Conceptual slippery slope arguments assume that because we cannot draw a distinction between adjacent stages, we cannot draw a distinction between any stages at all.
Example: "There is no essential difference between 199 and 200 grains of sand or 200 and 201 grains and so on. Thus, there is no difference between 1 grain of sand and 3 billion grains of sand.”
I think he means that it’s a dangerous precident. Opening the door to political violence not only makes your side look barbarous, but is also a potential justification for future political violence against an arbitrary group.
I hate Nazis, but we shouldn’t be punching people for saying stupid, hateful shit.
If your neighbours started saying your family needs to be put into gas chambers you’d laugh it off? Nazis believe in genocide. It is not a laughing matter. It is a threat.
Believing in racial superiority is as absurd as a flat earth, but in-order to be willing to punch someone, you have to take their ideas seriously enough to find them threatening, there-by legitimizing them [for the audience the Nazi is targeting].
Some rando standing on a street espousing the deranged ramblings of a long-dead dictator is not a legitimate threat in my eyes.
If the rando is somehow having their verbal excrement backed by the state, then we can talk about violence, but that is not currently the case where I live, and in most of the world.
I don’t want to debate a Nazi about whether the emperor’s clothes are ugly or not. I’m going to tell everyone the emperor has no clothes.
Some rando standing on a street espousing the deranged ramblings of a long-dead dictator is not a legitimate threat in my eyes.
That’s exactly the first scene of the Twilight Zone episode He’s Alive. Not that it proves anything as it’s just a fictional story but it’s the first thing I thought of.
An article that also comes to mind is Bartender explains why he swiftly kicks out Nazis even if they’re ‘not bothering anyone’. Basically, if you allow the “rando” Nazi’s a safe place to congregate they’ll tell all their friends who tell their friends and eventually your bar, town square, etc are the local Nazi hangout and the extremists start showing up. Now you have too many Nazis to safely and easily remove.
Now, you absolutely don’t need to use violence as your language of choice, what’s most important is that you make it loud and clear that trying to put down roots is going to be more trouble than it’s worth.
Oh for sure. I’m not at all for leaving Nazis alone. Like I said, they should be mocked merciless. They should know just exactly how deranged they sound, and they should feel bad for opening their dumb mouths. However, no matter how dumb their mouth may be, you don’t get to punch them in it.
Not really. It’s an ideology, and ideologies always have various layers, variants, intensities and whatnot. If someone has a race bias are they automatically a Nazi? If someone is in a position to kill a jew but doesn’t do it, are they automatically not a Nazi? Putin says Ukraine is controlled by Nazis. The entire US population is pretty much split on whether “certain politicians” are Nazi or not.
As much as I’d like it to be true, it’s not something objective enough that most people can agree on a single definition.
The guy is doing a fucking Nazi salute. There are people who literally wave the fucking Nazi flag. People will tattoo the Nazi swastika on their bodies and literally self identify as a Nazi. It isn’t that complex holy fuck.
Oh I never disagreed with that. If someone openly identifies as a nazi they deserve anything that’s coming their way. My gripe with your initial comment was that you said this couldn’t lead to a slippery slope because “a Nazi is well defined”, when it’s not. If we stop at people who are 100% confirmed nazis I’m all in, the thing that person was mentioning is how we should be wary of applying the same logic to people who could be nazis, because it’s all downhill from there.
Nope. A Nazi is well defined.
Slippery Slope Fallacy
I think he means that it’s a dangerous precident. Opening the door to political violence not only makes your side look barbarous, but is also a potential justification for future political violence against an arbitrary group.
I hate Nazis, but we shouldn’t be punching people for saying stupid, hateful shit.
We should be mocking them mercilessly.
If your neighbours started saying your family needs to be put into gas chambers you’d laugh it off? Nazis believe in genocide. It is not a laughing matter. It is a threat.
Not just genocide but eugenics.
They will genocide anyone who doesn’t fit in whatever their definition of a perfect human being is.
Your elderly mom who has a disability? Gassed.
Your partner, who happens to have some link to a race of people they don’t like? Gassed. (And your children, possibly you too for fraternizing)
You look a little different for no apparent reason? Gassed.
It’s almost like old school witch trials in nature where they just make up shit with flimsy justifications to exterminate you.
Believing in racial superiority is as absurd as a flat earth, but in-order to be willing to punch someone, you have to take their ideas seriously enough to find them threatening, there-by legitimizing them [for the audience the Nazi is targeting].
Some rando standing on a street espousing the deranged ramblings of a long-dead dictator is not a legitimate threat in my eyes.
If the rando is somehow having their verbal excrement backed by the state, then we can talk about violence, but that is not currently the case where I live, and in most of the world.
I don’t want to debate a Nazi about whether the emperor’s clothes are ugly or not. I’m going to tell everyone the emperor has no clothes.
That’s exactly the first scene of the Twilight Zone episode He’s Alive. Not that it proves anything as it’s just a fictional story but it’s the first thing I thought of.
An article that also comes to mind is Bartender explains why he swiftly kicks out Nazis even if they’re ‘not bothering anyone’. Basically, if you allow the “rando” Nazi’s a safe place to congregate they’ll tell all their friends who tell their friends and eventually your bar, town square, etc are the local Nazi hangout and the extremists start showing up. Now you have too many Nazis to safely and easily remove.
Now, you absolutely don’t need to use violence as your language of choice, what’s most important is that you make it loud and clear that trying to put down roots is going to be more trouble than it’s worth.
Oh for sure. I’m not at all for leaving Nazis alone. Like I said, they should be mocked merciless. They should know just exactly how deranged they sound, and they should feel bad for opening their dumb mouths. However, no matter how dumb their mouth may be, you don’t get to punch them in it.
Congratulations you are privileged enough to laugh because they aren’t affecting your life
I agree with you. It’s a lot harder to make that effective, though.
Not really. It’s an ideology, and ideologies always have various layers, variants, intensities and whatnot. If someone has a race bias are they automatically a Nazi? If someone is in a position to kill a jew but doesn’t do it, are they automatically not a Nazi? Putin says Ukraine is controlled by Nazis. The entire US population is pretty much split on whether “certain politicians” are Nazi or not.
As much as I’d like it to be true, it’s not something objective enough that most people can agree on a single definition.
The guy is doing a fucking Nazi salute. There are people who literally wave the fucking Nazi flag. People will tattoo the Nazi swastika on their bodies and literally self identify as a Nazi. It isn’t that complex holy fuck.
And those people you listed are definitely Nazis. But are people who don’t do that stuff definitely not Nazis? There’s a huge gray area.
It does not follow from this that the existence of a gray area means that obvious nazis should not be opposed vigorously.
Oh I never disagreed with that. If someone openly identifies as a nazi they deserve anything that’s coming their way. My gripe with your initial comment was that you said this couldn’t lead to a slippery slope because “a Nazi is well defined”, when it’s not. If we stop at people who are 100% confirmed nazis I’m all in, the thing that person was mentioning is how we should be wary of applying the same logic to people who could be nazis, because it’s all downhill from there.