Allowing a MAGA forum to coexist here isn’t simply allowing “differing opinions” - their “opinion” is known, and it invariably moves us up the rungs on the ladder toward genocide. I say this as someone whose own parents are in the MAGA cult: defederate. Don’t allow that ideology to fester in your community. Have individual discussions with the people in your own life to pull them back from the brink, if you feel safe doing so, but don’t allow that growth in the petri dish that is your collective, or you will wake up with an infection. Set boundaries or get taken over.
This is a good point. At first I was thinking it is good to know what is going on and hear what they have to say, but now I think this is a stronger arguement. I just really thought we should not discriminate based on differences, but in this case I think maybe we should defend our community health, which actually will decrease if we do not defederate. On the other hand, knowing what is going on is invaluable, but if we wanted to see a bunch of toxic shitty rage bait, we could just go to r/conservative. Anyways, not sure this impacts my instance, but it will surely come up if the instance is legitimate.
Yeah, maybe you should open your eyes and see what trans people and immigrants in this country see: the clear escalation towards genocide both in their rhetoric, and in public policy aimed at separation and detention of the target groups.
I’m sorry, this sort of hysteria and screaming genocide is partially why people discredit the Left even when there are actual, real problems.
Is the treatment of illegal immigrants under Maga awful? Absolutely. But screaming genocide because it’s the worst thing you know, well goddamn, now we just sound dumb. This ain’t moving us to a place where we can figure things out. (You probably can’t have everyone in the world who wants to go to America in America. Conversely, they are still humans and even if they are illegally in the country, sending them to an El Salvadorean prison is heinous.) If we aren’t there to make the reasonable case, no one makes it.
It’s like how the right complains that Christianity is under attack etc and they are persecuted for it. Is that true? No and it makes them sound insane. Are there actual arenas wherein things are harder or tricky for religious folks? Sure! (If you believe the Pope and feel abortion is murder, pretty hard to reconcile that with funding abortion etc.)
I will just leave you with the fact that the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention has issued a warning for the US, and alsp has issued a particular warning for trans people in the US. If you’re familiar with the stages of genocide, that may also help you to see clearly what is going on.
Whether you believe me or think I’m hysterical, i will still be preparing to leave this country at a moment’s notice and be prepared to submit an asylum claim upon arrival in Canada. I don’t think it gets more real than that.
Admittedly, the Lemkin institute is being pursued in court for misusing the Lemkin name and fragrant misuse of the word genocide. (They are also claiming there’s now a genocide red alert in the UK for trans people.)
You could cite multiple groups like the heritage foundation etc that would strenuously deny anything of the sort is taking place.
I could certainly cite the Heritage Foundation, who are currently pushing for the FBI to define all transgender people as terrorists and lock us all up. That would definitely destroy any argument that anybody’s trying to do a Genocide here, right?
When you hear a wild claim like that, it’s worth double checking a primary source or, failing that, a reputable second hand source.
From page 3 of the full memo:
Note that this designation does not apply to all persons that are
transgender, or their allies. It applies to those who: (1) believes that any opposition to
transgender ideology is a violent and existential threat to the right of transgender people
to exist and amounts to an imminent threat to physical safety; (2) believes that this fear
justifies violence against those who refuse to affirm transgender ideology; and (3) takes,
incites, or promotes violent action based on that ideology. All three criteria must be met.
Individuals cannot and will not be investigated solely based on 1st Amendment protected
activity alone.
While I don’t particularly agree with their take, what’s actually being proposed is adding transgender based violence to existing categories. The current categories are: race based, anti government/authority, animal rights/environmental, abortion and other.
Now, as far as I understand, vegans are not being locked up for being vegan, racists are still allowed to be racist, environmental activists are still okay to protest etc.
Could this be abused? Absolutely! And that is why it is stupidly important to be accurate. When we claim hysterical untrue shit, it makes everyone less likely to listen when things are actually dangerous. (We spent 4 years screaming fascist starting in 2016 and now when shit’s actually getting scary, it is much harder to get people to listen because they’ve tuned us out. Boy who cried wolf etc.)
Edit: And like a goof, I forgot to link the primary source!
I’m not calling the paradox (or the constitution) silly, I’m saying they don’t apply in this scenario.
From the snippet above:
I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies ; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most imwise
But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force ; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument ; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.
In other words, yeah, if that instance starts getting people to be assholes to everyone etc, sure, tolerance does not mean we should let them do so here, that’s the point of the paradox. But, as the author states, suppressing them without cause etc would be most foolish. Far better to try and discuss with rational argument first before resorting to “well, we don’t want to talk to you because my MAGA uncle is a dick.”
Allowing people to hear different opinions is not unlimited tolerance.
Allowing a MAGA forum to coexist here isn’t simply allowing “differing opinions” - their “opinion” is known, and it invariably moves us up the rungs on the ladder toward genocide. I say this as someone whose own parents are in the MAGA cult: defederate. Don’t allow that ideology to fester in your community. Have individual discussions with the people in your own life to pull them back from the brink, if you feel safe doing so, but don’t allow that growth in the petri dish that is your collective, or you will wake up with an infection. Set boundaries or get taken over.
This is a good point. At first I was thinking it is good to know what is going on and hear what they have to say, but now I think this is a stronger arguement. I just really thought we should not discriminate based on differences, but in this case I think maybe we should defend our community health, which actually will decrease if we do not defederate. On the other hand, knowing what is going on is invaluable, but if we wanted to see a bunch of toxic shitty rage bait, we could just go to r/conservative. Anyways, not sure this impacts my instance, but it will surely come up if the instance is legitimate.
Wow, that is a damn crazy assertion. And exactly why more discussion is a good thing.
Yeah, maybe you should open your eyes and see what trans people and immigrants in this country see: the clear escalation towards genocide both in their rhetoric, and in public policy aimed at separation and detention of the target groups.
I’m sorry, this sort of hysteria and screaming genocide is partially why people discredit the Left even when there are actual, real problems.
Is the treatment of illegal immigrants under Maga awful? Absolutely. But screaming genocide because it’s the worst thing you know, well goddamn, now we just sound dumb. This ain’t moving us to a place where we can figure things out. (You probably can’t have everyone in the world who wants to go to America in America. Conversely, they are still humans and even if they are illegally in the country, sending them to an El Salvadorean prison is heinous.) If we aren’t there to make the reasonable case, no one makes it.
It’s like how the right complains that Christianity is under attack etc and they are persecuted for it. Is that true? No and it makes them sound insane. Are there actual arenas wherein things are harder or tricky for religious folks? Sure! (If you believe the Pope and feel abortion is murder, pretty hard to reconcile that with funding abortion etc.)
I will just leave you with the fact that the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention has issued a warning for the US, and alsp has issued a particular warning for trans people in the US. If you’re familiar with the stages of genocide, that may also help you to see clearly what is going on.
Whether you believe me or think I’m hysterical, i will still be preparing to leave this country at a moment’s notice and be prepared to submit an asylum claim upon arrival in Canada. I don’t think it gets more real than that.
Admittedly, the Lemkin institute is being pursued in court for misusing the Lemkin name and fragrant misuse of the word genocide. (They are also claiming there’s now a genocide red alert in the UK for trans people.)
You could cite multiple groups like the heritage foundation etc that would strenuously deny anything of the sort is taking place.
I could certainly cite the Heritage Foundation, who are currently pushing for the FBI to define all transgender people as terrorists and lock us all up. That would definitely destroy any argument that anybody’s trying to do a Genocide here, right?
When you hear a wild claim like that, it’s worth double checking a primary source or, failing that, a reputable second hand source.
From page 3 of the full memo:
While I don’t particularly agree with their take, what’s actually being proposed is adding transgender based violence to existing categories. The current categories are: race based, anti government/authority, animal rights/environmental, abortion and other.
Now, as far as I understand, vegans are not being locked up for being vegan, racists are still allowed to be racist, environmental activists are still okay to protest etc.
Could this be abused? Absolutely! And that is why it is stupidly important to be accurate. When we claim hysterical untrue shit, it makes everyone less likely to listen when things are actually dangerous. (We spent 4 years screaming fascist starting in 2016 and now when shit’s actually getting scary, it is much harder to get people to listen because they’ve tuned us out. Boy who cried wolf etc.)
Edit: And like a goof, I forgot to link the primary source!
https://itsyourgov.org/investigation/oversight-project-unveils-case-for-new-fbi-domestic-terrorism-designation/
Is that the only thing you can rebut out of all of that?
It is the only relevant part.
Are these the kind of meaningful debates you have with MAGA?
Yeah, I get similarly silly stuff from the right, where they have readnheard of something but don’t quite understand how it applies, eg:
“I guess you haven’t read the Constitution!”
“Free speech is about government, not public outcry.”
Such is life.
What’s silly about the paradox of intolerance? Why does it not apply to defederating here? I don’t grasp it’s purported lack of relevance.
You are misunderstanding.
I’m not calling the paradox (or the constitution) silly, I’m saying they don’t apply in this scenario.
From the snippet above:
In other words, yeah, if that instance starts getting people to be assholes to everyone etc, sure, tolerance does not mean we should let them do so here, that’s the point of the paradox. But, as the author states, suppressing them without cause etc would be most foolish. Far better to try and discuss with rational argument first before resorting to “well, we don’t want to talk to you because my MAGA uncle is a dick.”
I disagree with you on this and various other points you’ve made here, but I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate your viewpoint.
Thanks!