FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Language
Language
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
If four related questions are too much to cope with, do just pick one.
I also understand that follow up questions in the form of a back and forth discussion also upset some people, so do not feel that you need to respond to any further queries that I make to points that you may raise. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?"
Fairly sure 1930s Germany used German. So different. 
Serious answer: I don't know what language was being used in 1930s Germany. I'd like to see some comparison done before answering. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
Fairly sure 1930s Germany used German. So different.
Serious answer: I don't know what language was being used in 1930s Germany. I'd like to see some comparison done before answering. "
Over to you then on doing some digging.
I only tend to send links as a source for quotes that I may give now, because nobody seems to trust anything that they haven't "researched" themselves.
It is not going to be specific words, of course. It is more about tone and narrative. Creating a sense of blame, threat, anger and fear. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s? "
Absolutely yes it is. There are clear parallels between the what is being said lately by our own Govt and HS and the type of language the Nazis used demonise jews, gypsies, slavs, socialists, communists and so on.
"Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi? "
No! It is highlighting how dangerous and distasteful the rhetoric is becoming and pointing out lessons from history. The fact that a holocaust survivor confronted the HS on this very issue should be more than pause for thought for everyone.
"Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?"
We must always guard against extremism, both right wing facism and left wing communism. It is our duty as citizens of the world to call out and warn against extremist behaviour. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ild_oatsMan
over a year ago
the land of saints & sinners |
In Germany during the 1930’s there were a number of political parties that espoused antisemitic views together with some of the media of the day.
Is Gary Lineker saying the government is Nazi … No he is drawing a comparison with the rhetoric that was being used during that period.
It is clear that Gary has a better understanding of history than anyone who states he is calling them Nazis
The row is nothing more than a distraction technique to draw away from the appalling language being used by the closet fascist Home Secretary….. There I’ve said it… |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?"
No.
But feel free to read into it what you want. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
No.
But feel free to read into it what you want. "
I can only assume that you are replying to all three questions.
The language used is not similar to 1930s Germany.
Drawing a parallel to 1930s Germany is not the same as calling someone a Nazi.
There are no circumstances under which 1930s Germany can be compared to any current event. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
No.
But feel free to read into it what you want.
I can only assume that you are replying to all three questions.
The language used is not similar to 1930s Germany.
Drawing a parallel to 1930s Germany is not the same as calling someone a Nazi.
There are no circumstances under which 1930s Germany can be compared to any current event."
I have absolutely no idea.
I wasn't part of that era.
But I wouldn't have associated what was said to Nazism.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
No.
But feel free to read into it what you want.
I can only assume that you are replying to all three questions.
The language used is not similar to 1930s Germany.
Drawing a parallel to 1930s Germany is not the same as calling someone a Nazi.
There are no circumstances under which 1930s Germany can be compared to any current event.
I have absolutely no idea.
I wasn't part of that era.
But I wouldn't have associated what was said to Nazism.
"
Is it okay to compare something today to 1930s Germany? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
No.
But feel free to read into it what you want.
I can only assume that you are replying to all three questions.
The language used is not similar to 1930s Germany.
Drawing a parallel to 1930s Germany is not the same as calling someone a Nazi.
There are no circumstances under which 1930s Germany can be compared to any current event.
I have absolutely no idea.
I wasn't part of that era.
But I wouldn't have associated what was said to Nazism.
Is it okay to compare something today to 1930s Germany?"
Yes why not. If there is a direct link in comparison. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?"
I have heard of comments like 'swarm of people' and 'invasion' both of which I think could be slightly compared to 1930 Germany though I don't think they were constantly said. It seems in Germany they were using that language constantly along with far worse things like 'sub human'. Maybe it could be argued that the language used to date us just the tip of the iceberg and there is worse to come but that remains to be seen. I may well have missed far worse comments that have been made. If there was others, what were they? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
I have heard of comments like 'swarm of people' and 'invasion' both of which I think could be slightly compared to 1930 Germany though I don't think they were constantly said. It seems in Germany they were using that language constantly along with far worse things like 'sub human'. Maybe it could be argued that the language used to date us just the tip of the iceberg and there is worse to come but that remains to be seen. I may well have missed far worse comments that have been made. If there was others, what were they?"
You hit the nail on the head.
THIS IS HOW IT STARTS!
Hitler and the Nazis started slowly and escalated the rhetoric as time progressed and they became emboldened both by growing support AND not being tackled/picked up for doing/saying it.
We need to address it now before it escalates further and such language (and the opinions language engenders and encourages) becomes normalised. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Personally I think the horrors of Nazis are trivialised whenever their name is conflated with whatever unfairness or inconvenience is in vogue. "
Depends on the situation and context. In this instance it was absolutely correct and fair to draw comparisons around the use of language. The warnings from history are there and should constantly be heeded. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Personally I think the horrors of Nazis are trivialised whenever their name is conflated with whatever unfairness or inconvenience is in vogue.
Depends on the situation and context. In this instance it was absolutely correct and fair to draw comparisons around the use of language. The warnings from history are there and should constantly be heeded. "
Yes, warnings from history should be heeded, but screaming "Nazis" in every situation is just crying wolf and devalues an episode of terror. Trying to impose legal measures to avert people smuggling is hardly the Holocaust. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Personally I think the horrors of Nazis are trivialised whenever their name is conflated with whatever unfairness or inconvenience is in vogue.
Depends on the situation and context. In this instance it was absolutely correct and fair to draw comparisons around the use of language. The warnings from history are there and should constantly be heeded.
Yes, warnings from history should be heeded, but screaming "Nazis" in every situation is just crying wolf and devalues an episode of terror. Trying to impose legal measures to avert people smuggling is hardly the Holocaust. "
But you have done exactly what the easily offended trying to excuse the government do. Jumped straight to the 1940s. Lineker didn’t make a comparison with the Holocaust. He made a comparison between the language used in 1930s Germany with UK Govt rhetoric. He was totally correct to do so. The parallels are clear.
As per my earlier post, as the 1930s progressed the vitriolic language hateful language employed by the Nazis escalated. It didn’t start with the dial turned up to 10, it slowly dialled up as the Nazis were emboldened by support and not being effectively tackled. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Personally I think the horrors of Nazis are trivialised whenever their name is conflated with whatever unfairness or inconvenience is in vogue.
Depends on the situation and context. In this instance it was absolutely correct and fair to draw comparisons around the use of language. The warnings from history are there and should constantly be heeded.
Yes, warnings from history should be heeded, but screaming "Nazis" in every situation is just crying wolf and devalues an episode of terror. Trying to impose legal measures to avert people smuggling is hardly the Holocaust.
But you have done exactly what the easily offended trying to excuse the government do. Jumped straight to the 1940s. Lineker didn’t make a comparison with the Holocaust. He made a comparison between the language used in 1930s Germany with UK Govt rhetoric. He was totally correct to do so. The parallels are clear.
As per my earlier post, as the 1930s progressed the vitriolic language hateful language employed by the Nazis escalated. It didn’t start with the dial turned up to 10, it slowly dialled up as the Nazis were emboldened by support and not being effectively tackled. "
*typos (language twice)
And to add...the warning from history is not the holocaust. That was the result of not stopping the rise of extremism. The warning is to stop extremism taking hold in the first place. It starts with propaganda, misinformation and political rhetoric. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Lineker didn’t make a comparison with the Holocaust. He made a comparison between the language used in 1930s Germany with UK Govt rhetoric. He was totally correct to do so. The parallels are clear."
Would you care to quote some of the language used in 1930s Germany, so that we can all see how clear the parallels are? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Lineker didn’t make a comparison with the Holocaust. He made a comparison between the language used in 1930s Germany with UK Govt rhetoric. He was totally correct to do so. The parallels are clear.
Would you care to quote some of the language used in 1930s Germany, so that we can all see how clear the parallels are?"
That’s very lazy. Do your own research. The internet is an amazing thing and Amazon has literally 000s of books about the rise of the Nazis.
Failing that you can probably find a variety of excellent TV series like “Nazis: A warning from History”.
Also research Joseph Goebbels. He was a genius around PR and marketing and how to manipulate the population (evil but a genius).
Then again, you know all of this! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Lineker didn’t make a comparison with the Holocaust. He made a comparison between the language used in 1930s Germany with UK Govt rhetoric. He was totally correct to do so. The parallels are clear.
Would you care to quote some of the language used in 1930s Germany, so that we can all see how clear the parallels are?"
No, but feel free to do your own research and come back when you have an opinion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Personally I think the horrors of Nazis are trivialised whenever their name is conflated with whatever unfairness or inconvenience is in vogue.
Depends on the situation and context. In this instance it was absolutely correct and fair to draw comparisons around the use of language. The warnings from history are there and should constantly be heeded.
Yes, warnings from history should be heeded, but screaming "Nazis" in every situation is just crying wolf and devalues an episode of terror. Trying to impose legal measures to avert people smuggling is hardly the Holocaust. "
Who has compared anything to the Nazis?
Have you taken the time to read the OP and respond directly? The intention is to define your position without any discussion of Nazism. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"No
No
Yes but people should think critically before screaming literal Nazi at everything otherwise we end up where we are today. "
On that case, why are you immediately implying that people are "screaming literal Nazi"?
It seems to me that it is as frequently those who are being warned about their behaviour who claim to be accussed of being Nazis when they have not been so as to ignore acknowledging what has been pointed out.
So, how do you draw the the parallel and counter the diversion? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
I have heard of comments like 'swarm of people' and 'invasion' both of which I think could be slightly compared to 1930 Germany though I don't think they were constantly said. It seems in Germany they were using that language constantly along with far worse things like 'sub human'. Maybe it could be argued that the language used to date us just the tip of the iceberg and there is worse to come but that remains to be seen. I may well have missed far worse comments that have been made. If there was others, what were they?
You hit the nail on the head.
THIS IS HOW IT STARTS!
Hitler and the Nazis started slowly and escalated the rhetoric as time progressed and they became emboldened both by growing support AND not being tackled/picked up for doing/saying it.
We need to address it now before it escalates further and such language (and the opinions language engenders and encourages) becomes normalised. "
You have taken a harder line than me, though possibly right to do so. I am saying it could be the tip of the iceberg not it definitely is the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure I must have missed some quotes as apart from those 2 words I mentioned, I am unaware of what else has been said |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
I have heard of comments like 'swarm of people' and 'invasion' both of which I think could be slightly compared to 1930 Germany though I don't think they were constantly said. It seems in Germany they were using that language constantly along with far worse things like 'sub human'. Maybe it could be argued that the language used to date us just the tip of the iceberg and there is worse to come but that remains to be seen. I may well have missed far worse comments that have been made. If there was others, what were they?
You hit the nail on the head.
THIS IS HOW IT STARTS!
Hitler and the Nazis started slowly and escalated the rhetoric as time progressed and they became emboldened both by growing support AND not being tackled/picked up for doing/saying it.
We need to address it now before it escalates further and such language (and the opinions language engenders and encourages) becomes normalised.
You have taken a harder line than me, though possibly right to do so. I am saying it could be the tip of the iceberg not it definitely is the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure I must have missed some quotes as apart from those 2 words I mentioned, I am unaware of what else has been said "
It goes beyond the use of individual words. Language is determined by intent and context as well as each word itself.
Remember that Ministers do not give speeches on the hoof. They are carefully prepared, refined, edited, and rehearsed. The HS SpAds know EXACTLY what they are doing and everything in her speeches is carefully chosen.
The simple fact that a Jewish Holocaust survivor confronted the HS asking her to tone down her language (which means the words, how they are used, and how they are delivered) and she refused and actually doubled down tells us a lot.
I may possibly be taking a hardline approach but I think your usual approach of fair play, neutrality, and balance (which is admirable) is a bit misplaced on this topic. The historical precedence is there and widely reported over 000s of books and TV series. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Where does it lead, if the language used was similar to language used in 1930s Germany does anyone believe that the eventual outcomes will be similar.
Will we see people rounded up into ghettos and eventually shipped of to camps to face almost certain death.
What is actually happening? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Where does it lead, if the language used was similar to language used in 1930s Germany does anyone believe that the eventual outcomes will be similar.
Will we see people rounded up into ghettos and eventually shipped of to camps to face almost certain death.
What is actually happening?"
The WHOLE point is to take a stand and be clear that the use of that type of language by anyone, especially our public servants who supposedly represent us, is not acceptable.
Few sane people would try to claim that any UK Govt would ever go as far as the Nazis (or Khmer Rouge or Stalin if we want balance). But even a step closer is unacceptable to me.
People always jump to the final solution and the holocaust. That too is unhelpful as it is as extreme as it is possible to go. But the journey there took almost a decade and plenty of awful things happened along that path that would be unacceptable.
But then again, let’s face it. Nobody would ever have assumed a repeat of anything remotely similar in Europe would or could ever happen again. But less than 50 years later we had Bosnia and Kosovo and the return of ethnic cleansing and concentration camps. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Where does it lead, if the language used was similar to language used in 1930s Germany does anyone believe that the eventual outcomes will be similar.
Will we see people rounded up into ghettos and eventually shipped of to camps to face almost certain death.
What is actually happening?"
It is, apparently, leading to every single person who gets off a small boat being imprisoned before deportation.
That is literally what is in the legislation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
Interesting things I am coming across...
“Nothing says "we're nothing like 1930's Germany, that's outrageous" quite like demanding for dissent against the government to be stamped out and those doing it to be removed/silenced!”
And did anyone see George Osborne on the Andrew Neil show? Seems he agrees with Lineker and is not happy with the language used by “some conservatives” in relation to immigration and deems it unacceptable.
I have rarely agreed with George Osborne! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Where does it lead, if the language used was similar to language used in 1930s Germany does anyone believe that the eventual outcomes will be similar.
Will we see people rounded up into ghettos and eventually shipped of to camps to face almost certain death.
What is actually happening?"
Really. Certain death?
At what point is the legislation stipulating death as the final outcome? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too? "
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
"
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?"
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
"
You’ve totally lost me? I was posting another example of a high profile person criticising government policy. Then linking that to the irony of Tory MPs being outraged. Seems like Lineker is in good company. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
You’ve totally lost me? I was posting another example of a high profile person criticising government policy. Then linking that to the irony of Tory MPs being outraged. Seems like Lineker is in good company."
If that doesn't happen, does the whole argument of 'censor everyone who criticises the Tories' , in fact mean its nonsense?
I know you are aware that the letter to the BBC called for a full investigation and apology. Not sure why you're saying they want people sacked. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
You’ve totally lost me? I was posting another example of a high profile person criticising government policy. Then linking that to the irony of Tory MPs being outraged. Seems like Lineker is in good company.
If that doesn't happen, does the whole argument of 'censor everyone who criticises the Tories' , in fact mean its nonsense?
I know you are aware that the letter to the BBC called for a full investigation and apology. Not sure why you're saying they want people sacked."
Will they be asking for a full investigation into the Archbishop and an apology? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
You’ve totally lost me? I was posting another example of a high profile person criticising government policy. Then linking that to the irony of Tory MPs being outraged. Seems like Lineker is in good company.
If that doesn't happen, does the whole argument of 'censor everyone who criticises the Tories' , in fact mean its nonsense?
I know you are aware that the letter to the BBC called for a full investigation and apology. Not sure why you're saying they want people sacked.
Will they be asking for a full investigation into the Archbishop and an apology?"
I have no idea but thats not what you said.
You used to be fairly balanced and factual, I understand why you don't appear 'balanced' atm the moment because you've been tipped over the edge by the Tories but you're also allowing huge exaggerations to get in the ways of your usual facts. It's a shame to see. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
You’ve totally lost me? I was posting another example of a high profile person criticising government policy. Then linking that to the irony of Tory MPs being outraged. Seems like Lineker is in good company.
If that doesn't happen, does the whole argument of 'censor everyone who criticises the Tories' , in fact mean its nonsense?
I know you are aware that the letter to the BBC called for a full investigation and apology. Not sure why you're saying they want people sacked.
Will they be asking for a full investigation into the Archbishop and an apology?
I have no idea but thats not what you said.
You used to be fairly balanced and factual, I understand why you don't appear 'balanced' atm the moment because you've been tipped over the edge by the Tories but you're also allowing huge exaggerations to get in the ways of your usual facts. It's a shame to see."
You refused to comment on the actual OP but you're willing to get into a squabble with someone else on a different matter.
Very courteous. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Former England and Liverpool footballer John Barnes told Sophie Ridge on Sky that the BBC appears to want to "pick and choose" when it wants to be impartial! Ouch!"
This is another topic, I think. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
You’ve totally lost me? I was posting another example of a high profile person criticising government policy. Then linking that to the irony of Tory MPs being outraged. Seems like Lineker is in good company.
If that doesn't happen, does the whole argument of 'censor everyone who criticises the Tories' , in fact mean its nonsense?
I know you are aware that the letter to the BBC called for a full investigation and apology. Not sure why you're saying they want people sacked.
Will they be asking for a full investigation into the Archbishop and an apology?
I have no idea but thats not what you said.
You used to be fairly balanced and factual, I understand why you don't appear 'balanced' atm the moment because you've been tipped over the edge by the Tories but you're also allowing huge exaggerations to get in the ways of your usual facts. It's a shame to see.
You refused to comment on the actual OP but you're willing to get into a squabble with someone else on a different matter.
Very courteous."
You're well aware of why I refused.
What exactly does it have to do with you what I say to someone else? I was replying to them, not you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?"
No |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
You’ve totally lost me? I was posting another example of a high profile person criticising government policy. Then linking that to the irony of Tory MPs being outraged. Seems like Lineker is in good company.
If that doesn't happen, does the whole argument of 'censor everyone who criticises the Tories' , in fact mean its nonsense?
I know you are aware that the letter to the BBC called for a full investigation and apology. Not sure why you're saying they want people sacked.
Will they be asking for a full investigation into the Archbishop and an apology?
I have no idea but thats not what you said.
You used to be fairly balanced and factual, I understand why you don't appear 'balanced' atm the moment because you've been tipped over the edge by the Tories but you're also allowing huge exaggerations to get in the ways of your usual facts. It's a shame to see.
You refused to comment on the actual OP but you're willing to get into a squabble with someone else on a different matter.
Very courteous.
You're well aware of why I refused.
