NS / racist/ neo-nazi / fascist - users and groups on Last FM

 
  • mroztn said:
    heykidfuckyou said:
    mroztn said:
    Hody83 said:
    good nazi = dead nazi

    No way. Violence is not the way of solving problems of humanity.


    what he said doesn't even mean anything violent you fucking crybaby, and nazism isn't a problem of humanity, it's a problem of hierarchy. and "violence" is the only viable means to solve any problem of totalitarian oppression, because you can only have peaceful protest in a modern-day "democratic" society. nice try though you fucking wannabe. you fucking irrational uneducated poser

    Look after your words and be responsible.
    Nazism is a "baby" of human minds. We are the humans. And we are responsible for this shit. If you think you are not, just do whatever you want.



    YEAH SORRY I DONT FEEL RESPONSIBLE FOR NAZISM EXISTING, SEEING AS I WASNT EVEN FUCKING BORN WHEN IT SITUATED ITSELF ON THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM

  • If they allow shitty pop on last.fm I cant see why they would not allow ns music. I like a few ns bands.

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 27 Mar 2010, 09:17
    Nazis/fascists can say whatever the fuck they want, but they should also be prepared to deal with the consequences. I'm not afraid of exposure to ignorant ideologies, nor am I afraid to get stuck-in.

    The struggle is as physical as it is mental, and make no mistake, it is a struggle. There is nothing oppressive or regressive about defending yourself, your values or your fellow man.

    "It is our aspiration and our aim that everyone should become socially conscious and effective; but to achieve this end, it is necessary to provide all with the means of life and for development, and it is therefore necessary to destroy with violence, since one cannot do otherwise, the violence which denies these means to the workers."

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 7 Apr 2010, 03:13
    How do you guys feel about nazi agitation on the good ol' last.fm? It's super immature and does nothing but I find it to be a new guilty pleasure of mine :D

  • troll them, diss them, take up conversation - or just ignore it - I think all is better than banning them and removing it from last.fm.

  • unfortunatelly there are many crypto racist neofolk-power electronics groups in last fm. they know how to take cover these days they tell people that "hey we are just doing it to provoke"....

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 14 Jul 2011, 18:44
    all you fascists and nazis fuck off and die

    • JTLDN said...
    • User
    • 1 Nov 2011, 22:35
    fuck fascist sympathy. they don't believe in the ethics of reciprocity or human rights, therefore they should have none. kill every last one of them. scum. the liberal pacifist sentiments on here are ridiculous.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC2lk7ju3Ys

    (sorry for the double post it's last.fm, not me.)

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 3 Nov 2011, 22:10
    I haven't read all the posts here so sorry if I'm repeating what's already been said but, why not just leave them to themselves and when you stumble across their page laugh and ignore it? Anarchist violence against them is an impossibility since all violence is by definition an authoritarian action due to the fact violence imposes one individuals will onto another. This means that anarchist opposition must be pacifist in nature. Now as my eloquent friend in the above post said (generally (india would disagree)) pacifist protests are ineffective. The only thing you are left with is to simply ignore them and separate your life from them.

  • Why do you hate fascism :( ? Did Benito do something very very evil ? Sied Heil \o

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 4 Nov 2011, 23:03
    Fascism absolutely does not work as system of establishing order. All authoritarian systems fail inevitably since they rely on technocratic state planning and no matter how intelligent said "experts" are they cannot accurately predict the future and the state cannot create accurate pricing mechanisms, since the value of a product is subjective. The state then always clumsily makes mistake after mistake, blames it on the first scapegoat and increases taxation to fix it's blunders. Statism has proven to be a failure and fascism is ultra-statism. Because statism doesn't work you have to turn to decentralised and localised systems that create infrastructure, which market anarchists call the free market and social anarchists call solidarity and mutual aid. Historically these systems have worked far more effectively eg Catalonia, Iceland, primitive tribal cultures etc.

    Also because the state is constantly having to sustain it's control it requires scapegoats for distraction eg homosexuals, drugs, ethnic minorities, religious minorities etc. This is more apparent with authoritarian systems like fascism as they rely on absolute and total compliance. Because these systems constantly have to penalise certain groups to maintain order, these ultra-statist ideologies eventually require the use of institutions in the same nature as concentration camps and work camps, where the government uses the state apparatus to essentially enslave it's populous and exterminate degenerates and dissenters. Anarchists oppose this because we believe that totalitarian system are not only patronising but have been historically for absolutely atrocious acts of tyranny and we are skeptical to it working any other way.

    While I cannot speak for all anarchists, this is simply a brief summery of generally why anarchists oppose fascism.

    • JTLDN said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 12:52
    Harliquensfly said:
    I haven't read all the posts here so sorry if I'm repeating what's already been said but, why not just leave them to themselves and when you stumble across their page laugh and ignore it? Anarchist violence against them is an impossibility since all violence is by definition an authoritarian action due to the fact violence imposes one individuals will onto another. This means that anarchist opposition must be pacifist in nature. Now as my eloquent friend in the above post said (generally (india would disagree)) pacifist protests are ineffective. The only thing you are left with is to simply ignore them and separate your life from them.


    violence isn't wrong in self-defence. that protects freedom, it doesn't oppress others. gandhi said the jews should've hurled themselves into gas chambers in order to "guilt" hitler into submission. he was an idiot. sociopaths don't have a moral centre. the problem with hate speech is that it empowers "harmless" viennese painters and others with similar prejudices. also, it maintains discrimination. only people who believe in pluralism and human rights should be tolerated. the absurd complacency of certain strands of liberalism is itself partially responsible for enabling tyranny.

    kaproidiot is a troll, don't bother.

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 16:52
    JTLDN said:

    violence isn't wrong in self-defence. that protects freedom, it doesn't oppress others. gandhi said the jews should've hurled themselves into gas chambers in order to "guilt" hitler into submission. he was an idiot. sociopaths don't have a moral centre. the problem with hate speech is that it empowers viennese painters and those with similar prejudices. also, it maintains discrimination. only people who believe in pluralism and human rights should be tolerated. the absurd complacency of certain strands of liberalism is itself partially responsible for enabling tyranny.

    kaproidiot is a troll, don't bother.


    Ghandi is one of the greatest (arguably the greatest) individuals of the 20th century and one of the most successful supporters of anarchist philosophy. Ghandi was right about what the jewish population should have done. People are all fundamentally good and are all capable of compassion and behaving ethically. If you disagree then you cannot believe anarchism is possible, as it requires people to be rational, be compassionate and act in the interest of common good. I'd also point out that while I agree with human rights, they are illusionry meta-narratives and cultural assumptions and actually hold no bearing on reality. Finally if you think about it anarchism is just consistent classical liberalism, like how fascism is consistent conservatism and a communist is just a consistent social-democrat.

    Oh yeah and it's funny a troll calling another user a troll

    • JTLDN said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 19:06
    Harliquensfly said:
    Ghandi is one of the greatest (arguably the greatest) individuals of the 20th century and one of the most successful supporters of anarchist philosophy. Ghandi was right about what the jewish population should have done. People are all fundamentally good and are all capable of compassion and behaving ethically. If you disagree then you cannot believe anarchism is possible, as it requires people to be rational, be compassionate and act in the interest of common good. I'd also point out that while I agree with human rights, they are illusionry meta-narratives and cultural assumptions and actually hold no bearing on reality. Finally if you think about it anarchism is just consistent classical liberalism, like how fascism is consistent conservatism and a communist is just a consistent social-democrat.

    Oh yeah and it's funny a troll calling another user a troll


    this is exactly why a lot of people think liberalism is stupid. too often, it advocates for criminal rights above those of the victim. despite the fact that the offender doesn't believe in those same rights.

    six million jews weren't enough to teach hitler compassion, but apparently it's the survivors' fault for not lining up to the gas chambers. maybe when the next genocidal maniac comes along you'll volunteer yourself to get tortured and murdered. martyr yourself if you want, but don't tell others to do so for the sake of your own ego.

    people are not all "fundamentally good and are all capable of compassion and behaving ethically". that's an article of faith, not a fact. i believe many people are, but not everyone which is why we have prisons and mental hospitals. an abusive minority can cause great harm against an apathetic majority. it's the pattern that underpins all hierarchy and will continue until people fight for total liberation.

    ofc human rights are social constructs, that doesn't in itself negate them. you could say the same thing about all ideas.

    flaming, disagreeing with someone or having an unpopular opinion isn't the same as trolling. if it were, you'd qualify.

    Edited by JTLDN on 6 Nov 2011, 19:22
    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 19:19
    Straw man arguments, ad hominems and various logical fallacies do not qualify for good quality arguments. Google search critical thinking and read up.

    • JTLDN said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 19:24
    whatever, you NEVER cite what you think is a strawman or a logical fallacy. all you do is simply strut in and declare yourself correct. which of course, isn't authoritative. don't bother exclaiming that it's solely because you "can't be bothered" to either. LOL.

    btw, personal insults aren't ad hominems.

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 19:38
    Haha editing what you put after I respond ;) don't worry I won't tell.

    I don't claim to be right objectively and authoritatively I just said my position in a open discussion, which opens up my position to scrutiny just as much as anyone else's. But you are right I can't be bothered with you because I don't find you to be worth my time. That's why I never responded in the other thread, you were just being childish and I have no time for trolls.

    Oh and by the way an ad hominem is when you rather than responding to the argument you insult the arguer.

    • JTLDN said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 20:00
    p.s more hypocrisy seeing as you deleted some of my posts in your thread.

    nah, you're just an arrogant ass who doesn't want to hear when someone tells him he's wrong. no, an ad hominem is when you attack the person, as a method of disproving their argument. not simply when you insult the person. idiot.

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 20:49
    I never deleted posts in any thread, in fact I cannot possibly do that since I'm not the group creator. So that was an complete and utter lie.

    You really need to grow up my friend, because you seem incapable of arguing without ad hominems, straw man arguments, logical fallacies or getting overly aggressive. I am not arrogant and I have no problem with being proved wrong (I'd rather it than live believing in anything false).

    Unless your next response is something a little less aggressive and not littered with flawed arguments, I probably shan't post back. I'm not going to waste my time on people who behave like you, life's short.

    • JTLDN said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 21:01
    it's not a lie. posts missing as evidenced by there being quotes which no longer correspond to text within the remaining comments and a lack of timestamps which would show any editions.

    whatever though, this is derailing the topic and you can't reason with someone who just labels any opposing argument wrong.

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 21:17
    Unless I'm some kind of amazing hacker and managed to hack last.fm and make changes to their system to allow me to delete other people's forum posts, you are telling an utter lie and I'm practically computer illiterate. Logic dictates that you are telling a lie then, because we've removed the other possibility.

    I shan't respond to another of your posts since I find you unnecessarily aggressive, a liar and I find you incapable of forming arguments of any quality.

    • JTLDN said...
    • User
    • 6 Nov 2011, 22:07
    Harliquensfly said:
    Unless I'm some kind of amazing hacker and managed to hack last.fm and make changes to their system to allow me to delete other people's forum posts, you are telling an utter lie and I'm practically computer illiterate. Logic dictates that you are telling a lie then, because we've removed the other possibility.

    I shan't respond to another of your posts since I find you unnecessarily aggressive, a liar and I find you incapable of forming arguments of any quality.


    you don't know anything about logic. that's a false dichotomy (a logical fallacy). http://www.last.fm/group/Anarchist+Music/forum/21498/_/966673 your third post quotes text that isn't in any of my previous replies which haven't been edited. i'm done.

  • [spam]

    [spam]

    Edited by hjbardenhagen on 13 Jan 2012, 07:03
  • stop justifying fascism by calling it free speech. you`ll never be completely free to do as you wish when you live in a community, you will always have to take others into consideration. your freedom of speech stops where it starts violating others freedom.
    activists that fight for the greater good are being thrown into jail and silenced while fascists are free to spread their filth. by giving them a platform you`re letting them recruit more and more youth. hitler got his power because he got into the parliament.
    i say we ban them all, from everything.

    naza has confirmed controversial moonlanding wuz bluff
  • Vicotnic said:
    I think the tolerance level for nazism is way to high. By ignoring them we just let them grow. Serious you might speak as laud as you want of your right of speach and opinion. Buf facts remain nazism is a racist, totleriterian, fascism idiologly and should never be tolerated. Fine take the discussion with the ones that still can be converted but never accept their presence ban them, exlclude them make sure to let them know that they are not welcome.



    So, fight totalitarinism with totalitarinism and intolerance? It woul be more effective to make fun of them.

Anonymous users may not post messages. Please log in or create an account to post in the forums.