Actually, I don't think nazis or nazism are 'evil'.

Misguided and based on antiquated values and pronciples, yes, but not evil.

Danyal:
Basically, apply the same standards to the claim "Nazism is evil" as you would to the claim "Islam is evil".

*Sigh*, even if there's no reason at all, you'll just make up a reason to sneak in a li'l *coughislamsuckscough* ey?

I know a lot of you don't want to try and genuinely answer this, but just want to personally attack me. Please don't pollute my thread in that way; just show your feelings in the poll.

Yeah, you big meanies. Stop harassing sweet Danyal.

Anyway:

"Nazism is evil".
You don't need me to support this claim; the nationalist, authoritarian, hierarchical, often-racist ingredients do all the convincing I need.

Cheers.

PS: "nap time"? Not yet, silly captcha-thing.

ok Nazism is a pretty unique concept because it is basically Fascism with the added bonus of racism on top.

The Nazis took the concept of Fascism (which in itself is not an evil concept) and basically added the idea of the 'master race'

Elevating people with a certain eye color above everyone else is wrong, especially when you go to the extent of killing people that don't fit into your perfect utopian view of the world.

Is Facism Evil? No!

If we invented a new political system tomorrow that was identical to democracy in every way, other than the fact that our system viewed tall, skinny white people as the 'master race'. This means that if you aren't tall, skinny or white you aren't the ideal person to live in our political system.

What's worse if you are of a different color of skin or are fat we get to kill you because you are polluting our master race.

How is that not evil?

EDIT: And while racism was rampant in the 40's, no other government in the world encouraged genocide of these groups of people (some of which wasn't based on race at all)

EDIT2:

Basically, apply the same standards to the claim "Nazism is evil" as you would to the claim "Islam is evil".

And why do I think Islam is evil? because I don't

Fuck your rules and your shoddy logic.

btw when a government endorses murder, torture, and enslavement both publicly and privately, and then pursues it with military and security apparatus shit has progressed far beyond fucking cherrypicking and a few loony toons.

and this moral gray area debate bullshit is overplayed and fucking tired. hypotheticals do not matter when there is a clearly present and accepted morality in reality at present time. By your line of thinking you could probably justify fucking children because it was ok in ancient greece.

"Hmmm maybe raping all these women and shooting all these people is probably an evil thing to do. Well the tribe of the Hurdadurr in Dingleberria doesn't think so... HERE I FUCKIN COME YOU SUBHUMANS!"

Flawless logic! If you're psychotic.

Saladfork:
Actually, I don't think nazis or nazism are 'evil'.

Misguided and based on antiquated values and pronciples, yes, but not evil.

Your suggestion that Nazi's would be acceptable in previous era's is a bit disturbing. You seem to hold the antiquity to a low standard.

Danyal:
I know I created a thread recently that is roughly similar to this one, but please try to 'answer' it.

You must pick one of three statements.
-Nazism is evil
-Nazism and Nazis are evil
-Nazis are evil

Remember that Nazism is a variety of Fascism, so all of your criticism of Fascism applies too.

So, you must defend the claim that Nazism/Nazis is evil.

Remember, your arguments must apply too;
-all of Nazism, not only the deeds of some extremists
-Nazism in a historical context (1940-Racism is very common)
-not be based on cherrypicking
-it must be clear that Nazism is evil, not just 'regular human nature'

Basically, apply the same standards to the claim "Nazism is evil" as you would to the claim "Islam is evil".

If we fail to do this, we must stop perceiving Nazis(m) as evil, or admit that we're bigots.

I know a lot of you don't want to try and genuinely answer this, but just want to personally attack me. Please don't pollute my thread in that way; just show your feelings in the poll.

the idea and practice of nazism is evil. no doubt about it, it promoted a singular master race above all else and caused the death several million people.

now if you asked use to defend something like say all nazi's are evil we would be having a different conversation.

1. This is assuming evil is not totally relative.

2. It supports an ideology of racial superiority, and racial discrimination. The time period is irrelevant on this issue these are definitely immoral.

3. Supported conquering other nations for "living space".

4. Quite sexist in that women were restricted to being essentially housewives.

5. Blatantly anti-gay.

tstorm823:

Saladfork:
Actually, I don't think nazis or nazism are 'evil'.

Misguided and based on antiquated values and pronciples, yes, but not evil.

Your suggestion that Nazi's would be acceptable in previous era's is a bit disturbing. You seem to hold the antiquity to a low standard.

