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.
Reply
Old 24th October 2019, 09:04 PM   #81
8enotto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Mexico
Posts: 1,239
A site with no one to offend you is boring. A site offering all a voice if they stay within basic rules is never boring. And inevitably everyone offends someone every once in a while. It's all part of the game here.

It's your choice to engage or not, based on whatever reasons. Some battles are worth the prize,most aren't.

And I still have no clear idea when a person becomes a reactionary to all points of view, which is important if we were to define it clearly. As mentioned earlier, anyone to the right of Marx, and I might add anyone to the left of the current US regime. It's a wide span of overlap.
8enotto 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 24th October 2019, 10:29 PM   #82
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,301
Originally Posted by 8enotto View Post
A site with no one to offend you is boring. A site offering all a voice if they stay within basic rules is never boring. And inevitably everyone offends someone every once in a while. It's all part of the game here.

It's your choice to engage or not, based on whatever reasons. Some battles are worth the prize,most aren't.

And I still have no clear idea when a person becomes a reactionary to all points of view, which is important if we were to define it clearly. As mentioned earlier, anyone to the right of Marx, and I might add anyone to the left of the current US regime. It's a wide span of overlap.
The current US president is, in reality, a perfect example of what we are discussing here - a guy with little to nothing to offer except for overt bigotry, yet treated as a perfectly legitimate. End result? A major backslide in terms of civil rights, the US' standing, and so forth - and mostly because the GOP, and the media, treated bigotry as a perfectly legitimate point, and what about Hillary's emails, and so forth.

Same for many of his followers - Steve Bannon and Milo Whocareswhathislastnameis were white nationalists, the end - as soon as people just shrugged their shoulders, they were reduced to just about nothing, with Bannon flailing around in Europe, and a now bankrupt Milo getting summarily run out of everywhere he tries to go.

For a more local example, any thread that TBD came to dominate was more or less a waste of time to read, since far too many decided to respond to his claptrap rather than move along to something interesting. Truth told, it's not very hard at all to figure out who is actually sticking to principles (those conservatives that say "I'm for rule of law, and Dolt 45 clearly isn't", as an example) and those who aren't ("I'm for law and order, by which I mean I will defend any cop that shoots a random unarmed black person - but I also think Black Lives Matter is a terrorist group.
Also, 'trannies' and queers should stop shoving their agenda down our throats, and demanding we bend over and take it.") It's the same old crap over and over, no real thought as to any principles, or why they're arguing against the exact "principle" they were swearing they loved a mere 2 sentences ago.

As much as people in this thread whined about Atheism+ They, at least, set up their own forum, and like most odd movements, ran their course. The guys arguing that feminists are "destroying" some entertainment industry or other, or that Hispanics are "invaders" and blacks are "thugs", and LGBT people are [overstated rape references and hack "I identify as" jokes]. Same crap their predecessors were saying for decades, if not centuries, more or less. No real principles, just emotional bigoted crap that they hold together with duct tape and paper clips.

Last edited by Mumbles; 24th October 2019 at 10:48 PM.
Mumbles 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 25th October 2019, 01:48 AM   #83
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
You were the one to suggest that we talk about the pathologies of those we disagree with. Or was that only supposed to apply to "reactionary" posters?
Yes, only reactionary posters and not named ones. It's in the thread title.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 25th October 2019, 01:55 AM   #84
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
It seems a lot of posters in this thread have problems with not importing arguments from other threads and would rather attack me for views they ascribe to me than engage in conversation about the topic of the thread. To those of you who feel this way, feel free to ignore me.

I realize that "free speech" is a golden calf for many Americans. I also realize that asking someone not to engage with an argument goes against the ego of a lot of posters. The reason I am asking you not to, as a couple of posters have said, is that doing so actually helps right wing extremists.

