Netphoria Message Board


Go Back   Netphoria Message Board > Archives > General Chat Archive
Register Netphoria's Amazon.com Link Members List Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-25-2018, 02:15 AM   #61
ilikeplanets
Braindead
 
ilikeplanets's Avatar
 
Location: Ignore List
Posts: 17,229
Default

It may be banned campus wide but still happens. The "safe space" immediately stops it from happening there. I'm confused about the confusion.

 
ilikeplanets is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 03:00 AM   #62
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

I don't really understand why a position like "gay marriage should not be allowed" has a fundamental right to exist at any institution. So I disagree, I think universities should be far more militant about enforcing the values behind their codes of conduct and such. There is no difference between gay people should not be allowed to marry and gay people should be exterminated other than the social acceptability. Both are anti-gay, and are anti human rights as they apply to LGBTQ people. For colleges and people in general to pretend one is hate speech and one is an unfortunate but acceptable opinion is what is wrong here. I don't worship the holy cow of free speech.

I totally support specific marginalized groups having spaces that are their own. I guess what I don't understand is that if someone wants to harass and demean a group of people, I don't understand where this line of acceptability is being drawn between debating these people's humanity in a way that is socially acceptable and a way which is not? What exactly about dehumanizing rhetoric or behavior is fine in regular campus zones but not in safe spaces?

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 03:24 AM   #63
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

maybe some of my confusion is because I did not go to a big university. I went to a small public college with a fairly insular community

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 03:25 AM   #64
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

also if the meaning of safe space is a place where a marginalized group can go to just be with other people of the same identity why would anyone but racist hateful right wing knuckle draggers be against that

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 10:04 AM   #65
Mals Marola
Socialphobic
 
Mals Marola's Avatar
 
Location: Your god damn living room
Posts: 10,000
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redbreegull View Post
also if the meaning of safe space is a place where a marginalized group can go to just be with other people of the same identity why would anyone but racist hateful right wing knuckle draggers be against that
i thought that's what it would be to but the definition that got brought up by the end of the first page just made it sound like a place for white ppl to look at puppies

first post considered i feel like this thread was made solely to bait people, a non-safe space if you will

 
Mals Marola is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 10:54 AM   #66
Elphenor
Braindead
 
Elphenor's Avatar
 
Location: TX
Posts: 16,289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redbreegull View Post
I don't really understand why a position like "gay marriage should not be allowed" has a fundamental right to exist at any institution. So I disagree, I think universities should be far more militant about enforcing the values behind their codes of conduct and such. There is no difference between gay people should not be allowed to marry and gay people should be exterminated other than the social acceptability. Both are anti-gay, and are anti human rights as they apply to LGBTQ people. For colleges and people in general to pretend one is hate speech and one is an unfortunate but acceptable opinion is what is wrong here. I don't worship the holy cow of free speech.

I totally support specific marginalized groups having spaces that are their own. I guess what I don't understand is that if someone wants to harass and demean a group of people, I don't understand where this line of acceptability is being drawn between debating these people's humanity in a way that is socially acceptable and a way which is not? What exactly about dehumanizing rhetoric or behavior is fine in regular campus zones but not in safe spaces?
pretty much this

 
Elphenor is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 11:45 AM   #67
ilikeplanets
Braindead
 
ilikeplanets's Avatar
 
Location: Ignore List
Posts: 17,229
Default

It's not that I don't wish entire campuses didn't allow bigotry (and worse), but it's not policeable. Safe spaces are fine but don't solve any deeper issues.

 
ilikeplanets is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 01:07 PM   #68
vixnix
Socialphobic
 
vixnix's Avatar
 
Location: we are champions, bathed in the heat of a thousand flame wars in the grim future of the internet there is only netphoria
Posts: 12,467
Default

I don’t like the idea of free speech being inhibited on campus. I think being anti-gay-marriage is quite different from being pro-gay-extermination. Not allowing different views seems very East Germany, to me. Less control is better, when it comes to opinions. I agree with higher taxation - forcing people to pay more tax. And I believe in strict gun control. I’m not an anarchist or anything. I would just rather hear what is on people’s minds, than make it so they have no outlet for their views, and a chance for them to be challenged. To me university is the perfect place to engage in dialogue with people you strongly disagree with. With an arts degree you are learning the skill of disagreeing with others in a civilised way. What better purpose is there for that - the skills you have learned - than to use them in a real life setting, to discuss difficult and emotional subjects in a calm and civilised way?