I daresay the concept of a superior 'master race' is rather old, and today, discredited. Thus, today, taking an action in the intrests of 'promoting the master race' would be considered morally wrong.

Go back in time a hundred years or two, though, and try preaching the same thing, you'd be more likely to be praised for attempting to strengthen your society by purging various undesirables from it.

I don't hold older societies to a 'lower' standard, just a different one due to the differences in our ways of thinking.

keiskay:
the idea and practice of nazism is evil. no doubt about it, it promoted a singular master race above all else and caused the death several million people.

now if you asked use to defend something like say all nazi's are evil we would be having a different conversation.

-The Aryan race concept was nothing more than a more defined version of the same elitism that has been with the human race since before written history began, and was supported by concepts taken from both the catholic church, and Darwin's theory of evolution. Eugenics programs were common at the time, we even had our own little ethnic cleansing here in the US. People aspiring to the notion wanted to improve the human race, a goal that is, at least inherently, far from ignoble. Feel free to state that their methods and ideals for achieving that goal were flawed however, no arguments there. Just remember that very few people within the Nazi party were even aware of how bad things really were with the Jews, much less were in a position to interfere.
-The deaths of innocent people is something that unfortunately ends up occurring with all nations and ideologies, including our own. The only difference here is a matter of scale. If numbers are all it takes to make something evil, where is the cutoff point? Are a thousand deaths acceptable? ten thousand? I can tell you that I doubt that the death toll that can be attributed to the US over the years since its founding in one way or another hasn't reached 6 or even 7 digits by now.

Like I mentioned in the other thread of Danyal's concerning morality, in my opinion, the only reasonably universal standard for an action being called evil lies in terms of the intent to do wrong by a person's own standards of thinking. Which would make only a small handful of Nazis evil, and the ideology itself no more than simply tragically misguided.

Jesus Christ. Danyal, not every idea you have merits three threads.

captcha: "get out". Me or him?

Katatori-kun:
No.

If a Nazi just wants to quietly sit at home and think that Jews, Romani, Slavs, and gays are sub-human but never do a thing about it, I don't care. But if they want to actually take action to enact their ideas on unwilling participants, then the onus is on the Nazi to prove their views are right.

Just as it is with religion. When a religious person wants to practice their religion at home, no one (sane) cares. But when they want to demand other people follow them, the onus is on the religious party to prove they are right. We don't need to prove them wrong.

The problem is that it is inherently evil to believe such things because it empowers and endorses those who would not just sit at home.

Evil like Nazzism, the NAtion of Islam, Islamic extremism, etc is evil even when innate because it can easily spread into a pandemic of violence. Anything that would endorse or support what the Nazi's did is evil in all facets.

Katatori-kun:

feeqmatic:
The problem is that it is inherently evil to believe such things because it empowers and endorses those who would not just sit at home.

I don't agree with that. Last I checked, inciting people to commit a crime was still in and of itself a crime.

I don't accept that beliefs are evil. People have all kinds of crazy thoughts that run through their heads every day. If they never become practice, then they're just some much mental ephemeral fluff. The only time something can be described as "good" or "evil" is when it becomes an action, because that's the only time it matters.

Conversely, having the most pious and moral thought process in the world counts for jack squat until you put it into practice.

There is some validity to that. However we are talking about an ideology not just a habit. An ideology can spread and become a pandemic of violence and death. Like the Nazis did. A crazy thought or a one off bad decision is not going to permanently affect a nation the way nazism did. The ideology of assigning criminality to a certain race is how Trayvon Martin, Armidou Diallo, Sean Bell, etc were all shot by people who assumed that they were commiting a crime. Im sure that outside of those incidents those individuals were probably not racists, or killers, but they held on to that ideology which caused them to do what they did.

tstorm823:
Your suggestion that Nazi's would be acceptable in previous era's is a bit disturbing. You seem to hold the antiquity to a low standard.

Feudal Europe? Fucking hell in this period what the rulers said went. Don't like people who look like that? Kill em off.

TheMatsjo:
"Nazism is evil".
You don't need me to support this claim; the nationalist, authoritarian, hierarchical, often-racist ingredients do all the convincing I need.

Is Nationalism evil?
Is Authoritarianism evil?
Are hierarchical systems evil?
Is Rascism evil?

The base question of the thread was what elements make the Nazi's "evil". Therefore if these base elements make something evil, they themselves must be evil when applied.

