Cutting People Off From Society For Their Politics

[Petrolheadia]

That's be a great way for them to lock in their echo chambers, and for everyone else to find themselves unable to respond to them or correct them.

No way, Jose.

[Petrolheadia]

Essentially out of principle I don't want anybody ostracised and for free speech to be absolute, but if politics continues to be increasingly polarised and a serious such movement gains pace we might as well use it to our own benefit and start going full Singapore/Interwar Poland and arresting people on both sides of the extremes and ban the leaners from political office and the middle class - keep them poor. That's the funniest and the most effective. No schadenfreude from capital punishment or prison outweighs the sadistic gain of seeing your enemy as a group of defenseless paupers. Also the most psychologically damaging.

Either way at that point you're no longer a democracy, you're authoritarian regardless of your intentions/leanings, and that shouldn't be celebrated.

And yes modern progressives a la Warren are on the left extreme.

There is only one thing more encouraging than seeing your enemies arrested, and that is seeing them change their ways.

Especially if it does not involve keeping a large part of the society poor.

[Kubra]

Fair point. I suppose of you are unemployed you just end up like Antifa people badgering and assaulting others all day.

And for as long as you're employed I can be fairly certain you'll continue to pass your leisure time posting this sort of thing, rather than having a go at them with your car or something.

It's also hypocritical for people to advocate for political violence or some sort of social punishment against people they disagree with but cry foul or complain when someone advocates the same against them.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Who among us can say that they're not sometimes of the persuasion of Polemarchus: help ones friends and harm ones enemies, and that is justice?

[Wahlid]

Views I consider worthy of ostracization:

- Being a Nazi
- Being a flat earther
- Being a young earth creationist
- Supporting an "ethnostate" (which means you support mass murder)
- Supporting conversion therapy being done to LGBTQ minors
- Incel and redpill ideology
- Supporting theocracy

"The Redpill is not a philosophy. It is a hateful, totalitarian ideology that seeks to destroy everything in Western civilization we cherish." -G. Page Wilders

Shitposting and Islamophobe bashing aside, I do think it's important to make every effort to get such individuals to see the errors of their ways whenever possible.

[Kaggeceria]

Fair point. I suppose of you are unemployed you just end up like Antifa people badgering and assaulting others all day.

And for as long as you're employed I can be fairly certain you'll continue to pass your leisure time posting this sort of thing, rather than having a go at them with your car or something.

I can't say that I would have a desire to run people over with my cars even if I was employed.

It's also hypocritical for people to advocate for political violence or some sort of social punishment against people they disagree with but cry foul or complain when someone advocates the same against them.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Who among us can say that they're not sometimes of the persuasion of Polemarchus: help ones friends and harm ones enemies, and that is justice?

I've never violently assaulted people for their beliefs, so I would certainly say I am better than the average Antifa terrorist or Neo-Nazi.

[Vince Vaughn]

I think that people who have ignorant. backward views and support authoritarian forms of government should be ostracized.

#MuslimBan

[Augustus Legions]

why the fuck would you ostracize someone for their politics? get rid of them because their an asshole who shot at your dog or something, not because they want a nation for the Aryan race.

[Valentine Z]

That is quite a dangerous preposition to take. As many have stated, this will just strengthen their ideas with one another and hell, they might even create a micronation dedicated to that policy that many people has shunned them for. Rather, they need to be debated and make sure that their goalposts are bolted so that they can't move it when proven with facts.

With that said... we technically already see this with anti-vaxxers with their kids being barred off from certain places. While not political, it is the only thing that I can think of where it is sensible to shun them away (even if heartbreaking). Politics don't exactly hurt that much on their own, but some ideas are dangerous and is asking for Measles III: The Return.

But vaccines are not political and not the topic of the thread, so with that said and done, I will still have to say no. I try my best to look over the politics and just treat them kindly. Sure, I get a little uncomfortable or concerned when they have extreme views, but if they treat me (bonus: also towards people around them) kindly, I see no reason to shun them.

A healthy debate wins hearts, rather than shunning.

[Hirota]

I wouldn't want to see anyone cut off from society for wrongthink. Criticised, sure. If their ideas are so fragile they cannot stand criticism or conflicting viewpoints, then thats a problem they have, not their critics.

Now, if that wrongthink crossed the line into actions, such as violence...well, then something might have to be done.

[Western-Ukraine]

Only Islamists and Russian apologists. Nazis are somewhat embarrassing, there's no need to take a movement like that seriously anymore. Especially if we didn't piss off nationalists all the time: we wouldn't even have major far-right movements around.

[Liriena]

Nazis, religious fundamentalists, Bolsonaro voters, Trumpists, Pinochet/Videla bootswallowers... yeah, I'm fine with cutting those off.

[Liriena]

I wouldn't want to see anyone cut off from society for wrongthink.

Calling the genocidal fantasies of extremists "wrongthink" is the epitome of bastardizing Orwell's ideas to serve some lame ass liberal idealism.

Support for genocide IS a form of action on its own. Words aren't just abstract bullshit. Words have material consequences. This is something that liberalism never understood, and we keep paying the price for it every time y'all go all pearl-clutching at the mere idea of not giving extremist discourse the benefit of the doubt in the name of some stupid fantasy of everything getting sorted out in the agora through mere debate.

While you try to pointlessly debate extremists and giving them a legitimacy that they do not deserve just because they have opinions, they are recruiting, they are inciting, they are intimidating and they are gaslighting.

So, in summary, hell yeah, we should be cutting the fuckers off for wrongthink. We should be amputating their putrid, malignant discourse from society until they either die off or the sheer shame brings them back into the light.

[Dumb Ideologies]

What I'm mostly getting here is that we're all shiny friendship unicorns and any inability to talk to converse with certain groups is purely The Other Side not playing nice. Boo, The Other Side, Boo.

[Page]

Especially if we didn't piss off nationalists all the time: we wouldn't even have major far-right movements around.

Especially if we didn't piss off Salafists all the time: we wouldn't even have radical Islamist terrorism around.

Such statements kind of sound like victim blaming.

[Western-Ukraine]

Especially if we didn't piss off nationalists all the time: we wouldn't even have major far-right movements around.

Especially if we didn't piss off Salafists all the time: we wouldn't even have radical Islamist terrorism around.

Such statements kind of sound like victim blaming.

The difference is that nationalists represent a far greater number of people than Islamist minorities. We can't just ignore their issues. And there's no denying that we've embraced neo-liberal policies for quite some time, so it's just a matter of returning to old, proven principles.

[Mattopilos II]

Especially if we didn't piss off Salafists all the time: we wouldn't even have radical Islamist terrorism around.

Such statements kind of sound like victim blaming.

The difference is that nationalists represent a far greater number of people than Islamist minorities. We can't just ignore their issues. And there's no denying that we've embraced neo-liberal policies for quite some time, so it's just a matter of returning to old, proven principles.

Those old and proven principles have led to large amounts of oppression and bloodshed. They are proven to do something, I guess.

[Western-Ukraine]

The difference is that nationalists represent a far greater number of people than Islamist minorities. We can't just ignore their issues. And there's no denying that we've embraced neo-liberal policies for quite some time, so it's just a matter of returning to old, proven principles.

Those old and proven principles have led to large amounts of oppression and bloodshed. They are proven to do something, I guess.

Hardly. Excessive immigration and globalization are relatively new phenomena, at least in Europe. European countries were doing just fine before embracing those new values. Without oppression and bloodshed, largely without far-right radicalism. The US has mostly the same issues.

[Mattopilos II]

Those old and proven principles have led to large amounts of oppression and bloodshed. They are proven to do something, I guess.

Hardly. Excessive immigration and globalization are relatively new phenomena, at least in Europe. European countries were doing just fine before embracing those new values. Without oppression and bloodshed, largely without far-right radicalism. The US has mostly the same issues.

"excessive immigration" - not the issue in most if even few societies.
"globalisation" is new but also not something embraced particularly by the left or right so I am not sure where you are going with this. If you are suggesting we go back to essentially treating each nation as a literal island then good luck with that.
As for "doing just fine": things were always bad, don't pull that shit.

[Western-Ukraine]

Hardly. Excessive immigration and globalization are relatively new phenomena, at least in Europe. European countries were doing just fine before embracing those new values. Without oppression and bloodshed, largely without far-right radicalism. The US has mostly the same issues.

"excessive immigration" - not the issue in most if even few societies.
"globalisation" is new but also not something embraced particularly by the left or right so I am not sure where you are going with this. If you are suggesting we go back to essentially treating each nation as a literal island then good luck with that.
As for "doing just fine": things were always bad, don't pull that shit.

Fair enough, excessive is from just one perspective. But it's true that free movement of people has rapidly increased immigration. Especially the number of refugees.

And globalization isn't either a right wing or left wing issue, but it's a major change regardless. I'm not looking for culprits here, just saying that there are reasons for why we have more ultranationalism and even nazism. It's just a reaction to changing old systems. Systems that worked.

[The New California Republic]

That's be a great way for them to lock in their echo chambers, and for everyone else to find themselves unable to respond to them or correct them.

No way, Jose.

They have already locked themselves in their echo chamber, that lock can be operated from the outside or the inside. The difference is that those inside have piled up all the furniture behind the door, so that nobody can even get to them anymore...

[Risottia]

In what circumstances does someone's political views go beyond the pale? In what circumstances do someone's political views make them worthy of ostracization?

Disrespect of the fundamental values of the Constitution and of the EDHR, just to begin with.

[Trumptonium1]

Essentially out of principle I don't want anybody ostracised and for free speech to be absolute, but if politics continues to be increasingly polarised and a serious such movement gains pace we might as well use it to our own benefit and start going full Singapore/Interwar Poland and arresting people on both sides of the extremes and ban the leaners from political office and the middle class - keep them poor. That's the funniest and the most effective. No schadenfreude from capital punishment or prison outweighs the sadistic gain of seeing your enemy as a group of defenseless paupers. Also the most psychologically damaging.

Either way at that point you're no longer a democracy, you're authoritarian regardless of your intentions/leanings, and that shouldn't be celebrated.

And yes modern progressives a la Warren are on the left extreme.

There is only one thing more encouraging than seeing your enemies arrested, and that is seeing them change their ways.

Especially if it does not involve keeping a large part of the society poor.

Some people can't be rehabilitated no matter what.

[Bakery Hill]

Views I consider worthy of ostracization:

- Being a Nazi
- Being a flat earther
- Being a young earth creationist
- Supporting an "ethnostate" (which means you support mass murder)
- Supporting conversion therapy being done to LGBTQ minors
- Incel and redpill ideology
- Supporting theocracy

Having wrong opinions isn't necessarily socially harmful. I see no point in forcing flat earthers into exile.

[Bakery Hill]

Essentially out of principle I don't want anybody ostracised and for free speech to be absolute, but if politics continues to be increasingly polarised and a serious such movement gains pace we might as well use it to our own benefit and start going full Singapore/Interwar Poland and arresting people on both sides of the extremes and ban the leaners from political office and the middle class - keep them poor. That's the funniest and the most effective. No schadenfreude from capital punishment or prison outweighs the sadistic gain of seeing your enemy as a group of defenseless paupers. Also the most psychologically damaging.

Either way at that point you're no longer a democracy, you're authoritarian regardless of your intentions/leanings, and that shouldn't be celebrated.

And yes modern progressives a la Warren are on the left extreme.

If Warren is extreme then mate you're going in your own camps.

[Page]

Especially if we didn't piss off Salafists all the time: we wouldn't even have radical Islamist terrorism around.

Such statements kind of sound like victim blaming.

The difference is that nationalists represent a far greater number of people than Islamist minorities. We can't just ignore their issues. And there's no denying that we've embraced neo-liberal policies for quite some time, so it's just a matter of returning to old, proven principles.

What are the issues of nationalists? Letting refugees on boats drown? Putting more migrant children in prisons with pedophile ICE thugs?