|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:On April 21 2017 23:46 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:37 Mohdoo wrote:On April 21 2017 20:09 bardtown wrote:
However, I think it is important to understand that a platform like Twitter, Facebook or Youtube is so universal that it is practically infrastructure, and also that governments are putting a huge amount of pressure on these companies. The right, as well as people who criticise immigration, are definitely more penalised on these platforms, I would say. Same applies to universities which should be completely open. Universities *are* open. What a lot of people miss is the fact that a lot of these ideas that have been shunned have already been gone over. They are old news and have had very convincing arguments made against them, numerous times, to completion. We used to have outdated views of chemistry, physics, biology, maths and many other topics. We've refined since then. Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward. This is what leftists actually believe. And it's why you have Trump  enjoy. Are you disputing the idea that a lot of right-wing ideas have been discussed at length throughout history and that decisions were made to abandon them? This post feels more like sticking your tongue out than actual participation. Want to try again? Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently.
I see this as a failure of the speaker's hosts. So long as the speaker is not inspiring violence of using hate speech (which is a very different thing from saying refugees are shitty. I'm talking straight up Nazi shit being bad, but that's it.), it is a failure of the host/venue.
However, I think it is also fair to recognize that these are private areas and that it isn't a squelching of views as much as it is choosing to not be a part of those views. Are there no places where these talks can also be? Its a weird situation. Ultimately, I would say the protesters are the ones to blame here for trying to keep opposing views subdued. The fact that these extremists see anti-immigrant rhetoric as hateful or something like that is a big problem. There needs to be respect for the fact that political views don't need to be binary. People can want refugees out of their country without being racist.
|
On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:On April 21 2017 23:46 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:37 Mohdoo wrote:On April 21 2017 20:09 bardtown wrote:
However, I think it is important to understand that a platform like Twitter, Facebook or Youtube is so universal that it is practically infrastructure, and also that governments are putting a huge amount of pressure on these companies. The right, as well as people who criticise immigration, are definitely more penalised on these platforms, I would say. Same applies to universities which should be completely open. Universities *are* open. What a lot of people miss is the fact that a lot of these ideas that have been shunned have already been gone over. They are old news and have had very convincing arguments made against them, numerous times, to completion. We used to have outdated views of chemistry, physics, biology, maths and many other topics. We've refined since then. Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward. This is what leftists actually believe. And it's why you have Trump enjoy. Are you disputing the idea that a lot of right-wing ideas have been discussed at length throughout history and that decisions were made to abandon them? This post feels more like sticking your tongue out than actual participation. Want to try again? Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend.
Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional.
Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out.
|
On April 22 2017 00:57 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:On April 21 2017 23:46 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:37 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
Universities *are* open. What a lot of people miss is the fact that a lot of these ideas that have been shunned have already been gone over. They are old news and have had very convincing arguments made against them, numerous times, to completion. We used to have outdated views of chemistry, physics, biology, maths and many other topics. We've refined since then. Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward. This is what leftists actually believe. And it's why you have Trump enjoy. Are you disputing the idea that a lot of right-wing ideas have been discussed at length throughout history and that decisions were made to abandon them? This post feels more like sticking your tongue out than actual participation. Want to try again? Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend. Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional.Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out.
How many times do ideas need to be brought up, and why do certain people need to be the ones discussing them every time? What exactly are you saying is getting squelched? Are you saying sociology classes should talk about the value of denying food stamps to families? The value of limiting pel grants and other student assistance?
I am saying nobody here on TL are the ones saying these people should be shut down. Comparing communism to left ideas is silly because it is an inexact, crappy comparison.
Pure capitalism would have no problem with slavery. Is that an argument against capitalism? Or does any modern interpretation of capitalism strictly disallow slavery? Same deal with left ideas. Do I advocate for using inheritance tax, capital gains taxes, and similar methods to give poor children free school lunch and free health care? Absolutely. Do I want the government to be the sole owner of all product and industry and to control all money and wages and everything in between? Of course not. Communism is a silly comparison. If you talked about the value of capitalism, then someone else said "yeah well capitalism sees nothing wrong with slavery unless people themselves decide slavery is bad, so fuck capitalism", that'd be stupid.
