Masterful display of someone refuting an argument in a logical in eloquent way, whilst addressing all the points in the article, thank you. The internet is much better after that comment was posted.
I see him as a clever person. It points out that the very title of the piece exhibits exactly the same behavior that it pretends to call out. That's a time-saver: if the author is that un-self-aware, then the article itself is not worth the time to refute.
Fascists should be fought everywhere all the time, even for "jokes".
People are quick to forget but history isn't, and the death count speaks for itself.
A tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance, lest it gets destroyed by it.
Well the accusation was that he would have been born in Kenya, which you may want to research a bit further. The birth certificate he presented was reviewed by two independent people, and both came to the same conclusion which was ...
He was a natural-born American, from birth, with less colorable questions than applied to John McCain, who was also a natural-born American from birth, even though he was born on the occupied territory of another country… the only sort of person that thinks otherwise is the one who thinks the ends justify the means.
And sure, ISIS, did plenty wrong, just not one tiny bit of it in the pursuit of anything resembling fascism.
Calling Salafist/Wahhabist Islamist extremism “islamofascist” is as idiotic as calling adherents to the prosperity gospel “christotrotskyites”… it’s just a propaganda tool without discernible meaning to anyone but the (idiot) choir.
"Byman and his co-author found something remarkable. Their tally showed that in the first half of 2025, far-left terrorist activity had overtaken that from the far right. It's a departure from the pattern of the last 30 years. "
At some point we have to look at reality. One political party in the US is explicitly toying with fascism.
> Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian political ideology emphasizing extreme nationalism, a strong central government led by a dictator, suppression of opposition, militarism, and the subordination of individual rights to the state's perceived needs, often with state control of the economy and a belief in national rebirth and strength.
MAGA is fascist or at the very least fascist adjacent. If they don’t like the accuracy of the label, they should stop being authoritarian assholes.
If your ideology has differential effects on people by race, then you may well be participating in a racist ideology even if you detest it.
Most notably: current policies are addressed at punishing illegal immigrants, but it's clear that it's being targeted at non-white and mostly Spanish-speaking people. There are numerous incidents of people being racially profiled despite being American citizens, and no steps are being taken to minimize that. The policy is popular with those who are explicit about their racial supremacy.
If you support programs that hurt people of a different race, then calling you a "Nazi" is not inapt, regardless of what you think of the actual Nazis.
> If your ideology has differential effects on people by race, then you may well be participating in a racist ideology even if you detest it.
Mine don’t, I don’t like that people are being unfairly targeted if they’re citizens or have legal rights to be in the country. That said, I don’t want illegal immigrants to be harmed or mistreated. And it’s not just me, many Americans feel the same way.
The issue is more complex than simply a humanitarian cause. The effect of letting in hundreds of people is something you can balance over time, but letting in millions over a relatively short period has both economic and geopolitical ramifications. Besides that, borders exist for more than security, their permeability has implications for national sovereignty as well. For Americans who aren’t racist, the issue is multifaceted and just as important as the plight of an economic immigrant or asylum seeker.
If you look at who is entering the U.S. illegally, it includes people from strong economic powerhouses with healthy growth projections and competitive GDP, like Brazil, Mexico, China, India and so on.
When you just absorb the economic or political issues of other countries by taking in their poor, then you don’t ever let those societies reflect on what they’re doing wrong or right for their people. Countries should be responsible for their people, and if they’re unable to be that way for one reason or another, their people need to examine why and ask their leaders some tough questions. Immigrating to other countries, for jobs, safety, or education, is not a good or sustainable way of doing things, which is why we’re currently having the issues that we’re having.
I also think asylum seekers should be sent to countries that most match their cultural backgrounds, and repatriated when conflict is resolved, or sent somewhere where they have family ties. There needs to be a better way to bring normalcy into the lives of people affected by war or conflict other than turning them away, or indefinitely opening your doors to anyone who claims asylum, where there is a non-zero occurrence of fraud.
Good and responsible governance is the only way to ensure better outcomes for people. Political extremism isn’t going to enable good governance.
> The effect of letting in hundreds of people is something you can balance over time, but letting in millions over a relatively short period has both economic and geopolitical ramifications.
Which specific ramifications? It is interesting how often people stop here.
There’s a lot of information available already, feel free to look it up. No one reasonable says that (legal) immigration is bad, what becomes concerning is mass, unsanctioned movement. I don’t discount the humanitarian crises, which is why I think there needs to be a good faith effort to resolve the issues for people who are impacted by such crises. Sadly, the problem is realpolitikal, and that’s why there is no good faith solution which presents itself.
So the issue isn’t about racism, mass migration from a country is not a healthy indication of state of affairs, and in some way countries tacitly sanction bad governance by others when they absorb the problems of others. No one should have to leave their homelands for economic or safety reasons.
So let me just be clear. You are saying that Somalians are predisposed to commit fraud in ways that Americans are not such that having any Somalians immigrate to the US will increase the amount of fraud here and overall make society worse?
And you want me to believe that this isn't bigoted garbage?
So you don't believe that immigration of millions of people from let's say India (my country) which has corrupt institutions and people generally lack civic sense (littering etc.) will not cause issues to America and Americans ?
The Nazi Party used the term "Socialist" in its name primarily for propaganda purposes to attract votes from the working class and to co-opt a popular political term in post-World War I Germany. In practice and ideology, Nazism was a far-right, racist, and anti-Marxist movement that brutally suppressed actual socialists and communists once in power.
But lets not let facts get in the way of things shall we?
I always cringe when I hear the word "Nazism." Because the first time I heard it, it was when Putin said it in a speech after invading Ukraine. And indeed, if you check Google Trends, you'll see that the term had its peak around that time and has had an increased usage ever since. Nazism is not a word known in German either. We purposefully call it national socialism. And to be honest, I think it makes sense to be national socialism. Because it is nationally socialist. Meaning it is social towards the nation. Which is also a reason why there is the "Internationale." Because to me socialism that is constraint to a nation is inevitably nationalist, I mean how else could it not be?
“Nazism” with the capital N represents a specifically German instance of “national socialism”; to whit, the instance that reflexively called Adolf Hitler’s assassin “Mein Fuhrer”. Nazism modeled itself, in turn, on a specific instance of “fascism” which took its class name from its basal instantiation, Italian “Fascismo”, to whit the instance that reflexively called the man ultimately responsible for the death of Benito Mussolini “Il Duce”.
The main lesson of history is that personality cults are a very bad idea.
Notice your own use of the German word “Nationalsozialistische” and not the word “Sozialistische”? They are two different words coined with intent to have two very different — in fact pretty much opposite — meanings. That’s a fact Hitler and his other very-definitely conservative friends knew and understood well, just like they’d have known that “Ich bein ein Berliner Pfannkuchen” is not the same as “Ich bein ein Berliner”… as often seems to be the case the actual facts directly contradict the alt-facts you seem to think you know.