What exactly does it have to do with you what I say to someone else? I was replying to them, not you."
Nothing really.
Just making the point considering your pontifications. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
No"
Again, I can only assume that you are replying to all three questions.
The language used is not similar to 1930s Germany.
Drawing a parallel to 1930s Germany is not the same as calling someone a Nazi.
There are no circumstances under which 1930s Germany can be compared to any current event. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
No
Again, I can only assume that you are replying to all three questions.
The language used is not similar to 1930s Germany.
Drawing a parallel to 1930s Germany is not the same as calling someone a Nazi.
There are no circumstances under which 1930s Germany can be compared to any current event."
My response was to all three questions and I disagree with your claims. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened…. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
I have heard of comments like 'swarm of people' and 'invasion' both of which I think could be slightly compared to 1930 Germany though I don't think they were constantly said. It seems in Germany they were using that language constantly along with far worse things like 'sub human'. Maybe it could be argued that the language used to date us just the tip of the iceberg and there is worse to come but that remains to be seen. I may well have missed far worse comments that have been made. If there was others, what were they?
You hit the nail on the head.
THIS IS HOW IT STARTS!
Hitler and the Nazis started slowly and escalated the rhetoric as time progressed and they became emboldened both by growing support AND not being tackled/picked up for doing/saying it.
We need to address it now before it escalates further and such language (and the opinions language engenders and encourages) becomes normalised.
You have taken a harder line than me, though possibly right to do so. I am saying it could be the tip of the iceberg not it definitely is the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure I must have missed some quotes as apart from those 2 words I mentioned, I am unaware of what else has been said
It goes beyond the use of individual words. Language is determined by intent and context as well as each word itself.
Remember that Ministers do not give speeches on the hoof. They are carefully prepared, refined, edited, and rehearsed. The HS SpAds know EXACTLY what they are doing and everything in her speeches is carefully chosen.
The simple fact that a Jewish Holocaust survivor confronted the HS asking her to tone down her language (which means the words, how they are used, and how they are delivered) and she refused and actually doubled down tells us a lot.
I may possibly be taking a hardline approach but I think your usual approach of fair play, neutrality, and balance (which is admirable) is a bit misplaced on this topic. The historical precedence is there and widely reported over 000s of books and TV series."
Thank you for the kind words about fair play, neutrality and balance. One of the downsides to this approach is applying it equally to all concerned regardless if you agree or disagree with them as opposed to being selective in applying it. The HS persons comments are definitely something that should make everyone stop and consider everything on this subject |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened…."
Your “epiphany” was already posted by me waaay up the thread (not the Katie Hopkins bit). There was an escalation of rhetoric over the almost decade period of Nazi control. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
You’ve totally lost me? I was posting another example of a high profile person criticising government policy. Then linking that to the irony of Tory MPs being outraged. Seems like Lineker is in good company.
If that doesn't happen, does the whole argument of 'censor everyone who criticises the Tories' , in fact mean its nonsense?
I know you are aware that the letter to the BBC called for a full investigation and apology. Not sure why you're saying they want people sacked.
Will they be asking for a full investigation into the Archbishop and an apology?
I have no idea but thats not what you said.
You used to be fairly balanced and factual, I understand why you don't appear 'balanced' atm the moment because you've been tipped over the edge by the Tories but you're also allowing huge exaggerations to get in the ways of your usual facts. It's a shame to see."
Wait a second I *think* I know what the issue is here and it was of my making. I strayed away from the OP (sorry Easy) and started adding a few other things that have vern coning to light in connection to the Immigration Bill and the row kicked off around Lineker.
I saw a connection in terms of the reaction to language and linking it to 1930s Germany and was fascinated by how people like George Osborne and then the Archbishop of York had ALSO criticised the Govt.
However, perhaps I strayed too far or some of you didn’t see the connection to the OP?
My bad! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Is the language being used by the current and previous Home Secretaries similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s?
Is drawing such a parallel the same as accusing someone of being a Nazi?
Are there any circumstances in which any comparison can be made with the rise of Nazism in Germany or is it not possible to use this period in history as a reference for anything?
No
Again, I can only assume that you are replying to all three questions.
The language used is not similar to 1930s Germany.
Drawing a parallel to 1930s Germany is not the same as calling someone a Nazi.
There are no circumstances under which 1930s Germany can be compared to any current event.
My response was to all three questions and I disagree with your claims. "
I haven't "claimed" anything.
I have written what "no" to all those questions means.
I don't know if that's your intention or not as it was unclear.
If you mean something else, what is it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"Illegal migration bill is ‘cruelty without purpose’, says Archbishop of York. So I assume there will be an avalanche of angry red faced Tory MPs calling for him to be sacked too?
And you think the Archbishop of York is highly regarded in social media?
No idea but I suspect he is highly regarded by the millions of Church of England Christians across the UK. What exactly is your point?
Come on, you know you are only speculating.
Are you expecting his resignation soon?
You’ve totally lost me? I was posting another example of a high profile person criticising government policy. Then linking that to the irony of Tory MPs being outraged. Seems like Lineker is in good company.
If that doesn't happen, does the whole argument of 'censor everyone who criticises the Tories' , in fact mean its nonsense?
I know you are aware that the letter to the BBC called for a full investigation and apology. Not sure why you're saying they want people sacked.
Will they be asking for a full investigation into the Archbishop and an apology?
I have no idea but thats not what you said.
You used to be fairly balanced and factual, I understand why you don't appear 'balanced' atm the moment because you've been tipped over the edge by the Tories but you're also allowing huge exaggerations to get in the ways of your usual facts. It's a shame to see.
Wait a second I *think* I know what the issue is here and it was of my making. I strayed away from the OP (sorry Easy) and started adding a few other things that have vern coning to light in connection to the Immigration Bill and the row kicked off around Lineker.
I saw a connection in terms of the reaction to language and linking it to 1930s Germany and was fascinated by how people like George Osborne and then the Archbishop of York had ALSO criticised the Govt.
However, perhaps I strayed too far or some of you didn’t see the connection to the OP?
My bad!"
There are already a lot of threads on Lineker and the immigration plan. I was trying to be more specific |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened…."
Do you mean that Hopkins paved the way to normalise the language? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened…."
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
There may not be any intention or plan in the long run.
However, if you start dehumanising people, blaming them, scapegoating them, little by little it becomes easier to forget they are people for which there will be real consequences.
Just a political tool, to be treated as such.
Interesting talk by Stephen Fry, who does know a think or two about language:
https://youtu.be/ohrtFuxUzZE |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There may not be any intention or plan in the long run.
However, if you start dehumanising people, blaming them, scapegoating them, little by little it becomes easier to forget they are people for which there will be real consequences.
Just a political tool, to be treated as such.
Interesting talk by Stephen Fry, who does know a think or two about language:
https://youtu.be/ohrtFuxUzZE"
I pretty much agree. I don't think the Tories have some evil masterplan with some evil ultimate aim.
But I think it's pretty clear the Tories are deliberately othering certain people to whip up anger & hatred against them. That's nasty & disturbing. And it can lead to real world harm. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
"
So you agree that the language used by the HS in relation to immigrants and asylum seekers is wrong? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"There may not be any intention or plan in the long run.
However, if you start dehumanising people, blaming them, scapegoating them, little by little it becomes easier to forget they are people for which there will be real consequences.
Just a political tool, to be treated as such.
Interesting talk by Stephen Fry, who does know a think or two about language:
https://youtu.be/ohrtFuxUzZE
I pretty much agree. I don't think the Tories have some evil masterplan with some evil ultimate aim.
But I think it's pretty clear the Tories are deliberately othering certain people to whip up anger & hatred against them. That's nasty & disturbing. And it can lead to real world harm."
I also doubt they have some cunning evil long term plan and end goal beyond:
1) Distracting people from the real shitshow in the UK.
2) Playing to the gallery (or bread and circuses) to satisfy the need in some to have someone to point at and blame for their increasingly harder lives (and distract from real reasons).
3) Maintain power (and that by necessity includes silencing criticism including protest, strikes, presenters voices etc) in order to protect both their own, and most importantly their donors/supporters/controllers.
So you gotta say they are doing pretty well! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
So you agree that the language used by the HS in relation to immigrants and asylum seekers is wrong?"
It's not just the current Home Secretary.
This has grown over years with previous Home Secretaries and both within and outside Government.
Hostile environment etc. etc. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
So you agree that the language used by the HS in relation to immigrants and asylum seekers is wrong?"
I think everyone is wrong |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
So you agree that the language used by the HS in relation to immigrants and asylum seekers is wrong?
I think everyone is wrong"
Sweeping statement 
Although strangely ambiguous? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
So you agree that the language used by the HS in relation to immigrants and asylum seekers is wrong?
I think everyone is wrong
Sweeping statement
Although strangely ambiguous?"
You are wrong |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
So you agree that the language used by the HS in relation to immigrants and asylum seekers is wrong?
I think everyone is wrong
Sweeping statement
Although strangely ambiguous?
You are wrong "
I am never wrong |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
"
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language…. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language…. "
They both weaponised their language |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language"
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language"
?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?"
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion."
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
"
The attempted victim blaming above is something else... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion."
Oh dear  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
The attempted victim blaming above is something else..."
Who is blaming a victim? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
The attempted victim blaming above is something else...
Who is blaming a victim?"
It rather felt like a certain poster was blaming a holocaust victim for being too agressive in the way she confronted Braverman. I find that criticism pretty astonishing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
The attempted victim blaming above is something else..."
I'm thinking benefit of the doubt in that he's being very analytical, for now.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
The attempted victim blaming above is something else...
Who is blaming a victim?
It rather felt like a certain poster was blaming a holocaust victim for being too agressive in the way she confronted Braverman. I find that criticism pretty astonishing."
I read it as he was saying she weaponised her language. Ot sure where blame comes into that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
The attempted victim blaming above is something else...
Who is blaming a victim?
It rather felt like a certain poster was blaming a holocaust victim for being too agressive in the way she confronted Braverman. I find that criticism pretty astonishing.
I read it as he was saying she weaponised her language. Ot sure where blame comes into that"
She simply confronted a person who she saw using the sort of damaging language she'd seen used before to awful effect. Given what she went through in the past, she was remarkably polite to Braverman. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
The attempted victim blaming above is something else...
I'm thinking benefit of the doubt in that he's being very analytical, for now.."
I was thank you.
The poster above and the instant labelling without thought to the actual written word or subject is a little too common, I'm afraid. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
The attempted victim blaming above is something else...
Who is blaming a victim?
It rather felt like a certain poster was blaming a holocaust victim for being too agressive in the way she confronted Braverman. I find that criticism pretty astonishing.
I read it as he was saying she weaponised her language. Ot sure where blame comes into that"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language"
let's beg the question that they both did.
Id say that an MP has more responsibility not to weaponnise language. And it's inexcusable to use loaded language in prepared speaches. It's also harsh to expect some directly affected by the weaponosed language to take the higher ground. .
I'd also say, if an MP has been cornered, maybe some refelction on how they'd been cornered is needed... It suggested there is some degree of truth in there. Has this happened or have they repeated their "mistakes"? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
The attempted victim blaming above is something else...
Who is blaming a victim?
It rather felt like a certain poster was blaming a holocaust victim for being too agressive in the way she confronted Braverman. I find that criticism pretty astonishing.
I read it as he was saying she weaponised her language. Ot sure where blame comes into that
She simply confronted a person who she saw using the sort of damaging language she'd seen used before to awful effect. Given what she went through in the past, she was remarkably polite to Braverman."
Tbf, I haven't watched it. Just responding the to written word here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
Perhaps her emotional response was triggered by the absolutely horrendous memory of the time she lived through?
The attempted victim blaming above is something else...
I'm thinking benefit of the doubt in that he's being very analytical, for now..
I was thank you.
The poster above and the instant labelling without thought to the actual written word or subject is a little too common, I'm afraid."
Perhaps that's their experiences of how you've previously written things or you don't get in etc?
It was badly worded (which we all do now and then) given the people involved.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
No, its state media pushing the lie. Look at what the Conservative party say, and look at what actually happens...How many of the illegal entrants have actually been removed? Very few and that is exactly the intention of the state. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion."
