SoylentNews

Talk to these people sometime. I am not conservative, but I did grow up in the South, and I am increasingly at odds with what passes for "liberalism" in America. The reason is because of what will happen during that chat. You're like to find they'd be happy to have you in, give you some tea, and have a nice fun back and forth. Try to do the same thing in San Francisco and you will likely be met with condescendence at best, and very likely outright hostility. They will likely try to hurt you, perhaps not physically (immediately), but in things like trying to get you fired if they can, or doing anything they can to otherwise try to destroy your life.

People don't seem to understand that this is precisely what fascism is. The complete abuse of Karl Popper's Paradox of Tolerance is so incredibly dystopic:

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise.

But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

When he said this, he obviously was not endorsing the idea of attacking anybody who doesn't abide the same ideology, ignoring/censoring their arguments, and ultimately trying to destroy them. Popper was a Jew and saw the gradual rise of the Nazis in a population where their tendency towards violence and suppression of the opposition was never really dealt with. This was in part apathy, but also in part because people often didn't really like the people that the Nazis were trying to destroy. Hence, this is where get things like "First They Came For" poem:

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me

But alas, it seems humanity is ever incapable of learning from the mistakes of others, doomed to forever repeat the exact same patterns, hoping for the future to learn from "our" mistakes - so little different than the countless episodes we could and should have already learned from ourselves.