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.
View Poll Results: Is is okay to insult opponents on their views?
Not just okay, but a duty! 8 10.53%
Yes, it is okay to insult opponents. 15 19.74%
No, it is not effective. 27 35.53%
No, it is dehumanizing. 18 23.68%
I don't have an opinion on this. 2 2.63%
XXXX you, snowflake! 6 7.89%
Voters: 76. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Old 20th January 2021, 07:41 PM   #41
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 70,273
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
All too often on this forum “Nazi”, “fascist” and “bigot” = someone you don’t agree with.
Yeah, and that's a problem in my opinion. Maybe not the biggest of problems, but it is a problem.
__________________
Please scream inside your heart.
arthwollipot 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 20th January 2021, 07:45 PM   #42
rockinkt
Master Poster
 
rockinkt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,096
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
All too often on this forum “Nazi”, “fascist” and “bigot” = someone you don’t agree with.
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Yeah, and that's a problem in my opinion. Maybe not the biggest of problems, but it is a problem.

It is a large problem - IMHO, of course.
__________________
"Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." Steve Earle

"I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." Townes Van Zandt
rockinkt 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 20th January 2021, 07:53 PM   #43
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,415
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
I think we can safely assume that all of the people involved in the Capitol insurrection are deplorables, can't we?
I can mostly agree to that. Some however were merely dupes and caught up in the mob, which is a thing in all mobs. They should be prosecuted but still there was a mix of folks. Those that always intended violence and those that were caught up in the mob. That is a thing with mob psychology, folks loose what little rationality we have.

Again, they should be prosecuted, as an old friend of mine once said, "Its always 'one things leads to another, so don't do that one thing!'" She was talking about me at the time. I wish I had listened.

That also doesn't include the tens of millions of folks that voted for Trump that didn't storm the capitol. The rhetoric too often lumps them all in with the violent mob(same regarding the right's discussion of the previous 9 months). Any rate, depending on your goal, I recommend caution
when using insults.

Also, I agree with the last to post. NAZI(and I'll include Commie/pinko/socialist) are too often used to just describe, "people I don't like" rather than actual NAZI's.

Last edited by ahhell; 20th January 2021 at 07:55 PM.
ahhell 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 20th January 2021, 09:17 PM   #44
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,518
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
But I have a question about the word "historically". Does it make a difference if there is a history of discrimination?

If there was a sudden new genetic mutation that made some people have purple hair and orange eyes, would it be okay to use insulting language towards them just because there is no history of doing so?

I think obviously not. For me, it would come down to immutable features. Generally speaking, we don't consider gender, ethnicity and sexuality to be particularly flexible. It is unreasonable to insult them on those grounds. However, if I voted for the "Leopards eating peoples face" party because I like the cut of their jib, then that is surely open to ridicule/insult.
In an abstract sense, there is an important line between immutable features and choices.

In the practical sense, the problem with slurs against immutable qualities is that they are used activelt to dehumanize and marginalize, give kids complexes etc. Unless you're talking to an impressionable child, if a particular quality you're remarking on isn't part of a systemic problem of marginalization and doesn't seem likely to any time soon, it might not always be a problem.

For instance, Mitch McConnell looks like a turtle. That's his body, not a choice. But we never had concentration camps for turtle looking people. Landlords never lied about apartment availability when turtle looking people asked about renting. I'm not going to lose much sleep when people call Mitch a turtle.
__________________
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 20th January 2021, 09:28 PM   #45
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 29,390
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
In an abstract sense, there is an important line between immutable features and choices.

In the practical sense, the problem with slurs against immutable qualities is that they are used activelt to dehumanize and marginalize, give kids complexes etc. Unless you're talking to an impressionable child, if a particular quality you're remarking on isn't part of a systemic problem of marginalization and doesn't seem likely to any time soon, it might not always be a problem.

For instance, Mitch McConnell looks like a turtle. That's his body, not a choice. But we never had concentration camps for turtle looking people. Landlords never lied about apartment availability when turtle looking people asked about renting. I'm not going to lose much sleep when people call Mitch a turtle.
Do you mean, "I agree, except for calling Mitch McConnell a turtle"?
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba 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 20th January 2021, 09:35 PM   #46
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,518
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Do you mean, "I agree, except for calling Mitch McConnell a turtle"?
I don't think that's the only case that matches the conditions I mentioned, but sure.
__________________
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 20th January 2021, 09:37 PM   #47
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 29,390
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I don't think that's the only case that matches the conditions I mentioned, but sure.
I guess Hitler having only one ball might be okay. Even if it is not factually accurate.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba 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 20th January 2021, 10:50 PM   #48
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,424
Originally Posted by rockinkt View Post
IMHO - The most important thing is ensuring your name calling and labels are accurate and you have overwhelming evidence to back up your accusation or assertion.
SNIP
The context and general 'level' of the conversation matter here too though. The more loose and casual the conversation, the more generally acceptable broadening the 'technical' definitions becomes.

