Quote from: philipma1957 on Today at 11:12:54 AM

Quote from: kurious on Today at 10:57:10 AM

Godwin's law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

According to Godwin himself it is okay to make appropriate Hitler comparisons and that it should not end the discussion.

So are you saying that the Hitler reference was correct or incorrect?

The only one whom I seemed to be comparing to Hitler was myself. You know—the Jewish Chinese Nazi, who is just running a Sun Tzu psy-op to keep marcus confused. Zing.

What with this being the Internet, I had thought to explain pre-emptively that Godwin’s Law does not mechanistically apply to all historical comparisons or analogies involving Hitler. Then, I decided that it would be a waste of words: Surely, people would be more intelligent than that... Welcome to the Internet.

No, I was not comparing Hitler and the SA to nutildah, Antifa, or anybody whom I dislike. If that is what you read into it, then that’s on you.

To waste time and text explaining the obvious: My point was that if, hypothetically, somebody were to use the Sturmabteilung name and symbol, then yes, that obviously would have some relevance to Adolf Hitler. Neither nutildah nor anybody else would claim that it has nothing to do with Hitler, on the absurd grounds that:

Quote from: nullius on Today at 05:55:49 AM

The original NSDAP, including the SA, has been defunct since 1945; and “not many people... identify themselves as [National-Socialists] anymore”.

Quote from: nutildah on October 02, 2020, 11:23:47 PM

...the original Antifa... have technically been defunct since 1933... Not many people in the US or anywhere for that matter identify themselves as communists anymore, or even socialists.

Got it now? Or do I need to write ten more pages explaining an argument that was intended to be concise?

As a relatively minor point that I should mention because it’s quoted above, nutildah’s statement that the original Antifa has been “defunct since 1933” is factually incorrect. (And that was not the only thing wrong with his post...) The Antifas functioned as underground/illegal from 1933–45, including amongst Communists imprisoned in labour camps, then lost momentum and faded away in the postwar era of the DDR. Overt Communists gravitated toward the East, of course; and there is not much room for a street-level gang of Communist thugs in a country openly ruled by a government gang of Communist thugs!

By the way, does anyone here have New York Times paywall access? If so, here are some links that I bookmarked once upon a time, when this stuff was not paywalled. It was careless of me not to save local copies.
https://www.nytimes.com/1959/03/08/archives/now-castro-faces-the-harder-fight-his-revolution-against-batista.html
https://www.nytimes.com/1959/04/19/archives/castro-hails-newsmen-gives-medals-to-americans-who-interviewed-him.html

It is not about Antifa, but rather, an exemplar of the whitewash of Communists. (I thought to mention that before, but decided instead to reach back to Walter Duranty.) But a more accurate metaphor would be the Fair Play for Cuba Committees.

In 1959, nutildah would have jeered at me and traduced my intelligence for my claim that Fidel Castro is a Communist. That was a wild accusation only believed by “right-wing extremists” with a “conspiratorial theory of history”, who “see a Red under every bed”! (Until Castro himself came out and proudly announced that he had always been a Communist.)

Now, it is just too bizarre for nutildah to claim that an organization which today overtly uses a Communist name, a Communist symbol, substantively Communist ideology, and Communist tactics, with the same old Communist purpose of inciting riots and cancelling free speech with their fists (as Antifa’s predecessor KDP/SDP gangs did throughout the 1920s), has nothing to do with Communism.

Quote from: nutildah on Today at 10:48:36 AM

Sure is a long-winded, roundabout way of admitting that you don't have the slightest fucking clue of what you're talking about.

No, that is a terse way of brushing you off as you deserve. Though I should thank you for demonstrating the level of your dishonesty:

If I spend my time and effort writing a cogent exposition of my thesis, you insult it as too long; and you proudly profess not to read it. E.g.:

Quote from: nutildah on September 24, 2020, 01:13:45 AM
I'm ignoring you in general because you take too many words to say too little.
If I mostly ignore your nonsense, and concisely dismiss it with four sentences plus one graphic (“long-winded”?) to make a baseline demonstration that it is nonsense, then you accuse me of “[not having] the slightest fucking clue what [I’m] talking about”. And with a hypocrisy that would be astounding if it were not typical of a certain type, you thereby dodge my point—with a substance-free statement that is somehow simultaneously advanced from a position of conceited ignorance, and loaded with sneering derision. Per your usual standard.

I am not inclined to engage you in an extended discourse on history and political theory, for the same reason that I have never delivered a lecture on geophysics to Flat Earthers. But since you are so transparently using propaganda shill tactics that should make hv_ envious of your twistiness, I must ask: Why are you so deadset determined to whitewash Antifa?

It’s odd that an historical observation I tossed off-the-cuff, just because I was examining it again whilst working on something else (as I noted) and I thought it would be of interest to others here, has attracted such opprobrium from someone who claims to be “ignoring [me] in general”. #triggered