• dactylotheca@suppo.fiOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sorry, that means you’re just as bad as the fash. You should be engaging them on the marketplace of ideas, just like people did in WW II when they stopped the fascists with kindness and debate

      • jerkface@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Fascism was never stopped. Can never be stopped. Fascism is not a political ideology, it is an expression of human psychology.

        If someone in your life is becoming a fascist, like is happening in many of our lives, do you get a gun and kill them? Does that solve fascism in your life? Perhaps you merely punch them until they stop being a fascist. Is this really actionable advice?

        Fascism is growing because people are afraid of an increasingly uncertain future that they have no power over. Threatening them with violence will only make them more afraid and draw even more on what fascism offers them. The people in our lives need love, not violence.

        • dactylotheca@suppo.fiOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Fascism is not a political ideology

          “Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement […]” (wiki, although I’m sure you’ll soon tell us that Wikipedia is not a valid source because you don’t understand the difference between using Wikipedia as a source on Lemmy vs. in a scientific article)

          The people in our lives need love, not violence.

          The people in my life aren’t Nazis

              • P00ptart@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                That last part is the important bit. If you know a fascist, they don’t need to be part of your life.

                • dactylotheca@suppo.fiOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  No no, apparently that’s “purity testing” and you’re a bad person for not wanting to associate with fascists

          • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            The people in my life aren’t Nazis

            I know the right-wing infosphere has brainwashed multiple members of my family. I don’t have a way to check the percentage of people I’ve known in my life that are now brainwashed. I know that my life would have been lesser had I not met every single one of them. I don’t see the people in my life as a purity test, they’re still the same people. What happened to them is a reminder that we must first and foremost defeat fascism, the political ideology.

            • dactylotheca@suppo.fiOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              What the – and I simply can’t emphasize this enough – fuck does it have to do with PuRiTy TeStInG if I don’t want to associate or spend time with people whose political ideologies would fucking literally have me stripped of human rights if not outright murdered because of my gender and/or gender identity? What sort of an obligation do I have to keep those people in my life if they have publicly stated opinions that make it clear that I may not actually be physically safe in their presence?

              And no, I don’t have a way to “check the percentage of people I’ve known in my life that are now brainwashed” either you utter cabbage, I just don’t knowingly associate with extremists conservatives let alone literal Nazis. If somebody I know turns out to have fallen off the deep end, I just don’t keep associating with them. See, no magical PuRiTy TeStEr required?

              So yes, great, good on you for being so accepting of people, I unironically commend you for that, but even though I have no idea who you are or what your background is, this comment – like a lot of the hugbox let’s defeat the nazis with love bullshit I’ve seen earlier – definitely feels like it’s coming from someone who’s got no experience with being on the receiving end of bigotry or misogyny. Easy to be a bit more understanding and accepting of Nazis when you wouldn’t be one of the first people they’d shove in a camp.

              Edit: and I’m saying this as an avowed lover of hugboxes of various kinds. “Cute but will fight”

              • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Not everyone has the luxury of knowing no one who has been brainwashed by the right-wing infosphere. A person not having anyone who has partially or fully adopted fascist ideology in their life is not something to brag about. Nor should that be the goal.

                People have families. People have childhood friends they’ve known their whole lives. People have classmates with the same or similar schedule as them. People have adult friends in their social circles. People have co-workers at their jobs. People cannot control the political ideology of the people around them. If someone is informed enough to know exactly who in their life is currently a fascist and can disassociate exactly from those people then good for them. The majority of people will not be able to do that. Nor will doing that solve the problem.

                When the response to this

                The people in our lives need love, not violence.

                is this

                The people in my life aren’t Nazis

                That’s a purity test. Your argument is to sort ourselves by political ideology.

                Easy to be a bit more understanding and accepting of Nazis when you wouldn’t be one of the first people they’d shove in a camp.

                I am a Jewish, atheist, social democrat, lesbian, trans woman. I’m white and pre-transition, so I get to benefit from white male privilege for now. But if the fascists could put me in a death camp they would.

                If a person is in danger from someone in their life and can dissociate from that person, then by all means dissociate from them.

                The way to defeat fascism is to defeat the ideas that make up the political ideology. Isolating ourselves does nothing to forward this goal.

                • dactylotheca@suppo.fiOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  You’re still missing the point here. I never said I keep tabs on everyone at all times just so I can pull the eject handle if they turn Nazi, just that if it does turn out somehow that someone is a Nazi, that is when I pull the eject handle.

