Censorship...

[The Cat]

Everyone is on the wrong side of history to someone else. The tides of civilization ebb and flow and the modern human must desperately believe that the misery endured in the present is somehow progress to the misery endured in the past. But like the stage magigian giving a hell of a performance. It's just so much prestidigitation. All this has happened before and all of it will happen again. There is nothing new under the sun.

 

[The Cat]

Besides we must get rid of the old statues from the old war so they have someplace to put the new statues from the new war . @_@

- - - Updated - - -

Rebranding is a human constant

 

[ceecee]

Why would this be...pleasing?

Why would it be pleasing if Americans who are anti-fascist used the symbols from a German anti-fascist group that were against Nazis, communists and reactionary conservatives?

Iron Front - Wikipedia

 

[Red Memories]

I know some anarchists, they don't think it's a good idea. They also know that this idiotic thing cooked up by the Trump campaign isn't going to be a dog whistle for white nationalists or even garden variety racists- they are already his voters for the most part. As far as symbols go - the only thing I see regularly is the Three Arrows/Iron Front. Frankly I would be very pleased to see it being used by American anti-fascists if I had any recollection of the Iron Front in early 1930's Germany.

[MENTION=4050]ceecee[/MENTION] wanted to note this is why I shouldn't try reading politics while I'm still half asleep, my brain didn't comprehend the iron front part and I was like whyyy would you find it chill to take on the swastika??? This is 100% different thing. XD That makes PERFECT sense why they would use THAT...

why my response also included point "I'm kind of curious why there's a psychological desire to reclaim symbols which lead to mass murder and genocides and complete utter disregard for human rights?" yeah brain good job.

sorry for the misunderstanding on that note!

 

[Coriolis]

The underlying principle with censorship is determining the harm caused by words. I understand people are not allowed to yell 'fire' in a crowded building because of the harm it would cause. Committing slander is also supposed to be against the law because of the harm. There is question about cyber-bullying leading to suicides, etc.

Knowing where to draw the line of free speech is difficult because words do lead to physical harm. It is also a problem to stifle negative ideas because they don't go away. People tend to feel more justified in their ideas when they feel persecuted for them. Silencing harmful ideas can also lead to physical harm. I don't see it as an easy topic because it is always shifting and I think there are a lot of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' aspects to moderating types of hate speech.

The right to free speech does not come with the right to have others accept or agree with what you say. Too often I see disagreement equated with censorship, and free speech equated with unopposed speech. If someone wants to exercise this right, they need also to take responsibility for what they say and its consequences. This is best done by actually engaging in substantive discussion, and treating what others say with the same respect you want given to your own words.

 

[Virtual ghost]

[MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION] speaking is correct also. I actually really agree with this statement. Nationalism of America was so strong, we actually got left behind. We felt we were so grand as a country, perfect morally in every right, that we neglected to educate ourselves, advance ourselves, and develop new things. My mother was looking at how South Korea was handling the pandemic with technology and was shocked by the innovation. She asked why we don't have those kinds of things here. Well...we did not innovate. We got cocky and said eh We're on top. Now we're not.

Well, outside of USA for a long time the country is seen as the empire in decline. This goes all the way back at least to the Bush years, that aren't even close past anymore. However everything since then is a flop globally. The pride that doesn't have strong base in reality, even the military isn't really winning anymore. I am form country that is globally "nobody" but even we in more and more things have some things solved better than US. Even if we are post communist country where the war blow up half of the country a generation ago (and the same goes for last 3 generations) we can organize medicare for all and free college while US as the global superpower supposedly can't. In my book that doesn't really add up. Even if those are vital programs in keeping inner turmoil at bay before it blows up the country. The life is enough of a struggle even without having such guarantees, so it is no wonder that half of your nation need professional help of some kinds. What simply doesn't add up with supposed greatness. Deconstructing the greatness argument at this point in time really isn't that hard if you have enough data to compare things.

