The Problem with Andrew Tate (and Incel Radicalization)

[Tee Googly Coffee Me]

For starters, I wouldn’t let a kid under 13 anywhere near social media. Staying aware of online trends and talking to your kids about them could help. Talk to your kids about online safety. And I hate to be that person, but if need be, keep tabs on who your kids are talking to online.

As for adults, I’m not really sure what could be done. You can’t restrict an adult’s online activity the way you can a child’s. Perhaps colleges could have programs addressing this specific form of hate? Idk.

It'd take more than that tbh. If your kid goes to public school they're going to be exposed to internet culture and videos they definitely shouldn't be seeing before they're a teenager just because of their peers. At least that's how it was when I was growing up in the early days of like YouTube and stuff, I didn't have restrictions on social media and internet at home but I had friends who did, they all found ways around it or classmates would show them The Lonely Island and Smosh vids anyway.

[Ifreann]

For starters, I wouldn’t let a kid under 13 anywhere near social media. Staying aware of online trends and talking to your kids about them could help. Talk to your kids about online safety. And I hate to be that person, but if need be, keep tabs on who your kids are talking to online.

As for adults, I’m not really sure what could be done. You can’t restrict an adult’s online activity the way you can a child’s. Perhaps colleges could have programs addressing this specific form of hate? Idk.

It'd take more than that tbh. If your kid goes to public school they're going to be exposed to internet culture and videos they definitely shouldn't be seeing before they're a teenager just because of their peers. At least that's how it was when I was growing up in the early days of like YouTube and stuff, I didn't have restrictions on social media and internet at home but I had friends who did, they all found ways around it or classmates would show them The Lonely Island and Smosh vids anyway.

Why specify public school?

[The Holy Therns]

For starters, I wouldn’t let a kid under 13 anywhere near social media. Staying aware of online trends and talking to your kids about them could help. Talk to your kids about online safety. And I hate to be that person, but if need be, keep tabs on who your kids are talking to online.

As for adults, I’m not really sure what could be done. You can’t restrict an adult’s online activity the way you can a child’s. Perhaps colleges could have programs addressing this specific form of hate? Idk.

It'd take more than that tbh. If your kid goes to public school they're going to be exposed to internet culture and videos they definitely shouldn't be seeing before they're a teenager just because of their peers. At least that's how it was when I was growing up in the early days of like YouTube and stuff, I didn't have restrictions on social media and internet at home but I had friends who did, they all found ways around it or classmates would show them The Lonely Island and Smosh vids anyway.

School wasn't where I was shown wacky internet things. I just had friends, in general.

[Tee Googly Coffee Me]

It'd take more than that tbh. If your kid goes to public school they're going to be exposed to internet culture and videos they definitely shouldn't be seeing before they're a teenager just because of their peers. At least that's how it was when I was growing up in the early days of like YouTube and stuff, I didn't have restrictions on social media and internet at home but I had friends who did, they all found ways around it or classmates would show them The Lonely Island and Smosh vids anyway.

Why specify public school?

I had friends that went to like Christian schools and then came to public school and just seemed more sheltered. Idk man just my anecdotes lol

[Xmara]

For starters, I wouldn’t let a kid under 13 anywhere near social media. Staying aware of online trends and talking to your kids about them could help. Talk to your kids about online safety. And I hate to be that person, but if need be, keep tabs on who your kids are talking to online.

As for adults, I’m not really sure what could be done. You can’t restrict an adult’s online activity the way you can a child’s. Perhaps colleges could have programs addressing this specific form of hate? Idk.

It'd take more than that tbh. If your kid goes to public school they're going to be exposed to internet culture and videos they definitely shouldn't be seeing before they're a teenager just because of their peers. At least that's how it was when I was growing up in the early days of like YouTube and stuff, I didn't have restrictions on social media and internet at home but I had friends who did, they all found ways around it or classmates would show them The Lonely Island and Smosh vids anyway.

Now that I think about it, I remember one of my friends in the 3rd grade telling me about Charlie the Unicorn at lunch. My internet usage at home was restricted.

[Page]

For starters, I wouldn’t let a kid under 13 anywhere near social media. Staying aware of online trends and talking to your kids about them could help. Talk to your kids about online safety. And I hate to be that person, but if need be, keep tabs on who your kids are talking to online.

As for adults, I’m not really sure what could be done. You can’t restrict an adult’s online activity the way you can a child’s. Perhaps colleges could have programs addressing this specific form of hate? Idk.

It'd take more than that tbh. If your kid goes to public school they're going to be exposed to internet culture and videos they definitely shouldn't be seeing before they're a teenager just because of their peers. At least that's how it was when I was growing up in the early days of like YouTube and stuff, I didn't have restrictions on social media and internet at home but I had friends who did, they all found ways around it or classmates would show them The Lonely Island and Smosh vids anyway.

Kids are supposed to be exposed to forbidden fruit by their peers, it's a natural part of growing up. Being sheltered is nothing enviable. Innocence is meant to be lost just like baby teeth. You don't want to be the only kid in high school who doesn't know why the number 69 is funny.

Granted, while profanity and dirty jokes and video game violence are harmless, a parent should definitely be on the lookout for nazis and misogynists and the like, but I don't think attempting to conceal the existence of these influences is the way to go about it, nor do I think kids should be punished for trying to learn about age-inappropriate things. What parents need to do is keep track of what kids are accessing and then talk to them about these things in a respectful manner.

[Fahran]

Kids are supposed to be exposed to forbidden fruit by their peers, it's a natural part of growing up. Being sheltered is nothing enviable. Innocence is meant to be lost just like baby teeth. You don't want to be the only kid in high school who doesn't know why the number 69 is funny.

I remained fairly sheltered into middle school and high school, at least comparatively. It wasn't a particular source of shame to me. Depending on the material in question, there are also definitive benefits to not seeing certain things before you're an adult. I mean... we all have stuff we wish we'd never seen.

Granted, while profanity and dirty jokes and video game violence are harmless, a parent should definitely be on the lookout for nazis and misogynists and the like, but I don't think attempting to conceal the existence of these influences is the way to go about it, nor do I think kids should be punished for trying to learn about age-inappropriate things. What parents need to do is keep track of what kids are accessing and then talk to them about these things in a respectful manner.

I don't really fault parents for placing hard limits on the time children spend with technology or even their access to profane, violent, or overtly sexual content. No media is without some semblance of the political.

[Page]

Kids are supposed to be exposed to forbidden fruit by their peers, it's a natural part of growing up. Being sheltered is nothing enviable. Innocence is meant to be lost just like baby teeth. You don't want to be the only kid in high school who doesn't know why the number 69 is funny.

I remained fairly sheltered into middle school and high school, at least comparatively. It wasn't a particular source of shame to me. Depending on the material in question, there are also definitive benefits to not seeing certain things before you're an adult. I mean... we all have stuff we wish we'd never seen.

Granted, while profanity and dirty jokes and video game violence are harmless, a parent should definitely be on the lookout for nazis and misogynists and the like, but I don't think attempting to conceal the existence of these influences is the way to go about it, nor do I think kids should be punished for trying to learn about age-inappropriate things. What parents need to do is keep track of what kids are accessing and then talk to them about these things in a respectful manner.

I don't really fault parents for placing hard limits on the time children spend with technology or even their access to profane, violent, or overtly sexual content. No media is without some semblance of the political.

Oh yeah I saw a lot of stuff I wish I could unsee, though I sought out the most horrible stuff in reaction to attempted sheltering. But that's me and I don't think my experiences are representative of the population, I've always been incourigably curious. It's actually kind of a habit for me that there is stuff I don't give a shit about, but then I find out somebody is trying to hide it from me (or the population at large), then I find it and view it and then I resume not giving a shit. I'm also that way with experiences in general, I learn about something people do and I know it's going to suck but I have to find out for myself and most of the time I'm like "yeah, that sucked."

[Stellar Colonies]

I didn't know that people who weren't straight existed outside of science fiction until I was on the verge of beginning high school...and I only learned about transgenders being a thing a couple months before I got one as a teacher. I guess that would make me sheltered in that respect.

Due to that, those groups held a tinge of "strangeness" for me well into my early adulthood, partially also because I've only met two (aforementioned trans teacher and another teacher who was a lesbian) that I know of in person. Partially also because I was still being influenced by the conservative side of my family during my early high school years.

If I'd learned about them in parallel with the mainstream majority, I imagine I would have absorbed the realization earlier and moved on.

[Australian rePublic]

Andrew Tate is an absolutely fruit loop. He unironically said that the solution ro all of the world's problems (yes, ALL) is for men to walk around the house carrying a sword. Now he's a full blown ISIS sympathiser. If I didn't know any better, I would have thought that he's either lying or a satirist, but sadly, he's serious.

As to why boys are attracted to him- it's simple. Boys, especially white boys, have been told their whole lives that they're oppressors, overly privileged, that they deserve to be discriminated against in the jobs market, etc. Many young boys in the west have never known a life where discriminating against them wasn't justified. And here comes someone who values men and values boys. Young men have also spent their whole lives being lectured about toxic masculinity, being told that men are predators, etc. What do you think's gonna happen? White men aren't more genetically predispositioned to be far-right than anyone else. No body is born more prone to be far right than anyone else. Something obviously drives them to that cause, and all who were driven to that cause then turned away share the same story- we're sick of left winged identity politics. Ask someone who was drawn to the alt-right and then drawn away, and they'll more likely than not tell you that- they're sick to death of identity politics

As much as the general NSG community likes to deny it, the left has a lot to answer for when it comes to becoming so ridiculously extreme that they deter rational people away from the cause and into the embrace of the far right. It's really time that the moderate left stopped living in denial, held the extreme left accountable and saying that the extremists don't represent the left as a whole. But as long as the left lives in denial, nothing will change and people, especially young men, will get more and more radicalised

People need to see how pathetic he is

[Neu California]

Andrew Tate is an absolutely fruit loop. He unironically said that the solution ro all of the world's problems (yes, ALL) is for men to walk around the house carrying a sword. Now he's a full blown ISIS sympathiser. If I didn't know any better, I would have thought that he's either lying or a satirist, but sadly, he's serious.

As to why boys are attracted to him- it's simple. Boys, especially white boys, have been told their whole lives that they're oppressors, overly privileged, that they deserve to be discriminated against in the jobs market, etc. Many young boys in the west have never known a life where discriminating against them wasn't justified. And here comes someone who values men and values boys. Young men have also spent their whole lives being lectured about toxic masculinity, being told that men are predators, etc. What do you think's gonna happen? White men aren't more genetically predispositioned to be far-right than anyone else. No body is born more prone to be far right than anyone else. Something obviously drives them to that cause, and all who were driven to that cause then turned away share the same story- we're sick of left winged identity politics. Ask someone who was drawn to the alt-right and then drawn away, and they'll more likely than not tell you that- they're sick to death of identity politics

As much as the general NSG community likes to deny it, the left has a lot to answer for when it comes to becoming so ridiculously extreme that they deter rational people away from the cause and into the embrace of the far right. It's really time that the moderate left stopped living in denial, held the extreme left accountable and saying that the extremists don't represent the left as a whole. But as long as the left lives in denial, nothing will change and people, especially young men, will get more and more radicalised

People need to see how pathetic he is

Here's the thing. All the things you accuse the left of are blatant lies. The only people being g called oppressors are the actual oppressors (Bull Connor, Alexander Stephens, etc.) and no one outside of a fringe minority is teaching this sins of the father nonsense you seem to think they are (and if anyone was in a school setting, I'd expect a.massive stink.to be raised). If this is actually happening, then you better have some damn solid sourcing well beyond a few YouTube videos showing isolated incidents. Think research papers and the like

That goes for your misrepresentation of how toxic masculinity is taught and handled as well.

The things you claim are a result of the extreme left having so much power simply have no basis in reality as far as I've seen, and sound more.like make-up justifications for far right beliefs that themselves are exceedingly toxic. Treating LGBT people as if they deserve to be scorned, abused, and never.knowing a life where discriminating against them wasn't justified until recently being a major example.

[Saiwania]

Treating LGBT people as if they deserve to be scorned, abused, and never.knowing a life where discriminating against them wasn't justified until recently being a major example.

If you believe in your heart of hearts that biological men can't be women and biological women can't be men, there is no reason to compromise on that or validate what you consider to be invalid.

It is unfortunate, but there will be zero sum situations where only one side can win out. I'm never truly going to consider a trans woman and a woman to be one and the same or vice versa, just because inclusivity crap is popular these days.

[Mountains and Volcanoes]

Treating LGBT people as if they deserve to be scorned, abused, and never.knowing a life where discriminating against them wasn't justified until recently being a major example.

If you believe in your heart of hearts that biological men can't be women and biological women can't be men, there is no reason to compromise on that or validate what you consider to be invalid.

It is unfortunate, but there will be zero sum situations where only one side can win out. I'm never truly going to consider a trans woman and a woman to be one and the same or vice versa, just because inclusivity crap is popular these days.

This mindset, makes me want to outlaw conservatism as a whole! But I know, that will never happen due to Neoliberal realism! (Plus it’s insidious use of tokenism)

[Australian rePublic]

Andrew Tate is an absolutely fruit loop. He unironically said that the solution ro all of the world's problems (yes, ALL) is for men to walk around the house carrying a sword. Now he's a full blown ISIS sympathiser. If I didn't know any better, I would have thought that he's either lying or a satirist, but sadly, he's serious.

As to why boys are attracted to him- it's simple. Boys, especially white boys, have been told their whole lives that they're oppressors, overly privileged, that they deserve to be discriminated against in the jobs market, etc. Many young boys in the west have never known a life where discriminating against them wasn't justified. And here comes someone who values men and values boys. Young men have also spent their whole lives being lectured about toxic masculinity, being told that men are predators, etc. What do you think's gonna happen? White men aren't more genetically predispositioned to be far-right than anyone else. No body is born more prone to be far right than anyone else. Something obviously drives them to that cause, and all who were driven to that cause then turned away share the same story- we're sick of left winged identity politics. Ask someone who was drawn to the alt-right and then drawn away, and they'll more likely than not tell you that- they're sick to death of identity politics

As much as the general NSG community likes to deny it, the left has a lot to answer for when it comes to becoming so ridiculously extreme that they deter rational people away from the cause and into the embrace of the far right. It's really time that the moderate left stopped living in denial, held the extreme left accountable and saying that the extremists don't represent the left as a whole. But as long as the left lives in denial, nothing will change and people, especially young men, will get more and more radicalised

People need to see how pathetic he is

Here's the thing. All the things you accuse the left of are blatant lies. The only people being g called oppressors are the actual oppressors (Bull Connor, Alexander Stephens, etc.) and no one outside of a fringe minority is teaching this sins of the father nonsense you seem to think they are (and if anyone was in a school setting, I'd expect a.massive stink.to be raised). If this is actually happening, then you better have some damn solid sourcing well beyond a few YouTube videos showing isolated incidents. Think research papers and the like

That goes for your misrepresentation of how toxic masculinity is taught and handled as well.

The things you claim are a result of the extreme left having so much power simply have no basis in reality as far as I've seen, and sound more.like make-up justifications for far right beliefs that themselves are exceedingly toxic. Treating LGBT people as if they deserve to be scorned, abused, and never.knowing a life where discriminating against them wasn't justified until recently being a major example.

They don't need to be the majority, they need to be the most vocal ones. Do you think Hitler was majority in NAZI Germany? Of coarse not, he was just one man. Also, view the post I quoted at the bottom of this one. Is this the "fringe minority" you're talking about?

As for your criticism:
1. Fricken' common sense. I mean, why did black people in the USA support Martin Luther King Jr.? Why do you think atheists in Sharia law countries pretend to be Muslims? Why do you think women of WWII supported the women's rights movement (and the ones that didn't didn't do so because they were scared that they would be conscripted or treated equally like men). People (generally) choose the side that's not going to oppress them. You're the one here claiming that it would be different white men, as if white men are somehow different to everyone else genetically to the point where they behave differently.
2. Why are you dismissing anecdotal evidence? Why won't anyone tell me why they supported this political ideology? Oh, you are telling me, well your story is irrelevant. Now, why anyone tell me why they supported this political ideology? Ph you are answering the question- shut up, no one asked you! Why isn't anyone answering my question?
3. Here you go:
https://www.sv.uio.no/c-rex/english/gro ... liefs.html

If you believe in your heart of hearts that biological men can't be women and biological women can't be men, there is no reason to compromise on that or validate what you consider to be invalid.

It is unfortunate, but there will be zero sum situations where only one side can win out. I'm never truly going to consider a trans woman and a woman to be one and the same or vice versa, just because inclusivity crap is popular these days.

This mindset, makes me want to outlaw conservatism as a whole!

Yea, good job. Make the problem worse

[Celritannia]

Treating LGBT people as if they deserve to be scorned, abused, and never.knowing a life where discriminating against them wasn't justified until recently being a major example.

If you believe in your heart of hearts that biological men can't be women and biological women can't be men, there is no reason to compromise on that or validate what you consider to be invalid.

It is unfortunate, but there will be zero sum situations where only one side can win out. I'm never truly going to consider a trans woman and a woman to be one and the same or vice versa, just because inclusivity crap is popular these days.

So Aydian Dowling is a woman, and Cambell Kenneford is a man?

[Celritannia]

1. Fricken' common sense. I mean, why did black people in the USA support Martin Luther King Jr.? Why do you think atheists in Sharia law countries pretend to be Muslims? Why do you think women of WWII supported the women's rights movement (and the ones that didn't didn't do so because they were scared that they would be conscripted or treated equally like men). People (generally) choose the side that's not going to oppress them. You're the one here claiming that it would be different white men, as if white men are somehow different to everyone else genetically to the point where they behave differently.

I'm sorry, trying to compare the need for civil rights/the secrecy of Atheism in Muslim countries/women's rights to why people are turning to far-right ideologies is just laughable. They are not the same thing in any capacity.

No one is oppressing right-wingers.
Calling right-wing views stupid is not oppression.

[Australian rePublic]

1. Fricken' common sense. I mean, why did black people in the USA support Martin Luther King Jr.? Why do you think atheists in Sharia law countries pretend to be Muslims? Why do you think women of WWII supported the women's rights movement (and the ones that didn't didn't do so because they were scared that they would be conscripted or treated equally like men). People (generally) choose the side that's not going to oppress them. You're the one here claiming that it would be different white men, as if white men are somehow different to everyone else genetically to the point where they behave differently.

I'm sorry, trying to compare the need for civil rights/the secrecy of Atheism in Muslim countries/women's rights to why people are turning to far-right ideologies is just laughable. They are not the same thing in any capacity.

No one is oppressing right-wingers.
Calling right-wing views stupid is not oppression.

White men don't need to be oppressed, they just think they do. White men are turning to the far right because they think they're being oppressed. Whether or not they actually are is irrelevant. Saying "oh, but you're not oppressed" doesn't allay. Xi Jinping claims that his subjects aren't oppressed. There aren't enough left-wingers saying "we don't want to oppress white men", and if that continues to be the case, then the far right can lump all left wingers in together with the oppressors. Just because an idea is popular, doesn't mean that it's true. I mean, take Islam for example. Hundreds of millions of people believe in Islam. Does that make Islam true? It doesn't matter, people will continue believing it. As long as the left wing does nothing to suppress the narrative that they want to oppress white men, people will continue to believe, irregardless of whether or not there's any truth behind it

[The Second Order of Life]

White men don't need to be oppressed, they just think they do. White men are turning to the far right because they think they're being oppressed. Whether or not they actually are is irrelevant. Saying "oh, but you're not oppressed" doesn't allay. Xi Jinping claims that his subjects aren't oppressed. There aren't enough left-wingers saying "we don't want to oppress white men", and if that continues to be the case, then the far right can lump all left wingers in together with the oppressors. Just because an idea is popular, doesn't mean that it's true. I mean, take Islam for example. Hundreds of millions of people believe in Islam. Does that make Islam true? It doesn't matter, people will continue believing it. As long as the left wing does nothing to suppress the narrative that they want to oppress white men, people will continue to believe, irregardless of whether or not there's any truth behind it

I needed this, thanks for the laugh. Man, a good joke is always good to clean the soul, y'know?

...What do you mean it wasn't a joke?

[Celritannia]

I'm sorry, trying to compare the need for civil rights/the secrecy of Atheism in Muslim countries/women's rights to why people are turning to far-right ideologies is just laughable. They are not the same thing in any capacity.

No one is oppressing right-wingers.
Calling right-wing views stupid is not oppression.

White men don't need to be oppressed, they just think they do. White men are turning to the far right because they think they're being oppressed. Whether or not they actually are is irrelevant. Saying "oh, but you're not oppressed" doesn't allay. Xi Jinping claims that his subjects aren't oppressed. There aren't enough left-wingers saying "we don't want to oppress white men", and if that continues to be the case, then the far right can lump all left wingers in together with the oppressors. Just because an idea is popular, doesn't mean that it's true. I mean, take Islam for example. Hundreds of millions of people believe in Islam. Does that make Islam true? It doesn't matter, people will continue believing it. As long as the left wing does nothing to suppress the narrative that they want to oppress white men, people will continue to believe, irregardless of whether or not there's any truth behind it

Because it's fucking obvious people on the left are not wanting to oppress people.
Why is it you can't understand that those who cry they are being oppressed the most, i.e. the far right, are actually the ones wanting to oppress others?

Once again, you are trying to compare apples to carrots.

Also, let's just note now that most "white people" don't need a singular racial characteristic. I have nothing in common with a white German or a Swede.

[Saiwania]

So Aydian Dowling is a woman, and Cambell Kenneford is a man?

Your eyes can deceive you, which is what makes Trans so dangerous in my mind. If it becomes known that they aren't as they appear, I'll adjust accordingly. In my judgement, Aydian is a woman who has become unattractive to straight cisgender men in general. But perhaps she only cares about being able to "pass" as a man. On that metric, mission is accomplished. Its very distressing and disappointing from my perspective, but its their life.

[Celritannia]

So Aydian Dowling is a woman, and Cambell Kenneford is a man?

Your eyes can deceive you, which is what makes Trans so dangerous in my mind. If it becomes known that they aren't as they appear, I'll adjust accordingly. In my judgement, Aydian is a woman who has become unattractive to straight cisgender men in general. But perhaps she only cares about being able to "pass" as a man.

And your views become more disgusting.

Good job psychology shows the evidence that trans people are the gender they say they are.

[Australian rePublic]

If you believe in your heart of hearts that biological men can't be women and biological women can't be men, there is no reason to compromise on that or validate what you consider to be invalid.

It is unfortunate, but there will be zero sum situations where only one side can win out. I'm never truly going to consider a trans woman and a woman to be one and the same or vice versa, just because inclusivity crap is popular these days.

So Aydian Dowling is a woman, and Cambell Kenneford is a man?

Oh really? Well, in this very post that you quoted, I also.quoted Mountains and Volcanoes literally saying that right wingers should be oppressed. Why didn't you address that? Your failure to address that could lead me to all kinds of conclusions, including that you actually support their cause. You had the opportunity to address Mountains and Volcanoes in the post I quoted, but you chose not to, proving my point. If "no body" right wingers, then why didn't you address Mountains and Volcanoes saying that we should oppress them, despite having perfect the perfect opportunity to do so

[Celritannia]

So Aydian Dowling is a woman, and Cambell Kenneford is a man?

Oh really? Well, in this very post that you quoted, I also.quoted Mountains and Volcanoes literally saying that right wingers should be oppressed. Why didn't you address that? Your failure to address that could lead me to all kinds of conclusions, including that you actually support their cause. You had the opportunity to address Mountains and Volcanoes in the post I quoted, but you chose not to, proving my point. If "no body" right wingers, then why didn't you address Mountains and Volcanoes saying that we should oppress them, despite having perfect the perfect opportunity to do so

Because it was a response to sai, a far-right supporter, wanting to oppress people?
How ever, Mountains and Volcanoes said, and I quote:

This mindset, makes me want to outlaw conservatism as a whole! But I know, that will never happen due to Neoliberal realism! (Plus it’s insidious use of tokenism)

Where in this post did M&V say he wanted to oppress people?

[Australian rePublic]

Oh really? Well, in this very post that you quoted, I also.quoted Mountains and Volcanoes literally saying that right wingers should be oppressed. Why didn't you address that? Your failure to address that could lead me to all kinds of conclusions, including that you actually support their cause. You had the opportunity to address Mountains and Volcanoes in the post I quoted, but you chose not to, proving my point. If "no body" right wingers, then why didn't you address Mountains and Volcanoes saying that we should oppress them, despite having perfect the perfect opportunity to do so

Because it was a response to sai, a far-right supporter, wanting to oppress people?
How ever, Mountains and Volcanoes said, and I quote:

This mindset, makes me want to outlaw conservatism as a whole! But I know, that will never happen due to Neoliberal realism! (Plus it’s insidious use of tokenism)

Where in this post did M&V say he wanted to oppress people?

They literary said in black and white that they want to outlaw an ideology. How is that not oppression? Realising that they can't do something despite really, really wanting to doesn't make it any less oppressive

[Celritannia]

Because it was a response to sai, a far-right supporter, wanting to oppress people?
How ever, Mountains and Volcanoes said, and I quote:


Where in this post did M&V say he wanted to oppress people?

They literary said that they want to outlaw an ideology. How is that not oppression? Realising that they can't do something despite really, really wanting to doesn't make it any less oppressive

Outlawing an ideology is not oppressing people.
Is outlawing nazism oppression?