Rendered at 00:51:00 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
nielsbot 23 hours ago [-]
Wondering why this was flagged--seems of public interest. Is it not authentic? (@dang)
akagusu 15 hours ago [-]
Because this is not a neutral ground.
This site is owned by far-right aligned people and they censor everything that makes them look bad.
exiguus 3 hours ago [-]
I think it is the other way around: Political indifference is a luxury of the privileged.
tim333 12 hours ago [-]
I'm not sure that's true. There seems to be more a general thing to flag politics as it's not so much what the HN is about. The most prominent owner is probably PG who wrote a long thing on why to vote Kamala.
nielsbot 46 minutes ago [-]
Curious who he'd recommend if it was, say, Mamdani for prez.
akagusu 9 hours ago [-]
Sorry, but it is true.
Post a fact about how bad is the far right, including the current US administration, and it will be flagged.
Post a fake news about how good is the far right, including the current US administration, and it will be right on the front page, no matter how much you downvote or flag.
wnoise 22 hours ago [-]
It's flagged because lots of "trusted" users flagged it.
Why did they do that? Some might have an aversion to politics in general. That has long been a strong strain here, with people seeing it as diluting the tech focus.
But for a lot, it's clearly more sinister. There has been a lot of partiality in tech recently to plainly fascist and other ultra-right-wing ideas, especially among the executives and capital. They like it, and want it to win, everywhere, and will reflexively do what they can to help it, including burying bad coverage.
singularity2001 17 hours ago [-]
" There has been a lot of partiality in tech recently to plainly fascist "
For a second, I thought this is Dangs / HN official view now lol
exiguus 12 hours ago [-]
"tech bros"
6 hours ago [-]
crossroadsguy 14 hours ago [-]
Cloudflare now shows the blocker warning:
Warning
Suspected Phishing
This website has been reported for potential phishing.
So either that site is a bit shady (that I didn't notice) or people have been actively at work to paint is as shady.
But then I often see this for any source:
(source text not published for this record)
And the top also shows this
SUPPORT THIS ARCHIVE — MONERO
<and probbaly a monero address>
So can't really say.
So I think [flagged] for this source/post is rightly served, one way or the other.
jacquesm 6 hours ago [-]
That is something CF can only do because the site uses CF.
vlugorilla 13 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
4 hours ago [-]
oliwarner 18 hours ago [-]
(Source text not published for this comment)
exiguus 12 hours ago [-]
The torrent has also the message body and the DKIM keys to verify
lurk2 15 hours ago [-]
“Dude trust me”
silexia 10 hours ago [-]
Hacking political organizations you disagree with is still a crime.
sillyfluke 10 hours ago [-]
it may not be if the country's laws you reside in allows you whistleblower protection.
And just like in the USA, that does not make it absolute. The exact interpretation and limitations are different, but saying saying that Germany does not have freedom of speech is disrespectful and incorrect.
arkfrost 6 hours ago [-]
Germany does NOT have freedom of "speech". It has freedom of OPNION and expression.
Freedom of speech, like it exists in the US is called "Redefreiheit", but Germany has "Meinungsfreiheit", which is not the same. Redefreiheit means you can say anything you want. This is not the case in Germany. Meinungsfreiheit means, you can think whatever you want, but not say whatever you want.
Even in the article of the Grundgesetz you listed, it's stated:
> (2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons and in the right to personal honour.
Or in other words: your freedom of expression ends, when you're expressing something that is deemed illegal by the law.
account42 14 hours ago [-]
Constitution is irrelevant if the government doesn't follow it.
jst1fthsdys 7 hours ago [-]
They arrest you for saying "from the river to the sea". There is free speech as long as it is okay with the ruling class. So there is not free speech.
tonymet 6 hours ago [-]
that is the statute . a component of the constitution, but not the entire constitution. or even the major component of it.
The constitution that you are governed by includes all of the judgements that have been made.
in other words, the constitution is defined by its practical application.
So saying "the US has free speech" does not mean "we have the first amendment". It means we have a long culture of judgements that have established free speech as a fundamental right.
tonymet 23 hours ago [-]
Would you say that Defamation risk in germany is bigger, smaller or the same?
td2 14 hours ago [-]
Germany literally has no freedome of speach .
Trump is a disgusting pedo
Try saying the same about Merz
jbloggs777 9 hours ago [-]
That would be a Beleidigung... unless you can prove it, and you might have to.
You can criticise Merz's hairstyle, his politics, and his small hands all you like though.
td2 5 hours ago [-]
I know sadly im german myself.
But thats exactly my point. Im not allowed to say that.
American can say it about theire president
Ofcourse we can say a lot, but our speach is far from free.
Volksverhetzung is another thing. Say the wrong thing about some groups and your in trouble.
And im not necessarily saying its a bad thing that this exists. But we shouldnt pretend like our speach is free
ndsipa_pomu 16 hours ago [-]
"Free speech" is typically about the government restricting what you are allowed to say (e.g. the FCC threatening removal of ABC's broadcasting license) and nothing to do with allowing individuals to defame others.
It's shocking how many people in the USA don't understand how their country and laws are designed to work.
tonymet 11 hours ago [-]
It affects the burden of proof
ndsipa_pomu 10 hours ago [-]
I don't understand what you mean. What burden of proof do you mean and how does free speech or not affect that?
tonymet 10 hours ago [-]
then why would this be worth my time?
ndsipa_pomu 9 hours ago [-]
It's a general aim of conversation to be able to get your point across so that the other party can understand what you're trying to say. However, if you have no desire to improve your communication skills, then you can just post meaningless tripe and have people think that you have nothing of import to say.
tonymet 9 hours ago [-]
I’m not convinced . Maybe you’re an interesting person in other contexts . But it’s not clear to me
9 hours ago [-]
20 hours ago [-]
tonymet 1 days ago [-]
AI summary:
"AfD member xxx writes and forwards racist dehumanizing incitement:.
Source:
(source text not published for this record)
retrac 1 days ago [-]
They assert the full text is available in the torrent archive. I have not verified this: https://hexane.cc/verify/
tonymet 1 days ago [-]
why redact?
tonymet 1 days ago [-]
from their site
> Rendering them as individual pages would mean publishing an indexed, searchable copy of every private message in the corpus — including the many that concern ordinary members and people who wrote to the party, not public figures.
Since you seem to have no interest in using HN as intended, we've banned the account.
tonymet 1 days ago [-]
Besides the practical hassle of downloading 300gb and wasting time .
It's their report, their claims, their argument. The burden to make the case and be transparent is theirs, not mine. It's dishonest to present AI summaries as facts.
There should be at least a sample of the source text so we can see how well the descriptions match the sources.
Also, where is the prompt, the model? The methods used to present the content.
It's funny how much critique of "AI slop" is on HN, and here's a case where even mild hallucination is very misleading, yet the bar is incredibly low.
stop50 1 days ago [-]
There is a second magnet which features all the 100k file as individual files. The packed archive is only for more efficient torrents
tonymet 1 days ago [-]
that's even worse
striking 1 days ago [-]
The way I see it, either you are curious enough to download some of the files or you are not. I don't understand this middle ground where you spend more time complaining about the distribution method than it would take to download. It feels contrived or even in bad faith, especially given that the link above would allow you to do exactly that without starting a torrent client.
exiguus 12 hours ago [-]
If you download the torrent you may find instructions to validate the messages with the DKIM Keys in 99_FOR_JOURNALISTS
roosterIllusi0n 1 days ago [-]
If you are bothered by not knowing, why aren't you downloading it and looking?
wallst07 14 hours ago [-]
No way I'm downloading 300GB of torrent text to run some prompts by either.
I would read a non AI generated article from a (hopefully unbiased) legitimate source. Hopefully providing some nuance that the world including HN lacks lately.
Look dude, maybe this is your project , so you're defensive.
I saw the tag line, visited and thought "ooh some spicy emails that'll be interesting. ".
Then i found a bunch of AI slop, with no grounding.
That's all it is.
ofjcihen 1 days ago [-]
“Here’s the files so you can look for yourself”
“I refuse to and I’m still going to complain.”
account42 14 hours ago [-]
Complete lie
- source that approximately nobody will follow up with
This has been a common journalist tactic to report the opposite of the truth.
retrac 6 hours ago [-]
So much conjecture in this thread.
Am I the only one who bothered to download the torrent and check?
So much intellectual laziness, if I may be blunt. All of you who replied to me. The link was there. I didn't have time last night. But I do now. And the torrent appears to be genuine.
Journalists have reached the same conclusion, and the AfD spokesperson seems to have admitted at least some of them are genuine.
Thank you. This is the typical response from these people when caught red handed.
tonymet 1 days ago [-]
So what's your argument? accept it at face value? It's an incomplete report. I'm not complaining. I'm pointing out the gaps to people who may not take the time to explore what is on the site.
ofjcihen 1 days ago [-]
Are you just trolling?
The documents have been provided.
If you don’t believe it go and download the documents and grep through them. You act like 300gb is large. It’s not. The next FPS will probably be that big.
jdb9001 23 hours ago [-]
i think youre being ragebaited by an idiot
tonymet 1 days ago [-]
no
exiguus 12 hours ago [-]
I think there will be verification by german press and CCC in the following days.
As what I can say, the mbox files / messages from the torrent correspond to the site and LLM generated summaries.
In `99_FOR_JOURNALISTS/VERIFY.md` you may find instructions to validate (DKIM) it for your self.
1 days ago [-]
caidan 1 days ago [-]
Now this is an excellent use of AI!
jonathanstrange 4 hours ago [-]
Why has this been flagged? HN now literally supports Nazis now who joke about making leather bags out of immigrants and sign emails with Sieg Heil?
I think that "let's not attach each other" and "supporting" aren't the same thing.
TFNA 1 days ago [-]
The pact included industrial cooperation and dividing up foreign conquests. To simply quote Wikipedia:
"In August of that year [1939], the countries expanded their economic relationship by entering into a Trade and Credit agreement whereby the Soviet Union sent critical raw materials to Germany in exchange for weapons, military technology and civilian machinery. That deal accompanied the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, which contained secret protocols dividing central Europe between them, after which both Nazi forces and Soviet forces invaded territories listed within their 'spheres of influence'."
baud147258 13 hours ago [-]
I mean Germany even sent soldiers to get trained in the URSS in tank usage, while Germany was still pretending to follow the Versailles treaty. And the trade in commodities between the two continued right up until June 1941
JumpCrisscross 1 days ago [-]
They’re not. But the Nazis hating minorities within their own borders doesn’t delineate them.
spwa4 10 hours ago [-]
If you're going to argue who the Nazis were, it's tough to beat this article:
The reality is the NSDAP had no ideological grounding whichever way. All their public policies were exclusively to get elected. They were populists, nothing else. Within the Nazi party it was as pure a dictatorship as was possible: there were no political discussions happening there. There was a clear order and members owed alegiance to people "above" them and could do whatever they wanted to people "below" them.
Just about the only thing they DID discuss was what made specific people fall above or below others. There was more than a page of rules about which family constituents made people "untermensch". What about 1 Jewish ancestor? What about 5 ancestors with unknown affiliations? What about a nephew that became communist? What about a grandfather who was NSDAP member but had a Jewish/communist/immigrant mistress? What about ...
mulderc 1 days ago [-]
Should probably add that her grandfather was a member of the SS
red_candle_wax 1 days ago [-]
Not quite the same, but I believe something like this happens in "Look Who's Back"
1 days ago [-]
gvfsa 1 days ago [-]
This is a good example of why the right wing is such a joke in Europe. Look at what they call “far right”.
polyamid23 14 hours ago [-]
Fascists working towards an ethno-state is far right.
