this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
272 points (96.3% liked)

World News

39004 readers
421 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

If you want a tolerant society, you cannot tolerate the intolerant.

If you want democracy, you must suppress anti-democratic ideas.

You have to fight for want you believe in, and not let antithetical ideas fester and subvert yours, just because they exploit your tolerance and use the space you give them to fight it.

[–] momo420@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sure, but your methodology for determining what is an anti-democratic idea should be really tight, before you raid/arrest people.

No one wants murders in their society, but showing that they did that action is more important than stating that an action is wrong/anti-democratic/immoral etc.

[–] ParsnipWitch@feddit.de 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

How do you suppose they should have proceeded instead?

[–] momo420@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

In this case if they have evidence, they should be investigated as is being done.

My critique is on the general sense of tolerance/intolerance as that can be vague, although unjustified incitement of violence or violent action is a good place to draw a line. However what is a call to violence can be tricky to parse sometimes.