Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 70

Thread: The True Face of Tucker Carlson

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    So what then is the dividing line between government activity you deem to be "dehumanizing" and oh hey guys Holocaust is a coming.
    Sorry, I'm not clear on what you're asking.
    I'll lend you my essence for your rusted throne, and you could bring back the light to the last home of civilisation without which I'm gone
    So take this godsoul to bring forth a new dawn, I'll forgive the death you've earned, the cities you've burned, the lessons we've learned
    For all that remains, just sacrifice me. I'll hide away in a castle on the sea.

  2. #32
    He's asking for an acceptable level of dehumanization.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  3. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    He's asking for an acceptable level of dehumanization.
    Is deportation dehumanizing?

  4. #34
    The govt machine empowered to find and deport immigrants frequently subject them—as well as innocent brown citizens—to an excessively dehumanizing process. The officials tasked with this duty subject the people they've gotten their claws into to dehumanizing treatment, both physically and verbally. The govt's rhetoric is dehumanizing. Implementation of the govt's policies must be interpreted in the context of that rhetoric and those demonstrable acts of dehumanization. Denying someone service may not be a racist act in and of itself, in the abstract, but denying them service on the basis of racism, in a racist manner (eg. coupled with racist taunts), would be a racist act. Similarly, deporting a person may not be a particularly dehumanizing act in and of itself, but arresting, imprisoning and deporting him in a grossly dehumanizing fashion, to further a deeply dehumanizing agenda, is a dehumanizing act.

    Dehumanization is not a simple binary state; a person can be subjected to varying degrees of dehumanizing treatment, of varying degrees of rightness. Putting a human being in a cage can be dehumanizing, but you can at least imprison someone without dehumanizing them more than you absolutely must.
    Last edited by Aimless; 08-12-2019 at 07:05 PM.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  5. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    The govt machine empowered to find and deport immigrants frequently subject them—as well as innocent brown citizens—to an excessively dehumanizing process. The officials tasked with this duty subject the people they've gotten their claws into to dehumanizing treatment, both physically and verbally. The govt's rhetoric is dehumanizing. Implementation of the govt's policies must be interpreted in the context of that rhetoric and those demonstrable acts of dehumanization. Denying someone service may not be a racist act in and of itself, in the abstract, but denying them service on the basis of racism, in a racist manner (eg. coupled with racist taunts), would be a racist act. Similarly, deporting a person may not be a particularly dehumanizing act in and of itself, but arresting, imprisoning and deporting him in a grossly dehumanizing fashion, to further a deeply dehumanizing agenda, is a dehumanizing act.

    Dehumanization is not a simple binary state; a person can be subjected to varying degrees of dehumanizing treatment, of varying degrees of rightness. Putting a human being in a cage can be dehumanizing, but you can at least imprison someone without dehumanizing them more than you absolutely must.
    Hopefully the irony of using dehumanizing terms in reference to ICE/Border Patrol agents is not lost.

  6. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Hopefully the irony of using dehumanizing terms in reference to ICE/Border Patrol agents is not lost.
    It was intentional. Did you just have some sort of galaxy brain moment where you thought you'd discovered some sort of clever gotcha? It falls entirely within the norms of conventional speech, whereas the US govt's and ICE-officials' dehumanizing rhetoric—evoking vermin and worse—and actions fall far outside those norms.
    Last edited by Aimless; 08-12-2019 at 08:21 PM.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  7. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Is deportation dehumanizing?
    No, the way the deportations are implemented and publicly justified is.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  8. #38
    "We have people coming into the country or trying to come in, we're stopping a lot of them, but we're taking people out of the country. You wouldn't believe how bad these people are. These aren't people. These are animals.” - Donald Trump

    You can't get any more literal.
    I'll lend you my essence for your rusted throne, and you could bring back the light to the last home of civilisation without which I'm gone
    So take this godsoul to bring forth a new dawn, I'll forgive the death you've earned, the cities you've burned, the lessons we've learned
    For all that remains, just sacrifice me. I'll hide away in a castle on the sea.

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    It was intentional. Did you just have some sort of galaxy brain moment where you thought you'd discovered some sort of clever gotcha? It falls entirely within the norms of conventional speech, whereas the US govt's and ICE-officials' dehumanizing rhetoric—evoking vermin and worse—and actions fall far outside those norms.
    If you want to hold yourself to the same standard used by those you are decrying be my guest. You might try aiming higher though.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 08-12-2019 at 10:05 PM.