24 hours ago [-]
guywithahat 1 days ago [-]
[flagged]
exe34 1 days ago [-]
I think ethnic cleansing for a national renewal is pretty far right, no? The next stop is gas chambers, I believe.
jjtheblunt 1 days ago [-]
[flagged]
_hugerobots_ 1 days ago [-]
There is no 'jargon' to compare left and right leaning parties from 80 years ago, to today's versions. To exercise ANY comparison within that context in a serious tone, is to build the most flammable straw man that even laughing at it would set the argument to ashes.
eta: I realize arguing with bots and paid farms is to do a disservice to everyone, but it's just painful to see these bad faith arguments presented as 8th grade reading level trick-questions. That said, fucking vote. It's your democratic responsibility in society that is based on social governance.
jjtheblunt 1 days ago [-]
i think you said, in your first sentence, just what i was observing. the latter sentences seem unrelated?
piva00 1 days ago [-]
No, Hitler himself said that the cooptation of "socialism" was on purpose[0], don't get fooled by simple naming, it's the easiest way one can be manipulated (e.g.: "Democratic People's Republic of Korea"):
> "Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"
> "Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.
> "Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.
> "We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."
yeah...that's my point, these namings are pretty devoid of _consistent_ meaning, both with respect to what they reference (as in your democratic people's republic of korea example) as well as across time.
the namings are just messy.
piva00 16 hours ago [-]
There are philosophical consistencies, it's not because someone can coopt the meaning of it that makes it meaningless, it's just deceptive.
exe34 14 hours ago [-]
Anybody claiming to believe that Nazis were socialists need to provide evidence of themselves eating urinal cake. Otherwise we know that they are misusing the etymological fallacy on purpose.
jjtheblunt 10 hours ago [-]
it's the Nazi's own use of the term in describing their party name that is being referred to.
exe34 7 hours ago [-]
Do you believe it? If not, why bring it up suddenly 81 years later? Were you trying to say something about today's fascists?
jjtheblunt 52 minutes ago [-]
i have no idea what you're going on about, because my entire point was that the terminology meant different things at different times, purposefully obviously.
goodpoint 1 days ago [-]
Yes, they are proper nazi.
jjtheblunt 1 days ago [-]
[flagged]
rixed 20 hours ago [-]
Political ideologies are not scientific theories, they are just words layered on top of mental confusion. It seems vain to try to make sense of it.
Don't judge people by what they say but by what they do, goes the saying. Pay even less attention to what they call themselves.
jjtheblunt 10 hours ago [-]
agreed : that's my point in noting overloading (and contradictory overloadings) of the term.
Terr_ 1 days ago [-]
This is an editorial cartoon from 1931 showing how Hitler emphasized contradictory parts of the party-name to different suckers. (English translation in page.)
That's 95 years ago, how have we not internalized that things named by bad people don't usually do what the name says?
jjtheblunt 1 days ago [-]
Yes! that's what i'm getting at: the use of these names is presented as meaningful but they're too mired in misdirection and propaganda to be context-free meaningful, both in an era, and across time.
piva00 1 days ago [-]
No, Hitler himself said that the cooptation of "socialism" was on purpose[0], don't get fooled by simple naming, it's the easiest way one can be manipulated (e.g.: "Democratic People's Republic of Korea"):
> "Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"
> "Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.
> "Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.
> "We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."
Hi, can you provide evidence of you eating urinal cake please? Otherwise it's clear that you are misusing the etymological fallacy on purpose.
qs1ykyusPlate 16 hours ago [-]
you spent more than 10 minutes reading any history book about this you would have know the reason instead you are here spewing misinformation.
stop50 1 days ago [-]
The socialism part was fake. The named it so because socialism was popular and the promises are hard to distinguish from some right wing parties. In the past jews were the main enemy, now its muslims.
