Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 26.01.2021, 17:16
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 8,643
Groaned at 314 Times in 241 Posts
Thanked 19,851 Times in 6,917 Posts
k_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
BZZzzzt!

'I'm thinking of coining a new Internet Law, bit like Godwin's. The moment someone starts a sentence with "so what you're saying is" is the moment they lose the argument.
Reminds me of this legendary interview


Edit: a very much edited summary, but still proves your point
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank k_and_e for this useful post:
  #122  
Old 26.01.2021, 17:35
Pancakes's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Zurich-ish
Posts: 5,061
Groaned at 286 Times in 204 Posts
Thanked 10,693 Times in 4,012 Posts
Pancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
I never said people should be free from the consequences of what they say.

But those consequences should not include discrimination or repression by the state.

But they may include consequences such as losing friends or business or whatever. Or people thinking you're a crackpot.

you mean like BLM or Antifa?

Murder is not an opinion.

Rap music is still legal I gather.

But seriously. children are a special case because parents have a right and a duty to protect them and determine what they want to expose them to.

A church is private property. The custodians would have the right to refuse entry.

But if they want to stand in the street outside the church and do the same while the people are coming in or going out, then I don't see why not.

If worrying about consequences is a euphemism for worrying about jackboots kicking in your door at 3am because you used the wrong words, then maybe you should think about why it was that people were fleeing from dictatorships rather than trying to get inside.
You wrote: "But those consequences should not include discrimination or repression by the state." So do you think that the government should not try to suppress terrorist cells or intervene if a group of white nationalists is discussing a plan to attack a synagogue?

Yes, parents have a right and duty to try to protect their kids and control what they're exposed to, but the reality is that many don't and that it's impossible to fully control what your teenagers are exposed to online. Not to mention the fact that many of these parents themselves are racists, white supremacists, etc. so of course they're not going to shield their kids from adopting those same ideologies.

You keep trying to shift the focus onto BLM and Antifa but are ignoring the many peaceful protests that occurred and the reason BLM exists in the first place. You are also ignoring the fact that thousands of Trump-supporters violently stormed the Capitol building and hung a noose outside and then went searching for Mike Pence, etc. Should they have been able to just "do their thing" without any government intervention?

Should the government wait until violence actually occurs rather than try to do anything to prevent it?
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Pancakes for this useful post:
  #123  
Old 26.01.2021, 17:41
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Bern
Posts: 2,244
Groaned at 413 Times in 263 Posts
Thanked 4,623 Times in 1,681 Posts
Susie-Q has a reputation beyond reputeSusie-Q has a reputation beyond reputeSusie-Q has a reputation beyond reputeSusie-Q has a reputation beyond reputeSusie-Q has a reputation beyond reputeSusie-Q has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
You keep trying to shift the focus onto BLM and Antifa but are ignoring the many peaceful protests that occurred and the reason BLM exists in the first place. You are also ignoring the fact that thousands of Trump-supporters violently stormed the Capitol building and hung a noose outside and then went searching for Mike Pence, etc. Should they have been able to just "do their thing" without any government intervention?
Yep, and ...

The Capitol attack can be tied almost exclusively to hate speech and misinformation (i.e. QAnon) being spread online and within these communities.

BLM protests were in response to actual events that happened.
Reply With Quote
The following 4 users would like to thank Susie-Q for this useful post:
  #124  
Old 26.01.2021, 17:49
Pancakes's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Zurich-ish
Posts: 5,061
Groaned at 286 Times in 204 Posts
Thanked 10,693 Times in 4,012 Posts
Pancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
Reminds me of this legendary interview


Edit: a very much edited summary, but still proves your point
That very heavily edited version is nothing like what actually occurred in that interview. This is the unedited version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

I've noticed this so many times, now -- where a an interview or speech, etc. is heavily chopped and edited in order to cater to the cognitive biases of viewers, completely misrepresenting the truth, and yet people take the edited version to be truth precisely because it conforms with their cognitive biases.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 26.01.2021, 18:00
3Wishes's Avatar
Moderately Amused
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bern area
Posts: 11,350
Groaned at 90 Times in 86 Posts
Thanked 19,665 Times in 8,701 Posts
3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
That very heavily edited version is nothing like what actually occurred in that interview. This is the unedited version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

