Interesting. So, do you think that if something becomes illegal, it simply goes away?
So, for example…lets take something I feel is a natural. Homosexuality. If suddenly homosexuality suddenly became punishable by death by everyone in the world would it vanish? Would all people just be straight? No.
People are all wired differently.
Instead of repressing who people are, we should seek to understand what fears people have, what brings them comfort, educate them, highlight the ways in which we are similair as people. We should fight fascism not with oppression but inclusion.
Facists gain power by division. It’s “us” vs “them”
They lose power when “us” is all there is.
Anyway. My original point is that I would rather see the wolf for what it is and watch it, than allow it to hide amongst the flock, undetected
I normally try to engage at eye level and not be condescending. But if this following bit comes across as condescending, then that is with full intent.
I cannot possibly express in words how utterly naïve the notion of ‘fighting fascism with inclusion’ is. I’ve been around for long enough to see that it doesn’t work. Neo-Nazis haven’t been around since yesterday. The whole inclusion shtick has been tried, over and over and over. And what’s happened? They’ve become more emboldened and more omnipresent. Some 30 years ago there were massive Neo-Nazi marches and violent incidents in Germany, when Neo-Nazis set fire to asylum seeker housing in several places. Back then there were many shocked faces, and outrage, and yet we had the same voices urging calm and to engage them at eye level and not oppress them. Did it work? Fuck no.
And that whole idea of sunlight being the best disinfectant… yeah nah.
The only way to fight fascism is to make unequivocally clear that it has no place in modern society. None whatsoever.
And since you brought homosexuality into the mix, there is a key difference here: being a fascist is a choice - being homosexual is not. You are born with your sexuality, you can’t choose to be not homosexual. But you can choose to not be a fascist. However, in spite of all attempts at inclusion and meeting these people at eye level over decades, more and more of them decide they want to be fascists. How much longer would you like to try for?
I understand your frustration, and also the need to come across as condescending. You’re probably the downvote on my comment. You want to punish me, don’t you?
See, that feeling you are feeling… that frustration. It isn’t unique to you.
The primary driver in fascism is emotion. Fear, anger, frustration. Stong human emotion that lead to feeling like other people are lesser than yourself. The bad guy. The evil one. The ones that must be stopped.
Those strong feelings and the desire to shush the words of the other are exactly the kinds of things that lead to extremes.
Having strong feelings toward other people are as natural and normal as homosexuality.
When I say inclusion, I’m not talking about inviting the Nazi to roast the Jew at dinner. I’m talking about inviting everyone, Jew, Christian, Atheist, Hindu, Muslim, everyone, to dinner and giving each a timer to talk.
It sounds hokey as fuck, but we need to learn to love each other as we love ourselves. Only then, can Nazi’s cease to exist. If you repress people, it only makes the hate stronger.
Anyway, there is a portion of the population that is incapable of what I mentioned above. For them, there is no cure. For them, they must be watched. If -and only if- they cause harm to others, then they need to be jailed to protect everyone else. But… I believe they’re (thankfully) rare. For everyone else, there’s hope
I understand your frustration, and also the need to come across as condescending. You’re probably the downvote on my comment. You want to punish me, don’t you?
I did not downvote you, and I don’t want to punish you, so there is no need to give me a lecture.
If -and only if- they cause harm to others, then they need to be jailed to protect everyone else.
You do not understand that by the time they’re causing harm to others, it’s too late. By then you’ve let them do their thing long enough that they feel strengthened, emboldened and justified. And that time has passed. It passed when they invaded the Capitol on 6th January 2021. It passed when the Neonazi ploughed his car into the crowds in Charlottesville. It passed when Neonazis firebombed asylum seeker homes in Germany 30 years ago. Fascists and Nazis are actively doing harm, everywhere in the world. This is what they’re here for. And society has failed to stop them. They’re here to stay now.
I’m not lecturing you, I apologize if it seemed that way. What I was trying to do is allow you to recognize that your own biases, to help explain why people jump on the fascist boat
I’m not gonna continue arguing, because it seems like you’re upset. I just hope that you can remember thenold adage: you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar
Damn straight I’m upset. I’m upset, no, fuming, that people seem to think fascists are just naughty kids who you let be and watch, and only when they do something really wrong do you take action. I’m upset that nobody seems to have learned the lessons history is so readily and urgently trying to teach us. I’m upset that we are sleepwalking into another era of fascism and people seem to want it that way.