She did not use intemperate language to induce fear or aggression as far as I can tell, and neither did Lineker. How is this "weaponised" compared to the language of Braverman about "invasion" and "hundreds of millions" of people who would all come here?
I have to profoundly disagree.
It's the difference between asking someone to consider their language and trying to influence millions of people to hold negative thoughts about others. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
She did not use intemperate language to induce fear or aggression as far as I can tell, and neither did Lineker. How is this "weaponised" compared to the language of Braverman about "invasion" and "hundreds of millions" of people who would all come here?
I have to profoundly disagree.
It's the difference between asking someone to consider their language and trying to influence millions of people to hold negative thoughts about others."
mmm maybe I worded this badly which has been mentioned.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"I have kinda had an epiphany here…
Remember when the darling of the alt right Katie Hopkins called migrants “cockroaches” and everyone lost their shit…. Well isn’t language like “invasion” or “sworm” to describe migrants just in effect the gateway to the more extreme…
Almost like we are getting the palatable stuff to soften people up in public opinion…for the more unpalatable…… which is exactly what happened in 1930’s Germany
The language became more and hardened….
Your epiphany and your views can be seen as exactly the same thing you are calling out, soften people up in public opinion...
Everyone is responsible for their language, be considerate and don't weaponise your language is my view.
Which is what suella braverman is doing… and was asked by the holocaust survivor to temper the language….
They both weaponised their language
The holocaust survivor weaponised their language?
I thought she did if you listen to the whole interaction, she set her up for the whammy and then demanded an apology. Clearly I'm not talking about the Holocaust, I'm talking how she used her speech to back her into a corner in front of the media and audience.
She could have tried a less aggressive approach and made a lot more out of it in my opinion.
She did not use intemperate language to induce fear or aggression as far as I can tell, and neither did Lineker. How is this "weaponised" compared to the language of Braverman about "invasion" and "hundreds of millions" of people who would all come here?
I have to profoundly disagree.
It's the difference between asking someone to consider their language and trying to influence millions of people to hold negative thoughts about others.
mmm maybe I worded this badly which has been mentioned.
"
I'm intending make a slightly different point here.
What is Braverman and her predecessor trying to do? Manipulate, and I believe that is the right word, public perception and individual emotions to think negatively about other human beings.
I don't think that the discussion about the language being similar to the 1930s is attempting to do that. It asking to not use language in this way. It is not the name calling that it is being characterised as. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis."
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way."
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?"
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain."
It is also one of the most horrific parts of history we have seen. Certainly any in the not too distant past.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain.
It is also one of the most horrific parts of history we have seen. Certainly any in the not too distant past.
"
Indeed! Imagine spending three years completely immersed in European History 1910-1950 and reading probably millions of words of both historical analysis and first hand primary accounts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain.
It is also one of the most horrific parts of history we have seen. Certainly any in the not too distant past.
Indeed! Imagine spending three years completely immersed in European History 1910-1950 and reading probably millions of words of both historical analysis and first hand primary accounts."
You studied European history at degree level? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain.
It is also one of the most horrific parts of history we have seen. Certainly any in the not too distant past.
Indeed! Imagine spending three years completely immersed in European History 1910-1950 and reading probably millions of words of both historical analysis and first hand primary accounts.
You studied European history at degree level?"
More years ago than I care to remember. 1st Class Hons from a very well known Uni. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain.
It is also one of the most horrific parts of history we have seen. Certainly any in the not too distant past.
Indeed! Imagine spending three years completely immersed in European History 1910-1950 and reading probably millions of words of both historical analysis and first hand primary accounts.
You studied European history at degree level?
More years ago than I care to remember. 1st Class Hons from a very well known Uni."
It is probably responsible for my centrist views and vehement dislike and concern about extremism on both the left and the right. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain.
It is also one of the most horrific parts of history we have seen. Certainly any in the not too distant past.
Indeed! Imagine spending three years completely immersed in European History 1910-1950 and reading probably millions of words of both historical analysis and first hand primary accounts.
You studied European history at degree level?
More years ago than I care to remember. 1st Class Hons from a very well known Uni."
Fcuk thattttt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain.
It is also one of the most horrific parts of history we have seen. Certainly any in the not too distant past.
Indeed! Imagine spending three years completely immersed in European History 1910-1950 and reading probably millions of words of both historical analysis and first hand primary accounts.
You studied European history at degree level?
More years ago than I care to remember. 1st Class Hons from a very well known Uni.
Fcuk thattttt "
Seriously interesting (to me) but as per my other post, spending that long learning about the sheet horror humans can inflict on each other leaves a mark. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyuk OP Man
over a year ago
West London |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain.
It is also one of the most horrific parts of history we have seen. Certainly any in the not too distant past.
"
..and how was it enabled? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If you don’t like being compared to the Nazis then stop acting like the Nazis!*
*disclaimer 1: Before anyone takes offence, this is tongue in cheek (a bit).
*disclaimer 2: That could be 1930 or 1933 Nazis it doesn’t automatically mean 1940s Nazis.
It was not only the Nazis that used this language at the time. That's the point. It was widespread and normalised. Not just in Germany, but throughout Europe including the UK.
It created the environment that allowed something unspeakable to happen and it was not only Nazis but people without the remotest intent to carry out what eventually happened that prepared the way.
Which may why people rushed to jump to Gary implying 'nazi' possibly? He purposefully wrote 'Germany'. Why not just say 1930's?
Because the consequences of the rhetoric culminated in what happened in Germany.
Most people also have a limited knowledge of history. WWII Germany is one of the most widely understood. Better even than 1930s Britain.
It is also one of the most horrific parts of history we have seen. Certainly any in the not too distant past.
..and how was it enabled?"
You said yourself that the same language was used throughout Europe including Britain.
Said language didn't lead to the Nazi behaviour in all of those other states.
Hence why referring specifically to Germany people linked it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
The 1930s saw the rise and increased popularity of extreme right and left across Europe. Communists emboldened by the revolution in Russia and a right wing reaction to that (often propagated/encouraged or even openly supported by the wealthy establishment in various countries).
It resulted in the Spanish Civil War. Rise of Mussolini. Rise of Hitler and the Nazis.
