|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Russ, you are either incredibly stupid or a Trolling Bigot
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
And once again, this quotation (first posted on the closed DH thread) becomes pertinent:
quote:
"The primary sources of evil are indifference and self-deception. Both lead me to a life of convention, simply living up to the code of conduct given to me by my society... The problem comes when the society [eta: or subculture] giving me the rules happens to be Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia." (or apartheid South Africa, or Chechnya right now...)
From the essay by Neil Mussett, "Is Anyone Actually Chaotic Evil?", p. 56-7. [in Dungeons & Dragons and Philosophy, ed. C. Robichaud, published by Wiley-Blackwell, 2014 ]
I have read the rest of the book. Honest.
[ 09. May 2017, 10:55: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
quoted by Jane R:
a life of convention, simply living up to the code of conduct given to me by my society... The problem comes when the society giving me the rules happens to be Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia.
I'd agree that there are plenty of people who are no better and no worse than the society in which they find themselves.
But from my perspective, the people seeking to identify and apply a clear framework of coherent moral principles are those striving to do better than the "moral transparency" that this quote refers to.
And the idiots asking "does he know it's 2017 ?" are the ones who are happy to take current social mores as normative.
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Not necessarily, but definitely better than the sexist, homophobic and racist mores of the past, yes.
[ 10. May 2017, 14:32: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
But from my perspective, the people seeking to identify and apply a clear framework of coherent moral principles are those striving to do better than the "moral transparency" that this quote refers to.
1. That's not what this quote refers to. This quote refers to the fact that whole populations stood by while millions were murdered.
2. You're not striving to 'do better'. You're looking for excuses to 'do nothing'. And you still are with your mealy-mouthed self-justifying moral-high-ground special-snowflake excuses.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
3.And looking to continue to run everyone 'round in circles with just enough pretence of an actual POV.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
So it's true: all gall is divided into three parts.
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leaf:
So it's true: all gall is divided into three parts.
link
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Seriously, Russ. We're not going to discuss whether you're racist here. That - over thirty fucking pages - is decided, and yes, you are a racist.
You've pronounced the verdict.
And gestured vaguely in the direction of some evidence.
I'm waiting for the bit where you bring the accused to an understanding of the charges against him...
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
As I said, I'm not taking another 30 pages to do that. Go and seek self-enlightenment elsewhere.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
As I said, I'm not taking another 30 pages to do that. Go and seek self-enlightenment elsewhere.
"M'lud, after endless evidence of culpability, with reams of documentation and inumerable witness to back it up, I find myself at a loss of how the guilty verdict came about"
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
You've pronounced the verdict.
Close, but meta-wrong. He just spoke the truth. A truth that you have proven by your words.
quote:
And gestured vaguely in the direction of some evidence.
That you are uncomfortable with the truth makes no difference at all to the truth.
quote:
I'm waiting for the bit where you bring the accused to an understanding of the charges against him...
If having people understand things were a required aspect of something being true, well, it'd be a religion.
But, really, having a mushroom sing and dance is not required to make it a fungi.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
I'm waiting for the bit where you bring the accused to an understanding of the charges against him...
I think it was Mayor Ed Koch of New York who said "I can explain things to you, but I cannot comprehend things for you".
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
As I said, I'm not taking another 30 pages to do that. Go and seek self-enlightenment elsewhere.
Getting any enlightenment from you is clearly out of the question.
Looking elsewhere, I find various definitions of "racism" such as
quote:
[1] a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race (Merriam-Webster online)
I don't believe that, and I suspect that very few intelligent people believe that these days.
Or quote:
[2]an irrational attitude of hostility directed against a race or their supposed characteristics
I don't think I feel hostility towards other races, and don't see how my words could be interpreted as such.
I guess that what you object to is that I put forward an ethic that omits your Eleventh Commandment "thou shalt not be racist".
when what you mean by "racism" is
quote:
[3]any proposition that the speaker disagrees with that has any relationship to race
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
To give you a clue, seeing as you have not got one over the last 30 pages: I am using the second definition. I categorise refusing to serve people, or treat them equally, as hostile acts.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
As I said, I'm not taking another 30 pages to do that. Go and seek self-enlightenment elsewhere.
