Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,034
Which data, and under what criteria are they judging "political" violence?
There are more of us than there are of them
- Thread starter Hygro
- Start date
- Status
Which data, and under what criteria are they judging "political" violence?
I think a point you're really missing, is that the Alt-Right/Neo-Nazis/etc are trying to make violence into the law of the land. They're trying (and succeeding) to fully institutionalize harmful discrimination, and that's why they're so much more dangerous than random acts of hate or fear.
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
Hate seeking validation through law is nothing novel, it's ongoing and continuous. It certainly has not gone away, no. If we're seeking that which fertilizes extremism and isolated worldview, a principle seedbed of violence, internet news seems to be doing the most effective fertilization. The studies seem to keep popping up regarding the correlation.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,034
But you, and several others here don't seem to understand, or grasp, or accept, is that the tactics you're proposing to combat the "rise of Fascism," are themselves the sort of tactics historic Fascist regimes start off with immediately upon coming to power, before leading into the later atrocities. Censorship by bloc ideologies, politicizing criminals by definition, law-enforcement, priority, and punishment, and couching rhetoric into simplistic "us and them" blocs is, indeed, early onset Fascistic thinking and ideology.
No. It really sounds like you're basically just saying "Don't fight against fascism because you'll end up doing some things fascists do (like eating and breathing)"
The real threat of leaving the rise of fascism unchecked greatly outweighs whatever potential perceived threat you may be imagining will come from those efforts to stop it.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,034
So, basically, you've just paraphrased here the slogan of justification for some of the greatest and most horrific atrocities of history, "the ends always justify the means, the greater good is all that matter." Now, I am the one that's wondering what's happened to you morally speaking (to quote a question you asked me on these forums some months ago).
No.
I find it very worrying (and perhaps revealing?) that you seem to be thinking that anti-fascist reaction (targetted only at attempts to institutionalize militant regimes of hate) is somehow a worse evil than actual fascism.
I'm as anti-violence as anyone, but I'm not so out of touch with reality that I'm going to focus on reactionary actions of people suffering, taken against dangerous oppressors, as somehow being greater or even an equal issue.
I do feel that people who are being directly threatened get just a little leeway, but I have no such feelings for people using their positions of power and privilege to enact hate-fueled suffering.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,034
But who can be TRUSTED to arbitrarily declare groups as "militant regimes of hate," and what checks are put on such abusing succumbing to well-observed HUMAN nature and abusing such power thoroughly? I've asked this question several times on these forums in the past, and every time I get evasive answers, the declaration of how dire the situation, but still without an answer (that is VERY worrisome in and of itself), or being accused of "collaborating with Fascists," just for asking. And now, a litmus test question. Would Nation of Islam, under it's current form led by Louis Farrakhan, as an example off the top of my head, be considered a "militant regime of hate," as they do indeed have a VERY militant rhetoric (and a violent history), and openly espouse hate for several demographics, but do not have White members?
No one's interested in your whataboutism.
Are you denying what the Alt-Right is trying to do is institutionally harmful to women, minorities, LGBTQ+, immigrants, and so on? Your posts make it sound like you don't believe there's a serious problem right now.
Sorry, most of us aren't succumbing to a defeatist attitude of "I know I'm not 100% perfect, so when I see something wrong happening I'm just going to let it go."
Are you denying what the Alt-Right is trying to do is institutionally harmful to women, minorities, LGBTQ+, immigrants, and so on? Your posts make it sound like you don't believe there's a serious problem right now.
Sorry, most of us aren't succumbing to a defeatist attitude of "I know I'm not 100% perfect, so when I see something wrong happening I'm just going to let it go."
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,034
No, I'm not denying what such groups are doing or that it is causing a lot of damage. However, first the Alt-Right/White Supremacists/Neo-Nazis are not the only socially destructive, hate (or at least really bad idea) driven groups outs there, and to pretend they are is bizarrely self-sabotaging. And, while I do believe a solution for ALL political extremism, needs to be addressed, I WILL NOT support Draconian, Orwellian, McCarthyist, Fascistic, and Atrocity-in-the-Making policies and viewpoints to see it done. While I do not support the Fascists, I also do not support Stalinist-style Anti-Fascist Purge mentality. I will NOT side with this insanity on either extreme. Forgive me for retaining my rationality, conscience, and foresight and declining to support either brand of madness or brewing atrocity.
Cloud_Strife
Deity
People like me are at literal harm from your ideology that is on full display in this thread.
That isn't an opinion that is a fact, these people will try to harm me if they ever gain any sort of purchase in society, they are an existential threat that you are willing to tolerate until they do harm to yourself.
Your attitude is harmful to minorities and ultimately harmful to yourself, it's neither rational nor conscientious because it lacks empathy and even sympathy for the dangers they face.
That isn't an opinion that is a fact, these people will try to harm me if they ever gain any sort of purchase in society, they are an existential threat that you are willing to tolerate until they do harm to yourself.
Your attitude is harmful to minorities and ultimately harmful to yourself, it's neither rational nor conscientious because it lacks empathy and even sympathy for the dangers they face.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,034
What ideology are you ACCUSING me of? And I hope it's not more baseless slander...
And I do have empathy and sympathy for those in such danger. However, it is hard to maintain when they propose using tactics to effectively replace and become the evil they seek to oppose.
Synobun
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2006
- Messages
- 24,884
You are recommending inaction against a current reality and danger due to a hypothetical dystopian future. You're erasing all nuance in the situation and saying that disallowing violent action of the right is equivalent to disallowing all action of any state-targeted population, and that the former will lead to the latter in a linear fashion.
Even if someone were to give you the benefit of the doubt on this, you seem to exhibit no intention of finding an alternative solution. You're only interested in maintaining the right's ability to exert itself against undesirables. You advocate for today's suffering to continue in order to avoid the maybe of a different suffering tomorrow.
If you do not support the right, your actions do not match the intention.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,034
No, I am not recommending inaction, and I've never said that once (more words in my mouth, more of your credibility lost). I just don't agree with the tactics being proposed here. They are ill-thought-out, easily abused, unchecked, with no proposed appeal or recourse for suffering undue targeting, act in sweeping generalizations, and ignore all threats to society outside a specific targeted group. Frankly, it's madness. It's worse than "1984." This proposal is a matter of a "the cure is worse than the disease," ideal. And my fears are not quite so hypothetical as you dismiss them as - history and human nature is on my side as evidence here. I have also never been "only interested in maintaining the right's ability to exert itself against undesirables," - that is completely disingenuous to anything I've said and is completely loathsome fabrication. I have never been an advocate of mass disenfranchisement of basically human rights for ANYONE - but you're demanding I choose one side to strip utterly of such right and all due process, or you declare arbitrarily I stand for doing the same to the "other side," (and, again, notice my disdain for this "two sides," or "two blocs," crap), and that is just madness. So I hearby spit out all of these words you've stuffed in mouth, denounce all the disingenuous labels you've laid upon me, and I call you, and your compatriots out, as being, by intention, JUST AS BAD THOSE YOU OPPOSE!
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,034
You must really be insane! There is no humour there...
I think it's time for psychiatric visits for you and a few of your compatriots here.
Moderator Action: Flaming posters by impugning their mental health is simply not acceptable. You may leave the thread forthwith. ~ Arakhor
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Last edited by a moderator:
Senethro
Overlord
Ok boomer etc etc
Synobun
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2006
- Messages
- 24,884
Shifty Synsensa and Pudgy Phrossack are attacking you with their fake news WITCH HUNT covfefe
- Status