In the UK there was serious concerns about Communism in the aftermath of WWI. This also indirectly spilled over into increased nationalist tensions in Ireland leading to Civil War. A reaction to all of this was the rise of Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Had WWII not happened it is likely their popularity would have continued to increase. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The 1930s saw the rise and increased popularity of extreme right and left across Europe. Communists emboldened by the revolution in Russia and a right wing reaction to that (often propagated/encouraged or even openly supported by the wealthy establishment in various countries).
It resulted in the Spanish Civil War. Rise of Mussolini. Rise of Hitler and the Nazis.
In the UK there was serious concerns about Communism in the aftermath of WWI. This also indirectly spilled over into increased nationalist tensions in Ireland leading to Civil War. A reaction to all of this was the rise of Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Had WWII not happened it is likely their popularity would have continued to increase."
Ha I missed the point of saying all that
Extremist language was indeed prevalent across Europe and while the Nazis were the most extreme example, there were highly dreadful and inflammatory things being said everywhere and it demonstrably did lead to a rise in extremism in countries other than Germany. In many ways the overreach of Hitler and outbreak of WWII actually saved Europe from a far darker future. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The 1930s saw the rise and increased popularity of extreme right and left across Europe. Communists emboldened by the revolution in Russia and a right wing reaction to that (often propagated/encouraged or even openly supported by the wealthy establishment in various countries).
It resulted in the Spanish Civil War. Rise of Mussolini. Rise of Hitler and the Nazis.
In the UK there was serious concerns about Communism in the aftermath of WWI. This also indirectly spilled over into increased nationalist tensions in Ireland leading to Civil War. A reaction to all of this was the rise of Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Had WWII not happened it is likely their popularity would have continued to increase.
Ha I missed the point of saying all that
Extremist language was indeed prevalent across Europe and while the Nazis were the most extreme example, there were highly dreadful and inflammatory things being said everywhere and it demonstrably did lead to a rise in extremism in countries other than Germany. In many ways the overreach of Hitler and outbreak of WWII actually saved Europe from a far darker future. "
I bow to your far superior knowledge on this.
Why couldn't he have compared it to 1930s Britain? Is it because Britain, who had Mosley actually done something about it and imprisoned him? Or is it because Mosley was Labour for a time? Or is it because he was trying to use the most extreme example he could find?
It was probably the third but imo the most extreme examples not always the best representation.
If we want to have serious debate and have people listen to our concerns then we need to stop with the extremities, they polarise. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The 1930s saw the rise and increased popularity of extreme right and left across Europe. Communists emboldened by the revolution in Russia and a right wing reaction to that (often propagated/encouraged or even openly supported by the wealthy establishment in various countries).
It resulted in the Spanish Civil War. Rise of Mussolini. Rise of Hitler and the Nazis.
In the UK there was serious concerns about Communism in the aftermath of WWI. This also indirectly spilled over into increased nationalist tensions in Ireland leading to Civil War. A reaction to all of this was the rise of Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Had WWII not happened it is likely their popularity would have continued to increase.
Ha I missed the point of saying all that
Extremist language was indeed prevalent across Europe and while the Nazis were the most extreme example, there were highly dreadful and inflammatory things being said everywhere and it demonstrably did lead to a rise in extremism in countries other than Germany. In many ways the overreach of Hitler and outbreak of WWII actually saved Europe from a far darker future.
I bow to your far superior knowledge on this.
Why couldn't he have compared it to 1930s Britain? Is it because Britain, who had Mosley actually done something about it and imprisoned him? Or is it because Mosley was Labour for a time? Or is it because he was trying to use the most extreme example he could find?
It was probably the third but imo the most extreme examples not always the best representation.
If we want to have serious debate and have people listen to our concerns then we need to stop with the extremities, they polarise. "
“1930s Germany” is a short hand almost everyone will understand. If you cite anything else it becomes too vague or nuanced for joe public.
The trouble is most people immediately think of the holocaust when you say “Nazi” but as per my other posts, they didn’t turn the dial straight up to ten in 1933. It was gradual but ultimately exponential.
If Lineker had said “1930s Britain” many people would have been left scratching their heads. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The 1930s saw the rise and increased popularity of extreme right and left across Europe. Communists emboldened by the revolution in Russia and a right wing reaction to that (often propagated/encouraged or even openly supported by the wealthy establishment in various countries).
It resulted in the Spanish Civil War. Rise of Mussolini. Rise of Hitler and the Nazis.
In the UK there was serious concerns about Communism in the aftermath of WWI. This also indirectly spilled over into increased nationalist tensions in Ireland leading to Civil War. A reaction to all of this was the rise of Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Had WWII not happened it is likely their popularity would have continued to increase.
Ha I missed the point of saying all that
Extremist language was indeed prevalent across Europe and while the Nazis were the most extreme example, there were highly dreadful and inflammatory things being said everywhere and it demonstrably did lead to a rise in extremism in countries other than Germany. In many ways the overreach of Hitler and outbreak of WWII actually saved Europe from a far darker future.
I bow to your far superior knowledge on this.
Why couldn't he have compared it to 1930s Britain? Is it because Britain, who had Mosley actually done something about it and imprisoned him? Or is it because Mosley was Labour for a time? Or is it because he was trying to use the most extreme example he could find?
It was probably the third but imo the most extreme examples not always the best representation.
If we want to have serious debate and have people listen to our concerns then we need to stop with the extremities, they polarise.
“1930s Germany” is a short hand almost everyone will understand. If you cite anything else it becomes too vague or nuanced for joe public.
The trouble is most people immediately think of the holocaust when you say “Nazi” but as per my other posts, they didn’t turn the dial straight up to ten in 1933. It was gradual but ultimately exponential.
If Lineker had said “1930s Britain” many people would have been left scratching their heads."
Lol I very much doubt most people under the age of 30 are even aware that there was a world war, never mind two of them |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The 1930s saw the rise and increased popularity of extreme right and left across Europe. Communists emboldened by the revolution in Russia and a right wing reaction to that (often propagated/encouraged or even openly supported by the wealthy establishment in various countries).
It resulted in the Spanish Civil War. Rise of Mussolini. Rise of Hitler and the Nazis.
In the UK there was serious concerns about Communism in the aftermath of WWI. This also indirectly spilled over into increased nationalist tensions in Ireland leading to Civil War. A reaction to all of this was the rise of Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Had WWII not happened it is likely their popularity would have continued to increase.
