1388
1389

[badscience]/r/badscience/ debunks nazi post from /r/TheDonald, author of one of the science papers jumps in. (np.reddit.com)

SkyPL が 投稿

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 270
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]InternetWeakGuy 481ポイント482ポイント  (142子コメント)

There's literally nothing I like better on reddit than a good debunking comment. There's so much obvious horseshit that gets posted where I just roll my eyes and move on because I know that arguing with hateful fucks on the internet is a complete waste of time because they often don't care about the truth, they just care about winning, but when someone goes "ah fuck it, i'll bite" and then expertly rips apart the nonsense, piece by piece.... I FUCKING LOVES ME SOME OF THAT.

[–]ThatNeonZebraAgain 211ポイント212ポイント  (92子コメント)

Especially when it's blatant racist/nationalist (ie Stormfront, /pol/, r/The_Donald, r/european etc) copy/pasta propaganda.

[–]Hot4_TeaCha 138ポイント139ポイント  (72子コメント)

It's bizarre how much of a self-reinforcing bubble of information they're in.

Like, we're all in filter bubbles to some extent, but they seem utterly immune to cognitive dissonance. I don't understand how anyone can be that willfully blind.

[–]Dr-Sommer 96ポイント97ポイント  (26子コメント)

I occasionally happen to visit these subs in a sudden act of masochism, and the funny thing is that the users there tend to say exactly the same thing about "liberals" (which includes, by their definition, everyone who doesn't believe that brown people are an inferior race).

[–]Hot4_TeaCha 86ポイント87ポイント  (20子コメント)

I can see how someone who spends too much time on Tumblr and Shit Reddit Says might come away with that conclusion.

But it's always really funny to see them tear down people who are, mostly, high school/college kids who are just experimenting with applying new ways to frame issues that they're learning about as if they're striking at the intellectual heart of "liberalism."

It's like, yeah way to punch down on that 16 year old girl you intellectual juggernaut you!

[–]Murgie 93ポイント94ポイント  (8子コメント)

I can see how someone who spends too much time on Tumblr and Shit Reddit Says might come away with that conclusion.

That's pretty much the phenomena which drives me away from subs like /r/TumblrInAction. Despite the fact that I can often get a good laugh from the content, the comment sections are atrocious because the majority of the user base seem to have no sense of scale whatsoever. (Or sense of satire, but that's another matter.)

They see their reddit feed filled nonsense day in and day out, and it seems to lead them to believe that what they're seeing must be overwhelmingly prevalent in reality, after all they see it every day.

[–]Dr-Sommer 31ポイント32ポイント  (5子コメント)

They see their reddit feed filled nonsense day in and day out, and it seems to lead them to believe that what they're seeing must be overwhelmingly prevalent in reality, after all they see it every day.

That's just Reddit in general, though. There are honorable exceptions, but this site is mostly a bunch of echo chambers in one way or another. The FBI is literally Hitler and Sanders is the messiah, just to name a few other examples.

[–]promonk 20ポイント21ポイント  (4子コメント)

That's not just Reddit, but the modern web. Social networks (of the internet type) have made it very easy to fall into a rhetorical trap of one's own, unconscious devising. Basically, anywhere you're asked "tell us your interests so we can personalize for you!" is a fish trap of intellectual echoes.

[–]Dr-Sommer 13ポイント14ポイント  (1子コメント)

True, but Reddit is especially prone to this effect due to the voting system. Of course, even without such a system people will still tend to group with other people with similiar views, but the voting system likely has an amplifying effect on this phenomenom.

[–]dlm891 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

I still believe Reddit is better than many message boards because I see a lot more "self-reflection" discussions on Reddit than anywhere else. Like the one going on in this thread right now.

[–]EDGE515 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Even Google has personalized search results, which means the news you read is catered to your own interests. This then leads into a feedback loop that reinforces your own beliefs because it's almost certainly the majority of what news you see on the internet.

コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

    [–]mdmrules 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

    They act like it's channels on a TV and this is all that's available to them and they are just sick of it!... when in reality they're the ones seeking it out to get all fired up in the first place.

    Where are all of these crazy liberals? I am pretty liberal and so are most of my friends and I never hear this stuff. My professional peers and social group doesn't include 16-22 year old bloggers so their opinions have little effect on my world.

    [–]sadcatpanda -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    TIA from what I've seen takes satire seriously. Tumblr has a really specific sense of humor and reddit does not get it.

    [–]kornian 57ポイント58ポイント  (4子コメント)

    Places like /r/The_Donald are dripping with insecurity. That's what drives them to Trump. Same massively insecure (I'm the smartest, I have all the big words) personality.

    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

      [–]BamaFlava 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

      If they were 16 years old, but they're not. They're professionals in respected fields or college students writing Thesis papers like the guy above. Once you know enough of them you realize they're not as smart as people think. Self reflections goes a long way there, and I'm not immune to it either.

      [–]Ambassador_Buta 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Being young is no excuse for having an idiotic view on something

      [–]maybe_I_am_a_bot 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

      My favourite part is when they bring the data, and are all "can't debunk that huh?", all the while anyone disagreeing with them, and thus not allowing any debunking to happen.