Getting any enlightenment from you is clearly out of the question.
I refer you to Sioni's quote above. It's not my fault you're as thick as pig shit and as dense as neutronium.
Now fuck off.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
Getting any enlightenment from you is clearly out of the question.
But you're not really looking for enlightenment, are you? You whine that you haven't been given a proper definition of racism while you try to justify an "unconscious association" of dark skin with dirty hands. If you want to know what racism is, look in the mirror or read your own posts, asshole.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
quote:
[2]an irrational attitude of hostility directed against a race or their supposed characteristics
I don't think I feel hostility towards other races, and don't see how my words could be interpreted as such.
Shall we play this game?
Firstly, we note the subtle but crucial shift from an attitude of hostility to feeling hostility. It's a bit pointless playing the I demand you define your terms game if you're then going to miscite the definition given. You did that with Eliab's definition too. Seems to be a bit of a pattern.
'Hostility' OED: Opposition or antagonism in action, thought, or principle.
I think it's fair to say that a principle that refusing to hire someone on the basis of their race is opposition in principle or thought, and therefore an attitude of hostility based on race.
Ditto for the principle that it is morally innocent to extort such a refusal from the proprietor in question by not patronising their business.
As for whether the attitude is 'irrational' you have rather signally failed to provide any rational justification that stands up to any kind of questioning.
That said, I don't think you're essentially racist. If someone were black and had lots of money and power I'm sure you'd stick up for them if they were being sued by poor white people.
For comparison from the OED:
quote:
A belief that one’s own racial or ethnic group is superior, or that other such groups represent a threat to one's cultural identity, racial integrity, or economic well-being; (also) a belief that the members of different racial or ethnic groups possess specific characteristics, abilities, or qualities, which can be compared and evaluated.
Hence: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against people of other racial or ethnic groups (or, more widely, of other nationalities), esp. based on such beliefs.
Because the OED recognises that the world is complex, words are not to be summed up in single sentence definitions, and definitions are not exact equivalents for words but rather pointers to the meaning.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
I guess that what you object to is that I put forward an ethic that omits your Eleventh Commandment "thou shalt not be racist".
Not speaking in an official function at this time:
There is no such commandment, obviously. However, one could make a very convincing case for your posting to systematically be in violation of Commandment 1.
Perhaps you tell yourself that you are amusing more than just yourself with your faux-naif displays of looking for insight as excuses to make racist rhetoric. Possibly because either 1) you think we're that stupid, or 2) you really are that stupid. Either way, the stupidity is getting old.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Now 'faux-naif', I have been looking for that word in the depths of my medial temporal lobe structures, but to no avail, but the kind man has provided same.
Yes, a long running faux-naif Gish gallop trollathon, or as some say, a wank and a half.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
quote:
[2]an irrational attitude of hostility directed against a race or their supposed characteristics
I don't think I feel hostility towards other races, and don't see how my words could be interpreted as such.
Shall we play this game?
Please, let us not. This is what the troll wants, this is his game.
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
faux-naif
Thank you! I did not know this term. However, though Russ has provided a perfect example of how it works, I do not think I shall extend thanks to him.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
Perhaps you tell yourself that you are amusing more than just yourself with your faux-naif displays of looking for insight as excuses to make racist rhetoric.
You haven't got the point yet, have you ?
I have not the slightest interest in making rhetoric which disrespects people of other races. My interest is in reasoning and moral philosophy and the way we use language and why people get things wrong.
My case is that LilBuddha, and those who think the same way, use the word "racist"/"racism" too loosely. And therefore lump together morally-right actions (hiring the employee who will be most advantageous to your employer's business) with morally-wrong actions (refusing to hire someone because of personal hostility to their race or because of pre-judgments about their capability).
I don't think I brought up the subject of racism. It arose because those who promote the "gay rights" agenda want the same abuse of language - the sort of language that prevents nuanced reasoning and pushes people to one extreme or the other - to be used for homosexuality as it is used for race.
