Mid-Life Crisis posted:

No, opinions you don’t like don’t deserve bans if they are articulated with arguments. Thats the whole idea here. You retort with flaws in the points and then leave it be. If their arguments don’t have any basis, then you probe for not bringing anything to the table other than hateful, exclusionary feelings. But not until that’s made abundantly clear. The reality is there’s always some misunderstanding in-between, the gray area. Some folk’s method of getting to that may be making an outlandish claim and waiting for the entire internet to tell them why they’re wrong-they are just less empathic, not necessarily bad faith or trolling. But only if they tackle the points brought forward. That’s D&D

Short one liners, reductivism, etc. are all social tools used to bully. You can say you feel okay bullying Nazis, go do so in GBS or CSPAM. These are leftist tools for control, acting no different than Nazis, just with a different target. That’s not debating or discussing. Calling someone a Nazi should not be okay unless you take the effort to compare their arguments with those historically made by the reich. Calling someone a Nazi doesn’t change them. Banning doesn’t either. Showing them how their arguments mirror Nazi principles might. This goes the other way too

If the effect of your argument is to turn anyone you dislike into a ‘ist’ to nullify their opinion you aren’t debating or discussing. Way too much of this going on here.