Another side issue is solidarity. If you are not aware there are a lot of counter-intel and infiltration going on. This backbiting where you are trying to declare every progressive wrong who uses the word Nazi to describe conservatives is exactly this type of action.
There isn’t any solidarity created in attacking allies because they have a disagreement.
Disagreement is important, it creates conversations where people are should be forced to rationally articulate why they believe what they believe. Shouting down disagreement and using cyberbullying tactics to drive off anyone who doesn’t 100% agree with the group is incredibly toxic and corrosive to any group. You can see several replies from people accusing me of being a Nazi and that kind of behavior is being rewarded, while a person with a good faith disagreement is shouted down.
Outside of your response, the vast majority of responses in this thread are low-effort, zero substance, social media meme replies. These are not people that appear have a firmly held belief in what they’re saying, they just know what meme is popular in their in-group and which opinions and people that they can act toxic towards with impunity.
We don’t need a party of ignorant people who simply know which opinions to parrot. We don’t need a movement of people who reflexively attack anyone who disagrees with them.
Any rational organization would be punishing the low effort and toxic comments. That isn’t what is happening here. On social media, a person is more rewarded for making hot takes that drive outrage than having a reasoned opinion that they can defend. That may be entertaining while you’re doomscrolling on the toilet, but it is a terrible political strategy.
I wasn’t confused about it, this isn’t my first day being a contrarian on the Internet :P
I agree that the people that respond are not going to change their minds, they’re the ones that couldn’t overcome the impulse to do the social media thing (or they’re bots).
I just assume that there are people who are reading and understand that this tactic feels wrong but may not know how to articulate what they’re observing. There are people who are still forming their opinions and trying to get a grasp on the situation in a grounded manner.
It’s important to recognize that there are different flavors of fascism than 1930s Germany and the elites who are currently seizing power in the US have different motivations and methods than the Nazi party. Opposing fascism in 2025 requires understanding how fascism works in the current political environment and that defeating fascism in a democratic society will require different methods than was used in the 1930s.
I agree with the sentiment of the people that I’m arguing with. I just think that their messaging is 1 dimensional and, while it can feel cathartic to write, doesn’t advance their position in any meaningful way outside of creating outrage.
There isn’t any solidarity created in attacking allies because they have a disagreement.
Disagreement is important, it creates conversations where people
areshould be forced to rationally articulate why they believe what they believe. Shouting down disagreement and using cyberbullying tactics to drive off anyone who doesn’t 100% agree with the group is incredibly toxic and corrosive to any group. You can see several replies from people accusing me of being a Nazi and that kind of behavior is being rewarded, while a person with a good faith disagreement is shouted down.Outside of your response, the vast majority of responses in this thread are low-effort, zero substance, social media meme replies. These are not people that appear have a firmly held belief in what they’re saying, they just know what meme is popular in their in-group and which opinions and people that they can act toxic towards with impunity.
We don’t need a party of ignorant people who simply know which opinions to parrot. We don’t need a movement of people who reflexively attack anyone who disagrees with them.
Any rational organization would be punishing the low effort and toxic comments. That isn’t what is happening here. On social media, a person is more rewarded for making hot takes that drive outrage than having a reasoned opinion that they can defend. That may be entertaining while you’re doomscrolling on the toilet, but it is a terrible political strategy.
Your not wrong at all, I was just pointing out why your posts are perceived the way they are.
I totally see where you are coming from, but I also see arguing semantics with the majority of people as a non-starter.
I wasn’t confused about it, this isn’t my first day being a contrarian on the Internet :P
I agree that the people that respond are not going to change their minds, they’re the ones that couldn’t overcome the impulse to do the social media thing (or they’re bots).
I just assume that there are people who are reading and understand that this tactic feels wrong but may not know how to articulate what they’re observing. There are people who are still forming their opinions and trying to get a grasp on the situation in a grounded manner.
It’s important to recognize that there are different flavors of fascism than 1930s Germany and the elites who are currently seizing power in the US have different motivations and methods than the Nazi party. Opposing fascism in 2025 requires understanding how fascism works in the current political environment and that defeating fascism in a democratic society will require different methods than was used in the 1930s.
I agree with the sentiment of the people that I’m arguing with. I just think that their messaging is 1 dimensional and, while it can feel cathartic to write, doesn’t advance their position in any meaningful way outside of creating outrage.