Who’s the Nazi?

Lately there has been much back and forth about just who is a Nazi. To be sure, all of us on the right have, at one time or another, been accused of being Nazis of one sort or another. But this latest game of Expose the Nazi is different in that plenty of people on the right are joining the left in the hunt.

I suppose this has been coming for a while – remember how we were all supposed to be in a panic about the Alt-Right in 2015/16? They were Nazis out to set up the Fourth Reich…to be run, as it turns out, by the flamboyantly gay Milo Yiannopoulos. Which didn’t – and doesn’t – make any sense, but the real purpose of the exercise was to un-person Yiannopoulos as having a gay spokesman for the right who was also wickedly funny just wrecked too many Progressive Narratives while also displeasing the Tru-Cons; who have no problem with gay, but do have a great deal of problem with anyone on the right who may actually advance a conservative notion or two.

The latest explosion was caused by a guy named Nick Fuentes. I honestly don’t know much about him. I knew zero about him – had never heard of him – before the explosion and even after looking him up, I can only find that a lot of people really, really dislike the guy. There doesn’t seem to be a political party run by Fuentes and he hasn’t created a political program…seems to me that he’s just this guy and his thing is to make outrageous statements for attention. Among the outrageous statements are anti-Semitic and anti-Immigrant statements. From what I can gather, this makes him out to be an a**hole…but I can’t discern a plan on Fuentes’ part to unify the nation under a Leader, eliminate all non-Aryans (with special attention to the Jews) and conquer increased Living Space for the Aryans. This would, of course, be the plan, if you were a Nazi. Fuentes being a Spanish name, I’m wondering if the guy even has any Kraut blood?

Part of the controversy resulted in Michelle Malkin being fired by YAF for coming to the defense of Fuentes. This is another jarring note in the concept that Fuentes is a Nazi because Malkin is of Philippine blood. It seems these days that “Nazi” is becoming a catch-all for “people I don’t like” and “people I have to get out of the public square because they might win an argument with me”. Good to keep in mind that while all Nazis are anti-Semites, not all anti-Semites are Nazis…unless you want to assert that Ilhan Omar is a Nazi. I somehow doubt that the likes of Fuentes and Malkin are planning a Nazi takeover of the United States.

Does this excuse any statements from either of them which I may consider wrong? Of course not. Either of them may have in the past – or may in the future – say things which I find outrageously wrong. But until they set up a National Socialist party and start trying to take over (while providing a logical explanation for why they’d want a system which would imprison and kill them as Untermensch) I’m not going to call them Nazis, or even think that they might have that goal in mind.

Are there any actual Nazis out there? Yep. I’ve even come across a few of them on social media – briefly, before I blocked them. There are in the world today genuine, dyed-in-the-wool Nazis who want to set up a Nazi system…the only slight variation on Hitler’s Nazism is that most of today’s Nazis consider anyone white to be Übermensch. This isn’t strictly in keeping with Nazi ideology which held that only Germans were the master race and while other white people could be superior in this way or that, none could compare to Germans. But, hey, when you’re running a con about Nazism in modern America, you have to cast a wide net for clicks and donations. I wouldn’t think that more than a few tens of thousands of Americans adhere to Nazi ideology.

There is, though, a larger group which, while not explicitly Nazi, do share a lot of Nazi notions. These people can more broadly be classified as “White Nationalists”. They generally support democratic self-governance. They are not advocating for wars of conquest. In economics, its a bit of a mish mash of welfare State and free market. Many of them don’t even argue that non-whites are inferior. But what they do argue is that whites should be separate from non-whites: that there should be places set aside where only white people live – and part of this desire is that the United States no longer allow immigration. What we have here, in my view, is an attempt to make out that since Malkin, Fuentes and many others on the right are anti-immigration, they are akin to White Nationalists who are, in turn, akin to Nazis…and so Malkin and Fuentes, and everyone who won’t condemn them, are Nazis.

That is an incredible level of nonsense – but it is in keeping with the times. What is really desired here is to make being anti-immigration socially unacceptable. That if you take a position that immigration should no longer happen – or even that it should be highly restricted – then you are acting entirely from base motives. That you are a racist Nazi. Crucial to such a program would be to un-person anyone non-white who is taking the position that immigration should be stopped…and so the non-white voices of Malkin and Fuentes have to go.

