Using the phrase “in-group” to describe an entire society, group of societies really - just for the purpose of calling somebody a Nazi - is pointlessly edgy, and makes the word so broad it’s meaningless.
The correct words are available…they even used one of them.
"Is pointlessly edgy"
Expect nothing less from BadEmpanada, he's the king of hyperbole and needlessly inflammatory accusations.
I have to admit I have no idea who that is.
And who is the outgroup that Mamdani doesn't want to have free buses? (because I'm assuming this shit take is about Zohran Mamdani)
You can always rely on Geneva here to have shit takes about Mamdani. They hate him for whatever reason.
Palestinians
Oh I didn't know that Zohran became mayor of Israel.
Last I heard was that he had become mayor of NYC, and even the Palestinians living in NYC will be able to ride the free bus in NYC. So again, who is the outgroup?
Last I heard Zohran Mamdani was telling people to vote for top AIPAC recipient and massive Zionist Hakeem Jeffries who supports murdering the out-group (Palestinians) so that the in-group (Americans) could get free busses.
Is this really so difficult to understand or do you simply not want to understand it?
Isn't that what countries are supposed to do? Prioritizing taking care of their own population first? Does that make me sound like a nazi? I dont think so...
Also, the nazis werent really into what youre talking about anyway, youre just making stuff up..
Borders racist, nationalism bad
Bro is cheering on Nazis and doesn't even know it.
Ironic comment
Even this framing sanewashes the Nazis.
The actual Nazi party delivered none of this while gutting government services and selling services (like the post office) off to the lowest bidder.
The term "privatization" was coined in order to describe what the Nazis were doing in Germany
No, this is false. The Nazis were fighting for benefits for their in-group. They did not get the benefits, of course.
Turns out when you're willing to throw others under the bus, leadership will gladly do the same for you.
Why do you think they called themselves National Socialists
What are the mechanics of the Nazis "fighting" for benefits, and not getting them? They literally had complete control.
Because it was a good rhetorical strategy to gain power?
Does it matter that their first acts once they gained power was to kill actual socialists and communists?
Does it matter that working conditions worsened for German people even before the first shots of WW2 were fired, as they ramped up productions to prepare the war machine?
I'm sorry, it's just historically inaccurate to describe the actions of the Nazi party as even potentially beneficial to the German people.
We see this in fascist movements today as well. Even under "white supremacy" there's no advocacy for anything that would actually benefit white people, it's just grievance politics against out groups.
The Nazis built a tremendous amount of infrastructure. Mostly from stolen wealth from the out-group. Their problem was that to continue this they needed to keep stealing and that didn't go very well.
That seems entirely unrelated to anything that I'm saying.
Maybe, if they were extremely disingenuous, one could make the argument that the Autobahn, which is still in use today, Materially improves people's lives, and that this refutes my point that the nazis didn't advocate for the material interests of the German people. Maybe.
But it was also not necessarily built for that. (War production benefits from internal infrastructure as well)
But that doesn't impact the overall character of what I'm saying.
Look, liberals are wrong to support a genocide abroad, full stop. Liberal (and conservative, of course) politicians should face trial at the Hague for war crimes committed.
You (or here, BadEmpanada) don't need to lie about the Nazis to make that comparison.
The end goal of Nazi Germany was to improve the lives of the in-group at the expense of the out group. In America the spoils of imperialism also don't end up in the hands of the peasants. But the peasants will support it as long as the government will give them some treats in exchange.
You should look up what the inspiration was for Nazi Germany.
Bad Empanada with lunatic shit takes as always.
Politics are local. Change things locally first, before attempting world wide change.
Assuming the whole world even wants the change you want locally is an imperialist mindset.
Just tankies using their world revolution fantasies to not work towards actual change.
"The Nazis ate vegetables with their meals."
"If you sit down at the dinner table, and you eat vegetables -- then there is much less separating you from the Nazis than you think."
Even beyond the bullshitness of the idea that the Nazis were earnestly trying to give social services to people in their in-group, the problem with the Nazis was not that they did want certain services to be provided to certain people. The problem was those other things that they did, that were different from providing services.
The problem was those other things that they did, that were different from providing services.
And even when speaking specifically about services, the fact that they specifically wanted the outgroup to not have them. If you're actually against foreigners having these things, instead of simply focusing on getting them at home first, then Bad Empanada is right about you, but I don't think that person actually exists. Maybe Jackson Hinkle or someone thinks that.
And the Nazis very importantly did not want social services for everyone in their country. That was a big part of their platform.
in group.
not country.
Yeah, that's my point. The Nazis wanted social services for specific people within their jurisdiction. Socdems, or whomever Bad Empanada is complaining about, want social services for everyone in their jurisdiction.
"I want my workplace to have better working conditions"
"Fucking Nazi!"
lol
"I want my workplace to have better working conditions and I will stop fighting imperialism because of it"*
Why do you feel like you need to stop to the latter to achieve the former?
Yeah why can't we have free bus rides for me and the government can implement slavery for others?
Why would you want the slavery though?
To finance the free busses.
Do you think the West did slavery because it was fun or something? Exploiting others is massively profiteable.
Eat your veggies because children are dying in Africa
Vote for Zionists to get your free bus ride.
Who is the Zionist I have to vote to get a free bus ride
According to Zohran Mamdani you have to vote for Hakeem Jeffries to get your free bus ride.
I can't vote for him
Such a shame there goes the free bus.
I hope to find local candidates who support free or at least lowe cost public transportation
Not very impressed with this BadEmpanada guy
Nor should you be lol
He's right in that the hatred and oppression of the outgroups has been exported to the third world. But this is not quite the same purpose that the outgroup served under Nazi Germany. The outgroup served some material benefit in work camps during the war but this was not it's main purpose.
The main purpose was to direct the failures of capitalism to a scapegoat. To unite the nation under fascism and nationalism so that as the material conditions of the working class continued to decline the hatred would further be directed at that group.
And, while the US is definitely directing it's xenophobia in a way similar to this, it is not being done by the same group that wants healthcare and high speed rail. The group that wants healthcare and high speed rail barely has any influence in American politics.
I think BE has this take because he spends far too much time arguing with liberals that have no understanding of Imperialism but do want "better things and not worse things" and so attracted to DSA candidates and that movement.
There is no class consciousness in the US. And BE keeps arguing for a new political party while at the same time criticizing an organization who's main material benefit is not in electoral politics. DSA is a stepping stone for education. It is not that movement. If you're reading this and at all think you are a leftist, then chances are, you started that journey with Bernie in 2016. Bernie is a SocDem Zionist. He's not what we want. But he was a stepping stone for many people that grew up in their politics to realize that "the left" is not the Democratic party at all.
It's why he doesn't talk about PSL at all but spends all day critizing DSA. If he promoted PSL instead of DSA I would take his criticism more seriously. If he was offering an alternative I would take his criticism more seriously. He has good criticism that a lot of leftist will nod their head and agree with. BUT, he is serving the purpose of inaction. He is giving leftist a place to reasonably decide to just not do anything and maintain their doomerism. Whether this is his intention or not really doesn't matter. Whether he sometimes mentions vaguely what should be done instead does not matter. His viewers are consuming his content to serve the rational of their own inaction.
PSL is essentially exactly what he wants people to be doing. They focus on material support and improvement at the community level and run political candidates as a means of exposure. But I don't think he actually cares. I think he enjoys being critical more than he enjoys being helpful. If he wanted to be helpful he'd offer analysis on why DSA is able to get mass political exposure by running political candidates and why PSL fails to do so. That would be a good video and would better serve to introduce his viewers to an alternative.
PSL needs more leftist. But we're not getting any more of you showing up because you watched a BE video criticizing DSA. You know you just sit at home instead.
Just logging that I don't think sharing random takes by internet people is a great use of this comm. I appreciate the one large post of analysis in the comments, but I'm not convinced people are making it here (7 upvotes vs 99 on the OP atow), and I'm not sure sharing the short take to vaguely dunk or vibe with is useful.
I'm considering blocking the OP to improve my feed (just to match content I want; this is certainly not report worthy), but would appreciate hearing others reasons for wanting to see this post first.
You should block me and probably this entire community as it is clearly not in your interest. I recommend sticking to /Politics.
People should just block you in general because you're a dishonest person who makes posts like this in bad faith.
Read your own comment back to yourself
Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)
(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)
