As one insider told me (who is not me): ‘imagine an equally sexist name was given to, say, female pundits and journalists’ … what would the reaction be?’

With the amount of misandry omnipresent in mainstream media. I'm starting to question which way is up and which is down.

Wtf is this unhinged gaslighting that wouldn't even trick a two year old? You literally said:

All Republicans are Nazis.

All Nazis must hang.

Therefore, should all Republicans be hanged?

I don't know how to reach these people or whether they're reachable at all. Yes, my main motivation by a very long shot was to correct absurd levels of misinformation in a community where I believe most members care about not spreading misinformation.

What worries me is that so many people seem to be living in an echo bubble that's radicalizing them to hate people they shouldn't be hating.

So yes, there's a lot of not so great things about Jordan Peterson. But all things considered he's not that bad. And I haven't paid attention closely for the last few years, but I wouldn't be characterizing him as a piece of shit.

The author of the article is a worse piece of shit than Jordan Peterson. People who seem to take pleasure out of Jordan's suffering due to his Benzodiazepine addiction are even worse.

But, looking at some of Jordan's twitter comment, he's definitely a bit of an asshole. But 95% of people seem to be assholes when they go on twitter.

The only really bad thing about him is his political views. But even there, there seems to be less malice and less self serving talk than most right wingers (other than the apparent or effective grifting). But even the grifting, in my opinion, is not as bad as most people (both on the left and on the right). Still, right wing ideology is a very problematic from a liberal perspective (which is my perspective). But at the same time today's mainstream and increasingly radical left ideology is also problematic from a liberal perspective. Regardless, I still don't think that someone's anti-liberal social views necessarily makes them a piece of shit regardless of if they're on the left or on the right. But it does make it easy to become one.

Now I'm doing a triple reply but I think it needs to be said.

There's a huge difference between tolerating intolerance and tolerating the intolerant.

Right now I'm doing the best I can to be tolerant of you. But I will not tolerate your intolerance. It is utterly unacceptable.

Replying to your edit:

edit: I also won’t fall victim to the paradox of tolerance. Punching Nazis is a net good. Superman does it, after all.

You're literally "jokingly" advocating for GENOCIDE!! What is wrong with you? Can't you tell the difference between punching someone in the face, and murdering an entire population over a political disagreement?

And instead of at the very least qualifying your statement saying "It's a joke, obviously I don't mean this should be taken literally and I'm just venting without really noticing the full ramifications of what I'm saying". Or something to that effect. You just double down on defending your statement.

At least when the Moms of Liberty were accused of supporting the Hitler quote, the modified their news letter to be double extra clear that they were condemning the Hitler quote. You can't even do that much...

I'm not disputing any of that. I haven't looked into it, but it seems very believable that an extreme right wing group hates lgbt+ and is at least low-key racist.

What I'm disputing is the characterization of their use of a Hitler quote as being clearly in support of Nazism. When the context clearly indicates that they were comparing their political opponents to nazis, aka they condemning the quote.

But that's not my main point of contention with the community here. My main point of contention with the community here is that in this thread there is currently a comment jokingly calling for genocide with 27 upvotes and no condemnations.

At the very least Moms for Liberty had the goods sense to publish a correction to make the intent behind their Hitler was that they were condemning. Meanwhile, you guys seem to be doubling down on promoting genocide.

Your comment which kinda jockingly advocates for genocide is one of the top voted comments on this thread.

Personally, I think you should be ashamed of this. And of this community.

I propose that to help make things better, you should perhaps apologize.

I can barely tolerate the unhinged comments I find here. I don't think I would survive over there.

Is it too much to ask to have people try and be sensible. Show some kind of respect for the truth. And not try to set the whole world on fire?

And now you're accusing them of being Nazi's. But THEY know they're not Nazis (well those of them that aren't nazis think they're not nazis). So who are you trying to convince? Yourselves? Now they're worried because people are lying about them and what they want and then they'll just donate to the astroturfing organization that's protecting them from the unhinged lunatics accusing them of being nazis.

You need to fight on both fronts, you have to use a charitable approach to slow down grass roots recruiting. AND you attack the values and falsehoods behind the hidden agenda.

They have their public claims and they have their behind closed doors claims. You combat their public claims directly and proactively promote the counterarguments to their behind closed doors claims.

You also indict them for ACTUAL poor behavior that they've done.

This is the best source I could find for the original context for the Hitler quote. Sticking strictly to the context of that image, it's classic: Hitler did this thing that the government is doing, that's why we have to fight against it.

https://eu.indystar.com/story/news/2023/06/21/moms-for-liberty-hamilton-county-indiana-quotes-hitler-in-newsletter/70344659007/

I don't have the actual original before the yellow box was added, so I can't say if the yellow box was the only change. But now all you're doing by attacking them on this nothingburger of a Hitler quote, is you've given them ammunition to talk about how irrational and unreasonable the people opposing them are.

The accusation of ambitions similar to that of Hitler could be true, but your evidence doesn't support it at all. All you're doing is whipping up your side to an irrational fervor which will get noticed by the other side and then they'll do the same thing.

You're making things worse, not better.

I don't know. That's how I do advocacy, maybe it's ineffective. I think it works on the people where something can work and doesn't work on the people where nothing worse. This more unhinged kinda of advocacy is pushing away the people on whom it can work, helps turn the people on your side into lunatics and helps to turn people on the other side into even worse lunatics.

From the very few references to them I've seen, that's exactly what I assumed them to be.

That doesn't excuse the behavior I see in this thread. By not addressing their points from a charitable perspective, you're playing right into the astroturfer's hands.

If you have real evidence to present of their true agenda, then present it. Otherwise, fight their presented agenda directly and advocate against their hidden agenda indirectly.

But most importantly there's a comment on here jokingly kinda calling for armed genocide with as of writing SEVETEEN upvotes. There's something deeply wrong with this community and that's what I object to the most.

I may be butting into a topic I don't understand. I don't know much about these Moms for Liberty except that I thing I've heard that they support trump.

The quote in question is: "He alone, who OWNS the youth, GAINS the future.”

It's pretty ambiguous in its meaning and intent. In the context where it was used: advocating for parents to have more control over their children's education: aka decentralize control of children.

But let me point you to a less catchy but far more horrifying quote:

I rarely agree with or endorse or agree with violence. But the rise of the far-right shitbirds has really led me to believe that perhaps General Sherman really should’ve gone all the way to the sea.

If I learned anything from playing Civilzation, even when you win a neighboring city over to your side with culture or trade alone, they’re always going to be a problem. It’s better to just raze the whole damn thing to the ground and start over in the same spot.

It has 2 upvotes and I'm the only downvote ...

You talk about bad faith actors using shitty strategy to derail the debate. They're affirming that parents should have more control over their children's education, they unwisely used a Hitler quote without enough context in one of their publication and now that's all you want to talk about.

I haven't looked into it but I'm pretty sure that the greater context here is that these parents don't want their kids to be taught that "it's ok to be gay" and "kill the trans" is a bad thing to say. They probably won't say it publicly, but that's what I suspect is really going on.

And if I see them on the fediverse making these kinds of statements I might call them out on it. If I see them accusing the other side of acting in bad faith by acting in bad faith themselves, I might call them all on it. And if I see them almost directly calling for armed conflict, you bet your ass I'll DEFINITELY call them out on it.

But guess who it is that I see acting in bad faith right now? You.

And guess who it is that I see kinda, "but really just joking", advocating for armed conflict / quasi genocide? Someone on this thread getting upvoted that I won't even give the respect of directly responding to.