i find that passionate certainty can be a good thing in some cases, especially when someone really does know what they are talking about.
but fanaticism is more often a problem than not. fanatics tend to not really understand what they're talking about, or twist it to fit what they want it to be about.
> Fanaticism: Excessive enthusiasm, unreasoning zeal, or wild and extravagant notions, on any subject, especially religion, politics or ideology; religious frenzy.
note -- not talking about any particular "thing" here. just commenting about passion vs. fanaticism in general.
Keep going. Look at Matthew 7:6. "Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you."
That is (in this context), don't bother trying to give truth (or even have a reasonable conversation) with those who simply will not listen. Zealots, shill, propagandists... it's like talking to a brick wall. If anyone has a technique for getting them to stop being a brick wall and start actually engaging with what you're saying, I'd like to know what it is.
You can call it "transmit only mode" (hat tip Patrick McClure). When you realize that the person you're talking to is in transmit only mode, you understand how the conversation is going to go if you continue it.
Forgive me if I'm mischaracterising you but you seem to be not only reinforcing the false equivalence but in fact doubling down on it? That trans rights protesters are not only morally equivalent to nationalist protesters, but in fact, in some way more of a problem? A plank in the eye vs a mote of dust?
When I say 'false equivalence' in this context I don't mean 'nationalist protesters are all bad and trans rights protesters are all good'. Of course there are bad actors in the trans rights camp, people who are blinded by their own flag; likewise I'm sure there are well-intentioned and peaceful nationalists who are simply misinformed. I submit to you however that the number of, and danger presented by bad actors in the former camp is severely limited compared to the bad actors in the camp of people who hate foreigners and wish to see them expelled and/or commit violence against them. Even without comparing actual events, that would seem to be self-evident given the trans rights cause itself is centered around support and love for a group of people, and once you do compare actual events the difference is obvious. I've been in the presence of a nationalist rally once, and even as a cis white guy it was a scary thing. I would have absolutely no qualms whatsoever showing up to a trans rights march.
Do you really think the two are basically morally equivalent? That someone could not reasonably criticise rising and widespread nationalist hatred if they don't also, with the same vigour, also call out a handful of zealots aggressively pushing for acceptance and fair treatment?
As I said I totally accept I may have misunderstood you and/or the other commenters here, so please enlighten me if so.
> given the trans rights cause itself is centered around support and love for a group of people
If only that were true. As a political project, it's mostly focused on abolishing the boundaries around single-sex spaces, and certainly in terms of rhetoric, mostly those boundaries used to safeguard women and girls.
Just look at the frequent threats of violence and death threats that women who speak out against this, such as JK Rowling, receive from trans ideological activists. This is not a movement of love and support.
> I've been in the presence of a nationalist rally once, and even as a cis white guy it was a scary thing. I would have absolutely no qualms whatsoever showing up to a trans rights march.
That's because you are male and you're not in disagreement with them. If you were female with "terf" views you would almost certainly feel differently. There are some dangerous, violent men who attend these marches, as is the case with the nationalist ones.
> If only that were true. As a political project...
Equal rights for trans folks is a political project, eh? Who's the project manager? :)
> Just look at the frequent threats of violence and death threats that women who speak out against [equal rights for trans folks]
What reaction did you expect to someone advocating against equal rights? To someone advocating for unequal rights for people who are different? To someone fanning the flames of the frequent threats of violence and death threats received by the women who speak out for equal rights for trans folks?
You're familiar with Popper's Paradox of Tolerance? It would be counterproductive to expect folks to tolerate any and all intolerance, and it would be cruel gaslighting to expect the victims of abuse to be tolerant towards their persecutors.