That's basically what I'm asking: Don't help right wing extremists.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 25th October 2019, 02:04 AM   #85
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
This pretty well explains the problem, and why I have most of our resident crowd of contrarians and conservatrolls on ignore. The goal of reactionaries and others related to them isn't to win arguments, it's not even to propose a convincing argument, or stir emotions. The goal is to legitimize themselves by association. It doesn't matter how bad they sound, how stupid, how insane, how mean. The simple fact that their viewpoints have been treated as valid enough to be worthy of debate is their main and overriding goal.

Refusal to engage with them on any level may seem counterintuitive at first, but it's actually the best reaction one can have in the long term. Ostracism, not engagement. The moment you treat their views as worth acknowledging, you've given them the advantage; because they will never debate honestly, but will resort to all the tricks and lies and evasions and underhanded tactics they know how to use. You will always be on the defensive, which further feeds into legitimizing their beliefs and actions.

I've posted this before, but I don't know that people are taking it seriously enough.

The Daily Stormer's Leaked Style/Propaganda Guide

Further, it also thrusts them and their hatred into the forefront, and indirectly serves to aid in their marginalizing of minorities and other "undesirables". I've had this in my signature for a bit, but it is very appropriate here:

"When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won."

There is no reason in this day and age that these debates should be continuing. They should be a thing of the past, a historical relic, treated like the atavistic nonsense they are.




But you can't do this, because it's a violation of their "free speech", a bit of sound bite propaganda that the alt.right has made quite a lot of mileage out of, and which we can see parroted quite often on this very board.

Deplatforming is ultimately the most effective tool against the fascists. Ignore them like a 2 year old throwing a tantrum, and eventually they make themselves look ridiculous. Deny them a venue to preach their hate, and whole lot fewer people will hear it.

Another bit that bears repeating: Tolerance is not a moral precept, it is a peace treaty. Those who violate the peace treaty are no longer protected by it. We have no compelling reason to tolerate the intolerant, to accept and allow platforms for those who preach hate and attempt to oppress and marginalize any other social group.
Just wanted to highlight this post. If you all don't want to discuss the points in my OP and would rather just attack me, perhaps you could discuss the quoted post instead. Might be a bit harder than just casually dismissing the "leftist extremist", but it would do you good as you might learn something.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 25th October 2019, 04:51 AM   #86
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,994
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
(...) Refusal to engage with them on any level may seem counterintuitive at first, but it's actually the best reaction one can have in the long term. Ostracism, not engagement. The moment you treat their views as worth acknowledging, you've given them the advantage; because they will never debate honestly, but will resort to all the tricks and lies and evasions and underhanded tactics they know how to use. You will always be on the defensive, which further feeds into legitimizing their beliefs and actions. (...)

Just wanted to highlight this post. If you all don't want to discuss the points in my OP and would rather just attack me, perhaps you could discuss the quoted post instead. Might be a bit harder than just casually dismissing the "leftist extremist", but it would do you good as you might learn something.

Refusing to engage with them would turn the ISF into 4chan. A good argument against their lies doesn't give them any advantage. It disarms them, and it arms their opponents. You confuse their unwillingness to recognize explicitly that their arguments have been exploded with a legitimization of their beliefs and actions, but when they resort to comments like this or this, it shows that they do recognize that they have run out of actual arguments. And it is also a sure sign for the lurchers that have nothing to offer but "tricks and lies and evasions and underhanded tactics" - even the ones who pretend to be libertarians or centrists.
That you have reactionaries on ignore is a victory for them.

If you are interested in doing it right instead of just giving up, you can start here:
Why democrats fail at the criticism of fascism! (Ruthless Criticism)
__________________
/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; 25th October 2019 at 04:52 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 25th October 2019, 05:19 AM   #87
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Refusing to engage with them would turn the ISF into 4chan. A good argument against their lies doesn't give them any advantage. It disarms them, and it arms their opponents. You confuse their unwillingness to recognize explicitly that their arguments have been exploded with a legitimization of their beliefs and actions, but when they resort to comments like this or this, it shows that they do recognize that they have run out of actual arguments. And it is also a sure sign for the lurchers that have nothing to offer but "tricks and lies and evasions and underhanded tactics" - even the ones who pretend to be libertarians or centrists.
That you have reactionaries on ignore is a victory for them.

