• EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m not a both-siders, but I was just arguing with a leftist yesterday that was saying we should jail people for voting for trump.

    So I’m hesitant to pretend there are not wack jobs on the left who would happily exterminate people for their political gain.

    • madcaesar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      The left absolutely has nut jobs. That’s why it’s important that us normal, reasonable left people call them out and check their shit.

      The right let their right wing nut jobs take over. That’s why we’re in this mess.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        The right didn’t “let their nutjobs take over,” as Capitalism has continued to decay Capitalists have consolidated power. There wasn’t a cognizant decision to shift towards fascism, but fascism itself arose as the material conditions of society declined.

        Fascism doesn’t spread because “it’s an appealing idea,” fascism specifically is a result of Capitalist decline, and pretending it’s just something that happens randomly makes combatting it difficult.

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The second layer to both-sides is false-equivalence fallacy. A majority of Republicans believe in the Big Lie; their literal nominee tried to overthrow a free & fair election.

      Let that sink in: A MAJORITY of Republicans believe 2020 was stolen.

      Do you see the broader Democratic party or any of their high-level leaders calling for jailing people voting for Trump? No.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Being fooled is not a crime. Trump (along with many accomplices) is a criminal that needs to be prosecuted and thrown in jail, but unfortunately the morons who have fallen for his lies aren’t breaking the law by doing so, so any claim to have them jailed is anti democratic authoritarianism.

        • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Being fooled is not a crime

          I take it you defend the same of the percentage of Russian citizens who are brainwashed into voting for Putin? Or the Germans who went to marches and cheered on for Hitler?

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Assuming they believe they have not committed a crime, absolutely.

    • Contravariant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      You can pretend all you like the problem is that there have been leftist wack jobs that very much did exterminate people for political gain.

      Things would be so much easier if we could simply argue about ideology without anyone getting the ‘clever’ idea that you can simply exterminate everyone who disagrees and end up with a harmonious society of people all working towards the same ideal.

      • Angry_Autist (he/him)@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Some ideals are so dangerous they need to be exterminated. If you can show me a method that does this while leaving the bigot alive, I would happily see it implemented.

        • Contravariant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          If you place killing an ideal beyond implementing your own you’re making exactly the same mistake.

          The best we’ve come up with is to try to ensure people are educated and well informed and only a majority can make certain decisions. Not all countries are doing too well on all 3 (heck the U.S. doesn’t even manage to ensure decisions require a majority) but if an ideal gets accepted under anything resembling those conditions then killing the bigots is no longer an option.

            • bastion@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              Absolutely not.

              WWII was an excellent example of how some actions cannot be meet with peace.

              If you think you can suppress an ideal with violence, you have a poor grasp of the situation.

              One can respond to ideals that are bad by having a better, more effective way of life - one that addresses the underlying needs that those with bad ideals are trying to meet, and that has a path for them to join you.

              But if you simply suppress it, it will fester and grow.

        • bastion@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Education and human relation. Standing your ground in a conversation without getting combative. Being winning willing to fight if needed, but actively choosing not to when it’s not truly necessary.

          No, if you exterminate an ideal, you also lose the resistance to it and the generational cognizance of it. Instead, you let it survive, and teach people, by example, how to deal with it - not through suppression, but through response.

          • Angry_Autist (he/him)@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            You just admitted my clause:

            Being winning to fight of needed

            No, if you exterminate an ideal, you also lose the resistance to it and the generational cognizance of it.

            Yes, and it stops being relevant. Just like every dictatorial regime that has been put down.

            • bastion@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I did not “admit your clause”. Being willing to fight does not necessitate extermination.

              Although, perhaps you’re right, and I should adopt your ideology of ideological extermination, starting with your ideology.

              No, if you exterminate an ideal, you also lose the resistance to it and the generational cognizance of it.

              Yes, and it stops being relevant. Just like every dictatorial regime that has been put down.

              Oh, is that what you think happens? Go live it, then, and good luck with that.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Voting is a sacred right in our society, even if it’s for a treasonous corrupt felon wannabe fascist. I don’t understand why anyone would give him their vote but that just makes them an idiot

      It seems like you’re the one jumping from someone wanting jail time to those voting to overthrow our democracy, all the way to exterminate. Yeah, I suppose those people exist but a huge difference is there is no widespread support for left wing nut jobs

      I don’t remember what politician was convicted a few years back where a lot of people kept trying to make the point that a left wing criminal is a criminal that we all want brought to justice, whereas too much right wing criminal behavior is ignored or even lionized. Both sides are very much NOT the same

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        It seems like you’re the one jumping from someone wanting jail time to those voting to overthrow our democracy, all the way to exterminate.

        It’s part of the submission.

        But I’m not equating the two sides, but every right winger I know, including Trump supporters who I unfortunately have way too many of in my family, wish no ill will on anyone and don’t believe trump does. So this claim that there is widespread support for exterminating people on the right does not reflect the reality I experience.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          No one says that. But Trump has repeatedly said variations of acting as dictator, subverting the constitution and the checks and balances that are fundamental to our government. He is guilty of instigating treason. He repeatedly acts racist and extremely misogynistic. He should be held responsible for the hundreds of thousands of excess Covid deaths during his term when he denied reality and prevented a coordinated response. He has decades of history with contract fraud and likely tax fraud. His speeches are falsehood after falsehood and he contradicts himself depending on what his audience wants to hear. He was a disaster of a president, and certainly this time around no one can claim to not know what to expect.

          I don’t know your family, but how can they support the constitution and vote for some who ignores it and has announced fascination as a goal and has already committed election fraud , how can they claim to not be racist and elect a racist, how can they claim to not be sexist and elect someone that disdainful of women’s rights, how can they elect someone noncoherent and expect anything, how can they believe they will get whatever they think he promised when he also promised the opposite and has a history of not following through with either? How can they claim to be nice people and elect someone with a history of spite and who has already professed revenge on people not sufficiently loyal?

    • curiouschipmunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      That I think it’s the scariest thing we have right now: a lot of people that forgot we need to live together and trying to shove your ideology down others throats is not the way to go, no matter how right one believes to be.

    • Xanis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      I feel they mean well…most of them anyway. They don’t want shit to go further south and feel jailing Trump to be the correct course. Admittedly, I do agree to an extent, though only because he keeps weaseling his way out of taking real responsibility for all of his bullshit. Mostly because we rolled the judicial equivalent of a Nat1 with Cannon.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      The whack jobs on the left are a vanishing minority, so if you’re pretending they’re equivalent to the right wing who actually attempted a fucking coup and want to do another one, you’re either disingenuous or an idiot.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’ve seen far more calls from the left for actual violence since the rise of trump than probably combined the rest of my life. I agree the right wing is currently more violent, but the claim that they are vanishing, rather than rising, doesn’t match up with the reality I’ve experienced. Especially surprising to claim it here on Lemmy where I see it most.

    • eatthecake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      The far left has guillotines for that purpose and they’re not ashamed to say so. Lemmy has been an interesting education on what far left actually means.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      3 months ago

      we should jail people for voting for trump

      • Donald Trump is launching a full fascist coup on the American democratic state and if he wins he will kill millions of people, primarily those who are poc, lgbtq, and foreign born. We need to stop him at all costs.

      • Hey, listen, who you vote for is your call and I’m not here to judge. Its just an election, I don’t see why you need to make a federal case out of it.

      These two views are in sharp contradiction with one another.

      • timestatic@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        So if Trump is proposing ideas going against the foundation of the State and its constitution we should not let Trump run. How is jailing people for voting Trump a solution?

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          What if someone told you aid to an enemy of the state is the definition of treason. The man tried to overthrow our government with an insurrection, there is no question he is an enemy of the state. (So all who have donated to his compaign and broadcasted for his rise to power have committed treason)

          I don’t think we should jail Trump voters, but they should at least make aware that just because they believed his/medias lies, doesn’t make them immune from all ignorant actions. The first civil war set precedent that you don’t need to punish them, but any members who partook who held office prior to the attempt (currently still ongoing) should not be able to hold office in the future as written in the amendment MADE for insurrectionsts. (Even this seems extreme with current events)

          Now as we learned from the last time, we should ignore our previous actions and follow what Robert E Lee suggested, that all statues of Trump & the confederates should be taken down (flags as well) and should not be built nor allowed outside museums/textbooks in the future.

          His reason was because history showed countries heal faster that way. Ours hasn’t healed since the conferency, we did it wrong.

          Make possession charges harsh, so they hide again, but next time when the NAZI flag and the KKK burning crosses came to light, they would legally shut it down before it gained traction and spread their hate so far and wide.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          So if Trump is proposing ideas going against the foundation of the State and its constitution we should not let Trump run.

          He was President for four years and he did a lot worse than “propose ideas”. Perhaps we should throw him in jail.

          How is jailing people for voting Trump a solution?

          It strongly discourages people to support a fascist who threatens my existence.

