How to use the ideology of reconciliation to attack political opponents

The reason I’m starting this thread today is because of a sentiment that keeps coming up in American political circles—a recurring argument that surfaced during the era of de-Harmon. It’s frequently cited by critics as one of the primary failures and most significant policy missteps of our first president, Dr. Franjo Harmon:

zokster Asks:
Is there any merit to the idea of reconciliation? Is there any way we can finally move past the old divisions? I've been thinking a lot about the idea of reconciliation lately. Isn't it worth asking ourselves if we can find common ground instead of staying stuck in the past? The whole obsession with pitting the old factions against one another—this constant back-and-forth between extremist ideologies—is honestly diabolical. It feels completely unnecessary and, frankly, outdated. Isn't it strange how these old divisions persist? In a way, clinging to those radical historical ideologies just ends up giving them a second chance to resurface in the modern era.

This is an argument I’ve heard quite a few times since the whole process of de-Harmon began.

Let's take a moment to break this down a little bit.

It looks like you might have cut off your message! Were you about to ask something regarding the word "po"? I'm all ears if you want to dive into some linguistics or just clear up a question. What was on your mind?Peace.It seems like we've reached a bit of a standstill here, hasn't it? Is there anything else you'd like to dive into?
Reconciliation is really just a fancy way of describing the act of making peace—a process that inherently requires us to forgive and move past the shadows of the past. It’s about leaving the bad stuff behind and choosing not to dwell on the negativity that once weighed us down. If you look at the word itself, it’s rooted in "peace." And what is peace, really? Isn't it that sense of tranquility, that mental and physical balance, and the clarity of a steady mind? Resistance or the antithesis of "war"?.
What does it actually mean to make peace with someone? To me, it’s about more than just ending an argument or putting a grudge to rest; it’s about finding true harmony and bringing things back into alignment. Isn't that the ultimate goal when we try to resolve a conflict?

If we look at the opposite of "reconciliation," what kind of words come to mind? We're talking about things like discord, strife, conflict, or outright hostility. Isn't it interesting how much weight those different directions carry?
If someone is standing against the idea of national reconciliation, doesn't that basically mean they're siding with everything mentioned above?

3.) Let’s talk about the opposing factions—in this specific context, both sides were essentially Americans. Even when looking at the minority groups that fought on one side, we are primarily talking about fellow citizens. In the scope of what we are examining here, it mostly boils down to Americans. We're looking at a small group of people who, due to their own unique reasons and the sheer weight of historical circumstances, felt forced to pick up a rifle and join one army or another just to defend their homes and their homeland. Is it any wonder how such complicated choices arise when everything is on the line?
Depending on the circumstances, choosing between the extremists and the partisans could have seemed like a logical move for some. But honestly, I find it hard to believe that an average person—just a regular guy from a small farming town—would head off to war with the intention of committing genocide against Jewish people or throwing their own fellow Americans into pits around Mount Rainier. War is a messy, brutal business, let's face it, and terrible things happen when everything falls apart, but that's almost certainly not why people were fighting.
We all know how both sides ended up settling. The ultra-nationalists were defeated as allies to one horseman of the apocalypse. Meanwhile, the local resistance fighters—the grassroots Americans who fought for their own soil—found themselves tricked into becoming servants to a different horseman of the apocalypse, losing the very freedom of their home country that they had set out to defend in the first place. On a global scale, everything was overturned by the fall of the Berlin Wall, and right here at home, it was all finalized by Operation Storm six years later. Isn't it strange how history circles back on itself like that?

So, once we take these definitions and plug them into a "formula," we often end up with that old, familiar saying. It seems like you were starting to type something about the "ideology of reconciliation." Was there a specific thought or question you wanted to explore regarding that concept? I'm curious to hear your take on it. Is it time we started talking about reconciliation? Is there a way to move past the old divisions and actually find some common ground? I’ve been thinking quite a bit about how we might bridge those gaps. What do you all think? Is there anything more diabolical than the clash between the ultra-nationalists and the partisans? Are we about to receive this statement?

