Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
the idea here is left wingers are also completely capable of behaving like right wingers. both end of the extreme aren't that much different in a sense that they are basically extremes that drives people to behaving badly, uncivil,intolerant and discrimitory.
while one side is more violent than the other,it does not absolve them of the violence they commit no matter the justification and violence as we all know, comes in different forms.
if nazi is a word specifically reserved for a group of individuals then extremists would have been a better word to use,given the 2 extremes aren't necessary better than the other but is equally bad if left unchecked.
The extremes are different, the behaviours are different... wildly so! One extreme involves advocating for the extermination of entire peoples, while the best example of the other extreme you can come up with so far is accusing people of transphobia! How can you think these are the same? And they "drive" people to obviously very different ends, too! The far right version of "behaving badly" is fucking murdering people, while the far left version is apparently being mean to you on the internet.
Please, provide an example of leftists actually doing something you think is as bad as killing people, or advocating genocide. Otherwise it seems like you are the apologist - and you aren't just an apologist of some nebulous group who you won't define, as you accused me of, you are actually being an apologist for far right child murderers. Because by comparing the far right's crimes to something as people on the internet policing language you are minimising those crimes, and that is a disservice to the victims of those crimes.
aaron danielson ring any bells?? how about antifa??
far left extremists are completely capable of terrorist and other deadly behaviours the question is when and where.
like i have written ,they are extremes,none is better than the other. you aren't changing my mind on. the right wing nuts jobs and certainly not the left wing extremists.
i concur,this conversation isn't really going anywhere other than you trying to change my mind on the left.
the right wing nutjobs are crazy for sure but the left wing nutjons are getting crazier.
Antifa might be violent, but they are violent in their opposition to violent ideologies, not to random members of the public. Aaron Danielson, I'll take a guess, is the single example of someone actually being killed by a far left terrorist in the US in a 25 year period, mentioned by the earlier commenter.
Sure, I mean Pol Pot was a communist, he killed loads of people in Cambodia in the 1970s. But today? There is objective evidence that the far right is worse!
I'm trying to convince you, and anyone reading this, that the left is not the same as the right. If you can't see that, well that's on you. You have been deluded by the right. You think you're in the middle, but you aren't. You are sitting with and minimising the abundant actual crimes of racists and bigots by trying to equate them with trivial internet bullshit and a single solitary actual murder.
Hahahah, the left is getting more reasonable with time, not less! I mean, I refer again to Pol Pot, do you see anyone like that on the left today? Nowadays the right are just getting more sensitive, and people like you are whining because you aren't allowed to be transphobic without people being mean to you and hurting your feelings. Get a grip.
"Extremism" doesn't inherently mean "violent." Equating those with far-left views with "bad and violent" views is unsubstantiated.
Every single claim you've made, that extremism is bad because it drives people to "behave badly" is unsubstantiated. You're arguing off of vibes alone.
The two extremes are not "equally bad." On the far-right, you have genocide and ethno-states under brutal fascist rule, on the far left you have a stateless, classless, moneyless society.