• 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
Cake day: January 20th, 2025
  • spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zonetopolitics @lemmy.world•DOGE goons physically drag social security worker from deskEnglish
    2·
    5 days ago

    No, by definition they’re not fascists either

    Lol, so you don’t actually know what fascists are. Literally the definition of fascism:

    a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual, that is associated with a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, and that is characterized by severe economic and social regimentation and by forcible suppression of opposition

    Please, explain how “by definition” they’re not fascists when the political philosophy they’re putting in place is fascism.

    (If you’re wondering why you’re being called a sympathizer, it’s [charitably] because you’re saying things that the Nazis say, and you don’t understand the words you’re [mis]using.)

  • spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zonetopolitics @lemmy.world•The '3.5% rule': How a small minority can change the worldEnglish
    3·
    13 days ago

    If I’m interested, what should I do different?

    There’s no good answer for this to someone who legitimately is curious but lacks even the most base knowledge of the topic. But the answer I give to seemingly good faith participants is to not come into an active conversation that’s already into the weeds and ask basic questions that could be answered by a simple Google search. Failure to do so will be seen as bad faith participation because this is the same tactic that bad faith participants use and it’s not worth the average person’s energy to dig through a profile to see whether or not they may be a good faith participant.

    TLDR - If you don’t put in the effort before asking a basic question about a controversial topic, people likely won’t put forth the energy to engage in a productive manner when it appears you have not done so as well.

  • spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zonetoAsk Lemmy@lemmy.world•What is one moral you have that most people don't agree with?English
    2·
    14 days ago

    You start with mass murderers, proceed with torturers, sadists, animal abusers, child abusers, rapists, and from abjection to abjection you end up justifying to yourself not forgiving your neighbour for letting his dog poop in your yard.

    "But muh slippery slope!’

    “Never forgive, never forget” sounds cool but from a spiritual standpoint, it’s not much less dehumanizing than horrors such as mass murders

    but from a spiritual standpoint, it’s not much less dehumanizing than horrors such as mass murders

    not much less dehumanizing than horrors such as mass murders

    Sorry, I can’t respond to the reductio ad absurdum response of saying that mass murderers’ do not deserve forgiveness and that not forgiving them is any way close to the mass murder of people.

    I get the point you’re trying to make, but we fundamentally disagree on the concept of even the most basic morality, clearly, if you can find any moral similarities between the two situations.