• 2 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2023

help-circle



  • To everyone pearl clutching in response to this correct meme with one of the following phrases:

    • “That’s how you create an echo chamber”

    • “paradox of intolerance doesn’t say how to fight fascism”

    • “This is about silencing opposing thought”

    I would like to take this moment to remind you that the paradox of intolerance isn’t about exiling those who disagree on economic policy; it’s about recognizing and directly opposing those who are trying to harm or disadvantage others and doing so in a meaningful way that will actually change the outcome. You can’t debate Hitler out of doing a genocide, but you could have jailed him before he gained power.

    Being too spineless to call out and fight intolerance enables fascism. The longer you live wrapped up in your civility politics, the overton window shifts further right, and it strengthens the fascist support. It happened in pre-WW2 Germany, and it’s being repeated in dozens of countries worldwide. If you feel the urge to block me, go ahead…

    …but know that this is your fault

    Edit: spelling



  • The article also mentions that Israel has started using it in their own propaganda videos. showing the triangle over targets as they’re hit, and when you flip it like that there’s a very clear implication of destroying the symbol of freedom… Which is to say, I still fail to see your ultimate point. You’re just pointing at the news article and saying “SEE! THEY SAY ITS BAD!”

    Could you provide some actual argumentation to go with that?

    And just so it doesnt seem like I’m running, “Targeting reticle” would imply a weapon optic or similar, hence my confusion. “using it to mark targets” would have been clearer.





  • To be clear, that wasnt me you just responded to, but I was the one who asked you the questions. You seem to be making a lot of bad faith assumptions about my intent with those questions.

    You’re asking a rhetorical question in the hopes of getting a gotcha.

    Well, it is rhetorically framed, but I was trying to see if you and I are both working with frameworks built on reality.

    Your primary goal here is not to deepen any kind of understanding.

    Again, ouch. The tone of the questions may have come across that way, but my intent is never to “gotcha”… You’ll just have to take my word for it obviously.

    If you did, you would be a lot more honest in your questions. You’d open up with a clear argument, based on specifics, with dates, people, events etc.

    This is a forum on internet, not debate club. Like I said above, I’m sorry if my questions came across as being bad faith, but I’m not obligated to serve you a rhetorically perfect and fallacy-free set of questions, just as you are not obligated to engage with my questions if you feel they’re trying to uh… “Gotcha”

    If you did, you would be a lot more honest in your questions. You’d open up with a clear argument, based on specifics, with dates, people, events etc.

    I’m not totally sure how I’m responding with catch phrases. Honestly, if nothing else I’d love for you to clarify this

    You want a nuanced discussion that delves into the specifics of the geopolitics of the region? Start a thread that’s not just diluted meaningless sentences, such as this nugget:

    Why should the US president be in regular contact with the perpetrator of an ongoing genocide?

    I’m sorry, I’m not being intentionally obtuse, but I can’t tell if you’re using the above as an example of a “diluted meaningless sentence” or whether it’s meant to be a good question.

    Ultimately, I don’t feel I was acting in bad faith considering I was trying to evaluate your framework. If you feel it was done poorly, that’s okay, you dont need to respond.

    Also:

    Who are “you guys”?






  • MetaCubed@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlThe worst place in the galaxy
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Well… “They’re all” is kinda rhetorical shorthand, but the vast, vast majority of Israeli citizens are colonizers definitionally, just like how “all” north Americans are colonizers (obviously except indigenous people). The difference is that the USA/Canadian settler colonial projects have already “”“succeeded”“”.