      [–]thewoodendesk 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Meh, it gets repetitive after a while. Something something globalist something something cultural marxism something something white genocide.

      [–]BashfulTurtle 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      The crazy part is that you can look at the very top levels of the wealth distribution...and can find almost every nationality/gender ID/major religion represented.

      It's almost like...those things don't factor into success.

      コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

        [–]neilfarted 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        There's very few of us with no blind spots. We are all human, and being aware of our biases doesn't completely eradicate them.

        [–]KnockKnockKGB 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

        It's become unfocused with the inclusion of non-American redditors who have no real democratic connection with the American election. Instead those who share only the most controversial ideals with Trump (immigration) use it as a platform to reach an audience they otherwise wouldn't on a smaller subreddit like /r/European. Just look through the comments, it's by far the most international American election subreddit.

        [–]insaneHoshi 10ポイント11ポイント  (4子コメント)

        It's ironic that you should say that, since judging a sub on the basis of a single comment is also a self renforceing bubble of information.

        I'm not saying that sub isn't a cesspool, but people saying it is a just parroting what everyone else is saying about it. But when this nazi's post is being called out by other r/the Donald users, the perspective is a bit more complex.

        [–]BashfulTurtle 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

        This is the kind of post on Reddit that makes you wonder, "why did this person bother?"

        Semantics/technicalities/whatever

        [–]HeresCyonnah 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        But when that comment can't even be downvoted into the negatives, that tells you something about their readers.

        [–]Hot4_TeaCha -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Why would you assume assessments are based on a single comment? And in a response to a post that references multiple forums, why would you assume r/thedonald is the primary target?

        Defensive much? I actually find that sub kind of funny and alternately frightfully ignorant. But the first thing on the list I replied to was Stormfront for fuck's sake.

        [–]insaneHoshi 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Have you done an analysis of the sub or are you parroting what other users say about it?

        And let me be clear I'm not a member of that sub but I'm anti cognitive bias in any form it takes

        [–]dragonfangxl 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I mean, I like the_Donald and I saw this post, people on the_Donald still go on /r/all and see the same exact posts as everyone else

        [–]EARTHWAKED 8ポイント9ポイント  (11子コメント)

        You say "bubble" like it's shameful but what about the entirety of reddit? You're all living in a bubble hivemind and you mock r/the_Donald for doing the same with their views. You paint us all with one brush but you neglect the fact that the highest upvoted post in the original thread was someone calling out OP for being a nazi. We are obviously not all like that, don't be foolish.

        [–]Hot4_TeaCha 17ポイント18ポイント  (7子コメント)

        Some of us get most of our news from outside of Reddit.

        Reddit is mostly for DIY, funny gifs, articles about science and IT, and keeping up with what new maymays the kids are into these days.

        If Reddit IS where you get most of your current events and information then we have a real problem.

        [–]EARTHWAKED -4ポイント-3ポイント  (6子コメント)

        Then explain why the highest upvoted posts in this thread are ones calling Trump and his supporters Nazis just because they don't agree with him?

        [–]Hot4_TeaCha 15ポイント16ポイント  (5子コメント)

        Did you consider that maybe they don't agree with him because they think he's a fascist rather than the other way around?

        [–]BashfulTurtle 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Referencing "you" in relation to a massive reader base - even if the implication is slight - falls victim to the same point you're taking your stance with.

        [–]Exist50 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        You paint us all with one brush but you neglect the fact that the highest upvoted post in the original thread was someone calling out OP for being a nazi.

        And yet the original, highly upvoted post that spawned it all contains the same level of content and fact checking.

        [–]nameless912 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I think there's a little bit of glass house syndrome here. S4Pers say the same thing, that we aren't all idiots who can't do math or understand the election process, but a lot of /r/the_donald people paint us with a wide brush. Can we all acknowledge that all of us have opinions, and we belong to the groups that most closely align to our opinions, and that's that? If you like Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, alright! Go to your respective echo chambers and enjoy yourselves! I'll go to my favorite echo chamber and keep figuring out ways Sanders can mathematically win. Attacking each other on Reddit does absolutely nothing. The fact that I think Clinton is a crook and Trump is an overt racist are my opinions and other people are allowed having their own opinions too. Let's all just enjoy ourselves and have fun, please? All this serious bullshit makes it almost intolerable sometimes.

        [–]MAGA_USA 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

        I don't understand how anyone can be that willfully blind.

        Just go to /r/Sandersforpresident and watch them do mental gymnastics explaining how Bernie is actually winning.

        [–]MrPibbWasBetter 19ポイント20ポイント  (3子コメント)

        I'll take insufferable Bernie or Hillary supporters over neo-Nazis any day.

        [–]guydawg 1ポイント2ポイント  (15子コメント)

        you're not wrong. but people shouldn't forget that this applies to every single political group. they all have that bubble. they're all correct and righteous, according to themselves.

        [–]robboywonder 48ポイント49ポイント  (10子コメント)

        waaaait wait wait.

        This is a false equivalence. You absolutely cannot equate the insane r/the_donald bubble to, say, the ACLU. The ACLU is comprised of lawyers and intelligent people. r/the_donald is full of hateful middle-Americans.

        [–]grumpyold 15ポイント16ポイント  (3子コメント)

        Talk about a false equivalence. One is an anonymous subreddit, another is a group of people who do something in the real world.

        [–]erasedgod 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

        How dare he not comprehend the specificity of "every single political group"‽

        [–]BashfulTurtle 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Wow this loser thinks sitting on Reddit all day provoking fights regarding topics I just read an article on isn't doing something in the real world.

        Oh, ho ho - how wrong you are.

        [–]Kanapro 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

        hahaha I love this.

        "NAH DUDE BUT THIS ORG IS IMMUNE TRUST ME BRO"

        [–]guydawg 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

        I mean you're right but I wasn't exactly thinking of the ACLU when making that comparison. more thinking of stuff like occupy wall street. loosely affiliated political movements.

        [–]dagnart 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

        That's still a false equivalence. Yes, righteousness is present across the political spectrum, but there a difference between feeling righteous about a stance on the importance of banking reform and income inequality, which are complex and ambiguous subjects in which many viewpoints can be argued, and feeling righteous about a stance against race mixing, which is not at all a complex subject. Yes, both may require cognitive dissonance, but the degrees to which it is required are hardly even comparable. It's relatively easy to form a strong stance on a subject in which there are many viewpoints and arguments and few hard facts. It takes an immense amount of effort to form a strong stance when that stance is counter to a wealth of hard facts and history.

        [–]KWtones 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

        He's just saying that the bubble "applies", not that they're the same or equivalent bubbles. Any group can become insane overtime, and it's usually because of the way this bubble evolves from person to person and generation to generation into a self-ritcheous, bigoted platform of us vs them. I think his comment was more of a generalized warning of self awareness and balance than an exact equivocation of bubble-tudeness

        [–]BamaFlava 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        That's a lot of words with no point.

        [–]xmnstr 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

        To some extent, yes, but the far right people are explicitly fact resistant. Little of their opinion has any basis in reality and they are not able to comprehend any factual argument against their opinion. There aren't that many politican groups that are that bad in this regard.

        [–]guydawg 20ポイント21ポイント  (2子コメント)

        I find occupy wall street & the r/sandersforpresident crowd to be equally ignorant to many facts

        the thing with a lot of these groups is that they sort of have the right IDEA, but have very unrealistic solutions to the problems, or just flat out misattribute the causes for the problem that they want to fix

        they also have very odd ways of spreading their message. like the # of people who claim they will vote for trump if sanders isn't the dem nominee offers a peek into the level of thinking that is going on there.

        [–]A_Trip_into_oblivion 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

        like the # of people who claim they will vote for trump if sanders isn't the dem nominee offers a peek into the level of thinking that is going on there.

        These are people who are basically intent on tearing the system down. They don't think it's worth saving. I don't agree, but I get their point of trying to send a message.

        [–]zambartas 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I would think that's where most movements start though, we know what's wrong but don't quite know the best way to fix it yet. Kinda like getting out of the house for dinner, you know you're hungry but maybe don't know where you wanna fix that yet, but you can still get started by getting up and leaving the house.

        [–]giulianosse 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

        You perfectly described /r/The_Donald and /r/SandersForPresident

        [–]xmnstr -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Yes, this is how people come to vote for far right parties.

        [–]kornian 55ポイント56ポイント  (7子コメント)

        Can't believe how quickly blatantly neo-nazi material has been popularised by a lot of Trump supporters. /r/The_Donald has become one of the most popular subreddits and frequently hits /r/all multiple times every day.Never thought sites like reddit were so susceptible to this.

        [–]DoctorExplosion 40ポイント41ポイント  (6子コメント)

        /r/The_Donald is a front for /r/European at this point. That and 4chan's /pol/ board.

        [–]mdmrules 12ポイント13ポイント  (2子コメント)

        I can't even tell the difference between the 4chan-style trolling and real opinion anymore. The trolling has become more precise and the real opinions have become more bombastic.

        Sometimes I feel like it's really sharp satirists subverting the movement... but maybe people are just THAT ignorant and narrow minded?

        [–]DoctorExplosion 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Sometimes I feel like it's really sharp satirists subverting the movement... but maybe people are just THAT ignorant and narrow minded?

        This sadly. I caught the tail end of Rush Limbaugh the other day- first time I've listened in years- and a 19 year old called in and basically talked about Gamergate, feminism, and how "political correctness" is making him vote for Trump.

        You can't make this shit up.

        [–]mdmrules 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

        It's an epidemic!.... Of a few hundred dedicated activists and cohorts of naive teenagers.

        コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

          [–]mdmrules 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

          They're all over the internet. It's fascinating.

          I'll visit the Off-Topic portion of old forums I used to visit a lot, and they're out in full force with their overly formatted copypastas with all kinds of citations and quotes totally taken out of context.

          They have this shared delusion that there is a massive movement afoot and the winds of change are on their side. But fail to realize that it's not a silent majority that's finally being heard, it's a loud/angry/confused/scared minority that's found the perfect outlet to share their obsessions and paranoia.

          [–]Exist50 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Just add /r/worldnews. Same posters and content, just with a prettty veneer.

