What I am seeing is you looking at the ~10 most extreme examples of 'liberal thought-policing' during a period of a couple years in countries with total population of ~600 million and equating this with free speech being eroded. I also don't agree that all the examples you cite are really truthful portrayals of what happened - Paul Weston certainly was not 'arrested for citing Churchill'. To quote Police Commissioner Simon Hayes (rather than quote the headline from the Daily Mail, a complete garbage newspaper);
It has been wrongly suggested that Mr Weston was arrested for reciting passages written by Winston Churchill. I understand he was not welcome outside the Winchester Guildhall, the Police were called and he was asked to move on. I also understand that he was not prepared to move on and was arrested for this reason.
Members of the public are of course at liberty to debate issues of importance to them in private or public spaces. However, there must be a level of decorum and decency.
I don't think everything you say is wrong or bs, and I think it would be possible for us to have a healthy discussion on this matter - you're clearly intelligent and willing to engage in a level-headed discussion. However, there are several elements of your posting that strongly indicate that you are delving into conspiratorical territory, the aforementioned use of red-flag phrases like cultural marxism and liberal fascism are two of these, and in your previous post you alluded that the reason why leftists refuse to engage the problematic sides of Islam is that we are afraid to 'offend a segment of its voter base that they imported.' This is complete nonsense, leftists actually debate the problematic sides of Islam all the time - we just refuse to engage in fear-mongering and we don't accept exaggerated portrayals of how bad the situation is. But plenty leftists consider the famous pew research center picture showing how big percentages of muslims believe in various dangerous thoughts very problematic, and these issues are frequently debated in academic circles.
Like, I'm not going to defend everything people from the left has stated relating to these issues - there are morons on every side of the political isle, and while a leftist moron might whine about their need for university campuses to be a place where they can feel safe from antagonizing thoughts or words, this does not mean that this is the prevailing leftist mindset. I come from a leftist family in leftist Norway and I've studied leftist studies and hung out with leftist hippies. I think aside from feminism (where I have indeed encountered quite some that I find way too radical), none of the people in my circles would support some of the more ridiculous things you mention. We all think banning Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock is fucking stupid. The huge problem is that you are looking at these largely isolated incidents that are so extreme that they attract media attention and extrapolate from these a grand, overarching conspiracy stifling free speech and thought, going so far as to say that liberalism has turned fascist, which simply is not rooted in any form of reality and which genuinely showcase either ignorance of what fascism entails or a deliberate obfuscation of words. I'm not arguing that everyone on 'the right' is willing to nuke Europe, but if I showed as little respect for republican mindsets as you show for leftist ones, this would be the kind of hyperbolic extrapolations I could find myself making.
Did any university actually ban Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock? I think he meant they won't perform because university audiences are so sensitive that you can't really be funny.
Why does everything have to be left vs right and not right vs wrong? When some sort of issue comes up do you and your family and friends talk about it and follow whatever is the popular leftist opinion? What if you disagree even slightly? I think you would be afraid to and thats the problem with whats going on in the world right now. Everyone just wants to be angry in a group without using their brains.
On April 05 2016 16:55 KrappyKonnect wrote:
Did any university actually ban Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock? I think he meant they won't perform because university audiences are so sensitive that you can't really be funny.
Why does everything have to be left vs right and not right vs wrong? When some sort of issue comes up do you and your family and friends talk about it and follow whatever is the popular leftist opinion? What if you disagree even slightly? I think you would be afraid to and thats the problem with whats going on in the world right now. Everyone just wants to be angry in a group without using their brains.
Everything is not about what is left vs what is right. But political ideologies are normally quite cohesive, and if your world view happens to be one where one ideology explains world history/events better than another ideology, it is likely to explain mostly all events better from your perspective, and it is likely to supply better answers to problems that arise. Then there's the thing where opinions aren't binary or trinary, it's not like you are either a left wing, centrist or right wing, rather you will find yourself leaning more one way or the other depending on issue, but if you find yourself further left ideology wise in general, you are likely to be further left on each individual issue as well. Not to mention that the left-right dichotomy is a simplification which sometimes has definite shortcomings - but it also has a lot of validity and utilizing the terms, which are pretty universally understood and accepted, makes me not have to write even longer posts
Basically, it's not that me, my friends or my family just follow whatever the popular leftist opinion is, it's that the world views that initially made us accept leftist explanations for world occurrences continue to be our world views and they continue to be valid explanations for events. Except sometimes they are not - which is why people like myself, who identify as leftists, have no problems with, even among fellow leftists, arguing that in Norway, we should talk more about gender equality than about feminism because I believe both genders are currently disadvantaged in different ways, rather than historically, where women were the discriminated part. I don't have time to write more now, but I can definitely go more in depth regarding this issue if you are interested.