  10. #40
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    5,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    If you want to hold yourself to the same standard used by those you are decrying be my guest. You might try aiming higher though.
    I've yet to see you taking a stance regarding. Why exactly is that?
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  11. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    If you want to hold yourself to the same standard used by those you are decrying be my guest. You might try aiming higher though.
    I see no difference between your views and Lewkowski's.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    I've yet to see you taking a stance regarding. Why exactly is that?
    A stance on immigration? It's mostly unchanged since the last time I was involved in a discussion on this topic. I want more legal immigration, and for the whole process to be faster and easier for everyone involved. I think illegal immigrants broadly are like anybody else, (a mix of good, bad, and indifferent, heavily weighted towards the good and indifferent) but they are doing a huge disservice to those attempting to migrate legally to our country. I don't think they deserve to be rewarded in the face of those attempting to jump through all the hoops legally. I am in favor of a path to citizenship, opposed to quotas, and in favor of voluntary assimilation.

    I also think that very little attention was paid to this when the Deporter in Chief was in office, which is broadly why this doesn't pass the smell test.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    I see no difference between your views and Lewkowski's.
    Of course you don't. Your views over time have become more and more like those of a child. Simplistic, one dimensional, and self serving.

  13. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    and self serving.
    You think Minx wants to illegally enter the U.S?
    I'll lend you my essence for your rusted throne, and you could bring back the light to the last home of civilisation without which I'm gone
    So take this godsoul to bring forth a new dawn, I'll forgive the death you've earned, the cities you've burned, the lessons we've learned
    For all that remains, just sacrifice me. I'll hide away in a castle on the sea.

  14. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Of course you don't. Your views over time have become more and more like those of a child. Simplistic, one dimensional, and self serving.
    Based on that impassioned defense, I must believe you can distinguish between my use of dehumanizing language and the US govt's use of dehumanizing language and policies after all, and were just pretending to be a dimestore Tuquoqueski who can only think in either/or black/white terms for inscrutable galaxy brain reasons. An odd strategy, but you do you bro, you do you
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  15. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Hopefully the irony of using dehumanizing terms in reference to ICE/Border Patrol agents is not lost.
    What dehumanizing terms. "Nazi"? That's not dehumanizing. That partly encapsulates the whole problem. Forgetting that the Nazis and fascism in general were and are all too human is a mistake being made by the defenders of this kind of behavior in the first place. Hannah Arendt and The Banality of Evil come to mind here.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  16. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    You think Minx wants to illegally enter the U.S?
    He feels I am a dishonest debater. Frankly, I find it difficult to care about this opinion from a person who pretends to be unable to understand how my decision to use an animal metaphor may differ from speaking of—and treating—vulnerable individuals in a grossly dehumanizing manner, such as speaking of them as if they were vermin, forcibly taking them from their families, locking them up in cages, subjecting them to constant humiliation, denying them food and the means of maintaining basic hygiene, terrorizing their families and communities etc. To be perfectly honest, I was trying to remember the word "clutches", but I have no qualms about describing dehumanization as being a predatory and animalistic act that is less than worthy of humanity. I also believe humans should be free, but have no qualms in principle about the imprisonment of kidnappers. I guess that means I have been owned by a very intelligent argument?

    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  17. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    What dehumanizing terms. "Nazi"? That's not dehumanizing. That partly encapsulates the whole problem. Forgetting that the Nazis and fascism in general were and are all too human is a mistake being made by the defenders of this kind of behavior in the first place. Hannah Arendt and The Banality of Evil come to mind here.
    "claws"
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  18. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    "claws"
    Seriously?
    I'll lend you my essence for your rusted throne, and you could bring back the light to the last home of civilisation without which I'm gone
    So take this godsoul to bring forth a new dawn, I'll forgive the death you've earned, the cities you've burned, the lessons we've learned
    For all that remains, just sacrifice me. I'll hide away in a castle on the sea.

  19. #49
    I genuinely hope so, because the much more inane alternative is that he took issue with my decision to describe a govt agency's deportation apparatus as a "machine", which would indeed be dehumanizing if govt agencies were human.
    Last edited by Aimless; 08-13-2019 at 12:26 AM.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  20. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    A stance on immigration? It's mostly unchanged since the last time I was involved in a discussion on this topic. I want more legal immigration, and for the whole process to be faster and easier for everyone involved. I think illegal immigrants broadly are like anybody else, (a mix of good, bad, and indifferent, heavily weighted towards the good and indifferent) but they are doing a huge disservice to those attempting to migrate legally to our country. I don't think they deserve to be rewarded in the face of those attempting to jump through all the hoops legally. I am in favor of a path to citizenship, opposed to quotas, and in favor of voluntary assimilation.
    Good luck with that in the Trump era! They're making it harder to attempt the legal path by 'metering' asylum claims, forcing them to wait in Mexico, and not providing enough judges to process their claims. The 'disservice' comes from the administration first, and it appears to be intentional.

    Also, today it was announced that *legal* immigration will be made harder, too. Not just by lower quotas or limits to Family Reunification (aka chain migration).....but new criteria that many *citizens* couldn't even pass: a good credit score and proof of private health insurance!

    Plus not having used public assistance in any way (unless you're in the military), and we all know that the military accepts non-citizens, and even promises military service as a pathway to citizenship.

    It's all so absurd.
    Last edited by GGT; 08-13-2019 at 05:05 AM.

  21. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    If you want to hold yourself to the same standard used by those you are decrying be my guest. You might try aiming higher though.
    fuck this and fuck you. These are people's lives that are needlessly being upended, and sometimes ended, for mere political points. You don't come in here pretending to be on some sort of high horse complaining about decency because the side you favor had language used against it, that itself has used (and worse) for years.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  22. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    fuck this and fuck you. These are people's lives that are needlessly being upended, and sometimes ended, for mere political points. You don't come in here pretending to be on some sort of high horse complaining about decency because the side you favor had language used against it, that itself has used (and worse) for years.
    Are you done? I don't favor any mainstream political party. Republicans are wrong on immigration - period. That is what I have said in the past and will continue to say in years to come.

    People can be wrong about a topic - deeply and horribly wrong - and still be human. They can support policies I believe to be bad, even harmful, and still deserve basic decency and respect. They can be racists, misogynists, murderers and rapists and still have humanity. I find it deeply unsettling that people can in one breath push for more humane, decent, and compassionate treatment of convicted criminals, and in the next treat their fellow citizens that they have policy disagreements with as an enemy to be fought tooth and nail. And it is unsettling not because criminals aren't deserving of basic respect and understanding, but because we should be going out of our way to treat everyone that way, especially the people we disagree with. It is foundational to having a functioning society. It is the same thing I tell my children every night before I put them to bed. It is important to be kind and respectful not just to those who make it easy to be kind and respectful to, but to show kindness and respect to everyone - including those who are not being kind to you. I don't view basic respect and decency as belonging to or springing from a high horse - it is a birthright that belongs to everyone.

    The fact that you somehow missed that much of this was happening under the Obama administration (mass deportations - people's lives being upended, children in cages, poor conditions in detention facilities, and yes, even family separations though admittedly not to the same scale and not as a matter of policy) does point to this being used as an opportunity for scoring political points.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    You think Minx wants to illegally enter the U.S?
    I think Minx wants to believe that his ideological opposition aren't just wrong, misguided, or mistaken. They are evil, and because they are evil -ists anything and everything is fair game when it comes to how to confront and deal with them. It isn't bad to hate them, it is good. It isn't bad to think of them as less than human, it is what they deserve. It is not just self-serving, it is self-destructive. This is the same road that leads to dangerous Lewk thinking, a path that I have seen Minx veering down for some time now.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 08-13-2019 at 03:30 PM.

  23. #53
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    5,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    A stance on immigration? It's mostly unchanged since the last time I was involved in a discussion on this topic. I want more legal immigration, and for the whole process to be faster and easier for everyone involved. I think illegal immigrants broadly are like anybody else, (a mix of good, bad, and indifferent, heavily weighted towards the good and indifferent) but they are doing a huge disservice to those attempting to migrate legally to our country. I don't think they deserve to be rewarded in the face of those attempting to jump through all the hoops legally. I am in favor of a path to citizenship, opposed to quotas, and in favor of voluntary assimilation..
    You misunderstand: I've yet to see a stance from you regarding the current atrocities your border patrol pulls. Don't weasel out now by talking about generalities. We're talking about very specific instances of wrongdoing here.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  24. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Are you done? I don't favor any mainstream political party. Republicans are wrong on immigration - period. That is what I have said in the past and will continue to say in years to come.

    People can be wrong about a topic - deeply and horribly wrong - and still be human. They can support policies I believe to be bad, even harmful, and still deserve basic decency and respect. They can be racists, misogynists, murderers and rapists and still have humanity. I find it deeply unsettling that people can in one breath push for more humane, decent, and compassionate treatment of convicted criminals, and in the next treat their fellow citizens that they have policy disagreements with as an enemy to be fought tooth and nail. And it is unsettling not because criminals aren't deserving of basic respect and understanding, but because we should be going out of our way to treat everyone that way, especially the people we disagree with. It is foundational to having a functioning society. It is the same thing I tell my children every night before I put them to bed. It is important to be kind and respectful not just to those who make it easy to be kind and respectful to, but to show kindness and respect to everyone - including those who are not being kind to you. I don't view basic respect and decency as belonging to or springing from a high horse - it is a birthright that belongs to everyone.

    The fact that you somehow missed that much of this was happening under the Obama administration (mass deportations - people's lives being upended, children in cages, poor conditions in detention facilities, and yes, even family separations though admittedly not to the same scale and not as a matter of policy) does point to this being used as an opportunity for scoring political points.



    I think Minx wants to believe that his ideological opposition aren't just wrong, misguided, or mistaken. They are evil, and because they are evil -ists anything and everything is fair game when it comes to how to confront and deal with them. It isn't bad to hate them, it is good. It isn't bad to think of them as less than human, it is what they deserve. It is not just self-serving, it is self-destructive. This is the same road that leads to dangerous Lewk thinking, a path that I have seen Minx veering down for some time now.
    This is a bad take, which you should delete.

    There's no fucking obligation to show 'kindness and respect' to people who a) won't reciprocate and b) are actively harming others, if you want to take that kind of extreme pacifist position in your own day-to-day encounters that's your prerogative and, in a way, admirable (though a somewhat bizarre stance for some who advocates being allowed to carry weapons for self-defence) but you don't have a right to tell others they should respond that way.
    I'll lend you my essence for your rusted throne, and you could bring back the light to the last home of civilisation without which I'm gone
    So take this godsoul to bring forth a new dawn, I'll forgive the death you've earned, the cities you've burned, the lessons we've learned
    For all that remains, just sacrifice me. I'll hide away in a castle on the sea.

  25. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    You misunderstand: I've yet to see a stance from you regarding the current atrocities your border patrol pulls. Don't weasel out now by talking about generalities. We're talking about very specific instances of wrongdoing here.
    Very specific instances of wrongdoing? If a border patrol agent does something specifically wrong, prosecute them. If the agency is doing something wrong, (see family separation) change the policy and replace the politicians and bureaucrats who pushed for it and implemented it. If you want more specifics I am going to need more information from you about what exactly you want my opinion on - I was responding to generalities about dehumanization and not specific instances of wrong doing.

    I am likely less sympathetic to that behavior than you believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    This is a bad take, which you should delete.

    There's no fucking obligation to show 'kindness and respect' to people who a) won't reciprocate and b) are actively harming others, if you want to take that kind of extreme pacifist position in your own day-to-day encounters that's your prerogative and, in a way, admirable (though a somewhat bizarre stance for some who advocates being allowed to carry weapons for self-defence) but you don't have a right to tell others they should respond that way.
    Showing basic kindness and respect to everyone does not require you to condone, accept, or be passive when someone is actively harming another. Well trained police officers show respect to suspects in their custody, even if they know they have committed a horrible crime. They do not curse at them, do not physically violate them beyond what is absolutely necessary, and do not go out of their way to antagonize them. Suspects who are injured are given treatment. I would expect as much, if not better for those who have not raped, murdered, or maimed. Who may in fact only be guilty of disagreeing with me, or having a different perspective or understanding. How they choose to respond to that is outside my locus of control.

    If the time ever came where it became necessary for me to defend myself or others with lethal force, I would not relish it. I pray that day never comes. I go out of my way to avoid situations where it might be necessary - and part of that is trying to treat everyone I encounter as though they matter, and deserve respect, even if they do not feel the same obligation towards me.

    If you believe there is no obligation to show kindness and respect to others regardless of whether or not they reciprocate, that is your choice. However, it is a bad one - one that more often than not leads to bitterness, unhappiness, and destruction. You might be comfortable telling your children that the world would be a better place if everything was transactional - an eye for an eye* - I am not.


    *I know, I know wiggin...
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 08-13-2019 at 08:54 PM.