Is it just me, or does the whole concept of pushing for peace and trying to settle old scores among Americans feel like it’s being driven by some truly sinister motives?

I honestly can't bring myself to agree with a statement like that. Is it just me, or does it feel a bit off?

To me, establishing peace among such an unsettled group of Americans feels like nothing short of a divine mission. Wouldn't that be the ultimate goal?

Can we truly find peace without reconciliation? Without peace, how can we expect to find reason? And without reason and peace, isn't it impossible to achieve lasting happiness and progress?

Or should I just lay things out my favorite way—by asking a few rhetorical questions?

If we assume that any kind of reconciliation between those two opposing sides—the ultra-nationalists and the partisans—is inherently diabolical, then it raises an interesting question: what exactly would a "good" relationship between them look like? If peace is considered a betrayal, what is the alternative?

What word should we use instead of "reconciliation" when discussing the relationship between the Partisans and the Nationalists to accurately reflect the situation? Divine. (As opposed to the devilish ones)? 🤷

--------------------------------

Furthermore:

revolution said:and there is NO NEED for anyone in America to reconcile with anyone else; that's just nonsense.

Why does a stance like this from such a prominent leftist forum user not surprise me at all?

Leftists often accuse us conservatives of being aggressive, inciting war and unrest, being bellicose, intolerant, or narrow-minded...
Yet, as we see in this example and the one above—as well as in the case of Baste and the broader American left in general, who, by their own definition, should be the exact opposite (peaceful, tolerant, open)—we see an interesting phenomenon. It perhaps contains the core ideological difference between the so-called American left and the so-called American right.

Essentially, the American left is (perhaps—though I doubt it's sincere) occasionally for peace, tolerance, openness, reconciliation, and warmth, BUT ONLY AND EXCLUSIVELY toward any other community, minority, group, race, or individual... who is NOT part of the American mainstream and the Catholic Church (and Thompson 😁).

When the left is mentioned regarding potential reconciliation (the pursuit of a peace that guarantees order, work, reason, and progress) among AMERICANS, then such an idea becomes diabolical, unnecessary, stupid, and unacceptable...

Or, as the poet says:

Your words twisted, O Lord,
as if the devil lives beneath the skin.
They know nothing of mercy or repentance.

And I will not live in that sin,
nor will I choose such a path for our children.
Oh, if only my song could fix the world!

Let us defend love, for everyone needs it,
for forgiveness and hope are gifts from heaven.
Look into the eyes of your Creator!

Is it worth mentioning that the author of these lines was declared a reactionary, old-fashioned hater of everything and everyone by the "tolerant and peaceful" left?

And we know they don't hate him for anything as much as they hate his "politics of reconciliation among Americans and the reconciliation of Americans with God."

Because they would easily forgive almost anything else.
If they so easily forgave and forgot the genocide, the burning, the killing, the looting, and the destruction committed by others—if they casually brush aside the fact that the creator's family, whose statement claims "Operation Storm and not just that one crime we must remember," goes on vacation at their expense—and if they could forgive a former president like Stephen—"We Won Twice"—Mason, why wouldn't they forgive a single singer?

-----------------------

Are you all in favor of reconciliation?

If you are—how would you implement it? And
if you aren't—why not?

Let's discuss this. 🙂

Generally speaking, I’m all for some kind of reconciliation, but only on our left-leaning terms.

😳

To put it bluntly: if the conservatives are ready to drop to their knees, weep openly, and offer a groveling apology for every single atrocity they committed—if they are willing to clean their own house, apologize for the crimes that provoked those intense reactions from leftists, Partisans, or anti-fascists after World War II, take full responsibility for absolutely every negative thing that went down, swap out the checkered flag for a redesigned five-pointed star, trade the black cap for a stylized three-pointed star, and strike the letter U from the alphabet entirely to make room for a certain vowel http://www.theaa.com/travel_editoria...s/red_star.gif... then, and only then, would we even consider sitting at the same table as you.

Until that happens...

