4 ms·

Is there a slope to where everyone is a neo-nazi equivalent though? I realize these are not likable people, but at the same time slurs are thrown around these

Is there a slope to where everyone is a neo-nazi equivalent though? I realize these are not likable people, but at the same time slurs are thrown around these days at many undeserving groups. It's a tough call: I don't want to see losers abuse a private company's terms of service, nor do I want to see businesses be constantly virtue-signalling. Virtue-signalling is itself a dirty business: how long 'til we see the neo-communists (or whatever, you choose) who happily sell Che shirts on Stripe?

tareqak 8y ago
I'm not sure if you picked a bad example, or you're reaching for "both sides are the same", but https://www.amazon.com/s/?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=che%20guevara%20t-shirt https://www.amazon.com/s/?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywo... .
- isoskeles 8y ago
  Yeah but these are sold by capitalists.
- byron_fast 8y ago
  Everyone has their own view on who is bad, is all. One person's virtue signal is another's evil.
byron14 8y ago
The political views of most Gab users are essentially those of a majority of Americans during the 20th century. I doubt it would be fair to say those who fought Nazis in WW2 were also Nazis. By todays "standards" they would be called such hence why its a useless term.
- tareqak 8y ago
  It didn't stop a US ambassador during the Cold War from doing the same with with the word "communist": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test .
krapp 8y ago
>Is there a slope to where everyone is a neo-nazi equivalent though? No? The problem with the slippery slope argument here is that it assumes the political, social and legal energies involved can and must only flow in one direction (in this case, towards maximum censorship.) Yet human society doesn't operate like a fluid in a vacuum. Most people are capable of appreciating nuance, and of objecting to certain kinds of speech while not equivocating all forms of speech to the point that "everyone" becomes "a neo-nazi equivalent," simply because most people can see a difference between "neo-nazi" (read: someone who espouses white supremacist and/or anti-semitic ideals resembling those of the Nazi party) and "everyone" who espouses an opinion with which anyone else may disagree.

tareqak 8y ago

I'm not sure if you picked a bad example, or you're reaching for "both sides are the same", but https://www.amazon.com/s/?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=che%20guevara%20t-shirt https://www.amazon.com/s/?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywo... .

isoskeles 8y ago
Yeah but these are sold by capitalists.
byron_fast 8y ago
Everyone has their own view on who is bad, is all. One person's virtue signal is another's evil.

byron14 8y ago

The political views of most Gab users are essentially those of a majority of Americans during the 20th century. I doubt it would be fair to say those who fought Nazis in WW2 were also Nazis. By todays "standards" they would be called such hence why its a useless term.

tareqak 8y ago
It didn't stop a US ambassador during the Cold War from doing the same with with the word "communist": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test .

krapp 8y ago

>Is there a slope to where everyone is a neo-nazi equivalent though? No? The problem with the slippery slope argument here is that it assumes the political, social and legal energies involved can and must only flow in one direction (in this case, towards maximum censorship.) Yet human society doesn't operate like a fluid in a vacuum. Most people are capable of appreciating nuance, and of objecting to certain kinds of speech while not equivocating all forms of speech to the point that "everyone" becomes "a neo-nazi equivalent," simply because most people can see a difference between "neo-nazi" (read: someone who espouses white supremacist and/or anti-semitic ideals resembling those of the Nazi party) and "everyone" who espouses an opinion with which anyone else may disagree.