Re: Re:Public service announcement
Paradox -We the non-bigots want to freely discuss things, even when that offends other people, but we won't let you use our tolerance to hurt us, or curtail our freedoms, we will resist, by force if required.
Not sure why you think that's a paradox, unless it's projection. But it's also part of the problem. Non-bigots do want the ability to freely and rationally discuss things. Others may find that offensive and try to shut down debate, and curtail freedoms. But usually humans are pretty smart. If they find something is hurtful or offensive, one option is to ignore it rather than try to ban it. I don't like this, therefore you can't do that.. Which is not exactly tolerant. Then there's 'hurt'..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryJteQTPBlU
Which is admittedly painful to watch, but includes microagressions, jazz hands, incorrect use of gendered pronouns and general intolerance. So that makes life more complex, but to me doesn't seem to justify smacking people around the head with bike locks, or using improvised chemical weapons against the 'intolerant'.
I wonder why you feel the need to shorten the name. Does the term "AntiFa" seem easier to discredit?
Their actions make them easier to discredit. Plus if you do a quick search, you'll find plenty of Antifa branded merchandise for sale. Not all of it organic, and probably not licensed either, but I guess demonstrates how capitalism supports that movement.
Other flavours of bigoted bullshit are available..
Indeed..
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alt-right
Rather than concede the moral high ground to the left, the alt right turns the left's moralism on its head and makes it a badge of honor to be called "racist," "homophobic," and "sexist."
Like I said elsewhere, it's tribalism and weaponised language. Far-right or alt-right then becomes coding for someone who's racist, homophobic and sexist. But that's all part of the psychology of demonising and dehumanising political opponents, and trying to claim the moral high ground. So an interesting example of this comes from everyone's favorite bar-maid, Alexandria Ocasional-Cortex. Seen here-
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/28/us/migrant-shelters-ice-contracts-counties.html
Being comforted and distraught at the inhumanity of America's 'concentration camps'. Except-
https://www.rt.com/usa/462837-aoc-parking-lot-detention-center/
It was 'fake news'. So much so that Snopes officially debunked the fake, thus providing the denial needed to confirm a conspiracy*. AOC uses the term 'fake news' to try and deflect criticism a lot, but do you think it's 'alt-right' to point out that kind of dishonesty? Or right to try and supress anyone that tries to point it out.
But such is Google. If your views conflict with theirs, well, that's too bad. Despite Google and other anti-social media companies gatekeeping functions.
*For those on the alt-left, that was sarcasm. Mostly.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
