The philosophical architects of liberalism made an exception for savages, people too backwards to appreciate liberty. Socialism made exceptions for the bourgeois, people too attached to their ownership of the means of production to be beyond saving. Conservatism is built upon the idea that some people are better than others.

There’s always an exception. And somehow, that exception always becomes the norm, we enter into a state of exception. There’s savages everywhere! The bourgeois control everything! Equality! It’s time to kill people.

In no uncertain terms, fuck that no. If people believe asinine things, they (as a person, not as a holder of asinine beliefs) should be respected nonetheless. Classic Aristotle quote:

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it

Refusing to entertain, "respect’, or consider beliefs that you think are astoundingly stupid and wrong is basically an internal admission of being intellectually weak or a coward. Take your pick. Differences in how people see the world exist and that doesn’t automatically preclude collaboration and cooperation. In fact, it makes finding the best path to some goal far less likely to end in ruin.

From here:

If we’re going to engage in the deliberative model, we’d have to begin by rejecting that notion that only our position is legitimate; we’d have to value the inclusion of diverse points of view. The deliberative model says that we should take on the extraordinarily difficult task of arguing together, looking for policies that make everyone at least a little unhappy, but that are in the long-term best interest of everyone, or, at the very least, the long-term better interest of everyone.

That is, it’s in our collective best interest to respect everyone without exception. I suppose it’s hard if you’re just intellectual weak, but don’t choose to be a coward. Respect other people.

And if you’re like, “Well, what about the interests of Nazis?!”, then read the second sentence of the title. But if you think that means appeasing them, then read the article linked by the word ‘here’ above.

Edit: This was a really useful exercise. Thanks, y’all!

  • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’ll go a step farther. Respect should be the default stance when meeting someone.

    But …

    If someone shows disrespect from the get-go (and that includes wearing Nazi paraphernalia or other such hate symbols), fuck 'em in the ear with a rusty, spiked dildo.

      • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’m not going to be courteous with people who are screaming for my wife’s and son’s blood. Sorry. I’m sure that makes me a bad person, but someone doing that isn’t going to get courtesy from me. They’re going to get … let’s call it “extreme discourtesy” and leave it at that.

        • andyburke@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I’m not sure who you’re arguing with. I was trying to make sure people aren’t handing out respect and trust willy nilly.

          I guess I need to clarify that you give courtesy until and unless someone gives you an obvious reason not to. I thought that would be assumed and understood, guess that’s on me.