But the safe space would be good, for those who - that day, anyway - have just had enough, and want a break.

I think people rail against them because they project their ideas of what they will be like, onto the concept of a safe space. And then decide, from that purely cognitive experience, whether or not safe spaces are a good idea.

 
vixnix is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 01:11 PM   #69
Elphenor
Braindead
 
Elphenor's Avatar
 
Location: TX
Posts: 16,289
Default

you can have a debate about gun regulation

there is no point in considering whether racism is correct or if homosexuals are humans

 
Elphenor is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 01:19 PM   #70
vixnix
Socialphobic
 
vixnix's Avatar
 
Location: we are champions, bathed in the heat of a thousand flame wars in the grim future of the internet there is only netphoria
Posts: 12,467
Default

I mean, for many people looking in at the U.S., with the extraordinary number of deaths that a lack of gun control causes, it seems that gun control shouldn’t be debatable if the other two aren’t. Lack of gun control seems responsible for as many, or more deaths than the other two things. I would have though ending unnecessary death would be a high priority when considering public policy...

 
vixnix is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 01:22 PM   #71
Elphenor
Braindead
 
Elphenor's Avatar
 
Location: TX
Posts: 16,289
Default

I picked that issue specifically because it should be indisputable

the issue isn't the right to be wrong, full stop

at least how i see it nobody is entitled to have their intolerance tolerated

 
Elphenor is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 01:33 PM   #72
Elphenor
Braindead
 
Elphenor's Avatar
 
Location: TX
Posts: 16,289
Default

the ideas most deplatformed from American Universities historically have been socialist/communist ones

just seems like "free speech" only became an issue whenever Rededit Joe got corrected for saying "Oriental" or something

 
Elphenor is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 08:19 PM   #73
vixnix
Socialphobic
 
vixnix's Avatar
 
Location: we are champions, bathed in the heat of a thousand flame wars in the grim future of the internet there is only netphoria
Posts: 12,467
Default

One of the hallmarks of democratic society is peaceable disagreement, and that happens through education. If we make people with radical views feel unwelcome at university, we're shooting ourselves in the foot. University is the place where everyone learns that their ideas are shit, and they are naive and unoriginal and not really even that smart. We need more people with bad ideas to be engaged in discussions on campus, not less, IMO.

 
vixnix is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 08:40 PM   #74
FoolofaTook
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
FoolofaTook's Avatar
 
Location: Donald Trump of Netphoria
Posts: 37,215
Default

they've had 10,000 years to voice their hatred and bigotry. they need to stfu.

 
FoolofaTook is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 08:53 PM   #75
vixnix
Socialphobic
 
vixnix's Avatar
 
Location: we are champions, bathed in the heat of a thousand flame wars in the grim future of the internet there is only netphoria
Posts: 12,467
Default

But do they stfu just because we ban them from having the conversation in certain places? The dangerous thing about identity politics IMO is that they feel just as self-righteous about their platform as you and Elphenor and rbg do about yours. Think about what you would do if the tables were turned and you were being told that your gay agenda (or whatever they'd say) had tried to make headway for 10000 years but heteronormative culture was going to prevail because it was natural and needed for human society to thrive, so your ideas would no longer be tolerated.

I don't think any of us walk away from being silenced, feeling any less strongly about our views. Usually we feel just as strongly AND we feel angry about being silenced.

There are too many things that trouble me about anti-free speech laws for me to support them.

