6 ms·

Actually, let's do call them protesters. If you want to get universal agreement on the need for privacy regulations, you need to present it a way that does not

Actually, let's do call them protesters. If you want to get universal agreement on the need for privacy regulations, you need to present it a way that does not immediately turn away your intended audience. When both sides really agree on something, it's amazing how fast it gets done. Which, of course, is why there are people trying to hard to keep both sides from ever agreeing.

idiotsecant 3y ago
On one hand I know that this is true. We have to guard against special pleading that allows oppression of those we disagree with because that inevitably leads to our own oppression sooner or later. On the other hand I understand what the post you're replying to is saying, even if it's not said extremely well. There is an enormous online narrative with a lot of money and power behind it trying to normalize the most violent and anti-democratic parts of the right wing of American politics and using that to drive views, clicks, and votes. I'm normally not someone to clutch pearls and will be the first one to acknowledge that the vast majority of Americans are just decent enough people trying to figure out how to keep fed, healthy, and safe. But the tendency toward fascism in the human animal is something we need vigilance against, as demonstrated over and over again in human history. The people who attempted to violently attack the seat of democratically elected power in this country were not protestors. There were protestors outside, but the people who crossed the line to breaking and entering, assault, and terrorism were not protestors.
- graphe 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - MisterBastahrd 3y ago
    Yeah, that part where they were breaking down a window of a locked door in an attempt to get into the house inner chambers to attempt to impede the democratic process of the United States was totally a protest and not an insurrection. The folks who were non-violent never made it inside the capital because they were there to protest? They were protestors. The other ones? They were insurrectionists and they all deserve prison.

idiotsecant 3y ago

On one hand I know that this is true. We have to guard against special pleading that allows oppression of those we disagree with because that inevitably leads to our own oppression sooner or later. On the other hand I understand what the post you're replying to is saying, even if it's not said extremely well. There is an enormous online narrative with a lot of money and power behind it trying to normalize the most violent and anti-democratic parts of the right wing of American politics and using that to drive views, clicks, and votes. I'm normally not someone to clutch pearls and will be the first one to acknowledge that the vast majority of Americans are just decent enough people trying to figure out how to keep fed, healthy, and safe. But the tendency toward fascism in the human animal is something we need vigilance against, as demonstrated over and over again in human history. The people who attempted to violently attack the seat of democratically elected power in this country were not protestors. There were protestors outside, but the people who crossed the line to breaking and entering, assault, and terrorism were not protestors.

graphe 3y ago
[flagged]
- MisterBastahrd 3y ago
  Yeah, that part where they were breaking down a window of a locked door in an attempt to get into the house inner chambers to attempt to impede the democratic process of the United States was totally a protest and not an insurrection. The folks who were non-violent never made it inside the capital because they were there to protest? They were protestors. The other ones? They were insurrectionists and they all deserve prison.