Tobias GoeschelJul 30, 2023
When will we start treating Nazis like fucking Nazis? „They are just regular people that were neglected“ is not only a lie (we‘ve been listening to them, marked them „concerned citizens“, and justifying their vile and hatred for a decade, at least), but also ignores the historical fact that, for the most part, so were the actual fucking Nazis 90 years ago. And it’s made them stronger.
The consent has to be: „I’ll listen to you and take you seriously - as long as you’re not a fucking Nazi.“
Show threadOli
@weltraumpirat
And at the same time we manage to celebrate Georg Elser (or Stauffenberg for the less informed) while condemning violence as something that has no place in a democracy.
@spfeiffer
Jul 30, 2023 at 10:19amWeb
Show threadTobias GoeschelJul 30, 2023
@oli @spfeiffer This is only partially true. Violence is the monopoly of the state in a democracy.
And it equates things that are not the same: Elser was violent against a dictator in a fascist regime. And Stauffenberg and his allies were very much a part of that regime, just tried to run a coup against their leader, because he was losing the war.
Show threadOliJul 30, 2023

@weltraumpirat
I totally agree with the monopoly of the state and you elaborated on the very problem with Stauffenberg.

But to me it always felt strange, that facism first has to "prove" itself by reprisals, deportations, murder and war before someone stepping up is considered a hero.
@spfeiffer

Show threadTobias GoeschelJul 30, 2023
@oli @spfeiffer A single person or group acting violently against the government is a slippery slope. There’s a fine line between heroism against oppression and self-righteous terrorism.
Show threadTobias GoeschelJul 30, 2023
@oli @spfeiffer Democracy should be vigilant against fascism. „Wehret den Anfängen“. But that’s very much a job for the state.
Show threadAstrid SawatzkyJul 30, 2023

@oli @weltraumpirat @spfeiffer
As a lesser informed person (btw thank you for the disrespect) I just searched the internet for Elser.

Elser's attack was in 1939 and Stauffenberg's was in 1944, thus after 1933 and you claim it to be "violence in a democracy" long after Hitler took over .

Imho an informed person would take that into account, and would not take uprise in a dictatorship as argument for violence in a democracy.

But I'm just uninformed, so what do I know.