ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags censorship , free speech

Reply
Old 27th March 2019, 04:59 PM   #81
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 23,158
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
I wasn't necessarily talking about governments, more in general, like as is outlined in the OP. If platforms was to disallow certain content, then that's their prerogative, it's their private platform.

Say for instance, Twitter doesn't wan anyone to make mention of Bronys on their platform, then fair enough, Bronys can go elsewhere to spread their Broniness.

But what other ideas should we-the-people be suggested to shun ? What other ideas should be considered toxic and kept out of the marketplace ?
Well for what it's worth I actually do think anti-vaxx is one of those ideologies that needs to be rejected. Innocent and helpless people are suffering and dying because of it.

White supremacy/nationalism/separatism/"replacement" theory is another that needs to be canned. It kills innocents.

Politico-jihadist Muslim extremism. No more "well I'm not excusing them, but I can understand why they are upset..." waffling. Just like with the white nationalists, it's close enough to an excuse to encourage them.

There's room for doubt about the efficacy of modern mental health and oncological treatment; but those who openly advocate for people to stop taking their psychiatric or cancer drugs and withdraw from medical care entirely, also need to be denied an equal seat at the table.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 05:21 PM   #82
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 85,391
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
So if censoring antivaxxers isn't,maybe, such a good idea, could we have some more examples of ideas that should be kept out of the marketplace ?
Advocating for genocide or perhaps better put mass murdering of your fellow citizens?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 05:27 PM   #83
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,656
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Well for what it's worth I actually do think anti-vaxx is one of those ideologies that needs to be rejected. Innocent and helpless people are suffering and dying because of it.

White supremacy/nationalism/separatism/"replacement" theory is another that needs to be canned. It kills innocents.

Politico-jihadist Muslim extremism. No more "well I'm not excusing them, but I can understand why they are upset..." waffling. Just like with the white nationalists, it's close enough to an excuse to encourage them.

There's room for doubt about the efficacy of modern mental health and oncological treatment; but those who openly advocate for people to stop taking their psychiatric or cancer drugs and withdraw from medical care entirely, also need to be denied an equal seat at the table.
That seems like a pretty good list, hard to argue against any of that. I wonder if the social media platforms are considering banning those topics. yes I know about Facebook's recent announcement and their longstanding rejection of terrorist content and if not, why not.
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 05:28 PM   #84
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,656
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Advocating for genocide or perhaps better put mass murdering of your fellow citizens?
Already illegal in my part of the world.
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 05:54 PM   #85
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 12,078
I'll sum up my views with this: when reasoning like a Bayesian, never set your prior probability to either 0 or 1.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 07:33 PM   #86
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,383
Originally Posted by AnonyMoose View Post
That fact that ya'll are now referring to these people as "white nationalists" instead of what they really are... (white supremecists, neo-nazi circus freaks, racist ballbags).... is proof in and of itself on just how much ground they actually have won with regards to their 'carte blanche free speech' indoctrinations among the masses on social media and elsewhere.
Good if an idea and speech changed my mind, I'm glad. That is the very speech I want to be exposed to.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 07:40 PM   #87
mgidm86
Philosopher
 
mgidm86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,299
Suppose all the Christians in the US decided that Atheism was a bad idea and should be silenced? Many already think that, but imagine if they had the power to actually do it? Anyone ever heard of the Roman Catholic Church? Don't forget your history lessons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ..._United_States

Quote:
Christianity is the most adhered to religion in the United States, with 75% of polled American adults identifying themselves as Christian in 2015.[1][2] This is down from 85% in 1990, lower than 81.6% in 2001,[3] and slightly lower
What if not just Christians, but all religions joined the fight? You'd have an overwhelming majority of religious people wanting to shut you up. Even if you are correct in your views you will still be silenced.

As best I can find, approximately 5% of Americans are non-religious (not necessarily atheists). I won't post links because this is an average of what I've found. Could be more could be less.

Remember, the power you give someone can also be used against you one day. Pretty basic stuff.