          [–]Darkblitz9 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

          I visited there just now and people are posting absolutely unsourced articles about both Hillary and Sanders over incredibly petty shit.

          "Sanders was mean to one of his employees, maybe, one time, perhaps... WHAT A SCUMBAG #HITLERBERNIE"

          [–]Ultradroogie 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Racism and nationalism are not interchangeable.

          [–]LithiumTomato 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          What's wrong with nationalism..?

          [–]Dorago1991 -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

          What exactly is wrong with nationalism?

          Lol at all the globalist douches downvoting their butthurt away instead of actually telling me what's bad about Nationalism.

          [–]DeadDoug -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          borders are human constructs, maaan

          コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

            [–]Dr-Sommer 20ポイント21ポイント  (7子コメント)

            At the same time, though, it's really frustrating to see that the supporters of the debunked post will likely cling to their radical and incorrect sentiment no matter what. These people don't tend to get their views challenged by something as insignificant as the truth.

            [–]InternetWeakGuy 28ポイント29ポイント  (0子コメント)

            You can't reason people out of something they were not reasoned into.

            [–]lptomtom 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Exactly: while I admire the intellectual effort of debunking this kind of post, it's ultimately useless because these people are often so used to their echo chamber that truth is seen as propaganda for the "other side, the sheeple, the ones who can't read between the lines and believe the lies on the TV", etc...

            It's tragic, really.

            [–]PT10 19ポイント20ポイント  (1子コメント)

            They're racists, posts on the internet aren't going to change their mind.

            [–]2rio2 18ポイント19ポイント  (0子コメント)

            The interesting thing to me is always how many of them vehemently deny being racist by basing their stance on evidence from clearly racist and white supreme sources, and maintain that stance even if the source is clearly debunked. Like dude, yes you're racist you're just clinging for a way to claim you're not. Willful ignorance is a fascinating bit tragic part of humanity.

            [–]CookieDoughCooter 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Sometimes, over a period of years, they will change their views. A few former racists/bigots have said so, on Reddit, at least.

            [–]LithiumTomato 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Actually if you read the following chain of comments, people are calling him out for his ludicrous views.

            コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

              [–]Stoutyeoman 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I would love to pretend that it will make a difference, but you know that /r/The_Donald is going to completely ignore it.

              [–]grevemoeskr 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Yeah. Protip: If you ever see a highly upvoted comment on economics, assume it's bullshit and that the opposite is correct. Unless you are on /r/badeconomics

              [–]Dorkypotato 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

              "C'mon, everybody! It looks like this here's gonna be an old fashioned country debunking!"

              [–]akkmedk 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Dang, Paw! You see that third bullet point come outta nowhere? Sakes alive!

              [–]DrCharme 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

              unfortunately the harm is done:

              They dump a load of shit, and by the time you shoveled it all, nobody's around anymore

              [–]TriangleDimes 2ポイント3ポイント  (15子コメント)

              It didn't really debunk much. For example, this part about white people becoming a minority in Europe:

              There are multiple things wrong with this statement: first of all, it implicitly assumes that this is a result of immigration, which it is not: it is a result of low birth rates. Secondly, it assumes that this is inheritly bad.

              Nothing was debunked, OP just implied it might not be bad. The articles were not proven to be inaccurate or bad science.

              [–]Blackbeard_ 6ポイント7ポイント  (3子コメント)

              That isn't going to happen for at least a hundred years. And immigrant birth rates drop to match locals' within 2 generations.

              That's if you look at all stats and not cherry pick (first gen immigrants have high birthrates, locals have low, complete turnover within 50 years!) like an idiot.

              [–]TriangleDimes 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

              But it's not all about birthrates though. In the articles it discusses birthrate but also unchecked immigration. Look, I'll even quote the first one for you:

              By 2040, the number of foreign-born and non-white residents will double, meaning they will account for a third of the population, he predicted. By 2066 they will outnumber white Britons.

              Prof Coleman, a professor of demography, drew his findings from research on international population forecasts carried out for the Migration Observatory.

              Alongside migration, falling birth rates among white Britons were also said to account for Britain’s shifting demographic composition.

              [–]Blackbeard_ 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

              Trying to predict to 2040, 2050, etc is still problematic.

              Also, there are plenty of foreign-born whites. Is the author only counting foreign-born non-whites and UK-born non-whites?

              Because then the issue is just about white versus "coloured" (that's the word you're looking for, you can't politically correct racism).

              In 2001, 92.12% of the UK was white. In 2011 that became 87.17%. I simply don't buy his conclusions. I can get a third being non-white by 2040 but at that pace, the majority won't be non-white until near the end of the century, at least the 2080s, probably 2090s.

              And that's assuming whites continue to experience falling fertility rates for more than a century. IF that holds, white supremacists have no one to blame but whites.

              Also, going by current definitions of race (a social construct based on phenotype), not all of the non-whites are black Africans. Mixing Northern European whites and Middle Easterners and many Asians will still, by the end of the century, give a population that would pass for white today. Hell, Northern Europeans are already nearly a third Middle Eastern and Southern Europeans are majority Middle Eastern in heritage. They're all still "white". As long as strong selection for that phenotype occurs, you could mix a minority of whites and a majority of blacks and still come out with an extremely light skinned population. Again, white supremacists would have no one to blame but whites if white-skinned people become an actual minority in the UK before the end of the century.

