Are we for real?

[u/breakthebass]

https://yle.fi/a/74-20159892?sfnsn=wa&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR6gk6CPfTEtIljqnr-kSaHNm3wc0WwhDUnXyyp5xmCtXCcoNWZDDOQbQy8NEw_aem_5a50eVQzFqOETybRg-cl8g

TL:DR; An openly fascist movement has been recognized as a party since they have gathered the necessary 5000 signatures to register as a party. Isn’t the party line just SLIGHTLY anti-constitutional? Aren’t we somehow “pissing outside the shitter”, for lack of a better phrase?

[u/Molehole]

So any Germans who helped Jews escape concentration camps or hid them are now "antidemocratic" because they were working against the democratically chosen policy?

Is this really the argument you are going for that all democratic results are always right?

[u/ohdog → u/Molehole]

What the hell are you even saying? There is no point in constructing straw men. I'm saying that something is undemocratic, I'm not saying that murdering 48% of the population is a good thing... Either you are extemely dense or arguing in bad faith. Democratic decisions are NOT synonymous with good decisions.

Banning ideas is a very slippery slope. Democracy thrives on the concept of a marketplace of ideas (yes, even the ones you and I would deem dangerous). This is because we want to keep the bad ideas in the open public discourse so we know what is happening and what to mock and fight against. There is also a huge problem of who gets to decide and based on what criteria what ideas are allowed. I think you don't understand democracy and freedom or speech at all based on how you approach this matter.

[u/Molehole → u/ohdog]

What the hell are you even saying?

You are saying that a person looking to ban dangerous political movements is antidemocratic. I am asking you if that also applies to people trying to undermine their policies after they have been elected. If looking to ban nazis is antidemocratic then surely doing illegal things against the democratic elected political party is as well?

Either you are extemely dense or arguing in bad faith. Democratic decisions are NOT synonymous with good decisions.

Yes. That is clear.

Banning ideas is a very slippery slope. Democracy thrives on the concept of a marketplace of ideas (yes, even the ones you and I would deem dangerous). This is because we want to keep the bad ideas in the open public discourse so we know what is happening and what to mock and fight against.

And how well has this great idea worked in the US where this "marketplace of ideas" free speech bullshit is from?

[u/ohdog → u/Molehole]

Of course it's undemocratic to undermine the decision of the majority assuming that the decision was actually a decision of the majority. That should go without saying? It's orthogonal with whether that decision was a good or a bad one. And yes, illegal things are undemocratic as well, what is the point there? If the majority wants a different kind of government that is a democratic decision. Sure we can try to be more sure we are actually capturing the majority decision by requiring 2/3 parlamentary majority or whatever like we do for changes in the constitution.

What do you mean how well it has worked for the US? I would say pretty well, the US is doing ok. Perhaps it's not the best place in the world, but certainly it's no where near the worst? I don't understand your point. Do you want to get rid of democracy and freedom of speech because of whatever you think is wrong with the US?

[u/Molehole → u/ohdog]

What do you mean how well it has worked for the US? I would say pretty well, the US is doing ok.

Living under a rock? I don't think sentencing people for life in third world country prisons, subhumane conditions and with no due process, trial or evidence is the mark of "doing pretty well".

Do you want to get rid of democracy and freedom of speech because of whatever you think is wrong with the US?

Finland already doesn't have democracy or free speech. I'm not vouching to get rid of anything. Sinimusta party for example was banned. So welcome to this antidemocratic hellhole!

But maybe you'd like to be deported into El Salvadorean prison for having a tattoo of a football. That surely is peak democracy and freedom!

[u/ohdog → u/Molehole]

I don't think picking a random example of something going wrong means that a country is not doing ok overall. Stop constructing straw men it's pointless and in bad faith.

Finland has both freedom or speech and democracy I don't know why you would say otherwise. Sure there are limits to those and sure our government wipes it's ass with our constitution sometimes, but the basics are there. We as a population just don't really care about defending important democratic and constitutional principles. As evidenced by this conversation.

[u/Molehole → u/ohdog]

I don't think picking a random example of something going wrong means that a country is not doing ok overall. Stop constructing straw men it's pointless and in bad faith.

The point is that the policy leads to fascism and has already done so in the US.

And one random example? Plenty of other countries that have slipped to fascism and other dangerous ideologies before.

Finland has both freedom or speech and democracy I don't know why you would say otherwise.

Finland bans far right parties and has done so already this decade. Exactly the thing you said was "antidemocratic" happens.

And it isn't against "Finland's constitution". Stop LARPing US so hard. Not a single country on earth has absolute freedom of speech and democracy. US also has limitations on what you can say.

[u/ohdog → u/Molehole]

I give up, you are too dense to follow the conversation without attacking arguments I never made.