It could also happen that one of the groups you choose to silence may actually have been right all along. Isaac Newton comes to mind.
__________________
Franklin understands certain kickbacks you obtain unfairly are legal liabilities; however, a risky deed's almost never detrimental despite extra external pressures.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 07:44 PM   #88
mgidm86
Philosopher
 
mgidm86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,299
Facebook Bans Popular Atheist Group, Fans and Members Rally in Support

http://www.atheistrepublic.com/news/...-rally-support

Quote:
Members and fans of Atheist Republic have been rallying in support and finding ways to have their private group restored after Facebook arbitrarily banned it on January 8, 2015, without citing much clarity on its reasoning to its administrators or members.
Page was later restored. This time. Watch what you wish for folks.
__________________
Franklin understands certain kickbacks you obtain unfairly are legal liabilities; however, a risky deed's almost never detrimental despite extra external pressures.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 08:00 PM   #89
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,383
It just seems like the argument that society should base it on their values is the complete rejection of free speech. The notion that you allow speech that complies with your values or is ineffective is just a rejection if the concept. It is a trivially easy position. Free speech is communication that works and is contrary to society's sense of value.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 10:53 PM   #90
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,390
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
The "Marketplace of Ideas" doesn't mean every idea has to be debated forever until every party is satisfied.

"Is Nazism good or bad?" is not a debate anymore. We had a war about it. The whole world was involved. It was kind of a big deal. The jury is in on "Nazis."
By the definition people are now using for "Nazi" - white people who wish to live in vast-majority white nations and not have significant amounts of immigration from non-whites, and who like being white and prefer the company of whites ---- World War II was Nazis fighting Nazis for the most part.

By that definition, the European nations which fought and defeated Germany in WW2 were also Nazi nations.

If you'd asked the average white person or white soldier from France, the UK, Russia, the United States, etc. - during the middle of the fighting, if they understood themselves to be fighting the Nazis, they'd have enthusiastically agreed.

If you then followed up with "awesome, and by that I mean fighting to ensure that no country, including yours, ever has a preference for whites over nonwhites again or seeks to restrict immigration by millions of people from Africa, Pakistan, India, China, the Muslim world at large, or seeks to retain any semblance of male control over society, or seeks to enforce social standards on people of any kind, or seeks to limit men from becoming women or homosexual marriage..." etc. etc.

They'd have stared at you wide eyed and when they composed themselves, have made it clear that "no, I just mean I'm fighting the Germans who are very warlike and attacking other countries and killing people and want to conquer the world or something"

They'd have identified with the worldview of those Germans about a billion times more than the worldview of their own modern day countrymen in many, many ways.

Last edited by Skeptic Tank; 27th March 2019 at 10:59 PM.
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 10:56 PM   #91
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 7,473
If you like...

but they were much less Nazi-like than Germany. Which is the point here.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 11:05 PM   #92
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,390
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
White supremacy/nationalism/separatism/"replacement" theory is another that needs to be canned. It kills innocents.
So if white nationalists respond to you that multiracial ideology - the idea that nations should no longer have any limit on who can be part of them and are no longer connected to a particular people, and that the vast throngs of the third world and Muslim world and Africa should all have pretty much as wide open of access to western, traditionally white nations as logistics and practicality can allow for - is also an ideology which kills innocents because of the terror attacks and increase in knife crime and other things like that, AND that the stuff we're seeing now is only a small preview of the killing and fighting to come later if enough people come in and it triggers internal civil wars in these nations --- then I guess you'd sign off on ending debate, declaring the idea of multi-racialism to be discredited and beyond the pale --- you'd agree?
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 11:13 PM   #93
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,390
Any idea which deals with how the world should be arranged or what is best for a nation or region or anything like that, is always "an ideology which kills innocents" - the idea that slavery should end was a notion which killed a ton of innocents. The idea that fascism shouldn't be allowed to spread, the idea that communism shouldn't be allowed to spread, the idea that certain groups and individuals shouldn't be allowed to control certain Middle Eastern nations or other areas around the world because it might destabilize the region or represent a spreading awful ideology, blah blah blah...

Anything where people are trying to make or prevent or guide significant events in the world will involve a lot of death, generally.

Not saying that's desirable or good - just saying it's the nature of the world.
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 11:14 PM   #94
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 7,443
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post

I disagree with all of that. I think that the "marketplace of ideas" just gives more exposure and recruitment to bad ideas and allows people tentatively embracing them to find compatriots and strengthen their grasp on these ugly beliefs. It isn't logic or truth that wins the day, but rhetoric and emotion. The same ideas that fueled the Nazis, slavery and a good chunk of the most horrific things in human history really do not need to be debated over and over again. That merely gives the impression that they're up for debate.
The problem with that argument is most people don't even know what the Nazi's believed in. Like Skeptic Tank said, people think "Nazism = white nationalism"

In reality, Nazi's never espoused a pan-European ideology, they waged war with white countries. They planned to exterminate all Slavic people had they won, while allying with Japanese and claiming the Arabians had an "Aryan strain."
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 11:25 PM   #95
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 7,443
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
It just seems like the argument that society should base it on their values is the complete rejection of free speech. The notion that you allow speech that complies with your values or is ineffective is just a rejection if the concept. It is a trivially easy position. Free speech is communication that works and is contrary to society's sense of value.
After viewing this board I've noticed a massive difference between the way Europeans think versus the way Americans think. The Europeans seem to be a hive mind. They are so predictable in nearly every category. They love shaming tactics and they will always toe the (BBC) line. Especially when it comes to hot-button issues (race relations, immigration, Islamification of Europe).
With Americans, you never know what they think until they said it.

I'm not sure if this is because of Europe's oppressive "hate speech" laws or because they are more ethnically similar and therefore are more likely to collectively share the same thoughts.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 11:50 PM   #96
Lambchops
Graduate Poster
 
Lambchops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 1,174
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
By the definition people are now using for "Nazi" - white people who wish to live in vast-majority white nations and not have significant amounts of immigration from non-whites, and who like being white and prefer the company of whites ---- World War II was Nazis fighting Nazis for the most part.

By that definition, the European nations which fought and defeated Germany in WW2 were also Nazi nations.

If you'd asked the average white person or white soldier from France, the UK, Russia, the United States, etc. - during the middle of the fighting, if they understood themselves to be fighting the Nazis, they'd have enthusiastically agreed.

If you then followed up with "awesome, and by that I mean fighting to ensure that no country, including yours, ever has a preference for whites over nonwhites again or seeks to restrict immigration by millions of people from Africa, Pakistan, India, China, the Muslim world at large, or seeks to retain any semblance of male control over society, or seeks to enforce social standards on people of any kind, or seeks to limit men from becoming women or homosexual marriage..." etc. etc.

They'd have stared at you wide eyed and when they composed themselves, have made it clear that "no, I just mean I'm fighting the Germans who are very warlike and attacking other countries and killing people and want to conquer the world or something"

They'd have identified with the worldview of those Germans about a billion times more than the worldview of their own modern day countrymen in many, many ways.
Your grandchildren will be a lovely shade of dark caramel.

Don't fight it. Embrace it.
__________________
Cracking eggs and shooting children in the head is the exact same thing.
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 11:55 PM   #97
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,390
Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
Your grandchildren will be a lovely shade of dark caramel.

Don't fight it. Embrace it.
I know you think you're promoting something which will end hate and divisions (though admitting we all have to become one race to get along sort of concedes my worldview...) and I used to have exactly the same view. Exactly.

Used to say that we all need to mix into one race for the sake of peace, etc.

But regardless of what you think you're advocating, or why - in actuality, you are advocating for genocide.

You want to see the distinctiveness of the white race in particular erased from this world. Many, many people feel the same way.

It is evil and it is wrong.
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2019, 11:57 PM   #98
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 7,473
Mixing heritages isn't the same as extinguishing them - and it is both false and dangerous to think otherwise.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 12:01 AM   #99
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,390
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
Mixing heritages isn't the same as extinguishing them - and it is both false and dangerous to think otherwise.
Disagreed.

Otherwise, Neanderthals aren't extinct.

If there are a distinct people at one point, and you fast forward 500 years and that distinct, recognizable people is no longer present on the world stage - then they are gone.

Probably no group of people in history we now consider to be gone didn't mix into the larger species to some degree. Probably nobody has ever been completely wiped out with no genetic trace left behind. Yet, gone they are.

Edit:

And how about, just in case you're wrong, since you're hearing a percentage of white people say they don't want to mix and they want a space for only whites, how about we just play it safe and have that? Doesn't have to be a massive amount of territory but we need something.

Last edited by Skeptic Tank; 28th March 2019 at 12:03 AM.
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 12:02 AM   #100
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 7,443
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
Mixing heritages isn't the same as extinguishing them - and it is both false and dangerous to think otherwise.
What Lambchops is advocating for is ethnic cleansing. The childish taunts just make it that much more obvious.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 12:09 AM   #101
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 7,473
Neanderthals do agree: Europeans carry part of their genetic code.
You seem to be thinking of a kind of Australia situation, with a native ecosystem being replaced by invasive species.
But no world society has been this isolated in hundreds of years.

We know from immunology that offspring from genetically dissimilar parents are able to resist more diseases, whereas the lesson of the Royal Families of Europe is that trying to stay pure leads to infertility and sickness.

Multi-ethnicity is a blessing to humanity's biological fitness.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 12:21 AM   #102
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,390
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
Neanderthals do agree: Europeans carry part of their genetic code.
You seem to be thinking of a kind of Australia situation, with a native ecosystem being replaced by invasive species.
But no world society has been this isolated in hundreds of years.

We know from immunology that offspring from genetically dissimilar parents are able to resist more diseases, whereas the lesson of the Royal Families of Europe is that trying to stay pure leads to infertility and sickness.

Multi-ethnicity is a blessing to humanity's biological fitness.
Bone Marrow Transplants - When Race Is An Issue (Time Magazine)

Blacks face a tougher time finding a kidney transplant (USA Today)

Quote:
"Transplant recipients must have similar genes in their immune systems to those of the donor. Otherwise, the body will reject the organ.

"The genetic makeup is so broad-based in African-Americans," said Dr. Marquetta Faulkner, chief of nephrology at Meharry Medical College. "African-Americans have a big mix of Caucasian, African — it just depends on your genetic makeup."
Study: Students of Mixed Race Suffer More Health Problems (Diverse Education)

So it's very different to acknowledge that having kids with your sister or first cousin obviously leads to genetic problems than to try to claim that mixing with the most genetically distinct person you can find is good for your offspring. Not true.

Some of the most homogeneous people in the world have some of the best health. Danish people and such, for instance. Btw, did you know that the Danish genome is small enough that if a Danish woman has a child with Nigerian man, for instance, she can actually be more closely related to her neighbor's child than to her own?

You are awfully quick to throw away the genetic refinements of millennia in the span of one or two human lifetimes. It's very reckless.

But of course, no other major racial groups are going anywhere. They're too vast and their territories too uncontested for that. Only whites are on a trajectory to oblivion currently.

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
Neanderthals do agree: Europeans carry part of their genetic code.
K, so in an alternate reality where the Germans won WW2 and successfully holocausted every Jew on the planet, if they then developed genetic testing 100 years later and Third Reich scientists came back and said "ve have found zhat zhere is, on average, 0.5% Jewish DNA in ze German populace" you'd buy it if they then said "so, see? ve did not genocide anyvone! Zhey still exist!" ???

C'mon now.

Last edited by Skeptic Tank; 28th March 2019 at 12:29 AM.
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 01:19 AM   #103
Lambchops
Graduate Poster
 
Lambchops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 1,174
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
I know you think you're promoting something which will end hate and divisions (though admitting we all have to become one race to get along sort of concedes my worldview...) and I used to have exactly the same view. Exactly.

Used to say that we all need to mix into one race for the sake of peace, etc.

But regardless of what you think you're advocating, or why - in actuality, you are advocating for genocide.

You want to see the distinctiveness of the white race in particular erased from this world. Many, many people feel the same way.

It is evil and it is wrong.
I'm not promoting anything at all.

I'm just saying that your grandchildren will be brown.
__________________
Cracking eggs and shooting children in the head is the exact same thing.

