Outdated? Maybe. He's not making them look like nazis
Offensive? Not even close.
this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)
politics
31256 readers
3012 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
The fuck is this fascist apologist bullshit?
They don’t need help looking like Nazis. They already look, act, and smell like them. And if they look, act, and smell like a Nazi, they are a Nazi
I'm confused by your comment. Who is the fascist apologist?
Saying Tom Hanks portrayal of Maga is charitable of their behaviour is Nazi apologism?
What is your real issue here? You have that account blocked, and blocked so that it doesn't receive notifications. (Edit: I may have blocked you due to this type of behaviour)
Are you afraid that I'll poke holes in your argument?
Were you looking to call me a Nazi or do you just sling mud when someone steps out of your narrow set of authoritarian morals?
No, I'm not afraid you'll poke holes in my argument. I usually don't reply to threads of people who are very opinionated against me, as it seems to be a waste of time. But since you made a new account to get my attention....
The point I was trying to make was
- Whether or not Tom Hanks protrays them as Nazis or not, they are Nazis already.
- If Hanks is protraying them accurately, using the "looks like" phrasing feels like you're taking a soft approach to naming Nazis (This is where the (correct or not) facist apologist statement came in).
That's it. Take it as you will.
Not a new account chuckles, check the date. Hole one.
What I was saying and you have been told by others is that Hanks' portrayal is more charitable than they deserve and it makes them look like garden variety racists. Hole two.
I feel Hanks went soft on them.
You are worked up about a version of what I said in your fucking mind.
If you were blocked or blocked me why did you go out of your way to be offened?
Again, I don’t really care about holes at this point and I admittedly didn’t check your account date. I’m not sure if I have you blocked or not, I was perhaps a bit sensitive because I have the ever present dread that the US will continue to be a fascist state from here on out.
If you think Hanks went soft, I misunderstood your comment and we agree.