a million pieces/segments sneering at hasan piker and the co-chair of the DSA, meanwhile a republican congressional candidate in upstate new york named peter oberacker is the grandson of an actual nazi germany soldier and his former staffer was part of the 'i love hitler' young GOP group chat

all 71 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 76 points 2 months ago (12 children)

Should everyone be proud of where they come from? Probably not.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    I don't think being proud of your ancestry or heritage should be the default setting. In fact, we should look back with a critical view and criticize where we should and learn where appropriate. Humans tend to suck, you know? So we should acknowledge that and not ignore the faults of our nature.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    Thing is, you could very easily be a very proud German AND proud of your family and still say "yeah, I'm not so proud of my country and family between 1939 and 1945"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago

    I've never understood the concept of "being proud of your country" at all, to be honest. Like, you as an individual have such a vanishingly insignificant impact on your country as a whole that anything you may have contributed is pretty much irrelevant. This applies doubly so if you're below the age of, say 30 or 40, or if you're being "proud" of something your country did before you came of age, as you literally didn't contribute anything whatsoever and just happened to be born into it.

    The obvious exception is if you are the supreme dictator-for-life and singlehandedly made every major policy decision for the last 3 decades. Or if you live in Liechtenstein and therefore your individual impact is drastically overrepresented compared to a "regular size" country.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    It's not about isolating and ranking historical events or periods tied to whatever nation-state ideology you were brought up with. It's about questioning the authority and functions of nation-state narratives in the first place. And realizing that ugliness is often borne out of the most seemingly banal things ever.

    Being proud of your randomly assigned geography and demography can and has come with some good. But it's nothing compared to the ugliness it causes.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    I don’t really understand how, personally. I’m not proud of my family at all. I am American, but I am a first generation immigrant, and my family is Belgian and they are responsible for genocide and I mean they have in Belgium in their homes a Massive collection of stuff from the Congo. When I was younger, I didn’t understand what all of that ivory and everything else meant. But when I got older, I learned where it had come from. I’m not proud of that. I’m not proud of my family. I’m not proud of a thing they fucking did in the past.

    I don’t really understand how any American right now could be proud of America considering where we are at.

    I don’t understand, how German can be proud of themselves. It’s not been long enough. And while my own countries have been a fucked up places. I also saw what the Germans did to Belgium. My family never forgot that and we haven’t forgiven. I don’t understand why anyone fucking should.

    Now I don’t believe any person or country should be proud of anything. Elon Musk didn’t make all his money because of America. That took nearly the entire world’s leadership to do. And they are collective of all of us. So I’m not sure what there is to be proud of anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    It's a longer time period tho. And "not so proud" doesn't cut it for literal genocide, you need to actively denounce that shit if you claim to be proud of the rest of your culture and history.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    No you could not. Being "a proud " means outing oneself as a dimwitted loser with no accomplishments of one's own.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago*

    You can be proud of yourself and your own achievements. You can be proud of how your kids or students turned out and, to an extent, their achievements. You can be proud of your teammates (colleagues, coauthors etc) and what your team has done. Being proud of millions of totally unrelated people, or a social construct like a "nation" or a "country" is a big fucking stretch. If you insist on doing that, you also need to be ashamed of all the awful shit your country has done too. And believe me, there will be a ton of shit there. Can't take the credit but eschew the responsibility.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 47 points 2 months ago

    It's almost like their morality is just another tool they'll use or cast aside as needed whenever it's politically expedient or something.

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    We SALUTE and HONOR Nazis!

    -JEW LOVERS according to AIPAC!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago

    AIPAC doesn't care who the supporters are, just that they support them. Much like the "Fighters for the Freedom of Israel" were Zionists who wanted to get the British out of Palestine and found a Jewish state by teaming with the NAZI's and having them send the Jews to their cause. Turns out the NAZI's just didn't care to listen to them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 44 points 2 months ago

    Conservatives are bad people. That's it.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago*

    We've seen this kind of thing before. This is the Southern Lost Cause propaganda strategy as applied to Nazi Germany.

    If you've never been exposed to "The Lost Cause" in school, or haven't yet come to realize what that really means, I urge you to read up on it now.. It wears a thin veil of well-reasoned, even compassionate dialogue, but conveniently leaves out the bigger picture of why and what prompted all this in the first place. Those deploying this kind of speech are like a housecat: rolling over and displaying their belly while seemingly "taking the L", but are actually poised to harm by quietly aligning themselves with the Cause's original narrative.