We should strive to be as exact and precise with our critiques as possible. Comparing left ideas to communism is not productive.
|
On April 22 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 00:57 Danglars wrote:On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:On April 21 2017 23:46 bardtown wrote:[quote] This is what leftists actually believe. And it's why you have Trump enjoy. Are you disputing the idea that a lot of right-wing ideas have been discussed at length throughout history and that decisions were made to abandon them? This post feels more like sticking your tongue out than actual participation. Want to try again? Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend. Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional.Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out. How many times do ideas need to be brought up, and why do certain people need to be the ones discussing them every time? What exactly are you saying is getting squelched? Are you saying sociology classes should talk about the value of denying food stamps to families? The value of limiting pel grants and other student assistance? I am saying nobody here on TL are the ones saying these people should be shut down. Comparing communism to left ideas is silly because it is an inexact, crappy comparison. Pure capitalism would have no problem with slavery. Is that an argument against capitalism? Or does any modern interpretation of capitalism strictly disallow slavery? Same deal with left ideas. Do I advocate for using inheritance tax, capital gains taxes, and similar methods to give poor children free school lunch and free health care? Absolutely. Do I want the government to be the sole owner of all product and industry and to control all money and wages and everything in between? Of course not. Communism is a silly comparison. If you talked about the value of capitalism, then someone else said "yeah well capitalism sees nothing wrong with slavery unless people themselves decide slavery is bad, so fuck capitalism", that'd be stupid. We should strive to be as exact and precise with our critiques as possible. Comparing left ideas to communism is not productive.
Until you recognize you stand for the policing of speech and speakers. It all started when you claimed universities were open then defended closing them to ideas you regard as unrefined and archaic. Despite your sidestepping to curriculum and value judgments, you offer nothing to avow your primary thrust, which is that free speech must be tempered by some collective look at whether they're bad and good. Sorry, you're naively against their evaluation in the public square by repeatedly reframing the discussion of whether the speakers/ideas are permitted to whether or not some bad ideas are pretty bad. It's on the backdrop of speakers disinvited and a crusade of hate speech vs free speech, which I'm kinda glad you pay lip service to opposing, but you can't address the primary issue without simultaneously passing moral judgment on the results, despite repeated opportunities.
|
On April 22 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:
Pure capitalism would have no problem with slavery. Is that an argument against capitalism? Or does any modern interpretation of capitalism strictly disallow slavery?
Didn't Adam Smith give an argument against slavery in that the institution limited the ability of slaves to maximize their contributions to the economy? I vaguely remember something of the sort.
|
On April 22 2017 03:25 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:57 Danglars wrote:On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
Are you disputing the idea that a lot of right-wing ideas have been discussed at length throughout history and that decisions were made to abandon them? This post feels more like sticking your tongue out than actual participation. Want to try again? Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend. Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional.Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out. How many times do ideas need to be brought up, and why do certain people need to be the ones discussing them every time? What exactly are you saying is getting squelched? Are you saying sociology classes should talk about the value of denying food stamps to families? The value of limiting pel grants and other student assistance? I am saying nobody here on TL are the ones saying these people should be shut down. Comparing communism to left ideas is silly because it is an inexact, crappy comparison. Pure capitalism would have no problem with slavery. Is that an argument against capitalism? Or does any modern interpretation of capitalism strictly disallow slavery? Same deal with left ideas. Do I advocate for using inheritance tax, capital gains taxes, and similar methods to give poor children free school lunch and free health care? Absolutely. Do I want the government to be the sole owner of all product and industry and to control all money and wages and everything in between? Of course not. Communism is a silly comparison. If you talked about the value of capitalism, then someone else said "yeah well capitalism sees nothing wrong with slavery unless people themselves decide slavery is bad, so fuck capitalism", that'd be stupid. We should strive to be as exact and precise with our critiques as possible. Comparing left ideas to communism is not productive. Until you recognize you stand for the policing of speech and speakers. It all started when you claimed universities were open then defended closing them to ideas you regard as unrefined and archaic. Despite your sidestepping to curriculum and value judgments, you offer nothing to avow your primary thrust, which is that free speech must be tempered by some collective look at whether they're bad and good. Sorry, you're naively against their evaluation in the public square by repeatedly reframing the discussion of whether the speakers/ideas are permitted to whether or not some bad ideas are pretty bad. It's on the backdrop of speakers disinvited and a crusade of hate speech vs free speech, which I'm kinda glad you pay lip service to opposing, but you can't address the primary issue without simultaneously passing moral judgment on the results, despite repeated opportunities.
I think what you are interpreting as sidestepping is actually us arguing past each other. What exactly is it that you see not happening, which you think should be happening? Are you saying sociology classes don't cover conservative perspectives with enough time? Or are you more so talking about universities canceling speeches by Milo and the like? Universities do a lot of stuff and I am making sure I am understanding your complaint. Are we talking about a change in curriculum, or are we talking about taking a more hands off approach to who speaks where?
On April 22 2017 04:40 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:
Pure capitalism would have no problem with slavery. Is that an argument against capitalism? Or does any modern interpretation of capitalism strictly disallow slavery? Didn't Adam Smith give an argument against slavery in that the institution limited the ability of slaves to maximize their contributions to the economy? I vaguely remember something of the sort.
I am not familiar enough to say, but I do remember that argument being made that women are being under utilized by being confined to homes and that they could create a lot of value if given equal opportunity.
|
Liberalism is for the maximum amount of freedom without coercing others. Slavery is a clear example of a person coercing the slave to do his/her will. Capitalism doesn't just throw human rights out of the window.
|
On April 22 2017 06:18 RvB wrote:
Liberalism is for the maximum amount of freedom without coercing others. Slavery is a clear example of a person coercing the slave to do his/her will. Capitalism doesn't just throw human rights out of the window.
Foxconn is a prime example for humans throwing themselves out of the window thanks to capitalism.
You can easily add several factory desaster and unhuman working conditions in Asia and India and probably all ovder the world to that.
Am I not reading your sarcasm?
|
Capitalism is arguably the system that maximises individual choice, whether that amounts to freedom is a very different discussion. Freedom is a big word.
|
Happy Lenin's Birthday to all people sufficiently eastward geographically.
|
On April 22 2017 06:52 LegalLord wrote:
Happy Lenin's Birthday to all people sufficiently eastward geographically.
And sufficiently backwards mentally?
User was warned for this post
|
On April 22 2017 00:57 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:On April 21 2017 23:46 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:37 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
Universities *are* open. What a lot of people miss is the fact that a lot of these ideas that have been shunned have already been gone over. They are old news and have had very convincing arguments made against them, numerous times, to completion. We used to have outdated views of chemistry, physics, biology, maths and many other topics. We've refined since then. Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward. This is what leftists actually believe. And it's why you have Trump enjoy. Are you disputing the idea that a lot of right-wing ideas have been discussed at length throughout history and that decisions were made to abandon them? This post feels more like sticking your tongue out than actual participation. Want to try again? Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend. Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional. Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out.
Communism is still being debated in universities? I assume you mean outside of history lessons and as a valid political ideology? I would like some evidence to that happening, because i don't actually think that is happening.
People see the communism comment as a smear of leftists in general because they don't believe you actually mean that literal communism is being debated as a good idea in modern universities.
You always feel like everyone is censoring and prosecuting you unfairly. You also constantly complain about being lumped together with people you don't feel belong to your group. Meanwhile everyone who is not as rightwing as you are a homogenous group of "the leftists", and when any one of those people does or says something, that is obviously something that all the other "leftists" also believe, because all leftists are only one person.
