The allies were defending people. Besides that, they did many immoral things, such as killing deserters of their own side. If you hurt Nazis out of spite when they are not posing a threat to yours or other’s lives, then that is not justified.
Read my other reply to a reply to my comment. But I’m worried if we set the ‘threat to lives’ bar too low, when they are not actually killing people, they can do the same, and kill you because you are a potential threat to their lives, or the lives of what they would think are genetically inferior children.
Whatever you decide, it has to go both ways, otherwise is it just a excuse for authoritarian enforcement of whatever your belief happens to be.
I don’t really think that I’m going to convince anyone I’m arguing with right now, but I’m hoping that lurkers, and those who might see this in the future, see that not wanting to kill Nazis is actually a valid opinion that exists.
No, did I ever threaten you with violence in response? You’re straw manning my argument. Both positions where you want to kill any group of people are wrong, and I will try and stop them both in non violent ways - as now, when I am writing this for the benefit of lurkers that they possibly change their mind.
You’re not actually worried about that. You’re trying to defend them because deep down inside, you agree with some of the things they say and think Nazism and fascism are legitimate political ideologies when they are not, and never have been.
You said the allies were defending people. The purpose of the U.S. in the war was offense, not defense. I’m not sure why you being incorrect about that part of your comment should be ignored just because you wrote other things.
Because it’s not incorrect when you read the rest of my comment, specifically the quoted and emboldened part? They were defending other’s lives, not their own.
They were not defending anyone’s lives. They were not there to defend lives. They were there to kill Nazis. That they were able to save lives while doing it is good, but that wasn’t the plan. They didn’t say “well we could attack the Wehrmacht, but instead maybe we’ll stop them from running their tanks through that town with a blockade.” They just bombed the shit out of them.
If their goal was not to protect people but to kill nazis, maybe they were doing something wrong. Anyway, it’s different in wartime. We are not in wartime, and modern day people who believe in Nazism are not killing people, so no violent means to convert them will be more effective. Anyway, you’re not even killing them, but expressing your desire to kill them, which if they saw it, all that would happen is you would antagonise them, and make non violent methods less productive, as they would scream ‘Radical Liberals wanttto kill us for our beliefs’ and develop a (rightful) persecution complex, ignoring that they are persecuting other people, or would, if they could.
But they won’t see this, as you posted this in a far left echo chamber, and they are stuck in their own far right echo chamber. All these sorts of comments (‘all nazis should be killed’) do is drive people apart and make them less susceptible to argument.
I have responded to what people are saying in their whole comments. Just because I read their whole comment doesn’t mean I agree with them, and I think I have explained why I don’t agree in my reply. I replied thinking the replyer has a short attention span, as they hadn’t seem to have read the quoted section of my comment, that would have answered their question I thought.
I’m not justifying their ideology, and I fully support trying to change their mind and decrease their influence in non-violent ways. Your apparent desire to kill anyone for a belief they currently hold is antithetical to a free and happy society, and ignores how their Nazism may not be a permanent belief, and could be changed through non violent means, such as education, deradicalisation therapy, and general reorganization of society to increase happiness and wellbeing, which would need democratic action to take place.
How did I justify their ideology? Or are you one of those black and white people that think disagreeing with you about anything means automatically agreeing 100% with your political enemy?
How did I justify their ideology? Or are you one of those black and white people that think disagreeing with you about anything means automatically agreeing 100% with your political enemy?
Your apparent desire to kill anyone for a belief they currently hold is antithetical to a free and happy society,
But theirs doesn’t; their desires are legitimate political beliefs that have to be respected, catered to and appeased while the left even thinking of doing anything in the name of their best interests or even their survival is completely morally unacceptable and needs to be shot down whenever possible.
And when fascists actually do murder people in public, it’s completely ignored by you.
I’m not talking to Nazis right now, but if I was, I would also advocate that they don’t kill, or threaten to kill people, and if it was in real life, encourage them to spend time with people from races they discriminate against, to show them that the people aren’t all that bad.
The problem is, we can’t have a free and happy society with Nazi’s in it. Yeah sure wanting Nazi’s dead is bad, but “reorganizing society to increase happiness and wellbeing” isn’t something that will happen quickly, but still they continue to exist.
Of course, the last one is a long term change, but you can still try to befriend Nazis and show them other races aren’t that bad. Often they are racist because they haven’t had exposure to other races, so you can give them that. You can still argue with them, get them therapy. But can’t anyone see that saying you want to kill them makes you look good and get upvotes to your left wing echo chamber, but for the actual Nazis that you supposedly hate, all it does is drive them apart and make them more strong in their beliefs?
Could you inform me as to when, exactly, someone whose ideology is based around the sudden and unsupported overthrow of legitimate government through a mixture of public chilling violence and abuse of democratic institutions, in favor of a regime that worships death and war, and believes undesirables should be exterminated on an industrial scale, is NOT a threat to mine or others’ lives?
Punching Nazis is unacceptable because we outsource our violence to the government, and democratic governments must be careful about applying violence to opinions if they wish to retain legitimacy. Not because Nazis aren’t 100% deserving of a beat-down.
They are a potential threat, they are not killing people in the streets. If it got to that, non violent protest would be much weaker. But as it is, we can have a greater impact, and actually change people’s minds rather than just antagonise them and stay inside our respective echo chambers, by using the non violent methods listed in my other comment.
On an individual basis, deal with the people killing people in the streets, preferably non violently, violently if you have to. But the other Nazis, the majority of them, who were taught their beliefs from their parents and online echo chambers, and never questioned them, can be much better converted by argument and education than displaying your intent to kill them.
When someone says they want to kill you, you don’t think ‘I should believe something different’ (and anyway someone convinced against their will is of the same opinion still), you think, ‘these people are dangerous, I need to fight them back’.
Do you see how violence, or the threat of violent towards Nazis doesn’t change their minds, but only make them more antagonised toward you?
I suggest you actually look at what Nazis, Neo-Nazis, and Fascist fucks regularly do to homeless camps. It’s not pretty, and sometimes police officers join in on the violence.
Then there’s the active assaults on random people in Portland, that shit happens every couple of months when one of these groups holds a rally there. Note that none of these fucks live in Portland, they just like to go in and throw their weight around.
All this in an environment where their ideology is not supported by the main stream. When Nazis and Fascist gain power, they spread hatred and violence. It’s what they do, because it’s what the ideology demands.
They are a proven threat. They DID kill people in the streets. This isn’t a “three strikes and you’re out” situation. Nazis do not get the benefit of the doubt, nor do they deserve it.
A Nazi will always be a threat to you and yours. The changes they’re forcing through Congress are evidence enough of their disdain for “others”, but you can always research the violence inflicted on their political opponents that they seem immune to if you’d like.
Read my other comments and decide again if you think I’m defending Nazis. I realise that things aren’t black and white, and the allies did some bad things too, but I still think what the Nazis did in WW2 was evil. I just don’t think violently assaulting them now, or saying that you want to, will actually convert Nazis to your side, it will only antagonise them further.
Nazism is a caustic, violent, hateful ideology that is intentionally and purposefully threatening by its very nature. There is no such thing as a Nazi that doesn’t pose a threat.
Yeah. And then read mine about how any Nazi represents a clear and present danger to literally everyone who is not also a Nazi. They do not get the benefit of the doubt, ever, under any circumstances.
I’m happy when a nazi is hurt because their ideology would have me in a gas chamber. A nazi is happy when I’m hurt because of the circumstances relating to my birth.
Painting this as black and white hides the red on their hands.
Paradox of Tolerance
Philosopher Karl Popper described the paradox of tolerance as the seemingly counterintuitive idea that “in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.” Essentially, if a so-called tolerant society permits the existence of intolerant philosophies, it is no longer tolerant.
The paradox says nothing about the ethics of using violence to achieve your ends. You’ve rest of the fucking owl’d them and name dropping Popper doesn’t hide that. Even the word intolerant is ambiguous and you’re using it to do a bait and switch.
They’re arguing that violent means against peaceful people is unethical. Their intolerance: words. Your intolerant response: violence. That’s what they’re asking you to address.
Some fascist-like groups do directly use violence (proud boys, patriot prayer, etc). Other groups rely on systemic violence implemented through law and stochastic terrorism to achieve their goals. Memes aside, it’s not very smart or helpful to engage in violence when it can’t be defended in court as self-defense. Violence does not change people’s minds; if anything, it probably cements their beliefs further.
I believe in very robust rights to self defense, and I think most of us believe in at least some self defense. It’s pretty popular to stretch definitions of violence right now or defend violence against noisy but ultimately peaceful bigots and edgelords. I don’t really like the idea of us fighting each other over words rather than fighting our overlords.
Countless fascists that went on to commit horrific acts of violence achieved power by peaceful means. We know that’s their end goal regardless of how “polite” and “peaceful” they are at the moment.
If you know someone is going to punch you it’s stupid to wait for them to take a swing before you hit them first. A Nazi’s mere existence is a threat of violence.
Connect can suck my dick. I’ve lost two long messages to you because I tried to fucking highlight text.
Conditions aren’t the same as 80 fucking years ago. Nice slippery slope.
And if you’re honest about how you label nazis, they want genocide. The only self-defense to genocide is obvious so don’t hide behind this punching bullshit. You’ve got a lot of illiterate rednecks to roll up on. Have fun.
I’d love to think all the people who seriously think killing Nazis in peacetime is good are trolls, but there are too many of them, so it seems we all actually believe what we’re saying.
Progress has always been bought with blood, violence is the only motivator that is actually universally respected, and these Nazis don’t have the same distaste for violence you do. If they reach certain numbers they begin using violence to try and control politics. That has to be actively discouraged to minimize violence, which means people with certain tendencies have to motivated to not be Nazis. The only universally respected motivator is violence, the threat of force is how all governments in the world maintain order. Less violence is needed to prevent the spread of Nazi beliefs than would be created by Nazi beliefs unchecked.
This modern idea that there is no such thing as moral violence is a lie and a tactic. Ignore it and forget it. Violence is a tool. Misusing it is evil. Using it properly, it kills evils.
You scared of them getting mad? What then, will you ask pretty please to stop their violence? Or do you seriously think they would listen to any rational explanation of what is wright or wrong?
Pls do correct me, but you sound like a close relative of mine, she’s really really afraid of violence. Most people don’t want to lose their ordinary life, but at the same time there’s not always a nice choice between the nazi and anti-nazis
Read my comments further down, expressing a desire to kill Nazis doesn’t even work, it just antagonises them further. And Nazis are just ordinary people who got roped into a toxic ideology, they need help, not being antagonised.
Where the fuck do you get this idea that Nazis are sole poor saps who just randomly get sucked into wanting to genocide entire groups of people? You can stop defending them at any time.
And Nazis are just ordinary people who got roped into a toxic ideology
Hard disagree bub, there are definitely some people out there that revel in white supremacy, there is not a tortured victim behind every nazi. Well, maybe there is, literally, but they certainly aren’t the same person.
they need help, not being antagonised.
Perhaps, but help does not mean always using kids gloves on them.
Yes, and? Do you think everyone who subscribes to Nazism has stubbed the toe of a single person, let alone kill someone, let alone commit genocide? Most of them also only want to kill people, and violence is not solved with more violence. That just leads to a warring and unstable society,and an escalation of levels of violence. This can be avoided if you use non violent methods, like those mentioned in my other comment.
Use violence when they have started WW3. Not when they are peaceful members of society not causing any harm to people. Can’t you see the difference between when they are killing people and when they are keeping to themselves?
Responding with violence to levels of violence that are manageable and not yet a war will indeed lead to escalation of violence, and possibly a war, but that seems to be what you want, so you have an excuse to kill Nazis. Deescalation of violence should be the left wing mindset when confronted with violence, to try and bring down the violence with non violent means, and make the Nazis realise that gay and trans people aren’t so bad. Otherwise they are perfectly justified in calling left wing people cancel culture and sensitive. We should want to refute those claims, not enforce them.
No, I think we should use non violent means, which are more effective anyway, while we are not at war. Violence is a last resort, not the first thing you turn to when someone believes something like that.
Of course, try and stop them, but not by saying in your left wing echo chamber that you want to kill them. Nobody’s actually going to kill the Nazis, they won’t see the comment, and if they do all it will do is drive them further apart and make them firmer in their beliefs.
Of course, I thought that would be obvious. I’m simply stating my opinion, that’s all that anyone can do. No one is an authority for the left, it is far too complex and divided within itself for that to be a thing.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
So the Allies were the same as the Axis Nazis?
The allies were defending people. Besides that, they did many immoral things, such as killing deserters of their own side. If you hurt Nazis out of spite when they are not posing a threat to yours or other’s lives, then that is not justified.
“If you hurt Nazis out of spite when they are not posing a threat to yours or other’s lives, then that is not justified.”
Correct.
But nazis are, by definition, a threat to other’s lives, so violence against them is always justified.
Read my other reply to a reply to my comment. But I’m worried if we set the ‘threat to lives’ bar too low, when they are not actually killing people, they can do the same, and kill you because you are a potential threat to their lives, or the lives of what they would think are genetically inferior children.
Whatever you decide, it has to go both ways, otherwise is it just a excuse for authoritarian enforcement of whatever your belief happens to be.
Only good Nazi is a dead Nazi. Your incapacity to believe them when they show you their ideals is a failure on your part.
A nazi isn’t a race of people, it is a belief held by a person, and beliefs can be changed.
Good, let the threat of death be the motivator for Nazis to change their ideology.
A person convinced against their will is of the sake opinion still.
you can take the veil off whenever, nobody here believes you’re anything but a nazi
I don’t really think that I’m going to convince anyone I’m arguing with right now, but I’m hoping that lurkers, and those who might see this in the future, see that not wanting to kill Nazis is actually a valid opinion that exists.
Yeah it’s a viable option for people who love Nazis
Yeah it’s a viable option for
people who loveNazisFTFY
deleted by creator
So, let’s see if i got this right:
when i say nazis deserve violence that’s unacceptable and i deserve violence in response.
But when nazis say jews, LGBT+ people and other groups deserve violence it’s not ok to wish violence upon them in response.
🤔 Curious.
No, did I ever threaten you with violence in response? You’re straw manning my argument. Both positions where you want to kill any group of people are wrong, and I will try and stop them both in non violent ways - as now, when I am writing this for the benefit of lurkers that they possibly change their mind.
You’re not actually worried about that. You’re trying to defend them because deep down inside, you agree with some of the things they say and think Nazism and fascism are legitimate political ideologies when they are not, and never have been.
Now you’re just claiming stuff which you have no evidence for, and that I refute.
The U.S. wasn’t defending its people. The U.S. was just fighting Nazis.
Did you even read beyond the first sentence of my comment?
I know attention spans are short these days, but 4 sentences?
You said the allies were defending people. The purpose of the U.S. in the war was offense, not defense. I’m not sure why you being incorrect about that part of your comment should be ignored just because you wrote other things.
Because it’s not incorrect when you read the rest of my comment, specifically the quoted and emboldened part? They were defending other’s lives, not their own.
They were not defending anyone’s lives. They were not there to defend lives. They were there to kill Nazis. That they were able to save lives while doing it is good, but that wasn’t the plan. They didn’t say “well we could attack the Wehrmacht, but instead maybe we’ll stop them from running their tanks through that town with a blockade.” They just bombed the shit out of them.
If their goal was not to protect people but to kill nazis, maybe they were doing something wrong. Anyway, it’s different in wartime. We are not in wartime, and modern day people who believe in Nazism are not killing people, so no violent means to convert them will be more effective. Anyway, you’re not even killing them, but expressing your desire to kill them, which if they saw it, all that would happen is you would antagonise them, and make non violent methods less productive, as they would scream ‘Radical Liberals wanttto kill us for our beliefs’ and develop a (rightful) persecution complex, ignoring that they are persecuting other people, or would, if they could.
But they won’t see this, as you posted this in a far left echo chamber, and they are stuck in their own far right echo chamber. All these sorts of comments (‘all nazis should be killed’) do is drive people apart and make them less susceptible to argument.
Rich coming from the person who’s been told the same thing 10 times by as many different people and still can’t clue on.
