Forum:It would appear that it's actually quite patriotic to punch Nazis

< Index | Politics discussion

History hath spoken, thus it shall be!

Since it's the forum, let's have a rant

Vigilante justice-type violence, legitimized by the majority, and directed against specific people purely on the basis of their (admittedly shitty) opinions is not a valid function within democratic society. And as far as social attitudes are concerned, overt schadenfreude is rarely a stepping stone to anything remotely progressive. I mean, don't people remember what master Yoda said?!

"Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering."

Now, I'm certainly not saying we should tolerate intolerance — we shouldn't. I'm well aware of the paradox of tolerance (and I side squarely with Popper on this one). I'm making a point not merely on attitudes, but equally on pragmatism. On what actions we consider acceptable by our own standards (assuming that we could never be the baddies ourselves, even in theory).

Not forgetting that an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.

Not forgetting that what you do unto the least of my brethren, you do unto me.

Not forgetting that you treat others the way you want them to treat you in return.

I'm saying that you don't defend your ideals by giving them up. Your ideals are untouchable, if you stick to them. They can't ever be taken from you, but you can surrender them yourself.

And you certainly don't win at democracy by physically brutalizing your ideological opposition — and that's a fact which is not somehow relative to how bad the views of said opposition are.

Indeed, their views are bad because they don't adhere to democratic universal principles when it suits them. In fighting the monster, one must take care not to become the monster. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:48, 17 March 2017 (UTC)