ubergeek comments on Grok got no chill

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 23 points 1 year ago (15 children)

Not advocating for death penalty, it’s categorically wrong.

It's not. The death penalty is suitable for things like genocide... Or even being a propagandist for crimes against humanity.

For example, the world would positively be a better place, if Elon Musk was executed for his aiding of crimes against humanity.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 15 child comments

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 11 points 1 year ago (14 children)

Life imprisonment I have always felt is the crueler of the punishments. A stretched out monotony that makes a day last the rest of a lifetime that warps and mushes the brain.

But also I do still get making a statement out of the death penalty for direct statements of what a society will not accept.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 14 child comments

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 14 points 1 year ago (13 children)

It's not about cruelty. Its about keeping others safe from a very evil (Objectively) person. It's not about statements, either. It's about halting the spread of fascism.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 13 child comments

[–] taxiiiii@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (12 children)

If you imprison someone for life, you're still keeping others safe though? And killing someone who puts out fake news doesn't necessarily stop those news from spreading, worst case, you have a martyr.

I'm from Germany and the death penalty has been forbidden since the 50s, for context.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 2 points 1 year ago (11 children)

If you imprison someone for life, you’re still keeping others safe though?

No, containment doesn't work to stop fascism. As long as the person can talk, they can spread it.

And killing someone who puts out fake news doesn’t necessarily stop those news from spreading, worst case, you have a martyr.

Yes, it does work. We already found deplatforming fascist works, we just stopped doing it. That would just be "deplatforming them from earth".

As far as martyrs go? Well, that makes it easier to identify the next round of fascists that need to be eliminated.

We learned that lesson in the 1940's.

I’m from Germany and the death penalty has been forbidden since the 50s, for context.

And that's likely one reason why the AfD is gaining power there.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 11 child comments

[–] taxiiiii@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Dude, your theory is that the current rise of right wing populism in Germany is because we weren't killing enough people? Fr, that's your take?

Who is in charge of doing the killing then? The death penalty isn't french revolution style, you want right leaning states and judges around the globe to have the responsibility to decide who lives or dies? Thank you very much, I'll pass.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Dude, your theory is that the current rise of right wing populism in Germany is because we weren’t killing enough people? Fr, that’s your take?

Yes. The more fascist you allow to live, the worst the problem becomes. Come on, you're from Germany... You should literally know this.

Who is in charge of doing the killing then?

We the people.

The death penalty isn’t french revolution style

Why can't it be? It was like that with Sadaam...

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] taxiiiii@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Who's the people? Because an individual or a group of people killing someone is something different than a formal death penalty handed out by the state, of all things.

I argue against giving the state (any state) and the courts power to decide who lives and who dies. Because ultimately, I don't trust the people on top to make that choice. Beside individual examples of killings that you find justified, do you have any example for a country that uses the death penalty exactly the "right" way? Where no one innocent is killed, where there are no moral grey areas, no ways to just change some laws and misuse the whole concept to "eradicate the gays" or some shit? Because I don't and I sure as hell wouldn't look to the US for advice.

I'm from Germany, yes. The Nazi problem wasn't solved simply by killing the top, nor does it grow right now because we stopped killing in the 50s. There were a lot of fundamental changes to be done at the bottom, a lot of them only just starting in the late 60s, far after the death penalty. And even then, a lot of people went to prison, some 90-somethings only in recent years.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

No, it's not solved just by killing to top. Its solved by killing every fascist.

Fascism is like weeds... you need to kill every weed, or it just comes back.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] taxiiiii@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Thats...not what happened. Please look at how "Entnazifizierung" actually worked and also rethink if you're actually antifascist or just deeply authoritarian if that's your preferred solution.

The whole point of fascism is that almost anyone could become one under the wrong circumstances.

Creating a terror state won't help you. You're not erasing ideologies by erasing people, unless you want to lean completely into censorship and mass murder on a bigger scale. At that point, you'd have to fight leftists as well, since a lot wouldn't want a state to hold the power to do all that.

That's quite different from Luigi killing a CEO or some random person punching a Nazi.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

As long as the person can talk, they can spread it.

Nope, isolation is a thing and with that I don't mean torture I mean a psychologist is going to talk to you about the sportsball results or whatever keeps you sane and that's it. It's why you hear practically nothing about Anders Breivik.

What we should re-introduce for these cases is an updated version of damnatio memoriae

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Nope, isolation is a thing and with that I don’t mean torture I mean a psychologist is going to talk to you about the sportsball results or whatever keeps you sane and that’s it. It’s why you hear practically nothing about Anders Breivik.

And leave the possibility of the medical pros being radicalized, and converted?

No.

Kill them. a 7.62mm round is more than sufficient.

Are we literally forgetting the bloody lesson of the 1940s?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

And leave the possibility of the medical pros being radicalized, and converted?

Yes.

Are we literally forgetting the bloody lesson of the 1940s?

Precisely the opposite: Sanctity of life is the exact opposite of Nazi doctrine.

It's not always easy. There was a case in Germany where a serial rapist murderer was sentenced to indefinite psych ward lockup (insanity plea) and he did manage to not just seduce, but also marry, one of the female nurses. Court is to this day refusing visitation, the only way the two see each other is through plexiglass. Authorities, of course, learn from these kinds of cases: While they considered him, from the very start, psychopathic enough so that noone would ever be alone in a room with him, they didn't have safeguards in place when it came to talking through plexiglass, and now there's this awkward situation of the infatuated nurse-wife. Which means that now there's precautions regarding these kinds of things in place.

Back to Anders: That clown doesn't have the rizz to pull such a thing off.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments