Here’s a pattern you’ve probably seen:
- Racists/nazi shows up and says racist/nazi things
- Get called out for it and/or banned
- They claim they are unfairly banned “for disagreeing.” They completely leave out the part about them being a racist nazi.
You know, that move. I’ve seen it more times than I can count and I bet you have too. They call disagreement with nazism “opinions you don’t like”, leaving out the nazism part. Any way of framing disagreements with them while subtracting out the actual content of what they say.
It’s so common that I think it deserves a word. I know there are generic descriptions: e.g. “being a troll”, but I think something specific to this particular behavior deserves its own word. That way it can just be identified and dismissed for what it is and not argued with.
Punching them in person helps their cause, and allows the to cry fowl. Counter protesting, and violence in self defence is a better rule of thumb imo.
I don’t know. It was effective for trash like Richard Spencer who has been punched, deplatformed and is now largely irrelevant.
I think the deplatforming was a lot more effective than the punch. I heard more about him after getting punched then ever before or after.
Yeah, I mean you’re probably right but watching him get KTFO was quite satisfying
Agreed, but justice boners are dangerous. That’s why we have cops idolizing the punisher. Violence is only justified when it has a tangible positive effect imo. I enjoy seeing justice get served as much as the next guy but retribution for retribution’s sake is not a good thing. Utilitarian justice FTW.
Let’s not exaggerate. I’m no boxing maven but in the video it looked like a glancing blow that did not even knock down the target individual. I admit I have watched the video a good few times. I don’t advocate violence.