I don’t dehumanize anybody. I just correctly recognize the threat that bigotry poses to society, especially if allowed to grow and gain power. That threat is very much human and we can never allow ourselves to forget that. Evil tends to be very banal.
In this thread you seem to be, because I’m the only party criticizing it. And if you had read what I wrote that should be pretty clear to you.
I just correctly recognize the threat that bigotry poses to society, especially if allowed to grow and gain power.
Not in this thread. Maybe you generally do, but I don’t see any shred of elaboration on that here.
That threat is very much human and we can never allow ourselves to forget that.
Like dehumanizing is a very (negative) human trait. Which I layed out and critisized in detail in my comment you opted not to read after the first line.
Evil tends to be very banal.
As in “Nazis are not humans” or “violence against Nazis is OK”? Spoiler alert: That’s dehumanization in action. And that’s what I’m criticizing.
Silly me, I forgot that truth and well refined and argued morals require majorities. Wait a second, that means the Nazis were right after all, because they were the elected majority from 1933 and onwards. Turkey was also right when they committed the Armenian genocide. This changes everything! Talking to you is so enlightening!
Not.
I’ll file your vile morals under youthful ignorance. I wish you could hear what you say through my ears. I hope that you refine and revise your morals over time and, maybe, in ten years or so, look back at what you’ve written and cringe.
Silly me, I forgot that truth and well refined and argued morals require majorities.[…]
I did not say anything about majorities. I said consider the possibility that you are wrong, because clearly you don’t spend enough time doing that.
I’ll file your vile morals under youthful ignorance. I wish you could hear what you say through my ears. I hope that you refine and revise your morals over time and, maybe, in ten years or so, look back at what you’ve written and cringe.
Instead of actually rebuking anything, you just make up a random reason to ignore it and assure yourself it must be the case. Funnily enough though, ten years ago I would have agreed with you on this topic.
Nazi colloquially includes neonazi. You’re being incredibly weird about this.
You seem to be part of the people who weirdly rationalize dehumanizing humans and on top of that water down language beyond usability.
I don’t dehumanize anybody. I just correctly recognize the threat that bigotry poses to society, especially if allowed to grow and gain power. That threat is very much human and we can never allow ourselves to forget that. Evil tends to be very banal.
In this thread you seem to be, because I’m the only party criticizing it. And if you had read what I wrote that should be pretty clear to you.
Not in this thread. Maybe you generally do, but I don’t see any shred of elaboration on that here.
Like dehumanizing is a very (negative) human trait. Which I layed out and critisized in detail in my comment you opted not to read after the first line.
As in “Nazis are not humans” or “violence against Nazis is OK”? Spoiler alert: That’s dehumanization in action. And that’s what I’m criticizing.
Consider that you might be in the wrong, then.
I elaborated on the dangers here.
Yes.
Silly me, I forgot that truth and well refined and argued morals require majorities. Wait a second, that means the Nazis were right after all, because they were the elected majority from 1933 and onwards. Turkey was also right when they committed the Armenian genocide. This changes everything! Talking to you is so enlightening! Not.
As I said: Not in this thread.
I’ll file your vile morals under youthful ignorance. I wish you could hear what you say through my ears. I hope that you refine and revise your morals over time and, maybe, in ten years or so, look back at what you’ve written and cringe.
I did not say anything about majorities. I said consider the possibility that you are wrong, because clearly you don’t spend enough time doing that.
Instead of actually rebuking anything, you just make up a random reason to ignore it and assure yourself it must be the case. Funnily enough though, ten years ago I would have agreed with you on this topic.