And you have a right to be upset. It’s good that you’re voicing that opinion, it’s good that you’re standing up for what you believe in. The more voices there are that speak up about injustice, the better!
I wonder if this all sounds contradictory to the person you may think you were debating/arguing with, but it’s not. Having voices heard is part of what I believe in. It’s just that I don’t think silencing opposing voices (no matter what garbage they spew) is the right way to go
This is where, in a verbal conversation, you’d hear a deep sigh.
You’re so hung up on the idea that we shouldn’t ‘silence voices’. This isn’t about that. And even if it was, it’s way too late for that. For better or worse, fascists are now a part of the public discourse. But no, it’s not about ‘silencing voices’. Again, they’re not here to debate. Their voices are a distraction.
What it is about is preventing the next steps, which will follow as sure as night follows day, as history has shown us. Prevent the incitement, the stochastic terrorism, stop them from getting a foothold in politics. Again, I fear it’s already too late for that. As a society, we didn’t shut them down the moment they poked their heads out of their holes, and we will pay a heavy price for that.
I will posit to you that if this was about extreme leftists - say, Stalinists, Maoists, Red Front - marching, displaying the hammer and sickle, seeking violence and talking about hanging politicians, we wouldn’t even have this discussion. Most people would be more than happy to shut that down, there would be none of this pearl-clutching about “we shouldn’t silence them”. The police and intelligence services would be all over it.
And with that, I will withdraw from this thread. There will come a day when the people who have tried to warn about fascism all along, will get to say “I told you so”, but on that day we’ll all be too busy fleeing the country or going underground.
I hear you and I understand. I just want to try to clarify something. This is over simplified because I’m on my phone
Imagine you’re in a room with 50 people. Two are designated as the leaders. Each leader has a goal of attainting the most followers, and will claim a cash prize for each follower they acquire.
Leader A looks around and thinks, “hey only about 25% of people have blonde hair. Ah ha! They’re my target” and then proceeds to talk mad shit. Some of the people agree, and also start talking mad shit.
The other leader looks around, and thinks: “I now know I have about 25% of the people on my side, but how do I get more?” B could silence A by force (a fight breaks out), B could point out what A is doing to gain followers (A could then claim B is a liar), or A could focus on how the blonde’s are really just people like everyone else, brothers and sisters, friends and lovers. A loses, if B can help people see that differences add to the group, as well as that everyone is connected to the human family
Whatever the outcome, what I mean with this is that the true baddies are few. They speak to the insecurities of the masses, and turn people on one another. They may not be the ones organizing the march, but they are at the head of it. I’m not saying to let them have the stage 24/7. I’m saying we should focus on swaying the hearts/minds of the people marching, because oppressing them only gives the main baddies more power
I had a friend once who said fascists just needed to “get it out of their system” when we were talking about the Boogaloo Boys a few days before the Jan6 insurrection. We’re both queer - a week or so before we were talking about how mutual trans friends of ours were being bashed in our city and that was an explicitly bad thing - I had to realize they might have only cared because they knew them personally.
I was honestly stun-locked by the whole conversation and all the little implications it made.
Never felt safe around them after that.
When former partners came out saying they were an abuser, I knew they were right.
You are just as entitled to your opinion as I am, and I won’t be silenced by you, or anyone else for that matter.
You can stomp your feet and whine all you want to. I wouldn’t even try to stop you even if I could. You know why?
Just because I disagree with you, doesn’t mean I wouldn’t defend your right to disagree with me. Hate me if you want to, it’s your right as a human being to feel however it is that you will feel
For me the line needs to be crossed. As soon as that happens, action can be taken. But guilty-by-association isn’t enough (and that’s how I see marching)
If someone makes a legit threat (or commits a crime) against another person, then something should be done to address that (what that something is needs to be proportional and preferably reform-based)
Like what’s happening to Trump and the Jan 6th crowd. The peeps involved are being handed sentences. Evidence against the baddies need to be properly collected so that they can be brought to justice in a civilized way.
You need a visual on them for that to happen. Let them march, identify them, and keep track of their behaviour. They’re fine… until they step out of line. And if they do, you know who they are, how many, etc.
I can understand why people misunderstand me and my meaning. I look at things with empathy, a love of freedom, a deep desire for open discussions, autonomy, and belief in taking action against others only when it’s truly justifiable (such as cases of physical threat, or impending threat)
Sure ok but you haven’t actually addressed the paradox of tolerance.