But you know, like I said before, if it's a majority opinion, then that's democracy. I probably wouldn't bother fighting against it. I just disagree with the idea of silencing people.

 
vixnix is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 09:23 PM   #76
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixnix View Post
One of the hallmarks of democratic society is peaceable disagreement, and that happens through education. If we make people with radical views feel unwelcome at university, we're shooting ourselves in the foot. University is the place where everyone learns that their ideas are shit, and they are naive and unoriginal and not really even that smart. We need more people with bad ideas to be engaged in discussions on campus, not less, IMO.
I would actually say this belief is contributing to the downfall of global democracy via the tolerance paradox and it's time to course correct. There is no magic hand or clockwork universe or self-evidence behind shit like liberals thought 300 years ago. Democracy is not a recipe like you throw in 1 cup tolerance, 2 tablespoons of freedom, and a teaspoon of equality for the best result.

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 09:26 PM   #77
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixnix View Post
if it's a majority opinion, then that's democracy.

see I really think this is wrong. Democracy is not just rule by popular will, and if it were, it is no different than a mob. It is VALUES which hold up a peaceful, democratic society. Rule by majority does not a democracy make.

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 09:34 PM   #78
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

Part of the issue is that historically, the left wing always cedes rhetorical power to the right through timidity and compulsion to compromise and seem civil, and then allows the right to set the neutral position, which always puts the left on the outside struggling to get in. We're talking now like questions of free speech and tolerance of hate speech is so modern and we have this very modern crisis on our hands, but this has been a debate in the US from day 1. During the Civil Rights movement, the left did not gain so much ground by presenting their opinion and walking away casually hoping others would see the rightness of their example and follow suit. I don't believe attitudes on race changed by peaceful calm discussion in classrooms, it happened via blood and tears, and one side eventually rhetorically overpowering the other and FINALLY vanquishing the racist right from the center of most institutions. Now these assholes are back, and the answer is still not to be tolerant of them.

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 09:46 PM   #79
vixnix
Socialphobic
 
vixnix's Avatar
 
Location: we are champions, bathed in the heat of a thousand flame wars in the grim future of the internet there is only netphoria
Posts: 12,467
Default

I don't think any answers are simple, when it comes to human societies. Which is why I think that peaceable disagreement is so important. Disagreement is a human constant. We don't all feel the same way.

Majority rule is definitely how democracy works - it's fairer than any other division of power IMO. Calling the majority THE MOB is a pretty elitist thing to do. It's no better than me using a term like hoi polloi.

 
vixnix is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 09:49 PM   #80
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixnix View Post
I don't think any answers are simple, when it comes to human societies. Which is why I think that peaceable disagreement is so important. Disagreement is a human constant. We don't all feel the same way.

Majority rule is definitely how democracy works - it's fairer than any other division of power IMO. Calling the majority THE MOB is a pretty elitist thing to do. It's no better than me using a term like hoi polloi.
Mob rule is a form of popular rule. Democracy is also a form of popular rule. They are not the same because democracy is founded on values. If you treat all opinions as being equally valid regardless of whether their values are counter to democratic values, your democracy is going to decline. This has happened in real life plenty of times, it's not some theoretical what if. Just being open to all opinions and letting anyone have a platform who wants to speak is not some magic recipe to keep democracy alive, and in fact it has resulted in absolute disintegration of democratic governments plenty of times.

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 09:52 PM   #81
vixnix
Socialphobic
 
vixnix's Avatar
 
Location: we are champions, bathed in the heat of a thousand flame wars in the grim future of the internet there is only netphoria
Posts: 12,467
Default

I don't know if you've heard of the Soviet Union, Maoist China or North Korea, but it is factually incorrect to say that the left always cedes rhetorical power to the right. Maybe in the U.S. But the right has no monopoly on political tyranny.

Terrible things happened in the U.S. in the past, but the stream of immigration from China to the U.S. is much more noticeable than the one going the other way.

 
vixnix is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 09:53 PM   #82
FoolofaTook
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
FoolofaTook's Avatar
 
Location: Donald Trump of Netphoria
Posts: 37,215
Default

you don't actually think those are/were communist countries?

 
FoolofaTook is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 09:56 PM   #83
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

yeah I wouldn't say any of those governments are leftist the way I was using it. they created an ultra-elite political class and threw everyone else into poverty. so.... they called themselves communist, but it's like Iran calling itself a Republic. Again, it's the values that really define these systems.

