• burghler@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think he was trying to have a philosophical point here but took the headass approach to it.

    20 years ish old, living in Poland, and perma online does things to a man. Weird though to have a take like that when Polish people in particular were significant victims in Auschwitz

    • Ferk@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      To his point: if not “discuss”, what is the correct approach against fascism? war and murder? dismiss it, try to “cancel it” without giving any arguments so it can continue to fester on its own and keep growing in opposition?

      To me, fascism is a stupid position that doesn’t make much sense, to the point that it falls on itself the moment you “discuss” it.

      I would have expected that it would be the fascists the ones unable/unwilling to discuss their position, since it’s the least rational one. So it’s certainly very jarring whenever I hear people jumping to defend against fascism while at the same time stopping in their tracks when it comes to discussing it. Even if those unable to reason might not be convinced by our arguments, anyone with reason would. Rejecting discussion does a disservice, because it does put off those willing to listen and strengthens those who didn’t really wanted an argument anyway.

      Stating “genocide is bad” should NOT be a statement of faith. Faith is the shakiest of the grounds, if we are unable to articulate the specific reasons that make genocide be bad, then we are condemned to see it repeat itself. So, I’d argue it’s for the sake of the victims in Auschwitz that antifascism should not be turned into a religion, but into a solid and rational position.