this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
1084 points (96.6% liked)
Microblog Memes
5176 readers
2961 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
Related communities:
- !whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works
- !best_of_mastodon@sh.itjust.works
- !curatedtwitter@sh.itjust.works
- !curatedtumblr@sh.itjust.works
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's a big different between the left and the right.
The right want certain people to have certain basic rights.
The left want everyone to have the same basic rights. Even if they are hated.
Does the left believe those they hate should have the right not to be physically assaulted by strangers?
Sure doesn't look like it in here, lol.
Tolerance is a social contract upheld by all who are tolerant. If someone violates that social contract, say, a nazi, then they are not governed by the social contract.
One cannot tolerate the intolerant.
Intolerance must be met with expulsion and force to maintain a civil society.
That means you, get off Lemmy.
Intolerance does not require violence. Equivocating a lack of on-sight violence with tolerance/advocacy is absurd.
So, no. You don't believe that is a right. Rights are things that apply to all people at all times, you know. If you believe certain people do not have the right not to be physically assaulted by strangers, then you do not believe in that right, period.
Thanks for pointing out that "The left want everyone to have the same basic rights. Even if they are hated." is a lie.
The distinction is that everyone has a right to defense, not to "never get punched no matter what". If someone is running at you with a spear, then you're entitled to defend yourself before the spear actually impales you. The same goes for credible threats to genocide your people.
One does not need to be a pacifist in order to respect the rights of others.
Your user history is disgusting. You’re constantly contentious. You pick fights with others, ask them to cite behaviors you have or haven’t exhibited. No one is gonna do homework for a bad faith actor. I would be surprised if you had any friends who would willingly talk to you in real life.
And yeah, if you got hit out there in real life, I would laugh while you would rub your jaw. I celebrate nazis getting hit.
That’s the kind of person you are.
You could change, but we both know you’re not going to.
You’re just gonna keep on playing your slimy little cryptofascist game, and try to trick people who don’t see your shenanigans.
And you will never ever enjoy the comforts of a sincere human relationship.
I disagree with things when I have good reason to, and I back up every position I take. That's more than I can say for you. And your type is always the first/only to lob personal insults, in response to your position(s) being challenged, making this accusation a particularly amusing bit of projection.
Correcting a false statement is not picking a fight. It only seems that way to people so embroiled in identity politics that they've lost the ability to distinguish between a challenge to their politics/assumptions, and a personal attack.
I've not asked anyone to 'do homework'.
That must be because your definition of "friend" is 'someone who agrees with me on everything and never contradicts me', and you're projecting that onto me, after I've demonstrated the willingness to engage someone in disagreement.
I have plenty of friends. I don't require my friends to agree with me--I welcome challenges to any positions I hold, that's how they get corrected/revised/strengthened over time. The only prerequisite is that the challenge must be of substance--if it's standard ideologue far of emotional arguments, or just repeating talking points you've done no original thinking about, you're not going to get anywhere with someone who actually uses their brain.
I get the distinct impression you've never "steelmanned" an argument in your life.
This makes you a bad person, objectively.
I'd rather strike the ideology than the individual, especially given what I've learned in my research about how 'punching Nazis' literally helps them in the long term. (see the comment I posted immediately prior to this for details/citations)
It's truly indicative of your political extremism that you're labeling me a Nazi, just for contrdicting you.
I've changed my positions many times over the years. Thing is, it requires a challenge of substance to do so. Lobbing personal insults and calling people Nazis for having the temerity to contradict you? Well, that ain't it, sunshine.
This really is pathetic, you know? To create this ridiculous fantasy in your mind about how, since I've contradicted you, I must be the biggest loser you can conceive of. Extra little bit of irony is that I received one of my SO's frequent (we're both on the mushy side, I'll admit) expressions of love, just as I was reading the above sentence.
Now, just because it's funny to me, I'm going to show you my political compass and 8values test results, knowing you will have no idea how to integrate the absurd assumptions you've made about me, with them. I predict you'll accuse them of being fabricated; after all, denial is generally the easiest way to hide from inconvenient truth.
https://i.imgur.com/ra1ix0n.png
https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=61.5&d=60.6&g=64.5&s=75.2
Rich white boy with ADHD detected. Dude was right and your paragraphs are actually proving his point about your post history. What's it like being a "nuh-uh" parrot?
"I'm racist, classist, and as a bonus, also bigoted against those with mental illness" is not the comeback you think it is.
I'm correct, you know it, and you're mad about it. That's why you insult me instead of pointing out a single flaw in anything I said.
No dude, nobody has to argue with you. You're just obnoxious. You might be able to put words in the mouths of your family and friends, but literally nobody online has to entertain your bullshit. Enjoy staying generally unliked I guess
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I don't care if bigoted ideologues like me. Your whiny personal insults are meaningless to me. The fact remains that if my arguments were flawed, your replies would be hammering my arguments instead of lobbing your impotent personal attacks.
The funniest part is that people like you actually feel morally superior after an exchange like this.
You have no idea what ideologue means. There's no morals or honor here dude, just an internet board. You have a disgustingly inflated sense of self worth and you seem genuinely unlikable. I can't imagine you ever listen to anyone anywhere before butting in with hardline sweeping generalizations, your input is generally worthless, and you're more concerned with being right than being correct.
It's so pitiful how ideologues ("an adherent of an ideology, especially one who is uncompromising and dogmatic <-- fits you perfectly, considering how you react to facts that contradict you)" can't manage anything other than variations of 'you're a bad person' when they're confronted with facts that contradict their precious narratives. Forbid anyone ever tell you that your short-sighted ego-stroking lust for instant gratification and convincing yourself of your moral superiority (another reason for the barrage of insults mentioned in the first sentence) may not actually be the best long-term move. No amount of evidence and data can shake an ideologue from their assumptions.
But yes, just keep pretending you know better than people whose life's work is researching and understanding extremist movements, they're all dumbasses and you've got the divine knowledge, right?
I pity you.
You are just an argumentative asshole dude, idiots like you are a dime a dozen and the sale never stops. Your "life's work" sounds a lot like googling buzzwords for definitions; you argue with anyone over anything, especially in venues where you've been told nobody is going to argue because they don't want or have to. These posts have nothing to do with honor or morals. It's social media. I didn't put forth any hardline ideas except "you're kind of an asshole judging by your post history" and you literally went and proved it by trying to argue with nothing but ad hominem (which is what you're accusing me of doing lmao).
Get a grip. Delete your account.
If you can't handle being contradicted in a public forum, public fora are not for you. I made my case very clearly and dryly, with citations, and you're seething over the facts contradicting what you want to be true. That's all there is to it.
I made zero attempts to evade any argument presented to me, at all, much less by attacking the one doing the arguing, which is what ad hominem actually is. On the other hand, you literally can't write a single comment without "asshole" or a similar word in it, the type of language I used zero times in any of my exchanges. You're projecting, hard.
No. :)
write me a better essay next time