[flagged]
> People who agree with my political ideology.
A woman of color that held heretical beliefs contrary to your orthodoxy would be no more welcome than anyone else.
It’s telling that you argue that your opponents are “people who want to silence, suppress and destroy anyone not part of the dominant group”, and then immediately turn around use that assertion to justify the necessity of silencing and suppressing those not part of your dominant group.
Not sure why one has to jump straight to fascists.
Shouldn't a truly diverse group of people always include people with views that you disagree with?
Otherwise we're defining a diverse group as 'looking diverse ' yet all thinking the same.
Obviously, todays fascism looks nothing like that of the modern era, just as todays leftists are different.
But it’s back, poisoning our democracies and pushing the world into a new hell. Putin is a neofascist. I could tell you which Americans are fascists, but you all get touchy when anyone brings it up.
There's fascists everywhere. They don't call themselves that, they don't organise under that label, and their views aren't particularly similar to historical fascism - but it's a serious threat! It's so powerful that they have to keep it a secret because they'll be cast out of polite society...
At least McCarthy actually found people spying for the USSR.
Why would they? Much of our current mythology is based around slaughtering fascists in WW2. Why would anyone identify with that?
> their views aren't particularly similar to historical fascism
Hence the appellation of neofascism. There is a direct thread of political genealogy from the alt-right to the OG fascists, through the European Nouvelle Droite (inspired by Mussolini) and including figures like Steve Bannon who used to push the British BNP: a legitimately neofascist party. He also was buddy with Dugin for a while: a confirmed neofascist.
Read some fucking history and get stuck into the thought and theories of the far right if you want to play this game son.
> it's a serious threat!
Finally, we can agree! Look at the escalating far right violence in the US and Canada, and the erosion of the open society in Europe, and the current actions of Russia and China.
And instead of that, we should recognize that most people just want to do work at their workplace, have friends, and live their life, and are not apart of any neo nazi groups that are going to target minorities at the drop of the hat.
Most people, are just regular normal individuals, who are not engaging in horrible actions or attacks against others, and we do not need to be on a witch hunt to find the secret nazis that you think are hiding just around the corner.
But of course you knew you were caught in an embarrassing error, because you edited you comment to remove the fact that you called nazis socialists.
If you're willing to hear a counterpoint: I disagree wholeheartedly with your worldview, and yet I support your right to express your views. See, I'm not looking to "silence", "suppress", or "destroy" you, even though I disagree with you. Please make a mental note that people like me exist and not everybody who disagrees with you is a fascist.
If you think holding views like that is OK, you walk, talk and quack like a fascist.
That's a nice motte-and-bailey lumping together "should be alive" and "have certain rights". The former is a very specific kind of extreme biggot, and the latter can mean almost anything. You know, words have actual meanings and not everybody who disagrees with you is a fascist. You can look up the definition of the word "fascist" in a dictionary. The definition is a lot narrower than you think. A religious person who opposes abortion is not a fascist. An athlete who opposes trans womens' rights to compete in womens' competitions is not a fascist.
I’d call them a theocrat, but lets not forget the close ties between fascism and the church/new political-religious movements in Germany and Italy.
> An athlete who opposes trans womens' rights to compete in womens' competitions is not a fascist.
This one is nuanced because transgender folks being allowed to exist openly is still fairly recent, and openly in sports is more novel still. There are fascists in that camp for sure, but also a lot of reasoned debate needed to work out the cultural niche for trans people in this area. Unfortunately the left will seek to stop any debate, and fascists will poison the debate until trans people are bludgeoned into silence once more.
Or better, let's.
Because what you're doing is just jumbling shit up together so words lose all meaning.
AND, most people (you'd accuse of thinking the view is ok to hold) don't think these views *are* ok to hold, but are caught in a purposefully wide net.
Like, often we hear that: * proposition 8 was fascist * brendan eich is a fascist because he donated to it * supporting brendan eich is fascist
I agree with marriage equality. (it is actually good conservatism, even!) But I disagree that prop 8 was fascist (and according to some that probably makes me a fascist as well)