are adherents of exterminationist ideologies, other than Communists, generally allowed to self-identify as such on AD?

for example, would Nazis or Fascists who identify as such be allowed to participate under these labels?

We do not offer a drop down box option for Nazis or Fascists (or a number of other political affiliations/philosophies, obviously) but anyone is welcome to participate here provided they are willing to follow our Rules.

I don't think it is at all reasonable to include Communists in that rubric, as an ideology it is certainly not exterminationist. Stalinism, perhaps..

One way or another, it might not be against the rules but I suspect somebody who identified themselves as fascist would have a difficult time of it...

Perhaps it would be better if there was a text box instead of a drop down box so that each member can declare there own ideological stance?

Two things:

1 - Jamie your avatars are creepy. Like I want to cry creepy.
2 - You should add a blob so you can enter anything from 1 - 254 characters to describe your murderous political leanings like Baalist.

Vermillion:

Sorry, friend, but my avatar disagrees with you re the exterminationist mindset of "communism." Since since she was exterminated, then she should know.

Oh, and truth be told, and since I might as well say it here and now, for those posting as "communist," well, there truly is no point in addressing myself to their remarks on either a legal or moral basis. And for the same reason, I find it rather "rich" when ole Vlad speaks of "relent." Yeah, and we wish that some "communists" had done some relenting [and would do so now as well].



guy:

Speaking of things legal, well, the law presumes me incompetent to testify as to your stand of mind, but if I make that leap of faith and/or imagination, then I suppose that you're wondering why the "right" has no drop down for self-identifying as "Nazi" or "fascist" but the "left" has such for "communist", and never mind, apparently, that "communism" killed its own millions upon millions, including the precious little one that appears as my avatar [as, yes, nightimer, she was and is a real human, so no sterile and academic debate to be found here in her regard].

I'm pretty sure this is not the place for this argument, perhaps if it interests you, you should start a debate in the 'history' section. However suffice to say that Communism is most certainly not an exterminationist ideology, avatar victims notwithstanding. Are theocracies and monarchies exterminationist ideologies? After all some of the worst slaughters in human history have been perpetrated by leaders under them, perhaps I could post a picture of a dead person to prove that fact.

Technically, fascism isn't an exterminationist ideology either, only Nazism has extermination as an actual principle in its doctrine. Mussolini and Franco actually protected the jews in their country against German demands a lot better than some of the 'democracies' that fell under Nazi sway. There certainly is no exterminationist principle in Communism.

If you really want to continue this, I look forward to it in a more appropriate section...

In point of fact Communism is not inherently exterminationist ideologically; it's just that it has been turned into one by those regimes which put it into practice. Unlike Nazism, it does not call in the abstract for anyone's death on principle, but in practice is does not put up enough objections to prevent exterminationist policies.

If you'd said "ideologies that have been exterminationist in power" and not "exterminationist ideologies" you'd have been more accurate, but then you might as well have just said "admirers of totalitarian regimes" and cut straight to the chase.

But that's by-the-by.

There are two options - a free for all, where many people's choices of affiliation would be too obscure to mean anything much to the rest of the community, or the limited choices we already have, where few people get a unique identity but everybody knows what is meant by the affiliations that do exist.

In my own case, I don't get to describe myself as a socialist - something which is seen as more or less synonymous with communism in the USA, but which is a distinct and respectable family of ideologies with a separate history from totalitarian communism and even Marxism. Instead, I either have to use the catch label "liberal" (which means something different this side of the pond and which, domestically, I do not identify with) or make no disclosure.

And, provided the rules are adhered to, there is nothing to stop any poster from editing their sign-off footer to say "I am a communist".

I regard any 'ism' that led to mass slaughter in the same light as national socialism.

National socialism doesn't actually advocate extermination either, so the distinction your giving communism seems biased to me. The bottom line as I see it, is if these ideologies, like so many others lead to extermination, with the ease they have, then they are as guy catelli describes them.

