Eh. Nazism Is a form of far-right totalitarianism. That's how it was bloody well defined at the Nuremberg Trials. (Source A Von Knieriem - 1959). Second source, I'm Humanities PhD Student... Seriously. My use of the term doesn't downplay it at all - It's not saying any of the bad things didn't happen due to 1930's-1940's German governments.giZmo wrote:Downplaying the word Nazi with just saying it´s a far right totalitarian party is the biggest bs i have ever read. I suggest you go
back to school and pay more attention in history glass or even better open some history books to complete your lack of school knowledge.
Here's a test for you, If I called him Soviet? What would your reaction be? Probably less of an emotional one. Because of the way history was written, the emotional burden of all the deaths during WW2 was placed on Nazi Germany. Despite the horrendous things that happens as a result of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, or dare I say, post-war treatment of eastern block states. It's the same in post-colonial states. Mention Britain vs France, and you'll see more hatred of Frances colonial history due to the two ways in with the empires disintegrated. But yet, you wouldn't shout at me if I called him a British colonialist. Every state has done some shitty things, Nazi Germany is probably at the top of that list. But it doesn't distinguish that I used the term in a vernacular use as a political far-right totalitarian. I.E overly harsh with the rules, which is pretty clear from the context.
Back to the Nazism argument you made, just so you can be a little more educated, hell students pay money for seminars I give, here is some information for you. There are other elements to what you can define Nazism within; You have normative, descriptive, and as you well just expressed emotional. We are well past the de-nazification stage of state-school education in academic literature. The more post-modernism literature has moved back to the realistic factual perspectives that were given at the Nuremberg trials. Mostly due to the excellent work of the Chief prosecutors who remained extremely well impartial. If they had used emotional descriptors, there was the fright of "sore loser" syndrome, which would re-open up the possibility of a Nazi revival. This means the evidence and their presentation is an excellent primary source - if you look at many books on the subject now, you'll see them using the orginal papers, not those from the 1960'-90's which had Implicit stereotypes due to the cold war. (1st & 2nd world perspectives).
I'll ask my supervisor if I can take some time off to go back to "glass" to increase my "lack of school knowledge" because apparently doctoral education is too high for you?. Jesus Christ.