|
Norway28559 Posts
xDaunt, there's no secret that I have issues with a position of supporting Israel on this issue. Part of me tries to stay out of israel-palestine discussions because it's impossible for me to maintain the position of calm neutrality which is so crucial for a productive discussion to take place, but that part of me tends to lose out on the side of me that views this as the single most abhorrent behavior that actually has any degree of significant support in the west. I can't, and don't want to, hide that I find supporting Israel's behavior towards Palestine - not Israel's right to existence - but the combination of increased encroachment, continued settlements, removing access to water, essentially making living conditions absolutely unbearable while shooting protesters with real bullets, morally abhorrent (or based on a wrongful understanding of how conditions in Gaza are - but you seem to understand this). I think the increased polarization caused by people being unable to respectfully discuss areas where they disagree is a significant societal problem which I also try to combat, but I think this particular fight is much more important than that. That said, while I am not going to speak on his behalf, I think Seeker has a much more apolitical approach and that he did not moderate against your post just based on what you said, but how you said it. For me, the issue here is also what you said - but I had no involvement in this decision to moderate.
If it's not clear, the issue I have with your post is that it literally states that protesters should be happy that they were shot and killed. I don't care that you justify this statement through stating that 'they should know this was a predictable outcome before they acted in the way they did', it's still so.. callously disregarding of human life, so incapable of understanding their perspective, so deliberately inflammatory, that I don't think it's a position that deserves to be argued on these forums. If you had literally been talking about suicide bombers, you'd have a point. But you are not. People are getting killed for throwing rocks, for trying to cross a fence, or for being around people who throw rocks and try to break fences. Yes I read there were some people with some explosives, I think I saw 3 in particular and maybe there were more. That was not the case for most people who were killed, and most certainly not for most people who were shot.
Like, Israel-Palestine is such a polarized and politicized issue that people have a strong tendency to support or oppose one side regardless of how the side acts. I'm not going to pretend that I am somehow above this. But like, in the post I am replying to, you seem to understand why Palestinians protest, so you seem to have some understanding of how desperate their position is. But then due to the politicization of the issue, you still feel compelled to support Israel. I get that, honestly. Hamas has done plenty outrageous shit, I can't support that, but I've still fairly consistently supported palestine&palestinians.
However, try to think of a similar situation with people in a conflict where your allegiances (presumably) differ. Should a Jewish person who tried to escape from a concentration camp during WW2 be happy that they were shot and killed? Should the Tianmen square protesters be happy that they were gunned down? If this was a case of Black people crossing a bridge to Selma who got predictably beaten up and gained important support for their case, I could see that you'd have a point, but I don't see the similarity.
It's just.. The idea that the people who protested or tried to border jump should be happy that they are dead? Really? I'm sure what actually would have made them happy would have been an improvement of their living conditions. And while it's obvious that the extreme goals of Hamas' charter have no chance of realization (and it's not like I'm arguing in favor of Israel's destruction), Israel is still building new settlements. Honestly, the only way for me to accept your statement as passable would be if you coupled it with a changed position on the conflict, where your change of heart would work as evidence for their willingness to self-sacrifice possibly bearing fruition. When this is not the case, you come off as arguing that 'their living conditions are so terrible that a glorious death is preferable to being alive, and I support the policies that make their living conditions this terrible'. I can't help but be angered at that position.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?36923 Posts
Good God... Drone, I wish I could post in a coherent manner like you can even after posting a wall of text.
|
what the fuck people, i find the 'they want to die' logic asinine; there is nothing factual about it.
no one wants to die(excluding people with disorders here) period, not even those strapped on explosive belts that blow themselves up.
both indoctrination and socialization(by living there) can lead(and do lead in this case) to extreme manifestations of violence/rage but neither trigger an actual desire to die in its supporters. the former comes from "i don't want to die but <insert indoctrination reason here> and the later from 'i don't care if i die because <insert oppressive reason here>'.
how does this dying stuff would work anyway?:
- does one randomly wakes up one day with an acute desire to die(when, how, why)?;
- does one always wanted to die?; was it born that way?; is it like a chronic disease there?;
- did palestinians started breeding walking ticking time bombs because ... evolution?.
just honestly, fuck off with that.
|
exhibit a in the persecution complex being unwarranted. saying people ‘asked for it’ and ‘got what they deserved’ and ‘go fuck themselves’ in response to getting shot for protesting and throwing rocks. a post literally everyone should be banned for. and the immediate ‘just know we’re back to double standards here.’ woof. really undermining yourselves.
and props to the immediate walking back of ‘they asked for it, they can go fuck themselves,’ to ‘we can’t say a killing was justified?’ by Danglars. refreshing when you haven’t seen something that contorted in a while.
i look forward to hearing more why the thread is worse off without the both of you. if the arguments are this strong i think we all might learn something. unless P6 summed it up well enough with when you’re unable to see your own mistakes blaming moderation seems an attractive answer.
cheers.
|
On May 16 2018 19:57 brian wrote:
exhibit a in the persecution complex being unwarranted. saying people ‘asked for it’ and ‘got what they deserved’ and ‘go fuck themselves’ in response to getting shot for protesting and throwing rocks. a post literally everyone should be banned for. and the immediate ‘just know we’re back to double standards here.’ woof. really undermining yourselves.
and props to the immediate walking back of ‘they asked for it, they can go fuck themselves,’ to ‘we can’t say a killing was justified?’ by Danglars. refreshing when you haven’t seen something that contorted in a while.
i look forward to hearing more why the thread is worse off without the both of you. if the arguments are this strong i think we all might learn something. unless P6 summed it up well enough with when you’re unable to see your own mistakes blaming moderation seems an attractive answer.
cheers.
You should reread the first paragraph lol. No walk backs.
To others: Drone attested to the difficulty of separating emotion from the issue. For my side, the fact that Hamas recruits teenagers and locates its missile sites in schools to reap children & civilian deaths for propaganda purposes, among other acts in the same vein. I don’t want to see the language (in my view) appropriate for terrorist groups that wage war this way frequently used in any conflict or any group.
|
whatever you want to call it, you specifically said ‘are we saying we can’t call a killing justified?’ that is not what he wrote, and certainly is not what is happening. if not walking back, perhaps a nice mischaracterization of the argument at hand.
which if xD was modding, i’m told would’ve gotten you banned.
On May 10 2018 03:16 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2018 03:06 Liquid`Drone wrote:On May 10 2018 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On May 10 2018 01:47 Liquid`Drone wrote:On May 10 2018 00:11 xDaunt wrote:On May 09 2018 14:48 IgnE wrote:
practically See, I disagree. Most of the stupidity falls into the category of the snarky stupidity that I referenced earlier. It would be very easy to eliminate those posts and posters. No it wouldn't be. People have vastly different opinions on what constitutes stupid. I think you're a smart guy in general, but I think your assertion that it's 'easy to eliminate stupidity from the thread' is actually pretty stupid. :p Moltkewarding has been called variants of idiot/stupid/incomprehensible guy who needs to work on his command of the English language before, for example. Like I mentioned before, I have a good, objective measure in mind. I'd eliminate the snarky posts that misrepresent the argument of the posts to which they're responding. This stuff isn't objective. You can't quantify snarkiness. It's all contextual and based on personal interpretation. You're looking at the wrong element. It's not the snarkiness that I'd be focused on so much as the misrepresentation, which is objective.
of course, i understand just a few posts later he went back on that and said the lack of snark in his forthcoming mischaracterization of an argument was why he shouldn’t be banned, but that particular hypocrisy notwithstanding i think he had a real point.
|
On May 16 2018 23:45 brian wrote:whatever you want to call it, you specifically said ‘are we saying we can’t call a killing justified?’ that is not what he wrote, and certainly is not what is happening. if not walking back, perhaps a nice mischaracterization of the argument at hand. which if xD was modding, i’m told would’ve gotten you banned. Show nested quote +On May 10 2018 03:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 10 2018 03:06 Liquid`Drone wrote:On May 10 2018 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On May 10 2018 01:47 Liquid`Drone wrote:On May 10 2018 00:11 xDaunt wrote:On May 09 2018 14:48 IgnE wrote:
practically See, I disagree. Most of the stupidity falls into the category of the snarky stupidity that I referenced earlier. It would be very easy to eliminate those posts and posters. No it wouldn't be. People have vastly different opinions on what constitutes stupid. I think you're a smart guy in general, but I think your assertion that it's 'easy to eliminate stupidity from the thread' is actually pretty stupid. :p Moltkewarding has been called variants of idiot/stupid/incomprehensible guy who needs to work on his command of the English language before, for example. Like I mentioned before, I have a good, objective measure in mind. I'd eliminate the snarky posts that misrepresent the argument of the posts to which they're responding. This stuff isn't objective. You can't quantify snarkiness. It's all contextual and based on personal interpretation. You're looking at the wrong element. It's not the snarkiness that I'd be focused on so much as the misrepresentation, which is objective. of course, i understand just a few posts later he went back on that and said the lack of snark in his forthcoming mischaracterization of an argument was why he shouldn’t be banned, but that particular hypocrisy notwithstanding i think he had a real point.
No, I offered two possible choices for what was objectionable. Drones/Seeker exchange cleared up which one. Don’t play this game in misleading about what I selected out of his post. He said the Palestinians wanted this. Seeker selected “they deserved what they got.”
|
On May 17 2018 00:12 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 23:45 brian wrote:whatever you want to call it, you specifically said ‘are we saying we can’t call a killing justified?’ that is not what he wrote, and certainly is not what is happening. if not walking back, perhaps a nice mischaracterization of the argument at hand. which if xD was modding, i’m told would’ve gotten you banned. On May 10 2018 03:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 10 2018 03:06 Liquid`Drone wrote:On May 10 2018 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On May 10 2018 01:47 Liquid`Drone wrote:On May 10 2018 00:11 xDaunt wrote:On May 09 2018 14:48 IgnE wrote:
practically See, I disagree. Most of the stupidity falls into the category of the snarky stupidity that I referenced earlier. It would be very easy to eliminate those posts and posters. No it wouldn't be. People have vastly different opinions on what constitutes stupid. I think you're a smart guy in general, but I think your assertion that it's 'easy to eliminate stupidity from the thread' is actually pretty stupid. :p Moltkewarding has been called variants of idiot/stupid/incomprehensible guy who needs to work on his command of the English language before, for example. Like I mentioned before, I have a good, objective measure in mind. I'd eliminate the snarky posts that misrepresent the argument of the posts to which they're responding. This stuff isn't objective. You can't quantify snarkiness. It's all contextual and based on personal interpretation. You're looking at the wrong element. It's not the snarkiness that I'd be focused on so much as the misrepresentation, which is objective. of course, i understand just a few posts later he went back on that and said the lack of snark in his forthcoming mischaracterization of an argument was why he shouldn’t be banned, but that particular hypocrisy notwithstanding i think he had a real point. No, I offered two possible choices for what was objectionable. Drones/Seeker exchange cleared up which one. Don’t play this game in misleading about what I selected out of his post. He said the Palestinians wanted this. Seeker selected “they deserved what they got.”
note the emphasis, mine. you’ve provided nearly the textbook definition of a false dichotomy, and with that i’d say instead it’s you playing the games.
|
On May 16 2018 22:50 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 19:57 brian wrote:
exhibit a in the persecution complex being unwarranted. saying people ‘asked for it’ and ‘got what they deserved’ and ‘go fuck themselves’ in response to getting shot for protesting and throwing rocks. a post literally everyone should be banned for. and the immediate ‘just know we’re back to double standards here.’ woof. really undermining yourselves.
and props to the immediate walking back of ‘they asked for it, they can go fuck themselves,’ to ‘we can’t say a killing was justified?’ by Danglars. refreshing when you haven’t seen something that contorted in a while.
i look forward to hearing more why the thread is worse off without the both of you. if the arguments are this strong i think we all might learn something. unless P6 summed it up well enough with when you’re unable to see your own mistakes blaming moderation seems an attractive answer.
cheers. You should reread the first paragraph lol. No walk backs. To others: Drone attested to the difficulty of separating emotion from the issue. For my side, the fact that Hamas recruits teenagers and locates its missile sites in schools to reap children & civilian deaths for propaganda purposes, among other acts in the same vein. I don’t want to see the language (in my view) appropriate for terrorist groups that wage war this way frequently used in any conflict or any group.
Honest question. Do you think this was another example of a conservative being inappropriately actioned for being a conservative? Or do you think the mods got this one right?
Not that my opinion matters much (I'm a biased liberal, me and xDaunt have beef, etc.) but it seems pretty clear cut to me. Not from a "it's never okay to call killing justified" or "it's never okay to tell someone to go fuck themselves" perspective. Whether you're on Israel's or Palestine's "side" in all this, what happened was a tragedy, and is owed some amount of respect for that. You could argue the IDF practiced justified self-defense, but it should still be thought of as a regrettable necessity.
|
Seeker’s interpretion of Xdaunts post is similar to my own. Xdaunt is an attorney and knows that tone is often as important as verbiage. In this case, his aggressive tone overshadowed the language he used several times over. Which is why he is leaning to hard into people misreading his intentionally aggressive post.
This isn’t a case of misinterpretion. Xdaunt intended in to make an argument, came in WAY TO HOT, and got slapped for it. Sometimes people make arguments that are just to spicy for the thread. I shamelessly specialized in them for some time.
|
On May 17 2018 00:42 Plansix wrote:
Seeker’s interpretion of Xdaunts post is similar to my own. Xdaunt is an attorney and knows that tone is often as important as verbiage. In this case, his aggressive tone overshadowed the language he used several times over. Which is why he is leaning to hard into people misreading his intentionally aggressive post.
This isn’t a case of misinterpretion. Xdaunt intended in to make an argument, came in WAY TO HOT, and got slapped for it. Sometimes people make arguments that are just to spicy for the thread. I shamelessly specialized in them for some time.
Essentially he was trying to provoke a strong emotional reaction from the posters in the thread but got one from the mods instead.
Boo fuckin' hoo.
At least he can add it to evidence of the persecution of conservatives on tl
Notice also that people reacted more to kickboxer's antisemitic rant than they did to his obvious attempt at a provocation.
That's because people on here can see what's over the line and what's just someone being an asshole, and it has nothing to do with the political spectrum the post is coming from.
Maybe xDaunt could try and learn that the new modding system includes the rule "Don't be an asshole."
|
one might say xdaunt deserved what he got here or he was asking for it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User was warned for this post: No twitch memes please, even in website feedback
|
On May 16 2018 16:30 xM(Z wrote:
what the fuck people, i find the 'they want to die' logic asinine; there is nothing factual about it.
no one wants to die(excluding people with disorders here) period, not even those strapped on explosive belts that blow themselves up.
both indoctrination and socialization(by living there) can lead(and do lead in this case) to extreme manifestations of violence/rage but neither trigger an actual desire to die in its supporters. the former comes from "i don't want to die but <insert indoctrination reason here> and the later from 'i don't care if i die because <insert oppressive reason here>'.
how does this dying stuff would work anyway?:
- does one randomly wakes up one day with an acute desire to die(when, how, why)?;
- does one always wanted to die?; was it born that way?; is it like a chronic disease there?;
- did palestinians started breeding walking ticking time bombs because ... evolution?.
just honestly, fuck off with that.
what do you mean there's nothing factual about it? let's return to Marx here: "they do not know it, but they are doing it"
why is it that people who are so keen to criticize the libertarian/liberal concept of rational autonomous subjectivity, homo oeconomicus, are the first to disavow the unconscious of the oppressed? "how does it work? it makes no economic/biological sense!" since when is desire an entirely conscious operation? anyone who consciously desires death is "disordered," anti-biological.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
A third pillar of controversial opinion-posting has fallen to the temp ban - what horrible affliction shall the thread suffer over the course of the next week?
|
On May 17 2018 02:03 ticklishmusic wrote:
one might say xdaunt deserved what he got here or he was asking for it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
L O L
Honestly, whenever someone posts in a particularly flaming way, I just assume they've been drinking. We've had a few people who get either temp banned or warned for posts of a spiciness level we basically never see otherwise. I can recall one time I woke up to being warned, checked the thread and was like "lol guess I shouldn't post after a night of drinking".
|
I never logged into TL after a few drinks to make good life choices.
|
On May 17 2018 00:17 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 22:50 Danglars wrote:On May 16 2018 19:57 brian wrote:
exhibit a in the persecution complex being unwarranted. saying people ‘asked for it’ and ‘got what they deserved’ and ‘go fuck themselves’ in response to getting shot for protesting and throwing rocks. a post literally everyone should be banned for. and the immediate ‘just know we’re back to double standards here.’ woof. really undermining yourselves.
and props to the immediate walking back of ‘they asked for it, they can go fuck themselves,’ to ‘we can’t say a killing was justified?’ by Danglars. refreshing when you haven’t seen something that contorted in a while.
i look forward to hearing more why the thread is worse off without the both of you. if the arguments are this strong i think we all might learn something. unless P6 summed it up well enough with when you’re unable to see your own mistakes blaming moderation seems an attractive answer.
cheers. You should reread the first paragraph lol. No walk backs. To others: Drone attested to the difficulty of separating emotion from the issue. For my side, the fact that Hamas recruits teenagers and locates its missile sites in schools to reap children & civilian deaths for propaganda purposes, among other acts in the same vein. I don’t want to see the language (in my view) appropriate for terrorist groups that wage war this way frequently used in any conflict or any group. Honest question. Do you think this was another example of a conservative being inappropriately actioned for being a conservative? Or do you think the mods got this one right? Not that my opinion matters much (I'm a biased liberal, me and xDaunt have beef, etc.) but it seems pretty clear cut to me. Not from a "it's never okay to call killing justified" or "it's never okay to tell someone to go fuck themselves" perspective. Whether you're on Israel's or Palestine's "side" in all this, what happened was a tragedy, and is owed some amount of respect for that. You could argue the IDF practiced justified self-defense, but it should still be thought of as a regrettable necessity.
I haven't heard back on my prior post from a member of the moderator staff. If I receive a response breaking down my either or question, I'll be able to give a response. I think it's fine if staff wants to make a bright line on "they can go fuck themselves," so that less careful posters don't use that kind of language to describe things other than extremist terror groups. The other one I'll have to see when a different poster in the new thread says something comparably callous in a terse manner (and I expect this to occur, given general attitudes towards US foreign policy and Israel). I haven't seen an unactioned liberal response of similar quality, but then again I've been banned for seven weeks so I haven't been reading the thread as closely as I did in the past.
|
I'm suprised xdaunt got off with a tempban from the US Pol thread. I don't see any reason why a post that would had got him tempbanned if posted in the general forum, merely got him tempbanned from the thread he posted in. The fact that he went back and claim that "those Palestinians wanted to die -- which is a factual statement." in underlined bolded highlight just serves to show how much of a deterent to behaviour that a simple tempban from the thread is.
|
On May 17 2018 02:13 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2018 16:30 xM(Z wrote:
what the fuck people, i find the 'they want to die' logic asinine; there is nothing factual about it.
no one wants to die(excluding people with disorders here) period, not even those strapped on explosive belts that blow themselves up.
both indoctrination and socialization(by living there) can lead(and do lead in this case) to extreme manifestations of violence/rage but neither trigger an actual desire to die in its supporters. the former comes from "i don't want to die but <insert indoctrination reason here> and the later from 'i don't care if i die because <insert oppressive reason here>'.
how does this dying stuff would work anyway?:
- does one randomly wakes up one day with an acute desire to die(when, how, why)?;
- does one always wanted to die?; was it born that way?; is it like a chronic disease there?;
- did palestinians started breeding walking ticking time bombs because ... evolution?.
just honestly, fuck off with that. what do you mean there's nothing factual about it? let's return to Marx here: "they do not know it, but they are doing it" why is it that people who are so keen to criticize the libertarian/liberal concept of rational autonomous subjectivity, homo oeconomicus, are the first to disavow the unconscious of the oppressed? "how does it work? it makes no economic/biological sense!" since when is desire an entirely conscious operation? anyone who consciously desires death is "disordered," anti-biological. (first: to me, desire = a wish or longing; craving, more implied than articulated; primal. if i have the wrong meaning then i don't know, suggest another word.)
second, i won't even touch on the homo economicus bit because it defeats your whole argument then i can't nitpick at it+ Show Spoiler +even if we go with what the wiki has here, self-interested agents who usually pursue their subjectively-defined ends optimally. there's no way you can show how back and forth fighting then running for cover is an optimal way to pursue ones death.
i think that i understand your post(for the most part), but you're interchangeably mixing two contexts: i desire/urge to die(a.k.a., the unconscious of the oppressed) vs i have the right to die(a.k.a., liberal concept of rational autonomous subjectivity). you use what you think might trigger the former to justify the/an outcome of the later.
the answer to your question(in very broad strokes) comes from understanding the relation of those contexts with each other.
the structure is layered, with the want at the bottom and the right on top and as with entropy, it has one and only one heading - up.
meaning, the desire to die is prior to the right to die; if you don't fix or get passed the desire you can't reach 'the right to'('cause you're fucking dead) and if you're already pondering on your 'right to' then the desire is no longer an option(it was replaced by a need to die).
throwing rocks at people with guns can be seen as a rational gesture if you're trying to die but to justify it, you need a rational reason for what triggered it; you can't say but the unconscious ...+ Show Spoiler +the part of your mind that contains feelings and thoughts that you do not know about, and that influences the way you behave
if you admit that for rational actions the trigger needs to be a rational reason, then you have to look at palestinians as rational agents and you(the liberal, since you brought it up) are not able to do that because then you'll need to justify what's happening there(morally and ethically) and objectively, you can't do it.
the western culture taught you that you can sometimes be allowed a right to die in extreme conditions(pain, life quality ..etc) and applying that to this scenario, makes palestinians 'want to die'(as people put it) also stem from atrocious living conditions and not from the fucking unconscious.
(ps: i'm not using fuck as a stance enforcer or something; i just fuck a lot, it doesn't mean much here)
|
How did GreenHorizons get banned this time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
