Made a small edit to my previous post for people with reading comprehension difficulties.
Incidentally, I do not think Queen's accusation of "Nazi apologism" qualifies a thought-terminating cliché, since it was very much secondary to her actual point (that it is unreasonable to ask for evidence of Cernovich's intent).
I'm not sure what part of this accusation Lana is taking offense with. Is that the "apologist" part, and the underlying implication that her defense of Cernovich (and others before him) might not have entirely been in good faith? Or does she object to the use of the word "Nazi" to describe a white identitarian, ultra-nationalist, male chauvinist, anti-semitic dog-whistling conspiracy theorist, presumably because he is not a proper ethno-nationalist and abstains from explicly blaming "the jews"? The world may never know, as she prefers to prentend being slandered for her principled opposition to Nazi-punching.
Or maybe we could try having a reasonable discussion about our respective definitions of Nazism hahaha who am I kidding.
I know how fun it is to play with Lana's personal outrage over being called anything less than a perfectly reasonable moderate, but... doesn't it feel like a distraction to move the subject away from her own terrible arguments? Every time someone calls her out on her bullshit, she just doubles down on the false equivalences and vague accusations of hypocrisy. The original post equated a bunch of 10-year-old offensive jokes with Barr's deplorable (heh) social media behavior while hired by ABC, and the best excuse she could find is that, I quote:
"Roseanne only made one such tweet. Gunn made many.".