I don’t think violently hurting people is a good idea.
A lot of people forget, due to the exceptionally stable nature of modern Western society, that society is built on violence. We, as citizens of a polity, subcontract out our violence to a central state. And this is, to at least some degree, a good thing - there’s a central entity which can be observed and judged and regulated, rather than a million people all trying to enforce and judge one another’s usage of violence as justified or unjustified.
But ultimately, such subcontracting of violence is conditional - as long as the central state represents our rights adequately, to at least some degree, people are willing to continue to surrender their own sovereign right to commit violence to it. Whenever the central state does not represent a citizen’s rights adequately, the citizen often withdraws that surrender of sovereignty - either in total or, more often, conditionally - to protect their own rights.
When you make a contract - even in something as small as buying an apple - you are relying on the threat of force from the state to back it - “We will forcibly remove property or freedom from you if you violate this contract.” Violence is a part of everyday life - what’s important is to act in such a way that minimizes the need for it. In the case of defense of LGBT rights, sometimes that means using violence as a means of deterrence against the violence of bigots that is insufficiently deterred by state action.
in fact, not punching a nazi when you have the opportunity is in itself a net negative, so we can say it’s immoral to not punch a nazi whenever possible.
I understand this statement in principle but unfortunately thats not how the world works. If you tolerate intolerance you will just end up opressed or dead.
Fascists don’t have any problems hurting and killing whoever they deem not worthy of living, they should be met with the same prejudice.
You have two opposing groups, let’s call them a and B. Group a says “we dont think group b has a right to exist and we are prepared to get violent” and group b says “we will never use violence”. How long do you expect group b to last?
Fascists are mercifully not common where I live, but if I hear one mouthing off they’re going to get a savage beating.
Surely the answer is both sides decided the other doesnt have a right to exist. There’s no difference between labeling someone a Nazi or labeling someone trans when the only point is to excuse violence on that group.
People are letting their emotions cloud their better judgment, or they haven’t developed better judgment yet. Unfortunately people think very short term and often mold reasoning around their actions after the fact.
A trans person is a trans person does not have a choice about their identity. Being a nazi is a choice you make because you want to hate people. A nazi merely needs to decide not to be a cunt and the problem resolves itself. The only way a trans person can make peace with a nazi is by hiding who they are and living a lie. It’s not the same. And if you think it is then either A: you’re delusional or B: you know I’m right but you’re also a nazi.
To put it a different way, should black people go around in white face to make the kkk happy?
They are similar in american society because both would argue they have a right to exist, and both are targets for violence in public if they are overt about it. I’m simply saying neither should be attacked, the whole point is to coexist. People need to learn how to de-escalate and create bridges, not hit each other in the face with bricks.
Edit to answer your question: Obviously not, black people don’t want to be white people. Trans people do want to pass as a specific gender.
Fascism is an ideology based on the oppression of other people. The whole ideology is based around not coexisting with other people. And it’s not just trans people fascists have a problem with. It’s literally anyone who isn’t straight, white and also a fascist.
The only way to coexist with fascists is to pretend to be one at which point, what you’re doing is worse than violence you’re pretending there isn’t a problem and allowing them to hurt other people. Fascists choose violence as their plan A. If you allow them to spew their hate you might as well lynch an immigrant yourself.
One problem with “fascists should be met w violence” is in the lack of definition for fascist. I can tell you, in my experience, saying something like “I don’t want universal healthcare” is enough to earn me the label of “fascist” in leftwing forums like Lemmy and Reddit.
If the logic is “people who disagree are fascists, and fascists deserve violence” or more simply “people who disagree deserve violence”… well isn’t that what fascists say??
Do you agree that that example at least highlights a serious problem in the chain of logic?
No, that’s you and others being petty, that’s not fascism. If you want other people to be dead on the basis of who they were born as and attempt to make those ideals a reality you are a fascist and death for you would be a net positive. Don’t be a crybaby, be realistic and stop being such a reactionary child.
Edit: And that is not reason, that is just myopic self justification. If you have the problem that people are constantly calling you a fascist and you’re not arguing for death camps and absolute authoritarianism, then the thing that’s going on is that you’re just an insufferable and controlling asshole.
Edit: Also, point blank, supporting fascists makes you a fascist.
One problem with “fascists should be met w violence” is in the lack of definition for fascist. I can tell you, in my experience, saying something like “I don’t want universal healthcare” is enough to earn me the label of “fascist” in leftwing forums like Lemmy and Reddit.
If the logic is “people who disagree are fascists, and fascists deserve violence” or more simply “people who disagree deserve violence”… well isn’t that what fascists say??
Do you agree that that example at least highlights a serious problem in the chain of logic?”
That. That is a very long winded way to tell people you are a thin skinned crybaby who thinks criticism is persecution.
“Even” Animals don’t deserve it? Why is “even” in that sentence? Are you assuming we would be more willing to hurt animals than we would be to defend ourselves from fascists?
Tolerance of intolerance is the death of tolerance.
I don’t think violently hurting people is a good idea.
A lot of people forget, due to the exceptionally stable nature of modern Western society, that society is built on violence. We, as citizens of a polity, subcontract out our violence to a central state. And this is, to at least some degree, a good thing - there’s a central entity which can be observed and judged and regulated, rather than a million people all trying to enforce and judge one another’s usage of violence as justified or unjustified.
But ultimately, such subcontracting of violence is conditional - as long as the central state represents our rights adequately, to at least some degree, people are willing to continue to surrender their own sovereign right to commit violence to it. Whenever the central state does not represent a citizen’s rights adequately, the citizen often withdraws that surrender of sovereignty - either in total or, more often, conditionally - to protect their own rights.
When you make a contract - even in something as small as buying an apple - you are relying on the threat of force from the state to back it - “We will forcibly remove property or freedom from you if you violate this contract.” Violence is a part of everyday life - what’s important is to act in such a way that minimizes the need for it. In the case of defense of LGBT rights, sometimes that means using violence as a means of deterrence against the violence of bigots that is insufficiently deterred by state action.
Or, when the state threatens us, as it so often does.
As indicated at that first pride.
Gotta remind the complacent goons that oppression has consequences. 👍
Unless they’re fascists. Because punching nazis is a net positive for the world
Punching Nazis is always self defence, since being a Nazi in public is an act of violence.
in fact, not punching a nazi when you have the opportunity is in itself a net negative, so we can say it’s immoral to not punch a nazi whenever possible.
Fascist lives don’t matter.
How do you think Pride managed to become a reality? With “thank you” cards?
They won’t think twice about violently hurting trans folk though so… Yeah
What would be the issue with that.
What justified this instance of your violence vs one instance of their violence?
I understand this statement in principle but unfortunately thats not how the world works. If you tolerate intolerance you will just end up opressed or dead. Fascists don’t have any problems hurting and killing whoever they deem not worthy of living, they should be met with the same prejudice.
This. Violence against fascists isn’t really violence, it’s enforcement of the societal End User License Agreement.
You understand how circular that reasoning is right?
You have two opposing groups, let’s call them a and B. Group a says “we dont think group b has a right to exist and we are prepared to get violent” and group b says “we will never use violence”. How long do you expect group b to last?
Fascists are mercifully not common where I live, but if I hear one mouthing off they’re going to get a savage beating.
Surely the answer is both sides decided the other doesnt have a right to exist. There’s no difference between labeling someone a Nazi or labeling someone trans when the only point is to excuse violence on that group.
People are letting their emotions cloud their better judgment, or they haven’t developed better judgment yet. Unfortunately people think very short term and often mold reasoning around their actions after the fact.
A trans person is a trans person does not have a choice about their identity. Being a nazi is a choice you make because you want to hate people. A nazi merely needs to decide not to be a cunt and the problem resolves itself. The only way a trans person can make peace with a nazi is by hiding who they are and living a lie. It’s not the same. And if you think it is then either A: you’re delusional or B: you know I’m right but you’re also a nazi.
To put it a different way, should black people go around in white face to make the kkk happy?
They are similar in american society because both would argue they have a right to exist, and both are targets for violence in public if they are overt about it. I’m simply saying neither should be attacked, the whole point is to coexist. People need to learn how to de-escalate and create bridges, not hit each other in the face with bricks.
Edit to answer your question: Obviously not, black people don’t want to be white people. Trans people do want to pass as a specific gender.
Fascism is an ideology based on the oppression of other people. The whole ideology is based around not coexisting with other people. And it’s not just trans people fascists have a problem with. It’s literally anyone who isn’t straight, white and also a fascist.
The only way to coexist with fascists is to pretend to be one at which point, what you’re doing is worse than violence you’re pretending there isn’t a problem and allowing them to hurt other people. Fascists choose violence as their plan A. If you allow them to spew their hate you might as well lynch an immigrant yourself.
Crazy responses huh? If it makes you feel better, after they chase off any voices of reason, these type of people resort to eating eachother.
What is the voice of reason for fascists?
It’s a good question.
One problem with “fascists should be met w violence” is in the lack of definition for fascist. I can tell you, in my experience, saying something like “I don’t want universal healthcare” is enough to earn me the label of “fascist” in leftwing forums like Lemmy and Reddit.
If the logic is “people who disagree are fascists, and fascists deserve violence” or more simply “people who disagree deserve violence”… well isn’t that what fascists say??
Do you agree that that example at least highlights a serious problem in the chain of logic?
No, that’s you and others being petty, that’s not fascism. If you want other people to be dead on the basis of who they were born as and attempt to make those ideals a reality you are a fascist and death for you would be a net positive. Don’t be a crybaby, be realistic and stop being such a reactionary child.
Edit: And that is not reason, that is just myopic self justification. If you have the problem that people are constantly calling you a fascist and you’re not arguing for death camps and absolute authoritarianism, then the thing that’s going on is that you’re just an insufferable and controlling asshole.
Edit: Also, point blank, supporting fascists makes you a fascist.
Im being a crybaby? Sorry, im not following.
Yup. Catch on.
Yeah im trying. What did I say/do?
“It’s a good question.
One problem with “fascists should be met w violence” is in the lack of definition for fascist. I can tell you, in my experience, saying something like “I don’t want universal healthcare” is enough to earn me the label of “fascist” in leftwing forums like Lemmy and Reddit.
If the logic is “people who disagree are fascists, and fascists deserve violence” or more simply “people who disagree deserve violence”… well isn’t that what fascists say??
Do you agree that that example at least highlights a serious problem in the chain of logic?”
That. That is a very long winded way to tell people you are a thin skinned crybaby who thinks criticism is persecution.
Totally depends on who you’re hurting.
No.
Even animals don’t deserve to be treated violently.
That implies animals are lesser than fascists.
it implies violence is unacceptable towards life
“Even” Animals don’t deserve it? Why is “even” in that sentence? Are you assuming we would be more willing to hurt animals than we would be to defend ourselves from fascists?
Tolerance of intolerance is the death of tolerance.