Political scientists separate substantive democracies and nominal democracies, again, because voting does not equal democracy. The majority of people wanting one thing does not mean you are watching democracy at work.

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 09:57 PM   #84
vixnix
Socialphobic
 
vixnix's Avatar
 
Location: we are champions, bathed in the heat of a thousand flame wars in the grim future of the internet there is only netphoria
Posts: 12,467
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redbreegull View Post
Mob rule is a form of popular rule. Democracy is also a form of popular rule. They are not the same because democracy is founded on values. If you treat all opinions as being equally valid regardless of whether their values are counter to democratic values, your democracy is going to decline. This has happened in real life plenty of times, it's not some theoretical what if. Just being open to all opinions and letting anyone have a platform who wants to speak is not some magic recipe to keep democracy alive, and in fact it has resulted in absolute disintegration of democratic governments plenty of times.
It's a tautology to say that democracy is founded on values - democracy is a human form of political distribution of power, and humans are values-driven beings. We're incapable of basing our societies on anything other than values.

But as you say, there is no magical force that reveals to us what A++ top marks values are. We make up our own values, and then we find out that they're wrong, and we correct them. It's an endless process of revision because we live in a constantly changing environment - socially, environmentally, technologically...

So - how do we form the values that we base our societies on? Through peaceful disagreement, and voting. That's the essence of democracy.

 
vixnix is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 10:10 PM   #85
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

No, you misunderstand me. Democracy is not founded on values vs. a system of no values, it is a system of SPECIFIC values. The Democracy we have today is not Greek democracy or Roman democracy, it is Enlightenment democracy, and the folks who thought all this up were pretty much in agreement that the purpose of popular rule is to enshrine a SPECIFIC set of values. The US has done a lot wrong but it also created a model that basically the entire world has tried to mimic, and that model is extremely clear that it exists to promote several very specific political and philosophical values.

I feel you are refusing to acknowledge that an inherent problem in democracy is that people who want to destroy it can freely incubate inside of it and then use democratic system to spread ideas which will end the system and replace it with something else. This has literally happened all over the world many times. Populism + erosion of democratic values = the absolute quickest road to despotism. Throw in economic growth concurrent with these other trends and it is historically almost assured your democracy will be replaced by authoritarianism.

Like these Trump people. Do you really believe talking to them around a table will change their mind? You're thinking completely from inside the democratic values mindset without even realizing it. They don't care. They will rip the system down if you try to be nice to them or compromise with them. They WANT an authoritarian system regardless of what they say. look at their actions. There are plenty of things which should be solved by sitting down at a table, and some things which cannot. You can't change these people's minds for the most part because they are absolutists, and absolutism is incompatible with democracy.

again, the only reason these people aren't openly calling for genocide and things like that are because the overton window has not shifted far enough (yet). but it certainly has shifted pretty far to right. Trump and people like him delight in using democracy against itself. They poison and weaponize language like something out of Orwell. You cannot reason with them. Every time you engage with them like they are capable of changing their minds, you give them more legitimacy and more power

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 10:10 PM   #86
vixnix
Socialphobic
 
vixnix's Avatar
 
Location: we are champions, bathed in the heat of a thousand flame wars in the grim future of the internet there is only netphoria
Posts: 12,467
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FoolofaTook View Post
you don't actually think those are/were communist countries?
The problem with communism is that there are no examples of communist countries. There are countries formed using the leftist rhetoric of fair pay for a hard day's work, which quickly devolved into authoritarianism, and that's it. Maybe Cuba. But have you visited Cuba, or met anyone who has? It's not for everyone - but a lot of Cubans don't have a choice, or a way to change things.

I think it's good for the left to be aware of that. A lot of the time, as a left-leaning person, I am basically asking for my own values to be imposed on others using a government that they are supporting through taxation. I'm voting for part of their wages to be taken from them and used to fund programs they don't agree with. I believe in the benefit of those programs enough (let's say - free early childhood education for all children) that I think it's worth the means of violating someone's autonomy to achieve the end. But I know how disgruntled I feel when it's my money being spent on something I don't agree with. So I think it pays to be mindful of that, and to be open to discussion where disagreements can occur without relationships breaking down.

