Bloggers making "poor choices"

Ya know, throwing out terms like 'Nazi' and 'Fascist' really pisses me off.  It seems to be the staple terminology of the far left, used to describe anyone holding a political belief that differs to theirs. 

Perhaps if they had a taste of life in a real fascist or nazi culture/state they wouldn't be quite so quick to bandy the term around.

I just don't get it. I don't even care if you aren't talking to the owner of a site you are hanging out at, calling people Nazis and Fascists is just idiotic. But to bite the hand that feeds you? Seems like the last time someone recommended doing that it was Weird Al in a little song called "Dare to be Stupid".

What a bunch of morans. (yes, that was deliberate!)

The most recent person wrote several pretty decent articles that got next-to-no attention, and then started writing really provocative, insulting stuff once he realized it got attention. That kind of attention always backfires, though. It isn't easy handling the role of villain, lol. After a while it wears on you and you crack, I guess.

I wonder how some of the people on here function in society. They have no idea when to shut up, they write things for the expressed purpose of pissing others off, and they have no clue how to yield to authority.

Obviously you and I don't see eye to eye on many things . . . however, I admire your accomplishments, I appreciate the gracious way you run and share this site, and I respect your position of authority as site owner and admin. It seems to me that some of these bloggers say things like that to you just so that they can feel like they are "sticking it to the man." If they really want to make themselves heard, they should learn to play nice with others so that they can live to blog another day. Idiots.

Draginol:

While I would never use such terminology for anyone and I share your sentiments in terms of the language, should you be the only person who doesn't have to suffer from the abuse? I mean, wouldn't a general warning that use of such language towards anyone will not be tolerated be appropriate?

CrispE: I have seen Brad deal with folks who abuse other folks many times, not just him. Granted, it is up to Brad to decide if it is really abuse, and if it warrants stern action, but someone has to.


If made me a moderator, more people would be exiled. If he made you moderator, it would no doubt be different people, or less, or more. In the end it is his site, and it reflects his administration. If it is going to reflect on him, then he should set the threshhold.

I think when he is slow to act it isn't because he is hesitant, I just think he aviods a lot of this drek like most of us do.

With the aftermath of 911 fresh in our minds any name callng needs to be directed towards the "resident evil which lies in the hearts of the people in which we are at war.Calling someone a "nazi" is nothing but silly ,these people are still living in the past.I bet they would'nt call you a terrorist??

I don't know who called you names, but no matter what those terms are not acceptable. They are words associated with hate and fear. Sorry people can be so rude.

But using the term to describe a republican, a conservative, or just anyone who happens to disagree with you just shows a level of ignorance that should let a person know that the argument isnt worth persuing.

Exactly. 

As for jessicascrunchy, he's been asking for exile for...well, ever since he began blogging.  He wrote deliberately, self-professedly inflammatory articles.

I for one will not miss him.

I've been on R & R on my own away from the networld for some time, so I don't know what transpired. I agree, though, that calling each other "labels" clouds whatever merit anyone's blogs might have. It's probably what we have to be careful about in this blogsphere (hey, it's not the only one, but we do have this chance to make it a good one, so blogitizens, (that the right word?), keep cool!). I confess to having ruminated dark thoughts on draginol once when I submitted this blog and found out it wasn't even appearing as a ju recent blog. I clicked on my account and saw "owner:draginol". Hhmm, I said. I clicked on his articles and found out we were ,in some respects, on different poles. So, I thought, "Is Draginol censoring my blogs just because it doesn't conform to his?" (he could actually do that as "owner") I thought about it and thought about it to the point that it was going to be the title of my next planned blog. Then I said, "Nahh. He'd only kill his blogsphere if he did that."

Anyways, what else is new? No blogger got sniped, got anthrax in his mailbox or car-bombed ?

Do they even realize that Nazi stands for National Socialist

I did not realize that.

By the way...You're a Fascist Nazi!!!!



-- B

I was glad to see this. The guy was a burr in my side since he started, but I decided to just let him get enough rope to hang himself...and am mighty glad to see he did. Many of us have our disagreements on here,  but there's often at least a minimum of respect for the other's position...from his point of view, there was none. His view was the only acceptable one...sounds like...well, let's just say it has to do with a pot and kettle.

Some people don't really know what any of those words mean. Yet they still manage to throw them around like tomatoes on a hot Pamplona summer day.

Well, as a real-life friend of the poster in question, I'll post this once in defense of all his posts but the one in which he called Draginol a "fascist." I tell the guy not to blog when drinking, but none of us have had much luck with that.

It seems a lot of you took issue with his "inflammatory" posts, by which I guess you mean the silly ones he wrote about car magnets and jesus fish. Mikey wondered if car magnets would get more of a response than some of his other work -- such as Nuclear Safety regulations and a really swell piece called "random acts of blindness." He's a bit of an eccentric sociologist (which means "crazy ass") but the thing is, his hypothosis worked out in this case.

As for the offending post, Mikey took it down as soon as he woke up, shook his hang over head, and decided that he had crossed the line. He posted a little followup to the magnet story and then went out fishing with myself and our wives. He sends his apologies, and would have posted them save for the fact that his blog has been frozen -- which is why I'm posting this.

He requests that you just delete the blog he was working on, as he has already moved the articles to another blog site. He furthermore states that "By such a show of totalitarian power, they made my point better than I ever could." Which he said laughing, as a joke. So don't get offended by it.

Mikey introduced me to JU after buying the Political Machine game, and there are a lot of good bloggers here. But it's just the internet, y'all, nothing too serious about it. We all tend to argue things a bit more vehemently than we would in real life, which is both a good and a bad thing. It doesn't really change your world, or mine, or his, what goes up on these pages. But hey, standards are standards and rules are rules and life is life, which means those in power don't have to play by those rules.

And don't forget to buy your car magnets

Do they even realize that Nazi stands for National Socialist. They weren't right-wing in any way.

Just a sidenote on this topic : With the rise of conservatism in the United States today, many try to portray Nazism, Neo-Nazism and even Fascism as a form of Left-Wing-ish ideology to avoid being to the same "side" as them.

However there are way too many conflicts in labelling Nazism as "left-wing". First off, although Hilter was in fact, the head of a "worker's party", the party allied and merged with the conservative parties of Germany in order to defeat the rising Communist party: his biggest rival (which he banned as soon as he came to power). The far-right European parties at the time even supported him (like Britain's Conservative Party in the early 30's)

In his "New Order", he abolished trade unions and cooperatives and even prohibited strikes and lock-outs. State-owned businesses were returned to private owners (although, yes, you may argue that every influent businessmen were highly controlled and influence by the central government, but that's just how it is in an autocratic regime – just think of monarchies... now don't tell me those are somehow left-wing now...)

Draginol has always been fair: his guide:though he might disagree he respects differing views when within the framework of reason and decency. The proof is in the pudding--I'm still here.

Well gee whiz, J.E. guess where else trade unions, cooperatives and strikes were prohibited? Yes, that's right, the Soviet Union! And don't look now, but Communist China also has none of these! Nor do the North Koreans! Or Cuba! When you arrive in that wonderful state of human brotherhood known as socialism, since all industries are 'owned' by the people and run by the leaders of people, and work towards the common good of all workers, there is no need to strike against the bloodsucking capitalists! In a symbolic gesture to eradicate this vile remnant of the oppressive imperialist capitalist system, we will make striking illegal! Proletariat of all nations, unite!

Let's define left-wing, at least in the context of this discussion (we're not discussing the difference between Joe Lieberman and John Kerry). Left-wing is the poltics of the collective good outweighing individuals (social liberalism is not a defining factor of leftism, nor is it exclusive to leftism by a long shot). Avoid it all you want, but that is the one defining aspect of left-wing politics as it has existed in the past 100 years. National Socialism was no less socialism than that of the Soviet union - although Hitler was not so stupid as to nationalize all industries. Whereas Lenin publicly pandered more to the 'working class', Hitler pandered more to the 'German people' (hence *national* socialism). As to social issues - homosexuality was illegal in the Soviet Union as well as Nazi Germany, Jews were persecuted in both places. Freedom of speech did not exist.

As to people supporting Hitler in the early 30s, keep in mind that much like during most of the 20th century, everyone opposed Communists, and supported most everyone who opposed them. Much as Hitler turned out to be heinous evil, anyone with a knowledge of 20th century history knows that it was the lesser of two. Communists killed, by a conservative (not in the poltitical sense) estimate, one hundred million people. Others put the number as high as two hundred million. So the idea that conservatives supporting a socialist against full-blown communists makes the socialist conservative is ludicrours. The US supported Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war - does that make Saddam (a Baath socialist) a conservative? Roosevelt allied with Stalin against the Germans - did that make him a Commie?