          • timestatic@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            So we have an undemocratic state if voting one out of two candidates gets you in jail. This is literally the playbook definition of an autocracy. He should be judged by the actions he took and shouldn’t be above the law like the supreme court decided but judging the voters is crazy

            • mwguy@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 months ago

              This is literally the playbook definition of an autocracy. He should be judged by the actions he took and shouldn’t be above the law like the supreme court decided but judging the voters is crazy

              He’s not above the law. Congress Impeached him for it and 57 Senators (less than the 67 needed) voted to convict (including 7 Republicans). But the Democrats rushed it for political reasons. The Nixon Impeachement process took 9 months and it had several hearings evidentiary and others that gave Republicans who didn’t and couldn’t support impeachment at the start of the process justify impeachment to their constituents. Impeachment is a political process, and Dems politicked like morons.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              3 months ago

              So we have an undemocratic state if voting one out of two candidates gets you in jail.

              The Tolerance Paradox is only resolved when you refuse to tolerate intolerance.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Since we’re wishcasting here, I’d say “¿Por Qué No Los Dos?”

                  But I agree, getting fascists off the ballot would be the highest imperative. I’d also say that we’re not going to do either, so getting angry at someone online for suggesting either one seems silly.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I said nothing about not judging them. They are, at best, gullible rubes. I judge them very harshly. However, I was very explicit that it was about jailing them.

        So, sure, if you just make up my position, I can see how you can make it contradictory. Good for you.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          They are, at best, gullible rubes.

          They know exactly what they’re asking for. It isn’t as though the homophobia and xenophobia of the American right is some kind of secret. Persecuting minority groups is a signature issue.

          However, I was very explicit that it was about jailing them.

          And if we were voting on changing the speed limit, I’d agree that taking voting to the level of incarceration would be extreme. But we’re talking about policies of mass incarceration, seizure of property, and execution of dissidents. That’s the threat that a future Trump Presidency is supposed to present.

          So either I was lied to and Future President Donald Trump isn’t an existential threat to my existence. Or the reports are sincere and a vote for Donald Trump is the same as a vote for my summary execution.

          If a lynch mob shows up outside your door and starts voting on whether or not to string you up, what would you say the remedy is? Lobby them not to kill you? Politely ask them to leave? Or show up on the porch with a shotgun and tell them all to piss off?

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            They know exactly what they’re asking for.

            For some, sure. For most? It reads more like a justification to act like an authoritarian and jail political opponents. It sounds exactly like when people like trump say the left is coming after Christians.

            But we’re talking about policies of mass incarceration, seizure of property, and execution of dissidents.

            We’re not tho. You’re just assuming this will happen. I agree with you it’s a distinct risk and we must stop trump because it’s far greater than a zero percent chance. But he’s not outright calling for it. These people believe he is protecting them and their way of life. Dumb? Yes. Criminal? No.

            But can we stop and laugh for a second about you pointing to assumption of mass incarceration as a justification for outright calling for mass incarceration? Which does, pretty clearly, demonstrate my point.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              For most? It reads more like a justification to act like an authoritarian and jail political opponents.

              When the political opponents are, themselves, violent domestic terrorists and anti-democratic authoritarians, you’d be a fool to wait until they’re installed in the highest levels of government before taking action.

              You’re just assuming this will happen.

              I am being told “Go out and vote against Trump or this will happen”. This was the primary Ridin’ With Biden argument and the reason we were supposed to swallow a little like genocide in Gaza for the greater good. There were a bunch of memes and everything. People insisting that a Trump Presidency would amount to a domestic holocaust. People insisting that failure to vote for the Democrat or even a vote for a third party candidate was a tacit endorsement of this pending holocaust.

              But can we stop and laugh for a second about you pointing to assumption of mass incarceration as a justification for outright calling for mass incarceration?

              Sure. The joke is funniest right down on the US/Mexico border where we’ve got toddlers behind razor wire, because the governors are all pandering to a political base that wants to end birthright citizenship and deport anyone browner than a cup of milk.

              • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                3 months ago

                When the political opponents are, themselves, violent domestic terrorists and anti-democratic authoritarians, you’d be a fool to wait until they’re installed in the highest levels of government before taking action.

                Except we’re not talking about terrorists and anti democratic authoritarians, we are talking about jailing people for the way they vote. You are, by claiming people should be jailed for the way they vote, being the anti democratic authoritarian.

