{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Stallcall:
8/20/2017 10:27:07 PM
43
On punching National Socialists...
For anybody who peruses Reddit from time to time, you may have found yourself in a thread discussing the topic of punching National Socialists (we'll use that term since the colloquialism is filtered).
If you [i]have[/i] found yourself in such a thread, you've probably noticed this common line of reasoning coming from those who claim that it is justified to inflict violence on National Socialists.
[i]"Their ideas are inherently violent. Therefore, they are violent. Violent people deserve to be punched/attacked/what-have-you."[/i]
If you disagree with that line of reasoning, please explain why.
If you agree, I have a few questions for you.
1) What makes somebody's ideas "inherently violent" to the point where that person's very existence is aggressive enough to warrant a solid uppercut?
2) If ideas are inherently violent and can justify punishing somebody, could the state not justifiably prosecute these people for their violence and then imprison them for their ideas? For the sake of discussion, let's assume that the state passes proper legislation (although consider what that legislation would contain).
3) If we accept the premise that these people are violent because their ideas necessitate violence (as in, if you accept their ideas then you tolerate violence against particular innocent people), then could I not punch a Democratic Socialist (or hell, maybe even an American liberal or conservative) because of their urge to extort me?
-
2 RepliesSilencing someone just makes people want to hear what they have to say more.
-
I don't condone violence but I can understand someone wanting to punch someone waving a [url=http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law]-godwinslaw!-[/url] flag. For some people seeing that symbol is just too much, reminds them of all the people that died at the hands of the [url=http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law]-godwinslaw!-[/url]'s. I honestly get angry even typing about it but the fact remains that violence is not the answer, if you give in to your anger they win,Don't give in to that anger
-
2 RepliesEdited by LiamCDM: 8/21/2017 3:56:45 PMThis is an example of something we can agree on. I'm not ashamed to admit that I've lost some friends for rejecting the notion that the far-right is less deserving of the right to free speech because their views are controversial and bigoted. Freedom of speech doesn't exist if it doesn't protect those of whom we fundamentally disagree.
-
1 ReplyIf you think punching someone because their ideas are inherently violent then your ideas are also inherently violent and most likely you're the only one who is actually violent.
-
2 RepliesBut if you punch them, aren't you violent now? And if they are peacefully protesting/gathering, doesn't that make [i]you[/i] the bad guy for punching them for no reason?
-
4 RepliesThis whole thing has become terrifying if you ask me. This movement to stifle free thought in the name of morality is incredibly dangerous. It has the hallmarks of totalitarianism and PEOPLE THINK IT IS REASONABLE. I'm a minority. I have three kids. I would much rather have them grow up in a world with racism than a world where the mob controls free thought. This type of shit is why we homeschool.
-
19 RepliesEdited by Yarbey: 8/21/2017 12:39:08 AMLiberals are like Christians from the dark ages at this point xD Seriously replace liberal with christian, and alt right with witch. Same belief of self superiority, and crazy ass justifications for violence that go completely against what they supposedly stand for. Both turn heavily on those who go speak out against their actions. The only difference is the christians got like that out of a fear of their god, I don't understand how liberals got like this.
-
2 RepliesI feel like I'm in my Philosophy class! Count me in! I'll answer these in a later post. Bump for later- as I'm gathering some statements for my argument in order for it to be a valid argument- and to add to this, I want to ensure my statements are backed by facts. I'll ensure reason and logic are included. Bump for later response.
-
2 RepliesAnyone who punches a N@zi (that was not violent) deserves no sympathy or approval. If someone expressing free speech causes another person to resort to violence, the only person that looks stupid is the one that used violence, even if the person speaking is crazy. People who punch N@zis do nothing to diminish their cause. They only empower them and give them more ground to stand on. That's the beauty of free speech. If a N@zi is using their free speech to spew some ridiculous garbage, use your own free speech to expose that and show how stupid it is. People think that their only option is violence. Counter speech with speech of your own.
-
Well as of right now being a N@zi isn't illegal, assault is.
-
4 Repliesyou seem like a Satanist. [spoiler] a semi-rational, science based individual[/spoiler]
-
Edited by Vox Mortuis: 8/22/2017 10:23:20 AMI have these same questions. In the recent case, I saw both sides as in the wrong because both were violent. However, many friends of mine have been posting things on social media that imply people should attack and even kill said people. I mean, are people really encouraging assault and battery and murder? Edit: an extension to that thought though, if someone's views being violent is an open invitation to assault them, shouldn't the people chanting "pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon" have been attacked during their march?
-
Edited by TheWilkieWay: 8/22/2017 4:44:45 AMI could go on long rant of why its wrong and we need to be above their hate . . . but all of that reasoning, for me atleast, is trumped by the fact I am a pacifist and just do not condone violence in any form (except self defence).
-
2 RepliesIt does not matter if their "ideas" are inherently violent. The response to such an idea should not be violence, but an idea to counter it. Like the idea that their idea is wrong.
-
Punching n@zis don't stop them, it allows them to play the victim card. Besides that, it's also illegal.
-
5 RepliesThe alt left has gotten so spoiled they can't fathom not getting their way. They feel entitled to A world where nobody is allowed to disagree with them. A spoiled child never thinks [i]he[/i] has a problem.
-
Hitting people who peacefully disagree with you is childlike, no matter how diabolical their standpoint is.
-
3 RepliesEdited by blade329: 8/21/2017 7:24:36 PMI don't agree with that reasoning at all. I hate Neo-[url=http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law]-godwinslaw!-[/url]'s, but I'm not using violence on anyone unless it's self defense. It doesn't take any brains to use violence, which is why ANTIFA chooses that route. I think there is something inherently dangerous about this line of thinking. Pretty soon you will be justifying hurting someone for all sorts of reasons. Besides, what is a "National Socialist"? I just saw a video today where an ANTIFA idiot was calling a guy wearing MAGA hat and shirt, a N-A-Z-I. Its that the definition for N-A-Z-I now? Anyone who follows Trump? That's f_c$ing stupid. I know a couple people who are Trump supporters and they are most definitely not National Socialists.
-
I read this as "Purchasing National Socialists". Needless to say, I was disappointed.
-
1 ReplyPunch all socialist commi antifa scum
-
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible,make violent revolution inevitable.
-
1 ReplyI think its fine so long as we give equal treatment to all radical groups. Communists are responsible for close to 90 million deaths so whenever i see one i have the right, hell the responsibility, to beat the shit out of them, kill them, and hang their bodies in a public square because their ideas and past are inherently evil. By doing this i am righteous and good and exalted above all! We will hang them right next to the National Socialists, KKK, BLM, and Occupy members. We should also throw in the Republicans and Democrats because they hate America and are inherently evil.
-
1 ReplyEdited by THUNDERCHILD: 8/21/2017 8:03:21 PMI AM NOT ADVOCATING VIOLENCE nothing tickles me more than a filthy n@zi getting their comeuppance :D I AM NOT ADVOCATING VIOLENCE
-
I don't worry about stuff until action [i][b]must[/b][/i] be taken.
-
It's a N..azi Punch it
-
I disagree with that line of logic. Because reasons. [spoiler]Really though. They deserve violence because they are violent. That's not what I would call moral high ground. If we're gonna punch [url=http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law]-godwinslaw!-[/url] can we just do it for the sake of punching [url=http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law]-godwinslaw!-[/url] because it's 2017 and being a [url=http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law]-godwinslaw!-[/url] just doesn't seem like something people should be doing. [/spoiler]