Dead Horses is ISTM the right place for trying to make my case on a topic where people have well-established views.
Hell is not the right place for trying to make that case (despite Dafyd's willingness to play ball).
So if it's all the same to you, kind hellhost-speaking-in-personal-capacity, I'll leave you where you belong and depart for the upper realms with as much dignity as I can muster.
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
with as much dignity as I can muster.
I didn't realise dignity came in negative units.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Shall we play this game?
"The only winning move is not to play."
--Joshua the computer, "War Games".
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
You haven't got the point yet, have you ?
I don't give a flying fuck about what point you think you might have, Russ.
If you inflict more of your point-wishing on the too-patient Hosts of Dead Horses, you will be here again soon enough. Or worse. Get my point, asshole?
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Russ, in the Styx you have said:
quote:
What this thread is about seems to be whether the Ship can good-humouredly accommodate the spectrum of views on homosexuality, or whether it will in effect come down on the progressive side by deeming any contrary opinion to violate the rules of civilised discourse between individuals.
If we allow Thunderbunk's approach to apply to all issues - "I identify as a Methodist so any negative view of Methodism is something I'm entitled to take as a personal attack to which I want to be allowed to respond with personal abuse" - then it's hard to see how the Ship could continue.
No-one's suggesting that this should apply to all issues. Yet. But it would set a precedent...
Progressivism is too big a topic to tackle here. But part of it involves the idea of social change as a ratchet, that people have some sort of moral duty to keep up with.
Some of us reject this doctrine.
So, apart from mischaracterising Thunderbunk's point of view, your excuse for continuing homophobia is that you don't agree with progressivism? So what the flying fuck are you doing posting on a message board on the internet. Surely that's far too progressive for you? Perhaps if you want to refuse all progressivism you should be carving out your words on stone tablets or writing them on papyrus? Driving around in a horse and cart and farming your own land?
So you're using a computer, driving a car and wearing mixed fibres? So why is that progressivism allowed and other progressivism not?
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
My profound apologies to the various crew members for spreading your trolling bigotry into the Styx. You are spouting poisonous bollocks all over the ship, whatever you call it.
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Russ is a troll. Plain and simple. And a good enough one to keep getting attention.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Yes, a clever one, who puts out enough bait to pull in punters. What a waste of time.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity Killed
So you're using a computer, driving a car and wearing mixed fibres? So why is that progressivism allowed and other progressivism not?
I think you're confusing technical progress with progressivism, which is a doctrine about social change.
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
CK, I believe this is what he is looking for.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
So you're using a computer, driving a car and wearing mixed fibres? So why is that progressivism allowed and other progressivism not?
But those are different things, and I think you know it.
In the case of a piece of technological progress (the car, the mobile phone, whatever), Russ is free to evaluate each on its merits, and decide whether or not he wants one. If he decides he doesn't want one, the average man in the street might think he's a bit odd, but he wouldn't attract censure.
What you seem to be proposing was an absolute duty to buy into the social mores ratchet, which is not the same thing at all.
(I don't think Russ is a troll. It seems to me that he's covered in a surface layer of some spongy substance, which deforms a bit in response to external pummelling, but doesn't let the pummelling penetrate to the core beneath.)
[ 14. June 2017, 00:31: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
The dictionary definition of progressivism is the "support or advocacy of social reform".
As someone who started using the internet in 1995 and can just about remember being able to play in the street before car was king, both these inventions have wrought huge social changes. I deliberately chose two aspects of progress that have bodies of research demonstrating that social reform. I linked to an article on the sociology of the internet above, but it is just as easy to find articles demonstrating the social impacts from the introduction of the motor car.
(The farming and mixed fibres were thrown in as references to Leviticus and the societies that existed at the time.)
I suspect there is a thesis to be written on how the rise of the motor car and the internet have changed our attitudes to homosexuality, as both are drivers of the social changes we are living through.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
CK, I believe this is what he is looking for.
Some days, you really get my goat...
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
And the internet has had no impact on social change?
There are social changes that have been "driven by" technology. But that doesn't mean that all social changes are. (Maybe the internet has a big impact on how changes spread through the population without determining the content of those changes ?)
And with tech-driven change, having the latest technology and "buying into" the social changes that come with it is largely optional.
I say "largely", because for example it can happen that the corner shop you walk to is put out of business leaving the supermarket that you drive to as the only option. Or some service becomes only available over the internet.
Such things are to be accepted stoically, or organised against on a volunteer basis. The price of freedom is putting up with other people's free choices.
The optional/compulsory dimension is one I tend to find significant - one of the constructs on my repertory grid, so to speak.
So if people want to enthuse about latest trends and new ways, fine. But I'm for giving others the space to accept or reject particular changes, or adopt them at a slower pace.
So you can keep #SoWhat and LGBTXYZ; I'll carry on farming my little bit of land, thank you.
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
.... So if people want to enthuse about latest trends and new ways, fine. But I'm for giving others the space to accept or reject particular changes, or adopt them at a slower pace.
...
I see you're back to your folksy arguments for anarchy. Would you please go stand in that new crosswalk that I haven't accepted yet? Ta.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I just haven't decided yet whether or not to treat gay people as human beings. It's all so new. Give me time. I'll get back to you.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
So you can keep #SoWhat and LGBTXYZ; I'll carry on farming my little bit of land, thank you.
And keep posting on the Internet, so demonstrating that you continue to be selective, nay discriminatory, into what progressivism you choose to buy into.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
The optional/compulsory dimension is one I tend to find significant - one of the constructs on my repertory grid, so to speak.
Your ability to isolate yourself from the legal/legislative repercussions of your embodied opinions is disgusting.
"I'm just pulling weeds on my lil' ol' patch of dirt, while also voting for rights-screwing shitbags and their life-ruining politics." Hyuck.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I just haven't decided yet whether or not to treat gay people as human beings.
I have.
Gay people are human beings, with the same moral rights and duties as everyone else. Which includes the right to purchase goods offered for sale to the public (subject to the same conditions of offer - e.g. handing over the money - that apply to everybody else).
Retailers are human beings, with the right to choose what goods and services to offer for sale, in pursuit of their own vision of the sort of business they wish to build. Not things to be used as tools for building your vision of the Good Society.
Progressives are human beings, with the right to believe in a narrative of change from the Bad Old Days of discrimination and prejudice. To order their own lives by that narrative, and seek to convince others of its truth by persuasion.
Conservatives are human beings, with the right to believe in a narrative of having fallen away from the Good Old Days when people were god-fearing and respected authority and had a place or role in society. To order their own lives by that narrative, and seek to persuade others of its truth.
Pluralism, not anarchism.
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
And the wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round...
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
Geez, Russ, you really are determined to show yourself in the worst possible light here. Any sane and sensible person would have drunk deeply from the well of "Shut the fuck up" by now, but I'm guessing I've just answered my own question.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
Progressives are human beings, with the right to believe in a narrative of change from the Bad Old Days of discrimination and prejudice. To order their own lives by that narrative, and seek to convince others of its truth by persuasion.
Progressives are free not to discriminate. Everybody else is free to discriminate. This is your brave new world. Fuck it. It's wrong, it's evil, it's bad, it's inhuman, it's unchristian. Fuck it to hell.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Geez, Russ, you really are determined to show yourself in the worst possible light here.
I've no doubt he is as vile as you think. But spreading his ideas is not what he is doing here. He is trolling for attention and succeeding.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Progressives are free not to discriminate.
Absolutely. For example, in a theocratic society, I'm saying you should have a right to dissent from the prevailing beliefs and treat the out-caste equally with everybody else.
quote:
Everybody else is free to discriminate.
Yes, within the constraints of the other moral duties upon them. For example, if you're making hiring decisions on behalf of an employer, you owe it to the employer to select the best person for the job and not discriminate on irrelevant characteristics. The state is there to serve all citizens; if you're acting on behalf of the state you're not free to select which group of citizens you want to benefit.
You're free to discriminate only in that domain in which you're free to choose. In other words, no 11th commandment.
Nothing unreasonable there.
Your alternative, on the other hand, denied others the right of dissent that you'd claim if the positions were reversed. And you think my view immoral ?
You want to force conservative Christians to sell slogans that go against their faith, and you think my view unChristian ?
You've left Christianity for the church of Robin Hood...
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Robin Hood, who returned to the poor what the rich had stolen from them, at least had Christian priorities, if confused means. Your priorities -- putting the right to harm in the name of religion above the right to not be harmed -- are not Christian at all. You have sided with the Pharisees and not with the Christ.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I note that Russ has left off posting for a time. I wonder if when he returns he will address any of the points still hanging on the threads he has been posting on, or ignore them and start anew, like Steve Langton does?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
Russ,
Your new physician does not believe in the new-fangled germ theory, relying instead on the time-honoured tradition of humoralism and therefore will bleed you as treatment. You can always find a new physician - I'm sure that's easy in rural Ireland! Too bad, your new Health Minister will only support humoralism too, since it is such an effective cost-cutting measure.
You wish to protest this new health policy? Too bad, you don't share the religion of the head of government, who believes that only co-religionists have any rights. Of course the idea that people who do not share the religion of the head of government have any rights is really quite new, certainly as implemented by governments. I am sure you will respect the integrity of the government's very traditional belief, and suck it up, heretick.
You want to vote to change the government, or sue? Too bad, the rule of law no longer applies, and the most traditional system of all - Might Makes Right - is now the order of the day. Unfortunately for you, you are not the strongest, richest, most powerful person in your land, nor do you have sufficient influence.
The point is: You have no realistic fear that the progressive ideas from which you already benefit will be taken away from you. You can therefore comfortably hop off the train of progress, and not really care whether it keeps going or stops. You aren't concerned that those who hopped off earlier will negatively affect you. You are blithely unconcerned with whether anyone stays on or hops off, because you think you personally will be just fine either way.
In fact, if the train keeps rolling, it will cause you minor inconveniences - having to adapt to new norms of politeness and law, having to pay slightly more tax to support others' newly recognized rights. You personally would be better served if the train rolled back to the pre-Civil Rights era. Of course, society would suck for everyone who does not similarly benefit, but they probably asked to be born female or non-white or disabled or non-hetero.
Those on the train desperately hope it will keep rolling forward, because they DO have something to fear from those who have mentally jumped off: fear of discrimination, poverty, abuse, attack. They cannot afford to be blithe about it. Your anarcho-capitalist version of pluralism represents a randomized threat - a threat which you yourself do not experience, but to which you would subject others.
I sincerely hope that you become a person of greater vision and compassion... partly because it's true, and partly because it's the most effective version of "Fuck you" I can think of.
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leaf:
I sincerely hope that you become a person of greater vision and compassion... partly because it's true, and partly because it's the most effective version of "Fuck you" I can think of.
Burn of the thread.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
I see that Russ is at it again on "The social progressive mindset" thread.
I do not believe that he is engaging in that conversation in good faith. I would encourage Shipmates who are posting there to do so either to clarify your own thinking on the subject, or to lay out examples of clear thinking for others who may benefit, or both. But do not expect honest dialogue with Russ. Save your breath. Use your pixels elsewhere.
Recently, and in quite another context, I found this article and was struck by how many of the diversionary tactics Russ uses were listed in it. Sample:
quote:
3. Nonsensical conversations from hell.
If you think you’re going to have a thoughtful discussion with someone who is toxic, be prepared for epic mindfuckery rather than conversational mindfulness.
Malignant narcissists and sociopaths use word salad, circular conversations, ad hominem arguments, projection and gaslighting to disorient you and get you off track.
Having been puzzled by the endless weird analogies, slippery-slope arguments, coy insinuations, whataboutery, and other odd angles used by Russ in his postings on this and similar subjects, I was enlightened by descriptions in the article. I couldn't put my finger on why his posts were so "off". Now I know. It took me much longer than it did lilBuddha to figure this out.
This is a handmade public service announcement for the Purgatory thread: "Warning! This conversational bridge has a troll under it."
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