 

[anticlimatic]

Why would this be...pleasing? I'm kind of curious why there's a psychological desire to reclaim symbols which lead to mass murder and genocides and complete utter disregard for human rights? I'm not an anarchists though. I'm...honestly not sure why anyone would want an anarchy either... While I agree those people are certainly voting for Trump, I think it is fairly pessimistic to assume that all of Trump's voters were white nationalists and garden variety racists. Sadly, there was many people who voted Trump merely because it wasn't Clinton. Ignorant youth who vote more based on what their family says, or just don't vote at all. People who felt like Obama didn't really hear them in the first place and felt the democratic party was letting things get out of hand on issues. Some people did not like the flimsy policies of Bill Clinton and judged her by her husband. There are people of color who actually voted for Trump, and you could see them in the crowd at Trump rallies. Now I have...a lot of issues I can state with Trump, very directly. 1. For god fucking sakes GET OFF TWITTER YOU TWAT. 2. He is ignorant, as all hell, and that's scary as fuck to have in office when chaos is happening. 3. I love this country, it is a beautiful country filled with freedoms and opportunities to create better lives for people. It is already great, but we do need some improvements. 4. I will never ever agree with stop and frisk. 5. He literally made fun of a disabled reporter and I want to punch my own brother when he makes fun of disabled people. It's not funny. 6. grab'em by the pussy. 7. I don't see why in this process, as long as they have all been here, why we shouldn't just make the DACA kids citizens by default and do better in the future with immigration. 8. I feel the reporters do ask dumb baiting questions to him. But he should recognize dumb baiting questions and not react like a child. I could go on, but there's some things... I really do think we need to bring production and jobs BACK to America. I;m not totally against him trying to apply policies which try to force these people to produce in America. I'm for better border control. I don't think he's doing it the right way though. that's about it and I voted for Clinton because when you got a bucketlist of items you despise about someone vs. the other side you go for the lesser of 2 evils as stated...but I felt like Clinton was also a bit blind about things. I agree with a black voter who said to Biden it is not enough to NOT be Trump. If I don't feel like either one gets a good candidate I don't see why I should vote for two horribly corrupt people and say I am morally superior for voting for one. I think both parties have "deplorables" in one way or another who support them and their policies. The reality is it is likely these supremacists have already been voting for some republican or etc. for years, not just Trump. If even that, most of these "deplorables" are a sort of anarchy of their own waiting to rise. My mother grew up in West Virginia and said there's always been those rednecks who cry the south will rise again. She finds rednecks just as frightening as gang members, they both have guns, they both lack care for the people, and they both will kill you if you get in the wrong place at the wrong time in the wrong way. And sadly as a Christian, I state how many Christians voted for Trump over a measly issue of Abortion. Some Christians refuse to vote for anyone who is pro-choice. I think that is a very ignorant way to vote. But they feel Trump will protect the rights of Christians and churches as separation of church and state keeps getting muddy in the modern era. Personally, I feel like churches have become quite corrupt and money hungry in their own way so in some regards, it makes some sense they'd back each other into oblivion. Nothing to do with racism though. I think we do a disservice to a greater issue when we just assume every trump voter is a nasty racist radical. I find it as much of a disservice that every liberal now is labeled a garden variety progressive who spends too much time on the internet listening to the news. I speak of this because discussing politics in my own house is hell. I'm a moderate democrat and anytime I suggest a liberal policy is good I get called one of those progressive brainwashed idiots. and this conclude the "I hate throwing people all into one category over anything" soapbox.

Trumps biggest accomplishment and contribution to the potential future of America was that he proved that an outsider could win a presidential election.


Republicans used to be for big buisness, and democrats used to be for the common man, but ever since the rise of the internet both parties only care about the status quo of their wealthy buisness constituents- albeit different ones.

Trump might be his own kind of monster, but at least he proved that we don't have to live with establishment politicians forever. THIS is why most people voted for him.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Trumps biggest accomplishment and contribution to the potential future of America was that he proved that an outsider could win a presidential election.


Republicans used to be for big buisness, and democrats used to be for the common man, but ever since the rise of the internet both parties only care about the status quo of their wealthy buisness constituents- albeit different ones.

Trump might be his own kind of monster, but at least he proved that we don't have to live with establishment politicians forever.

That was the one good aspect of his election. But I think there's going to be a huge backlash in both parties, and moving forward it's going to be a lot harder for outsiders to enter the primary process.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

they belong in art history museums. I really don't see any better way to study them. One isn't going to learn diddly squat about the eras these people lived in, but they stand to learn a great deal about trends in art and sculpting in the 19th and early 20th centuries. In fact, I took an art history course once that focused on late 19th century western architecture and sculptures, and one of the areas we covered focused heavily on statues and monuments from the period. The Richmond Lee monument was one of the statues we examined and discussed.

 

[anticlimatic]

That was the one good aspect of his election. But I think there's going to be a huge backlash in both parties, and moving forward it's going to be a lot harder for outsiders to enter the primary process.

