• Tedesche@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t want to strip people of human rights under any circumstances.

    Then I’m not sure what we’re arguing about anymore. My objection was to denying people their basic human rights, not civil rights.

    But your idea about separating us from them reminds me of the paradox of tolerance that is often cited around left leaning Fediverse communities. What do you think about this?

    Karl Popper was simply saying that if you never stand up to intolerant people, they will eventually steamroll the tolerant and dissolve the tolerant society they grew out of. It’s like a pacifist who refuses to defend themselves against physical assault. But I’ve seen plenty of well-meaning people on both Reddit and Lemmy misusing this concept to promote physically assaulting KKK members who are simply protesting, and therein lies the danger of what I’m talking about. Those people have now crossed the line into unjustified intolerance, and by their own logic other people should come kick their asses. And then another group should come and attack them. And so on and so forth.

    Generally speaking, tolerance of ideas and speech is a good thing–even reprehensible instances. Likewise, intolerance of violence that isn’t done in either self-defense or enforcement of the law is also a good thing (and even those can go too far, obviously). But when we start locking people up for simply expressing intolerant views, we create a chilling effect on the marketplace of ideas that can (and usually does) result in authoritarian ideologues taking over anyway. No one thinks intolerant extremists can come from their corner, because too many people have a poor understanding of human psychology.