If you are interested in doing it right instead of just giving up, you can start here:
Why democrats fail at the criticism of fascism! (Ruthless Criticism)
We don't have to engage with them in order to criticize their beliefs. We will never be able to win an argument with Nazis if we define "winning an argument" as limiting the spread of Nazism.

I would reccommend a Youtube series for you. I don't present it as an argument, or as evidence for my argument, but rather as something that might interest you, and that is related to this issue.

It's called "The Alt-Right Playbook", and it goes through the tactics of the far right as well as tactics that can be used by people who wish to counter the spread of Nazism and the far right.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...ANnTnzkA_HMFtQ

As for your link, I've read it before when you presented it and it's interesting, but it looks at the issue from a purely Communist perspective, and I feel like the author is assuming his conclusion. I do not believe what is wrong with Fascism is the same things that are wrong with Capitalism. I believe they are separate entities and should be treated separately.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

Last edited by uke2se; 25th October 2019 at 05:25 AM.
uke2se 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 25th October 2019, 06:22 AM   #88
rockysmith76
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 389
Alex Jones was censored because he saw Hillary for what she was.
rockysmith76 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 25th October 2019, 06:42 AM   #89
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 52,026
Originally Posted by rockysmith76 View Post
Alex Jones was censored because he saw Hillary for what she was.
A sexy grandma who's always up for a game of badminton followed by iced tea and sugar cookies!
__________________
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 25th October 2019, 06:42 AM   #90
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,558
Some of them really can just be ignored.

When it's indistinguishable from a 9 year old trolling, I'm not sure what the point of engagement is.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 25th October 2019, 07:01 AM   #91
rockysmith76
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 389
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Some of them really can just be ignored.

When it's indistinguishable from a 9 year old trolling, I'm not sure what the point of engagement is.
The point is knowing your role, and engaging because it's there to be engaged in.
rockysmith76 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 25th October 2019, 07:08 AM   #92
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,490
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Some of them really can just be ignored.

When it's indistinguishable from a 9 year old trolling, I'm not sure what the point of engagement is.
They can also be mocked.

Whoever the hell they is.
A: Let's ignore reactionaries!

B: Good idea!

A: OK let's go ignore Biff!

B: Er, I don't see that Biff is a reactionary.
Unlike us, at least A & B are able to sort things out.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   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 25th October 2019, 07:13 AM   #93
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,920
Jackpot ! I made the list.

I hereby declare that from now on, not only will check under my bed for nazis throughout the day rather than just before I go to bed. I think my cat may be a nazi.
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 25th October 2019, 07:20 AM   #94
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
They can also be mocked.

Whoever the hell they is.
A: Let's ignore reactionaries!

B: Good idea!

A: OK let's go ignore Biff!

B: Er, I don't see that Biff is a reactionary.
Unlike us, at least A & B are able to sort things out.
Seems to me that your objection is mainly about definition of terms and application of an absolute rule - at least when you discount your apparent objections to posts of mine in other threads. My advice would be to not think about this as absolute rules in a machine-like system but rather as a behavioural guide in order to do your part to combat the extreme right.

You are an intelligent person. You are able to recognize an extreme rightwinger utilizing the tactics that have been described in this thread and many others. When you do, please don't engage because you serve to amplify the extreme rightwinger's message.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 25th October 2019, 07:37 AM   #95
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,774
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
Yea, how weird is that ? Don't discuss things on a discussion board. Anyways, there's been several suggestions of echo chambers for those who are bothered by the uppity conservatives sitting at their lunch counter.
Such a short post with SO much bull in it. Hats off to you for your crap packing skills.

Let me see how much of it I can unpack.

Quote:
Yea, how weird is that ? Don't discuss things on a discussion board.
It's a discussion board, not a "Everyone has to engage in every discussion anyone comes here with" board.

It really boggles my mind that "Not engaging these particular people about these particular topics" is somehow synechdochized to mean all discussion. If tomorrow suddenly a bunch of baking fanatics descended on the forum and there were dozens of threads on the proper technique for mirror glaze, it wouldn't be anti discussion to not want to engage in those particular threads or with those particular people. No one here engages everyone on every topic. We make choices. Demonizing that is ridiculous.

Quote:
Anyways, there's been several suggestions of echo chambers
Again, a pretty dumb epithet. "Echo chambers" is up there with "SJW" and "Virtue Signaling" as one of those phrases used mostly to attack anyone who isn't thrilled to welcome BS.

If not wanting to engage in EVERY discussion with EVERY person is wanting an echo chamber, then everyone is trying to make an echo chamber. The fact of the matter is that there is plenty to discuss and disagree with without having to actively engage EVERY disingenuous troll.

And again, as is almost always the case, not wanting to waste your energy on certain topics and individuals or empower them through engagement is misrepresented as not wanting to engage with disagreement in general. As though ******** represent the whole of disagreement.

Quote:
those who are bothered by the uppity conservatives sitting at their lunch counter.
I think you've been reading too many tweets from your dear leader. I don't even want to impact all the ridiculousness of this image.

But finally, the main thing is that this whole post is a proof of OP's point. I've attempted to engage the argument of a reactionary, treating his points as though they need or deserve rebuttal, and it will accomplish nothing. My position is unchanged, there's been nothing for me to learn. The person I'm addressing is unchanged and was not looking to learn anything anyhow. Spectators won't change their mind on the issue and whether they change their view of either participant doesn't really matter. Nothing of substance could possibly have happened. Yet somehow, I'm obliged to engage this drivel or else I'm somehow censoring it? That's beyond silly.
__________________
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 online now   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 25th October 2019, 08:02 AM   #96
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,920
Woh...cool your jets there. I didn't say anything, or even remotely suggest that everyone has to discuss everything with everyone else. That's a made up story.

What I'm saying is....Let the people who want to discuss things, discuss things and if you don't like that idea, then hit the road for a forum that won't tolerate such shenanigans. Imagine, discussing conspiracy theories with conspiracy theorists...THE HORROR.

You know what an echo chamber is but if you have a better description, then suggest it rather than getting offended about the term. Remember when Atheism+ banned the term "walking of eggshells" and why they did it ? Yep, they didn't like what they'd become and the only way they could see to combat it was banhammer.

So are we clear? we don't need any directives to suggest who and what we should be talking about, we can figure that out for ourselves and decide whether or not to engage.
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 25th October 2019, 08:10 AM   #97
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,774
Originally Posted by Stout View Post

So are we clear? we don't need any directives to suggest who and what we should be talking about, we can figure that out for ourselves and decide whether or not to engage.
Why are you against discussion about this topic? Take it to your echo chamber.
__________________
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 online now   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 25th October 2019, 08:12 AM   #98
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,920
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
Why are you against discussion about this topic? Take it to your echo chamber.
We are discussing it, are we 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 25th October 2019, 08:16 AM   #99
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 52,026
Did this just pivot to telling people they shouldn't talk about not talking about talking to people not talking to reactionaries?
__________________
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 25th October 2019, 08:20 AM   #100
wobs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Hull
Posts: 2,069
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Did this just pivot to telling people they shouldn't talk about not talking about talking to people not talking to reactionaries?
I think it might be rude to point that out.
__________________
"To vowels. They stop consonants sticking together like boiled sweets in a paper bag."
wobs 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 25th October 2019, 08:20 AM   #101
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,994
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
We don't have to engage with them in order to criticize their beliefs. We will never be able to win an argument with Nazis if we define "winning an argument" as limiting the spread of Nazism.

I never talked about winning an argument. How do you decide who wins? Is it when an audience is convinced that you won? You never have the power do decide that. People choose to believe what they choose to believe. However, you have the power to present arguments that point out what's true against those whose arguments consist in lies. But it's still up to people if they prefer to believe in the truth or in the lies.
And sometimes even hard-core Nazis are able to consider an argument and discover what's true and what's a lie.

Quote:
I would recommend a Youtube series for you. I don't present it as an argument, or as evidence for my argument, but rather as something that might interest you, and that is related to this issue.

It's called "The Alt-Right Playbook", and it goes through the tactics of the far right as well as tactics that can be used by people who wish to counter the spread of Nazism and the far right.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...ANnTnzkA_HMFtQ

The problem with The Alt-Right Playbook is that it makes right extremism much more nefarious than it actually is by focussing on things that are quite harmless in themselves, for instance the charismatic leaders!
Yes, fascism has its charismatic leaders - as do all other kinds of mass movements. And a charismatic leader is obviously much more successful in attracting a bunch of people than an uncharismatic one is. But it requires a very partisan way of looking at things to ignore that democratic politicians also need a certain charisma to get elected. As a matter of fact, the two-party system of the USA is organized as two groups of politically interested people who choose a charismatic guy/gal to run for office out of a group of competing contenders, peaking in the finals when the two remaining guys, one from each party, are up against each other for the actual election.
But it is so easy to ignore the cult of personality when the charismatic guy is called Obama, Clinton, Bush, Reagan or Romney, isn't it?! When you place posters with their faces in your window or have them tattooed on your biceps, it's just political engagement and not at all a cult of personality ...

Quote:
As for your link, I've read it before when you presented it and it's interesting, but it looks at the issue from a purely Communist perspective, and I feel like the author is assuming his conclusion. I do not believe what is wrong with Fascism is the same things that are wrong with Capitalism. I believe they are separate entities and should be treated separately.

Yes, capitalism and fascism are very different things. First of all, one is a mode of production, the other one is an ideology that springs from the first one. When it takes power in the shape of a fascist leader, it establishes an alternative way of governing a capitalist economy, i.e. an alternative to the democratic kind of government: "They embody two variants of the competition for power in the bourgeois nation state." (Which has been made very obvious by the most recent developments in the USA.)
That is how it is. It's not created by a nefarious way of looking at it, i.e. "from a purely Communist perspective."
__________________
/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
Old 25th October 2019, 08:26 AM   #102
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,920
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Did this just pivot to telling people they shouldn't talk about not talking about talking to people not talking to reactionaries?
To tell you the truth in all this excitement I've kinda lost count myself, were there five talking tos, or were there six. But being this is a discussion board, the most powerful communications tool in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question. Do you feel like discussing ?
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 25th October 2019, 08:38 AM   #103
Joe Random
Master Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,140
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Some of them really can just be ignored.

When it's indistinguishable from a 9 year old trolling, I'm not sure what the point of engagement is.

IMHO there have been/possibly still are posters here with whom engagement would be pointless. Nothing would come of an attempted discussion save for wasting our precious global pixel reserves. But my reasons for thinking engagement was pointless have nothing to do at all with where they fall on the political axis. It's all about their style, the way they'd make whatever point it was they were making (or not making, if they were simply throwing out whatever to rile up the 'opposition').

One example I can use because he's gone is Logger. After about the second or third attempt by someone to make a reasoned reply in hopes of being answered in kind it ought to have been obvious to anyone that all he brought to the table were sophomoric japes and jabs. But the fact that he was (at least by his self identification) on the conservative side of things was entirely incidental. He could have been a Che humping lefty, and his style would still have made fruitful discussion a total pipe dream.

The general idea laid out in this thread seems at least to me to be predicated on the idea that only those with far too much of the righty side of things are apt to become Unworthy. It's right in the damned title : reactionaries. It's not "Why we shouldn't be talking to trolls" (which is itself a horribly misused word these days), or "Why we shouldn't be talking to heckling idiots". Nope, the problem this thread is attempting to solve is apparently something specific to the right.

