A nazi is an ideology that is used as an identity. The ideology is made up of a group of identical opinions. Some people may share an opinion with the nazi, but if they shade no others then we really should be polite to at least find out if they’re a closeted nazi.
I guess it depends on whether they’re referring to elected officials or the electorate, because support for the genocide is only mainstream among elected officials and not the electorate.
But they could also be referring to border policy, which is a little less straightforward, as a lot of the Democratic electorate still has some reactionary views on the border and immigration as a result of candidates and elected officials refusing to offer a counter-narrative to the “border crisis.”
Everyone gets to express their opinion. As long as you are honest and polite it’s fine. If others choose to be impolite then fuck em.
What if someone is a nazi. Should we be polite ?
Being a nazi is not an opinion.
For those who may be confused:
A nazi is an ideology that is used as an identity. The ideology is made up of a group of identical opinions. Some people may share an opinion with the nazi, but if they shade no others then we really should be polite to at least find out if they’re a closeted nazi.
That is so generic that it applies to every single ideology ever. By this definition, someone who identifies as LGBT is a Nazi.
being a nazi is not being polite
Not saying you can’t strongly disagree. It is possible to tell someone to go to hell politely.
Sir, would you be so kind as to graciously go fuck thyself?
Gentlemen, may I take a moment to remark on the excellent attire of our good sir. It is unfortunately his rehetoric that reveals his damnation.
“Out of my sight! Thou dost infect mine eyes.”
“I do desire that we may be better strangers.”
People are called Nazis here espousing views that are mainstream in the US Democratic Party.
And that’s the problem of the US Democratic Party.
Which views would those be?
Maybe the genocide in Gaza?
I guess it depends on whether they’re referring to elected officials or the electorate, because support for the genocide is only mainstream among elected officials and not the electorate.
But they could also be referring to border policy, which is a little less straightforward, as a lot of the Democratic electorate still has some reactionary views on the border and immigration as a result of candidates and elected officials refusing to offer a counter-narrative to the “border crisis.”
The electorate supports genocide by electing these officials.
When most of the AIPAC candidates were elected the electorate was largely ignorant of Israel-Palestine.
Do you think the electorate is still ignorant of it? If not, do you think they’ll vote for anti genocide representatives this year?
Views like “genocide is no biggie”
deleted by creator