Ha I missed the point of saying all that
Extremist language was indeed prevalent across Europe and while the Nazis were the most extreme example, there were highly dreadful and inflammatory things being said everywhere and it demonstrably did lead to a rise in extremism in countries other than Germany. In many ways the overreach of Hitler and outbreak of WWII actually saved Europe from a far darker future.
I bow to your far superior knowledge on this.
Why couldn't he have compared it to 1930s Britain? Is it because Britain, who had Mosley actually done something about it and imprisoned him? Or is it because Mosley was Labour for a time? Or is it because he was trying to use the most extreme example he could find?
It was probably the third but imo the most extreme examples not always the best representation.
If we want to have serious debate and have people listen to our concerns then we need to stop with the extremities, they polarise.
“1930s Germany” is a short hand almost everyone will understand. If you cite anything else it becomes too vague or nuanced for joe public.
The trouble is most people immediately think of the holocaust when you say “Nazi” but as per my other posts, they didn’t turn the dial straight up to ten in 1933. It was gradual but ultimately exponential.
If Lineker had said “1930s Britain” many people would have been left scratching their heads.
Lol I very much doubt most people under the age of 30 are even aware that there was a world war, never mind two of them"
Seriously? They teach kids around the age of 8 about WWI & WWII. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The 1930s saw the rise and increased popularity of extreme right and left across Europe. Communists emboldened by the revolution in Russia and a right wing reaction to that (often propagated/encouraged or even openly supported by the wealthy establishment in various countries).
It resulted in the Spanish Civil War. Rise of Mussolini. Rise of Hitler and the Nazis.
In the UK there was serious concerns about Communism in the aftermath of WWI. This also indirectly spilled over into increased nationalist tensions in Ireland leading to Civil War. A reaction to all of this was the rise of Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Had WWII not happened it is likely their popularity would have continued to increase.
Ha I missed the point of saying all that
Extremist language was indeed prevalent across Europe and while the Nazis were the most extreme example, there were highly dreadful and inflammatory things being said everywhere and it demonstrably did lead to a rise in extremism in countries other than Germany. In many ways the overreach of Hitler and outbreak of WWII actually saved Europe from a far darker future.
I bow to your far superior knowledge on this.
Why couldn't he have compared it to 1930s Britain? Is it because Britain, who had Mosley actually done something about it and imprisoned him? Or is it because Mosley was Labour for a time? Or is it because he was trying to use the most extreme example he could find?
It was probably the third but imo the most extreme examples not always the best representation.
If we want to have serious debate and have people listen to our concerns then we need to stop with the extremities, they polarise.
“1930s Germany” is a short hand almost everyone will understand. If you cite anything else it becomes too vague or nuanced for joe public.
The trouble is most people immediately think of the holocaust when you say “Nazi” but as per my other posts, they didn’t turn the dial straight up to ten in 1933. It was gradual but ultimately exponential.
If Lineker had said “1930s Britain” many people would have been left scratching their heads.
Lol I very much doubt most people under the age of 30 are even aware that there was a world war, never mind two of them"
I also suspect they don't know England has won a world cup.
The rivalry they feel with Germany must be very confusing for these kids.
Altogether now
"Two eurovisions and one referendum, do day, do dah". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The 1930s saw the rise and increased popularity of extreme right and left across Europe. Communists emboldened by the revolution in Russia and a right wing reaction to that (often propagated/encouraged or even openly supported by the wealthy establishment in various countries).
It resulted in the Spanish Civil War. Rise of Mussolini. Rise of Hitler and the Nazis.
In the UK there was serious concerns about Communism in the aftermath of WWI. This also indirectly spilled over into increased nationalist tensions in Ireland leading to Civil War. A reaction to all of this was the rise of Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists. Had WWII not happened it is likely their popularity would have continued to increase.
Ha I missed the point of saying all that
Extremist language was indeed prevalent across Europe and while the Nazis were the most extreme example, there were highly dreadful and inflammatory things being said everywhere and it demonstrably did lead to a rise in extremism in countries other than Germany. In many ways the overreach of Hitler and outbreak of WWII actually saved Europe from a far darker future.
I bow to your far superior knowledge on this.
Why couldn't he have compared it to 1930s Britain? Is it because Britain, who had Mosley actually done something about it and imprisoned him? Or is it because Mosley was Labour for a time? Or is it because he was trying to use the most extreme example he could find?
It was probably the third but imo the most extreme examples not always the best representation.
If we want to have serious debate and have people listen to our concerns then we need to stop with the extremities, they polarise.
“1930s Germany” is a short hand almost everyone will understand. If you cite anything else it becomes too vague or nuanced for joe public.
The trouble is most people immediately think of the holocaust when you say “Nazi” but as per my other posts, they didn’t turn the dial straight up to ten in 1933. It was gradual but ultimately exponential.
If Lineker had said “1930s Britain” many people would have been left scratching their heads.
Lol I very much doubt most people under the age of 30 are even aware that there was a world war, never mind two of themI also suspect they don't know England has won a world cup.
The rivalry they feel with Germany must be very confusing for these kids.
Altogether now
"Two eurovisions and one referendum, do day, do dah". "
I think a lot of people under 30 might think you are doing them a disservice with that statement! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
No its not.
Have any idiots commenting to suggest that the language is like Nazi propaganda actually cited specific examples or quotes?
No, they haven't. Because if they do it will be more than clear that it's nothing like 1930's Nazi f*ckin' Germany! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"No its not.
Have any idiots commenting to suggest that the language is like Nazi propaganda actually cited specific examples or quotes?
No, they haven't. Because if they do it will be more than clear that it's nothing like 1930's Nazi f*ckin' Germany!"
You haven’t read this thread have you?
Are you really calling the Holocaust survivor who confronted Braverman asking her to change the language and tone of what she has been saying, an idiot?
When you say “nothing like 1930s Nazi f*ckin Germany!” Are you referring to 1933? 1936? 1939? When you think of the Nazis what is your go to reference point? Do you think the Nazis landed with the propaganda rhetoric already dialled up to ten?
You also understand it is about tone and how things are said, positioned and set within a wider context rather then individual matching words right? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