  26. #56
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    5,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Very specific wrongdoing? If a border patrol agent does something specifically wrong, prosecute them. If the agency is doing something wrong, (see family separation) change the policy and we would absolutely do well to replace the politicians who pushed for it. If you want more specifics I am going to need more information from you about what exactly you want my opinion on - I was responding to generalities about dehumanization and not specifics.
    Right. More weasel words. As expected.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  27. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    Right. More weasel words. As expected.
    I honestly don't know what you are expecting from me. Are you under the impression I voted for, or otherwise support Trump, and his policies? Have I not been clear enough on that front? What specific instances are you talking about? I have skimmed through this thread, (granted I haven't explored every link posted) and found no references to specific instances of wrongdoing by border patrol agents. In fact, I think I was the first to bring up family separations. I am trying to be direct, but for someone complaining about weasel words you have provided me nothing concrete, aside from vague allusions to specific instances.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 08-13-2019 at 10:07 PM.

  28. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Showing basic kindness and respect to everyone does not require you to condone, accept, or be passive when someone is actively harming another.
    So, lethal force is OK in defence of yourself or others, but mean words aren't?

    Well trained police officers show respect to suspects in their custody, even if they know they have committed a horrible crime. They do not curse at them, do not physically violate them beyond what is absolutely necessary, and do not go out of their way to antagonize them. Suspects who are injured are given treatment.
    They're acting in their professional capacity as agents of the state, and that bit is not their job - that's what the judicial system is for. Have you seen some of the things judges say in sentencing remarks, once a criminal has been convicted? If the crime is particularly bad, they absolutely go to town on them. Phrases like "despicable acts of evil" and "depraved cruelty" are not uncommon. There are important reasons that they do this, it's not just the judge letting off steam.

    I would expect as much, if not better for those who have not raped, murdered, or maimed. Who may in fact only be guilty of disagreeing with me, or having a different perspective or understanding. How they choose to respond to that is outside my locus of control.
    Speaking harshly to someone is one tactic we humans like to use to correct someone's behaviour before they rape, murder or maim anyone, or any other things they might do to someone which are less severe but we still need to stop. Or we do it after they've done it, to try and make sure they don't do it again. We also do it publicly and performatively, so to show solidarity with victims and to set boundaries to anyone else who might thinking of doing something similar.

    If in your presence someone says something horribly racist and you 'respectfully disagree', what happens? Well, what you've just done - unintentionally - is set the help establish the idea that A) that's an OK thing to say and B) the content of what they said is up for discussion. It's now a point of discussion that some,human beings are inherently inferior. Even if you crush them with your rationalist debater skills - which is not guaranteed because debating in person is hard and they likely have a lot of bullshit up their sleeve for just such an occasion - that's still a win for them and very likely the entire point of the exercise from their point of view, because it's not about having a reasoned discussion about ideas, it's about pushing boundaries. If on the other hand, you tell them to sit down and shut the fuck up, you have sent the message that saying things like that will not be tolerated and ideas like that will not be entertained.

    You gotta be able to say 'you just crossed a line, buddy'.

    Incidentally, it is my strong belief that our collective failure to do this previously, and the pernicious idea that it is worse to be called a racist than to be one and our general, collective coddling these vicious little shits is pretty much directly responsible for Trump and the rise of the right in America right now. With the accompanying increase in hate crimes and far right mass shootings, the chances of you actually having to use a weapon in anger in some Situation are thus increased, albeit by an infinitesimal amount.

    I am as guilty of this as anyone.

    If the time ever came where it became necessary for me to defend myself or others with lethal force, I would not relish it. I pray that day never comes. I go out of my way to avoid situations where it might be necessary - and part of that is trying to treat everyone I encounter as though they matter, and deserve respect, even if they do not feel the same towards me.
    I think it's best to have a few tactics for dealing with aggressive people between the treating them with respect and kindness stage and the shooting them dead stage. Watch cats or dogs interact or something - if one animal starts being aggressive or annoying the other will normally start warning the other animal before they progress to biting the offending animal in the face. Hiss at them or something.

    You should hiss at people before you shoot them.

    If you believe there is no obligation to show kindness and respect to others regardless of whether or not they reciprocate, that is your choice. However, it is a bad one - one that more often than not leads to bitterness, unhappiness, and destruction.
    Deescalation has it's place on people who are legitimately upset and angry, but if you try it with people who are simply trying to get their way through intimidation or bluster, you'll just encourage them. Since, you know, it just worked.
    I'll lend you my essence for your rusted throne, and you could bring back the light to the last home of civilisation without which I'm gone
    So take this godsoul to bring forth a new dawn, I'll forgive the death you've earned, the cities you've burned, the lessons we've learned
    For all that remains, just sacrifice me. I'll hide away in a castle on the sea.

  29. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    So, lethal force is OK in defence of yourself or others, but mean words aren't?
    If someone is trying to kill you, someone you love, or those around you, feel free to say mean words to them if that's all you can do. If someone is trying to change the tax code, has different ideas about immigration, or crazy theories about the earth being flat, maybe there are other, better ways to handle it.


    They're acting in their professional capacity as agents of the state, and that bit is not their job - that's what the judicial system is for. Have you seen some of the things judges say in sentencing remarks, once a criminal has been convicted? If the crime is particularly bad, they absolutely go to town on them. Phrases like "despicable acts of evil" and "depraved cruelty" are not uncommon. There are important reasons that they do this, it's not just the judge letting off steam.
    This is all true. It also has no bearing on the argument. The argument was that you don't have to be passive or complicit in hurting someone else to still believe it is important to treat everyone with kindness and respect.

    Speaking harshly to someone is one tactic we humans like to use to correct someone's behaviour before they rape, murder or maim anyone, or any other things they might do to someone which are less severe but we still need to stop. Or we do it after they've done it, to try and make sure they don't do it again. We also do it publicly and performatively, so to show solidarity with victims and to set boundaries to anyone else who might thinking of doing something similar.

    If in your presence someone says something horribly racist and you 'respectfully disagree', what happens? Well, what you've just done - unintentionally - is set the help establish the idea that A) that's an OK thing to say and B) the content of what they said is up for discussion. It's now a point of discussion that some,human beings are inherently inferior. Even if you crush them with your rationalist debater skills - which is not guaranteed because debating in person is hard and they likely have a lot of bullshit up their sleeve for just such an occasion - that's still a win for them and very likely the entire point of the exercise from their point of view, because it's not about having a reasoned discussion about ideas, it's about pushing boundaries. If on the other hand, you tell them to sit down and shut the fuck up, you have sent the message that saying things like that will not be tolerated and ideas like that will not be entertained.

    You gotta be able to say 'you just crossed a line, buddy'.
    I don't disagree. There is a time and place for speaking harshly, setting expectations, and even cutting off communication. None of those belies being respectful when you do so. Saying, "You crossed a line, buddy," is a perfect example. It is fine to set boundaries, express those boundaries, and stand by them. That doesn't mean you have to do so in a way that debases yourself, or your beliefs.

    Incidentally, it is my strong belief that our collective failure to do this previously, and the pernicious idea that it is worse to be called a racist than to be one and our general, collective coddling these vicious little shits is pretty much directly responsible for Trump and the rise of the right in America right now. With the accompanying increase in hate crimes and far right mass shootings, the chances of you actually having to use a weapon in anger in some Situation are thus increased, albeit by an infinitesimal amount.

    I am as guilty of this as anyone.
    Yeah, I don't know what culture you grew up in, but that has not been my experience. If anything I think what we are seeing is a natural result of an increasingly sectarian and tribal focus that has evolved on both the right and left that has pushed everyone farther apart. I don't believe that further driving a wedge between people will do anything to improve the situation. When you can't disagree with someone without being called a racist, and you can't shut down a racist without being a leftist, there is little room for an interchange of ideas. If a "leftist" can't speak to a "racist," or a "racist" dialogue with a "leftist" without their peers attacking them for coddling the opposition we end up with little more than echo chambers and the coarsening of rhetoric creating a feedback loop. You shouting down a racist doesn't change his mind, it reinforces his views of the opposition - and of course it gets you likes and retweets.

    I think it's best to have a few tactics for dealing with aggressive people between the treating them with respect and kindness stage and the shooting them dead stage. Watch cats or dogs interact or something - if one animal starts being aggressive or annoying the other will normally start warning the other animal before they progress to biting the offending animal in the face. Hiss at them or something.

    You should hiss at people before you shoot them.

    Deescalation has it's place on people who are legitimately upset and angry, but if you try it with people who are simply trying to get their way through intimidation or bluster, you'll just encourage them. Since, you know, it just worked.
    Again, absolutely true. Again, missing the point. You can disagree with someone, you can even be angry with someone, and still strive to do so in a respectful way. And if you can temper your anger with kindness even better.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 08-14-2019 at 03:38 PM.

  30. #60
    Guys, take a break. He's on vacation...hopefully a vacation of the Bill O'Reilly kind.
    .

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •