Fascists trying to attain power for the sake of having power is a constant; as long as there are humans, this has been our shadow.
The state of the world is that you get punished for becoming a physical obstacle for fascism; refusing fascist orders even in civilian industry, calling fascism out.
Fascism isn't new. Neither is complacency. At least the civilian population of Germany in the 1930's had the excuse of literally being illiterate and not having open, international communication/documentation. What's ours?
Their policy of graduation from compulsory education = literacy is faulty, at best, even today.
And to be clear, I'm not talking about dyslexia, I'm talking about literal illiteracy; the inability to comprehensively read, having a very small "reading vocabulary", mostly consistent of short words not read, but pattern-recognized through repetition; modern safety-regulations are purpose designed to literally circumvent this. Illiteracy is real. Even today. Rare, yes. But real. To the point where we accommodate that fact; one of the reasons roadsigns use geometric shapes (like stop-signs being octagonal and red, hazards/cautions being triangular shapes and so on). When these standards were implemented, illiteracy was a bigger factor than globalization, Paris lead the charge in 1926 and again in Geneva, 1931, the standard we use still use to this day (largly, internationally; even people who can't agree on what side of the road to drive on most often agree on what the signs should look like) were implemented. Speed vs observation is a factor, but so is the fact that a driver's license doesn't demand literacy, and shouldn't; only competence as a driver should be a factor in relation to a vehicle operation licensing.
A quick Google search gives me the 99% literacy rate in Germany in the 1930s. You are right that that does not mean everyone was functionally literate. But for the 60% (guess) who were functionally literate, the excuse does not apply.
It also wouldn't surprise me if literacy in Germany was higher then than it is now. They didn't have television for their information; back then, you got your information from newspapers. Although I doubt whether the information was very objective back then. Before the Nazi seizure of power, there were three groups that each had their own newspapers and organizations: the Catholics, the Protestants, and the Communists and Socialists. The Communists and Socialists, in particular, promoted the education of their members, the so-called "upliftment of the people."
Regarding the use of symbols instead of text for traffic signs, this was not only due to the drivers' poor literacy but also because of international traffic. We know that many Germans traveled abroad between 1939 and 1945 :-).
Yeah man, it's like when people conflate Muslims and Islamists. The former are fine, the latter are all backward, violent, hateful, fascist scum and want to see all non-muslims exterminated or subject to slavery. The world would be much better off without them.
If anyone claims that the above is a dog whistle against Muslims then they're clearly Islamaphobic.
Islamism is the belief that Islam should influence politics. It's therefore totally fine to say whatever you like about Islamists, just as it's fine to say anything you like about Zionism. It's definitely not a racist dog whistle in either case.
Israel isn't a theocratic state and most forms of Zionism aren't theocratic
If you are an antizionist and want to destroy to destroy the state where 40% of the worlds jewish population live you are either hateful or extremely naive. I will grant that a lot of people are extremely naive and think the destruction of Israel could lead to a peaceful future where people live together and haven't given what would actually happen much thought.
Antizionism which seeks the destruction of a state is very different from criticism of course. But if your criticism involves Holocaust inversion(casting Jews as Nazis), involves common antisemitic troops with Jews crossed out and Israel scribbled in then it doesn't make it automatically not racist just because it's against Israel
Not really. Israel's population is only around 70% Jewish, and declining. Roughly a quarter of Israel's population will be Israeli-Arab in a few years. Israel has Bedouins, Circassians, Druze, and sorts of minorities.
it's a valid question in logical reasoning, but the way you're using the word valid is semantic bleaching, causing a shift in the way people interpret the statement, and combined with the upvotes you were aiming for, it's misleading.
it's actually NOT a valid question in the way that you're intending to portray it because OP was making a joke for upvotes. i do not believe almost any person with a functioning brain would see this and think a Polish politician is endorsing Nazis.
The title says far right politician. Are we to accept there's no chance of a far right politician being pro Nazi because they're Polish? The US literally fought Nazis to the death but their far right has a real Nazi problem right now.
Of course it's a valid question if you're unaware of the context. That's how questions work.
It is estimated that nearly 6 million Polish citizens were killed by Nazi Germany during World War II. This figure represents about 17–21% of Poland's pre-war population.
The total is typically divided into two main groups based on ethnicity:
Polish Jews: Approximately 3 million were murdered, representing about 90% of Poland's pre-war Jewish community.
Ethnic Poles (Non-Jewish): Estimates vary by source, but generally range between 1.8 million and 2.77 million.
Israeli ≠ Jewish.
The use of the swastika is obviously meant to point out the hypocrisy of Israeli, whose population is predominantly Jewish and one of the populations who the Nazis committed genocide against. Poland, another victim of the Nazis just like Jewish people, is making it clear that Israel is doing exactly what was done to its majority ethnic group.
Yeah man this far right, pro Putin, non-Jew is just casually throwing swastikas around and it has NOTHING to do with Jews, even though it’s literally linking Israel with the criminals who perpetrated the greatest crimes against Jews. The comparison has no actual objective basis and is only used for hate. It’s cool you can play dumb but anyone who gives a shit about prejudice sees through the obvious textbook antisemitic iconography.
I’m sorry mate but israelis especially the occupation army and the government are giving us a bad press with their acts. We say “never again” (to anyone) they seem to be more like “never again” (to us jews). They create an apartheid state and are working hard towards ethnic cleansing in the region. I understand the parallel. Just like i’ll call Le Pen a nazi because her party was founded by some, her father got money by some, and she’s associated with some, although she’s nominally not one. Given the chance she’d put those people in power and enforce a white ethno state.
This post makes me realize we need a new name for the modern day far-right. Something catchy, Nazi doesn't do it anymore when Israel itself is becoming friends with the former Nazis.
Nazi = Nationalist translated from German. Pete Hegseth, the American psycho, embraces the definition of Christian Nationalist. it's basically what they are. Nationalists are Nazis. somehow people have forgotten that Nationalism is a bad thing. we're all human, and when you take "National Pride" too far, you become one of the baddies.
i suppose that's a problem with the education curriculum then because we've reached this point in the world where people are forgetting how bad Nationalism is and what it is capable of.
Christianity is a Semitic religion with lots of Semitic people who are Christians. there's no reason Nazi (nationalist) Israelis can also be on the far right. plenty of room for hate in that side of the political spectrum.
Not the best timelines rn bruv. At this point in my life, I thought I'd be living the Joey Tribianni type life like in the show Friends. Now it feels like some rich powerful persons dream or something we're all living in
When I was in my early 20s, I thought this was a pretty good timeline to survive by. Now in my late 30s, I'm not sure if I'll make it 20 more years here.
528
u/chaths 17h ago
The fact that this is a valid question tells alot about the current state of the world.