Comment on My thoughts on Hexbear. Posting as the megathread was locked.

• GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  To be fair, you guys argue in bad faith as well right now. The statement is factually correct. A person with one wrong belief can still be correct about something else. Otherwise by your logic all vegetarians are nazis as well because Hitler didn’t eat meat either.

  source

  • silent_water@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    nazi sympathizers don’t get good faith because they’re excusing people who want to wipe many of us from the face of the earth. I don’t care about how right their opinions are - they’re my enemies.

    source

    • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      but he’s not excusing the nazi apologist, he just accidentally quoted them on an unrelated topic and then distanced themselves upon learning they were an apologist.

      source

      • silent_water@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        saying we should take a nazi seriously on their point that the asiastics are devilish is nazi apologia - Zenz isn’t merely an apologist, he’s straight up a christofascist.

        source
      • sovietknuckles@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        I think I have made it pretty clear that while I condemn Zenz fatuous remarks on Nazis, I still believe that his observations about Xinjiang are not necessarily incorrect.

        That is not distancing themselves from the Nazi sympathizer. They’re listening to all of the propaganda the Nazi sympathizer puts out, then rejecting the parts that don’t support their specific narrative.

        source
  • GarbageShoot@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    “Being a Nazi means your testimony is not worth hearing outside of a courtroom” =/= “If you believe anything a Nazi also happened to believe, that means you are a Nazi”

    You invoke logic, but the formal relation is completely different.

    source
  • SeborrheicDermatitis@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Theoretically he could still be right but there is no reason to believe he is. He doesn’t speak any local languages, has never done any fieldwork in the region, and his methodology/analysis is extremely unscientific and poor. I would encourage you to read his articles and see for yourself-it’s based on extremely shoddy and weak correlations w/ no serious causal connection whatsoever. I was honestly shocked at how poor the “scholarship” was considering how many people take it seriously.

    There’s obviously extensive evidence of persecution and forced cultural assimilation, but that is not genocide. These things matter.

    source