Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls
No. Flat out banning something or ignoring the problem will most likely lead to other problems. That is a short term patch and I like long term solutions, unless something is so urgent that the long term will not exist without an immediate bandaid.
I think this part is reasonable. We just have different thresholds, mine being much higher (I assume).
I think it's about the same. You still have to acknowledge and be considerate of how your actions will affect those around you because we live in a community and we should all do our part to help maintain peace and structure. The problem is a lack of education, I'd put money on the fact that a large majority of the population that hates swastikas has no idea of it's meaning outside of the nazi regime, and that is an education problem creating a social problem.
|
The presumption is that by banning it, you get a long term solution (with authoritative support, comes more widespread support. People that were afraid to stand up or were on the fence or were obedient citizens will now be able to). You pull the rug out from everybody all at once and you'll have unrest (I. E. Prohibition) but when it's a minority that are the issue, the demonstration of government support can bolster public support (such as in marriage equality and LGBT rights in general, where a significant portion of the population already supported it. In fact, Obama did not support marriage equality vocally until 51% of the US did and it's snowballed since then).
Anecdotally, the supreme court decision brought a lot of neutral people on my Facebook feed out to support the movement. I see a lot of my friends that were homophobic in high school being supportive now on online media. It was Alaska, a rural red state; I was raised homophobic too. Not by my parents, they were neutral, but by the rest of my redneck community.