I'll use of one of the examples. In a non-academic or formal setting, calling someone a 'TERF' when they are not could be perfectly acceptable if they are not actually a TERF but they are using a TERF argument. A person might actually subscribe to Legal Feminism and thus not be a Radical Feminist, but if they are arguing based on the Radical Feminist ideas that oppression by men as a group and individually is an intrinsic part of being a woman and that the Patriarchy doesn't hurt men, well, it becomes splitting hairs to object to them being called a TERF. A white man who thinks the Jews run the world and need to be exterminated along with the disabled and the blacks, but doesn't consider himself a Nazi and is fine with homosexuals...well, again, splitting hairs to go oh, 'He's KKK, but not a Nazi, and actual Nazis can't exist outside of 1940's Germany'.

Abandoning one's actual beliefs to employ the arguments of a group you don't belong to in order to arrive at a desired conclusion is going to get one lumped in with that group, and it isn't some sin to do that lumping together.

The problem is the lumping done to avoid thinking and just dismiss or dehumanize.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 20th January 2021, 10:53 PM   #49
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,424
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
In an abstract sense, there is an important line between immutable features and choices.

In the practical sense, the problem with slurs against immutable qualities is that they are used activelt to dehumanize and marginalize, give kids complexes etc. Unless you're talking to an impressionable child, if a particular quality you're remarking on isn't part of a systemic problem of marginalization and doesn't seem likely to any time soon, it might not always be a problem.

For instance, Mitch McConnell looks like a turtle. That's his body, not a choice. But we never had concentration camps for turtle looking people. Landlords never lied about apartment availability when turtle looking people asked about renting. I'm not going to lose much sleep when people call Mitch a turtle.
We don't have to pretend all harms are equal in magnitude, but we also don't have to pretend that small harm is equal to no harm.

But, yeah, even though when you mock a 'bad person' for their body you're going to hurt many more people who share that feature, the turtle thing is probably the most benign I can think of. Wouldn't you lean into it? Turtles are cool.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 20th January 2021, 11:21 PM   #50
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 16,798
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
We don't have to pretend all harms are equal in magnitude, but we also don't have to pretend that small harm is equal to no harm.

But, yeah, even though when you mock a 'bad person' for their body you're going to hurt many more people who share that feature, the turtle thing is probably the most benign I can think of. Wouldn't you lean into it? Turtles are cool.

Personally, If I mock, insult, and demean racists, neo-nazis, fascists, and white supremacists, I don't lose a moment's sleep worrying about hurting others who "share those features"!!
__________________
I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms.
- Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project)
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky 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 20th January 2021, 11:28 PM   #51
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 16,798
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
“Hitler has only got one ball! The other is in the Albert Hall!...”

“Must we be so insulting about Mr Hitler? Should we really stoop to his level?”
Sung to the tune "Colonel Bogey March"

Hitler, he only has one ball
Goering has two but they are very small
Himmler,
has something similar
and poor old Goebels has no balls at all
__________________
I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms.
- Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project)
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky 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 21st January 2021, 12:51 AM   #52
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 29,390
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
"Bernie Stan" isn't just an insult, it's pointing out that Sanders' most fervent "supporters" were outright destructive to their own cause. See one Jimmy Dore, who now spends his videos screaming with anger because Sanders, AOC, and so on aren't nice enough to him...
Whenever I hear about Jimmy Dore, it is usually from someone who is extremely right-wing who says something along the lines of "Jimmy Dore is one of the few left-wingers I respect..."

Why is that? I don't know, but every time I see one of his videos he seems to be promoting right-wing people or taking right-wing BS at face value.

This video that just popped up is a case in point. First he begins by claiming he doesn't know who the Boogaloo Boys are and then plays a clip of an armed guy reading some BS about how the corrupt politicians have made their fellow right-wing groups and also left-wing groups like this and we don't want to be violent, but there's a limit... which Jimmy Dore simply passes off as a genuine attempt at wanting unity.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


The video is called Populist Right & Left Joining Forces Against the Establishment. That is simply not happening.