I have responded to what people are saying in their whole comments. Just because I read their whole comment doesn’t mean I agree with them, and I think I have explained why I don’t agree in my reply. I replied thinking the replyer has a short attention span, as they hadn’t seem to have read the quoted section of my comment, that would have answered their question I thought.
deleted by creator
Letting a Nazi live is immoral. Don’t ever try to justify their ideology and paint it as okay to be left alone.
Death penalty for mind crime is really immoral in my book.
And being a Nazi isn’t?
It is. So, should you be on the level of Nazi, or worse?
Do you practice being this stupid or does it come naturally?
Do you practice being asshole or does it come naturally? My post did not deserve personal attack.
If you only have thoughts in your head, and don’t act on them, it’s impossible for anyone to know you’re a piece of shit.
I’m not justifying their ideology, and I fully support trying to change their mind and decrease their influence in non-violent ways. Your apparent desire to kill anyone for a belief they currently hold is antithetical to a free and happy society, and ignores how their Nazism may not be a permanent belief, and could be changed through non violent means, such as education, deradicalisation therapy, and general reorganization of society to increase happiness and wellbeing, which would need democratic action to take place.
you are absolutely justifying their ideology, nazi.
How did I justify their ideology? Or are you one of those black and white people that think disagreeing with you about anything means automatically agreeing 100% with your political enemy?
How did I justify their ideology? Or are you one of those black and white people that think disagreeing with you about anything means automatically agreeing 100% with your political enemy?
But theirs doesn’t; their desires are legitimate political beliefs that have to be respected, catered to and appeased while the left even thinking of doing anything in the name of their best interests or even their survival is completely morally unacceptable and needs to be shot down whenever possible.
And when fascists actually do murder people in public, it’s completely ignored by you.
I’m not talking to Nazis right now, but if I was, I would also advocate that they don’t kill, or threaten to kill people, and if it was in real life, encourage them to spend time with people from races they discriminate against, to show them that the people aren’t all that bad.
I’m for less killing all round.
Go on a long walk in the Serengeti and explain to the lions that you won’t fight back, but that them eating you breaks your personal moral code.
Come back and tell us about it.
The problem is, we can’t have a free and happy society with Nazi’s in it. Yeah sure wanting Nazi’s dead is bad, but “reorganizing society to increase happiness and wellbeing” isn’t something that will happen quickly, but still they continue to exist.
Of course, the last one is a long term change, but you can still try to befriend Nazis and show them other races aren’t that bad. Often they are racist because they haven’t had exposure to other races, so you can give them that. You can still argue with them, get them therapy. But can’t anyone see that saying you want to kill them makes you look good and get upvotes to your left wing echo chamber, but for the actual Nazis that you supposedly hate, all it does is drive them apart and make them more strong in their beliefs?
Could you inform me as to when, exactly, someone whose ideology is based around the sudden and unsupported overthrow of legitimate government through a mixture of public chilling violence and abuse of democratic institutions, in favor of a regime that worships death and war, and believes undesirables should be exterminated on an industrial scale, is NOT a threat to mine or others’ lives?
Punching Nazis is unacceptable because we outsource our violence to the government, and democratic governments must be careful about applying violence to opinions if they wish to retain legitimacy. Not because Nazis aren’t 100% deserving of a beat-down.
They are a potential threat, they are not killing people in the streets. If it got to that, non violent protest would be much weaker. But as it is, we can have a greater impact, and actually change people’s minds rather than just antagonise them and stay inside our respective echo chambers, by using the non violent methods listed in my other comment.
Learn something, you ignorant fuck.
On an individual basis, deal with the people killing people in the streets, preferably non violently, violently if you have to. But the other Nazis, the majority of them, who were taught their beliefs from their parents and online echo chambers, and never questioned them, can be much better converted by argument and education than displaying your intent to kill them.
When someone says they want to kill you, you don’t think ‘I should believe something different’ (and anyway someone convinced against their will is of the same opinion still), you think, ‘these people are dangerous, I need to fight them back’.
Do you see how violence, or the threat of violent towards Nazis doesn’t change their minds, but only make them more antagonised toward you?
I suggest you actually look at what Nazis, Neo-Nazis, and Fascist fucks regularly do to homeless camps. It’s not pretty, and sometimes police officers join in on the violence.
Then there’s the active assaults on random people in Portland, that shit happens every couple of months when one of these groups holds a rally there. Note that none of these fucks live in Portland, they just like to go in and throw their weight around.
All this in an environment where their ideology is not supported by the main stream. When Nazis and Fascist gain power, they spread hatred and violence. It’s what they do, because it’s what the ideology demands.
They are a proven threat. They DID kill people in the streets. This isn’t a “three strikes and you’re out” situation. Nazis do not get the benefit of the doubt, nor do they deserve it.
They already received like 5+ strikes the first time around, this time they get zero
A Nazi will always be a threat to you and yours. The changes they’re forcing through Congress are evidence enough of their disdain for “others”, but you can always research the violence inflicted on their political opponents that they seem immune to if you’d like.
You’re out here undermining the actions of Allies to defend Nazis and you don’t see a problem with your behavior.
Read my other comments and decide again if you think I’m defending Nazis. I realise that things aren’t black and white, and the allies did some bad things too, but I still think what the Nazis did in WW2 was evil. I just don’t think violently assaulting them now, or saying that you want to, will actually convert Nazis to your side, it will only antagonise them further.
It’s an argument in what’s practical.
Nazism is a caustic, violent, hateful ideology that is intentionally and purposefully threatening by its very nature. There is no such thing as a Nazi that doesn’t pose a threat.
Read my other comments about taking non violent action.
Yeah. And then read mine about how any Nazi represents a clear and present danger to literally everyone who is not also a Nazi. They do not get the benefit of the doubt, ever, under any circumstances.
I’m happy when a nazi is hurt because their ideology would have me in a gas chamber. A nazi is happy when I’m hurt because of the circumstances relating to my birth.
Painting this as black and white hides the red on their hands.
Paradox of Tolerance Philosopher Karl Popper described the paradox of tolerance as the seemingly counterintuitive idea that “in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.” Essentially, if a so-called tolerant society permits the existence of intolerant philosophies, it is no longer tolerant.
The paradox says nothing about the ethics of using violence to achieve your ends. You’ve rest of the fucking owl’d them and name dropping Popper doesn’t hide that. Even the word intolerant is ambiguous and you’re using it to do a bait and switch.
They’re arguing that violent means against peaceful people is unethical. Their intolerance: words. Your intolerant response: violence. That’s what they’re asking you to address.
Some fascist-like groups do directly use violence (proud boys, patriot prayer, etc). Other groups rely on systemic violence implemented through law and stochastic terrorism to achieve their goals. Memes aside, it’s not very smart or helpful to engage in violence when it can’t be defended in court as self-defense. Violence does not change people’s minds; if anything, it probably cements their beliefs further.
I believe in very robust rights to self defense, and I think most of us believe in at least some self defense. It’s pretty popular to stretch definitions of violence right now or defend violence against noisy but ultimately peaceful bigots and edgelords. I don’t really like the idea of us fighting each other over words rather than fighting our overlords.
Countless fascists that went on to commit horrific acts of violence achieved power by peaceful means. We know that’s their end goal regardless of how “polite” and “peaceful” they are at the moment.
If you know someone is going to punch you it’s stupid to wait for them to take a swing before you hit them first. A Nazi’s mere existence is a threat of violence.
Connect can suck my dick. I’ve lost two long messages to you because I tried to fucking highlight text.
Conditions aren’t the same as 80 fucking years ago. Nice slippery slope.
And if you’re honest about how you label nazis, they want genocide. The only self-defense to genocide is obvious so don’t hide behind this punching bullshit. You’ve got a lot of illiterate rednecks to roll up on. Have fun.
deleted by creator
That is a cartoonishly blatant attempt at manipulating other people’s sense of morals and it’s not going to work. You’ll find no quarter here.
‘Manipulate each other’s morals’ So like, have an argument on morality?
actually it makes you much better than the nazis. nazis all support letting other nazis live.
Ha. Ha. Great joke. /s
Please tell me this is just a troll.
I’d love to think all the people who seriously think killing Nazis in peacetime is good are trolls, but there are too many of them, so it seems we all actually believe what we’re saying.
But they are the one want to cause war. Why not harm the ones that actively trying starting a war?
Or do you really think letting them further their goals and recruit more in hope they change in the future?
There are no nazis in peace time.