Danyal would then possibly then associate the "evil" elements of Nazism with Islam... he could do it with any religion but Islam will be taking the first hits of the fray.

Personally I think very few things are evil and you can't call the majority of things evil. Rascism is born out of ignorance. Intolerance is born out of how you are raised and that's the problem... are you evil for being constructed to be who you are, or is it your creators who are evil... but what if the people responsible are equally stupid... they can't hold responsibility of the term evil can they?
This is my problem with the term.

Even someone like Hitler who most would think qualifies as an "evil" person. He knowing killed millions of people but so did Churchill... both believed they were doing the best, thing for their country. Churchills view of the best thing for his country was obtaining the Status Quo and not rounding up a particular group or race and killing them.

Churchill, child of the Empire and a descendant to John Churchill the Duke of Marlborough who won the battle of... Marlborough. He believed in Britain and the way of Government of our country.

Hitler, child of humble origins who grew up after the uniting of multiple countries such as Prussia into the German Empire. He then fought and was injured in a war to stop the Established power squashing his country (from his point of view). Then German politicians are seen to end the war that was being won in the Germans view due to back stabbing politicians. Then Foriegn powers put massive restrictions on Germany as a result... Hitler see's his country in ruins. Long story short: He blames the Jews, gets support, gets power, kills lots of people, start lots of wars, loses the wars etc etc.

He was constructed as a child of his time and circumstance. Is he evil... or was he just a result of putting the bricks in that order...

As I said... I don't like the term "evil"... what is it... its something that is wrong in your opinions, which are relative to your circumstnaces.
Saying something is evil... has not more credibility than you saying you don't like something, except evil has thousands of years of superstitious weight behind it... and... science?

TheMatsjo:
*Sigh*, even if there's no reason at all, you'll just make up a reason to sneak in a li'l *coughislamsuckscough* ey?

Hmm, I may be incorrect but I actually read that as quite the opposite. More of a "Well if Islam is apparently so evil you should have no problem attacking what is considered by most to be one of the most unequivocably evil powers of the past millenium ey? Oh, so you're defending Nazism but you still think Islam is evil, ey?" Almost satire in it's own way. If I were to say anything in critisism I'd say he's really just preaching to the choir.

Danyal:
snip

If I were to decry Nazism or Nazis as being evil I would first need some way of defining evil. I don't think one can define a certain set of ideals as being inherently evil because ultimately, they're only ideals. Ideals can always be good, depending on point of view. Likewise, actions (often based on ideals) can be percieved as 'good' or 'evil' depending on one's point of view. I could make the claim that we should brutally murder one in every three babies because I don't like babies. They're annoying and waste time their parents could spend being productive members of society. This would be a good thing. And killing them violently only makes sense because we might as well have some fun with it, right? Now some claim that it's wrong to kill babies, but I contest that we as a society have no problem killing rats because they're a pest and a nuisance and we do it by breaking their legs or backs and letting them slowly die wounded and caught in a trap. My actions and motivations can be percieved any way you like. Even the outcomes of these actions can be percieved any way you like. World War 2 cost what, 80 million or so lives? Or was it more? I can't remember. We killed millions but we defeated the enemy so that was no longer evil; this is the view that seems to be held quite often. The death of millions is one outcome that many would no doubt interpret as evil, but the victory will often be interpreted as good. So now we've ruled out action, motivation and outcome defining factors for what is evil. Without any way of defining evil, I claim that there is no way of defending the claim that Nazism or Nazis are inherently good or evil.

feeqmatic:
The problem is that it is inherently evil to believe such things because it empowers and endorses those who would not just sit at home.

Evil like Nazzism, the NAtion of Islam, Islamic extremism, etc is evil even when innate because it can easily spread into a pandemic of violence. Anything that would endorse or support what the Nazi's did is evil in all facets.

Here's my problem, why are you able to declare their actions or motivations immoral and simultaneously dismiss their accusations of your inherent evil as incorrect? This is the problem I have with moral absolutism; no matter what the other person says the moral absolute will always simply say "no, that's incorrect". Perhaps they have excellent reasons for saying "no, that's incorrect". Perhaps they have 99.999 percent of the population supporting them in the assertion that the particular view of morality is incorrect. But no matter what, you're still labelling a moral issue as an absolute, the same way a mathematical theorem is absolute. Unfortunately, it only takes a single case to disprove a theorem, and henceforth it stops being absolute and the stance of moral absolutism falls apart. You can deny the flaw in the theorem and claim it to be incorrect all you want, but the flaw is there nonetheless. QED.

