I'm arguing AGAINST violence. I'm a pacifist. And I'm tired of being called right wing or fascist everytime I argue for pacificism, when I couldn't be any further from the right wing. It's insanity. Have you said anything to the violence supporters in this thread?

https://deadline.com/2023/08/andy-ngo-journalist-author-wins-300k-in-alleged-assault-1235526808/

So he won 300k for being violently attacked but I'm wrong that he was violently attacked. Ok.

And you're a fucking idiot.

I left reddit because all of the brain dead right wing trumper zombies that toe the line, only to find the left wing equivalents here. Fuck politics as a team sport. Literally no difference between either side other than the team color

It's clear from their comment that they are referring to the well known physically violent attack against Ngo, and that they are claiming that Ngo is not the victim here. It's not theoretical astrophysics, read the comment again. What's with the abject denialism here?

Regarding your other comments, I know what that means, I was just preemptively calling out potential BS responses, because they were used multiple times before on this very Lemmy instance by others defending the violence against Ngo.

Bullshit, by this definition every journalist is under attack. Ngo was famously attacked in public with a concrete "milkshake" for supposedly being a nazi. There are people on Lemmy in other forums defending this. There is no confusion here, so don't sow it.

Anger and violence are two different things bud.

You said you argued with your friend about Ngo being attacked but not being the victim. Come on, it's not like your comment was 100 pages long.

No one is living 100% to ideological perfection. It's a spectrum. Some are a lot closer than others. I've definitely met some ascetic non-judgemental types.

Fuck Joe Rogan and fuck Ngo but also fuck you for continuing this narrative that violence against people you don't like is ok. Yeah Ngo is an asshole but so are a lot of other people. I'm sure you'll retort with him associating with fascists or providing kill lists (which is bullshit if you look into it) or being a "stochastic terrorist" (what the fuck even is that). You've gotta provide even assholes like Ngo due process or else things will devolve into stone age chaos. Only way arbitrary violence makes sense ideologically is if you are a fascist or a true anarchist, otherwise there is rule of law.

It's insane to me that your argument against Rogan is about not supporting anarchist guerilla warfare.

This "punch a nazi" bullshit is such a bad idea because 98% of the people that end up getting punched are just people you feel might be fascist-ish because you hear their supposed dog whistles rather than because they are actually wearing swastikas. It's the worst us vs them team bullshit.

And what's even worse is pacifists like myself will get unfairly bucketed as fascists by dumbfucks such as yourself for advocating against violence, and then you fail to see the irony.

I agree with you, but you will get shut down because it hurts the narrative. Those terms will be called "dog whistles" or something stupid like that.

That one is a legit problem.

It's so you can be labeled Nazi-adjacent so they can punch you without due process.

The concept of cultural appropriation is mostly bullshit. Almost every single behavior and action every person takes is richly informed by multiple cultures, whether it language, clothes, food, or beliefs.

I think the term only makes sense if it's done in a disrespectful way, e.g. cracking a joke or wearing a sacred ceremonial headress to a frat party.

But otherwise no culture "owns" any behavior or idea.

Because it's additive?

This assumes there is some clearly defined line of what is intolerance that everyone agrees on. For a while at the company I worked at, just being a white male was considered "intolerant", so they fired many of them. The irony was not lost on the employees. It was a very oppressive environment and I'm glad it recovered. It's a famous company that aired some of this dirty laundry publically so you might be able to guess who it is.

Some people are black and white bigots like this comic, but people are stupid binary thinkers and call people out as intolerant who are not overtly bigoted or bigoted at all, but are of the wrong identity or associate with the wrong groups.

This comic is basically a straw man.

Sucks on Android tho

So even back in the early 90s when I dabbled in Libertarianism, people had a more nuanced take here, in that shared resources like water and air that crossed land boundaries would be protected by law. For instance you could do a class action lawsuit against the person damaging your air and water. But no one is that nuanced now.

Most "libertarians" are this dumb, but the old school ones at least attribute the problems to uneven regulation rigged in favor of the ruling class, which does jive with my understanding of what is wrong with the financial system. That being said, libertarianism wouldn't work even if they did get shit straight.