I’m guessing the point wasn’t to express mere disinterest, but active resentment of the opposing viewpoint: “Not only have I no desire to converse with you, which may be taken as a hesitation to engage with your views, but I believe such a conversation to be utterly worthless because I despise your entire world view” with a dash of “You’re a bigot and I want nothing to do with your kind.”
That doesn’t preclude taking a moment to write such a letter.
If anything, it serves to challenge the pretense of dignified and harmless “opinions” that fascists like to leverage. I’d argue that is much more productive than the way discourse has occasionally evaded calling out the cruel, sadistic, violent, bigoted assholes and enemies of human progress and dignity as just that.
As Russel notes, there is no reasonable discussion to be had with someone so openly endorsing violence beyond reason, whose entire worldview is so diametrically opposed that there is no common ground to found a discussion on in the first place.
Giving fascists the “Eh, just opinions” benefit normalises their hateful views as permissible. For anyone valuing freedom, tolerance, progress and justice, opposing these rhetorics is not just sensible, but even crucial to combat the spread of this ideological cancer.
There can be no peaceful disagreement with an ideology that, given the chance, will suppress all disagreement violently.
I’m guessing the point wasn’t to express mere disinterest, but active resentment of the opposing viewpoint: “Not only have I no desire to converse with you, which may be taken as a hesitation to engage with your views, but I believe such a conversation to be utterly worthless because I despise your entire world view” with a dash of “You’re a bigot and I want nothing to do with your kind.”
“No thank you” just doesn’t drive that home.
Where does the motivation to drive that home come from, isn’t this just a difference in opinion?
“I hate bigotry” is quite a strong opinion
Yea, I’d expect they’d do something more productive against it then
That doesn’t preclude taking a moment to write such a letter.
If anything, it serves to challenge the pretense of dignified and harmless “opinions” that fascists like to leverage. I’d argue that is much more productive than the way discourse has occasionally evaded calling out the cruel, sadistic, violent, bigoted assholes and enemies of human progress and dignity as just that.
As Russel notes, there is no reasonable discussion to be had with someone so openly endorsing violence beyond reason, whose entire worldview is so diametrically opposed that there is no common ground to found a discussion on in the first place.
Giving fascists the “Eh, just opinions” benefit normalises their hateful views as permissible. For anyone valuing freedom, tolerance, progress and justice, opposing these rhetorics is not just sensible, but even crucial to combat the spread of this ideological cancer.
There can be no peaceful disagreement with an ideology that, given the chance, will suppress all disagreement violently.
This isn’t challenging or achieving anything though, it’s just a long form “no”