It’s great that you love freedom, autonomy, and open discussions, but what if there is a group of people intent on using this inclusivity to promulgate their agenda, which is intolerance?
To say the same thing another way, these ideals are based on the premise that everyone is acting in good faith, but some are not.
As you say you need to wait until people step out of line. Modern society has determined that the “line” is somewhere before assembling in overtly intolerant groups. A parade of Nazism is already out of line.
You’re right, but we have to be careful. We can’t rely on what society deems acceptable as the total and reasonable truth. That’s how Nazism rises in the first place.
Idk if you saw that post about Ignaz Semmelweis, who proposed that docs should wash their hands (and was so mocked that he ended up having a break-down and died after a beating in the asylum). Society at the time couldn’t accept his radical new idea. There are so many times in history (Galileo spending his last years under house arrest because heliocentrism was considered heresy) where people were persecuted for having ideas that went against society
I have a mixed bag of beliefs that are frankly half-baked, which is why I’m happy to have these kinds of debates
But what I’m getting at is that I dislike repressing people and ideas just because the status quo says you should repress them- even if that means undesirable idiologies creep in. We need to examine them closely, in an open minded way that isn’t immediately crushing because we can miss opportunities for growth
I’m liberal. I believe in autonomy, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. I am against genocide, racism, sexism, and all that
However- we have to let them speak and argue against them. We need to be pushing back against things like book removals, and pushing for funding of schools. It’s exhausting, and considerably more difficult, but I think it’s a better way to go
Imagine if, at these marches, you and I had a big screen which displayed the horrors of concentration camps. The images of fingernail marks embedded in the metal of the gas chambers. Images of the disease. Excerpts from the wretched experiments.
Maybe it’s naive, but I believe we would sway enough of those people marching that to weaken their cause.
Just yelling at them to shut up, or arresting them when half of them don’t even think it was real isn’t gonna work. It’ll just strengthen the cause and send them underground
Interesting. So, do you think that if something becomes illegal, it simply goes away?
So, for example…lets take something I feel is a natural. Homosexuality. If suddenly homosexuality suddenly became punishable by death by everyone in the world would it vanish? Would all people just be straight? No.
People are all wired differently.
Instead of repressing who people are, we should seek to understand what fears people have, what brings them comfort, educate them, highlight the ways in which we are similair as people. We should fight fascism not with oppression but inclusion.
Facists gain power by division. It’s “us” vs “them”
They lose power when “us” is all there is.
Anyway. My original point is that I would rather see the wolf for what it is and watch it, than allow it to hide amongst the flock, undetected
I normally try to engage at eye level and not be condescending. But if this following bit comes across as condescending, then that is with full intent.
I cannot possibly express in words how utterly naïve the notion of ‘fighting fascism with inclusion’ is. I’ve been around for long enough to see that it doesn’t work. Neo-Nazis haven’t been around since yesterday. The whole inclusion shtick has been tried, over and over and over. And what’s happened? They’ve become more emboldened and more omnipresent. Some 30 years ago there were massive Neo-Nazi marches and violent incidents in Germany, when Neo-Nazis set fire to asylum seeker housing in several places. Back then there were many shocked faces, and outrage, and yet we had the same voices urging calm and to engage them at eye level and not oppress them. Did it work? Fuck no.
And that whole idea of sunlight being the best disinfectant… yeah nah.
The only way to fight fascism is to make unequivocally clear that it has no place in modern society. None whatsoever.
And since you brought homosexuality into the mix, there is a key difference here: being a fascist is a choice - being homosexual is not. You are born with your sexuality, you can’t choose to be not homosexual. But you can choose to not be a fascist. However, in spite of all attempts at inclusion and meeting these people at eye level over decades, more and more of them decide they want to be fascists. How much longer would you like to try for?
I understand your frustration, and also the need to come across as condescending. You’re probably the downvote on my comment. You want to punish me, don’t you?
See, that feeling you are feeling… that frustration. It isn’t unique to you.
The primary driver in fascism is emotion. Fear, anger, frustration. Stong human emotion that lead to feeling like other people are lesser than yourself. The bad guy. The evil one. The ones that must be stopped.
Those strong feelings and the desire to shush the words of the other are exactly the kinds of things that lead to extremes.