I've noticed this so many times, now -- where a an interview or speech, etc. is heavily chopped and edited in order to cater to the cognitive biases of viewers, completely misrepresenting the truth, and yet people take the edited version to be truth precisely because it conforms with their cognitive biases.
And the edited version suits the shorter attention spans people have these days.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank 3Wishes for this useful post:
  #126  
Old 26.01.2021, 18:01
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 8,643
Groaned at 314 Times in 241 Posts
Thanked 19,851 Times in 6,917 Posts
k_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
That very heavily edited version is nothing like what actually occurred in that interview. This is the unedited version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

I've noticed this so many times, now -- where a an interview or speech, etc. is heavily chopped and edited in order to cater to the cognitive biases of viewers, completely misrepresenting the truth, and yet people take the edited version to be truth precisely because it conforms with their cognitive biases.
I know the original - it's not much less absurd than the edit.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank k_and_e for this useful post:
  #127  
Old 26.01.2021, 18:09
Pancakes's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Zurich-ish
Posts: 5,061
Groaned at 286 Times in 204 Posts
Thanked 10,693 Times in 4,012 Posts
Pancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
I know the original - it's not much less absurd than the edit.
I think that depends on one's perspective. I know of a few people who worship that Peterson guy like a god and believe that he can say no wrong.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Pancakes for this useful post:
  #128  
Old 26.01.2021, 18:19
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 340 Times in 276 Posts
Thanked 26,264 Times in 11,001 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
You wrote: "But those consequences should not include discrimination or repression by the state." So do you think that the government should not try to suppress terrorist cells or intervene if a group of white nationalists is discussing a plan to attack a synagogue?
Speech is about what you say. Not what you do.

Saying you dislike Zionism on a public forum or on a street is not the same as attacking a synagogue. Not even close. Otherwise we should stick Corbyn in prison for mass murder.

Quote:
View Post
Yes, parents have a right and duty to try to protect their kids and control what they're exposed to, but the reality is that many don't and that it's impossible to fully control what your teenagers are exposed to online. Not to mention the fact that many of these parents themselves are racists, white supremacists, etc. so of course they're not going to shield their kids from adopting those same ideologies.
And your point is?

Is smashing down people's doors at 3am and sticking them in prison honestly the best way you can think of to solve this?

Quote:
View Post
You keep trying to shift the focus onto BLM and Antifa but are ignoring the many peaceful protests that occurred and the reason BLM exists in the first place. You are also ignoring the fact that thousands of Trump-supporters violently stormed the Capitol building
Any you are ignoring that there were many many peaceful protesters at the Capitol march too. In fact most of them didn't even know what has happening inside while they were peacefully protesting outside.

There are good and bad people anywhere. Stop thinking in black and white.

Quote:
View Post
Should the government wait until violence actually occurs rather than try to do anything to prevent it?
Dichotomic thinking again.

There is a huge difference between not doing anything and outright restricting free speech.

Suppose the government wanted to prevent bank robberies. Would it be a good idea if they did that by banning people from saying anything about banks at all? Would such a measure not hit thousands of innocent people, while the real bank robbers would find a way of communicating nevertheless?

Last edited by amogles; 26.01.2021 at 18:30.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #129  
Old 26.01.2021, 18:26
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
I think that depends on one's perspective. I know of a few people who worship that Peterson guy like a god and believe that he can say no wrong.
I've never heard of him - don't know anything about what the subject of the interview was, but the only point being made was to highlight just how much the interviewer was trying to force him into a corner by using the "so you're saying" approach. I think he dealt with it very well.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #130  
Old 26.01.2021, 19:29
Pancakes's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Zurich-ish
Posts: 5,061
Groaned at 286 Times in 204 Posts
Thanked 10,693 Times in 4,012 Posts
Pancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
Speech is about what you say. Not what you do.

Saying you dislike Zionism on a public forum or on a street is not the same as attacking a synagogue. Not even close. Otherwise we should stick Corbyn in prison for mass murder.

And your point is?

Is smashing down people's doors at 3am and sticking them in prison honestly the best way you can think of to solve this?

Any you are ignoring that there were many many peaceful protesters at the Capitol march too. In fact most of them didn't even know what has happening inside while they were peacefully protesting outside.

There are good and bad people anywhere. Stop thinking in black and white.

Dichotomic thinking again.

There is a huge difference between not doing anything and outright restricting free speech.

Suppose the government wanted to prevent bank robberies. Would it be a good idea if they did that by banning people from saying anything about banks at all? Would such a measure not hit thousands of innocent people, while the real bank robbers would find a way of communicating nevertheless?
You are once again missing the point entirely. I wasn't talking about someone simply saying that they dislike Jews, for example. I'm talking about hate speech that is intended to -- or has the power to -- lead to or encourage violence. Uncle Bob mentioning that he dislikes Jews at Thanksgiving dinner is different from a large group of people discussing their hatred for Jews on the internet, sharing hate propaganda and recruiting others to their group and then using those shared ideologies to encourage violent behavior. Or even someone who is using his or her ideologies to make violent threats, for that matter.

You asked: "Is smashing down people's doors at 3am and sticking them in prison honestly the best way you can think of to solve this?

How else do you suggest we solve the problem of terrorist cells and other people who are plotting acts of violence on the internet?

"Free speech" doesn't mean that people are not -- or should not -- be held accountable for what they say and/or the consequences of it. And unfortunately, the Internet has led to the creation of a worldwide platform where people are eagerly expressing their opinions and then having their hatred fueled by similar minds and are not wise enough to consider the consequences of their actions (and indeed, speech is an action).

Perhaps this is a good example, where a teenage boy was told by his father, after his father returned from the Capitol riots: “If you turn me in, you’re a traitor. And you know what happens to traitors. Traitors get shot.”

Son tipped off FBI about his father, who is charged in Capitol riot
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/na...4xy-story.html

“He would always tell me that he’s going to do something big,” Jackson Reffitt said in a phone interview Saturday. “I assumed he was going to do something big, and I didn’t know what.”

FBI agents found an AR-15 rifle and a pistol at his home. Guy Reffitt told investigators that he had brought the pistol with him to Washington."


Should that kid have just turned a blind eye to his father's increasingly violent behavior because, well, that was just his father employing his own "free speech?"
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 26.01.2021, 20:19
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 340 Times in 276 Posts
Thanked 26,264 Times in 11,001 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Once again, you are trying to move the goalposts.

Have you not noticed that one thing dictatorships have in common is that they repress free speech.

Of course you can always come up with a good reason. But if the consequence of that reason is discrimination and persecution, then the reason wasn't good enough.

Quote:
View Post
You are once again missing the point entirely. I wasn't talking about someone simply saying that they dislike Jews, for example. I'm talking about hate speech that is intended to
Hate speech is a euphemism "for stuff we don't like", or "discussions we don't want to be having".

It's a cheap and lazy expression.

Quote:
View Post
-- or has the power to -- lead to or encourage violence. Uncle Bob mentioning that he dislikes Jews at Thanksgiving dinner is different from a large group of people discussing their hatred for Jews on the internet, sharing hate propaganda and recruiting others to their group
You're not being entirely fair on Corbyn here.

Quote:
View Post
and then using those shared ideologies to encourage violent behavior. Or even someone who is using his or her ideologies to make violent threats, for that matter.
If somebody tells you, go and put a brick through that window, and you do it, then it's your fault. You did it. People need to grow up and accept responsibility for their own actions.

I listened to some "hate speech" just isn't a good enough excuse.

Take an example. You've said plenty of very nasty things about Trump here on this forum. Suppose somebody actually resorted to violence and then told the judge, I read what Pancakes wrote on the Ef and that made me do it. And the judge sent you to prison. Would that be fair?

Quote:
View Post
You asked: "Is smashing down people's doors at 3am and sticking them in prison honestly the best way you can think of to solve this?

How else do you suggest we solve the problem of terrorist cells and other people who are plotting acts of violence on the internet?
Again, how often must i repeat this.

Speech does not kill anybody. If they are being arrested they should be arrested for what they are doing, not what they are saying.

Quote:
View Post
"Free speech" doesn't mean that people are not -- or should not -- be held accountable for what they say and/or the consequences of it. And unfortunately, the Internet has led to the creation of a worldwide platform where people are eagerly expressing their opinions and then having their hatred fueled by similar minds and are not wise enough to consider the consequences of their actions (and indeed, speech is an action).
Speech is a harmless action.

The best way to counter speech is by countering the arguments.

Suppression is a sign that you have no counter-arguments.

Quote:
View Post
Perhaps this is a good example, where a teenage boy was told by his father, after his father returned from the Capitol riots: “If you turn me in, you’re a traitor. And you know what happens to traitors. Traitors get shot.”

Son tipped off FBI about his father, who is charged in Capitol riot
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/na...4xy-story.html

“He would always tell me that he’s going to do something big,” Jackson Reffitt said in a phone interview Saturday. “I assumed he was going to do something big, and I didn’t know what.”

FBI agents found an AR-15 rifle and a pistol at his home. Guy Reffitt told investigators that he had brought the pistol with him to Washington."


Should that kid have just turned a blind eye to his father's increasingly violent behavior because, well, that was just his father employing his own "free speech?"
Ok, body turns his dad in. What's that got to do with free speech?
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #132  
Old 26.01.2021, 20:29
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Here
Posts: 512
Groaned at 59 Times in 49 Posts
Thanked 1,470 Times in 523 Posts
RufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Amogles I agree with a lot of what you wrote but I'm not sure I agree with your definition of hate speech. Yes, it can be, as you say, euphemistic, and is most likely now too wide an umbrella term but hate speech can, and does, lead to awful actions.

Quote:
View Post

Speech does not kill anybody. If they are being arrested they should be arrested for what they are doing, not what they are saying.



Speech is a harmless action.

The best way to counter speech is by countering the arguments.

Suppression is a sign that you have no counter-arguments.

Speech - words - are not harmless. The "right" speech at the right time can inspire, galvanise, incite... Dr King, Henry V, Hitler, Churchill, Pankhurst, Angelou, Trump. Look what Amanda Gorman did with her words. To a nation, to a world.

Not all can be countered by more words if the reaction whipped up is sufficiently rousing.
Reply With Quote
The following 9 users would like to thank RufusB for this useful post:
  #133  
Old 26.01.2021, 20:48
NotAllThere's Avatar
Modulo 2
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Baselland
Posts: 14,521
Groaned at 280 Times in 239 Posts
Thanked 21,777 Times in 8,831 Posts
NotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
so what you're saying is" is the moment they lose the argument.
so what you're saying is that if I try to clarify that what you're saying, and explaining why it is wrong, I've automatically lost.

Quote:
View Post
This is going off topic...

The BLM protests were peaceful with an exception of a few, and most of the violence came from the police or the racists they were protesting against.
There were no riots. There was no looting.

Quote:
View Post
Otherwise we should stick Corbyn in prison for mass murder.
Seems reasonable.

Quote:
I've never heard of him - don't know anything about what the subject of the interview was, but the only point being made was to highlight just how much the interviewer was trying to force him into a corner by using the "so you're saying" approach. I think he dealt with it very well.
Watch the video. It is a prime example of a leftist journalist letting their biases influence the interview. She should be ashamed of herself. There are plenty of journalists who are left wing who would have given him a run for his money. She wasn't one of them.

I'm no fan of Petersen.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 26.01.2021, 21:07
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 11,144
Groaned at 356 Times in 291 Posts
Thanked 16,454 Times in 8,366 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
I've never heard of him - don't know anything about what the subject of the interview was, but the only point being made was to highlight just how much the interviewer was trying to force him into a corner by using the "so you're saying" approach. I think he dealt with it very well.
I did hear of him, watched some videos on youtube, read a book (almost, couldn't finish it) and I still don't get what is it with all the fuss about him. It is not like he's telling completely new things (or extremely interesting, if you ask me). It is funny, although he's a professor of psychology he became some sort of influencer. lol
Anyway, if you watch his lectures you may (or may not) think he's screaming and is angry at something (perhaps the world or humankind at large?).....

Quote:
View Post
Amogles I agree with a lot of what you wrote but I'm not sure I agree with your definition of hate speech. Yes, it can be, as you say, euphemistic, and is most likely now too wide an umbrella term but hate speech can, and does, lead to awful actions.




Speech - words - are not harmless. The "right" speech at the right time can inspire, galvanise, incite... Dr King, Henry V, Hitler, Churchill, Pankhurst, Angelou, Trump. Look what Amanda Gorman did with her words. To a nation, to a world.

Not all can be countered by more words if the reaction whipped up is sufficiently rousing.
This.

Words can be a weapon. Otherwise they wouldn't have invented propaganda.
Reply With Quote
The following 4 users would like to thank greenmount for this useful post:
  #135  
Old 26.01.2021, 21:26
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 340 Times in 276 Posts
Thanked 26,264 Times in 11,001 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post


Speech - words - are not harmless. The "right" speech at the right time can inspire, galvanise, incite... Dr King, Henry V, Hitler, Churchill, Pankhurst, Angelou, Trump. Look what Amanda Gorman did with her words. To a nation, to a world.

Not all can be countered by more words if the reaction whipped up is sufficiently rousing.
Humans are social animals and talking is what holds social groups together and enables them to jointly overcome problems. So of course speech is a very powerful tool. Both in the positive and negative sense.

To me, the examples you cite for the most part used speech to build awareness of problems and turn hearts (for better or for worse). In some cases bringing up new perspectives or even wholly new ideas that people hadn't had previously and that helped humanity advance. In other cases maybe just being leaders of things that would have happened anyway.

And of course there is always a latent risk that some ideas that people bring up and promote may be bad ideas.

Of course in hindsight it is generally easy to spot the bad ideas, but when you're living at the time and in the middle of it, this may not always be obvious.

But anyway, the people on your list did not (for the most part ) promote individual violent actions of the type pancakes is speaking, but were more thinking in terms of the big picture objectives. Not targetting specific individuals. So maybe your examples are not totally applicable here.

Despite that, many of the people on your list actually suffered some level of suppression or repression by the governments of the day. The term hate speech hadn't been invented yet then but if it had, I'm sure it would have been used. But the suppression didn't work. In many cases the suppression was even counter-productive and strengthened the resolve of these people not to give up. The persecution that Dr King suffered actually helped build his stature for example. If he had been ignored maybe he would today be forgotten.

So suppression causes much pain and suffering for its victims but is in the long run actually rather ineffective if not counter-productive.

History tends to write badly of those who used it.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #136  
Old 26.01.2021, 21:44
Pancakes's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Zurich-ish
Posts: 5,061
Groaned at 286 Times in 204 Posts
Thanked 10,693 Times in 4,012 Posts
Pancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
Humans are social animals and talking is what holds social groups together and enables them to jointly overcome problems. So of course speech is a very powerful tool. Both in the positive and negative sense.

To me, the examples you cite for the most part used speech to build awareness of problems and turn hearts (for better or for worse). In some cases bringing up new perspectives or even wholly new ideas that people hadn't had previously and that helped humanity advance. In other cases maybe just being leaders of things that would have happened anyway.

And of course there is always a latent risk that some ideas that people bring up and promote may be bad ideas.

Of course in hindsight it is generally easy to spot the bad ideas, but when you're living at the time and in the middle of it, this may not always be obvious.

But anyway, the people on your list did not (for the most part ) promote individual violent actions of the type pancakes is speaking, but were more thinking in terms of the big picture objectives. Not targetting specific individuals. So maybe your examples are not totally applicable here.

Despite that, many of the people on your list actually suffered some level of suppression or repression by the governments of the day. The term hate speech hadn't been invented yet then but if it had, I'm sure it would have been used. But the suppression didn't work. In many cases the suppression was even counter-productive and strengthened the resolve of these people not to give up. The persecution that Dr King suffered actually helped build his stature for example. If he had been ignored maybe he would today be forgotten.

So suppression causes much pain and suffering for its victims but is in the long run actually rather ineffective if not counter-productive.

History tends to write badly of those who used it.
I don't think it's me who is "moving the goal posts here." Because we're clearly talking about two different things. You are talking about mere speech and opinions. I'm talking about speech and ideologies that are intended to provoke violence. As I've already tried to explain, it's like the difference between simply saying "I don't like Mexicans" and forming an anti-Mexican / anti-immigrant group that promotes violence and violent attitudes toward Mexicans.

You're trying to minimize the subject to being merely about speech in general and are completely failing to recognize or admit the fact that speech has consequences. You're also trying to reduce the issue to being about "dictatorship" instead of addressing the real problem and the fact that hate propaganda can lead and has led to hate crimes as well as discrimination, terrorism, etc.

I suggest you do some proper research about the power of propaganda, including how Nazi hate propaganda was used to convince the nation of Germany to support the killing of Jews. Here's a start:

Propaganda and Hoaxes in Nazi Germany: 80 Years Later
The psychological tactics used to make us believe the most outrageous ideas.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...80-years-later

Nazi Propaganda
The Nazis effectively used propaganda to win the support of millions of Germans in a democracy and, later in a dictatorship, to facilitate persecution, war, and ultimately genocide. The stereotypes and images found in Nazi propaganda were not new, but were already familiar to their intended audience.
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/conte...azi-propaganda
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Pancakes for this useful post:
  #137  
Old 26.01.2021, 21:54
MusicChick's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: La Cote
Posts: 17,488
Groaned at 414 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 20,428 Times in 10,577 Posts
MusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
Suppression is a sign that you have no counter-arguments.
I don't think that suppression would be the only sign of that. But denigrating people for the way they express themselves...or throwing mental health diagnosis around, personality analysis only because they happen to offer different points of view. It is not a civil and polite invitation to exchange ideas.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank MusicChick for this useful post:
  #138  
Old 26.01.2021, 21:59
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Here
Posts: 512
Groaned at 59 Times in 49 Posts
Thanked 1,470 Times in 523 Posts
RufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post

But anyway, the people on your list did not (for the most part ) promote individual violent actions of the type pancakes is speaking, but were more thinking in terms of the big picture objectives. Not targetting specific individuals. So maybe your examples are not totally applicable here.

Despite that, many of the people on your list actually suffered some level of suppression or repression by the governments of the day. The term hate speech hadn't been invented yet then but if it had, I'm sure it would have been used. But the suppression didn't work. In many cases the suppression was even counter-productive and strengthened the resolve of these people not to give up. The persecution that Dr King suffered actually helped build his stature for example. If he had been ignored maybe he would today be forgotten.

So suppression causes much pain and suffering for its victims but is in the long run actually rather ineffective if not counter-productive.

History tends to write badly of those who used it.

Those figures - King and Pankhurst - in particular certainly spoke out against violence. Pretty certain Dr King suffered because of his words and beliefs. I doubt he would have been forgotten. It is mostly hate speech, perpetuated by the hate of a people, a religion, a tenet, that causes the violence. A whisper in the "right' ear.

I was arguing with your original assertion that they are just/only words and, that speech doesn't kill. Of course it does. You seem to be shifting to saying that "speech other than that which targets oppression" is harmless. I disagree there too. Similarly suppression, long term suppression, never seems to be eradicated. Or there wouldn't be increasingly reported cases of FGM, "honour" killings, race crimes, etc. It's a very effective tool.

Springsteen, Dylan, Mathers, Tupac follow in the footsteps of Thomas, the Shelleys, Tennyson, Blake, Marvell, Dickinson, Plath. Ideas are important. It's not only hate speech that has power.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank RufusB for this useful post:
  #139  
Old 26.01.2021, 22:02
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 340 Times in 276 Posts
Thanked 26,264 Times in 11,001 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Quote:
View Post
I suggest you do some proper research about the power of propaganda, including how Nazi hate propaganda was used to convince the nation of Germany to support the killing of Jews. Here's a start:
And talking about researching the nazis, why don't you read up on how suppression of the movement in the early years gave it credibility in the first place.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #140  
Old 26.01.2021, 22:04
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Here
Posts: 512
Groaned at 59 Times in 49 Posts
Thanked 1,470 Times in 523 Posts
RufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are american evangelicals just a political group

Tbf, the message to est 5/7 portions of fruit and veg a day is also propaganda.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Political Correctness taken too far Medea Fleecestealer General off-topic 37 31.10.2019 22:52
Project Swiss - Political Discussion Group Guest Commercial 6 13.02.2014 18:54
Political politeness... acd483 Swiss politics/news 8 12.03.2012 16:35
Political History sailmb Swiss politics/news 9 02.01.2012 23:39
Political map of Switzerland Guest Swiss politics/news 12 09.08.2009 16:39


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 09:15.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0