    While we're a far cry from erecting bronze statues and renaming streets in the name of Nazism, I caution everyone to identify this kind of speech wherever you see it. So, stamp it out, decry it as revisionist, and don't let up. Render it impolite, uncouth, and socially unacceptable in any context. Unchecked, this kind of thing slowly creeps in, eventually worming its way into textbooks and everyday chit-chat.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago
    [–] 7 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Most what I learn from the USA nowadays is very negative and it seems that some people are totally off the rails over there.

    It seems that the general quality of living is way worse than in EU.

    Is the reality as bad as the news and these kinds of statements make it look like? We have higher taxes but good quality schools and healthcare is included. How is America average buying power after those?

    It is very worrying that a country that often has been viewed as the lighthouse of the western culture seems to struggle so much.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    Honestly, I'd imagine it's pretty similar to the EU. Your living experience varies drastically state to state and even city to city. Some cities/states prioritize education, infrastructure, healthcare, etc. and some don't. General political views seem to be the major difference between the EU and the US, from what I've heard, most of the "left" here would be considered center or center-right over there. I've only briefly visited the EU so many of you probably have a much better answer than me and I welcome any corrections.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    Yes, USA is an miserable shithole. Personally I've been making long term plans to move to EU. Cities like Madrid, Barcelona, Paris, etc. They are like utopia compared to the fucking parking lot society that I live in.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    In August 2026, an old post made by Oberacker resurfaced. The post, from 2015, was a Veterans Day memorial post for his grandfather, who died in the Battle of the Bulge fighting for Nazi Germany. Oberacker, who had served on the state Senate’s Republican antisemitism working group, came under fire for the post. Oberacker later said, "Looking at it through the prism of today, totally different story. Having been on the antisemitism task force for the Senate Republicans, I would look at it a little bit differently now."

    Oh, he'd look at it differently now. He didn't say he shouldn't have made the post, or that he wouldn't do it again. Just that he'd squint a little harder, I guess.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    Fascism isn't widely recognized or condemned from within a fascist society.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    What happened with the co-chair of the DSA?

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    Literally a bit from the Office

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    All the troops.

    Though at least the “other” troops in The Office’s scenario could have been described as defensive.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    all military people are evil, and those that offer military discounts to only some militaries are worst of all

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    i mean that's definitely an equally hot take. i'll admit i shared it until i made friends with a radiologist. didn't realize he was serving at the local military hospital until after we'd become best buds, but i'm not too big to admit when i'm wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago*

    There were former military in the black panthers. The military is an institution that exploits the poor and subjects them to moral injury in the name of imperialism- people who participate in it must do the labor to un-fuck their heads after, but those who have truly seen the belly of the beast and what horrors it would offer can be incredibly valuable allies.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    I’m sure he only means the white kind of soldier

  • source
  • [+] -6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    I am not a WWII expert and don't know which unit his grandfather was in, with that in mind the Wehrmacht was a draft army and many non-Nazis were forced into the military and died "for their country" to protect their own families (if only from the consequences of their refusing to serve).

    That's a man's duty to his family in my opinion, and I can't hate him for that. Many were executed for refusing to serve, also asset forfeiture and working in camps. If I had children, in their position, I would have served in the hopes of keeping them alive and well (not knowing that the entire country would be razed in a few years).

    My grandfather served US Navy against the Japanese, he was a submariner. Until the day he died in his 80s he refused to tie his shoes, and any shoes that he wore had to be loose so that he could kick them off. He usually wore slippers.

    Later, I found out that this was because his submarine was sunk, and he almost died trying to get his boots off to swim to the surface. He refused to talk about any of it to anybody.

    Horrifying. I'm sorry for all of the "good people" involved on every side of the war.

    I'll GTFO now

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -16 points 2 months ago (19 children)

    I feel the same way when I see people sucking Allied WW2 dick. There were no good guys in WW2, just a few imperialist powers fighting over who gets to take advantage of the world's resources.

