Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

hairyfigment comments on Failed Utopia #4-2 - Less Wrong

53 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 21 January 2009 11:04AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (248)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: hairyfigment 27 December 2012 07:01:03AM -2 points [-]

I'm pretty sure you can arrest Nazis when they start attacking other parties with the intention of overthrowing the government. Wiki says the following happened before they were officially Nazis:

Some 130 people attended; there were hecklers, but Hitler's military friends promptly ejected them by force, and the agitators "flew down the stairs with gashed heads."

Comment author: MugaSofer 27 December 2012 04:02:40PM *  -1 points [-]

It was such incidents I had in mind. Clearly, I was suffering from the illusion of transparency; I'll change it.

Comment author: hairyfigment 27 December 2012 09:59:21PM -1 points [-]

See, racists (even in a fairly strong sense) would often have been in power. I don't know what verbal beliefs you think characterize Nazis more than their willingness to use violence against particular targets. Hitler had belonged to (what they would later call) the Nazi Party for at most two months when the cited violence happened. He wouldn't write Mein Kampf for more than three years. Mussolini allegedly said,

The Socialists ask what our political program is. Our political program is to break the heads of the socialists.

Comment author: MugaSofer 29 December 2012 07:39:21PM 1 point [-]

I don't know what verbal beliefs you think characterize Nazis more than their willingness to use violence against particular targets.

You don't? Well, you may not have heard of this, but they had kind of a thing about Jews. Thought they were subhuman and corrupting society and all sorts of crazy shit.

Comment author: MixedNuts 29 December 2012 08:33:13PM 2 points [-]

Is a typical Nazi closer to someone who privately thinks Jews are subhuman and corrupting society and is exactingly nice and friendly to everyone so that the Jewish conspiracy have nothing to use against her, or to someone who advocates violence up to and including mass murder against green-eyed manicurists on the grounds that they are subhuman and corrupt society?

Comment author: Oligopsony 29 December 2012 09:06:04PM *  2 points [-]

Temperamentally, or in terms of verbal beliefs?

Comment author: MixedNuts 29 December 2012 10:03:47PM 1 point [-]


Comment author: Oligopsony 29 December 2012 11:08:39PM 1 point [-]

Well, let's compare Nazis to Ankharists. Ankharists if anything have a longer hitlist than Nazis, although they have nothing in particular against Jews. Are Ankharists more Nazi than Nazis? Uh, no. Ankharism is actually an entirely different ideology, with little in common besides the long hitlist (consisting of different targets.)

Of course with respect to the original question it's also true that there are lots of distinctions between National Socialism and the various ruling racist ideologies that preceded them other than hitlist as well, so.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 15 July 2014 09:11:50PM 4 points [-]

What is Ankharism? Google does not find anyone but you using this word. I suspect you have fabricated an English word by transliterating from another language, but I cannot trace it. Somewhere you talk about Cambodia. Perhaps you mean Angkorism, a rare name for the ideology of the Khmer Rouge, after the Angkor Empire?

(There is also the Ankharite, named after the Egyptian Ankh, which may be displacing the term you use.)

Comment author: Oligopsony 25 July 2014 02:21:20AM 3 points [-]

It was a garbled version of Angkorism, sorry.

Comment author: MugaSofer 30 December 2012 12:06:50AM 0 points [-]

The latter, historically. However, focusing on the specific example is probably counterproductive, as it doesn't affect the point that certain verbal beliefs are dangerous; specifically those that stereotype, demonize and dehumanize particular groups. Obviously most who hold such beliefs will never attack anyone; but ... if they were restricted, there would be less hate crimes. This would cause irreparable damage to society in other ways, of course - that's rather the point.

Comment author: hairyfigment 29 December 2012 10:44:10PM -1 points [-]

Apparently people dispute that Georg Ratzinger published the same beliefs. But again, since I've apparently had trouble making myself understood: none of those verbal claims, at least the ones publicly known before the start of violence, distinguished the Nazis from other people (if not literally people like GR within the German government).

Comment author: MugaSofer 30 December 2012 12:40:51PM *  -1 points [-]

Oh, right. Well, it's certainly true that anti-semetism was a lot more popular and socially acceptable before the holocaust. But it was even more popular, socially acceptable, and extreme among Nazis.