4 ms·
No, it's actually not, because people have different moral foundations, and many people value loyalty/authority/sanctity over care/fairness. It doesn't mean the
by jamiequint 6y ago
No, it's actually not, because people have different moral foundations, and many people value loyalty/authority/sanctity over care/fairness. It doesn't mean they don't care about care/fairness, it just means they don't make it their moral priority.
If you refuse to engage with these people and view them all as sub-human there's no path forward for society.
- Udik 6y agoHey hey. You're opposing loyalty, authority and sanctity to fairness. This is already a caricature of ideological positions different from yours. Most people you violently disagree with have probably a different view of fairness than you do, and think that your opinions and goals are plainly unfair, as much as you think the same about them.
- ordinaryradical 6y agoYou can't build a functioning society that embraces people who reject the humanity of its other members. Or rather, you can build a society that way, but the moment that opinion is accepted you are on the road to terrible persecution of that out-group, whoever they are. A pluralistic society can handle many different viewpoints, but it cannot give them equal value or acceptance.
- jamiequint 6y agoOf course you can't, however many people have different definitions of "rejecting humanity" and you don't get to just define that however you want and then make anyone who doesn't agree with your definition the de facto outgroup.
- patmcc 6y agoIf someone has "moral foundations" that cause them to think that, for example, a particular race of people is not worthy of life, I will refuse to engage with them in reasonable debate. There's no midpoint between nazis and non-nazis; the nazis are wrong and should be handled by force. This may or may not be the case with ICE, the GOP, etc. but fundamentally there are some people who should not be engaged with in this way.
- nec4b 6y agoWhere do you find all these nazis that want to debate you in real life?
- talcumx 6y agoPerhaps he was talking about "kill all white men" radlibs.
- jamiequint 6y agoHow many people in the GOP/ICE/etc do you actually think believe "particular race X is not worthy of life"?
- malcolmgreaves 6y agoThe entire party's leadership has publiclly stated this. Their chief leader, Trump, is the most obviously outspoken racist. From calling Back athletes exercising their 1st amendment thugs, accepting endorsements from the KKK, to pardoning a white solider who committed war crimes murdering brown people, Trump and the Republican party's unconditional support make their views clear as day.
- will4274 6y agoDo you really believe that the entire Republican party leadership publicly stated that black people are not worthy of life?
- godshatter 6y agoAbortion is a great example here. One side thinks their opponents want total control over women's reproductive systems while the other side thinks their opponents are fine killing babies as long as they haven't actually made it through the birth canal yet. Very few people think they aren't the good guys in their own narratives, and what's moral isn't an obvious choice in a lot of situations.
- TeaDrunk 6y agoI'm so baffled by this comment. It's saying that there's no path forward when refusing to engage with people/viewing people as subhuman, as an argument for the benefit of people who view others as subhuman! WTF?