• Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    The fact that it takes a lot more energy to debunk a claim is why I said you can take a few and show that they are disingenuous. Spend a bit of energy to show that they always talk bullshit so that they can be proven liars and easily discounted by anybody with a brain. The people you are trying to convince are not the Nazis. They’re basically a lost cause. They are few and far between but if people listen to what they say and nobody is around to disprove it or argue against it they gain a bit of power. They haven’t created more Nazis so you have the same enemies to fight against. Cut off the head of the snake by showing their claims to be disingenuous and lies.

    These are all things that do not require the power of law and force of government to silence people.

    • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Taking a few and showing that they’re disingenuous doesn’t work well.

      For a less rational audience, all that the Nazi need to do is to relabel their discourse; for example saying that they’re “the alternative right” instead of “neonazi”, or “anti-woke” instead of “alt right”. And, for a more rational audience, the nazi can point out that you’re generalising an attribute to the group based on properties of a few of them (“ackshyually, that guy is bad, but not all of us are like that!”).

      In both cases, if you decide to not keep engaging, they can simply claim “see? He was left with no arguments!”. And they do this all the time.

      The people you are trying to convince are not the Nazis. They’re basically a lost cause.

      Fully agree with that.

      These are all things that do not require the power of law and force of government to silence people.

      I think that our major point of disagreement is if those things are enough to keep the Nazi at bay. I think that often they aren’t.