Sudan Massacre

[Politesse]

Especially since you apparently can "win" by calling pood a holocaust denier and relegating him to the bucket of people you've decided are "right wing". Because somehow, you're the authority on other people's thoughts and beliefs and motivations, and we're supposed to just completely accept whatever YOU tell us WE are. It's asinine. Be better.

Waaaaah waaaah waaaaah.


If you think I'm misinterpreting you, skip the melodrama and just correct me. It'll save time.

 

[Emily Lake]

Ignoring the lessons of history makes your argument less convincing. Saying “it’s the others” while whitewashing “us” is the age old tactic of demogogues.

Go ahead, fear Islam and ignore white Christian nationalists today.

I'm getting so tired of this kind of argument. You're acting like I think christianity is fantastic or something, which is just plain dumb.

No,I’m not at all. Ignoring or playing down a threat does not imply applauding it. At least to someone with sufficient cognitive capacity to make rational evaluations.

Unfortunately, the mindless Islamophobia in your posts is inconsistent with your confidence.

Weirdest inadvertent post error I've seen in a while.

Anyway, it's not mindless. Were we currently living in 15th century Europe, I'd very rationally be arguing that catholicism as interpreted and employed at that time was far more dangerous. If in a decade, Buddhists start waging a religious war on the west and blowing up buildings for not being respectful enough of Buddha, I'll give that religion top billing as the current most dangerous faith.

 

[Emily Lake]

Where by "my link", you mean the official platform of the Nazi Party?

Are you admitting to being a history denialist?

Are you like clinically unable to interact with someone who disagrees with you without resulting to childish taunts, ad hominems, and misrepresentations?

 

[Emily Lake]

“Positive Christianity” was basically a rewriting of Christianity to put Hitler as the head of a new revelation. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se.

So your position is that Positive Christianity has "nothing to do" with Christianity.

Oh FFS. By your own link, christianity only gets mentioned at the very end, and pretty much in passing. It comes up exactly once:

1. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility.

The Nazi platform from your link does not frame itself as a christian endeavor, nor as being motivated by christianity. At best, it gives a passing mention to christianity as a means to demonize jews.

Why did the Nazis "demonize" Jews?

RACISM. As explicitly stated by your own fucking link:

1. Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently no Jew can be a member of the race.

 

[Politesse]

Where by "my link", you mean the official platform of the Nazi Party?

Are you admitting to being a history denialist?

Are you like clinically unable to interact with someone who disagrees with you without resulting to childish taunts, ad hominems, and misrepresentations?

HIstory is the systematic study of the past, primarily through written documents. If you deny that written documents are valid evidence concerning the past, you deny history.

 

[Emily Lake]

Do you deny that endorsement of Christianity was an explicit plank of the Nazi Platform?

Alright, let me see if I'm following your logic. Naziism was 100% an aggressive, imerialistic, genocidal *religion*, framed entirely around christianity as its motivation, and put itself forth as waging a holy war. And because somehow you think this is "true", it means that christianity as a whole in 2025 in western nations is a bigger and more dangerous religion than islam...

What are you talking about? I said literally none of that.

That's the core of your argument - that christianity is a more dangerous religion than islam because the nazi party was a religious movement.

 

[Politesse]

“Positive Christianity” was basically a rewriting of Christianity to put Hitler as the head of a new revelation. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se.

So your position is that Positive Christianity has "nothing to do" with Christianity.

Oh FFS. By your own link, christianity only gets mentioned at the very end, and pretty much in passing. It comes up exactly once:

1. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility.

The Nazi platform from your link does not frame itself as a christian endeavor, nor as being motivated by christianity. At best, it gives a passing mention to christianity as a means to demonize jews.

Why did the Nazis "demonize" Jews?

RACISM. As explicitly stated by your own fucking link:

1. Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently no Jew can be a member of the race.

Why would they consider Jews to be a race, let alone an inferior one?

 

[Politesse]

Do you deny that endorsement of Christianity was an explicit plank of the Nazi Platform?

Alright, let me see if I'm following your logic. Naziism was 100% an aggressive, imerialistic, genocidal *religion*, framed entirely around christianity as its motivation, and put itself forth as waging a holy war. And because somehow you think this is "true", it means that christianity as a whole in 2025 in western nations is a bigger and more dangerous religion than islam...

What are you talking about? I said literally none of that.

That's the core of your argument - that christianity is a more dangerous religion than islam because the nazi party was a religious movement.

I neither believe that, nor have said anything remotely of the sort. Like, no part of that is even sort of true.

 

[IIDB Staff]

The "fuck you"s have been thrown around here and in other threads. You all know this is against the rules.

This is your first and only warning.

Another "fuck you" or similar insult posted by any member will cause your posting priveleges to be immediately suspended.

 

[Emily Lake]

Where by "my link", you mean the official platform of the Nazi Party?

Are you admitting to being a history denialist?

Are you like clinically unable to interact with someone who disagrees with you without resulting to childish taunts, ad hominems, and misrepresentations?

HIstory is the systematic study of the past, primarily through written documents. If you deny that written documents are valid evidence concerning the past, you deny history.

Somehow you seem to think that your creative reinterpretation of historical documents, based on what you think those departed authors actually really secretly meant, makes your revisionism accurate.

Studying history is great. Written documents are great. But for them to have any actual utility, you need to understand both what happened, and why those things happened - not just foist your own current beliefs on top of them until it kind of sort of looks the way you want to make it look.

Realistically, Naziism was a result of overly heavy sanctions and punishment of Germany after WW1. Especially because the punitive actions screwed over every day normal german citizens who didn't have a say in any of it. On the heels of continuing technological leaps creating pressures on working people, the influence of Bolshevism, and a failing economy that created a sense of hopeless oppression for german people, this was the response. The fact that jews in germany tended to be more economically successful made them a target; combine that with Hitler's own racism and the need for an enemy, and there you go.

There are a lot of well-documented, well-understood influences that allowed a charismatic speaker to gain power... but waging a holy war and seeking to expand the power and primacy of christianity is NOT one of those influences.

 

[Emily Lake]

“Positive Christianity” was basically a rewriting of Christianity to put Hitler as the head of a new revelation. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se.

So your position is that Positive Christianity has "nothing to do" with Christianity.

Oh FFS. By your own link, christianity only gets mentioned at the very end, and pretty much in passing. It comes up exactly once:

1. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility.

The Nazi platform from your link does not frame itself as a christian endeavor, nor as being motivated by christianity. At best, it gives a passing mention to christianity as a means to demonize jews.

Why did the Nazis "demonize" Jews?

RACISM. As explicitly stated by your own fucking link:

1. Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently no Jew can be a member of the race.

Why would they consider Jews to be a race, let alone an inferior one?

Because jews are an ancestral line, traced through the maternal side. Anyone born of a jewish mother is a jew - not by religion but by ethnicity. That has been a fairly clear cornerstone of judaism for a few thousand years or so.

If a jewish man marries a gentile woman, their children are gentiles because their mother was not jewish. If that woman converts to judaism, their children are raised as part of the jewish faith, but still aren't really considered ethnically jewish. If a jewish woman marries a gentile man, even if she converts to his religion, her children are considered to be jewish - even if they never attend a synagogue.

It's a matrilineal ethnic group.

 

[Politesse]

Studying history is great. Written documents are great. But for them to have any actual utility, you need to understand both what happened, and why those things happened

What pood said was not "I disagree with your interpretation of the linked document, and here are the reasons why". What he said, all he said, was "I don’t really give a fuck about your link." That's history denialism, not an informed alternative interpretation of history.

 

[Emily Lake]

Studying history is great. Written documents are great. But for them to have any actual utility, you need to understand both what happened, and why those things happened

What pood said was not "I disagree with your interpretation of the linked document, and here ate the reasons why". What he said, all he said, was "I don’t really give a fuck about your link." That's history denialism, not an informed alternative interpretation of history.

YOUR insistence that Nazism was an explicitly Christian movement is the historical revisionism, Poli.

 

[Politesse]

“Positive Christianity” was basically a rewriting of Christianity to put Hitler as the head of a new revelation. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se.

So your position is that Positive Christianity has "nothing to do" with Christianity.

Oh FFS. By your own link, christianity only gets mentioned at the very end, and pretty much in passing. It comes up exactly once:

1. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility.

The Nazi platform from your link does not frame itself as a christian endeavor, nor as being motivated by christianity. At best, it gives a passing mention to christianity as a means to demonize jews.

Why did the Nazis "demonize" Jews?

RACISM. As explicitly stated by your own fucking link:

1. Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently no Jew can be a member of the race.

Why would they consider Jews to be a race, let alone an inferior one?

Because jews are an ancestral line, traced through the maternal side. Anyone born of a jewish mother is a jew - not by religion but by ethnicity. That has been a fairly clear cornerstone of judaism for a few thousand years or so.

If a jewish man marries a gentile woman, their children are gentiles because their mother was not jewish. If that woman converts to judaism, their children are raised as part of the jewish faith, but still aren't really considered ethnically jewish. If a jewish woman marries a gentile man, even if she converts to his religion, her children are considered to be jewish - even if they never attend a synagogue.

It's a matrilineal ethnic group.

All of that is questionably relevant. I don't see how matrilineal inheritance of an ethnic identity makes one any more or less a "race" than patrilineal inheritance would, and its beside the point anyway. I am asking you, why did the Nazi Party hate and fear Jews? Why Jews, particularly? I know that you know why, and that it has nothing to do with biology.

 

[laughing dog]

Anyway, it's not mindless. Were we currently living in 15th century Europe, I'd very rationally be arguing that catholicism as interpreted and employed at that time was far more dangerous. If in a decade, Buddhists start waging a religious war on the west and blowing up buildings for not being respectful enough of Buddha, I'll give that religion top billing as the current most dangerous faith.

If we were in 15th century, you’d have likely been an uneducated peasant who was too exhausted to think about such things and very cautious about being burned at the stake.

 

[Emily Lake]

All of that is questionably relevant. I don't see how matrilineal inheritance of an ethnic identity makes one any more or less a "race" than patrilineal inheritance would, and its beside the point anyway. I am asking you, why did the Nazi Party hate and fear Jews? Why Jews, particularly? I know that you know why, and that it has nothing to do with biology.

Aright, we're getting somewhere with this, I can work with this.

Nazis hated jews because... drumroll please... they were a conveniently affluent and identifiable group of people that didn't conform to the social rules that nazis wanted to impose. At least some of that has a religious history, of course. But certainly not all of it. Under christian rule (you know, when large portions of europe were actually governed by the vatican through royalty-as-proxies?) jews were prohibited from many social roles, but they were NOT prohibited from moneylending and trading. Throughout many periods of history, jews were more economically successful within their diaspora countries. Partly due to their involvement in finance, but also do to the highly jewish community focused nature of their religion.

Are you under the impression that I think religious history has no impact on social structures? That would be dumb, and I'm not dumb.

Now then. If you take as given that the historical christianity of germany was a fundamental and unavoidable primary influence of naziism, then you're effectively taking the stance that any other reason that the nazi party provided for their actions were made up justifications, and that their true and real reason was religious dominance.

By that same token, you'd end up having to conclude that the bolshevik revolution was a christian uprising, and that the imposition of a secular state was just window-dressing for a fundamentally christian religious war.

And you'd also have to conclude that every aggressive action taken on the part of any muslim-dominated nation or organization is ALSO inescapably an attempt to impose islam by force on the rest of the world. Therefore, islam as a religion is a threat to all people who aren't islamic.

 

[Politesse]

All of that is questionably relevant. I don't see how matrilineal inheritance of an ethnic identity makes one any more or less a "race" than patrilineal inheritance would, and its beside the point anyway. I am asking you, why did the Nazi Party hate and fear Jews? Why Jews, particularly? I know that you know why, and that it has nothing to do with biology.

Aright, we're getting somewhere with this, I can work with this.

Nazis hated jews because... drumroll please... they were a conveniently affluent and identifiable group of people that didn't conform to the social rules that nazis wanted to impose. At least some of that has a religious history, of course. But certainly not all of it. Under christian rule (you know, when large portions of europe were actually governed by the vatican through royalty-as-proxies?) jews were prohibited from many social roles, but they were NOT prohibited from moneylending and trading. Throughout many periods of history, jews were more economically successful within their diaspora countries. Partly due to their involvement in finance, but also do to the highly jewish community focused nature of their religion.

Are you under the impression that I think religious history has no impact on social structures? That would be dumb, and I'm not dumb.

Now then. If you take as given that the historical christianity of germany was a fundamental and unavoidable primary influence of naziism, then you're effectively taking the stance that any other reason that the nazi party provided for their actions were made up justifications, and that their true and real reason was religious dominance.

By that same token, you'd end up having to conclude that the bolshevik revolution was a christian uprising, and that the imposition of a secular state was just window-dressing for a fundamentally christian religious war.

And you'd also have to conclude that every aggressive action taken on the part of any muslim-dominated nation or organization is ALSO inescapably an attempt to impose islam by force on the rest of the world. Therefore, islam as a religion is a threat to all people who aren't islamic.

Except that I'm not stupid, and don't hew to over-simplified, single cause myths to explain history.

 

[Emily Lake]

All of that is questionably relevant. I don't see how matrilineal inheritance of an ethnic identity makes one any more or less a "race" than patrilineal inheritance would, and its beside the point anyway. I am asking you, why did the Nazi Party hate and fear Jews? Why Jews, particularly? I know that you know why, and that it has nothing to do with biology.

Aright, we're getting somewhere with this, I can work with this.

Nazis hated jews because... drumroll please... they were a conveniently affluent and identifiable group of people that didn't conform to the social rules that nazis wanted to impose. At least some of that has a religious history, of course. But certainly not all of it. Under christian rule (you know, when large portions of europe were actually governed by the vatican through royalty-as-proxies?) jews were prohibited from many social roles, but they were NOT prohibited from moneylending and trading. Throughout many periods of history, jews were more economically successful within their diaspora countries. Partly due to their involvement in finance, but also do to the highly jewish community focused nature of their religion.

Are you under the impression that I think religious history has no impact on social structures? That would be dumb, and I'm not dumb.

Now then. If you take as given that the historical christianity of germany was a fundamental and unavoidable primary influence of naziism, then you're effectively taking the stance that any other reason that the nazi party provided for their actions were made up justifications, and that their true and real reason was religious dominance.

By that same token, you'd end up having to conclude that the bolshevik revolution was a christian uprising, and that the imposition of a secular state was just window-dressing for a fundamentally christian religious war.

And you'd also have to conclude that every aggressive action taken on the part of any muslim-dominated nation or organization is ALSO inescapably an attempt to impose islam by force on the rest of the world. Therefore, islam as a religion is a threat to all people who aren't islamic.

Except that I'm not stupid, and don't hew to over-simplified, single cause myths to explain history.

What, you mean other than you trying to force christianity to be the cause of WW2 in the European theater, and the underlying reason for nazis?

 

[pood]

Studying history is great. Written documents are great. But for them to have any actual utility, you need to understand both what happened, and why those things happened

What pood said was not "I disagree with your interpretation of the linked document, and here are the reasons why". What he said, all he said, was "I don’t really give a fuck about your link." That's history denialism, not an informed alternative interpretation of history.

I am not being paid to write essays here.

I said what I said because of your bullshit posts, including accusing me of Holocaust denialism, which have grown quite tiresome.

 

[pood]

Nazism and religion, summary