The nazis don’t need you to come to their defense.
Nazism is basically ignoring the will of their own people and actively working against them.
>Eg Nazi Germany still benefited from a high-ish level of social trust, despite numerous atrocities.
>What's the benefit of social trust when a society can commit such atrocities?
Then you come in with
> It's not like atrocities started with Nazis
Your comment pretty much directly says the nazis weren’t that bad and in context looks like you’re agreeing with previous poster they are high trust.
Nazis were one of the worst regimes we had in Europe, but the German regime before them was also bad. Bad enough that many saw Nazis as a viable alternative. In desperate times, people make desperate choices.
This is more or less a historical consensus, which I pointed out. If we want to prevent a Nazi-like regime from coming to power again, we need to avoid mistakes made by the Weimar Republic. Unfortunately, I see a global trend of governments making the same mistakes again, and I fear it will end in the same way.
I don't think Nazi society was high-trust. But I also don't think Nazis destroyed trust, because it already eroded before them.
What are those?
Yes? How does that preclude Germany still having absolutely high trust (by global standards), even if it was lower than the even higher levels before?