Butkuiss: Left-wing Bias in mainstream media

Butkuiss 12.11.17	The BBC are radical centrists. Everything y'all folx own in a box to the left, please.
butcherboy 12.11.17	The New York Times is owned by the Murdoch family.. there is no free or left media, they just lean where the money is..
AlexKzillion 12.11.17	I got a bone to pick with capitalism
cylinder 12.11.17	Truth Sweet list too
Sinternet 12.11.17	GOOD list add leftover crack
ShadowRemains 12.11.17	this thread oughta be interesting
Cygnatti 12.11.17	list needs grindcore
ZombieParty 12.11.17	channel 4
Astral Abortis 12.11.17	all i hear is left wing this and right wing that but what's the deal? you can't fly with just one wing. i wanna be a full bird
Sinternet 12.11.17	centrism_irl
Butkuiss 12.11.17	What the fuck are we seriously having a reasoned, mild conversation in a bait thread? This is not the Sputnik I remember.
someguest 12.11.17	No economic / political viewpoint is perfect. It's yin and yang, no good without the bad as with anything else. And the world has never had as much equality as it does now. If you rush progress, you get shit like Trump. Trump never would've happened if Obama wasn't president before him. The masses can't handle change too quickly.
neekafat 12.11.17	edgy
Butkuiss 12.11.17	Hahahahahha except Obama was pretty much the definition of sticking to the status quo. No, wait, scratch that. He actually upped the amount of drone strikes on little kids. I thought reactionaries loved stuff like that.
grannypantys 12.11.17	Oh ya the masses can't handle change too quickly. It wasn't the fact that Obama's 8 years had "officially been the worst recovery in US history (despite adding almost $10 trillion to the national debt)" No i'm sure it was all the change that was happening
Butkuiss 12.11.17	Nah it was just the fact that OBUMMER! WAS! A! DAMN! MOSLEM! KENYAN! AL QAEDA!
someguest 12.11.17	I think you two are ignoring the elephant in the room. The only reason Trump's sitting in the oval office right now is because a BLACK MAN was the President before him. Whew, glad we could clear that up.
Trebor. 12.11.17	If people could stop voting Republican that would be great Make the democrat party the new right wing party and have a true left wing party be the left party
someguest 12.11.17	But what are we going to do without those Christian values? #fuckyourreligion
Butkuiss 12.11.17	Ya it weirds me tf out that most of you yanks actually think the Dems are "left wing" and not center right???
Cygnatti 12.11.17	"Make the democrat party the new right wing party and have a true left wing party be the left party" this.
Ebola 12.11.17	"Make the democrat party the new right wing party and have a true left wing party be the left party" But then who would elect the confederacy-fetishizing pedophiles?
someguest 12.11.17	Alabama's the sphincter of America.
beefshoes 12.11.17	The worst are the people that think that the Scandinavian and Nordic countries are socialist because they have welfare states, and didn't ditch Keynesian economic policy in favour of neoliberalism as quickly as Britain, the U.S., and Germany. It's usually the same people that think that liberals are actually on the left though, and trying to have a discussion about the nuances of neoliberalism with them....it's akin to yanking hair out. (Dave Rubin is a prime example of this, and the guy blocked me on Twitter a few days ago for tweeting him public opinion polls from American Jews and Israelis in relation to the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel)
Keyblade 12.11.17	"The only reason Trump's sitting in the oval office right now is because a BLACK MAN was the President before him." yea but that's different than ur original assertion that he was implementing change too fast for ppl to handle. he was the definition of status quo which is why ppl voted for trump in the first place
Deathconscious 12.11.17	Thought someone was bumping an old list again, i havent seen that username in a long time.
Keyblade 12.11.17	same also the title is so 2009 lol. didnt realize ppl still complain about that
MrHarrison 12.11.17	Right on, comrade
TheSonomaDude 12.11.17	furiously tips fedora
RogueNine 12.11.17	I mean, it's clear which ones slant left and which ones slant right.
Keyblade 12.11.17	more like which ones slant far right and which ones slant center right
RogueNine 12.11.17	I understand you're talking about the spectrum when viewed through a global lens Key, but those are the terms used synonymously with American media.
zakalwe 12.11.17	Itâ€™s associated with the left because of what is affiliated with the right. Essentially itâ€™s both authoritarian as fuck.
zakalwe 12.11.17	And because of that people steer away from socialism and what have you. Iâ€™ve found that iâ€™ve done it myself.
RogueNine 12.11.17	"Ya it weirds me tf out that most of you yanks actually think the Dems are "left wing" and not center right???" Because their placement of "center" is different.
Keyblade 12.11.17	@rogue yea I know dude, just thinking out loud at how batshit American politics is
ScuroFantasma 12.11.17	You guys are mixing up the x and y axis. Left wing and right wing are economical terms of course, but in colloquial speech people tend to map social issues in the same way. Hence "liberals" are left, "conservatives" are right etc.
Keyblade 12.11.17	democrats are barely socially liberal anyway the whole thing is basically 1 set of corporate slaves who also happen to hate minorities and poor people vs another set of corporate slaves who don't hate minorities and poor people but don't really give too much of a shit about them either
Madbutcher3 12.11.17	can't wait for keynesian economics to strike back like the empire in episode 5
anarchistfish 12.11.17	"colloquial politics = stupidity and failures of the education system tbh" this tbh
MrHarrison 12.11.17	Keyblade you got it dead on, man
unclereich 12.11.17	"If people could stop voting Republican that would be great" When the chargers win a superbowl ill stop voting republican #maga
Butkuiss 12.11.17	@Adolf, yeah man, stopped visiting here while I was in uni and for a bit after but my job these days leaves me with a bit of spare time in front of a computer and finally having time to listen to music again drew me back
unclereich 12.11.17	I took poli sci in college as well
ScuroFantasma 12.11.17	It's not even really colloquial, it's just not solely an economic term, and the left/right paradigm is super vague and reductive as is.
Egarran 12.11.17	But who would defend the ethnically pure nation state? History might show us again and again that a strong leader is a terrible idea, but we should give it one more try. Don't let honest populism get polluted by facts.
Tunaboy45 12.11.17	ah the "left wing bias" bogeyman
humandoorstop 12.11.17	For those interested in the initial argument https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/08/opinion/facts-have-a-well-known-liberal-bias.html?action=click&contentCollection=opinion&module=NextInCollection®ion=Footer&pgtype=article&version=column&rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fpaul-krugman&_r=0
RogueNine 12.11.17	Pretty much, Scuro.
beefshoes 12.11.17	Paul Krugman is a notorious neoliberal, he threw his weight completely behind Hillary Clinton in 2016 and smeared Bernie Sanders as being a radical (Sanders would be a Keynesian-leaning centrist in any other country), and the guy absolutely epitomises the notion of a smug liberal.
Josh D. 12.11.17	hello comrades
SCREAM! 12.11.17	"For those interested in the initial argument" I thought this started in the Eminem news thread where snide was claiming that every mainstream news outlet that isn't Fox were basically all hardline left
MO 12.11.17	"The only reason Trump's sitting in the oval office right now is because a BLACK MAN was the President before him." no way is that the only reason...or a dominant reason at that. I think he was a pretty underpar president, he really didn't do a lot. he pushed so hard for obamacare which is all he did. debt went up, unemployment was high, shit wasn't moving. as much as I can't stand trump he's sticking to his guns and actually doing something. obviously it won't be loved by everyone, it never is, but based on the stock market and jobs numbers, you can't deny there's a shift happening in the US economy
ConcubinaryCode 12.11.17	Where do the gay frogs fit into all of this?
zakalwe 12.11.17	Atrazine
Fear 12.11.17	Left wing...right wing...central wing...we must exchange our wings for additional legs, so we may walk away from this nonsensical crass!!!
ZippaThaRippa 12.11.17	I believe the center-wing is referred to as 'breast meat'
cold 12.11.17	This is prime time for Anti-Flag's big comeback lol
Fear 12.11.17	As a left winged one, consumption of breast meat defies my code of ethics, as a right winged one, I consume only the lies of corporate fat-cats.
Egarran 12.11.17	As a european, it's astounding how much the average american likes being fucked in the ass.
worthlessscab 12.11.17	Why is it always about seizing the means of production and never about creating new means of production?
DinosaurJones 12.11.17	Because innovation would disrupt the status quo, and you can't have that!
alienobserver 12.11.17	theyre turning the frogs gay
DinosaurJones 12.11.17	Gay frogs have rights too
Egarran 12.12.17	USA has a strong a culture of thinking misery is the fault of the individual. The very idea that you need a successful society before you can make a successful individual is some damn weakling communism.
zakalwe 12.12.17	USA. The only place in the world which actually believes in the individual. Fair fucks to â€˜em. Iâ€™m moving over there.
Joejk3 12.12.17	Perhaps left and right are relative to ones individual position and cultural surroundings and that you, as a socialist, are likely to have a left-skewed perception vis-a-vis the average individual of that which is right-wing. Perhaps a viewpoint can espouse both left wing and ring wing viewpoints depending on the topic at hand, in that one may want lower taxation and fewer restrictions on immigration. Perhaps perception of left-or-right bias in the media is heavily influenced by the topics of import in the current political environment, those being immigration, egalitarianism, affirmative action, race and equity - in short, equality or hierarchy. Perhaps when people are referring to news channels as "overwhelmingly left-leaning", they're not, unfortunately for you, being stupid enough so as to claim that each news station is advocating for the means of production to be seized. Perhaps these people are claiming that popular news stations overwhelmingly espouse views that are "left-wing" with respect to equality and hierarchy vis-a-vis the centre-ground of the sphere in which they operate.
