I said something along the lines of:

“Wow, I haven’t had a reason to smile ear to ear in a while.”

Along with

“Nah, the more dead corpos dragons, the better.”

In response to some liberal going off about how violence is never the solution, not mentioning how this murdered dipshit has personally overseen a system that perpetuates harm, suffering and death (violence) in the name of profit.

…

Good ole’ civility clause.

Whats the paradox of tolerance?

.world mods have never heard of it I guess.

  • spujb@lemmy.cafeEnglish
    61·
    15 days ago

    the paradox of tolerance is stupid (e: as a rhetorical tool) anyway because why on earth is a paradox a suitable foundation for any argument, much less an argument with life and death involved? literally wish i could wipe that shit from the history of the internet.

    (edit: obviously i still agree with the sentiment of the paradox but it could be argued so much more efficiently.) real ones conceive of tolerance as a social contract. infinitely easier and less chronically online “um-akshually”-pilled.

    • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
      14·
      15 days ago

      You sound like a flat-earther with this argument. “How could the behaviour of the sky possibly tell us anything about the shape of the ground?”. Well, it does. And just because you don’t understand it doesn’t make it wrong.

      1. The paradox of tolerance is a valid argument, and it has been since long before the creation of the internet (Karl Popper, The Principle of Leadership, 1945).
      2. If we tolerate the intolerant, then intolerance becomes the norm.

      These aren’t my opinions, these are facts.
      If you can’t come up with some actual logic as to why we should ignore the tolerance paradox, then it will continue to stand as a cognitive guideline.
      Anyway why would you want to give the intolerant free rein? You should be glad you don’t have to tolerate them.

      • spujb@lemmy.cafeEnglish
        41·
        15 days ago

        Yeah, you deeply deeply misunderstood what you are responding to my friend. Please read it again, or I’ve written another explanation here: https://lemmy.cafe/post/10380507/8770998

        My qualms are with the rhetorical language of the paradox. I actually quite agree with the paradox’s sentiment, as I see you also do.

        I don’t appreciate the jump to insults either. I’m sorry you misunderstood me but let’s stay kind when responding, hm?

        • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
          1·
          15 days ago

          There was no insult intended. Before your edit and response, your argument sounded like flat earth nonsense. I’ll go and read your explanation.

        • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
          1·
          15 days ago

          There was no insult intended. Before your edit and response, your argument sounded like flat-earth-style nonsense. I’ll go and read your explanation.

          Edit: can’t open your link