> Just to make it very, very clear what you believe to be a great situation: you want to create a big group of underground neo-nazis, ideologically isolated from the rest of society, with an amazingly strong victimhood complex, their own independent communications infrastructure...

Neo-Nazis aren't dumb. They would do all of these things anyway. We know, because they did. Neo Nazis use the open, public squares as recruiting tools. They don't yell "Gas the Jews". They say much more "acceptable" things. "Wow, it's truly painful how high the interest rates are. You know why that is, don't you?" And you, intrigued, say "No, no I don't." And they give you an invitation to a private, special event where they start talking about the banks and the man and how he holds us down. And you agree. And then by the end, it's less the banks, and more the jews who control the banks, and also the immigrants who steal our jobs. And in fact, the jews encourage the immigrants to come because they can better control the immigrants than we can. You should be afraid of the immigrants and the jews who control the banks.

And a lot of people find that unsettling and leave. But a few people find it unsettling and believable. And those people, those are new recruits who now get more and more pulled into the extremism.

(In the real world, by the way, this is going to a subreddit like the now banned /r/ConsumeProduct, seeing a discord link in the sidebar which goes to a literal fascist recruitment chatroom, and eventually graduating from the recruitment chat to like actively fascist places).

They'd take advantage of the disapproval people had anyway. They sell it as a redpill truth that the people keeping you down don't want you to know, the proof is that most people will disagree with them or look at you aghast when you claim these things (victimhood, check!). It feeds on the same stuff as conspiracy theories, at first.

They keep the really extreme stuff hidden anyway (underground, check!. Ideologically isolated, check!). And use complex recruiting paths to slowly pull people in (independent comms infra, check!) and recruit them (big group, check!).

The only thing that groups choosing to kick them out does is that it makes it much, much more difficult for them to recruit, because they can't siphon people off out of the prior recruiting channels. You can't slowly radicalize someone when the chat rooms where you radicalize people are banned. You can't siphon people out of existing communities when they ban you. It's much, much easier to radicalize someone slowly over time (boiling the frog) than to try and confront them with the whole "Gas the Jews" schtick from the get-go.

So if making it more difficult for neo nazis to recruit is really what concerns you, you have weird priorities. Now if you didn't know that, then fine, congrats. You're one of today's lucky 10,000 who learned more about how neo nazi radicalization pipelines work.

And lest you think I'm making this up, this is exactly the kind of thing that self described Neo-Nazis consider to be how they ended up becoming "red-pilled"[0]. Very, very few of them go "oh, how unjustly those poor Neo-Nazis are treated, I must investigate". It starts with "edgy" things and people and slowly escalates.

But let's also remember how we got here. You were first worried about an angry mob, who might cause someone to lose their job. Now you're defending neo-nazis right to openly debate the "jewish question".

Does that mean that it's acceptable for a Neo-Nazi to call for death of a Jew, since that's free speech, but if the Jew turns around and suggests that, perhaps, the Neo-Nazi who just called for extermination should be fired from his job, that we should be upset with the Jew, because being fired is "violence", but being exterminated...isn't? I'm having trouble understanding the logic here.

[0]: https://www.splcenter.org/20180419/mcinnes-molyneux-and-4cha...