Dude.
You are literally arguing for the right to be mean to others without consequences.
Voidian
joined 4 months ago
If they don't have meaningful power, then neither do people who would abuse any space they're in, rendering moderating wholly pointless. But people sure don't like that idea.
I don’t think OP is suggesting we sympathize with the ideology or the harm it causes. There is a vital distinction between empathy as an alignment and empathy as a diagnostic tool.
Understanding the cognitive or mental health mechanics that lead to radicalization isn't about giving someone a 'pass.' It’s about having the clarity to see the situation for what it is. If we don't understand the 'why' behind how people are manipulated, we can't effectively dismantle the systems that recruit them.
True compassion in a political sense isn't about being 'nice' to someone spouting hate; it’s about having the clarity to address the root cause of the behavior rather than just reacting to the symptoms with more hate. It’s possible to hold a boundary against someone’s actions while still being mindful of the human vulnerabilities that landed them there.
The fact that they still exist in an authoritarian system hardly argues in favor of them.
No hard feelings :)
Not sure what theme you're using but at least for me the default one makes it a bit hard to separate replies. I still like it most of all for just lurking.
You're making quite a lot of frankly weird assumptions.
Find a single line from me where I'm saying that people who don't engage in rational discourse shouldn't be kicked out.
In fact, have a honest think. How much of your response is based on a knee jerk reaction instead of actually looking at what I've been saying in this thread?
I think it's fine to look at general biological markers and categorize people for healthcare reasons. Most of the time being in the ballpark works for most people. Maybe in the future we can have some full body scan thing that picks up the optimal healthcare setup for each individual but in the meanwhile, we'll go with what we got.
But that doesn't have to have shit to do with their internal experience of themselves, or how the social environment should react to them. And I reiterate: "most people". Meaning there's going to be outliers and that's okay, and they'll need more individualized care. Being abnormal is normal.
Start building what works now, where you are.
Every reform you like started as people organizing. The second the state touches it, it turns care into control. Prisons, cops, "rehab", all began as community ideas. Now they’re cages.
Anarchy isn’t "no system." It’s systems we control. Local, adaptable, replaceable. The state just standardizes failure.
You personally don't have to. Always plenty of people out there willing to do it for you.
You mean the direct quote of Popper that you yourself referred to? You didn't read the very piece of text you told me to read?
view more: next ›
You realize the OP is doing a melodramatic bit, right? It's funny, at least to me.
You say that they are full of false assumptions but your arguments against them hinge on the assumption that they have been asking for banning for words. Can you point to a single instance where he says this?