If it constantly happens, it's not isolated incidents, it's systemic!
If police constantly kills POC, it's not some bad apples, it's #SystemicRacism!
If a political party is full of nazis, it's a nazi-party!
If your fediverse instance is full of nazis, it's not a "#FreeSpeech" instance, it's a nazi instance!
If there are weather extremes on a daily basis, it's not the weather, it's the #ClimateCrisis!
#RecycledToot from old account.
@dojima5071 @PaulaToThePeople No. If a person or organisation keeps making the same "mistake" without changing things to prevent it from happening again, it is no longer a mistake: it's a choice. That's not an act of generalising people within groups, it's a matter of observing and judging people/organisations for their action.
@tudiv @PaulaToThePeople That's not what I'm talking about. Like my algebra I teacher said in my freshmen year, "If you do something once, it's a mistake, but if you keep doing it, it's intentional." What I mean is the idea of assuming a political party is nazi because most of it's members are nazis, calling an instance a nazi instance because of most of its instances, etc. If you end up banning hate speech, you're technically banning free speech.
The whole point of free speech is to allow everyone's beliefs, even the ones that you absolutely loathe, such as nazism and eugenicism. If you ban certain beliefs on your instance, then does free speech really exist? Plus, what would be considered worth banning next after that? I could go on and discuss this.
@dojima5071 @PaulaToThePeople You can't have tolerance while tolerating intolerance. And if most of a party's members are nazis, that makes it a nazi party because those members have power within the party.
Let's say you organise a party. You satay everyone is welcome: both gay people and homophobes, for example. Then you get homophobes, because gay people aren't safe at a party with homophobes and they know that.
The example you gave where you say both gay people and homophobes are allowed in a party I organized needs some context. What would you consider that makes such people homophobic? Would this group be like nazis? Another concern that myself, and a lot of people in the GRSM community have is the watering down of buzzwords like racist, ableist, etc.
@tudiv @PaulaToThePeople The problem with letting only BIPOC determine racism, people with disabilities determine ableism, and variations of those, is that it leaves people out of the conversation. It's important to have all perspectives on an issue, otherwise you don't have the true picture. The kind of stuff I worry about is people that are like "YoU dOn'T lIkE X, Y, oR Z? YoU'rE a RaCiSt!" and similar things. Those kind of individuals are why people don't take systemic racism as seriously as
@tudiv @PaulaToThePeople "Bigoted people don't become bigoted or refuse to take discrimination seriously because of being told about it too often." That's exactly what I'm talking about and I'm scared will happen. I think society needs to be more careful with when they use buzzwords so people will take bigotry more seriously when it actually does happen.
@tudiv @PaulaToThePeople I'm not doubting that. I'm just saying that if we give these words more power, then people would understand and support movements like #MeToo and BLM a lot more because the issues of sexism and systemic racism of the Black community will be seen as more serious than if we accuse every minor thing of being bigoted, whether it's intentional, a joke, or neither.
@dojima5071 @PaulaToThePeople See, here we fundamentally disagree. I know there will always be bad people in this world, but I refuse to just accept that. "That's just how the world is." is a very unhealthy way of going through life. Maybe this is my autism, but I will not sit by and watch. By talking about things and standing up and gains intolerance we can make a difference, no matter how small.
"Nobody has ever changed someone else's mind: people change their own minds."
Yes, there are things we cannot change. But we can make others aware of them and cast those bad things out. Like with COVID-19. In the countries where even the smallest symptoms and the first infections were taken seriously, like Australia, it's not an issue anymore.
@dojima5071 also of course it's sometimes fine to generalze things.
If I say "I like pizza" I'm generalizing.
@dojima5071 Thanks, in this case, how can one talk about a system without generalization? Yesterday, I saw a tweet about a cop arresting another cop for something like beating someone who's handcuffed, but normally, that doesn't happen. Normally, cops don't just look the other way, but even the chief makes up a fictionalized account that excuses an officer.
@kete The police is built to enforce systemic racism, so therefore I don't care when people say ACAB. What I mean is when you generalize races and sexualities and whatnot.
Police violence against POGM folks / mention of nazis
You can not generalize the fact that all cops are okay with working for a system that opresses communities. Even if they want to change the inside of it.
You can not generalize the fact that someone often sharing nazi content is in fact a nazi themselves.
Things are what they are.
Police violence against POGM folks / mention of nazis
I'm just saying it's ridiculous to say that just because most people in an instance, subreddit, etc. are neo-nazis mean the platforms themselves are neo-nazi. It's especially ridiculous when the platforms weren't founded to support them.
An example would be 4chan. Yes, 4chan is full of fucked up people, but was it founded to support the alt-right? Nope. So it's slander to say it's a neo-nazi site.
When a black person murders someone, all black folks are murderers.
These generalization hurt communities and are wrong. But they go along with the system we've all grown in.
You can not say the same for the opposite considering privileged folks.
That's where we should draw the line.
So you're saying it's okay to generalize and hate on white and cis people but not okay to do those things towards POC and trans people? I don't think double standards will help your cause. If you truly do care about equality for all, then you need to fight for everyone, even white and cis people. If you don't do that, you ain't fighting for equality, you're fighting for privilege.
Please, stop mixing these two when they are two completely different things.
Again, and as I've said before, when people should be called out, they must be. It's not hate toward them as long as they think twice about their behavior and educate themselves when necessary.
"SurveillanceCapitalist"? how about #SurveillanceCommunist ?
At least do you research on china and research how they do the surveillance, do they same for cuba and venezuela how they "own" the internet in their country and how those communist country punish their citizen if they do wrong use of the internet. To get better in your "privacy" articles instead of a list of open source app that have nothing to do with privacy. 🙃
@x41kla I never said that surveillance by authoritarian regimes isn't bad too, but I'm no expert on how to circumvent that, so I didn't write an article about it. The only tips I have for those in that situation are: Use Tor and use encryption.
Ok point taken about the article and yes you never said that.
But it don't have nothing to do with capitalism. Is just surveillance, fix the tag please. People living in a communist country have the same issue and even worse your are killed.
This is an official mastodon instance for activists of the global climate justice and social justice movement.