Most right-leaning people I know say that it's better to just collect less tax and let people go about their business. It's a fairer system in some ways - it's just that IMO it leads to unhappier outcomes for more people, and I'm a utilitarian so in this case, the outcome trumps my ideology.

 
vixnix is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 10:16 PM   #87
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

I believe the government itself must try to refrain from inhibition of free speech as much as possible and the rest of us should be chasing these people out of town with pitchforks

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 10:21 PM   #88
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixnix View Post
Most right-leaning people I know say that it's better to just collect less tax and let people go about their business. It's a fairer system in some ways - it's just that IMO it leads to unhappier outcomes for more people, and I'm a utilitarian so in this case, the outcome trumps my ideology.
I would say utilitarianism actually sprung in large part from Enlightenment democracy asserting that life is essentially about seeking happiness and fulfillment for each person regardless of their identity, and that is exactly why freedom of speech is not an unlimited value. Allowing some people to speak without consequences is going to result in uh... "less happy outcomes" to put it mildly.

but to clarify, I am very rarely for the government BANNING speech. I am just for there being heavy social consequences, like if you are going to be a racist at college, you could be shown the door

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 10:25 PM   #89
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

like if you want to take taxes as an example, there are a lot of compelling arguments for no taxation at all. How is it compatible with the ideals of freedom to force people to incorporate into the revenue stream of a vast government which does many things you won't agree with using your money? What if you morally reject the social contract? Is it not some kind of sacred violation to non-consensually take something off another human? Is that not oppression? Well it all sounds good in the vacuum sealed chamber of ideology, but in terms if real life, more people will suffer. Same with unlimited free speech.

I think we are basically in agreement, but I think it is also clear democracy has some serious problems right now, and the current trajectory is not making things better. So time to course-correct.

also, I just want to say that just a few years ago I would have hardcore agreed with the idea that de-platforming is wrong and socially silencing people is mostly wrong. Having a populist quasi-authoritarian ELECTED in your own country kind of changes your perspective on shit

Last edited by redbreegull : 11-25-2018 at 10:35 PM.

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 11-25-2018, 10:34 PM   #90
vixnix
Socialphobic
 
vixnix's Avatar
 
Location: we are champions, bathed in the heat of a thousand flame wars in the grim future of the internet there is only netphoria
Posts: 12,467
Default

Well that's pretty much how I feel. That maintaining the legal right to free speech means that private citizens can control how they react to it.

I still think making people with (what I consider) terrible ideas feel unwelcome at university is a bad idea. University, more than any other place, is where we should be learning about good ideas. Open disagreement is good - simply telling the other person they should shut up and not talk about their ideas, is not so good, IMO.

Regarding constitutional democracy, I think that influence of the U.S constitution was more of a passing fashion than an eternal set of inviolable values that democratic nations will continue to draw on, for all time. They were authored a few hundred years ago by a handful of people who were at the time, members of the elite class. Which already doesn't seem particularly democratic.

I grew up under the Westminster system so I don't have a big appreciation for or understanding of constitutional democracy. It seems like a strange idea to me, to try and author the best A++ top marks document of all time and then base your entire political system on it, forever and ever... that in itself seems like an outdated concept from a time when things changed at a much slower pace.

 
vixnix is offline
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is On
Google


Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Age Of Innocence Big Truck05 Smashing Pumpkins/Billy Corgan Discussion 59 07-10-2021 08:43 AM
I think Elph is right slunken Music Board Archive 72 06-22-2016 10:45 PM
Kick-Ass was a far better movie than I expected Nimrod's Son General Chat Archive 45 06-14-2012 06:02 AM
Help me crack a safe in 24 hrs. seign General Chat Archive 63 11-20-2008 11:24 PM
How safe is it accepting a PayPal payment from someone who is unconfirmed? danondorf General Chat Archive 3 07-30-2008 03:07 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:27 AM.




Smashing Pumpkins, Alternative Music
& General Discussion Message Board and Forums
www.netphoria.org - Copyright © 1998-2022