              [–]TriangleDimes 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

              See, right there, you're doing a better job than OP in the linked post did. The argument should have been "there's no accurate way to tell" and "immigrant birthrates fall" or even the foreign-born whites argument. Great points.

              What I am saying is that OP more or less said "this might not be bad" and that, to me, is just a shitty and lazy argument and makes it more of an opinion piece. There's been better points made in this thread than the linked thread, I just think the linked thread was just poorly done in essence, especially when it comes to such a controversial and contentious topic.

              [–]InternetWeakGuy 5ポイント6ポイント  (10子コメント)

              You've cherry picked pretty well there, deftly avoiding all the instances (90% of the post) where he pointed out the sources did not match the conclusions drawn from them.

              [–]TriangleDimes -2ポイント-1ポイント  (9子コメント)

              I didn't cherry pick. I literally quoted all they said in that section. They move onto a completely different point right after.

              Oh, sorry, I missed the whole first part before that. Here you go:

              nutzi intensifies

              [–]InternetWeakGuy 6ポイント7ポイント  (6子コメント)

              I didn't cherry pick. I literally quoted all they said in that section.

              That's my point - you cherry picked one section that supported your assertion about the entire post, ignoring all the other sections which do not.

              [–]AnAmazingPoopSniffer 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

              Uh you literally just pointed out one thing to justify that his whole post "didn't debunk much"...

              [–]Solid_Waste 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

              He tried the Gish Gallup and got rekt by a Logic Locomotive

              [–]notaflatlander 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

              It's every bit as satisfying as that Marshall McLuhan scene from Annie Hall. I love it too.

              コメントをもっと表示する (15 返事)

                [–]iBoMbY 13ポイント14ポイント  (2子コメント)

                The Merkel part at the end is mostly true though, she was "Secretary for Agitation and Propaganda" in the Free German Youth. Different Source (German)

                [–]rubygeek 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

                For context, it's worth pointing out that if you wanted to attend higher education in East Germany, membership in Free German Youth was pretty much compulsory. As a result, the vast majority of youth in East Germany were members. And if wanted to get somewhere, you'd end up with responsibilities.

                [–]Kolima25 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                just like the previous pope was in Hitlerjugend

                [–]nsiems12 87ポイント88ポイント  (8子コメント)

                I feel bad for the author cited. Saying that is not the first time neonazis have cited to your work as justification must sting.

                [–]kurburux 52ポイント53ポイント  (5子コメント)

                Some weeks ago I've read an article about Hugo Junkers, a german engineer that owned the Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke AG. His company produced innovative planes and motors. He wanted to promote civil aviation. He was an enemy of the Nazis and his company was taken from him in 1933. Afterwards his advanced airliner JU-52 became of the most known german military planes of WWII. And there was nothing he could do about his work being used to kill innocents.

                [–]Chicomoztoc 2ポイント3ポイント  (4子コメント)

                Meanwhile companies that survive to this day willfully helped with all that killing and genocide. Everyone at the top of those companies and their children continued to enjoy their bloodmillions and lavish lives.

                [–]CptBuck 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

                Actually there were trials of German war industrialists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krupp_Trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flick_Trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IG_Farben_Trial

                [–]WikipediaPoster 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                Krupp Trial

                The Krupp Trial (or officially, The United States of America vs. Alfried Krupp, et al.) was the tenth of twelve trials for war crimes that U.S. authorities held in their occupation zone at Nuremberg, Germany after the end of World War II.

                These twelve trials were all held before U.S. military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal, but took place in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. The twelve U.S. trials are collectively known as the "Subsequent Nuremberg Trials" or, more formally, as the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT). The Krupp Trial was the third of three trials of German industrialists; the other two were the Flick Trial and the IG Farben Trial.

                I am a bot. Please contact /u/GregMartinez with any questions or feedback.

                コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                  [–]Ls777 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Happens to a lot of studies. There's one that's used by a lot of anti-trans people where the author also had to complain about people misinterpreting the study.

                  [–]mindbleach 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Neonazis will cite anything. Any data is applicable to their worldview, because their worldview is not based on honest consideration of facts.

                  [–]czhunc 141ポイント142ポイント  (2子コメント)

                  "But, but, but, facts can't be racist!"

                  Yeah, but the way you pull conclusions out of your ass and twist basic research to suit your own hateful world view is.

                  [–]joebleaux 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  The dude literally both said "facts can't be racist" and "racism is good". It's not the facts that are racist, it's the person applying them in a racist manner.

                  [–]Esc_ape_artist 41ポイント42ポイント  (46子コメント)

                  I've read some stuff in /TheDonald and can't figure it out... Is it a serious sub? Some of it seems so over the top it's like it should be /TheDonaldOinion or something. It's a caricature.

                  [–]guydawg 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  well it's an ultra popular sub with a ton of activity. it's "serious" in the sense that they like Donald Trump. but at the same time it's not serious in the sense that they aren't actually looking for actual discussion (whether it's about Trump or any candidate or issue).

                  right now it's interesting because you have memers/shitposters, people just having fun, racists, nationalists, Sanders supporters (aka "cucks" in r/the_donald terminology), actual "normal" Trump supporters who just legitimately think he would be a great president, etc all kind of fighting for their 2-3 hours of r/the_donald reddit fame.

                  but if you had to sum it up the entire in one phrase it would be "ridiculous Trump extreme memes". not "serious political discussion by American electorate"

                  [–]buddythebear 31ポイント32ポイント  (11子コメント)

                  I think it's a serious sub in that the people who go there are serious about voting for Trump, but it's pretty clear they don't take themselves or political/social norms very seriously.

                  Milo Yuannoplis' The establishment conservative's guide to the alt-right is actually a really insightful read if you want to better understand people who frequent /r/The_Donald.

                  [–]terminator3456 -4ポイント-3ポイント  (10子コメント)

                  Who made Milo the arbiter of what a political philosophy & movement is & is not?

                  He's not a political scientist.

                  TL;DR of that piece is "it's a prank bro!"

                  Hilariously, actual nationalist groups came out & refuted it saying "No, we're serious."

                  [–]ebilgenius 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

                  He's not a political scientist.

                  So? Doesn't mean he can't be right.

                  Also your TL;DR is bad

                  [–]buddythebear -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  He's the poster boy of the alt-right. If you want to learn about the movement, you should at least hear someone from inside the movement speak about it.

                  コメントをもっと表示する (7 返事)

                    [–]vlasvilneous 62ポイント63ポイント  (13子コメント)

                    No, I think they are serious, as concluded by this linked post. People will pull anything out of their ass to sound right.

                    Racists, biggots, and all hate groups rely on incomplete data, data that contains traces of their point, and arbitrary conclusions to make their points look like fact. Dig into it, and you find it incorrect.

                    Look at any country where bigotry, racism, or just hatred towards something has or is happening. Hell, look at it here in the USA, where the new bigotry is against trans people and their bathroom rights. Fucking bathroom rights? Holy shit!

                    Anyways, the statements do not mash up to real life facts and statistics, and the arguments made are so general, yet are based in fear of "well... it could happen.".

                    Typical hatred propaganda.

                    [–]kurburux 28ポイント29ポイント  (10子コメント)

                    where the new bigotry is against trans people and their bathroom rights. Fucking bathroom rights? Holy shit!

                    Oh, we've been there before. That's a courthouse in Clinton, Louisiana 1964. Of course racial segregation and transgender rights aren't exactly the same. But it's remarkable how some things seem to repeat itself.

                    More pics

                    [–]mindbleach 24ポイント25ポイント  (4子コメント)

                    Here's the problem: bigots can't understand satire. So a few serious idiots start an enforced circlejerk that looks like a joke, and people who think nobody could possibly be that stupid start adding actual jokes, and then the idiots don't get the joke. That sub is the end result.

                    The people joking need a slap in the face to realize that these people are actual fascists. They're not joking. They don't understand jokes at their expense. Please - stop encouraging them.

                    [–]klajd 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

                    bigots can't understand satire

                    See example Erdogan. He got mad about a small german satire clip about him that only would have reached a few thousands. And most people would have forgotten about it a week later. Then Streisand effect kicked in, millions saw it and now it's a part of history.

                    [–]mdmrules 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Same as thin-skinned trump and his overly defensive attitude toward any kind of criticism.

                    [–]goddom 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    "If you spend all your time pretending to be an asshole, don't be surprised when you find yourself in the company of assholes."

                    ~Albert Einstein

                    [–]xveganrox 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    I think it's mostly because when the sub started most people saw the possibility of him getting the nomination as a joke.

                    [–]StevelandCleamer 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    It's very odd. The people there are absolutely serious about Donald, and talk quite seriously even when they aren't being serious.

                    They rarely support their assertions with such a lengthy collection of sources though, so this specific instance seems more like Stormfront leaking into /r/The_Donald.

                    It started out as mostly trolls, but has actually picked up a lot of real Trump supporters and other people simply dissatisfied with the way this election cycle has been going.

                    And of course, any place where people ironically imitate irrational individuals will eventually end up with people being serious about the shit they spout.

                    [–]Haephestus 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

                    It's called Poe's law. Basically it means that some peoples' political ideologies are totally indistinguishable from sarcasm.

                    For example: "Let's build a big effing wall on the Mexican border to keep the rapist pedophile murderers out. And we'll make Mexico pay for it!"

                    Yes. Some people support and even like this idea. Some people donate actual money from their paychecks to support this idea. It's hard to believe this is real.

                    [–]epicblob 8ポイント9ポイント  (5子コメント)

                    I didn't even notice until this year but reddit as a whole is extremely racist and sexist. I'm just surprised that a neonazi center such as /r/The_Donald hasn't shown up earlier.

                    [–]kultrazero 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Actually, there are a lot of neo-nazi centers on Reddit. It's pretty freaky, lol.

                    [–]mdmrules 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    It is overwhelming discussion on totally unrelated subs too.

                    Go to Documentaries, AdviceAnimals, Cringe, etc etc etc and there are threads filled with racist and xenophobic outrage.

                    They're oddly "winning" the voting most of the time as well.

                    コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                      [–]DrCharme 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      I feel that it started as a tongue in cheek sub, like "ok people make fun of trump quirks, lets roll with it", but with time and popularity comes the oblivious nutjobs, and you get what the donald is today... a steaming pile of shit that leaks into a lot of subs... I even start to see the influence on /r/france...

                      [–]rubygeek 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Trump is a caricature of himself so it seems fitting.

                      [–]BabyPuncher5000 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      You just described everyone who supports Donald Trump. If /r/The_Donald is a satire, then so is the man's entire campaign.

                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                        [–]DerJawsh 57ポイント58ポイント  (10子コメント)

                        So exactly where is this debunked? At best he's casting doubt onto the points trying to be made by using the studies, he hasn't "debunked" it at all.

                        Debunked basically means to prove false, but he hasn't done that, he merely showed that there are factors that aren't being accounted for and that some of the points being made perhaps didn't exactly fit with what a few of the sources were claiming. This was coupled with just snarky comments.

                        For example, here is what he's doing.

                        "A common known fact is the UK has far higher violent crime rates compared to the US!"

                        Him: "Well violent crimes are classified differently there, verbal abuse is counted as a violent crime!" (A common retort to that fact)

                        He hasn't proven that violent crime rates AREN'T higher in the UK, just saying that it's possible that the difference in classification means that the comparison isn't that great and MAY be wrong.

                        He also has quite a few ad hominem fallacies thrown in with his arguments. For some of the studies, his retort is basically, "That source sucks" without actually addressing it. That is the definition of an Ad Hominem fallacy where you attack the source and not the argument.

                        Both the original comment and the "debunking" are absolute crap. But it seems /r/bestof is actually just /r/PeopleWhoSaidStuffThatConformsToMyWorldView

                        E: Just to note, he is right about how the OP did mis-represent some of the data/findings in the studies (such as how the original author of one of the studies noted) and that some of the studies may have been flawed, I'm just saying that there isn't much "debunking" going on in the comment.

                        [–]thepunismightier 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        You can argue that whoever picked the title for the bestof post chose the wrong verb, but the_donald's OP asked for a rating on his compilation of sources, and the badscience guy does a fairly thorough job of rating that compilation of sources.

                        [–]TriangleDimes 20ポイント21ポイント  (4子コメント)

                        Same thing with the rape rate in Sweden. If they want to debunk the claim it would make sense to prove that because of the broad definition of rape it is higher and by the American definition of rape they are actually lower. Hell, the study they cited apparently disproving the link between refugees and rape ends with this:

                        The heretofore mentioned barriers to the research question indicates the absolute necessity of a comprehensive sexual violence database within Europe, whilst demonstrating the benefits of ethnic data reporting. It is argued were more adequate and extensive statistics available, investigation into a correlation, or lack of, between immigrants and rape would be better attained.

                        They're basically saying there's no way they could know and yet and the paper is more or less about nationalism and "right wing" beliefs.

                        [–]Big_Theta 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

                        Someone makes a claim: "Migrants are rapists"

                        This person attempts to provide evidence: "incidents of rape have exploded in Sweden."

                        Someone else refutes that evidence: "you cannot claim Sweden has higher incidence of rape based on those numbers because of how Sweden defines rape and how incidents are counted in Sweden"

                        It does not become the second person's responsibility to prove migrants are not rapists. The first person made the claim and the first person failed to provide evidence.

                        [–]TriangleDimes 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        It does not become the second person's responsibility to prove migrants are not rapists.

                        Of course it does, if they choose to respond. If one person makes a point and provides evidence to back it up, they ought to provide either a counter-example or point out where in the original source it is incorrect. The second person couldn't do that, most likely, because the PDF was in Swedish so their argument just became "we can never know." I just don't see that as a very good argument.

                        Whether or not you believe it is their "job," I am saying they did a shit job so if you would rather discuss what was said vs. what doesn't need to be said, go ahead.

                        [–]Exist50 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        I can add something to the Sweden rape statistics thing. Usually in these kinds of posts, they refer to a study on rape taken from a major Swedish city (forgive my lack of specificity). However, what they always forget to mention is that the study was conducted in the equivalent of the city's slum/ghetto. No wonder you'll find high rates of both minorities and all sorts of crime if that's where you draw from, but context is always the first thing lost in an internet argument.

                        [–]Definitelynotasloth 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        I agree. Poor arguments and discussion all around. The only reason this is on /r/bestof is because of the context - not content.

                        [–]wantonballbag -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Don't bother. This entire thread is a Bernout security blanket. Just let them cuddle each other.

                        コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                          [–]trollMD 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          Ph.D. In cuckology Outstanding

                          [–]The_Nisshin_Maru 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          To be fair, he got called out for being a blatant racist fairly quickly by responders

                          [–]Exist50 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I just love how in the initial post, when asked for valid sources, the guy uses Brietbart, the Daily Mail, Wikipedia, and others in his reply.

                          No, those are not legitimate sources...

                          [–]El_Dumfuco 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          That's interesting. I work with pure mathematics, so I'm lucky not having nazis cite my papers.

                          Damn, sick burn

                          [–]kajimeiko 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          In the case of Ostersund (Swedish Town) local police chief Stephen Jerand issuing a warning against women venturing out at night in light of recent attacks, what is the explanation for that?

                          http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/12188274/Police-warn-women-not-to-go-out-alone-in-Swedish-town-after-spate-of-sex-attacks.html

                          I would be interested if there has actually been an unbiased investigation into what exactly accounts for Sweden supposedly on paper being one the rape capitals of the world. Obviously their definition of rape plays a part, but it is hard to gauge what the other factors are. There is probably not ethnic statistics on perpetrators there either.

                          [–]widespreadhammock 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          If you look at the full comments, the original author actually shows up and tries to re-debunk the bad science post with more anti-Semitic nonsense.

                          [–]evadcobra1 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          Not surprising, its from /r/the_donald

                          [–]Brekbaru 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I have a dream that one day, political or social posts on reddit will be neither a racist circlejerk nor a SJW clown fiesta.

                          [–]Urfeelsdntmatr 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          Yeah, except the debunking was fundamentally false and intentionally dishonest. Oh well, feels over reals.

                          How dow we know how he said was fundamentally false? Let's look at the first thing claims made.

                          Ergo, whilst there are no verifiable correlations between numbers of immigrants and rape rates,

                          No verifiable correlations... Any time there is a mass influx of individuals into an area, there will be at least the equal rise in the rate of crimes in that area. Combine this with the fact impoverished individuals commit crimes at a greater rate than other demographics and we can deduce simply through rational logic the statement, " no verifiable correlations between numbers of immigrants and rape rates," is fundamentally false and intentionally dishonest as they don't even fucking look at ethic background in the sources he sited.

                          here is a non partisan organization saying the same thing all those evil racists are

                          Significantly, the report does not touch on the background of the rapists. One should, however, keep in mind that in statistics, second-generation immigrants are counted as Swedes.

                          The pesky truth starts to emerge.

                          A new trend reached Sweden with full force over the past few decades: gang rape -- virtually unknown before in Swedish criminal history. The number of gang rapes increased spectacularly between 1995 and 2006. Since then no studies of them have been undertaken.

                          What?? but.. no correlations. It's hard to believe those debunkers when they lie so well and say things which give us warm fuzzies about the world.

                          it is crucial to consider why the various sexual attacks in Germany and Sweden have evoked emotionally-charged responses from the general public and right-wing parties."

                          Gee, I wonder why the public would be upset at immigrants committing crimes, they must all be xenophobic racists...

                          Racists often cite Sweden as an example of "the rape capital of Europe"

                          Of course, only a racist would be concerned about this.

                          Edit:

                          Oh and look, this was all made by a poster who is exactly what he claims to hate

                          Go back to /r/the_donald with your maymays, you subhuman garbage.

                          Dehumanizing people they disagree with? Nah, we wouldn't want to hold ourselves to the same standard as we hold others.

                          [–]areyoukiddingme5233 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

                          It should be worth something that most of the responding posts on The_Donald to the nazi's post are calling him out as a nazi and expressing disapproval. There are nutjobs in every community and its important to not judge the entire community based on them.

                          [–]Exist50 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          And yet the original post is guilty of much the same, and is still highly upvoted. If that doesn't represent the community, then what does?

                          [–]areyoukiddingme5233 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I take every post's votes in the donald with many grains of salt. It had ~30-40 upvotes when I saw it, and the negative responses have around 50-120. There is so much brigading and vote manipulation in attempts to smear the entire sub that indictments of the entire 130,000 person sub are unreasonable at best. Also, what lots of people do is upvote everything on a page to counteract the downvoting brigades, so a long post with lots of sources isn't going to be read and just upvoted without consideration of the actual point of the post.

                          [–]rubygeek 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          That may be so, but at the same time it is noteworthy that a lot of nazis and other vermin have come out of the woodwork in support of Trump. Most Trump supporters may not like that, but their candidate has excited far right extremists more than any major candidate in decades.

                          [–]areyoukiddingme5233 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          "A lot" is not necessarily an objective measurement. The actual percentage of all people (or even trump supporters for that matter) who are legitimately racist, white supremacist, etc. is infinitesimally low. While they will agree with Trump's policies based on racism, it does not prove that trump's policies are inherently racist, especially when Trump himself has said nothing of the sort. All claims of his policies being racist have been proven to be grounded in a misconstruction of his words and are an example in confirmation bias. Therefore, it's improper to attribute responsibility for the vermin's reaction to Trump himself.

                          *edit: it's also important to add that true racists are universally agreed to be morons who will twist whatever messages they hear to suit their own biases, and Trump's policies are no different.

                          [–]Howisthisaname 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          And the comments right after are him being called out as a nazi by others (which got 3x as many upvotes as the nazi's comment), then the nazi trying desperately to prove he's not a nazi and failing... but we don't talk about that why? Political bias is so prevalent during election years.

                          コメントをもっと表示する (7 返事)