On the other hand, it is projection. Furthermore the term "subhuman" is not a racial slur and is primarily meant to dehumanize. I think fascists should be dehumanized for their behaviours. Genocidal scum who SA need to be degraded and dehumanized.

Not by using their terms and conceding their intellectual basis as being correct (Just applied the other way). You don't defeat homophobes by calling them slurs because you feel the stereotypes they apply to homosexuals apply better to them, the same goes for white supremacists, eugenicists , fascists et al. Subhuman is literally the term the nazis used man. You don't win by conceding that the idea that someone can be or make themselves be less than human and that this is a correct way to frame other humans.

Fascists are humans, their flaws are human flaws, people who commit SA are humans, and they should be treated with these things in mind. That does not excuse them, the fact that they choose to abuse our shared humanity is wrong.

[–] SuperNovaCouchGuy2@hexbear.net 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Subhuman is literally the term the nazis used man.

Yep now that I remember, thats correct, the word "untermensch" translates to "subhuman" in english. I will be more careful about using the term from now on.

For the sake of discussion though;

You don't defeat homophobes by calling them slurs because you feel the stereotypes they apply to homosexuals apply better to them

I agree, and, to communicate what I meant clearly, when I used the term "sub-human" I meant it literally, as in "below the standard of good/neutral human behaviour" i.e. "pathologically harmful to others".

I don't mean to say that the nazis stereotypes about disabled people/slavs/roma apply more to them, I frankly do not know any of the stereotypes nazis had about the people they persecuted other than their genocidal Judeophobic propaganda.

I meant it more in a stark literal way (sub-human, below human), not in a way that relied on racial/ableist/queerphobic stereotypes created by the nazis.

*No actually I think that part of it is acknowledging that when racists call nonwhite people "civilization destroying, barbaric, etc." as qualifiers for the term "sub-human" I think these terms apply more to whites and the west than anyone else. Look at history.

You don't win by conceding that the idea that someone can be or make themselves be less than human and that this is a correct way to frame other humans.

Genuinely asking, isn't the idea of prison or capital punishment based on the idea that the person has made themselves less of a human being and thus deserves to have some or all of their rights removed? I agree that most western and imperialist countries unfairly fill their prisons with ethnic minorities, torture, and kill them, but what about when you need to throw reactionaries in jail?

For the record I don't want to "win" here per se and I know it would be insane to declare that everyone should start using the word "sub-human" as its a winning strategy. I'm just angry.

the fact that they choose to abuse our shared humanity is wrong

Well I don't think I share any humanity with a being that is rabidly genocidal, sees me as inferior to them, and either wants to destroy me without mercy or wouldn't mind doing so to further their own personal gain. *Why should I conceptually share humanity with someone who doesn't even see me as a human being?