  |
 Intolerance - a double-edged sword? |
| Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum |
 15th August 2017, 06:26 PM
Post
#41
|
|
 I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908 User: 10,596 
   |
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Aug 15 2017, 03:14 PM)  So you accept that demonising people for their beliefs is wrong? It's hardly demonising if their views are bigoted. No one is expecting every member of the public to become a bastion of tolerance and inclusivity overnight. What tends to rankle is when those with what you could call 'outdated' views become so defensive over their right to maintain their ignorance towards people less privileged than themselves. |
 |
 
|
|
15th August 2017, 08:22 PM
Post
#42
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,851 User: 17,376
  |
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Aug 15 2017, 03:14 PM) So you accept that demonising people for their beliefs is wrong? I don't believe that 'not unequivocally condemning injustices' automatically means you support them - that's an absurd position. 1. You do like making mountainous leaps of logic. If the views are harmful to others, no, it's absolutely just. If by "demonising" you mean standing up against those examples I gave ie people who will murder you given half a chance. The Nazis in the USA want to send black people to the gas chambers, that's their aim. Let's all start talking about removing the rights of people with initials VD, then? Free to express an opinion? Or is it unfairly demonising people with VD in their name? I think the latter. If we're talking about fave brands of tea, anyone can say what they want, and yes, that is demonisation and it's wrong. 2. Depends on the scale of the injustice. The people of Germany sat on their placid arses while Nazis were out exterminating those who spoke up, were "the elite" (ie smart), "the hated media" (ie telling the truth about Nazis) or were "undesirables" eg gay, jewish, gypsies etc etc. "I'm alright Jack" it's called. It leads to mass murder and genocide in the blink of an eye. It's happening right now - in Yemen, in Syria, in many other countries in the world, and on a smaller scale it's happening in the UK and the USA in incidents of various origins. BTW I didn't say "support" I said "condone": definition: accept (behaviour that is considered morally wrong or offensive). synonyms: deliberately ignore, not take into consideration, disregard, take no notice of, take no account of, accept, allow, make allowances for, let pass, turn a blind eye to, overlook, forget, wink at, blink at, connive at; More approve or sanction (something), especially with reluctance. |
|
|
|
|
16th August 2017, 06:59 AM
Post
#43
|
|
 Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
 |
QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Aug 15 2017, 09:22 PM) 1. You do like making mountainous leaps of logic. If the views are harmful to others, no, it's absolutely just. If by "demonising" you mean standing up against those examples I gave ie people who will murder you given half a chance. The Nazis in the USA want to send black people to the gas chambers, that's their aim. Let's all start talking about removing the rights of people with initials VD, then? Free to express an opinion? Or is it unfairly demonising people with VD in their name? Surely it's only *acting* on bigoted views that does damage, merely holding them harms no-one? Since Vidcapper is obviously not my real name, that's not a very good example.  QUOTE 2. Depends on the scale of the injustice. The people of Germany sat on their placid arses while Nazis were out exterminating those who spoke up, were "the elite" (ie smart), "the hated media" (ie telling the truth about Nazis) or were "undesirables" eg gay, jewish, gypsies etc etc. "I'm alright Jack" it's called. It leads to mass murder and genocide in the blink of an eye. It's happening right now - in Yemen, in Syria, in many other countries in the world, and on a smaller scale it's happening in the UK and the USA in incidents of various origins. BTW I didn't say "support" I said "condone": definition: accept (behaviour that is considered morally wrong or offensive). In the above case, if you're going to be executed for speaking out against a repressive regime, then survival instinct kicks in, and most people will keep their heads down. It's easy to condemn them from a distance for doing so, but in real life I suspect its very different. This post has been edited by vidcapper: 16th August 2017, 07:01 AM |
|
|
|
|
16th August 2017, 06:44 PM
Post
#44
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,851 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Aug 16 2017, 07:59 AM) Surely it's only *acting* on bigoted views that does damage, merely holding them harms no-one? Since Vidcapper is obviously not my real name, that's not a very good example. In the above case, if you're going to be executed for speaking out against a repressive regime, then survival instinct kicks in, and most people will keep their heads down. It's easy to condemn them from a distance for doing so, but in real life I suspect its very different. No, promoting those views is harmful. Do you even watch the news or read history? It's easy for those keeping their heads down to justify their own actions as they watch others tossed into gas chambers, yes that's true. Doesn't make it right or excusable. The whole point of my argument is you don't let it get to state of HAVING a repressive regime by condemning their actions before they get to the point where they are killing people. In that case, nobody has any excuse for sitting on the fence other than either selfishness or agreeing with the forthcoming regime. Even T. May is speaking out against fascists today, because it's the right thing to do....... |
|
|
|
|
17th August 2017, 05:43 AM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Aug 16 2017, 07:44 PM) No, promoting those views is harmful. Do you even watch the news or read history? Yes I do, which is why I am wary of any group whose raison d'être is censorship. This is why I draw an analogy between political correctness, and Newspeak in George Orwell's '1984'. Both seek to eliminate political opposition by banning any words that could be used to oppose their ideology. That is an affront to freedom of speech. QUOTE It's easy for those keeping their heads down to justify their own actions as they watch others tossed into gas chambers, yes that's true. Doesn't make it right or excusable. The whole point of my argument is you don't let it get to state of HAVING a repressive regime by condemning their actions before they get to the point where they are killing people. In that case, nobody has any excuse for sitting on the fence other than either selfishness or agreeing with the forthcoming regime. Even T. May is speaking out against fascists today, because it's the right thing to do....... The socialist left are as big a danger to freedom as are fascists - you only have to look at Venezuela to see that! |
|
|
|
|
17th August 2017, 07:05 AM
Post
#46
|
|
|
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908 User: 10,596
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Aug 17 2017, 06:43 AM) The socialist left are as big a danger to freedom as are fascists - you only have to look at Venezuela to see that! Please, tell me more about Venezuela. |
|
|
|
|
17th August 2017, 07:28 AM
Post
#47
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,851 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Aug 17 2017, 06:43 AM) Yes I do, which is why I am wary of any group whose raison d'être is censorship. This is why I draw an analogy between political correctness, and Newspeak in George Orwell's '1984'. Both seek to eliminate political opposition by banning any words that could be used to oppose their ideology. That is an affront to freedom of speech. The socialist left are as big a danger to freedom as are fascists - you only have to look at Venezuela to see that! 1. Congratulations! You just became Trump, an apologist for people who feel they have the right to oppress others by condemning the left as if holding liberal values means one supports Oppression. Being a decent human being, and holding non-racist values is not in ANY way supporting a regime on the left, right, or hanging in mid-air positioned over Jupiter. Political Correctness is not an oppressive state, it's the ultimate liberal democracy where everyone has the freedom to express their views AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT HARM SOMEONE ELSE. You have just said holding views that DO cause harm to others is acceptable by using a "get-out" clause, that it's only wrong if someone ACTUALLY kills someone, and then refuse to condemn them because you choose not to get involved in condemning anyone for their beliefs - unless it's PC, then that's fine to condemn. At least try and be consistent. 2. Has anyone suffering from PC actually said they support the Venezuelan Government actions? Please refer to appropriate comments. I will be happy to express my opinions - hint: they don't exactly concur with Corbyn's statements, though broadly condemning them (as he did) is at least not condoning them. |
|
|
|
|
17th August 2017, 02:33 PM
Post
#48
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Aug 17 2017, 08:28 AM) 1. Congratulations! You just became Trump, an apologist for people who feel they have the right to oppress others by condemning the left as if holding liberal values means one supports Oppression. Being a decent human being, and holding non-racist values is not in ANY way supporting a regime on the left, right, or hanging in mid-air positioned over Jupiter. Congratulations, you've kept up your 100% record of misinterpreting me.  I've *never* been an apologist for any oppressor, I just try to walk a centre line between libertarianism & authoritarianism. QUOTE Political Correctness is not an oppressive state, it's the ultimate liberal democracy where everyone has the freedom to express their views AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT HARM SOMEONE ELSE. You have just said holding views that DO cause harm to others is acceptable by using a "get-out" clause, that it's only wrong if someone ACTUALLY kills someone, and then refuse to condemn them because you choose not to get involved in condemning anyone for their beliefs - unless it's PC, then that's fine to condemn. At least try and be consistent. Your 100% record remains intact.QUOTE 2. Has anyone suffering from PC actually said they support the Venezuelan Government actions? Please refer to appropriate comments. I will be happy to express my opinions - hint: they don't exactly concur with Corbyn's statements, though broadly condemning them (as he did) is at least not condoning them. True freedom of speech cannot have any qualifications, as it necessarily includes the freedom to give offence - that's why, however repulsive their views, groups like the KKK are allowed to go on marches,as in Charlottesville. |
|
|
|
|
17th August 2017, 04:05 PM
Post
#49
|
|
|
Say that hiss with your chest, and...
Joined: 24 May 2016
Posts: 18,472 User: 23,308
    |
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Aug 17 2017, 03:33 PM) True freedom of speech cannot have any qualifications, as it necessarily includes the freedom to give offence - that's why, however repulsive their views, groups like the KKK are allowed to go on marches,as in Charlottesville. If the statue wouldn't have been removed in Charlottesville, there wouldn't have been the repugant far right marches there though. While I would agree that General Lee historically was fighting for a repugnant and racist cause and that the statue had caused offence to many, it is still hard to know about whether the removal of the statue was right considering that it was definitely going to cause problems with the alt right and sadly extremists from the far right protesting there. Another solution would have been replacing it with a statue of a Union general symbolically defeating General Lee and that change may not have caused the repugnant far right protests in Charlottesville (as Lee would still be part of the statue) while also showing the defeat of a racist cause and the triumph of good over evil. Anyway Trump's reluctance to condemn the far right and white supremacists until media/US political pressure came on him to do so is very disappointing (especially considering the circumstances of a suspected white supremacist murdering an anti fascist protester that day) although expected considering he wants to court the far right vote. This post has been edited by Hiß: 17th August 2017, 04:47 PM |
|
|
|
|
17th August 2017, 04:40 PM
Post
#50
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,851 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Aug 17 2017, 03:33 PM) Congratulations, you've kept up your 100% record of misinterpreting me. I've *never* been an apologist for any oppressor, I just try to walk a centre line between libertarianism & authoritarianism. Your 100% record remains intact. True freedom of speech cannot have any qualifications, as it necessarily includes the freedom to give offence - that's why, however repulsive their views, groups like the KKK are allowed to go on marches,as in Charlottesville. ...and yet you continue to fail to see the blatantly obvious link between promoting hate (which is illegal in this country), carrying mass weapons, clearly with the intent to intimidate and start a conflict and offer no sympathies to victims caught up in the hatred. People who are NOT carrying weapons and are peacefully expressing THEIR opinion. Presumably you would be very happy to have armed Nazis demonstrating outside your house, threatening you with death and the extermination of you and all your family (because that is what these people post and believe towards people who are not white), because you believe they have a right to do that? Let's see you walk that line of lib n auth faced with actual real life rather than abstract BS. |
|
|
|
|
17th August 2017, 07:51 PM
Post
#51
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,088 User: 3,474
      |
|
|
|
|
|
17th August 2017, 07:55 PM
Post
#52
|
|
|
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,105 User: 18,639
    |
I saw that on Facebook today, but I do wonder if these memed, whilst philosphically and morally sound, do more harm r.e entrenching attitudes and maing the right think that WE are the autocrats stifling, admitedly appalling, free speech? Whilst I agree with the meme, we have to think like our ... um ... other spectrum counterparts to win the culture war and stop our countres spiralling further into authoritarian right wing regimes.
This post has been edited by MoistSummerFruit: 17th August 2017, 07:56 PM |
|
|
|
|
17th August 2017, 08:51 PM
Post
#53
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,676 User: 3,272
   |
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Aug 17 2017, 03:33 PM) Congratulations, you've kept up your 100% record of misinterpreting me. I've *never* been an apologist for any oppressor, I just try to walk a centre line between libertarianism & authoritarianism. Your 100% record remains intact. True freedom of speech cannot have any qualifications, as it necessarily includes the freedom to give offence - that's why, however repulsive their views, groups like the KKK are allowed to go on marches,as in Charlottesville. Are you suggesting that it should be perfectly OK to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theatre? Should I be allowed to call for the assassination of the Prime Minister? |
|
|
|
|
18th August 2017, 05:35 AM
Post
#54
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Aug 17 2017, 05:40 PM) ...and yet you continue to fail to see the blatantly obvious link between promoting hate (which is illegal in this country), carrying mass weapons, clearly with the intent to intimidate and start a conflict and offer no sympathies to victims caught up in the hatred. People who are NOT carrying weapons and are peacefully expressing THEIR opinion. 100% still! I see the link perfectly well, but IMO Free Speech trumps (no pun intended) everything else. QUOTE Presumably you would be very happy to have armed Nazis demonstrating outside your house, threatening you with death and the extermination of you and all your family (because that is what these people post and believe towards people who are not white), because you believe they have a right to do that? I wouldn't be happy to see that, but I will quote the line often misattributed to Voltaire 'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'Let's see you walk that line of lib n auth faced with actual real life rather than abstract BS. QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Aug 17 2017, 09:51 PM) Are you suggesting that it should be perfectly OK to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theatre? Should I be allowed to call for the assassination of the Prime Minister? I just *knew* someone would quote that one. While you technically have that right, if there is *no* fire, then claiming 'freedom of speech' will not absolve you from any negative consequences of your irresponsible action. |
|
|
|
|
18th August 2017, 07:42 AM
Post
#55
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,088 User: 3,474
|
Free Speach does not give you the right to spout intolerant bigoted hate speach.
