• OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    So punishing free speech and protest is not fascist provided that they are “only” in jail for a couple of days? Seriously?

    Obviously cracking down on protests doesn’t mean it’s 1930s Germany but it’s part of the same playbook, surely?

    • Anarcho-Bolshevik@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Most other prisoners of the early camps were soon set free again—not because of outside intervention, but because the authorities felt that a brief period of shock and awe was normally enough to force opponents into compliance. As a result, there was a rapid turnover in 1933, with the places of released prisoners quickly filled with new ones.

      The duration of detention was unpredictable. Prisoners who expected to regain their freedom after a few days were mostly disappointed, but it was rare for them to remain inside for a year or more. Longer spells were served in the bigger, more permanent camps, but even in a large camp like Oranienburg, around two‐thirds of all prisoners stayed for less than three months.244

      The result was a constant stream of former prisoners back into German society, and it was these men and women who would become the most important sources of private knowledge about the early camps.

      (Emphasis added. Source.)

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      It was at a private college campus and the dean suspended all the students protesting and requested to have NYPD come remove them. In other words, the property caretaker was being a dick and had them removed from the premises.

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m certainly not defending the silencing of protest. It’s just that all fascism is authoritarian, but not all authoritarianism is fascist. Fascism has a specific definition and it’s a whole other degree of bad.

      • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Fair enough. It is being used more colloquially in this case, you’re right. I retract the accusation of fascism and substitute “an unjust authoritarian crackdown on the right to freedom of speech and expression, undermining the very tenets of democratic society. A national embarrassment.”

      • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        7 months ago

        would you be able to link to a page that helps describe fascism as you say: that relies on severity of consequence?

        asking because whilst i agree that fascism is specific - and this doesn’t cover it - im not sure that degree of severity is part of the definition and that could be a dangerous precedent to set because the other parts of fascism about control and quashing dissent enable the severe consequences once they are present

          • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            really appreciate you taking the effort! i see where you’re coming from with the “enemies of the state” part, and think that id agree there