Comment

Comment on Substack says it will not remove or demonetize Nazi content

you’re conflating fascism with the actions necessary to stop fascism. you may want to read up on the “paradox of tolerance”. here’s the first sentence from the wikipedia page:

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society’s practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
That logic is in conflict with itself. It’s literally advocating for intolerance to get rid of intolerance.

People are against nazies but meanwhile advocate we treat other groups they dont like the way nazies would treat jews. Be that millionaires/billionaires, capitalists, republicans or whatever. “Eat the rich”

I can’t get behind that. Daylight is the best disinfectant. I want nazies to be allowed to announce publicly that they’re nazies.

source
- FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Maybe you should read the whole page. Maybe then you’d learn why so many of us are against a fundraising platform which allows Nazi writers to earn money.
  
  source
- winterayars@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  “The paradox of tolerance” as originally stated is not “in conflict with itself”, it is pointing out a conflict that exists within the idea of “tolerance as a moral good”. The point is that “tolerance” will eventually give way to “intolerance”… one way or another. So: pick your side wisely.
  
  I think there are problems with the concept as it is started (others have proposed some in this post) but it’s trying to address the conflict.
  
  source
- affiliate@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  
  That logic is in conflict with itself. It’s literally advocating for intolerance to get rid of intolerance.
  
  this is why it’s called “the paradox of tolerance” my guy. did you even read the name?
  
  People are against nazies but meanwhile advocate we treat other groups they dont like the way nazies would treat jews.
  
  this is a bad faith representation of his argument. also, in this case, “people” is Karl Popper, a renowned philosopher with countless awards for his work on political science and philosophy. maybe you would understand his argument better if you actually read it.
  
  source