|
On April 22 2017 07:24 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 00:57 Danglars wrote:On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:On April 21 2017 23:46 bardtown wrote:[quote] This is what leftists actually believe. And it's why you have Trump enjoy. Are you disputing the idea that a lot of right-wing ideas have been discussed at length throughout history and that decisions were made to abandon them? This post feels more like sticking your tongue out than actual participation. Want to try again? Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend. Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional. Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out. Communism is still being debated in universities? I assume you mean outside of history lessons and as a valid political ideology? I would like some evidence to that happening, because i don't actually think that is happening. People see the communism comment as a smear of leftists in general because they don't believe you actually mean that literal communism is being debated as a good idea in modern universities. You always feel like everyone is censoring and prosecuting you unfairly. You also constantly complain about being lumped together with people you don't feel belong to your group. Meanwhile everyone who is not as rightwing as you are a homogenous group of "the leftists", and when any one of those people does or says something, that is obviously something that all the other "leftists" also believe, because all leftists are only one person.
http://communists.soc.srcf.net/
In my city. Most universities have a communist group, or at least a socialist society, and they are often indistinguishable.
By the way, read the first sentence on their website and think about it for a second. It really cracked me up :D.
|
On April 22 2017 06:52 LegalLord wrote:
Happy Lenin's Birthday to all people sufficiently eastward geographically.
Are you actually into Lenin? I can't tell if you're trying to bait
|
On April 22 2017 07:31 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 07:24 Simberto wrote:On April 22 2017 00:57 Danglars wrote:On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:On April 21 2017 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
Are you disputing the idea that a lot of right-wing ideas have been discussed at length throughout history and that decisions were made to abandon them? This post feels more like sticking your tongue out than actual participation. Want to try again? Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend. Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional. Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out. Communism is still being debated in universities? I assume you mean outside of history lessons and as a valid political ideology? I would like some evidence to that happening, because i don't actually think that is happening. People see the communism comment as a smear of leftists in general because they don't believe you actually mean that literal communism is being debated as a good idea in modern universities. You always feel like everyone is censoring and prosecuting you unfairly. You also constantly complain about being lumped together with people you don't feel belong to your group. Meanwhile everyone who is not as rightwing as you are a homogenous group of "the leftists", and when any one of those people does or says something, that is obviously something that all the other "leftists" also believe, because all leftists are only one person. http://communists.soc.srcf.net/In my city. Most universities have a communist group, or at least a socialist society, and they are often indistinguishable. By the way, read the first sentence on their website and think about it for a second. It really cracked me up :D.
How many people are actually in that society, though?
When i click on the "Meetings" page of that website, the first result is "Meetings: Michaelmas 2014". I don't exactly know what Michaelmas is, but if the last meeting they bothered to put on that page was in 2014, that group is probably not exactly a thriving community. The facebook link to the Cambridge Communist party seems to be broken, too.
|
On April 22 2017 07:36 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 06:52 LegalLord wrote:
Happy Lenin's Birthday to all people sufficiently eastward geographically. Are you actually into Lenin? I can't tell if you're trying to bait
What's bait about "Happy Birthday" exactly?
|
On April 22 2017 07:37 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 07:31 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 07:24 Simberto wrote:On April 22 2017 00:57 Danglars wrote:On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:
[quote]
Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend. Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional. Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out. Communism is still being debated in universities? I assume you mean outside of history lessons and as a valid political ideology? I would like some evidence to that happening, because i don't actually think that is happening. People see the communism comment as a smear of leftists in general because they don't believe you actually mean that literal communism is being debated as a good idea in modern universities. You always feel like everyone is censoring and prosecuting you unfairly. You also constantly complain about being lumped together with people you don't feel belong to your group. Meanwhile everyone who is not as rightwing as you are a homogenous group of "the leftists", and when any one of those people does or says something, that is obviously something that all the other "leftists" also believe, because all leftists are only one person. http://communists.soc.srcf.net/In my city. Most universities have a communist group, or at least a socialist society, and they are often indistinguishable. By the way, read the first sentence on their website and think about it for a second. It really cracked me up :D. How many people are actually in that society, though? When i click on the "Meetings" page of that website, the first result is "Meetings: Michaelmas 2014". I don't exactly know what Michaelmas is, but if the last meeting they bothered to put on that page was in 2014, that group is probably not exactly a thriving community. The facebook link to the Cambridge Communist party seems to be broken, too.