I couldn't watch the whole thing, but I don't believe he is stupid enough to be so credulous.
He can't be serious, can he?
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

Last edited by angrysoba; 21st January 2021 at 12:52 AM.
angrysoba 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 21st January 2021, 02:06 AM   #53
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,262
I think my thoughts on the name-calling go toward President Biden's inaugural address, specifically when he called out truth, versus lies. Along with "lies", I'll also include exaggerations, distortions, and any other variation on untruth.

If your opponents are actually fascists, it's ok to call them fascists. If not, then don't call them that. Are they TERFs? Call them that, although be aware it isn't necessarily an insult.

SJWs? CHUDs? No one is actually one of those, and yet they mean something, and something real, but the great danger is painting with far too broad of a brush, especially since they don't have actual, precise, definitions.

I would say that if you are dealing with someone who has blind faith in Donald Trump, supports him on every position, and refuses to listen to any counterargument or view any evidence, it's ok to mock them, and if you are in company that won't mind, then "CHUD" isn't an unforgivable sin. On the other hand, those with blind faith in Donald Trump represent a very small segment of the 74 million voters who cast votes for Trump in this election, so be very, very, cautions in applying those labels. Similarly for SJW, and, for that matter, TERF. What I see is that almost no one who uses those derogatory
terms actually limits their application to the appropriate group. Anyone who votes for Trump gets called a CHUD. Any woman, and once in a while a man, who disagrees with any aspect of any transgender activist goal becomes a TERF. Anyone who suggests that there is any element of racial or other minority injustice that government ought to help eliminate in America is called an SJW.

And.....Bernie Bros? That's not an insult.

In summary, it's ok to call people things that they really are. Sometimes, a term sounds insulting because it is, and deservedly so, but be extremely cautious in only applying the term to the people who really fit the description. It's ok to call those folks in Charlottesville carrying the torches Nazis, even if it isn't 100% accurate, but don't make the mistake that the same can be said for anyone with a "thin blue line" flag.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?

Last edited by Meadmaker; 21st January 2021 at 02:08 AM.
Meadmaker 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 21st January 2021, 02:34 AM   #54
Delvo
Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 9,296
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
There's a lot of people out there that think there is some vital service to be had in really, really tone policing the "correct" side of the discussion to extreme degrees because they have zero idea of what "fairness" and "balance" actually mean. I just think it's insane.
When people say it's unproductive, they don't mean it's unfair or unbalanced. They mean it's unproductive. Making "them" feel better might not feel good to you, but the question is what results it gets, not how you feel about doing it or how you feel about how they feel or how you feel about how you think they feel. (And the mechanism by which something works or doesn't work doesn't need to have anything to do with making the targeted people feel better anyway. Next quote for that...)

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I have grown weary of Enlightened Centrists talking about the need for everyone to reason respectfully together as MAGA fascists have ruled for 4 years with an explicit policy of "**** your feelings"

No amount of jerking these people off with respectability politics is going to help the situation.
Probably not. But what could actually help is looking at the background behind them to find and address how they got that way. And that is an activity which being perpetually stuck in Insult Mode prevents. I've seen it repeatedly right here: if anybody tries to point a conversation toward real causes and possible real solutions, the insult-obsessed brush it aside to make room for more insults instead, as if because their goal of a constant neverending insult stream can't be done by the same minds at the same time as a practical discussion. Maybe it's because the latter tends to involve admitting that The Enemy are actually humans too, or that the insult-obsessed could possibly turn out to have anything else in common with The Enemy.

Also, even from the side of the insultees rather than the insulters, there's still another reason why laying off the perpetual insults would be more useful, still totally separate from whether it "hurts their feelings" or not: it discredits you in their eyes, proving that you are not somebody worth listening to.

There's no sense at all in pretending this is about "not hurting their feelings", other than to try to bury the real subject in more layers of counterproductive insults against one group used as excuses for other counterproductive insults another group. One could hardly ask for a better demonstration of not caring what's productive and what isn't, whether the people who act that way admit it or not.

Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Appealing to the better nature of racists, white supremacists, fascists and other assorted deplorables is ultimately futile - they have no better nature to which you can appeal. Shaming them, insulting them and treating them like the scum-of-the-earth is a far better way to go, the namby-pamby way simply does not work!
But your suggestion doesn't do any good either, so this reasoning isn't a reason or justification for the insultism; it's just a thin excuse for it.

