4 ethnically Jew, my Jewish great-grandparents fled Nazi Germany in the 1930s to escape persecution, so I really don't appreciate the insinuation that I am sympathetic towards Nazism.

...I'm sure you don't want to be viewed that way. I'm sure you don't think of yourself that way. But you are defending Nazis, sympathetically or not, in the name of "polite society."

[Draco Dracul]

Communism has claimed far more lives than the Nazis ever did, and it was often against the very people they claimed to be fighting their glorious revolutions for. And say what you will about fascists, they don't go around claiming that, "oh, well that wasn't real fascism," or otherwise making excuses for all the mass murders they've caused throughout history.

Communism claimed more lives than the Nazis mostly by virtue of being around longer. Nazism caused between 20 and 30 million deaths in just 12 years.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

If you're a nazi and you're fired, it's your fault!
If you're a nazi and you're fired, it's your fault!
If you were spotted in the mob, and you lost your fucking job,
You're a nazi, and you're fired! It's your fault!

[Admiral X]

Communism has claimed far more lives than the Nazis ever did, and it was often against the very people they claimed to be fighting their glorious revolutions for. And say what you will about fascists, they don't go around claiming that, "oh, well that wasn't real fascism," or otherwise making excuses for all the mass murders they've caused throughout history.

Communism claimed more lives than the Nazis mostly by virtue of being around longer. Nazism caused between 20 and 30 million deaths in just 12 years.

Even taking that as a given, that doesn't make communism or its followers look any better.

[Draco Dracul]

Communism has claimed far more lives than the Nazis ever did, and it was often against the very people they claimed to be fighting their glorious revolutions for. And say what you will about fascists, they don't go around claiming that, "oh, well that wasn't real fascism," or otherwise making excuses for all the mass murders they've caused throughout history.

Communism claimed more lives than the Nazis mostly by virtue of being around longer. Nazism caused between 20 and 30 million deaths in just 12 years.

Even taking that as a given, that doesn't make communism or its followers look any better.

And? I'd have no problem with a business firing someone for being a communist and not wanting to be associated with communism. As I said it's a proud American tradition.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Waving and shouting "communism is bad! D<" does fuckall to address the problems of Nazis at large wielding socio-political power in our own country.

[GandALF]

MFW people think German authoritarian militarism came out of nowhere and started with Hitler

[PlasmaHam]

I'm 1/4 ethnically Jew, my Jewish great-grandparents fled Nazi Germany in the 1930s to escape persecution, so I really don't appreciate the insinuation that I am sympathetic towards Nazism.

...I'm sure you don't want to be viewed that way. I'm sure you don't think of yourself that way. But you are defending Nazis, sympathetically or not, in the name of "polite society."

I am defending human decency. Nazis aren't monsters, they are people by your own word. You shouldn't be deriding someone for defending their right to peaceably live in society. I don't really much see the point in this tangent anyway, seems like a pointless lefty "You are a Nazi because I said so"! argument.

Whether you appreciate it or not, people like you who defend the genocidal attitudes allow Nazis to gain political power.

This has nothing to do with me in anyway, and I have yet to defend any opinions or attitudes of Nazism. Unless of course you think claiming Nazi's are people and thus deserve basic rights and protections is somehow defending their ideology. But regardless, stop with the Nazi accusations, it makes you look like a child.

Also, saying "I am a Nazi" or expressing Nazi opinion that aren't a direct threat or going to encourage immediate action is not fighting words under US law. Given what you've posted, I'm beginning to think that you don't know the legal definition, so let me share it with you:
Fighting words are, as first defined by the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) in Chaplinsky v New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942), words which "by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."

This was defined moreso in later cases. The gist of it is, if someone is making a direct and immediate threat to someone, or if someone is saying something that would result in immediate violence and harm, then that is fighting words. Being a Nazi, expressing Nazi opinions in a manner which isn't directly threatening to an individual or going to cause immediate violence, is protected under the First Amendment. And if you start saying that Nazi's don't deserve First Amendment rights, then I really feel sorry for you.

This is not an "opinion" like pineapple on pizza. This is about whether human rights extend to every human, or just the non-jewish non-muslim white ones.

Human rights also extend to Nazis. That seems like an inconvenient fact for you though.

Though to be clear, if you can't respond like a sensible human being and stop with the Nazi accusations and pointless stammering about how Nazis aren't humans too, then you can consider this debate over.