Paradox of Tolerance Philosopher Karl Popper described the paradox of tolerance as the seemingly counterintuitive idea that “in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.” Essentially, if a so-called tolerant society permits the existence of intolerant philosophies, it is no longer tolerant.
The paradox says nothing about the ethics of using violence to achieve your ends. You’ve rest of the fucking owl’d them and name dropping Popper doesn’t hide that. Even the word intolerant is ambiguous and you’re using it to do a bait and switch.
They’re arguing that violent means against peaceful people is unethical. Their intolerance: words. Your intolerant response: violence. That’s what they’re asking you to address.
Countless fascists that went on to commit horrific acts of violence achieved power by peaceful means. We know that’s their end goal regardless of how “polite” and “peaceful” they are at the moment.
If you know someone is going to punch you it’s stupid to wait for them to take a swing before you hit them first. A Nazi’s mere existence is a threat of violence.
Some fascist-like groups do directly use violence (proud boys, patriot prayer, etc). Other groups rely on systemic violence implemented through law and stochastic terrorism to achieve their goals. Memes aside, it’s not very smart or helpful to engage in violence when it can’t be defended in court as self-defense. Violence does not change people’s minds; if anything, it probably cements their beliefs further.
Progress has always been bought with blood, violence is the only motivator that is actually universally respected, and these Nazis don’t have the same distaste for violence you do. If they reach certain numbers they begin using violence to try and control politics. That has to be actively discouraged to minimize violence, which means people with certain tendencies have to motivated to not be Nazis. The only universally respected motivator is violence, the threat of force is how all governments in the world maintain order. Less violence is needed to prevent the spread of Nazi beliefs than would be created by Nazi beliefs unchecked.
This modern idea that there is no such thing as moral violence is a lie and a tactic. Ignore it and forget it. Violence is a tool. Misusing it is evil. Using it properly, it kills evils.
If you read my other comments further down, you see why violence doesn’t actually convert Nazis, but just antagonise them.
You scared of them getting mad? What then, will you ask pretty please to stop their violence? Or do you seriously think they would listen to any rational explanation of what is wright or wrong?
Pls do correct me, but you sound like a close relative of mine, she’s really really afraid of violence. Most people don’t want to lose their ordinary life, but at the same time there’s not always a nice choice between the nazi and anti-nazis
I’d love to think all the people who seriously think killing Nazis in peacetime is good are trolls, but there are too many of them, so it seems we all actually believe what we’re saying.
This is what happens when kids grow up in schools where they get suspended for defending themselves from bullies and not just taking it quietly.
Read my comments further down, expressing a desire to kill Nazis doesn’t even work, it just antagonises them further. And Nazis are just ordinary people who got roped into a toxic ideology, they need help, not being antagonised.
And Nazis are just ordinary people who got roped into a toxic ideology
Hard disagree bub, there are definitely some people out there that revel in white supremacy, there is not a tortured victim behind every nazi. Well, maybe there is, literally, but they certainly aren’t the same person.
they need help, not being antagonised.
Perhaps, but help does not mean always using kids gloves on them.
Call me old fashioned but I’d rather want to beat the teeth out of a Nazi than be a Nazi.
So? that’s a personal preference. And I would probably amend my comment slightly and say that you are slightly better than a Nazi, even if you kill Nazis, as it is killing for a belief that is a choice, rather than race which is not.
But it is still bad and ineffectual, as killing them paradoxically increases their numbers, as they feel more threatened, have more children, indoctrinate them in Nazism - not violent methods such as argument are simply more effective.
actually it makes you much better than the nazis. nazis all support letting other nazis live.
That is a cartoonishly blatant attempt at manipulating other people’s sense of morals and it’s not going to work. You’ll find no quarter here.
Yes, and? Do you think everyone who subscribes to Nazism has stubbed the toe of a single person, let alone kill someone, let alone commit genocide? Most of them also only want to kill people, and violence is not solved with more violence. That just leads to a warring and unstable society,and an escalation of levels of violence. This can be avoided if you use non violent methods, like those mentioned in my other comment.
The allies were defending people. Besides that, they did many immoral things, such as killing deserters of their own side. If you hurt Nazis out of spite when they are not posing a threat to yours or other’s lives, then that is not justified.
You’re out here undermining the actions of Allies to defend Nazis and you don’t see a problem with your behavior.
Nazism is a caustic, violent, hateful ideology that is intentionally and purposefully threatening by its very nature. There is no such thing as a Nazi that doesn’t pose a threat.
“If you hurt Nazis out of spite when they are not posing a threat to yours or other’s lives, then that is not justified.”
Correct.
But nazis are, by definition, a threat to other’s lives, so violence against them is always justified.
Could you inform me as to when, exactly, someone whose ideology is based around the sudden and unsupported overthrow of legitimate government through a mixture of public chilling violence and abuse of democratic institutions, in favor of a regime that worships death and war, and believes undesirables should be exterminated on an industrial scale, is NOT a threat to mine or others’ lives?
Punching Nazis is unacceptable because we outsource our violence to the government, and democratic governments must be careful about applying violence to opinions if they wish to retain legitimacy. Not because Nazis aren’t 100% deserving of a beat-down.
Letting a Nazi live is immoral. Don’t ever try to justify their ideology and paint it as okay to be left alone.