I’m not going to do that: I will not let my opponents define me. I still don’t really know who Fuentes is. If he’s making the anti-Semitic statements that he’s accused of, then he’s an idiot and wrong in those statements. But I refuse to go along with deplatforming and destroying him. I don’t care what he says. I have no connection with him and have no moral requirement to prove I’m not like him by adopting positions I think wrong. I’m especially not going to do it because it seems pretty clear to me that the heart attack being had over him is mere political garbage designed to destroy those the Establishment want destroyed. The Establishment wants not only continued immigration, but increased immigration. Their solution to illegal immigration is to make it so easy to immigrate that no one would bother with doing it illegally. I’m not going along with that.

Demonstrate to me that someone is an actual Nazi and I’ll condemn that person. So, too, if you can demonstrate that they are racist, anti-Semitic, in favor of tyranny…prove to me that someone wants wicked things, and I’ll condemn the wicked plans and work to ensure they aren’t carried out. But don’t dare try to call someone a Nazi because you simply want me to run away from a political position. I happen to think that it is time to call a halt to immigration, at least for a period of time. For refugees, I’d set up refugee camps which will have as their goal the return of the refugees to their homeland…a temporary, safe harbor where they can be safe from dying but which is no ways is a step towards becoming a resident of the United States. Rely on it: set that up and you’ll only get people who are in actual fear of their lives showing up…because “camp or death” means “camp” while “camp or just staying home which isn’t so bad” means “just staying home which isn’t so bad.”

I am Catholic. I am part Jewish in blood. I have non-white relatives by blood and marriage. I live and work among non-white people. I am not in any way, shape or form racist and I could never be Nazi – or Socialist or fascist or Communist or any other such evil twaddle fit only for criminals and idiots. I will advocate for what I think is right and I will not be scared off on it because someone out there might slander me. Nor will I take anyone’s uncorroborated word for it that someone is evil. It is time for us on our side to call an end to this game: this “insult to win” garbage the Left – and, truth be told, part of the Right – has engaged in because they can’t win an argument.

9 thoughts on “Who’s the Nazi?

  1. JeremiahTMM December 8, 2019 / 8:14 pm

    The thing about the Left is, free-speech is incompatible with their society. They’re kind of like Islamists, either you convert to socialism or you can get wrecked. That’s what it all boils down to.

    The determination of conservatives to say No that’s not what America is going to be like should be just as strong even stronger. Even to the point of taking life and giving one’s life for the freedom to be free.

  2. Cluster December 9, 2019 / 9:51 am

    I am not in any way, shape or form racist and I could never be Nazi

    Just that statement alone gives the Left a win ….. you’re in defense mode. The word racism should just make everyones eyes roll – it’s meaningless and the people that use the word as a cudgel are worthless. I could not care less if anyone thinks i am a racist, it says more about them than it does me. I have little regard for the average intelligence of our population, and the childish word play the Left is involved in is simply designed to pander to, and enflame the emotions of the low IQ. The best line I have heard in a long time is “this country is not nearly as racist as the democrats want it to be”.

    It is time to completely dismiss the Democrat Party as anything serious or worthy of our attention. And as I type this, Morning Joe gives me a concrete example of why …. in an earlier segment the panel was castigating Republicans for even suggesting that Ukraine meddled in the 2016 election BECAUSE 17 INTEL AGENCIES HAVE TOLD US THAT THAT IS WHAT RUSSIA WANTS US TO BELIEVE.

    Fast forward 10 mins.

    The panel is now citing a new WaPo article claiming that the State dept. and other intel agencies have been lying to America for the last decade about the Afghan war …. and none of them noted the irony. I am sure if I listen just a little longer I will hear how dangerous it is to attack the patriotism of career State dept. officials, diplomats and the other intel agencies.

    These people are bone deep stupid

  3. Retired Spook December 9, 2019 / 9:55 am

    I honestly can’t recall anyone ever calling me a Nazi. That said, if anyone ever did, I guess my questions to them would be, “in what way am I a Nazi?” “Do you know who the Nazis were — what they did?” My guess is that the vast majority of people who have been educated in public schools in the last 30 or 40 years haven’t been taught about the Nazis.

    Now I HAVE been called a racist — on this blog. I don’t remember the exact circumstances, but it was probably in response to my noting that blacks had been voting overwhelmingly for Democrats for over 50 years and didn’t have much to show for it.

    Bottom line — I don’t worry too much about labels. When someone starts calling you names, it just means they’ve lost the argument.

    • Amazona December 9, 2019 / 1:10 pm

      We also have to remember that Leftist name-calling is wholly dependent on first redefining terms. That is, when they use a term as a pejorative they have first redefined it so it no longer has any true meaning, just the cobbled-together nonsense the Left has ascribed to. Their very use of these terms in a de facto admission of profound ignorance. For example, they have a vague sense that “Nazis” were in some way bad, though they are too intellectually lazy to find out what they really were or what drove them. So when they want to insult someone they call him a “Nazi” in spite of that person’s politics, character and personal life all representing the polar opposite of anything related to Nazis.

      Just look at what they call “racist”, starting with the concept of ignoring skin color and evaluating people based on their character and behavior. That attitude is the opposite of racism, yet it has been redefined in the Leftist Word Reassignment Dictionary as meaning evaluating people solely on the basis of their skin color. This silliness, toxic as it is, lets them define anything anyone in the political opposition does or says as “racist”—things unrelated to skin color or ethnicity, such as learning math or washing human excrement off the sidewalks or attaching value to accomplishment.

      The only way to make sense of Leftist howling, name calling and insults is to flip everything over, as the opposite of what they are saying is usually the truth.

      For example, a “Nazi” is someone with specific political views that are Leftist—a massively powerful Central Authority, allegiance to the State over that to family or God, the imposition of the will of the State on all who live under its governance, massive State control over the economy, punishment for violation of Draconian Thought Crimes and the abolition or at least severe curtailment of individual liberty of thought, action or belief. The very word “Nazi” is extremely close to the current crop of leading Dems and wholly unrelated to any belief system held by any true political conservative.

      Just look at “Antifa”, the allegedly anti-fascist mob that is, in fact, a living example of the evils of fascism. Just look at the Dem House mobs prattling on about their dedication to the Constitution as they work tirelessly to gut it, claiming that abusing and undermining our foundational rule of law is really “patriotism”.

      The hurling of either of these epithets, much like the flaunting of old Obama/Biden bumper stickers or the new crop of Bernie or Warren support stickers, is really just a way of saying “Want to see how stupid I am? Watch!”

  4. Cluster December 9, 2019 / 2:48 pm

    WASHINGTON – A lawyer for Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee called President Trump “a clear and present danger” as he summarized the party’s case for impeaching him for having abused his power and obstructed a congressional investigation into his conduct in Urkaine.

    Hahahahahahahaha – Trump is definitely a “clear and present danger” ….. to the Democrat Party and their colleagues in the media


    • Amazona December 9, 2019 / 3:37 pm

      Yes, he is not only a clear and present danger to the existing Democrat Party but to its future as a hardcore tyrannical Leftist construct, and even more dangerously to the carefully planted and embedded agents of the Left who are burrowed deep into the hearts of every federal agency where they can act like termites, chewing away a little at a time on the Constitution and its designated form of government.

      I believe that a calculation has been made at the top of the Leftist machine that sacrificing the House by using it out to try to disrupt Trump’s reelection is a worthwhile sacrifice if they can defeat him, or at least distract him, as he inexorably works to dismantle the carefully planted agents and systems in the various agencies that really do run the country.

      If Trump can remove most of these subversive agents he can effectively cripple the Left and set its efforts back by decades, especially if he can simultaneously replace them with patriots and people dedicated to true public service and the Constitutional rule of law. He is engaged in sabotage of the Left and it has them panicky.

      I often refer to Kim Philby, one of the infamous Cambridge Five, who infiltrated the top echelons of British Intelligence, even working with American Intelligence, so deeply embedded that he was able to direct and report on the most sensitive areas of international intelligence. When people started to suspect him he panicked and got Russia to exfiltrate him before he could be arrested. But he should be an example of how clever the Left is at implanting its agents deep into the heart of government services. Our national agencies are packed with lower-level agents and subversives, some of who are just ideologues eager to push our government in the directions they feel are best, but some are more trained and focused, like Comey and Brennan.

      I believe Horowitz is outing himself as one of these, as he frantically tries to come up with a report that touches on facts but then denies the obvious and inescapable conclusions that have to be drawn from those facts, in his efforts to protect the Deep State from prosecution and also protect those who have yet to be identified.

      As for “…obstructed a congressional investigation into his conduct in Urkaine.” just what “congressional investigation into his conduct in Ukraine” has been “obstructed”? Are they saying they would have been able to call more State Department bureaucrats whose noses are out of joint at the effrontery of the president acting like he has the actual authority of the presidency? Are they saying there are even more planted agents of the Left who would have eagerly come forth to explain THEIR interpretations of the tea leaves to discern the hidden motives and agendas behind the words Trump actually uttered? Are they saying these efforts have been “obstructed” by the president? How many days/weeks/months of witness after witness, none of whom ever actually witnessed anything but are eager for a chance to get in front of cameras to emote about their emotional reactions to what the president might have meant, would we need to have to satisfy their sense of a full investigation?

      • Amazona December 9, 2019 / 3:45 pm

        Speaking of Horowitz and his efforts to provide cover for the Left and its attacks on Trump: emphasis mine

        WASHINGTON — Attorney General William P. Barr sharply criticized on Monday the F.B.I.’s decision to open the Russia investigation, undercutting a major finding . in a long-awaited watchdog report and at the same time showing his willingness to act as President Trump’s vocal defender.

        The report, by the Justice Department’s inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, found that the F.B.I. had adequate reason in 2016 to open an investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties with Russia. Mr. Horowitz broadly rejected Mr. Trump’s allegations that F.B.I. officials conspired to sabotage his campaign, but Mr. Barr highlighted findings that underscored his and the president’s shared view that investigators were nonetheless overly invasive in scrutinizing people associated with a presidential campaign.

        “The inspector general’s report now makes clear that the F.B.I. launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken,” Mr. Barr said in a statement.

        John H. Durham, a federal prosecutor whom Mr. Barr appointed to run a separate criminal investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation, backed Mr. Barr’s findings in his own highly unusual statement. “Last month we advised the inspector general that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the F.B.I. case was opened,” Mr. Durham said.


        I probably don’t need to highlight the latest example of journalistic malpractice, as the
        Times author blatantly inserts his or her personal opinion—and that of the paper—by snarling, about Barr, “… showing his willingness to act as President Trump’s vocal defender.” Which is, if you think about it, a de facto admission that objectivity and accuracy are defenses of Trump. Funny, but I didn’t see a comment about Horowitz showing his willingness to act as the Democrats’ vocal defender.

  5. Amazona December 9, 2019 / 2:48 pm

    Mark, why are you carrying the water for the ugly and misleading term “White Nationalists”? This is applied to all Trump supporters, and is intended to convey a sense of racism, of a belief in white superiority. It is a clever and toxic manipulation of the language to convey a lie.

    What is the source for your claim that “There is, though, a larger group which, while not explicitly Nazi, do share a lot of Nazi notions. These people can more broadly be classified as “White Nationalists”. They generally support democratic self-governance. They are not advocating for wars of conquest. In economics, its a bit of a mish mash of welfare State and free market. Many of them don’t even argue that non-whites are inferior. But what they do argue is that whites should be separate from non-whites: that there should be places set aside where only white people live – and part of this desire is that the United States no longer allow immigration. This is a very strange and, I think, confused and confusing conglomeration of various tweets and opinions kind of mixed up into something I reject.

