Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Herschelkrustofsky (talk | contribs) at 22:49, 31 May 2004. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Their supporters are frequently low-income young men who blame their or their society's problems on immigrants and a presumed Jewish conspiracy.

I have a small quibble with this. Their members are generally as described, but their supporters, both ideological and financial, are often quite wealthy and/or politically involved. -- April

I've cut : "However, more mainstreeam organisations such as the FN and Vlaams Blok strong refute this description." It was writen in the previous para. : "no political party of significant importance will describe itself as neo-nazi." I think this is somewhat redundant. Ericd 15:41, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I've always thought that describing the Front National as neo-nazi misses the point and banalizes "nazism" up to the point where it's meaningless. Still, some people argue that they are neo-nazis, so we should mention that. David.Monniaux 15:49, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Should mention important role of neo-Nazi &c. music. --Daniel C. Boyer 15:36, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)

(shudder) That's going to be a fun one to write in a manner acceptable to all parties. Probably a separate article, though.

Yes; this was my thinking. --Daniel C. Boyer 17:39, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Bands who are/have been actively part of neo-Nazi culture (e.g. Skrewdriver, Fortress) vs. bands that have been accused of being neo-Nazis (e.g. Death In June, Non, Rozz Williams of all people). And labels that have been so accused (e.g. World Serpent). And bands and labels that have been so accused and sued for libel and won (I forget who off the top of my head, at least one recent case). And so on. And so forth. This is an actively contentious issue, and I shall salute anyone who can do a good job on it ... - David Gerard 15:56, Jan 27, 2004 (UTC)

I think the article should mention whether the party is openly neo-Nazi or whether its a label applied to them by their apponents. Those of you who know more about the subject please say whether the party is openly Nazi or not.

Italy

• Movimento Sociale Italiano (MSI) (Mussolini) Misplaced Pages says it is neo-fascist
• Movimento Solidad Italiano (MSI) (LaRouche) ?? ~ not a chance.
• Alleanza Nazionale (AN) Musolini's grandaughter left the party because the party leader condemed her grandfather, so its not openly neo-fascist anymore.
• Lega Nord (LN) ??

USA

• The Ku Klux Klan dificult question because it was founded long before Nazism existed although politically very similar, also there are different organisations calling themselves the KKK
• American Nazi Party name says it all really
• National Alliance/] dnies beeing Nazi (although the evidence seems to suggest otherwise).
• Christian Identity??
• World Church of the Creator??
• Buchanan Brigade definately denies it
• Lyndon LaRouche definately denies it
• Council of Conservative Citizens??

UK

• The British Movement originally called National Socialism Movement so openly Nazi atleast originally
• The British National Party definately deny it today, I think they denied it under Tyndall aswell but not sure
• The British Nazi Party also known as the "November 9th Society". -name says it all
• The International Third Position??
• The National Front (UK) probably deny it
• The [[National Socialist Movement - linked to London nail bomber David Copeland -title says it all
• The Flag NF??
• League of St. George??
• Combat 18 openly Nazi
• The White Nationalist Party??

Other countries

• Austrian Freedom Party - (Austria) don't think they'd admit it
• Front National - (France) don't think they'd admit it
• Mouvement National Républicain - (France) don't think they'd admit it
• White Noise - (promoters of nationalist skinhead/Oi bands such as Skrewdriver) probably would admit it, not sure
• Blood & Honour - militant neo-Nazi network, distributing racist music -openly Nazi
• Vlaams Blok - (Belgium) don't think they'd admit it
• Liberal Democratic Party of Russia??
• Hvit Ariskt Motstand (White Aryan Resistance) - (Sweden)??
• Swiss People's Party - (Switzerland)??
• Greater Romania Party - (Romania)??

Saul Taylor 07:26, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Jewwatch

I object against the inclusion of the link to the Jewwatch website. It's bad enough that these people peddle their views—linking to them just gives them wider exposure.
JFW | T@lk 10:13, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

You could say the same for any of the organisational sites. Even though I largely agree with your POV on their views, it's still POV - David Gerard 10:45, May 7, 2004 (UTC)

Neo-Nazism in Russian

A question to the community. I have just added a long writeup about a part of the topic, the Russian neo-Nazis. I suspect that it should merit a separate page. So the question is, what exactly is our policy on splitting pages? If I put the long description into a separate article, what should I leave in this article? Any advice is greatly appreciated. Watcher 11:10, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

I'd say it's not a problem yet. When the page starts getting really long (usually considered the 32KB warning), it might be time to split it out to a separate article with a summary paragraph in the main article - David Gerard 13:11, May 15, 2004 (UTC)