I can't believe that I actually have to type that above sentence. If what you're saying will be harmful towards a group of people then it's not free speach, it's hate speach. Additionally, there's no such thing as free speach in U.K. Law this is an American thing. Most, if not all, places in Europe place "limits" on free speach to prosecute hate speach. There is no free speach defence in a court of law if you're charged with a hate crime |
|
|
|
|
18th August 2017, 08:41 AM
Post
#56
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(5 Silas Frøkner @ Aug 18 2017, 08:42 AM) Free Speach does not give you the right to spout intolerant bigoted hate speach. I can't believe that I actually have to type that above sentence. If what you're saying will be harmful towards a group of people then it's not free speach, it's hate speach. Additionally, there's no such thing as free speach in U.K. Law this is an American thing. Most, if not all, places in Europe place "limits" on free speach to prosecute hate speach. There is no free speach defence in a court of law if you're charged with a hate crime There is no such thing as free speach, since it is free speech. Seriouly though, is it still hate speech if no-one who could be offended by it, hears it? Taking offence on behalf of a 3rd party, in other words. Another example might be if someone reports another person for smoking cannabis, even though their doing so doesn't affect the reporter in any way. It;s like that proverb 'If a tree falls in the woods with no-one to hear it, does it make a sound?'  [As you've probably guessed by now, I like playing devil's advocate] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_advocate In common parlance, the term devil's advocate describes someone who, given a certain point of view, takes a position he or she does not necessarily agree with (or simply an alternative position from the accepted norm), for the sake of debate or to explore the thought further. It's not the same as trolling, as the intent is benign, rather than malicious. This post has been edited by vidcapper: 18th August 2017, 08:44 AM |
|
|
|
|
18th August 2017, 09:19 AM
Post
#57
|
|
|
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,105 User: 18,639
|
Wait, are you now talking about virtue signalling?
|
|
|
|
|
18th August 2017, 09:29 AM
Post
#58
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,088 User: 3,474
|
Yes it's still bloody hate speech!!!! That's some captain obvious shit.
Piss off with your devils advocate shit. You can't play devils advocate with bigoted racists. You either denounce them or you're condoning their hateful ideology |
|
|
|
|
18th August 2017, 11:24 AM
Post
#59
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(MoistSummerFruit @ Aug 18 2017, 10:19 AM) Wait, are you now talking about virtue signalling? I've never even heard of that? |
|
|
|
|
18th August 2017, 11:30 AM
Post
#60
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(5 Silas Frøkner @ Aug 18 2017, 10:29 AM) Yes it's still bloody hate speech!!!! That's some captain obvious shit. Piss off with your devils advocate shit. You can't play devils advocate with bigoted racists. You either denounce them or you're condoning their hateful ideology Of course I condemn the hateful ideology of racists - how clear do I have to make that?  Did you not read an earlier post of mine... QUOTE(vidcapper @ Aug 17 2017, 03:33 PM) True freedom of speech cannot have any qualifications, as it necessarily includes the freedom to give offence - that's why, however repulsive their views, groups like the KKK are allowed to go on marches,as in Charlottesville. Do not mistake my acknowledgement of their 1st Amendment Rights (in the US) for endorsement of their views! This post has been edited by vidcapper: 18th August 2017, 11:36 AM |
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 26th April 2024, 08:57 PM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
