You're thinking of Gandalf Big Naturals. Easy mistake to make.

It absolutely is. It's a thought process people use to make their actions easier to justify to their own sense of morality and empathy. Militaries drill that same thought process into soldiers for the same reason. It's much easier to shoot something than it is to shoot somebody, so your enemy must be less than human to make pulling the trigger easier. So you turn a group of people into the Other. And the more you do it, the easier it gets, and all it takes is somebody convincing you that the wrong group deserves the same treatment.

"My enemy isn't human. My enemy is less than human. Since the dawning of Mankind, this has been the battlecry."

Also, I take issue with the entire concept of "sin," so that argument holds no water for me. I mean, what a meaningless "argument". How does it absolve them of anything??

I don't care one way or another about the theology around the word "sin," but it's the perfect word to describe their actions. By reducing them to subhuman, you make it easy to remove their free will in the equation - it becomes the "just following orders" excuse - and it's incredibly important to remember that they chose to do this. Nobody is born hateful, hatred is learned. They made the conscious choice to be hateful and act this way, and they should be held accountable for that choice.

People have a hard time accepting that the worst people this planet has ever seen are as human as you and me, but to deny it is to turn a blind eye to the fact that the people in that video could be our neighbors, friends, or family. Because we know them, and they're good people, so they'd never do something like that, right?

This is only one study, but I saw an article a few months ago talking about a study by a major phone company that found that the vast majority of people (80% or more IIRC) either didn't care about AI features on their phones or actively disliked them.

I think most people don't really care one way or another but hate that it's being shoved into everything, and those who know the stats on how often it's wrong are a lot more likely to actively dislike it and be vocal about their dislike.

Funnily enough, I say the same thing about art.

I would also add just calling people by their name instead of their preference to your nickname example. Like, if your name is Matt but somebody only calls you Matthew and refuses to use Matt even after you ask them to. Matthew may legally be your name, but there's only one reason why somebody would do that.

My dad actually has a similar situation in that his first name can be turned into two different nicknames easily, so he can immediately tell how well somebody knows him or cares by which name they call him.

It's not about tolerating the intolerant, it's about not using their same thought process lest you fall prey to the same kinds of propaganda. Besides, removing their humanity absolves them of their sin. This isn't like a house cat killing birds on instinct, these people choose to do this. And they should be treated accordingly.

Broke: Nazis aren't human

Woke: The worst monsters to be born on this planet are all human, and they all seem to really like swastikas

Also the fact that he credited the Black Panthers with allowing him to be able to do what he was doing by protecting the protesters from retribution, and saying that the only reason that they weren't doing anything more was because what they were doing already was illegal and anything more would risk actual jail time.

The question I have is whether or not it can be considered censorship by the fact that they're stealing books related to a specific minority group/topic with the intent to censor information about that group.

I think there's a better case to be made there for federal charges.

As were some of the groups in the Civil Rights movement. There was a group armed and trained by a black WW2 veteran that protected families from retaliation by the KKK for going to desegregated schools. Armed with rifles and machine guns, they would put sandbag emplacements on people's porches to ensure that their kids were safe throughout the night.

Together, monkey strong. When we're divided, it's much easier to silence us one by one. And that doesn't even need guns to be involved in the equation.

This is basically just the sanitized internet conflict again, only it's the parents wanting to force adult-only spaces to disappear instead of advertisers. What's next, banning gay and lesbian bars for not catering to straight people?

To add to this, this also probably goes to something that seems to have been largely lost between the Baby Boomers and the next generations: the concept of passing on generational wealth. I know my parents have flat out said that they're planning on using all the money they saved working.

Keeping enough money not just to ensure that your family is taken care of today but in the future for possibly generations to come is the kind of thing I can only wish to do.

Almost as real as the gifted boy to burnout good-girl with a praise kink pipeline.