Discussion
Sorry but DHH calling people wolves that need to be shot does not come "from a place of caring" https://lobste.rs/s/ipy9xw/normalized_fascism_open_source_12#c_gzsbdi
You can defend any horrible genocidist this way: oh they were a good family member, a nice neighbor, they're worried about their kids. But what you're doing with that is enabling genocide https://lobste.rs/s/ipy9xw/normalized_fascism_open_source_12#c_gzsbdi
Yes, it's good, and important when feasible, to participate in de-radicalizing people by approaching them with empathy and helping them understand that the path they are on is dangerous
But publicly *excusing* someone powerful and famous who's deep down that rabbit hole isn't that.
@cwebber Quite the leap to suggest one can't indirectly discuss someone's intolerant ideas bluntly because being directly empathetic can make them change their mind (after a LOT of work and frequently just a small improvement).
But saying "but he's a caring father" ain't even indirectly being empathetic. Favorably, it's asking (begging) everyone else (who likely has no access to DHH) to have direct empathetic talks. Unfavorably, it's just glazing.
@cwebber Two things can be true: Daryl Davis seems to be a truly wonderful human being doing The Lord's Work(TM) in trying to reach out to people who are racist, etc., and teach them better ways. I admire him greatly.
I sometimes wonder if Davis is unintentionally doing more harm than good, though, because his story gets trotted out in so many discussions with the implication (or outright assertion) that you can't be intolerant of bigots because they allegedly can be turned around if everybody just works hard enough. It's not their fault, really; they're just misguided. Don't be mean to them; even when they're openly working toward eradicating whole groups of people, *you* just have to work harder!
The fact that someone like Davis can *sometimes* reach those folks and walk them back does not excuse them one iota. It certainly does not obligate the rest of us to tolerate bigotry and worse when people like DHH use their position to advocate for what amounts to genocide or at least apartheid. (Being charitable, let's assume that DHH and Co. would be content to "merely" segregate Europe and the US so that white people are the majority and hold power.)
In my mind, the right approach is to ostracize bigots, etc., and work to prevent harm. Only after they are unable to inflict harm on their targets is it a priority to reach them and try to bring them back into a healthy society. As long as they are hurting people it is not reasonable to let that continue in the hopes that *maybe* they can be compassioned into reason. And there are some folks, like DHH, that I don't think can be reached regardless.
Some people are bigoted and cruel because it's what they've learned and they can unlearn it. Some people just like it, and you could try everything under the Sun and never reach them. It is unimportant to me to try to distinguish between those groups as long as they are a threat to innocent people.
@jzb @cwebber The problem, I think, is that...
[/2¢ (adjusted for inflation)]
Install bonfire.cafe
Get the full app experience
