Not really “powertripping”. Just pathetic. Consider this a notice to avoid feddit.org… I’ve unsubbed and blocked the instance.

We can’t dehumanize fascists for their choice to dehumanize everyone for things outside their control though, because that would be mean, and hurt their sociopath feefees!

Europe stool idly by throughout the 1930’s “tolerating” fascism, and the Nazi’s killed over 100 million people. Don’t make the same mistake as the radical centrists of history. Fascists will not afford you the same tolerance or courtesy.

  • Don Antonio Magino@feddit.nl
    38·
    6 days ago

    They seem to only have a rule against dehumanisation of minorities, where the term is pretty clearly intended to mean minorities generally subject to persecution/bigotry:

    4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.

    I feel the ban is a bit over the top, anyway. I get the post being removed for being a bit too aggressive, but to immediately ban over (what I presume) is a first offence… I’d simply give a warning myself.

    • cows_are_underrated@feddit.org
      3·
      4 days ago

      Another rule is that all contents have to follow German, Austrian and Switzerland’s laws. Under German law the comment that got deleted is incitement of people and therefore it was right to delete it.

    • Skiluros@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      223·
      6 days ago

      Ban is definitely over the top.

      Sometimes less is more with respect to rhetoric (not saying there aren’t situations were you have to be clear and uncompromising in your statements).

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      2317·
      6 days ago

      Saying “nazi lives don’t matter” isn’t even “dehumanizing”.

      Dehumanization is Trump calling immigrants rapists and criminals, and associating them with insects, rodents, and pests.

      Dehumanization is banning every government department from acknowledging the existence of women, LGBTQ+, minorities, etc, and ordering them to erase any mention of their history.

      • friendlymessage@feddit.org
        92·
        5 days ago

        You’re not gonna see this as you blocked feddit.org, also geh dahin wo der Pfeffer wächst!

        For everyone else:

        Saying “nazi lives don’t matter” isn’t even “dehumanizing”.

        Doubtful from a legal point of view

        Dehumanization is Trump calling immigrants rapists and criminals, and associating them with insects, rodents, and pests.

        Dehumanization is banning every government department from acknowledging the existence of women, LGBTQ+, minorities, etc, and ordering them to erase any mention of their history.

        Basically everyone on feddit.org agrees with this, so this whole rambling doesn’t make any sense. Two things can be true at the same time.

        • FelixCress@lemmy.world
          25·
          5 days ago

          Doubtful from a legal point of view

          Can you quote the section of German law you based this assessment on?

          • needanke@feddit.org
            9·
            5 days ago

            https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__130.html

            (1) Anyone who, in a manner that is likely to disturb the public peace,

            1. incites hatred against a national, racial, religious or ethnic group, against sections of the population or against an individual because of his or her membership of the aforementioned group or a section of the population, or incites violence or arbitrary measures, or
            2. attacks the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously denigrating or defaming a designated group, sections of the population or an individual because of their membership of a designated group or a section of the population,

            shall be liable to a custodial sentence of three months to five years.

            And according to https://kujus-strafverteidigung.de/strafrecht/volksverhetzung/ the protected groups include

            Gruppen mit einer bestimmten weltanschaulichen Überzeugung (Groups with a certain view or conviction)

            Which one could concievably put Nazis into (although their views are shit they’re still views)

            https://www.anwalt.org/volksverhetzung/#absatz-1-nr-1-stoerung-des-oeffentlichen-friedens-durch-aufruf-zu-hass-und-gewalt Further provides the following explanation for attacks against human dignity:

            Dem Täter kommt es aus verwerflichen Beweggründen darauf an, andere Menschen als besonders minderwertig, unwürdig und verachtenswert darzustellen. (For reprehensible motives, the perpetrator aims to portray other people as particularly inferior, unworthy and despicable.)

            I would think saying someones live does not matter constitutes them as unworthy (of life).

            • FelixCress@lemmy.world
              47·
              5 days ago

              Thank you, first answer with a merit. Although 1 definitely doesn’t apply. 2 you can argue about but I doubt it.

      • Skiluros@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        161·
        6 days ago

        Agreed regarding Trump and dehumanization. I am Ukrainian, so you can imagine what I think of Trump, his goons and even those who support Trump (Americans or otherwise).

        I am almost arguing from a devil’s advocate point of view.

        To be honest, I wouldn’t be surprised if the mods at a high level support your views (in a different more nuanced phrasing), but you do have to have a modicum of fairness when approaching a rule like “no dehumanization”. The style/tone of your comment did conflict with the rules, that’s all I am saying.