In other words, Nazis announce that they are our enemies and want to see the rest of us dead. I'd call that a clear and open threat, wouldn't you?
Except that's not what the "Nazis" are saying. You are putting words in their mouths. If you can cite specific and clear threats against particular persons, you can initiate criminal proceedings with ease. In fact, this has been done quite often against "Nazis" and anyone else issuing threats. Simply saying "I am a National Socialist" is not a specific threat in any legal sense whatsoever. What we have here are radical leftists making arbitary definitions of another ideology, and then using their definition as justification to kill or harm others before they have in fact done anything to allegedly live up to the leftist "definition" of National Socialism, which is a bullsh_t definition anway- you really think Hitler would have gotten anyone to follow him if he had advocated his own enemies definition of what National Socialism was? Don't be absurd.
Communism killed many, many, many, many times more people than Nazis ever did, and yet no one is advocating that we take away the free speach rights of communists, simply because according to some anti-communist's theoretical definition, "communists announce that they are our enemies and want to see the rest of us dead." Let's punish people for what they actually do, please, not for what your feverish imagination claims they might do in some alternate universe. The fact is Nazis are a tiny and despised minority and are a threat to no one. Going on the body count alone, leftists, communists, and "anti-nazis/anti-fascists" have killed a lot more people than nazis have, so when do we start rounding up all the "anti-nazis", for "public safety"? If we are going to go by guilt of association, let's start with those who themselves are advocating violating the Bill of Rights, since after all what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander; let's have those shouting for censorship the loudest, begin by censoring themselves, since they are a far greater real threat to our civil liberties than a handful of nazi nobodies are. Pathetic nazis have no power to silence us. The government does.
Back when I was a kid, yelling "Kill the umpire!" would simply be regarded as an idiot using his free speech. If he repeated himself (usually, not always a him, at anything from Little League to the Bigs) he might be escorted from the premises.
On the other hand, a crime boss saying to one of his employees, "Kill the umpire!" might get arrested. It's a matter of credible threat.
Another example: many people are shocked when/if they find out the Charles Manson did not participate in most of his group's violence. I remember scratching my head, wondering why all the focus on him, when most of the slaying was done by others - remember reading the stories, not all the details. I was a teen then, and did not fully grasp his complicity - then.
I remember being even more puzzled at the conviction of Patty Hearst - after being kidnapped, repeatedly raped, locked in a closet, etc. As an adult, I (mostly) fully understand the difference between a Patty Hearst, a cult follower, and a Charles Manson.
Unfortunately, in our PC (Political Censorship) era, often the distinction is lost. The National Socialist Workers (spit here) announced a march. A whole slew of other groups took note and planned. Or is it all the same? Mr. White ain't a Jim Robinson. Sorry, Jim, for even having your name in the same post as that other guy. So who's writing the checks? FR has a quarterly fund-raiser. I just don't see that many swastika bumper stickers. Think I'd raise Mr. W car insurance if he has them. Ah - agent provocateur - that is the phrase I've been hunting for.