Andrew StroehleinDec 2, 2022

The Holocaust did not begin with killing; it began with words.

Genocides do not start with mass murder. That's where they end up.

Genocides & other mass atrocity crimes begin with words - specifically, with powerful people dehumanizing a minority.

Once they are seen as less than human, anything is possible, even mass murder.

šŸ‘‰ You can speak out loudly today for the rights of others, or you can stay silent & wait for tomorrow, when your rights will be taken away too.

Show threadNazishDec 2, 2022

@andrewstroehlein A lot of hate speech is being normalized under the label free speech. This leads to the escalation of violence in vocabulary. Free speech should not be free of responsibility - or content moderation - otherwise itā€™s anarchy. There needs to be regulation and accountability for social media platforms like for other media.

Ā« In the beginning was the word Ā» and words lead to actions.

Show threadArielDec 2, 2022
@Nazishmunch a minor nitpick: people being able to spread hate without pushback is not what 'anarchy' means. Quite often, it's anarchists who are pushing back against hate the hardest, so I hope you get why I feel like what you said is a mischaracterisation.
Show threadNazishDec 2, 2022
@Walk_blesseD I meant, in my opinion, freedom without responsibility/ rules is anarchy. You are free to drive a car as long as you respect the rules that protect the safety of all - even in a private parking lot. You are not allowed to drive over someoneā€™s foot even in a private place without being held responsible for it.
Show threadArielDec 2, 2022
@Nazishmunch I think your opinion is, at best, unhelpful because it's perpetuating an inaccurate view of what people who want anarchy are actually trying to achieve. As far as I see it, "freedom without responsibility/ rules is anarchy" is just as reductive and misleading a take as "socialism is when the government does stuff."
Show threadArielDec 2, 2022
@Nazishmunch oh right, it looks like you're a capitalist. Nevermind.
Show threadMatthew Woodget Dec 2, 2022
@Walk_blesseD @Nazishmunch call me a capitalist too if you must. We live in a world where money is necessary for survival. I prefer it to barter šŸ¤·ā€ā™‚ļø more money = more resources = more able to help others. All things in moderation. Also words matter. I prefer laws that give us equal footing & opportunity. My experience with anarchists is they tend to be well meaning but naive of the complexities of society. Something experience usually educates and alters.
Show threadSilkesterDec 2, 2022

@mattwoodget @Walk_blesseD @Nazishmunch

Unadulterated capitalism is toxic. I find it frightening how unchallenged people repeat the mantra a company has one goal, which is profit.

Absolutely not! No entity has the right to put profit over the well-being of the individual or the community or the environment.

We need strong anarchistic, socialistic and democratic regulations in our society so that the natural instinct of any capitalist entity is to learn to benefit all three as much as able.

Show threadNazishDec 2, 2022
@silkester @mattwoodget @Walk_blesseD agree and yet that is the main indicator banks, investors and stock holders look at. When they consider EBITDA as the need to have and the others just nice to have, flying against it feels like facing gale force winds.
Look at paid sick leave. How this is not yet mandatory in the US is beyond my comprehension. And yet so it is because the one argument against it, the corporate profit margin, wins the day.
Show threadSilkesterDec 2, 2022
@Nazishmunch @mattwoodget @Walk_blesseD
I once spoke with the risk manager for Daimler in Stuttgart. He put the emphasis clearly on the investors. I held against, that investors only do them good short term. There needs to be a balance between customer, investor, and employees and as it turns out the environment. Daimler may very well see their last days if they can't solve CO2 emissions and environmental friendly energy sources for their engines.
Show threadNazishDec 2, 2022
@silkester @mattwoodget @Walk_blesseD And Daimler Benz has the cash reserves and the clout to do so. The fact that they donā€™t is probably partly because consumers buy their cars anyway as a prestige symbol so thereā€™s no incentive for change and partly because of the corporate inertia that can be found often in large companies.
Show threadSilkester

@Nazishmunch @mattwoodget @Walk_blesseD

Well, they have and had for decades the clout to generate the awareness and chose not to. Just like Exxon they employ scientists to assess their car's effect on the environment and economical risks, and just like exxon they chose not to heed the warnings.

We're not talking about days but decades.

Dec 2, 2022 at 11:00pmWeb
Show threadNazishDec 2, 2022
@silkester @mattwoodget @Walk_blesseD thereā€™s no consumer pressure on them either. We know that their lobbying budgets - which btw I feel is legalized corruption - ensure they wonā€™t face any governmental pressure. But if consumers keep buying their products, and thereā€™s no consumer pressure, what incentive is there for them to change?
Show threadSilkesterDec 2, 2022

@Nazishmunch @mattwoodget @Walk_blesseD

Bloody foresight and the chance to keep the lead instead of running behind mediocre competitors like Tesla with a shoddy quality management and a CEO who talks a good game but not much more.

Daimlers lead was well deserved for staying ahead with car developments, just not in one department: emissions.

Show threadNazishDec 2, 2022
@silkester @mattwoodget @Walk_blesseD all good then. itā€™s only the planet and our collective future šŸ˜³šŸ™„šŸ˜‚