system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: People who condemn other people for supporting a certain party or having a certain opinion on a topic have inherently misunderstood the concept of democracy.

Edit: I am from Germany. This generally means that most parties do not disregard any human rights and you are not going to change my mind by telling me how horrible a certain American party is.

Most of the western world lives in a democracy and one of its basic principles is pluralism. Pluralism encourages the support of a variety of opinions and viewpoints and is arguably one of the most important parts of democracy. 

In recent times, I've seen many people fixated on one thing and they then claim everyone supporting a certain viewpoint is wrong/immoral. This concept of trying to erase other opinions, regardless how moral or immoral one regards them to be inherently contradicts the basis of democracy and therefore people who do this and yet claim to be democratic are hypocrits. 

Don't get me wrong, everyone is allowed to disagree with opinions and even publicly arguing against them, but 'cancelling' people over viewpoints or things they said has no part in a democratic system.

I don't necessarily think that this is wrong but everytime I voice this I get downvoted so there seems to be a flaw in my logic. I'm always open to change if someone can convince me :)

Edit: I am solely talking about viewpoints that are within the democratic system. This means issues like racism, genocide or any other form of discrimination are not included.

Last Edit: I'm off to bed now and I want to clarify a few things. I worded this post poorly. The reason for the post was that I think it's stupid to cut off people/ disregard people's opinions if they do not need to be divisive. Sure you can condemn a racist, but you shouldn't condemn someone who thinks climate change can be better solved by something else you think. 

That being said, my view has changed insofar that everyone is entitled to have boundaries so it isn't really hypocritical but can just as much work as a defense mechanism. I also shouldn't use democracy and constituition interchangably which I sort of did here. 

I'll try to be more precise next time since people couldn't really change my mind as I worded the cmv incorrectly.
gpt
Okay. Let's say you vote for the super racist party, because your opinion is that everyone of a certain race is just inferior. That's a stupid opinion, but it's an opinion.

Should you be free from criticism? No, because your opinion is both wrong and repulsive. That doesn't mean the people who criticise you are against democracy, it means they think the range of tolerable opinions to have democratic decisions over excludes yours.

Not every opinion must be tolerated for the sake of having more opinions. Some people are just wrong and awful, and it's okay to tell them as much.