How is the link relevant? Was there something specific or is it just general? I was wondering if this tweet uses some specific phrase mentioned in the link but can’t seem to find it.
It’s a fascinating read, but I didn’t quite get the connection either. I can see how the quote can be understood as “submission of the individual to the State”, but that’s far from the only way I can see to take it.
It could certainly be a dogwhistle, but I’m also curious about the connection.
And, just to sort of add on, I’m not saying they shouldn’t have shared it. In case anyone interprets it sort of sarcastically like “UM WHY’D YOU INCLUDE THIS? HOW IS IT RELEVANT???”
Fixed 🔗.
Tl;dr the streets were payed by the tax payers, it belongs to tax payers, and it should be used as the tax payers see fit.
If Japanese folks want to walk on them, then do so, without a fascist mythos of a downfall that will not exist. Streets are meant to be travelled, by stroller or auto. If not, I’m strolling a hike on the wilderness.
I’m criticizing from a Japanese historical context, as a Japanese person. Should I stop you from jaywalking streets tax payers paid for to use as they see fit?
In the old man scenario, if I had concern for a foreigner strolling the street, I wouldn’t stop her, but say: “The crosswalk is over there, mam. Don’t lose your life over cagers.”
How is the link relevant? Was there something specific or is it just general? I was wondering if this tweet uses some specific phrase mentioned in the link but can’t seem to find it.
It’s a fascinating read, but I didn’t quite get the connection either. I can see how the quote can be understood as “submission of the individual to the State”, but that’s far from the only way I can see to take it.
It could certainly be a dogwhistle, but I’m also curious about the connection.
And, just to sort of add on, I’m not saying they shouldn’t have shared it. In case anyone interprets it sort of sarcastically like “UM WHY’D YOU INCLUDE THIS? HOW IS IT RELEVANT???”
Fixed 🔗.
Tl;dr the streets were payed by the tax payers, it belongs to tax payers, and it should be used as the tax payers see fit. If Japanese folks want to walk on them, then do so, without a fascist mythos of a downfall that will not exist. Streets are meant to be travelled, by stroller or auto. If not, I’m strolling a hike on the wilderness.
But I’m extremely worried now, lemmy isn’t being intolerant to the intolerant. There was zero reason to be stopped at all. How lemmy is not getting that, is extremely worrying.
Multiple comments are criticizing this. Most that it is fake and yours that it is a dog whistle. I don’t see that as tolerating intolerance.
I’m criticizing from a Japanese historical context, as a Japanese person. Should I stop you from jaywalking streets tax payers paid for to use as they see fit?
In the old man scenario, if I had concern for a foreigner strolling the street, I wouldn’t stop her, but say: “The crosswalk is over there, mam. Don’t lose your life over cagers.”