I get what you’re saying, but stating that it is always acceptable kill a nazi no matter the situation is most definitely dehumanization. I’m not sure how you could twist it into anything else.
There are so many other ways to remove them from society that doesn’t include labeling someone as something and deciding it’s okay to kill them based on that label.
They labeled themselves. If someone admits to murder in a courtroom, and a judge sentences them to death is the judge dehumanizing the murderer? I don’t think anyone would seriously make that claim.
These people are openly wearing the symbols of a regime that believed in the extermination of people for a random set of traits. They are openly espousing the hatred and beliefs that some people are lesser and should be exterminated still. So people are passing judgment. This does not dehumanize them, it holds them accountable for their actions.
And a person can absolutely come to the decision to kill another person while being fully aware and recognizing that persons humanity. It is just an incredibly awful thing to do. I still have zero compunction saying out and out Nazis should die.
The irony is that you can look at the responses to my comments, and see people quite literally say they aren’t human.
This is the problem with statements like the top level comment. You’re giving people permission to dehumanize another group.
And the “self label” isn’t even a good argument. You’re one step away from “they didn’t self label but look at what they believe”.
The solution to a Nazi walking into a bar is to kick their ass out, not shoot them in the head.
Edit: I want to clarify, my point with the “not just a self label” isn’t to say that someone can have Nazi beliefs without being a Nazi, it’s that the label can be applied by anyone to anyone when it’s convenient.
I’m one step away from nothing. They are literally displaying swastikas. And given the chance they would kill me. That is not acceptable. They cannot be tolerated.
Also saying someone lacks humanity isn’t dehumanizing them, it is saying they lack empathy, goodwill, and traits required to be a contributing member of a healthy society. They mean different things.
Admittedly I overstated things when I said no one is dehumanizing them. People can be hateful. What I should have said is that isnt the majority, and dehumanizing someone isnt required for the belief that they should be killed.
Fuck off. They want to kill me for existing. I want to kill them because they want to commit murder on an industrial scale. If you can’t see a difference between those two things, then grab onto your ears and pull really hard until your head is removed from your ass you fucking piece of shit.
I don’t even know how to respond to this without being snarky so imma just head out.
I’ll just leave you with the fact that killing isn’t a solution, because the reasoning for the killing can easily be usurped and tainted. As history has proven over and over.
if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance, thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance. This paradox was articulated by philosopher Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945),[1] where he argued that a truly tolerant society must retain the right to deny tolerance to those who promote intolerance. Popper posited that if intolerant ideologies are allowed unchecked expression, they could exploit open society values to erode or destroy tolerance itself through authoritarian or oppressive practices
That is exactly what tolerating Nazi ideology within a society leads to. If you allow objectively harmful ideology on the grounds of balance or fairness, they are allowed to continue and eventually take over.
Even if you’re a 100% centrist, you should never allow anyone to undermine or remove basic constititional or human rights. Yet that is exactly what Nazis do. Tolerating them means tolerating that.
No, they took that as their entire reason for being from the very beginning of their existence, it’s not their excuse, it’s their modus operandi, it’s their birthright. They don’t need excuses, they have entitlement.
If someone feels entitled to end your life based on theological racist bullshit then how is returning that sentiment, solely for reasons of wanting to stop others and yourself from their predatory intentions, anything other than self-preservation in the face of a deadly predator?
There are bad people in the world, down to their core monsters, not everybody has a node of redemption and understanding hiding somewhere inside of them waiting to blossom. They are born and die as horrendous atrocities embedded among humanity. Not all of them are nazis but every single nazi has chosen to be one among those ranks.
I get what you’re saying, but stating that it is always acceptable kill a nazi no matter the situation is most definitely dehumanization. I’m not sure how you could twist it into anything else.
There are so many other ways to remove them from society that doesn’t include labeling someone as something and deciding it’s okay to kill them based on that label.
They labeled themselves. That’s good enough for me.
They labeled themselves. If someone admits to murder in a courtroom, and a judge sentences them to death is the judge dehumanizing the murderer? I don’t think anyone would seriously make that claim.
These people are openly wearing the symbols of a regime that believed in the extermination of people for a random set of traits. They are openly espousing the hatred and beliefs that some people are lesser and should be exterminated still. So people are passing judgment. This does not dehumanize them, it holds them accountable for their actions.
And a person can absolutely come to the decision to kill another person while being fully aware and recognizing that persons humanity. It is just an incredibly awful thing to do. I still have zero compunction saying out and out Nazis should die.
The irony is that you can look at the responses to my comments, and see people quite literally say they aren’t human.
This is the problem with statements like the top level comment. You’re giving people permission to dehumanize another group.
And the “self label” isn’t even a good argument. You’re one step away from “they didn’t self label but look at what they believe”.
The solution to a Nazi walking into a bar is to kick their ass out, not shoot them in the head.
Edit: I want to clarify, my point with the “not just a self label” isn’t to say that someone can have Nazi beliefs without being a Nazi, it’s that the label can be applied by anyone to anyone when it’s convenient.
I’m one step away from nothing. They are literally displaying swastikas. And given the chance they would kill me. That is not acceptable. They cannot be tolerated.
Also saying someone lacks humanity isn’t dehumanizing them, it is saying they lack empathy, goodwill, and traits required to be a contributing member of a healthy society. They mean different things.
Admittedly I overstated things when I said no one is dehumanizing them. People can be hateful. What I should have said is that isnt the majority, and dehumanizing someone isnt required for the belief that they should be killed.
You are giving them the same excuse.
Fuck off. They want to kill me for existing. I want to kill them because they want to commit murder on an industrial scale. If you can’t see a difference between those two things, then grab onto your ears and pull really hard until your head is removed from your ass you fucking piece of shit.
I don’t even know how to respond to this without being snarky so imma just head out.
I’ll just leave you with the fact that killing isn’t a solution, because the reasoning for the killing can easily be usurped and tainted. As history has proven over and over.
Bai
Because they’re fucking right and you don’t like that
Look up the paradox of tolerance.
if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance, thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance. This paradox was articulated by philosopher Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945),[1] where he argued that a truly tolerant society must retain the right to deny tolerance to those who promote intolerance. Popper posited that if intolerant ideologies are allowed unchecked expression, they could exploit open society values to erode or destroy tolerance itself through authoritarian or oppressive practices
That is exactly what tolerating Nazi ideology within a society leads to. If you allow objectively harmful ideology on the grounds of balance or fairness, they are allowed to continue and eventually take over.
Even if you’re a 100% centrist, you should never allow anyone to undermine or remove basic constititional or human rights. Yet that is exactly what Nazis do. Tolerating them means tolerating that.
The number of people conflating “we shouldn’t dehumanize people” with “tolerate the Nazis” has me questioning people’s reading comprehension.
No, they took that as their entire reason for being from the very beginning of their existence, it’s not their excuse, it’s their modus operandi, it’s their birthright. They don’t need excuses, they have entitlement.
If someone feels entitled to end your life based on theological racist bullshit then how is returning that sentiment, solely for reasons of wanting to stop others and yourself from their predatory intentions, anything other than self-preservation in the face of a deadly predator?
There are bad people in the world, down to their core monsters, not everybody has a node of redemption and understanding hiding somewhere inside of them waiting to blossom. They are born and die as horrendous atrocities embedded among humanity. Not all of them are nazis but every single nazi has chosen to be one among those ranks.
We didn’t label them, they labeled themselves loudly and proudly as an imminent threat to anyone who is not them.