Nexus297
26577
871
11
Jan 27, 2026 2:21 AM
Nexus297
26577
871
11
GodAintReal
Yeah. If he has been being honest, his poem would have been:
“First they came for the “others,” and I was glad, because fuck them.
But then it impacted ME! Why isn’t anyone protecting ME?!?!?”
It’s always annoyed me when that poem is referenced. He wouldn’t have learned ANY lesson if they hadn’t gotten around to him. THEN it was a tragedy. He even intentionally omitted a bunch of other folks they “came for” first.
Fuck him.
Fuck fascists and all selfish, stupid enablers of fascism.
Allrighty
That's conservatism for you. But if this is how to get through to them...
orp0piru
It's not a long poem, folks.
thanatos777
The National Holocaust Museum removes the line about Communists, because of course they do.
Bundalicious
Complete lack of meaningful action will have USA citizens saying these exact words. No one is coming to save you, you have to save yourselves. When the outsiders come to end the madness. We will assume you all wear the red hats.
Rogerwilco1974
- Pastor Martin Niemoller
- Maria Shriver
- Michael Scott
thoughtfulllama
Meanwhile, people who voted Trump into office AGAIN will regret their decision at the start of a social media post and demand that people forgive and forget at the end.
nicholcm
Knowing the background to the quote somehow makes it even more powerful
18booma
Imagine writing that after manufacturing consent for genocide from the apartheid state. For those not familiar with Bari Weiss, she's the zionist who got installed to make CBS more zionistic.
peedrinkingcrapface
the real takeaway of this poem is that retrospect is a luxury bought with cowardice, that in times like these standing up for the right thing is often mutually exclusive to writing a poignant verse about it afterword, or to telling your kids and grandkids that you were one of the good guys. it comes down to a choice between being on the right side of history and being on the living side of history.
Allrighty
It's not purely retrospective though - it's a lesson to future generations.
MirroredImage
The man didn't defend his neighbors when they were being hunted down, didn't confront fascism when it may have mattered, was sent to a camp alongside everyone else anyway, and regretted his cowardice every moment of the rest of his days. And your takeaway was "cowardice is good actually, I'm gonna do nothing for anyone and hope it works out?" Were you homeschooled in Mississippi?
peedrinkingcrapface
where did i ever say it was good???
blaghart
And the Democrats are still at the "When they came for the trade unionists" phase, given how many of them still respond to "the system is fundamentally broken and Trump is the culmination of it's flaws, it must be destroyed" with "you're a russian bot/magat!"
VoidScreamer
I don't think you're a bot. But you are definitely a MAGAT, and therefore a steaming pile of shit.
TeddyMoment
You're complaining about the wrong group.
blaghart
Fascists and their collaborators? No I'm pretty sure I'm complaining about the right group there, person who still thinks that federal judges can stop ICE
Telemapus
It kind of irritates me how much the British changed the poem, mostly to create a spurious delineation between "communist" and "socialist" and to erase "social democrat". This is the original:
powwerbottom
Wow, I didn't know this. Thank you - now I'm more than kind of irritated
ThatOtherMacAvoyWoman
Don’t be. As far as I can tell it’s like saying “fish” instead of “goldfish.” It’s just a little less specific, not inaccurate.
BrdCdn
Probably because at the time social democrat was a German party so they just simplified it. There are differences between communists and socialists. The original clearly separates them too. It just references the German social democrat party they belonged to vs the communists. The poem makes no statement or judgment about any group. Translation seems fine to me.
stryhf
It's also capitalized, so I assume they meant the SPD; the centre-left party started 150 years ago.
WaxedApple
The SPD did their best. They held their nose and voted for a weak and ineffectual elder conservative, who then turned over power to the Nazis because ultimately he hated the left more than the fascists
Allrighty
That wasn't the best. But they also hated communists more than nazis.
DerpMeister
The SPD was the only party in the Reichstag that voted against the "Ermächtigungsgesetz", the law that handed all power over from parliament to the (Nazi) government. All other remaining parties in the Reichstag voted for that law and the Nazis needed those extra votes of the non-Nazi parties to pass that law that turned the Weimar Republic into Nazi Germany. Communist and Anarchist assholes today try to blame the Social Democrats for causing the fall of the Weimar Republic by cooperating with
DerpMeister
liberal and some conservative parties of the Weimar Republic, because elements of those conservative parties were, in the end, voting in favor of the Nazis. Those assholes do this today to hide that fact that communist and anarchist assholes back then did not just fight against the Nazis, but against anyone who tried to establish and keep Democracy in Germany. The communist wanted to - surprise!, surprise! - abolish Democracy and turn Germany into a Communist state like the Soviet Union. The
DerpMeister
Social Democrats were the only Socialists that tried to keep Democracy alive and shape the German state in a way that was Democratic and reigned in Capitalism. The Weimar Republic was destroyed by people who wanted to see it being destroyed: The Nazis, that wanted to establish a fascist state, and the Communists, who fought against both Nazis and Social Democrats because they neither wanted a fascist nor a democratic Germany, but a communist one.
GeneralAnubis
Wild how that happens literally every time.
Arbitrarynamehere
I wonder if we can learn anything from this example today...
NickRivieraMD
All nouns are capitalized in German.
GeneralAnubis
True, but I'd expect the compound noun «Sozialdemokraten» to refer to the actual party members
trigaranus
Bah. If you want to. It's not in any shape or form a necessary conclusion. Could just as well be people who had publically supported them. I long self-defined as a "Sozialdemokrat" without ever being a party member.
ThatOtherMacAvoyWoman
Can someone pls explain why this difference matters?
ahb1020306
No. If you have to ask you're too stupid to have it explain.
cambam3000
That's an interesting way to tell us you don't know
NinjablazerZero
If you didn't want to explain it, you could have just not responded.
Actually easier to not respond at all than to be an ass about it.
ThatOtherMacAvoyWoman
Hey, buddy, go fuck yourself.
raskirorikson8
In this context specifically, I think he (the pastor) meant members, voters and followers of the social democratic parties in Germany. The difference may be minor, but it was more specific on who was taken.
ThatOtherMacAvoyWoman
Ah, so it was a specific group. But they were still socialists, ya? Just democratic socialists?
raskirorikson8
Correct but not entirely. As I said, they were especially members and followers of the opposing political parties in Germany back then. He mentioned communists, but that included also the left wing party members (at that time, they were all called communist, and it wasn't far off. The left wing in Germany back then has nothing to do with the left wing in the US right now)
The main party, SPD, is still one of the biggest parties in Germany.
jtwood
Nice to see history repeating itself. Looking forward to when it repeats itself again… and again… and again…
Big fan of us humans. We do awesome stuff.
QuartzPoker
Fascism is relatively new in human history. Authoritarianism is ancient, but it didn't wear terror like a badge of honor before fascism
Neanderthalersutopiaphilandrousanteatersotherbrother
We'll be lucky to make it to a second 'again'
SteveTheEgg
Well the bonus is Germany was rebuilt pretty nicely afterward, but . My luck, China will take over the West where I live and turn it into the equivalent of East Germany. I'll be dead before they tear down the Kansas City wall.
WebMaka
Those that refuse to learn from history intend to repeat it.
etherbunny41
Luckily the Nazis were defeated, so we have that to look forward to I guess. Not wiped out mind you, just defeated. Really hoping they don't do the whole nuke bit again though, that one might cause things to veer off course considering how many nukes there are these days.
Then again, maybe that'll put a hard stop to that whole "history repeating" thing. History can't repeat if it suddenly ends.
Conqueeftadore
Really hoping for a Nuremberg trial rerun of history. The sooner the better, these goons need to be held to account or it’ll just keep happening.
Rhythmaster
You have to defeat the fascists first. Nuremberg trials can only happen after they have been defeated and removed from power.
thedudeman519
A more thorough Nuremberg at that.
7hatsBollocks
So.. let most off the hook? Let's do it for real this time!
Telemapus
Niemoller also said: "What is the reason for [their] obvious punishment, which has lasted for thousands of years? Dear brethren, the reason is easily given: the Jews brought the Christ of God to the cross!"
blfpd
Even a Jew was mean enough to carry the cross himself!
billstranger
All religion is stupid, but in what context did he say this?
morninggloryshade777
Way to shut down a dialogue.... You c dial it back & just ask your Q.....
Telemapus
It's complicated. He said it in a sermon in 1935, when he was already known for opposing the NDSAP. He was a dyed-in-the-wool German "conservative" which means antisemitism was part of the package. It took him a while to let go of those beliefs... I suspect being put in a concentration camp himself helped. Fun fact: in WW1 he was a fairly successful U-boat captain - after coming up through the ranks his boat shut down the port of Marseilles for a bit in 1917 via torpedoes and minelaying.
18booma
I think it's in the context of being a raging anti-semite. Is there a context where this could be anything other than anti-semitic? You can still appreciate the poem. In fact even moreso knowing that his anti-semitism and nazism didn't protect him.
billstranger
I'd like to know the context. Was it before nazis or post-nazism. Did he already know about concentration camps, or just "government arresting people." As in, in what stage of current America was this said? I think it's very relevant historically, and very relevant currently.
mikeatike
Conservatives can't feel empathy. Closest is when things start to affect them personally.