Egarran 12.12.17	Lots African and ME countries are also sabotaging their society for the benefit of the strong individual.
zakalwe 12.12.17	Society built on dictatorship is always a utopia.
osmark86 12.12.17	so media is driven by profits? who'd have thunked
RadicalEd 12.12.17	I haven't read the thread yet, but the statement at the top of the list strikes me as very confused. I agree that the guys at fox complainging about "the left wing mainstream media" are fucking laughable. The problem with your statement at the top is: You're not really enganging with the opposition, you're strawmanning them. Only the absolute crackpots are claiming that CNN or other mainstream news-outlets are "left-wing" in the sense that they are socialists (or communists even). They aremostly saying they are culturally left-wing, very politically correct etc. Which is at least a defensible claim. (I'm not from the US, but from what I saw on the reporting on several hot topic issues, most of the big news channels seem to default to a pretty liberal/left position) That said, when I read comments like this: (only read a few above me) "USA has a strong a culture of thinking misery is the fault of the individual." I'm instantly becoming more symphatetic to calling people who cry about the left wing media retards and stop defending them. The US has a strong culture of thinking misery is the fault of the individual DESPITE MOUNTAINS and MOUNTAINS of evidence to the contrary. And this is GOOD.
Egarran 12.12.17	You can't stop there, ed. I want to be proved wrong DESPITE MOUNTAINS and MOUNTAINS of evidence that I'm correct. Like the latest tax reform.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"Timothy said "she used her power over me." What sort of power did Melanie have? Just the power of "you're my friend so you should do what I want"? Because that sort of "power" is used manipulatively all the time, but due to the nature of friendship, there's never a clear distinction between manipulation and self-gift. I wonder if, at the time, Timothy didn't really like what was happening but viewed it as an act of friendship, and allowed it to happen because she cared for Melanie (in which case, what Melanie did was certainly morally questionable, but not a crime). And I wonder if now they've had some sort of falling-out that's caused Timothy to devalue her friendship with Melanie and want to take back what she had given freely. " I wonder if you know what it's like being raped? Because as a straight, white male, I had no idea. Still don't, but a friend/survivor/LGBT type person urged me to try and educate myself on these matters, so I at least understand how it makes others feel. It shuts them down. You can't really try and apply logic to this sort of scenario in the same way you would a math problem. While I like to shitpost as much as the next person, once you get into the gravity of what this shit actually is, it stops being remotely funny. And don't blame the victim you fucking cuck.
RadicalEd 12.12.17	"Like the latest tax reform." Oh, I'm sorry I'm not able to just respond to talking points without any meat upon them. Could you elaborate.
grannypantys 12.12.17	https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/67fc088b4d80a823c39cc93f3546d8da3adfdd19/c=60-0-867-607&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2015/09/14/USATODAY/USATODAY/635778468865724061-late-night-hosts-jon-stewart-conan-obrien-stephen-colbert-trevor-noah-sam-jones.jpg what bias???
zakalwe 12.12.17	Why has everything changed so vastly, so rapidly? Itâ€™s just a constant all encompassing virtue fest that solves absolutely nothing and just creates division, resentment and hostility. Truth and facts is what we need. We are starved of it and are dependent on junk. We have become dopamine fiends.
RadicalEd 12.12.17	Bruh, you just told me yesterday that you think soy makes you left wing and weak. You have yourself to blame for not finding truth and facts.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	nah bro soy makes you a flaming feminist ive seen the science
grannypantys 12.12.17	"researchers have expressed concern that consuming phytoestrogens in soy might lower testosterone levels, decrease sperm count, or even contribute to male breast formation" sounds like left wingers to me
zakalwe 12.12.17	Iâ€™ve never said that? I reckon it boosts estrogen and gives ya tits.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	fwiw the phytoestrogen thing is true but one would have to be consuming a ton of soy for it to have a noticeable affect on most people
SCREAM! 12.12.17	"Itâ€™s just a constant all encompassing virtue fest that solves absolutely nothing and just creates division, resentment and hostility" Yup the people trying to be fair, inclusive and insure everyone is given equal opportunity are the ones creating hostility Not those who want to restrict other's rights unless they fit into their narrow view of what is "normal" Â¯_(ãƒ„)_/Â¯
SCREAM! 12.12.17	"Iâ€™ve never said that? I reckon it boosts estrogen and gives ya tits" Hops give you tits too but that's never stopped you from downing a pint (or 6) with the fellas
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	it would appear to me that in the current climate its actually the left that is more imposing on people's rights to free speech etc at the moment theres basically riots at any campus that milo y shows up at
Josh D. 12.12.17	shut up bitch
Egarran 12.12.17	"Oh, I'm sorry I'm not able to just respond to talking points without any meat upon them." Yours had no meat despite claiming mountains of evidence. In all caps, even. If you are unable to read about the tax reform without seeing a pattern of increased inequality, then I don't think anything I can say will change your mind.
MO 12.12.17	"it would appear to me that in the current climate its actually the left that is more imposing on people's rights to free speech etc at the moment" this
Egarran 12.12.17	"this" You forgot the milo y. part. Everybody needs to hear what that magnificent man says.
Josh D. 12.12.17	people protest Milo showing up to out gay and immigrant students a huge dumbass: so much for the tolerant left
Egarran 12.12.17	The guy is infinitely quotable: Something inside of me tells me that being homosexual is probably wrong. Feminism is cancer. I like to think of myself as a virtuous troll. My theory is that women simply can't get along with each other or work well together. Why someone would protest this is just fear of the truth.
grannypantys 12.12.17	Nothing wrong with protesting obviously but shutting down the ability for other people to speak is not a good look
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"Why someone would protest this is just fear of the truth." when you disagree with someone you debate them and deconstruct their claims with logic, not shut them down and disallow them to speak not only does that go against one's right to free speech, it's actually counter productive
Josh D. 12.12.17	lol you don't know what freedom of speech is
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	lol
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"when you disagree with someone you debate them and deconstruct their claims with logic, not shut them down and disallow them to speak not only does that go against one's right to free speech, it's actually counter productive" Fuck yeah, dude.
Egarran 12.12.17	Free speech, like freedom, is a relative thing. There is a limit for all governments. Nazis are probably also shut down from speaking at campuses. I think Milo said it best: "It's not okay to lie about people and particularly not okay to hurl the worst imaginable names at people just because you think you might not like their politics."
MO 12.12.17	"when you disagree with someone you debate them and deconstruct their claims with logic, not shut them down and disallow them to speak not only does that go against one's right to free speech, it's actually counter productive" thus the problem with the left these days. I used to be more centre-left, but after seeing the fallout of this last election and the toxic rhetoric coming from them and MSM it's totally soured that allegiance like they can't even debate without throwing emotions into it, and take offence to everything. it's just unbearable
grannypantys 12.12.17	keep your hatespeech off this campus
Egarran 12.12.17	Yeah if people don't turn right after Trump and his demonstration of the right's vast intellectual resources, they're living in some SJW denial.
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	Same MO, I used to be way more to the Left than I am now. This is obviously just one of the many reasons, but yea in my experience it is insanely more difficult to have actual conversations with people who are that far Left than anyone else (obviously not all)
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"Yeah if people don't turn right after Trump and his demonstration of the right's vast intellectual resources, they're living in some SJW denial." Lmao that's not quite what he was saying. I voted for Clinton, just for some context of who is saying this.
Egarran 12.12.17	Come on, it was obvious even when GWB was president. He was too smart for the left, but they just can't deal with it.
cold 12.12.17	Isn't there a politic/debate thread in community
MO 12.12.17	"but yea in my experience it is insanely more difficult to have actual conversations with people who are that far Left than anyone else (obviously not all)" which is ironic as fuck since they pander to the idea of being all inclusive and free, but as soon as you disagree with hard facts you're a facist, racist homophobic bigot. like fuck right off
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	i find it ironic that nazism is considered an exception to free speech and you're right a nazi activist presumably would not be allowed to speak on any campus in say america however pro-marxism is not only allowed to be discussed it's actually taught directly or indirectly by a large proportion of academics quick sputnik history lesson: who killed more people: hitler or stalin?
H61 12.12.17	Cool Anecdotes about how people you disagree with politically are hard to talk to, fellas
MO 12.12.17	stalin by a long shot
Josh D. 12.12.17	holy shit, actual neo-fascist sympathizing, nice work gang
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	holy shit coming in hot with the red herring to prove my point thank you Josh D.
Josh D. 12.12.17	also, if you think Stalin and what Russia became after the Bolsheviks took power was socialist and Marxist, you can be safely ignored.
grannypantys 12.12.17	Stalin was just as bad I always say.
H61 12.12.17	ah yes, marxism must take all the blame for stalin, never mind that he purged most of them - Centrist Bro
grannypantys 12.12.17	6 million or 6 hundred. They're both terrible numbers.
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"holy shit, actual neo-fascist sympathizing, nice work gang" Jew here, that's not what was going on lol. And yeah, fuck Communism. The fact that there are so many young commies is incredibly strange and disheartening.
grannypantys 12.12.17	real communism has never been tried right
Josh D. 12.12.17	"Jew here, that's not what was going on lol." saying 'but why not listen to Nazis' is that, yeah but anyway
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"stalin by a long shot" correct and while hitler's murders could be deemed "more evil" in that they were based on racist ideology, stalin's is indicative of the fact that marxism fails and the deaths under stalin were mostly as a result of famine or essentially slavery of his own people to try and sustain the thing in a controlled market setting
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"also, if you think Stalin and what Russia became after the Bolsheviks took power was socialist and Marxist, you can be safely ignored." the point is marxism fails 100% of the time and if you think otherwise you might as well also believe there are purple unicorns on the moon because your opinion is not based on anything in reality
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"Cool Anecdotes about how people you disagree with politically are hard to talk to, fellas" What, do you want a pew poll or graph that 'my experience of talking to people that far on the Left are hard to talk to'?
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	Also that was when I was more progressive that I noticed that so it was not people I disagreed with at all, dude.
Josh D. 12.12.17	It can't be the point since even Lenin before his death did a lot of non-Marxist things. Getting rid of the soviets and concentrating power in the politburo isn't philosophical socialism.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"ah yes, marxism must take all the blame for stalin, never mind that he purged most of them - Centrist Bro" ahh yes ignorant random internet poster making an indirect claim that marxism can actually be successful in practice yet fails to provide any example thereof BECAUSE THERE FUCKING ARENT ANY
MO 12.12.17	my mother grew up in communist Poland, after the worst time of Soviet rule (famines, mass executions). I had a great aunt who lost a sister in the Siberian gullags fuck communism, piece of shit system
JWT155 12.12.17	"holy shit, actual neo-fascist sympathizing, nice work gang" No ones sympathizing with Nazis, but it's important for radicals to speak, it forces society as a whole to continually re-evaluate why we believe in what we do, to revisit the facts and re-enforce our beliefs. Any time someone denies the Holocaust, it gives us a chance to revisit the proof it did, confront the sobering pictures, first hand accounts and places and to reaffirm it's existence and our resolve from it ever happening again. Silencing Nazis and other radicals only emboldens them, it prevents discussion/discourse, it only strengthens their opinions and it prevents us from truly understanding why we hold such strong opinions about the Nazis and what they did in the first place. If we take away that opportunity through free speech then what happened will become buried and history will repeat itself. We should shun the Nazis and Nazi sympathizers by shining a bright light on them wherever they are and whenever they speak.
grannypantys 12.12.17	you're forgetting about venezuela
Egarran 12.12.17	Who has killed more civilians, the russian or the american army?
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	no ones defending nazism, no ones defending american imperialism in either, both points are red herrings detracting from the fact marxism is an unrealistic system
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	JWT155 ftw
cold 12.12.17	Y'all figure out whose cock is the biggest yet?
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	i bet putins hung trumps got small hands, you know what they say about sm0l hands AMIRITE BOYS
Egarran 12.12.17	Maybe nazis are correct now. We can't be sure if they aren't heard.
Josh D. 12.12.17	Lamentations of not hearing out Nazis coupled with lack of nuance of history. Kill this thread.
MO 12.12.17	"you're forgetting about venezuela" yea what a great state they're in now...yikes
Egarran 12.12.17	Without holocaust deniers, how would we know holocaust was a bad thing, eh?
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	im fine with nazis being allowed to speak because their arguments are easy to deconstruct and perhaps this public deconstructing will open the eyes of people who either already claimed to be nazis or were going to potentially fall into it in the future and you'll be better off detracting people from nazism in an open forum debate format than simply shutting them down because that only pisses people off and gives them more fuel and garners them more support
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"Lamentations of not hearing out Nazis coupled with lack of nuance of history. Kill this thread." KILL EVERY OPINION EVER THAT ISNT MINE, FUCK FREE SPEECH I AM LITERALLY THE JESUS
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"Without holocaust deniers, how would we know holocaust was a bad thing, eh?" Dude, one of the main arguments that asshole anti-Semites make is 'why would it be illegal to question it if there wasn't something fishy here?' Shed light on them. Publicly shame them. Don't force these fucking idiots underground where they can grow.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	ding ding ding
JWT155 12.12.17	"Maybe nazis are correct now. We can't be sure if they aren't heard." That's not the point. There's a difference between holding beliefs because you're told that's just the way it is and holding beliefs because you've confronted the issue yourself and made that decision. There's generations of people and kids completely removed from the events of WW II, heck there's barely many people left who fought in the war. Every time a Nazi or anyone for that matter makes statements like "the holocaust didn't happen" should be allowed to speak and it gives everyone else a chance to debate the issue, examine the facts and find out for themselves the atrocities the Nazis did. Being told to just believe something isn't an effective way to have [people hold strong beliefs/values. Christopher Hitchens is much more eloquent then I am but he essentially echoes my sentiment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwXUVgIP0Q4
MO 12.12.17	"Lamentations of not hearing out Nazis coupled with lack of nuance of history" lmao, how about instead of bitchy one liners you try and type out actual arguments
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	JWT IS A NAZI SYMPATHIZER REEEEEEEEEEEE SOMEONE PUNCH HIM DONT LET HIM TALK!
Egarran 12.12.17	His implication that a political debate on sputnikmusic has any consequence is just adorable. But ok, people still need to learn that nazis are bad, so alright let them speak at campuses. Seems like a waste of time though.
JWT155 12.12.17	The fact is that as a society we're much better off knowing who holds terrible beliefs and allowing them to speak. I'd like to know if my neighbor is a Nazi sympathizer then having them in the closet and it gives all of us more information to choose who we decide to associate with and support.
JWT155 12.12.17	Right Chuck, I better watch out now
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	yeah and rather than your neighbor coming out and being able to speak about their opinions, having them deconstructed, at least potentially bring them closer to reality and more sympathetic to their fellow man, extreme leftys would rather shut them down, isolating them, fueling their hate for humanity into something even greater than it was, then they end up being one of the growing number of mass shooters or something OR, as in europe in the 20s and 30s, the groups of disgruntled peoples in despair grows SO large that they actually can organize and begin to take over it just doesnt fucking work and the current trend of denying free speech is the most dangerous trend in society i have ever witnessed in my near 29 years
cowboydan89 12.12.17	Butkuiss go on Chapo
Egarran 12.12.17	Nazis don't have free speech in Germany. They are shut down and isolated. Maybe a society needs to go through a phase of seeing its terrors first hand before they can be censored. Otherwise they are just victims of left wing hate.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	i can give you like 100 examples of societies going through phases of terror as a result of controlling free speech if you'd like including plenty going on right now the example of venezeula has been given
worthlessscab 12.12.17	idk stopping the commie disease from plaguing humanity will probably be a good thing
grannypantys 12.12.17	@egarran are you implying that if Germany had free speech then the Nazis would take over again?
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	there are no significant communist parties in most of western europe and definitely none in the US so i don't think you need to worry about that. also extreme right beliefs violate fundamental human rights. i think it's impossible to support giving them a platform and the notion of human rights at the same time without ignoring the blatant conflict of interests there also leftist factions rarely advocate for the actual elimination of free speech; no-platforming a group is pretty much just a use of your own free speech since it's not like you're restricting their ability to talk at a government level. it makes decent sense to oppose having discourse that encourages damaging the position of ethnic minorities or trans people, for example, but people can still express those views elsewhere
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	just because one is allowed to say they want to murder doesn't mean they are allowed to murder no one's suggesting to legalize genocide or something
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	I just don't understand how people think that jailing or fining people for expressing a viewpoint, no matter how horrible, will deter anyone from thinking those things.
Egarran 12.12.17	Madbutcher3 is now my spokesperson. Also, I was reminded of lesson 19 in Mark Rosewater's talk to game designers: "Your audience is good at recognizing problems and bad at solving them."
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	people aren't suggesting genocide but they are supporting mass deportations and so on. the method for dealing with those views is probably not to silence them but they do need to be dealt with because they generate support for laws and practices that undermine other people's civil liberties and the fundamental concepts of democratic society.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"no-platforming a group is pretty much just a use of your own free speech since it's not like you're restricting their ability to talk at a government level" we're talking about debate being silenced on university campuses, which is happening across the board this is anti-free speech activism whether you want to admit it / realize it or not
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"the method for dealing with those views is probably not to silence them but they do need to be dealt with because they generate support for laws and practices that undermine other people's civil liberties and the fundamental concepts of democratic society." the point is silencing them is counter productive and will lead to them doubling down individually, and more broadly garnering larger numbers letting them talk exposes the illegitimacy of their ideas that is the whole fucking point of academia, or what it is meant to be
Keyblade 12.12.17	how fucking weak were some of u in ur convictions that all it took was some whiny lil college beats for u to lurch to the right
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	but in academic spaces it's so widely acknowledged that those views are illegitimate. there's no added value to be gained from repeatedly arguing against the same views over and over again also, to argue against university no-platforming is basically restricting the rights of free speech of the students, if they are in active support of it. plus there are so many other mediums for which those views could be expressed. i think you shouldn't bring the idea of free speech to either side of the logical extreme too easily. you can protect notions of free speech whilst retaining a group's right to not listen to particular views, in the case of something like a unversity or religious group your notion that there is some kind of value in repeatedly smashing down the extreme right in academic spaces is lacking. there are naturally limits to how much you can no-platform and if there is sufficient support for a group or individual appearing then you should respect that, but if not i see no point in aimlessly "supporting free speech" when A) there may be little support for the figure to appear and B) their views oppose other democratic values. rejecting supposed threats to free speech but then supporting groups that oppose other values central to democracy is pretty much hypocritical
cold 12.12.17	https://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=61
grannypantys 12.12.17	"people aren't suggesting genocide but they are supporting mass deportations and so on. the method for dealing with those views is probably not to silence them but they do need to be dealt with because they generate support for laws and practices that undermine other people's civil liberties and the fundamental concepts of democratic society." Deportations are not a violation of civil liberties unless a citizen is getting deported. and this doesn't undermine a democratic society it is a function of it.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	yeah and if you think irrational views are going to forever be banished and never come up again in the discourse you're denying human nature the thing comes round again and again historically, as the system falters people get a little crazy and organize, and historically the best way of dealing with it is through discourse, the worst way is by suppression yes certain groups "retain the right to not listen", that is part of free speech, but the halls of academia are meant to open to debate any opinion, and if your opinion is as flawed as fascism that's fine you will be absolutely destroyed in debate
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	That's perhaps true, but I think it would be perceived as undemocratic by several groups and systems. Hard to say imo but I can see your point. Not super clear cut. However, support for said deportations often goes hand in hand with more outright racist and xenophobic rhetoric and activities, which I think would be considered anti-democratic by most groups
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"how fucking weak were some of u in ur convictions that all it took was some whiny lil college beats for u to lurch to the right" Lmao this isn't the only reason why I stopped being a progresive, dude. It was like a decade long process - just because we're focusing on this topic doesn't mean that we were like "WOW COLLEGE KIDS ARE DUMB LETS CHANGE MY POLITICAL VIEWS"
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	i havent gone further left or right i dont think, its that the left has gone further left since i graduated university
grannypantys 12.12.17	lol how weak were some of your convictions that real world experience caused you to lurch to the right??.?
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"it would be perceived as undemocratic " no, not letting them speak is undemocratic given the right to free speech is in the first amendment
SCREAM! 12.12.17	Some users: "Lmao communism has never worked check ur facts and history guys" Same users: "Allowing Nazis to speak is the only way to address and silence them that's what saved us from starting WWII..."
Keyblade 12.12.17	pro-palestinian professors are frequently barred from giving speeches at some college...just for being pro-palestinian pro-palestinian rallies are shut down on the reg at colleges not too long ago whats her name from tyt was disinvited from giving a talk at this 1 college cuz she made fun of trump supporters and the panel was made up of trump supporters it's weird that i never see these incidents brought up by free speech warriors. it's always fucking milo, the self professed troll...the agent provacateur whose entire MO is to incite shit that's brought up as some sort of travesty against free speech
SCREAM! 12.12.17	"no, not letting them speak is undemocratic given the right to free speech is in the first amendment " Madbutcher has repeatedly addressed this. See how useful that debate was?
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	there is no certainty that those views would come flaring up. the argument that they will because of human nature ignores some of the real cause for the increase in extreme right support in other places, which is more to do with political opportunism than some sort of ideological degeneration back to pre-1940s ideals. debate is time consuming and there is no guarantee that a group that is supposedly defeated in a debate will just shut up and go home, to think that is pretty naive. extreme right groups have always been opposed and ridiculed by mainstream parties/voters, and still got elected in spite of that. winning a debate in an academic space doesn't mean that working classes, the poor, or rural people are going to buy into that. it seems altogether pretty pointless from a "defeat the XR" perspective to try and fight them over a group who almost never votes for them anyway guitarded_chuck, please read what i say in full rather than just lurching out and repeating the same nonsense over and over again. protecting the free speech rights (a democratic principle) of a group that opposes pluralism and the system (one a basic democratic principle and the other its institutions) is a conflict of interest and hypocritical. yes there are problems for the other side as well, but they're rarely applied on a state level, whereas XR supporters would surely aim for getting the views produced in government legislation.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	part of the reason the german people fell for nazism was because there was no precedent for what would come of it at the time (rendering your point invalid by the way) thankfully we are more educated historically on the subject now than they were then given the entirety of world war 2 happened and such and so there is no danger in letting them speak
Keyblade 12.12.17	"no, not letting them speak is undemocratic given the right to free speech is in the first amendment" the first amendment only protects u from the government silencing/punishing u for ur speech, not from private citizens or institutions
SCREAM! 12.12.17	"so there is no danger in letting them speak" That is so easy to say when you aren't one of the groups they are trying to exterminate/deport/whatever though. It isn't that simple, having people speak on public platforms empowers many who share their views. Just look at the hate attacks that have surfaced since Trump was elected
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	well you are partially correct key, private institutions have the right to form their own site of ideals and accepted say language, but no private citizens are not allowed to silence peaceful protest and demonstrations they can form a counter demonstration which if in the case of the counter idea being that of the majority they will silence them in that way, but isn't that just supporting my argument for free speech?
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	" That is so easy to say when you aren't one of the groups they are trying to exterminate/deport/whatever" except one thats illegal, two the people that think that are the exceedingly tiny minority, so yeah, no danger whatsoever
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	nazism literally came after Italian fascism. you are wasting my time let alone Leninism and Stalinism, btw, which used many of the same authoritarian principles
Keyblade 12.12.17	"That is so easy to say when you aren't one of the groups they are trying to exterminate/deport/whatever" lol exactly no danger my ass. the current climate has many ppl like me devising back up plans in case shit hits the fan
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"pro-palestinian professors are frequently barred from giving speeches at some college...just for being pro-palestinian " What in the holy fuck are you on about? It is literally the complete opposite on a widespread scale to a degree that is insane. People who are pro-Israel are largely branded as pro-apartheid, pro-genocide, pro-whatever horrible phrase whenever this is discussed on campuses. Being on the side of Israel on college campuses is FAR from "cool" - I have family members who are professors, I have visited colleges for debates on this and it is palpable. The students who are pro-Israel get bullied FAR moreso, especially since BLM has taken it upon themsleves to claim that being pro black is also pro Palestinian somehow.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"winning a debate in an academic space doesn't mean that working classes, the poor, or rural people are going to buy into that. it seems altogether pretty pointless from a "defeat the XR" perspective to try and fight them over a group who almost never votes for them anyway" of course not but if the ideas we are talking about were actually held by any sort of sizeable proportion of society, the debates we are talking about would be held in government as the people would be voting for it, which would be a much more publicly witnessed and involved discussion, at which time (WHICH IS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN ANYWAY AS LONG AS WE ALLOW FOR FREE SPEECH) the irrational beliefs would be negated and they would have zero power
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"the first amendment only protects u from the government silencing/punishing u for ur speech, not from private citizens or institutions" This is true, but as mentioned before the entire purpose of a university is to expose students to difficult ideas, not make their decisions for them. They are supposed to be informed adults, not ideologues.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"nazism literally came after Italian fascism. you are wasting my time let alone Leninism and Stalinism, btw, which used many of the same authoritarian principles" whats your point
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	" no danger my ass. the current climate has many ppl like me devising back up plans in case shit hits the fan" and guess what the number one issue is that is causing a stir, especially in canada key, its impingement on free speech it's arguably the sole reason trump is president, the whole backlash against pc culture
Keyblade 12.12.17	@darkside, uhh it's possible that both happen u know my point is nobody brings up the ones i mentioned even tho they happen quite frequently. that doesnt mean that pro-israeli professors arent barred too (conspicuously they arent normally brought up either, it's always the lame ass troll that ppl pick up their internet spears for)
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"That is so easy to say when you aren't one of the groups they are trying to exterminate/deport/whatever" I actually don't know what his race/religion/whatever is, but tbh letting people discuss controversial topics openly is not the same as enacting policy. How are we going to find out what is truly beneficial if certain topics are too taboo to talk about in a free society?
ExhaleTheLight 12.12.17	I need to study for finals but this thread is so goddamn entertaining.
Keyblade 12.12.17	"it's arguably the sole reason trump is president, the whole backlash against pc culture" its funny because nobody is more pc than the ppl who supposedly hate pc culture let a nigga say 'happy holidays' and see how many people get triggered by this microaggression
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	@Keyblade - yeah true, just saying that it's not even really close especially because most college campuses in America are pretty damn 'progressive' and thus pretty anti-Israel But I take it that wasn't your main point, my bad lol
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	You keep saying that a far right party will never get in if we allow for free speech, but there is no actual proof behind this statement. in fact, it seems counter to both historical precedent and a large part of logic. yes, people with those views will feel more disillusioned, but they're also not getting institutionally legitimised. My point was that arguing that there was no precedent for what was happening under Nazi Germany is untrue. Fascism oppressed political enemies, as did communism. Nazism was genocidal, but even then under prior authoritarian regimes similar things occurred (German genocide in Namibia).
Keyblade 12.12.17	man chuck stop playing devils advocate in here lmaoo
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"ts funny because nobody is more pc than the ppl who supposedly hate pc culture let a nigga say 'happy holidays' and see how many people get triggered by this microaggression" you're talking about the extremes to the other end, that isnt the majority im not playing devils advocate key im being dead fucking serious ITT
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"My point was that arguing that there was no precedent for what was happening under Nazi Germany is untrue. Fascism oppressed political enemies, as did communism. Nazism was genocidal, but even then under prior authoritarian regimes similar things occurred (German genocide in Namibia)" what i meant was the experiment of fascism had not yet been allowed to play out to completion at any point at the point in history and my proof that a far right party will never get voted in is the entirety of democracy IN COUNTRIES WITH FREE SPEECH post ww2
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	there is practically no argument that you can make for backlash against PC culture being the sole reason for Trump was elected. there are enough socio-economic and political factors there that it's basically impossible to select one sole reason
Keyblade 12.12.17	"you're talking about the extremes to the other end, that isnt the majority" just like the authoritarian far left/sjws are an extreme and not the majority? i mean of course u couldnt tell by the knee-jerk reaction to them by anti-pc crowd but yea
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"its funny because nobody is more pc than the ppl who supposedly hate pc culture" That's true for a certain number of people who are so far Right that they themselves become 'triggered' (for lack of a better word coming to mind) but once again, from my personal experience over the past 5 years, you can't even talk about topics on gender, BLM, feminism, etc and have a pleasant conversation unless you're willing to just pretend to agree with them the entire time. I'm more in the middle so I have constant conversations with my friends on the Right where we disagree vehemently and it's generally infinitely cordial. Obviously there are a select few friends on the Left that I can disagree with, but it seems to be an overarching cultural phenomenon.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	im exaggerating obviously in that it was the "sole reason", do you think im actually that naive, but good of you to hop on the only time i wasnt being literal in a desperate attempt to prove me wrong at all
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"just like the authoritarian far left/sjws are an extreme and not the majority? i mean of course u couldnt tell by the knee-jerk reaction to them by anti-pc crowd but yea" keybro heres how it is, the thing is teetering, we're getting further removed from past major conflict and horror as north americans everyday, people forget what happens when people get scared and go authoritarian whether left or right, but it never ends well either way. upholding the things that have more or less held together our societies post ww2 and allowed for the greatest period of progress in human history right now is of utmost importance, and from what i can tell the two biggest reasons for this period was the mass implementation of democracy and free speech
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	"and my proof that a far right party will never get voted in is the entirety of democracy IN COUNTRIES WITH FREE SPEECH post ww2" FRPd in the late 70s. Lega Nord in the mid 90s/early 2000s. FPO early 2000s. MSI during the 70s. The extreme right rarely gets in as the main party but they have managed to be major players in coalitions and proportional systems since the 1970s Also what difference does "fascism playing out to completion" even make? People can easily have observed that civil liberties were getting suppressed and that anti-semitism/anti-religious tendencies were occurring at a state level before 1933
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	sure, like i said one can not expect these ideas to ever go away completely, they cater to a dark side of human nature, but i think our best bet of keeping the thing relatively stable is not through the authoritative move of silencing people and slowly removing free speech as i can give you more than a few minor examples as to when that did not go well, it's through discourse and education with that i think ive said what i need to say, no need to keep going in circles, although im willing to answer any direct objections or questions
Keyblade 12.12.17	"keybro heres how it is, the thing is teetering, we're getting further removed from past major conflict and horror as north americans everyday, people forget what happens when people get scared and go authoritarian whether left or right, but it never ends well either way. upholding the things that have more or less held together our societies post ww2 and allowed for the greatest period of progress in human history right now is of utmost importance, and from what i can tell the two biggest reasons for this period was the mass implementation of democracy and free speech" both of which are in no greater danger than now under the current us administration...and not by some scrawny 20 year olds with blue hair the president, a man who sued a comedian (pretty sure it was bill maher) for a joke that offended him also happened to be on the campaign trail talking about significantly opening up libel laws (presumably so they can encompass offensive jokes) among other curtailments of free speech so tell me, who's more of a threat...the most powerful man in the country (and the world) or a fringe group of left wing extremists?
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	if you're implying i agree with either of those two things key you are very mistaken
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	We've already tackled how it's not really suppressing free speech since it isn't at a state level already, but I can see how you might say otherwise. I think the core problem with your argument is that very few people who vote for the extreme right would either be on the receiving end of that education or care for it. Discourse is a good method, but you establish that through the media anyway, so really the only way you'd do that is with a more left leaning media (probably private media), which people would probably accuse of being too politically biased.
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	Agreed, Trump is awful and real terrifying. But also the widespread disdain for open conversation in an entire new generation of people who seem to not appreciate the significance of debate is also pretty damn scary to me.
Keyblade 12.12.17	"if you're implying i agree with either of those two things key you are very mistaken" i'm doing nothing of the sort. i'm saying that there are much bigger fish to fry if ur worried about free speech potentially being curtailed
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	well what happened was the anti-pc community bought into trumps bullshit he was spewing them, drain the swamp all this businessman horseshit dialogue and they ate it up to sum up my response to this post and butchers last one, obviously i think we can all agree on one if not THE solution here being the need for better education
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	"But also the widespread disdain for open conversation in an entire new generation of people who seem to not appreciate the significance of debate is also pretty damn scary to me." Can you explain to me what this debate will result in? Do you think the extreme right have anything new to say to tackle the existing criticisms the mainstream has of them? Do you think it is sensible to give people a platform when they can use it to humiliate ethnic groups or other minorities? I just don't see how it'll result in any debate. It's literally just defeating the same defeated ideologies of before.
grannypantys 12.12.17	"Just look at the hate attacks that have surfaced since Trump was elected" ya a lot of fake hate crimes too http://www.kcci.com/article/are-fake-hate-crimes-on-the-rise/9544819
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	" I just don't see how it'll result in any debate. It's literally just defeating the same defeated ideologies of before." doesnt matter, new people, different place and time, and the debate is unfortunately going to have to continue to happen for the entirety of human existence imo
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	Better education is good but sadly we're not in a good position to cause that at a state level. Additionally, the problems likely go into the entire system of employment in the USA, perhaps the world. You're not left with any clean option there I'm afraid.
Keyblade 12.12.17	"ya a lot of fake hate crimes too" and these are supposed to invalidate the real ones how again
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	Not to say that I'm opposing better education lmao. That really is the ideal option, but only if you have the financial and institutional resources for it. Sadly the US is so federalized that you'd probably have local governments sooner spend it on building confederate monuments than education
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"I just don't see how it'll result in any debate. It's literally just defeating the same defeated ideologies of before." No it isn't? Gender studies is exponentially expanding in philosophy and becoming more widespread - this also involves ever changing statistics as well. How to help out poorer communities with high crime rates without just saying "fuck rich people" (throwing money at them hasn't been solving the problem), how to talk about healthcare in an open way without just assuming the intentions of the other side, how to talk about sensible immigration (which America is pretty great at) There are so many topics here that I don't even know where to begin. Many of these don't have easy black and white answers and they are all incredibly important conversations that should be discussed without people just backing out instantly because they are too offended.
SgtShock 12.12.17	Hate crimes are some of the hardest crimes to prove in court. I wouldn't worry so much about "fake" ones inflating the statistics.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"Not to say that I'm opposing better education lmao. That really is the ideal option, but only if you have the financial and institutional resources for it. Sadly the US is so federalized that you'd probably have local governments sooner spend it on building confederate monuments than education" well thankfully there is free speech and democracy right, go organize a demonstration and numbers advocating for better education, call your local rep, encourage others to vote such that education is a bigger priority, etc this is how you truly make progress in a free society, not silence people, and the option of living in an non-free society fails 100% of the time so it would seem that if and until some new einstein figure comes about with brand new suggestion for how humans should organize themselves i suggest you start playing the game the best way possible as opposed to complaining about the game itself mic drop
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	I don't get the gender studies point but as for poor communities and healthcare, sure, but those are not the actual issues the XR gets elected and debates on centrally. It's almost always immigration, for which the argument is less helpful than with mainstream parties/views which are already pretty diverse in their ideas of how to tackle it.
grannypantys 12.12.17	Hate crimes shouldn't exist imo. Just crimes. How is a crime against one group of people better or worse than the same crime against another?
MO 12.12.17	"both of which are in no greater danger than now under the current us administration" I dunno man, the last 8 years has seen a huge increase in identity politics and anyone who is opposed to them based on their beliefs is a bigot or trans/homophobe. people who oppose get slandered to death all oversocial media and in the MSM. I'd say that's a danger to free speech, if you don't agree with the MSM/social media machine you're the outcast
SgtShock 12.12.17	@granny I could see how if someone didn't find discrimination reprehensible they could take that position.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	lol
grannypantys 12.12.17	that's quite the jump in logic
SgtShock 12.12.17	If a crime is found to be motivated by racial hatred, is that not morally reprehensible in its own regard? Haven't we agreed (at least on paper) that discrimination is frowned upon in society?
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	I don't live in the US but go do that then Again you talk of "silencing people" as though the entire country is trying to round up and arrest anyone who thinks muslims are a menace or something. It's a bit of a strawman to simply say it in such un-nuanced terms. In the UK, where I live, our system is pretty much invincible to any kind of extreme right support anyway, but throughout the rest of Europe the XR has a fair bit of support already. I doubt the solution will be to educate people and whatnot because that takes so much time and concentrated effort by mainstream parties. Those parties need to actually be in power to do that, and an XR party can very quickly undo a lot of progress. It's a hard thing to achieve education that'll prevent extreme right support when the demographics that are most likely to support the extreme right are the largest, and the threat of a party catering them getting elected is honestly high in many place (see recent Austrian and German elections)
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	theres a place for denoting hate crimes and things in order to watch for change in crime pattern trends however it is that type of hasty generalization rhetoric that is pissing people off, pls no irrationality if you can help it
grannypantys 12.12.17	Racial hatred is reprehensible but it is not a crime. If you get 10 years for killing one race but 20 for killing another the law is valuing those lives unequally and that is the problem.
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	I thought everyone on the planet lived in America?
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	How is believing racially motivated discrimination is bad irrational?
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"Again you talk of "silencing people" as though the entire country is trying to round up and arrest anyone who thinks muslims are a menace or something. It's a bit of a strawman to simply say it in such un-nuanced terms." nope, putting words in my mouth, if you were so kind as to politely ask me what i mean by silencing people i would have politely explained to you i mean the current climate of rhetoric amongst people on social media or in universities where if you don't completely subscribe to the new postmodern idea that genders dont exist, etc you are called a bigot or transphobe or something, let alone if you try and bring up actual far right politics ps i dont live in the USA either but that point is invalid because my suggestion that you make activist attempts to garner support for better education would apply in any country with democracy and free speech
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"How is believing racially motivated discrimination is bad irrational?" alright at this point you're not even following the conversation
SgtShock 12.12.17	@chuck: Sorry for coming at you the wrong way. I just wanna understand where granny is on this. "theres a place for denoting hate crimes and things in order to watch for change in crime pattern trends" There's gotta be a place for the law to punish discrimination. Especially in one of its most heinous forms.
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	Hmm fair point in regard to the last thing, but again there is a large possibility of an immediate XR threat to institutions. There may simply be not enough time for those kind of solutions, and they may not adequately address the problem (only time can really tell if it does happen). To deny the right to criticise someone for a held belief is also an infraction on freedom of speech. Can't have it both ways. Yes it is annoying that people overreact to certain ideas but it's not something you can necessarily fix in that regard, nor is it something that most of the demographics that vote for XR parties will vote on. They care more about immigration and employment, judging from their socio-economic position.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	" There's gotta be a place for the law to punish discrimination. Especially in one of its most heinous forms. " yeah i agree
Keyblade 12.12.17	"I dunno man, the last 8 years has seen a huge increase in identity politics and anyone who is opposed to them based on their beliefs is a bigot or trans/homophobe. people who oppose get slandered to death all oversocial media and in the MSM." identity politics is such a buzzword man. trumpism itself is just 1 giant slab of identity politics i dont get why ppl get hung up on the fact that ppl are quick to call out bigotry nowadays. the problem is, nobody can ever be bigoted lol. in everyone's mind they're a great person which is closely related to another problem...the widely held notion that only bad ppl can have bigoted views. u can be an otherwise great person and out of ignorance, hold a bigoted view. i agree that a lot of the times ppl dont engage these views in ways that are conducive to helping the person change these views (also because of the belief that since they have this view they must automatically be a bad person). but a lot of the time ppl are just fucking bigoted man
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"To deny the right to criticise someone for a held belief is also an infraction on freedom of speech. " ?????????????????????????????? no it isnt wtf THIS IS EXACTLY MY POINT omgggggggggggggggggggg edit- ftr i misread the quoted post, the double negative threw me off
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	aite im done im hungry
SgtShock 12.12.17	"Racial hatred is reprehensible but it is not a crime. If you get 10 years for killing one race but 20 for killing another the law is valuing those lives unequally and that is the problem." I get where you're coming from but the problem with your comparison is that for it to be a hate crime, one of those examples would have to be a murder that was demonstratively racially motivated. You don't automatically get more in trouble for killing someone of a certain skin color. It's the motivation and circumstance that impacts the sentence and that has to be proved in court -- just like first-degree, second-degree, etc.
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	what the hell are you saying? if people are expressly criticising certain viewpoints and calling them bigoted or whatever, that's their right to do so. It's not some form of state level no platforming, it's literally people using their free speech to criticise the result of someone else using their free speech. To say "people shouldn't be allowed to force down the views of other people in discourse" is saying that people shouldn't be allowed to have free speech when it comes down to criticising other people. Yes, one ideal will lose out, but that is because another group is simply more numerous or outspoken.
SCREAM! 12.12.17	"nope, putting words in my mouth, if you were so kind as to politely ask me what i mean by silencing people i would have politely explained to you i mean the current climate of rhetoric amongst people on social media or in universities " Except social media has become a total cesspool. For every left-leaning person shutting down the debate with "racist this and that" you've got a right leaning one doing the same with "snowflake/cuck/libtards/etc" and the real facts and debate that occurs is largely ignored. Also people seem to view debates and arguments as one side vs the other to pick a winner rather than an exchange of ideas to find the best solution and the whole climate is toxic and we're all fucked
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"i dont get why ppl get hung up on the fact that ppl are quick to call out bigotry nowadays" Because a lot of the time it's not bigotry and people are confusing genuine conversations as some sort of crazy hate infused aggression to their entire being as a person.
Keyblade 12.12.17	last 3 posts [2] hard
Keyblade 12.12.17	ah dammit lucca lol
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	Btw I'd like to pause and say that I'm enjoying that everyone here is open to conversation about this so m/ for sputnik community
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	lmao GIVE ME CREDIT MWAHHA
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	yeh i mean i had fun even if i totally disagree with you plebs
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	i'm gonna stop here anyway since I think we've established the core problems with either perspective.
SgtShock 12.12.17	Anything is better than end-of-year Sput Politics last year.
Keyblade 12.12.17	"Because a lot of the time it's not bigotry and people are confusing genuine conversations as some sort of crazy hate infused aggression to their entire being as a person." a lot of it is just the nature of the internet man. ppl are just so reactionary especially when they're anonymous...there's no real trying to understand each other just like SCREAM said. because it's a delicate balancing act in real life...u have to guage whether or not this particular view that u find bigoted is due to ignorance or just due to the person being a prejudiced asshole. who the hell has time for that on the internet lol. it's easier to just yell RACIST or CUCK
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	Must have forgotten/blocked out last years debate
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	True, but I'm not just talking about the internet - I'm also talking about public discourse. I even saw a shift in how people were able to have conversations from when I was a freshman to when I was a senior in college.
cold 12.12.17	This is giving me 'Nam flashbacks of debate class
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	Back in 'Nam there were no racists
cold 12.12.17	-_____________________-
grannypantys 12.12.17	the real discrimination is america https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M62Va6Ft2cw
MO 12.12.17	damn granny that was intense
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	Jesus fucking Christ
Keyblade 12.12.17	holy fuck
osmark86 12.12.17	I member
zakalwe 12.12.17	Give us a summary please dudes
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	every loses
SCREAM! 12.12.17	Honestly,I think a bigger issue hindering us now are these two party systems. Everything is either democrat or republican, liberal or conservative, left or right, and I think that can be largely blamed for the total lack of nuance we are seeing in online debates as well. If we had more parties that could represent people's views all along the spectrum that would be a huge step in the right direction. Unfortunately though people are super entrenched in their ways and making big changes is generally borderline impossible and the ruling parties have 0 incentive to want to push for this since that would mean breaking their steady cycle of being in power every 4/8 years. Things are fucked I tell ya
Egarran 12.12.17	Yeah I'm not watching that. The article was horrible enough. Also, a nazi and an islamist should team up for a talking tour across America.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	discussing whether or not discourse is the best way to prevent fascism or if there should be exceptions to free speech edit @z jesus christ 14 posts in a second thot we were dun
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	yes the two party system is nearly as antiquated as fucking islam
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	problem is pr means you might actually get them in power (Italy in the 2000s, Austria right now). both systems have severe problems so it depends what you want
worthlessscab 12.12.17	that video really made me rage
Keyblade 12.12.17	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDF7xt226cE this aired a couple of weeks ago on the most watched news network (and cable networks period) in america and we're still talking about sjw's
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	again its not the extremes on one side or the other going crazy rn, its both tell you wot though if it wasnt for free speech that kind of blatant in bed with the state media would be the only media you have access to
MO 12.12.17	"Everything is either democrat or republican, liberal or conservative, left or right, and I think that can be largely blamed for the total lack of nuance we are seeing in online debates as well." yes this we can all agree on. it inevitably results in an us vs them mentality which is totally fucking toxic atm
Keyblade 12.12.17	fox news is not an extreme, it's mainstream i'm afraid. and that's not some random guest, that's one of their main hosts on one of their most watched shows
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	/que us and them by floyd
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	whilst the extreme left is (by your definition) in opposition to free speech, so is the extreme right, plus they're opposed to pluralism generally. neither is good but the right is probably worse.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	as if its not by literally everyones definition ever fuck off if you dont understand that the far left and far right converge on totalitarianism you need a grade 7 history lesson
worthlessscab 12.12.17	Soviet Union or Nazi Germany? Which is the less shit option?
zakalwe 12.12.17	Itâ€™s the whole rigidity of thinking that gets on my tits. Because I align myself with this I must accept that. Doesnâ€™t matter where you lie on the political spectrum you have to have free thought or youâ€™re fucked. In my life Iâ€™ve gone from quite far right (not quite NF type stuff), to far left, to centre and agree with stuff from all sides.
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	thanks for that information pal, yes, in fact i do know that both communism and fascism are totalitarian. cheers for being condescending for no decent reason dickhead
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	your implying that totalitarian communism does not include a lack of free speech is the definition of being a dickhead unless you actually think that and in that case i instantly become an even bigger advocate for education
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	you're right, i should clarify since your capability to perform even the most basic level of critical thinking seems questionable: the stances of the social left on issues like gender politics and ethnicity might involve violations of free speech (again, by your definition). however, that does not make the social left communists, or promoters of a totalitarian system I was imagining you might not need that kind of thing spelt out for you like an adult talking to a toddler but I guess I was a little optimistic
zakalwe 12.12.17	For the U.K mob. This man is definitely switched on. I have no doubt whatsoever he would fuck us all over but I canâ€™t help but like the bloke. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk35on3m7KE
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	mogg's legitimately a genius but he is also a huge nob
zakalwe 12.12.17	Literally, but fuck me itâ€™s the first â€˜grown upâ€™ politician weâ€™ve had for 20 years.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"you're right, i should clarify since your capability to perform even the most basic level of critical thinking seems questionable:" lol my critical thinking is telling me youre being a slimy fuck trying to make one out to be the greater evil when in fact its both sides that have historically gone to shit when they go to extremes and became totalitarian (which by definition basically just means - a society that has lost all free speech)
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	But you're equating the modern social left (not necessarily even remotely ideologically attached to communism) with communism. It doesn't even make sense for the logical extreme of social leftism to go in that direction. Again, again again I have to state that your notion of what qualifies free speech is easily up for interpretation. The widespread and popular criticism of an ideology isn't necessarily breaking freedom of speech if it's based on public discourse and not institutional control.
Sinternet 12.12.17	thread turned into triggeredcentrists.com overnight i see
Sinternet 12.12.17	also can somoene just delete chuck's account? would make this thread a lot less cringy and insulting
zakalwe 12.12.17	Sin. Even you have to admit old Rees Mogg has something about him.
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	yeh he's raising my blood pressure kill his account before i have a heart attack and spare society the indignity of having me be a part of it
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"But you're equating the modern social left (not necessarily even remotely ideologically attached to communism) with communism. It doesn't even make sense for the logical extreme of social leftism to go in that direction." mmmmmmmmmm no i was directly replying to what you said here which was categorically false: "whilst the extreme left is (by your definition) in opposition to free speech, so is the extreme right, plus they're opposed to pluralism generally. neither is good but the right is probably worse." as if it were only by my definition
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"kill his account" "also can somoene just delete chuck's account?" ah yes the ever present lefty proponents of free speech, making my points for me
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	I have addressed the fact that what you perceive to be a violation of free speech could be argued otherwise. Repeatedly ignoring that and then talking down to me is just pathetic. As for that statement: "again its not the extremes on one side or the other going crazy rn, its both" unless you specifically meant communism as the left side extreme, rather than the social left as would be the logical conclusion from having read LITERALLY ANY OF THIS THREAD, you're just randomly taking what i said out of context to make me look like an idiot, which is just a bit mean spirited really
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	"thread turned into triggeredcentrists.com overnight i see" Hey man :-/
RogueNine 12.12.17	"To deny the right to criticise someone for a held belief is also an infraction on freedom of speech." "no it isnt" Wait a minute dude, I was following you up to this point. Wouldn't freedom of speech include the right to criticize?
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	whoa not even a double post a double sentence next level (until you edited it out) but yeh that's essentially what i meant, albeit very tl;dr'd
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	you havent addressed anything, you have an opinion on it, i have mine (free speech is black and white), stop acting like your opinion has any more weight than mine or any of the other 8 billion people on the planet for fuck sakes im not trying to make you look like an idiot if you feel that way about yourself im sorry and you shouldnt its okay to be wrong it just means you learned something, those are the moments i live for
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"Wait a minute dude, I was following you up to this point. Wouldn't freedom of speech include the right to criticize?" yeah i misread what he was saying there, we're still on the same wavelength rogue, the double negative threw me off
Egarran 12.12.17	The great thing about some right wing debaters is they don't know when they cross into crazyland.
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	I haven't learned anything new from talking to you other than that you're just exceedingly stubborn lmao. Ultimately I think going "well, that's just like, your opinion, man" is a bit of a cop out in this situation. I recognise that you have your opinion, I am just criticising it for what I perceive to be significant logical flaws with it. The whole notion of dealing with things in black and whites is its own can of worms for example but it's clear I won't be able to convince you otherwise/.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	if youre implying im a right winger, im 29 years old, have voted in numerous provincial and federal elections in canada, and have each time voted NDP, the social democrat party of canada, the most left leaning of the three major parties (all of which are quite a bit further left than either of the american parties) i also have a degree in environmental science and spent time working with the federal government doing studies on climate data to show the degree of climate change happening in the arctic i also date teacher that works for the public school system im a far right winger tho yeah Kappa the great thing about users like Egarran that have zero capacity to contribute to the debate is they just fling shit at the wall from a distance hoping something sticks
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	you do you dude. i think your opinion is whack but that's what we're here for
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"I haven't learned anything new from talking to you other than that you're just exceedingly stubborn lmao. Ultimately I think going "well, that's just like, your opinion, man" is a bit of a cop out in this situation. I recognise that you have your opinion, I am just criticising it for what I perceive to be significant logical flaws with it. The whole notion of dealing with things in black and whites is its own can of worms for example but it's clear I won't be able to convince you otherwise/." the very fact you think there can't be two possible answers to the thing tells me a lot about your level of rational thought, that coming from someone quick to criticize the critical thinking of another (something you started by the way) your argument for tempered free speech is valid, my argument for clear black and white free speech is valid, learn to accept the other side can sometimes also have plausible valid opinions or youre going to have a hard time
DarkSideOfLucca 12.12.17	This got less civil Although apologies for getting heated at Key randomly before, that was my bad
DinosaurJones 12.12.17	The REAL question is who the heck actually eats their toast butter side down?
Egarran 12.12.17	Btw, have you ever noticed that some people will say increasingly offensive and stupid things and at some point someone will tell them to shut up, and they use that to yell they are being suppressed?
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	ye ftr my blood pressure hasnt risen once although if im ever called a right winger yeah i have to explain myself because that certainly is not the case ive devoted my entire career to progressive ideals
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"Btw, have you ever noticed that some people will say increasingly offensive and stupid things and at some point someone will tell them to shut up, and they use that to yell they are being suppressed?" who are you even talking to
Egarran 12.12.17	"I haven't learned anything new from talking to you other than that you're just exceedingly stubborn lmao. " [2] You ever experience road rage? You seem like the type.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	you ever actually contribute to a discussion or just stand on the side lines and shit talk?
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	Urgh dude you're killing me. Two opinions can be valid but one can be argued to be better reasoned and more logical than the other. If you cannot grasp the concept that one view might stand up to criticism better than another then you're the one with a flawed mentality. I'm not even saying your view is strictly invalid, I'm saying it has logical flaws that potentially undermine it compared to others. It can still have value in that case, but the moment you make the validity of something a binary "useless" vs "valid" you lose a whole bunch of depth
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	yeah and how exactly are you supposing your side is more valid? i defend mine by giving you examples of societies that have failed without free speech (all of them ever) pls tell me how wrong i am o wise seer of the truth and rational
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	the irony is that you're the one being stubborn here by not accepting the fact that there may be two valid viewpoints on free speech here, i'm literally extending the olive branch and you keep getting triggered DUDE YOURE KILLING ME KILL HIS ACCOUNT lmao
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	But a literal total lack of free speech is different to a popular discourse opposing particular viewpoints! God help me here My evidence includes the fact that the totally un-criticised expression of certain views legitimizes then and anti-democratic sentiments, which could result in a crisis of legitimacy for a democratic system and an authoritarian government in future unless abated in some way. Also, the fact that there is a difference between a system where views are literally punished by the state and one where they are popularly opposed And, the idea that opposing the popular discourse criticising and talking down certain views in turn is harming freedom of speech, if you were to try and actually implement something resulting in your "black/white freedom of speech"
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	"the irony is that you're the one being stubborn here by not accepting the fact that there may be two valid viewpoints on free speech here, i'm literally extending the olive branch and you keep getting triggered DUDE YOURE KILLING ME KILL HIS ACCOUNT" "two opinions can be valid but one can be argued to be better reasoned and more logical than the other. If you cannot grasp the concept that one view might stand up to criticism better than another then you're the one with a flawed mentality. I'm not even saying your view is strictly invalid, I'm saying it has logical flaws that potentially undermine it compared to others"
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	" My evidence includes the fact that the totally un-criticised expression of certain views legitimizes then and anti-democratic sentiments, which could result in a crisis of legitimacy for a democratic system and an authoritarian government in future unless abated in some way." yeah well in a democratic society with free speech views don't go criticized so your point is invalid "Also, the fact that there is a difference between a system where views are literally punished by the state and one where they are popularly opposed" giving the state the power to choose what speech is allowed or disallowed is a potential slippery slope that leads to the situation i am warning of im going to the gym goodbye
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	"yeah well in a democratic society with free speech views don't go criticized so your point is invalid" i live in a democratic society and I am criticising your views.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	youre literally not understanding dude here it is before im done i need to go lift IF YOUR SOCIETY HAS FREE SPEECH THERE WILL ALWAYS BE FORUMS TO DETRACT BAD IDEAS INCLUDING NAZISM, SO YOUR PREMISE THAT IDEAS WILL SPREAD IF LEFT UNCRITICIZED IS INVALID BECAUSE THEY W I L L BE CRITICIZED goodbye goodluck have a nice life
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	"aren't you a positivist bro? #science" no im not but anyway this is philosophy not science but if you want to turn it into a scientific debate fine, the science says 100% of societies without free speech end in turmoil
Egarran 12.12.17	I feel you have attained a kind of compromise now. We have different boxes for internet debaters. Chuck just seems to fall into the caps lock category.
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	Egarran lands in that sit back and watch then point fingers and call people names that he doesn't like like kids do in kindergarten Vote Egarran for Prez 2018 im out
Egarran 12.12.17	don't drink before lifting bro
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	irregardless i do believe my argument aligns with postivism anyway ftr i used to be more of a hardline positivist ive waivered a bit though upon reflection of things such as my psychedelic experiences
Relinquished 12.12.17	whatever happened to the gym lol
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	waiting for the pwo to kick in weeeeeeeee
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	taking quotes out of context, classic i did play some right wing in hockey
Egarran 12.12.17	Maybe the repeated mention of going to the gym somehow aligns with the debate style. You sense the guy has small but significant psychological problems.
grannypantys 12.12.17	So what is the summary of this thread? i'm sick of paying taxes, anarchy is the future
zakalwe 12.12.17	In context heâ€™s saying heâ€™s at an age where he has voted a number of times you thick cunts.
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	"IF YOUR SOCIETY HAS FREE SPEECH THERE WILL ALWAYS BE FORUMS TO DETRACT BAD IDEAS INCLUDING NAZISM, SO YOUR PREMISE THAT IDEAS WILL SPREAD IF LEFT UNCRITICIZED IS INVALID BECAUSE THEY W I L L BE CRITICIZED " sorry to throw darts at your magnum opus but here we go firstly, your argument is very confused. you literally state earlier that you see freedom of speech in black/white terms, in contrast to me saying that a popular discourse criticising a view is a form of free speech and not something that infringes it. But your newest thing contradicts yourself. If you say that views will be criticised in a society with free speech, but you regard popular criticism and discourse that goes against that view on mass as an infringement on free speech, then you've contradicted yourself. Your all caps statement isn't actually too bad and I largely agree that criticism will occur in a society of free speech, but your prior definition of free speech seems to contradict that, and is in turn much more vulnerable to the spread of bad ideas. For example, if extreme right views weren't no platformed or criticised, they would essentially be perceived as having gained legitimacy in debate and discussion (since nobody would vocally go against it). This already creates some problems in and of itself, such as the fact that you've legitimised an anti-democratic viewpoint and one that might be something like transphobic or racist, which kind of undermines the principles of debate to begin with. Since legitimacy is then achieved for the extreme right view, they might gain a significant degree of support, or influence mainstream political thought to encompass their view. For an example of this, take UKIP in the UK. UKIP aren't a proper XR party, but they have the same root elements of xenophobia and immigration as a core issue. Regardless of how well they performed electorally, they received a considerable proportion of media time (as a result of not getting broadly no platformed and a slight right bias to the BBC at the time), and then they successfully set the political agenda to immigration. The conservatives then co-opted the policy along with a brexit referendum and now the UK is fucked. Big mistake there. By providing a platform for UKIP we ended up doing a shit in our pants. Other examples include the Lega Nord and agenda setting on devolution for Northern Italy and Immigration. I recommend van Spanje, Joost (2010), â€˜Parties beyond the Pale: Why some Political Parties are ostracized by their Competitors while others are notâ€™ for some elaboration on my point
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	since i accidentally wrote a small essay there I have to do my addendum here: (in regard to my British example with UKIP) Admittedly this is related to the fact that the UK's dominant media service is state run and is thus therefore unable to provide any time for criticising the ideas of UKIP, regardless of how crap they are. Point is, enabling the freedom of expression for a party without no platforming them carries huge risks unless you have a larger and more powerful source to criticise them
hal1ax 12.12.17	jesus
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	i agree honestly i think i was just possessed by some evil left wing spirit with exactly the same views as me and twice the conviction
zakalwe 12.12.17	If itâ€™s all about economic growth we are fucked, if itâ€™s about having having some semblance of sanity the UK will be alright.....I hope.
Cryptkeeper 12.12.17	Chuck you should look up the tolerance paradox, because you don't know what you're talking about
Egarran 12.12.17	Teach the controversy!
SgtShock 12.12.17	This is still going better than pre-election Sputnik debates ever did.
ChuckingIdiot 12.12.17	lmao lmao unwitty one-liner/insult lmao im out
ChuckingIdiot 12.12.17	hey guys just chiming in to say ur wrong because i said so im out
ChuckingIdiot 12.12.17	you are LITERALLY all fucking idiots smh lmao im out
ChuckingIdiot 12.12.17	i dickride for free speech because i have no political convictions other than i like to say naughty words lmao oh shit i said that out loud lmao im out
ChuckingIdiot 12.12.17	hey guys did you know that if you just talk to nazis in a rational way they will just abandon their irrational ideology and become spineless centrists just like me! it literally works nevery timer! ok lmao im out
ChuckingIdiot 12.12.17	did you know that the winner of a debate is the person who can be the most condescending quickest? i always win on that rule because people literally cant stand to talk to me and i say lmao a lot which basically means youre wrong and im right aite im done lol lmao
worthlessscab 12.12.17	The proposition of leaving a union that has increased it's influence over matters far past initially agreed upon and that wants to become a federation thus undermining the sovereignty of the country and reducing the influence of it's citizens is too extreme, not worth considering and anyone arguing such a view should be no platformed? Lad, tell me you're not this stupid. You think you're gonna be the one setting the agenda? The reason you protect the rights of shitheads is so you have rights too.
ChuckingIdiot 12.12.17	ftr i used to be more of a hardline positivist ive waivered a bit though upon reflection of things such as my psychedelic experiences ftr i used to be more of a hardline positivist ive waivered a bit though upon reflection of things such as my psychedelic experiences ftr i used to be more of a hardline positivist ive waivered a bit though upon reflection of things such as my psychedelic experiences ftr i used to be more of a hardline positivist ive waivered a bit though upon reflection of things such as my psychedelic experiences
ChuckingIdiot 12.12.17	IF YOUR SOCIETY HAS FREE SPEECH THERE WILL ALWAYS BE FORUMS TO DETRACT BAD IDEAS INCLUDING NAZISM, SO YOUR PREMISE THAT IDEAS WILL SPREAD IF LEFT UNCRITICIZED IS INVALID BECAUSE THEY W I L L BE CRITICIZED IF YOUR SOCIETY HAS FREE SPEECH THERE WILL ALWAYS BE FORUMS TO DETRACT BAD IDEAS INCLUDING NAZISM, SO YOUR PREMISE THAT IDEAS WILL SPREAD IF LEFT UNCRITICIZED IS INVALID BECAUSE THEY W I L L BE CRITICIZED IF YOUR SOCIETY HAS FREE SPEECH THERE WILL ALWAYS BE FORUMS TO DETRACT BAD IDEAS INCLUDING NAZISM, SO YOUR PREMISE THAT IDEAS WILL SPREAD IF LEFT UNCRITICIZED IS INVALID BECAUSE THEY W I L L BE CRITICIZED
ChuckingIdiot 12.12.17	m not trying to make you look like an idiot if you feel that way about yourself im sorry and you shouldnt its okay to be wrong it just means you learned something, those are the moments i live for m not trying to make you look like an idiot if you feel that way about yourself im sorry and you shouldnt its okay to be wrong it just means you learned something, those are the moments i live for m not trying to make you look like an idiot if you feel that way about yourself im sorry and you shouldnt its okay to be wrong it just means you learned something, those are the moments i live for m not trying to make you look like an idiot if you feel that way about yourself im sorry and you shouldnt its okay to be wrong it just means you learned something, those are the moments i live for
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	Alright you got me. I'm not gonna debate this anymore because I've probably wasted literal hours here today but I do concede that there are plenty of decent reasons to consider Brexit, even if I think the results atm are already looking bleak. anyway my point is that the rights of shitheads are protected on a technical legal level, and as such people naturally have the right to criticise them, which seems to be about what you said as well.
SgtShock 12.12.17	I genuinely feel sorry for whoever made that chuck alt.
Madbutcher3 12.12.17	tbf he understands me better than i ever could
zakalwe 12.12.17	Whatâ€™s Brexit?
osmark86 12.12.17	The result of a massive hungover or the first round at happy hour?
hal1ax 12.12.17	lmao
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	lmfaoooo
sixdegrees 12.12.17	net neutrality thoughts?
guitarded_chuck 12.12.17	hey sach sry i left cons server dont take it personally i was on my period that day
zakalwe 12.12.17	I did once. She worked at McDonaldâ€™s behind the counter and we had a shag in the carpark.
Butkuiss 12.13.17	This thread didn't disappoint
Egarran 12.13.17	So are you closer to eating that Ushanka?
ShadowRemains 12.13.17	why did i just read all of that jesus christ on a cracker also thank the fucking heavens that hillaryclittounge isn't still around here
ShadowRemains 12.13.17	trying to disable net neutrality is ridiculous and gives big telecommunication far too much theoretical power (and too many options with which to use it), it's a bad idea on a multitude of levels
Madbutcher3 12.13.17	yeh pretty sure nobody on sput would disagree with that one
Egarran 12.13.17	I don't know, there's something lefty about it.
Butkuiss 12.13.17	Eh, I'm an anarchocommie so net neutrality is a big deal
osmark86 12.14.17	yanks calling other yanks leftist is pretty amusing. your left is right wing af.