Conservative activist, Charlie Kirk, has been shot and killed at University

[Emerald]

4 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Making fascism your enemy gives fascism precisely what it needs to fester and grow: Resistance, conflict.

 

Fascism never was your enemy, humanity was. You were too late to recognize it, and now it might be too late to stop it. Most likely, your actions now will serve to accelerate the process rather than prevent it. That is the sad reality.

Don't strawman my point. I never said Fascism is my enemy... nor did I say anything about harming Fascists or anything like that.

You're just projecting that onto what I'm saying because I'm advocating for simply calling Fascism what it is.

I said that Fascism should be called Fascism without pussy-footing around and muddying the waters. That's all.

It's important to call a thing what it is so that we're actually clear about what we're dealing with.

But, as with any harmful action, the deeper human vulnerabilities that cause people to behave this way should always be looked at for root cause cures. Fascism is an expression of deeper human vulnerabilities that get mangled into something destructive and monstrous.

And you can only prevent Fascism by exploring those deeper vulnerabilities and building a world where people are less susceptible to having these vulnerabilities exploited.

[Emerald]

5 minutes ago, Scholar said:

It is muddying the water, because people externalize fascism. Calling it out will do nothing other than give the fascists what they need, which is conflict.

You are treating symptom rather than causes. And in this particular case, treating the symptoms worsens the causes. I don't understand why anyone believes that calling out fascism will do anything. 

If this is the propose solution, then you are lost. In that case, the only way forward is through the darkness.

You'd be correct if you were talking about how to address individuals that you're trying to de-radicalize or prevent from going down Fascist rabbit holes.

But the hour is later than you think. A critical mass has already formed, and the problem is upon us.

We currently have an active Fascist authoritarian takeover that's being actively attempted. And non-political people need to be aware of that... without the waters being muddied with weasel words that pussy-foot around the problem and minimize it.

It's important that people know when a hurricane is coming... so use the world hurricane when you tell them.

It's important that people know when Fascism is upon us... so use the world Fascism when you tell them.

[Scholar]

1 minute ago, Emerald said:

Don't strawman my point. I never said Fascism is my enemy... nor did I say anything about harming Fascists or anything like that.

You're just projecting that onto what I'm saying because I'm advocating for simply calling Fascism what it is.

I said that Fascism should be called Fascism without pussy-footing around and muddying the waters. That's all.

It's important to call a thing what it is so that we're actually clear about what we're dealing with.

But, as with any harmful action, the deeper human vulnerabilities that cause people to behave this way should always be looked at for root cause cures. Fascism is an expression of deeper human vulnerabilities that get mangled into something destructive and monstrous.

And you can only prevent Fascism by exploring those deeper vulnerabilities and building a world where people are less susceptible to having these vulnerabilities exploited.

You are misunderstanding. When I mean "enemy", I mean in particular identifying fascism as a problem and focusing on it as a problem. It's not the problem, it's the symptom.

You can advocate calling fascism fascism, but that does literally nothing. It alienates everyone from themselves, from recognizing their own evil, because we have created in culture in which only evil people are nazis. But nobody considers themselves evil, so using fascism as a label literally veils their evil, renders it invisible.

If we lived in a society in which everyone recognize the humanity of Adolf Hiter, then calling out fascisms might be effective. But in this world, I don't think it does anything other than further blindness and ignorance.

 

If you were to not muddy the waters, you would be calling every democracy on this planet fascistic, given what every society on this planet does to animals. It dominates entire subgroups of individuals, exterminates them, enslaves them, for the same underlying reasons the fascists did the same to those they considered subhuman, or the communists to those they considered class-traitors.

Focusing on fascism is a red herring.

[Scholar]

2 minutes ago, Emerald said:

You'd be correct if you were talking about how to address individuals that you're trying to de-radicalize or prevent from going down Fascist rabbit holes.

But the hour is later than you think. A critical mass has already formed, and the problem is upon us.

We currently have an active Fascist authoritarian takeover that's being actively attempted. And non-political people need to be aware of that... without the waters being muddied with weasel words that pussy-foot around the problem and minimize it.

It's important that people know when a hurricane is coming... so use the world hurricane when you tell them.

It's important that people know when Fascism is upon us... so use the world Fascism when you tell them.

