Branding everything as nazism does not help.
It is not a good thing if people go around thinking that their friendly republican neighbor or grandmother/grandfather is a nazi. It might lead some (who doesn't know better) to think nazism isn't that bad.
Besides, Nazism is a particular brand of evil and you fight them better if you learn the correct terminology, so it is a win-win (unless ones goal is to make the divide in American politics even wider by branding those at the other sites as the ugliest of all men.)
Also I haven't seen a single swastika or other NSDAP related flag on any republican event. Do you mean the confederate flag or something?
And we've also just proven my point together as well: so many people have been calling ordinary people nazis that when someone actually bring nazi symbols and colours to the convention I refuse to believe it. (And yes, I will check more sources before I claim this happened.)
Edit: read and reread the link. I couldn't find anything to connect the Republican party and all those flags? I specifically searched for "convention", "party" and "stage" based on your comments but I saw nothing relevant.
Now English is not my first language but are you sure you gave me the correct link, and if so, can you point me to the smoking gun?
And there are lots of other data points to go with it. The singer of the national anthem on that stage, for instance, disagrees that Disney no longer sells "Song of the South", an explicitly racist film from their archives.
These things all work together to paint a clear picture.
There was no fucking nazi symbol on the stage at cpac.
If you want to take a tiny group of extremists that are not accepted by a group and pretend they represent a group, we can do that the other way also.
...and Gmail, Facebook and Chrome logos are masonic symbols.
You've somehow managed to delegitimize Wikipedia with those stupid claims, congratulations.
https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/08/12/flags-and-oth...
We are quickly approaching "have you stopped beating your wife" at this point.
I don't think it would change anything if they came out and said it wasn't intentional.
Some friends of me got viciously attacked last year over some perceived fraud. They responded by publishing their books sinve they had nothing to hide.
What happened? Story just changed: "They are so crooked they managed to hide it from both the police[0] and a big four accounting company." was tje new story.
[0]: who investigated them for three years, first secretly, then openly after a previous false accusation.
Okay, so what? Should I start adding all the random incidents where people made something that was coincidentally shaped like swastika to the Wikipedia article as examples of modern usage?
> CPAC hasn't come out with a denial that their stage was that shape intentionally.
They did, they called it slanderous.
> slander (noun) - the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another's reputation
CPAC cancelled some black dude for anti-semitism. They didn't do that after he was saying anti-Christian and anti-white stuff, only after he started saying that Judaism is illegitimate or whatever. But yes, I'm supposed to believe that they're using Nazi imagery on purpose.
This is exactly how dog whistles work, dude...
I haven't seen anyone picking up that "dog whistle" besides people like you.
edit: search on twitter the phrase "cpac rune based" or "cpac stage based". If it was a dog whistle, I would expect someone to pick up on it and call it "based". Yet the only people who are talking about it are the people who are making those stupid accusations. Literally no one cared about it until you made a big deal out of it. And still barely anyone cares.
Please kill all of my snarky comments in this thread with downvotes, as they were inappropriate and it's a flamewar that has no place on HN.
Because people on that stage, even, openly agree with the things the Charlottesville people marched about.
That's not true: they denied it almost immediately. Like QAnon, it's a hard question on whether to even acknowledge these kinds of conspiracies[0], since denying them can even help to spread them.
The Trump wing is without question populist, nativist, often conspiratorial, and caught in a cult of personality. But they're not Nazis, and by trying to conflate these things, you do a disservice to the victims of actual Nazism (note the publication I linked to, from a country of founded by Nazi survivors that has quite a few supporters of Trump).
Charlottesville Nazis likely did use it, but they're far from being Trump supporters. They deeply distrust him because of Jared and Ivanka. And they're a tiny, tiny percentage of our population - all extreme right-wing groups combined (neoconfederates, Nazis, militia, etc) are well under 1%. You'll see SPLC trumpet things like "30% rise!" without mentioning how tiny these groups are (and they have a good idea about how small they are, it's just harder to fundraise when you discuss these things).
0. https://www.timesofisrael.com/cpac-denies-stage-was-intentio...