WaxedWookie @ WaxedWookie @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

1,078

Joined

2 yr. ago

I don't think there's any doubt the Nazis are bad - which is why they're a good example. When they've had power, they killed millions - the violence has already happened at an incredible scale, but you continue to defend their existence.

Surely you don't propose atomising response to the individual level - that we only react to individual members of openly genocidal groups after they harm/kill someone, otherwise allowing the unhindered operation and growth of those groups?

Protecting openly genocidal groups' speech is akin to protecting individuals' rights to make death threats (even after they've killed a bunch of people) - the speech itself is harmful, intimidating minorities, and it's a strong indicator of upcoming violence that you can prevent instead of waiting for innocent people to get harassed, attacked, and killed. Conversely, there's zero social utility to the hate speech other than identifying genocidal cunts that are probably deserving of some violence, for the betterment of society - the ol' paradox of tolerance.

You drew the line at violence, but defend the Nazis and ISIS - What's the bar for unacceptable violence? More than the 17 million people the Nazis killed, obviously, but where is that line?

It's not as overt as the Nazis yet, but there's no shortage of mainstream Jewish dogwhistles that are targets of hate... Soros, Gates, globalist elites, the world economic forum, cultural Marxists, the WHO, Hollywood, the MSM....

Both ISIS and the Nazis have committed a huge amount of violence, yet you defend them - why?

You don't see the issue with comparing two groups whose objective is genocide with two groups with fairly specific goals oriented around freedom, which have committed sporadic violence serving those ends?

For what it's worth, I place Hamas in the Nazi/ISIS bucket for consistent reasons.

You frame your statement as though the Israeli government's disregard for the safety of Israelis is supposed to contradict the fact that they propped up a hostile terror org to kill their citizens and create a pretext for the genocide.

Why?

Seem clear to me that Israel did this for the same reason they helped Hamas oust more moderate PLO - backed groups - they wanted to manufacture the pretext for the genocide they're now escalating.

What happened to "nothing to fear, nothing to hide"?

Putting aside the effect of the t-shirt, has that happened (for ISIS or Nazis), or are you making things up to be afraid of?

Both ISIS and Nazis are terror groups whose explicit goal it is to kill large numbers of people. Their very existence is tantamount to a death threat made against Jews, "sexual deviants", "lesser races", the west, socialists, and so on...

So the genocides need to happen again before we can do anything about them?

This isn't thought crime - it's a group motivated by hate, that has a history of genocide, and previously had to be stopped by the military might of the bulk of the western world. They're working to recruit and to intimidate, there's zero value to their existence, and very good reason to stop them.

What have I missed?

Perhaps being a member of a group that committed a series of genocides, was a military enemy of the and US, and is grounded in nothing but conspiacism and pseudoscience that had to be stopped by the combined military force of half the western world should be illegal.

The main downside of protecting Nazism is genocide - what's the upside?

Would you defend the rise of ISIS in the US for the same reasons, and if not, why not?

What are the differences in policy prescriptions between your average Texan Republican and your average Nazi?

There's not a punchline here.

That's supposed to be an either thing?

For a laugh, here's what this definitely consistent person with a principled dislike of politics (which definitely isn't just things they disagree with) posted immediately after their complaint:

US fed doesn't recognize basic ethics laws, how unsurprising

A boring dystopia

It's not as though the article is any better - bots just wrapping up a comment thread from twitter, cramming it with ads, and presenting it as an article.

Late stage capitalist media is a dumpster fire.

I'm sorry people aren't posting content relevant to your personal preferences.

May I suggest you use filters, or perhaps go fuck yourself?

The Labour Party.

This isn't unique to the UK by any stretch of the imagination, which is why I used the broad terms.

The conservatives burn it all down, the liberals preserve the status quo - even if that's ashen ruins.

Perish the thought of building anything - that'll mean we can't give tax breaks to those that need them the last.

It's been about a quarter century since I've spent meaningful time with a billionaire, and I'd wager that few here have been that close. What does alienating ourselves from the world's ~2,700 billionaires ,who already lock the world out and work to escape to other planets by explaining out why they're the problem cost us, exactly?

Remember folks, don't criticise Nazis - you'll alienate yourself from them, and that's bad.

He's far too thin skinned and snivelling for anyone to confuse him for a hero with a shell.