Comment by dijit
8 hours ago
Ok so make that case. What specifically is he doing, what mechanisms is he using, what does the trajectory look like? Because that’s an argument worth having and I’d probably agree with a lot of it. But “this is a Nazi before he gets into his stride” is still just the label doing the work instead of the argument. That’s my entire point.
I’ll grant you he’s a Nazi sympathiser, there’s enough evidence for that and its easy to lay it out. But that’s the argument you should be making, with specifics, not just calling him a Nazi and leaving it there. Because the specifics are what actually alarm people. The label just lets them dismiss you.
Wide reaching propaganda that advocates for a white ethnostate (this alone is enough), explicit displays of Nazism with the heil, financial support to white supremacist parties in the US and abroad.
See, this is what I’m asking for. You’re making an actual argument now and I don’t even disagree with most of it. The AfD support and the white solidarity stuff is indefensible. I’d call him a Nazi sympathiser based on the evidence. But that’s not what the original comment said. It said “he’s a Nazi and there’s nothing to debate.” There’s a world of difference between building the case you just built and just slapping the label on and shutting down the conversation. One of those persuades people. The other one lets them dismiss you.