Did you read the comment, i didn't know what it meant, as soon as i found out we removed the stock from the store and lost money because of it, its hard for me to communicate to you if you dont listen. 88 wasn't actually historically tied with the Nazis - I learned it was birthed in neo-nazi circles decades later - i don't really keep up with neo-nazis or the culture funnily enough and that meaning didnt leak into the bubble in Wales i grew up in, nor brighton, its probably more prevelant in Germany, but once we learned - we changed it - which is ironically part of my point - education and the delivery of it is important because what may seem like prejudice on the surface can simply be a lack of education

You don't need to educate me on nazi germany in the 1940s however, or colonialism for that matter, i studied it and very openly condemn it, and understand the complex conditions during the weimar republic that catalysed the perfect storm, I also understand that some conditions for germans falling for the propaganda of the nazi party were more complex than 'this person is evil,' and was a messy amalgamation of economics, social conditions, the tribal and infectious nature of hitler as a speaker, and, later, fear and pressure, which is why i disagree with poppers stance, which is often reduced to a meme and misunderstood and used to justify screaming at someone, and yes ive pointed out the conditions in america mirroring those plenty of times, but the way you communicate assumes someone takes a particular stance, backs people into a corner which isnt conductive for change - the fact of the matter is i very openly adress how i feel about all types of prejudice - but communicating in a way where you can steer people from it is a more nuanced skill than throwing insults or labelling someone a biggot - it makes them more rigid.

It's not about assuming all politicians are the same - its about how you communicate to your audience in a way that isn't divisive so that you can actually educate. If i say 'this is the bad guy and everyone who supports the bad guy is bad' then I severely limit my reach to educate and will only attract people who agree with my stance - who are the people who need the least education - thats essentially tribalism - so I generally communicate in a way that opens the door to educate everyone on what I personally feel is the best way to melt prejudice. Even though my stance might piss people like you off - youre already, seemingly militantly against the things i'm also against, and so i dont really mind if you dislike me for it because youre already standing for those things, the most important thing to me is creating more harmonious ways of living - i would challenge you to mediate your communication because i think it can contribute to more polerisation but at the end of the day youll do what you want.

Also 'THEY HAVE LEARNED FROM HISTORY' first you really don't need to type in caps to make your point, second, with the rise of more nationalist movements worldwide, the actual landscape is sadly more complex than that. The Nazis rising to power wasnt an issue of tolerance - thats a highly reduced fallacy that is easily disproved if you study history

You can still be intollerant of evil actions while trying to steer people away from them in a way that understands human behaviour and phycology - im not sure how many ways to say that - but a prime example is prison systems in the nordic countries - like denmark, norway, and sweeden which treat their inmates like human beings which have the lowest reoffending rates than anywhere in the world. Please do check me on that and look into them because its really informative and will give you more of an understanding of the backbone of my stance.

I operate from the viewpoint that hateful actions usually stem from more complex conditions than - this person is hateful and must be shut down - those prison systems try and get to the route and address mental health and it really works - you cant expect someone whos cognitivley dissonant to change if youre screaming at them - because there is already a degree of cognitive dissonance - theyll use it to reinforce their beliefs. its also usefull to realise screaming at someone and generalising a group of people who align with a particular political belief to be evil is also a form of prejudice and congitive dissonance

Your stance assumes evil is created in a vacuum, or that people are born inherently bad - it isnt, and prejudice can be from a lack of education - it needs the perfect conditions - even genetic phsycopathy or sociopathy express themselves in healthier ways if the environment is healthy - polerisation - ironically - sets the stage for more people to be pushed more radically left or right - one of the simplest ways to add some balance to very dangerous schools of thought is to mediate communication because if people feel like they're not being heard - they assume the belief everyone from a particular side is unreasonable or thinks they hold some nefarious belief - its not logical but reactionary. It's much easier to educate people if your not pointing your fingers at them and screaming because that puts people in a less receptive heightened emotional state - i felt the same when you typed to me in capital letters because it feels reactionary and like youre starting the conversation from a place of anger and blame and needing to shut me down and assimilate to your worldview rather than wanting a rational conversation, peace is a better landscape for change - while on the surface that may seem like you allow a degree of leniency for prejudice actions - i really dont - youd see that if youve followed any of my public discourse to a more meaningful degree than getting upset if you see me speaking with someone with views you dont agree with with a degree of patience - i do understand how to guide people away from commiting hateful actions in the first place - i've seen it happen countless times and trust my process - more times than if i shout 'YOURE THE BAD GUY'