The Instigator
Adam2
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
jared8844
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Neo-Nazis are morons who are ignorant of who the real Nazis were

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/12/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 978 times Debate No: 54570
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Adam2

Pro

I will argue that neo-Nazis are a bunch of idiots who Hitler would laugh at. I will also argue that they are wannabe punk high school drop outs, that have mixed up a Nordic Ku Klux Klan with a mostly Catholic (anti-Protestant/anti-Jewish/anti-Nordic) movement that made Germany what it was -- Nazism. (As a side note, I partially blame wimpy butt-hurt liberal politicians who creating the atmosphere that has allowed for these morons and fools to perpetrate, by mixing up the KKK and Nazis as though they were the same).
jared8844

Con

I will argue on the side of neo-Nazism. Pro is in the wrong that the movement is nothing more than "punk high school drop outs". I will attempt to prove that the principles of neo-Nazism, as well as its advocates, are the same as that of Nazi Germany. Good luck!
Debate Round No. 1
Adam2

Pro

I will start with a few important points
One, neo-Nazism is distinctly American, coinciding with the fall of the Ku Klux Klan as a terrorist group (though that can be contested) and more as a group that perpetrates hatred through speeches, much like the neo-Nazis.
Two, the liberals (mostly butt-hurt liberals) have been rewriting history to make it seem that the KKK and Nazis believed in the same thing, when they clearly weren't at all.
Three, this has created an atmosphere in which neo-Nazis claim to be the same the KKK.

Here's where they go wrong:
The KKK was the only group favoring Nordicism. The KKK came from Northern European groups (Scots-Irish, Danish, Swedish). They were strictly Protestants-only. They believed in imperialism (that is conquering other countries and looting them). They were also very brilliant and cunning in their ways and deceit.

The Nazis were completely the opposite. It was mostly nationalistic (Germany), and their allies were southern and eastern countries (Italy, Japan). As a matter of fact, the south of England, along with the Highlands of Scotland and Wales, probably the closest ally of Germany of all of Great Britain. Nazism was also Catholic for the most part. Hitler was a Roman Catholic. His leading officers were Catholics. Anglicanism was perhaps the second biggest supporter of the regime after Catholicism. Two of the most famous supporters of Hitler was Anglicans: Henry Ford and Neville Chamberlain. Chamberlain was a southerner (England). Churchill was never really religious, and there's evidence that his family ancestry was from the north (England).

Inherently two different things. The mostly Scots-Irish and Swedish Klans were heavily in favor of the USA's entrance int World War II. They were against Fascist beliefs in general (in some cases for racially motivated reasons). The KKK was interning German, Italian and Japanese citizens.

The two ideologies are different. In many cases the Nazis, though not always explicit, are anti-Nordic. Now, I will say that Hitler loved Norway and Norwegians, so much so that Qusiling made a puppet government in favor of Hitler. But that's as far as it goes. He despised Denmark and Sweden. He despised Denmark for what they did to Germany in the Schwelig Wars, and for stealing Schewlig from them. He despised the way Denmark treating Greenland, which is why he had allies amongst the Inuits. He hated Sweden for what they did to Finland, which is why Finland joined the Axis. Hitler was inherently anti-imperialist. Germany and Austria never had a history of imperialism that Britain and Denmark had. Neither did Italy.

It's only when the liberal hippies started rewritting history in the 1970s to fit their goals that everything dumbed down.
jared8844

Con

"Neo-Nazism consists of post-World War II social or political movements seeking to revive Nazism.[1][2][3][4] The term neo-Nazism can also refer to the ideology of these movements."

My opponent ignores the fact that neo-Nazism is a post-WWII global movement seeking to revive Nazism. Neo-Nazis are a minority within the U.S, but a majority in Greece and other countries formerly known as the Eastern Bloc for communism. It is important to note that the U.S 'National Socialist Movement' shares similar characteristic, that both parties are known to harass, attack, torment people of different ideological or religious opinions--Hitler in the 'Beer Hall Putsch', National Socialist Movement (NSM) in Toledo Riot (2005).

While Hitler can claim that he's against imperialism, but when he's annexing territories (Austria, Czech) just over several months, compounding with the fact that he overstepped his boundaries in militarizing French Rhineland, it's not wrongful to call him a hypocrite either. Yes, their behaviors are like that of a teenager with a severe case of anxiety, but isn't that the essence of a Nazism with all its unpleasant implications? Moreover, when a movement is as influential as neo-Nazism, it's unfair to call the people behind it mere "wannabe punk high school drop outs". It's just what they believe in. A more suitable term would be "organized agitators".

To summarize:
>neo-nazism is distinctly American
It's European
>Two, the liberals (mostly butt-hurt liberals) have been rewriting history to make it seem that the KKK and Nazis believed in the same thing, when they clearly weren't at all.
KKK and Nazism: essentially the same thing, just in different countries.
>Hitler was inherently anti-imperialist
That's like persuading someone that Confucius was actually a Mexican.
Debate Round No. 2
Adam2

Pro

"Neo-Nazism consists of post-World War II social or political movements seeking to revive Nazism.[1][2][3][4] The term neo-Nazism can also refer to the ideology of these movements."

