• tartra@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The disgust - which should be the bare minimum - is very, very often withheld.

    So go full force on disgust. That’s plenty on its own. It’s not just about them who organized this, but to show to everyone this is targeting (non-white supremacists) that this is not accepted in our communities, and that the people who aren’t directly targeted by this do not want to be in the company of white supremacists either.

    The weaker the disgust is, the more it emboldens others to think ‘lesser’ forms can sneak in under the radar, since it’s not ‘as bad’ as the first thing they did. Everyone who’s targeted by the impact of this hatred sees those attempts made over and over again, so shutting it down each time shows that there’s never going to be a compromise of “okay we’ll do a little bit of racism because we have to meet in the middle”.

    • CoderKat
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, it doesn’t have to require a legal solution. Public shunning is an effective tool against things like this. Most people feel shame. As well, most employers do not want to employ blatant bigots, and losing your job can be just as harsh as any legal system punishment would be. In most cases, public shaming is all it takes for the event to dissolve entirely.

      • Rocket@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Most people feel shame.

        Most people feel ashamed of being put in a negative spotlight. I’m not sure that equates to them actually changing their thoughts. More likely they will just become more discrete about sharing their thoughts, which changes absolutely nothing.