Self-deprecation is still deprecation, not everyone values that.
What do you term racist here, towards which groups? Racists come in three forms -> raised (ideologically protective), radicalized (paranoid/reactive to a perception of current events), and unstable (confused, many hatred/reactive thoughts due to receiving abuse from other sources etc, racism becomes an outlet). I've never seen a true innate racist, because their reasoning is always based on the sense of identity or some visceral nature. No one's born "hey I think I'll hate x race or all/other races", you shouldn't give racists the identity that makes them think this is normal.
Likewise the term "nazi" should be used carefully, I think among racists, only a minority align themselves with national-socialist ideologies. As such the word "nazi", an reductio ad hitlerum becomes a slur and devoids the root cause of their behaviors. If you drive that home they might just start trying to become actual nazis or pretending to be them. In other words, you cause a segregation and this results in poor communication. It's untruthful to the underlying cause for the majority of the time. Most racism is passive-aggressive, therefore radicalized racism is visceral in nature and inherently an insecurity.
I feel like you're too focused on the actions than the cause of them. Something must have happened in this person to cause this to happen. This means that is preventable in the future. Simply segregating any such persons will radicalize them further, because they will feel attacked. I could tell, like you, that was going to happen years ago, but what did you do? You did it your way and it failed, it isn't how psychology works.
It's very clear this person didn't get the help needed but rather kept getting kicked and thus encouraged for his actions. When someone is suffering from inner-conflict, this will have a volcanic effect and will cause the person to believe their own monologues and engage in groups that enforce said monologues.
Furry is full of very defined "hug-boxes" which are very unsettling to people who are not aligned with the political or ideological values of said group. This makes them develop their own groups which they will report back to whenever they feel ostracized or harmed (viscerally, through drama) by others. If there was more middle-ground in the fandom it would better allow those persons to make a mental compromise. As long as the volcanic effect is eased, then these fatal behaviors won't occur. The trouble is the hug-boxes tend to punish thought and feeling, rather than dissolve it by showing them the diversity in thought and that there a many opinions beyond their own. Because they were pushed into monologue-driven groups instead of accepting ones they can't help but see things as a division. This is different to how an internet-troll behaves for example, as a troll seeks a reaction and doesn't desire acceptance as they're more stable. A person like this is not troll-driven and lashes out because they struggle to let go of the divide due to the polarized barrier.
In order to diffuse such polarization in the fandom, you must understand that these persons are conflicted.
It is not easy for most to see past this, as both sides have their own fair share of mental diarrhea.
But you can try to show your understanding towards them at the base human level. Many just feel they have a score to settle as well. It's important for those who developed inner-conflict from damage or poor role models from a young age to be given better role models through the fandom. That is not going to happen for as long as you give them identity (e.g. call them nazis) or ostracize them, because in doing so you're encouraging these people to create a sense of patronage that doesn't really exist.
If such persons say something racist, it should be clear-cut rules in any group that doesn't want this that that is the rules. If someone rants or warrants drama, they should be told to calm down or to leave on the sole basis that they're disrupting the status quo. If you bar them immediately on the basis of their ideology, you will make them feel ganged up against, which will make them feel more driven and victimized.
However you should not hunt out, bully or cancel these people when they are behaving. It's of most importance that furry communities/groups try to encourage these people to see the light, instead of feeding hatred.
I am not blaming any one set person, their interactions may be discrete and historic, and potentially even outside of the fandom. But I've seen how people can be cancelled in the furry communities to the point they tried to make their own communities, and this creates warring factions of split-up and diverging ideologies.
Just like you mentioned with babyfurs and InkBunny, it seems even you find that due to the ostracization of an innocent group (e.g. babyfurs). Babyfurs have been massively discouraged from other sites and that has created an imbalance. The fact that there's any comparison to something like babyfurs to racist or nazi ideology is a blatant demonstration of the lack of acceptance in the fandom. The fandom treats babyfurs in a similar way to how historical racists treat other races through apartheid. It's all rather uncanny isn't it? Actually, not at all, many people told babyfurs they're inferior and unwanted or that they're pedophiles when even medicine and criminology discerns a different between pedophilia and infantilism. So I'm not surprised one or two have lashed back and absorbed values opposite to the rest of the fandom. Whether they were babyfur before or after is moot as the fact this segregation even exists in itself shows the fandom can do far better to prevent the breeding of hatred that results from ostracization.
It's what happens when you let media and non-psychologists try to define how any set community e.g. furry should be like. Want the furry community to be a global whole? Then where are its democratic elections where everyone gets a say? No, it's the responsibility of people to understand each other and not exercise their power with such poor understanding of each other. If people invested in psychology rather than in flexing over what ideology should rule the fandom then this mess would have never happened, believe me. Thankfully I'm in no such furry groups that actually think that way and there's no racists there, only ex-racists.
Self-deprecation is still deprecation, not everyone values that.
What do you term racist here, towards which groups? Racists come in three forms -> raised (ideologically protective), radicalized (paranoid/reactive to a perception of current events), and unstable (confused, many hatred/reactive thoughts due to receiving abuse from other sources etc, racism becomes an outlet). I've never seen a true innate racist, because their reasoning is always based on the sense of identity or some visceral nature. No one's born "hey I think I'll hate x race or all/other races", you shouldn't give racists the identity that makes them think this is normal.
Likewise the term "nazi" should be used carefully, I think among racists, only a minority align themselves with national-socialist ideologies. As such the word "nazi", an reductio ad hitlerum becomes a slur and devoids the root cause of their behaviors. If you drive that home they might just start trying to become actual nazis or pretending to be them. In other words, you cause a segregation and this results in poor communication. It's untruthful to the underlying cause for the majority of the time. Most racism is passive-aggressive, therefore radicalized racism is visceral in nature and inherently an insecurity.
I feel like you're too focused on the actions than the cause of them. Something must have happened in this person to cause this to happen. This means that is preventable in the future. Simply segregating any such persons will radicalize them further, because they will feel attacked. I could tell, like you, that was going to happen years ago, but what did you do? You did it your way and it failed, it isn't how psychology works.
It's very clear this person didn't get the help needed but rather kept getting kicked and thus encouraged for his actions. When someone is suffering from inner-conflict, this will have a volcanic effect and will cause the person to believe their own monologues and engage in groups that enforce said monologues.
Furry is full of very defined "hug-boxes" which are very unsettling to people who are not aligned with the political or ideological values of said group. This makes them develop their own groups which they will report back to whenever they feel ostracized or harmed (viscerally, through drama) by others. If there was more middle-ground in the fandom it would better allow those persons to make a mental compromise. As long as the volcanic effect is eased, then these fatal behaviors won't occur. The trouble is the hug-boxes tend to punish thought and feeling, rather than dissolve it by showing them the diversity in thought and that there a many opinions beyond their own. Because they were pushed into monologue-driven groups instead of accepting ones they can't help but see things as a division. This is different to how an internet-troll behaves for example, as a troll seeks a reaction and doesn't desire acceptance as they're more stable. A person like this is not troll-driven and lashes out because they struggle to let go of the divide due to the polarized barrier.
In order to diffuse such polarization in the fandom, you must understand that these persons are conflicted.
It is not easy for most to see past this, as both sides have their own fair share of mental diarrhea.
But you can try to show your understanding towards them at the base human level. Many just feel they have a score to settle as well. It's important for those who developed inner-conflict from damage or poor role models from a young age to be given better role models through the fandom. That is not going to happen for as long as you give them identity (e.g. call them nazis) or ostracize them, because in doing so you're encouraging these people to create a sense of patronage that doesn't really exist.
If such persons say something racist, it should be clear-cut rules in any group that doesn't want this that that is the rules. If someone rants or warrants drama, they should be told to calm down or to leave on the sole basis that they're disrupting the status quo. If you bar them immediately on the basis of their ideology, you will make them feel ganged up against, which will make them feel more driven and victimized.
However you should not hunt out, bully or cancel these people when they are behaving. It's of most importance that furry communities/groups try to encourage these people to see the light, instead of feeding hatred.
I am not blaming any one set person, their interactions may be discrete and historic, and potentially even outside of the fandom. But I've seen how people can be cancelled in the furry communities to the point they tried to make their own communities, and this creates warring factions of split-up and diverging ideologies.
Just like you mentioned with babyfurs and InkBunny, it seems even you find that due to the ostracization of an innocent group (e.g. babyfurs). Babyfurs have been massively discouraged from other sites and that has created an imbalance. The fact that there's any comparison to something like babyfurs to racist or nazi ideology is a blatant demonstration of the lack of acceptance in the fandom. The fandom treats babyfurs in a similar way to how historical racists treat other races through apartheid. It's all rather uncanny isn't it? Actually, not at all, many people told babyfurs they're inferior and unwanted or that they're pedophiles when even medicine and criminology discerns a different between pedophilia and infantilism. So I'm not surprised one or two have lashed back and absorbed values opposite to the rest of the fandom. Whether they were babyfur before or after is moot as the fact this segregation even exists in itself shows the fandom can do far better to prevent the breeding of hatred that results from ostracization.
It's what happens when you let media and non-psychologists try to define how any set community e.g. furry should be like. Want the furry community to be a global whole? Then where are its democratic elections where everyone gets a say? No, it's the responsibility of people to understand each other and not exercise their power with such poor understanding of each other. If people invested in psychology rather than in flexing over what ideology should rule the fandom then this mess would have never happened, believe me. Thankfully I'm in no such furry groups that actually think that way and there's no racists there, only ex-racists.