This paradox was articulated by philosopher Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945),[1] where he argued that a truly tolerant society must retain the right to execute those who promote intolerance.
Perhaps death is too far but name, shame, and ridicule until they stop speaking Nazi rhetoric, until they are afraid to spread their opinions. The world fought a war about this and we all agree the idea of massacring millions for their religious views is a bad thing. I’m looking at you Israel, just because your peoples were victims once doesn’t mean you cant turn around and become the evil you once feared. As a society we must deny tolerance to those who would take advantage of said tolerance and promote intolerance
The world fought a war about this and we all agree the idea of massacring millions for their religious views is a bad thing
That was not what WW2 was fought about at all.
The Jews weren’t killed in the Holocaust for their religious views, but for their ethnicity. An atheist communist with one Jewish parent went to the gas chambers and shooting pits just like the pious Jew in traditional dress.
No, they were rightly fought because they had active roles in the mass murder of millions of innocent people. Your argument is a strawman; the post is advocating for the murder of people based on their views, not theit actions.
If you execute people for holding views you don’t like you’re no better than a Nazi.
Nazi: I want to create an ethnostate and genocide the people I consider inferior.
Anti-nazi: Well then I’ll kill you to prevent you from doing that.
You for some reason: both these positions are equally bad.
Nah, the OP is one step ahead and wants to execute people for holding tattoos.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
That definitely doesn’t say you should kill people you disagree with.
TIL Georg Elser was as bad as Hitler. /s
Please quote the part where Karl Popper suggests executing people.
At least, that’s what the op apparently read.
You intentionally misquoted. You wrote:
But the real quote is:
Why did you do this?
Because they thought you wouldn’t call them out.
Is joke.
Perhaps death is too far but name, shame, and ridicule until they stop speaking Nazi rhetoric, until they are afraid to spread their opinions. The world fought a war about this and we all agree the idea of massacring millions for their religious views is a bad thing. I’m looking at you Israel, just because your peoples were victims once doesn’t mean you cant turn around and become the evil you once feared. As a society we must deny tolerance to those who would take advantage of said tolerance and promote intolerance
So you disagree with the post about murdering people. Good!
That was not what WW2 was fought about at all.
The Jews weren’t killed in the Holocaust for their religious views, but for their ethnicity. An atheist communist with one Jewish parent went to the gas chambers and shooting pits just like the pious Jew in traditional dress.
Found the “centrist”.
Found the tankie
Not a tankie, try again.
So the partisans who killed Mussolini are supposedly jpst as bad as Mussolini and Georg Elser just as bad as Hitler, or what? /s
No, they were rightly fought because they had active roles in the mass murder of millions of innocent people. Your argument is a strawman; the post is advocating for the murder of people based on their views, not theit actions.
I think that’s the strawman.
How?