Outside a train station near Tokyo, hundreds of people cheer as Sohei Kamiya, head of the surging nationalist party Sanseito, criticizes Japan’s rapidly growing foreign population.

As opponents, separated by uniformed police and bodyguards, accuse him of racism, Kamiya shouts back, saying he is only talking common sense.

Sanseito, while still a minor party, made big gains in July’s parliamentary election, and Kamiya’s “Japanese First” platform of anti-globalism, anti-immigration and anti-liberalism is gaining broader traction ahead of a ruling party vote Saturday that will choose the likely next prime minister.

  • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Recognize that it is an opinion that some people may disagree with, not a fact that everyone has to accept, and act accordingly. In this case, that means not using the force of government to persecute people who disagree with your opinion.

    • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      8 hours ago

      You’re still talking about how they are wrong but not how they are illogical. You can still apply logic to lies. It doesn’t make them true but it also doesn’t make it illogical.

      • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        No, I’m not. I am starting from the premise that there is an objective reality we all have to deal with and that different individuals have different subjective preferences, and everything else logically flows from there.

        If you’re looking for a utilitarian reason to behave the way I am suggesting, I would say that when you start taking tangible objective actions against everyone who doesn’t agree with your particular subjective preferences you will give people with a variety of different subjective preferences something in common (i.e. that they are being oppressed by you) and that will eventually make them work together to stop you. On a long enough timeline, tyranny is always a losing strategy.

        • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          No, I’m not. I am starting from the premise that there is an objective reality we all have to deal with and that different individuals have different subjective preferences, and everything else logically flows from there.

          That’s just something you made up. Logic doesn’t start from objective reality and preferences. It’s just a tool.

          If A then B. If B then C. Therefore if A then C.

          I don’t have to know what A, B and C are in some objective reality for this rule to be true. I can see you struggle to understand that logic is abstract and separate it from facts you want to apply it to but that’s just what logic is. You’re basically confusing logic with truth. To decide what is true you have to start with some objective reality and apply logic to it but you can apply logic to anything. You can apply it correctly to Harry Potter or to invalid facts. You will not reach truth but you’re reasoning can still be logical.