You must log in or # to comment.
Well, that… Or a swift punch to the snout.
Everyone has a plan until Mike Tyson
To convince people who haven’t completely lost themselves? Yeah, it requires a delicate, compassionate approach, regardless of and unfazed by insults and mockery. The rest you just gotta fight, even if you don’t want to (as it should be).
Nobody is definitively lost. But one can fight someone else compassionately, it’s not an either/or.
I think that’s a lovely sentiment but I don’t think it’s true. Do you think you could reason Musk out of his ideology? Kissinger and Netanyahu out of their murderous intent and disregard for human life? Trump out of fucking kids that look like his daughter? ICE agents to the point of them willingly joining the people and the resistance against tyranny? Maybe 5% of the last example, but the rest? Certainly not, in my opinion. Sometimes you just gotta fight. And sometimes, in self defense, you have to kill a beast you cannot reason with.
Again, it’s not an either/or situation. Musk, Trump and Netanyahu should be fought with everything we’ve got, but the second one stops considering them as human beings with inalienable rights and dignity, one becomes a part of the problem. Let’s not let them transform us; in order to fight them we have to refuse to imitate them.
No, the problem is that they are, they were endowed with everything we were, they just decided to be evil. Free will is a thing, after all. Putting them six feet under is nothing but self defense and protection of humanity as a whole. They won’t change, they’ve had decades to do so, are we just supposed to wait some more until they repent, somehow? They’ve crossed every line imaginable, they’ve been given a million chances to turn around, they’re confirmed amoral cunts with power and influence. I’m not saying “torture them until they draw their last breath” (God will take care of that), I’m saying “imprison or kill them, whatever is more feasible, for the sake of humanity”. It doesn’t change me, or make me any less moral, to take this stance because this is self defense against murderous rapists who simply won’t reform themselves.
And the only reason it’s not either/or in your view, I assume (but do correct me if I’m wrong), is because they’re not dead and so they could still repent and change their ways? But my man some of these folks are in their 70s and 80s, you still wanna give them a chance? This is willful ignorance. No, for practical reasons, we must understand them as long gone astray and unrepentant. There’s more evidence for it than evidence against it, after all, especially if they’re old AF.
Free will is a thing, after all.
Is it though? What makes me who I am? We like to portray ourselves as individuals in control, making choices, but when you study the paths of criminals, for example, you often find commonalities. If I’d had a different childhood, if I’d been born to different parents, who knows if I wouldn’t have become a murderer? Even without going that far, if I’d been born in a small town in Texas, I’d probably be a brainless MAGA. I can’t be proud of something I’m not responsible for.
So things are obviously more complex, and there are plenty of people born in small towns in Texas who aren’t MAGA. But I think no one ever decides to be evil (that’s why fighting against evil people is not enough and will never be; it’s necessary of course but we should at the same time study the causes of evil, and fight it).
is because they’re not dead and so they could still repent and change their ways?
Partly, but not mainly. I do think that anyone can change and repent, but in these cases I don’t think they will change, and I don’t see what someone who did a genocide could do to repent, even if he changed. No, it’s not that.
My position is based on broader principles. Human beings have inalienable rights and dignity. I personally base these rights and this dignity on theological grounds, but even remaining purely secular, it is essential that what is inalienable stay so, because if these things are taken away from some, then they are no longer inalienable to anyone. This is precisely what Trump, Musk, Netanyahu and the others are trying to achieve: a society divided between human beings and dehumanized people, and such a society always leads to the dehumanization of the same people, even if they were not the original targets.
I’ll take the example of the USSR. They dehumanized the bourgeoisie, the royalists, the kulaks. But soon, it was the minorities, the homosexuals, the artists, the “oddballs,” and others who ended up in the Gulag (or in psychiatric asylum), while the new bourgeoisie (the Party cadres) had “reclaimed” their humanity. It’s not to protect Trump and Netanyahu that we must always consider them human beings with dignity and rights. It’s for the sake of society as a whole, and especially its most vulnerable members.
But again, this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t fight them, and fight them hard. It simply means that not everything is permissible in this fight or, fighting evil persons, we will reinforce the causes of evil.
I agree entirely with your final point, and I really appreciate the thorough reply. Yeah, not everything is permissible, gotta make sure one doesn’t turn into a monster fighting one, and we can keep our honour and morals while fighting evil. 👌
I agree that history pretty clearly shows that winning by any means necessary fundamentally changes the winner in negative ways.
Nice now do the Malcom X version.
