A good amount of people use the race of a wrongdoer to justify the dehumination and collective guilt of everyone said group. Look at how people justify the murder of Jews by pointing to Netanyahu. Look at how Islamic Terrorists justified the murder of Westerners by pointing to the crimes of America. Look at how many people justify the murder of Muslims by pointing to 9/11 or Rotherham. Look at how Terfs justify the dehumanization and extermination of transgender people, or even gender variants in general, by pointing to cases involving transgender people.
It does not prevent the collectivisation of crimes to justify the dehumanization of groups and people. It is still a slippery slope that leads to fascism.
A good amount of people use the race of a wrongdoer to justify the dehumination and collective guilt of everyone said group.
Its a good thing I’m not advocating for that.
Look at how people justify the murder of Jews by pointing to Netanyahu. Look at how Islamic Terrorists justified the murder of Westerners by pointing to the crimes of America. Look at how many people justify the murder of Muslims by pointing to 9/11 or Rotherham. Look at how Terfs justify the dehumanization and extermination of transgender people, or even gender variants in general, by pointing to cases involving transgender people.
These are all in-group out-group dynamics. They have nothing to do with the fact that people point at specific bad powerful individuals. In fact its often the other way around, people will often hate/love a leader more depending on whether they’re perceived to be in any specific group.
It does not prevent the collectivisation of crimes to justify the dehumanization of groups and people. It is still a slippery slope that leads to fascism.
I am specifically advocating only to make it easier to pull the trigger on powerful people doing massive harm. More harm comes from letting a powerful person live if they’re active in doing harm. Anything that makes it easier to take down harmful powerful people in aggregate results in a net good.
Luigi Mangione is innocent of murder. The dead CEO is guilty of mass murder and intended to continue. The new CEO taking his place is also likely someone that should be luigi’d, as are the current stockholders.
I burnt out at work and lost my job a little while back, I moved in with my mother on south padre island.
This island is only half a mile wide but the rent on the ocean side is a little bit more than rent on the bayside.
As a joke I’ve decided that makes me better than bayside people. I’ve decided people who live on the other side of the one road are poorly educated troglodytes and they smell like the gross bay over there.
Obviously it’s a joke but it illustrates how arbitrary dehumanizing can be.
I do understand you’re point that it can make it easier for some people to do what needs to be done… but I’d argue if you need to dehumanize then you shouldn’t be doing part of the job. It’s bad for your mental health.
I don’t need to dehumanize bad humans to fight them. If you do then perhaps the physical fight isn’t the best place for you. There’s plenty of logistic works and none physical roles you can slide into. Leave the violence to people who can say “look, you’re human but you’re in the way of improving this world.… I have to get you out of the way now…” best to leave that job to people who don’t have to mentally justify it with “it’s only fine because they weren’t really people” no… they were people but what needed to be done still needs to be done.
The world could be made a better place if so many people weren’t trained into reflexive, voluntary disarmament masquerading as moral high ground. Actual morals involve bringing those prowling “low” to justice
Absolutely. Though I want to clarify my take on justice. If an injustice is required to make the world better, happier, safer, freer, I’m in favor of it. I’m not looking to bring punishment to bad people.
For instance, I don’t want a certain racist rapist fascist idiot to suffer, I want him to stop causing suffering. If that means a quick and painless death, or being put into a peaceful vegetative state, or simply being removed from office and somehow made culturally/politically irrelevant, I will take it.
Now, would I personally enjoy seeing him suffer? Yes, but that’s not really the important bit.
Dehumanization of groups from a position of power is bad.
Dehumanization of bad powerful individuals to make it emotionally easier to take them down may be necessary.
I don’t believe in evil, but I do believe in consequences.
Yeah but here’s the thing:
A good amount of people use the race of a wrongdoer to justify the dehumination and collective guilt of everyone said group. Look at how people justify the murder of Jews by pointing to Netanyahu. Look at how Islamic Terrorists justified the murder of Westerners by pointing to the crimes of America. Look at how many people justify the murder of Muslims by pointing to 9/11 or Rotherham. Look at how Terfs justify the dehumanization and extermination of transgender people, or even gender variants in general, by pointing to cases involving transgender people.
It does not prevent the collectivisation of crimes to justify the dehumanization of groups and people. It is still a slippery slope that leads to fascism.
Its a good thing I’m not advocating for that.
These are all in-group out-group dynamics. They have nothing to do with the fact that people point at specific bad powerful individuals. In fact its often the other way around, people will often hate/love a leader more depending on whether they’re perceived to be in any specific group.
I am specifically advocating only to make it easier to pull the trigger on powerful people doing massive harm. More harm comes from letting a powerful person live if they’re active in doing harm. Anything that makes it easier to take down harmful powerful people in aggregate results in a net good.
Luigi Mangione is innocent of murder. The dead CEO is guilty of mass murder and intended to continue. The new CEO taking his place is also likely someone that should be luigi’d, as are the current stockholders.
Let me explain it this way:
I burnt out at work and lost my job a little while back, I moved in with my mother on south padre island.
This island is only half a mile wide but the rent on the ocean side is a little bit more than rent on the bayside.
As a joke I’ve decided that makes me better than bayside people. I’ve decided people who live on the other side of the one road are poorly educated troglodytes and they smell like the gross bay over there.
Obviously it’s a joke but it illustrates how arbitrary dehumanizing can be.
I do understand you’re point that it can make it easier for some people to do what needs to be done… but I’d argue if you need to dehumanize then you shouldn’t be doing part of the job. It’s bad for your mental health.
I don’t need to dehumanize bad humans to fight them. If you do then perhaps the physical fight isn’t the best place for you. There’s plenty of logistic works and none physical roles you can slide into. Leave the violence to people who can say “look, you’re human but you’re in the way of improving this world.… I have to get you out of the way now…” best to leave that job to people who don’t have to mentally justify it with “it’s only fine because they weren’t really people” no… they were people but what needed to be done still needs to be done.
I don’t agree. Dehumanizing even one evil individual takes away from the severity of their bad deeds.
OK, but I care about material consequence. Not the emotional catharsis of moral judgement.
The world could be made a better place if so many people weren’t trained into reflexive, voluntary disarmament masquerading as moral high ground. Actual morals involve bringing those prowling “low” to justice
Absolutely. Though I want to clarify my take on justice. If an injustice is required to make the world better, happier, safer, freer, I’m in favor of it. I’m not looking to bring punishment to bad people.
For instance, I don’t want a certain racist rapist fascist idiot to suffer, I want him to stop causing suffering. If that means a quick and painless death, or being put into a peaceful vegetative state, or simply being removed from office and somehow made culturally/politically irrelevant, I will take it.
Now, would I personally enjoy seeing him suffer? Yes, but that’s not really the important bit.