My previous word limit met, so I add the following:

Rhian,

<<In my dim and distant youth in the UK I was a member of the Anti-Nazi League, and remember waving a banner which equated the National Front to Nazis with the image NF = [swastika].>>

As a vegetarian, I can buy a range of things like vegetarian chicken, vegetarian bacon, vegetarian sausages etc. Now, I don't buy them as I feel as a vegetarian you should celebrate the vegetable, fruit, plant, lentil etc.

So, what might be something "which equated" is not the same as something which is exact and used for purposes to expand, push or drive in this case Neo-Nazi activity.

To put it into context, my vegetarian bacon for example is not same as bacon which comes from the animal which involves pain and suffering (alongside death) at the animal end. They (or what you refer to) shouldn't be compared as bluntly they are not the same thing. Not even close.

So, if someone uses something which has an equation to it, or similarities at a Neo-Nazi end, they are not the same and should not be put into the same basket. They are not the same, nor are they comparable. Also, the reasons for using them will be different, so also not comparable.

Yuyutsu,

Re personal responsibility my post would have been better saying:

"Sadly no, as I do not know if people will be hit by such activity."

Honestly I don't know if Neo-Nazi's will be hit by things such as God's divine justice. I have seen no evidence.

For those affected by the actions of Neo-Nazi's, something noticeable to deter Neo-Nazi activity will be accepted by more (as seen to deter negative activity against others).

I don't know exactly what to include there as I generally don't like prisons or anything too harsh against people. I'd prefer people understand that engaging in Neo-Nazi activity is not a good thing for them and others and that they stay away from such practices/actions in the first place.

Dear Nathan,

«Honestly I don't know if Neo-Nazi's will be hit by things such as God's divine justice. I have seen no evidence.»

Well of course nobody has empirical evidence - that is a matter of faith.
That is not a far stretch because you already have faith that eating animals is bad for you.
Either you accept the words of scripture and the sages as evidence or you don't.

But note that nobody will be judged for being a Neo-Nazi alone, only for hurting others, that is for example if one's Nazi-salute actually hurts the people present around.

«For those affected by the actions of Neo-Nazi's, something noticeable to deter Neo-Nazi activity will be accepted by more.»

That is if you generally believe in deterrence:
Deterrence SEEMS beneficial because, with effort, you can indeed deter specific others from doing specific things.
Yet there is no way you can deter God from handing you back your just punishment when you so deserve, this way or the other, thus all that effort you might invest in trying to avoid pain is for naught. The wise just accept their pain as God's gift in the same way that others accept only their pleasures.

«I don't know exactly what to include there as I generally don't like prisons or anything too harsh against people.»

Neither do I.

So if you decided to take the path of deterrence, then one thing you could do is to name, shame and avoid them socially; and the other is to refuse the provision of goods and services - and so long as we still have laws, the law should allow people to refuse to serve criminals.

As an individual you should be able to prevent them from entering your shop or taxi, etc.; as an employer you should be able to sack them; and in the case of extremely serious criminals, even an ambulance driver should be able to refuse to take them to hospital and police officers should be able to refuse to register their complaints.

«I don't know exactly what to include there as I generally don't like prisons or anything too harsh against people.»
NathanJ,
There doesn't appear any "too harsh" as it doesn't deter them. As for prison, I assume you refer to those facilities where inmates get better conditions than most old age pensioners can only dream about. They're most definitely no deterrent !

I hear reports a lot of Israels are upset that Netanyahu wasn't home when the drone hit his house.

Dear Critic,

Indeed, what a miss!

Had the drone been successful, the Israeli hostages and their families could re-unite.

You should read the comments in Israeli media, openly grieving that they were not at home.

The elected Israeli opposition obviously cannot say it openly, but their silence is deafening.

Now more resources will be allocated "to protect symbols of governance", which means less iron-dome coverage for ordinary citizens.

As the comments say "and the poor ordinary citizens will die in their apartment-block staircases" - "why won't Netanyahu hide in his staircase instead?"

What was the point of this exactly?
What is a person thinking when they do this?
I hope none of the Pro-Israel side ever tries to tell me the Palestinians are taught to hate.
I shall reply with the following video evidence and tell them 'For damn good reasons it seems'

http://x.com/AnasAlSharif0/status/1847352625974399346
>>Extremely difficult scenes:
An Israeli drone targeted a child with live ammunition in one of the streets of northern Gaza.
When citizens gathered to rescue and assist him, they were hit by a direct strike, turning them into scattered remains.<<