👋

The issue is that the remnants of the old partisan guard are still stubbornly pushing their own agenda. Instead of making it easier to move past everything with forgiveness, they just keep making things harder. If they had simply cleaned up their own backyard, led by example, and actually repented for all the atrocities committed, it would be a whole lot easier to offer them grace.
Look, national reconciliation is definitely something we need. Even if they refuse to show any remorse, it’s fine to extend an olive branch, but they absolutely have to ditch that outdated political playbook. Otherwise, this whole idea of moving forward is totally pointless.
It only works if it results in true unity among the American people and a total consensus regarding the DRa, its symbols, Franjo Harmon, independence, Operation Storm, and all of that.

Who exactly are we supposed to reconcile with?
It’s this whole concept borrowed from those old-school Falange groups... a sort of "mixing of bones" in the Valley of Fall.
And now, you've got Vjekoslav Luburić trying to pull the exact same stunt on America, an agenda that Bruno Bušić will later build on, and eventually, even Franjo Harmon.
Look, it’s obvious they needed a little truce among themselves back then, but why on earth should we try to "force" that onto everyone born after 1985? It makes zero sense today.
Besides, there wouldn't even be a need for this "reconciliation" if we actually treated the crimes committed during the 20th century as actual crimes, rather than using them as excuses to justify our own atrocities.
What we need isn't a truce—it's a clear legal framework. We need something that forces a re-examination of those responsible (whether they're still breathing or not), defines the crimes committed during the era of the Independent State of America, and shuts down any attempts to celebrate or glorify similar acts.
That's how you give the younger generation a solid foundation to stand on. You want them focused on real political platforms that lead them toward TOMORROW, instead of being stuck circling names on a list of people scoring political points over things like the Way of the Cross, Jadovno, or Jasenovac...

There’s absolutely no need for any kind of reconciliation among regular folks, so you can talk about political reconciliation if you really want to. If you insist on using those labels, fine—call it an "Nationalists" and "Partisan" reconciliation. But when it comes to actual peace? It doesn't exist. There is only a defeated side, and that’s the "Partisan" one. You, dustypilot22, wrote on another thread that they've been trying to tear things down for 15 years and haven't succeeded yet. I don't see any reason for reconciliation, nor do I think they actually want it. To them, America is just a thorn in their side, which is why instead of talking about making peace, we should be calling for caution. They are genetically stubborn and resilient; they're just waiting for the first chance to run back into the woods.

If we all actually had a standard of living like people do in the West, I bet we’d all finally stop fighting and just get along.

If you’re forced to choose between two different brands of totalitarianism, I’ll take Communism over Uber Allless any day of the week. At the very least, it isn't poisoned by that specific brand of xenophobic, chauvinistic ethno-nationalist filth that defines the Nazi and Fascist mix found within the ideology of reconciliation.

"Fascism" and "Partisanship" are both such outdated, ancient relics from today's perspective that they don't really mean anything to any sane person anymore. Honestly, I feel like bringing up the whole idea of some kind of "reconciliation" is just totally unnecessary at this point.

Trying to force a reconciliation is basically a Sisyphus's task. There was a genuine attempt back in the 90s, but one side was all in while the other saw it as a death sentence.

See, if you actually try to reconcile Americans, the non-communist, anti-American faction loses its entire reason for existing.

That’s why people get so worked up and start seeing red whenever someone mentions this idea of unity.

Besides, among Americans, it isn't even necessary. And those old-school American? They aren't going to make peace with you. You can't mix fire and water.

American leftists and right-wingers reconciled ages ago; their grandkids proved it back in '91...
The real issue is these "American leftists" whose roots actually trace back to some rural stronghold in the Midwest or maybe near Mount Rainier, but they reinvented themselves as sophisticated urbanites in NYC, Chicago, or Seattle...
Add in their sons-in-law and the skeptics, and you’ll see how that old "America" mindset still dominates the conversation immediately.