                Again, we both agree that trump is a risk and we need to stop him. But jailing people for falling for his rhetoric and commiting the crime of voting makes you a risk to our democracy as well. The only difference I see between you and trump, on this point at least, is you’re explicitly espousing it. He’s just using a dog whistle.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Except we’re not talking about terrorists and anti democratic authoritarians

                  We’re talking about their donors, their canvasers, and their supporters.

                  Again, we both agree that trump is a risk and we need to stop him.

                  We both agree he should be stopped. I’m not sure we agree on actually stopping him. It seems like we’re just going to roll the dice on the election and hope for the best, because doing anything else would be unfair to the fascists.

                  • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Hey, listen, who you vote for is your call and I’m not here to judge. Its just an election, I don’t see why you need to make a federal case out of it.

                    It’s clear, even in your own post, that you know we are talking about voters.

                    It seems like we’re just going to roll the dice on the election and hope for the best, because doing anything else would be unfair to the fascists.

                    Well, certainly becoming a anti democratic authoritarian seems like a terrible idea to avoid an anti democratic authoritarian. I’m hoping the electorate wakes up and, if it doesn’t, the institutions designed to protect us against authoritarianism hold up. I certainly will never get behind jailing people for the crime of voting a way I don’t like.

    • daltotron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Extermination and jailing people aren’t really equivalent.

      You have plenty of out and about fascists who would vote for trump, actual groypers and nazis and shit. As a kind of, probe question, right, do you think it would be pertinent to go and actually kill those motherfuckers, given the kind of, borrowed time on which we’re living right now, the lack of resources, right, lack of popular support from a mainstream political system and their ability to so clearly co-opt it in this moment, and impending climate change which means we can’t waste time on them really more than is necessary. Those are some of the justifications that somebody might give for exterminating out and about fascists, right, even if they can’t guarantee that those people are actual fascists, in their heart of hearts, and that it would’ve taken too many resources to convert them, or too much time. That’s all normal shit, right, normal death sentence justification, which I usually don’t agree with, maybe greased up a little bit since you can have the apologia of a kind of wartime or desperation, right. You get what I’m saying?

      I agree with you also, that there are plenty (I would even say, a majority) of supporters that legitimately just don’t realize how bad he is, and how bad things are in general, lots of them because they’re coked up on denial and lack of imagination, lots of them because they stand to benefit from these systems as they currently operate. They might not be “racist”, but they might still be perpetuating racism, they might not be fascists, but they might still be perpetuating fascism, through their ignorance and incompetence. Those people, right, sure, doesn’t make much sense to kill them.

      But then, how do you propose to change their minds? A staunch communist might propose that we change the system, and then the majority will more naturally come to like, normal conclusions, right, and then you can just round up the rest that are sort of very staunch in their misinformed support, and then you can perhaps “re-educate” those people, right.

      This is a process most people have problems with, but I dunno, what’s your take, what’s your alternative? If you’re dealing with those people, and you’re still giving them the freedom to attain power, control the economy and other people’s lives, even as misguided as they are, just sort of, for the sake of not having them in jail, right, then I dunno if that’s really going to work long term. It locks you into an untenable position, especially as many of these people will be actively dedicated to your dissolution, even if they’re just fooled, which dooms your movement from the start. You have to remove them from power, and if you want to remove them from power and ownership, while also not expatriating them from your country, an act which is usually viewed as genocide and for which you will constantly hear bitching from gusanos in the miami herald about, then you need to put them in some sort of reeducation camp, basically, and that camp is going to constitute jail.

      So I dunno, hit me with your argument against that kind of jailing.

      I don’t really think there’s any level of like, very natural reform that you’re going to engage in, or slow convincing over time to get people to give up their own power, that’s going to improve things, or that’s going to improve things at nearly the rate that we need right now considering what’s on the horizon. I might be wrong on that, but my basis for that belief is that people are in the positions of power that they’re in because they are naturally groomed and ensured to be the ones who have the beliefs and attitudes most suited to retain that power. If you have a business size of like, hundreds, and you’re promoting people in your business to positions of power, promoting people to become CEO by the board of directors, then naturally the system is going to start appointing people which reinforce the system. Asskissers who will do anything to get promoted, are usually the ones to get promoted, we know this. This doesn’t even need to be a universal tendency, this just needs to be a tendency more of the time than not, for it to be really problematic, for the majority of people in power to be assholes. The board of directors doesn’t want to start appointing CEOs that turn their companies into co-ops, that take the power out of their hands, there’s a natural incentive structure there. The same is mostly true of political systems which are mostly autocratic.

      So, I dunno if there’s really much of an alternative, if we’re taking a sort of, step back look down at that idea of jailing your opposition. Maybe you have one, I dunno.