Yes, i very much agree. Liberalism will never present a legitimate defense against fascism, and will never prioritize working class rights.
Support working class politics. Support public ownership. Essentially, become a working class state. Outlaw fascist rhetoric. Redistribute wealth from billionaires to the working class. The main reason that fascist media organizations exist is because billionaires do. They wouldn't be able to mass indoctrinate if they did not have essentially boundless economic power. Fascists won in Germany and America both because of media dominance and manipulation of the western liberal political system. In very comparable ways honestly.
The German democracy failed to respond in any way to the rise of the fascists. The only political party attempting any actual resistance of the fascists was the communists. The conservative and liberal parties were more interested in combating the communists than they were about combating the fascists. It was more important to them that the institutions of capital remains unaffected than fascism being stopped. They could have never let Hitler step foot out of a jail cell again. They honestly could've shot him, and a fair number of his nazi party upper echelon. People were calling for it, literally. Most people believe that Hitler mass indoctrinated all of Germany and won a landslide election and from there dismantled German democracy. That actually isnt true though. The final fair and democratic elections in Weimar Germany resulted in an extremely slim victory for the Nazi party. The communists were very close behind them. And in turn were conservatives and social democrats close behind the communists. On the whole, the majority of the nation voted for other parties. Once a bad actor was chancellor, all he had to do was find an excuse to enact emergency powers. He was handed the best possible opportunity on a silver platter by a young communist who was doing his part to fight back. If only others had followed his example, maybe history wouldve ended differently. As it was, Hitler enacted emergency powers to suspend all civil liberties in Germany. He banned the communists from any political organization and started literally rounding up communists and communist politicians and putting them in concentration camps. This was in 1933. The first camps were for communists. Then when Hindenburg died a short while later there was literally nothing standing between him and pure absolute dictatorship.
He could've been stopped at many points if liberal democracy was an ideology that prioritized the rights of the working class. If they had had an aim whatsoever of stopping fascism, it was preventable. Much like the democratic party though, their primary aims were to protect the ruling class of capitalists and the institutions that allow them to steal working class labor.
The last waves of fascism this advanced in America were in the 1930s. Throughout the latter half of the 20th century outright Nazis were generally associated with skinheads and were almost universally hated by mainstream culture. There are now actual Nazi movements in control of western nations. And even where they aren't, they are winning over sizable percentages of the population.
This isnt going to pass as easily as you seem to think. Genocide has been live streamed around the world for almost 2 years and resistance to it has been relatively minor in terms of what you would actually expect. White western Christians (men especially) are actually mostly very down with white supremacy and neofascism. It benefits them specifically. And they represent the largest voting block in most western nations.
Liberalism could have prevented this by preventing Nazis from ever coming into positions of economic / cultural / political power in the first place. Liberalism is primarily concerned with countering revolutionary politics, moreso even than preventing fascist uprisings. It's more important to them that pro capitalist values are the dominant ones in politics and culture than whether anti fascist values are. The ruling class almost entirely stands to benefit either way, they're ambivalent towards fascism.
Have all the western countries that have had rising fascist dictatorship movements in the past few years come about through some other unrelated means?
Empathy isn't your strong suit is it. Nor apparently is carrying a serious conversation or responding to basic questions. Id love for you to point out what constitutes vitriol in that comment. Because no the comment as a whole is not vitriolic. I didnt call you names, I didnt insult you. I responded very deliberately and explained how I feel about this exact subject. Unless youre operating on a different definition of the word.
I dont get where this accusation that I am vitriolic is coming from, nor that I am asking you to be angry? I said that summarizing Joanne as a "shit person" puts her on par with like a guy at work who makes passively bigoted comments about his coworkers.
This is exactly what I have been talking about throughout this thread. People act like what she has done is just like, mildly bad or distasteful or something. Like she said a slur once or something. She is creating an international legal movement to attack my community. Thats an incredibly serious discussion to me.
You also didnt call her a monster, not in the comment I responded to anyhow. Its not a matter of my liking, its a matter of people downplaying the severity of who she is and what she has done. I've lost friends in the past 2 years due to rising hatred against our community. We live in fear of genocidal violence against us, and she is one of the loudest voices in the movement creating genocidal violence against us.
I dont understand where this defensiveness comes from for you, exactly. You and several other people here are acting like this is a casual difference of opinion when obviously to me and other people it isn't. I never insulted you, nor anyone else here. I have been upset and I have emphasized my opinion as this is obviously a subject that matters a lot to me. If you disagree with something I've said you can respond to it, instead of claiming that my issue is "you're not vitriolic/angry enough for my liking"?
Calling Joanne a shit person is incredibly dismissive of who she is and what she has done.
Youre spreading apologia for people supporting a woman who is extremely harmful to my community. I'm not going to passively sit back and watch you attempt to downplay how serious this conversation is to us. You ignored my comment and I did bring it over here when I saw you saying the same thing in an adjacent comment (this is all under my original comment, I see the updates). I'm not interested in people spreading support direct or indirect for Joanne Rowling on my home instance. I will argue against that every single step of the way.
I maintain what I said. Everyone has a line. Murder, sexual violence, child abuse, you know everyone has a point beyond which they will no longer consume content produced by someone. By continuing to consume content produced by Joanne Rowling, they are saying that she hasn't done anything enough to actually make the content she produced unethical to consume. There are always exceptions when it comes to art. I'm never going to convince people not to like something. But they can and should have to sit with the shame of that. The least they can do is own it, "yes spearheading an international movement to attack the rights of queer people is not enough for me to give up my favorite childhood author". If that's it for them, great. They're people who should probably stay away from the trans community. But to try and act like "No matter what an artist does it doesn't matter, their art is still sacred on its own and enjoyable without any ethical implcations" is ridiculous.
We're adult members of a community facing an ongoing outside attempt to literally destroy us. She is the figurehead of a movement thats sole aim is to entirely drive us out of society, an aim she is aware will kill us. If thats not enough for someone to drop a fucking book series than clearly trans lives dont matter too damn much to them.
She will. Haven't heard her name in 5 months. I honestly think by next election she will be entirely forgotten.
Is it against the rules to deride the use of image generation models in this community? Clarifying because your rules section says nothing about it.