"Paradox of Tolerance"

@Wellwater  
I’m aware that there was an extensive slave trade across East Africa and the Muslim Middle East, but i will point out that it failed to produce lasting negative effects on the demography and economy of both areas, unlike the Atlantic slave trade.  
Does that mean the Arab slave trade wasn’t exploitative? No. I will not defend the Arabs for perpetrating it. But you’re clearly comparing apples to oranges here.  
(What Aaron said before me, too)

“it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.”
 
The same people who spout off this “paradox” and the actual ones who literally do all of that. If it weren’t violently enraging, it’d be funny and sad.

@AaronMk  
It sounds like you’re saying it’s okay that the Arab slave trade went through an order of magnitude more slaves because it took roughly five times as long to do so and was more decentralized.
 
Sorry, but no.
 
@BadgingBadger  

 
Given the number of transplanted tribes within Africa itself (some of which later suffered ethnic discrimination up to and including genocide) and the many slaves living today in the various destinations (some of whom, if I’m not mistaken, are surviving first-generation slaves!), I don’t think this is at all supportable.
 

 
For those keeping track at home, this is the third time the goalposts have been moved on me (today, in this thread), and I’m pretty sick of this disingenuous slavery apologism. Intentional or otherwise, at some point ignorance can become culpable, and downplaying becomes excusing.

Lmao, you’re going to have to do a lot more leg work after you shifted the goal posts yourself to the Arab World as a counter argument

@AaronMk  
The post I replied to attempted to blame Europeans for African internecine raiding and slaving. Giving a counter-example that shows that this had already occurred before the European influence being blamed is not goalpost-shifting, but disproof by counter-example.

Lol you fucking goob. That is not what I am doing. How about trying to read?

@AaronMk  
It’s undeniably not what you are doing, but it certainly was what I was doing in reply to the original post (which wasn’t yours).

@Wellwater  

 
Oh, so you admit to fallacy’ing the fallacy? Very nice.

@AaronMk  
No, and I’m not sure how you came to that conclusion. I thought I was pretty clear in restating that I was using disproof by counter-example. Not that I was somehow moving the goalposts.

@Wellwater
 
You’re already distracting from the discussion with a non-sequeter about how someone else did X. I butt in with context, you get mad. I think a bluff has been called here.

@AaronMk  
I suppose I should have known better than to keep engaging with someone who is not only unclear, but arguing in bad faith and even using personal insults. But sure, you can consider your own bluff called if you insist.
 
I’m not sure how better to explain what a counter-example is, but maybe you can look it up somewhere.

@BadgingBadger  

 
Totally wrong. I don’t know where you got that from.  
The first African slave trades got immediately implemented as soon as they were able to expand their trade routes across the Sahara, which was at the time of the muslim conquests.  
And domestic slavery in Africa goes as far back as we have records about African history. i.e. the Kingdom of Kongo used captives from the Kingdom of Ndongo as slaves. In fact, we don’t know about a single period in history where there was no slavery in Africa.
 
Read a history book.

@BadgingBadger  

 
First:  
No, you were not aware that there was an slave trade in Africa, you specifically stated that slavery in Africa began when Europeans came into contact with them. Which is factually totally wrong and displays a huge gag in your educations.
 
Second:  
Of course it has a lasting effect on demographics and economy. It itself took place over centuries and the Atlantic slave trade was just the continuation of what they themselves started and the muslims continued for centuries.  
It did not have a long lasting impact on the muslim world because they castrated the slaves that they used. There are no descendants of those slaves in muslim countries today and there is no parallel society based on those there because they simply could not produce children or got killed like cattle as soon as they were of no value anymore.  
btw. the economic effects of slavery in the origin African countries was positive, both of the muslim and the atlantic slave trade. It was the reason why trade routes got built in the first place. Slavery was the reason why the first traders had interest in crossing the sahara. And Central Africa simply had no economy before slave trading. There was nothing. Just nomadic tribes and hunters and gatherers. Slave trading caused an economic boom in the congo region.

@Background Pony #FC15  

 
I think this is an overstatement; since 2/3rds of the North African slaves were female (for obvious and unpleasant reasons), they actually did have descendants, and in fact some of them are still around.
 
It is true, though, that many of the male slaves were castrated, which was not nearly as common in the Americas.

is incest tolerated?

@BadgingBadger  
Untrue, even natives from the rest of the american continent enslaved other natives centuries before the european invasion.

@Background Pony #5C7B  
But think of the Noble Savage narrative!

@Background Pony #8AE7  
I would unironically be for the restitution of a poni-only ethnostate fwiw. NO TWATTER LUSERS ALLOWED!  
Conquer Derpi in the name of artistic freedom and rename it Seaponyland!!!!  

 
@Background Pony #CC03  
Ironically there’s a hint of authenticity to the ‘Nigeria for Nigerians!’ remark.  
If you check out their largest forums, they’re not much different than ‘the donald’  
Hecc, Nairaland is just /pol/ for black peopol (Ha~Hah! I mæk funneh!)

@Inucroft  
Derpibooru is an art archive, not a political platform. Hosting user generated content does not make the site accountable to german or basically any non-totalitarian world government just because Nazi content is present. Learn the law you are attempting to cite before you attempt to wield it as a weapon, attempting to use law as a weapon before understanding it on the internet is akin to challenging an olympic fencer to a duel with a rapier and wondering why no one thinks you’ll win. SOMEONE on the internet will know more than a layperson’s perspective on the issue and will challenge your assumptions, as I just have.
 
Edit: Whoops. Forgot to click last before responding. Sorry for dredging this up!

@VermiIIion  
Not in real life. In art though? Go absolutely ham.

@NounVerb
 
The “Paradox of Intolerance” is quite simple: the very freedom you enjoy will be used by the fascist to take it from you; by tolerating them, you inevitably wind up under the jackboot of their tyranny because tolerating them means doing nothing to stop them. Therefore, to avoid that, you must be intolerant of them. Because they have demonstrably done great harm to every society they’ve come to power in and it’s only in denying them the chance to do so again that we can avoid repeating history. It’s paradoxical because to ensure a more tolerant society, you must be intolerant of those who would destroy it. It’s an argument against the kind of idiotic naivete that demands we don’t live in the real world where that has actually really happened before and we cannot possibly learn from history.
 
I’m not going to get my knickers in a twist but at the same time, it’s a bit… unnerving how some people so apoplectically rush to the defence of Nazism and/or its supporters. Again, it’s demanded that we naively believe that no one could possibly be a neo-Nazi, that they don’t try to cynically use human psychology to manipulate others, and that taking any steps against them pits you as the real one at fault.
 
Again, cynical manipulation of people - it’s something they’re great at.
 
It’s been well documented that they repackage their arguments in ways that make them seem innocuous but if you pull at the thread just a little bit, it starts to unravel. Then they (and their patsies) get mad and start screeching that it doesn’t prove anything because we have to pretend no one could possibly see through their euphemisms.
 
Speaking of euphemisms, the massive uptick in the use of ‘Marxism’ and more pointedly ‘Cultural Marxism’ is just a little bit on the nose as regards being a flimsy attempt to rename ‘Cultural Bolshevism’. Then you see the same and similar people wailing about ‘degeneracy’ … well, being asked to ignore the glaring commonalities becomes just a bit fucking much, frankly.
 
Nazi horses is just a way to get the foot in the door. A lot of these movements have been trying to capitalise on disaffected young men and I wouldn’t say it’s any great stretch to say many exist in the fandom. Because it’s not about Nazi horses, it’s about normalising the concept of Nazism, as something kitschy and cartoonish - harmless. Except not really harmless because then it starts being about the ‘normies’ or whatever they call it these days. It starts being about how you are the victim in society, no matter your own responsibility for your situation, and more importantly that they are the ones responsible for your status. Once they are removed, you will assume your rightful place.
 
And not-at-all-suddenly you have people marching through the streets chanting “the Jews will not replace us”.
 
But it doesn’t start out like that. Not everywhere. To the faithful and true believers inducted into it, that’s what they’re told explicitly. But to the witless and the disaffected? Package it up in something that appears somewhat innocuous (you don’t have to try that hard).
 
If you see the potential for a fire, do you wait until it’s started? Or do you take steps to prevent it? That is what the ‘Paradox of Intolerance’ gets at. We know the warning signs. Some people are just angrily demanding we ignore them.

@Standard Deviation  
this

@Standard Deviation
 
I’m gonna be honest this sounds like “moon landing was fake”-tier conspiracy theory malarkey. To say neonazis aren’t real is about as accurate as shooting a flintlock at a target 50 miles away. They’re real, for certain.
 
They’re not numerous enough to be a genuine threat, however.
 
See the issue with this claim is that culturally speaking, nazis represent the greatest evil to the common man, and so, the greatest of proof is required for someone to be factually labelled a nazi. That said, when you have a group so solely devoted to pulling every string they can to call things fascist or racist or “nazi” for doing an okay hand sign you can start to see why people don’t take the concept of nazis all that seriously anymore.
 
Make no mistake, the fact that the nazis even ascended to a position of power to begin with (and in germany of all places) was an order of events so politically random and unfortunate that it may not happen again in the history of humanity as a whole.
 
Being on the fence doesn’t make you an enabler, only extremists think that. If you want to stop nazis, here’s a genuine 100% successful method that not only WORKS, but also doesn’t harm bystanders that are merely living their lives: Ignore & report them.
 
That’s it, the answer to the riddle so cleverly hidden in plain sight. You ignore them and go about your day.
 
If the person posting racist shit is a troll, then ignoring works because trolls crave attention, and denying them their fix of attention results in them giving up and going somewhere else to bait a reaction.
 
If the person is an actual nazi, then ignoring works because most people don’t actually know what a nazi is and what their ideals are beyond being bigoted and fascist, and by debating them unprepared you don’t know what to look out for and may buy into their ideology. Not only that but by debating them you’re forcing them deeper into their delusion regardless of the outcome of that argument, so by ignoring them you’re passively helping them snap out of it.
 
So no, sorry but prevention only works to mostly annoy and harm bystanders who know little and care less about political climates and warning signs, and who are unlikely to even fall in these traps because if all the “nazi dogwhistles” are so insconpicuous, how can they ever be used to recruit normal people?
 

 
 
Huge edit because this  

 
Is simply just not true