4 ms·

Who judges the intolerant? What intolerance gets you lumped into those you profess to want to starve to death by denying employment or means to a wage? Easy t

Who judges the intolerant? What intolerance gets you lumped into those you profess to want to starve to death by denying employment or means to a wage? Easy to put supremacists in, but then if a person makes a comment at Evergreen, they are now in the racist group and can now be destroyed.

alkonaut 9y ago
> Who judges the intolerant? You mean who decides what is intolerant enough, and what isn't? That's a judgment everyone must make. A difficult one. One with lots of room for mistakes and arbitrary decisions. Yet the lesser evil.
kstrauser 9y ago
I 100% agree with you in principle, but I honestly never thought we'd be having this debate in 2017 about people carrying swastika flags and calling themselves Nazis. Frankly, that changes the entire equation for me. We cannot, cannot, cannot allow this to take root and grow. Everything thinks "it can't happen here", but it doesn't not-happen on its own. I don't want my grandkids asking "how did you try to stop them?", and having to answer "well, I very adamantly told them they were wrong but they didn't listen." I am incredibly tolerant of diverse idea. I grew up in the buckle of the Bible Belt, and now I live in the bluest of blue places. I have wonderful lifelong friends in both places (and lots of others) who I love as people but whose opinions infuriate me. That's OK! We talk about stuff and occasionally ruffle each other's feathers, but we get along just fine. I can argue both sides of gun control, abortion, and anarchism with clever friends for the fun of it. But what I can't tolerate is people in my America wearing, carrying, and acting out Nazi symbols in my backyard. That cannot be allowed to find fertile soil. I've said this before but I want to be perfectly clear: I have an exceedingly tight definition of that term. I have never called someone that word because I disagree with them, no matter how important the matter to me or how ferociously I oppose their opinion. I'm referring specifically to people who show up at white power protests wearing the uniforms, carrying the flags, and throwing the salutes of the group my family fought to stop within my mom's lifetime. That's not a slippery slope. It's perfectly possible - and reasonable, and good - to say "we'll allow people to speak abhorrent opinions" and still draw the line at literal Nazis.
- aaronblohowiak 9y ago
  You don't put out a fire with gasoline. The way to diminish something is not to make it illegal or prohibited -- that didn't work for prohibition and it won't work for nazism in America (which has been around for as long as nazis have existed.) You're making an ends justify the means argument. While I agree that less Nazism in America is better, using a bad means (intolerance, violence) to get to that end is unjustifiable. Even if it were justifiable, it is ineffective and actually strengthens their cause. Why do you you think the fascists try to speak at Berkeley and other leftist institutions? To incite "de-platformers" to violence which reafffirms their message of victim hood and "opression," which emboldens their supporters and furthers their cause. See the stances of ACLU and SPLC for smarter people than I making similar arguments.

alkonaut 9y ago

> Who judges the intolerant? You mean who decides what is intolerant enough, and what isn't? That's a judgment everyone must make. A difficult one. One with lots of room for mistakes and arbitrary decisions. Yet the lesser evil.

kstrauser 9y ago

I 100% agree with you in principle, but I honestly never thought we'd be having this debate in 2017 about people carrying swastika flags and calling themselves Nazis. Frankly, that changes the entire equation for me. We cannot, cannot, cannot allow this to take root and grow. Everything thinks "it can't happen here", but it doesn't not-happen on its own. I don't want my grandkids asking "how did you try to stop them?", and having to answer "well, I very adamantly told them they were wrong but they didn't listen." I am incredibly tolerant of diverse idea. I grew up in the buckle of the Bible Belt, and now I live in the bluest of blue places. I have wonderful lifelong friends in both places (and lots of others) who I love as people but whose opinions infuriate me. That's OK! We talk about stuff and occasionally ruffle each other's feathers, but we get along just fine. I can argue both sides of gun control, abortion, and anarchism with clever friends for the fun of it. But what I can't tolerate is people in my America wearing, carrying, and acting out Nazi symbols in my backyard. That cannot be allowed to find fertile soil. I've said this before but I want to be perfectly clear: I have an exceedingly tight definition of that term. I have never called someone that word because I disagree with them, no matter how important the matter to me or how ferociously I oppose their opinion. I'm referring specifically to people who show up at white power protests wearing the uniforms, carrying the flags, and throwing the salutes of the group my family fought to stop within my mom's lifetime. That's not a slippery slope. It's perfectly possible - and reasonable, and good - to say "we'll allow people to speak abhorrent opinions" and still draw the line at literal Nazis.

aaronblohowiak 9y ago
You don't put out a fire with gasoline. The way to diminish something is not to make it illegal or prohibited -- that didn't work for prohibition and it won't work for nazism in America (which has been around for as long as nazis have existed.) You're making an ends justify the means argument. While I agree that less Nazism in America is better, using a bad means (intolerance, violence) to get to that end is unjustifiable. Even if it were justifiable, it is ineffective and actually strengthens their cause. Why do you you think the fascists try to speak at Berkeley and other leftist institutions? To incite "de-platformers" to violence which reafffirms their message of victim hood and "opression," which emboldens their supporters and furthers their cause. See the stances of ACLU and SPLC for smarter people than I making similar arguments.