• TheUniqueOne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    How? Should anti nazi advocates never challenged nazi beliefs and instead say doing a little less genocide is okay. Should anti-colonial revolutionaries not responded with violence or direct action to force the colonizers to change and instead sent letters saying " I know you are people too you are activly harming me but I’m not going to fight against you we have to agree to disagree." Your point makes no sense.

    • ClarkDoom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s the most straw man argument I’ve seen in a while.

      Maybe take a step back and think about how using nazi analogies when discussing meat eaters is counterproductive to your beliefs and frigging offensive to large swaths of the global population who were affected by nazis. Those two things are not comparable and you need to do some self education if you think that’s okay or persuasive.

      • oshitwaddup@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Maybe take another step back and recognize that many jews who were tortured by the nazis see the similarities to animal agriculture and are actively against it

        Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_analogy_in_animal_rights

        “Perhaps the earliest use of the analogy comes from Edgar Kupfer-Koberwitz, a German concentration camp survivor and journalist, who wrote in 1940 in his “Dachau Diaries” from inside the Dachau Concentration Camp that “I have suffered so much myself that I can feel other creatures’ suffering by virtue of my own”.[4][5] He further wrote, “I believe as long as man tortures and kills animals, he will torture and kill humans as well—and wars will be waged—for killing must be practiced and learned on a small scale”.[4]”