>it's a pretty slippery slope.

I disagree.

>Is this a hate symbol?

I believe so.

>will you also consider whatever other symbol gets co-opted?

Yes, if it does get co-opted to the extent of replacing its original meaning. Luckily that only happens rarely. That's just how symbols and communication work - it's an unfortunate and unavoidable reality. The swastika is the most obvious example.

I think a photo of the Che is a hate symbol. It is glorifying a psychopath who killed without a second thought for a genocidal ideology. That's my opinion. So do I get to get it removed everywhere because it offends me?

1. Spend time educating people on why Che doesn't deserve to be idolized 2. Garner support for his removal 3. Go to any company using or selling his image and use your support to have it removed

You asked how it works, that's how it works

I don't think this is what we should be doing in a tolerant society.

In other words, the glorification of intolerance (“I find those ideas are dangerous, they shall be banned”).

Do you find the Paradox of Intolerance to be a dangerous idea?

The premise is that maximalist tolerance means tolerating intolerant ideas, and that there's a risk that a movement of intolerance can form which destroys the culture of tolerance. It suggests that rational discourse might not always lead us away from intolerant views, and maximalist tolerance could therefore be self-defeating.

You have to decide what's worth tolerating. You can't just say "can't we all be nice to each other" when there are people trying to celebrate an icon of slavery and white nationalism.

You're talking past the point. You assume some idiots with slavery icons can't be embarrassed and shamed out of their views.

Where does this conclusion come from that rationality is so weak and our tolerant views are on such shaky ground that we have to prevent people from expressing intolerance?

It would be wonderful if things actually played out that way. What I'm seeing, are elected officials caving in to mobs with torches and pitchforks. So no, if I think Che Guevara is a hate symbol, I need only muster up a few hundred individuals, cause damage to private property and presto! No more Che...

Are Che Guevara statues on public property a common thing? I think I would support removing them from public property in my community. It also seems like the few mentions of Che statues I can find online indicate that they have long been controversial, like this: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/no-more-statues-of-che_b_1626...

So I'm not really sure what your point is. You seem to be trying to make a reductio ad absurdum, but it doesn't seem absurd to me for a community to be upset about a public statue of Che Guevara and demand it be removed.

We are talking about a few pixels in a videogame. It doesn't need to be a statue.

What's the actual difference between mobs and protestors?

Whether or not you agree with them.