Half your country supports Donald Trump, the magnitude of the problem goes beyond just galvanizing your side to vote. But I doubt that using words like fascism is effectie to convince inactive moderates to act against what is happening. The term fascism has sadly been overused by the left in the past decade, like the word racist. Nobody takes it seriously anymore, it simply has no weight to it, people will dismiss you if you apply it even if you are accurate.

If the facts of what Donald Trump is doing is not sufficient to get people on your side, calling it fascism will not change that fact.

[MightyMind]

@Scholar

2 hours ago, Scholar said:

You have to recognize that comparing extreme fringe intellectuals and the most radical elements of the non-liberal left (that liberals do reject anyways), to the mainstream of the right is simply silly.

Yes, the fringes on both sides are insane. If you want to compare the radical lefties, compare them to the radical righties, which are literal nazis and ethno-nationalists.

That's not the problem, crazy people exist on both sides. The issue is that the rights mainstream is absolutely insane. They are violent, engage in full blown authoritarianism and are calling for civil war, when right wing violence far exceeds left wing violence. You simply can't compare the two, this is 95% a right wing problem.

I'm not trying to compare them, I'm trying to illuminate there is more going on within "the left" than what the left realizes. And, both sides, "far right/far left" contribute to and escalate the situation; both sides in a way, call each other forth into formation. they play off of each other, and so we must address both sides consistently. This is why this conversation requires a thread of examples and elaboration. Again, my focus is NOT on making the case, that the left is worse than the right. 

Edited September 14 by MightyMind

[Emerald]

1 minute ago, Scholar said:

You are misunderstanding. When I mean "enemy", I mean in particular identifying fascism as a problem and focusing on it as a problem. It's not the problem, it's the symptom.

You can advocate calling fascism fascism, but that does literally nothing. It alienates everyone from themselves, from recognizing their own evil, because we have created in culture in which only evil people are nazis. But nobody considers themselves evil, so using fascism as a label literally veils their evil, renders it invisible.

If we lived in a society in which everyone recognize the humanity of Adolf Hiter, then calling out fascisms might be effective. But in this world, I don't think it does anything other than further blindness and ignorance.

 

If you were to not muddy the waters, you would be calling every democracy on this planet fascistic, given what every society on this planet does to animals. It dominates entire subgroups of individuals, exterminates them, enslaves them, for the same underlying reasons the fascists did the same to those they considered subhuman, or the communists to those they considered class-traitors.

Focusing on fascism is a red herring.

I understand that nobody considers themselves evil. And 100%... people are absolutely Fascist-minded when they see themselves as superior to animals such that we feel we can exploit them for pleasure. And it's important to help people recognize this in other contexts.

But that doesn't mean that we should lie and handle people with kid gloves when it comes to discussing important political matters.

Calling Fascism, 'Fascism' is about telling the truth about the situation at hand. And it raises the alarm for people in a much-needed way. It also discourages people from getting sucked into Fascism because they'd have a clearer sense of what they're getting into before they get in too deep.

But it's also important to educate people on the fact that Fascists are not rare evil-doers. They are everyday people. And no one is exempt from being sucked into Fascism.

So, I don't recommend muddying the waters about the reality... Fascist authoritarianism is upon us. And anyone who supports it is functionally a Fascist and will be remembered as such in history.

But also, Fascists are just your next-door neighbor. And any society can go Fascist. And when a society goes Fascist, 30% of people will be Fascist, 60% will enable Fascism, and 10% will fight back. And ANY individual can fall into any one of those categories.

So, the solution to uncomfortable truths is not to hide them and rationalize them away... but to add more truth to clarify.

 

[Daniel Balan]

38 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Everyone who supports that or who creates propaganda that helps with that is functionally a Fascist.

It's not about one's abstract ideology. It's about what they're actively functionally supporting.

Is Gavin Newsom also a fascist? Acording to the logic stated above he is a fascist for having a podcast with a fascist. 

This is pathetic and silly on levels beyond my ability of comprehension.

No wonder leftists and democrats lose all elections. 

Every leftist influencer has the blood of Charlie Kirk on their hands. When MAGA calls a leftist a communist it implies someone who wants to take your property, but when the leftists call someone like Kirk a fascist it implies someone whose political ideology is responsible for the killing of 60 million people during WW2 and unimaginable horrors. Calling someone fascist or nazi should lead to serious jail time for anyone who uses this label for someone. 

Leftists seem really goofy and stupid by calling a Christian Conservative Nationalist a fascist. A fascist is someone who advocates for empire, for the rebirth of the nation via military conquest & territorial expansion, for extreme nationalism, for extreme obedience to religion and tradition, for dictatorship, for nationalization of all the means of productions that will now produce for the revival of the nation, for the collective, not the individual. Only one individual in the world right now could be legitimately called a fascist and that is Putin.

While Charlie was just a voice that advocated for more tradition and religion and less woke ideology. 

Leftists are so weak and pathetic that they can't defeat a man using ideas and arguments therefore they go and kill the voices they can't outwit in a political debate. Leftists are such losers. 

If you are a man go ahead and debate a conservative using civil language, not bullets that have written on them "Fascist catch". 

Every leftist influencer should be sent to live few years in Chechnya, Russia to see how life really is. Those spoiled brats don't even know what a fascist is. Leftists need to touch grass ASAP. 

 

 

Edited September 15 by Daniel Balan

[Scholar]

Just now, Emerald said:

I understand that nobody considers themselves evil. And 100%... people are absolutely Fascist-minded when they see themselves as superior to animals such that we feel we can exploit them for pleasure. And it's important to help people recognize this in other contexts.

But that doesn't mean that we should lie and handle people with kid gloves when it comes to discussing important political matters.

Calling Fascism, 'Fascism' is about telling the truth about the situation at hand. And it raises the alarm for people in a much-needed way. It also discourages people from getting sucked into Fascism because they'd have a clearer sense of what they're getting into before they get in too deep.

But it's also important to educate people on the fact that Fascists are not rare evil-doers. They are everyday people. And no one is exempt from being sucked into Fascism.

So, I don't recommend muddying the waters about the reality... Fascist authoritarianism is upon us. And anyone who supports it is functionally a Fascist and will be remembered as such in history.

But also, Fascists are just your next-door neighbor. And any society can go Fascist. And when a society goes Fascist, 30% of people will be Fascist, 60% will enable Fascism, and 10% will fight back. And ANY individual can fall into any one of those categories.

So, the solution to uncomfortable truths is not to hide them and rationalize them away... but to add more truth to clarify.

 

I don't understand what this means "handle people with kid gloves". This is a serious matter Emerald, it's not a game.

In such circumstances we need to have the maturity to do what we believe to be effective, not what makes us feel good. Telling the truth isn't some sort of virtue that at all points must take precedent.

 

But we seem to have empirical disagreements. I believe using terms like fascisms actively makes it less likely that individuals alarms are raised. I think it does the opposite of preventing people from getting sucked into fascism because they begin misidentifying the cause of fascism. The term fascism isn't even really accurate. What we are describing here is something far more fundamental to the human condition, something that was present in communists, fascists, feudalists and even capitalists. Fascism was just one expression of this aspect, and precisely because todays form looks different from historical fascism, it will make people dismiss your critique. They lack the understand to recognize what you are truly referencing.

 

You can't do all of this in an informational environment in which fascists are considered the worst thing that exists. That's just how people perceive fascists. So, before using this lable could ever be effective, you would have to change how people understand fascism in the first place.

[Emerald]

10 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Half your country supports Donald Trump, the magnitude of the problem goes beyond just galvanizing your side to vote. But I doubt that using words like fascism is effectie to convince inactive moderates to act against what is happening. The term fascism has sadly been overused by the left in the past decade, like the word racist. Nobody takes it seriously anymore, it simply has no weight to it, people will dismiss you if you apply it even if you are accurate.

If the facts of what Donald Trump is doing is not sufficient to get people on your side, calling it fascism will not change that fact.

It's not about getting people to vote at all... as voting is not how we fight against an authoritarian regime.

It's about un-muddying the waters so that people aren't frogs in boiling water... rendered complacent by muddy labels and words.

When there's a fire, you should shout "Fire!"... and not "It's a little bit hot in here!"

Also, I'm mostly trying to help people in this specific forum context stop muddying the waters and just call a thing what it is. It seems like people are afraid to accurately label the phenomenon we're dealing with and doing mental gymnastics to avoid the reality in front of their faces.

But that's why (over the years) it's been, "Nah! They'll never do that!" and then they do that.

And "Okay they did that, but they'l never do that!" but then they do that also.

And again it's like "Okay, they did that and than. But certainly they'll never do that!" but then they do that too.

And on and on and on...

People just keep thinking they've hit the bottom and that things can't get any more Fascist than they already are. But then, it just keeps going.

Honestly, we already have concentration camps for immigrants and a demagogue who wants to stay in power so many people on this forum, "How can we be sure this is actually Fascism?"

So, let's just be adults and call the thing what it is already. It's been 10 years, and it was pretty obvious the whole time.

[Emerald]

7 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I don't understand what this means "handle people with kid gloves". This is a serious matter Emerald, it's not a game.

It's absolutely 100% a serious matter and not a game.

My husband is an immigrant, and he's very vulnerable to this Fascist regime despite being married to me and having his Green Card. And of course, women will continue to have fewer and fewer rights if Fascists succeed at taking over.

This is not a game... AT ALL!

That's exactly why we need to call Fascism what it is. Otherwise people will be sitting ducks.

[Daniel Balan]

6 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

Is Gavin Newsom also a fascist? Acording to the logic stated above he is a fascist for having a podcast with a fascist. 

This is pathetic and silly on levels beyond my ability of comprehension.

No wonder leftists and democrats lose all elections. 

Every leftist influencer has the blood of Charlie Kirk on their hands. When MAGA calls a leftist a communist it implies someone who wants to take your property, but when the leftists call someone like Kirk a fascist it implies someone whose political ideology is responsible for the killing of 60 million people during WW2 and unimaginable horrors. Calling someone fascist or nazi should lead to serious jail time for anyone who uses this label for someone. 

Leftists seem really goofy and stupid by calling a Christian Conservative Nationalist a fascist. A fascist is someone who advocates for empire, for the rebirth of the nation via military conquest & territorial expansion, for extreme nationalism, for extreme obedience to religion and tradition, for dictatorship, for nationalization of all the means of productions that will now produce for the revival of the nation, for the collective, not the individual. Only one individual in the world right now could be legitimately called a fascist and that is Putin.

While Charlie was just a voice that advocated for more tradition and religion and less woke ideology. 

Leftists are so weak and pathetic that they can't defeat a man using ideas and arguments therefore they go and kill the voices they can't outwit in a political debate. Leftists are such losers. 

If you are a man go ahead and debate a conservative using civil language, not bullets that have written on them "Fascist catch". 

Every leftist influencer should be sent to live few years in Chechnya, Russia to see how life really is. Those spoiled brats don't even know what a fascist is. Leftists need to touch grass ASAP. 

 

 

That garbage human that killed Charlie Kirk should've been in front of Charlie with a microphone in his hand, using his ideas and brain to debate Charlie one on one. Like a man! Prove to the whole crowd that Charlie's ideas are not good. But he couldn't. Like all the leftists in existence, they start crying the moment you debate them like a man. Charlie would've wiped the floor with him and make him look like a fool in front of everyone. So he decided to shoot him in cold blood. Only a castrated man could do such a thing. And honestly, leftists are castrated creatures. When they can't withstand you during a debate, they grab their sniper rifle. Losers! 

I didn't agree with Kirk's political discourse at all, but I admired how much of a man he was. He debated anyone, anywhere using civil and nice language. No name calling, no bullshit. A fine man, killed by an ideology which couldn't counter his arguments with words, only with bullets. Rest in peace!

[Emerald]

12 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

 

Once Trump got elected, Gavin Newsom came to the conclusion that buddying up with right-wingers would be good for his career.

So, yes. I'm quite consistent. He was willing to support the causes of Fascists if he thought it would help his career.

It would be similar if some liberal politician in the 1940s started buddying it up with Mussolini supporters.

Since then, he realized that he'd gain more political power by fighting Trump. But I still remember what he's willing to be in order to hold onto power.

[Scholar]

1 minute ago, Emerald said:

It's not about getting people to vote at all... as voting is not how we fight against an authoritarian regime.

It's about un-muddying the waters so that people aren't frogs in boiling water... rendered complacent by muddy labels and words.

When there's a fire, you should shout "Fire!"... and not "It's a little bit hot in here!"

Also, I'm mostly trying to help people in this specific forum context stop muddying the waters and just call a thing what it is. It seems like people are afraid to accurately label the phenomenon we're dealing with and doing mental gymnastics to avoid the reality in front of their faces.

But that's why (over the years) it's been, "Nah! They'll never do that!" and then they do that.

And "Okay they did that, but they'l never do that!" but then they do that also.

And again it's like "Okay, they did that and than. But certainly they'll never do that!" but then they do that too.

And on and on and on...

People just keep thinking they've hit the bottom and that things can't get any more Fascist than they already are. But then, it just keeps going.

