I hate how “anti-war” has been hijacked by these people to mean, let imperialist countries invade whoever they want with no consequences. (in the case of tankies, any imperialist country that isn’t in NATO).

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        71·
        7 days ago

        I wouldn’t say “Nazi apologist” is an ad hominem… It seems directly related to the discussion at hand.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            111·
            7 days ago

            Is there a “trying to fit everything you don’t like into a fallacy in order to dismiss it outright” fallacy?

            There is the “fallacy fallacy,” but that’s slightly different I believe (though you’re also doing that one).

            But I’ll indulge: You know nobody was referring specifically to the National Socialist party of 1930s Germany. Don’t be obtuse.

                  • 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠@programming.dev
                    2·
                    6 days ago

                    Since you seem to be a little thick: you’re being called a Nazi apologist because you’re effectively providing excuses for why Russia’s fascist dictator was right to invade Ukraine, or at the very least isn’t to blame. It’s a horseshit narrative because Putin alone is in charge of his army and Ukraine has not done anything a sovereign nation shouldn’t be allowed to do.

                    It’s a direct attack on your position, which appears to apologize for a fascist dictator invading a sovereign nation. It’s neatly wrapped in the form of an insult, but that doesn’t make it an ad hominem by and of itself. For that to be the case, he’d have to call you a Nazi and not bother addressing what you said. But he directly addressed it, by stating that he believes your argument is apologizing for a fascist dictator. Hence it attacks your position, hence it’s not an ad hominem.