Even more problematic stuff

Locked
User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Forty Two » Wed Jan 09, 2019 5:59 pm

Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 5:18 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:34 pm
Brian Peacock wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:29 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:48 pm
If antifa comes to town, are they the good guys fighting the bad guys, or are they the bad guys fighting the good guys?
I guess that depends on one's ideology; on whether one thinks fascists are good guys or bad guys. :tea:
Indeed, or whether one thinks communists are bad guys or good guys ,or anarchists are bad guys or good guys, or antifa is bad or good, etc.

:tea:

If they come to town, may "we" use force if necessary to suppress them? Many of "we" think they are bad guys. If you say "no, Forty Two, you cannot use force if necessary to suppress the communists, anarchists and/or antifa members...." then why not? If you think "we" ought to be able to do that, why is that?
You appear to think there is a definitive, absolute judgement to be made here, one that is morally righteous and secure regardless of context - this seems apparent in how you discuss this matter as if all political positions are essentially equal or equivalent.
One, I am addressing Popper's argument, and why it fails foundationally.

Two, no, I do not believe all political positions are essentially equal. For example, communism and socialism are horrible horrible, terrible, no good ideas, which cause misery, oppression, and horror wherever they go. They are among the worst of ideas. Other terrible ideas are fascism, Nazism, monarchism, totalitarianism, and the like. Social Darwinism. Racial hierarchism. Racism in general. Terrible terrible terrible ideas. Some other ideas are just plain stupid - Creationism versus Evolution, for example. Flat Earth theory. Homeopathy. Anti-vax. Anti-GMO. Retarded views. To suggest that all people have the right to express the ideas that they wish to express is not in the least the same as saying that everyone's ideas are equal.

Three, there is an indefinite number of different viewpoints, however, as to which ideas are evil, good, stupid or smart, or neutral. And, if you view the issue rationally, you may actually admit to yourself that some of the things that you believe might well be considered by most people to be either dangerous or evil, or perhaps just stupid. The vast majority of people, for example, think there is a God. I don't. I think you've said you're an atheist too. So, if the majority "we" decided that lack of god belief is dangerous, do you (does Popper) grant "we" the right to use "force if necessary" to suppress the dangerous view? If not, why not?

Four, I have not suggested that there is an "absolute judgement to be made here." Quite the opposite. I haven't. My view is that we as a "we" cannot make a judgment as to which ideas have merit, and which don't, which are bad or good, which are dangerous or benign, which are "good dangerous" (because they "speak truth to power") and which are "bad dangerous" (because they "punch down"), etc. My view does not make an absolute judgment. My view, and the view of liberal thinkers for 400+ years - is that ideas and actions are different, and you debate or argue about ideas, and nobody has the right to use force to suppress ideas.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
laklak
Posts: 20981
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:07 pm
About me: My preferred pronoun is "Massah"
Location: Tannhauser Gate
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by laklak » Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:09 pm

This is why one of the most useful statements is "Well, yeah, that's just, like, your opinion, man'.
Yeah well that's just, like, your opinion, man.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Forty Two » Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:11 pm

Is it better to (a) have a debate on whether God exists and let everyone who cares to speak have their say, or (b) to take vote as to whether god-belief or atheism is a dangerous idea and to then suppress it?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Svartalf
Offensive Grail Keeper
Posts: 40340
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
Location: Paris France
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Svartalf » Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:17 pm

if god exists it's evil and unworthy of worship, what else is there to say?
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug

PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Forty Two » Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:37 pm

That your idea is dangerous, damaging and hateful, and therefore should be silenced, with force if necessary, as it is intolerant and therefore intolerable.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Svartalf
Offensive Grail Keeper
Posts: 40340
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:42 pm
Location: Paris France
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Svartalf » Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:40 pm

:pawiz:
Embrace the Darkness, it needs a hug

PC stands for "Patronizing Cocksucker" Randy Ping

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Forty Two » Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:48 pm

Oh, such violence. Images of clubs hitting emojis over the head may incite people to violence.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Forty Two » Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:49 pm

You have recently joined a book club.

Before each meeting, one member of the literary collective sends an email to the club secretary offering a few thoughts on the assigned text. This month, it’s your turn to compose the brief review.

A new study suggests that the words you use may depend on whether the club secretary’s name is Emily (“a stereotypically White name,” as the study says) or Lakisha (“a stereotypically Black name”). If you’re a white liberal writing to Emily, you might use words like “melancholy” or “euphoric” to describe the mood of the book, whereas you might trade these terms out for the simpler “sad” or “happy” if you’re corresponding with Lakisha.

But if you’re a white conservative, your diction won’t depend on the presumed race of your interlocutor.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2 ... 8d6d5fcba0
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Hermit » Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:44 pm

Forty Two wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:44 pm
Ideas are not action.