Progress has always been bought with blood, violence is the only motivator that is actually universally respected, and these Nazis don’t have the same distaste for violence you do. If they reach certain numbers they begin using violence to try and control politics. That has to be actively discouraged to minimize violence, which means people with certain tendencies have to motivated to not be Nazis. The only universally respected motivator is violence, the threat of force is how all governments in the world maintain order. Less violence is needed to prevent the spread of Nazi beliefs than would be created by Nazi beliefs unchecked.
This modern idea that there is no such thing as moral violence is a lie and a tactic. Ignore it and forget it. Violence is a tool. Misusing it is evil. Using it properly, it kills evils.
If you read my other comments further down, you see why violence doesn’t actually convert Nazis, but just antagonise them.
You scared of them getting mad? What then, will you ask pretty please to stop their violence? Or do you seriously think they would listen to any rational explanation of what is wright or wrong?
Pls do correct me, but you sound like a close relative of mine, she’s really really afraid of violence. Most people don’t want to lose their ordinary life, but at the same time there’s not always a nice choice between the nazi and anti-nazis
No, you’ve got things the wrong way around. Tolerating Nazis is what makes you no better than a Nazi
Call me old fashioned but I’d rather want to beat the teeth out of a Nazi than be a Nazi.
It makes you win WWII though
This is what happens when kids grow up in schools where they get suspended for defending themselves from bullies and not just taking it quietly.
Read my comments further down, expressing a desire to kill Nazis doesn’t even work, it just antagonises them further. And Nazis are just ordinary people who got roped into a toxic ideology, they need help, not being antagonised.
Where the fuck do you get this idea that Nazis are sole poor saps who just randomly get sucked into wanting to genocide entire groups of people? You can stop defending them at any time.
Hard disagree bub, there are definitely some people out there that revel in white supremacy, there is not a tortured victim behind every nazi. Well, maybe there is, literally, but they certainly aren’t the same person.
Perhaps, but help does not mean always using kids gloves on them.
Just remember:
Wanting and doing are not the same.
Yes, and? Do you think everyone who subscribes to Nazism has stubbed the toe of a single person, let alone kill someone, let alone commit genocide? Most of them also only want to kill people, and violence is not solved with more violence. That just leads to a warring and unstable society,and an escalation of levels of violence. This can be avoided if you use non violent methods, like those mentioned in my other comment.
deleted by creator
Use violence when they have started WW3. Not when they are peaceful members of society not causing any harm to people. Can’t you see the difference between when they are killing people and when they are keeping to themselves?
deleted by creator
Responding with violence to levels of violence that are manageable and not yet a war will indeed lead to escalation of violence, and possibly a war, but that seems to be what you want, so you have an excuse to kill Nazis. Deescalation of violence should be the left wing mindset when confronted with violence, to try and bring down the violence with non violent means, and make the Nazis realise that gay and trans people aren’t so bad. Otherwise they are perfectly justified in calling left wing people cancel culture and sensitive. We should want to refute those claims, not enforce them.
Why do they get to decide what you think?
deleted by creator
They’ll start WW3 if we leave them alone.
I’m not saying to leave them alone, I’m saying to not express a desire to kill them. There’s a difference.
You want to wait for WW3 to start before taking action?
No, I think we should use non violent means, which are more effective anyway, while we are not at war. Violence is a last resort, not the first thing you turn to when someone believes something like that.
In hindsight, maybe we should have seen the writing on the wall and stopped them before they started causing harm to people.
Of course, try and stop them, but not by saying in your left wing echo chamber that you want to kill them. Nobody’s actually going to kill the Nazis, they won’t see the comment, and if they do all it will do is drive them further apart and make them firmer in their beliefs.
If Nazis scatter like rats they’ll get hunted like rats.
What goes around comes around.
I’d rather not have WW3. Since this lesson has already been learned and all we can stop it first.
No one here needs your permission to stop them nor are you an authority who has the right to tell the left what to do.
Of course, I thought that would be obvious. I’m simply stating my opinion, that’s all that anyone can do. No one is an authority for the left, it is far too complex and divided within itself for that to be a thing.
I wonder what you’d have done during World War 2.
Write a letter to Hitler that you think he should reconsider.