Hitler opposed the Communists because he was, besides being a socialst, a *nationalist* as well. He had no desire for an international Communist revolution which would ultimately make Germany a part of the Soviet Union. Opposing world-dominating communists does not make you a conservative. It's like saying I'm a vegetarian because I don't like fish.

Nazi Germany was a collectivist society that vilified individualism - all must work for the glory of the German people and listen to the people's glorious leader - Hitler. Now substitute Germany with 'Cuba'. Hitler with 'Castro'. Or 'Russia' and "Stalin'. 'China' and 'Mao'.

Now try 'America' and 'Reagan'. Doesn't work.

"The United States of America was a collectivist society that vilified individualism - all must work for the glory of the American people and listen to the people's glorious leader - Reagan."

Anyone who doesn't see the inherent ludicrousness of the above sentence, they're nuts.

"The proof is in the pudding--I'm still here."

Yeah... wait a minute. This isn't as foolproof as I thought... ...

unigolyn357 :

You can't see a linear political spectrum (Left & Right) as being tangible through time. It is, rather, a limited classification and comparison tool to its given period. The term has grown enormously through time since its genesis during the French Revolution according to the geopolitical setting; rendering it different from region to region and from time to time (and also, quite evidently, on what you're trying to compare). Try to situate the line in history rather than throughout history. Therefor, the question should rather be : "Was Nazism Right-Wing when it existed?" The answer should be, when situated in context, yes.

It is almost like Left and Right bend all the way around and meet at the other side. Some of the most Left have ended up being the most Right, if you think about it. Think of how totalitarian most "collective" societies have become eventually or from the very beginning. Our leftists here are very authoritarian, imho... ...

Back to the original topic.

Not that I'm defending anybody, but as there are no rules for what is and what isn't allowed on the site, You can't really blame people who 'cross the line'. We are all different and eeach of us has different standards in comunication. What's for one of us a joke for another one may be an insult. And vice-versa. As an example, if You know some Englishmen (preferably over 35 yrs old), You know they have a very strange way of having fun with people they consider best friends. Their behavior would be considered extremely rude in my culture - but they consider it 'good fun,old chap'.

On the other hand, putting up rules or guidelines would serve no purpose at all. If you say "You mustn't use the word 'Fascist'", people would say 'Fas3ist' or 'big F' or something else. You could go around banning people but someone can always call You totalitarian - as in their view You are.

I propose to just ignore troublemakers. Their aim is to provoke attention and if You don't give them any, they are defeated. The points system is on the right track - when You comment on something, You give it value, so - don't. This is why I took time to reply to this post.

It is almost like Left and Right bend all the way around and meet at the other side. Some of the most Left have ended up being the most Right, if you think about it. Think of how totalitarian most "collective" societies have become eventually or from the very beginning. Our leftists here are very authoritarian, imho...

Perceptive there BakerStreet. I've always liked the wheel theory better than the line theory. To me it's always seemed to fit the real world better.

as there are no rules for what is and what isn't allowed on the site, You can't really blame people who 'cross the line'

As LW pointed out, you obviously didn't read the Terms of Service as you were supposed to have.  #1 rule, don't piss off the admins.  They reserve the right to boot you for whatever reason they see fit.  You can choose to ignore people but if the admins feel you are a thorn in their side, they are going to just get rid of you and I don't blame them.  Life is too short to put up with crap.

It seems a lot of you took issue with his "inflammatory" posts, by which I guess you mean the silly ones he wrote about car magnets and jesus fish. Mikey wondered if car magnets would get more of a response than some of his other work -- such as Nuclear Safety regulations and a really swell piece called "random acts of blindness." He's a bit of an eccentric sociologist (which means "crazy ass") but the thing is, his hypothosis worked out in this case.

Your friend stated outright that he feels that verbally abusing people is a sign of intelligence. He can be your buddy all you like, but he is a jerk, and any intelligence he may have is hidden by his absolute disrespect for views other than his. I tolerate a wide range of views, and I have seen Brad tolerate a wide range of views; in fact, there are VERY few people Brad has exiled, out of the thousands that have blogged here.

Well, life is too short for Terms of Service. But I did read them. And the owner can certainly boot anyone (s)he wants. The point is moot. I should have said 'there are no PRECISE rules'. And I'm not saying there should be - read my post.