Who knows. The point is simply that they don't get shut down or blocked from bringing their speakers, etc. By the way, the intersection between radical feminists and communism is huge, so if you actually want to find large groups of communists that is where you need to look. They are also the same people who are blocking events and speakers (and I know you have them in Germany too).
|
On April 22 2017 07:36 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 06:52 LegalLord wrote:
Happy Lenin's Birthday to all people sufficiently eastward geographically. Are you actually into Lenin? I can't tell if you're trying to bait
It's LL, 100% bait/troll
|
On April 22 2017 06:04 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 03:25 Danglars wrote:On April 22 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:57 Danglars wrote:On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:04 bardtown wrote:
[quote]
Because your point of view is absolutely laughable, and I know from experience that interacting with people like you yields nothing of worth. If anything has been discussed at length, and tested in practice, in recent history - it's communism. Some hundred million deaths later, it's still prevalent and widely discussed at universities. Try to point out basic numbers relating to the 'wage gap' however, and your event will be shut down. So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend. Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional.Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out. How many times do ideas need to be brought up, and why do certain people need to be the ones discussing them every time? What exactly are you saying is getting squelched? Are you saying sociology classes should talk about the value of denying food stamps to families? The value of limiting pel grants and other student assistance? I am saying nobody here on TL are the ones saying these people should be shut down. Comparing communism to left ideas is silly because it is an inexact, crappy comparison. Pure capitalism would have no problem with slavery. Is that an argument against capitalism? Or does any modern interpretation of capitalism strictly disallow slavery? Same deal with left ideas. Do I advocate for using inheritance tax, capital gains taxes, and similar methods to give poor children free school lunch and free health care? Absolutely. Do I want the government to be the sole owner of all product and industry and to control all money and wages and everything in between? Of course not. Communism is a silly comparison. If you talked about the value of capitalism, then someone else said "yeah well capitalism sees nothing wrong with slavery unless people themselves decide slavery is bad, so fuck capitalism", that'd be stupid. We should strive to be as exact and precise with our critiques as possible. Comparing left ideas to communism is not productive. Until you recognize you stand for the policing of speech and speakers. It all started when you claimed universities were open then defended closing them to ideas you regard as unrefined and archaic. Despite your sidestepping to curriculum and value judgments, you offer nothing to avow your primary thrust, which is that free speech must be tempered by some collective look at whether they're bad and good. Sorry, you're naively against their evaluation in the public square by repeatedly reframing the discussion of whether the speakers/ideas are permitted to whether or not some bad ideas are pretty bad. It's on the backdrop of speakers disinvited and a crusade of hate speech vs free speech, which I'm kinda glad you pay lip service to opposing, but you can't address the primary issue without simultaneously passing moral judgment on the results, despite repeated opportunities. I think what you are interpreting as sidestepping is actually us arguing past each other. What exactly is it that you see not happening, which you think should be happening? Are you saying sociology classes don't cover conservative perspectives with enough time? Or are you more so talking about universities canceling speeches by Milo and the like? Universities do a lot of stuff and I am making sure I am understanding your complaint. Are we talking about a change in curriculum, or are we talking about taking a more hands off approach to who speaks where?
The quote train laid it out plainly. At every juncture you go zooming off into the outfield, which now appears to be purposeful in light of how diligently you pursue it. If a slow re-reading of the chain of comment-responses doesn't illumine the large point here, and why I drew my conclusions, all further efforts of mine are likely to be similarly wasted. I'm content to let the subject pass until the EU current events draw it back to the fore and maybe we'll all have taken the time to reflect.
