So yeah, the PC people have won once again..

[rob_gould]

Of course, your point?

Just curious. I live in an area where the majority are Muslim. I have yet to see any negative influence in day to day civic life. I'd go one step further and say that their religious beliefs have *no* impact of any kind on day to day existence here.

 

[rob_gould]

Wow, you two have been busy...

 

[rob_gould]

If I had a euro for every strawman on the last page  ;D

 

[ComodoComplex]

I wondered at which point you were going to mention the Nazis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law#:~:text=Godwin's%20law%2C%20short%20for%20Godwin's,or%20Hitler%20becomes%20more%20likely.

So you tell me if I am right :

black lives matter - not hate speech, all lives matter - hate speech
pro choice -  not hate speech, pro life - hate speech

So basically everything that you don't agree with is hate speech, or what am I missing?

So according to Goodwin's law, we've reached the end of a civilized discussion, because it is being dampened.

1) black lives matter is saying that a group which endures injustice in our society should be uplifted. All lives matter is a response which says that the injustice is not occurring and shouldn't be addressed. So yes spot on with that

2) Pro choice says the government should pass no laws abridging the rights of a woman to control her reproductive health. Pro-life says women should be forced to carry pregnancies to term from the moment of conception, so yes spot on there as well.

3) yes I tend to err on the side of trying not to believe in hateful ideologies, but it takes a lot of learning AND unlearning to get there. Nobody is perfect, we all have implicit biases and cultural biases that are learned passively and actively.

4) OK I used an infographic which uses Nazism as an example... I didn't call you a nazi - I brought up the tolerance paradox. I guess we're really leaning heavily on the "Law" in Godwin's Law here, but if that's what you need to not address the point on its merits, go for it!

 

[user 37518]

1) black lives matter is saying that a group which endures injustice in our society should be uplifted. All lives matter is a response which says that the injustice is not occurring and shouldn't be addressed. So yes spot on with that

2) Pro choice says the government should pass no laws abridging the rights of a woman to control her reproductive health. Pro-life says women should be forced to carry pregnancies to term from the moment of conception, so yes spot on there as well.

3) yes I tend to err on the side of trying not to believe in hateful ideologies, but it takes a lot of learning AND unlearning to get there. Nobody is perfect, we all have implicit biases and cultural biases that are learned passively and actively.

4) OK I used an infographic which uses Nazism as an example... I didn't call you a nazi - I brought up the tolerance paradox. I guess we're really leaning heavily on the "Law" in Godwin's Law here, but if that's what you need to not address the point on its merits, go for it!

So spot on on everything you like, not spot on on what everyone else thinks. Right, no cancel culture there....

 

[ComodoComplex]

So spot on on everything you like, not spot on on what everyone else thinks. Right, no cancel culture there....

Sure buddy I think you're dense. Is that me canceling you?

 

[user 37518]

Sure buddy I think you're dense. Is that me canceling you?

No, thats speaking what's on your mind, exactly what I want people to do.

 

[ComodoComplex]

No, thats speaking what's on your mind, exactly what I want people to do.

But everything thus far is not me speaking what's on my mind?

 

[user 37518]

But everything thus far is not me speaking what's on my mind?

Ohhh yes, you have been giving arguments on why you think someone should be supressed. I just think you should be fair with both sides.

 

[user 37518]

Sure buddy I think you're dense. Is that me canceling you?

And if you think you are not being offensive or insulting with that argument, then more to my point, you are allowed to do so, why not me? Just for the record, I didn't personally attack you or call  you names. Insults are not arguments

 

[Tubetec]

Holy fuck balls batman ,looks like this thread has turned into a viral tit for tat shit slinging match  very quickly ;D
Luckily I was always a hard target to take insult or offence and far more adept at dishing it out  ,
If some one trys to knock you , take it on the chin , send yourself down momentairliy with an even more inteligent 'self depricating ' quip  that makes everone laugh , then go in with a killer blow while their guard is down,game over 
Remember that old line from the 'Incredible Hulk' Bill bixby era , 'you wouldnt like me when Im angry' 

 

[ComodoComplex]

Ohhh yes, you have been giving arguments on why you think someone should be supressed. I just think you should be fair with both sides.

I've been giving pretty cogent arguments as to why your ideas are illogical and rooted in xenophobia and yes, (gasp) racism. How dare I!? You poor thing

Look, maybe this will clear things up. I (and maybe I can speak for "the left" here) don't think that holding racist beliefs is *evil*. I think it's part of being an imperfect human who absorbs their environment. I bring up the concept of racism not to "cancel" or insult someone but to hold a mirror to their beliefs and try to get them to reflect critically. The problem is that you see it as ad-hominem. It's not.

Racism is an issue of prejudice yes, but it's also in large part an issue of policy and social organization (systemic stuff)

 

[ComodoComplex]

And if you think you are not being offensive or insulting with that argument, then more to my point, you are allowed to do so, why not me? Just for the record, I didn't personally attack you or call  you names. Insults are not arguments

I don't really care if you insult me. My point was that I haven't insulted you at all thus far, but you are still insisting I'm cancelling you. No one is cancelling you! I don't even know who you are!

 

[user 37518]

I don't really care if you insult me. My point was that I haven't insulted you at all thus far, but you are still insisting I'm cancelling you. No one is cancelling you! I don't even know who you are!

You called me "dense" and then you asked a sarcastic question, I never called you any names.

 

[user 37518]

I've been giving pretty cogent arguments as to why your ideas are illogical and rooted in xenophobia and yes, (gasp) racism. How dare I!? You poor thing

Look, maybe this will clear things up. I (and maybe I can speak for "the left" here) don't think that holding racist beliefs is *evil*. I think it's part of being an imperfect human who absorbs their environment. I bring up the concept of racism not to "cancel" or insult someone but to hold a mirror to their beliefs and try to get them to reflect critically. The problem is that you see it as ad-hominem. It's not.

Racism is an issue of prejudice yes, but it's also in large part an issue of policy and social organizahtion (systemic stuff)

Again with the racism, ohhh my, why everything ends up with race? You call my arguments illogical just because you don't agree with what you say.

 

[ComodoComplex]

You called me "dense" and then you asked a sarcastic question, I never called you any names.

That's what I'm referring to. My point in calling you dense and asking if that cancelled you was to point out that being mean to someone is not cancelling them. Being critical of someone isn't cancelling them. You're whining about being cancelled by the collective will of a population and yet you're *pro* free speech?? It seems like you'd actually like to force people to have to listen to every hateful thing someone says. I don't have to listen to Tucker Carlson do I?  Does Fox have to keep him on their payroll? Does Berkeley have to host Milo Yianopoulos?

 

[ComodoComplex]

Again with the racism, ohhh my, why everything ends up with race? You call my arguments illogical just because you don't agree with what you say.

Not everything ends up with race. But you brought up issues of religious prejudice against Islam which overlap greatly with racial prejudice. Are the muslim refugees from Syria in large part brown or white?

 

[user 37518]

Not everything ends up with race. But you brought up issues of religious prejudice against Islam which overlap greatly with racial prejudice. Are the muslim refugees from Syria in large part brown or white?

Talking about ad hominem, "you are against Islam, most muslims are brown, so therefore you are against brown people and therefore a racist"

That train of thought could be used with almost anything BTW

 

[ComodoComplex]

Talking about ad hominem, "you are against Islam, most muslims are brown, so therefore you are against brown people and therefore a racist"

If you can handle some nuance here, it's this:

You have a problem with Muslim immigration into Europe, or at the very least with the growth of Islam as a religion globally. The majority of muslims are non-white, and therefore the policy issue of addressing immigration and asylum laws for muslim migrants has race as a consideration. If you are barring a certain type of person from entering your country, or relegating them to a political and economic underclass, what difference does it make if it's because that person is not white, or because of a proxy trait like being muslim? There is still a racial element that is present and inextricably linked to the situation. Racism, xenophobia, islamophobia overlap and intersect in very complicated ways. It's not ad-hominem to bring up those issues

 

[user 37518]

If you can handle some nuance here, it's this:

You have a problem with Muslim immigration into Europe, or at the very least with the growth of Islam as a religion globally. The majority of muslims are non-white, and therefore the policy issue of addressing immigration and asylum laws for muslim migrants has race as a consideration. If you are barring a certain type of person from entering your country, or relegating them to a political and economic underclass, what difference does it make if it's because that person is not white, or because of a proxy trait like being muslim? There is still a racial element that is present and inextricably linked to the situation. Racism, xenophobia, islamophobia overlap and intersect in very complicated ways. It's not ad-hominem to bring up those issues

Exactly when did I mention Muslim immigrants to Europe? I was talking about the rise of Islam as an ideology, not as a people or race.Why can't I disagree with the ideology of Islam.

Ok, to make things easier, I am not against muslims, I am against what the Quran and the Hadith preaches, those are books and ideologies. I don't like that those ideologies will become predominant in the future.

"You like Beethoven, Beethoven was German, Germans hated Jews, therfore you hate jews, and so you are a racist"

And BTW a similar argument about Beethoven has already been made by the left, as absurd as it sounds https://www.classicfm.com/composers/beethoven/composer-cancelled-fifth-symphony-elitist-vox-debate/