Last edited by Lambchops; 28th March 2019 at 01:36 AM.
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 01:30 AM   #104
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 23,158
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
It just seems like the argument that society should base it on their values is the complete rejection of free speech.
The idea of free speech is that government cannot stop you from saying anything, or lock you up for what you say.

Private individuals and companies aren't merely "able" to reject, drown out, shut down, or refuse to accommodate others' speech when they disagree with it; the act of doing so, is itself a form of speech - expressing an opinion. Boycotts, whether of businesses, individuals, or groups, are speech.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 01:34 AM   #105
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 7,473
ST, you seem to confuse genetics and culture quite a bit.
In the case of Neanderthals, their culture would have died out in any case, replaced by something more modern over time. Genetics was the only way they could survive in some sense.
And the same is true today: only very naive groups of people think they can preserve a cultural status quo or, even more ludicrous, return to a early state. Cultural mixing and happens naturally, and with it comes genetic mixing; and even those who keep themselves apart are defined by the presence of the "other".
Nothing stays the same.

To your other point:
By the magic of Recombination, "genetic refinement" isn't lost when two people from different genepools have children: they are combined and inherited. The children are more, not less fit, thanks to the "refinement" of two sets of genotypes instead of just one.

More generally:
"genetic refinement" is a joke when it comes to consider the competition between organisms that evolve on the human timescale and parasites, microbes and viruses: humans aren't really in a competition with each other, we are in a race against everything that wants to weaken and kill us.
Most of the genetic revolution will focus on combing through genomes worldwide to find an individual with a special resistance, identify the relevant genes and splice them into patients - we will mix our genes even without reproduction.
And those who don't will be in a similar situation as the anti-vaxxers are today.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 01:35 AM   #106
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 23,158
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
Btw, did you know that the Danish genome is small enough that if a Danish woman has a child with Nigerian man, for instance, she can actually be more closely related to her neighbor's child than to her own?
Did you know that this is equally probable if the Danish woman has a child with a Spanish man, or a Hungarian man, or a Scottish man?
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 02:17 AM   #107
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,659
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
It's not peoples opinions that are the problem. The problem is that they are actively agitating for them in an attempt to implement them. They hold public rallies, are out pamphleting or otherwise distributing propaganda. That's the point where it goes from just holding hostile opinions and where they start to undermine the foundations of liberal-democracy.

Coercive measures should be used proportionally against to them in an attempt to restrict the harm they can cause, as opposed to just passively tolerating them even if they start gaining public support.
I get that, but who gets to decide, and how do we ensure that the next administration doesn't decide that _my_ speech and attempts to implement my ideas are not against the common good?

So that's first. Second, how about a guy like Alex Jones? Do you jail him for his nonsense?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 02:50 AM   #108
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,705
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
I’ll throw in this quote from a former Supreme Court justice:

“Those who won our independence believed that the final end of the state was to make men free to develop their faculties, and that in its government the deliberative forces should prevail over the arbitrary. They valued liberty both as an end and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty. They believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government.”
Got it so the genocide in Myanmar is a good thing because it won out in the marketplace of ideas.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 02:52 AM   #109
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,705
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
Other than nazis, and I'm sure we're all sick of nazis, what suggestions do you have for ideas that need to be removed ?
Promoting the Rohingya genocide. I know it won in the marketplace of ideas but really that shouldn't be the be all and end all of morality.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 02:54 AM   #110
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,705
Originally Posted by DragonLady View Post
If in the future people are being deported, it's probably because they're not citizens. Maybe it will be necessary to reconsider who is allowed to enter in the first place.

If people are being murdered, it's because the laws against murdering them aren't adequate or aren't being enforced adequately.

Neither issue is going to be solved by preventing people from discussing it over coffee.

If we believe we can truthfully say "the wrong" speech causes "the wrong" acts, then it follows "the wrong" thought leads to "the wrong" speech.* Are we going to make it a crime to THINK about murder next**?

Also, if we do make discussion of anything illegal how in hell do we pass our values on to future generations?

