More than 50 people stood outside the Enoch Pratt Library’s Southeast Anchor branch on a recent spring morning in Baltimore. Parents with small children, teenagers, and senior citizens clustered outside the door and waited to hear their ticket numbers called.
They weren’t there for books—at least, not at that moment. They came to shop for groceries.
Connected to the library, the brightly painted market space is small but doesn’t feel cramped. Massive windows drench it in sunshine. In a previous life, it was a café. Now, shelves, tables, counters, and a refrigerator are spread out across the room, holding a mix of produce and shelf-stable goods.
But you’re still advocating for the murder of an out-group (i.e. conservatives). You’re also just shifting the blame to someone else, which is exactly what you’re accusing THEM of.
Doctors cut people up just like serial killers. They’re basically the same.
No, because their intention is different.
You’re not trying to cure conservatives of their hard-heartedness, you’re threatening to punish them for it.
The intention is different. Self defense against conservatives vs their offense against all. See also the paradox of tolerance
So you’re still just arguing about what’s best for you in the moment.
Say you succeeded with this plan, all the rich conservatives are dead, and all their wealth has been distributed to feed those who are in need. Who are you going to kill and eat next?
Arguing for what’s best for humanity long term…
No one. This isn’t the fascism that always needs an enemy to hate on
“We’re gonna round up and kill all the undesirables, but it’s not fascism when WE do it”
Okay buddy.