Most other prisoners of the early camps were soon set free again—not because of outside intervention, but because the authorities felt that a brief period of shock and awe was normally enough to force opponents into compliance. As a result, there was a rapid turnover in 1933, with the places of released prisoners quickly filled with new ones.

The duration of detention was unpredictable. Prisoners who expected to regain their freedom after a few days were mostly disappointed, but it was rare for them to remain inside for a year or more. Longer spells were served in the bigger, more permanent camps, but even in a large camp like Oranienburg, around two‐thirds of all prisoners stayed for less than three months.^244^

The result was a constant stream of former prisoners back into German society, and it was these men and women who would become the most important sources of private knowledge about the early camps.

(Emphasis added. Source.)

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I'm certainly not defending the silencing of protest. It's just that all fascism is authoritarian, but not all authoritarianism is fascist. Fascism has a specific definition and it's a whole other degree of bad.

[–] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Fair enough. It is being used more colloquially in this case, you're right. I retract the accusation of fascism and substitute "an unjust authoritarian crackdown on the right to freedom of speech and expression, undermining the very tenets of democratic society. A national embarrassment."

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

100% agree with you then.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

would you be able to link to a page that helps describe fascism as you say: that relies on severity of consequence?

asking because whilst i agree that fascism is specific - and this doesn’t cover it - im not sure that degree of severity is part of the definition and that could be a dangerous precedent to set because the other parts of fascism about control and quashing dissent enable the severe consequences once they are present

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I usually go by Umberto Eco's Ur-Fascism essay for a definition.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism

Suppression of protest would fall under #4 "Disagreement is Treason". Under fascism it is not enough to silence opposition. They must be treated as enemies of the state and be eradicated.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 5 months ago

really appreciate you taking the effort! i see where you’re coming from with the “enemies of the state” part, and think that id agree there

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It was at a private college campus and the dean suspended all the students protesting and requested to have NYPD come remove them. In other words, the property caretaker was being a dick and had them removed from the premises.

[–] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Hmmm.. well that almost sounds like capitalism in a Republic democracy. Shit, now what?

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Keep doing it until almost the entire student body is suspended, or protest off campus?

[–] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Sounds like a plan! Can't suspend alumni, so I'm game