Having strong feelings toward other people are as natural and normal as homosexuality.
When I say inclusion, I’m not talking about inviting the Nazi to roast the Jew at dinner. I’m talking about inviting everyone, Jew, Christian, Atheist, Hindu, Muslim, everyone, to dinner and giving each a timer to talk.
It sounds hokey as fuck, but we need to learn to love each other as we love ourselves. Only then, can Nazi’s cease to exist. If you repress people, it only makes the hate stronger.
Anyway, there is a portion of the population that is incapable of what I mentioned above. For them, there is no cure. For them, they must be watched. If -and only if- they cause harm to others, then they need to be jailed to protect everyone else. But… I believe they’re (thankfully) rare. For everyone else, there’s hope
I did not downvote you, and I don’t want to punish you, so there is no need to give me a lecture.
You do not understand that by the time they’re causing harm to others, it’s too late. By then you’ve let them do their thing long enough that they feel strengthened, emboldened and justified. And that time has passed. It passed when they invaded the Capitol on 6th January 2021. It passed when the Neonazi ploughed his car into the crowds in Charlottesville. It passed when Neonazis firebombed asylum seeker homes in Germany 30 years ago. Fascists and Nazis are actively doing harm, everywhere in the world. This is what they’re here for. And society has failed to stop them. They’re here to stay now.
I’m not lecturing you, I apologize if it seemed that way. What I was trying to do is allow you to recognize that your own biases, to help explain why people jump on the fascist boat
I’m not gonna continue arguing, because it seems like you’re upset. I just hope that you can remember thenold adage: you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar
Damn straight I’m upset. I’m upset, no, fuming, that people seem to think fascists are just naughty kids who you let be and watch, and only when they do something really wrong do you take action. I’m upset that nobody seems to have learned the lessons history is so readily and urgently trying to teach us. I’m upset that we are sleepwalking into another era of fascism and people seem to want it that way.
And you have a right to be upset. It’s good that you’re voicing that opinion, it’s good that you’re standing up for what you believe in. The more voices there are that speak up about injustice, the better!
I wonder if this all sounds contradictory to the person you may think you were debating/arguing with, but it’s not. Having voices heard is part of what I believe in. It’s just that I don’t think silencing opposing voices (no matter what garbage they spew) is the right way to go
This is where, in a verbal conversation, you’d hear a deep sigh.
You’re so hung up on the idea that we shouldn’t ‘silence voices’. This isn’t about that. And even if it was, it’s way too late for that. For better or worse, fascists are now a part of the public discourse. But no, it’s not about ‘silencing voices’. Again, they’re not here to debate. Their voices are a distraction.
What it is about is preventing the next steps, which will follow as sure as night follows day, as history has shown us. Prevent the incitement, the stochastic terrorism, stop them from getting a foothold in politics. Again, I fear it’s already too late for that. As a society, we didn’t shut them down the moment they poked their heads out of their holes, and we will pay a heavy price for that.
I will posit to you that if this was about extreme leftists - say, Stalinists, Maoists, Red Front - marching, displaying the hammer and sickle, seeking violence and talking about hanging politicians, we wouldn’t even have this discussion. Most people would be more than happy to shut that down, there would be none of this pearl-clutching about “we shouldn’t silence them”. The police and intelligence services would be all over it.
And with that, I will withdraw from this thread. There will come a day when the people who have tried to warn about fascism all along, will get to say “I told you so”, but on that day we’ll all be too busy fleeing the country or going underground.
I hear you and I understand. I just want to try to clarify something. This is over simplified because I’m on my phone
Imagine you’re in a room with 50 people. Two are designated as the leaders. Each leader has a goal of attainting the most followers, and will claim a cash prize for each follower they acquire.
Leader A looks around and thinks, “hey only about 25% of people have blonde hair. Ah ha! They’re my target” and then proceeds to talk mad shit. Some of the people agree, and also start talking mad shit.
The other leader looks around, and thinks: “I now know I have about 25% of the people on my side, but how do I get more?” B could silence A by force (a fight breaks out), B could point out what A is doing to gain followers (A could then claim B is a liar), or A could focus on how the blonde’s are really just people like everyone else, brothers and sisters, friends and lovers. A loses, if B can help people see that differences add to the group, as well as that everyone is connected to the human family
Whatever the outcome, what I mean with this is that the true baddies are few. They speak to the insecurities of the masses, and turn people on one another. They may not be the ones organizing the march, but they are at the head of it. I’m not saying to let them have the stage 24/7. I’m saying we should focus on swaying the hearts/minds of the people marching, because oppressing them only gives the main baddies more power
I had a friend once who said fascists just needed to “get it out of their system” when we were talking about the Boogaloo Boys a few days before the Jan6 insurrection. We’re both queer - a week or so before we were talking about how mutual trans friends of ours were being bashed in our city and that was an explicitly bad thing - I had to realize they might have only cared because they knew them personally.
I was honestly stun-locked by the whole conversation and all the little implications it made.
Never felt safe around them after that.
When former partners came out saying they were an abuser, I knew they were right.
No tolerance for intolerance.
‘Here is why you are objectively wrong.’
'I’m sorry you feel that way. ’
Stop talking.
You are just as entitled to your opinion as I am, and I won’t be silenced by you, or anyone else for that matter.
You can stomp your feet and whine all you want to. I wouldn’t even try to stop you even if I could. You know why?
Just because I disagree with you, doesn’t mean I wouldn’t defend your right to disagree with me. Hate me if you want to, it’s your right as a human being to feel however it is that you will feel
Nobody said you can’t speak, jackass. People are telling you why should stop saying dumb shit.
Your response to “shut up” shouldn’t be the same as an actual stomping-and-whining child, going “make me!” like it’s a matter of ability.
Ok, toddler
Dull.
I’m almost certain how aware of it, but you haven’t addressed the intolerance paradox.
For me the line needs to be crossed. As soon as that happens, action can be taken. But guilty-by-association isn’t enough (and that’s how I see marching)
If someone makes a legit threat (or commits a crime) against another person, then something should be done to address that (what that something is needs to be proportional and preferably reform-based)
Like what’s happening to Trump and the Jan 6th crowd. The peeps involved are being handed sentences. Evidence against the baddies need to be properly collected so that they can be brought to justice in a civilized way.
You need a visual on them for that to happen. Let them march, identify them, and keep track of their behaviour. They’re fine… until they step out of line. And if they do, you know who they are, how many, etc.
I can understand why people misunderstand me and my meaning. I look at things with empathy, a love of freedom, a deep desire for open discussions, autonomy, and belief in taking action against others only when it’s truly justifiable (such as cases of physical threat, or impending threat)
Sure ok but you haven’t actually addressed the paradox of tolerance.
It’s great that you love freedom, autonomy, and open discussions, but what if there is a group of people intent on using this inclusivity to promulgate their agenda, which is intolerance?
To say the same thing another way, these ideals are based on the premise that everyone is acting in good faith, but some are not.
As you say you need to wait until people step out of line. Modern society has determined that the “line” is somewhere before assembling in overtly intolerant groups. A parade of Nazism is already out of line.
You’re right, but we have to be careful. We can’t rely on what society deems acceptable as the total and reasonable truth. That’s how Nazism rises in the first place.
Idk if you saw that post about Ignaz Semmelweis, who proposed that docs should wash their hands (and was so mocked that he ended up having a break-down and died after a beating in the asylum). Society at the time couldn’t accept his radical new idea. There are so many times in history (Galileo spending his last years under house arrest because heliocentrism was considered heresy) where people were persecuted for having ideas that went against society
I have a mixed bag of beliefs that are frankly half-baked, which is why I’m happy to have these kinds of debates
But what I’m getting at is that I dislike repressing people and ideas just because the status quo says you should repress them- even if that means undesirable idiologies creep in. We need to examine them closely, in an open minded way that isn’t immediately crushing because we can miss opportunities for growth
I’m liberal. I believe in autonomy, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. I am against genocide, racism, sexism, and all that
However- we have to let them speak and argue against them. We need to be pushing back against things like book removals, and pushing for funding of schools. It’s exhausting, and considerably more difficult, but I think it’s a better way to go
Imagine if, at these marches, you and I had a big screen which displayed the horrors of concentration camps. The images of fingernail marks embedded in the metal of the gas chambers. Images of the disease. Excerpts from the wretched experiments.
Maybe it’s naive, but I believe we would sway enough of those people marching that to weaken their cause.
Just yelling at them to shut up, or arresting them when half of them don’t even think it was real isn’t gonna work. It’ll just strengthen the cause and send them underground