Comment on Know the difference

• lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  If ypu ban nazi speech as the one major caveat to free speech, then they will never be able to exist in large enough numbers that you HAVE to fight them.

  That’s deluded speculation & the old antifascists knew that.

  I remember other instances of unexpected support, too. There were times when, during speeches I gave about the Skokie case, Holocaust survivors courageously stood up to say that I was right to have represented the Nazis. Several years later, another survivor sent me a letter saying the same thing. These survivors said that they did not want the Nazis driven underground by speech-repressive laws or court injunctions. They explained that they wanted to be able to see their enemies in plain sight so they would know who they were.

  Better to see them right where they are.

  Such legal compromises are trash. Look how they work for Germany: live police suppressing pro-Palestinian protests as anti-semitic, raids & arrests over calling a politician pimmel, internet patrols penalizing vitriol, insults, & satirical images of politicians showing fake quotes.

  Its the logical conclusion of the paradox of tolerance.

  It’s a paradox without a single logical conclusion, and you likely misunderstood it.

  Image :::spoiler text alternative

  The True Paradox of Tolerance

  By philosopher Karl Popper[^popper-source]

  You think you know the Popper Paradox thanks to this? (👉 comic from pictoline.com)

  Karl Popper: I never said that!

  Popper argued that society via its institutions should have a right to prohibit those who are intolerant.

  Karl Popper: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance.

  For Popper, on what grounds may society suppress the intolerant? When they “are not prepared to meet on the level of rational argument” “they forbid their followers to listen to rational argument … & teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fist or pistols”. The argument of the intolerably intolerant is force & violence.

  We misconstrue this paradox at our peril … to the extent that one group could declare another group ‘intolerant’ just to prohibit their ideas, speech & other freedoms.

  Grave sign: “The Intolerant” RIP
  Underneath it lies a pile of symbols for Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Black power. A leg labeled tolerance kicks the Gay Pride symbol into the pile.

  Muchas gracias a @lokijustice y asivaespana.com :::

  [^popper-source]: Source: The Open Society and It’s Enemies, Karl R. Popper

  source
• tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Agreed, but it’s still a tough line to draw. Here’s a scale:

  We’ve got some problems, and it’s probably because of “someone”.
  Aren’t the X suspicious? We should keep an eye on them.
  All the X have rights but it’s their fault for all our problems.
  We should give jobs to everyone before all the X.
  We should expel all the X.
  We should genocide all the X.

  At which point is it ok for the cops to come have a conversation with you?

  source