Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall fight to the death to defend your right to say it.
When you ban people, you tell them to go form an echo chamber where they'll flourish.
A more intelligent approach is to imitate Daryl Davis, who has convinced hundreds of KKK members to leave the KKK, simply by respectfully talking with them.
You might actually learn a thing or two in the process.
You sound like you've never argued with fascists online.
They only exist in echo chambers, anyway, and do not debate in good faith. There is nothing similar to what Daryl Davis did except in the most superficial way possible. Go visit /r/conservative and you might actually learn a thing or two.
I was active in r/Conservative, and here I'm the primary contributer to m/Conservative. Hi, nice to meet you. When I'm engaged in arguments involving the word "fascist", it's rarely me using that word (unless we're literally discussing Mussolini), and usually me who's called that for favoring levelheaded conservative principles. I enjoy mutually respectful debate, but I find most others prefer to fearfully call me a "fascist," downvote everything I've ever written, block me, and walk away feeling sanctimonious.
That's a hilarious turn; my statement was meant to be rhetorical. But you really have never argued with fascists!
And I never said YOU were fascist... but I guess that doesn't fit with your canned response then, huh?
Fascists haven't existed since 25 Luglio in 1943. You can find a tiny number of exceptions over the years, but as a broad statement it's true. I'm not old enough to have argued with fascists, and I bet you're not either.
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Yea wow, we've never seen that in the last 7 years!
I can see I really triggered you with that word. It's hilarious that you self-identified with it and got defensive.
It certainly does sound like typical leftists if you squint. Everyone in this thread opposing free speech is an authoritarian. But if you actually read that definition word for word, it's a position almost nobody supports. What's more, the definition has been changed from the original political affiliation. I'm not surprised Miriam-Webster's open to redefining words, but try as they might, words still mean what they originally meant. Still, their definition is close enough to the original to demonstrate my point that there are no fascists left, unless you squint and look at modern leftists.
Ah, right- There are no fascists but if there are it's the leftists! Thanks for a good laugh today. Don't ever let facts get in your way, bud.
Hmm, let's break it down:
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti)
Could be leftists, conservatives, or any other political group.
that exalts nation and often race above the individual
Well that excludes conservatives, because conservatism celebrates rugged individualism.
Leftism, by contrast, embraces groups above individualism. This is what conservatives usually refer to as neo-Marxism. It's also known as identity politics. It's this idea that we're all members of a group, and that group gives us our identity. Then with intersectionality, you have multiple groups defining identity.
Two caveats:
and that stands for a centralized autocratic government
Yes, in general, conservatives support small government, while leftists prefer government regulations over private business, government handouts for the poor, government taxation of the wealthy, and government control of every little thing in life — basically big government.
Centralized? In the US, centralized means federal control whereas decentralized means State and local control. Leftists generally prefer the former, whereas conservatives generally prefer the latter.
headed by a dictatorial leader
Not applicable in the US, but I wouldn't put it past the Left in the near future.
severe economic and social regimentation,
Yep, see this thread for instance. Leftist love regimented control over what we're allowed to think, and they love silencing the opposition.
and forcible suppression of opposition
Oh, you mean like when Biden has his primary opponent, Trump, tied up in court with accusations and a threat of imprisonment? Or, you mean like this very thread where leftists are trying to silence the TERFs? Yes, leftists absolutely love the forcible suppression of their opposition.
In conclusion, no, it's not a perfect fit for leftists, but it's loosely close — and it certainly doesn't fit conservatives even slightly.
Great theory, but lets take a look at reality.
that exalts nation and often race above the individual
Have you heard of MAGA?
and that stands for a centralized autocratic government
While Trump announced he "plans to eliminate executive branch constraints on his power if he is elected president in 2024"
headed by a dictatorial leader
See the last point..
and forcible suppression of opposition
Like Jan 6th.
You can't just make up whatever you want when you're not in /r/conservative. You are constrained by reality. Nobody is here to delete my posts and ban me for you.
Yes, well the MAGA crowd isn't very conservative if you ask me, and personally I support DeSantis. I think Democrats are strongly pushing for a Trump nomination because they know he's unelectable, and it's an easy play.
But to your point, I concede that most people do consider MAGA to be right wing, and that Trump has on several occasions said things suggesting he'd like an autocracy. I think we can agree that'd be undesirable. I just don't think it's very conservative.
Like Jan 6th.
All that was, was a group of jaded voters who believed (rightly or wrongly) that there was election fraud. Personally I see no evidence of fraud substantial enough to change the election. But at the same time, I recognize that for someone who truly did believe there was election fraud, they were upset and they wanted to protest about it. That's all it was — a protest that was legitimate based on what they believed.
You are constrained by reality. Nobody is here to delete my posts and ban me for you.
And I'm glad about that, 100%. I wouldn't want you banned.
But back to the definition, you can't just pluck a couple of words out of there and say it's a match. The whole definition fits the left way better than the right, and yet in truth doesn't fit either completely.
"lol, I hate the main conservative group in the US because they're not the right kind of ~~Scotsman~~ conservative. Instead, I love the guy who been pushing the most extreme book-banning policy in the US."
did you forget that this was a conversation about fascism when you brought DeSantis up, or do you not know who he is?
(rightly or wrongly)
lol no
But at the same time, I recognize that for someone who truly did believe there was election fraud
who do you think tricked them into believing that? or do you think it was all one massive coincidence?
No, fascists (which TERFs are) should not be allowed to fester here.
This article is really not convincing.
like, fuck terfs, fuck the anti-trans movement, but the connection between the anti-trans movement and fascism is framed in this suuuuper abstract way that no meaningful definition of fascism would allow. It kind of just makes fascism sound like "statism."
There are plenty of terfs (again, fuck terfs) who are not calling for government action, but trying to exclude trans women from feminist spaces on non-governmental levels, arguing for a limiting social or academic definition of feminism or of a woman and holding exclusionary events. Fascism is an incorrect label for that behavior.
Furthermore, to call terfs fascists implies that they are generally for other things fascists are for, like a command economy, which I don't think is common.
And to be clear, there is an overlap between terfs and fascists, and an even bigger overlap between anti-trans people in general and fascists. We all know the Nazis fucked up a lot of good gender research, but they were never pretending to be feminists.
Nope, terfs are fascists.
... did you link to the wrong article by mistake? that article doesn't really have anything to do with fascism, except insofar as most fascists also happen to be racists.
I could link articles all day but I have better things to do than entertain (presumably) a cis guy while he plays devils advocate about the people who want my friends thrown in camps not being fascists.
that's literally the first article you linked to. Do you have a point at all? You can link to articles all day, but only two of them, and only one that argues for your point at all, which I've already addressed?
I'm not advocating for terfs or fascists, they're both villains, but to say they're the same is like saying the KKK and the muslim brotherhood are the same. Just because they're both evil and there are some common threads between their ideas doesn't mean they're the same. I think we should learn how to talk about the terrible groups out there instead of just equating all of them and dancing around our own ignorance. I'm not advocating them, I'm advocating against them as strongly as I can, and you're promoting ignorance instead of responding to the one damn point I've made.
that's literally the first article you linked to.
Yeah I thought maybe you would read it this time.
I read it, and responded to it. You've been ignoring my response because you don't have an answer to it. So again. The core argument that terfs are fascists is:
To that end, Butler does a good job of laying out that the anti-trans movement ultimately is about strengthening government oversight — restricting access to medical care and generally seeking to ban LGBTQ+ people from the public sphere, which fits pretty neatly into just about every standard definition of fascism. That includes gender critical feminists, the self-professed “leftist” equivalent of the more extreme right-wing fundamentalists.
Which, again:
If you have a point, then instead of linking to the same article again or linking article that isn't about fascism, please make your point.
Why are you "Well, actually..."ing fascists? Who gains there?
who gains from making up a new definition of fascism? why do you want people to be ignorant?
know thy enemy.
I'm not nitpicking here, I'm not being pedantic, your article didn't even vaguely touch on what fascism is. Maybe the underlying article did, but I'm having trouble imagining what the point is.
Does it piss you off you spend all this effort flailing about defending fascists and I still tell you (correctly) you're wrong and spend a fraction of the effort?
where the fuck do you see me defednding fascists?
does it piss you off that you don't have any response to anything I've actually said? does it piss you off to discover that this publication you like just published a point it didn't understand at all? does it piss you off to see a person argue that we should attack terfs for being terfs and fascists for being fascists and not just assume that all bad people are the same kind of bad person?
is that why you're afraid to read any of my comments?
Having no time for a jackass in a month old thread dredging up his lack of reading comprehension and pathological need to defend fascists from true accusations of being fascists is very much different than being afraid.
You are correct that I am not reading your replies at this point, nor is anyone else.
stop saying that I'm defending fascists, asshole.
you didn't read any of my replies, and you kept accusing me of shit I'm not doing, because you are, in fact, not interested in defending your bullshit. Blaming me for that is sad.
also... I just found this thread today, how did that happen?
I'll stop saying it when you stop doing it.
Why are you advocating for the KKK?
show me a place where I implied that Fascists might not be complete pieces of shit. Show me one place.
You admitted to not reading my comments, you're nothing but a troll. This is serious. Go fuck yourself.
You sure are upset about this group of fascists being fascists.
Why are you so cut up about arguing in a thread no one is reading?
I'm upset that you're promoting the Westboro Baptist Church!
I'm upset that decent people are being tricked into a stupid opinion about bad people. Just because fascists are evil and terfs are evil doesn't mean we should be making up confused bullshit about them, we should make coherent arguments and insult them for what they actually are. Making fun of terfs for being fascists is not effective because intelligent people will see that they're not fascists, and then not understand the actual issues with terfs. This is doubly problematic if your argument that terfs are fascists is as superficial and weak as the Them article you posted. You'll alienate people that absolutely want to be on our side.
Why are you so cut up about arguing in a thread you're not reading?
Are you still typing?
Still caught up on a group of fascists needing you to tell people they aren't fascists, huh?
How's that working out for you?
I'll be here for as long as you keep defending Tucker Carlson.
I'm not doing this for the fascists. The fascists love it when people get confused about who they are.
I'm doing this for your benefit, and for the benefit of any other decent people reading. Decent people don't like being lied to, decent people don't benefit when you tell them that cake is a type of potato, decent people don't suddenly get smarter when you tell them that Rush Limbaugh is a Scientologist. Labels have meanings and degrading those meanings is not a progressive act.
That's how you spend your cis-ass time? Defending terfs from descriptions of fascism when they're fascist?
That would seem like a bad things to do for a group who doesn't need defending.
why are you using cis as a slur? that's so weird
I am using it as a descriptor of an out group member sticking his nose in a oppressed in group's business. It is apt.
you're weird
I've been accurately called worse.
Why
You're asking me to provide motivation for others' actions—calling me things—which I cannot do.