CBS says it's OK to "punch a Nazi"

[BmorePat87]

(04-17-2019, 09:05 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Were they well known before reporters started using their tweets for the basis of articles? Because I do try to avoid the extremes of both sides on general principle, but I haven't heard of these people. I also think social media is a cess pit and avoid it other than browsing Twitter (but not using it) for sports news.

Granted, I also lean towards the "shun and do not engage or mention until they fade away" method of dealing with white supremacists and the like. The thing they want the most is attention and validation. The current system of reporting (and social media as a whole) gives them both. The attention just fuels them and makes their attempts grow.

It's like that crazy girl just recently who was being hunted for by the police because she was obsessed with the Columbine shooter and got a gun and made threats (she was on the run and later shot herself it seems). By continuing to give so much coverage to shitheads of society like the Columbine shooter, sure you're condeming them, but you're also putting them up on a pedestal. You're making them special and remembered, rather than their memory having faded away like it needs to be. That's honestly my belief on why there's the school shootings these days. Angry unknown loser turns into the country's most talked about person for weeks/months, and immortalized in memory. A different angry unknown loser sees that and thinks that isn't so bad compared to their sad little life.

It's not good to reward acts of being a horrible human being, and the attention is indeed a reward. They're basically providing them with a free bullhorn to spread their horribleness and thinking that it's "helping".

- - - - - - - - - -

As for people worried that Conservatives will be lumped with Nazi, it's already happening. Racist, Bigot, and Nazi have basically just come to mean anyone right of Bill Clinton these days. Shit, even on P&R if I don't agree with the left and toe the company line, I get called a Trump supporter/voter, and people have decided to expand the term white supremacist to seemingly all Trump supporter/voters (because apparently half the voters and a third of the Hispanic vote are white supremacists).

I refuse to even wear a full-red Cincinnati Reds hat, because it's not worth the potential hassle of some jackass thinking they're doing a "good deed" seeing someone wearing a red hat from behind. (I am sure someone will come in here in a bit and post a "Won't someone think of the white people?" meme or something in response to play down the issue.)

I guess my use of "well known" should be "prominent leaders". They absolutely aren't household names unless you live with white supremacists.

 You either ignore them and do clue others into the fact that this is happening and needs to stop or you report on them and spread their views to new people who are susceptible to them. I don't discredit your view and I think it's valid, I just feel like more good than harm is done by shedding a light on them. Exposure does them more harm in my opinion. 

I don't think people lumping all conservatives in with them is as prominent as you're suggesting, but I can only speak from my experiences. I remember there was a lot of pushback initially with Charlottesville, and I told people point blank that they were defending Nazi's when they defended those individuals, using evidence to show the march was populated by Neo Nazi's and that their chants were Nazi chants. Those people were the ones who can could absolutely label as racists and white supremacists, and they have been banned here. There certainly were people who were hesitant to call them out at first, assuming they weren't all Nazis/White Supremacists, and having the leading member of the GOP suggest some of them were "good people" didn't help.