6 ms·

I want to engage with this comment in good faith, but I'm confused on what is trying to be said. Per American Heritage Dictionary 5th Edition: > A system of g

I want to engage with this comment in good faith, but I'm confused on what is trying to be said. Per American Heritage Dictionary 5th Edition: > A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. Looking at this case so far; - we have not observed any dictatorial behavior, - this is unrelated to economics, - we have not observed any violent suppression, - we have not observed any actions based on nationalism/race, given these facts, at least by this definition of fascism, there appears to be none yet present in this case. What history books or definition should Americans learn from that would lead them to view what transpired as fascism, and how should that inform their beliefs/decisions differently than how they are currently informed about the situation?

mindslight 2mo ago
> we have not observed any dictatorial behavior, - this is unrelated to economics, - we have not observed any violent suppression, - we have not observed any actions based on nationalism/race, So the main thing tying your comment together is that you have not been observing? This does not seem particularly "good faith", nor does it make for an interesting or productive conversation.
- Magicrafter13 2mo ago
  This is incorrect as this is not what I said. I stated 'we' not 'I'. And I did not imply that we haven't been observing, I was stating historically that, with all we have observed about this duress pin case, we have yet to observe any of the listed things happening. If one believes we have, in fact, observed any of the above things taking place - rather than complaining about an uninteresting or unproductive conversation - one should contribute evidence to the contrary, which would be productive by informing everyone here.
  - mindslight 2mo ago
    Yes, I translated. You used the word "we" to make it sound like this is a universal opinion, when the reality is that it is merely your opinion. There are well-known examples of every single one of the bullet points you "have not observed". So either you have not been paying much attention, which can be fixed with some simple web searches. Or you are being willfully ignorant of the widespread criticism, which is a disingenuous framing if you are truly interested in "good faith" discussion.

mindslight 2mo ago

> we have not observed any dictatorial behavior, - this is unrelated to economics, - we have not observed any violent suppression, - we have not observed any actions based on nationalism/race, So the main thing tying your comment together is that you have not been observing? This does not seem particularly "good faith", nor does it make for an interesting or productive conversation.

Magicrafter13 2mo ago
This is incorrect as this is not what I said. I stated 'we' not 'I'. And I did not imply that we haven't been observing, I was stating historically that, with all we have observed about this duress pin case, we have yet to observe any of the listed things happening. If one believes we have, in fact, observed any of the above things taking place - rather than complaining about an uninteresting or unproductive conversation - one should contribute evidence to the contrary, which would be productive by informing everyone here.
- mindslight 2mo ago
  Yes, I translated. You used the word "we" to make it sound like this is a universal opinion, when the reality is that it is merely your opinion. There are well-known examples of every single one of the bullet points you "have not observed". So either you have not been paying much attention, which can be fixed with some simple web searches. Or you are being willfully ignorant of the widespread criticism, which is a disingenuous framing if you are truly interested in "good faith" discussion.