                  In any case, my argument absolutely is that I’m going to sort my friends by political ideology – and no, I don’t give people forms to fill out or install cameras in their homes. Doesn’t mean everyone has to think exactly like me, but “no Nazis” doesn’t feel like it should be a high bar. Sure, maybe this does nothing to help solve the situation but I have no interest in having to be buddies with them, let alone loving them – better people are welcome to it, but I’m done, I’d jump off a cliff if I had to listen to yet another “rational” fascist wannabe explain why my whole gender is inferior to his and then dismiss me when I get ANGY. Call it purity testing all you want, but for me and I suspect a lot of people this is self care

        • BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          There’s been a push for decades that everyone should be respectful and peaceful and not bother anyone when they protest in any way. The entire country forgetting how we’ve accomplished almost every major societal change.

        • dactylotheca@suppo.fiOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I mean of course I was being hyperbolic but I’ve had several people tell me something equivalent to pretty much like this. “Using violence against fascists is stooping to their level” is another classic.

          edit: aaaaaand here we go, there is now at least one person in these comments saying exactly this

  • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Seems like a good spot for this:

    Nonviolence works the same way: if you’re engaging with someone / some group who isn’t violent, there’s an expectation that you’ll also remain nonviolent. If they pull a gun on you and you happen to be packing (and a quick shot) and shoot em dead, that does NOT bring you down to their level.

    • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      From the German constitution:

      Anyone who abuses the freedom of expression, in particular the freedom of the press (Article 5 para. 1), the freedom of teaching (Article 5 para. 3), the freedom of assembly (Article 8), the freedom of association (Article 9), the secrecy of letters, mail and telecommunications (Article 10), the property (Article 14) or the right of asylum (Article 16a) to fight against the free democratic basic order, forfeits these fundamental rights. The forfeiture and its extent are pronounced by the Federal Constitutional Court.

        • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          There also is this section:

          Parties that, according to their goals or the behavior of their supporters, aim to impair or eliminate the free democratic basic order or to endanger the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany are unconstitutional.

      • masquenox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        to fight against the free democratic basic order,

        Wold be nice if “liberal democracy” consisted of anything that can be called democratic with a straight face - perhaps then Germany wouldn’t be one of Israel’s most vitriolic genocide enablers.

          • masquenox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            You did know there’s a western-backed genocide being perpetrated in Palestine right now, right?

              • masquenox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                You mean… apart from the fact that Germany is funding, supporting and enabling Israel’s genocide?

                • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  But what does this have to do with democracy? If the elected parties fund a war, morally correct or not, it is still democracy as they were chosen. There are multiple German parties who oppose Israel, but they weren’t elected

    • RandomVideos@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Does the paradox of tolerance even exist?

      If you tolerate a group that hates a group of people, there are people that hate a group of people, meaning the society is intolerant to that group of people until those people are gone

      If you dont tolerate a group that hates a group of people, there are people that hate the group that hates a group of people, meaning the society is intolerant to that group that hates the group of people until those people are gone

      Because there is no way to become a tolerant society until one of the 2 groups is gone, the easiest way to become a tolerant society would mean getting rid of the easiest group you can get rid of.

      Which group would be easiest to get rid off:

      1. Jews, communists, slavic people, Romani people, all races but one, people with mental and physical illnesses, LGBTQ+ people and poor people Or
      2. People with a specific ideology

      Anything else wouldnt matter since the society will remain intolerant

      PS: by “get rid off”, i mean remove people from the group, not specifically kill

      • dactylotheca@suppo.fiOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Does the paradox of tolerance even exist?

        If you tolerate a group that hates a group of people, there are people that hate a group of people, meaning the society is intolerant to that group of people until those people are gone

        Exactly: there is no paradox there if you don’t think of tolerance as an absolute. This blog post put it pretty well:

        Tolerance is not a moral absolute; it is a peace treaty. Tolerance is a social norm because it allows different people to live side-by-side without being at each other’s throats. It means that we accept that people may be different from us, in their customs, in their behavior, in their dress, in their sex lives, and that if this doesn’t directly affect our lives, it is none of our business. But the model of a peace treaty differs from the model of a moral precept in one simple way: the protection of a peace treaty only extends to those willing to abide by its terms. It is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.

    • dactylotheca@suppo.fiOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is slander and I will not stand for it: I bet Jadzia would be down for a nice fash bash