• deaf_fish@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    I am kinda confused while reading your post. It sounds like we agree. I am not by nature a violent person. In fact, I would rather not punch anyone. The problem is that history shows clear a progression when it comes to fascists. Their ideas spread like a virus and people who have not been educated about it are easily convinced, even though there is a bunch of history and philosophical evidence that bad outcomes will happen. Once they gain power, that is it.

    As I am talking with the OP, it seems like they think that violence is never necessary. I think this is incorrect. I think you agree with me on that point at least.

    I think the punching should only happen if they have a big audience or if they are open and loud about it. Obviously try to educate them first. But at the end of the day, if they are just a normal person that doesn’t talk about their politics, and they salute a picture of Hitler before they go to bed. I am fine with that. They don’t need to be punched, they can enjoy society as long as they stay quite about it.

    The problem isn’t the people, the problem is the idea. The people are fine as long as they don’t spread the idea.

    • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I feel like intolerance is kind of a wildcard. The initial intolerance could be anything from asking an ignorant question to trying to start a genocide, and the responding intolerance is much the same.

      It’s kind of like having a function that ignores the parameters and just gives a random response to intolerance. We agree because we’ve actually mapped the initial action to our reaction, so we know that with this input we get this other output.

      Did I explain my objection well enough this time? I know it’s probably me not knowing how to explain it properly.

      • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, this makes sense. Would you feel better about the this: “It’s ok to punch fascists”? Using the common definition for all these terms. I know this is slightly different from what OP was posting about.

        • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          It depends on the fascist? Common language suggests they’re, what? None of them have real political ideals.

          I’m good with punching people that use slurs or rhetoric to attack others,

          • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Fascists want power to hurt people. They think they are making the world a better place by “removing” a “bad” group of people.

            When do you start punching these people? If never, they are going to kill and harm a lot of people.

            • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              So, you start punching when they get credibly threatening. We let them be fucky and loud and when it gets violent or close to, we do damage.

              • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Yes, I have no problem with that. I think we only need to target people who spread fascist ideology to a wide and/or large audience. The average fascist Joe, has very little reach and it would look bad if it seemed like random nobodies were being targeted.

                Edit: When I say the average fascist Joe. I mean the average person who is a fascists. Not anyone named Joe. Sorry for any confusion.