Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8806 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-16-2017 10:01 AM
265 online now:
Coyote, jar, kjsimons, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat) (5 members, 260 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,324 Year: 28,930/21,208 Month: 996/1,847 Week: 371/475 Day: 34/102 Hour: 0/7

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
4344
45
4647
...
64NextFF
Author Topic:   The Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right
Faith
Member
Posts: 26734
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 661 of 960 (812283)
06-15-2017 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 645 by Chiroptera
06-15-2017 4:18 PM


Re: more of the same
Courts these days are politicized.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 645 by Chiroptera, posted 06-15-2017 4:18 PM Chiroptera has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 668 by Chiroptera, posted 06-15-2017 6:14 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26734
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 662 of 960 (812284)
06-15-2017 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 660 by PaulK
06-15-2017 5:17 PM


Re: Hate speech
Wow, more of same. Unbelievable.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 660 by PaulK, posted 06-15-2017 5:17 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 675 by PaulK, posted 06-15-2017 11:55 PM Faith has responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 888
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 663 of 960 (812285)
06-15-2017 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 659 by Faith
06-15-2017 5:16 PM


Re: Hate speech
In both cases they're wrong. In the first instance, there's a debate to be had about the impact of imperialist pasts, but certainly neither I nor you (I'm a white person, and I am supposing you are too, but please correct me if not) are responsible for the world's ills. In the second instance, that's bullying, and the appropriate interventions should happen - school, parents, and other societal pressures.

But neither adds up to hate speech, because vulnerable groups in society are not being targeted for their vulnerability. We preserve special punishments for hate speech (at least in the UK), and they should only be applied to limit free speech in defence of those vulnerable groups.

Not to say those situations aren't wrong - they are. But where more vulnerable people are targeted, extra protections are appropriate.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 659 by Faith, posted 06-15-2017 5:16 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 664 by Faith, posted 06-15-2017 5:35 PM vimesey has responded
 Message 741 by caffeine, posted 06-19-2017 2:26 PM vimesey has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26734
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 664 of 960 (812288)
06-15-2017 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 663 by vimesey
06-15-2017 5:24 PM


Re: Hate speech
I think the definition is skewed. What makes a class "vulnerable" is the hate speech or bigotry itself, and a kid is vulnerable no matter what. This kid says he wants to kill himself. Thanks to the Left.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 663 by vimesey, posted 06-15-2017 5:24 PM vimesey has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 665 by vimesey, posted 06-15-2017 5:44 PM Faith has responded
 Message 666 by DrJones*, posted 06-15-2017 5:48 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 888
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 665 of 960 (812289)
06-15-2017 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 664 by Faith
06-15-2017 5:35 PM


Re: Hate speech
There's no perfect world, in which any one approach to life results in universal happiness. But I don't think that means that we shouldn't strive for the least bad result. And for me, that means preserving freedom of speech (and dissent, and disagreement, and argument, and insult), to the extent that is possible, whilst limiting its harm to others, and I think the balance is rightly struck by defining (and proscribing) hate speech as we have.

It means that certain sections of society get more protected than elements of society that you and I regularly identify with. But I recognise my own privilege and fortune in being who I am, and I recognise too that it's fair that less privileged groups get a little more protection than I do. I'm lucky enough as it stands. The standard protections are good enough for me.

Edited by vimesey, : Autocorrect doesn't know "proscribing"


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 664 by Faith, posted 06-15-2017 5:35 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 673 by Faith, posted 06-15-2017 11:08 PM vimesey has not yet responded

    
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1683
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004


Message 666 of 960 (812290)
06-15-2017 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 664 by Faith
06-15-2017 5:35 PM


Re: Hate speech
are you going to/did you denounce the president for having Ted Nugent over for dinner? if not your accusations against the "the left" carry little weight.

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 664 by Faith, posted 06-15-2017 5:35 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10125
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 667 of 960 (812291)
06-15-2017 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 650 by New Cat's Eye
06-15-2017 4:53 PM


Re: Hate speech
But if the leftists don't want to be hypocrites, then they should admit that according to their own logic it does.

Except that Clinton's speech does not meet anyone's definition of hate speech. Just because the announcer claims that a speech incited violence does not mean that it did.

Let's contrast that with Trump saying that he would pay the legal bills for someone who physically attacked a protester.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

Not really, it is a theory that is imposed on nature so consistently that you think you are observing it. -- Faith

Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000


This message is a reply to:
 Message 650 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-15-2017 4:53 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

    
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6397
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003


(2)
Message 668 of 960 (812292)
06-15-2017 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 661 by Faith
06-15-2017 5:23 PM


Re: more of the same
Courts these days are politicized.

Were the courts politicized when they ruled against Obama in Burwell v Hobby Lobby? How about when it ruled against Obama's EPA in Michigan v EPA?

'Cause every time someone says something like "the courts are politicized", it usually really means, "I don't like the courts' rulings."

Edited by Chiroptera, : Typo.

Edited by Chiroptera, : Another typo.


Freedom is merely privilege extended, unless enjoyed by one and all. Billy Bragg

This message is a reply to:
 Message 661 by Faith, posted 06-15-2017 5:23 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member (Idle past 34 days)
Posts: 906
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 669 of 960 (812297)
06-15-2017 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 609 by NoNukes
06-15-2017 8:07 AM


Re: Who will be the first A-hole
In fact, I am sure that they would be supportive based on the reaction following the shooting of Ms. Gifford.

You saw supportive compassion from Democrats when Ms. Gifford was shot? I saw a lot of fingers pointed at Sarah Palin, but not much compassion.

http://www.sarahpalin.com/...es-palin-inciting-2011-shooting

Sanders got plenty of time on ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT WITH DAVID MUIR last night to "condemn the latest shooting in the strongest possible terms", but I don't remember ABC giving Palin the same privilege back in 2011.

A lot of people today are calling attention to the fact that political polarization in this day and time is more intense than it's ever been in the past, and of course the question "why" is now a pretty hot topic. Though morals are declining, population is increasing etc. I don't think there's much difference in people's temperaments today than there was 40 or 50 years ago. Two-way conflicts are human nature, it's obvious because of the tremendous interest there has always been in spectator sports.

The difference in today versus 40 or 50 years ago is communication technology Today's news reporting and political observation and commentary is saturated with money, largely unheard of before the internet and cable television. News reporters long ago learned that sensationalism sold far better than boring, factual news reporting. Their bias started becoming clear during the Reagan years, and in the late 80's and early 90's, a guy named Rush Limbaugh found himself in exactly the right place at the right time. The rest is history - no one can factually claim that he, or any other right wing commentator, stirs up more or less nut cases to commit violence than Rachel Maddow or any other left wing commentator.

The left is off-balance right now, they couldn't imagine someone who owns and apparently takes an interest in guns to so passionately support the party that seeks to take his freedom to own a gun. I can't understand it either, but it's clear that it happens. The only explanation is that those on the left, for reasons of jealousy or whatever, seek to see others freedoms be destroyed, and fully expect to keep their own. I can only conclude that they take their own freedoms for granted, and are short-sighted largely because of their lack of a knowledge of world history.

So the beat goes on, Bernie Sanders blames Sarah Palin for the Giffords shooting, and claims perfect innocence for himself for this recent shooting. Nothing's going to change, and this recent shooting will be quickly forgotten. The news media knows that no matter what they do, their already falling credibility with the general public is going down a few more notches, and the best thing they can do is downplay this and move on. ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT WITH DAVID MUIR was very interested in Bill Cosby and many other news stories this evening, rather than harp too much on this guys love for Rachel Maddow for instance.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 609 by NoNukes, posted 06-15-2017 8:07 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 674 by NoNukes, posted 06-15-2017 11:26 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member (Idle past 34 days)
Posts: 906
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 670 of 960 (812299)
06-15-2017 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 616 by Chiroptera
06-15-2017 11:54 AM


Re: Who will be the first A-hole
I can't speak for all the mainstream news and I don't know what gets counted as "downplaying", but this morning the New York Times had an article on the front page that made it clear that Hodgkinson supported left wing causes and was a Bernie Sanders supporter.

They have no choice but to report most of the basic truths, because they know those truths are going to be all over the internet and conservative news and commentary. But it will be abbreviated much more than it would if the situation were reversed.

They have a brand new problem, their former accusations of gun violence coming only from conservative inspiration just got completely destroyed. NoNukes is probably wondering if I'm happy about it, all I can say is no more happy than Bernie Sanders and other gun control people were when Ms. Giffords was shot.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 616 by Chiroptera, posted 06-15-2017 11:54 AM Chiroptera has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 672 by Chiroptera, posted 06-15-2017 9:37 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11855
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 671 of 960 (812301)
06-15-2017 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 656 by vimesey
06-15-2017 5:10 PM


Re: Hate speech
Way more so than amongst religious backgrounds, yes. And I note that you don't deny my rebuttal of your point.

I'm still getting this straight: So if Democrats breed Democrats like Christians breed Christians, would that remove some of the choice in the matter? And then political affiliation could be a protected class?

Come to think of it, maybe the choice part shouldn't be mattering to you that much. You can choose your sex and apparently your race too these days

There are some examples of that - are you claiming the preponderance of racist assaults against white people is greater than against black/Asian people in our societies ?

What!? No. You said they're not vulnerable, I'm saying they can be.

In my view, it doesn't require Republicans to suffer a zero amount of vulnerability in order to protect black people/gays etc.

Of course, but apparently there is some level of vulnerability that is not worth protecting. I mean, you can't be saying it doesn't matter just because these people were Republicans?

Because if we are to limit freedom of speech, to protect vulnerable segments of society, it is right that we limit those limitations. Hence hate speech should be a very specific definition.

Now that I can agree with. I'm not convinced that hate speech should be a thing, but if it is you're right.

I see that you've got another post, Message 663. I'll respond to it here as well:

We preserve special punishments for hate speech (at least in the UK), and they should only be applied to limit free speech in defence of those vulnerable groups.

Not to say those situations aren't wrong - they are. But where more vulnerable people are targeted, extra protections are appropriate.

This, I can understand. Now, I don't really care for it, but I get it.

If you're going to go "above and beyond", you should take extra care. Secial punishments, should you decide they exist, should not only be accurate, but very precise.

But neither adds up to hate speech, because vulnerable groups in society are not being targeted for their vulnerability.

This I'm having a little more trouble with.

How do I target someone for their vulnerability? What does that mean? And why is that the important qualifier?

If an individual is being targeted for being a member of a group, why does it have to be for their vulnerability to be important enough to be protected from?

And is choice really that important?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 656 by vimesey, posted 06-15-2017 5:10 PM vimesey has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 678 by vimesey, posted 06-16-2017 4:23 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6397
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003


Message 672 of 960 (812303)
06-15-2017 9:37 PM
Reply to: Message 670 by marc9000
06-15-2017 8:33 PM


Re: Who will be the first A-hole
They have no choice but to report most of the basic truths, because they know those truths are going to be all over the internet and conservative news and commentary.

Or they reported it because that's their job as journalists; they felt the information is important and they felt it's their professional duty to get this news out to the people.

Edited by Chiroptera, : Extensively rewrote this post.


Freedom is merely privilege extended, unless enjoyed by one and all. Billy Bragg

This message is a reply to:
 Message 670 by marc9000, posted 06-15-2017 8:33 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 684 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-16-2017 10:44 AM Chiroptera has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 26734
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 673 of 960 (812309)
06-15-2017 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 665 by vimesey
06-15-2017 5:44 PM


Re: Hate speech
It's crossed my mind that we may have to go back to the methods of medieval times and start dotting the landscape with fortified castles to protect ourselves from each other.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 665 by vimesey, posted 06-15-2017 5:44 PM vimesey has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 679 by Huntard, posted 06-16-2017 4:55 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10125
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


(1)
Message 674 of 960 (812312)
06-15-2017 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 669 by marc9000
06-15-2017 8:27 PM


Re: Who will be the first A-hole
You saw supportive compassion from Democrats when Ms. Gifford was shot? I saw a lot of fingers pointed at Sarah Palin, but not much compassion.

I said that I saw support from Republicans for Gifford just as I also saw support from Democrats for Scalise yesterday. The BS miss-statement you are trying to attribute to me is just plain idiotic.

Sanders got plenty of time on ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT WITH DAVID MUIR last night to "condemn the latest shooting in the strongest possible terms", but I don't remember ABC giving Palin the same privilege back in 2011.

The problem with your statement is that you have a demonstrated track record of not remembering news stories correctly and then pretending that your flagging memory is of some import.

Bernie made a point of getting his position on record. Sarah Palin is not some private citizen without any opportunity to get their story out. If she wanted to speak out about Gabby's shooting she would have no problem finding an audience. Whether or not Palin got on ABC, plenty of other Republicans including Governor Brewer had no problem getting in front of cameras.

Do you have some evidence to back up your claim about ABC or about Palin having anything constructive to say but not getting any attention, or are you just blowing smoke? Again.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

Not really, it is a theory that is imposed on nature so consistently that you think you are observing it. -- Faith

Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000


This message is a reply to:
 Message 669 by marc9000, posted 06-15-2017 8:27 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 13369
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.8


(1)
Message 675 of 960 (812315)
06-15-2017 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 662 by Faith
06-15-2017 5:23 PM


Re: Hate speech
You expect you and your side to be exempt from criticism - even truthful criticism - while retaining the right to criticise your opponents without regard for the truth. And you find it "unbelievable" that your opponents won't accept that ?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 662 by Faith, posted 06-15-2017 5:23 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 676 by Faith, posted 06-16-2017 12:28 AM PaulK has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
4344
45
4647
...
64NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017