No… how do you get that from what I’ve said. We should out talk them, the example post given is very easy to poke holes in. People can and do change their minds, but only when challenged. Giving up, slapping a label on and holding moral superiority just grows their side. While you get to feel good about calling them a nazi. Doesn’t help anyone and just pushes them further down that hate filled mindset. You beat hate with compassion and conversation, not more hate. Look into the artist Daryl Davis, his ideology around the subject is how I frame mine.
“There will always be nazis” is pretty fatalistic. And beside that point, why can’t we do both? Poking holes in their dingbat ideology and shaming them for how vile they are are by no means mutually exclusive.
You’re never going to get someone to leave their side and come to yours with that mentality. Shaming them does nothing but make you feel superior. Use someone like Daryl Davis as an example.
(Sorry too many comment threads going so I’m gonna synthesize concepts here to stop the comment fragmentation)
See here’s the disconnect: I don’t want them on my side, I don’t think they can be brought over to my side, I think they are a lost cause. The reason to explicitly call out their behavior is so people, people who aren’t yet too far gone, can see where their rhetoric stems from. I want people to see that that authoritiarian-leaning but largely inoffensive opinion comes from a place of self-loathing masquerading as trolling and nazi adjacent hypercapitalist idol worship. They, Luniatiqueue, can fuck right off. But the person reading the comment, the one that risks being frog-boiled over to sympathizing with their opinions by gradual exposure to more and more authoritarian rhetorical concepts, those people I care about. THOSE people are worth saving, worth engaging with.
And no, they’re not going to be pushed away by seeing someone else get called a nazi for doing things like supporting the literal policies of the nazi party. If someone is that inherently contrarian, so hung up on “polite interaction” that they are only going to criticize that apparent lack of decorum instead of the person claiming that nobody deserves a chance at happiness and dancing around the issue of putting trans people in camps, someone like you, I don’t have much hope for them.
Maybe they can be reached, but they’re already teetering on the edge, and spending my time worrying about them instead of trying to shine a light on the truly vile creatures lurking in our community, that is not worth my time.
Yeah, we have a fundamental disagreement in morals. Thats fine, I think its very rare for someone to be too far gone to retrieve. Trolls are trolls though so I wont pretend this person is changeable. Im just of the camp that people have shitty opinions due to all kinds of factors. The only thing that changes those opinions is open dialoge. Shaming doesn’t help at anyone at any point, aside from the shamer who gets to feel morally superior. I wont pretend to know you or your story and it wouldnt really change how I’m approaching this discussion. As I’ve said in other comments, I try to frame my perspective of the issue around Daryl Davis’s approach to engaging with hate.
Why do you think the rejection of a supremacist is inherently a supremacist act? I don’t feel superior to them, I feel deep all consuming sadness that society can produce a person like that. I feel angry that they’re here trying to spread their insanity. And I feel tired, so so tired. But I don’t feel superior to them. Justified for my anger? Sure. But that isn’t superiority.
You really like Daryl Davis, as do I: he’s done amazing work. But have you engaged with his writings, or what he feels about this issue? He doesn’t ascribe to your absolutism - he supports the broad work in combating rhetorical hatred just as I will absolutely support you in a bid to engage directly and de-radicalize those people. It’s important you realize that if the existence of a sympathetic ear could be undone by broad cultural opposition, Daryl Davis would never have been able to make a difference.
I can respect the ideals you claim, but I cannot respect their misapplication not least because the originator of your ideals doesn’t. I’ve made no claims of superiority, even refusing to feed into their obvious self-loathing and encouraging them on being more authentic in the expression of their ideas regardless of their content, but you have claimed I intrinsically have*.
I have to ask, are you projecting? Do you feel your ideology is superior to mine, here, now? Because if you do, that truly needs examination. And if you don’t, you should examine why you’re deflecting from face-value criticism of your actions with claims of their own inherent moral superiority.
Not everyone wants to spend all their energy debating nazis. It’s not going to change the nazi’s mind.
they recieve an instant block, i rarely report.
Then there will always be nazis
I notice they didn’t say “live and let live”
So we should just… give up and accept them?
No… how do you get that from what I’ve said. We should out talk them, the example post given is very easy to poke holes in. People can and do change their minds, but only when challenged. Giving up, slapping a label on and holding moral superiority just grows their side. While you get to feel good about calling them a nazi. Doesn’t help anyone and just pushes them further down that hate filled mindset. You beat hate with compassion and conversation, not more hate. Look into the artist Daryl Davis, his ideology around the subject is how I frame mine.
“There will always be nazis” is pretty fatalistic. And beside that point, why can’t we do both? Poking holes in their dingbat ideology and shaming them for how vile they are are by no means mutually exclusive.
You’re never going to get someone to leave their side and come to yours with that mentality. Shaming them does nothing but make you feel superior. Use someone like Daryl Davis as an example.
(Sorry too many comment threads going so I’m gonna synthesize concepts here to stop the comment fragmentation)
See here’s the disconnect: I don’t want them on my side, I don’t think they can be brought over to my side, I think they are a lost cause. The reason to explicitly call out their behavior is so people, people who aren’t yet too far gone, can see where their rhetoric stems from. I want people to see that that authoritiarian-leaning but largely inoffensive opinion comes from a place of self-loathing masquerading as trolling and nazi adjacent hypercapitalist idol worship. They, Luniatiqueue, can fuck right off. But the person reading the comment, the one that risks being frog-boiled over to sympathizing with their opinions by gradual exposure to more and more authoritarian rhetorical concepts, those people I care about. THOSE people are worth saving, worth engaging with.
And no, they’re not going to be pushed away by seeing someone else get called a nazi for doing things like supporting the literal policies of the nazi party. If someone is that inherently contrarian, so hung up on “polite interaction” that they are only going to criticize that apparent lack of decorum instead of the person claiming that nobody deserves a chance at happiness and dancing around the issue of putting trans people in camps, someone like you, I don’t have much hope for them.
Maybe they can be reached, but they’re already teetering on the edge, and spending my time worrying about them instead of trying to shine a light on the truly vile creatures lurking in our community, that is not worth my time.
Yeah, we have a fundamental disagreement in morals. Thats fine, I think its very rare for someone to be too far gone to retrieve. Trolls are trolls though so I wont pretend this person is changeable. Im just of the camp that people have shitty opinions due to all kinds of factors. The only thing that changes those opinions is open dialoge. Shaming doesn’t help at anyone at any point, aside from the shamer who gets to feel morally superior. I wont pretend to know you or your story and it wouldnt really change how I’m approaching this discussion. As I’ve said in other comments, I try to frame my perspective of the issue around Daryl Davis’s approach to engaging with hate.
Why do you think the rejection of a supremacist is inherently a supremacist act? I don’t feel superior to them, I feel deep all consuming sadness that society can produce a person like that. I feel angry that they’re here trying to spread their insanity. And I feel tired, so so tired. But I don’t feel superior to them. Justified for my anger? Sure. But that isn’t superiority.
You really like Daryl Davis, as do I: he’s done amazing work. But have you engaged with his writings, or what he feels about this issue? He doesn’t ascribe to your absolutism - he supports the broad work in combating rhetorical hatred just as I will absolutely support you in a bid to engage directly and de-radicalize those people. It’s important you realize that if the existence of a sympathetic ear could be undone by broad cultural opposition, Daryl Davis would never have been able to make a difference.
I can respect the ideals you claim, but I cannot respect their misapplication not least because the originator of your ideals doesn’t. I’ve made no claims of superiority, even refusing to feed into their obvious self-loathing and encouraging them on being more authentic in the expression of their ideas regardless of their content, but you have claimed I intrinsically have*.
I have to ask, are you projecting? Do you feel your ideology is superior to mine, here, now? Because if you do, that truly needs examination. And if you don’t, you should examine why you’re deflecting from face-value criticism of your actions with claims of their own inherent moral superiority.
edit: clarity