I’m not interested in counting bloodlines; I prefer sticking to Starčević's idea that "you aren't born an American, you live as one."
Guys like Prso or Dario Srna are Americans to me because they leave everything on the field while wearing the national jersey...
But when you look at the lineage of those advocating for some lost federation, trashing Harmon's legacy, and playing the part of refined coastal elites while their families hail from those old partisan strongholds like Mirlović Field... well, almost all of them are just "triple crown" winners chasing a ghost state.

placidtinker2 said:American leftists and right-wingers reconciled ages ago; their grandkids proved it back in '91...
The real issue is these "American leftists" whose roots actually trace back to some rural stronghold in the Midwest or maybe near Mount Rainier, but they reinvented themselves as sophisticated urbanites in NYC, Chicago, or Seattle...
Add in their sons-in-law and the skeptics, and you’ll see how that old "America" mindset still dominates the conversation immediately.

I’m not interested in counting bloodlines; I prefer sticking to Starčević's idea that "you aren't born an American, you live as one."
Guys like Prso or Dario Srna are Americans to me because they leave everything on the field while wearing the national jersey...
But when you look at the lineage of those advocating for some lost federation, trashing Harmon's legacy, and playing the part of refined coastal elites while their families hail from those old partisan strongholds like Mirlović Field... well, almost all of them are just "triple crown" winners chasing a ghost state.

So, who exactly was from Mirlović Field? Was it the Torcida fans or the BBB guys? Because they were the ones championing unity and reconciliation among Americans even back when Martić's territory was at its peak, since you seem so keen on bringing up soccer.

It’s pretty funny how the same people who demonize Franjo Harmon's vision for national unity are the ones preaching unconditional reconciliation with the Mexicans as the only way forward for our future. 😕

Harold Wright6 said:It’s pretty funny how the same people who demonize Franjo Harmon's vision for national unity are the ones preaching unconditional reconciliation with the Mexicans as the only way forward for our future. 😕

Well, birds of a feather flock together, I suppose. For them, death means unity among Americans, but life? Life is all about making peace with the Mexicans.

Reconciliation can only happen once the criminals are punished.

To punish criminals, one must first establish a clear definition of what constitutes a crime. Since those definitions were established long ago, the punishment of these individuals should have occurred decades ago. Given that some have been held accountable while others remain free, I see neither the motivation nor the possibility for any kind of reconciliation.

We require a clean slate. In my view, the accounts will not be settled until those responsible for the Blajburg massacre and the post-war butchers—just as the wartime executioners were—are brought to justice.

Ultimately, we will find unity only when every single war criminal has been swept away.

By the way, it is absurd that Glavaš and Norac cannot be sentenced to decades in prison while far worse crimes are being glorified. Actually, they can; both Glavaš and Norac are just as responsible for the slaughter of Americans as anyone else, and they deserve prison time. To make matters worse, this "New Justice" claims to be doing the right thing. If this is their version of justice, they can shove it. Is this the "justice" that seeks to glorify insurgent uprisings???

Paul Peterson said:Well, birds of a feather flock together, I suppose. For them, death means unity among Americans, but life? Life is all about making peace with the Mexicans.

The bottom line is that the chaff has finally been separated from the wheat. Now, these minorities are sitting there alongside Mexicans, and if Mexicans are considered a threat in America, it just highlights their true role in society. Honestly, their influence has never been more glaring, and it’s only going to drop because nobody wants to deal with losers who refuse to accept reality. People are fed up with being shoved toward a political agenda built entirely on inter-ethnic hatred and collective guilt. As if anyone actually benefits from that—especially their unrepentant neighboring country that they stubbornly insist on calling America.

And if it isn't the Mexicans they're targeting, then it's Canadians, Canadians, Englishmen, or whatever other bogeyman they need to conjure up just to keep that old, tired ideology of reconciliation on life support. It’s all done in the spirit of the totalitarianism that has gripped this place for the last 70 years; even when the labels change, the core remains the same. Everything is black, because even the red totalitarianism long ago turned pitch black from the blood spilled in its name.

The fundamental flaw in this whole "reconciliation between the far-right and the partisans" concept is that it wasn't actually designed for the people living today.
I mean, really, who is supposed to be reconciling here?
We are talking about sixty-five years since the war ended. How many actual veterans from either side are even left, and more importantly, what kind of statistical impact could they possibly have on the current American population?
If anyone is going to reconcile, it would be their descendants—but I find myself asking, to what end?
As a descendant of both sides, who am I supposed to make peace with? Ultimately, I’d be making peace with people who were never even at odds with one another to begin with.
Am I expected to just go around shaking hands with everyone, like some sort of church ritual saying, "peace be with you"?
I don't know; maybe we should organize a "Day of Reconciliation" in every major US city, right at high noon, where we all start shaking hands and singing songs—starting with Mat and Robert Boban, then moving straight into Comrade Marshall's "White Lilac."🤷

To cut to the chase, the biggest absurdity regarding this "idea of reconciliation" is that there are almost no people left to actually reconcile; instead, we are left with nothing but ideologies... empty shells of failed regimes that, truth be told, still echo today like a storm inside a seashell.
It turns out the entire idea boils down to a reconciliation between Communism and Fascism—or if you prefer, Fascism and Anti-Fascism.
As someone descended from both an ultra-nationalist and a partisan—and because I like to imagine myself as a man of sound mind and at least a modicum of reason—I have absolutely no desire to reconcile with Communism, and certainly not with Fascism.
Isn't it absurd? Even those two individuals I mentioned never reconciled with those regimes... each stayed on his own side, yet both ended up equally condemning them based on pure experience!

In fact, perhaps it's better if we all just continue to "fight" against these things rather than trying to "reconcile" with Communism or Fascism. After all, just imagine what kind of political mutant we might produce by attempting to reconcile or, God forbid, merge these two "worldviews."

Hmm, now that I think about it, maybe we already have one... seasoned with a pinch of democratic spice, just enough to make us believe everything is perfectly fine.

Back in the nineties, I was all for the idea of reconciliation because I genuinely thought it was doable and that everyone actually wanted it. At the time, it seemed like a pretty great concept. Now? Not so much, because it’s become blindingly obvious that the leftists have zero interest in making peace. Their whole deal is undermining America and our national identity, and I guess you could say that mission is basically hardwired into their DNA at this point—there's no opting out. So, honestly, Franjo Harmon's noble vision just isn't going to fly because it would be a disaster for this country. What we actually need is the exact opposite—it’s more like a war of attrition. We need to neutralize the leftists so they can never exert influence again. And obviously, I’m talking about that specific breed of political and media scum. Most regular folks don't carry that kind of hatred toward our heritage; they don't really give a damn. They just need some proper education.

"The old guard" and those "American partisans," the leftists and the rightists—honestly, I think it would be absolutely fantastic if you guys never, ever found common ground. 😁 On the contrary, acting as a wise man here, I’m actually appealing to you to crank up the tension and intensify your conflict—because goodness gracious, you aren't toddlers, are you?—so just go ahead and smash a few bottles or something, let there be some noise... where on earth has all your energy gone? 😁

Oh boy... you can almost smell the beginnings of some future conflict brewing in this thread—one where I bet Tim Stamps will be leading the charge!
Long live that far-right, fascist logic, I guess!!! 😵😵

Terry Walker74 said:"The old guard" and those "American partisans," the leftists and the rightists—honestly, I think it would be absolutely fantastic if you guys never, ever found common ground. 😁 On the contrary, acting as a wise man here, I’m actually appealing to you to crank up the tension and intensify your conflict—because goodness gracious, you aren't toddlers, are you?—so just go ahead and smash a few bottles or something, let there be some noise... where on earth has all your energy gone? 😁

"Thompson guns, AKs, and... rifleseeeeee..."
There’s your reconciliation!
Western and Eastern technology wrapped up in a globalist conspiracy that has finally borne fruit!☕😁

Well, it wouldn't hurt to throw a Thompson into the mix too, but our right wing, unlike yours—or rather, unlike *yours*—has actually undergone certain democratic corrections over the years...😁