Yeah I don't know. Trump only pulled it off virus style by emulating enough republicanism to sneak in and float to the top. Still it's possible. The nation is starved for quality leadership.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Yeah I don't know. Trump only pulled it off virus style by emulating enough republicanism to sneak in and float to the top. Still it's possible. The nation is starved for quality leadership.

Agreed, and I'd start by reforming the political system so elected officials aren't essentially professional politicians. Honestly, I think the best leaders are those who serve reluctantly. I have a natural distrust for anyone whose entire existence is devoted to the acquisition and maintenance of their own power.

 

[anticlimatic]

Agreed, and I'd start by reforming the political system so elected officials aren't essentially professional politicians. Honestly, I think the best leaders are those who serve reluctantly. I have a natural distrust for anyone whose entire existence is devoted to the acquisition and maintenance of their own power.

I like the idea of a draft for leadership, possibly against their wills, but at least executed out of civic or patriotic duty. If we can do it for soldiers we can do it for politicians. It might be something that could even be done independently right away, theoretically in time for November. Though I don't know how you get around the fact that MSM is entirely owned by the Dempublicans. At least their current offerings are objectively hard enough to sell that a home run alternative might get close. But I think people are just too programmed to believe that the only legitimate things there could be come from things the MSM doesn't ignore. However, another Trump era perk is how effectively the MSM has wrecked its own credibility with the people.

 

[evilrubberduckie]

Nothing should be sensored. All is knowledge, even the bad stuff.

Don't want to hear it? Find a source that caters to you and your morals. Money speaks louder than words.

 

[Virtual ghost]

So this is a growing issue, especially within the "arts" field, is a sort of "censorship" of thought. Or the "requirement" of someone of a community to be in there to meet representation, or otherwise be considered racist and etc.

If we allow a certain degree of censorship, where exactly would this stop?
Who's idea of "censorship" would be correct?

One of the greatest privileges we have in the USA is freedom of speech. More and more, from both sides, this "freedom" is being violated. Trump should not tell people they cannot protest this or that, but people also shouldn't be saying I can't watch a movie because it depicted blacks negatively in some scene.

I am curious what your thoughts and stances are on this growing issue. Because it seems more people want a sort of censorship.

I will go back to the start to this thread. In my opinion the main problem here are social media and to some degree more traditional media. The problem is that those created "tribes" in American society and in this sense you no longer have a country. The problem is in the mix of what is in America sacred "a personal choice" and modern technology. In other words with modern media you can basically filter pretty much everything you don't like out of your life and have it exactly as you want it. However in doing so you are becoming blind to different interpretations of reality and perhaps you are even focused on different facts. Plus you are likely to encounter plenty of info that isn't checked or even correct in the most basic common sense and knowledge. While you are getting gathering and mobilization of people around those same unchecked facts. What in the end just breeds censorship as a way to phase out other tribes. I did some reading on the influence of internet on people and I can say that most of the stuff I found there can be pretty easily recognized in real life. Even if here were a lagging a few years behind US and perhaps we have a saving grace in general mono culture and few other things. However there is evidently a factor of ignorant doing a war on ignorant. Especially since hours of looking at a screen every day evidently distorts the vision of reality. Just a few decades ago people didn't live like this anywhere. Therefore the problem is breeding of closed mindedness and intellectual laziness. Which are slowly eroding genuine productivity and metal health, what only boosts "mobilizations", until the whole structure starts to open crack. What usually breeds only more mobilizations.

 

[Tellenbach]

UCLA Professor On Leave After Students Blast Response To Request To Postpone Final Exam As ‘Woefully Racist’

One last thing strikes me: Remember that MLK famously said that people should not be evaluated based on the “color of their skin.” Do you think that your request would run afoul of MLK’s admonition? Thanks, G. Klein

Ouch! Professor Klein should know better than to quote MLK to leftists. It's clearly racist to judge people on the content of their character rather than the color of their skin.

Gordon Klein received the email on June 2, and rejected the request, stating the following, according to a change.org petition calling for his termination:

Clearly, all black students should be given automatic A+++'s and a thousand smileys on their report cards and any one who disagrees is a racist, A RACIST!!!!!!!!

 

[anticlimatic]

More people need to start standing up to the mob. What's especially troubling is how even institutions of the STEM fields are caving, due to needing the grant money from the crazies.