this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
181 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10133 readers
76 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The purported names and addresses of grand jurors who indicted Donald Trump were posted online by Trump supporters on a fringe website known for violent rhetoric. This prompted security concerns for the jurors and district attorney's office. A research group found the jurors' information being spread across other sites along with false claims about their political views. The indictment itself does not include such private details. After Trump referred to "riggers" online, supporters appeared to use that term in place of a racial slur in discussing the jurors. Both the sheriff's office handling Trump's surrender and the FBI declined to comment on grand jury security matters. The posting of jurors' private information has led to death threats against them from some Trump supporters online.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago (6 children)
[–] gaael@beehaw.org 42 points 1 year ago (5 children)

They are people.

Calling them monsters and dehumanizing them separates "them" from "us" and prevents us feom trying to understand how a real person, with intellect, feelings, a family, a social life etc. can get to the point where they do such things. If we don't collectively at least try and understand it, we have zero chance of preventing it from happening again.

That being said, I'm not at all making excuses for their actions, which I find seriously violent, disgusting and worrying.

[–] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Thought experiment for you then. How do you resolve the issue that arises when a person or group of persons live just down the street from you who claim that the core belief of their very being is that people "like you" shouldn't exist, or should, at the very least, go away, preferably across a large body of water.

Would you truly believe that all the people in this group, or even the majority of them, would be willing to listen to your arguments or protests simply because you recognize the conditions under which their beliefs came to be and you would like to rather, in the present, address those conditions?

I agree that there are problematic systemic conditions that give rise to far right ideologies like white supremacy and it's close extension, fascism. We definitely need to address them. But these conditions are not just the result of modern sociological paradigms, they have specific historical origins and are passed down through culture and tradition, and that is not something you can defeat through just argument and social ostracism, you sometimes just need to force the monsters out.

We can try to do all the other preventative measures first and we should, but some peoples' ideaologies are so deeply engrained into their identities, there is no convincing.

For some, there's no talking to them, they don't engage in dialogue genuinely, they twist Democratic forums, insisting on being heard while advocating for policies that ultimately aim to marginalize and silence others, constantly playing the victim while insisting the strength of their ideas on the sole basis of their opinion being fact.

A simple saying sums up my feelings on the far right and their fascist dreams. It was popularized during Trump's Muslim ban:

[–] mountainpilot@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago

Not really an answer to your question, but your reply reminded me of the Paradox of Tolerance.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)