• Hazrod@jlai.lu
      771·
      1 年前

      It’s a thing that has started to appear because of mainstream social media deleting post with “bad vibes”. Kill, suicide, and such vocabulary are actively repressed to “ensure happiness”

      • squiblet@kbin.social
        27·
        1 年前

        That makes sense. Avoiding censorship is reasonable. I was thinking some people did it to avoid triggers, as if seeing ‘r*pe’ or ‘k!ll’ isn’t the exact same thing as seeing the words spelled out.

        • Kalkaline @leminal.space
          23·
          1 年前

          It’s more of a demonetization thing. I see it all over the YouTube videos of homicide investigation police interviews, which makes no sense.

          • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            1·
            1 年前

            Yea YouTube and TikToks automated demonetization is definitely a big part to blame for this stupid trend. It also annoys me as an enjoyer of YouTube murder porn.

            It’s especially dumb because there is some extremely heinous stuff on YouTube that is still monetized, and when a video is demonetized for a channel they still play ads all over it, too.

      • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
        13·
        1 年前

        Yeah they don’t like when people talk about mental health issues. Go kill yourself in private and stop getting your bad vibes all over my nice, clean website.

  • Obinice@lemmy.world
    1252·
    1 年前

    Good thing you censored those naughty words, everyone on the internet are children and it’s not appropriate for them to know such no-no words.

    I’m glad no child knows the word “kill”. Phew.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
      731·
      1 年前

      Solved simply by treating tolerance as a social contract instead of an absolute moral doctrine.

      Break the contract, lose the protections.

      • theneverfox@pawb.socialEnglish
        10·
        1 年前

        Well put.

        It really is just as simple as “don’t do mental gymnastics”, there’s only a paradox here if you make one

      • ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social
        732·
        1 年前

        Human rights should always be universal and immutable, we can’t go around deciding who does or doesn’t have basic human rights. Antifa has to be the better people because unfortunately we have to be the adults in the room and show the children what it means to be a decent human being. But, having your human rights respected doesn’t mean that you’re immune to the consequences of your actions like getting the shit kicked out of you for being a Nazi prick, or getting locked up in prison for the rest of your life.

        • Lightor@lemmy.world
          281·
          1 年前

          We do decide who doesn’t get all their rights all the time. It’s called jail.

          • ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social
            721·
            1 年前

            Those aren’t Human Rights, those are Freedoms. Freedoms are often included as part of Human Rights decrees but they are usually merely subsections of Human Rights decrees and can be restricted by governments if there is just cause, but never or rarely removed outright.

            The Universal Declaration of Human Rights identifies a few key things like the Right to Life including protections from slavery and torture. The Freedom of Movement is one that can be restricted if you prove dangerous. The big one that most people are referring to when they mention Human Rights is all of the “constitutional liberties”, here’s a quote from the article I linked about that:

            the so-called “constitutional liberties” and spiritual, public, and political freedoms, such as freedom of thought, opinion, expression, religion and conscience, word, peaceful association of the individual, and receiving and imparting information and ideas through any media.

            The above linked declaration hasn’t been ratified in every country, and it’s sort of a basic boilerplate that countries may use to form their own Human Rights decrees. But again the big one that is quite universal is the constitutional liberties which are basically the freedom from discrimination and oppression.

            My point being, restricting a person’s Freedoms isn’t necessarily the same as violating their Human Rights.

            • Lightor@lemmy.world
              91·
              1 年前

              I mean, there is the right to bear arms, people in jail and felons don’t have that right. Felons can’t even vote.

              • ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social
                47·
                1 年前

                Human rights are bigger than just the United States. What happens there is a pretty atrocious infringement on the rights of inmates. It’s not surprising though, considering the US prison system is essentially just modern slavery and that there are corporations who have a vested interest in dehumanizing the inmates so they can exploit them as slave labor without anyone objecting.

                • Lightor@lemmy.world
                  62·
                  1 年前

                  Article 20 Right of Peaceful Assembly and Association

                  People in jail can’t do that.

                  Article 13 Right to Free Movement in and out of the Country

                  They can’t do that either.

                  Article 14 Right to Asylum in other Countries from Persecution

                  I mean, how do you define persecution? Because we help find people sometimes, which seems like the opposite.

        • Sanctus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          71·
          1 年前

          No, there are real adults with these opinions. Real adults that perform real actions based on their opinions. If they can’t stop themselves from being uncivilized animals based on bigotry and discrimination then we need to protect the rest of our society that is peaceful and tolerant. The only way to be decent to absolute villains is to relinquish them of their ability to take action. Otherwise everything we’ve built since Babylon comes tumbling down.

        • kameecoding@lemmy.world
          51·
          1 年前

          tfw they are ushering you into a gas chamber but you don’t fight back because you don’t want to infringe on their human rights.

        • TheBeege@lemmy.world
          51·
          1 年前

          Let’s walk through an example. Please note that I absolutely do not mean anything of what I’m about to say. Imagine someone were to say the following things.

          I’m going to kill you. I don’t think you have a right to exist. I’m going to torture, dismember, and end you because I personally believe this is morally right. You do not deserve life. I will come to your home. I will take you in the night. I will make you watch as your family screams in terror while I take them all away. I will do this to everyone like you. I will destroy you because I believe it is the right thing to do. I will experiment on you. You will be like cattle for my whims because I do not believe you are human like me. You are just a meat sack. I will abuse you simply for my enjoyment because you hold no value beyond the value I give you. You are worthless, and I will dispose of you.

          If someone legitimately said these things to you, if they really meant it, would you want the government to just be like, “hey man, they can say whatever they want. Human rights?” This is a Nazi’s inner monologue.

          • ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social
            4·
            1 年前

            Uttering death threats is a crime in most nations. So they would hopefully be put in jail long before they acted upon those thoughts. If someone is that disturbed then there’s something wrong with them on a fundamental level – be that nature or nurture. What I would hope for that person is that they’re locked away from society, but treated as well as they can be considering some safety measures need to be in place for even prison guards to interact with someone like that.

            I’m not arguing at all that we never lock anyone up, that’s absurd and anyone who thinks that is probably intentionally misunderstanding my meaning. I just think that treating people with as much dignity and respect as we can is the right thing to do in all circumstances. Dehumanizing and othering people is what fascists do, if we want to call ourselves the good guys, we can’t act like fascists. It’s just plain wrong, and it’s evil.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      327·
      1 年前

      The paradox of tolerance can only apply to actions though, otherwise you just become the intolerant one that should be ostracized.

  • oatscoop@midwest.socialEnglish
    3914·
    1 年前

    People don’t have a problem with tankies because they want to use violence against fascists. Violence against fascists is fine.

    People dislike tankies because they’re reactionary assholes. They dislike them for cheer-leading unjustifiable abuses and failures because they believe we’re in some zero-sum game that excuses it. Because they’re extremists, oppressive authoritarians, and want to use violence against all of their ideological enemies, including the “wrong kinds” of communist.

    The good things they believe in and do aren’t what people have an issue with: it’s the inexcusably bad parts of their ideology people don’t like, and the fact they’re obnoxious about it.

    Edit: I stand by what I said, but apparently its easier to recognize flags when you expand the image … and my rant had nothing to do with the post.

      • InputZero@lemmy.ml
        31·
        1 年前

        Kay I need to ask, how does Lemmy use tankie? I’ve always thought it meant people who are willing to use violence against capitalist. I have a feeling I’m wrong.

        • Heavybell@lemmy.world
          61·
          1 年前

          AFAIK a tankie is someone who is a fan of authoritarian communism or socialism… I forget which but the key part is the authoritarianism part, I think.

          • samus12345@lemmy.worldEnglish
            111·
            1 年前

            Yeah, they’re fans of the so-called “communism” of authoritarian countries like China and the USSR, which are about as communist as the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is democratic or a republic.

              • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
                31·
                1 年前

                Not necessarily, Leninists and OG Marxists usually don’t get lumped in with Tankies - while Trotskists definitely should be. Tankies accept blatant authoritarianism as an acceptable cost to achieve socialism, non-Tankies reject authoritarian regimes.

                … and super-Tankies are Pol Pot apologists.

    • icepuncher69@sh.itjust.works
      53·
      1 年前

      Its not even their ideology, its the fact they defend murderous tyranical regimes and try to be apologetic, defensive or straight up deny that shit.

    • weeeeum@lemmy.worldEnglish
      28·
      1 年前

      Yeah like most of the time you ever see them recorded in public they’re just breaking shit and hitting random people accusing them of being a Nazi.

      • phar@lemmy.ml
        3·
        1 年前

        Do you have a link? Are any of these people westerners? I don’t think I’ve actually seen this. I am starting to think I’m not really sure what a tankie is.

        • weeeeum@lemmy.worldEnglish
          14·
          1 年前

          It’s been a while since I have seen the video but i do remember the context behind it. It was during the 2020 BLM protests in the United States and many were identifying themselves as antifa (take it with a grain of salt, antifa is merely an ideology with no real leader or representative).

          Some of those identifying as antifa were starting fights with others and making accusations. This was in addition to general arson ranging from property theft, destruction of property and starting fires. There are some even lighting up fireworks in the streets but it’s hard to tell if they are “apart” of antifa.

          A Tankie is a hardcore communist usually with an affinity for authoritarianism. They are named “tankies” because during the cold war communists in western countries were defending the USSR’s use of tanks to crush anti government/communist protest, thus the name Tankie.

          While one doesn’t mean the other they often have a prominent overlap with many of antifa being Tankies and vice versa.

          Edit: the confusion was the original comment mistook the antifa logo as a communist symbol and referred to them as such and my comment was referring to antifa specifically .

          • phar@lemmy.ml
            3·
            1 年前

            Understood. Yea I know tons of people that consider themselves anti fascist and never met anyone like this, so I’d say definitely not the same lol. Generally antifa is against any authoritarianism from my experience.

  • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
    1219·
    1 年前

    The real version is the first guy says he won’t bake a cake for a gay couple, which is shitty, but his right. Then the second guy comes along and says he wants to kill the first guy because nazis also wouldn’t bake cakes for gay people, so the first guy must also be a nazi, and nazis all deserve to die, so this guy does too.

    Then a rational person comes along and points out that both of them are being shitty and everyone loses their goddamned mind over it.

    • Murais@lemmy.one
      3·
      1 年前

      I dunno about you, my dude, but the only people I’ve seen fucked up by antifascists were not saying that they didn’t want to bake a gay cake.

      But I’ve seen the people who didn’t want to bake a gay cake be called pieces of shit who should do better. And I think that’s just called social consequences.