So I’m hetero and, by American measure, of a not hated racial background. But suppose I’ve liked some absolutely amazing girls who are, unfortunately, not hetero (or I’m not cool enough to transcend that barrier), and the guy who’ve introduced me to the concept of aerodynamics (when I was a kid) using frisbees as example was an African student, but I have some ideas that might be called fascist here, so can we please be more nuanced with what sucks?
I mean, OK, I’m not automated, but how do you know.
IRL what of my ideas can be called fascist is usually expressed by leftists, mostly anarchists. Systems of laws and influences with time become too complex for a society to not be constrained with them, and also dominated by negative selection of authority figures, which means you need violence to allow them to evolve further. I don’t mean mass executions and dictatorships, just things like copyright and patents being bad, but not always, things like freedom of speech being good, but not always, and in general no absolutes being true.
At the same time anarchist and leftist arguments don’t seem to explain those parts and seem to keep them as pure emotion, while fascism has explanations (by its own rules, of course).
So I’m hetero and, by American measure, of a not hated racial background. But suppose I’ve liked some absolutely amazing girls who are, unfortunately, not hetero (or I’m not cool enough to transcend that barrier), and the guy who’ve introduced me to the concept of aerodynamics (when I was a kid) using frisbees as example was an African student, but I have some ideas that might be called fascist here, so can we please be more nuanced with what sucks?
I mean, OK, I’m not automated, but how do you know.
That’s a hell of a thing to just gloss over when asking for more nuance, especially these days.
IRL what of my ideas can be called fascist is usually expressed by leftists, mostly anarchists. Systems of laws and influences with time become too complex for a society to not be constrained with them, and also dominated by negative selection of authority figures, which means you need violence to allow them to evolve further. I don’t mean mass executions and dictatorships, just things like copyright and patents being bad, but not always, things like freedom of speech being good, but not always, and in general no absolutes being true.
At the same time anarchist and leftist arguments don’t seem to explain those parts and seem to keep them as pure emotion, while fascism has explanations (by its own rules, of course).