• merc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    3 days ago

    You love it? You don’t look at this and think “This can’t possibly be how a reasonable society works”?

    • Freefall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      It isn’t how reasonable society works. It is how OUR society works. Can’t play by the rules of another game you wish you were playing, you will lose every time.

    • Liz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      When it stops being illegal to help vulnerable people, I’ll stop cheering for folks who open carry firearms to deter cops that might otherwise try to stop them.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        And the key to getting to a reasonable society is for everybody to wear guns.

    • Themadbeagle@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      3 days ago

      Of course most of us don’t love it. A lot of us live in places where, due to concepts like gerrymandering, we have no political choice, so people have to resort to stuff like this. We love that people are fighting back, not that it has to be this way.

    • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Not everyone agrees the cops should do whatever they want and sorting it out in court later is the way

      • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        and sorting it out in court later is the way

        Not with cops in US from what i heard. No chance.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          3 days ago

          That’s like saying the tolerant can’t be intolerant of the intolerant, when in fact they have to be.

          • rekabis@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            And it becomes even more viable when you consider that Popper’s idea is actually based off of a social contract.

            Essentially, tolerance is based on a social contract to be tolerant to each other. If someone is being intolerant, they are explicitly and intentionally removing themselves from the contract. Ergo, they no longer fall under protections, and people can then be intolerant of their intolerance.

              • Senal@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago
                • Regular Ignorance
                • Wilful Ignorance
                • Bad Faith

                Pick One, possibly two.

                There will of course be some who haven’t considered this perspective and some who disagree.

                I’d put money, however, on the vast majority arguing in favour of tolerating intolerance are the people this concept is talking about.

                The actively intolerant using the tolerance of others to enact further intolerance.