What was the point of this thread?

Well this is interesting, I just had a discussion of the nature of evil pertaining to Sophie's Choice.

But ANYWAYS
It seems pretty obvious to me that you're purposely making a logic bear trap, but whatevs.
I don't think Nazis or Nazism is evil per se. But I do think there were evil Nazis and that the ideology allowed for evil to flourish, being accentuated by other factors.

Besides, isn't the "OMG EVERY NAZI WAS A TERRIBLE PERSON" viewpoint, well, pretty much gone now? Everyone and their dog has seen Schindler's List

I said this in the other thread, I don't think they were evil. I simply believe they were fiercely passionate people with an ideology, be it one I don't agree with.

Saladfork:

I daresay the concept of a superior 'master race' is rather old, and today, discredited. Thus, today, taking an action in the intrests of 'promoting the master race' would be considered morally wrong.

Go back in time a hundred years or two, though, and try preaching the same thing, you'd be more likely to be praised for attempting to strengthen your society by purging various undesirables from it.

I don't hold older societies to a 'lower' standard, just a different one due to the differences in our ways of thinking.

I don't know about that. Genocide, from what I can see, is as prevalent now as it was in the past, and I think viewing past genocides as though the people just had different values both underestimates some of our predecesors and dangerously ignores the present. If you can find me the difference between Manifest Destiny and the War on Terror, point it out. If you say that people are against the war now and that makes it different, you are assuming there was nobody against the violent conquest of the western US.

Danyal:

Blobpie:
What was the point of this thread?

To find a way in which you can logically state that a certain ideology is evil.

Conclusion; we can't, and when anyone here says that Nazism is evil, I know now that they are bigoted racists.

Epic.

Correction, they are not racist as nazis are not a race, nazis just follow a specific idealogy.

Danyal:

Xan Krieger:
Correction, they are not racist as nazis are not a race, nazis just follow a specific idealogy.

Hm, people who said that I was a racist because I didn't like Islam were not corrected that fast.

Saying that those who oppose Islam are racist is very strange; people of all colors are Muslim.
But Nazism was very race-conscious, and it was the specific ideology of 'Aryans'. Because one race is tied so strongly to Nazism, it makes a little more sense to call those who oppose Nazism racist.

And we still have the herp-derp you oppose those from a certain nation/religion, that's racist!-people. Well, Nazism was very German, and it could nearly be called a religion.

Here's the thing there, while the Aryans were blue eyed and blond haired people there were way more people who were nazis than there were actual aryans. As for being called racist for insulting Islam, I never understood that. I'm pretty sure there are people of all races who follow the religion of Islam. It's just that since Islam is centered in the middle east and most of the people there are arabs that people confuse the two. You can be an arab of any religion as you can be of any race and follow Islam.

Comando96:
As I said... I don't like the term "evil"... what is it... its something that is wrong in your opinions, which are relative to your circumstances.

Everyone has their reasons. Evil is a term that is impossible to apply objectively (as you say), therefore I automatically use it in the subjective form, as "things whose presence I unequivocally consider detrimental" based on a range of values I hold. Seeing as I had no interest in the semantic issue, I just went ahead with the terms as-is.

Danyal:
To find a way in which you can logically state that a certain ideology is evil.

Conclusion; we can't, and when anyone here says that Nazism is evil, I know now that they are bigoted racists.

If you feel that way, I guess then the question becomes; which haters are you rebutting? Who is it that uses the term "evil" as an objective value?

Cheers.

The horror of Nazism/Japanese Imperialism/Stalinism/Apartheid/what have you not is not that it's 'evil'. When you turn something into the symbol of evil incarnate, you're dehistorizing history by making it fit some lame narrative based on 'good' and 'evil'. The horror is that all those historical developments and events are banal and trite.

To proclaim Hitler/Stalin/Pot/Hirohito/Bush/Hussein/Bin Laden/Thatcher as the summum of evil, is to absolve everyone else of any responsibility for what happened. Those who drove the trains to the camps, those who stood by while jews/political prisoners were being arrested and deported, those are in a sense far worse.

Congratulations, this thread makes a mockery of history.

well it has its basis as marxism and as such picks a group of people as "enemies of the state"to blame for all problems and who have to be eliminated.

ive seen myself old books produced under the 3rd reich.. the amount of hate is sickening to say the least