Any press is good press. Filter out any mention of fashtech so that you can’t be tempted to respond to it.
The picture is an example in #mbin. Lemmy might have it too
Any press is good press. Filter out any mention of fashtech so that you can’t be tempted to respond to it.
The picture is an example in #mbin. Lemmy might have it too
people are using the word facist wrong. they are watering it down. but the guy is racist. he wasnt lamenting about illegal immigrants he was complaining that brits were no longer white. he did this by referencing a graph that showed the oercentage of british citizens (not illegal immigrants). this graph showed a percentage of white and non white and he referenced that exact percentage.
It’s possible he is actually racist, I don’t know, but I agree with you that the word fascist is being thrown around much too easily.
The problem I see is people don’t seem willing to have good-faith discussions or accept that other equally valid perspectives can exist.
Out of sheer curiosity I said this to my local LLM:
Usually, yes—if your goal is to change their mind. Internet arguments often reward winning, performance, and group approval more than honest reconsideration. It can still be worthwhile when: - Someone else might learn from the exchange. - The claim could cause real harm if left unchallenged. - The person seems curious and is engaging in good faith. - You can provide a concise correction with evidence and then stop. A useful rule: make one clear point, support it briefly, and watch their response. If they ignore evidence, shift the goalposts, insult you, or repeat the same claim, disengage. You don’t have to attend every argument you’re invited to.