5 ms·
You do understand that if their side does the same, you won't have any kind of moral high ground to stand on because you have already condoned stooping to their
by ThrowawayR2 10mo ago
You do understand that if their side does the same, you won't have any kind of moral high ground to stand on because you have already condoned stooping to their level?
- immibis 10mo ago[flagged]
- Terr_ 10mo ago> won't have any kind of moral high ground You're exaggerating. Yes, it gives up the "doxxing not OK", but there will often remain a large moral difference between "Alice was accurately doxxed as KKK/Nazi" versus "Bob was accurately doxxed as $X." There are very few $X which are both worse, plausible, and "the other side." We also need to ask who is going to care or be convinced. Orwell's The Party does not care about ethical or moral consistency, only power.
- vekntksijdhric 10mo agoright, because being a anti-white supremacists is the same as being a white supremacist....
- mc3301 10mo agosomething something, "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them," something something
- Imustaskforhelp 10mo agoWow, this comment was so hard to read with the something something which made me think it was condescending From what I can tell your comment about: You are talking about paradox of tolerance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance)
- immibis 10mo agoThat's correct. They are talking about the paradox of tolerance.
- ceejayoz 10mo agoDo you imagine white supremacists don't currently dox people?
- bigyabai 10mo agoI can imagine that white supremacists do a great deal of things I would never condone.
- King-Aaron 10mo ago"Their side" absolutely does this continuously, and is one of the reasons early facebook allowed people to use pseudonyms etc. Only one side of the political spectrum routinely resorts to malicious/vexatious behaviour as their modus operandi.
- BigTTYGothGF 10mo agoWhat do you mean "if"? I've had multiple friends driven off the internet by right-wing doxxers.
- strbean 10mo agoHow dare the US government, which executes people, tell me that I don't get to murder at will? Where is their moral high ground? /s
- protocolture 10mo agoWeird moral equivocation. Nazis declare themselves enemies of mankind. They otherise themselves with their beliefs. It should be legal to stone them in the streets as non humans. If "Their Side" did the same to innocent people who hadn't declared they are everyone's enemies its a completely different scenario.
- croes 10mo agoDefine doing the same? Exposing racism? Where is the moral problem? This isn’t exposing people for being white but for being supremacists. If they also expose something of the same kund of wrong I see no problem, everything I wouldn’t call doing the same. That’s like comparing police arresting people with criminals kidnapping people, both do kind of the same: imprison people.
- subdude 10mo agoI think the side that isn’t full of white supremacists would have the moral high ground by default.
- tolleydbg 10mo agoI'm not sure how much that would mean swinging from the rafters of [insert intolerant country]. The white supremacists will maybe lose their jobs or reputation, but the consequences could be much more dire in retaliation.
- immibis 10mo ago[flagged]
- clydethefrog 10mo agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46515191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46515191
- immibis 10mo agoWhen Batman corners the Joker it's good. When the Joker corners Batman it's bad.