Republicans: continued

Post Reply
User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 5700
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:22 pm

In her original comment (the recording played by Lieu), Owens glossed over the genocide and made out that where Hitler had gone wrong was in attempting to expand his rule beyond the borders of Germany. That is not excusable. To verify that in context, Owens ignored the genocidal aspect of Hitler's rule in her comment, go to about the 40:50 mark of the video of the event at the RAC Club in London. She didn't condemn him for genocide, she condemned his 'globalist' ambition.



She's either being ignorant or maliciously disingenuous. In addition, her line of rhetoric is bullshit, as if somebody with territorial ambitions cannot be a nationalist. She compounded the bullshit when she attempted to dig herself out of the hole in her subsequent statement: 'He wasn’t a nationalist. He was a homicidal, psychotic maniac.' Hitler being a 'homicidal, psychotic maniac' doesn't preclude him from being a nationalist. Note that the subsequent statement was not made at the RAC Club event--it was a Twitter video she released after she was called out on what she said at the RAC Club.
Last edited by L'Emmerdeur on Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Animavore
Nasty Hombre
Posts: 39234
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:26 am
Location: Ire Land.
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Animavore » Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:27 pm

Hermit wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:22 pm
Animavore wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:09 pm
She's basically talking about Hitler like he was pretty innocuous until he started invading other countries.
Quote her. I mean, quote her. I anticipate your interpretation of what her actual words mean will be of the same calibre as Ted Lieu's interpretation when he accused Owens of legitimising Hitler: Unadulterated rubbish.

Edit: And you just did what I told you not to do.

No, Owens said: "if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine." Doesn't even look remotely like she was saying Hitler like was pretty innocuous until he started invading other countries.
It looks exactly like that. You can't separate Hitler from his views on Jews and non-whites so saying it would've been fine if all he wanted to do was make Germany great doesn't cut it.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Hermit » Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:33 pm

L'Emmerdeur wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:22 pm
Owens ignored the genocidal aspect of Hitler's rule in her comment, go to about the 40:50 mark of the video of the event at the RAC Club in London. She didn't condemn him for genocide, she condemned his 'globalist' ambition.
Correct. Now find the bit where she attempts to legitimise Hitler.

Your line of thinking reminds me of those shitheads who say that Muslims who fail to condemn Islamist terrorism are in favour of, or at least sympathise with it. Are they trying to legitimise Islamic terrorism?
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
Jason
Destroyer of words
Posts: 17782
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Jason » Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:37 pm

It does seem to give Hitler's other policies, such as the elimination of "undesirable" elements of German society, a pass. It seems to implicitly sweep them all under the umbrage of "making Germany great -" as if eliminating non-whites, Jews, homosexuals, and others, is just part of what one does to make a nation "great."

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Hermit » Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:40 pm

Animavore wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:27 pm
Hermit wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:22 pm
Animavore wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:09 pm
She's basically talking about Hitler like he was pretty innocuous until he started invading other countries.
Quote her. I mean, quote her. I anticipate your interpretation of what her actual words mean will be of the same calibre as Ted Lieu's interpretation when he accused Owens of legitimising Hitler: Unadulterated rubbish.

Edit: And you just did what I told you not to do.

No, Owens said: "if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine." Doesn't even look remotely like she was saying Hitler like was pretty innocuous until he started invading other countries.
It looks exactly like that. You can't separate Hitler from his views on Jews and non-whites so saying it would've been fine if all he wanted to do was make Germany great doesn't cut it.
Owens did not even say Hitler was a nationalist, and yes, you can make Germany great and have things run well without being genocidal. Old Fritz did it when Germany was basically just Prussia-Brandenburg, and Bismarck too before and after it was formally re-established as a nation.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Hermit » Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:42 pm

Jason wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:37 pm
It does seem to give Hitler's other policies, such as the elimination of "undesirable" elements of German society, a pass. It seems to implicitly sweep them all under the umbrage of "making Germany great -" as if eliminating non-whites, Jews, homosexuals, and others, is just part of what one does to make a nation "great."
Like Muslims who fail to protest Islamic terrorism?
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 5700
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:52 pm

Hermit wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:33 pm
L'Emmerdeur wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:22 pm
Owens ignored the genocidal aspect of Hitler's rule in her comment, go to about the 40:50 mark of the video of the event at the RAC Club in London. She didn't condemn him for genocide, she condemned his 'globalist' ambition.
Correct. Now find the bit where she attempts to legitimise Hitler.

Your line of thinking reminds me of those shitheads who say that Muslims who fail to condemn Islamist terrorism are in favour of, or at least sympathise with it. Are they trying to legitimise Islamic terrorism?
If you've read my previous comments on this topic, you know that I have not claimed that she was attempting to legitimize Hitler. In the original comment, she finds his territorial ambitions problematic while claiming that 'if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine.' We know how Hitler wanted to make Germany great, but according to her comment 'the problem' is really that 'he had dreams outside of Germany.'

I think you would agree that Hitler's agenda for making Germany great and having things run well was not 'OK, fine.' As I said above, Owens' comment was inexcusable.

ETA: If I read of a Muslim who said, 'If ISIS just wanted to re-establish the caliphate and have things run well, OK, fine. The problem is that they have dreams outside of Syria and Iraq,' I would find their comment highly problematic.
Last edited by L'Emmerdeur on Wed Apr 10, 2019 4:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Jason
Destroyer of words
Posts: 17782
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Jason » Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:53 pm

That "if" is a pivotal word in interpreting the meaning in that sentence. You can take it to introduce a hypothetical and therefore discount everything Hitler wanted to do in Germany and then introduce the simple imperative of "making Germany great " which does not include such things as ethnic cleansing. In that sense she's basically saying "If Hitler hadn't been a genocidal monster intent on purging the German population and only wanted to improve conditions within Germany then there wouldn't have been a problem." She, however, confounds that banal statement with the contrasting "he wanted to globalize." This does seem to concretize the previous hypothetical statement and make Hitler out to be something of an over-stepping nation-builder instead of the monster he was. There's an implicit whitewashing going on there - at least it's not an unreasonable interpretation of what was said that there is.

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 5700
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Wed Apr 10, 2019 4:45 pm

To be perfectly clear, since the editing window has closed: If I read of a Muslim who said, 'If ISIS just wants to re-establish the caliphate and have things run well, OK, fine. The problem is that they have dreams outside of Syria and Iraq,' I would find their comment highly problematic inexcusable as well. 'The problem' is that they're murderous fanatics--their territorial ambitions, while not acceptable and worthy of the most strenuous opposition, somewhat fade into the background of their essential character and mode of operation.

As far as I'm concerned the same is the case with Hitler's Third Reich. If I make out that 'the problem' with Hitler is that he wanted to expand the nation's Lebensraum while glossing over the rest of his agenda as just wanting 'to make Germany great and have things run well,' I'm being dishonest. People would be right to question whether I was in fact doing one of the things the alt-right is infamous for--using ambiguous wording to slip acceptance of white nationalism into the conversation while maintaining at least minimally plausible deniability. Perhaps Candace Owens is just clueless enough to have picked up that sort of gambit and regurgitated it without understanding what her compatriots are doing. However, the whole point of Owens' appearance before the committee was to downplay concerns over the rise of white nationalism as just a ploy to get Democrats elected.
“The hearing today isn’t about white nationalism, it’s a preview of a Democrat 2020 election strategy, same as the 2016 election strategy,” Owens said. “If they were really concerned about white nationalism, they’d hold hearings on antifa.”

[source]

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 7339
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Pluviophile
Location: Covidiocracy
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Seabass » Wed Apr 10, 2019 5:39 pm

That Hitler fella was doing a fine job at Making Germany Great Again, but then it all went tits up after the Anschluss. Silly globalist... :nono:
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 37956
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Brian Peacock » Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:21 pm

You know, the more I hear about this Hitler bloke the less I like him. :whistle:

Look, Owens wants to rehabilitate 'nationalism' as a legitimate political term - one that isn't associated with death camps and blond hair. Good luck to her in that misguided venture - but if we're going to take issue with her views lets take issue with what she says rather than what she doesn't. After all, charitability is the first rule of honest discourse.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 7339
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Pluviophile
Location: Covidiocracy
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Seabass » Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 pm

It's all fun and games until someone annexes the Sudetenland. :nono:
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Forty Two » Wed Apr 10, 2019 7:01 pm

pErvinalia wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:02 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:01 pm
pErvinalia wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 1:36 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 1:23 pm
I swear, it's like talking to a wall.
The problem is that you constantly conflate communists with Stalinism.
Stalinism is a form of communism.
pErvinalia wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 1:36 pm

They aren't the same thing.
Stalinism is a form of communism.
NO IT'S NOT! FFS, how many times do we need to explain get it wrong this to you? Communism advocates a stateless decentralised society. State authoritarianism is clearly not stateless. Stop conflating the two.
Your stupid argument is like someone saying that a capitalist country isn't capitalist because it's not pure laissez-faire capitalism. You're using your dumbass "No True Scotsman" routine.

How many times does it have to be explained to you that Stalinism is, in fact, a form of communism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... ideologies
Self-identified communists hold a variety of views, including Marxism, Dengism, Trotskyism, Stalinism, council communism, Luxemburgism, anarcho-communism, Christian communism, Islamic socialism and various currents of left communism.
Stalinism -- systematized and expanded on "....the ideas of Vladimir Lenin into the ideology of Marxism–Leninism as a distinct body of work. In this sense, Stalinism can be thought of as being roughly equivalent to Marxism–Leninism....[/quote]

Stalinism is sometimes used as a term
...to describe a wide variety of political systems and governments, including the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact countries of Europe, Mongolia, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Ethiopia, Albania, and others. In this sense, it can be seen as being roughly equivalent to actually existing socialism,...
- i.e. - a whole host of Communist countries are/were of the Stalinist variety of Communism.
some of the contributions to communist theory that Stalin is particularly known for are:

The theoretical work concerning nationalities, as seen in Marxism and the National Question,[2]
The notion of Socialism in One Country
Marxist Theory of Linguistics[clarification needed]
The theory of aggravation of the class struggle along with the development of socialism, a theoretical base supporting the repression of political opponents as necessary.
Stalinism is a form of Marxist Communism.

So, no matter how many times you offer a wrong, and really obviously ignorant, explanation, you only show yourself to be ill-informed. You probably heard someone somewhere make some dopey argument that Stalin was really a right winger and what was going on then was really fascism, not communism, and it's expedient for you to swallow that bullshit. But, alas, it's about as intelligent an argument as someone saying that Hitler was really a Socialist, cuz, like, it's in the name of the Nazi Party.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 7339
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Pluviophile
Location: Covidiocracy
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Seabass » Wed Apr 10, 2019 7:05 pm

Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:21 pm
You know, the more I hear about this Hitler bloke the less I like him. :whistle:

Look, Owens wants to rehabilitate 'nationalism' as a legitimate political term - one that isn't associated with death camps and blond hair. Good luck to her in that misguided venture - but if we're going to take issue with her views lets take issue with what she says rather than what she doesn't. After all, charitability is the first rule of honest discourse.
She's also hilariously trying to associate globalism with Hitler. To do that, she has to, as others have pointed out, gloss over that whole genocide thing and focus on the expansion of Germany beyond its borders. It's a preposterous and transparent sleight of hand.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 37956
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Brian Peacock » Wed Apr 10, 2019 11:21 pm

I think that attitude can be summed up as, "OMG! People are making stuff cheaper than we are. That's not fair!! The system is rigged... boo hoo... boo hoo boo hoo, boo hoo, bwwaaaaaaaaaaaaa-aaaa-aaaaa-aaah! Mommy!!"
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 27 guests