If you're really after what might have a chance of working by pushing people's emotional buttons, I've seen some indications that the best way to go might be neither niceness nor hatred & anger but laughter. And that means not the "I'm making hostile 'jokes' about you because you're horrible" kind of "humor" that's really just another kind of hateful insult, but the "I just can't take you seriously" kind. Even people who are often called shameless probably do all have a sense of shame, but just not one that gets activated by having someone shout "Shame!" at them; it might just need not being taken seriously to activate it. (For example, I read a story about an area where KKK participation took a nosedive after an article by an infiltrator was published in the newspaper to describe secret KKK ceremonies for outsiders. It had described their inner workings not as scary or disturbing or such but as silly and childish, like little kids trying to sound important.)

Originally Posted by lionking View Post
All too often on this forum “Nazi”, “fascist” and “bigot” = someone you don’t agree with.
My favorite recent example of that kind of thing is in another thread somewhere around here. Just within the last day or two, I saw a couple of insult-imbeciles discussing how much I supposedly seem like a Republican... for saying that the main problem with certain Democrats is their tendency to be too much like Republicans... because complaining about too much Republicanism is such a Republican thing to do. They could hardly have demonstrated the stuplicity in their own "thinking" any better if they'd posted pictures of themselves holding up protest-signs saying "i dont car about fax if u dont wership all demicrats ur a republikin!".
Delvo 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 21st January 2021, 03:35 AM   #55
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 16,798
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
My favorite recent example of that kind of thing is in another thread somewhere around here. Just within the last day or two, I saw a couple of insult-imbeciles discussing how much I supposedly seem like a Republican... for saying that the main problem with certain Democrats is their tendency to be too much like Republicans... because complaining about too much Republicanism is such a Republican thing to do. They could hardly have demonstrated the stuplicity in their own "thinking" any better if they'd posted pictures of themselves holding up protest-signs saying "i dont car about fax if u dont wership all demicrats ur a republikin!".
Its an understandable mistake for a believer in horseshoe theory - that if you're far enough left you start to become indistinguishable from the far right... like communism and fascism - anti-Semetic, authoritarian, anti-democratic, state control of resources, secret police states, promotes revolutionary change, curbed or eliminated individual rights, no free speech, control of religion, indoctrination of youth, elimination of dissenters.

Yes, the far left and the far right have much in common.
__________________
I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms.
- Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project)
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky 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 21st January 2021, 03:45 AM   #56
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 14,669
The 'horseshoe theory' is nonsense: the mistake comes from thinking of political ideology happening on a single gradient, from Communism to Fascism.
there is basically no overlap between far-right and far-left ideology.

What is happening is that all fringe ideology groups are inherently anti-establishment, and in history, such groups have often made common cause for the single purpose of overthrowing the current order.
But they don't form political alliances for actual government.

A bit more precision when it comes to comparing Left and Right would be appropriate.
__________________
So what are you going to do about it, huh?
What would an intellectual do?
What would Plato do?
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 21st January 2021, 05:34 AM   #57
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,518
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Personally, If I mock, insult, and demean racists, neo-nazis, fascists, and white supremacists, I don't lose a moment's sleep worrying about hurting others who "share those features"!!
Let's say a particular neo-nazi was very short and suddenly social media was jam packed with jokes denigrating his height.

I imagine short people who were not neo nazis might feel a little sting there and the stigmatization of shortness might increase a little.
__________________
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 21st January 2021, 05:41 AM   #58
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,518
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I guess Hitler having only one ball might be okay. Even if it is not factually accurate.
That one is not the end of the world, but probably more harmful than the turtle thing. There IS a history of calling into question men's manliness and value based on the condition of their genitalia. And there are men who lose a testicle or two to war, or cancer etc or who are born with one who suffer some serious self image issues over it.

I'd imagine some WWII vets who had their genitals damaged during the war may not have felt as great hearing that song sung gleefully.

That's why I think the history of abuse (or the potential) are a valid part of evaluating such a question.
__________________
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 21st January 2021, 05:44 AM   #59
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,009
Someone resurrect Chaplin's ghost and tell him his film "The Great Dictator", which is basically 84 minutes of insulting Hitler and Nazism, is in bad taste and counter productive.

Insulting dangerous people with dangerous ideas is not only acceptable, it's desirable. Treating these people like they deserve respect is granting them unearned privileges that only advances their horrific causes.

I have no idea if calling these extremist right wing groups CHUDs is effective, and I personally doubt it. But it's definitely acceptable, and I see no reason to believe it's detrimental.

Keep in mind how this pearl clutching derail even started. I referred to the various fractions of fascists, neo-confederates, conspiracy theorists, etc that stormed the capitol as CHUDs. I find it a useful shorthand for the various types that feel that violently installing a extremist right wing ghoul as permanent head of state is their prerogative.

This was not even the point of the post, but rather just a passing jab that serves a useful purpose as a catch-all for the various elements present at these violent protests. Apparently this was a severe enough offense for someone to come white knighting for civility politics when it comes to dealing with a coalition of fascists and unhinged, bloodthirsty conspiracy cranks.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 21st January 2021 at 05:50 AM.
SuburbanTurkey 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 21st January 2021, 05:55 AM   #60
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,518
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
We don't have to pretend all harms are equal in magnitude, but we also don't have to pretend that small harm is equal to no harm.
I don't know if you can speak for any length of time about anything of importance and objectively cause zero harm.

Heck, anything we're typing about now is adding to the carbon in the atmosphere through the electricity we're using and future landfill waste by wearing out our keyboards a little sooner.

Just like risk, harm is never zero. It's all about managing the thresholds and balances you're comfortable with.
__________________
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 21st January 2021, 06:16 AM   #61
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 59,496
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Someone resurrect Chaplin's ghost and tell him his film "The Great Dictator", which is basically 84 minutes of insulting Hitler and Nazism, is in bad taste and counter productive.

Insulting dangerous people with dangerous ideas is not only acceptable, it's desirable. Treating these people like they deserve respect is granting them unearned privileges that only advances their horrific causes.

I have no idea if calling these extremist right wing groups CHUDs is effective, and I personally doubt it. But it's definitely acceptable, and I see no reason to believe it's detrimental.

Keep in mind how this pearl clutching derail even started. I referred to the various fractions of fascists, neo-confederates, conspiracy theorists, etc that stormed the capitol as CHUDs. I find it a useful shorthand for the various types that feel that violently installing a extremist right wing ghoul as permanent head of state is their prerogative.

This was not even the point of the post, but rather just a passing jab that serves a useful purpose as a catch-all for the various elements present at these violent protests. Apparently this was a severe enough offense for someone to come white knighting for civility politics when it comes to dealing with a coalition of fascists and unhinged, bloodthirsty conspiracy cranks.
This particular bunch of pearls seems to be clutched tightest by hypocrites. This was most evident to me in the perpetual "let's hate trannies" threads when multiple posters explained that I was homophobic for objecting to being called a queen. They didn't just insist I wasn't allowed to take offense to being called that, they insisted I was the only actual bigot because I objected. I'm not the least bit surprised the same crap bastards are wringing their hands when someone uses unflattering terms: it strikes them too close to home. They want to hide in a fog of words and not be nailed down by simple terms that accurately describe them. They'll fight for opacity in the name of "civility" because it lets them get away with promulgating their vile opinions.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 21st January 2021, 06:35 AM   #62
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,063
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
Let's say a particular neo-nazi was very short and suddenly social media was jam packed with jokes denigrating his height.

I imagine short people who were not neo nazis might feel a little sting there and the stigmatization of shortness might increase a little.
Thank you, a very important point. I see often an instinct to double up on an insult, like "that fat *******", and I do think it is harmful, because being fat has nothing to do with it, and indeed it only serves to add collateral damage while stinging the deserving target no better than just "*******".
__________________

gnome 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 21st January 2021, 08:53 AM   #63
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
 
Butter!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 7,266
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Personally, If I mock, insult, and demean racists, neo-nazis, fascists, and white supremacists, I don't lose a moment's sleep worrying about hurting others who "share those features"!!
I don't agree with this. Making fun of a racist for being fat still hurts every other non-racist fat person who hears the comments. Just make fun of them for being racist losers.
__________________
Get these tribbles off the bridge
Butter! 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 21st January 2021, 08:55 AM   #64
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
 
Butter!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 7,266
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Whenever I hear about Jimmy Dore, it is usually from someone who is extremely right-wing who says something along the lines of "Jimmy Dore is one of the few left-wingers I respect..."

Why is that? I don't know, but every time I see one of his videos he seems to be promoting right-wing people or taking right-wing BS at face value.

This video that just popped up is a case in point. First he begins by claiming he doesn't know who the Boogaloo Boys are and then plays a clip of an armed guy reading some BS about how the corrupt politicians have made their fellow right-wing groups and also left-wing groups like this and we don't want to be violent, but there's a limit... which Jimmy Dore simply passes off as a genuine attempt at wanting unity.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


The video is called Populist Right & Left Joining Forces Against the Establishment. That is simply not happening.

I couldn't watch the whole thing, but I don't believe he is stupid enough to be so credulous.
He can't be serious, can he?
He sounds like Joe Rogan, another LINO. He calls himself a liberal and yet uses his podcast to chat with people like Ben Shapiro and repeat right-wing talking points to death (especially with regard to pandemic lockdowns). If you go to his subreddit and bitch about how repetitive and dishonest he's gotten, 25 billion bros start parroting, "He's a liberal, man, look how crazy you are. Hahaha, he's totally liberal, he had Tulsi Gabbard on once, and he likes weed!"
__________________
Get these tribbles off the bridge

Last edited by Butter!; 21st January 2021 at 08:57 AM.
Butter! 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 21st January 2021, 09:29 AM   #65
Butter!
Rough Around the Edges
 
Butter!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 7,266
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
The 'horseshoe theory' is nonsense: the mistake comes from thinking of political ideology happening on a single gradient, from Communism to Fascism.
there is basically no overlap between far-right and far-left ideology.

What is happening is that all fringe ideology groups are inherently anti-establishment, and in history, such groups have often made common cause for the single purpose of overthrowing the current order.
But they don't form political alliances for actual government.

A bit more precision when it comes to comparing Left and Right would be appropriate.
When people talk about the far left in the context of horseshoe theory, aren't they talking about governments like China's? Aside from the ostensible communism, the way that government controls citizens and information seems fairly similar to the way a right-wing dictatorship would. That's what I always thought horseshoe theory meant, like a Hitler vs. Stalin kind of comparison.

If people are applying it to MAGA vs Antifa, that's much more silly, and I'd agree with you.
__________________
Get these tribbles off the bridge
Butter! 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 21st January 2021, 10:02 AM   #66
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 14,669
Originally Posted by Butter! View Post
When people talk about the far left in the context of horseshoe theory, aren't they talking about governments like China's? Aside from the ostensible communism, the way that government controls citizens and information seems fairly similar to the way a right-wing dictatorship would. That's what I always thought horseshoe theory meant, like a Hitler vs. Stalin kind of comparison.

If people are applying it to MAGA vs Antifa, that's much more silly, and I'd agree with you.
There is an authoritarian to anti-authoritarian dimension, but again, this has nothing to do with ideology: it works just as well with religion, apartheid, ethnicity.
You can simply say that governments who want to stay in control no matter what use the same tools. No comparative ideology required.
__________________
So what are you going to do about it, huh?
What would an intellectual do?
What would Plato do?
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 21st January 2021, 11:18 AM   #67
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 16,798
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
Let's say a particular neo-nazi was very short and suddenly social media was jam packed with jokes denigrating his height.

I imagine short people who were not neo nazis might feel a little sting there and the stigmatization of shortness might increase a little.
That isn't me though.

The question is, should I use insulting language to shame neo-nazis and other deplorables? What others do is their own businesses.

I demean racists because they are racists, not because they are short or fat, or have a funny nose. Drawing attention to the fact that Trump is fat serves no purpose, but drawing attention to the fact that he is racist supporter of white supremacy, and is a (failed) wannabe authoritarian does. I demean these deplorables for WHO and WHAT they are and what they represent, not what they look like.
__________________
I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms.
- Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project)
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky 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 21st January 2021, 11:20 AM   #68
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 16,798
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
The 'horseshoe theory' is nonsense: the mistake comes from thinking of political ideology happening on a single gradient, from Communism to Fascism.
there is basically no overlap between far-right and far-left ideology.

What is happening is that all fringe ideology groups are inherently anti-establishment, and in history, such groups have often made common cause for the single purpose of overthrowing the current order.
But they don't form political alliances for actual government.

A bit more precision when it comes to comparing Left and Right would be appropriate.

See the contradiction in your post?
__________________
I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms.
- Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project)
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky 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 21st January 2021, 11:28 AM   #69
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 14,669
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
See the contradiction in your post?
No contradiction.
Groups are against the Status Quo if it doesn't serve them, and for it if it does.
Being anti-establishment is a result of lack of power, not ideology.
By definition, if they were in power, they would no longer be fringe.
__________________
So what are you going to do about it, huh?
What would an intellectual do?
What would Plato do?

Last edited by The Great Zaganza; 21st January 2021 at 11:29 AM.
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 21st January 2021, 11:34 AM   #70
dann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,596
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Do you mean, "I agree, except for calling Mitch McConnell a turtle"?
Most turtles will find it demeaning and offensive.

ETA: I should probably add that I don't disapprove of turtles!
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 21st January 2021 at 11:40 AM.
dann 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 21st January 2021, 11:45 AM   #71
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 50,334
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Personally, If I mock, insult, and demean racists, neo-nazis, fascists, and white supremacists, I don't lose a moment's sleep worrying about hurting others who "share those features"!!
This.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb 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 21st January 2021, 11:49 AM   #72
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 14,804
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
using "TERF" to describe a feminist who's transphobia is couched in feminist theory is not inaccurate.
You demonstrate the problem right there. You assume transphobia, you assume bigotry right out of the gate.

In application, you and others assume bigotry or hatred where it doesn't exist, and use that assumption to justify applying an insulting term to your opponents.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat 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 21st January 2021, 11:50 AM   #73
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,424
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
This particular bunch of pearls seems to be clutched tightest by hypocrites. This was most evident to me in the perpetual "let's hate trannies" threads when multiple posters explained that I was homophobic for objecting to being called a queen. They didn't just insist I wasn't allowed to take offense to being called that, they insisted I was the only actual bigot because I objected. I'm not the least bit surprised the same crap bastards are wringing their hands when someone uses unflattering terms: it strikes them too close to home. They want to hide in a fog of words and not be nailed down by simple terms that accurately describe them. They'll fight for opacity in the name of "civility" because it lets them get away with promulgating their vile opinions.
That's the point I stopped even lurking in that thread to laugh.

But it does touch on a few ways this 'civility' discussion can be used to control the discourse and disguise stupid, vile, or just plain silly arguments. They can hide behind 'reasonable theater' where sounding reasonable is used as a proxy for being reasonable. Further it is often used as a proxy for being correct. 'Mother******, two plus ******* two is ******* four' is better than 'My good man, I believe you, being a clever man of virtue, will find that examining the equation, two in addition to another two will yield seven.'

Poster above touched on making sure the accusation is accurate, but sometimes it being accurate is the reason people object. Taking the above example, the polite wrong person will object to be lumped in with being in a 'wrong' because there are other people who think that 2+2=pedophilia. This relates to that thread and many posts in politics too; an idea does not have to be extreme to be not just wrong, but dumb. 'Strangle half the puppies' is not a more reasonable, more correct, nor less vile a position just because some are calling for drowning all the puppies. Yes, it is perfectly correct to put those both in the same group of 'wrong people who find killing puppies acceptable'. If there were a shorthand for that group, the 'strangle half the puppies' people would likely act highly offended for that shorthand being applied to them! Why, that shorthand is for those bad and wrong people!

Do we really think that a person politely advancing Nazi ideology would be less vile or more acceptable? Would we really listen to that person when they call us bigots for calling them a Nazi? It's a trick that works on some. Is that a good thing? Being right should be more important.

Controlling the discourse is likewise why some insist that 'cis woman' is a grave insult rather than a neutral descriptor. The con becomes more obvious when you think of analogous uses of language like 'biological child'. In every important way it's the same as arguing that 'biological child' is a slur, there should only be children, adopted people aren't really the 'child' of the person who adopted them and it is only right an proper to call such people 'adoptee' to avoid confusion. It's easy to see such an argument is in bad faith to either attack adopted children or privileged biological children.

Yeah, the question from the OP really is only answered in the specifics. Sometimes such labels are bad, sometimes they are only badly used, and sometimes they're just fine and the objections to them are to control the argument.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 21st January 2021, 12:01 PM   #74
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,262
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Personally, If I mock, insult, and demean racists, neo-nazis, fascists, and white supremacists, I don't lose a moment's sleep worrying about hurting others who "share those features"!!
That was kind of the intent by my post earlier. If there are neo-nazis and you call them neo-nazis, there's no harm done. If there are neo-nazis and you hold them in contempt, and use some sort of derogatory term for them, that's really not so bad.

If, on the other hand, you call someone a neo-nazi when they are not a neo-nazi, then you are part of the problem. It's ok to call someone a TERF, if they are a TERF. It's ok to call someone a racist, if they are a racist, and I would go so far as to say it's okay to call them "racist scum", or something similar, even if you can only document the "racist" part.

However, if you have to connect very many dots between what positions they hold, and "racist scum", you might be overreaching. As an example, Dylan Roof murdered nine people in the hope of starting a race war. I think it's fair to say he's racist, and call him "racist scum", or whatever you want. On the other hand, there are lots of policies that might have a disparate impact on different races. It would not be fair to call everyone who espuses one of those polices "racist scum". It might be that there is justification for the policy quite independent of how it impacts people of different racial backgrounds.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker 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 21st January 2021, 12:11 PM   #75
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,009
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
That was kind of the intent by my post earlier. If there are neo-nazis and you call them neo-nazis, there's no harm done. If there are neo-nazis and you hold them in contempt, and use some sort of derogatory term for them, that's really not so bad.

If, on the other hand, you call someone a neo-nazi when they are not a neo-nazi, then you are part of the problem. It's ok to call someone a TERF, if they are a TERF. It's ok to call someone a racist, if they are a racist, and I would go so far as to say it's okay to call them "racist scum", or something similar, even if you can only document the "racist" part.

However, if you have to connect very many dots between what positions they hold, and "racist scum", you might be overreaching. As an example, Dylan Roof murdered nine people in the hope of starting a race war. I think it's fair to say he's racist, and call him "racist scum", or whatever you want. On the other hand, there are lots of policies that might have a disparate impact on different races. It would not be fair to call everyone who espuses one of those polices "racist scum". It might be that there is justification for the policy quite independent of how it impacts people of different racial backgrounds.
Sure, but then you have people who might rightfully be labeled one thing trying to wriggle out of it through rebranding and optics.

Take the "alt-right". People like Richard Spencer would go to great lengths explaining they aren't Nazis or fascists or white nationalists, meanwhile espousing views that are boilerplate nazi ideology.

A lot of these alt-right types would certainly cry foul if you called them a neo-nazi, but that doesn't mean it's not accurate.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey 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 21st January 2021, 12:16 PM   #76
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,063
Then the key is to be confident in your assessment. I think there's something to be said about doubting the label if there's too many degrees of Kevin Bacon between the person's opinion and that of an obvious racist. I would sooner ask more questions of the person, than connect those dots hastily.
__________________

gnome 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 21st January 2021, 12:25 PM   #77
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 16,798
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
No contradiction.
Yes there is.

You made an affirmative statement of fact that far-left and far-right have nothing in common....

"no overlap between far-right and far-left ideology"

...then you went right ahead and gave another example of how they do...

"all fringe ideology groups are inherently anti-establishment"

But the issue here is not weather they are the same, but whether you can always accurately parse someone's words to determine their politics. In Delvo's case, I made the mistake of assuming the he was very right wing because he was parroting a lot of right wing talking points - an easy mistake to make since the far left also sound a lot like the far right when you hear them talk. Its difficult to parse from those words, that he is actually left of Karl Marx!!
__________________
I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms.
- Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project)
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 21st January 2021 at 12:27 PM.
smartcooky 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 21st January 2021, 12:28 PM   #78
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 14,669
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Yes there is.

You made an affirmative statement of fact that far-left and far-right have nothing in common....

"no overlap between far-right and far-left ideology"

...then you went right ahead and gave another example of how they do...

"all fringe ideology groups are inherently anti-establishment"

But the issue here is not weather they are the same, but whether you can always accurately parse someone's words to determine their politics. In Delvo's case, I made the mistake of assuming the he was very right wing because he was parroting a lot of right wing talking points - an easy mistake to make since the far left also sound a lot like the far right when you hear them talk. Its difficult to parse from those words, that he is actually left of Karl Marx!!
no.
they have something in common by dint of being Fringe.
Don't confuse that with having something in common because of overlapping ideology.
__________________
So what are you going to do about it, huh?
What would an intellectual do?
What would Plato do?
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 21st January 2021, 12:32 PM   #79
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,262
Originally Posted by gnome View Post
Then the key is to be confident in your assessment. I think there's something to be said about doubting the label if there's too many degrees of Kevin Bacon between the person's opinion and that of an obvious racist. I would sooner ask more questions of the person, than connect those dots hastily.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you're right, but would it hurt you to actually provide some information?
Meadmaker 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 21st January 2021, 01:31 PM   #80
dann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,596
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
... the far left also sound a lot like the far right when you hear them talk. ...

Could you come up with an example?!
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann 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 12:06 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.