While I'm on the subject, how would this impact historical study? Should we ban books so no one can start to think about a world without ______? Should we ban references in entertainment, too?

If we're going to ban discussions of white nationalism, should we also ban discussions of other cultures? Should we close down blacks-only schools? Turn the native Americans out of their reservations and raze Chinatown?


*If so..."the right" speech should lead to "the right" acts; thus we've achieved balance and no changes are needed.

**AFAIK we're currently lacking the technology, but I'm sure with the right applications of money, political pressure and power we can make it a priority for R&D companies to find a way. Who needs a cure for cancer when we can start raking in tax dollars to incarcerate those who dare believe the WASP culture is worth keeping?
Should facebook even try to stem their roll in the Rohingya genocide or not, after all it is only discussion so it can't be bad by definition.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 03:10 AM   #111
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,705
Originally Posted by DragonLady View Post

If we think it's fine to have a "black culture week" then we need a "white culture week" too. Or, we need to shun both as just being sides of the same coin.
Of course logic like this is why we see lots of searches for international men's day around international women's day but no actual ones on the day it already exists.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8814501.html
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 03:12 AM   #112
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,705
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Censorship isn't the way to go in any case. Governments should be remaining neutral.

It is society at large - "we the people" - who need to shun, de-platform, and deny space to toxic and terroristic ideologies.
Yep Facebook needs to give up their efforts to stem the genocide in Myanmar.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 03:13 AM   #113
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,705
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
Already illegal in my part of the world.
How dare you censor ideas in that way!
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 04:13 AM   #114
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,659
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
I know you think you're promoting something which will end hate and divisions (though admitting we all have to become one race to get along sort of concedes my worldview...) and I used to have exactly the same view. Exactly.
Considering your posts here, I don't believe you. I think you always held these views but have more recently found an excuse to support them openly.

The problem with those excuses is that you're forced to ignore a good part of the facts in order to maintain that support. Your general point, in essentially every thread you participate in, is that humans divide by race and so should be kept separate for their respective societies to live in harmony. Except that humans divide by everything. If they're racially homogeneous they'll find some other nonsense to fight over. The problem is not race; it's our tendency to divide. The good news is, there are ways to mitigate this problem, so segregation is not only pointless and ineffective, it's unnecessary.

Quote:
You want to see the distinctiveness of the white race in particular erased from this world. Many, many people feel the same way.
And here we have further proof that your pretense of caring about other races and operating on facts evaporates. It's clear from the above that you just care about whites.

But explain to me: why would it matter if whites, or any other ethnic group for that matter, disappeared, so long as humanity and its cultures survive?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward



Last edited by Belz...; 28th March 2019 at 04:14 AM.
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 04:15 AM   #115
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,659
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
Disagreed.

Otherwise, Neanderthals aren't extinct.
That's a good point.

They're really not.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 04:56 AM   #116
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,104
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I get that, but who gets to decide, and how do we ensure that the next administration doesn't decide that _my_ speech and attempts to implement my ideas are not against the common good?
Who gets to decide? Legislators enact laws, the police investigate alleged or suspected crimes, prosecutors file charges and the judiciary finally determines whether or not someone is guilty. Again, in a well-functioning liberal-democracy under the rule of law there's no single person who gets to arbitrarily and unilaterally decide whether something is against the law.

And ultimately it's not whether your opinion or political ideas are against the "common good". That's not the standard of acceptable conduct here. It's perfectly permissible to suggest and advocate poorly thought out and ultimately socially harmful policies. Edit: Just for emphasis: Liberal-Democracy is certainly not a perfect political system, as clearly demonstrated by the countless failed laws and regulations that have been enacted in them, but it's by far the best one there is.

It's those who agitate against the foundations of liberal-democracy that are the problem. I don't care how justified they believe they are, but the people who desire to bring about a totalitarian or authoritarian political system should not be accommodated.

Quote:
So that's first. Second, how about a guy like Alex Jones? Do you jail him for his nonsense?
Considering his track record i wouldn't object to him being fined and his entire operation being shut down as well as prohibiting him from continuing spreading his brand of conspiratorial nonsense. You don't necessarily need to imprison people.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 28th March 2019 at 05:17 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 04:59 AM   #117
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,659
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
Who gets to decide? Legislators enact laws, the police investigate alleged or suspected crimes, prosecutors file charges and the judiciary finally determines whether or not someone is guilty. Again, in a well-functioning liberal-democracy under the rule of law there's no single person who gets to arbitrarily and unilaterally decide whether something is against the law.
No but there are elected officials who represent those who elected them. When the shoe's on the other foot, or when the people at the top are out of control, they have an aparatus to shut you up. So my question is: how do you prevent that? You've already given them the tools to determine what constitutes bad speech and to stop it.

Quote:
It's those who agitate against the foundations of liberal-democracy that are the problem. I don't care how justified they believe they are, but the people who desire to bring about a totalitarian or authoritarian political system should not be accommodated.
Ok then, who decides what the foundations of liberal-democracy are? Face it: a sizeable chunk of the country has a very different idea of what those are.

Quote:
Considering his track record i wouldn't object to him being fined and his entire operation being shut down as well as prohibiting him from continuing spreading his brand of conspiratorial nonsense.
What if they find that, for instance, MSNBC regularily broadcasts erroneous information or undermines government functions by constantly nay-saying the President?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 05:35 AM   #118
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,383
Originally Posted by Baylor View Post
After viewing this board I've noticed a massive difference between the way Europeans think versus the way Americans think. The Europeans seem to be a hive mind. They are so predictable in nearly every category. They love shaming tactics and they will always toe the (BBC) line. Especially when it comes to hot-button issues (race relations, immigration, Islamification of Europe).
With Americans, you never know what they think until they said it.

I'm not sure if this is because of Europe's oppressive "hate speech" laws or because they are more ethnically similar and therefore are more likely to collectively share the same thoughts.
I had a specific exchange with the OP where he/she said this thread was also about government regulation.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 05:43 AM   #119
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,356
Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
Suppose all the Christians in the US decided that Atheism was a bad idea and should be silenced?
Pretty much that exact thing has happened in many countries throughout history. But they never got there in the way you and others are suggesting this slippery slope might work.

I'll absolutely grant that there is a real risk in setting any precedent for greater power of government (or even in private entities with a lot of power). But when you get to the point of major dystopian predictions, I don't believe that this one small open door would be the thing they need and that the door being closed would stop them were everything else aligned.

I can't imagine a massive religious wave taking power over the country, wanting desperately to silence atheists, having the political power to pass such legislation but being thwarted by the lack of a vaguely similar (if you really squint) precedent.

I'm sure you can provide examples of countries changing boiled frog style bit by bit where expansions of power lead to negative consequences. I just don't see allowing neo Nazis to openly recruit as the bulwark against such a tide.

As I've said before, our free speech protection is already imperfect. We have had obscenity laws our whole history. Speech in private forums has always been subject to censorship. Saying no to racism is not going to be the thing that lets the flood water loose.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 05:47 AM   #120
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,659
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
Pretty much that exact thing has happened in many countries throughout history. But they never got there in the way you and others are suggesting this slippery slope might work.

I'll absolutely grant that there is a real risk in setting any precedent for greater power of government (or even in private entities with a lot of power). But when you get to the point of major dystopian predictions, I don't believe that this one small open door would be the thing they need and that the door being closed would stop them were everything else aligned.

I can't imagine a massive religious wave taking power over the country, wanting desperately to silence atheists, having the political power to pass such legislation but being thwarted by the lack of a vaguely similar (if you really squint) precedent.

I'm sure you can provide examples of countries changing boiled frog style bit by bit where expansions of power lead to negative consequences. I just don't see allowing neo Nazis to openly recruit as the bulwark against such a tide.

As I've said before, our free speech protection is already imperfect. We have had obscenity laws our whole history. Speech in private forums has always been subject to censorship. Saying no to racism is not going to be the thing that lets the flood water loose.
What you need to prevent hate speech is to make sure that the speech is very specifically described and that the law can't be changed easily to make it broader or more wobbly. It's not easy, but it's not impossible, either. It's just very risky.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:17 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.