Which Nazi Ideas am I Supposed to Debate for Your Profit?

I am behind on this, of course, but the leaders of Substack have responded to the letter voicing concerns about the monetization of Nazi newsletters on Substack. I signed the letter, and Substack’s leadership was quite clear that they intended to go on making money from people who wish to kill and oppress their fellow humans. I am not surprised —the VC class as a whole seems very alt-right/Nazi curious. I haven’t decided what to do with this newsletter. Moving it would require money, something this newsletter definitely does not make. But I am coming back to this because one aspect of the response stuck out to me:

I just want to make it clear that we don’t like Nazis either—we wish no-one held those views. But some people do hold those and other extreme views. Given that, we don't think that censorship (including through demonetizing publications) makes the problem go away—in fact, it makes it worse.

We believe that supporting individual rights and civil liberties while subjecting ideas to open discourse is the best way to strip bad ideas of their power.

Emphasis mine.

This comment leaves me with a question: Which Nazi ideas, specifically, does the Substack leadership think have power? I mean, we have seen Nazism in its full glory: it led to a massive world war, oppression of anyone the Nazis did not like, and perhaps the world’s first industrialized genocide. Which of those ideas am I supposed to debate? Which violent eliminationism is worthy of further refutation? Is it the genocide? The demand for other’s land for themselves? The idea that once race is inherently superior to others and thus can oppress and murder the others at will?

See, my mother’s family is Polish. By which I mean they all immigrated from Poland. Some of my uncles were old enough to have lived through the Second World War. I don’t have all of the details (gee, Uncle Frank, what did you do in the war? is not a question a child asks of the obviously very angry, very damaged man who survived), but I do know that the Nazis debated with my family members and their countrymen with a bullet to their heads. Explain to me, again, why that idea is worthy of monetization? How, precisely, is a parlor debate about whether my relatives, and anyone who doesn’t fit their notion of a true human, deserve to live in anyway going to refute the idea more effectively than the outcome of WWII?

Because Nazis don’t respect democracy. They don’t debate in good faith, and they aren’t interested in the give and take of a pluralistic society. They demand power and they seek to attain through violence. The idea that you can talk them down from that position is insane. All allowing them on your platform does is allow them the infrastructure necessary to spread their hate.

De-platforming works. Not all speech is deserving of support. You cannot shout fire in a crowded theater, to use the cliche, and companies make decisions all the time about what does and does not constitute acceptable speech on their platforms. Substack leadership knows both of these positions are true: they ban porn and sex workers from their platform. No, pretending that you can reason with people who wish to destroy democracy is nothing more than a disingenuous attempt to profit from pro-genocide and other anti-democratic positions while providing a fig-leaf to keep others from abandoning their platform.

There are no Nazi ideas with power. History has thoroughly refuted them to anyone who wishes to see. You are not required to give platforms to people who wish to destroy your tolerant society. But the Substack leadership obviously cares more about the money the Nazis bring them than about preserving democracy or a tolerant, pluralistic society.

As I said, I am not sure what I am going to do with this newsletter. It is a hobby. I have roughly 120 subscribers, and don’t even have a paid option. Even if I did, it is unlikely I could bring in enough to pay for other services. But I do know that I am not going to play the Substack leaders game and pretend that I must take seriously the disproven ideas of the people who wish to destroy my family, my friends, and my society. No amount of money should be worth that.