589
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
589 points (98.5% liked)
News
23376 readers
3393 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Look, not killing them is a debatable point. Not meeting their violence with overwhelming violence leads to this kind of shit
What you're advocating is vigilantism. In a working society, if they are committing acts of violence (aka crime), you shouldn't need to advocate "overwhelming violence" in response, you should be advocating a working police force who can arrest them, and hold them safely until they can be judged by a jury of their peers.
I feel like vigilantism is the left making an equivalent argument to the right's "more guns = more safety". Unless you live in a lawless warzone, you shouldn't want either.
Yeah well apparently we don't have a working society any more
Then let's make one.
My brother in christ that is literally what they are trying to do
No sir, scroll up and re-read the suggestion about "meeting violence with overwhelming violence".
So when is violence in response to fascists and specifically Nazis okay? Because they start with rhetoric then move fairly quickly on to violence. As in we are in the last part of their rhetoric as they are now openly waving flags without challenge.
When our police and justice system fails, and we officially live in a failed state, then all bets are off.
But until then, if your neighbor yells "I think you all should die" out his window, it doesn't suddenly justify the neighbors taking matters into their own hands, busting down his door, and "overwhelming" him. That's wild west law.
You don't bust down his door, but when he in the street with a NAZI flag, feel free to bust his nose.
That's the same thing. It's inconsistent to argue that it's ok to violate a person's autonomy for what they yell in public, but not for what they yell out their window.
I mean, realisticly I'm not going to stop you from punching a self-described nazi, I'm just going to ask that you be consistent about when you believe it's ethical to do so.
Edit: the US actually has a legal grey area around this topic deemed "fighting words", which is speech that the jury agrees is immediately threatening enough that the person had no choice but to physically respond. This obviously can get pretty unethical in its interpretation. If a nazi yells "fuck the jews" outside an Anne Frank play, I think no jury would have a problem if they get hit. Does that also mean if someone else yells "fuck the police" outside a police station, the cops are justified in beating them?
There is a difference here:
Window dude is being a nuisance that should be dealt with. But he isn't being specific, nor is he showing any tendency for violence. He's just being a shit bag.
Nazi flag dude is out in the street, his views are specific and violent. They are a call to commit violence on a mass scale towards minority groups. Nazis (and fascists of all kinds) frequently get violent, without being the first to be hit.
Yelling out the window is a warning sign, waving a Nazi flag in public is an act of hate, and demonstration of an adherence to a violent ideology.
We're still not on the same page. The intention of the analogy is that he's doing the same thing in public as he is out his window. Waving a flag and yelling are both first amendment protected actions, so I wasn't drawing a distinction between the two, but apparently it's causing confusion, so for the sake of the discussion, let's say he's flying a swastika out his window vs flying it in front of a theater.
So now my question is: is there a difference between you punching him in the face in public vs breaking into his house and punching him there?
Because the answer is no, in either case (for better or worse) you are violating his autonomy.
But my original point that got us here is: you shouldn't want to punch him OR break into his house, because if whatever he's doing is actually encouraging violence, you should want to have a functioning police and justice system to handle the situation in a fair and consistent manner. To do anything less is to admit you do not live in a functioning society. Which, sure, maybe that's the case, but as long as we agree on what "ideal" is, my hope us we can agree to work towards that. Punching a nazi is treating a symptom, it's not a solution to any problem.
You expect cops to arrest their friends? You have a very charitable view of the kind of people that become cops.
Well until now in this discussion we haven't established that cops were the ones committing waving the flags. But unfortunately you're right, "some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses."
Speaking ideally, yes obviously we all expect cops to arrest their friends when their friends are committing crimes. Unfortunately that doesn't happen nearly as much as it should.