Anonymous #1 1w

I agree but there’s a certain level of social acceptability now as opposed to a few years back

51

Anonymous OP 1w

I think it’s bc the words been overused so it’s lost the weight of it, also I think since those who lived during that time are largely not around anymore so it’s also lost weight there too

-8

Anonymous #2 1w

Or maybe you started becoming more Nazi like and are coping

21

Anonymous #2 1w

People like you are hilarious

13

Anonymous #7 1w

Or maybe people just are more comfortable with acting like Nazis

14

Anonymous #7 1w

I think words can change meaning over time but I don’t think nazi is one of those words, I just think there’s more of a community cultivated around it now and people are more comfortable either revealing their true selves or conforming / picking up those opinions to be apart of a group

1

Anonymous #7 1w

Can I just say thank you for being one of the only logical comments here? This generation is offended by everything and ashamed of nothing, it’s despicable.

0

Anonymous #6 1w

Anyone who would consider themselves a Nazi should be ashamed, nazi rhetoric isn’t a good thing to be associated with, I am curious to why you think this way though if you want to explain?

3

Anonymous OP 1w

Who here elected themselves a Nazi, exactly?

0

Anonymous #6 1w

I’m confused by this sentence

3

Anonymous OP 1w

Shocker. You’re implying I associate with “nazi rhetoric” by agreeing that when a words usage changes, peoples understanding and interpretation of that word’s meaning inevitably changes. So it’s incredibly ironic to complain that a word is too widely accepted when that word has become commonly used to describe widely accepted things, or things it never really used to represent in the first place.

1

Anonymous #6 1w

Nazi used to refer to the German eugenics militia. Now it is typically used synonymously with bigot. Naturally, it’s going to be used more if the general usage refers to a much more expansive demographic. This is common sense, it’s unbelievable that this even needs to be explained.

2

Anonymous #6 1w

Does this include people calling feminists “feminazis”

1

Anonymous #8 1w

….uhhh yup. That was not the gotcha moment you were looking for babe

0

Anonymous #6 1w

I’m not saying it shouldn’t be used I’m saying being a Nazi isn’t something to be proud of or to be celebrated. The values that are behind the Nazi symbol and group have not changed and shouldn’t be something socially acceptable to follow

5

Anonymous OP 1w

Yeah no shit? Who’s arguing that traditional Nazi values are acceptable 😭 you’re fighting ghosts here

1

Anonymous #6 1w

The values behind the word haven’t changed, the word itself can still describe a new group of people who have rallied behind it, but it still holds the same values

1

Anonymous OP 1w

IF ITS DESCRIBING A NEW GROUP OF PEOPLE THEN THE GENERALLY ACCEPTED MEANING BEHIND THE WORD HAS ALREADY CHANGED😭😭😭😭Not to mention “values” are not universally transferable when a word starts being used differently than when those said values initially applied. This is so simple I really don’t see what you’re getting at here.

3

Anonymous #6 1w

Its describing them because those people decided to associate themselves with that word knowing its history and meaning, I don’t get your point either and I’m confused on weather you are dumb or trying to rage bait ;p

5

Anonymous #9 1w

I’m just saying the word and meaning behind it shouldn’t be normalized or celebrated. But yeah a lot of words nowadays we have certainly gotten desensitized to, I don’t think they’ve lost their meaning though because some people use them differently

11

Anonymous OP 1w

I agree. That’s why it shouldn’t be used lightly. If you see some guy dressed as one and yelling “heil h***er” and it’s not Halloween or a movie set or anything then you can call someone a Nazi but other than that there is no reason to go around calling someone it.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

That’s what I said and I got hate for it wtf 😭

4

Anonymous #1 1w

you’re who we’re talking about…

1

Anonymous #6 1w

Yeah you’re just who we’re talking about. You’re the one who should be ashamed. Repent before it’s too late, Nazis go to hell.

-1

Anonymous #9 1w

MAGA Republicans are fascists… this is a factual statement. No amount of hurt feelings or crying changes the fact that they would’ve supported the Nazis had they been alive in Germany at the time. It’s a global moment for Fascism, neo-Nazis are the second largest party in Germany and rising.

4

Anonymous #10 5d

Leftists are communists… this is a factual statement. No amount of hurt feelings or crying changes the fact that they would’ve supported the Soviet’s red terror had they been alive in Russia at the time. It’s a global movement for communism, communists are the second largest party in Russia and rising.

-2

Anonymous #9 5d

Communists are awesome

7

Anonymous #4 5d

Yea if killing 50 million of your own people in two years is awesome. The best part is that those deaths were from famine because the government thought they could produce and distribute food better than the market could. It was just incompetence. At least with fascism the government doesn’t create a freaking famine. Good god. Have you seen the amount of dumb shit communist governments do? It makes our government look smart

-2

Anonymous #9 5d

The market kill millions of people by privatizing and profiting off of maintaining a forced scarcity of essential goods. We produce enough food in America alone to end world hunger, and yet people across the globe starve to death. Also the markets have determined that the 6th mass extinction is worth maintaining profits. If you want to keep living as a cuck to capitalism, I hope that you are willing to die by that sword, because I am willing to die for a better world, which is a communist one.

6

Anonymous #4 5d

If the market thought that we would still be mining coal like crazy, if the market thought that electric vehicles would never have taken off. If the market thought that the US would not be investing hundreds of billions of dollars in nuclear energy trying to make it practical again. Oil companies will be around even if there are no gas power plants or gas powered cars on Earth. Oil is used to make fertilizer which we use to grow food, it’s used in manufacturing and much more.

0

Anonymous #9 5d

The planet is dying and the minimal effort by the ever expanding market is not going to cut it for making change. Sorry man

5

Anonymous #4 5d

The problem with people like you is that you think because a system isn’t perfect it needs to be replaced. The grass isn’t always greener on the other side. Especially when it comes to revolutions.

0

Anonymous #9 5d

The issue is this isn’t an imperfect system, it is an inherently harmful, broken one. The negative effects of capitalism aren’t accidents, the system is working precise as intended, it’s just that by its nature it benefits a tiny portion of society while harming the vast majority. It is literally driving us into extinction, either we destroy it, or it destroys us.

5

Anonymous #9 5d

I understand that accepting that the world as you have been taught and conditioned to know it is a lie is a deeply unpleasant experience, and it can be easy to want to fight for a system that benefits off exploiting you but I promise that there is a better solution than just accepting capitalism

10

Anonymous #4 5d

Minimal effort? The world is spending trillions of dollars trying to solve this problem. Carbon capture , nuclear energy, electric vehicles , you have literally hundreds of companies working on solutions to many of the problems that contribute to global warming. these aren’t things that happen overnight. fusion power still isn’t producing net energy so it’s not ready yet.

0

Anonymous #9 5d

Dude I fucking love nuclear energy and I respect the hell out of people who work in that industry, but we’d be lying to ourselves if we didn’t recognize the imbalance between the oil and gas industry and the nuclear/ alternative energy industry

12

Anonymous #4 5d

The challenge with Nuclear energy right now is building reactors. They are incredibly capital intensive to build and construction tends to go WAY over budget due to environmental lawsuits and the regulatory environment. Currently the US has built 2 new nuclear power reactors since 1981. Vogtle units 3 and 4 each took about 14 years and 18.4 billion dollars each to build. We stopped building them for years because of accidents in Ukraine and Japan.

1

Anonymous #4 5d

I do agree that we need more of them. The NRC is trying to reduce the time to get a permit to build them down to 18 months rather than several years. One of the tricky things about nuclear power is that you can’t change the thermal power level to quickly or you will cause xenon to build up and poison the core. Part of the solution the DOE is investing in is small modular reactors that can be manufactured and shipped and assembled at site. Currently research into that has been promising

1

Anonymous #9 5d

Yeah, I’m aware and I believe we’re on the same page here. However, I want you to understand that the level of regulation and lack of attention being given to nuclear is a result of capitalism and monopoly of the oil and gas industry

4

Anonymous #9 5d

Uh nuclear fission is already good enough to do the job? That’s the solution to climate change, stop burning massive amounts of fossil fuels, use fewer cars, move away from single use plastic. Carbon capture is woo woo magic that is used to make us feel like science will magically save us. It won’t. Millions, potentially billions of people are going to die due to climate change, even if we stopped using every fossil fuel today.

10