this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
5 points (85.7% liked)
Asklemmy
45839 readers
1037 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I feel like each answer here is wrong and right.
Literally, Nazi was a shortened version of National Socialist, and was the anglicized name for the German party that Adolf Hitler rose to power in.
In the vernacular, Nazi is a somewhat catch all to describe various fractions and identified ideologies which the broad usage I think hurts discourse.
Some people mean in this general way, any racist, or ethnostate advocate could be considered a Nazi, as could any racist or fascist group.
I'm not for any of it, but the fluidity of usage ends up feeling like hyperbole when someone is not a literal Nazi, or doesn't even share Nazi values and beliefs.
When describing our enemies, I think static definition matters, because inaccuracies can be an attack surface to dismantle arguments.