The only thing that centrists really stand for is decorum. Anything is permissible as long as it is done legally in “norm-respecting” ways within the framework of liberal democracy.

So when a centrist is rude to you, they are telegraphing the fact that they don’t see you as human. Humans deserve decorum, in fact it’s all they deserve in the establishment centrist view, so you can infer that a rude centrist has decided you are no longer human.

So frankly if I ever blow up at you on Lemmy, this is probably why, because I have less than zero patience for rudeness from people whose literally only virtue is decorum. If you treat me like a person, then we can get along. Posting this so I have something to link to next time if happens 😆

Edit: I tell people politely but explicitly when they’re being rude and give them a chance to correct their course…but if they double down on being rude, then I gotta quintuple down on being exponentially more rude because that’s the only language they’ll listen to.

Furthermore, this also doesn’t apply if you have literally any more principles than maintaining decorum.

  • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.orgOPEnglish
    1·
    14 days ago

    Honestly, not really, no. Like if one disagrees with this now but not back before Trump (and still maintains that it was justified back then, i.e. I’m not including the case where someone’s opinion on pre-Trump deportations has been changed because of Trump-era deportations) then yeah, it’s about the “neatness” of the process and not the existence of the deportation process itself.

    • MyBrainHurts@piefed.caEnglish
      1·
      14 days ago

      Again, you’re confusing due process and asylum laws with “neatness” or “politeness.”

      To put it another way, we are probably both against rape and okay with putting rapists in jail. But, if police started jailing anyone they thought looked a little rapey, and those jailed had no due process, I would hope we would both be against that. Not because it wasn’t neat or polite but because that is a fundamentally dangerous thing for a state to do.

      I think a country should be able to control its borders, thus you need a mechanism to remove people, which is deportation.

      However, due process is essential (whole asylum laws are required to meet international law + treaty/moral obligation) and without it, it’s super dangerous.

      This isn’t about neatness or politeness, it’s about a fundamental and essential check on state power.

      • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.orgOPEnglish
        1·
        14 days ago

        I think a country should be able to control its borders, thus you need a mechanism to remove people, which is deportation.

        I don’t. Countries literally should not exist. I oppose deportations however they are being conducted. That’s kinda my point: from my perspective, you’re practically with the right wingers on this issue, because some people ultimately get deported.

        • MyBrainHurts@piefed.caEnglish
          1·
          14 days ago

          I don’t. Countries literally should not exist. I oppose deportations however they are being conducted.

          That’s fine, oppose deportations etc but you’re completely missing the point, which is that it’s not about politeness or decorum, there is something fundamentally different about the lack of due process.

          To put it very bluntly, did you fail to understand the difference between jailing rapists after due process versus jailing anyone whom any police officer thinks is a rapist? Or is one just an impolite version of the other?