    The media have been quite energetic in damning the Trump movement as “white nationalist”, purposely conflating “nationalism” with a vague sense of it being, somehow, related in some way to white supremacy. This has been a very ugly effort, and we have failed on the Right to stand up to it and call it out for the lie it is. Nationalism is merely the belief that your nation, whichever nation that happens to be, is the best place to live. There is nothing toxic or hateful or racist in that. The Left has cleverly tacked the word “white” onto that word, to deceive and mislead.

    And evidently they have succeeded, if people like you are being sucked into it and are repeating it.

    Now it appears that somehow, probably through your meandering through the intellectual wasteland of Social Media in its various forms, you have come to the conclusion that there is in fact not just a subgroup of people who believe that “…whites should be separate from non-whites: that there should be places set aside where only white people live – and part of this desire is that the United States no longer allow immigration” but that this subgroup is actually accurately defined as White Nationalists.

    I reject that, and find it distasteful on so many levels. What you are talking about is not “white nationalism” but a subset of the white supremacy movement, which is not related to nationalism as much as it is to bigotry and hatred. You concede that “Many of them don’t even argue that non-whites are inferior…” Wow. Just “many”, eh? But of course this means that many of them DO, which has nothing at all to do with nationalism and everything to do with toxic, vile racism.

    When people who ostensibly want to represent the conservative political values of the Right fall prey to the lies and semantic manipulations of the Left and then proceed to promote them, spread them and quote them as if they are legitimate I realize that we may never win this war. Who controls the language controls the society, and when we let the Left control the language we are submitting to their eventual total control.

    “WHITE NATIONALISM” is basically nothing more or less than the belief that the United States is the best country, and pride in it, its history and its accomplishments. It is NATIONALISM with the appendage WHITE tacked onto it to try to suck the gullible into accepting the impression that it is linked in some way to skin color or an attitude toward skin color. And, evidently, this is a pretty effective tactic if it has people like you promoting it and treating it as if it is a legitimate description of an actual movement. But as it truly exists, aside from the efforts to distort it and hijack it to associate it with the white supremacist movement as an adjunct. It is benign, it is merely pride in the country and what it truly stands for, and it is not related in any way to skin color aside from the malignant efforts of the Left to taint it through semantic manipulation.

    You are a Catholic. Imagine how you would feel if you were suddenly informed that you have adopted WHITE CATHOLICISM and of course that means that your religious belief is not only tainted by but based on a core philosophy that while “(m)any (Catholics) don’t even argue that non-whites are inferior…. what they do argue is that whites should be separate from non-whites: that there should be places set aside where only white people live – and part of this desire is that the United States no longer allow immigration.” Huh? How could that huge leap not only occur but be accepted? By associating the two words, is how. Put two unrelated words together and you create a whole new meaning. That is basic language art, and it is depressing that so many can’t see it in action.

    We ALL have to be vigilant to watch out for and fight and hopefully defeat the malignant efforts of the Left to taint and distort everything into something ugly and divisive it can use to further splinter the nation into discrete and ultimately warring factions. (And yes, I mean “discrete” and not “discreet”.)

    I am not only deeply offended by the claim, which I think is not only false but based on Leftist propaganda, that there is a ” larger group which, while not explicitly Nazi, do share a lot of Nazi notions. These people can more broadly be classified as “White Nationalists”. I reject it out of hand vigorously and with anger. I argue vehemently that it is false and not only false but indefensible. What will it TAKE to look at false flag efforts to apply malignant terms and motives to terminology where they do not really belong to start to see this when it happens, instead of just accepting it and then repeating it as if it has any basis in fact or truth?

    WHITE Nationalism exists only in the fevered minds of the hateful and the bowels of Leftist propaganda masters. It is an invention, an effort to taint nationalism with the stink of racism. And you are enabling that. Arrgghhh.

  6. JeremiahTMM December 9, 2019 / 9:06 pm

    One of the key facts missing from this impeachment trial is that Jerry Nadler soils himself daily, several times a day…I know today, he had to be excused at least twice, as the people in the committee hearing room were coughing and hacking because they couldn’t take the awful odor emanating through the room. Also, Adam Schifft carries Jerry’s bag with the soilings, and a fresh change of diapers.

    So every time you hear Jerry holler “Impeach” you know he’s soiling himself.

Comments are closed.