Yeah I dont really understand it at all but seems to me we should try and look at things in the middle and then weigh the case to decide what side you lean on. I think people who have no idea just follow whatever is the liberal message or whatever is the conservative message and dont use their brains. Or lifelong democrats and republicans. Why not listen to what both candidates say and pick which one you agree with the most. I think this labelling of ourselves is silly. Its hard to see both sides to an issue when you come into it with most of your weights on one side.
Like how you are worried about feminism and how we are different in different ways. Feminists wouldnt like to hear that. Its the same thing with other issues people get mad and plug their ears when people are trying to be the other side to a debate.
On April 05 2016 16:28 Liquid`Drone wrote:
What I am seeing is you looking at the ~10 most extreme examples of 'liberal thought-policing' during a period of a couple years in countries with total population of ~600 million and equating this with free speech being eroded. I also don't agree that all the examples you cite are really truthful portrayals of what happened - Paul Weston certainly was not 'arrested for citing Churchill'. To quote Police Commissioner Simon Hayes (rather than quote the headline from the Daily Mail, a complete garbage newspaper);
It has been wrongly suggested that Mr Weston was arrested for reciting passages written by Winston Churchill. I understand he was not welcome outside the Winchester Guildhall, the Police were called and he was asked to move on. I also understand that he was not prepared to move on and was arrested for this reason.
Members of the public are of course at liberty to debate issues of importance to them in private or public spaces. However, there must be a level of decorum and decency.
I don't think everything you say is wrong or bs, and I think it would be possible for us to have a healthy discussion on this matter - you're clearly intelligent and willing to engage in a level-headed discussion. However, there are several elements of your posting that strongly indicate that you are delving into conspiratorical territory, the aforementioned use of red-flag phrases like cultural marxism and liberal fascism are two of these, and in your previous post you alluded that the reason why leftists refuse to engage the problematic sides of Islam is that we are afraid to 'offend a segment of its voter base that they imported.' This is complete nonsense, leftists actually debate the problematic sides of Islam all the time - we just refuse to engage in fear-mongering and we don't accept exaggerated portrayals of how bad the situation is. But plenty leftists consider the famous pew research center picture showing how big percentages of muslims believe in various dangerous thoughts very problematic, and these issues are frequently debated in academic circles.
Like, I'm not going to defend everything people from the left has stated relating to these issues - there are morons on every side of the political isle, and while a leftist moron might whine about their need for university campuses to be a place where they can feel safe from antagonizing thoughts or words, this does not mean that this is the prevailing leftist mindset. I come from a leftist family in leftist Norway and I've studied leftist studies and hung out with leftist hippies. I think aside from feminism (where I have indeed encountered quite some that I find way too radical), none of the people in my circles would support some of the more ridiculous things you mention. We all think banning Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock is fucking stupid. The huge problem is that you are looking at these largely isolated incidents that are so extreme that they attract media attention and extrapolate from these a grand, overarching conspiracy stifling free speech and thought, going so far as to say that liberalism has turned fascist, which simply is not rooted in any form of reality and which genuinely showcase either ignorance of what fascism entails or a deliberate obfuscation of words. I'm not arguing that everyone on 'the right' is willing to nuke Europe, but if I showed as little respect for republican mindsets as you show for leftist ones, this would be the kind of hyperbolic extrapolations I could find myself making.
While indeed its a small minority these regressive people from the left, (people claiming safe space, demanding scientists to apologize for shirts etc) it is a very rapidly growing trend, its not an old thing that is stable, its a new thing that is increasing fast and for that reasons I think it requires our attention.
Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online
1
traxamillion United States. Apr 06 2016 05:30. Posts 10468
Smurfing? he has another account or something?
I think he dropped some of the best posts on this site. Unban imo
