Both sides! - eviltoast
  • Angry_Autist (he/him)@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Some ideals are so dangerous they need to be exterminated. If you can show me a method that does this while leaving the bigot alive, I would happily see it implemented.

    • Contravariant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      If you place killing an ideal beyond implementing your own you’re making exactly the same mistake.

      The best we’ve come up with is to try to ensure people are educated and well informed and only a majority can make certain decisions. Not all countries are doing too well on all 3 (heck the U.S. doesn’t even manage to ensure decisions require a majority) but if an ideal gets accepted under anything resembling those conditions then killing the bigots is no longer an option.

        • bastion@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Absolutely not.

          WWII was an excellent example of how some actions cannot be meet with peace.

          If you think you can suppress an ideal with violence, you have a poor grasp of the situation.

          One can respond to ideals that are bad by having a better, more effective way of life - one that addresses the underlying needs that those with bad ideals are trying to meet, and that has a path for them to join you.

          But if you simply suppress it, it will fester and grow.

    • bastion@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Education and human relation. Standing your ground in a conversation without getting combative. Being winning willing to fight if needed, but actively choosing not to when it’s not truly necessary.

      No, if you exterminate an ideal, you also lose the resistance to it and the generational cognizance of it. Instead, you let it survive, and teach people, by example, how to deal with it - not through suppression, but through response.

      • Angry_Autist (he/him)@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        You just admitted my clause:

        Being winning to fight of needed

        No, if you exterminate an ideal, you also lose the resistance to it and the generational cognizance of it.

        Yes, and it stops being relevant. Just like every dictatorial regime that has been put down.

        • bastion@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I did not “admit your clause”. Being willing to fight does not necessitate extermination.

          Although, perhaps you’re right, and I should adopt your ideology of ideological extermination, starting with your ideology.

          No, if you exterminate an ideal, you also lose the resistance to it and the generational cognizance of it.

          Yes, and it stops being relevant. Just like every dictatorial regime that has been put down.

          Oh, is that what you think happens? Go live it, then, and good luck with that.