You can have protection against the action of others, while those others still having the same right as you to express your ideas willingly.
So, abolish all hate-speech laws? I mean, what is wrong with saying: "Let's round up all Jews and gas them like the vermin they are." Or "We need to bring back the Jim Crow laws without delay. They will stop racially inferior niggers from polluting our water founts, park benches and schools." They're ideas, right, not action.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by pErvinalia » Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:48 pm

Forty Two wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:34 pm
Brian Peacock wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:29 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:48 pm
If antifa comes to town, are they the good guys fighting the bad guys, or are they the bad guys fighting the good guys?
I guess that depends on one's ideology; on whether one thinks fascists are good guys or bad guys. :tea:
Indeed, or whether one thinks communists are bad guys or good guys ,or anarchists are bad guys or good guys, or antifa is bad or good, etc.
antifa isn't communist or anarchist. It's anti-fascist.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by pErvinalia » Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:53 pm

Forty Two wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:11 pm
Is it better to (a) have a debate on whether God exists and let everyone who cares to speak have their say, or (b) to take vote as to whether god-belief or atheism is a dangerous idea and to then suppress it?
Where are these "votes" that you keep referring to happening? :think:
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Forty Two » Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:07 pm

Hermit wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:44 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:44 pm
Ideas are not action.

You can have protection against the action of others, while those others still having the same right as you to express your ideas willingly.
So, abolish all hate-speech laws? I mean, what is wrong with saying: "Let's round up all Jews and gas them like the vermin they are." Or "We need to bring back the Jim Crow laws without delay. They will stop racially inferior niggers from polluting our water founts, park benches and schools." They're ideas, right, not action.
Well, yeah. We don't have them in the US. That's a good thing. People can have the opinions they like.

You just said "let's round up all the Jews and gas them like the vermin they are," didn't you? Was something wrong with that? Do you get to say it, but someone who really believes it doesn't?

Taking the position that we should bring back Jim Crow laws, etc., or that a race is inferior is just an idea - yes, it's not action. And, again, you just said it.

The liberal justices of the US Supreme Court had this figured out more 50 years ago. Brandenburg v Kentucky -- and the Nazi Party v Skokie Illinois -- speech is speech, man. In Brandenburg, the SCOTUS ruled that free speech includes the "mere" advocacy of violence. The court recognized the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.

Imminent means "right now." Like - whipping up a crowd to go beat up a specific person. But, merely advocating that it would be a good idea to have a violent communist revolution, or a violent fascist uprising - or whatever, would not be illegal. It's protected speech.

Frankly, if someone has the opinions that they think it would be a good idea to gas people, I want them to say it. If they can say it, then the rest of us know who he is. Driving such people underground just makes them fester - they band together in secret - they convince each other that the government or the orthodoxy is silencing the truth. Example - if Nazis can march down the street, then everyone can laugh at and ridicule the Nazis. If the Nazis have to fight to march down the street, or if they are barred from marching down the street, that's proof to them that the Jews really are in control, and silencing them. I prefer a world where the Nazis are open, and laughed at, and where they aren't funny, law enforcement knows where to find most of them.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Forty Two » Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:10 pm

pErvinalia wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:48 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 4:34 pm
Brian Peacock wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:29 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:48 pm
If antifa comes to town, are they the good guys fighting the bad guys, or are they the bad guys fighting the good guys?
I guess that depends on one's ideology; on whether one thinks fascists are good guys or bad guys. :tea:
Indeed, or whether one thinks communists are bad guys or good guys ,or anarchists are bad guys or good guys, or antifa is bad or good, etc.
antifa isn't communist or anarchist. It's anti-fascist.
Says you. Being anti-fascist is not exclusive to being communist or anarchist. I've seen the rallies. Lots of communist regalia and signage shows up.

Also, being anti-fascist doesn't guarantee that they are the good guys. Communists are anti-fascist too, generally speaking, and those guys are fucking asshats.

And don't miss the point. The point is that different factions of "we" are of different minds as to who is righteous and who is not. Do "we" get to silence them by force? Which "we?"
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by Forty Two » Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:13 pm

pErvinalia wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:53 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:11 pm
Is it better to (a) have a debate on whether God exists and let everyone who cares to speak have their say, or (b) to take vote as to whether god-belief or atheism is a dangerous idea and to then suppress it?
Where are these "votes" that you keep referring to happening? :think:
Fuck, man. You weren't in the fucking conversation.

There aren't any votes. I haven't said they were actually occurring.

We're talking about the hypothetical -- raised by Popper (see the post above, which you can find by searching the thread) that "we" can use force if necessary to silence others -- that by doing so we can be intolerant of the intolerable speech.

Taking a vote is one way for a group to decide what "we" as a group will do.

Part of the discussion of Popper's theory is how it would be decided what speech "we" find intolerable.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Even more problematic stuff

Post by pErvinalia » Wed Jan 09, 2019 11:16 pm

Ok, no votes.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests