Harpers Magazine publishes alt right hate speech treatise, falls on wrong side of history

hammies

Miki Dora status
Apr 8, 2006
4,806
993
113
Consider Hong Kong.

A certain group of people, who used to not have power, gets power.
The group who used to have power complain about their lost power and lost voice.
The people now in power do not want this. They assert their dominance over the people who used to have power by enacting draconian laws restricting all kinds of freedoms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Billy Ocean

ElOgro

Duke status
Dec 3, 2010
20,181
1,591
113
Global International Gov-bang-crash-boom-ohmigod-they'recomingthroughthefrontdoorrrrr.....the jackbootssssss!!!




:p
There’s some truth to his message. Sadly, it wasn’t appreciated here. America could do worse.
 

ElOgro

Duke status
Dec 3, 2010
20,181
1,591
113
Consider Hong Kong.

A certain group of people, who used to not have power, gets power.
The group who used to have power complain about their lost power and lost voice.
The people now in power do not want this. They assert their dominance over the people who used to have power by enacting draconian laws restricting all kinds of freedoms.
That scenario has been presented and was rejected by our resident global political guru. I think that trump slurping reprobate grapenazi brought it up. It seemed reasonable to me. I’m sorry.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: grapedrink

the janitor

Tom Curren status
Mar 28, 2003
11,700
1,228
113
north of the bridge
What are you not free to say or write about?

Give me an example.
There are lots of taboo subjects, but the point of the letter is the stifling effect cancel culture is having on public discussion. The online mob mentality seems to currently favor SJW causes. You seem to agree with this. I think you are missing the point that normalizing this behavior is dangerous for two reasons:

1. Mob rule is very, very, very, very, very, very rarely a good thing
2. At some point social norms will change and now that weaponized mob rule cancel culture methodology will likely be used by the other team against your team.
 

the janitor

Tom Curren status
Mar 28, 2003
11,700
1,228
113
north of the bridge
Consider Hong Kong.

A certain group of people, who used to not have power, gets power.
The group who used to have power complain about their lost power and lost voice.
The people now in power do not want this. They assert their dominance over the people who used to have power by enacting draconian laws restricting all kinds of freedoms.
I agree, but Hong Kong was hosed the second the Brits handed it over to the Chinese. If anything I'm amazed that China upheld the treaty as long as they did. This sucks for Hong Kong and was totally predictable.
 

plasticbertrand

Michael Peterson status
Jan 12, 2009
3,040
1,427
113
There are lots of taboo subjects, but the point of the letter is the stifling effect cancel culture is having on public discussion. The online mob mentality seems to currently favor SJW causes. You seem to agree with this. I think you are missing the point that normalizing this behavior is dangerous for two reasons:

1. Mob rule is very, very, very, very, very, very rarely a good thing
2. At some point social norms will change and now that weaponized mob rule cancel culture methodology will likely be used by the other team against your team.
What taboo subject is there, that we can't talk about anymore?

The reason the SJW is even a thing is because the mob who previously ruled was your mob. That's why you didn't see it as a mob.

SJW is way over the top but for a reason - the more grapebois screech, the worse is going to get. The racism and bigotry is coming all the way from the top psychopath in the land, he made it normal and it's worse than ever. That's why SJW exist in the first place.

The correct response is indifference with a dose of compassion.

But some people just can't.

1594407500359.png
 

plasticbertrand

Michael Peterson status
Jan 12, 2009
3,040
1,427
113
I agree, but Hong Kong was hosed the second the Brits handed it over to the Chinese. If anything I'm amazed that China upheld the treaty as long as they did. This sucks for Hong Kong and was totally predictable.
Hong Kong will be the last nail in the coffin of the communist party in China.

They tasted democracy and freedom and will never be reappropriated.

Mark this thread.
 

plasticbertrand

Michael Peterson status
Jan 12, 2009
3,040
1,427
113
Consider Hong Kong.

A certain group of people, who used to not have power, gets power.
The group who used to have power complain about their lost power and lost voice.
The people now in power do not want this. They assert their dominance over the people who used to have power by enacting draconian laws restricting all kinds of freedoms.
Your HK analogy is flawed.

You skipped the part where the freedoms of the people who had no power was taken away from them for many decades.
 

hammies

Miki Dora status
Apr 8, 2006
4,806
993
113
Hong Kong will be the last nail in the coffin of the communist party in China.

They tasted democracy and freedom and will never be reappropriated.

Mark this thread.
People and companies are already making exit plans. The Chinese govt. does not tolerate dissent and will no longer allow protests like the HK govt. did last year. Instead, they will crush them violently into submision. China knows that the world is so dependent on them economically that they can get away with just about anything domestically.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Ifallalot

hammies

Miki Dora status
Apr 8, 2006
4,806
993
113
Your HK analogy is flawed.

You skipped the part where the freedoms of the people who had no power was taken away from them for many decades.
The people who used to have no power ware the communist Chinese. They got the power in '97.
 

Billy Ocean

Duke status
Jan 7, 2017
18,378
2,144
113
Hong Kong will be the last nail in the coffin of the communist party in China.

They tasted democracy and freedom and will never be reappropriated.

Mark this thread.
they'll just kill all those MFers except for the ones who are lucky enough to escape to the west

How stupid we want to impose the same social credit scores on ourselves
 
  • Love
Reactions: Ifallalot

Autoprax

Duke status
Jan 24, 2011
40,758
3,852
113
59
Vagina Point
There are lots of taboo subjects, but the point of the letter is the stifling effect cancel culture is having on public discussion. The online mob mentality seems to currently favor SJW causes. You seem to agree with this. I think you are missing the point that normalizing this behavior is dangerous for two reasons:

1. Mob rule is very, very, very, very, very, very rarely a good thing
2. At some point social norms will change and now that weaponized mob rule cancel culture methodology will likely be used by the other team against your team.

There would be no cancel culture if to cancel someone, you had to read a newspaper, write a letter, put it on an envelope, find a stamp, walk down the street to the mail box.

Blame it on the internet~
 
Last edited:

plasticbertrand

Michael Peterson status
Jan 12, 2009
3,040
1,427
113
Or publish a letter to the editor where your real name will be printed.
Again, problem?

You either fully stand behind what you believe and are willing to take the full brunt of the consequences your words will bring, or you don't.

Either way, you are FREE to say whatever you want.

You are literally demanding for your opinion to be accepted as valid.

Smells like a temper tantrum in here.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: grapedrink

Sharkbiscuit

Tom Curren status
Aug 6, 2003
11,566
2,849
113
Jacksonville Beach
I'd be more inclined to care if anyone on the other team cared when Bill Maher's show got cancelled after 9/11 or Colin Kaepernick wasn't worth the popular opinion risk for a middling to backup-tier QB or they weren't completely fckng up in arms about not flying the Confederate Flag at NASCAR races.

I'm not sure in the private sector where boycott, threat thereof, or aversion to negative PR risk became a problem?

The private sector's job is to provide acceptable rate of return to the slaveholders/cashholders. NYT's job is to sell advertisements. NYT subscribers probably think a good step to making America great again would be to kick Tom Cotton's state out of the Union.

I'll worry about Harvard not using SAT scores negatively affecting poor/middle class white kids, Stanford renaming buildings named after Serra, etc. right after the same ilk gives a f--k about BYU (and Patrick Henry, and Liberty, and Bob Jones) banning gay students.

My guess is, the same people who have a problem with what Stanford did will trot out some retarded sh!t about Brigham Young and John the Baptist's imaginary friend.

I am however 100% against what happened at Evergreen State as that is a public sector University.
 
  • Love
Reactions: plasticbertrand