Anonymous #3 1w

like there’s “bad views” and “literal nazism” the scale matters lol

11

Anonymous #3 1w

Everyone thinks their perspective is valid and disregarding someone’s without understanding is how people become extremists

1

Anonymous OP 1w

I agree that It’d do a lot to try to empathize with people who get pulled into extremist groups but we can’t and shouldn’t entertain the possibility that maybe nazism isn’t so bad after all. You gotta be clear that some things aren’t negotiable

11

Anonymous #2 1w

Giving head to destiny

6

Anonymous #5 1w

that blows

10

Anonymous #3 1w

OOP here, I was just about to say this lol

9

Anonymous OP 1w

well we’re currently talking about people who are already extremists but regardless some things i’m not gonna debate. people should know certain views are absolutely unacceptable and giving them any time of day can be validating to those unacceptable views

14

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

The EU is doing that by blocking election results in countries that elect far right governments. if there are issues that cause far right movements to gain momentum and support you need to address the issues being discussed instead of telling them their concerns are irrelevant

1

Anonymous #3 1w

It’s like telling someone in pain that they’re imagining it

1

Anonymous OP 1w

if someone is like “i’m in pain :(“ and because it it they start punching people because of it i’m not gonna sit them down and be like aw why are you in pain i’m gonna be like wtf stop punching people

3

Anonymous OP 1w

I agree in theory but to be fair some popular concerns are indeed irreverent and should be treated as such. I mean look at the American far right and their concerns around immigration. Their politicians claim that illegal immigrants make the country more dangerous and that they eat up social security benefits. Both are pretty obvious lies, so those concerns are not super relevant because the issue isn’t actually a real issue.

4

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

Far right governments usually take real issues (crime and poor funding for social security) and make them out to be because of something that really has little to do with the actual issue. If you’re going to build a party around dishonesty I think it’s fair to discourage that. Especially when it’s fueled by rabbid nationalism and racism.

3

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

It’s tough though because the European approach will likely only make the people who believe those lies more entrenched. However when nothing is done then large swaths of the population start to believe the lies like what’s happened here. The solution is probably a more robust multi party system but idk what that’d look like exactly

6

Anonymous #3 1w

Most neo Nazis aren’t out there hitting people, they’re people who can’t find jobs, can’t afford homes, and look for someone that makes them feel heard. People see their neighbors struggling and ask why Israel gets billions of dollars, people ask why our department of homeland security’s Twitter is based in Tel Aviv and there isn’t someone on the left asking those same questions

-1

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

You have a point but if the roles were reversed I’m sure you would not have nice things to say about international organizations blocking left leaning governments from being elected

-1

Anonymous OP 1w

Well if we wanna try to be super fair to both sides, where do we see far left movements that are built around lies and designed to make the most vulnerable members of a given society the scapegoats for everything?

5

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

Zimbabwe, their government took a lot of their white minority’s farm land and redistributed it to political allies of the previous president

-1

Anonymous OP 1w

its a metaphor babe. the response to their pain is the adoption of views that hurt others. your pain doesn’t give you an excuse to be harmful to minorities lmao

7

Anonymous #2 1w

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

3

Anonymous OP 1w

Do you even believe that argument yourself? White Zimbabweans only have the land they have today because their ancestors stole the countries most valuable land and forced native people onto unproductive lands. Corrections of past wrongs, even somewhat clumsy corrections, have essentially nothing in common with far right policies which use legitimately vulnerable minorities as scapegoats. Just not an honest argument

6

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

If they distributed it evenly I would say yes but the farm land was given to politicians who didn’t know how to run farms which destroyed Zimbabwe’s agriculture industry. Also why is it okay to say white people are the cause of a county’s problems but not anyone else?

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Idk I just don’t think it should be that shocking that a country that didn’t manage to escape from colonialism until relatively recently hasn’t managed to get everything working smoothly yet. I agree it could’ve been done better but I don’t think that’s a super meaningful criticism given what they’re working with.

5

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

If the citizens hadn’t been forced out of positions of control of their nations major industries then they’d probably have a better idea of how to run them once the colonization was over.

6

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

Given that Singapore exists I have little sympathy for former colonies that can’t get their act together, Zimbabwe has had 45 years and started out as one of the richest countries in Africa

0

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

Because history matters. White settlers literally invaded the country and forced people off their lands and into positions of subjugation. Some of those settlers had kids and gave their kids all the power and wealth that they had stolen. It’s only right that some of that power and wealth get returned to its rightful owners. You can directly tie fault to these colonizers who happen to be white in this case.

3

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

And so their descendants who had no part in the invasion should be stripped of their land and persecuted by the government?

0

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

However the scapegoats of the maga extremists are illegal immigrants who are blamed for problems that they have nothing to do with. They make the county safer per capita, not more dangerous. They pay more into social security than they take out. That’s why they’re scapegoats and white South Africans / Zimbabweans are not.

6

Anonymous OP 1w

I think you might be underestimating the long lasting damage that colonization and an extraction based economy has on a country and its people. We are in no position to judge

10

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

The United States, Australia, Singapore, Hong Kong, New Zeland, and Canada were are former British colonies, just like Zimbabwe

1

Anonymous OP 1w

And yes absolutely they should be stripped of some land. How would anything else make sense? And how would someone who’s a white descendant of those colonizers who cares about the country not support that? You’re telling me you’d be fine sitting on top of the best farm land in the country while others starve just because your dad stole it and now you’re the lucky son who gets the spoils?

7

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

Isn’t that what we’re doing in the US? Are we all chopping at the bit to give land back to native Americans?

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Seems like a bit of whataboutism but there are key differences and I’ll be happy to name them. 1. The time gap between theft of lands and today is so large that It’d be impossible to return lands in a meaningful way. Who specifically do you give it to and where do you find them? Are they still around?

6

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

2. We’ve so thoroughly wiped out the native population that returning all stolen land to the handful of tribes that are still around would be entirely impractical. How do so few people manage such expanses of land? Where do all the non native Americans go?

5

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

I say it’s whataboutism because these two cases do both deal with stolen land but the situations are so obviously different that it’s sort of common sense that the solutions shouldn’t be and can’t be the same. The existence of a thorny American problem that absolutely requires more action doesn’t mean that the obvious solution for recently stolen land in Zimbabwe shouldn’t be pursued.

6

Anonymous fuuuckyikyak 1w

But also yes, I think we should be proud to help return land to native Americans if we can. I’m not a land owner myself but the entities that own the majority of land in the us should give some back and be proud to do so. If I’m ever in the position of owning land where I could return something meaningful to native tribes I’d like to do so.

5