Anonymous #1 15h

Or the eugenics movement in Germany (that led to the Holocaust, just to reinforce) being heavily informed by American eugenicists, who have a direct lineage to white supremacists today.

10

Anonymous #1 15h

i believe OP is making the argument that, the comparison trying to be made is not the academic one but a moral one. if you assessed the comparisons of nazis and confederates, a person with the sentiment of the older post would make an attempt to justify one of those solely because it is less morally bad than the other. when you are approached with that type of sentiment then the comparison does not matter. when taking a genuine approach to compare the two, this type of analysis is important.

4

Anonymous #3 13h

That's not really how they justify it. They rarely argue "we're less bad than the Nazis." They argue the harm didn't happen or doesn't count. The Confederacy becomes "states' rights," not slavery. Taking Native land becomes "they killed each other anyway." America First becomes "just putting our country first." Each time, the harm gets renamed until it stops registering as harm at all.

1

Anonymous #3 13h

Then comes the inversion: whoever points out the harm becomes the aggressor. Naming racism is "propaganda," "communism," "dividing us." That's how coloniality works. It doesn't just write new stories, it controls salience, meaning what's even allowed to count as a problem. That's why it's a broken record: the same moves every time, so the harm never gets discussed on its own terms.

1

Anonymous OP 12h

I meant to imply that emphasizing the difference between “america first” and groypers is pointless (solely in terms of attempting to justify one as OOP was), which is why I invoked historical parallels (being confederates and nazis). that does not mean that those distinctions are not important for historical context and sociological analysis, however i was attempting to criticize who I perceive to be supporting a cause rooted in white supremacy.

1

Anonymous OP 12h

my use of the word “comparing” in that context is likely the primary factor in this, as far as i can tell. apologies for any misunderstandings caused by that, and for anyone reading i ask that you either disregard that final statement in my post, or focus on the historical parallels mentioned in it; it was poorly worded and seemingly overshadowed the main point of my post

1

Anonymous OP 12h

(i also forgot to close a parenthesis😭)

1