My opponent ignores the fact that neo-Nazism is a post-WWII global movement seeking to revive Nazism. Neo-Nazis are a minority within the U.S, but a majority in Greece and other countries formerly known as the Eastern Bloc for communism. It is important to note that the U.S 'National Socialist Movement' shares similar characteristic, that both parties are known to harass, attack, torment people of different ideological or religious opinions--Hitler in the 'Beer Hall Putsch', National Socialist Movement (NSM) in Toledo Riot (2005).
What I am talking about is not Nazi parties existing today in many Southern and Eastern European countries, and in England. Those people are educated and very briliant, and in many cases arrogant, though quite understandable. I'm talking about a group more similar to the KKK: a group that assembles and does speeches. In this case I'm talking things such as gangs, prison gangs, skinheads. The neo-Nazis, as skinheads, arguably did not come until the mid-1960s, in America, which perhaps not coincidently, started mixing up the Klan with the Nazis, though confusing many of these kids.

While Hitler can claim that he's against imperialism, but when he's annexing territories (Austria, Czech) just over several months, compounding with the fact that he overstepped his boundaries in militarizing French Rhineland, it's not wrongful to call him a hypocrite either. Yes, their behaviors are like that of a teenager with a severe case of anxiety, but isn't that the essence of a Nazism with all its unpleasant implications? Moreover, when a movement is as influential as neo-Nazism, it's unfair to call the people behind it mere "wannabe punk high school drop outs". It's just what they believe in. A more suitable term would be "organized agitators".
Austria chose to join Germany. As a matter of fact, Hitler was Austrian. Militarizing the Rhine area doesn't make it imperialism. Imperialism involves conquering countries for the sole purpose of looting, as Denmark did to Greenland and Britain did to Ireland and its many other colonies. Germany didn't do those things. So no it's not the same. As for your comment about the behaviors of teenagers, no that is not the essence of true Nazism. Nazism was brilliant. Hitler and Himler were actually calm and quite ruthless. They did not display the annoying buffoonery of skinheads.

>Two, the liberals (mostly butt-hurt liberals) have been rewriting history to make it seem that the KKK and Nazis believed in the same thing, when they clearly weren't at all.
KKK and Nazism: essentially the same thing, just in different countries.
Here's a piece of info that shows that not only Nazism but Germany society was different from the Klan, taken from http://en.wikipedia.org...
"These views were echoed in the works of Dutch, French and German [that's not a typo, it says German] authors. Nicolaus Hieronymus Gundling proposed that the exotic appearance and cannibalism of the Scottish people made them akin to the savages of Madagascar. Even as late as the mid-18th century, German authors likened Scotland and its ancient population to the exotic tribes of the South Seas.[13] With the close political ties of the Franco-Scottish alliance in the late Medieval period, before William Shakespeare's Macbeth, English Elizabethan theatre dramatised the Scots and Scottish culture as comical, alien, dangerous and an uncivilised. In comparison to the manner of Frenchmen who spoke a form of English,[14] Scots were used in material for comedies; including Robert Greene's James IV in a fictitious English invasion of Scotland satirizing the long Medieval wars with Scotland. English fears and prejudices were deeply rooted, drawing on stereotypes as seen in Raphael Holinshed's Chronicles and politically edged material such as George Chapman's Eastward Hoe in 1605, offended King James with its anti-Scottish satire, resulting in the imprisonment of the playwright.[15] Despite this, the play was never banned or suppressed. Authors such as Claude Jordan de Colombier in 1697 plagiarised earlier works,[16] Counter-reformation propaganda associated the Scots and particularly Highland Gaelic-speakers as barbarians from the north[17] who wore nothing but animal skins. Confirming old stereotypes relating back to Roman and Greek philosophers in the idea that "dark forces" from northern Europe (soldiers from Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, France and Scotland) acquired a reputation as fierce warriors.[18][19][20] With Lowland soldiers along the North Sea and Baltic Sea, as well as Highland mercenaries wearing the distinctive Scottish kilt, became synonymous with that of wild, rough and fierce fighting men."
German society was anti-Nordic and they were the ones who founded the Nazis. They were no the same at all.
jared8844

Con

jared8844 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Adam2

Pro

Germans, especially southerners and Austrians, thought of Germanics as barbarians. It's not surprising that this worldview would be the Hitler worldview as well Hitler. Hitler wanted retaliation for Schwelig being taken from him. He even sided with a country that sneered at whites and called them "barbaric," Japan. Same with Italy.
Neo-Nazis, well those skinhead groups who make noise and speeches, much like the KKK (and as a clarification, I never said that the neo-Nazis were similar to the Klan, but rather that, like the KKK, the neo-Nazis get together in groups and make speeches) are ignorant and buffoonish teenagers who have no sense of reality and live in lalaland. The only modern Nazi that seems to be smart is Carolyn Yeager, of Texas, who leads a Nazi apologist group. Her denounciation of the Danes, Brits and Dutch speaks volumes as to who the real Nazis were.
http://carolynyeager.net...

http://en.wikipedia.org...
According to here, the modern neo-Nazi skinhead groups only started in the 1960s, which coincides with liberals, mostly butthurt ones, rewritting history.

Hitler and his gang were devout Catholics. The Ku Klux Klan was a combination of various Protestant groups, such as Baptists, Presbyterian (one of the most notorious being John Calhoun), and Lutheran.

They wery different. The neo-Nazis don't know anything in my opinion about basic history.
jared8844

Con

jared8844 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Adam2

Pro

Well, as you can see the debate is over.
jared8844

Con

jared8844 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Ameliamk1 3 years ago
Ameliamk1
Well, Naziism was a fascistic and nationalistic movement, that also happened to be anti-semitic, homophobic, and in most cases, racist, so a good fit for the KKK, but not technically the same.
No votes have been placed for this debate.