And I'm willing to bet my entire collection of Donald Trump memorabilia (of which I don't own any, as he's a sub-literate twat) that the definition of who counts as one of these shun-able reactionaries will grow and morph to cover anyone we've decided isn't to be allowed to play our reindeer games anymore.
Joe Random 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 25th October 2019, 02:01 PM   #104
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,490
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Seems to me that your objection is mainly about definition of terms and application of an absolute rule - at least when you discount your apparent objections to posts of mine in other threads. My advice would be to not think about this as absolute rules in a machine-like system but rather as a behavioural guide in order to do your part to combat the extreme right.

You are an intelligent person. You are able to recognize an extreme rightwinger utilizing the tactics that have been described in this thread and many others. When you do, please don't engage because you serve to amplify the extreme rightwinger's message.
Actually, the concepts that you expressed in the OP are foreign to my way of thinking. When I think of a description for right-wingers beyond redemption, the words that come to mind are fact-free and impermeable.

I suspect if posters compiled lists of people we thought were lost causes, there would be some overlap and some not. Again, too vague a foundation and the rules don't allow specificity. But even if we could be specific, I don't see the harm in engaging on a discussion forum.

I believe in redemption by the way. (Not the religious variety.) People can change. People have changed, here on this forum. Furthermore, I have learned things from people I disagree with as a result of engaging with them. And I like to think this was flowed both ways.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   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 25th October 2019, 02:57 PM   #105
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 363
I don't know if I understand exactly how uke2se defines what a reactionary is, but my feeling is this: I have no problem engaging with people on subjects where we disagree (even strongly), but I likely won't engage with anyone who I feel is just trolling or stirring things up just to stir them up.

I'm not convinced that the point of this thread is to create an echo chamber at all, but rather a call to have reasoned discussion among people with different points of view.
Max_mang is online now   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 25th October 2019, 02:58 PM   #106
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,145
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Refusing to engage with them would turn the ISF into 4chan.

Little wake up call, ISF is already 4chan, or near enough as makes no odds. Has been for years. The conservatrolls, TERFs, reactionaries, racists, pro-corporate libertarians, pseudo-centrists, and the various useful idiots who support them are over 50% of the regular posters here, and have been for some time. They manage to disrupt pretty much any thread that's even remotely related to some sort of political or social issue, to the point where certain topics have become effectively impossible to have a rational discussion about.

The only reason it's not worse here is, unlike 4chan, Reddit, Faceboo, or other major social media platforms, there simply isn't the population here to make it worse. The only reason that this place hasn't become yet another MRA/Incel/alt.right hotbed like all those others is because it's a little ass-end-of-nowhere board with no influence, and still maintains some semblance of rules preventing the sheer volume of personal attacks and obscenity that floods nearly every other forum these days.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.

Last edited by luchog; 25th October 2019 at 03:06 PM.
luchog 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 25th October 2019, 03:10 PM   #107
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,539
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Little wake up call, ISF is already 4chan, or near enough as makes no odds. Has been for years. The conservatrolls, TERFs, reactionaries, racists, pro-corporate libertarians, pseudo-centrists, and the various useful idiots who support them are over 50% of the regular posters here, and have been for some time. They manage to disrupt pretty much any thread that's even remotely related to some sort of political or social issue, to the point where certain topics have become effectively impossible to have a rational discussion about.
Interesting take.

I do however agree that it sometimes seems hard to have a rational discussion.
Giz 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 25th October 2019, 03:13 PM   #108
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Little wake up call, ISF is already 4chan, or near enough as makes no odds. Has been for years. The conservatrolls, TERFs, reactionaries, racists, pro-corporate libertarians, pseudo-centrists, and the various useful idiots who support them are over 50% of the regular posters here, and have been for some time. They manage to disrupt pretty much any thread that's even remotely related to some sort of political or social issue, to the point where certain topics have become effectively impossible to have a rational discussion about.