|
On April 22 2017 07:43 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2017 07:37 Simberto wrote:On April 22 2017 07:31 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 07:24 Simberto wrote:On April 22 2017 00:57 Danglars wrote:On April 22 2017 00:25 Ppjack wrote:On April 22 2017 00:23 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:15 Mohdoo wrote:On April 22 2017 00:09 bardtown wrote:On April 22 2017 00:06 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
So your version of contributing to a conversation is saying someone's ideas are laughable and then equating leftist ideas with communism? Is this your first time discussing complex ideas on the internet? Wage gap? What are you even trying to say here? When did I equate leftist ideas to communism? Communism is an extreme left position, though. What I am explaining to you is that the worst ideas in the world are still actively discussed on university campuses. There is no reason to shut down right wing conversations that people on the right want to have. Any university that does that is selling out its values. If you're talking about ANTIFA, you won't see any disagreement from me. I doubt any left-leaning posters here support ANTIFA at all. ANTIFA is seriously bad and causes a lot of violence wherever they go. I am not saying it is right to cancel ring-wing speakers. No one is saying it is appropriate to shut down right-wing speakers. I will say that whenever ANTIFA is involved, it is worthwhile to make sure they are not involved. I honestly don't know what the ring thing for Berkeley to do is. When large groups are going to attempt to inspire violence to their fullest ability, you've kinda got your hands tied. I am not going to pretend I understand the legality associated with trying to get campus police to get rid of ANTIFA. I'm just assuming you're talking about ANTIFA-muddied protests. Is that what you mean, or is there something else? I'm not talking about Berkeley; at least, not specifically. This is the European thread after all. Antifa are the extreme end of a general trend, though. All sorts of speakers have been shut down at universities across the UK (and the US, Canada, Australia, etc) because left wing students don't like their views. Look up the Warren Farrell protest and then watch him speak and see if you can find any justification for their actions. Protest has become a means for shutting down legitimate and reasonable conversation, and it is creating a backlash. People didn't hold 'free speech rallies' before because they didn't feel that their free speech was under threat until recently. Couldn't agree more. And events in recent years just proved that this is a trend. Now what I'm trying to get a handle on is people like Mohdoo that float to good-faith argument regularly. "Universities *are* open" arguments evolve to "ideas ... have already been gone over" and "Archaic ideas perpetuated by the right had their place at one point. Then we moved forward." If he truly believes universities are open, the rest of that paragraph would be non-sequitur. Who cares which person declares we've moved in another direction if they're open for them to be brought up again? If it's relevant, that's because he supports and is happy that universities are closed to certain ideas that we've left behind as we "moved forward." It's entirely dishonest and highly delusional. Next comes the bob and weave more typical from other kinds of posters. He says certain right-wing beliefs have been abandoned, yet can't see the relevance of communism still being debated. He can only see that as a smear of leftists. Is this a true act of misunderstanding or pretense? He says that nobody defends wanting to shut down right-wing speakers, but current events show the trend of one speaker after another being shut down, not the reverse trend of a movement lacking defenders petering out. Communism is still being debated in universities? I assume you mean outside of history lessons and as a valid political ideology? I would like some evidence to that happening, because i don't actually think that is happening. People see the communism comment as a smear of leftists in general because they don't believe you actually mean that literal communism is being debated as a good idea in modern universities. You always feel like everyone is censoring and prosecuting you unfairly. You also constantly complain about being lumped together with people you don't feel belong to your group. Meanwhile everyone who is not as rightwing as you are a homogenous group of "the leftists", and when any one of those people does or says something, that is obviously something that all the other "leftists" also believe, because all leftists are only one person. http://communists.soc.srcf.net/In my city. Most universities have a communist group, or at least a socialist society, and they are often indistinguishable. By the way, read the first sentence on their website and think about it for a second. It really cracked me up :D. How many people are actually in that society, though? When i click on the "Meetings" page of that website, the first result is "Meetings: Michaelmas 2014". I don't exactly know what Michaelmas is, but if the last meeting they bothered to put on that page was in 2014, that group is probably not exactly a thriving community. The facebook link to the Cambridge Communist party seems to be broken, too. Who knows. The point is simply that they don't get shut down or blocked from bringing their speakers, etc. By the way, the intersection between radical feminists and communism is huge, so if you actually want to find large groups of communists that is where you need to look. They are also the same people who are blocking events and speakers (and I know you have them in Germany too).
That's just not true. FPÖ shut down a school event with a (green-affiliated) speaker, because he called student connections close to the FPÖ out for extremist views. We have identitaries' actionism all the time, often disrupting events etc. We have Nazi groups attacking and burning refugee homes or blackmailing people, even identitairies threatening people on reddit from personal experience. How the fuck are those not right-wingers trying and sometimes succeeding to shut down others views and free speech? You have to be blind to believe this is not happening both ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
