5 ms·
Yet again everyone rushes to the defence of fascists. If history has taught us anything it’s that giving fascists a platform is never, ever the solution, you c
by neotek 8y ago
Yet again everyone rushes to the defence of fascists.
If history has taught us anything it’s that giving fascists a platform is never, ever the solution, you can never reason with them, you can never argue them out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into, and they will always use your kindness as a weapon against you.
There is no value in anyone giving people like Alex Jones a platform, all you are doing is giving him wider access to people who will be swayed by his idiotic ramblings.
It shouldn’t even require saying; how do you think he has such a large following in the first place? Do you think he’s been unchallenged up to this point? Do you think the counter arguments have had any effect on his base? Do you think the sort of person who ends up falling for a dickhead like Jones is even capable of understanding the arguments against his position?
Stop protecting fascists, open a history book.
- ErikHuisman 8y agoYou think suppressing speech is a great way to combat "fascism"? The irony.
- jackweirdy 8y agoIt's not ironic, it is the Paradox of tolerance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
- ErikHuisman 8y ago"I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise." - Karl Popper
- Cthulhu_ 8y agoGreat in theory, in practice, channels like infowars are using irrational arguments and keep using them; you'll never see the rational counter arguments in their broadcasts. I mean to bring up facism again, there were valid rational counter-arguments to the nazi's arguments, but because they owned the media nobody saw them and those that published them were squashed. Same thing is still happening all over the place.
- hhjinks 8y agoIgnoring the fact that the paradox of intolerance is the mother of all slippery slope arguments, letting a fascist speak is not the same as "being tolerant without limit". If your people are turning fascist, it's not because of a clown on itunes, it's because you've failed to provide sufficient education and opportunity to self-actualize to your population. Fascism doesn't grow where fascists speak, it grows where people are hateful and disenfranchised. That's not to say I want Alex to stay. Good riddance. I just don't like the paradox of intolerance.
- repolfx 8y agoOK, let's open a history book. How is Alex Jones a fascist? Can you elaborate on that? Historically speaking fascists were hard left. The Fascist government of Mussolini had the following features: - No democracy - Massive state control over private industry - Forced suppression of the opposition by censorship and intimidation Has Alex Jones advocated for censorship of his opponents, massive state control over private industry or the institution of dictatorship? If not, what makes him fascist, exactly?
- bmarquez 8y agoI was about to make a similar comment. I believe that "fascist" here is being used at a political pejorative (much like right-wingers will call someone "socialist" as an insult.) There are many negative adjectives that can be used to describe Alex Jones and his conspiracy theories, but to the best of my knowledge he does not support totalitarian dictatorships.
- amaccuish 8y agoMassive state control over private industry != hard left. It's merely a tool to achieve an aim. Otherwise you can start argueing that Hitler was extreme left, which is laughable.
- repolfx 8y agoHow is it laughable, again? You know what Nazi stands for, don't you? And if you accept the premise that America is probably the most culturally right wing society today, then which was Nazi Germany closer to in its policies - America or the USSR?
- beezle 8y agoAJ may be a pos but a fascist he is not. It would be helpful if you and the many others who use this term to open a dictionary and encyclopedia to learn what it really means and not what you think or want it to mean.
- imron 8y agoRoper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you — where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast — man's laws, not God's — and if you cut them down — and you're just the man to do it — d'you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake