How should society deal with Neo-Nazis?

[Saint Frankenstein]

What's normal, how is that determination made, by whom, and why are they being held to different standards? I never got the impression there was an exemption clause in the golden rule.

I'm simply treating the neo-Nazis as they would have others treat them. See, I can turn it around on you, as well.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I'm simply treating the neo-Nazis as they would have others treat them. See, I can turn it around on you, as well.

That's not what the golden rule tells you to do. It tells you to treat others as you would have them treat you. Not how they want to treat you. That's vengeance. And also rather opposed to the 'turn the other cheek.'

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

That's not what the golden rule tells you to do. It tells you to treat others as you would have them treat you. Not how they want to treat you. That's vengeance. And also rather opposed to the 'turn the other cheek.'

Basically, the verse is saying that if you want to be treated well, treat others well. I think by stopping people from harming others (and themselves) is treating others well.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Actually the verse would more be saying that if you don't want people to decide that your views are suddenly unfit for social display, you shouldn't do the same to their views.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Basically, the verse is saying that if you want to be treated well, treat others well. I think by stopping people from harming others (and themselves) is treating others well.

I disagree that's what the verse says, especially when it explicitly says not to resist evil, not to slap someone looking to slap you.
I agree with the sentiment of protection, but I think sacrificing freedoms, in this case free speech, freedom to gather, etc, undermines the security it's trying to provide. Plus, as I believe with many subjects, driving what I disagree with into the underground only makes it more extreme and less tracable.
"I disagree vehemently with what you say but I will defend your right to say it" and all that.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I disagree that's what the verse says, especially when it explicitly says not to resist evil, not to slap someone looking to slap you.
I agree with the sentiment of protection, but I think sacrificing freedoms, in this case free speech, freedom to gather, etc, undermines the security it's trying to provide. Plus, as I believe with many subjects, driving what I disagree with into the underground only makes it more extreme and less tracable.
"I disagree vehemently with what you say but I will defend your right to say it" and all that.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[VioletVortex]

Basically, the verse is saying that if you want to be treated well, treat others well. I think by stopping people from harming others (and themselves) is treating others well.

Neo-Nazis rarely do any sort of harm. People like Dylann Roof aren't Nazis, they're just ignorant and sociopathic. They use racialist ideals as a motive for their actions, which are really just driven by a carnal motive to kill people. These kinds of people are disgraces to Nationalism.

 

[icehorse]

Plus, as I believe with many subjects, driving what I disagree with into the underground only makes it more extreme and less tracable.

So back to the OP, what can you do? There have to be morally and ethically sound approaches to marginalizing the intolerant or evil. (Yes, I think climate change deniers are evil.)

 

[psychoslice]

What's happening around the world lately, I don't think Neo-Nazis are a problem at all, lets get our priorities right.

 

[LuisDantas]

What specific actions should society take in response to groups like this?

Fix the natality rates, the jaundiced social disparities, and the social support network, while slaughtering and mocking the very memory of worship of military force and bullying in a more general sense.

In the U.S., when Neo-Nazis march in Jewish communities, we defend their right to do so (and it's expensive to provide that defense).

That is nice to know, but I don't think it connects to the solution in a significant way.

Should we decry them? Should we marginalize them? What would that look like?

Nazism is perhaps the earlier clear stance of the protagonism that now so threatens us all. In order to heal that disease we must render it unnecessary and unappealling.

In the repressive front, that means mocking the living daylights out of it and making it exceedingly clear that we will not accept it among our friends and family. Much like, say, pedophily or blatant rape.

In the ultimately more decisive preventive front, that means destroying its causes, which unavoidably means building a more integrative, inclusive society with far lesser social inequalities.

 

[Stevicus]

Fix the natality rates, the jaundiced social disparities, and the social support network, while slaughtering and mocking the very memory of worship of military force and bullying in a more general sense.

I agree, although it occurred to me that we really do tend to worship military force and bullying in general. Our culture tends to glorify violence to a large degree, as well as certain Darwinian principles about the "laws of nature" and so forth. That's how the social disparities and inequities are often justified, since "only the strong shall survive," while the weak deserve to be dominated and exploited. The more "enlightened" version of it is that the "good strong" (Captain America) have to fight the "evil strong" in order to protect the weak, but either way, the "weak" are mainly there as abstract symbolism, either as helpless victims or loyal servants who know their place. But oftentimes the line between "bully" and "protector" can get blurred.

 

[LuisDantas]

I agree, although it occurred to me that we really do tend to worship military force and bullying in general. Our culture tends to glorify violence to a large degree, as well as certain Darwinian principles about the "laws of nature" and so forth. That's how the social disparities and inequities are often justified, since "only the strong shall survive," while the weak deserve to be dominated and exploited. The more "enlightened" version of it is that the "good strong" (Captain America) have to fight the "evil strong" in order to protect the weak, but either way, the "weak" are mainly there as abstract symbolism, either as helpless victims or loyal servants who know their place. But oftentimes the line between "bully" and "protector" can get blurred.

That is IMO a major obstacle to world peace. Although I would not call it Darwinian, but rather instintictual.

The arms race mentality is very easy to explain as a consequence of instinctual drives that were useful back in the stone age. But today they are a major threat to humanity's continued existence. Our weapons, ambitions and sheer numbers can no longer sustain such unenlightened attitudes.

 

[icehorse]

In the ultimately more decisive preventive front, that means destroying its causes, which unavoidably means building a more integrative, inclusive society with far lesser social inequalities.

Wonderful post Luis. One important step in this direction is to improve education. Criticize indoctrination, and promote the teaching of critical thinking.

If you "google": teaching philosophy to young students

You can find many articles discussing how teaching kids philosophy makes them better students overall.

 

[columbus]

One important step in this direction is to improve education. Criticize indoctrination, and promote the teaching of critical thinking.

You evilutionist atheist you. How dare you promote godlessness so shamelessly?
Why do you hate God?

Tom

 

[leibowde84]

Allowing people to hide behind rights they do not accept others having will have horrible consequences down the road. This is the bigger concern. Tolerating the intolerant leads to the end of tolerance for all.

You should forfeit your claim to any rights you advocate taking away from others. There is nothing unethical or morally objectionable about reciprocity, no double standards allowed.

You are confusing "should" with "must". If they willfully give up their rights, that is a lot more reasonable than taking their rights away against their will. You can't rob anyone of their constitutional rights. And, until neo-nazis actually take ACTION rather than mere words and expression, there is nothing that should be done to rob them of their constitutionally protected rights.

Part of living in a free society means putting up with things that are despicable. Neo-nazis are a disgusting breed of human beings (if you can even call them that). But, they remind us of what we must keep fighting against. They remind us that racism, nationalism, and hatred are still a real enemy in the US. The recent election made that very clear as well. It's not just neo-nazis that we must be weary of, it is the alt-right as well. In a lot of ways, they are one and the same. America first is a dangerous policy, and it is one that will harm America in the long run.

But, a free society must have open debate. There cannot be any fear of legal action against one for merely expressing their beliefs. That WILL lead to authoritarianism and inevitably the end of freedom of speech.

In other words, to protect the right of expression for reasonable people, the right of free expression must be protected for the worst of us.

 

[icehorse]

In other words, to protect the right of expression for reasonable people, the right of free expression must be protected for the worst of us.

Agreed. But I hope you'd be okay if we mock them mercilessly.

 

[leibowde84]

Agreed. But I hope you'd be okay if we mock them mercilessly.

I encourage it, actually.

 

[columbus]

Agreed. But I hope you'd be okay if we mock them mercilessly.

I definitely feel that is the peaceful solution.
Viciously mock them with all the nuclear tipped sarcasm possible. Under certain circumstances, cream pies and rotten tomatoes could be brought to bear.
Tom

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Just remember that cream pies and tomatoes in today's world constitute as assault.

 

[columbus]

Just remember that cream pies and tomatoes in today's world constitute as assault.

Yeah well, people can justify looting and vandalism parties in honor of the latest "suicide by cop" celebrity.
They'll have to get over a clothes cleaning bill.
Tom