Seems to me the Jews are still very much target #1, not-further-specified migrants #2 and with black people a clear #3 (strange to see that in Germany), and while it mentions muslims, there's 10 hate slurs against Jews for every 1 mention of muslims.
Oh, and the first mention of muslims seems to be encouragement of Palestinian shall we say "actions against Jews" in like the 7th mail here. But yes, it does get quite negative after that.
But yes, after that it does go quite negative.
The socialism part was fake in the sense that Nazis were populists, they promised whatever would convince large amounts of voters, and of course weren't anything remotely like convinced socialists. But it goes much further than that. They were purely after power, right down to the personal level, and that went pretty damn deep in the Nazi party. In other words: they believed in essentially none of their standpoints and you could argue they don't belong to any side of the spectrum (nor did they care about any kind of academic or economic classification of their standpoints). And so if you look at the fake standpoints, the promises they never intended to keep, those are socialist promises. They implemented a lot of them too, which is were more confusion comes from.
But they were hardly the only party that could be credibly accused of openly lying about the standpoints they personally hold, and those parties are all around the spectrum. And the people who were convinced ... that didn't help either. The KPD very much openly expressed support for the Red Terror at the time of Nazis, that is not a lie, and probably really was a big reason for voters to vote for the Nazi party.
Today AfD, die Linke and DKP have all 3 been very obviously caught receiving Kremlin aid and very publicly supporting Russia, AfD leader Alice Weidel recently even going to far as indirectly defending Russia's attack on Ukraine:
(at least in die Linke, you can say that it's the dominant faction that supports Russia, while clearly there is very vocal opposition against them in the same party. In AfD, the members clearly don't care. Almost like most AfD votes are protest votes rather than AfD votes)
Something similar is happening in Austria. Every extremist party is supporting the Kremlin.
Grimeton 1 days ago [-]
Naa, far left are the international socialists.
thomastjeffery 1 days ago [-]
National Socialist was a lie at the time. The meaning of socialism has not changed. Labels are assertions, not prescriptions. The inconsistency is truth, not ideology.
cbradford 1 days ago [-]
[flagged]
24 hours ago [-]
kylepomykala 1 days ago [-]
Interesting.
Website screams AI slop though.
1 days ago [-]
anon84873628 1 days ago [-]
The website seems perfectly clear and functional.
vfclists 24 hours ago [-]
Cloudflare has put up a notice saying that the site is suspected of phishing, but doesn't block access to it. The site has been reported as some kind of phishing site, someone clearly doesn't it.
The issue of sites like this is their one-sided nature. If they are going to be fair then they should dump the archives of all the other parties, then AfD supporters will not be able to claim that they are being set upon.
Acts like these have the ability to create sympathy and dislike in equal measure for their targets.
nielsbot 23 hours ago [-]
> The issue of sites like this is their one-sided nature
Are you saying that outing racists is one-sided and will create sympathy for them?
soraminazuki 23 hours ago [-]
You're arguing against a group of people who have the galls to falsely report a site for phishing and then use that to delegitimize what it says.
vfclists 7 hours ago [-]
I don't suppose you are aware that Trump won the Presidential election despite his open racism, the ongoing criminal prosecutions against him, and his sympathy for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, soft touch on Israel's genocide and his harsh ICE-led anti-immgration policies.
This is a man who openly stated that you could grab women by the crotch yet won the votes of a significant amount of women, twice.
If you have any intelligence you will never underestimate right-wingers sense of victimhood, grievance and feeling that they are the poor, oppressed, ignored downtrodden people who need to rise and fight against "The Powers That Be" and the sympathy that engenders in others.
If these "hexane.cc" guys have any sense they should do the same for the other parties, who I'm sure have documents and communications that will be as equally embarrassing and let the voters judge.
This site is owned by far-right aligned people and they censor everything that makes them look bad.
Post a fact about how bad is the far right, including the current US administration, and it will be flagged.
Post a fake news about how good is the far right, including the current US administration, and it will be right on the front page, no matter how much you downvote or flag.
Why did they do that? Some might have an aversion to politics in general. That has long been a strong strain here, with people seeing it as diluting the tech focus.
But for a lot, it's clearly more sinister. There has been a lot of partiality in tech recently to plainly fascist and other ultra-right-wing ideas, especially among the executives and capital. They like it, and want it to win, everywhere, and will reflexively do what they can to help it, including burying bad coverage.
For a second, I thought this is Dangs / HN official view now lol
But then I often see this for any source:
And the top also shows this So can't really say.So I think [flagged] for this source/post is rightly served, one way or the other.
And just like in the USA, that does not make it absolute. The exact interpretation and limitations are different, but saying saying that Germany does not have freedom of speech is disrespectful and incorrect.
Freedom of speech, like it exists in the US is called "Redefreiheit", but Germany has "Meinungsfreiheit", which is not the same. Redefreiheit means you can say anything you want. This is not the case in Germany. Meinungsfreiheit means, you can think whatever you want, but not say whatever you want.
Even in the article of the Grundgesetz you listed, it's stated:
> (2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons and in the right to personal honour.
Or in other words: your freedom of expression ends, when you're expressing something that is deemed illegal by the law.
The constitution that you are governed by includes all of the judgements that have been made.
in other words, the constitution is defined by its practical application.
So saying "the US has free speech" does not mean "we have the first amendment". It means we have a long culture of judgements that have established free speech as a fundamental right.
Try saying the same about Merz
You can criticise Merz's hairstyle, his politics, and his small hands all you like though.
Ofcourse we can say a lot, but our speach is far from free. Volksverhetzung is another thing. Say the wrong thing about some groups and your in trouble. And im not necessarily saying its a bad thing that this exists. But we shouldnt pretend like our speach is free
It's shocking how many people in the USA don't understand how their country and laws are designed to work.
> Rendering them as individual pages would mean publishing an indexed, searchable copy of every private message in the corpus — including the many that concern ordinary members and people who wrote to the party, not public figures.
which is suspicious
It's their report, their claims, their argument. The burden to make the case and be transparent is theirs, not mine. It's dishonest to present AI summaries as facts.
There should be at least a sample of the source text so we can see how well the descriptions match the sources.
Also, where is the prompt, the model? The methods used to present the content.
It's funny how much critique of "AI slop" is on HN, and here's a case where even mild hallucination is very misleading, yet the bar is incredibly low.
I would read a non AI generated article from a (hopefully unbiased) legitimate source. Hopefully providing some nuance that the world including HN lacks lately.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-news-hackers-release-afd-party...
Look dude, maybe this is your project , so you're defensive.
I saw the tag line, visited and thought "ooh some spicy emails that'll be interesting. ".
Then i found a bunch of AI slop, with no grounding.
That's all it is.
“I refuse to and I’m still going to complain.”
- source that approximately nobody will follow up with
This has been a common journalist tactic to report the opposite of the truth.
Am I the only one who bothered to download the torrent and check?
So much intellectual laziness, if I may be blunt. All of you who replied to me. The link was there. I didn't have time last night. But I do now. And the torrent appears to be genuine.
Journalists have reached the same conclusion, and the AfD spokesperson seems to have admitted at least some of them are genuine.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-news-hackers-release-afd-party...
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/germanys-far-right-...
The documents have been provided.
If you don’t believe it go and download the documents and grep through them. You act like 300gb is large. It’s not. The next FPS will probably be that big.
What a disgrace.
That’s old news [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pac...
"In August of that year [1939], the countries expanded their economic relationship by entering into a Trade and Credit agreement whereby the Soviet Union sent critical raw materials to Germany in exchange for weapons, military technology and civilian machinery. That deal accompanied the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, which contained secret protocols dividing central Europe between them, after which both Nazi forces and Soviet forces invaded territories listed within their 'spheres of influence'."
https://harpers.org/archive/1941/08/who-goes-nazi/
The reality is the NSDAP had no ideological grounding whichever way. All their public policies were exclusively to get elected. They were populists, nothing else. Within the Nazi party it was as pure a dictatorship as was possible: there were no political discussions happening there. There was a clear order and members owed alegiance to people "above" them and could do whatever they wanted to people "below" them.
Just about the only thing they DID discuss was what made specific people fall above or below others. There was more than a page of rules about which family constituents made people "untermensch". What about 1 Jewish ancestor? What about 5 ancestors with unknown affiliations? What about a nephew that became communist? What about a grandfather who was NSDAP member but had a Jewish/communist/immigrant mistress? What about ...
eta: I realize arguing with bots and paid farms is to do a disservice to everyone, but it's just painful to see these bad faith arguments presented as 8th grade reading level trick-questions. That said, fucking vote. It's your democratic responsibility in society that is based on social governance.
> "Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"
> "Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.
> "Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.
> "We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2007/sep/17/greatint...
the namings are just messy.
Don't judge people by what they say but by what they do, goes the saying. Pay even less attention to what they call themselves.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jacobus_Belsen_-_Das...
That's 95 years ago, how have we not internalized that things named by bad people don't usually do what the name says?
> "Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"
> "Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.
> "Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.
> "We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2007/sep/17/greatint...
Seems to me the Jews are still very much target #1, not-further-specified migrants #2 and with black people a clear #3 (strange to see that in Germany), and while it mentions muslims, there's 10 hate slurs against Jews for every 1 mention of muslims.
Oh, and the first mention of muslims seems to be encouragement of Palestinian shall we say "actions against Jews" in like the 7th mail here. But yes, it does get quite negative after that.
But yes, after that it does go quite negative.
The socialism part was fake in the sense that Nazis were populists, they promised whatever would convince large amounts of voters, and of course weren't anything remotely like convinced socialists. But it goes much further than that. They were purely after power, right down to the personal level, and that went pretty damn deep in the Nazi party. In other words: they believed in essentially none of their standpoints and you could argue they don't belong to any side of the spectrum (nor did they care about any kind of academic or economic classification of their standpoints). And so if you look at the fake standpoints, the promises they never intended to keep, those are socialist promises. They implemented a lot of them too, which is were more confusion comes from.
But they were hardly the only party that could be credibly accused of openly lying about the standpoints they personally hold, and those parties are all around the spectrum. And the people who were convinced ... that didn't help either. The KPD very much openly expressed support for the Red Terror at the time of Nazis, that is not a lie, and probably really was a big reason for voters to vote for the Nazi party.
Today AfD, die Linke and DKP have all 3 been very obviously caught receiving Kremlin aid and very publicly supporting Russia, AfD leader Alice Weidel recently even going to far as indirectly defending Russia's attack on Ukraine:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hzb8aSMDwag
But ...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/19/germanys-die-l...
(at least in die Linke, you can say that it's the dominant faction that supports Russia, while clearly there is very vocal opposition against them in the same party. In AfD, the members clearly don't care. Almost like most AfD votes are protest votes rather than AfD votes)
Something similar is happening in Austria. Every extremist party is supporting the Kremlin.
Website screams AI slop though.
The issue of sites like this is their one-sided nature. If they are going to be fair then they should dump the archives of all the other parties, then AfD supporters will not be able to claim that they are being set upon.
Acts like these have the ability to create sympathy and dislike in equal measure for their targets.
Are you saying that outing racists is one-sided and will create sympathy for them?
This is a man who openly stated that you could grab women by the crotch yet won the votes of a significant amount of women, twice.
If you have any intelligence you will never underestimate right-wingers sense of victimhood, grievance and feeling that they are the poor, oppressed, ignored downtrodden people who need to rise and fight against "The Powers That Be" and the sympathy that engenders in others.
If these "hexane.cc" guys have any sense they should do the same for the other parties, who I'm sure have documents and communications that will be as equally embarrassing and let the voters judge.