-
Playing devil's advocate here...
If you; 1) didn't treat the "other" group in society in an objectively bad way - i.e. harming them, etc. and 2) as a result of the policy no harm came to the other group; is there anything intrinsically wrong with prioritising the citizens of a nation, and using the nation as a construct to unify and create solidarity in society?
Also out of curiosity (as an ideal) do you think employing communism would be positive because it creates economic equality / is inherently equitable, or because it would result in a happier more cohesive society? (if both, is one more important?)
hugo7-
didn't treat the "other" group in society in an objectively bad way
non-inclusion is objectively bad
-
Also out of curiosity (as an ideal) do you think employing communism would be positive because it creates economic equality / is inherently equitable, or because it would result in a happier more cohesive society? (if both, is one more important?)
I don't believe employing communism is actually possible but I do believe embracing more socialism would help this country a lot.
Sumo
It's a fair point that people used the ideology as an excuse, but communism as an idea didn't cause those killings. At it's heart communism is about equality, all people being equal, the fact that there has been genocides in it's name doesn't change this. Whereas a nationalist ideology like Nazism is very much about one group of people being more important than others. That's why they can never be equivalents.