Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Charlottesville

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by mr_e View Post
    That works out great when your opponents are out there with signs "I want to take away your rights and overthrow the government".

    Not so much when the issues are more subtle and nuanced. One man's freedom is another man's totalitarianism.

    It all depends upon which side of the razor wire you're standing on.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23X14HS4gLk

    M

    Comment


    • Originally posted by simpleman View Post
      More on my takes on free speech...

      The system should guarantee the freedoms that don't harm the system... in other words, the system itself have its own limitations and it should not protect more than what it can afford to protect.

      For example communism is an ideology that plaint upfront wants to destroy the system... communism want to take away all the individual freedoms, they should not have the freedom to promote this cause, because this is the demanding to exercise a freedom that they will not give to anyone ones they get to the power.

      Likewise neo-nazis should have at least a restricted freedom... why a judge though it was a good idea to let them have their protests? Why they have torches and talk about burning down a synagogue? Can we even aford to give them this freedom to run rampants like this?
      We already have restrictions, they are called laws. They are pretty strict and acts of violence are clear transgression, also incitement of violence, defamation, libel, slander. There is plenty of recourse for those claiming to be harmed.

      A judge has a duty to determine the case by law.

      The torches are meaningless, other than what meaning people put on them. Same torches appears on environmental protests, a lot of torches at night look dramatic but no one thinks a group of environmental protesters want to burn down stuff. I've interviewed (educational / work not media interviews) Animal Liberation Front protesters, they consider themselves environmentalists, but some of them do want to burn down stuff, including the homes of people they hate.

      This is fine line stuff, where you draw the division, and there is more than one issue over it. It isn't just saying well those guys are crazy silence them. We have a system which is restricted for our own benefit. We as the people, all of us are under threat from the state, the instruments and power of the state are handed to people, people who hate us might get power. They could keep it secret and pretend like they love everybody, but when they get power the repression starts. For that reason we need restrictions on the power of the state. We also need the state to be equal and consistent, if it has any leeway to be inconsistent it's ripe and ready to be corrupted.

      Many commenters here have pointed out the inconsistency that's been going on for years. Groups have been going too far, used threats and violence to close down others, it's been low level, these people have claimed they are oppressed, they claim special protected status - or more accurately they claim they are acting for oppressed people and people with protected special status. Then they attack those who they don't like, they don't actually bother to ask genuinely oppressed people what they want, they don't do anything democratically at all, regardless of what silly little games some play in public with 'sparkles' and talk circles with speakers ranked in order of oppression.

      Here's the thing, if neo-nazis have said 'we think burning down synagogues would be a good thing, or we want to do, etc, etc' they skirted pretty damn close to violating laws against incitement. Citizens and law enforcement can gather the evidence and see if those are credible threats, whilst doing that an accurate identification of who is responsible is also needed. People standing next to someone ranting, isn't guilt of anything.

      But for many these are slippery slope laws, and open to abuse. The evidence and the truth is always the first thing to get abused.

      I saw two videos of the same footage, white men carrying torches, one no subtitles they were shouting 'You will not replace us'. Angry white men pissed off about being pushed out of society, losing jobs, worried about immigration, worried about the feminists who go on men aren't needed they should be got rid of.

      The the same footage, this time with subtitles saying 'Jews will not replace us'. My ears are not faulty but this time that is what I heard, 'You' became 'Jews' I don't know which was actually said, maybe both were said. The meaning of each is very different. I don't even know how they could imagine Jews are replacing them, they are no floods of Jewish migrants. These men were not Palestinians complaining about Israeli settlements on their land.

      Maybe you could ask the men, what they said, and what they meant. But they could lie and change their story, plenty of others who were there have a different story and they weren't chanting.

      5 words and it's complete mess to sort out what the truth is. That's why you need credible evidence. There is no single side in this, if just one far or extreme group in one side is willing bear false witness against others, it barely matters what the others do. If the state then brings down it's power, then men who were chanting 'You will not replace us' will get locked up and replaced. Perhaps there is an irony in that. But I don't want to see it happen.

      I don't feel afraid for myself, I'm not going to take stupid chances to be set up, I don't want to bear false witness against anyone or pick fights. I don't want anyone with views I oppose locked up or forced to be silenced, so why should I be a target. I am afraid of where this goes... because it only goes one way. It won't matter which side or which views get control, when the 'good enough system of democratically making do' falls it goes to whoever can take control by force.

      You or others can make a case using evidence that they intended to burn down a synagogue either themselves or intended to incite others to do it, seriously it's a good thing to have them charged. The laws and systems exist for you or others to do it, it would be justice. But you or others are going to fail if you mess with the evidence, if you pollute it or corrupt so it can't be used fairly in court, and that includes pre-judging before the evidence, then matching evidence to your biases and running around telling people what they heard, you've destroyed the case and that's on you. The accused are innocent until you've shown they are not, you could be lying about them because you hate them, you could be attempting to corrupt the system to use it as a weapon against people whose jobs you want to take, or some other form of gain.

      There is nothing trivial about the shape of a justice system. It goes wrong, it gets corrupted, it has been corrupted, the necessary challenge is to put it back on track and remove the corruption, then you get back to doing what is just. The completely wrong and stupid move is to say well they got away with corrupting, let's all do that, let's make sure people not us don't have equal rights. Bitter pills all around, even if people want to rob you of your equal rights, including your rob you of your life - they still don't get their rights stripped from them. But you can be smart, you can let them have their free speech, without interference and without tainting the evidence and they'll say enough to create evidence against them. However if they stay on the right side of the fine line, that's tough you gotta live with it, stay vigilant if they have criminal intent they'll slip up because the pressure on themselves, their desire to do it will drive them to cross that fine line.
      "...especially when it comes to communication, it can be observed, if it is not a negotiation it's a war."
      Originally posted by menrppl2
      Can't live with em, life is great without them.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
        Thought provoking video.
        FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
        It's time to call it out for what it is.
        == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


        The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
        http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Grumpy Old Man View Post
          Holy shit, there is actually another human who is familiar with The Games People Play and with it Transactional Analysis (TA). I read that book in high School and it is on my bookshelf to this day. One of the seminal works in understanding human interaction...for me any way. I recently discussed this in a conversation in a chat. Irony. Thx
          I studied TA when I did my counselling psychology training for working in educational and work guidance. Games People Play was one of the books for the course, definitely the most readable and enjoyable. I found TA very interesting and very useful, went on to study a lot more as optional material, a very useful model of communication and I still use the ideas crossed communication to try to understand what is really being communicated.

          As I recall there was quite a following for Games People Play, it became very influential, so much so it generated it's own game, of people making up games people play.
          "...especially when it comes to communication, it can be observed, if it is not a negotiation it's a war."
          Originally posted by menrppl2
          Can't live with em, life is great without them.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by mr_e View Post
            Thought provoking video.
            Indeed.
            It seems as though lessons get lost if they are not relearned every generation. Orwell's honest men stating the obvious, and so forth.

            The curse of the 68 generation was that they undermined the values behind this tolerance and solidarity.
            They didn't so much attack tolerance and solidarity as such, but they scorned and eroded the forms in which it had been expressed,
            and things you have no way of expressing - or things whose expression you must continually repress, as Nietzsche put it - wither away.
            And "when the pure spring stops flowing, the muddy water rushes back in," as they say in Japan.

            And the first and fundamental breach in the dam was the slogan "You have freedom of speech, but not freedom from consequences".
            And that sentiment went largely unopposed, because we, too, hold it to be true, as expressed in laws against e.g. libel.

            But what that slogan does is to elevate anyone who is displeased by something _perfectly legal_ that someone said to the role of prosecutor, judge and jury. And with Antifa at hand as executioners. Those are doing physically what people claim Alinsky promoted people do politically.

            The fundamental error is of course that the "free" in "freedom" means exactly that - sanctuary from sanction.
            If people get silenced, deplatformed, fired, doxed, harassed, threatened and abused there _is_ no freedom of speech.
            There is merely a mob surging about out there in public, baying for a lynching.

            Once that was allowed to happen, it was merely a question of time and The Them realizing this, before they began to try, as they do now, to outdo each other in indignation, in ever louder demands for "righteous vengeance" - administered by their own hands, in situ. But any such matters belong before a court of law, and no other place. When the law breaks down, civilization breaks down.

            The house that was built still stands, but now it shows some blemishes; and a paint job won't do anymore: First all the rotwood has to go.

            M

            Comment


            • Use 'Smart Dust' To Neutralize ANTIFA

              The next time the ANTIFA thugs show up to commit violence wearing their black clothes and masks, all you need to do is spray them with 'Smart Dust' from Hitachi and then you can identify them later, after-the-fact.

              'Smart Dust' is similar to an RFID tag except on a much smaller scale, approximately a micrometer across-- that's very, very tiny. It is made with a slightly tacky coating so it sticks well to most surfaces including skin. It gets into all the cracks and crevices of both clothing and skin thus remains detectable for many days afterwards, even weeks or more. And due to their size and tacky nature, they can resist removal in even vigorous washups because they are small enough to accumulate almost anywhere

              Later on when the conflict is over, it's easy to identify the people you sprayed with your dust using your detector which will report the ID numbers from any dust particles it senses which you can then compare with the range of ID's which were included in your batch.

              Hitachi Develops World’s Smallest RFID Chip
              http://thefutureofthings.com/3221-hi...est-rfid-chip/

              Snopes.com - Smart Dust
              http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/smartdust.asp

              (Result: TRUE)

              Last edited by mr_e; 08-23-2017, 06:49 PM.
              FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
              It's time to call it out for what it is.
              == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


              The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
              http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                Should our freedom of speech protect the speech that demands the elimination of the freedom of speech?
                In my opinion, NO.

                Should our tolerance include tolerance for the intolerant?
                Here I will give a lower case no.

                Must we protect out attackers?
                NO.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by mr_e View Post
                  I don't know that you can simply declare any system to be anything one way or another in such a cut-and-dried manner. For one thing, there is a huge difference between how the system is proposed, written down, and then actually implemented. Additionally there is a lot of variance in the attitudes and opinions of the people who actually implement it-- provide it animus.
                  Sure... but for those ideas that straight up front in their definition, they already declare that they want to take away the freedoms of everyone else... I'd say it is safe to suppress them.

                  For example, the pure idea of communism isn't really such a bad concept-- in theory.
                  Oh my... I am biting my tongue here...

                  The problem is that there has never been a *TRUE* communist system, but only bastard versions that sort of claim that they're communist
                  No... there have been plenty country that try communism, all with the expected results.

                  Further, you would have to define what you mean by "Protect" and what you mean by "Cost". There are many ways to define those terms based upon who is asking and who is answering and what their attitudes and opinions are-- and whether or not they're holding a rifle in their hands as they're asking...
                  I think it is the civic duty of every adult citizen to arm himself... so... go a get a rifle.

                  Frankly, I'm generally of the opinion that the ones who are willing to lay their lives on the line in order to defend their system, their rights, and so forth, are *really* the ones who should be making those decisions. And after them, the people who have skin in the game-- own property or businesses or pay taxes should be next in line. And I'd be okay giving people who work in public service a voice. And I'd be perfectly fine with letting all the rest suck hind tit. That way there would be a number of ways that one could become "enfranchised" and "invested" in one's country and its operation and future. For people who are unable to buy their way in, and unwilling to serve the public in some manner-- tough shit.
                  Sounds great, if you don't end up creating a system of classes where the lower class will never have an opportunity to move up in the social strates.

                  That *used* to be the way it was here in America, after a fashion. And I agree that there were some problems in the way it was interpreted and who ultimately was permitted to be enfranchised and how. And I further agree that actions needed to be taken to remedy those situations and work to fix it so that everybody had the same *right of opportunity* to become enfranchised. But that's not what actually did happen-- they skipped that "of opportunity" part and just went straight for the goal of everybody having "equal rights" without everybody having to have equal responsibilities and obligations-- and most especially the one about being willing to put one's life on the line to defend one's own rights.
                  I think every sensible and well educated citizen is willing to, as you say, put his life on the line... the problem is that... from some time forth, we are not fighting for our rights but for... who knows what? And there is a big difference between fighting for your own rights and being the pawn on someone else game...

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                    If people get silenced, deplatformed, fired, doxed, harassed, threatened and abused there _is_ no freedom of speech.
                    It is very disturbing watching this whole thing play out arse backwards ... I wouldn't mind hearing your explanation of the 'how' in how the fuck is this happening

                    Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                    And "when the pure spring stops flowing, the muddy water rushes back in," as they say in Japan.
                    "Into the vacuum, rushes the fart", says myself
                    "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one" - Charles Mackay

                    And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee. - Donne

                    "What we are seeing in this headless misandry is a grand display of the Tyranny of the Underdog: 'I am a wretchedly longstanding victim; therefore I own no burden of adult accountability, nor need to honor any restraint against my words and actions. In fact, all efforts to restrain me are only further proof of my oppressed condition.'
                    "It is the most perfect trump-card against accountable living ever devised." - Gladden Schrock

                    "What remains for most men in modern life is a world of expectation without reward, burden without honor and service without self" - Paul Elam

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by simpleman View Post
                      NO.
                      So, your cunning plan is that your goal is to protect freedoms, by taking them away (from some)

                      not sure you have thought this through properly
                      "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one" - Charles Mackay

                      And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee. - Donne

                      "What we are seeing in this headless misandry is a grand display of the Tyranny of the Underdog: 'I am a wretchedly longstanding victim; therefore I own no burden of adult accountability, nor need to honor any restraint against my words and actions. In fact, all efforts to restrain me are only further proof of my oppressed condition.'
                      "It is the most perfect trump-card against accountable living ever devised." - Gladden Schrock

                      "What remains for most men in modern life is a world of expectation without reward, burden without honor and service without self" - Paul Elam

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by mr_e View Post
                        Use 'Smart Dust' To Neutralize ANTIFA
                        wont work.

                        Smart dust sticks to nearly everything.

                        Unfortunately all the little nooks and crannys are already full with Stupid-Dust
                        "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one" - Charles Mackay

                        And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee. - Donne

                        "What we are seeing in this headless misandry is a grand display of the Tyranny of the Underdog: 'I am a wretchedly longstanding victim; therefore I own no burden of adult accountability, nor need to honor any restraint against my words and actions. In fact, all efforts to restrain me are only further proof of my oppressed condition.'
                        "It is the most perfect trump-card against accountable living ever devised." - Gladden Schrock

                        "What remains for most men in modern life is a world of expectation without reward, burden without honor and service without self" - Paul Elam

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by voidspawn View Post
                          The torches are meaningless, other than what meaning people put on them...
                          OK... any idea what they mean for the KKK and the neo-nazis?

                          This is fine line stuff, where you draw the division, and there is more than one issue over it. It isn't just saying well those guys are crazy silence them. We have a system which is restricted for our own benefit. We as the people, all of us are under threat from the state, the instruments and power of the state are handed to people, people who hate us might get power. They could keep it secret and pretend like they love everybody, but when they get power the repression starts. For that reason we need restrictions on the power of the state. We also need the state to be equal and consistent, if it has any leeway to be inconsistent it's ripe and ready to be corrupted.
                          Just to be safe... let's draw the line when they kill 10000 people... then we can know for sure they are out to no good...

                          Here's the thing, if neo-nazis have said 'we think burning down synagogues would be a good thing, or we want to do, etc, etc' they skirted pretty damn close to violating laws against incitement. Citizens and law enforcement can gather the evidence and see if those are credible threats, whilst doing that an accurate identification of who is responsible is also needed. People standing next to someone ranting, isn't guilt of anything.
                          In reality it is mostly private efforts, like the Anti-Defamation League... the government will tell you, they don't have enough resources to do any of what you list here...

                          I saw two videos of the same footage, white men carrying torches, one no subtitles they were shouting 'You will not replace us'. Angry white men pissed off about being pushed out of society, losing jobs, worried about immigration, worried about the feminists who go on men aren't needed they should be got rid of.

                          The the same footage, this time with subtitles saying 'Jews will not replace us'. My ears are not faulty but this time that is what I heard, 'You' became 'Jews' I don't know which was actually said, maybe both were said.
                          Yes, they chant both.

                          The meaning of each is very different. I don't even know how they could imagine Jews are replacing them, they are no floods of Jewish migrants. These men were not Palestinians complaining about Israeli settlements on their land.
                          Beats me... Sometimes you just gotta give up trying to understand it...

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by mr_e View Post
                            Constitutional Monarchies have an even better track record, in general. My recollection is that the folks in Denmark think it works pretty well for them-- perhaps someone else here (Manalysis?) might have some better input on that.
                            Yes, constitutional monarchies - Sweden, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, and a few others - do well; but perhaps not because of the Monarch.
                            What these nations have in common is that the Crown is not a power of its own; it exists on the goodwill of the people.
                            The counter-example to this is the UK, which to my knowledge is still a bonafide old style class society, wityh people divided into commoners and nobility, and the nobility still has power in that they still have real, true privilege, i.e. separate legislation, and their own parliament chamber, also many major landowners belong to that class, and one can probably find a lot of them in industry, banking, the military, academia, the civil service as well as in government, too. And the Crown of this jewel is, of course, the Crown, itself a very rich family of landowners, and de jure - and pretty much de facto - very involved in the running of things.
                            AFAIK the "secret" of the other protestant monarchies is their emphasis on equality and the abolition of poverty; resulting in societies that are high in trust, low in conflict, etc. etc. What the monarchies do bring in, are the royal families. They are uncontroversial figureheads thart anybody can be "for" without that making them anyting; they prevent that all kinds of icky politicians end up representing the nation (like the German system, where the Chancellor represent the Executive, and the Bundespräsident is merely some old party warhorse put to pasture); and they do represent a horizon that goes beyond the quarterly report, the year, even the 4 year election period, for many also beyond generations - they are manifestations of "The Long View", reminding of responsibility, stewardship, reason, being sensible ... sort of the "adulthood of the nation".
                            Me, I like.

                            Frankly, I'm generally of the opinion that the ones who are willing to lay their lives on the line in order to defend their system, their rights, and so forth, are *really* the ones who should be making those decisions. And after them, the people who have skin in the game-- own property or businesses or pay taxes should be next in line. And I'd be okay giving people who work in public service a voice. And I'd be perfectly fine with letting all the rest suck hind tit. That way there would be a number of ways that one could become "enfranchised" and "invested" in one's country and its operation and future. For people who are unable to buy their way in, and unwilling to serve the public in some manner-- tough shit.
                            Hahaha ...
                            That's been done before; it was called "The Roman republic", and lasted for many years.
                            You'd have been a staunch Roman, I think.
                            Provided you mastered a little gladio fencing, own land, lent money or supervised the city sewers, and weren't a prole.


                            M
                            Last edited by Manalysis; 08-23-2017, 11:01 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by MatrixTransform View Post
                              So, your cunning plan is that your goal is to protect freedoms, by taking them away (from some)

                              not sure you have thought this through properly
                              My plan is that anti-freedom should not be protected as freedom...

                              Comment


                              • Simpleman, you're right....nazis everywhere.

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23X14HS4gLk

                                go to 12:17
                                "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one" - Charles Mackay

                                And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee. - Donne

                                "What we are seeing in this headless misandry is a grand display of the Tyranny of the Underdog: 'I am a wretchedly longstanding victim; therefore I own no burden of adult accountability, nor need to honor any restraint against my words and actions. In fact, all efforts to restrain me are only further proof of my oppressed condition.'
                                "It is the most perfect trump-card against accountable living ever devised." - Gladden Schrock

                                "What remains for most men in modern life is a world of expectation without reward, burden without honor and service without self" - Paul Elam

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X