The only reason it's not worse here is, unlike 4chan, Reddit, Faceboo, or other major social media platforms, there simply isn't the population here to make it worse. The only reason that this place hasn't become yet another MRA/Incel/alt.right hotbed like all those others is because it's a little ass-end-of-nowhere board with no influence, and still maintains some semblance of rules preventing the sheer volume of personal attacks and obscenity that floods nearly every other forum these days.
Can't disagree much with you there, at least as far as the social forums go. The science and general skepticism/paranormal sections are top-notch in my opinion. We can take down a ghost hunter or a bigfooter or conspiracy theories with all kinds of dispassionately reasoned arguments where we separate fact from speculation, but all that reason goes kaflooey when it comes to guns or politics or homelessness or crimes or whatever in the social forums.
Max_mang is online now   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 25th October 2019, 04:04 PM   #109
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,145
Originally Posted by Max_mang View Post
Can't disagree much with you there, at least as far as the social forums go. The science and general skepticism/paranormal sections are top-notch in my opinion. We can take down a ghost hunter or a bigfooter or conspiracy theories with all kinds of dispassionately reasoned arguments where we separate fact from speculation, but all that reason goes kaflooey when it comes to guns or politics or homelessness or crimes or whatever in the social forums.

Yeah, those bits, certain specific posters, and the Forumvision contests are the only reason I still bother coming here.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.
luchog 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 25th October 2019, 04:26 PM   #110
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,972
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Little wake up call, ISF is already 4chan, or near enough as makes no odds. Has been for years. The conservatrolls, TERFs, reactionaries, racists, pro-corporate libertarians, pseudo-centrists, and the various useful idiots who support them are over 50% of the regular posters here, and have been for some time. They manage to disrupt pretty much any thread that's even remotely related to some sort of political or social issue, to the point where certain topics have become effectively impossible to have a rational discussion about.

The only reason it's not worse here is, unlike 4chan, Reddit, Faceboo, or other major social media platforms, there simply isn't the population here to make it worse. The only reason that this place hasn't become yet another MRA/Incel/alt.right hotbed like all those others is because it's a little ass-end-of-nowhere board with no influence, and still maintains some semblance of rules preventing the sheer volume of personal attacks and obscenity that floods nearly every other forum these days.
Translation;Angry because everybody on ISF does not share my politics.
But that is some damn good, over the top hard left rhetoric.
__________________
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 online now   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 25th October 2019, 04:32 PM   #111
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,058
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Translation;Angry because everybody on ISF does not share my politics.

But that is some damn good, over the top hard left rhetoric.
Be nice. It's not like he worships Dear Leader.
theprestige is online now   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 25th October 2019, 04:33 PM   #112
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,539
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Translation;Angry because everybody on ISF does not share my politics.
But that is some damn good, over the top hard left rhetoric.
A multiparty democracy (or constitutional republic) needs its citizens to be able to discuss issues. An inability to do that, and instead treat the opposition as heretics will destroy the open free society.
Giz 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 25th October 2019, 05:15 PM   #113
mgidm86
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,831
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Little wake up call, ISF is already 4chan, or near enough as makes no odds. Has been for years. The conservatrolls, TERFs, reactionaries, racists, pro-corporate libertarians, pseudo-centrists, and the various useful idiots who support them are over 50% of the regular posters here, and have been for some time. They manage to disrupt pretty much any thread that's even remotely related to some sort of political or social issue, to the point where certain topics have become effectively impossible to have a rational discussion about.

The only reason it's not worse here is, unlike 4chan, Reddit, Faceboo, or other major social media platforms, there simply isn't the population here to make it worse. The only reason that this place hasn't become yet another MRA/Incel/alt.right hotbed like all those others is because it's a little ass-end-of-nowhere board with no influence, and still maintains some semblance of rules preventing the sheer volume of personal attacks and obscenity that floods nearly every other forum these days.

Everyone look - THESE ^^^ are the people you should not be talking to! This is a great example of what the OP was talking about, except....different! Look at the self-righteousness, the quivering lower lip! This is truly the enemy of the forum! The intolerant tolerants, the unuseful idiots, the arrogant know-it-alls who think everyone simply must agree with them (how could anyone not agree?) - then have a hissy fit when they find out the truth.

Yes folks, it's pretty much every day that some reactionary leftist critical feeler has to have some kind of weird epiphany and start a thread about everything that upset them this morning.

And 50% of the posters are these whatever somethings you said they are? I want some of what you're smoking! Critical feelings baby!

My post - this one right here - is the best post in this thread and you other dummies can agree or piss off!
__________________
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 25th October 2019, 05:17 PM   #114
IsThisTheLife
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 406
Deleted. Not worth the effort.
__________________
"There is no sin except stupidity."

Last edited by IsThisTheLife; 25th October 2019 at 05:18 PM.
IsThisTheLife 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 25th October 2019, 06:06 PM   #115
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,490
Originally Posted by Max_mang View Post
Can't disagree much with you there, at least as far as the social forums go.
The comments that you don't disagree with impress me disconnected from reality by a wide margin. Do you really think that was an accurate representation of the ISF membership? Do you actually consider 1/2 the posters here as deplorable?

Maybe 4chan isn't the abject cesspit it's portrayed as. I've never experienced it directly. I understand it to be dominated by highly deplorable characters such as racists, bigots and incels. By all means, correct me if I'm wrong.

Not upholding skeptical principles in the Politics section isn't anywhere near the same thing as being equivalent to 4chan.

I'm not familiar with your posts, but I'll keep an eye out in the hopes that you're a good model for applying skepticism in the socio-political domain. We can use more of that.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   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 25th October 2019, 06:52 PM   #116
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,145
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Translation;Angry because everybody on ISF does not share my politics.
But that is some damn good, over the top hard left rhetoric.

Thank you for so clearly and effectively proving my point.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.
luchog 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 25th October 2019, 07:15 PM   #117
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 24,363
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
A multiparty democracy (or constitutional republic) needs its citizens to be able to discuss issues. An inability to do that, and instead treat the opposition as heretics will destroy the open free society.

Yup.

Anyone who would do that are scum.

__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation."
quadraginta 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 25th October 2019, 08:00 PM   #118
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
The comments that you don't disagree with impress me disconnected from reality by a wide margin. Do you really think that was an accurate representation of the ISF membership? Do you actually consider 1/2 the posters here as deplorable?
Personally, I wouldn't say deplorable. But there is a huge difference in the amount of critical thinking skills being used in the science and general skepticism sections than in the social/political sections.

We can have multiple posters describing the intricacies of rocket science; destroying ufo theories and religious zealotry with sound scientific data and logic. Then those same people watch the same video with black guy and a white guy in it and they all somehow see completely different things and start calling each other racist or reverse-racist or whatever immediately.
Max_mang is online now   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 25th October 2019, 08:58 PM   #119
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,301
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Translation;Angry because everybody on ISF does not share my politics.
But that is some damn good, over the top hard left rhetoric.
People who have differing politics, but are coherent about it, are actually interesting to discuss.

People whose guiding principle is "these people do not deserve rights because they have a different skin color/gender/sexual orientation/whatever" are not. You can't be a patriotic American and love the Confederate battle flag. You can't favor "small government" *and* insist that trans people shouldn't be allowed in public bathrooms legally, or that police should be allowed to "stop and frisk" people based on skin color. But quite a few of our so-called "conservatives" have effectively advocated exactly this.

ETA: I wouldn't be shocked if my ignore list and luchog's contain quite a few of the same names, and for the same reason: neither of us are interested in talking to people who deny with our status as human beings.

Last edited by Mumbles; 25th October 2019 at 09:02 PM.
Mumbles 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 25th October 2019, 09:29 PM   #120
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 13,111
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
What process did you use to arrive at the conclusions that are stated as fact in the above paragraph?
Given the nature of this forum, I would think this would be considered a pretty basic first step. Before we decide to take action based on some set of facts, we first determine if those facts are actually accurate or not.

It's possible that my request received no reply because I'm on the list of reactionaries with whom we shouldn't be talking, I guess, but if so I find that pretty strange given my political views.
__________________
"... 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
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 04:04 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.