this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2023
1 points (66.7% liked)

Politics

10168 readers
9 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm simply asking this question because of Lemmygrad.ml existing, and that there isn't a far-right equivalent of it yet. If Lemmygrad has any standing for its right to exist under free speech, where is the line drawn for other extremist political ideologies? If Holodomor skepticism is allowed, then what stops Holocaust skepticism? (as it is generally accepted the Holodomor was man-made). I'm simply wondering what gives far-left politics a right to promote such extremist views in the Fediverse, when their far-right counterparts would be Defederated in minutes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] natori@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It isn't at all a no true Scotsman argument, what are you talking about?

You can be a leftist and not be bigoted. Bigots also join the left, we can't help that, but that's because they personally are bigoted, not because the ideology is. In fact, most modern leftism argues that bigotry is fundamentally at odds with the core ideals, and in my experience a majority of the left, at least in English speaking countries, wants to distance these people.

You cannot be a fascist without being bigoted. Being bigoted is part of the ideology. It aims to spread and teach bigotry, that's the purpose of it.

No true Scotsman would be "yeah but the anti Semitic leftists aren't real leftists", which isn't what anyone said.

[–] TMoney@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I disagree, but if we argue, it'll go nowhere.

[–] kalanggam@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

There's not really anything to disagree with. What you're calling a No True Scotsman isn't a No True Scotsman argument in the slightest.