It doesn't come as a surprise however that peope on the left seek to disasociate communism with facism or from tyranny. This self imposed blind spot has been a common feature of left wing politics this last hundred years or more. A right wing dictator like Pinochet can be openly hated, but communist dictators like Castro are practicaly admired. National socialism thus gets easily described as fascist, but excuses are made for communism that seek to seperate it from the crimes committed in its name. Suddenly we're expected to make a distinction between Stalinism and Communism, yet no one ever talks of 'Hitlerism'.

The irony of the left wingers self proclaimed anti facist stance is that communism murdered far and away more people than any other political ideology of the twentieth century, but to this day the left is still giving it a free pass. I still see people parading with communist icons on their T shirts, hammer and sickle logo's worn with blatent disregard for what that symbol stands for. Imagine if I were to wear a swastika T shirt with the same blasé attitude. How much verbal abuse do you suppose I would receive?

Communism is the worst political ideology of all because not only is it oppressive, causing tyranny, but it is also a blatent lie. It has killed more people than any other ideology of the twentieth century and yet it still receives the benefit of the doubt.

Maybe this is just some KivrotHaTaavah-speak that I'm not down with, but what the hell does your avatar have to do with me?

I think you need to take a step back for a moment Moif.

Firstly, yes nazism actually does advocate extermination. It advocates eugenics and purity of a racial ideal and elimination of those who do not conform to that ideal. The actual meaning of elimination changed between 38 and 42, but elimination was the principle none the less. I can quote you chapter and verse from some of the leading historians in the field if you wish, to say nothing of Mein Kampf itself...

Secondly, your jab at 'the left' is a touch unfounded. I am not, and will never defend Stalin, or the USSR, or communism in general as a functional ideology. But that does not mean that I will accept historical mischarictarisation or inaccuracy. There is nothing, and I mean nothing innately exteminationist or genocidal at all about Communism, in fact in its intellectual origins it is exactly the opposite. Stalin was not first and formost a Communist, he was first and foremost a mass-murdering paranoid megalomaniac.

If you consider any 'ism' under which slaughter has occurred exterminationist, then I assume you consider Monarchies, theocracies and frankly most other such isms in the world to be exterminationist? Would you consider democracies to be enslaving an enslaving concept, because at one point democracies kept slaves? It is intellectual laziness to assume that because Stalin and Mao existed under generally communist regimes, then by definition Communism is a reflection of Stalin and Mao's ideologies.




Thats because you are not a historian. In fact 'Hitlerism' IS National Socialism, it is an ideology founded by him, Rosenburg and a few other of his followers and is a specific reflection of his principles put into practice. Technically, Nazism is not fascism, they are different ideologies, though with a few similarities. Nazism is usually taken to be a racialist and genocidal outgrowth of fascism. The reason one is expected to make a difference between Stalinism and Communism is because there is an enormous difference.

Do not assume that insisting on historical accuracy is some 'left-wing' thing, nor is it just another leftie leaping to the defence of Stalin.

When someone jumps to the defense of Communism by attempting to craft an artificial distinction between Stalinism and "true" Communism, they're being historically dishonest. We know this because everywhere Communism has been put into practice as a system of government, the results have been horrendous. Communist Body Count: 149,469,610. That's 150 million people, killed by their own government, and it doesn't count the war dead from foreign conflicts, or those killed in other nations by invasion.

Whether it be "Leninism" (3.28 million), "Stalinism" (50+ million), "Maoism" (64+ million), "Pol Potism" (2.5+ million), "Castroism" (73k and growing), "Mugabeism", etc, the results are universally alike, and deadly. To claim there is nothing innately exterminationist is to ignore, no, fly in the face of history.

A distinction that is meaningless. Its like saying playing Russian roulette isn't inherently suicidal ideologically, but rather simply a risky way of jumpstarting one's adrenalin. Awww nuts! Russian roulette isn't even a very good analogy, because you've got a 5 in 6 chance of surviving. On the other hand, Communist ideology put into practice has a track record of being exterminationist 100% of the time. Pointing to some theortetical properties of Communism and claiming it's not "inherently" exterminationist doesn't pass the smell test, and it most certainly doesn't pass any test a scientist would devise, i.e., what do we observe?