https://ww2gravestone.com/holocaust-in-the-netherlands/
For contemporary instances, consider that the present U.S. administration openly supports racist, neo-Nazi, White Supremecist, and similar organisations. Social-graph association of undocumented immigrants, Muslims, gang- (or non-gang-) members, or similar inferences, all come readily to mind.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15105534 and marked it off-topic.
I'm finding HN's views on this matter increasingly untenable.
I'd suggest you please not do that.
Not true, highly offensive, and inflammatory. Citations obviously required.
You can make a point without stooping to tenuous, politically motivated, and controversial accusations.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion on how "serious" the situation is but I, (and probably others) would appreciate it if you kept the hyperbole and rhetoric minimized. Your original point stands fine without it, and in fact that accusation weakens your entire post and makes it appear little more than a simple troll.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865686908/Sen-Mike-Lee-re...
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/346348-hatch-my-brother-d...
But words have meaning, and calling this "open support" is flat lying. He's unbelievably terrible at the job of president and human being: you don't need to lie in order to make the case that he is.
Just because your bubble (and my own) consists entirely of people who are aware of how terrible he is doesn't mean everyone is, and lying for political reasons is exactly the kind of thing that makes big chunks of the country inhabit alternate realities where all news is fake and the notion of a fact disappears from political discourse. You should be ashamed of yourself.
I don't know how much more explicit you expect his support of white supremacists to be. (Honestly, I doubt you're engaging genuinely at all.)
Dude, are you kidding me? You're looking at someone who said:
“Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans,”
and you can't think of a way for him to support them less? Are you really that obtuse, or are you just playing dumb?
Here's a really simple, utterly obvious way he could have been closer to "open support" (other than uh, openly expressing support......): _not repudiating them_. I honestly can't believe I just sincerely explained a tautology to someone.
"Sometimes the truth is X" is not a universally applicable maxim. If you really believe the above, you should probably look up what "flamebait" means.
I try not to follow what the guy says too closely, but do you have any source for this? The last thing on the topic I recall him saying was a repudiation of said groups.
I feel like I would've heard about it if he openly supported any of these groups.
This falls into the same line of thinking as "I need my assault weapon to fight the government when it becomes tyrannical." It's an unreasonable conclusion that comes from a reasonable set of first principals because the landscape is so different now than in the comparing period.
For examples of each:
AT&T maintain call-level history of its subscribers dating to the 1980s, which has been provided to the US DEA.
Google have disclosed information to both Chinese and Russian nationals, through extralegal, non-discretionary disclosures. The first occured when the accounts of Chinese nationals involved in the Free Tibet movement were hacked. The latter when an email account belonging to Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta, was hacked by parties strongly linked to the present Russian government.
"You can't disclose what you don't have" is a well-established principle of data security. You'll find variants of it offered by Gene Spafford, Bruce Schneier, Eben Moglen, Cory Doctorow, and others. Or in the alternative, "data are vulnerability".
Sources:
Google / China / Tibet: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/google-not-only-target-of-china-...
Podesta / Clinton: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/mg7xjb/how-hacker...
AT&T / DEA: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/09/att-gives-dea-26...
If you're in the center, like me, then you recognise there are credible reasons the landscape is similar enough. Any nation can turn fairly quickly as the political tides shift. History is replete with examples. It is usually only a matter of months.
Boy, this got off-track fast.