    If you get upset reading this, read about what the British were doing to Indians in India at the time and what the Americans were doing to "Indians" in the US forever. Still not convinced? How about what that generation of US veterans voted for in the years returning from the war? There is no moral high ground to claim, so I wish the same energy directed at the idiot who posted the original "I salute all who served" message was directed at all war propaganda.

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    Your moral compass is broken.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Haha no shit, Sherlock. I'm an American combat veteran who served during the Global War on Terror. I am morally shattered. I belong in the Hague, but people keep thanking me for my service.

    But at least I'm aware enough to know there has never been a "good" war, and being on the side of a genociding force isn't "good" even if the other side is also genociding bastards.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (3 children)

    So you don't think getting rid of the nazis and responding to pearl harbor were wrong? I'm fascinated by your viewpoint. At what point can you respond to an attack and fight back?

    It sounds like you have personal issues that go well beyond your military service. PTSD?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    lol yeah we were just minding our own business, and then Pearl Harbor happened. Jesus I might have issues, but at least I'm not still fooled by decades-old propaganda.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    So Poland provoked Nazi Germany? We forced Japan to attack our naval base? Japan HAD to attack China. England shouldn't have fought back? Wow

    I think you've been fooling yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    While I agree there’s no moral high ground, and Britain was always a terrible empire daddy, and the scramble for Africa was wrong… there was very clearly a difference in approach.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Please do explain the differences in approach between the Nazis and the British and American governments when it comes to colonization and the persecution of undesirables.

    The only real differences are of degree, and since that was pretty much a result of staring down the business end of the losing side of a war, it's easy for me to imagine us acting similarly. For instance, had Japan invaded the contiguous US and were approaching our internment camps and Indian reservations, the decision to convert them to kill camps seems like something we would have done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    You’ve delved way too far into whataboutism. I can’t argue what should or could have happened in the WW2 era. No one is alive from that time to have an educated discussion about it. It’s a question for a historian, which I am not.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    I will agree that nation-states can't be "good guys" by definition. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't support those who were the less bad guys, or "on the right side of history" so to say, especially the common proletarian soldiers on the ground.

    Otherwise you end up with "well, Iranian government represses women therefore it's OK to bomb the country into the stone age".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    I don't understand your logic. I'm saying that the US should not have been involved in a European war between essentially two morally and ethically bankrupt sides (and how bragging about being on one side over the other is literally retarted thinking). How do you extend that logic to being okay with bombing Iran?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    Because the sides (which, to be clear, were mostly USSR vs nazi germany) were clearly not equally "morally and ethically bankrupt"?

    USSR, while very far away from perfect as I will be the first to admit, was a socialist nation struggling to build an equitable, just, and advanced society for all working people, first inside its borders then worldwide.

    Germany was a bunch of rich capitalists pushing nazi propaganda on its population, aiming to turn the entire European continent into an ethostate, enslave all slavs and kill all jews, with reactionary&inhumane views about gender, sexuality, disability, and a thousand other topics.

    If you think that those two sides are somehow "the same" and thus it's somehow OK if Germany won that war, why would USA vs Iran be different?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    lol you think we joined the Allies because of Russia, and not the UK, which we had been selling war supplies to for years prior to us joining? Russia, the country we started fighting against before the Third Reich had even collapsed?

    You are right that the majority of the conflict was between Germany and Russia, but you have eluded my point about why the US joined the fight. FDR was not salivating at the prospect of entering WWII to help Stalin. He was interested in the economic benefits.

    I assume the soviets were the most morally just out of all the major WW2 players bc I know the least about their history, and what I do know has a veneer of anti russia propaganda. Had we intervened on their behalf out of a moral obligation, I can see how you got to the Iran thing- that was my excuse for supporting and fighting in wars against Iraq and Afghanistan- obvious mistakes at the time and even clearer with a little hindsight. But during WW2 we helped England, even if we were helping Russia, and England in the 1940s was objectively abhorrent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    It doesn't really matter why someone joined one side of the war over another, the thing that matters is that they did. In this harsh world, you will need to choose the "lesser of two evils" all the time, and in the case of WW2 it's patently obvious which side is the lesser of two evils. USSR was not only a more progressive and less awful country overall but also it was defending itself from an existential threat. Fighting on its side, even for the wrong reasons, is the right thing to do.

    None of this applies to any other war the US was involved in post-WW2. I can understand that you can look at the string of genocide and war crimes and generally awful shit and apply the same lens to WW2, but it is just not the case then. US soldiers were fighting an opponent which was by all accounts about as awful as US itself, for the first and last time in history.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    The lesser of two evils is still evil, and we did not have to choose a side. That same false choice is why the US has been involved in so many quagmires around the world over the last 80 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Yes fuck the allies, they should've just stayed out of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Had we adopted that position in WW1, there would not have been a WW2, a Third Reich, a holocaust, or a genociding Israel. The US would not have experimented with chemical and biological warfare in Korea because Operation Paperclip would not have happened. Vietnam would have gone differently even if we still invaded because we would not have had shit like Agent Orange to poison generations of people. So yeah, maybe we should adopt a "just stay out of it" approach to our foreign policy.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -20 points 2 months ago (11 children)

    Fun note: pointing out the bag guys doing super bad shit isn't some.kind of "own" of the people pointing out the so-called good guys doing bad shit.

    The framing of this post is inane.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (10 children)

    Yeah, this post strips a lot of context from history. What I mean is that it's important to remember that in Nazi Germany not everyone was a Nazi and that the armed forces were a separate organization lead by Nazis. That's an important distinction because a lot of the soldiers in Nazi Germany's armed forces were just regular people. Who happened to be in an organization who's leadership was replaced by Nazis. Some of whom were already serving long before the Nazis took over.

    Now I don't know if this particular person in this photo was army or SS. I don't know if they were a Nazi or regular person who was forced to follow Nazis or die. I do know that not every German soldier was a Nazi.

    Also it's a dumb post by a Neo Nazi. Just hopefully revealing to people that Nazi Germany wasn't so simple and had a lot of context.

    Edit: so apparently I have been falling for the "Clean Wehrmacht" myth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    You’re repeating the “clean Wehrmacht” myth. It originated within the German army during the war, and was further spread by the Americans at the Nuremberg trials, and subsequently, to prop up West German military legitimacy during the cold war. It was not until after reunification that popular attention was drawn to the deceit.

    In fact, soldiers were amongst the most fervent Nazis, and had committed many war crimes and crimes against humanity, including willing participation in the Holocaust and the extermination of the Slavic peoples.

    For example, the majority of all German soldiers in the Eastern Front actively participated in mass murder and mass rape, sometimes with a whole army unit participating in the latter. So that’s most of the 10 million Wehrmacht soldiers on the Eastern Front, itself the majority of the 18 million who served in the war altogether.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)
  • [+] -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    SA like mob with only voluntary members.

    too many acronyms all up and down the thread. not your fault my brain is numb. South Africa? Sturm...Arb...needentolernenmasdeustchen?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Sturmabteilung. Hey, its shorter than many English words, and given that it translates to "storm department", "ice" sounds rather fitting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    I knew it wasn't Sturmwaffe, although that would have been a cool name, the stormwaffles, i just remember they had a seeming obsession with the word storm. i get it, some words and phrases are cool. they roll off the tongue nicely. like cellar door. velvet elvis. nazi pulp.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    It is a cool sounding propaganda term, they certainly did know their propaganda stuff. I honestly don't know how that "storm" naming came to be but in German you you have the word "stürmen", which does translate quite directly if I am not mistaken, as in "storming Congress". I heard Maga knows a thing or two about it.

    Now that I think of it I am not sure they were named after a storm. "stürmen" means moving rapidly into something and "erstürmen" means conquering/taking hold of something. "Sturm" is merely the noun for that. The weather phenomenon is rather named after that, than the other way round.

    There is also the cultural epoque of "Sturm und Drang" btw (which had nothing to do with Nazis and predates them, emphasizing emotion over rationality in art in the late 18th century), which is also not about storms but about pressing forward. Maybe taking hold of something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    predates them, emphasizing emotion over rationality

    it's about beating your spouse to the fridge and getting the last of the bacon fried rice for breakfast dammit.

    i wanted that rice. i'll win that race one of these days.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    I am not sure fried rice was a big thing in the 18th century Holy Roman Empire. ;) Sturm und Drang was also something that rather intellectually inclined young writers from the upper class were into. Goethe for example. They probably did not even race for a Bratwurst.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Someday, people like you will be saying that people only joined ICE because they were unemployed and desperate because of the Biden administration, and Trump's ICE was a successful work program to get them back on their feet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment