Qwabour Harbour wrote:North Saitama wrote:While we're on the subject, I do believe that "liberating" Fascist regions is unethical, as is raiding them unprovoked. IC, it amounts to a war of aggression, which is, in fact, a war crime.
Which is also why I am so opposed to how organisations like the MT Army are actually
commended for what are IC war crimes, Fascist or not. I do not believe that war crimes should be rewarded and encouraged, no matter who the target is.
Are you saying that fascism should be allowed to run loose? The MT Army has spent the last 16-17 years fighting fascism. They deserve the commendation. Or are you salty your repeal didn't get momentum and you're sitting on your fascist sympathising bum whining about it?
Maybe they wouldn't
have to fight facism for the last 16-17 years if they just tried to
reason with the other side and eventually come to a satisfactory free "mobility of ideology" (where people are allowed to change views rather efficiently without too much peer pressure to change back).
From my experience of actually
debating with fascists and studying actual Nazis (or National Socialists, as they love to call themselves - even though it's just a longer version of the same idea), I can promise you that these raids against them have actually
strengthened them. Creating an atmosphere of fear and closemindedness where they are legitimately afraid of dissenting views because they're afraid of dying off completely.
This near-universal hatred of them has given them an "edgy ideology" status and shared camaraderie where they see each other as fellow brothers-in-arms against a "wave of liberalism, degeneracy and modernism" has
ensured that they will never die. In a way, we are creating our own boogiemen.
By using ad hominems (like calling them basement dwellers and racists), we make it seem like our beef is with their existence, rather than ideology - thus creating this feeling that
they are being ridiculed by society and attacked left-and-right. By failing to explain the flaws with authoritarianism and
actually come to a reasonable conclusion on what is the best way to govern and defaulting on calling them the "scum of the Earth", we are fostering a sense of brotherhood between them - and giving them a shared victimhood hive mentality.
By suppressing their views, we show weakness to debate and reasoning with these people and their ideologies, feeding into this image that they have crafted for themselves as "edgy philosophers" who have "secret ways and knowledge" into how to actually govern a country. The same way people feel a wave of liberation when they move from totalitarian North Korea into a significantly less repressive society like America, South Korea, etc., these fascists are creating a pseudo-air of intellectual freedom by promising newcomers that they shall allow any radical perspectives.
Now, I'm no fascist. But to say that every fascist is a racist, basement dwelling white supremacists is both belittling and foolish. I have seen fascists from
across the world. An Assyrian woman who feels resentment toward "Western democratic countries" for intervening in her nation's affairs, a Finnish man who feels angered by the weakness and dog-like pandering to votes he sees in his country (and the political corruption in the ruling class), a Greek Holocaust-Denier who blames the liberalism of his homeland for its sprawling debt (who is now a democratic-centrist, mind you) and even a Turkish Muslim who dreams of the (I quote) "glorious rebirth of the Sejuk Turk Sultanate" and who as well feels resentment towards "Western democratic countries" (and as if to add insult to injury, that Turkish guy supports Trump's stance on immigration, because "It keeps third-world workers from leaving their country and ensures that they stay and improve their own homelands economically).
So, what do these people all have in common? For starters, they're all humans with their own individual outlook on life and independent conclusions on why the world is messed up and how to improve it. And they all believe that the key to a better future is in a strong and unapologetically nationalistic government with its people's needs (not short-term wants, but long-term needs) in mind. And they each have a unique take on who is to blame for the current ills their nations face... But they tend to blame it especially on democracy and "corrupt, vote-pandering politicians" - which the Nazis then claim is propagated by rich Jews.
With that in mind, it shouldn't be so difficult to listen and talk for a change, rather than yell and try to shut one another up. Of course, not everyone will be willing to change their minds, and that's fine. As long as they don't threaten death or try to harrass anyone to the point of madness, then everything should be fine, and people will be free to decide for themselves what's best.
Of course, this is for nation-states - which, to be frank, as a nation simulator also doubles as a political debate platform, since we get to explain our differing views and showcase the (somewhat accurate?) results of our own
freakish policies -, and real life violence
has been perpetrated in the names of all manner of ideologies - there, I can understand the need to sometimes censor dangerous ideas (even if I don't entirely agree with censorship). But,
this is NationStates, where we
can debate and discuss without the threat of the other side physically beating us to death or using secret police or KKK militia forces to silence one another.
So, frankly, it should be easier for us to reason on this website than real life, thus I see no reason for us to bring OOC feuds to the forums and messaging boards where no one but Max Barry and his Mods have the power to speech police us - who, to be frank, are
not self-proclaimed fascists, so it's not like anyone's going to censor non-fascist ideas.
Posted: Wed May 01, 2019 8:05 pm
