I'm pretty sure a wannabe means they want to be, and not only that but they'll transform their behavior to mirror that which they want to be.
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."
As a person with relatives and ancestors from Germany who were persecuted, killed, and hurt during the Holocaust, I'd say any idiots who try to even act like the Nazis of that era should be labeled as such, lest we allow that behavior to fester.
Does it matter? If you throw up a symbol of the Nazis while burning down a synagogue (that is to say, performing one of their most memorable policies), what distinguishes a wannabe from a real Nazi? Enumerating the policies which Hitler campaigned with?
That's my underlying question. There was more to the 30-40s era Nazi platform than just hating non-white Christians. But now it's "don't like Jews? Nazi!" and the haters pick that up by spraying symbols, and then we all play along by pulling out the fainting couch. Do we do anyone a service by acting like dealing with ignorant, hateful white people is the same as defeating Hitler himself? Personally, I think we'd do everyone a great service by ditching the labels, a label the wannabes hope you pin on them, and just call it like it is: un-American white people who don't buy into the melting pot ideal that has made the country what it is.
Fair enough. My perspective comes from growing up in Indiana, probably one of the last places left that still had the occasional KKK rally. And frankly were it not for what they advocated, it was kind of pathetic. A dozen or so middle-aged rednecks pissed off about how it's not 1954 anymore, wearing Halloween costumes. The protesters would outnumber the participants. And there frequent calls to just quit protesting. Let them have their little get-together with an audience of...no one. I think that would be a lovely idea.
Keep an eye on them, that's for sure. If they commit a crime, investigate it, prosecute them. But otherwise quit giving them press, quit giving them labels that they like. Because calling them Nazis gives them credibility they don't deserve, IMO. They're surrounded by people that think they're assholes, so they only have the power we choose to give them. They can't pass any laws, they'll never get anywhere near a majority (underlying racism in the current political system is a long way from these nutters). Unlike the U. S. South of last century, the police generally aren't on their side. So keep a close watch, keep them contained, keep the amount of press proportional to the participation. If it's the "million Nazi march" on the Mall in D. C., then the NYT and WAPost should most certainly report. But if it's twelve sad, old guys in funny outfits, could we not make it tomorrow's headline?
Were those Nazis that committed those acts, or wannabes? I think that is parent's point. How many of those "Nazis" can name a single plank of the Nazi platform? (And I'm sure that more than one can do just that, but not even a majority.) In other words, are they Nazis or more like the character Otto in the movie A Fish Called Wanda?
Otto West: Apes don't read philosophy. Wanda: Yes they do, Otto. They just don't understand it. Now let me correct you on a couple of things, OK? Aristotle was not Belgian. The central message of Buddhism is not "Every man for himself." And the London Underground is not a political movement. Those are all mistakes, Otto. I looked them up.
But at the end of the day, IMO, it's all just semantics. Some people irrationally hate Jews, some have a distaste for blacks. Whether or not they fit a particular label or not is a distraction from the fact that there are violently hateful people out there, and there weren't Jews they'd find someone else to hate that isn't like them.