Comment

I don’t know how to make it any more simple for you. Which part confuses you?

I’ll ask again – to whom are you arguing against?

To repeat myself, I’m arguing that the top comment (and clearly you) doesn’t understand the paradox of intolerance. If you’re not going to read my comments before you reply, what are you hoping to achieve? You just come across as lacking even basic reading comprehension.

source

Sort:hotnew top

YeetPics@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
I feel like you don’t get the paradox part. Being a nazi is opting out if the social web of protections of which tolerance is a part.

Punch a local nazi today, you’ll see that it’s a wholesome experience.

source
APassenger@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
If a group disrespects another group, they disrespect it and some shame may befall them.

If they begin to rally for the diminish enter of a group - that has caused no harm (other than imagined) - then that group has left the social contract and its protections.

You’re conflating conveniently and setting up a garbled false choice where you’re arguing in defense of tolerating intolerance because to do otherwise is bad and “both sides.”

Once one side proclaims that the other side deserves a punch in the face, the receivers may try to invoke this drivel, but they began by deciding a population should be removed or diminished.

It’s not the same.

source