Philologer. Lexicographer. Finitude fighter. Low-key weeb/Koreaboo. M1911, cast iron, Linux, and raw milk freedom fighter. Carnivorous cow destroyer.
Maybe I’m a bit too wary of demonizing demons. You don’t necessarily need to welcome people in order to be willing to talk to them, though. Responding to evil, or even perceived evil, with censorship and hate only risks turning you into a variant of the villain you claim to be opposing.
Yes, I am probably more accepting of discussions around “racism and genocide,” by your standards, than whatever camp you belong to. I believe it is important to maintain open dialogue with everyone, even those you consider evil or those you actively oppose. For example, speaking with a murderer can sometimes lead to a confession. There is always a chance that you, I, or someone else is in the wrong, just as there is a chance that we are in the right. Humans are fallible, and we cannot know everything.
P.S. I am also a Christian who is willing to forgive murderers who repent. They still deserve punishment on earth, but forgiveness is a separate matter.
Would they ban people for expressing interest in Orania or in freedom of association understood in the negative-liberty sense, even when that interest is not tied to settler colonialism or imperialism, that is, not taking anyone else’s property, but simply choosing to leave and form a separate community?
What does that dude with the hat mean?
Human Spiral, this policy could end up banning people like you, right? Personally, I do not support Israel, but even supporting a two-state solution might be enough for a left-libertarian to want to ban you.
We do not need to censor Zionists; their ideas are easy to refute. Censoring them can backfire.
Censorship almost always starts with something that sounds sensible and ends up in absurd territory. If people choose to censor in this way, the fediverse risks repeating the same mistakes made during Web 2.0.
I am pretty sure that this “paradox of tolerance” argument was one of the major factors that led to the takeover of Wikipedia as well. Personally, I would prefer a genuinely neutral platform rather than one that is overly tendentious. Hard-left activists took advantage of liberal sensibilities to push the platform in favor of their own beliefs on Wikipedia.
There is probably a better way to avoid interacting with Zionists than banning any account potentially associated with Zionism. I personally oppose Zionism, so this does not affect me yet, but it could easily turn into a slippery slope. If someone does not oppose Zionism in the “correct” way, perhaps in an anti-hierarchy, anarchist, left-libertarian fashion, they could end up being instantly banned.
Policies like this risk turning the platform into yet another echo chamber, similar to Gettr or Bluesky. I honestly do not think there is any need to ban Zionists, since their ideas are easy to refute in the marketplace of ideas. That said, this may simply reflect my own (maybe) culturally liberal outlook, which does not align with this site’s apparent bias.
Perhaps laudanum deserves a comeback, along with bacteriophages, which would be an excellent complement to antibiotics.
Guy was exiled to Outremer in the first place for trying to kidnap Eleanor of Aquitaine btw.
Guy was not exiled for kidnapping or attempting to kidnap Eleanor of Aquitaine.
Realistically, the American military is likely to be fairly diverse, just not especially gender-diverse. You do not need quotas to achieve a reasonable level of racial diversity, as many men are psychographically drawn to military service regardless. An Estonian military, by contrast, is unlikely to be diverse no matter how aggressively DEI policies are applied; attempting to force diversity would effectively result in a foreign legion.
Women tend to require incentives, often in the form of college funding, to develop an interest in joining the military. They also tend to be less effective in duties involving firefighting and direct combat and can be liabilities in those particular situations. However, they are no different intellectually and are fully capable of performing engineering, technical, and similar roles, & advances in technology may help bridge some of these physical gaps in the future.
Regarding your claim that “a team with 20 percent minorities will be less likely to be overzealous toward minorities,” the reality may be closer to the opposite. White personnel can experience anxiety about appearing prejudiced and may therefore become overly cautious or under-enforcing in certain situations. Some evidence of this can be seen in instances where white police officers avoid proactive enforcement out of fear of being accused of racism, homophobia, or similar biases. Black officers (for example), by contrast, often appear to have greater immunity from these particular concerns.
P.S. Ideally, the U.S. military and other militaries would not be searching for monsters to destroy abroad, such as inventing reasons to attack Venezuela, Iran, etc. possibly for the benefit of Israel, lol.
The 2005 Kingdom of Heaven movie really did Guy and Sibylla dirty. I’m fairly sure the history was especially distorted because the writer and director were atheists and clung too tightly to a “religious tolerance is ideal” message, even at the expense of accurately portraying the actions of the actual historical figures.
So you actually believe a military should have quotas based on arbitrary characteristics such as race or gender, tied to the population it is meant to protect? That is, if the population is around 50% women, the military should attempt to have 50% women in all positions? And that any disparate outcome would be evidence of racism or sexism? Would that be your position taken to its extreme, while your actual position has the same essence but is much more sensible in degree? Or what do you think?
You should be free to be rude online. It’s useful to know who the rude ones are so you can avoid them. Censoring is a bad idea in this case, and I believe Valve has taken the correct stance.
This reminds me of Jeremy Kauffman’s ad, “War is Gay,” which advocated for making militarism as gay as possible. The point is that militarism, or zabernism, is considered acceptable and even encouraged as long as DEI quotas are met within the military. https://youtu.be/kdfym6LKpQ0
On Bluesky, you’ll see people who would rather kill or punch a Nazi than allow such a person to repent or attempt to make amends; in that way, hatred of evil can itself morph into evil.