We have a new model in which we no longer have parties of government of right and left but rather a civic democratic party and an authoritarian populist party. There’s a good chance they’ll be contesting elections for a while, even as the authoritarian populist party is trying in various ways to end them or radically change how free they are.
Nearly every act of bigotry, misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia, transphobia, antisemitism and racism ever committed in the U.S. has been committed by conservatives. I don’t think I am the one guilty of dehumanizing people. I think I am affording them considerably more respect than they deserve.
Is it different somehow when you dehumanize the dehumanizers? I personally will not employ those methods, though I do understand the anger.
As has been pointed out to me, I think we are finding ourselves in a paradox of intolerance, wherein to resist intolerance, one must be intolerant of the intolerant.
I’m well familiar with that argument. I simply believe its sometimes counterproductive. It can create more, not less, of them. Does intolerance have a long pattern of successful results? Their intolerance, even in places like Russia, has failed to stamp out the LGBT community there. Fear is simply not as strong a motivator as some would like to believe, people do not have to do what it takes to survive. They also experience things like pride, which conservatism even encourages to a large degree.
While strategic intolerance is important, we certainly shouldn’t throw intolerance away and do 100% tolerance, I think we need a broader set of methods. That’s all. It’s that whole diversity thing, utilizing a broad array of methods and styles in the hopes of achieving broader success.
Fair points.