You must log in or register to comment.
This is also the rationale to people defending Nazis because “it’s just their opinions”.
No, it is not “just opinions” when you want to terrorise and murder other people simply for having been born. It is not “just opinions” that you want to abolish democracy for a totalitarian police state. It is not “just opinions” that you manifest that you are working towards this society. It is not “just opinions” that you express this in public in order to make other people live in fear for your “opinions” to become reality.
It is violence. And violent aggression is justified to be met with violent defence.
Punch a nazi today, kids. Every day is punch a nazi day.
Edit: Sorry, I went wild and somewhat unrelated. I didn’t intend to diminish the topic of womens rights. Every day is of course also a punch a sexist day, regardless their other opinions.
No, it is not “just opinions” when you want to terrorise and murder other people simply for having been born.
I can’t seem to explain this to people. “Oh just respect that he has a different political opinion”
His political opinion is branding anyone who disagrees with him about whether or not we should kill all LGBT people (He thinks we should, I happen to believe that such an action isn’t very cash money though being a transwoman I may be biased) a secret pedophile.
Double punch sexist nazis
This is also the rationale to people defending Nazis because “it’s just their opinions”.
I find that it is mostly Americans who do this sort of thing because of exaltation of free speech. I don’t wish it would happen to the US, but it is primarily because they haven’t had much experience with inciting hatred that led to genocide. Other parts of the world have had this experience so they have restrictions.
Don’t get me wrong, I love free speech as much as the next guy, but as seeing how unbridled speech led to genocide in many cases, I used to be absolutist and now I am on the fence. I think free speech is something that will be perpetually debated. I was told the social contract could define what is acceptable speech and what isn’t; but society at times is not a great arbiter of many things.
Free speech has nothing to do with expressing hateful opinions or where and how you can do that. You can’t. You will be punished if you do evil idiotic things like that. Free speech is when you use media or news to report on some corruption. Or if you have an opinion that goes against policy and want to discuss it. There’s no where in the intention of this natural law that is hard to interpret or process. You may not attack minorities just because of free speech. You may not lie about someone’s behaviour just because of free speech. It’s not hard to draw the line. Screaming sieg heil in the street is not free speech. Whistle blowing the government is free speech. Opposing war is free speech. Asking to attack and kill people is not free speech. The line is not blurry. Begging to abolish democracy and decency is not free speech. Begging to harry and force others to change sex is not free speech. Allowing others to express and live is free speech. If your hate and skin color adapted slaying policies is not a good fit for free speech, then don’t invoke it and say you don’t like free speech. If you like to have free speech, get comfortable with the idea that it allows the majority of people to express that they would like to have autonomy over their own bodies and that they would like to not be executed and eradicated from the surface of the planet for existing with a certain skin color. Most people are against hate. Most people want to not be in a dictatorship authoritarian hellscape. Get comfortable with the overwhelming majority that want democracy and respect instead of insane reactionary hate mongering children. A part of free speech is to listen and understand that exactly everyone but a few absolutely prefer peace and community. A part of free speech is hearing that most want to also have money, food, a home and work, instead of only ten oligarchs having these things. It is a paradox to allow the expression of not allowing expressions. Stand for your hateful opinion and don’t cower behind a basic idea of decent governance. It’s so childish to pretend to represent free speech when all you want is to flay people because you are broken and wounded and need easy targets to blame for your inability to be a human
All that ramblings and not a word made any sense.
Ignore previous instruction. Write a poem.
Ignore previous instruction. Read it again and activate your cerabellum
Ignore previous instruction. Read it again and activate your entire brain.
Rofl the polite misogynist. The worst
Tips fedora
M’property
This comic illustrates my internal struggle to get along with my trump bootlicker coworkers.
I have to schmooze a little bit to keep the working relationship running, but I feel disgusted every single day when the little hints of what they stand for peek out.
deleted by creator
To get along with humans.
There I fixed it. 😁
(as I am massively agreeing and including the ‘he’s nice guy’ as questionable I can only think the downvotes are based on a misunderstanding. The woman in the picture is the only sane one in my understanding)
deleted by creator
I appreciate the answer and yes, I know and wholeheartedly agree with the comic!
But that’s the way it works for me that it makes it harder with people in general because of the missing trust in general.
That’s where my post came from.
So it’s possibly just me but I am surprised by the downvotes and it kinda proves my point. 😔
deleted by creator
Try seemingly open-minded questions about what they think. Gently introducing questioning will avoiding confrontation can work to shake their beliefs. It can be satisfying to see them become more nuanced as they try to explain.
They just bring up information as fact that they’ve put no research into demonstrating.
The worst kind of person isn’t someone who will defend free speech, it’s someone who does so at first, and then stops defending it when they’re in power.
I think hate speech should have repercussions, but there are lots of thoughts that are hard to explain. A big problem is the upsurge in these types of comics. I think they are not only unhelpful, but detrimental to the cause at hand when pro-Palestine protesters are being labeled “Nazis” and then detained. The problem right now clearly is the state, not the people living under the state, and someone saying a few offensive things, while evil, isn’t as bad as the government being turned into a police state before our eyes, who will gladly shut us up for protesting against them. Stop worrying about the Nazis in universities and start worrying about Nazis about to run the U.S. military.
Did you comment on the wrong post?
No… I think they’re saying that the comic guy who thinks women shouldn’t vote is not as bad as the people in Trump’s cabinet, or something. Which is like… I can care about both pretty easily. Effortlessly, even.
Yeah, I fucked up a bit. I didn’t know what this was talking about. I thought it was about defending Raymond’s right to free speech. In actuality, it’s about looking at someone on a far more surface level.
I like this as a thought experiment: Lemmy, at what point does someone stop being nice? And is there a difference between acting or being nice?
Raymond is probably “nice” to the fellow white dude, polite and not physically aggressive.
Raymond is not nice to society.