Honestly, we already have concentration camps for immigrants and a demagogue who wants to stay in power so many people on this forum, "How can we be sure this is actually Fascism?"

So, let's just be adults and call the thing what it is already. It's been 10 years, and it was pretty obvious the whole time.

But this is precisely the problem. Think about what is happening here.

You said it yourself, Trump does fascists things and then people dismiss it. Genuinely ask yourself, trying to reflect on how other human beings operate: Do you believe that labelling what Trump is doing "fascism" and being adamant about it will change whatever the problem here is?

 

I just don't see how this is a rational response. If people see what Trump is doing and dismiss it, there is something far deeper wrong here that needs remedy that will not be resolved through point to the thing and labelling it fascism. If anything, this will likely cause more resistance in them.

 

I think there is a natural cognitive resistance here because, I think if we are honest, we realize this situation is more scary than it appears to be. The fact that people are this ignorant is profoundly concerning, and the idea that the fascist discussion will do anything to truly help the situation is almost delusional in light of the significance of the problem we are facing. This is a far deeper and more serious issue than the proposed solution is presuming.

Calling it what it is does nothing Emerald. This is what has to be realized. Just look at the reaction in here. This is pure desperation in the face of an existential threath. It's like trying to shoot rockets at a planet sized object that is hurling towards the earth. It makes you feel saver, but it's unlikely to do anything to impact the issue at hand.

 

[Emerald]

3 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Calling it what it is does nothing Emerald. 

That's where you're 100% wrong.

It's irresponsible not to.

[Hojo]

@Leo Gura ok the front page of reddit. So its face is radical the mods are radical.

Edited September 15 by Hojo

[Daniel Balan]

2 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Once Trump got elected, Gavin Newsom came to the conclusion that buddying up with right-wingers would be good for his career.

So, yes. I'm quite consistent. He was willing to support the causes of Fascists if he thought it would help his career.

It would be similar if some liberal politician in the 1940s started buddying it up with Mussolini supporters.

Since then, he realized that he'd gain more political power by fighting Trump. But I still remember what he's willing to be in order to hold onto power.

Please tell me that you were joking when you said that. Because if you weren't, then good luck defeating MAGA. If all the democrats think like you, I don't blame the American citizenry for voting Trump. If in your eyes Charlie Kirk and Gavin Newsom are fascists, I'm litteraly lost for words. My mind can't compute such a perspective.

[Leo Gura]

@Daniel Balan Interviewing a fascist does not make one a fascist.

[Jodistrict]

2 hours ago, r0ckyreed said:

This is false. Don’t spread fake news around. I had to look this up myself. Bill Maher did not turn to the right at all.

he's a snake trying to play both sides of the fence.   He is clever.  Very clever.  But he is not good.

[Emerald]

6 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

Please tell me that you were joking when you said that. Because if you weren't, then good luck defeating MAGA. If all the democrats think like you, I don't blame the American citizenry for voting Trump. If in your eyes Charlie Kirk and Gavin Newsom are fascists, I'm litteraly lost for words. My mind can't compute such a perspective.

People who support Fascist causes are functionally Fascists. Gavin Newsom going on those right wing podcasts showed me that he'd be willing to join ranks with Fascists if it would help his career.

Honestly, Gavin Newsom would probably support Hitler if he were a politician in 1940s Nazi, Germany. He is very calculated and politically savvy... he'll goose-step with he best of them, if that's what's en vogue.

And Charlie Kirk was obviously a Fascist... ideologically speaking and functionally.

I'm not personally going to defeat MAGA... nor will I destroy chances of defeating MAGA. I'm not that powerful in either direction.

There are two ways this ends...

1. People wake up to the threat of authoritarian Fascism enough en masse to resist the regime and its aims will fail. But people have to wake up.
2. Authoritarian Fascism will become the way of the land for a time and it will fall apart in a few years in ways that cause a lot of harm and chaos, and all those that were involved in the regime or supported the regime in any capacity will try to minimize their support.

[Emerald]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Daniel Balan Interviewing a fascist does not make one a fascist.

This statement in itself is true. But it depends on why and how the person is interviewing a Fascist.

But he wasn't just interviewing Fascists.

He was trying to ride the tides of the populace and associate himself with popular right-wingers because he thought it would be good for his career, when Trump got elected.

He assumed that his most powerful lane was to play patty-cake with Steve Bannon, Charlie Kirk, and the like.

He wasn't playing hardball with them or pushing back on them.